UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

 

 

 

FORM 10-K

 

 

 

xANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 

For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 20122013

 

OR

 

¨TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 

Commission File

        Number

  

Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter;

State of Incorporation; Address of Principal

Executive Offices; and Telephone Number

  IRS Employer
Identification Number

1-16169

  

EXELON CORPORATION

(a Pennsylvania corporation)

10 South Dearborn Street

P.O. Box 805379

Chicago, Illinois 60680-5379

(312) 394-7398

  23-2990190

333-85496

  

EXELON GENERATION COMPANY, LLC

(a Pennsylvania limited liability company)

300 Exelon Way

Kennett Square, Pennsylvania 19348-2473

(610) 765-5959

  23-3064219

1-1839

  

COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY

(an Illinois corporation)

440 South LaSalle Street

Chicago, Illinois 60605-1028

(312) 394-4321

  36-0938600

000-16844

  

PECO ENERGY COMPANY

(a Pennsylvania corporation)

P.O. Box 8699

2301 Market Street

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101-8699

(215) 841-4000

  23-0970240

1-1910

  

BALTIMORE GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY

(a Maryland corporation)

2 Center Plaza

110 West Fayette Street

Baltimore, Maryland 21201-3708

(410) 234-5000

  52-0280210

 

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

 

Title of Each Class

  Name of Each Exchange on
Which Registered

EXELON CORPORATION:

  

Common Stock, without par value

  New York and Chicago

Series A Junior Subordinated Debentures

  New York

PECO ENERGY COMPANY:

  

Cumulative Preferred Stock, without par value: $4.68 Series, $4.40 Series, $4.30 Series and $3.80 Series

New York

Trust Receipts of PECO Energy Capital Trust III, each representing a 7.38% Cumulative Preferred Security, Series D, $25 stated value, issued by PECO Energy Capital, L.P. and unconditionally guaranteed by PECO Energy Company

  New York

BALTIMORE GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY:

  

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

  New York

 

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

 

COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY:

Common Stock Purchase Warrants, 1971 Warrants and Series B Warrants


Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.

 

Exelon Corporation

 Yes  x  No  ¨

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

 Yes  x  No  ¨

Commonwealth Edison Company

 Yes  x  No  ¨

PECO Energy Company

 Yes  x  No  ¨

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

 Yes  x  No  ¨

 

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.

 

Exelon Corporation

 Yes  ¨  No  x

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

 Yes  ¨  No  x

Commonwealth Edison Company

 Yes  ¨  No  x

PECO Energy Company

 Yes  ¨  No  x

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

 Yes  ¨  No  x

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrants (1) have filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) have been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes  x    No  ¨

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).    Yes  x    No  ¨

 

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.  ¨

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See definition of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

 

   Large Accelerated  Accelerated  Non-Accelerated  Small Reporting
Company

Exelon Corporation

  ü      

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

      ü  

Commonwealth Edison Company

      ü  

PECO Energy Company

      ü  

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

      ü  

 

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

 

Exelon Corporation

  Yes  ¨   No  x 

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

  Yes  ¨   No  x 

Commonwealth Edison Company

  Yes  ¨   No  x 

PECO Energy Company

  Yes  ¨   No  x 

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

  Yes  ¨   No  x 

 

The estimated aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by nonaffiliates of each registrant as of June 30, 20122013 was as follows:

 

Exelon Corporation Common Stock, without par value

  32,084,086,34326,430,683,706

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

  Not applicable

Commonwealth Edison Company Common Stock, $12.50 par value

  No established market

PECO Energy Company Common Stock, without par value

  None

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, without par value

  None

 

The number of shares outstanding of each registrant’s common stock as of January 31, 20132014 was as follows:

 

Exelon Corporation Common Stock, without par value

  855,019,272857,419,806

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

  not applicable

Commonwealth Edison Company Common Stock, $12.50 par value

  127,016,761127,016,904

PECO Energy Company Common Stock, without par value

  170,478,507

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, without par value

  1,000

 

Documents Incorporated by Reference

Portions of the Exelon Proxy Statement for the 20132014 Annual Meeting of

Shareholders and the Commonwealth Edison Company and PECO Energy Company 20132014 information statementsstatement are

incorporated by reference in Part III.

 

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, PECO Energy Company and Baltimore Gas and Electric Company meet the conditions set forth in General Instruction I(1)(a) and (b) of Form 10-K and are therefore filing this Form in the reduced disclosure format.

 

 

 


TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

   Page No. 

GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

   1  

FILING FORMAT

   5  

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

   5  

WHERE TO FIND MORE INFORMATION

   5  

PART I

    

ITEM 1.

  

BUSINESS

   6  
  

General

   6  
  

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

   7  
  

Commonwealth Edison Company

   1920  
  

PECO Energy Company

   2122  
  

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

   2426  
  

Employees

   2830  
  

Environmental Regulation

   2931  
  

Executive Officers of the Registrants

   3436  

ITEM 1A.

  

RISK FACTORS

   3941  

ITEM 1B.

  

UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

   6264  

ITEM 2.

  

PROPERTIES

   6365  
  

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

   63

Commonwealth Edison Company

66

PECO Energy Company

66

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

67

ITEM 3.

LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

68

Exelon Corporation

68

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

6865  
  

Commonwealth Edison Company

   68  
  

PECO Energy Company

   68  
  

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

   6869

ITEM 3.

LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

70

Exelon Corporation

70

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

70

Commonwealth Edison Company

70

PECO Energy Company

70

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

70  

ITEM 4.

  

MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES

   6870  

PART II

    

ITEM 5.

  

MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

   6971  

ITEM 6.

  

SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

   7374  
  

Exelon Corporation

   7374  
  

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

   7475  
  

Commonwealth Edison Company

   7476  
  

PECO Energy Company

   7576  
  

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

   7677  

ITEM 7.

  

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

   7778  
  

Exelon Corporation

   7778  
  

Executive Overview

   7778  
  

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

   9497  
  

Results of Operations

   109113  
  

Liquidity and Capital Resources

   144  
  

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

   173  
  

Commonwealth Edison Company

   175  
  

PECO Energy Company

   177  
  

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

   179  


   Page No. 

ITEM 7A.

  

QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

   161  
  

Exelon Corporation

   161  
  

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

   174  
  

Commonwealth Edison Company

   176  
  

PECO Energy Company

   178  
  

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

   180  

ITEM 8.

  

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

   181  
  

Exelon Corporation

   191  
  

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

   196  
  

Commonwealth Edison Company

   201  
  

PECO Energy Company

   206  
  

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

   211  
  

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

   216  
  

1. Significant Accounting Policies

   216  
  

2. Variable Interest Entities

   231  
  

3. Regulatory Matters

   236237  
  

4. Merger and Acquisitions

   261265  
  

5. Accounts Receivable

272

6. Property, Plant and EquipmentInvestment in CENG

   273  
  

6. Accounts Receivable

275

7. Jointly Owned Electric UtilityProperty, Plant and Equipment

   276  
  

8. IntangibleImpairment of Long Lived Assets

   277280  
  

9. Jointly Owned Electric Utility Plant

282

10. Intangible Assets

283

11. Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities

   281287  
  

10.12. Derivative Financial Instruments

   304310  
  

11.13. Debt and Credit Agreements

   320327  
  

12.14. Income Taxes

   331336  
  

13.15. Asset Retirement Obligations

   341

14. Retirement Benefits

349

15. Corporate Restructuring and Plant Retirements

366345  
  

16. Retirement Benefits

353

17. Severance

371

18. Preferred and Preference Securities

   367374  
  

17.19. Common Stock

   369375  
  

18.20. Earnings Per Share and Equity

   376382  
  

19.21. Changes in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income

383

22. Commitments and Contingencies

   377384  
  

20.23. Supplemental Financial Information

   401410  
  

21.24. Segment Information

   411418  
  

22.25. Related Party Transactions

   416423  
  

23.26. Quarterly Data

   424431

27. Subsequent Events

433  

ITEM 9.

  

CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

   427434  

ITEM 9A.

  

CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

   427434  
  

Exelon Corporation

   427434  
  

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

   427434  
  

Commonwealth Edison Company

   427434  
  

PECO Energy Company

   427434  
  

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

   427434  

ITEM 9B.

  

OTHER INFORMATION

   428435  
  

Exelon Corporation

   428435  
  

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

   428435  
  

Commonwealth Edison Company

   428435  
  

PECO Energy Company

   428435  
  

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

   428435  


   Page No. 

PART III

    

ITEM 10.

  

DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

   429436  

ITEM 11.

  

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

   430437  

ITEM 12.

  

SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

   431438  

ITEM 13.

  

CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE

   432439  

ITEM 14.

  

PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES

   433440  

PART IV

    

ITEM 15.

  EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES   434441  

SIGNATURES

   467472  
  

Exelon Corporation

   467472  
  

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

   468473  
  

Commonwealth Edison Company

   469474  
  

PECO Energy Company

   470475  
  

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

   471476  

CERTIFICATION EXHIBITS

   472477  


GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

 

Exelon Corporation and Related Entities

Exelon

  Exelon Corporation

Generation

  Exelon Generation Company, LLC

ComEd

  Commonwealth Edison Company

PECO

  PECO Energy Company

BGE

  Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

BSC

  Exelon Business Services Company, LLC

Exelon Corporate

  Exelon’s holding company

CENG

  Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC

Constellation

  Constellation Energy Group, Inc.

Exelon Transmission Company

  Exelon Transmission Company, LLC

Exelon Wind

  Exelon Wind, LLC and Exelon Generation Acquisition Company, LLC

Ventures

  Exelon Ventures Company, LLC

AmerGen

  AmerGen Energy Company, LLC

BondCo

  RSB BondCo LLC

ComEd Financing III

ComEd Financing III

PEC L.P.

  PECO Energy Capital, L.P.

PECO Trust III

  PECO Energy Capital Trust III

PECO Trust IV

  PECO Energy Capital Trust IV

BGE Trust II

BGE Capital Trust II

PETT

  PECO Energy Transition Trust

Registrants

  Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE, collectively

Other Terms and Abbreviations

1998 restructuring settlement

  PECO’s 1998 settlement of its restructuring case mandated by the Competition Act

Act 11

  Pennsylvania Act 11 of 2012

Act 129

  Pennsylvania Act 129 of 2008

AEC

  Alternative Energy Credit that is issued for each megawatt hour of generation from a qualified alternative energy source

AEPS

  Pennsylvania Alternative Energy Portfolio Standards

AEPS Act

  Pennsylvania Alternative Energy Portfolio Standards Act of 2004, as amended

AESO

  Alberta Electric Systems Operator

AFUDC

  Allowance for Funds Used During Construction

ALJ

  Administrative Law Judge

AMI

  Advanced Metering Infrastructure

ARC

  Asset Retirement Cost

ARO

  Asset Retirement Obligation

ARP

  Title IV Acid Rain Program

ARRA of 2009

  American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009

Block contracts

  Forward Purchase Energy Block Contracts

CAIR

  Clean Air Interstate Rule

CAISO

  California ISO

CAMR

Federal Clean Air Mercury Rule

CERCLA

  Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, as amended

CFL

  Compact Fluorescent Light

Clean Air Act

  Clean Air Act of 1963, as amended

1


Other Terms and Abbreviations

Clean Water Act

  Federal Water Pollution Control Amendments of 1972, as amended

1


Other Terms and Abbreviations

Competition Act

  Pennsylvania Electricity Generation Customer Choice and Competition Act of 1996

CPI

  Consumer Price Index

CPUC

  California Public Utilities Commission

CSAPR

  Cross-State Air Pollution Rule

CTC

  Competitive Transition Charge

DOE

  United States Department of Energy

DOJ

  United States Department of Justice

DSP

  Default Service Provider

DSP Program

  Default Service Provider Program

EDF

  Electricite de France SA

EE&C

  Energy Efficiency and Conservation/Demand Response

EGS

Electric Generation Supplier

EIMA

  Illinois Energy Infrastructure Modernization Act (Illinois Senate Bill 1652 and Illinois House Bill 3036)

EPA

  United States Environmental Protection Agency

ERCOT

  Electric Reliability Council of Texas

ERISA

  Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended

EROA

  Expected Rate of Return on Assets

ESPP

  Employee Stock Purchase Plan

FASB

  Financial Accounting Standards Board

FERC

  Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

FRCC

  Florida Reliability Coordinating Council

FTC

  Federal Trade Commission

GAAP

  Generally Accepted Accounting Principles in the United States

GHG

  Greenhouse Gas

GRT

  Gross Receipts Tax

GSA

  Generation Supply Adjustment

GWh

  Gigawatt hour

HAP

  Hazardous air pollutants

Health Care Reform Acts

  Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010

IBEW

  International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

ICC

  Illinois Commerce Commission

ICE

  Intercontinental Exchange

Illinois Act

  Illinois Electric Service Customer Choice and Rate Relief Law of 1997

Illinois EPA

  Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

Illinois Settlement Legislation

  Legislation enacted in 2007 affecting electric utilities in Illinois

IPA

  Illinois Power Agency

IRC

  Internal Revenue Code

IRS

  Internal Revenue Service

ISO

  Independent System Operator

ISO-NE

  ISO New England Inc.

ISO-NY

  ISO New York

kV

  Kilovolt

kW

  Kilowatt

kWh

  Kilowatt-hour

LIBOR

  London Interbank Offered Rate

LILO

  Lease-In, Lease-Out

LLRW

  Low-Level Radioactive Waste

 

2


Other Terms and Abbreviations

LTIP

  Long-Term Incentive Plan

MATS

  U.S. EPA Mercury and Air Toxics Rule

MBR

  Market Based Rates Incentive

MDE

  Maryland Department of the Environment

MDPSC

  Maryland Public Service Commission

MGP

  Manufactured Gas Plant

MISO

  MidwestMidcontinent Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.

mmcf

  Million Cubic Feet

Moody’s

  Moody’s Investor Service

MOPR

Minimum Offer Price Rule

MRV

  Market-Related Value

MW

  Megawatt

MWh

  Megawatt hour

NAAQS

  National Ambient Air Quality Standards

n.m.

  not meaningful

NAV

  Net Asset Value

NDT

  Nuclear Decommissioning Trust

NEIL

  Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited

NERC

  North American Electric Reliability Corporation

NGS

Natural Gas Supplier

NJDEP

  New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

Non-Regulatory Agreements Units

  Nuclear generating units or portions thereof whose decommissioning-related activities are not subject to contractual elimination under regulatory accounting

NOV

  Notice of Violation

NPDES

  National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

NRC

  Nuclear Regulatory Commission

NSPS

  New Source Performance Standards

NWPA

  Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982

NYMEX

  New York Mercantile Exchange

OCI

  Other Comprehensive Income

OIESO

  Ontario Independent Electricity System Operator

OPEB

  Other Postretirement Employee Benefits

PA DEP

  Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection

PAPUC

  Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission

PGC

  Purchased Gas Cost Clause

PJM

  PJM Interconnection, LLC

POLR

  Provider of Last Resort

POR

  Purchase of Receivables

PPA

  Power Purchase Agreement

Price-Anderson Act

  Price-Anderson Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act of 1957

PRP

  Potentially Responsible Parties

PSEG

  Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated

PURTA

  Pennsylvania Public Realty Tax Act

PV

  Photovoltaic

RCRA

  Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, as amended

REC

  Renewable Energy Credit which is issued for each megawatt hour of generation from a qualified renewable energy source

Regulatory Agreement Units

  Nuclear generating units whose decommissioning-related activities are subject to contractual elimination under regulatory accounting

RES

  Retail Electric Suppliers

RFP

  Request for Proposal

 

3


Other Terms and Abbreviations

Rider

  Reconcilable Surcharge Recovery Mechanism

RGGI

  Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative

RMC

  Risk Management Committee

RPM

  PJM Reliability Pricing Model

RPS

  Renewable Energy Portfolio Standards

RTEP

  Regional Transmission Expansion Plan

RTO

  Regional Transmission Organization

S&P

  Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services

SEC

  United States Securities and Exchange Commission

Senate Bill 1

  Maryland Senate Bill 1

SERC

  SERC Reliability Corporation (formerly Southeast Electric Reliability Council)

SERP

  Supplemental Employee Retirement Plan

SFC

Supplier Forward Contract

SGIG

  Smart Grid Investment Grant

SGIP

  Smart Grid Initiative Program

SILO

  Sale-In, Lease-Out

SMP

  Smart Meter Program

SMPIP

  Smart Meter Procurement and Installation Plan

SNF

  Spent Nuclear Fuel

SOS

  Standard Offer Service

SPP

  Southwest Power Pool

Tax Relief Act of 2010

  Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization and Job Creation Act of 2010

TEG

  Termoelectrica del Golfo

TEP

  Termoelectrica Penoles

Upstream

  Natural gas exploration and production activities

VIE

  Variable Interest Entity

WECC

  Western Electric Coordinating Council

 

4


FILING FORMAT

 

This combined Annual Report on Form 10-K is being filed separately by the Registrants. Information contained herein relating to any individual Registrant is filed by such Registrant on its own behalf. No Registrant makes any representation as to information relating to any other Registrant.

 

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

 

Certain of the matters discussed in this Report are forward-looking statements, within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, that are subject to risks and uncertainties. The factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements made by a Registrant include those factors discussed herein, including those factors with respect to such Registrant discussed in (a) ITEM 1A. Risk Factors, (b) ITEM 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, (c) ITEM 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data: Note 1922 and (d) other factors discussed herein and in other filings with the SEC by the Registrants. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which apply only as of the date of this Report. None of the Registrants undertakes any obligation to publicly release any revision to its forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this Report.

 

WHERE TO FIND MORE INFORMATION

 

The public may read and copy any reports or other information that the Registrants file with the SEC at the SEC’s public reference room at 100 F Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20549. The public may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at1-800-SEC-0330. These documents are also available to the public from commercial document retrieval services, the website maintained by the SEC atwww.sec.gov and the Registrants’ websites atwww.exeloncorp.com. Information contained on the Registrants’ websites shall not be deemed incorporated into, or to be a part of, this Report.

 

5


PART I

 

ITEM 1.BUSINESS

 

General

 

Corporate Structure and Business and Other Information

 

Exelon, incorporated in Pennsylvania in February 1999, is a utility services holding company engaged, through its principal subsidiary, Generation, in the energy generation business, and through its principal subsidiaries ComEd, PECO and BGE, in the energy delivery businesses discussed below. Exelon’s principal executive offices are located at 10 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois 60603, and its telephone number is 312-394-7398.

 

Generation

 

Generation’s integrated business consists of its owned and contracted electric generating facilities and investments in generation ventures that are marketed through its leading customer-facing activities. These customer-facing activities include, wholesale energy marketing operations and its competitive retail customer supply of electric and natural gas products and services, including renewable energy products, risk management services and natural gas exploration and production activities. Generation has six reportable segments consisting of the Mid-Atlantic, Midwest, New England, New York, ERCOT and Other regions.Regions.

 

Generation was formed in 2000 as a Pennsylvania limited liability company. Generation began operations as a result of a corporate restructuring, effective January 1, 2001, in which Exelon separated its generation and other competitive businesses from its regulated energy delivery businesses at ComEd and PECO. Generation’s principal executive offices are located at 300 Exelon Way, Kennett Square, Pennsylvania 19348, and its telephone number is 610-765-5959.

 

ComEd

 

ComEd’s energy delivery business consists of the purchase and regulated retail sale of electricity and the provision of transmission and distribution services to retail customers in northern Illinois, including the City of Chicago.

 

ComEd was organized in the State of Illinois in 1913 as a result of the merger of Cosmopolitan Electric Company into the original corporation named Commonwealth Edison Company, which was incorporated in 1907. ComEd’s principal executive offices are located at 440 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60605, and its telephone number is 312-394-4321.

 

PECO

 

PECO’s energy delivery business consists of the purchase and regulated retail sale of electricity and the provision of transmission and distribution services to retail customers in southeastern Pennsylvania, including the City of Philadelphia, as well as the purchase and regulated retail sale of natural gas and the provision of natural gas distribution services to retail customers in the Pennsylvania counties surrounding the City of Philadelphia.

 

PECO was incorporated in Pennsylvania in 1929. PECO’s principal executive offices are located at 2301 Market Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103, and its telephone number is 215-841-4000.

 

BGE

 

BGE’s energy delivery business consists of the purchase and regulated retail sale of electricity and the provision of transmission and distribution services to retail customers in central Maryland,

 

6


including the City of Baltimore, as well as the purchase and regulated retail sale of natural gas and the provision of gas distribution services to retail customers in central Maryland, including the City of Baltimore.

 

BGE was incorporated in Maryland in 1906. BGE’s principal executive offices are located at 110 West Fayette Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21201, and its telephone number is 410-234-5000.

 

Operating Segments

 

See Note 2124 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on Exelon’s operating segments.

 

Merger with Constellation Energy Group, Inc.

 

On March 12, 2012, Exelon completed the merger contemplated by the Merger Agreement among Exelon, Bolt Acquisition Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of Exelon (Merger Sub), and Constellation Energy Group, Inc.Constellation. As a result of that merger, Merger Sub was merged into Constellation (the Initial Merger) and Constellation became a wholly owned subsidiary of Exelon. Following the completion of the Initial Merger, Exelon and Constellation completed a series of internal corporate organizational restructuring transactions. Constellation merged with and into Exelon, with Exelon continuing as the surviving corporation (the Upstream Merger). Simultaneously with the Upstream Merger, Constellation’s interest in RF HoldCo LLC, which holds Constellation’s interest in BGE, was transferred to Exelon Energy Delivery Company, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Exelon that also owns Exelon’s interests in ComEd and PECO. Following the Upstream Merger and the transfer of RF HoldCo LLC, Exelon contributed to Generation certain subsidiaries, including those with generation and customer supply operations that were acquired from Constellation as a result of the Initial Merger and the Upstream Merger. See Note 4 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on the Constellation transaction.

 

Generation

 

Generation, is one of the largest competitive electric generation companies in the United States as measured by owned and contracted MW.MW, physically delivers and markets power across multiple geographic regions through its customer-facing business, Constellation. Generation creates incremental strategic value by operatingoperates in well-developed energy markets and employs an integrated hedging strategy to manage commodity price volatility. Its generation fleet, including its nuclear plants which consistently operate at high capacity factors, also provide geographic and supply source diversity. These factors help Generation mitigate the current challenging conditions in competitive energy markets. Generation operates as an integrated business, leveraging its owned and matching its largecontracted electric generation fleet with a leading customer-facing platform. Generation’s presence in well-developed energy markets, its integrated hedging strategy mitigating short-termcapacity to market volatility, and its low-cost nuclear generating fleet operating consistently at high capacity factors, position it wellsell power to succeed in competitive energy markets.

Generation’s customer-facing business, now referred to as Constellation, utilizes Generation’s energy generation portfolio to ensure delivery of energy to both wholesale and retail customers. Generation’s customers under long-terminclude distribution utilities, municipalities, cooperatives, financial institutions, and short-term contracts,commercial, industrial, governmental, and residential customers in spotcompetitive markets. Generation also sells natural gas and renewable energy and other energy-related products and other services, to meet its customers’ requirements. Generation is dependent upon continued deregulation of retail electric and engages in natural gas marketsexploration and its ability to generate and obtain supplies of electricity and gas at competitive prices in the market.production activities.

 

Generation is a public utility under the Federal Power Act and is subject to FERC’s exclusive ratemaking jurisdiction over wholesale sales of electricity and the transmission of electricity in interstate commerce. Under the Federal Power Act, FERC has the authority to grant or deny market-based rates for sales of energy, capacity and ancillary services to ensure that such sales are just and reasonable. FERC’s jurisdiction over ratemaking also includes the authority to suspend the market-based rates of utilities (including Generation, which is a public utility as FERC defines that term) and set cost-based rates should FERC find that its previous grant of market-based rates authority is no longer just and reasonable. Other matters subject to FERC jurisdiction include, but are not limited to, third-party

7


financings; review of mergers; dispositions of jurisdictional facilities and acquisitions of securities of

7


another public utility or an existing operational generating facility; affiliate transactions; intercompany financings and cash management arrangements; certain internal corporate reorganizations; and certain holding company acquisitions of public utility and holding company securities. Additionally, ERCOT is not subject to regulation by FERC but performs a similar function in Texas.Texas to that performed by RTOs in markets regulated by FERC. Specific operations of Generation are also subject to the jurisdiction of various other Federal, state, regional and local agencies, including the NRC and Federal and state environmental protection agencies. Additionally, Generation is subject to mandatory reliability standards promulgated by the NERC, with the approval of FERC.

 

RTOs and ISOs exist in a number of regions to provide transmission service across multiple transmission systems. CAISO, PJM, MISO, ISO-NE ISO-NY and SPP, have been approved by FERC as RTOs.RTOs, and CAISO and ISO-NY have been approved as ISOs. These entities are responsible for regional planning, managing transmission congestion, developing wholesale markets for energy and capacity, maintaining reliability, market monitoring, the scheduling of physical power sales brokered through ICE and NYMEX and the elimination or reduction of redundant transmission charges imposed by multiple transmission providers when wholesale customers take transmission service across several transmission systems.

 

Significant Acquisitions

 

Antelope Valley Solar Ranch One.On September 30, 2011, Generation acquiredExelon announced the completion of its acquisition of all of the interests in Antelope Valley, Solar Ranch One (Antelope Valley), a 230-MW solar photovoltaic (PV) project under development in northern Los Angeles County, California, from First Solar, Inc., which developedis developing, building, operating, and will build, operate, and maintainmaintaining the project. The first blockportion of the project began operations in December 2012, with threesix additional blocks coming online in February 2013 and an expectation2013. Exelon has been informed by First Solar of issues relating to delays in the certification of certain components relating to the final two blocks of the project, which will delay commercial operation of these two blocks until the first half of 2014. The delay will not have a material financial effect on Exelon. Exelon expects the project to be in full commercial operation by the end of the third quarter of 2013. When fully operational, Antelope Valley will be one of the largest PV solar projects in the world, with approximately 3.8 million solar panels generating enough clean,first half of 2014. The acquisition supports the Exelon commitment to renewable electricity to power the equivalentenergy as part of 75,000 average homes per year.Exelon 2020. The project has a 25-year PPA, approved by the California Public Utilities Commission,CPUC, with Pacific Gas & Electric Company for the full output of the plant. Exelon expectsUpon completion, the facility will add 230 MWs to invest up to $701 million in equity inGeneration’s renewable generation fleet. Total capitalized costs for the project through 2013. The DOE’s Loan Programs Office issued a loan guarantee of up to $646 million to support project financing for Antelope Valley. Exelon expects the total investment of up to $1.3 billionfacility are expected to be accretive to earnings and cash flows beginning in 2013. Once constructed and operating, the project is expected to have stable earnings and cash flow profiles due to the PPA.approximately $1.1 billion. Total capitalized costs incurred through December 31, 2013 were approximately $968 million.

 

Wolf Hollow Generating Station.On August 24, 2011, Generation completed the acquisition of all of the equity interests of Wolf Hollow, LLC (Wolf Hollow), a combined-cycle natural gas-fired power plant in north Texas, for a purchase price of $311 million which increased Generation’s owned capacity within the ERCOT power market by 720 MWs.

 

Exelon Wind. In 2010, Generation acquired 735 MWs of installed, operating wind capacity located in eight states for approximately $893 million in cash. In addition, Generation acquired development stage projects which became fully operational in 2012.

See Note 4 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on the above acquisitions.

 

Significant Dispositions

 

Maryland Clean Coal Stations.Associated with certain of the regulatory approvals required for the merger, Exelon and Constellation agreed to enter into contracts to sell three Constellation generating stations, Brandon Shores and H.A. Wagner in Anne Arundel County, Maryland, and C.P. Crane in Baltimore County, Maryland within 150 days (subsequently extended 30 days by the DOJ)

8


following the merger completion. In accordance with that agreement, on On November 30, 2012, a subsidiary of Generation sold these threethe Brandon Shores generating station and H.A. Wagner generating station in Anne Arundel County, Maryland, and the C.P. Crane generating stations and associated assetsstation in Baltimore County, Maryland to Raven Power Holdings LLC, a subsidiary of Riverstone Holdings LLC to comply with certain of the regulatory approvals required by the merger, for estimated net proceeds from the sale of approximately $371 million, which resulted in a pre-tax loss of $272 million. See Note 4 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

8


Generating Resources

 

At December 31, 2012,2013, the generating resources of Generation consisted of the following:

 

Type of Capacity

  MW 

Owned generation assets (a)

  

Nuclear

   17,20217,263 

Fossil

   12,05012,165 

Renewable (including Hydroelectric)(b)

   3,5163,710 
  

 

 

 

Owned generation assets

   32,76833,138 

Long-term power purchase contracts(c)

   9,2969,426 

Investment in CENG(d)

   1,9631,999 
  

 

 

 

Total generating resources

   44,02744,563 
  

 

 

 

 

(a)See “Fuel” for sources of fuels used in electric generation.
(b)Includes equity method investment in certain generating facilities.
(c)Excludes contracts with CENG. See Long-Term Power Purchase Contracts table in this section for additional information.
(d)Generation owns a 50.01% interest in CENG, a joint venture with EDF. See ITEM 2. PROPERTIES—Generation and Note 22—25—Related Party Transactions of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Generation has six reportable segments, the Mid-Atlantic, Midwest, New England, New York, ERCOT and Other Regions, representing the different geographical areas in which Generation’s customer-facing activities are conducted and where Generation’s generating resources are located.

Mid-Atlantic represents operations in the eastern half of PJM, which includes Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, Delaware, the District of Columbia and parts of North Carolina (approximately 32%37% of capacity).

Midwest represents operations in the western half of PJM, which includes portions of Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky and Tennessee; and the entire United States footprint of MISO excluding MISO’s Southern Region, which covers all or most of North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, and the remaining parts of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan and Ohio not covered by PJM; and parts of Montana, Missouri and Kentucky (approximately 34% of capacity).

New England represents the operations within the ISO-NE covering the states of Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Vermont (approximately 8% of capacity).

New York represents the operations within ISO-NY, which covers the state of New York in its entirety (approximately 3% of capacity).

ERCOT represents operations within Electric Reliability Council of Texas, covering most of the state of Texas (approximately 11%12% of capacity).

Other Regions is an aggregate of regions not considered individually significant (approximately 12%6% of capacity).

 

Nuclear Facilities

 

Generation has ownership interests in eleven nuclear generating stations currently in service, consisting of 19 units with an aggregate of 17,20217,263 MW of capacity. Generation wholly owns all of its nuclear generating stations, except for Quad Cities Generating Station (75% ownership), Peach Bottom Generating Station (50% ownership) and Salem Generating Station (Salem) (42.59% ownership)., which are consolidated on Exelon’s financial statements relative to its proportionate ownership interest in each unit. Generation’s nuclear generating stations are all operated by

9


Generation, with the exception of the two units at Salem, which are operated by PSEG Nuclear, LLC (PSEG Nuclear), an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of PSEG. In 20122013 and 2011,2012, electric supply (in GWh) generated from

9


the nuclear generating facilities was 53%57% and 82%53%, respectively, of Generation’s total electric supply, which also includes fossil, hydroelectric and renewable generation and electric supply purchased for resale. The majority of this output was dispatched to support Generation’s wholesale and retail power marketing activities. See ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS for further discussion of Generation’s electric supply sources.

 

Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, Inc.

 

Generation also owns a 50.01% interest in CENG, a joint venture with EDF. CENG is governed by a board of ten directors, five of which are appointed by Generation and five by EDF. CENG owns and operates a total of five nuclear generating facilities on three sites, Calvert Cliffs, Ginna and Nine Mile Point. CENG’s ownership share in the total capacity of these units is 3,9253,998 MW. See ITEM 2. PROPERTIES for additional information on these sites.

 

On July 29, 2013, Exelon, Generation and subsidiaries of Generation entered into a Master Agreement with EDF, EDF Inc. (EDFI) (a subsidiary of EDF) and CENG. The Master Agreement contemplates that the parties will execute a series of additional agreements at a closing that will occur following the receipt of regulatory approvals and the satisfaction of other customary closing conditions. Exelon currently expects that the closing will occur early in the second quarter of 2014.

At the closing, Generation, CENG and subsidiaries of CENG will execute a Nuclear Operating Services Agreement pursuant to which Generation will operate the CENG nuclear generation fleet owned by CENG subsidiaries and provide corporate and administrative services for the remaining life of the CENG nuclear plants as if they were a part of the Generation nuclear fleet, subject to EDFI’s rights as a member of CENG. CENG will reimburse Generation for its direct and allocated costs for such services. The Nuclear Operating Services Agreement will replace the SSA. At the closing, Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, a subsidiary of CENG, will also assign to Generation its obligations as Operator of Nine Mile Point Unit 2 under an operating agreement with the co-owner. In addition, at the closing the PSAA will be amended and extended until the complete and permanent cessation of operation of the CENG generation plants.

At closing, Generation will make a $400 million loan to CENG bearing interest at 5.25% per annum, payable out of specified available cash flows of CENG and, in any event, payable upon settlement of the Put Option Agreement discussed below, if the put option is exercised, or payable upon the maturity date of the note (which will be 20 years from the closing), whichever occurs first. Immediately following receipt of the proceeds of such loan, CENG will make a $400 million special distribution to EDFI. The parties will also execute a Fourth Amended and Restated Operating Agreement for CENG, pursuant to which, among other things, CENG will commit to make preferred distributions to Generation (after repayment of the $400 million loan) quarterly out of specified available cash flows, until Generation has received aggregate distributions of $400 million plus a unit contingent PPAreturn of 8.5% per annum from the date of the special distribution to EDFI.

Generation and EDFI will also enter into a Put Option Agreement at closing pursuant to which EDFI will have the option, exercisable beginning in 2016 and thereafter until June 30, 2022, to sell its 49.99% interest in CENG to Generation for a fair market value price determined by agreement of the parties, or absent agreement, a third party arbitration process. The appraisers determining fair market value of EDF’s 49.99% interest in CENG under the Put Option Agreement are instructed to take into account all rights and obligations under the CENG Operating Agreement, including Generation’s rights with respect to any unpaid aggregate preferred distributions and the related return, and the value of Generation’s rights to other distributions. The beginning of the exercise period will be accelerated if

10


Exelon’s affiliates cease to own a majority of CENG and exercise a related right to terminate the Nuclear Operating Services Agreement. In addition, under limited circumstances, the period for exercise of the put option may be extended for 18 months.

Generation will execute an Indemnity Agreement pursuant to which Generation will indemnify EDF and its affiliates against third party claims that may arise from any future nuclear incident (as defined in the Price Anderson Act) in connection with the CENG nuclear plants or their operations. Exelon will guarantee Generation’s obligations under this indemnity.

CENG owns 100% of four nuclear units in Maryland and New York and 82% of Nine Mile Point Unit 2 in New York. Generation currently has an agreement under which it purchases 85 to 90%is purchasing 85% of the nuclear plant output of CENG’s nuclear generating facilitiesowned by CENG that is not sold to third parties under the pre-existing firm and unit contingent PPAs through 2014. Beginning on January 1, 2015 and continuing to the end of the liveslife of the respective nuclear facilities,plants, Generation will purchase on a unit contingent basis 50.01% of the nuclear plant output owned by CENG, and EDF will purchase on a unit contingent basis 49.99% of the nuclear plant output owned by CENG (EDF PPA). This agreement will continue to be effective and is not affected by the Master Agreement, except that if the put option under the Master Agreement is exercised, then the EDF PPA would transfer to Generation upon the completion of the CENG’s nuclear facilities. All commitmentsPut Option Agreement transaction.

Currently, Exelon and Generation account for its investment in CENG under the equity method of accounting. The transfer of the operational control to purchase subsequentExelon and Generation will result in Exelon and Generation being required to December 31, 2014 areconsolidate the financial position and results of operations of CENG. When that accounting change occurs, Exelon and Generation will derecognize its equity method investment in CENG and will record all assets, liabilities and the non-controlling interest in CENG at market prices.fair value on Exelon and Generation’s balance sheets. Any difference between the former carrying value and newly recorded fair value at that date will be recognized as a gain or loss upon consolidation, which could be material to Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations. See Note 22—Related Party Transactions5—Investment in CENG of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding CENG.

 

Nuclear Operations.Capacity factors, which are significantly affected by the number and duration of refueling and non-refueling outages, can have a significant impact on Generation’s results of operations. As the largest generator of nuclear power in the United States, Generation can negotiate favorable terms for the materials and services that its business requires. Generation’s operations from its nuclear plants have historically had minimal environmental impact and the plants have a safe operating history.

 

During 20122013 and 2011,2012, the nuclear generating facilities operated by Generation achieved capacity factors of 92.7%94.1% and 93.3%92.7%, respectively. Generation manages its scheduled refueling outages to minimize their duration and to maintain high nuclear generating capacity factors, resulting in a stable generation base for Generation’s wholesale and retail marketing and trading activities. During scheduled refueling outages, Generation performs maintenance and equipment upgrades in order to minimize the occurrence of unplanned outages and to maintain safe, reliable operations.

 

In addition to the rigorous maintenance and equipment upgrades performed by Generation during scheduled refueling outages, Generation has extensive operating and security procedures in place to ensure the safe operation of the nuclear units. Generation has extensive safety systems in place to protect the plant, personnel and surrounding area in the unlikely event of an accident.

 

Regulation of Nuclear Power Generation.Generation is subject to the jurisdiction of the NRC with respect to the operation of its nuclear generating stations, including the licensing for operation of each unit. The NRC subjects nuclear generating stations to continuing review and regulation covering, among other things, operations, maintenance, emergency planning, security and environmental and radiological aspects of those stations. As part of its reactor oversight process, the NRC continuously

11


assesses unit performance indicators and inspection results, and communicates its assessment on a semi-annual basis. As of December 31, 2012,2013, the NRC categorized eachDresden units 2 and 3, LaSalle unit 2, and Clinton in the Regulatory Response Column, which is the second highest of five performance bands. All other units operated by Generation are categorized in the Licensee Response Column as of December 31, 2013, which is the highest of five performance bands.band. On January 1, 2014, Dresden units 2 and 3 returned to the Licensee Response Column. The NRC may modify, suspend or revoke operating licenses and impose civil penalties for failure to comply with the Atomic Energy Act, the regulations under such Act or the terms of the operating licenses. Changes in

10


regulations by the NRC may require a substantial increase in capital expenditures for nuclear generating facilities and/or increased operating costs of nuclear generating units.

 

On March 11, 2011, Japan experienced a 9.0 magnitude earthquake and ensuing tsunami that seriously damaged the nuclear units at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station, which are operated by Tokyo Electric Power Co. In July 2011, an NRC Task Force formed in the aftermath of the Fukushima Daiichi events issued a report of its review of the accident, including recommendations for future regulatory action by the NRC to be taken in the near and longer term. The Task Force’s report concluded that nuclear reactors in the United States are operating safely and do not present an imminent risk to public health and safety. The NRC and its staff have issued orders and implementation guidance for commercial reactor licensees operating in the United States. The NRC and its staff are continuing to evaluate additional requirements. For additional information on the NRC actions related to the Japan Earthquake and Tsunami and the industry’s response, see ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS—Executive Overview.

 

Licenses. Generation has 40-year operating licenses from the NRC for each of its nuclear units and has received 20-year operating license renewals for Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3, Dresden Units 2 and 3, Quad Cities Units 1 and 2, Oyster Creek and Three Mile Island Unit 1. Additionally, PSEG has 40-year operating licenses from the NRC and on June 30, 2011,has received 20-year operating license renewals for Salem Units 1 and 2. On December 8, 2010, in connection with an Administrative Consent Order (ACO) with the NJDEP, Exelon announced that Generation will permanently cease generation operations at Oyster Creek by December 31, 2019. The following table summarizes the current operating license expiration dates for Generation’s nuclear facilities in service:

 

Station

  Unit   In-Service
Date (a)
   Current License
Expiration
   Unit   In-Service
Date (a)
   Current License
Expiration
 

Braidwood(b)

   1    1988    2026    1    1988    2026 
   2    1988    2027    2    1988    2027 

Byron(b)

   1    1985    2024    1    1985    2024 
   2    1987    2026    2    1987    2026 

Clinton

   1    1987    2026    1    1987    2026 

Dresden (b)(c)

   2    1970    2029    2    1970    2029 
   3    1971    2031    3    1971    2031 

LaSalle

   1    1984    2022    1    1984    2022 
   2    1984    2023    2    1984    2023 

Limerick(c)(d)

   1    1986    2024    1    1986    2024 
   2    1990    2029    2    1990    2029 

Oyster Creek (d)(e)

   1    1969    2029    1    1969    2029 

Peach Bottom (b)(c)

   2    1974    2033    2    1974    2033 
   3    1974    2034    3    1974    2034 

Quad Cities (b)(c)

   1    1973    2032    1    1973    2032 
   2    1973    2032    2    1973    2032 

Salem (b)(c)

   1    1977    2036    1    1977    2036 
   2    1981    2040    2    1981    2040 

Three Mile Island (b)(c)

   1    1974    2034    1    1974    2034 

12


 

(a)Denotes year in which nuclear unit began commercial operations.
(b)On May 29, 2013, Generation submitted applications to the NRC to extend the operating licenses of Braidwood Units 1 and 2 and Byron Units 1 and 2 by 20 years.
(c)Stations for which the NRC has issued a renewed operating licenses.
(c)(d)OnIn June 22, 2011, Generation submitted applications to the NRC to extend the operating licenses of Limerick Units 1 and 2 by 20 years.
(d)(e)In December 2010, Exelon announced that Generation will permanently cease generation operations at Oyster Creek by December 31, 2019.

 

Generation expects to apply for and obtain approval of license renewals for the remaining nuclear units. The operating license renewal process takes approximately four to five years from the commencement of the renewal process until completion of the NRC’s review. The NRC review process takes approximately two years from the docketing of an application. Each requested license renewal is expected to be for 20 years beyond the original license expiration. Depreciation provisions are based on the estimated useful lives of the stations, which reflect the actual and assumed renewal of operating licenses for all of Generation’s operating nuclear generating stations except for Oyster Creek.

 

11


In August 2012, Generation entered into an operating services agreement with the Omaha Public Power District (OPPD) to provide operational and managerial support services for the Fort Calhoun Station and a licensing agreement for use of the Exelon Nuclear Management Model. The terms for both agreements are 20 years. OPPD will continue to own the plant and remain the NRC licensee.

 

Nuclear Uprate Program. Generation is engaged in individual projects as part of a planned power uprate program across its nuclear fleet. Using proven technologies,When economically viable, the projects take advantage of new production and measurement technologies, new materials and application of expertise gained from a half-century of nuclear power operations. The uprates are being undertaken pursuant to an organized, strategically sequenced implementation plan. The implementation effort includes a periodic review and refinement of the plan in light of changing market conditions. Decisions to implement uprates at particular nuclear plants, the amount of expenditures to implement the plan, and the actual MWs of additional capacity attributable to the uprate program will be determined on a project-by-project basis in accordance with Exelon’s normal project evaluation standards and ultimately will depend on market conditions, economic and policy considerations, and other factors.

Based on recentongoing reviews, the nuclear uprate implementation plan was adjusted during 2012, primarily2013 to cancel certain projects. The Measurement Uncertainty Recapture uprate projects at the Dresden and Quad Cities nuclear stations were cancelled as a result of the cost of additional plant modifications identified during final design work which, when combined with then current market conditions, including low natural gas prices andmade the continued sluggish economy, resulting inprojects not economically viable. Additionally, the deferral or cancellation of certain projects. In addition,market conditions prompted Generation to cancel the ability to implement several projects requires the successful resolution of various technical matters. The resolution of these matters may further affect the timing and amount of the power increases associated with the power uprate initiative. Following these reviews, any projects that may be undertaken are expected to be completed by the end of 2021, and may result in between 1,125 and 1,200 MWs of additional capacity at an overnight cost of approximately $3.4 billion in 2013 dollars. Overnight costs do not include financing costs or cost escalation.

Approximately 75% of the planned uprate MWs projects are either complete and in service or in the installation or design and engineering phases across seven nuclear stations including Limerick and Peach Bottom in Pennsylvania and Byron, Braidwood, Dresden, LaSalle and Quad Cities in Illinois. The remaining 25% of uprate MWs, if and when completed, would come from anpreviously deferred extended power uprate projectprojects at the LaSalle and Limerick currently schedulednuclear stations. During 2013, Generation recorded a pre-tax charge to begin in 2017. Fromoperating and maintenance expense and interest expense of approximately $111 million and $8 million, respectively, to accrue remaining costs and reverse the previously capitalized costs.

Under the nuclear uprate program, announcement in 2008 through December 31, 2012, Generation has placed ininto service 310projects representing 316 MWs of new nuclear generation through the uprate program at a cost of approximately $810$952 million, which has been capitalized to property, plant and equipment on Exelon’s and Generation’s consolidated balance sheets. At December 31, 2012, an additional approximate $3102013, Generation has capitalized $203 million has been capitalized to construction work in progress (CWIP) within property, plant and equipment on Exelon’s and Generation’s consolidated balance sheets,for nuclear uprate projects expected to be placed in service by the end of which approximately $200 million (202 MWs) relates to projects currently2016, consisting of 200 MWs of new nuclear generation, that are in the installation phase.phase across four nuclear stations; Peach Bottom in Pennsylvania and Byron, Braidwood and Dresden in Illinois. The remaining $110 million (346 MWs) in CWIP relates tospend associated with these projects currently in the design and engineering phase that continueis expected to be evaluated in accordance with Exelon’s normal project evaluation standards. The completionapproximately $300 million through the end of those projects in the design and engineering phase will ultimately depend on market conditions, economic and policy considerations, and other factors. As of December 31, 2012,2016. Generation believes that it is more likely than notprobable that allthese projects in CWIP will ultimately be placed in service.completed. If a project in the design and engineering phase is expected not to not be completed as planned, previously capitalized costs wouldwill be reversed through earnings as a charge to operating and maintenance expense.

New Nuclear Site Development. On August 28, 2012, Exelon halted efforts to gain initial federal regulatory approvals for new nuclear construction in Victoria County, Texasexpense and notified the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that it has withdrawn its related Early Site Permit application. The action is in response to low natural gas prices and economic and market conditions that have made construction

12


of new merchant nuclear power plants in competitive markets uneconomical now and for the foreseeable future. The withdrawal of the license application brings an end to all project activity.interest.

 

Nuclear Waste Disposal. There are no facilities for the reprocessing or permanent disposal of SNF currently in operation in the United States, nor has the NRC licensed any such facilities. Generation currently stores all SNF generated by its nuclear generating facilities in on-site storage pools or in dry cask storage facilities. Since Generation’s SNF storage pools generally do not have sufficient storage capacity for the life of the respective plant, Generation has developed dry cask storage facilities to support operations.

 

13


As of December 31, 2012,2013, Generation had approximately 58,10059,900 SNF assemblies (13,900(14,400 tons) stored on site in SNF pools or dry cask storage (this includes SNF assemblies at Zion Station, for which Generation retains ownership even though the responsibility for decommissioning Zion Station has been assumed by another party; see Note 1315 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding Zion Station Decommissioning). All currently operating Generation-owned nuclear sites have on-site dry cask storage, except for Clinton and Three Mile Island. Clinton and Three Mile Island will currently lose full core reserve, which is when the on-site storage pool will no longer have sufficient space to receive a full complement of fuel from the reactor core, in 2015 and 2023, respectively. Dry cask storage will be in operation at Clinton and is expected to be in operation at Three Mile Island prior to the closing of their respective on-site storage pools. On-site dry cask storage in concert with on-site storage pools will be capable of meeting all current and future SNF storage requirements at Generation’s sites through the end of the license renewal periods and through decommissioning.

 

For a discussion of matters associated with Generation’s contracts with the DOE for the disposal of SNF, see Note 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

As a by-product of their operations, nuclear generating units produce LLRW. LLRW is accumulated at each generating station and permanently disposed of at federally licensed disposal facilities. The Federal Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980 provides that states may enter into agreements to provide regional disposal facilities for LLRW and restrict use of those facilities to waste generated within the region. Illinois and Kentucky have entered into such an agreement, although neither state currently has an operational site and none is anticipated to be operational until after 2020.

 

Generation is currently utilizing on-site storage capacity at its nuclear generation stations for limited amounts of LLRW and has been shipping its Class A LLRW, which represent 93% of LLRW generated at its stations, to disposal facilities in Utah and South Carolina. The disposal facility in South Carolina at present is only receiving LLRW from LLRW generators in South Carolina, New Jersey (which includes Oyster Creek and Salem), and Connecticut. Generation has received NRC approval for its Peach Bottom and LaSalle stations that will allow storage at these sites of LLRW from its remaining stations with limited capacity. Generation now has enough storage capacity to store all Class B and C LLRW for the life of all stations in Generation’s nuclear fleet. During 2012, Generation entered into a six year contract to ship Class B and Class C LLRW to Texas. The terms of the agreement will provide for disposal of all current Class B and Class C LLRW stored at the stations, as well as the waste generated during the term of the agreement. Although Texas started accepting waste for disposal in 2012, the Texas site is curie limited (3.9 million curies for 15 years). With this limit, the annual facility volume will not match industry production of activated hardware, and on-site storage is expected to be required for the Generation boiling water reactors. Generation continues to pursue alternative disposal strategies for LLRW, including an LLRW reduction program to minimize cost impacts and on-site storage.

 

Nuclear Insurance.Generation is subject to liability, property damage and other risks associated with a major accidental outageincidents at any of its nuclear stations, including the CENG nuclear stations. Generation has reduced its financial exposure to these risks through insurance and other industry risk-sharing provisions. See “Nuclear Insurance” within Note 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for details.

 

13


For information regarding property insurance, see ITEM 2. PROPERTIES—Generation. Generation is self-insured to the extent that any losses may exceed the amount of insurance maintained or are within the policy deductible for its insured losses. Such losses could have a material adverse effect on Exelon’s and Generation’s financial condition and results of operations.

 

14


Decommissioning.NRC regulations require that licensees of nuclear generating facilities demonstrate reasonable assurance that funds will be available in specified minimum amounts at the end of the life of the facility to decommission the facility. See ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS—Exelon Corporation, Executive Overview; ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS, Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates, Nuclear Decommissioning, Asset Retirement Obligations and Nuclear Decommissioning Trust Fund Investments; and Notes 3, 911 and 1315 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding Generation’s NDT funds and its decommissioning obligations.

 

Dresden Unit 1 and Peach Bottom Unit 1 have ceased power generation. SNF at Dresden Unit 1 is currently being stored in dry cask storage until a permanent repository under the NWPA is completed. All SNF for Peach Bottom Unit 1, which ceased operation in 1974, has been removed from the site and the SNF pool is drained and decontaminated. Generation’s estimated ARO liability to decommission Dresden Unit 1 and Peach Bottom Unit 1 as of December 31, 20122013 was $195$208 million and $121$114 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2012,2013, NDT funds set aside to pay for these obligations were $390$436 million.

 

Zion Station Decommissioning.On December 11, 2007, Generation entered into an Asset Sale Agreement (ASA) with EnergySolutions, Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiaries, EnergySolutions, LLC (EnergySolutions) and ZionSolutions, LLC (ZionSolutions) under which ZionSolutions has assumed responsibility for decommissioning Zion Station, which is located in Zion, Illinois and ceased operation in 1998.

 

On September 1, 2010, Generation and EnergySolutions completed the transactions contemplated by the ASA. Specifically, Generation transferred to ZionSolutions substantially all of the assets (other than land) associated with Zion Station, including assets held in related NDT funds. In consideration for Generation’s transfer of those assets, ZionSolutions assumed decommissioning and other liabilities, excluding the obligation to dispose of SNF, associated with Zion Station. Pursuant to the ASA, ZionSolutions canwill periodically request reimbursement from the Zion Station-related NDT funds for costs incurred related to the decommissioning efforts at Zion Station. However, ZionSolutions is subject to certain restrictions on its ability to request reimbursement; specifically, if certain milestones as defined in the ASA are not met, all or a portion of requested reimbursements shall be deferred until such milestones are met. See Note 1315 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding Zion Station Decommissioning and see Note 2 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion of variable interest entity considerations related to ZionSolutions.

 

Fossil and Renewable Facilities (including Hydroelectric)

 

Generation has ownership interests in 15,56615,875 MW of capacity in fossil and renewable generating facilities currently in service. Generation wholly owns all of its fossil and renewable generating stations, with the exception of: (1) jointly-ownedjointly owned facilities that include Keystone, Conemaugh, and Wyman; (2) ownership interests through equity method investments in Colver, Malacha, Safe Harbor, and Sunnyside; and (3) certain wind project entities with minority interest owners.owners, see Note 2 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on these wind project entities. Generation’s fossil and renewable generating stations are all operated by Generation, with the exception of Colver, Conemaugh, Keystone, LaPorte, Malacha, Safe Harbor, Sunnyside and Wyman, which are operated

14


by third parties. In 20122013 and 2011,2012, electric supply (in GWh) generated from owned fossil and renewable generating facilities was 12%15% and 7%12%, respectively, of Generation’s total electric supply. The majority of this output was dispatched to support Generation’s wholesale and retail power

15


marketing activities. For additional information regarding Generation’s electric generating facilities, see ITEM 2. PROPERTIES—Generation.

Exelon Wind. During 2012, six development projects with a combined capacity of approximately 400 MWs began commercial operations. SeeGeneration and ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS—Exelon Corporation, Executive Overview for additional information.information on Generation Renewable Development.

 

Licenses. Fossil and renewable generation plants are generally not licensed, and, therefore, the decision on when to retire plants is, fundamentally, a commercial one. FERC has the exclusive authority to license most non-Federal hydropower projects located on navigable waterways or Federal lands, or connected to the interstate electric grid. On August 29, 2012 and August 30, 2012, Generation submitted hydroelectric license applications to the FERC for 46-year licenses for the Muddy Run Pumped Storage Project and the Conowingo Hydroelectric Project, respectively. TheBased on the latest FERC reviewprocedural schedule, the FERC licensing process is schedulednot expected to be completed byprior to the expiration of Muddy Run’s current license on August 31, 2014, and the expiration of Conowingo’s license on September 1, 2014, when2014. However, the current Conowingo and Muddy Runstations will continue to operate under annual licenses expire.until FERC takes action on the 46-year license applications. Refer to Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.

 

Insurance. Generation maintains business interruption insurance for its renewable projects, and delay in start-up insurance for its renewable projects currently under construction. Generation does not purchase business interruption insurance for its wholly owned fossil and hydroelectric operations. Generation maintains both property damage and liability insurance. For property damage and liability claims for these operations, Generation is self-insured to the extent that losses are within the policy deductible or exceed the amount of insurance maintained. Such losses could have a material adverse effect on Exelon’s and Generation’s financial condition and their results of operations and cash flows. For information regarding property insurance, see ITEM 2. PROPERTIES—Generation.

 

Long-Term Power Purchase Contracts

 

In addition to energy produced by owned generation assets, Generation sellssources electricity purchasedand other related output from plants it does not own under long-term contracts. The following tables summarize Generation’s long-term contracts to purchase unit-specific physical power with an original term in excess of one year in duration, by region, in effect as of December 31, 2012:2013:

 

Region

  Number of
Agreements
   Expiration Dates  Capacity (MW)   Number of
Agreements
   Expiration Dates  Capacity (MW) 

Mid-Atlantic(a)

   13   2013 - 2032   973    16   2016 - 2032   799 

Midwest

   10   2013 - 2026   2,981    7   2015 - 2022   1,734 

New England

   6   2015 - 2020   637    14   2014 - 2020   1,291 

New York(a)

   1   2013   100 

ERCOT

   3   2013 - 2022   1,088    5   2014 - 2026   1,489 

Other Regions

   10   2015 - 2030   3,517    11   2014 - 2030   4,113 
  

 

     

 

   

 

     

 

 

Total

   43      9,296    53      9,426 
  

 

     

 

   

 

     

 

 

 

   2013   2014   2015   2016   2017 

Capacity Expiring (MW)

   1,369    55    1,730    4    2,083 
   2014   2015   2016   2017   2018 

Capacity Expiring (MW)

   1,300    1,705     651    1,337    100 

 

(a)Excludes contracts with CENG.

 

1516


Fuel

 

The following table shows sources of electric supply in GWh for 20122013 and 2011:2012:

 

  Source of Electric Supply  (a)   Source of Electric Supply (a) 
      2012           2011             2013               2012       

Nuclear

   139,862    139,297    142,126    139,862 

Purchases—non-trading portfolio(b)

   91,994    18,908    69,791    91,994 

Fossil

   27,760    7,385    30,785    27,760 

Renewable

   4,079    4,253    6,420    4,079 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total supply

   263,695    169,843    249,122    263,695 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Represents Generation’s proportionate share of the output of its generating plants.
(b)Includes purchases in 2012 pursuant to Generation’s PPA with CENG. See Note 2225 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

The fuel costs for nuclear generation are less than those for fossil-fuel generation. Consequently, nuclear generation is generally the most cost-effective way for Generation to meet its wholesale and retail load servicing requirements.

 

The cycle of production and utilization of nuclear fuel includes the mining and milling of uranium ore into uranium concentrates, the conversion of uranium concentrates to uranium hexafluoride, the enrichment of the uranium hexafluoride and the fabrication of fuel assemblies. Generation has uranium concentrate inventory and supply contracts sufficient to meet all of its uranium concentrate requirements through 2016. Generation’s contracted conversion services are sufficient to meet all of its uranium conversion requirements through 2020. All of Generation’s enrichment requirements have been contracted through 2017.2018. Contracts for fuel fabrication have been obtained through 2018. Generation does not anticipate difficulty in obtaining the necessary uranium concentrates or conversion, enrichment or fabrication services to meet the nuclear fuel requirements of its nuclear units.

 

Natural gas is procured through long-term and short-term contracts, andas well as spot-market purchases. Fuel oil inventories are managed so that in the winter months sufficient volumes of fuel are available in the event of extreme weather conditions and during the remaining months to take advantage of favorable market pricing. Coal is procured primarily through annual supply contracts, with the remainder supplied through either short-term or spot-market purchases.

 

Generation uses financial instruments to mitigate price risk associated with certain commodity price exposures. Generation also hedges forward price risk, using both over-the-counter and exchange-traded instruments. See ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS, ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS, Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates and Note 1012 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding derivative financial instruments.

 

Power Marketing

 

Generation’s integrated business operations include the physical delivery and marketing of power obtained through its generation capacity and through long-term, intermediate-term and short-term contracts. Generation maintains an effective supply strategy through ownership of generation assets and power purchase and lease agreements. Generation has also contracted for access to additional generation through bilateral long-term PPAs. PPAs are commitments related to power generation of specific generation plants and/or are dispatchable in nature similar to asset ownership depending on

16


the type of underlying asset. Generation secures contracted generation as part of its overall strategic

17


plan, with objectives such as obtaining low-cost energy supply sources to meet its physical delivery obligations to both wholesale and retail customers and assisting customers to meet renewable portfolio standards. Generation may buy power to meet the energy demand of its customers, including ComEd, PECO and BGE. Generation sells electricity, natural gas, and related products and solutions to various customers, including distribution utilities, municipalities, cooperatives, and commercial, industrial, governmental, and residential customers in competitive markets. Generation’s customer facing operations combine a unified sales force with a customer-centric model that leverages technology to broaden the range of products and solutions offered, which Generation believes promotes stronger customer relationships. This model focuses on efficiency and cost reduction, which provides a platform that is scalable and able to capitalize on opportunities for future growth.

 

Generation’s purchases may be for more than the energy demanded by Generation’s customers. Generation then sells this open position, along with capacity not used to meet customer demand, in the wholesale electricity markets. Where necessary, Generation also purchases transmission service to ensure that it has reliable transmission capacity to physically move its power supplies to meet customer delivery needs in markets without an organized RTO. Generation also incorporates contingencies into its planning for extreme weather conditions, including potentially reserving capacity to meet summer loads at levels representative of warmer-than-normal weather conditions. Generation actively manages these physical and contractual assets in order to derive incremental value. Additionally, Generation is involved in the development, exploration, and harvesting of oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids properties.

 

Price Supply Risk Management

 

Generation also manages the price and supply risks for energy and fuel associated with generation assets and the risks of power marketing activities. Generation implements a three-year ratable sales plan to align its hedging strategy with its financial objectives. Generation also enters into transactions that are outside of this ratable sales plan. Generation is exposed to relatively greater commodity price risk in 2014 and beyond 2013 for which a larger portion of its electricity portfolio may be unhedged. Generation has been and will continue to be proactive in using hedging strategies to mitigate this risk in subsequent years. As of December 31, 2012,2013, the percentage of expected generation hedged for the major reportable segments was 94%-97%92%-95%, 62%-65% and 27%-30%30%-33% for 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2015,2016, respectively. The percentage of expected generation hedged is the amount of equivalent sales divided by the expected generation. Expected generation represents the amount of energy estimated to be generated or purchased through owned or contracted capacity, including purchased power from CENG. Equivalent sales represent all hedging products, which include economic hedges and certain non-derivative contracts, including sales to ComEd, PECO and BGE to serve their retail load. A portion of Generation’s hedging strategy may be implemented through the use of fuel products based on assumed correlations between power and fuel prices, which routinely change in the market. Generation also uses financial and commodity contracts for proprietary trading purposes, but this activity accounts for only a small portion of Generation’s efforts. The trading portfolio is subject to a risk management policy that includes stringent risk management limits, including volume, stop-loss and value-at-risk limits, to manage exposure to market risk. Additionally, the corporate risk management group and Exelon’s RMC monitor the financial risks of the wholesale and retail power marketing activities. See ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK for additional information.

 

1718


At December 31, 2012,2013, Generation’s short and long-term commitments relating to the purchase of energy and capacity from and to unaffiliated utilities and others were as follows:

 

  Net Capacity
Purchases (a)
   Power-Related
Purchases(b)
   Transmission Rights
Purchases(c)
   Purchased Energy
from CENG
   Total 

2013

  $374   $95   $28   $777   $1,274 

(in millions)

  Net Capacity
Purchases (a)
   REC
Purchases (b)
   Transmission Rights
Purchases (c)
   Purchased Energy
from CENG
   Total 

2014

   353    69    26    516    964   $412   $117   $25   $824   $1,378 

2015

   350    25    13    —      388    367    110    13    —      490 

2016

   266    11    2    —      279    284    76    2    —      362 

2017

   203    3    2    —      208    223    25    2    —      250 

2018

   112    3    2    —      117 

Thereafter

   469    5    34    —      508    414    3    32    —      449 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total

  $2,015   $208   $105   $1,293   $3,621   $1,812   $334   $76   $824   $3,046 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Net capacity purchases include PPAs and other capacity contracts including those that are accounted for as operating leases. Amounts presented in the commitments represent Generation’s expected payments under these arrangements at December 31, 2012,2013, net of fixed capacity payments expected to be received by Generation under contracts to resell such acquired capacity to third parties under long-term capacity sale contracts. Expected payments include certain fixed capacity charges which are contingentmay be reduced on plant availability.
(b)Power-Related Purchases include firm REC purchase agreements. The table excludes renewable energy purchases that are contingent in nature.
(c)Transmission rights purchases include estimated commitments for additional transmission rights that will be required to fulfill firm sales contracts.

 

As part of reaching a comprehensive agreement with EDF in October 2010, the existing power purchase agreements with CENG were modified to be unit-contingent through the end of their original term in 2014. Under these agreements Generation purchases 85% of the nuclear plant output owned by CENG that is not sold to third parties. CENG has the ability to fix the energy price on a forward basis by entering into monthly energy hedge transactions for a portion of the future sale, while any unhedged portions will be provided at market prices by default. Additionally, beginning in 2015 and continuing to the end of the life of the respective plants, Generation agreed to purchase 50.01% of the availablenuclear plant output of CENG’s nuclear plantsowned by CENG at market prices. This purchase agreement will continue to be effective under the Master Agreement discussed above, except that if the put option under the Master Agreement is exercised, then the EDF PPA will be transferred to Generation upon the completion of the Put Option Agreement transaction. Generation discloses in the table above commitments to purchase from CENG at fixed prices. All commitments to purchase from CENG at market prices, which include all purchases subsequent to December 31, 2014, are excluded from the table. Generation continues to own a 50.01% membership interest in CENG that is accounted for as an equity method investment. See Note 2225 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for more details on this arrangement.

 

Capital Expenditures

 

Generation’s business is capital intensive and requires significant investments in nuclear fuel and energy generation assets and in other internal infrastructure projects. Generation’s estimated capital expenditures for 20132014 are as follows:

 

(in millions)

        

Nuclear fuel(a)

  $1,000   $900 

Production plant

   1,000    900 

Renewable energy projects(b)

   575    300 

Uprates

   225    150 

Maryland commitments

   100 

Other

   50    50 
  

 

   

 

 

Total

  $2,850   $2,400 
  

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Includes Generation’s share of the investment in nuclear fuel for the co-owned Salem plant.
(b)Primarily relates to expenditures for the completion of the Antelope Valley development project.

 

1819


ComEd

 

ComEd is engaged principally in the purchase and regulated retail sale of electricity and the provision of distribution and transmission services to a diverse base of residential, commercial and industrial customers in northern Illinois. ComEd is a public utility under the Illinois Public Utilities Act subject to regulation by the ICC related to distribution rates and service, the issuance of securities, and certain other aspects of ComEd’s business. ComEd is a public utility under the Federal Power Act subject to regulation by FERC related to transmission rates and certain other aspects of ComEd’s business. Specific operations of ComEd are also subject to the jurisdiction of various other Federal, state, regional and local agencies. Additionally, ComEd is subject to NERC mandatory reliability standards.

 

ComEd’s retail service territory has an area of approximately 11,400 square miles and an estimated population of 9 million. The service territory includes the City of Chicago, an area of about 225 square miles with an estimated population of 2.7 million. ComEd has approximately 3.8 million customers.

 

ComEd’s franchises are sufficient to permit it to engage in the business it now conducts. ComEd’s franchise rights are generally nonexclusive rights documented in agreements and, in some cases, certificates of public convenience issued by the ICC. With few exceptions, the franchise rights have stated expiration dates ranging from 20132014 to 2066. ComEd anticipates working with the appropriate agencies to extend or replace the franchise agreements prior to expiration.

 

ComEd’s kWh deliveries and peak electricity load are generally higher during the summer and winter months, when temperature extremes create demand for either summer cooling or winter heating. ComEd’s highest peak load occurred on July 20, 2011, and was 23,753 MWs; its highest peak load during a winter season occurred on January 15, 2009,6, 2014, and was 16,32816,514 MWs.

 

Retail Electric Services

Under Illinois law, transmission and distribution services are regulated, while electric customers are allowed to purchase electricity supply from a competitive retail electric supplier.

 

Electric revenues and purchased power expense are affected by fluctuations in customers’ purchases from competitive retail electric generation suppliers. All ComEd customers have the ability to purchase energyelectricity from an alternative retaila competitive electric generation supplier. The customercustomers’ choice activity affects revenue collected from customers related to supplied energy; however, that activity has no impact on electric revenue net of purchased power expense. ComEd’s cost of electric supply is passed without markup directly through to default servicethose customers without markupnot served by a competitive electric generation supplier and those rates are subject to adjustment monthly to recover or refund the difference between ComEd’s actual cost of electricity delivered and the amount included in rates. For those customers that choose a competitive electric generation supplier, ComEd acts as the billing agent but does not record revenues or expenses related to the electric supply. ComEd remains the distribution service provider for all customers in its service territory and charges a regulated rate for distribution service. See ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS for additional information on customer switching to alternativecompetitive electric generation suppliers, and Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on ComEd’s electricity procurement process and for additional information.

 

Under Illinois law, ComEd is required to deliver electricity to all customers. ComEd’s obligation to provide generation supply service, which is referred to as a POLR obligation, primarily varies by customer size. ComEd’s obligation to provide such service to residential customers and other small customers with demands of under 100 kWs continues for all customers who do not or cannot choose a

19


competitive electric generation supplier or who choose to return to ComEd after taking service from a competitive electric generation supplier. ComEd does not have a fixed-price generation supply service obligation to most of its largest customers with demands of 100 kWs or greater, as this group of customers has previously been declared competitive. Customers with competitive declarations may still purchase power and energy from ComEd, but only at hourly market prices.

 

20


Energy Infrastructure Modernization Act (EIMA).Since 2011, ComEd’s distribution rates are established through a performance-based rate formula pursuant to EIMA. EIMA also provides a structure for substantial capital investment by utilities over a ten-year period to modernize Illinois’ electric utility infrastructure. In addition, as long as ComEd is subject to EIMA, ComEd will fund customer assistance programs for low-income customers, which amounts will not be recoverable through rates.

 

ComEd files an annual reconciliation of the revenue requirement in effect in a given year to reflect the actual costs that the ICC determines are prudently and reasonably incurred for such year. Under the terms of EIMA, ComEd’s target rate of return on common equity is subject to reduction if ComEd does not deliver the reliability and customer service benefits, as defined, it has committed to over the ten-year life of the investment program. See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Electric Distribution Rate Cases. The ICC issued an order in ComEd’s 2007 electric distribution rate case (2007 Rate Case) approving a $274 million increase in ComEd’s annual delivery services revenue requirement, which became effective in September 2008. In the order, the ICC authorized a 10.3% rate of return on common equity. On February 23, 2012, the ICC issued an order in the remand proceeding requiring ComEd to provide a refund of approximately $37 million to customers related to the treatment of post-test year accumulated depreciation. ComEd and several other parties filed appeals of the rate order with the Illinois Appellate Court (Court). On March 26,September 27, 2013, the Court ruled against ComEd on the accumulated depreciation issue and affirmed that ComEd owes a refund to customers of $37 million. As of December 31, 2013, and December 31, 2012, ComEd filedwas fully reserved for this liability. ComEd will not seek rehearing or appeal on this matter and is working with the ICC on the process and timing for a notice of appeal. ComEd has recognized for accounting purposes its best estimate of any refund obligation.to customers.

 

On May 24, 2011, the ICC issued an order in ComEd’s 2010 electric distribution rate case (2010 Rate Case), which became effective on June 1, 2011. The order approved a $143 million increase to ComEd’s annual delivery service revenue requirement and a 10.5% rate of return on common equity. The order has been appealed to the Court by several parties. On May 16, 2013, the Court dismissed as moot the appeals of the ICC’s order in the 2010 Rate Case as ComEd cannot predict the results of these appeals.now recovers distribution costs under EIMA through a pre-established formula rate tariff. See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on ComEd’s electric distribution rate cases.

 

Procurement-Related Proceedings.Since June 2009, the IPA designs, and the ICC approves, an electricity supply portfolio for ComEd and the IPA administers a competitive process under which ComEd procures its electricity supply from various suppliers, including Generation. In order to fulfill a requirement of the Illinois Settlement Legislation, ComEd hedged the price of a significant portion of energy purchased in the spot market with a five-year variable-to-fixed financial swap contract with Generation that expires on May 31, 2013. As required by EIMA, in February 2012 the IPA completed procurement events for energy and REC requirements for the June 2013 through December 2017 period. See Note 193 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on ComEd’s procurement plans. See Note 22 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on ComEd’s energy commitments.

 

Continuous Power Interruption. The Illinois Public Utilities Act provides that in the event an electric utility, such as ComEd, experiences a continuous power interruption of four hours or more that affects (in ComEd’s case) more than 30,000 customers, the utility may be liable for actual damages suffered by customers as a result of the interruption and may be responsible for reimbursement of local governmental emergency and contingency expenses incurred in connection with the interruption. Recovery of consequential damages is barred. The affected utility may seek from the ICC a waiver of these liabilities when the utility can show that the cause of the interruption was unpreventable damage

20


due to weather events or conditions, customer tampering, or certain other causes enumerated in the law. See Note 19—22—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

21


Smart Meter, Smart Grid and Energy Efficiency Programs

Smart Meter and Smart Grid Programs. On January 6, 2012, ComEd filed its Infrastructure Investment Plan with the ICC. Under that plan, ComEd will invest approximately $2.6 billion over ten years to modernize and storm-harden its distribution system and to implement smart grid technology. On April 23, 2012, ComEd filed its initial AMI Deployment Plan with the ICC, which was approved by the ICC on June 22, 2012, with certain modifications. ComEd outlined the new deployment schedule within testimony provided in the AMI Plan Rehearing and filed a revised AMI deployment plan with the ICC. On December 5, 2012, the ICC approved ComEd’s revised AMI deployment plan. On June 5, 2013, the ICC issued an interim Order approving ComEd’s accelerated AMI deployment plan consistent with the provisions of Senate Bill 9. The deployment plan provides for the installation of 4 million electric smart meters, of which more than 60,000 meters were installed by the end of 2013.

Energy Efficiency Programs. As a result of the Illinois Settlement Legislation, electric utilities in Illinois are required to include cost-effective energy efficiency resources in their plans to meet an incremental annual program energy savings requirement of 0.2% of energy delivered to retail customers for the year ended June 1, 2009, which increases annually to 2.0% of energy delivered in the year commencing June 1, 2015 and each year thereafter. Additionally, during the ten-year period that began June 1, 2008, electric utilities must implement cost-effective demand response measures to reduce peak demand by 0.1% over the prior year for eligible retail customers. The energy efficiency and demand response goals are subject to rate impact caps each year. Utilities are allowed recovery of costs for energy efficiency and demand response programs, subject to approval by the ICC. In December 2010, the ICC approved ComEd’s second three-year Energy Efficiency and Demand Response Plan covering the period June 2011 through May 2014. The plans are designed to meet the Illinois Settlement Legislation’s energy efficiency and demand response goals through May 2014, including reductions in delivered energy to all retail customers and in the peak demand of eligible retail customers.

EIMA provides for additional energy efficiency in Illinois. Starting in the June 2013—May 2014 period and occurring annually thereafter, as part of the IPA procurement plan, ComEd is to include cost-effective expansion of current energy efficiency programs, any additional new cost-effective program and/or third-party energy efficiency programs that are identified through a request for proposal (“RFP”) process. All cost-effective energy efficiency programs are included in the IPA procurement plan for consideration of implementation. While these programs are monitored separately from the Energy Efficiency Portfolio Standard (EEPS), funds for both the EEPS portfolio and IPA energy efficiency programs are collected under the same rider.

 

Construction Budget

 

ComEd’s business is capital intensive and requires significant investments primarily in energy transmission and distribution facilities, to ensure the adequate capacity, reliability and efficiency of its system. Based on PJM’s RTEP, ComEd has various construction commitments, as discussed in Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. ComEd’s most recent estimate of capital expenditures for electric plant additions and improvements for 20132014 is $1,400$1,775 million, which includes RTEP projects and infrastructure modernization resulting from EIMA. See ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS, Liquidity and Capital Resources for further information.

 

PECO

 

PECO is engaged principally in the purchase and regulated retail sale of electricity and the provision of transmission and distribution services to retail customers in southeastern Pennsylvania, including the City of Philadelphia, as well as the purchase and regulated retail sale of natural gas and

22


the provision of gas distribution services to retail customers in the Pennsylvania counties surrounding the City of Philadelphia. PECO is a public utility under the Pennsylvania Public Utility Code subject to regulation by the PAPUC as to electric and gas distribution rates and service, the issuances of certain securities and certain other aspects of PECO’s operations. PECO is a public utility under the Federal Power Act subject to regulation by FERC as to transmission rates and certain other aspects of PECO’s business and by the U.S. Department of Transportation as to pipeline safety and other areas of gas operations. Specific operations of PECO are subject to the jurisdiction of various other Federal, state, regional and local agencies. Additionally, PECO is also subject to NERC mandatory reliability standards.

 

PECO’s combined electric and natural gas retail service territory has an area of approximately 2,100 square miles and an estimated population of 4.0 million. PECO provides electric distribution service in an area of approximately 1,900 square miles, with a population of approximately 3.9 million, including approximately 1.5 million in the City of Philadelphia. PECO provides natural gas distribution service in an area of approximately 1,900 square miles in southeastern Pennsylvania adjacent to the City of Philadelphia, with a population of approximately 2.4 million. PECO delivers electricity to approximately 1.6 million customers and natural gas to approximately 497,000501,000 customers.

 

PECO has the necessary authorizations to provide regulated electric and natural gas distribution service in the various municipalities or territories in which it now supplies such services. PECO’s authorizations consist of charter rights and certificates of public convenience issued by the PAPUC and/or “grandfathered rights,” which are rights generally unlimited as to time and generally exclusive from competition from other electric and natural gas utilities. In a few defined municipalities, PECO’s natural gas service territory authorizations overlap with that of another natural gas utility; however, PECO does not consider those situations as posing a material competitive or financial threat.

 

PECO’s kWh sales and peak electricity load are generally higher during the summer and winter months, when temperature extremes create demand for either summer cooling or winter heating. PECO’s highest peak load occurred on July 22, 2011 and was 8,983 MW; its highest peak load during winter months occurred on December 20, 2004January 7, 2014 and was 6,8387,148 MW.

 

PECO’s natural gas sales are generally higher during the winter months when cold temperatures create demand for winter heating. PECO’s highest daily natural gas send out occurred on January 17, 20007, 2014 and was 718760 mmcf.

 

21


Retail Electric Services

 

PECO’s retail electric sales and distribution service revenues are derived pursuant to rates regulated by the PAPUC. Pennsylvania permits competition by EGSscompetitive electric generation suppliers for the supply of retail electricity while retail transmission and distribution service remains regulated under the Competition Act. At December 31, 2012,2013, there were 77 alternative EGSs87 competitive electric generation suppliers serving PECO customers. At December 31, 2012,2013, the number of retail customers purchasing energy from an alternative EGSa competitive electric generation supplier was 496,500531,500 representing approximately 31%34% of total retail customers. Retail deliveries purchased from EGSscompetitive electric generation suppliers represented approximately 66%68% of PECO’s retail kWh sales for the year ended December 31, 2012.2013. Customers that choose an alternative EGSa competitive electric generation supplier are not subject to rates for PECO’s electric supply procurement costs and retail transmission service charges. PECO presents on customer bills its electric supply Price to Compare, which is updated quarterly, to assist customers with the evaluation of offers from alternative EGSs.competitive electric generation suppliers.

 

Customer choice program activity affects revenue collected from customers related to supplied energy; however, that activity has no impact on electric revenue net of purchased power expense or PECO’s financial position. PECO’s cost of electric supply is passed directly through to default service

23


customers without markup and those rates are subject to adjustment at least quarterly to recover or refund the difference between PECO’s actual cost of electricity delivered and the amount included in rates through the GSA. For those customers that choose an alternative EGS,a competitive electric generation supplier, PECO acts as the billing agent but does not record revenues or purchase power and fuel expense related to this electric supply. PECO remains the distribution service provider for all customers in its service territory and charges a regulated rate for distribution service.

 

Procurement Proceedings. PECO’s electric supply for its customers is procured through contracts executed in accordance with its PAPUC-approved DSP Programs. PECO has entered into contracts with PAPUC-approved bidders, including Generation, as part of its DSP I competitive procurements conducted since June 2009 for its default electric supply beginning January 2011, which includeincluded fixed price full requirement contracts for all procurement classes, spot market price full requirements contracts for the commercial and industrial procurement classes, and block energy contracts for the residential procurement class. In September 2012, PECO completed its last competitive procurement for electric supply under its currentfirst DSP Program, which expiresexpired on May 31, 2013.

 

On October 12, 2012, the PAPUC approved PECO’s second DSP Program, which was filed with the PAPUC in January 2012. The plan outlines how PECO will purchaseis purchasing electric supply for default service customers from June 1, 2013 through May 31, 2015. Pursuant to the second DSP Program, PECO will procureis procuring electric supply through five competitive procurements for fixed price full requirements contracts of two years or less for the residential and small and medium commercial classes and spot market price full requirement contracts for the large commercial and industrial class load. In December 2012 and February 2013, PECO entered into contracts with PAPUC-approved bidders, including Generation, for its residential and small and medium commercial classes beginningthat began in June 2013. In September 2013, PECO entered into contracts with PAPUC-approved bidders, including Generation, for its residential and small and medium commercial classes that began in December 2013. In January 2014, PECO entered into contracts with PAPUC-approved bidders, including Generation, for its residential and small, medium and large commercial classes that will begin in June 2014. Charges incurred for electric supply procured through contracts with Generation are included in purchased power from affiliates on PECO’s Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

 

The second DSP Program also includes a number of retail market enhancements recommended by the PAPUC in its previously issued Retail Markets Intermediate Work Plan Order. PECO was also directed to allow its low-income Customer Assistance Program (CAP) customers to purchase their generation supply from EGSscompetitive electric generation suppliers beginning April 1, 2014. PECO expects to file its plan for CAP customers byOn May 1, 2013.2013, PECO filed a Petition for Approval of its CAP Shopping Plan with the PAPUC, which the PAPUC granted and denied in part on January 9, 2014. PECO and other parties to the proceeding filed petitions for reconsideration of the Commission’s decision on February 10, 2014, and these petitions are currently pending before the PAPUC.

 

See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

22


Smart Meter, Smart Grid and Energy Efficiency Programs

 

Smart Meter and Smart Grid Programs.In April 2010, the PAPUC approved PECO’s Smart Meter Procurement and Installation Plan, which was filed in accordance with the requirements of Act 129. Also, in April 2010, PECO entered into a Financial Assistance Agreement with the DOE for SGIG funds under the ARRA of 2009. Under the SGIG, PECO has been awarded $200 million, the maximum grant allowable under the program, for its SGIG project—Smart Future Greater Philadelphia. The SGIG funds are being used to offset the total impact to ratepayers of the smart meter deployment required by Act 129. On January 18, 2013, PECO filed with the PAPUC its universal deployment plan for approval of its proposal to deploy the remainder of the 1.6 million smart meters on an accelerated basis by the

24


end of 2014. On May 31, 2013, PECO and interested parties filed a Joint Petition for Settlement of the universal deployment plan with the PAPUC, which was approved without modification on August 15, 2013. In total, PECO currently expects to spend up to $595 million and $120 million on its smart meter and smart grid infrastructure, respectively, before considering the $200 million SGIG.

 

See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Energy Efficiency Programs.PECO’s approved four-yearPAPUC-approved Phase I EE&C plan totals approximately $328 millionhad a four-year term that began on June 1, 2009 and concluded on May 31, 2013. The Phase I Plan sets forth how PECO willwould meet the required reduction targets established by Act 129’s EE&C provisions.provisions, which included a 3% reduction in electric consumption in PECO’s plan includesservice territory and a CFL program, weatherization programs, an energy efficiency appliance rebate and trade-in program, rebates and energy efficiency programs for non-profit, educational, governmental and business customers, customer incentives for energy management programs and incentives to help customers reduce energy demand during peak periods. Under Act 129’s EE&C provisions, PECO was required to reduce peak demand by a minimum of 4.5% of itsreduction in PECO’s annual system peak demand in the 100 hours of highest demand by May 31, 2013. The peak demand period ended on September 30, 2012 and PECO will reportcommunicated its compliance with the reduction targets in a preliminary filingreport with the PAPUC on March 1, 2013. The final compliance report is due towas filed with the PAPUC byon November 15, 2013. In addition, PECO is required to reduce electric consumption in its service territory by 3% through May 31, 2013.

 

On August 2, 2012, theThe PAPUC issued its Phase II EE&C implementation order underon August 2, 2012, that provides energy consumption reduction requirements for the second phase of Act 129’s EE&C programs, which went into effect on June 1, 2013. The PAPUC deferred a decision on peak demand reduction requirements until late 2013. On February 28, 2013, the PAPUC has establishedapproved PECO’s three year cumulative consumption reduction target at 2.9%. PECO filed its three yearthree-year EE&C Phase II plan that was filed with the PAPUC on November 1, 2012. The plan2012, and sets forth how PECO will reduce electric consumption by at least 2.9%1,125,852 MWh in its service territory for the period June 1, 2013 through May 31, 2016.

 

See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Natural Gas

 

PECO’s natural gas sales and distribution service revenues are derived through natural gas deliveries at rates regulated by the PAPUC. PECO’s purchased natural gas cost rates, which represent a significant portion of total rates, are subject to quarterly adjustments designed to recover or refund the difference between the actual cost of purchased natural gas and the amount included in rates without markup through the PGC.

 

PECO’s natural gas customers have the right to choose their natural gas suppliers or to purchase their gas supply from PECO at cost. At December 31, 2012,2013, the number of retail customers purchasing natural gas from a competitive natural gas supplier was 53,600,66,400, representing approximately 11%13% of total retail customers. Retail deliveries purchased from competitive natural gas suppliers represented approximately 16%19% of PECO’s mmcf sales for the year ended December 31, 2012.2013. PECO provides distribution, billing, metering, installation, maintenance and emergency response services at regulated rates to all its customers in its service territory.

 

23


Procurement Proceedings. PECO’s natural gas supply is purchased from a number of suppliers primarily under long-term firm transportation contracts for terms of up to twothree years in accordance with its annual PAPUC PGC settlement. PECO’s aggregate annual firm supply under these firm transportation contracts is 3534 million dekatherms. Peak natural gas is provided by PECO’s liquefied natural gas (LNG) facility and propane-air plant. PECO also has under contract 2321 million dekatherms of underground storage through service agreements. Natural gas from underground storage represents approximately 30% of PECO’s 2012-20132013-2014 heating season planned supplies.

 

See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

25


Construction Budget

 

PECO’s business is capital intensive and requires significant investments primarily in electric transmission and electric and natural gas distribution facilities to ensure the adequate capacity, reliability and efficiency of its system. PECO, as a transmission facilities owner, has various construction commitments under PJM’s RTEP as discussed in Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. PECO’s most recent estimate of capital expenditures for plant additions and improvements for 20132014 is $569$625 million, which includes RTEP projects and capital expenditures related to the smart meter and smart grid project net of expected SGIG DOE reimbursements.

 

BGE

 

BGE is engaged principally in the purchase and regulated retail sale of electricity and the provision of transmission and distribution services to retail customers in central Maryland, including the City of Baltimore, as well as the purchase and regulated retail sale of natural gas and the provision of distribution services to retail customers in central Maryland, including the City of Baltimore. BGE is a public utility under the Public Utilities Article of the Maryland Annotated Code subject to regulation by the MDPSC as to electric and gas distribution rates and service, the issuances of certain securities and certain other aspects of BGE’s operations. BGE is a public utility under the Federal Power Act subject to regulation by FERC as to transmission rates and certain other aspects of BGE’s business and by the U.S. Department of Transportation as to pipeline safety and other areas of gas operations. Specific operations of BGE are subject to the jurisdiction of various other Federal, state, regional and local agencies. Additionally, BGE is also subject to NERC mandatory reliability standards.

 

BGE serves an estimated population of 2.8 million in its 2,300 square mile combined electric and gas retail service territory. BGE provides electric distribution service in an area of approximately 2,300 square miles and gas distribution service in an area of approximately 810800 square miles, both with a population of approximately 2.8 million, including approximately 621,000 in the City of Baltimore. BGE delivers electricity to approximately 1.2 million customers and natural gas to approximately 655,000 customers.

 

BGE has the necessary authorizations to provide regulated electric and natural gas distribution services in the various municipalities and territories in which it now supplies such services. With respect to electric distribution service, BGE’s authorizations consist of charter rights, a state-wide franchise grant and a franchise grant from the City of Baltimore. The franchise grantsrights are not exclusive and are perpetual. With respect to natural gas distribution service, BGE’s authorizations consist of charter rights, a perpetual state-wide franchise grant, and franchises granted by all the municipalities and/or governmental bodies in which BGE now supplies services. The franchise grants are not exclusive; some are perpetual and some are for a limited duration, which BGE anticipates being able to extend or replace prior to expiration.

 

BGE’s kWh sales and peak electricity load are generally higher during the summer and winter months, when temperature extremes create demand for either summer cooling or winter heating.

24


BGE’s highest peak load occurred on July 21, 2011 and was 7,236 MW; its highest peak load during winter months occurred on February 6, 2007January 7, 2014 and was 6,3476,526 MW.

 

BGE’s natural gas sales are generally higher during the winter months when cold temperatures create demand for winter heating. BGE’s highest daily natural gas send out occurred on February 5, 2007 and was 840 mmcf.

 

The demand for electricity and gas is affected by weather and usage conditions. The MDPSC has allowed BGE to record a monthly adjustment to its electric and gas distribution revenues from all residential customers, commercial electric customers, the majority of large industrial electric customers, and all firm service gas customers to eliminate the effect of abnormal weather and usage patterns per

26


customer on BGE’s electric and gas distribution volumes, thereby recovering a specified dollar amount of distribution revenues per customer, by customer class, regardless of changes in consumption levels. This adjustment allows BGE to recognize revenues at MDPSC-approved levels per customer, regardless of what actual distribution volumes were for a billing period (referred to as “revenue decoupling”). Therefore, while these revenues are affected by customer growth, they will not be affected by actual weather or usage conditions. BGE bills or credits impactedaffected customers in subsequent months for the difference between approved revenue levels under revenue decoupling and actual customer billings.

 

Retail Electric Services

 

BGE’s retail electric sales and distribution service revenues are derived from electricity deliveries at rates regulated by the MDPSC. As a result of the deregulation of electric generation in Maryland effective July 1, 2000, all customers can choose their EGS.a competitive electric generation supplier. While BGE does not sell electric supply 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 services. Customer choice program activity affects revenue collected from customers related to supplied energy; however, that activity has nominimal impact on electric revenue net of purchased power expense or BGE’s financial position. At December 31, 2012,2013, there were 53 alternative EGSs73 competitive electric generation suppliers serving BGE customers. At December 31, 2012,2013, the number of retail customers purchasing energy from an alternative EGSa competitive electric generation supplier was 362,117,approximately 399,000, representing approximately 29%32% of total retail customers. Retail deliveries purchased from EGSscompetitive electric generation suppliers represented approximately 60%61% of BGE’s retail kWh sales for the year ended December 31, 2012.2013.

 

BGE is obligated to provide market-based SOS to all of its electric customers. The SOS rates charged recover BGE’s wholesale power supply costs and include an administrative fee. The administrative fee includes a commercial and industrial shareholder return component and an incremental cost component. Bidding to supply BGE’s market-based SOS occurs through a competitive bidding process approved by the MDPSC. Successful bidders, which may include Generation, will execute contracts with BGE for terms of three months or two years.

 

BGE is obligated by the MDPSC to provide several variations of SOS to commercial and industrial customers depending on customer load.

 

Electric Distribution Rate Cases. In December 2010, the MDPSC issued an abbreviated electric rate order authorizing BGE to increase electric distribution rates for service rendered on or after December 4, 2010 by no more than $31 million. In March 2011, the MDPSC issued a comprehensive rate order setting forth the details of the decision contained in its abbreviated combined electric and gas distribution rate order issued in December 2010. As part of the March 2011 comprehensive rate order, BGE was authorized to defer $19 million of costs as regulatory assets. These costs are being recovered over a 5-year period beginning in December 2010 and include the deferral of $16 million of storm costs incurred in February 2010. The regulatory asset for the storm costs earns the authorized rate of return.

 

25


rate of return. On July 27, 2012, BGE filed a combinedan application for increasesan increase to its electric and gas base rates with the MDPSC. On February 22, 2013, the MDPSC issued an order in BGE’s 2012 electric rate case for increases in annual distribution service revenue of $81 million. The requestedelectric distribution rate ofincrease was set using an allowed return on equity in the application is 10.5%of 9.75%.

On October 22, 2012,May 17, 2013, BGE filed an updated application to requestfor an increase of $131 million to its electric distribution base revenue requirement. The newrates with the MDPSC. On December 13, 2013, the MDPSC issued an order in BGE’s 2013 electric distribution base rates are expected to take effectrate case authorizing an increase in late Februaryannual distribution service revenue of $34 million. The electric distribution rate increase was set using an allowed return on equity of 9.75%. The approved electric distribution rate became effective for services rendered on or after December 13, 2013. BGE cannot predict how much of the requested increases, if any, the MDPSC will approve.

 

27


Smart Meter and Energy Efficiency Programs

 

Smart Meter Programs.In August 2010, the MDPSC approved BGE’s $480 million SGIP, which includes deployment of a two-way communications network, 2 million smart electric and gas meters and modules, new customer pricing programs, a new customer web portal and numerous enhancements to BGE operations. Also, in April 2010, BGE entered into a Financial Assistance Agreement with the DOE for SGIG funds under the ARRA of 2009. Under the SGIG, BGE has been awarded $200 million, the maximum grant allowable under the program, to support its Smart Grid, Peak Rewards and CC&B initiatives. The SGIG funding is being used to reduce significantly reduce the rate impact of those investments on BGE customers. In total, throughAs of December 31, 2013, BGE has billed the ten year life ofentire $200 million grant to the Smart Grid program, BGE plans to spend up to $835 million on its smart grid and smart meter infrastructure.DOE.

 

Energy Efficiency Programs.BGE’s energy efficiency programs include a CFL program, weatherizationretrofit programs, an energy efficiencyefficient appliance rebate and trade-in program, rebates and energy efficiency programs for non-profit, educational, governmental and business customers, customer incentives for energy management programs and incentives to help customers reduce energy demand during peak periods. The MDPSC initially approved a full portfolio of conservation programs as well as a customer surcharge to recover the associated costs. This customer surcharge is updated annually. In December 2011, the MDPSC approved BGE’s conservation programs for implementation in 2012 through 2014.

 

Natural Gas

 

BGE’s natural gas sales are derived pursuant to a MBR mechanism that applies to customers who buy their gas from BGE. Under this mechanism, BGE’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 BGE’s actual cost and the market index is shared equally between shareholders and customers. Customer choice program activity affects revenue collected from customers related to supplied natural gas; however, that activity has nominimum impact on gas revenue net of purchased power expense or BGE’s financial position. At December 31, 2012,2013, there were 27 alternative NGSs41 competitive natural gas suppliers serving BGE customers. At December 31, 2012,2013, the number of retail customers purchasing fuel from an alternative NGSa competitive natural gas supplier was 143,351,approximately 172,000 representing approximately 22%26% of total retail customers. Retail deliveries purchased from NGSscompetitive natural gas suppliers represented approximately 56%54% of BGE’s retail mmcf sales for the year ended December 31, 2012.2013.

 

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 recovered under the MBR mechanism and are not subject to sharing. BGE meets its natural gas load requirements through firm pipeline transportation and storage entitlements. BGE’s current pipeline firm transportation entitlements to serve its firm loads are 362 mmcf per day.

 

BGE’s current maximum storage entitlements are 284 mmcf 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:

 

a liquefied natural gas facility for the liquefaction and storage of natural gas with a total storage capacity of 1,0001,055 mmcf and a daily capacity of 298332 mmcf,

 

26


a liquefied natural gas facility for natural gas system pressure support with a total storage capacity of 5.86 mmcf and a daily capacity of 5.86 mmcf, and

 

a propane air facility and a mined cavern with a total storage capacity equivalent to 500546 mmcf and a daily capacity of 8185 mmcf.

 

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

28


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 its supply of, and cost of, natural gas.

 

Natural Gas Distribution Rate Cases. In December 2010, the MDPSC issued a rate order authorizing BGE to increase the gas distribution base revenue requirement for service rendered on or after December 4, 2010 by no more than $9.8 million. In March 2011, the MDPSC issued a comprehensive rate order setting forth the details of the decision contained in its abbreviated combined electric and gas distribution rate order issued in December 2010.

On July 27, 2012, BGE filed a combinedan application for increasesan increase to its electric and gas base rates with the MDPSC. On February 22, 2013, the MDPSC issued an order in BGE’s 2012 gas rate case for increases in annual distribution service revenue of $32 million. The requestedelectric distribution rate ofincrease was set using an allowed return on equity in the application is 10.5%of 9.60%.

On October 22, 2012,May 17, 2013, BGE filed an updated application to requestfor an increase of $45 million to its gas distribution base revenue requirement. The newrates with the MDPSC. On December 13, 2013, the MDPSC issued an order in BGE’s 2013 natural gas distribution base rates are expected to take effectrate case authorizing an increase in late Februaryannual distribution service revenue of $12 million. The gas distribution rate increase was set using an allowed return on equity of 9.60%. The approved natural gas distribution rate became effective for services rendered on or after December 13, 2013. BGE cannot predict how much of the requested increases, if any, the MDPSC will approve.

 

Construction Budget

 

BGE’s business is capital intensive and requires significant investments primarily in electric transmission and electric and natural gas distribution and electric transmission facilities to ensure the adequate capacity, reliability and efficiency of its system. BGE, as a transmission facilities owner, has various construction commitments under PJM’s RTEP as discussed in Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. BGE’s most recent estimate of capital expenditures for plant additions and improvements for 20132014 is $663approximately $600 million, which includes capital expenditures related to the SGIP net of expected SGIG DOE reimbursements.

 

ComEd, PECO and BGE

 

Transmission Services

 

ComEd, PECO and BGE provide unbundled transmission service under rates approved by FERC. FERC has used its regulation of transmission to encourage competition for wholesale generation services and the development of regional structures to facilitate regional wholesale markets. Under FERC’s open access transmission policy promulgated in Order No. 888, ComEd, PECO and BGE, as owners of transmission facilities, are required to provide open access to their transmission facilities under filed tariffs at cost-based rates. ComEd, PECO and BGE are required to comply with FERC’s Standards of Conduct regulation governing the communication of non-public information between the transmission owner’s employees and wholesale merchant employees.

 

PJM is the ISO and the FERC-approved RTO for the Mid-Atlantic and Midwest regions. PJM is the transmission provider under, and the administrator of, the PJM Open Access Transmission Tariff (PJM

27


Tariff), operates the PJM energy, capacity and other markets, and, through central dispatch, controls

29


the day-to-day operations of the bulk power system for the PJM region. ComEd, PECO and BGE are members of PJM and provide regional transmission service pursuant to the PJM Tariff. ComEd, PECO, BGE and the other transmission owners in PJM have turned over control of their transmission facilities to PJM, and their transmission systems are currently under the dispatch control of PJM. Under the PJM Tariff, transmission service is provided on a region-wide, open-access basis using the transmission facilities of the PJM members at rates based on the costs of transmission service.

 

ComEd’s transmission rates are established based on a formula that was approved by FERC in January 2008. FERC’s order establishes the agreed-upon treatment of costs and revenues in the determination of network service transmission rates and the process for updating the formula rate calculation on an annual basis.

 

PECO default service customers are charged for retail transmission services through a rider designed to recover PECO’s PJM transmission network service charges and RTEP charges on a full and current basis in accordance with the 2010 electric distribution rate case settlement.

 

The transmission rate in the PJM Open Access Transmission Tariff under which PECO incurs costs to serve its default service customers and earns revenue as a transmission facility owner is a FERC-approved rate. This is the rate that all load serving entities in the PECO transmission zone pay for wholesale transmission service.

 

BGE’s transmission rates are established based on a formula that was approved by FERC in April 2006. FERC’s order establishes the agreed-upon treatment of costs and revenues in the determination of network service transmission rates and the process for updating the formula rate calculation on an annual basis.

 

See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding transmission services.

 

Employees

 

As of December 31, 2012,2013, Exelon and its subsidiaries had 26,05725,829 employees in the following companies, of which 8,6658,602 or 33% were covered by collective bargaining agreements (CBAs):

 

  IBEW Local 15 (a)   IBEW Local 614 (b)   Other CBAs (c)   Total Employees
Covered by CBAs
   Total
Employees
   IBEW Local 15 (a)   IBEW Local 614 (b)   Other CBAs (c)   Total Employees
Covered by CBAs
   Total
Employees
 

Generation

   1,701    110    1,889    3,700    12,116    1,690    100    1,973    3,763    11,973 

ComEd

   3,571    —       —       3,571    5,902    3,487    —      —      3,487    5,895 

PECO

   —       1,286    —       1,286    2,453    —      1,254    —      1,254    2,418 

BGE

   —       —       —       —       3,360    —      —      —      —      3,303 

Other(d)

   82    —       26    108    2,226    71    —      27    98    2,240 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total

   5,354    1,396    1,915    8,665    26,057    5,248    1,354    2,000    8,602    25,829 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)A separate CBA between ComEd and IBEW Local 15, ratified on October 10, 2012, covers approximately 2432 employees in ComEd’s System Services Group. Generation’s and ComEd’s separate CBAs with IBEW Local 15 will expire in 2013.were extended through February 28, 2014.
(b)1,2861,254 PECO craft and call center employees in the Philadelphia service territory are covered by CBAs with IBEW Local 614. The CBAs expire on March 31, 2015. Additionally, Exelon Power, an operating unit of Generation, has an agreement with IBEW Local 614, which expires on March 31, 2015November 3, 2016 and covers 110107 employees.
(c)

During 2013, Generation finalized a CBA with the Security Officer union at Oyster Creek, which will expire in 2016. Additionally, during 2013, three other 3-year agreements were negotiated: Power, IBEW Local 614, which will expire in 2016; New England ENEH, UWUA Local 369, which will expire in 2017; and New Energy IUOE Local 95-95A, which will expire in 2016. During 2012, Generation finalized CBAs with the Security Officer unions at Byron, Clinton and TMI, which expire between 2015 and 2016. During 2011, Generation finalized CBAs with the Security Officer unions at Braidwood,

30


Dresden, LaSalle and Quad Cities, which expire between 2014 and 2015. During 2009 and 2010, Generation entered into CBAsa CBA with the Security Officer unionsunion at Oyster Creek and Limerick, which expireexpires in 2013 and 2014, respectively.2014. Additionally, during 2009, a 5-year agreement was reached with Oyster Creek Nuclear Local 1289, which will expireexpires in 2015. In 2010, a 3-year agreement was negotiated with New England ENEH, UWUA Local 369, which will expire in 2014 and covers 10 employees.

(d)Other includes shared services employees at BSC.

 

28


Environmental Regulation

 

General

 

Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE are subject to comprehensive and complex legislation regarding environmental matters by the U.S. Congressfederal government and by various state and local jurisdictions in which they operate their facilities. The Registrants are also subject to regulations administered by the U.S. EPA and various state and local environmental protection agencies. Federal, state and local regulation includes the authority to regulate air, water, and solid and hazardous waste disposal.

 

The Exelon Boardboard of Directorsdirectors is responsible for overseeing the management of environmental matters. Exelon has a management team to address environmental compliance and strategy, including the CEO; the Senior Vice President, Corporate Strategy and Chief Sustainability Officer; the Corporate Environmental Strategy Director and the Environmental Regulatory Strategy Director, as well as senior management of Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE. Performance of those individuals directly involved in environmental compliance and strategy is reviewed and affects compensation as part of the annual individual performance review process. The Exelon Boardboard has delegated to its corporate governance committee authority to oversee Exelon’s compliance with laws and regulations and its strategies and efforts to protect and improve the quality of the environment, including, but not limited to, Exelon’s climate change and sustainability policies and programs, and Exelon 2020, Exelon’s comprehensive business and environmental plan, as discussed in further detail below. The Exelon Boardboard has also delegated to its generation oversight committee authority to oversee environmental, health and safety issues relating to Generation,Generation. The respective boards of ComEd, PECO and to its energy delivery oversight committee authority toBGE, which each include directors who also serve on the Exelon board, oversee environmental, health and safety issues related to ComEd, PECO and BGE.

 

Air Quality

 

Air quality regulations promulgated by the U.S. EPA and the various state and local environmental agencies in Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania and Texas in accordance with the Federal Clean Air Act impose restrictions on emission of particulates, sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx), mercury and other pollutants and require permits for operation of emissions sources. Such permits have been obtained by Exelon’s subsidiaries and must be renewed periodically. The Clean Air Act establishes a comprehensive and complex national program to reduce substantially reduce air pollution from power plants. Advanced emission controls for SO2 and NOx have been installed at all of Generation’s co-owned bituminous coal-fired units.

 

See Note 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding clean air regulation and legislation in the forms of the CSAPR and CAIR, the regulation of hazardous air pollutants from coal- and oil-fired electric generating facilities under MATS, and regulation of GHG emissions, in addition to NOVs issued to Generation and ComEd for alleged violations of the Clean Air Act.

 

During 2012, one of Generation’s co-owned facilities began a project to install environmental control equipment. Total costs incurred as of December 31, 2012 was approximately $39 million. The amount to be expended at Exelon and Generation in 2013, 2014 and 2015 is expected to total $70 million, $45 million and $5 million, respectively.

Water Quality

 

Under the Clean Water Act, NPDES permits for discharges into waterways are required to be obtained from the U.S. EPA or from the state environmental agency to which the permit program has been delegated and must be renewed periodically. Certain of Generation’s power generation facilities

 

2931


discharge industrial wastewater into waterways and are therefore subject to these regulations and operate under NPDES permits or pending applications for renewals of such permits after being granted an administrative extension.

 

See Note 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding the impact to Exelon of state permitting agencies’ administration of the Phase II rule implementing Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act.

 

Generation is also subject to the jurisdiction of certain other state and regional agencies and compacts, including the Delaware River Basin Commission and the Susquehanna River Basin Commission.

 

Solid and Hazardous Waste

 

The CERCLA provides for immediate response and removal actions coordinated by the U.S. EPA in the event of threatened releases of hazardous substances into the environment and authorizes the U.S. EPA either to clean up sites at which hazardous substances have created actual or potential environmental hazards or to order persons responsible for the situation to do so. Under CERCLA, generators and transporters of hazardous substances, as well as past and present owners and operators of hazardous waste sites, are strictly, jointly and severally liable for the cleanup costs of waste at sites, most of which are listed by the U.S. EPA on the National Priorities List (NPL). These PRPs can be ordered to perform a cleanup, can be sued for costs associated with a U.S. EPA-directed cleanup, may voluntarily settle with the U.S. EPA concerning their liability for cleanup costs, or may voluntarily begin a site investigation and site remediation under state oversight prior to listing on the NPL. Various states, including Illinois, Maryland and Pennsylvania, have also enacted statutes that contain provisions substantially similar to CERCLA. In addition, the RCRA governs treatment, storage and disposal of solid and hazardous wastes and cleanup of sites where such activities were conducted.

 

Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE and their subsidiaries are, or are likely to become, parties to proceedings initiated by the U.S. EPA, state agencies and/or other responsible parties under CERCLA and RCRA with respect to a number of sites, including MGP sites, or may undertake to investigate and remediate sites for which they may be subject to enforcement actions by an agency or third party.third-party.

 

See Note 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding solid and hazardous waste regulation and legislation.

 

Environmental Remediation

 

ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s environmental liabilities primarily arise from contamination at former MGP sites. ComEd, pursuant to an ICC order, and PECO, pursuant to settlements of natural gas distribution rate cases with the PAPUC, have an on-going process to recover environmental remediation costs of the MGP sites through a provision within customer rates. While BGE does not have a rider for MGP clean-up costs, BGE has historically received recovery of actual clean-up costs on a site-specific basis in distribution rates. The amount to be expended in 20132014 at Exelon for compliance with environmental remediation related to contamination at former MGP sites is expected to total $57$40 million, consisting of $51$33 million, $6 million and $0$1 million at ComEd, PECO and BGE, respectively.

 

Generation’s environmental liabilities primarily arise from contamination at current and former generation and waste storage facilities. As of December 31, 2012,2013, Generation has established an appropriate liability to comply with environmental remediation requirements including contamination

30


attributable to low level radioactive residues at a storage and reprocessing facility named Latty Avenue, and at a disposal facility named West Lake Landfill, both near St. Louis, Missouri related to operations conducted by Cotter Corporation, a former ComEd subsidiary.

 

32


In addition, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE may be required to make significant additional expenditures not presently determinable for other environmental remediation costs.

 

See Notes 3 and 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding the Registrants’ environmental remediation efforts and related impacts to the Registrants’ results of operations, cash flows and financial position.

 

Global Climate Change

 

Exelon believes the evidence of global climate change is compelling and that the energy industry, though not alone, is a significant contributor to the human-caused emissions of GHGs that many in the scientific community believe contribute to global climate change, and as reported by the National Academy of SciencesIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in May 2011.their Fifth Assessment Report Summary for Policy Makers issues September 2013. Exelon, as a producer of electricity from predominantly low-carbon generating facilities (such as nuclear, hydroelectric, wind and solar photovoltaic), has a relatively small GHG emission profile, or carbon footprint, compared to other domestic generators of electricity. By virtue of its significant investment in low-carbon intensity assets, Generation’s emission intensity, or rate of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) emitted per unit of electricity generated, is among the lowest in the industry. Exelon does produce GHG emissions, primarily at its fossil fuel-fired generating plants; CO2, methane and nitrous oxide are all emitted in this process, with CO2 representing the largest portion of these GHG emissions. GHG emissions from combustion of fossil fuels represent the majority of Exelon’s direct GHG emissions in 2012,2013, although only a small portion of Exelon’s electric supply is from fossil generating plants. Other GHG emission sources at Exelon include natural gas (methane) leakage on the natural gas systems, sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) leakage in its electric transmission and distribution operations and refrigerant leakage from its chilling and cooling equipment as well as fossil fuel combustion in its motor vehicles and usage of electricity at its facilities. Despite its focus onlow-carbon generation, Exelon believes its operations could be significantly affected by the possible physical risks of climate change and by mandatory programs to reduce GHG emissions. See ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS for information regarding the market and financial, regulatory and legislative, and operational risks associated with climate change.

 

Climate Change Regulation. Exelon is, or may become, subject to climate change regulation or legislation at the Federal, regional and state levels.

 

International Climate Change Regulation. At the international level, the United States has not yet ratified the United Nations Kyoto Protocol, which was extended at the most recent2012 meeting of the United Nations Framework on Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP 18) in December 2012.. The Kyoto Protocol now requires participating developed countries to cap GHG emissions at certain levels until 2020, when the new global agreement on emissions reduction is scheduled to become effective. TheThis new global agreement has been agreed to in concept and further development of itsfor GHG emissions reductions is scheduledwas agreed to beginonly in concept during the COP18, with a timeline for establishing the global targets by 2015. On November 22, 2013, at the 2013 COP 19 held in Warsaw, Poland, participating countries further agreed to provide their “intended nationally determined contributions” by the first quarter of 2015 in preparation for formally setting global target in 2015. At this point, there is much debate about the different levelsThe other major issues discussed at COP 19 were demands from developing countries for increased climate finance, and for a new mechanism to help especially vulnerable nations cope with unavoidable “loss and damage” resulting from climate change. Developed countries, which had previously promised to mobilize a total of emission reductions that will be required$100 billion a year by 2020, refused to set a quantified interim goal for developed and developing countries. Another significant outcome of the COP 18 was a re-examination of the long-term temperature goal which could influence internationalramping up climate policy by the United Nations.finance.

 

Federal Climate Change Legislation and Regulation. Various stakeholders, including Exelon, legislators and regulators, shareholders and non-governmental organizations, as well as other companies in many business sectors are considering ways to address the climate change issue,

33


including the enactment of federal climate change legislation. It is highly uncertain whether Federal

31


legislation to reduce GHG emissions will be enacted. If such legislation is adopted, Exelon may incur costs either to further limit or offset the GHG emissions from its operations or to procure emission allowances or credits. In June 2013, the White House released the President’s Climate Action Plan which consists of a wide variety of executive actions targeting GHG reductions, preparing for the impacts of climate change and showing leadership internationally; but the plan did not directly trigger any new requirements or legislative action.

 

The U.S. EPA is addressing the issue of carbon dioxide (CO2)(CO2) emissions regulation for new and existing electric generating units through the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) under Section 111 NSPS under the existing provisions of the Clean Air Act. A proposedPursuant to President Obama’s June 25, 2013 memorandum to U.S. EPA, the Agency re-proposed a Section 111(b) regulation for new units is to be finalized in springSeptember 2013 andthat may result in material costs of compliance for CO2CO2 emissions for new fossil-fuel electric generating units, particularly coal-fired units. TheUnder the President’s memorandum, the U.S. EPA is also expectedrequired to propose a Section 111(d) rule in 2013no later than June 1, 2014 to establish CO2CO2 emission regulations for existing stationary sources.

 

Regional and State Climate Change Legislation and Regulation. After a two-year program review, the nine northeast and mid-Atlantic states currently participating in the RGGIRegional Greenhouse Gas Reduction Initiative (RGGI) released an updated RGGI Model Rule and Program Review Recommendations Summary on February 7, 2013. Under the updated RGGI program, which must be approved pursuant to the applicable legislative and/or regulatory process in each RGGI State,state, the regional RGGI CO2CO2 budget would be reduced, starting in 2014, from its current 165 million ton level to 91 million tons, with a 2.5 percent reduction in the cap level each year between 2015-2020. Included in the new program are provisions for cost containment reserve (CCR) allowances, which will become available if the total demand for allowances, above the CCR trigger price, exceeds the number of CO2CO2 allowances available for purchase at auction. (CCR riggertrigger prices are $4 in 2014, $6 in 2015, $8 in 2016 and $10 in 2017, rising 2.5 percent thereafter to account for inflation). Such an outcome could put modest upward pressure on wholesale power prices; however, the specifics are currently uncertain.

 

At the state level, the Illinois Climate Change Advisory Group, created by Executive Order2006-11on October 5, 2006, made its final recommendations on September 6, 2007 to meet the Governor’s GHG reduction goals. At this time, the only requirements imposed by the state of Illinois are the energy efficiency and renewable portfolio standards in the Illinois Power Act that apply to ComEd.

On December 18, 2009, Pennsylvania issued the state’s final Climate Change Action Plan. The plan sets as a target a 30 percent reduction in GHG emissions by 2020. The Climate Change Advisory Committee continues to meet quarterly to review Climate Action Work Plans for the residential, commercial and industrial sectors. The Climate Change Action Plan does not impose any requirements on Generation or PECO at this time.

 

The Maryland Commission on Climate Change released its climate action plan on August 27, 2008, recommending that the state begin implementing 42 greenhouse gas reduction strategies. One of the Plan’s policy recommendations, to adopt science-based regulatory goals to reduce Maryland’s GHG emissions, was realized with the passage of the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Act of 2009 (GGRA). The law requires Maryland to reduce its GHG emissions by 25 percent below 2006 levels by 2020. It directsdirected the MDE to work with other state agencies to prepare an implementation plan to meet this goal. An interimThe implementation plan was submitted to the Governor and the General Assembly during the 2012 legislative session, and the final GGRA plan is expectedpublished in FebruaryOctober of 2013. The final GGRA plan is not expected to impose any additional requirements on BGE. Maryland targeted electricity consumption reduction goals required under the “Empower Maryland” program, and mandatory State participation in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Reduction Initiative (RGGI)recently updated and enhanced RGGI Program will beare listed as that sector’s contribution in the GGRA plan. The plan also advocates raising the renewable portfolio standard requirement from 22% by 2022 to 25% by 2022.

 

The Illinois Climate Change Advisory Group, created by Executive Order 2006-11 on October 5, 2006, made its final recommendations on September 6, 2007 to meet the Governor’s GHG reduction goals. At this time, the only requirements imposed by the state are the energy efficiency and renewable portfolio standards in the Illinois Power Act that apply to ComEd.34


Exelon’s Voluntary Climate Change Efforts. In a world increasingly concerned about global climate change and regulatory action to reduce GHG, Exelon’s low-carbon generating fleet is seen by management as a competitive advantage. Exelon remains one of the largest, lowest carbon electric generators in the United States: nuclear for base load, natural gas for marginal and peak demand,

32


hydro and pumped storage, and supplemental wind and solar renewables. As further legislation and regulation imposing requirements on emissions of GHG and air pollutants are promulgated, Exelon’s low carbon, low emissionlow-carbon, low-emission generation fleet will position the company to benefit from its comparative advantage over other generation fleets.

 

With the announcement in 2008 of Exelon 2020, Exelon set a voluntary goal to reduce, offset or displace more than 15.7 million metric tonnes of GHG emissions per year by 2020. Exelon updated that goal in 2012 following the Constellation merger to account for the integration of former Constellation GHG goals. The updated Exelon 2020 goal is to reduce, offset or displace more than 17.5 million metric tonnes of GHG emissions by 2020. The Exelon 2020 goal encompasses three broad areas of focus: reducing or offsetting Exelon’s own carbon footprint (with the year the asset/operations were acquired by Exelon as the baseline), helping customers and communities reduce their GHG emissions, and offering more low-carbon electricity in the marketplace.

Efforts to achieve Exelon has been maintaining strong performance towards achieving the Exelon 2020 goal will be supported byand anticipates reaching the company’s current business plans as17.5 million tons of annual abatement well as future initiatives that will be integrated into the annual business planning process. This includes a periodic review and refinement of Exelon 2020 initiatives in light of changing market conditions, regulations, technology and other factors that affect the merit of various GHG abatement options. Specific initiatives and the amount of expenditures to implement the plan will depend on economic and policy developments, and will be made on a project-by-project basis in accordance with Exelon’s normal project evaluation standards.before 2020.

 

Renewable and Alternative Energy Portfolio Standards

 

Twenty-nineThirty-nine states and the District of Columbia have adopted some form of RPS requirement. As previously described, Illinois, Pennsylvania and Maryland have laws specifically addressing energy efficiency and renewable energy initiatives. In addition to state level activity, RPS legislation has been considered and may be considered again in the future by the United States Congress. Also, states that currently do not have RPS requirements may adopt such legislation in the future.

 

The Illinois Settlement Legislation required that procurement plans implemented by electric utilities include cost-effective renewable energy resources or approved equivalents such as RECs in amounts that equal or exceed 2% of the total electricity that each electric utility supplies to its eligible retail customers by June 1, 2008, increasing to 10% by June 1, 2015, with a goal of 25% by June 1, 2025. Utilities are allowed to pass-through any costs from the procurement of these renewable resources or approved equivalents subject to legislated rate impact criteria. As of December 31, 2012,2013, ComEd had purchased sufficient renewable energy resources or equivalents, such as RECs, to comply with the Illinois Settlement Legislation. See Note 3 and Note 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

The AEPS Act wasbecame effective for PECO on January 1, 2011, following the expiration of PECO’s transition period. During 2012,2013, PECO was required to supply approximately 4.0% and 6.2% of electric energy generated from Tier I (including solar, wind power, low-impact hydropower, geothermal energy, biologically derived methane gas, fuel cells, biomass energy, coal mine methane and black liquor generated within Pennsylvania) through May 31, 2013 and subsequently 4.5% beginning June 1, 2013 and continuing through May 31, 2014. PECO was also required to supply 6.2% of electric energy generated from Tier II (including waste coal, demand-side management, large-scale hydropower, municipal solid waste, generation of electricity utilizing wood and by-products of the pulping process and wood, distributed generation systems and integrated combined coal gasification technology) alternative energy resources, respectively, as measured in AECs. The compliance requirements will incrementally escalate to 8.0% for Tier I and 10.0% for Tier II by 2021. In order to comply with these requirements, PECO entered into agreements with varying terms with accepted bidders, including Generation, to purchase non-solar Tier I, solar Tier 1 and Tier II AECs. PECO also purchases AECs through its DSP Program full requirement contracts.

 

3335


Section 7-703 of the Public Utilities Article in Maryland sets forth the RPS requirement, which applies to all retail electricity sales in Maryland by electricity suppliers. The RPS requirement requires that suppliers obtain a specified percentage of the electricity it sells from Tier 1 sources (solar, wind, biomass, methane, geothermal, ocean, fuel cell, small hydroelectric, and poultry litter) and Tier 2 sources (hydroelectric, other than pump storage generation, and waste-to-energy). The RPS requirement began in 2006, requiring that suppliers procure 1.0% and 2.5% from Tier 1 and Tier 2 sources, respectively, escalating in 2022 to 22.0% from Tier 1 sources, including at least 2.0% from solar energy, and 0.0% froma phase out of Tier 2 sources.resource options by 2022. In 2012, 6.5% were2013, 8.2% was required from Tier 1 renewable sources, including at least 0.1%0.25% derived from solar energy, and 2.5% from Tier 2 renewable sources. The wholesale suppliers that supply power to the state’s utilities through the SOS procurement auctions have the obligation, by contract with those utilities, to comply with and provide its proportional share of the RPS requirements.

 

Similar to ComEd, PECO and BGE, Generation’s retail electric business must source a portion of the electric load it serves in many of the states in which it does business from renewable resources or approved equivalents such as RECs. Potential regulation and legislation regarding renewable and alternative energy resources could increase the pace of development of wind and other renewable/alternative energy resources, which could put downward pressure on wholesale market prices for electricity in some markets where Exelon operates generation assets. At the same time, such developments may present some opportunities for sales of Generation’s renewable power, including from wind, solar, hydroelectric and landfill gas.

 

See Note 3 and Note 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Executive Officers of the Registrants as of February 21, 201313, 2014

 

Exelon

 

Name

  Age  

Position

  

Period

Crane, Christopher M.

  5455  Chief Executive Officer, Exelon;  2012 - Present
    Chairman, ComEd, PECO & BGE  2012 - Present
    President, Exelon; Exelon2008 - Present
President, Generation  2008 - Present2013
    Chief Operating Officer, Exelon  2008 - 2012
    Chief Operating Officer, Generation  2007 - 2010
Executive Vice President, Exelon2007 - 2008

Shattuck III, Mayo A.

58Executive Chairman, Exelon2012 - Present
Chairman, President and2001 - 2012
Chief Executive Officer, Constellation

Cornew, Kenneth W.

  4748  Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Commercial Officer, Exelon;  2013 - Present
President and CEO, Generation2013 - Present
Executive Vice President and Chief Commercial Officer, Exelon2012 - Present2013
    President and Chief Executive Officer, Constellation  2012 - Present2013
    Senior Vice President, Exelon; President, Power Team  2008 - 2012
Senior Vice President, Trading and Origination, Power Team2007 - 2008

O’Brien, Denis P.

  5253  Senior Executive Vice President, Exelon; Chief Executive Officer, Exelon Utilities2012 - Present
Vice Chairman, ComEd, PECO, BGE  2012 - Present
    Chief Executive Officer, PECO; Executive Vice President, Exelon  2007 - 2012
    President and Director, PECO  2003 - 2012

 

3436


Name

  Age  

Position

  

Period

Pramaggiore, Anne R.

  5455  Chief Executive Officer, ComEd  2012 - Present
    President, ComEd  2009 - Present
    Chief Operating Officer, ComEd  2009 - 2012
    Executive Vice President, Customer Operations, Regulatory and External Affairs, ComEd  2007 - 2009

Adams, Craig L.

  6061  President and Chief Executive Officer, PECO  2012 - Present
    Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, PECO  2007 - 2012

DeFontes Jr., Kenneth W.

  6263  President and Chief Executive Officer, BGE  2004 - PresentPresent(a)
    Senior Vice President, Constellation Energy  2004 - 2012

Gillis, Ruth Ann M.

  5859  Executive Vice President, Exelon  2008 - Present
    Chief Administrative Officer, Exelon  2010 - Present
    President, Exelon Business Services Company  2005 - Present
    Chief Diversity Officer, Exelon  2009 - 2012
Senior Vice President, Exelon2002 - 2008

Von Hoene Jr., William A.

  5960  Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Strategy Officer, Exelon  2012 - Present
    Executive Vice President, Finance and Legal, Exelon  2009 - 2012
    Executive Vice President and General Counsel, Exelon  2008 - 2009
    Senior Vice President, Exelon Business Services Company  2004 - 2009
Senior Vice President, Exelon2006 - 2008

Thayer, Jonathan W.

  4142  Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Exelon  2012 - Present
    Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Constellation Energy; Treasurer, Constellation Energy  2008 - 2012
Vice President, Constellation Energy2004 - 2008

Glace, Joseph R.Aliabadi, Paymon

  5251  SeniorExecutive Vice President and Chief Risk Officer, Exelon  20122013 - Present
    Chief Risk Officer, ExelonManaging Director, Gleam Capital Management  20082012 - Present2013
    Vice President, ExelonPrincipal and Managing Director, Gunvor International  20082009 - 20122011
Chief Executive Officer, Essent Trading International2004 - 2009

DesParte, Duane M.

  50  Senior Vice President and Corporate Controller, Exelon  2008 - Present
Vice President, Finance, Exelon Business Services Company2007 - 2008

 

Generation

 

Name

  Age  

Position

  

Period

Crane, Christopher M.Cornew, Kenneth W.

  5448  Senior Executive Vice President and Chief ExecutiveCommercial Officer, Exelon; Chairman, ComEd, PECO & BGE  20122013 - Present
    President Exelon; President,and CEO, Generation  20082013 - Present
Chief Operating Officer, Exelon2008 - 2012
Chief Operating Officer, Generation2007 - 2010
    Executive Vice President Exelon2007 - 2008

Cornew, Kenneth W.

47Executive Vice President and Chief Commercial Officer, Exelon; Exelon2012 - 2013
President and Chief Executive Officer, Constellation  2012 - Present2013
    Senior Vice President, Exelon; President, Power Team  2008 - 2012
Senior Vice President, Trading and Origination, Power Team2007 - 2008

 

3537


Name

  Age  

Position

  

Period

Pacilio, Michael J.

  5253  President, Exelon Nuclear; Senior Vice President2010 - Present
and Chief Nuclear Officer, Generation  2010 - Present
    Chief Operating Officer, Exelon Nuclear  2007 - 2010

Nigro, Joseph

49Executive Vice President, Exelon; Chief Executive Officer, Constellation2013 - Present
Senior Vice President, Portfolio Management and Strategy2012 - 2013
Vice President, Structuring and Portfolio Management, Exelon Power Team2010 - 2012

DeGregorio, Ronald

  5051  Senior Vice President, Generation; President, Exelon Power  2012 - Present
    Chief Integration Officer, Exelon  2011 - 2012
    Chief Operating Officer, Exelon Transmission Company  2010 - 2011
    Senior Vice President, Mid-Atlantic Operations, Exelon Nuclear  2007 - 2010

Wright, Bryan P.

  4647  Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Generation  2013 - Present
    Senior Vice President, Corporate Finance, Exelon  2012 - 2013
    Chief Accounting Officer, Constellation Energy  2009 - 2012
    Vice President and Controller, Constellation Energy  2008 - 2012
Vice President and Controller, Constellation Energy Resources2007 - 2008

Aiken, Robert

  4647  Vice President and Controller, Generation  2012 - Present
    Executive Director and Assistant Controller, Constellation  2011 - 2012
    Constellation
Executive Director of Operational Accounting, Constellation Energy Commodities Group  2009 - 2011
    Vice President of International Accounting, Constellation Energy Commodities Group  
Vice President of International Accounting,2007 - 2009
Constellation Energy Commodities Group

 

ComEd

 

Name

  Age  

Position

  

Period

Pramaggiore, Anne R.

  5455  Chief Executive Officer, ComEd  2012 - Present
    President, ComEd  2009 - Present
    Chief Operating Officer, ComEd  2009 - 2012
    Executive Vice President, Customer Operations, Regulatory and External Affairs, ComEd  2007 - 2009

Donnelly, Terence R.

  5253  Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, ComEd  2012 - Present
    Executive Vice President, Operations, ComEd  2009 - 2012
    Senior Vice President, Transmission and Distribution, ComEd  2007 - 2009

Trpik Jr., Joseph R.

  4344  Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, ComEd  2009 - Present
    Vice President & Assistant Corporate Controller, Exelon Business Services Company  2007 - 2009
    Vice President and Assistant Corporate Controller, Exelon  2004 - 2009

38


Name

Age

Position

Period

Jensen, Val

  5758  Senior Vice President, Customer Operations, ComEd  2012 - Present
    Vice President, Marketing and Environmental Programs, ComEd  2008 - 2012
Senior Vice President, ICF International2006 - 2008

36


Name

Age

Position

Period

O’Neill, Thomas S.

  5051  Senior Vice President, Regulatory and Energy Policy and General Counsel, ComEd  2010 - Present
    Senior Vice President, Exelon  2009 - 2010
    Senior Vice President, New Business Development, Generation; Senior Vice President, New Business Development, Exelon  2009 - 2009
    Vice President, New Plant Development, Generation  2007 - 2009

Marquez Jr., Fidel

  5152  Senior Vice President, Governmental and External Affairs, Exelon  2012 - Present
    Senior Vice President, Customer Operations, ComEd  2009 - 2012
    Vice President of External Affairs and Large Customer Services, ComEd  2007 - 2009

Brookins, Kevin B.

  5152  Senior Vice President, Strategy & Administration, ComEd  2012 - Present
    Vice President, Operational Strategy and Business Intelligence, ComEd  2010 - 2012
    Vice President, Distribution System Operations, ComEd  2008 - 2010
Vice President, Work Management and New Business2007 - 2008

Anthony, J. Tyler

  4849  Senior Vice President, Distribution Operations, ComEd  2010 - Present
    Vice President, Transmission and Substations, ComEd  2007 - 2010

Waden, KevinKozel, Gerald J.

  41  Vice President, Comptroller, Accountant and Controller, ComEd  20092013 - Present
    Assistant Corporate Controller, Exelon2012 - 2013
Director of Financial Reporting and Analysis, Exelon2009 - 2012
Manager of Accounting, Operations, ComEd  20072008 - 2009

 

PECO

 

Name

  Age  

Position

  

Period

Adams, Craig L.

  6061  President and Chief Executive Officer, PECO  2012 - Present
    Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, PECO  2007 - 2012

Barnett, Phillip S.

  4950  Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, PECO  2007 - Present
    Treasurer, PECO  2012 - Present

Innocenzo, Michael A.

  4748  Senior Vice President and Chief Operations Officer, PECO  2012 - Present
    Vice President, Distribution System Operations and Smart Grid/Smart Meter, PECO  2010 - 2012
    Vice President, Distribution System Operations  2007 - 2010

39


Name

Age

Position

Period

Webster Jr., Richard G.

  5152  Vice President, Regulatory Policy and Strategy, PECO  2012 - Present
    Director of Rates and Regulatory Affairs  2007 - 2012

Murphy, Elizabeth A.

  5354  Vice President, Governmental and External Affairs, PECO  2012 - Present
    Director, Governmental & External Affairs, PECO  2007 - 2012

Alden, Mark F.Jiruska, Frank J.

  5253  Vice President, Customer Operations, PECO  20092013 - Present
Vice President Gas, PECO2007 - 2009

37


Name

Age

Position

Period

Diaz Jr., Romulo L.

  6667  Vice President and General Counsel, PECO  2012 - Present
    Vice President, Governmental and External Affairs, PECO  2009 - 2012
    Associate General Counsel, Exelon  2008 - 2009
City Solicitor, City of Philadelphia2005 - 2008

Bailey, Scott A.

  3637  Vice President and Controller, PECO  2012 - Present
    Assistant Controller, Generation  2011 - 2012
    Director of Accounting, Power Team  2007 - 2011

 

BGE

 

Name

  Age  

Position

  

Period

DeFontes Jr., Kenneth W.

  6263  President and Chief Executive Officer, BGE  

2004 - PresentPresent(a)

    Senior Vice President, Constellation Energy  

2004 - 2012

Woerner, Stephen J.

  4546  Chief Operating Officer, BGE  

2012 - Present

    Senior Vice President, BGE  

2009 - Present

    Vice President and Chief Integration Officer, Constellation Energy  

2011 - 2012

    Vice President and Chief Information Officer, Constellation Energy  

2010 - 2011

    Vice President, Transformation, Constellation Energy  

2009 - 2010

    Senior Vice President, Gas and Electric Operations and Planning, BGE  

2007 - 2009

Khouzami, Carim V.

  38Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, BGE

2013 - Present

  Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, BGE  

2011 - Present2013

    Executive Director, Investor Relations, Constellation Energy  

2009 - 2011

    Director, Corporate Strategy and Development, Constellation Energy  

2008 - 2009

Butler, Calvin

44Senior Vice President, Regulatory and External Affairs, BGE

2013 - Present(a)

Senior Vice President, Corporate Affairs, Exelon

2011 - 2013

Senior Vice President, Human Resources, Exelon

2010 - 2011

Senior Vice President, Corporate Affairs, ComEd

2009 - 2010

40


Name

Age

Position

Period

Case, Mark D.

  5152  Vice President, Strategy and Regulatory Affairs, BGE  

2012 - Present

    Senior Vice President, Strategy and Regulatory Affairs, BGE  

2007 - 2012

Dempsey, Mary E.Dodson, Carol A.

  57Vice President, Governmental Affairs, BGE2012 - Present
Executive Director, State Affairs, Constellation Energy2010 - 2012
Managing Director, Public Affairs, Constellation Energy2008 - 2009

Mills, Jeannette M.

4649  Vice President, Customer Operations, BGE  2012

2013 - Present

    Chief Customer Officer, BGE  2011

2013 - Present

Vice President, Utility Oversight, BSC

2012 - 2013

Vice President, Engineering and Project Management, BGE

2012 - 2012

    Senior Vice President, Customer Relations and AccountAsset Management Services, BGE  2008

2009 - 2012

Senior Vice President, Gas Operations and Planning, BGE2007 - 2008

Gahagan, Daniel P.

  5960  Vice President and General Counsel, BGE  

2007 - Present

Vahos, David M.

  4041  Vice President and Controller, BGE  

2012 - Present

    Executive Director, Audit, Constellation  

2010 - 2012

    Director, Finance, BGE  

2006 - 2010

 

(a)On February 12, 2014, Kenneth W. DeFontes Jr., President and Chief Executive Officer at BGE announced his retirement from BGE on February 28, 2014. Effective March 1, 2014, Calvin G. Butler Jr. will become Chief Executive Officer of BGE and an executive officer of Exelon and Stephen J. Woerner will become President and continue as Chief Operating Officer of BGE.

38


ITEM 1A.RISK FACTORS

 

Each of the Registrants operates in a market and regulatory environment that poses significant risks, many of which are beyond the Registrant’s control. Management of each Registrant regularly meets with the Chief Risk Officer and the RMC, which comprises officers of the Registrants, to identify and evaluate the most significant risks of the Registrants’ businesses, and the appropriate steps to manage and mitigate those risks. The Chief Risk Officer and senior executives of the Registrants discuss those risks with the finance and risk oversightcommittee and audit committees of the Exelon Boardboard of directors and the ComEd, PECO and BGE Boardsboards of Directors.directors. In addition, the generation oversight committee of the Exelon Boardboard of directors’ generation oversight and energy delivery oversight committees, respectively, evaluateevaluates risks related to the generation and energy delivery businesses.business. The risk factors discussed below may adversely affect one or more of the Registrants’ results of operations and cash flows and the market prices of their publicly traded securities. Each of the Registrants has disclosed the known material risks that affect its business at this time. However, there may be further risks and uncertainties that are not presently known or that are not currently believed by a Registrant to be material that may adversely affect its performance or financial condition in the future.

 

The Registrants’ most significant risks arise as a consequence of: (1) Generation’s position as a predominantly nuclear generator selling power into competitive energy markets with a concentration in select regions, and (2) the role of ComEd, PECO and BGE as operators of electric transmission and distribution systems in three of the largest metropolitan areas in the United States. The Registrants’ major risks fall primarily under the following categories:

 

  

Market and Financial Risks. Exelon’s and Generation’s market and financial risks include the risk of price fluctuations in the wholesale and retail power markets. Wholesale powerPower prices are a function of supply and demand, which in turn are driven by factors such as (1) the price of fuels, in particular the priceprices of natural gas and coal, thatwhich drive the wholesale market prices that Generation’s nuclearGeneration can obtain for the output of its power plants, receive,(2) the rate of expansion of subsidized low carbonlow-carbon generation such as wind energy in the markets in which Generation’s output is sold, and(3) the impactseffects on energy demand of factors such as weather, economic conditions and implementation of energy efficiency and demand response programs. In addition,programs, and (4) the load serving andimpacts of increased competition in the retail marketing activities compete for customers in a competitive environment which impacts the margins that Generation can earn and the volumes that it is able to serve.channel.

 

41


  

Regulatory and Legislative Risks. The Registrants’ regulatory and legislative risks include changes to the laws and regulations that govern competitive markets and utility cost recovery, and that drive environmental policy. In particular, Exelon’s and Generation’s financial performance may be adversely affected by changes that could affect Generation’s ability to sell power into the competitive wholesale power markets at market-based prices. In addition, potential regulation and legislation regarding climate change and renewable portfolio standards could increase the pace of development of wind energy facilities, which could put downward pressure in some markets on wholesale market prices for electricity from Generation’s nuclear assets, partially offsetting any additional value Exelon and Generation might derive from Generation’s nuclear assets under a carbon constrained regulatory regime that might exist in the future. Also, regulatory actions in Illinois, Pennsylvania or Maryland could materially lower returns for ComEd, PECO and BGE, respectively.

 

  

Operational Risks. The Registrants’ operational risks include those risks inherent in running the nation’s largest fleet of nuclear power reactors and large electric and gas distribution systems. The safe and effective operation of the nuclear facilities and the ability to effectively manage the associated decommissioning obligations as well as the ability to maintain the availability, reliability and safety of its energy delivery systems are fundamental to Exelon’s ability to protect and grow shareholder value. Additionally, the operating costs of ComEd, PECO and BGE, and the opinions of customers and regulators of ComEd, PECO and BGE, are

39


affected by those companies’ ability to maintain the reliability and safety of their energy delivery systems.

 

  

Risks Related to the Merger with Constellation.Constellation and the Pending Master Agreement between Generation and CENG.As a result of the merger with Constellation that closed on March 12, 2012, Exelon ismay encounter unexpected difficulties or costs in meeting commitments it made under various orders and agreements associated with regulatory approvals from the July 29, 2013 Master Agreement between Exelon, Generation and subsidiaries of Generation with EDF, EDF Inc. (EDFI) (a subsidiary of EDF) and CENG. Exelon and Generation are subject to additional risks.the risks that integration of CENG’s nuclear fleet may not achieve anticipated results, and that Exelon and Generation may not be able to fully integrate the operations of CENG in the manner expected.

 

A discussion of each of these risksrisk categories and other risk factors is included below.

 

Market and Financial Risks

 

Generation is exposed to price fluctuationsdepressed prices in the wholesale and retail power markets, which may negatively affect its results of operations.operations and cash flows. (Exelon and Generation)

 

Generation hedges theis exposed to commodity price risk associated withfor the unhedged portion of its electricity generation it owns, or controls, through long-term power purchase agreements. Absent any hedging activity through fixed price transactions, Generation would be exposedsupply portfolio. As such, Generation’s earnings and cash flows are therefore subject to the risk of risingvariability as spot and falling spotforward market prices in the markets in which its assets are located, which would mean that Generation’s cash flows would vary accordingly.it operates rise and fall.

 

Price of FuelsThe wholesale spot market price of electricity for each hour is generally determined by the marginal cost of supplying the next unit of electricity to the market during that hour. Many times,Thus, the market price of power is affected by the market price of the marginal fuel used to generate the electricity unit. Often, the next unit of electricity will be supplied from generating stations fueled by fossil fuels, and, therefore, the market price of power will reflect the market price of the marginal fuel.fuels. Consequently, changes in the market price of fossil fuels will causeoften result in comparable changes to the market price of power. For example, the use of new technologies to recover natural gas from shale deposits has increased natural gas supply and reserves, placing further downward pressure on natural gas prices and, has reduced Generation’s revenues.therefore, on power prices. The continued addition of supply from new alternative generation resources, such as wind and solar, whether mandated through RPS or otherwise subsidized or

42


encouraged through climate legislation or regulation, may displace a higher marginal cost plant, further reducing power prices. In addition, further delay or elimination of EPA air quality regulations could prolong the duration for which the cost of pollution from fossil fuel generation is not factored into market prices which could reduce Generation’s revenue. Further, in the event that alternative generation resources, such as wind and solar, are mandated through RPS or otherwise subsidized or encouraged through climate legislation or regulation and added to the available generation supply such resources could displace a higher marginal cost fossil plant, which could reduce the price at which market participants sell their electricity. This occurrence could then reduce the market price at which all generators in that region, including Generation, would be able to sell their output. These events could adversely affect Generation’s financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows, and could also result in an impairment of certain long-lived assets.prices.

 

Demand and Supply:The market price for electricity is also affected by changes in the demand for electricity and the available supply of electricity. Worse than expectedUnfavorable economic conditions, milder than normal weather, and the growth of energy efficiency and demand response programs can each depress demand. The result is that higher-cost generating resources do not run as frequently, putting downward pressure on electricity market prices. The continued tepid economic environment and growing energy efficiency and demand response initiatives have limited the demand for electricity in Generation’s markets. In addition, in some markets, the supply of electricity through wind or solar generation, when combined with other base-load generation such as nuclear, may often exceed demand during some hours of the day, resulting in loss of revenue for base-load generating plants. The risk of increased supply in excess of demand is heightened by continued or increased RPS mandates or other subsidies, including ITCs and PTCs.

Retail Competition: Generation’s retail operations compete for customers in a competitive environment, which affects the margins that Generation can earn and the volumes that it is able to serve. In an environment of sustained low natural gas and power prices and low market volatility, retail competitors can aggressively pursue market share because the barriers to entry can be low and wholesale generators (including Generation) use their retail operations to hedge generation output. Increased or more aggressive competition can adversely affect overall gross margins and profitability in Generation’s retail operations.

Sustained low market prices for electricity. The continued sluggish economy in the United States has in fact led to a slowdown in the growth ofor depressed demand for electricity. If this continues, itand over-supply could adversely affect Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations and cash flows, and such impacts could be emphasized given Generation’s concentration of base-load electric generating capacity within primarily two geographic market regions, namely the Registrants’Midwest and the Mid-Atlantic. These impacts could adversely affect Exelon’s and Generation’s ability to fund other discretionary uses of cash such as growth projects or to pay dividends.Individends. In addition, the economicsuch conditions may no longer support the continued operation of certain generating facilities, which could adversely affect Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations through increased depreciation rates, impairment charges and accelerated future decommissioning costs.costs which may be offset in whole or in part by reduced operating and maintenance expenses. A slow recovery in market conditions could result in a prolonged depression of or further decline in commodity prices, including low forward natural gas and power prices and low market volatility, which could also adversely affect Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations, cash flows and financial position.

 

In addition to price fluctuations, Generation is exposed to other risks in the power markets that are beyond its control and may negatively affect its results of operations. (Exelon and Generation)

 

Credit Risk. In the bilateral markets, Generation is exposed to the risk that counterparties that owe Generation money, or are obligated to purchase energy or fuel from Generation, will not perform

40


under their obligations for operational or financial reasons. In the event the counterparties to these arrangements fail to perform, Generation might be forced to purchase or sell energy or fuel in the wholesale markets at less favorable prices and incur additional losses, to the extent of amounts, if any, already paid to the counterparties. In the spot markets, Generation is exposed to risk as a result of default sharing mechanisms that exist within certain markets, primarily RTO’sRTOs and ISO’s,ISOs, the purpose of which is to spread such risk across all market participants. Generation is also a party to agreements with entities in the energy sector that have experienced rating downgrades or other financial difficulties. In addition, Generation’s retail sales subject it to credit risk through competitive electricity and natural gas supply activities to serve commercial and industrial companies, governmental entities and

43


residential customers. Retail credit risk results when customers default on their contractual obligations. This risk represents the loss that may be incurred due to the nonpayment of a customer’s account balance, as well as the loss from the resale of energy previously committed to serve the customer.

 

Unstable Markets.The wholesale spot markets remain evolving markets that vary from region to region and are still developing practices and procedures. Problems in or the failure of any of these markets could adversely affect Generation’s business. In addition, a significant decrease in market participation could affect market liquidity and have a detrimental effect on market stability.

 

The Registrants are potentially exposed to emerging technologies that may over time affect or transform the energy industry, including technologies related to energy generation, distribution and consumption. (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

Some of these technologies include, but are not limited to further shale gas development or sources, cost-effective renewable energy technologies, broad consumer adoption of electric vehicles and energy storage devices. Such developments could lower the price of energy, could affect energy deliveries as customer-owned generation becomes more cost-effective, could require further improvements to our distribution systems to address changing load demands and could make portions of our electric system power supply and transmission and/or distribution facilities obsolete prior to the end of their useful lives. Such technologies could also result in further declines in commodity prices or demand for delivered energy. Each of these factors could materially affect the Registrants’ results of operations, financial position, and cash flows through, among other things, reduced operating revenues, increased operating and maintenance expenses, and increased capital expenditures, as well as potential asset impairment charges or accelerated depreciation and decommissioning expenses over shortened remaining asset useful lives.

Market performance and other factors may decrease the value of decommissioning trustNDT funds and employee benefit plan assets and increase the related employee benefit plan obligations, which then could require significant additional funding. (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Disruptions in the capital markets and their actual or perceived effects on particular businesses and the greater economy may adversely affect the value of the investments held within Generation’s NDTs and Exelon’s employee benefit plan trusts. The Registrants have significant obligations in these areas and Exelon and Generation hold substantial assets in these trusts to meet those obligations. The asset values are subject to market fluctuations and will yield uncertain returns, which may fall below the Registrants’ projected return rates. A decline in the market value of the NDT fund investments may increase theGeneration’s funding requirements to decommission Generation’sits nuclear plants. A decline in the market value of the pension and other postretirement benefit plan assets will increase the funding requirements associated with Exelon’s pension and other postretirement benefit plan obligations. Additionally, Exelon’s pension and other postretirement benefit plan liabilities are sensitive to changes in interest rates. As interest rates decrease, the liabilities increase, potentially increasing benefit costs and funding requirements. Changes in demographics, including increased numbers of retirements or changes in life expectancy assumptions or changes to Social Security or Medicare eligibility requirements may also increase the costs and funding requirements of the obligations related to the pension and other postretirement benefit plans. If future increases in pension and other postretirement costs as a result of reduced plan assets or other factors are not recoverablecannot be recovered, or cannot be recovered in a timely manner, from ComEd, PECO and BGE customers, the results of operations and financial positions of ComEd, PECO and BGE could be negatively affected. Ultimately, if the Registrants are unable to manage the decommissioning trustinvestments with the NDT funds and benefit plan assets, and obligations,unable to manage the related benefit plan liabilities, their results of operations, cash flows and financial positions could be negatively affected.

 

44


Unstable capital and credit markets and increased volatility in commodity markets may adversely affect the Registrants’ businesses in several ways, including the availability and cost of short-term funds for liquidity requirements, the Registrants’ ability to meet long-term commitments, Generation’s ability to hedge effectively its generation portfolio, and the competitiveness and liquidity of energy markets; each could adversely affect the Registrants’ financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The Registrants rely on the capital markets, particularly for publicly offered debt, as well as the banking and commercial paper markets, to meet their financial commitments and short-term liquidity

41


needs if internal funds are not available from the Registrants’ respective operations. Disruptions in the capital and credit markets in the United States or abroad can adversely affect the Registrants’ ability to access the capital markets or draw on their respective bank revolving credit facilities. The Registrants’ access to funds under their 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 the Registrants if they experience shortages of capital and liquidity or if they experience excessive volumes of borrowing requests from the Registrants and other borrowers within a short period of time. The inability to access capital markets or credit facilities, and longer term disruptions in the capital and credit markets as a result of uncertainty, changing or increased regulation, reduced alternatives or failures of significant financial institutions could result in the deferral of discretionary capital expenditures, changes to Generation’s hedging strategy in order to reduce collateral-posting requirements, or a reduction in dividend payments or other discretionary uses of cash.

 

In addition, the Registrants have exposure to worldwide financial markets, including Europe. The ongoing European debt crisis has contributed to instability in global credit markets. Further disruptionsDisruptions in the European markets could reduce or restrict the Registrants’ ability to secure sufficient liquidity or secure liquidity at reasonable terms. As of December 31, 2012,2013, approximately 31%30%, or $2.5 billion, of the Registrants’ available credit facilities were with European banks. The credit facilities include $8.3$8.4 billion in aggregate total commitments of which $6.5$6.6 billion was available as of December 31, 2012.2013. There were no borrowings under the Registrants’ credit facilities as of December 31, 2012.2013. See Note 1113 of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on the credit facilities.

 

The strength and depth of competition in competitive energy markets depend heavily on active participation by multiple trading parties, which could be adversely affected by disruptions in the capital and credit markets and legislative and regulatory initiatives that may affect participants in commodities transactions. Reduced capital and liquidity and failures of significant institutions that participate in the energy markets could diminish the liquidity and competitiveness of energy markets that are important to the respective businesses of the Registrants. Perceived weaknesses in the competitive strength of the energy markets could lead to pressures for greater regulation of those markets or attempts to replace market structures with other mechanisms for the sale of power, including the requirement of long-term contracts, such as the financial swap contract between Generation and ComEd as described further in Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, which could have a material adverse effect on Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations and cash flows.

 

If any of the Registrants were to experience a downgrade in its credit ratings to below investment grade or otherwise fail to satisfy the credit standards in its agreements with its trading counterparties, it would be required to provide significant amounts of collateral under its agreements with counterparties and could experience higher borrowing costs. (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Generation’s business is subject to credit quality standards that may require market participants to post collateral for their obligations. If Generation were to be downgraded or lose its investment grade credit rating (based on its senior unsecured debt rating) or otherwise fail to satisfy the credit standards of trading counterparties, it would be required under its hedging arrangements to provide collateral in the form of letters of credit or cash, which may have a material adverse effect upon its liquidity. The amount

45


of collateral required to be provided by Generation at any point in time is dependent on a variety of factors, including (1) the notional amount of the applicable hedge, (2) the nature of counterparty and related agreements, and (3) changes in power or other commodity prices. In addition, if Generation were downgraded, it could experience higher borrowing costs as a result of the downgrade. Generation could experience a downgrade in its ratings if any of the credit rating agencies concludes that the level of business or financial risk and overall creditworthiness of the power generation industry in general, or Generation in particular, has deteriorated. Changes in ratings methodologies by the credit rating agencies could also have a negative impact on the ratings of Generation.

 

42


ComEd’s financial swap contract with Generation and its operating agreement with PJM containcontains collateral provisions that are affected by its credit rating and market prices. If certain wholesale market conditions exist and ComEd were to lose its investment grade credit rating (based on its senior unsecured debt rating), it would be required under the financial swap contract with GenerationPJM operating agreement to provide collateral in the formforms of letters of credit or cash, which may have a material adverse effect upon its liquidity. Collateral posting by ComEd under the financial swap will generally increase as forward market prices fall and decrease as forward market prices rise. Conversely, collateral requirements under the PJM operating agreement will generally increase as market prices rise and decrease as market prices fall. Given the relationship to forward market prices, contract collateral requirements can be volatile. In addition, if ComEd were downgraded, it could experience higher borrowing costs as a result of the downgrade.

 

PECO’s and BGE’s operating agreements with PJM and their natural gas procurement contracts contain collateral provisions that are affected by their credit ratings. If certain wholesale market conditions exist and PECO and BGE were to lose their investment grade credit ratings (based on their senior unsecured debt ratings), they would be required to provide collateral in the form of letters of credit or cash, which may have material adverse effects upon their liquidity. PECO’s and BGE’s collateral requirements relating to their natural gas supply contracts are a function of market prices. Collateral posting requirements for PECO and BGE with respect to these contracts will generally increase as forward market prices fall and decrease as forward market prices rise. Given the relationship to forward market prices, contract collateral requirements can be volatile. In addition, if PECO or BGE were downgraded, they could experience higher borrowing costs as a result of the downgrade.

 

ComEd, PECO or BGE could experience a downgrade in its ratings if any of the credit rating agencies concludes that the level of business or financial risk and overall creditworthiness of the utility industry in general, or ComEd, PECO, or BGE in particular, has deteriorated. ComEd, PECO or BGE could experience a downgrade if the current regulatory environments in Illinois, Pennsylvania or Maryland, respectively, become less predictable by materially lowering returns for utilities in the applicable state or adopting other measures to mitigate higher electricity prices. Additionally, the ratings for ComEd, PECO or BGE could be downgraded if their financial results are weakened from current levels due to weaker operating performance or due to a failure to properly manage their capital structure. In addition, changes in ratings methodologies by the agencies could also have a negative impact on the ratings of ComEd, PECO or BGE.

 

ComEd, PECO and BGE conduct their respective businesses and operate under governance models and other arrangements and procedures intended to assure that ComEd, PECO and BGE are treated as separate, independent companies, distinct from Exelon and other Exelon subsidiaries in order to isolate ComEd, PECO and BGE from Exelon and other Exelon subsidiaries in the event of financial difficulty at Exelon or another Exelon subsidiary. These measures (commonly referred to as “ringfencing”) may help avoid or limit a downgrade in the credit ratings of ComEd, PECO and BGE in the event of a reduction in the credit rating of Exelon. Despite these ringfencing measures, the credit ratings of ComEd, PECO or BGE could remain linked, to some degree, to the credit ratings of Exelon. Consequently, a reduction in the credit rating of Exelon could result in a reduction of the credit rating of ComEd, PECO or BGE, or all three. A reduction in the credit rating of ComEd, PECO or BGE could have a material adverse effect on ComEd, PECO or BGE, respectively.

 

46


See Liquidity and Capital Resources—Recent Market Conditions and Security Ratings for further information regarding the potential impacts of credit downgrades on the Registrants’ cash flows.

 

43


Generation’s financial performance may be negatively affected by price volatility, availability and other risk factors associated with the procurement of nuclear and fossil fuel. (Exelon and Generation)

 

Generation depends on nuclear fuel and fossil fuels to operate its generating facilities. Nuclear fuel is obtained predominantly through long-term uranium concentrate supply contracts, contracted conversion services, contracted enrichment services and contracted fuel fabrication services. Coal, natural gas and oil are procured for generating plants through annual, short-term and spot-market purchases. The supply markets for nuclear fuel, coal, natural gas and oil are subject to price fluctuations, availability restrictions and counterparty default that may negatively affect the results of operations for Generation.

 

Generation’s risk management policies cannot fully eliminate the risk associated with its commodity trading activities. (Exelon and Generation)

 

Generation’s asset-based power position as well as its power marketing, fuel procurement and other commodity trading activities expose Generation to risks of commodity price movements. Generation attempts to manage this exposure through enforcement of established risk limits and risk management procedures. These risk limits and risk management procedures may not work as planned and cannot eliminate all risks associated with these activities. Even when its policies and procedures are followed, and decisions are made based on projections and estimates of future performance, results of operations may be diminished if the judgments and assumptions underlying those decisions prove to be incorrect. Factors, such as future prices and demand for power and other energy-related commodities, become more difficult to predict and the calculations become less reliable the further into the future estimates are made. As a result, Generation cannot predict the impact that its commodity trading activities and risk management decisions may have on its business, operating results, cash flows or financial position.

 

Generation buys and sells energy and other products in the wholesale markets and enters into financial contracts to manage risk and hedge various positions in Generation’s power generation portfolio. The proportion of hedged positions in its power generation portfolio may cause volatility in Generation’s future results of operations.

 

Financial performance and load requirements may be adversely affected if Generation is unable to effectively manage its power portfolio. (Exelon and Generation)

 

A significant portion of Generation’s power portfolio is used to provide power under procurement contracts with ComEd, PECO, BGE and other customers. To the extent portions of the power portfolio are not needed for that purpose, Generation’s wholesale output is sold in the wholesale market.power markets. To the extent its power portfolio is not sufficient to meet the requirements of its customers under the related agreements, Generation must purchase power in the wholesale power markets. Generation’s financial results may be negatively affected if it is unable to cost-effectively meet the load requirements of its customers, manage its power portfolio and effectively address the changes in the wholesale power markets.

 

Challenges to tax positions taken by the Registrants as well as tax law changes and the inherent difficulty in quantifying potential tax effects of business decisions, could negatively impact the Registrants’ results of operations and cash flows. (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Corporate Tax Reform. There exists the potential for comprehensive tax reform in the United States whichthat may significantly change the tax rules that are applicable to U.S. domiciled corporations. Exelon cannot assess what the overall effect of such potential legislation would be on its results of operations and cash flows.

 

4447


1999 sale of fossil generating assets.The IRS has challenged Exelon’s 1999 tax position on an involuntary conversion andits like-kind exchange transaction. In the third quarter of 2010, Exelon and IRS Appeals reached a nonbinding, preliminary agreement to settle Exelon’s involuntary conversion and CTC positions and for the IRS to withdraw its assertion of a $110 million substantial understatement penalty related to the involuntary conversion position. Definitive documents consistent with the preliminary agreement were finalized in the fourth quarter of 2012. However, Exelon and IRS Appeals failed to reach a settlement on the like-kind exchange position.position and Exelon expectsfiled a petition on December 13, 2013 to initiate litigation on this matter during 2013.in the United States Tax Court. Exelon was not required to remit any part of the asserted tax or penalty in order to litigate the like-kind exchange position. The litigation could take three to five years including appeals, if necessary.

 

As of MarchDecember 31, 2013, if the IRS is successful in its challenge to the like-kind exchange position, Exelon’s potential cash outflow, including tax and after-tax interest, exclusive of penalties, that could become currently payable may be as much as $860$840 million, of which approximately $320$305 million would be attributable to ComEd after consideration of Exelon’s agreement to hold ComEd harmless. In addition to attempting to impose tax on the like-kind exchange position, the IRS has asserted penalties for a substantial understatement of tax, which could result in an after-tax charge of $86$87 million to Exelon’s and ComEd’s results of operations should the IRS prevail in asserting the penalties. The timing effects of the final resolution of the like-kind exchange matter are unknown. See Note 1214 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Tax reserves and the recoverability of deferred tax assets.The Registrants are required to make judgments in order to estimate their obligations to taxing authorities. These tax obligations include income, real estate, sales and use and employment-related taxes and ongoing appeals issues related to these tax matters. These judgments include reserves for potential adverse outcomes regarding tax positions that have been taken that may be subject to challenge by the tax authorities. The Registrants also estimate their ability to utilize tax benefits, including those in the form of carryforwards and tax credits. See Notes 1 and 1214 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Increases in customer rates and the impact of economic downturns may lead to greater expense for uncollectible customer balances. Additionally, increased rates could lead to decreased volumes delivered. Both of these factors may decrease Generation’s, ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s results from operations and cash flows. (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s current procurement plans include purchasing power through contracted suppliers and in the spot market. ComEd’s and PECO’s costs of purchased power are charged to customers without a return or profit component. BGE’s SOS rates charged to customers recover BGE’s wholesale power supply costs and include an administrative fee which includes a shareholder return component and an incremental cost component. For PECO, purchased natural gas costs are charged to customers with no return or profit component. For BGE, purchased natural gas costs are charged to customers using a MBR mechanism that compares the actual cost of gas to a market index. The difference between the actual cost and the market index is shared equally between shareholders and customers. Purchased power and natural gas prices fluctuate based on their relevant supply and demand. Significantly higher rates related to purchased power and natural gas can result in declines in customer usage, lower revenues for electric transmission and distribution at ComEd, PECO and BGE, and for gas distribution at PECO, and potentially additional uncollectible accounts expense for ComEd, PECO and BGE. In addition, any challenges by the regulators or ComEd, PECO and BGE as to the recoverability of these costs could have a material effect on the Registrants’ results of operations and cash flows. Also, ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s cash flows can be affected by differences between the time period when electricity and natural gas are purchased and the ultimate recovery from customers.

 

45


Further, the impacts of economic downturns on ComEd, PECO and BGE customers and purchased natural gas costs for PECO and BGE customers, such as unemployment for residential customers and less demand for products and services provided by commercial and industrial customers, and the related regulatory limitations on residential service terminations, may result in an increase in the number of uncollectible customer balances, which would negatively impact ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s results from operations and cash flows. Generation’s customer supply activities

48


face economic downturn risks similar to Exelon’s utility businesses, such as lower volumes sold and increaseincreased expense for uncollectible customer balances. As Generation increases its customer supply footprint, economic downturn impacts could negatively affect Generation’s results from operations and cash flows. See ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK for further discussion of the Registrants’ credit risk.

 

The effects of weather may impact the Registrants’ results of operations and cash flows. (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Temperatures above normal levels in the summer tend to increase summer cooling electricity demand and revenues, and temperatures below normal levels in the winter tend to increase winter heating electricity and gas demand and revenues. Weather conditions directly influence the demand for electricity and natural gas and affect the price of energy commodities. Moderate temperatures adversely affect the usage of energy and resulting revenues at ComEd and PECO. Due to revenue decoupling, BGE recognizes revenues at MDPSC-approved levels per customer, regardless of what actual distribution volumes are for a billing period, and is not affected by actual weather with the exception of major storms. Extreme weather conditions or damage resulting from storms may stress ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s transmission and distribution systems, communication systems and technology, resulting in increased maintenance and capital costs and limiting each company’s ability to meet peak customer demand. These extreme conditions may have detrimental effects on ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s results of operations and cash flows. First and third quarter financial results, in particular, are substantially dependent on weather conditions, and may make period comparisons less relevant.

 

Generation’s operations are also affected by weather, which affects demand for electricity as well as operating conditions. To the extent that weather is warmer in the summer or colder in the winter than assumed, Generation may require greater resources to meet its contractual commitments. Extreme weather conditions or storms may affect the availability of generation and its transmission, limiting Generation’s ability to source or send power to where it is sold. In addition, drought-like conditions limiting water usage can impact Generation’s ability to run certain generating assets at full capacity. These conditions, which cannot be accurately predicted, may have an adverse effect by causing Generation to seek additional capacity at a time when wholesale markets are tight or to seek to sell excess capacity at a time when markets are weak.

 

Certain long-lived assets and other assets recorded on the Registrants’ statements of financial position may become impaired, which would result in write-offs of the impaired amounts. (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Long-lived assets represent the single largest asset class on the Registrants’ statement of financial position. Specifically, long-lived assets account for 58%59%, 48%49%, 60%61%, 65%66% and 73%75% of total assets for Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE, respectively, as of December 31, 2012.2013. In addition, the Registrants have significant balances related to unamortized energy contracts. See Notes 4 and 810 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on Exelon’s unamortized energy contracts. The Registrants evaluate the recoverability of the carrying value of long-lived assets to be held and used whenever events or circumstances indicating a potential impairment exist. Factors such as the business climate, including current and future energy and market conditions, environmental regulation, and the condition of assets are considered when evaluating long-

46


livedlong-lived assets for potential impairment. An impairment would require the Registrants to reduce the carrying value of the long-lived asset through a non-cash charge to expense by the amount of the impairment, and such an impairment could have a material adverse impact on the Registrants’ results of operations.

 

Exelon and Generation have investments in certain generating plant projects, including the CENG nuclear joint venture with a carrying value of $1.8$1.9 billion as of December 31, 2012.2013. These investments

49


were acquired in the March 2012 Constellation transaction, and were recorded as equity method investments on the balance sheet at fair value on the merger date as part of purchase accounting. Exelon and Generation continuously monitor for issues that potentially could impact future profitability of these equity method investments and which could result in the recognition of an impairment loss if such issues indicate an other than temporary decline in value. Such impairment could have a material adverse impactsimpact on Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations.

 

Exelon holds certain investments in coal-fired plants in Georgia and Texas subject to long-term leases extending through 2028-2032.leases. The investments are accounted for as direct financing lease investments. The investments represent the estimated residual values of the leased assets at the end of the respective lease terms. On an annual basis, Exelon reviews the estimated residual values of these leased assetsits direct financing lease investments and records a non-cash impairment charge to determine whether any indications of impairment exist. In determiningexpense if the estimate of residual value,review indicates an other than temporary decline in the expectation of future market conditions, including commodity prices, is considered. An impairment would require Exelon to reduce thefair value of its investment in the plants through a non-cash charge to expense.residual values below their carrying values. Such an impairment could have a material adverse impact on Exelon’s results of operations.

 

Exelon and ComEd had approximately $2.6 billion of goodwill recorded at December 31, 20122013 in connection with the merger between PECO and Unicom Corporation, the former parent company of ComEd. Under GAAP, goodwill remains at its recorded amount unless it is determined to be impaired, which is generally based upon an annual analysis that compares the implied fair value of the goodwill to its carrying value. If an impairment occurs, the amount of the impaired goodwill will be written-off, and expensed, reducing equity. The actual timing and amounts of any goodwill impairments will depend on many sensitive, interrelated and uncertain variables. A successful IRS challenge to Exelon’s and ComEd’s like-kind exchange income tax position, adverse regulatory actions such as early termination of EIMA, or changes in significant assumptions used in estimating ComEd’s fair value (e.g., discount and growth rates, utility sector market performance and transactions, operating and capital expenditure requirements and the fair value of debt) could result in an impairment. Such an impairment would result in a non-cash charge to expense, which could have a material adverse impact on Exelon’s and ComEd’s results of operations.

 

See ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS—Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates and Notes 67, 8 and 810 of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional discussion on long-lived asset and goodwill impairments.

 

The Registrants’ businesses are capital intensive, and their assets may require significant expenditures to maintain and are subject to operational failure, which could result in potential liability. (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The Registrants’ businesses are capital intensive and require significant investments by Generation in energy generation and by ComEd, PECO and BGE in transmission and distribution infrastructure projects. These operational systems and infrastructure have been in service for many years. Older equipment, even if maintained in accordance with good utility practices, is subject to operational failure, including events that are beyond the Registrants’ control, and may require significant expenditures to operate efficiently. The Registrants’ results of operations, financial condition, or cash flows could be adversely affected if they were unable to effectively manage their capital

47


projects or raise the necessary capital. Furthermore, operational failure could result in potential liability if such failure results in damage to property or injury to individuals. See ITEM 1. BUSINESS for further information regarding the Registrants’ potential future capital expenditures.

 

50


Exelon and its subsidiaries have guaranteed the performance of third parties, which may result in substantial costs in the event of non-performance by third parties. In addition, the Registrants have rights under agreements which obligate third parties to indemnify the Registrants for various obligations, and the Registrants may incur substantial costs in the event that the applicable Registrant is unable to enforce those agreements or the applicable third partythird-party is otherwise unable to perform. (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The Registrants have issued guarantees of the performance of third parties, which obligate one or more of the Registrants or their subsidiaries to perform in the event that the third parties do not perform. In the event of non-performance by those third parties, the Registrants could incur substantial cost to fulfill their obligations under these guarantees. Such performance guarantees could have a material impact on the operating results, financial condition, or cash flows of the Registrants.

 

The Registrants have entered into various agreements with counterparties that require those counterparties to reimburse a Registrant and hold it harmless against specified obligations and claims. To the extent that any of these counterparties are impactedaffected by deterioration in their creditworthiness or the agreements are otherwise determined to be unenforceable, the affected Registrant could be held responsible for the obligations, which could impact that Registrant’s results of operations, cash flows and financial position. In connection with Exelon’s 2001 corporate restructuring, Generation assumed certain of ComEd’s and PECO’s rights and obligations with respect to their former generation businesses. Further, ComEd and PECO may have entered into agreements with third parties under which the third partythird-party agreed to indemnify ComEd or PECO for certain obligations related to their respective former generation businesses that have been assumed by Generation as part of the restructuring. If the third partythird-party or Generation experienced events that reduced its creditworthiness or the indemnity arrangement wasbecame unenforceable, ComEd or PECO could be liable for any existing or future claims, which could impact ComEd’s or PECO’s results of operations, cash flows and financial position.

Due to its significant contractual agreements with ComEd, PECO and BGE, Generation will be negatively affected in the event of non-performance or change in the creditworthiness of ComEd, PECO or BGE. (Exelon and Generation)

Generation currently provides power under procurement contracts with ComEd, PECO and BGE for a significant portion of their electricity supply requirements. In addition, Generation entered into a financial swap contract with ComEd, effective August 2007, to hedge a portion of ComEd’s electricity supply requirements through May 2013. Consequently, Generation is highly dependent on ComEd’s, PECO’s, and BGE’s continued payments under these contracts and would be adversely affected by negative events impacting these contracts, including the non-performance or a significant change in the creditworthiness of ComEd, PECO or BGE. A default by ComEd, PECO or BGE under these contracts would have an adverse effect on Generation’s results of operations and financial position.

 

Generation’s business may be negatively affected by competitive electric generation suppliers. (Exelon and Generation)

 

Because retail customers where Generation serves load can switch from their respective energy delivery company to a competitive electric generation supplier for their energy needs, planning to meet Generation’s obligation to provide the supply needed to serve Generation’s share of an electric distribution company’s default service obligation is more difficult than planning for retail load before the advent of retail competition. Before retail competition, the primary variables affecting projections of load

48


were weather and the economy. With retail competition, another major factor is retail customers switching to or from competitive electric generation suppliers. If fewer of such customers switch from its retail load serving counterparties than Generation anticipates, the load that Generation must serve will be greater than anticipated, which could, if market prices have increased, increase Generation’s costs (due to its need to go to market to cover its incremental supply obligation) more than the increase in Generation’s revenues. If more customers from its retail load serving counterparties switch than Generation anticipates, the load that Generation must serve will be lower than anticipated, which could, if market prices have decreased, cause Generation to lose opportunities in the market.

 

Regulatory and Legislative Risks

 

The Registrants’ generation and energy delivery businesses are highly regulated and could be subject to adverse regulatory and legislative actions. Fundamental changes in regulation or legislation or violation of tariffs or market rules and anti-manipulation laws, could disrupt the Registrants’ business plans and adversely affect their operations and financial results. (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Substantially all aspects of the businesses of the Registrants are subject to comprehensive Federal or state regulation and legislation. Further, Exelon’s and Generation’s operating results and

51


cash flows are heavily dependent upon the ability of Generation to sell power at market-based rates, as opposed to cost-based or other similarly regulated rates, and Exelon’s, ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s operating results and cash flows are heavily dependent on the ability of ComEd, PECO and BGE to recover their costs for the retail purchase and distribution of power to their customers. Similarly, there is risk that financial market regulations could increase the Registrants’ compliance costs and limit their ability to engage in certain transactions. In the planning and management of operations, the Registrants must address the effects of regulation on their businesses and changes in the regulatory framework, including initiatives by Federal and state legislatures, RTOs, exchanges, ratemaking agencies and taxing authorities. Additionally, the Registrants shouldneed to be cognizant of rules changes or Registrant actions that could result in potential violation of tariffs, market rules and anti-manipulation laws. Fundamental changes in regulations or other adverse legislative actions affecting the Registrants’ businesses would require changes in their business planning models and operations and could adversely affect their results of operations, cash flows and financial position.

 

Regulatory and legislative developments related to climate change and RPS may also significantly affect Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations, cash flows and financial positions. Various legislative and regulatory proposals to address climate change through GHG emission reductions, if enacted, could result in increased costs to entities that generate electricity through carbon-emitting fossil fuels, which could increase the market price at which all generators in a region, including Generation, may sell their output, thereby increasing the revenue Generation could realize from its low-carbon nuclear assets. However, national regulation or legislation addressing climate change through an RPS could also increase the pace of development of wind energy facilities in the Midwest, which could put downward pressure on wholesale market prices for electricity from Generation’s Midwest nuclear assets, partially offsetting any additional value Exelon and Generation might derive from Generation’s nuclear assets under a carbon constrained regulatory regime that might exist in the future. Current state level climate change and renewable regulation is already providing incentives for regional wind development. The Registrants cannot predict when or whether any of these various legislative and regulatory proposals may become law or what their effect will be on the Registrants.

 

49


Generation may be negatively affected by possible Federal or state legislative or regulatory actions that could affect the scope and functioning of the wholesale markets. (Exelon and Generation)

 

Federal and state legislative and regulatory bodies are facing pressures to address consumer concerns, or are themselves raising concerns, that energy prices in wholesale markets are too high or insufficient generation is being built because the competitive model is not working, and, therefore, are considering some form of re-regulation or some other means of reducing wholesale market prices or subsidizing new generation. Generation is dependent on robust and competitive wholesale energy markets to achieve its business objectives.

 

Approximately 60% of Generation’s generating resources, which include directly owned assets and capacity obtained through long-term contracts, are located in the area encompassed by PJM. Generation’s future results of operations will depend on 1) FERC’s continued adherence to and support for, policies that favor the preservation of competitive wholesale power markets, such as PJM’s, and (2) the absence of material changes to market structures that would limit or otherwise negatively affect market competitiveness. Generation could also be adversely affected by state laws, regulations or initiatives designed to reduce wholesale prices artificially below competitive levels or to subsidize new generation, such as the subsequently dismissed New Jersey Capacity Legislation and the MDPSC’s RFP for new gas-fired generation in Maryland. See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further details related to the New Jersey Capacity Legislation and the Maryland new electric generation requirements.

 

In addition, FERC’s application of its Order 697 and its subsequent revisions could pose a risk that Generation will have difficulty satisfying FERC’s tests for market-based rates. Since Order 697 became

52


final in June 2007, Generation has obtained orders affirming Generation’s authority to sell at market-based rates and none denying that authority. On December 31, 2013, Generation submitted its triennial application seeking reauthorization to sell at market-based rates in the Northeast region (including PJM, ISO-NY and ISONE). Generation’s most recentprevious submission seeking reauthorization to sell at market-based rates was accepted by FERC on June 22, 2011 for the PJM region.

 

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank) was enacted into law on July 21, 2010. Its primary objective is to eliminate from the financial system the systemic risk that Congress believed was in part the cause of the financial crisis that unfolded during 2008. Dodd-Frank ushers in a brand new regulatory regime applicable to the over-the-counter (OTC) market for swaps. Generation relies on the OTC swaps markets as part of its program to hedge the price risk associated with its generation portfolio. In April 2012, the CFTC issued its rule defining swap dealers and major swap participants. Generation has determined that it will conduct its commercial hedging business as an end user in a manner that does not require registration as a swap dealer or major swap participant.

 

Notwithstanding the foregoing, Generation will still face additional regulatory obligations under Dodd-Frank, including some reporting requirements, clearing some additional transactions that it would otherwise enter into over-the-counter, and having to adhere to position limits. More fundamentally, however, the total burden that the rules could impose on all market participants could cause liquidity in the bilateral OTC swaps market to decrease substantially. Dodd-Frank may require up to $1 billion of additional collateral requirements at Generation, to be met with cash rather than letters of credit in a price stressed environment. Generation continues to monitor the rulemaking procedures and cannot predict the ultimate outcome that the financial reform legislation will have on its results of operations, cash flows or financial position.

 

50


Generation’s affiliation with ComEd, PECO and BGE, together with the presence of a substantial percentage of Generation’s physical asset base within the ComEd, PECO and BGE service territories, could increase Generation’s cost of doing business to the extent future complaints or challenges regarding ComEd, PECO and/or BGE retail rates result in settlements or legislative or regulatory requirements funded in part by Generation. (Exelon and Generation)

 

Generation has significant generating resources within the service areas of ComEd, PECO and BGE and makes significant sales to each of them. Those facts tend to cause Generation to be directly affected by developments in those markets. Government officials, legislators and advocacy groups are aware of Generation’s affiliation with ComEd, PECO and BGE and its sales to each of them. In periods of rising utility rates, particularly when driven by increased costs of energy production and supply, those officials and advocacy groups may question or challenge costs incurred by ComEd, PECO or BGE, including transactions between Generation, on the one hand, and ComEd, PECO or BGE, on the other hand, regardless of any previous regulatory processes or approvals underlying those transactions. The prospect of such challenges may increase the time, complexity and cost of the associated regulatory proceedings, and the occurrence of such challenges may subject Generation to a level of scrutiny not faced by other unaffiliated competitors in those markets. In addition, government officials and legislators may seek ways to force Generation to contribute to efforts to mitigate potential or actual rate increases, through measures such as generation-based taxes and contributions to rate-relief packages.

 

The Registrants may incur substantial costs to fulfill their obligations related to environmental and other matters. (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The businesses which the Registrants operate are subject to extensive environmental regulation and legislation by local, state and Federal authorities. These laws and regulations affect the manner in which the Registrants conduct their operations and make capital expenditures including how they handle air and water emissions and solid waste disposal. Violations of these emission and disposal

53


requirements can subject the Registrants to enforcement actions, capital expenditures to bring existing facilities into compliance, additional operating costs for remediation and clean-up costs, civil penalties and exposure to third parties’ claims for alleged health or property damages or operating restrictions to achieve compliance. In addition, the Registrants are subject to liability under these laws for the remediation costs for environmental contamination of property now or formerly owned by the Registrants and of property contaminated by hazardous substances they generate. The Registrants have incurred and expect to incur significant costs related to environmental compliance, site remediation and clean-up. Remediation activities associated with MGP operations conducted by predecessor companies are one component of such costs. Also, the Registrants are currently involved in a number of proceedings relating to sites where hazardous substances have been deposited and may be subject to additional proceedings in the future.

 

If application of Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act, which establishes a national requirement for reducing the adverse impacts to aquatic organisms at existing generating stations, requires the retrofitting of cooling water intake structures at Salem or other Exelon power plants, this development could result in material costs of compliance. Pursuant to discussions with the NJDEP regarding the application of Section 316(b) to Oyster Creek, Generation agreed to permanently cease generation operations at Oyster Creek by December 31, 2019, ten years before the expiration of its operating license in 2029.

 

Additionally, Generation is subject to exposure for asbestos-related personal injury liability alleged at certain current and formerly owned generation facilities. Future legislative action could require Generation to make a material contribution to a fund to settle lawsuits for alleged asbestos-related disease and exposure.

 

51


In some cases, a third partythird-party who has acquired assets from a Registrant has assumed the liability the Registrant may otherwise have for environmental matters related to the transferred property. If the transferee is unable, or fails, to discharge the assumed liability, a regulatory authority or injured person could attempt to hold the Registrant responsible, and the Registrant’s remedies against the transferee may be limited by the financial resources of the transferee. See Note 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Changes in ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s respective terms and conditions of service, including their respective rates, are subject to regulatory approval proceedings and/or negotiated settlements that are at times contentious, lengthy and subject to appeal, which lead to uncertainty as to the ultimate result and which may introduce time delays in effectuating rate changes. (Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

ComEd, PECO and BGE are required to engage in regulatory approval proceedings as a part of the process of establishing the terms and rates for their respective services. These proceedings typically involve multiple parties, including governmental bodies and officials, consumer advocacy groups and various consumers of energy, who have differing concerns but who have the common objective of limiting rate increases or even reducing rates. The proceedings generally have timelines that may not be limited by statute. Decisions are subject to appeal, potentially leading to additional uncertainty associated with the approval proceedings. The potential duration of such proceedings creates a risk that rates ultimately approved by the applicable regulatory body may not be sufficient for ComEd, PECO or BGE to recover its costs by the time the rates become effective. Established rates are also subject to subsequent prudency reviews by state regulators, whereby various portions of rates can be adjusted, including recovery mechanisms for costs associated with the procurement of electricity or gas, MGP remediation, smart grid infrastructure, and energy efficiency and demand response programs.

 

In certain instances, ComEd, PECO and BGE may agree to negotiated settlements related to various rate matters, customer initiatives or franchise agreements. These settlements are subject to regulatory approval.

 

54


ComEd, PECO and BGE cannot predict the ultimate outcomes of any settlements or the actions by Illinois, Pennsylvania, Maryland or Federal regulators in establishing rates, including the extent, if any, to which certain costs such as significant capital projects will be recovered or what rates of return will be allowed. Nevertheless, the expectation is that ComEd, PECO and BGE will continue to be obligated to deliver electricity to customers in their respective service territories and will also retain significant POLR and default service obligations to provide electricity and natural gas to certain groups of customers in their respective service areas who do not choose an alternative supplier. The ultimate outcome and timing of regulatory rate proceedings have a significant effect on the ability of ComEd, PECO and BGE, as applicable, to recover their costs and could have a material adverse effect on ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s results of operations, cash flows and financial position. See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for information on the recently enacted EIMA and appeals in connection with ComEd’s 2007 and 2010 Illinois electric distributionregarding rate cases.proceedings.

 

Federal or additional state RPS and/or energy conservation legislation, along with energy conservation by customers, could negatively affect the results of operations and cash flows of Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE. (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Changes to current state legislation or the development of Federal legislation that requires the use of renewable and alternate fuel sources, such as wind, solar, biomass and geothermal, could significantly impact Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE, especially if timely cost recovery is not allowed. The impact could include increased costs for RECs and purchased power and increased rates for customers.

 

52


Federal and state legislation mandating the implementation of energy conservation programs that require the implementation of new technologies, such as smart meters and smart grid, have increased capital expenditures and could significantly impact ComEd, PECO and BGE, if timely cost recovery is not allowed. Furthermore, regulated energy consumption reduction targets and declines in customer energy consumption resulting from the implementation of new energy conservation technologies could lead to a decline in the revenues of Exelon, ComEd, and PECO. For additional information, see ITEM 1. BUSINESS “Environmental Regulation-Renewable and Alternative Energy Portfolio Standards.”

 

The impact of not meeting the criteria of the FASB guidance for accounting for the effects of certain types of regulation could be material to Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE. (Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

As of December 31, 2012,2013, Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE have concluded that the operations of ComEd, PECO and BGE meet the criteria of the authoritative guidance for accounting for the effects of certain types of regulation. If it is concluded in a future period that a separable portion of their businesses no longer meets the criteria, Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE arewould be required to eliminate the financial statement effects of regulation for that part of their business. That action would include the elimination of any or all regulatory assets and liabilities that had been recorded in their Consolidated Balance Sheets and the recognition of a one-time extraordinary item in their Consolidated Statements of Operations. The impact of not meeting the criteria of the authoritative guidance could be material to the financial statements of Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE. At December 31, 2012,2013, the extraordinary gain (loss) could have been as much as $2.3$(2.4) billion, $730 million and $ 453 million (before taxes) as a result of the elimination of ComEd’s, regulatory assets and liabilities. At December 31, 2012, the extraordinary charge could have been as much as $703 million (before taxes) as a result of the elimination of PECO’s regulatory assets and liabilities. At December 31, 2012, the extraordinary charge could have been as much as $ 471 million (before taxes) as a result of the elimination of BGE’s regulatory assets and liabilities. Exelon would record the same amount of extraordinary gain or charge related to ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s regulatory assets and liabilities.liabilities, respectively. Further, Exelon would record a charge against OCI (before taxes) of up to $3.3$2.4 billion $43 million and $682$568 million for ComEd PECO and BGE, respectively, related to Exelon’s regulatory assets associated with its defined benefit postretirement plans. Exelon also has a regulatory liability of $45 million (before taxes) associated with PECO’s defined benefit postretirement plans that would result in an increase in OCI if reversed. The impacts and resolution of the above items could lead to an additional impairment of ComEd’s goodwill, which could be significant and at least partially offset the extraordinary gain at ComEd discussed above. A significant decrease in equity as a result of any changes could limit the ability of ComEd, PECO and BGE to pay dividends under Federal

55


and state law and no longer meeting the regulatory accounting criteria could cause significant volatility in future results of operations. See Notes 1, 3 and 810 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding accounting for the effects of regulation, regulatory matters and ComEd’s goodwill, respectively.

 

Exelon and Generation may incur material costs of compliance if Federal and/or state regulation or legislation is adopted to address climate change. (Exelon and Generation)

 

Various stakeholders, including legislators and regulators, shareholders and non-governmental organizations, as well as other companies in many business sectors, including utilities, are considering ways to address the effect of GHG emissions on climate change. In 2009, select Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states implemented a model rule, developed via the RGGI, to regulate CO2 emissions from fossil-fired generation. RGGI states are working on updated programs to further limit emissions and the EPA has introduced regulation to address greenhouse gases from new fossil plants that could potentially impact existing plants. If carbon reduction regulation or legislation becomes effective, Exelon and Generation may incur costs either to limit further the GHG emissions from their operations or to procure emission allowance credits. The nature and extent of environmental regulation may also impact the ability of Exelon and its subsidiaries to meet the GHG emission reduction targets of Exelon

53


2020. For example, more stringent permitting requirements may preclude the construction of lower-carbon nuclear and gas-fired power plants. Similarly, a Federal RPS could increase the cost of compliance by mandating the purchase or construction of more expensive supply alternatives. For more information regarding climate change, see ITEM 1. BUSINESS “Global Climate Change” and Note 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

The Registrants could be subject to higher costs and/or penalties related to mandatory reliability standards, including the likely exposure of ComEd, PECO, and BGE to the results of PJM’s RTEP and NERC compliance requirements. (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

As a result of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, users, owners and operators of the bulk power transmission system, including Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE, are subject to mandatory reliability standards promulgated by NERC and enforced by FERC. As operators of natural gas distribution systems, PECO and BGE are also subject to mandatory reliability standards of the U.S. Department of Transportation. The standards are based on the functions that need to be performed to ensure the bulk power system operates reliably and are guided by reliability and market interface principles. Compliance with or changes in the reliability standards may subject the Registrants to higher operating costs and/or increased capital expenditures. In addition, the ICC, PAPUC and MDPSC impose certain distribution reliability standards on ComEd, PECO and BGE, respectively. If the Registrants were found not to be in compliance with the mandatory reliability standards, they could be subject to remediation costs as well as sanctions, which could include substantial monetary penalties. Additionally, in 2011, the State of Maryland enacted legislation that imposed reliability and quality of service standards on electric companies and required the MDPSC to enact regulations during 2012 to implement these standards. These regulations could have a material impact on BGE’s financial results of operations, cash flows and financial position.

 

ComEd, PECO and BGE as transmission owners are subject to NERC compliance requirements. NERC provides guidance to transmission owners regarding assessments of transmission lines. The results of these assessments may require ComEd, PECO and BGE to incur incremental capital or operating and maintenance expenditures to ensure their transmission lines meet NERC standards. Uncertainties exist as to the construction of new transmission facilities, their cost and how those costs will be allocated to transmission system participants and customers. In accordance with a FERC order and related settlement, PJM’s RTEP requires the costs of new transmission facilities to be allocated across the entire PJM footprint for new facilities greater than or equal to 500 kV, and requires costs of new facilities less than 500 kV to be allocated to the beneficiaries of the new facilities. On August 6, 2009,Following a remand from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, remanded to FERC reaffirmed its decision related to allocation of new facilities 500 kV and aboveabove. That decision is being appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for further proceedings.the Seventh Circuit. This FERC order only applies to facilities included in the PJM RTEP

56


prior to February 1, 2013. For facilities subsequently approved, the costs of new facilities that are double circuit 345 kV or greater than or equal to 500 kV will be allocated 50% across the entire PJM footprint and 50% allocated to identified beneficiaries. Costs for all other facilities will be allocated to all identified beneficiaries. This later decision is subject to rehearing by FERC and possible appeal.

 

See Notes 3 and 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

The Registrants cannot predict the outcome of the legal proceedings relating to their business activities. An adverse determination could have a material adverse effect on their results of operations, financial positions and cash flows. (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The Registrants are involved in legal proceedings, claims and litigation arising out of their business operations, the most significant of which are summarized in Note 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. Adverse outcomes in these proceedings could require significant expenditures that could have a material adverse effect on the Registrants’ results of operations.

 

54


Generation may be negatively affected by possible Nuclear Regulatory Commission actions that could affect the operations and profitability of its nuclear generating fleet. (Exelon and Generation)

 

Regulatory risk. A change in the Atomic Energy Act or the applicable regulations or licenses may require a substantial increase in capital expenditures or may result in increased operating or decommissioning costs and significantly affect Generation’s results of operations or financial position. Events at nuclear plants owned by others, as well as those owned by Generation, may cause the NRC to initiate such actions.

 

As an example, prior to the Fukushima Daiichi accident on March 11, 2011, the NRC had been evaluating seismic risk. After the Fukushima Daiichi accident, the NRC’s focus on seismic risk intensified. As part of the NRC Near-Term Task Force (Task Force) review and evaluation of the Fukushima Daiichi accident, the Task Force recommended that plant operators conduct seismic reevaluations. In January 2012, the NRC released an updated seismic risk model that plant operators must use in performing the seismic reevaluations recommended by the Task Force. These reevaluations could result in the required implementation of additional mitigation strategies or modifications. Additionally, the Task Force provided recommendations for future regulatory action by the NRC to be taken in the near and longer term. In response, the NRC issued three immediately effective orders (Tier 1) to commercial reactor licensees operating in the United States for compliance no later than December 31, 2016. The NRC is currently evaluating the remaining Task Force recommendations and has not taken action with respect to the Tier 2 and Tier 3 recommendations. Actions to comply with the Task Force recommendations maywill result in increased costs and could significantly impact Generation’s results of operations or financial position. See ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS—Exelon Corporation, Executive Overview for a more detailed discussion of the Task Force Recommendations.

 

Spent nuclear fuel storage.The approval of a national repository for the storage of SNF, such as the one previously considered at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, and the timing of such facility opening, will significantly affect the costs associated with storage of SNF, and the ultimate amounts received from the DOE to reimburse Generation for these costs. The NRC’s temporary storage rule (also referred to as the “waste confidence decision”) recognizes that licensees can safely store spent nuclear fuel at nuclear power plants for up to 60 years beyond the original and renewed licensed operating life of the plants. In June 2012, the United States District Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit vacated the NRC’s temporary storage rule on the grounds that the NRC should have conducted a more comprehensive

57


environmental review to support the rule. In September 2012, the NRC directed NRC Staff to complete a generic environmental impact statement and to revise the temporary storage rule through rulemaking no later than September 6,which is now not expected until October 3, 2014.

 

Any regulatory action relating to the timing and availability of a repository for SNF may adversely affect Generation’s ability to decommission fully its nuclear units. In accordance with the NWPA and Generation’s contract with the DOE, Generation pays the DOE ongoing fees per kWh of net nuclear generation for the cost of SNF disposal. This fee may be adjusted prospectively in order to ensure full cost recovery. On November 19, 2013, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ordered the DOE to submit to Congress a proposal to reduce the current SNF disposal fee to zero, unless and until there is a viable disposal program. Until such time as a new fee structure is in effect, Generation must continue to pay the current SNF disposal fees. Furthermore, under its contract with the DOE, Generation would be required to pay the DOE a one-time SNF storage fee including interest of approximately $1 billion as of December 31, 2012,2013, prior to the first delivery of SNF. Generation currently estimates 2025 to be the earliest date when the DOE will begin accepting SNF, which could be delayed by further regulatory action. See Note 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on the spent nuclear fuel obligation.

 

License renewals. Generation cannot assure that economics will support the continued operation of the facilities for all or any portion of any renewed license period. If the NRC does not renew the operating licenses for Generation’s nuclear stations or a station cannot be operated through the end of its operating license, Generation’s results of operations could be adversely affected by increased

55


depreciation rates, impairment charges and accelerated future decommissioning costs, since depreciation rates and decommissioning cost estimates currently include assumptions that license renewal will be received. In addition, Generation may lose revenue and incur increased fuel and purchased power expense to meet supply commitments.

 

As discussed above, in June 2012, the United States District Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit vacated the NRC’s temporary storage rule. Generation does not expect the NRC to issue license renewals until Septemberthe end of 2014, at the earliest.

 

Operational Risks

 

The Registrants’ employees, contractors, customers and the general public may be exposed to a risk of injury due to the nature of the energy industry. (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Employees and contractors throughout the organization work in, and customers and the general public may be exposed to, potentially dangerous environments near their operations. As a result, employees, contractors, customers and the general public are at risk for serious injury, including loss of life. Significant risks include nuclear accidents, dam failure, gas explosions, pole strikes and electric contact cases.

 

Natural disasters, war, acts and threats of terrorism, pandemic and other significant events may adversely affect Exelon’s results of operations, its ability to raise capital and its future growth. (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Generation’s fleet of nuclear and fossil-fueled power plants and ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s distribution and transmission infrastructures could be impactedaffected by natural disasters, such as seismic activity, more frequent and more extreme weather events, changes in temperature and precipitation patterns, changes to ground and surface water availability, sea level rise and other related phenomena. Severe weather or other natural disasters could be destructive, which could result in increased costs, including supply chain costs. An extreme weather event within the Registrants’ service areas can also directly affect their capital assets, causing disruption in service to customers

58


due to downed wires and poles or damage to other operating equipment. Examples of such events include the June 2012 “Derecho” storm, which interrupted electric service delivery to customers in BGE’s service territory, and the October 2012 category 1 hurricane, Hurricane Sandy, which interrupted electric service delivery to customers in PECO’s and BGE’s service territories and resulted in significant costs to PECO and BGE for restoration efforts.

Other events include the 9.0 magnitude earthquake and ensuing tsunami experienced by Japan on March 11, 2011, that seriously damaged the nuclear units at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station, which are operated by Tokyo Electric Power Co., and the 5.8 magnitude earthquake and flooding associated with Hurricane Irene and Tropical Storm Lee that the Mid-Atlantic region of the United States experienced in 2011. These events increase the risk to Generation that the NRC or other regulatory or legislative bodies may change the laws or regulations governing, among other things, operations, maintenance, licensed lives, decommissioning, SNF storage, insurance, emergency planning, security and environmental and radiological aspects. In addition, natural disasters could affect the availability of a secure and economical supply of water in some locations, which is essential for Generation’s continued operation, particularly the cooling of generating units. Additionally, natural disasters and other events that have an adverse effect on the economy in general may adversely affect the Registrants’ operations and their ability to raise capital.

 

Exelon does not know the impact that potential terrorist attacks could have on the industry in general and on Exelon in particular. As owner-operators of infrastructure facilities, such as nuclear, fossil and hydroelectric generation facilities and electric and gas transmission and distribution facilities,

56


the Registrants face a risk that their operations would be direct targets of, or indirect casualties of, an act of terror. Any retaliatory military strikes or sustained military campaign may affect their operations in unpredictable ways, such as changes in insurance markets and disruptions of fuel supplies and markets, particularly oil. Furthermore, these catastrophic events could compromise the physical or cyber security of Exelon’s facilities, which could adversely affect Exelon’s ability to manage its business effectively. Instability in the financial markets as a result of terrorism, war, natural disasters, pandemic, credit crises, recession or other factors also may result in a decline in energy consumption, which may adversely affect the Registrants’ results of operations and its ability to raise capital. In addition, the implementation of security guidelines and measures has resulted in and is expected to continue to result in increased costs.

 

The Registrants would be significantly affected by the outbreak of a pandemic. Exelon has plans in place to respond to a pandemic. However, depending on the severity of a pandemic and the resulting impacts to workforce and other resource availability, the ability to operate its generating and transmission and distribution assets could be affected, resulting in decreased service levels and increased costs.

 

In addition, Exelon maintains 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. However, there can be no assurance that the amount of insurance will be adequate to address such property and casualty losses.

 

Generation’s financial performance may be negatively affected by matters arising from its ownership and operation of nuclear facilities. (Exelon and Generation)

 

Nuclear capacity factors. Capacity factors for generating units, particularly nuclear capacity factors for nuclear generating units, significantly affect Generation’s results of operations. Nuclear plant operations involve substantial fixed operating costs but produce electricity at low variable costs due to nuclear fuel costs typically being lower than fossil fuel costs. Consequently, to be successful, Generation must consistently operate its nuclear facilities at high capacity factors. Lower capacity factors increase Generation’s operating costs by requiring Generation to produce additional energy from primarily its fossil

59


facilities or purchase additional energy in the spot or forward markets in order to satisfy Generation’s obligations to committed third-party sales, including ComEd, PECO and BGE. These sources generally have higher costs than Generation incurs to produce energy from its nuclear stations.

 

Nuclear refueling outages.In general, refueling outages are planned to occur once every 18 to 24 months. The total number of refueling outages, along with their duration, can have a significant impact on Generation’s results of operations. When refueling outages at wholly and co-owned plants last longer than anticipated or Generation experiences unplanned outages, capacity factors decrease and Generation faces lower margins due to higher energy replacement costs and/or lower energy sales.

 

Nuclear fuel quality. The quality of nuclear fuel utilized by Generation can affect the efficiency and costs of Generation’s operations. Certain of Generation’s nuclear units have previously had a limited number of fuel performance issues. Remediation actions could result in increased costs due to accelerated fuel amortization, increased outage costs and/or increased costs due to decreased generation capabilities.

 

Operational risk. Operations at any of Generation’s nuclear generation plants could degrade to the point where Generation has to shut down the plant or operate at less than full capacity. If this were to happen, identifying and correcting the causes may require significant time and expense. Generation may choose to close a plant rather than incur the expense of restarting it or returning the plant to full capacity. In either event, Generation may lose revenue and incur increased fuel and purchased power

57


expense to meet supply commitments. In addition, Generation may not achieve the anticipated results under its series of planned power uprates across its nuclear fleet. For plants operated but not wholly owned by Generation, Generation may also incur liability to the co-owners. For plants not operated and not wholly owned by Generation, from which Generation receives a portion of the plants’ output, Generation’s results of operations are dependent on the operational performance of the operators and could be adversely affected by a significant event at those plants. Additionally, poor operating performance at nuclear plants not owned by Generation could result in increased regulation and reduced public support for nuclear-fueled energy, which could significantly affect Generation’s results of operations or financial position. In addition, closure of generating plants owned by others, or extended interruptions of generating plants or failure of transmission lines, could affect transmission systems that could adversely affect the sale and delivery of electricity in markets served by Generation.

 

Nuclear major incident risk.Although the safety record of nuclear reactors generally has been very good, accidents and other unforeseen problems have occurred both in the United States and abroad. The consequences of a major incident can be severe and include loss of life and property damage. Any resulting liability from a nuclear plant major incident within the United States, owned or operated by Generation or owned by others, may exceed Generation’s resources, including insurance coverage. Uninsured losses and other expenses, to the extent not recovered from insurers or the nuclear industry, could be borne by Generation and could have a material adverse effect on Generation’s results of operations or financial position. Additionally, an accident or other significant event at a nuclear plant within the United States or abroad, owned by others or Generation, may result in increased regulation and reduced public support for nuclear-fueled energy and significantly affect Generation’s results of operations or financial position.

 

Nuclear insurance.As required by the Price-Anderson Act, Generation carries the maximum available amount of nuclear liability insurance. The required amount of nuclear liability insurance is $375 million for each operating site. Claims exceeding that amount are covered through mandatory participation in a financial protection pool. In addition, the U.S. Congress could impose revenue-raising measures on the nuclear industry to pay claims exceeding the $12.6$13.6 billion limit for a single incident.

 

Generation is a member of an industry mutual insurance company, NEIL, which provides property and business interruption insurance for Generation’s nuclear operations. In previous years, NEIL had has

60


made distributions to its members but Generation cannot predict the level of future distributions or if they will occur at all. See Note 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional discussion of nuclear insurance.

 

Decommissioning. NRC regulations require that licensees of nuclear generating facilities demonstrate reasonable assurance that funds will be available in certain minimum amounts at the end of the life of the facility to decommission the facility. Generation is required to provide to the NRC a biennial report by unit (annually for Generation’s two units that have been retired) addressing Generation’s ability to meet the NRC-estimated funding levels including scheduled contributions to and earnings on the decommissioning trust funds. The NRC funding levels are based upon the assumption that decommissioning will commence after the end of the current licensed life of each unit.

 

Forecasting trust fund investment earnings and costs to decommission nuclear generating stations requires significant judgment, and actual results may differ significantly from current estimates. The performance of capital markets also can significantly affect the value of the trust funds. Currently, Generation is making contributions to certain trust funds of the former PECO units based on amounts being collected by PECO from its customers and remitted to Generation. While Generation has recourse to collect additional amounts from PECO customers (subject to certain limitations and thresholds), it has no recourse to collect additional amounts from ComEd customers or from the previous owners of Clinton, TMI Unit No. 1 and Oyster Creek generating stations, if there is a shortfall

58


of funds necessary for decommissioning. If circumstances changed such that Generation would be unable to continue to make contributions to the trust funds of the former PECO units based on amounts collected from PECO customers, or if Generation no longer had recourse to collect additional amounts from PECO customers if there was a shortfall of funds for decommissioning, the adequacy of the trust funds related to the former PECO units may be negatively affected and Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations and financial position could be significantly affected. See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Ultimately, if the investments held by Generation’s NDTs are not sufficient to fund the decommissioning of Generation’s nuclear plants, Generation may be required to take steps, such as providing financial guarantees through letters of credit or parent company guarantees or making additional contributions to the trusts, which could be significant, to ensure that the trusts are adequately funded and that current and future NRC minimum funding requirements are met. As a result, Generation’s cash flows and financial position may be significantly adversely affected. See Note 1315 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Generation’s financial performance may be negatively affected by risks arising from its ownership and operation of hydroelectric facilities. (Exelon and Generation)

 

FERC has the exclusive authority to license most non-Federal hydropower projects located on navigable waterways, Federal lands or connected to the interstate electric grid. The license for the Conowingo Hydroelectric Project expires August 31, 2014, and the license for the Muddy Run Pumped Storage Project expires on September 1, 2014. Generation cannot predict whether it will receive all the regulatory approvals for the renewed licenses of its hydroelectric facilities. If FERC does not renew theissue new operating licenses for Generation’s hydroelectric facilities or a station cannot be operated through the end of its operating license, Generation’s results of operations could be adversely affected by increased depreciation rates and accelerated future decommissioning costs, since depreciation rates and decommissioning cost estimates currently include assumptions that license renewal will be received. Generation may also lose revenue and incur increased fuel and purchased power expense to meet supply commitments. In addition, conditions may be imposed as part of the license renewal process that may adversely affect operations, may require a substantial increase in capital expenditures or may result in increased operating costs and significantly affect Generation’s results of operations or financial

61


position. Similar effects may result from a change in the Federal Power Act or the applicable regulations due to events at hydroelectric facilities owned by others, as well as those owned by Generation.

 

ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s operating costs, and customers’ and regulators’ opinions of ComEd, PECO and BGE, respectively, are affected by their ability to maintain the availability and reliability of their delivery and operational systems. (Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Failures of the equipment or facilities, including information systems, used in ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s delivery systems can interrupt the electric transmission and electric and natural gas delivery, which could negatively impact related revenues, and increase maintenance and capital expenditures. Equipment or facilities failures can be due to a number of factors, including weather or information systems failure. Specifically, if the implementation of advanced metering infrastructure, smart grid or other technologies in ComEd’s, PECO’s or BGE’s service territory fail to perform as intended or are not successfully integrated with billing and other information systems, ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows could be adversely affected. Furthermore, if any of the financial, accounting, or other data processing systems fail or have other significant shortcomings, ComEd’s, PECO’s or BGE’s financial results could be adversely affected. If an employee causes the operational systems to fail, either as a result of inadvertent error or by deliberately tampering with or manipulating the operational systems, ComEd’s, PECO’s or BGE’s

59


financial results could also be adversely affected. 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 aforementioned failures or those of other utilities, including prolonged or repeated failures, can affect customer satisfaction and the level of regulatory oversight and ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s maintenance and capital expenditures. Regulated utilities, which are required to provide service to all customers within their service territory, have generally been afforded liability protections against claims by customers relating to failure of service. Under Illinois law, however, ComEd can be required to pay damages to its customers in some circumstances involving extended outages affecting large numbers of its customers, and those damages could be material to ComEd’s results of operations and cash flows. See Note 22 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding proceedings related to storm-related outages in ComEd’s service territory.

 

ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s respective ability to deliver electricity, their operating costs and their capital expenditures may be negatively affected by transmission congestion. (Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Demand for electricity within ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s service areas could stress available transmission capacity requiring alternative routing or curtailment of electricity usage with consequent effects on operating costs, revenues and results of operations. Also, insufficient availability of electric supply to meet customer demand could jeopardize ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s ability to comply with reliability standards and strain customer and regulatory agency relationships. As with all utilities, potential concerns over transmission capacity or generation facility retirements could result in PJM or FERC requiring ComEd, PECO and BGE to upgrade or expand their respective transmission systems through additional capital expenditures.

 

Failure to attract and retain an appropriately qualified workforce may negatively impact the Registrants’ results of operations. (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Certain events, such as an employee strike, loss of contract resources due to a major event, and an aging workforce without appropriate replacements, may lead to operating challenges and increased costs for the Registrants. The challenges include lack of resources, loss of knowledge and a lengthy time

62


period associated with skill development. In this case, costs, including costs for contractors to replace employees, productivity costs and safety costs, may arise. The Registrants are particularly affected due to the specialized knowledge required of the technical and support employees for their generation, transmission and distribution operations. If the Registrants are unable to successfully attract and retain an appropriately qualified workforce, their results of operations could be negatively affected.

 

The Registrants are subject to physical and information security risks. (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The Registrants face physical and information security risks as the owner-operators of generation, transmission and distribution facilities. A security breach of the Registrants’ physical assets or information systems of the Registrants, their competitors, RTOs and ISOs, or regulators could impact the operation of the generation fleet and/or reliability of the transmission and distribution system or subject the Registrants to financial harm associated with theft or inappropriate release of certain types of information, including sensitive customer data. If a significant breach occurred, the reputation of Exelon and its customer supply activities may be adversely affected, customer confidence in the Registrants or others in the industry may be diminished, or Exelon and its subsidiaries may be subject to legal claims, any of which may contribute to the loss of customers and have a negative impact on the business and/or results of operations. ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s deployment of smart meters throughout their service territories may increase the risk of damage from an intentional disruption of the system by third parties. As a requirement of their SGIG grant, the DOE approved PECO’s and BGE’s cyber security plan related to its smart meter deployment and will review the plan annually through the expiration of the grant. As

60


with most companies in today’s environment, Exelon experiences attempts by hackers to infiltrate its corporate network. To date there have been no infiltrations that have resulted in loss of data or any significant effects on business operations. Exelon utilizes a dedicated team of cyber security professionals to ensure the protection of its information and ability to conduct business operations. Despite the measures taken by the Registrants to prevent a security breach, the Registrants cannot accurately assess the probability that a security breach may occur and are unable to quantify the potential impact of such an event. In addition, new or updated security regulations could require changes in current measures taken by the Registrants or their business operations and could adversely affect their results of operations, cash flows and financial position.

 

The Registrants may make investments in new business initiatives, including initiatives mandated by regulators, and markets that may not be successful, and acquisitions may not achieve the intended financial results. (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Generation continuously looks 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 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. As these markets mature, there may be new market entrants or expansion by established competitors that increase competition for customers and resources. Additionally, it is possible that FERC, state public utility commissions or others may impose certain other restrictions on such transactions. All of these factors could result in higher costs or lower revenues than expected, resulting in lower than planned returns on investment. ComEd, PECO and BGE face risks associated with the Smart Grid mandated regulatory initiative. These risks include, but are not limited to, cost recovery, regulatory concerns, cyber security and obsolescence of technology. Due to these risks, no assurance can be given that such initiatives will be successful and will not have a material adverse effect on ComEd’s, PECO’s or BGE’s financial results.

 

63


Risks Related to the Merger

The merger may not achieve its anticipated results, and Exelon may be unable to integrate the operations of Constellation in the manner expected.

Exelon and Constellation entered into the merger agreement with the expectation that the merger will result in various benefits, including, among other things, cost savings and operating efficiencies. Achieving the anticipated benefits of the merger is subject to a number of uncertainties, including whether the businesses of Exelon and Constellation can be integrated in an efficient, effective and timely manner.

It is possible that the integration process could take longer than anticipated and could result in the loss of valuable employees, the disruption of Exelon’s businesses, processes and systems or inconsistencies in standards, controls, procedures, practices, policies, valuation models, and compensation arrangements, any of which could adversely affect the combined company’s ability to achieve the anticipated benefits of the merger as and when expected. Exelon may have difficulty addressing possible differences in corporate cultures and management philosophies. Failure to achieve these anticipated benefits could result in increased costs or decreases in the amount of expected revenues and could adversely affect Exelon’s future business, financial condition, operating results and prospects.

61


The merger may not be accretive to earnings and may cause dilution to Exelon’s earnings per share, which may negatively affect the market price of Exelon’s common stock.

Exelon currently anticipates that the merger will be accretive to earnings per share in 2013, which will be the first full year following completion of the merger. Exelon also could encounter additional transaction and integration-related costs, may fail to realize all of the benefits anticipated in the merger or be subject to other factors that affect estimates. Any of these factors could cause a decrease in Exelon’s adjusted earnings per share or decrease or delay the expected accretive effect of the merger and contribute to a decrease in the price of Exelon’s common stock.

The merger may adversely affect Exelon’s ability to attract and retain key employees.

Current and prospective Exelon employees may experience uncertainty about their future roles at Exelon as a result of the merger. In addition, current and prospective Exelon employees may determine that they do not desire to work for the combined company for a variety of possible reasons. These factors may adversely affect Exelon’s ability to attract and retain key management and other personnel.

Exelon may incur unexpected transaction fees and merger-related costs in connection with the merger.

Exelon has incurred and expects to further incur a number of non-recurring expenses related to combining the operations of the Exelon and Constellation. Exelon may incur additional unanticipated costs in the integration of the businesses of the two companies. Although Exelon expects that the elimination of certain duplicative costs, as well as the realization of other efficiencies related to the integration of the two businesses, will offset the incremental transaction and merger-related costs over time, the combined company may not achieve this net benefit in the near term, or at all.

 

Exelon may encounter unexpected difficulties or costs in meeting commitments it made under various orders and agreements associated with regulatory approvals for the Constellation merger.

 

As a result of the process to obtain regulatory approvals required for the Constellation merger, Exelon is committed to various programs, contributions, investments and market mitigation measures in several settlement agreements and regulatory approval orders. It is possible that Exelon may encounter delays, unexpected difficulties or costs in meeting these commitments in compliance with the terms of the relevant agreements and orders. Failure to fulfill the commitments in accordance with their terms could result in increased costs or result in penalties or fines that could adversely affect Exelon’s financial position and operating results.

 

Risks Related to the Pending Master Agreement with CENG

The integration of CENG’s nuclear fleet may not achieve its anticipated results, and Exelon and Generation may not be able to fully integrate the operations of CENG in the manner expected.

Exelon, Generation and subsidiaries of Generation entered into a Master Agreement with EDF, EDF Inc. (EDFI) (a subsidiary of EDF) and CENG that will result in Generation operating the CENG nuclear generation fleet. The Master Agreement was entered into with the expectation that it will result in various benefits, including, among other things, cost savings and operating efficiencies. Achieving the anticipated benefits of the agreement is subject to a number of uncertainties, including whether CENG can be integrated into Generation in an efficient, effective and timely manner. Integration will take place, and additional agreements will be signed, upon receipt of regulatory approvals for the transfer of CENG’s nuclear operating licences to Generation.

It is possible that the integration process could take longer than anticipated and could result in the loss of valuable employees, the disruption of Generation’s business, processes and systems or inconsistencies in standards, controls, procedures, practices, policies, valuation models, and compensation arrangements. In addition, Generation may have difficulty addressing possible differences in corporate cultures and management philosophies. Any of these circumstances could adversely affect Generation’s ability to achieve the anticipated benefits of the agreement as and when expected. Failure to achieve these anticipated benefits could result in increased costs or decreases in the amount of expected revenues and could adversely affect Generation’s future business, financial condition, operating results and prospects.

ITEM 1B.UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

 

Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE

 

None.

 

6264


ITEM 2.PROPERTIES

 

Generation

 

The following table describes Generation’s interests in net electric generating capacity by station at December 31, 2012:2013:

 

Station(a)

  

Region

 

Location

 No. of
Units
 Percent
Owned (a)
 Primary
Fuel Type
 Primary
Dispatch
Type (b)
 Net
Generation
Capacity (MW) (c)
  

Region

 

Location

 

No. of
Units

 Percent
Owned (b)
 Primary
Fuel Type
 Primary
Dispatch

Type(c)
 Net
Generation
Capacity (MW) (d)
 

Limerick

   Mid-Atlantic    Limerick Twp., PA    2    Uranium    Base-load    2,314    Mid-Atlantic    Sanatoga, PA   2   Uranium    Base-load    2,316 

Peach Bottom

   Mid-Atlantic    Peach Bottom Twp., PA    2   50   Uranium    Base-load    1,158(f)   Mid-Atlantic    Delta, PA   2  50   Uranium    Base-load    1,167(f) 

Salem

   Mid-Atlantic    Hancock’s Bridge, NJ    2   42.59   Uranium    Base-load    1,006(f)   Mid-Atlantic    
 
Lower Alloways Creek
Township, NJ
  
  
 2  42.59   Uranium    Base-load    1,006(f) 

Calvert Cliffs

   Mid-Atlantic    Calvert Co., MD    2   50.01   Uranium    Base-load    877(f)(h)   Mid-Atlantic    Lusby, MD   2  50.01   Uranium    Base-load    878(f)(h) 

Three Mile Island

   Mid-Atlantic    Londonderry Twp, PA    1    Uranium    Base-load    837    Mid-Atlantic    Middletown, PA   1   Uranium    Base-load    837 

Keystone

   Mid-Atlantic    Shelocta, PA    2   41.98   Coal    Base-load    714(f)   Mid-Atlantic    Shelocta, PA   2  41.98   Coal    Base-load    714(f) 

Oyster Creek

   Mid-Atlantic    Forked River, NJ    1    Uranium    Base-load    625(e)   Mid-Atlantic    Forked River, NJ   1   Uranium    Base-load    625(e) 

Conowingo

   Mid-Atlantic    Harford Co., MD    11    Hydroelectric    Base-load    572    Mid-Atlantic    Darlington, MD   11   Hydroelectric    Base-load    572 

Conemaugh

   Mid-Atlantic    New Florence, PA    2   31.28   Coal    Base-load    531(f)   Mid-Atlantic    New Florence, PA   2  31.28   Coal    Base-load    532(f) 

Criterion

   Mid-Atlantic    Oakland, MD    28    Wind    Base-load    70    Mid-Atlantic    Oakland, MD   28   Wind    Base-load    70 

Colver

   Mid-Atlantic    Colver Twp., PA    1   25   Waste Coal    Base-load    26(f)   Mid-Atlantic    Colver Twp., PA   1  25   Waste Coal    Base-load    26(f) 

Solar Horizons

   Mid-Atlantic    Various    1    Solar    Base-load    16    Mid-Atlantic    Emmitsburg, MD   1   Solar    Base-load    16 

Solar New Jersey 2

   Mid-Atlantic    Various    2    Solar    Base-load    11    Mid-Atlantic    Various   2   Solar    Base-load    10 

Solar New Jersey 1

   Mid-Atlantic    Various    3    Solar    Base-load    10    Mid-Atlantic    Various   4   Solar    Base-load    10 

Solar Maryland

   Mid-Atlantic    Various    10    Solar    Base-load    8    Mid-Atlantic    Various   9   Solar    Base-load    9 

Solar Federal

   Mid-Atlantic    Various    1    Solar    Base-load    5    Mid-Atlantic    Trenton, NJ   1   Solar    Base-load    5 

Solar Maryland 2

  Mid-Atlantic    Pocomoke, MD   2   Solar    Base-load    4 

Solar New York

  Mid-Atlantic    Various   1   Solar    Base-load   3  

Solar New Jersey 3

   Mid-Atlantic    Various    1    Solar    Base-load    1    Mid-Atlantic    Middle Township, NJ   5   Solar    Base-load    2 

Muddy Run

   Mid-Atlantic    Lancaster, PA    8    Hydroelectric    Intermediate    1,070    Mid-Atlantic    Drumore, PA   8   Hydroelectric    Intermediate    1,070 

Eddystone 3, 4

   Mid-Atlantic    Eddystone, PA    2    Oil/Gas    Intermediate    760    Mid-Atlantic    Eddystone, PA   2   Oil/Gas    Intermediate    760 

Safe Harbor

   Mid-Atlantic    Safe Harbor, PA    12   66.7   Hydroelectric    Intermediate    277(f)   Mid-Atlantic    Conestoga, PA   12  66.7   Hydroelectric    Intermediate    278(f) 

Croydon

   Mid-Atlantic    Bristol Twp., PA    8    Oil    Peaking    391    Mid-Atlantic    West Bristol, PA   8   Oil    Peaking    391 

Perryman

   Mid-Atlantic    Hartford Co., MD    5    Oil/Gas    Peaking    347    Mid-Atlantic    Belcamp, MD   5   Oil/Gas    Peaking    353 

Handsome Lake

   Mid-Atlantic    Rockland Twp., PA    5    Gas    Peaking    268    Mid-Atlantic    Kennerdell, PA   5   Gas    Peaking    268 

Riverside

   Mid-Atlantic    Baltimore Co., MD    4    Oil/Gas    Peaking    228    Mid-Atlantic    Baltimore, MD   4   Oil/Gas    Peaking    228 

Westport

   Mid-Atlantic    Baltimore Co., MD    1    Gas    Peaking    116    Mid-Atlantic    Baltimore, MD   1   Gas    Peaking    115 

Notch Cliff

   Mid-Atlantic    Baltimore, MD    8    Gas    Peaking    101    Mid-Atlantic    Baltimore, MD   8   Gas    Peaking    118 

Richmond

   Mid-Atlantic    Philadelphia, PA    2    Oil    Peaking    98    Mid-Atlantic    Philadelphia, PA   2   Oil    Peaking    98 

Gould Street

   Mid-Atlantic    Baltimore, MD    1    Gas    Peaking    97    Mid-Atlantic    Baltimore, MD   1   Gas    Peaking    97 

Philadelphia Road

   Mid-Atlantic    Baltimore Co., MD    4    Oil    Peaking    61    Mid-Atlantic    Baltimore, MD   4   Oil    Peaking    61 

Eddystone

   Mid-Atlantic    Eddystone, PA    4    Oil    Peaking    60    Mid-Atlantic    Eddystone, PA   4   Oil    Peaking    60 

Fairless Hills

   Mid-Atlantic    Falls Twp, PA    2    Landfill Gas    Peaking    60    Mid-Atlantic    Fairless Hills, PA   2   Landfill Gas    Peaking    60 

Delaware

   Mid-Atlantic    Philadelphia, PA    4    Oil    Peaking    56   Mid-Atlantic    Philadelphia, PA   4   Oil    Peaking    56 

Southwark

   Mid-Atlantic    Philadelphia, PA    4    Oil    Peaking    52    Mid-Atlantic    Philadelphia, PA   4   Oil    Peaking    52 

Falls

   Mid-Atlantic    Falls Twp., PA    3    Oil    Peaking    51    Mid-Atlantic    Morrisville, PA   3   Oil    Peaking    51 

Moser

   Mid-Atlantic    Lower Pottsgrove Twp., PA    3    Oil    Peaking    51    Mid-Atlantic    Lower PottsgroveTwp., PA   3   Oil    Peaking    51 

Chester

   Mid-Atlantic    Chester, PA    3    Oil    Peaking    39    Mid-Atlantic    Chester, PA   3   Oil    Peaking    39 

Schuylkill

  Mid-Atlantic    Philadelphia, PA   2   Oil    Peaking    30 

Salem

   Mid-Atlantic    Hancock’s Bridge, NJ    1   42.59   Oil    Peaking    16(f)   Mid-Atlantic    Lower Alloways Creek Twp, NJ   1  42.59   Oil    Peaking    16(f) 

Pennsbury

   Mid-Atlantic    Falls Twp., PA    2    Landfill Gas    Peaking    6    Mid-Atlantic    Morrisville, PA   2   Landfill Gas    Peaking    6 

Keystone

   Mid-Atlantic    Shelocta, PA    4   41.98   Oil    Peaking    4(f)   Mid-Atlantic    Shelocta, PA   4  41.98   Oil    Peaking    4(f) 

Conemaugh

   Mid-Atlantic    New Florence, PA    4   31.28   Oil    Peaking    3(f)   Mid-Atlantic    New Florence, PA   4  31.28   Oil    Peaking    3(f) 
        

 

        

 

 

Total Mid-Atlantic

         12,993          13,067 

Braidwood

   Midwest    Braidwood, IL    2    Uranium    Base-load    2,349    Midwest    Braidwood, IL   2   Uranium    Base-load    2,353 

LaSalle

   Midwest    Seneca, IL    2    Uranium    Base-load    2,327    Midwest    Seneca, IL   2   Uranium    Base-load    2,327 

Byron

   Midwest    Byron, IL    2    Uranium    Base-load    2,326    Midwest    Byron, IL   2   Uranium    Base-load    2,319 

Dresden

   Midwest    Morris, IL    2    Uranium    Base-load    1,790    Midwest    Morris, IL   2   Uranium    Base-load    1,843 

Quad Cities

   Midwest    Cordova, IL    2   75   Uranium    Base-load    1,403(f)   Midwest    Cordova, IL   2  75   Uranium    Base-load    1,403(f) 

Clinton

  Midwest    Clinton, IL   1   Uranium    Base-load    1,067 

Michigan Wind 2

  Midwest    Sanilac Co., MI   50   Wind    Base-load    90 

 

6365


Station(a)

  

Region

 

Location

 No. of
Units
 Percent
Owned (a)
 Primary
Fuel Type
 Primary
Dispatch
Type (b)
 Net
Generation
Capacity (MW) (c)
  

Region

 

Location

 

No. of
Units

 Percent
Owned (b)
 Primary
Fuel Type
 Primary
Dispatch

Type(c)
 Net
Generation
Capacity (MW) (d)
 

Clinton

   Midwest    Clinton, IL    1    Uranium    Base-load    1,067  

Michigan Wind 2

   Midwest    Bingham Twp., MI    50    Wind    Base-load    90  

Beebe

   Midwest    Gratiot Co., MI    34    Wind    Base-load    81    Midwest    Gratiot Co., MI   34   Wind    Base-load    81 

Michigan Wind 1

   Midwest    Bingham Twp., MI    46    Wind    Base-load    69    Midwest    Huron Co., MI   46   Wind    Base-load    69 

Harvest 2

   Midwest    Huron Co., MI    33    Wind    Base-load    59    Midwest    Huron Co., MI   33   Wind    Base-load   59  

Harvest

   Midwest    Huron Co., MI    32    Wind    Base-load    53    Midwest    Huron Co., MI   32   Wind    Base-load    53 

Wildcat

   Midwest    Lee Co., NM    13    Wind    Base-load    27  

Ewington

   Midwest    Jackson Co., MN    10   99   Wind    Base-load    21(f)   Midwest    Jackson Co., MN   10  99   Wind    Base-load    21(f) 

Marshall

   Midwest    Lyon Co., MN    9   98-99    Wind    Base-load    19(f)   Midwest    Lyon Co., MN   9  99   Wind    Base-load    19(f) 

City Solar

   Midwest    Chicago, IL    1    Solar    Base-load    10    Midwest    Chicago, IL   1   Solar    Base-load    8 

Norgaard

   Midwest    Lincoln Co., MN    7   99   Wind    Base-load    9(f)   Midwest    Lincoln Co., MN   7  99   Wind    Base-load    9(f) 

AgriWind

   Midwest    Bureau Co., IL    4   99   Wind    Base-load    8(f)   Midwest    Bureau Co., IL   4  99   Wind    Base-load    8(f) 

Cisco

   Midwest    Jackson Co., MN    4   99   Wind    Base-load    8(f)   Midwest    Jackson Co., MN   4  99   Wind    Base-load    8(f) 

Brewster

   Midwest    Jackson Co., MN    6   94-99    Wind    Base-load    6(f)   Midwest    Jackson Co., MN   6  94-99    Wind    Base-load    6(f) 

Wolf

   Midwest    Nobles Co., MN    5   99   Wind    Base-load    6(f)   Midwest    Nobles Co., MN   5  99   Wind    Base-load    6(f) 

CP Windfarm

   Midwest    Faribault Co., MN    2    Wind    Base-load    4    Midwest    Faribault Co., MN   2   Wind    Base-load    4 

Moore

   Midwest    Faribault Co., MN    2    Wind    Base-load    3  

Blue Breezes

  Midwest    Faribault Co., MN   2   Wind    Base-load    3 

Cowell

   Midwest    Pipestone Co., MN    1   99   Wind    Base-load    2(f)   Midwest    Pipestone Co., MN   1  99   Wind    Base-load    2(f) 

Solar Ohio

   Midwest    Various    1    Solar    Base-load    1    Midwest    Toledo, OH   2   Solar    Base-load    1 

Southeast Chicago

   Midwest    Chicago, IL    8    Gas    Peaking    296    Midwest    Chicago, IL   8   Gas    Peaking    296 
        

 

        

 

 

Total Midwest

         12,034          12,055 

Whitetail

  ERCOT    Laredo, TX   57   Wind    Base-load    91 

Wolf Hollow 1, 2, 3

   ERCOT    Granbury, TX    3     Gas    Intermediate    705    ERCOT    Granbury, TX   3   Gas    Intermediate    704 

Mountain Creek 8

   ERCOT    Dallas, TX    1    Gas    Intermediate    565   ERCOT    Dallas, TX   1   Gas    Intermediate    565 

Colorado Bend

   ERCOT    Wharton, TX    1    Gas    Intermediate    498    ERCOT    Wharton, TX   1   Gas    Intermediate    498 

Quail Run

   ERCOT    Odessa, TX    1    Gas    Intermediate    488    ERCOT    Odessa, TX   1   Gas    Intermediate    488 

Handley 3

   ERCOT    Fort Worth, TX    1    Gas    Intermediate    395    ERCOT    Fort Worth, TX   1   Gas    Intermediate    395 

Handley 4, 5

   ERCOT    Fort Worth, TX    2    Gas    Peaking    870    ERCOT    Fort Worth, TX   2   Gas    Peaking    870 

Mountain Creek 6, 7

   ERCOT    Dallas, TX    2    Gas    Peaking    240    ERCOT    Dallas, TX   2   Gas    Peaking    240 

LaPorte

   ERCOT    Laporte, TX    4    Gas    Peaking    152    ERCOT    Laporte, TX   4   Gas    Peaking    152 
        

 

        

 

 

Total ERCOT

         3,913          4,003 

Holyoke Solar

   New England    Various    1    Solar    Base-load    5    New England    Various   2   Solar    Base-load    5 

Solar Massachusetts

   New England    Various    5    Solar    Base-load    3    New England    Various   5   Solar    Base-load    3 

Solar Net Metering

   New England    Various    1    Solar    Base-load    3    New England    Uxbridge, MA   1   Solar    Base-load    2 

Solar Connecticut

   New England    Various    2    Solar    Base-load    1    New England    Various   2   Solar    Base-load    1 

Mystic 8, 9

   New England    Charlestown, MA    2    Gas    Intermediate    1,382    New England    Charlestown, MA   2   Gas    Intermediate    1,418 

Fore River

   New England    North Weymouth, MA    1    Gas    Intermediate    688    New England    North Weymouth, MA   1   Gas    Intermediate    726 

Mystic 7

   New England    Charlestown, MA    1    Oil/Gas    Intermediate    560    New England    Charlestown, MA   1   Oil/Gas    Intermediate    575 

Wyman

   New England    Yarmouth, ME    1   5.89   Oil    Intermediate    36(f)   New England    Yarmouth, ME   1  5.9   Oil    Intermediate    36(f) 

Medway

   New England    West Medway, MA    3    Oil/Gas    Peaking    105    New England    West Medway, MA   3   Oil/Gas    Peaking    117 

Framingham

   New England    Framingham, MA    3    Oil    Peaking    28    New England    Framingham, MA   3   Oil    Peaking    33 

New Boston

   New England    South Boston, MA    1    Oil    Peaking    12    New England    South Boston, MA   1   Oil    Peaking    16 

Mystic Jet

   New England    Charlestown, MA    1    Oil    Peaking    9    New England    Charlestown, MA   1   Oil    Peaking    9 
        

 

        

 

 

Total New England

         2,832          2,941 

Nine Mile Point

   New York    Scriba, NY    2   50.01   Uranium    Base-load    798(f)(h)   New York    Scriba, NY   2  50.01(h)   Uranium    Base-load    833(f)(h) 

Ginna

   New York    Ontario, NY    1   50.01   Uranium    Base-load    288(f)(h)   New York    Ontario, NY   1  50.01   Uranium    Base-load    288(f)(h) 
        

 

        

 

 

Total New York

         1,086          1,121 

AVSR

  Other    Lancaster, CA   1   Solar    Base-load    198(g) 

Shooting Star

   Other    Kiowa Co., KS    65    Wind    Base-load    104    Other    Greensburg, KS   65   Wind    Base-load    104 

Whitetail

   Other    Webb Co., TX    57    Wind    Base-load    92  

Exelon Wind 4

   Other    Hansford Co., TX    38    Wind    Base-load    80    Other    Gruver, TX   38   Wind    Base-load    80 

Bluegrass Ridge

   Other    Gentry Co., MO    27    Wind    Base-load    57    Other    King City, MO   27   Wind    Base-load    57 

Conception

  Other    Barnard, MO   24   Wind    Base-load    50 

Cow Branch

  Other    Rock Port, MO   24   Wind    Base-load    50 

Mountain Home

  Other    Glenns Ferry, ID   20   Wind    Base-load    42 

High Mesa

  Other    Elmore Co., ID   19   Wind    Base-load    40 

Echo 1

  Other    Echo, OR   21  99   Wind    Base-load    35(f) 

Sacramento PV Energy

  Other    Sacremento, CA   4   Solar    Base-load    30 

Cassia

  Other    Buhl, ID   14   Wind    Base-load    29 

Wildcat

  Other    Lovington, NM   13   Wind    Base-load    27 

Sunnyside

  Other    Sunnyside, UT   1  50   Waste Coal    Base-load    26(f) 

Echo 2

  Other    Echo, OR   10   Wind    Base-load    20 

 

6466


Station(a)

  

Region

 

Location

 No. of
Units
 Percent
Owned (a)
 Primary
Fuel Type
 Primary
Dispatch
Type (b)
 Net
Generation
Capacity (MW) (c)
  

Region

 

Location

 

No. of
Units

 Percent
Owned (b)
 Primary
Fuel Type
 Primary
Dispatch

Type(c)
 Net
Generation
Capacity (MW) (d)
 

Conception

   Other    Nodaway Co., MO    24    Wind    Base-load    50  

Cow Branch

   Other    Atchinson Co., MO    24    Wind    Base-load    50  

Mountain Home

   Other    Elmore Co., ID    20    Wind    Base-load    42  

High Mesa

   Other    Elmore Co., ID    19    Wind    Base-load    40  

Echo 1

   Other    Umatilla Co., OR    21   99   Wind    Base-load    35(f) 

AVSR

   Other    Los Angeles County, CA    1    Solar    Base-load    31(g) 

Sacramento PV Energy

   Other    Various    1    Solar    Base-load    30  

Cassia

   Other    Twin Falls Co., ID    14    Wind    Base-load    29  

Sunnyside

   Other    Sunnyside, UT    1   50   Waste Coal    Base-load    26(f) 

Echo 2

   Other    Morrow Co., OR    10    Wind    Base-load    20  

Tuana Springs

   Other    Twin Falls Co., ID    8    Wind    Base-load    17    Other    Hagerman, ID   8   Wind    Base-load    17 

Greensburg

   Other    Kiowa Co., KS    10    Wind    Base-load    13    Other    Greensburg, KS   10   Wind    Base-load    13 

Echo 3

   Other    Morrow Co., OR    6   99   Wind    Base-load    10(f)   Other    Echo, OR   6  99   Wind    Base-load    10(f) 

Exelon Wind 1

   Other    Hansford Co., TX    8    Wind    Base-load    10    Other    Gruver, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10 

Exelon Wind 2

   Other    Hansford Co., TX    8    Wind    Base-load    10    Other    Gruver, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10 

Exelon Wind 3

   Other    Hansford Co., TX    8    Wind    Base-load    10    Other    Gruver, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10 

Exelon Wind 5

   Other    Sherman Co., TX    8    Wind    Base-load    10    Other    Texhoma, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10 

Exelon Wind 6

   Other    Sherman Co., TX    8    Wind    Base-load    10    Other    Texhoma, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10 

Exelon Wind 7

   Other    Moore Co., TX    8    Wind    Base-load    10    Other    Sunray, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10 

Exelon Wind 8

   Other    Moore Co., TX    8    Wind    Base-load    10    Other    Sunray, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10 

Exelon Wind 9

   Other    Moore Co., TX    8    Wind    Base-load    10    Other    Sunray, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10 

Exelon Wind 10

   Other    Moore Co., TX    8    Wind    Base-load    10    Other    Dumas, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10 

Exelon Wind 11

   Other    Moore Co., TX    8    Wind    Base-load    10    Other    Dumas, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10 

High Plains

   Other    Moore Co., TX    8   99.5   Wind    Base-load    10(f)   Other    Panhandle, TX   8  99.5   Wind    Base-load    10(f) 

Threemile Canyon

   Other    Morrow Co., OR    6    Wind    Base-load    10    Other    Boardman, OR   6   Wind    Base-load    10 

Solar Arizona

   Other    Various    2    Solar    Base-load    8    Other    Various   20   Solar    Base-load    29 

Outback Solar

   Other    Various    1    Solar    Base-load    6    Other    Christmas Valley, OR   1   Solar    Base-load    6 

Loess Hills

   Other    Atchinson Co., MO    4    Wind    Base-load    5    Other    Rock Port, MO   4   Wind    Base-load    5 

Denver Airport Solar

   Other    Various    1    Solar    Base-load    4    Other    Denver, CO   1   Solar    Base-load    4 

California PV Energy

  Other    Ontario, CA   2   Solar    Base-load    3 

Solar California

   Other    Various    4    Solar    Base-load    3    Other    Various   4   Solar    Base-load    2 

Hillabee

   Other    Alexander City, AL    1    Gas    Intermediate    684    Other    Alexander City, AL   1   Gas    Intermediate    670 

Malacha

   Other    Muck Valley, CA    1   50   Hydroelectric    Intermediate    16(f)   Other    Muck Valley, CA   1  50   Hydroelectric    Intermediate    15(f)(i) 

West Valley

   Other    Salt Lake City, UT    5    Gas    Peaking    200    Other    Salt Lake City, UT   5   Gas    Peaking    185 

Grand Prairie

   Other    Alberta, Canada    1    Gas    Peaking    93    Other    Alberta, Canada   1   Gas    Peaking    75 

SEGS 4, 5, 6

   Other    Kramer Junction, CA    3   4.2-12.2    Solar    Peaking    8(f)   Other    Boron, CA   3  4.2-12.2    Solar    Peaking    8(f) 
        

 

        

 

 

Total Other

         1,873          1,950 
        

 

        

 

 

Total

         34,731          35,137 
        

 

        

 

 

 

(a)All nuclear stations are boiling water reactors except Braidwood, Byron, Calvert Cliffs, Ginna, Salem and Three Mile Island, which are pressurized water reactors.
(b)100%, unless otherwise indicated.
(b)(c)Base-load units are plants that normally operate to take all or part of the minimum continuous load of a system and, consequently, produce electricity at an essentially constant rate. Intermediate units are plants that normally operate to take load of a system during the daytime higher load hours and, consequently, produce electricity by cycling on and off daily. Peaking units consist of lower-efficiency, quick response steam units, gas turbines and diesels normally used during the maximum load periods.
(c)(d)For nuclear stations, capacity reflects the annual mean rating. Fossil stations reflect a summer rating. Wind and solar facilities reflect name plate capacity.
(d)All nuclear stations are boiling water reactors except Braidwood, Byron, Salem and Three Mile Island, which are pressurized water reactors.
(e)Generation has agreed to permanently cease generation operation at Oyster Creek by December 31, 2019.
(f)Net generation capacity is stated at proportionate ownership share.
(g)Expected capacity upon project completion is 230MW. See Note 4 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.
(h)Reflects Generation’s 50.01% interest in CENG, a joint venture with EDF. For Nine Mile Point, the co-owner owns 18% of Unit 2. Thus Exelon’s ownership is 50.01% of 82% of Nine Mile Point Unit 2. Generation also has a unit contingentunit-contingent PPA with CENG under which it purchases 85 to 90%85% of the nuclear plant output of CENG’s nuclear generating facilitiesowned by CENG that is not sold to third parties under the pre-existing PPAs through 2014.

(i)In February 2014, Generation sold its remaining stake in Malacha.

 

65


The net generation capability available for operation at any time may be less due to regulatory restrictions, transmission congestion, fuel restrictions, efficiency of cooling facilities, level of water supplies or generating units being temporarily out of service for inspection, maintenance, refueling, repairs or modifications required by regulatory authorities.

 

Generation maintains property insurance against loss or damage to its principal plants and properties by fire or other perils, subject to certain exceptions. For additional information regarding nuclear insurance of generating facilities, see ITEM 1. Business—Generation. For its insured losses, Generation is self-insured to the extent that any losses are within the policy deductible or exceed the amount of insurance maintained. Any such losses could have a material adverse effect on Generation’s consolidated financial condition or results of operations.

 

67


ComEd

 

ComEd’s electric substations and a portion of its transmission rights of way are located on property that ComEd owns. A significant portion of its electric transmission and distribution facilities is located above or underneath highways, streets, other public places or property that others own. ComEd believes that it has satisfactory rights to use those places or property in the form of permits, grants, easements, licenses and franchise rights; however, it has not necessarily undertaken to examine the underlying title to the land upon which the rights rest.

 

Transmission and Distribution

 

ComEd’s higher voltage electric transmission lines owned and in service at December 31, 20122013 were as follows:

 

Voltage (Volts)

 

Circuit Miles

 

Circuit Miles

765,000

 90 90

345,000

 2,642 2,642

138,000

 2,237 2,292

 

ComEd’s electric distribution system includes 35,56335,491 circuit miles of overhead lines and 30,50630,626 circuit miles of underground lines.

 

First Mortgage and Insurance

 

The principal properties of ComEd are subject to the lien of ComEd’s Mortgage dated July 1, 1923, as amended and supplemented, under which ComEd’s First Mortgage Bonds are issued.

 

ComEd maintains property insurance against loss or damage to its properties by fire or other perils, subject to certain exceptions. For its insured losses, ComEd is self-insured to the extent that any losses are within the policy deductible or exceed the amount of insurance maintained. Any such losses could have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial condition or results of operations of ComEd.

 

PECO

 

PECO’s electric substations and a significant portion of its transmission lines are located on property that PECO owns. A significant portion of its electric transmission and distribution facilities is located above or underneath highways, streets, other public places or property that others own. PECO believes that it has satisfactory rights to use those places or property in the form of permits, grants, easements and licenses; however, it has not necessarily undertaken to examine the underlying title to the land upon which the rights rest.

 

66


Transmission and Distribution

 

PECO’s high voltage electric transmission lines owned and in service at December 31, 20122013 were as follows:

 

Voltage (Volts)

 

Circuit Miles

 

Circuit Miles

500,000

 188 (a) 188(a)

230,000

 548 548

138,000

 156 156

69,000

 200 200

 

(a)In addition, PECO has a 22.00% ownership interest in 127 miles of 500 kV lines located in Pennsylvania and a 42.55% ownership interest in 131 miles of 500 kV lines located in Delaware and New Jersey.

 

68


PECO’s electric distribution system includes 13,01312,989 circuit miles of overhead lines and 8,9018,915 circuit miles of underground lines.

 

Gas

 

The following table sets forth PECO’s natural gas pipeline miles at December 31, 2012:2013:

 

   Pipeline Miles 

Transmission

   31 

Distribution

   6,7476,764 

Service piping

   6,0386,068 
  

 

 

 

Total

   12,81612,863 
  

 

 

 

 

PECO has an LNG facility located in West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania that has a storage capacity of 1,200 mmcf and a send-out capacity of 157 mmcf/day and a propane-air plant located in Chester, Pennsylvania, with a tank storage capacity of 1,980,000 gallons and a peaking capability of 25 mmcf/day. In addition, PECO owns 31 natural gas city gate stations and direct pipeline customer delivery points at various locations throughout its gas service territory.

 

First Mortgage and Insurance

 

The principal properties of PECO are subject to the lien of PECO’s Mortgage dated May 1, 1923, as amended and supplemented, under which PECO’s first and refunding mortgage bonds are issued.

 

PECO maintains property insurance against loss or damage to its properties by fire or other perils, subject to certain exceptions. For its insured losses, PECO is self-insured to the extent that any losses are within the policy deductible or exceed the amount of insurance maintained. Any such losses could have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial condition or results of operations of PECO.

 

BGE

 

BGE’s electric substations and a significant portion of its transmission lines are located on property that BGE owns. A significant portion of its electric transmission and distribution facilities is located above or underneath highways, streets, other public places or property that others own. BGE believes that it has satisfactory rights to use those places or property in the form of permits, grants, easements and licenses; however, it has not necessarily undertaken to examine the underlying title to the land upon which the rights rest.

 

67


Transmission and Distribution

 

BGE’s high voltage electric transmission lines owned and in service at December 31, 20122013 were as follows:

 

Voltage (Volts)

 

Circuit Miles

 

Circuit Miles

500,000

 218 218

230,000

 321 322

138,000

 54 54

115,000

 697 697

 

BGE’s electric distribution system includes 9,4119,391 circuit miles of overhead lines and 15,74815,933 circuit miles of underground lines.

 

69


Gas

 

The following table sets forth BGE’s natural gas pipeline miles at December 31, 2012:2013:

 

   Pipeline Miles 

Transmission

   164163 

Distribution

   7,0157,054 

Service piping

   6,146 
  

 

 

 

Total

   13,32513,363 
  

 

 

 

 

BGE has an LNG facility located in Baltimore, Maryland that has a storage capacity of 1,0001,055 mmcf and a send-out capacity of 298332 mmcf/day, an LNG facility located in Westminster, Maryland that has a storage capacity of 5.86 mmcf and a send-out capacity of 5.86 mmcf/day, and a propane-air plant located in Baltimore, Maryland, with a storage capacity of 500546 mmcf and a send-out capacity of 8185 mmcf/day. In addition, BGE owns 12 natural gas city gate stations and 20 direct pipeline customer delivery points at various locations throughout its gas service territory.

 

Property Insurance

 

BGE owns its principal headquarters building located in downtown Baltimore. BGE maintains property insurance against loss or damage to its properties by fire or other perils, subject to certain exceptions. For its insured losses, BGE is self-insured to the extent that any losses are within the policy deductible or exceed the amount of insurance maintained. Any such losses could have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial condition or results of operations of BGE.

 

Exelon

 

Security Measures

 

The Registrants have initiated and work to maintain security measures. On a continuing basis, the Registrants evaluate enhanced security measures at certain critical locations, enhanced response and recovery plans, long-term design changes and redundancy measures. Additionally, the energy industry has strategic relationships with governmental authorities to ensure that emergency plans are in place and critical infrastructure vulnerabilities are addressed in order to maintain the reliability of the country’s energy systems.

 

ITEM 3.LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

 

Exelon,Generation,ComEd,PECO andBGE

 

The Registrants are parties to various lawsuits and regulatory proceedings in the ordinary course of their respective businesses. For information regarding material lawsuits and proceedings, see Notes 3 and 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. Such descriptions are incorporated herein by these references.

 

ITEM 4.MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES

 

Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE

 

Not Applicable to the Registrants.

 

6870


PART II

 

(Dollars in millions except per share data, unless otherwise noted)

 

ITEM 5.MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

 

Exelon

 

Exelon’s common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange. As of January 31, 2013,2014, there were 855,019,272857,419,806 shares of common stock outstanding and approximately 134,194129,928 record holders of common stock.

 

The following table presents the New York Stock Exchange—Composite Common Stock Prices and dividends by quarter on a per share basis:

 

  2012   2011   2013   2012 
  Fourth
Quarter
   Third
Quarter
   Second
Quarter
   First
Quarter
   Fourth
Quarter
   Third
Quarter
   Second
Quarter
   First
Quarter
   Fourth
Quarter
   Third
Quarter
   Second
Quarter
   First
Quarter
   Fourth
Quarter
   Third
Quarter
   Second
Quarter
   First
Quarter
 

High price

  $37.50   $39.82   $39.37   $43.70   $45.45   $45.27   $42.89   $43.58   $30.59   $32.42   $37.80   $34.56   $37.50   $39.82   $39.37   $43.70 

Low price

   28.40    34.54    36.27    38.31    39.93    39.51    39.53    39.06    26.64    29.42    29.84    29.10    28.40    34.54    36.27    38.31 

Close

   29.74    35.58    37.62    39.21    43.37    42.61    42.84    41.24    27.39    29.64    30.88    34.48    29.74    35.58    37.62    39.21 

Dividends

   0.525    0.525    0.525    0.525    0.525    0.525    0.525    0.525    0.310    0.310    0.310    0.525    0.525    0.525    0.525    0.525 

 

6971


Stock Performance Graph

 

The performance graph below illustrates a five-year comparison of cumulative total returns based on an initial investment of $100 in Exelon common stock, as compared with the S&P 500 Stock Index and the S&P Utility Index for the period 20082009 through 2012.2013.

 

This performance chart assumes:

 

$100 invested on December 31, 20072008 in Exelon common stock, in the S&P 500 Stock Index and in the S&P Utility Index; and

 

All dividends are reinvested.

 

 

Generation

 

As of January 31, 2013,2014, Exelon indirectly held the entire membership interest in Generation.

 

ComEd

 

As of January 31, 2013,2014, there were 127,016,764127,016,904 outstanding shares of common stock, $12.50 par value, of ComEd, of which 127,002,904 shares were indirectly held by Exelon. At January 31, 2013,2014, in addition to Exelon, there were 272294 record holders of ComEd common stock. There is no established market for shares of the common stock of ComEd.

 

7072


PECO

 

As of January 31, 2013,2014, there were 170,478,507 outstanding shares of common stock, without par value, of PECO, all of which were indirectly held by Exelon.

 

BGE

 

As of January 31, 2013,2014, there were 1,000 outstanding shares of common stock, without par value, of BGE, all of which were indirectly held by Exelon.

 

Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE

 

Dividends

 

Under applicable Federal law, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE can pay dividends only from retained, undistributed or current earnings. A significant loss recorded at Generation, ComEd, PECO or BGE may limit the dividends that these companies can distribute to Exelon.

 

The Federal Power Act declares it to be unlawful for any officer or director of any public utility “to participate in the making or paying of any dividends of such public utility from any funds properly included in capital account.” What constitutes “funds properly included in capital account” is undefined in the Federal Power Act or the related regulations; however, FERC has consistently interpreted the provision to allow dividends to be paid as long as (1) the source of the dividends is clearly disclosed, (2) the dividend is not excessive and (3) there is no self-dealing on the part of corporate officials. While these restrictions may limit the absolute amount of dividends that a particular subsidiary may pay, Exelon does not believe these limitations are materially limiting because, under these limitations, the subsidiaries are allowed to pay dividends sufficient to meet Exelon’s actual cash needs.

 

Under Illinois law, ComEd may not pay any dividend on its stock unless, among other things, “[its] earnings and earned surplus are sufficient to declare and pay same after provision is made for reasonable and proper reserves,” or unless it has specific authorization from the ICC. ComEd has also agreed in connection with a financing arranged through ComEd Financing III that ComEd will not declare dividends on any shares of its capital stock in the event that: (1) it exercises its right to extend the interest payment periods on the subordinated debt securities issued to ComEd Financing III; (2) it defaults on its guarantee of the payment of distributions on the preferred trust securities of ComEd Financing III; or (3) an event of default occurs under the Indenture under which the subordinated debt securities are issued. No such event has occurred.

 

PECO’s Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation prohibit payment of any dividend on, or other distribution to the holders of, common stock if, after giving effect thereto, the capital of PECO represented by its common stock together with its retained earnings is, in the aggregate, less than the involuntary liquidating value of its then outstanding preferred securities. At December 31, 2012, such capital was $3 billion and amounted to about 34 times the liquidating value of the outstanding preferred securities of $87 million.

PECO has agreed in connection with financings arranged through PEC L.P. and PECO Trust IV that PECO will not declare dividends on any shares of its capital stock in the event that: (1) it exercises its right to extend the interest payment periods on the subordinated debentures which were issued to PEC L.P. or PECO Trust IV; (2) it defaults on its guarantee of the payment of distributions on the Series D Preferred Securities of PEC L.P. or the preferred trust securities of PECO Trust IV; or (3) an event of default occurs under the Indenture under which the subordinated debentures are issued. No such event has occurred.

 

71


BGE is subject to certain dividend restrictions established by the MDPSC. First, BGE is prohibited from paying a dividend on its common shares through the end of 2014. Second, BGE is prohibited from paying a dividend on its common shares if (a) after the dividend payment, BGE’s equity ratio would be below 48% as calculated pursuant to the MDPSC’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. Finally, BGE must notify the MDPSC that it intends to declare a dividend on its common shares at least 30 days before such a dividend is paid. There are no other limitations on BGE paying common

73


stock dividends unless: (1) BGE elects to defer interest payments on the 6.20% Deferrable Interest Subordinated Debentures due 2043, and any deferred interest remains unpaid; or (2) any dividends (and any redemption payments) due on BGE’s preference stock have not been paid.

 

At December 31, 2012,2013, Exelon had retained earnings of $9,893$10,358 million, including Generation’s undistributed earnings of $3,168$3,613 million, ComEd’s retained earnings of $721$750 million consisting of retained earnings appropriated for future dividends of $2,360$2,389 million, partially offset by $1,639 million of unappropriated retained deficits, PECO’s retained earnings of $593$649 million, and BGE’s retained earnings of $808$1,005 million.

 

The following table sets forth Exelon’s quarterly cash dividends per share paid during 20122013 and 2011:2012:

 

  2012   2011   2013   2012 

(per share)

  

4th
Quarter

   

3rd
Quarter

   

2nd
Quarter

   

1st
Quarter

   

4th
Quarter

   

3rd
Quarter

   

2nd
Quarter

   

1st
Quarter

   

4th
Quarter

   

3rd
Quarter

   

2nd
Quarter

   

1st
Quarter

   

4th
Quarter

   

3rd
Quarter

   

2nd
Quarter

   

1st
Quarter

 

Exelon

  $0.525   $0.525   $0.525   $0.525   $0.525   $0.525   $0.525   $0.525   $0.310   $0.310   $0.310   $0.525   $0.525   $0.525   $0.525   $0.525 

 

The following table sets forth Generation’s quarterly distributions and ComEd’s PECO’s and BGE’sPECO’s quarterly common dividend payments:

 

   2012   2011 

(in millions)

  4th
Quarter
   3rd
Quarter
   2nd
Quarter
   1st
Quarter
   4th
Quarter
   3rd
Quarter
   2nd
Quarter
   1st
Quarter
 

Generation

  $242   $493   $291   $600   $111   $61   $—      $—   

ComEd

   10    10    10    75    75    75    75    75 

PECO

   85    86    85    87    80    84    73    111 

BGE

   —      —      —      —      —      —      —      85 (a) 

(a)Dividends on common stock for $85 million were paid to Constellation for the year ended December 31, 2011.
   2013   2012 

(in millions)

  4th
Quarter
   3rd
Quarter
   2nd
Quarter
   1st
Quarter
   4th
Quarter
   3rd
Quarter
   2nd
Quarter
   1st
Quarter
 

Generation

  $75   $76   $263   $211   $242   $493   $291   $600 

ComEd

   55    55    55    55    10    10    10    75 

PECO

   83    83    83    83    85    86    85    87 

 

First Quarter 20132014 Dividend.On February 6, 2013,January 28, 2014, the Exelon Board of Directors declared a first quarter 20132014 regular quarterly dividend of $0.525$0.31 per share on Exelon’s common stock payable on March 8, 2013,10, 2014, to shareholders of record of Exelon at the end of the day on February 19, 2013.14, 2014.

 

Revised Dividend Policy.On February 6, 2013, the Exelon Board of Directors approved a revised dividend policy which contemplates a regular $0.31 per share quarterly dividend on Exelon’s common stock payable beginning in the second quarter of 2013 (or $1.24 per share on an annualized basis), subject to quarterly declarations by the Board of Directors. The second quarter 2013 quarterly dividend of $0.31 per share on Exelon’s common stock is expected to be approved by the Exelon Board of Directors in the second quarter of 2013.

72


ITEM 6.SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

 

Exelon

 

The selected financial data presented below has been derived from the audited consolidated financial statements of Exelon. This data is qualified in its entirety by reference to and should be read in conjunction with Exelon’s Consolidated Financial Statements and ITEM 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

 

  For the Years Ended December 31,   For the Years Ended December 31, 

(In millions, except per share data)

  2012 (a)   2011   2010   2009   2008   2013   2012(a)   2011   2010   2009 

Statement of Operations data:

                    

Operating revenues

  $23,489   $19,063   $18,644   $17,318   $18,859   $24,888   $23,489   $19,063   $18,644   $17,318 

Operating income

   2,380    4,479    4,726    4,750    5,299    3,656    2,380    4,479    4,726    4,750 

Income from continuing operations

   1,171    2,499    2,563    2,706    2,717    1,729    1,171    2,499    2,563    2,706 

Income from discontinued operations

   —       —       —       1    20    —       —       —       —       1 

Net income

   1,171    2,499    2,563    2,707    2,737    1,729    1,171    2,499    2,563    2,707 

Earnings per average common share (diluted):

                    

Income from continuing operations

  $1.42   $3.75   $3.87   $4.09   $4.10   $2.00   $1.42   $3.75   $3.87   $4.09 

Income from discontinued operations

   —       —       —       —       0.03 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Net income

  $1.42   $3.75   $3.87   $4.09   $4.13   $2.00   $1.42   $3.75   $3.87   $4.09 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Dividends per common share

  $2.10   $2.10   $2.10   $2.10   $2.03   $1.46   $2.10   $2.10   $2.10   $2.10 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Average shares of common stock outstanding—diluted

   819    665    663    662    662    860    819    665    663    662 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

74


 

(a)The 2012 financial results only include the operations of Constellation and BGE from the date of the merger with Constellation (the Merger), March 12, 2012, through December 31, 2012.

 

   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2012   2011   2010   2009   2008 

Balance Sheet data:

          

Current assets

  $10,133   $5,713   $6,398   $5,441   $5,130 

Property, plant and equipment, net

   45,186    32,570    29,941    27,341    25,813 

Noncurrent regulatory assets

   6,497    4,518    4,140    4,872    5,940 

Goodwill

   2,625    2,625    2,625    2,625    2,625 

Other deferred debits and other assets

   14,113    9,569    9,136    8,901    8,038 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total assets

  $78,554   $54,995   $52,240   $49,180   $47,546 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Current liabilities

  $7,784   $5,134   $4,240   $4,238   $3,811 

Long-term debt, including long-term debt to financing trusts

   18,346    12,189    12,004    11,385    12,592 

Noncurrent regulatory liabilities

   3,981    3,627    3,555    3,492    2,520 

Other deferred credits and other liabilities

   26,626    19,570    18,791    17,338    17,489 

Preferred securities of subsidiary

   87    87    87    87    87 

Noncontrolling interest

   106    3    3    —       —    

BGE preference stock not subject to mandatory redemption

   193    —       —       —       —    

Shareholders’ equity

   21,431    14,385    13,560    12,640    11,047 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

  $78,554   $54,995   $52,240   $49,180   $47,546 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2013   2012   2011   2010   2009 

Balance Sheet data:

          

Current assets

  $10,137   $10,140   $5,713   $6,398   $5,441 

Property, plant and equipment, net

   47,330    45,186    32,570    29,941    27,341 

Noncurrent regulatory assets

   5,910    6,497    4,518    4,140    4,872 

Goodwill

   2,625    2,625    2,625    2,625    2,625 

Other deferred debits and other assets

   13,922    14,113    9,569    9,136    8,901 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total assets

  $79,924   $78,561   $54,995   $52,240   $49,180 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Current liabilities

  $7,728   $7,791   $5,134   $4,240   $4,238 

Long-term debt, including long-term debt to financing trusts

   18,271     18,346     12,189     12,004     11,385 

Noncurrent regulatory liabilities

   4,388    3,981    3,627    3,555    3,492 

Other deferred credits and other liabilities

   26,597    26,626    19,570    18,791    17,338 

Preferred securities of subsidiary

   —       87    87    87    87 

Non-controlling interest

   15    106    3    3    —    

BGE preference stock not subject to mandatory redemption

   193    193    —       —       —    

Shareholders’ equity

   22,732    21,431    14,385    13,560    12,640 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

  $79,924   $78,561   $54,995   $52,240   $49,180 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

73


Generation

 

The selected financial data presented below has been derived from the audited consolidated financial statements of Generation. This data is qualified in its entirety by reference to and should be read in conjunction with Generation’s Consolidated Financial Statements and ITEM 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

 

  For the Years Ended December 31,   For the Years Ended December 31, 

(In millions)

  2012 (a)   2011   2010   2009   2008   2013   2012 (a)   2011   2010   2009 

Statement of Operations data:

                    

Operating revenues

  $14,437   $10,447   $10,025   $9,703   $10,754   $15,630   $14,437   $10,447   $10,025   $9,703 

Operating income

   1,120    2,875    3,046    3,295    3,994    1,664    1,120    2,875    3,046    3,295 

Income from continuing operations

   558    1,771    1,972    2,122    2,258 

Income from discontinued operations

   —       —       —       —       20 

Net income

   558    1,771    1,972    2,122    2,278    1,060    558    1,771    1,972    2,122 

 

(a)The 2012 financial results only include the operations of Constellation from the date of the merger with Constellation (the Merger), March 12, 2012, through December 31, 2012.

 

  December 31,   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2012   2011   2010   2009   2008   2013   2012   2011   2010   2009 

Balance Sheet data:

                    

Current assets

  $6,211   $3,217   $3,087   $3,360   $3,486   $6,439   $6,211   $3,217   $3,087   $3,360 

Property, plant and equipment, net

   19,531    13,475    11,662    9,809    8,907    20,111    19,531    13,475    11,662    9,809 

Other deferred debits and other assets

   14,939    10,741    9,785    9,237    7,691    14,682    14,939    10,741    9,785    9,237 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total assets

  $40,681   $27,433   $24,534   $22,406   $20,084   $41,232   $40,681   $27,433   $24,534   $22,406 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Current liabilities

  $4,097   $2,144   $1,843   $2,262   $2,168   $3,867   $4,097   $2,144   $1,843   $2,262 

Long-term debt

   7,455    3,674    3,676    2,967    2,502    7,168    7,455    3,674    3,676    2,967 

Other deferred credits and other liabilities

   16,464    12,907    11,838    10,385    8,848    17,455    16,464    12,907    11,838    10,385 

Noncontrolling interest

   108    5    5    2    1 

Non-controlling interest

   17    108    5    5    2 

Member’s equity

   12,557    8,703    7,172    6,790    6,565    12,725    12,557    8,703    7,172    6,790 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total liabilities and member’s equity

  $40,681   $27,433   $24,534   $22,406   $20,084   $41,232   $40,681   $27,433   $24,534   $22,406 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

75


ComEd

 

The selected financial data presented below has been derived from the audited consolidated financial statements of ComEd. This data is qualified in its entirety by reference to and should be read in conjunction with ComEd’s Consolidated Financial Statements and ITEM 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

 

   For the Years Ended December 31, 

(In millions)

  2012   2011   2010   2009   2008 

Statement of Operations data:

          

Operating revenues

  $5,443   $6,056   $6,204   $5,774   $6,136 

Operating income

   886    982    1,056    843    667 

Net income

   379    416    337    374    201 

   For the Years Ended December 31, 

(In millions)

  2013   2012   2011   2010   2009 

Statement of Operations data:

          

Operating revenues

  $4,464   $5,443   $6,056   $6,204   $5,774 

Operating income

   954     886     982     1,056     843 

Net income

   249    379    416    337    374 

 

74


  December 31,   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2012   2011   2010   2009   2008   2013   2012   2011   2010   2009 

Balance Sheet data:

                    

Current assets

  $1,775   $2,188   $2,151   $1,579   $1,309   $1,540   $1,775   $2,188   $2,151   $1,579 

Property, plant and equipment, net

   13,826    13,121    12,578    12,125    11,655    14,666    13,826    13,121    12,578    12,125 

Goodwill

   2,625    2,625    2,625    2,625    2,625    2,625    2,625    2,625    2,625    2,625 

Noncurrent regulatory assets

   666    699    947    1,096    858    933    666    699    947    1,096 

Other deferred debits and other assets

   4,013    4,005    3,351    3,272    2,790    4,354    4,013    4,005    3,351    3,272 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total assets

  $22,905   $22,638   $21,652   $20,697   $19,237   $24,118   $22,905   $22,638   $21,652   $20,697 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Current liabilities

  $1,655   $2,071   $2,134   $1,597   $1,153   $2,048   $1,655   $2,071   $2,134   $1,597 

Long-term debt, including long-term debt to financing trusts

   5,521    5,421    4,860    4,704    4,915    5,264    5,521    5,421    4,860    4,704 

Noncurrent regulatory liabilities

   3,229    3,042    3,137    3,145    2,440    3,512    3,229    3,042    3,137    3,145 

Other deferred credits and other liabilities

   5,177    5,067    4,611    4,369    3,994    5,766    5,177    5,067    4,611    4,369 

Shareholders’ equity

   7,323    7,037    6,910    6,882    6,735    7,528    7,323    7,037    6,910    6,882 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

  $22,905   $22,638   $21,652   $20,697   $19,237   $24,118   $22,905   $22,638   $21,652   $20,697 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

PECO

 

The selected financial data presented below has been derived from the audited consolidated financial statements of PECO. This data is qualified in its entirety by reference to and should be read in conjunction with PECO’s Consolidated Financial Statements and ITEM 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

 

   For the Years Ended December 31, 

(In millions)

  2012   2011   2010   2009   2008 

Statement of Operations data:

          

Operating revenues

  $3,186   $3,720   $5,519   $5,311   $5,567 

Operating income

   623    655    661    697    699 

Net income

   381    389    324    353    325 

Net income on common stock

   377    385    320    349    321 
   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2012   2011   2010   2009   2008 

Balance Sheet data:

          

Current assets

  $1,094   $1,243   $1,670   $1,006   $819 

Property, plant and equipment, net

   6,078    5,874    5,620    5,297    5,074 

Noncurrent regulatory assets

   1,378    1,216    968    1,834    2,597 

Other deferred debits and other assets

   803    823    727    882    679 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total assets

  $9,353   $9,156   $8,985   $9,019   $9,169 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Current liabilities

  $1,158   $1,145   $1,163   $939   $981 

Long-term debt, including long-term debt to financing trusts

   1,831    1,781    2,156    2,405    2,960 

Noncurrent regulatory liabilities

   538    585    418    317    49 

Other deferred credits and other liabilities

   2,757    2,620    2,278    2,706    2,910 

Preferred securities

   87    87    87    87    87 

Shareholders’ equity

   2,982    2,938    2,883    2,565    2,182 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

  $9,353   $9,156   $8,985   $9,019   $9,169 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 
   For the Years Ended December 31, 

(In millions)

  2013   2012   2011   2010   2009 

Statement of Operations data:

          

Operating revenues

  $3,100   $3,186   $3,720   $5,519   $5,311 

Operating income

   666    623    655    661    697 

Net income

   395    381    389    324    353 

Net income on common stock

   388    377    385    320    349 

 

7576


   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2013   2012   2011   2010   2009 

Balance Sheet data:

          

Current assets

  $906   $1,094   $1,243   $1,670   $1,006 

Property, plant and equipment, net

   6,384    6,078    5,874    5,620    5,297 

Noncurrent regulatory assets

   1,448    1,378    1,216    968    1,834 

Other deferred debits and other assets

   879    803    823    727    882 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total assets

  $9,617   $9,353   $9,156   $8,985   $9,019 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Current liabilities

  $891   $1,158   $1,145   $1,163   $939 

Long-term debt, including long-term debt to financing trusts

   2,131    1,831    1,781    2,156    2,405 

Noncurrent regulatory liabilities

   629    538    585    418    317 

Other deferred credits and other liabilities

   2,901    2,757    2,620    2,278    2,706 

Preferred securities

   —      87    87    87    87 

Shareholders’ equity

   3,065    2,982    2,938    2,883    2,565 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

  $9,617   $9,353   $9,156   $8,985   $9,019 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

BGE

 

The selected financial data presented below has been derived from the audited consolidated financial statements of BGE. This data is qualified in its entirety by reference to and should be read in conjunction with BGE’s Consolidated Financial Statements and ITEM 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

 

  For the Years Ended December 31,   For the Years Ended December 31, 

(In millions)

  2012 2011   2010   2009   2008   2013   2012 2011   2010   2009 

Statement of Operations data:

                  

Operating revenues

  $2,735  $3,068   $3,541   $3,646   $3,769   $3,065   $2,735  $3,068   $3,541   $3,646 

Operating income

   132   314    350    268    183    449    132   314    350    268 

Net income

   4   136    147    91    52    210    4   136    147    91 

Net (loss) income on common stock

   (9  123    134    78    39 

Net income (loss) attributable to common shareholder

   197    (9  123    134    78 

 

  December 31,   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2012   2011 (a)   2010 (a)   2009 (a)   2008 (a)   2013   2012 (a)   2011 (a)   2010 (a)   2009 (a) 

Balance Sheet data:

                    

Current assets

  $973   $969   $1,012   $1,205   $1,093   $1,011   $980   $969   $1,012   $1,205 

Property, plant and equipment, net

   5,498    5,132    4,754    4,470    4,290    5,864    5,498    5,132    4,754    4,470 

Noncurrent regulatory assets

   522    551    566    602    670    524    522    551    566    602 

Other deferred debits and other assets

   506    551    545    386    231    462    506    551    545    386 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total assets

  $7,499   $7,203   $6,877   $6,663   $6,284   $7,861   $7,506   $7,203   $6,877   $6,663 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Current liabilities

  $973   $734   $728   $753   $1,041   $827   $980   $734   $728   $753 

Long-term debt, including long-term debt to financing trusts and variable interest entities

   1,969    2,186    2,060    2,141    2,198    2,199    1,969    2,186    2,060    2,141 

Noncurrent regulatory liabilities

   214    201    192    188    175    204    214    201    192    188 

Other deferred credits and other liabilities

   1,985    1,781    1,634    1,434    1,125    2,076    1,985    1,781    1,634    1,434 

Preference stock not subject to mandatory redemption

   190    190    190    190    190    190    190    190    190    190 

Shareholders’ equity

   2,168    2,111    2,073    1,939    1,538    2,365    2,168    2,111    2,073    1,939 

Noncontrolling interest

   —       —       —       18    17 

Non-controlling interest

   —       —       —       —       18 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

  $7,499   $7,203   $6,877   $6,663   $6,284   $7,861   $7,506   $7,203   $6,877   $6,663 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)BGE retrospectively reclassified certain regulatory assets and regulatory liabilities to conform to the current year presentation.

 

7677


Item 7.MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

 

Exelon

 

Executive Overview

 

Exelon, a utility services holding company, operates through the following principal subsidiaries:

 

  

Generation, whose integrated business consists of owned, contracted and investments in electric generating facilities managed through customer supply of electric and natural gas products and services, including renewable energy products, risk management services and natural gas exploration and production activities.

 

  

ComEd, whose business consists of the purchase and regulated retail sale of electricity and the provision of distribution and transmission services in northern Illinois, including the City of Chicago.

 

  

PECO, whose business consists of the purchase and regulated retail sale of electricity and the provision of distribution and transmission services in southeastern Pennsylvania, including the City of Philadelphia, and the purchase and regulated retail sale of natural gas and the provision of distribution services in the Pennsylvania counties surrounding the City of Philadelphia.

 

  

BGE, whose business consists of the purchase and regulated retail sale of electricity and the provision of distribution and transmission services in central Maryland, including the City of Baltimore, and the purchase and regulated retail sale of natural gas and the provision of distribution services in central Maryland, including the City of Baltimore.

 

Exelon has nine reportable segments consisting of Generation’s six power marketing reportable segments (Mid-Atlantic, Midwest, New England, New York, ERCOT and other regionsOther Regions in Generation), ComEd, PECO and BGE. See Note 2124 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding Exelon’s reportable segments.

 

Through its business services subsidiary BSC, Exelon provides its operating subsidiaries with a variety of support services at cost. The costs of these services are directly charged or allocated to the applicable operating segments. Additionally, the results of Exelon’s corporate operations include costs for corporate governance and interest costs and income from various investment and financing activities.

 

Exelon’s consolidated financial information includes the results of its four separate operating subsidiary registrants, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE, which, along with Exelon, are collectively referred to as the Registrants. The following combined Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations is separately filed by Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE. However, none of the Registrants makes any representation as to information related solely to any of the other Registrants.

 

77


Financial Results. The following consolidated financial results reflect the results of Exelon for year ended December 31, 20122013 compared to the same period in 2011.2012. The 2012 financial results only include the operations of Constellation and BGE from the date of the merger with Constellation (the Merger), March 12, 2012, through December 31, 2012. All amounts presented below are before the impact of income taxes, except as noted.

 

  The Years Ended December 31,  Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Variance
 
   2012  2011  
  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE  Other  Exelon  Exelon  

Operating revenues

 $14,437  $5,443  $3,186  $2,091  $(1,668 $23,489  $19,063  $4,426 

Purchased power and fuel

  7,061   2,307   1,375   1,052   (1,638  10,157   7,267   (2,890
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Revenue net of purchased power and fuel (a)

  7,376   3,136   1,811   1,039   (30  13,332   11,796   1,536 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other operating expenses

        

Operating and maintenance

  5,028   1,345   809   596   183   7,961   5,184   (2,777

Depreciation and amortization

  768   610   217   238   48   1,881   1,347   (534

Taxes other than income

  369   295   162   167   26   1,019   785   (234
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other operating expenses

  6,165   2,250   1,188   1,001   257   10,861   7,316   (3,545

Equity in earnings of unconsolidated affiliates

  (91  —      —      —      —      (91  (1  (90
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating income

  1,120   886   623   38   (287  2,380   4,479   (2,099
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

        

Interest expense, net

  (301  (307  (123  (111  (86  (928  (726  (202

Other, net

  239   39   8   19   41   346   203   143 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

  (62  (268  (115  (92  (45  (582  (523  (59
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Income (loss) before income taxes

  1,058   618   508   (54  (332  1,798   3,956   (2,158

Income taxes

  500   239   127   (23  (216  627   1,457   830 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income (loss)

  558   379   381   (31  (116  1,171   2,499   (1,328

Net (loss) income attributable to noncontrolling interests, preferred security dividends and preference stock dividends

  (4  —      4   11   —      11   4   (7
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income (loss) on common stock

 $562  $379  $377  $(42 $(116 $1,160  $2,495  $(1,335
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Results in 2013 were unfavorably impacted at Generation by continuing declines in realized power and gas prices, in part driven by the abundance of natural gas supply, continued sluggish demand and subsidized renewable generation; only partially offset by improved returns at the utilities, and the

78


realization of additional post-merger synergies and operational excellence across all businesses. Generation’s financial results continue to be challenged by low natural gas prices, and by the impacts of excess generation from subsidized renewable energy, flat load growth and distorted market designs, especially in its Midwest markets.

  The Years Ended December 31,  Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Variance
 
   2013  2012  
  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE  Other  Exelon  Exelon  

Operating revenues

 $15,630  $4,464  $3,100  $3,065  $(1,371 $24,888  $23,489  $1,399 

Purchased power and fuel

  8,197   1,174   1,300   1,421   (1,368  10,724   10,157   (567
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Revenue net of purchased power and fuel(a)

  7,433   3,290   1,800   1,644    (3  14,164   13,332   832 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other operating expenses

        

Operating and maintenance

  4,534   1,368   748   634   (14  7,270   7,961   691 

Depreciation and amortization

  856   669   228   348   52   2,153   1,881   (272

Taxes other than income

  389   299   158   213   36   1,095   1,019   (76
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other operating expenses

  5,779   2,336   1,134   1,195   74   10,518   10,861   343 

Equity in earnings/(losses) of unconsolidated affiliates

  10   —      —      —      —      10   (91  101 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating income

  1,664   954   666   449   (77  3,656   2,380   1,276 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

        

Interest expense, net

  (357  (579  (115  (122  (183  (1,356  (928  (428

Other, net

  368   26   6   17   56   473   346   127 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

  11   (553  (109  (105  (127  (883  (582  (301
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Income (loss) before income taxes

  1,675   401   557   344   (204  2,773   1,798   975 

Income taxes

  615   152   162   134   (19  1,044   627   (417
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income (loss)

  1,060   249   395   210   (185  1,729   1,171   558 

Net (loss) income attributable to noncontrolling interests, preferred security dividends and preference stock dividends

  (10  —      7   13   —      10   11   1 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income (loss) on common stock

 $1,070  $249  $388  $197  $(185 $1,719  $1,160  $559 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

(a)The Registrants’ evaluate operating performance using the measure of revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense. The Registrants’ believe that revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense is a useful measurement because it provides information that can be used to evaluate its operational performance. Revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense is not a presentation defined under GAAP and may not be comparable to other companies’ presentations or deemed more useful than the GAAP information provided elsewhere in this report.

 

Exelon’s net income on common stock was $1,719 million for the year ended December 31, 2013 as compared to $1,160 million for the year ended December 31, 2012, as compared to $2,495 million for the year ended December 31, 2011, and diluted earnings per average common share were $ 2.00 for the year ended December 31, 2013 as compared to $1.42 for the year ended December 31, 2012 as compared to $3.75 for the year ended December 31, 2011.2012.

 

Operating revenuerevenues net of purchased power and fuel expense, which is a non-GAAP measure discussed below, increased by $1,536$832 million primarily dueas compared to the addition of Constellation’s and BGE’s financial results. BGE’s2012. The year-over-year increase in operating revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense reflects the inclusion of Constellation and BGE’s results for the full period in 2013 and was $1,039primarily due to the following favorable factors:

Decrease in Generation’s amortization expense for the acquired energy contracts recorded at fair value at the merger date of $610 million;

79


Increase in BGE’s revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense of $278 million, from March 12, 2012 to December 31, 2012, which includedprimarily as a result of the $113 million impactinclusion of BGE’s results for the full period in 2013, accrual of the residential customer rate credit that was a condition of the MDPSC’s approval of Exelon’s merger with Constellation in connection with2012, and the Merger. Generation’s operating revenue netimpact of the MDPSC approved electric and natural gas distribution rate increases that became effective February 23, 2013;

 

78


purchased power and fuel expense increased by $518 million primarily due to the New England, New York, ERCOT and Other Regions. These regions contributed $729 million and did not previously have a significant impact onIncrease in Generation’s revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense prior to the Merger. Generation’s results were also favorably affected by $588of $159 million ofon other activities, including proprietary trading, retail gas, energy efficiency, energy management and demand response, upstream natural gas and the design and construction of renewable energycustomer sited solar facilities, and by $83 million in the Mid-Atlantic region alsoprimarily due to the addition of Constellation’s operationsConstellation; and

Increase in 2012. Generation had mark-to-market gains of $515 million in 2012 from economic hedging activities,ComEd’s revenue net of intercompany eliminations, comparedpurchased power expense of $154 million primarily due to $288 millionincreased distribution revenue due to recovery of increased costs and capital investment and higher allowed ROE pursuant to the formula rate under EIMA and the enactment of Senate Bill 9.

The year-over-year increase in mark-to-market losses in 2011. Offsetting these favorable impacts, Generation incurred $1,098 million of amortization expense for the acquired energy contracts, net, recorded at fair value at the merger date. Also,operating revenue net of purchased power and fuel expenses decreasedexpense was partially offset by $549 million in the Midwest region due to lower capacity revenues, increased nuclear fuel costs and lower realized power prices.following unfavorable factors:

 

ComEd’s operating revenuesDecrease in Generation’s electric revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense increased by $115of $565 million primarily due to lower realized energy prices, lower load volume and increased nuclear fuel expense, partially offset by higher capacity revenue, increased nuclear volumes, and lower energy supply costs as a result of the annual reconciliationintegration of ComEd’s distributionthe energy generation and load serving businesses following the merger;

Reduced revenue requirement pursuant to EIMA, net of lower allowed returnpurchased power and fuel at Generation of $136 million in 2013 associated with the Maryland Clean Coal assets that were sold in November 2012 and lost compensation on equity,the reliability-must-run program with PJM for retired fossil generating assets that expired on May 31, 2012; and increased transmission revenue.

Decrease in PECO’s operating revenuesrevenue net of purchased power and fuel expense decreased by $45of $11 million primarily as a resultdue to the decrease in effective rates due to increased usage per customer across all customer classes, decreased cost recovery for energy efficiency and demand response programs, decreased gross receipts tax revenue, and the customer refund in 2013 of unfavorable weather and a decline in electric load.the tax cash benefit related to gas property distribution repairs.

 

Operating and maintenance expense increaseddecreased by $2,777$691 million as compared to 2012 primarily due to the following favorable factors:

Decrease in operating and maintenance expense associated with the generating assets retired or divested during 2012 of $442 million;

Costs incurred in March 2012 of $216 million and $195 million as part of the Maryland order approving the merger and a settlement with the FERC, respectively;

Decrease in Constellation merger and integration costs of $201 million in 2013; and

Decrease in uncollectible accounts expense of $58 million at ComEd resulting from the timing of regulatory cost recovery and customers purchasing electricity from competitive electric generation suppliers.

The year-over-year decrease in operating and maintenance expense was partially offset by the following unfavorable factors:

Increase in labor, other benefits, contracting and materials costs of $298 million, primarily due to the addition of BGE and Constellation. In addition, Exelon’s results were unfavorably affected byConstellation for the $272 million loss on the salefull period in 2013; and

Long-lived asset impairments and related charges of three Maryland generating stations, of which $278 million was recorded to operating and maintenance expense. Including Constellation and BGE, labor, other benefits, contracting and materials increased by $1,393 million, pension and non-pension postretirement benefits expense increased by $199 million and Constellation merger and integration costs increased by $226 million. In addition, Exelon incurred $216$174 million in costs incurred as part2013, primarily related to Generation’s cancellation of nuclear uprate projects and the Maryland order approving the Merger and costsimpairment of $195 million associated with a settlement with the FERC in March, 2012, and BGE incurred $71 million of storm costs.certain wind generating assets.

 

80


Depreciation and amortization expense increased by $534$272 million primarily due to higher plant balances resulting from the addition of BGE and Constellation for the full period in 2013, BGE’s and Constellation’s plant balances as well asin 2012, ongoing capital expenditures across the operating companies.companies, the completion of wind and solar facilities placed into service in the second half of 2012 and in 2013 at Generation, and increased regulatory asset amortization related to higher MGP remediation expenditures and higher costs for energy efficiency and demand response programs at ComEd and BGE, respectively.

 

The favorable increase in Equity in lossesearnings/loss of unconsolidated affiliates increased by $90of $101 million was primarily due to higher net income from Generation’s equity investment in CENG in 2013 compared to the same period in 2012 and lower amortization of the basis difference of Generation’s ownership interest in CENG recorded at fair value atin connection with the merger date, partially offset by net income generated from Exelon’s equity investment in CENG.merger.

 

Interest expense increased by $202$428 million primarily due to an increase in interest expense at ComEd related to the remeasurement of Exelon’s like-kind exchange tax position in the first quarter of 2013, an increase in debt obligations as a result of the Mergermerger and an increase in debt issuedproject financing at Generation and BGE in 2012. Offsetting these unfavorable impacts, interest expense at ComEd and PECO decreased due to a lower outstanding debt during 2012 and lower interest rates on long-term debt.2013.

 

Exelon’s effective income tax rates for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 were 37.6% and 2011 were 34.9% and 36.8%, respectively. See Note 1214 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding the components of the effective income tax rates.

 

For further detail regarding the financial results for the years ended December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, including explanation of the non-GAAP measure revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense, see the discussions of Results of Operations by Segment below.

 

79


Adjusted (non-GAAP) Operating Earnings

 

Exelon’s adjusted (non-GAAP) operating earnings for the year ended December 31, 20122013 were $2,330$2,149 million, or $2.85$2.50 per diluted share, compared with adjusted (non-GAAP) operating earnings of $2,763$2,330 million, or $4.16$2.85 per diluted share, for the same period in 2011.2012. In addition to net income, Exelon evaluates its operating performance using the measure of adjusted (non-GAAP) operating earnings because management believes it represents earnings directly related to the ongoing operations of the business. Adjusted (non-GAAP) operating earnings exclude certain costs, expenses, gains and losses and other specified items. This information is intended to enhance an investor’s overall understanding of year-to-year operating results and provide an indication of Exelon’s baseline operating performance excluding items that are considered by management to be not directly related to the ongoing operations of the business. In addition, this information is among the primary indicators management uses as a basis for evaluating performance, allocating resources, setting incentive compensation targets and planning and forecasting of future periods. Adjusted (non-GAAP) operating earnings is not a presentation defined under GAAP and may not be comparable to other companies’ presentations or deemed more useful than the GAAP information provided elsewhere in this report.

 

81


The following table provides a reconciliation between net income as determined in accordance with GAAP and adjusted (non-GAAP) operating earnings for the year ended December 31, 20122013 as compared to 2011:2012:

 

   December 31, 
   2012  2011 

(All amounts after tax; in millions, except per share amounts)

     Earnings
per
Diluted
Share
     Earnings
per
Diluted
Share
 

Net Income

  $1,160  $1.42  $2,495  $3.75 

Mark-to-Market Impact of Economic Hedging Activities(a)

   (310  (0.38  174   0.27 

Unrealized (Gains) Losses Related to NDT Fund Investments(b)

   (56  (0.07  1   —   

Plant Retirements and Divestitures(c)

   236   0.29   33   0.05 

Asset Retirement Obligation(d)

   1   —     16   0.02 

Constellation Merger and Integration Costs(e)

   257   0.31   46   0.07 

Other Acquisition Costs(f)

   3   —     5   0.01 

Wolf Hollow Acquisition(g)

   —     —     (23  (0.03

Recovery of Costs Pursuant to ComEd Distribution Rate Case Order(h)

   —     —     (17  (0.03

Non-Cash Remeasurement of Deferred Income Taxes(i)

   (117  (0.14  33   0.05 

Amortization of Commodity Contract Intangibles(j)

   758   0.93   —     —   

Amortization of the Fair Value of Certain Debt(k)

   (9  (0.01  —     —   

Maryland Commitments(l)

   227   0.28   —     —   

FERC Settlement(m)

   172   0.21   —     —   

Midwest Generation Bankruptcy Charges(n)

   8   0.01   —     —   
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Adjusted (non-GAAP) Operating Earnings

  $2,330  $2.85  $2,763  $4.16 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
   December 31, 
   2013  2012 

(All amounts after tax; in millions, except per share amounts)

     Earnings
per
Diluted
Share
     Earnings
per
Diluted
Share
 

Net Income

  $1,719  $2.00  $1,160  $1.42 

Mark-to-Market Impact of Economic Hedging Activities (a)

   (310  (0.35  (310  (0.38

Unrealized Net Gains Related to NDT Fund Investments(b)

   (78  (0.09)  (56  (0.07)

Plant Retirements and Divestitures (c)

  ��(13  (0.02)  236   0.29 

Asset Retirement Obligation (d)

   7   0.01   1   —    

Merger and Integration Costs (e)

   87   0.08   257   0.31 

Other Acquisition Costs (f)

   —      —      3   —    

Reassessment of State Deferred Income Taxes(g)

   4   —      (117  (0.14

Amortization of Commodity Contract Intangibles(h)

   347   0.41   758   0.93 

Amortization of the Fair Value of Certain Debt(i)

   (7  (0.01)  (9  (0.01)

Remeasurement of Like-Kind Exchange Tax Position(j)

   267   0.31   —      —    

Long-Lived Asset Impairment(k)

   110   0.14   —      —    

Maryland Commitments(l)

   —      —      227   0.28 

FERC Settlement(m)

   —      —      172   0.21 

Midwest Generation Bankruptcy Charges(n)

   16   0.02   8   0.01 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Adjusted (non-GAAP) Operating Earnings

  $2,149  $2.50  $2,330  $2.85 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

(a)Reflects the impact of (gains) losses for the years ended December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, respectively, on Generation’s economic hedging activities (net of taxes of $200$201 million and $114$200 million, respectively). In order to better align the impacts of economic hedging with the underlying business activity (e.g. the sale of power and/or the use of fuel), these unrealized (gains) losses are excluded from operating earnings until the transactions are realized. See Note 1012—Derivative Financial Instruments of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional detail related to Generation’s hedging activities.
(b)Reflects the impact of unrealized (gains) lossesgains for the years ended December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, respectively, on Generation’s NDT fund investments for Non-Regulatory Agreement Units (net of taxes of $(132)$(144) million and $(3)$(132) million, respectively). See Note 1315—Nuclear Decommissioning of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional detail related to Generation’s NDT fund investments.
(c)

Primarily reflectsReflects the impactimpacts associated with the sale or retirement of three generating stations associated with certain ofin the regulatory approvals required for the merger for the yearyears ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 (net of taxes of $4 million and $106 million)million, respectively). For December 31, 2012 and 2011, also reflects incremental accelerated depreciation associated with the retirement of certain fossil generating

80


units and compensation for operating two of the units past their planned retirement date under a FERC-approved reliability-must-run rate schedule. See Note 15 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements and “Results of Operations—Generation” for additional detail related to the generating unit retirements.

(d)ReflectsPrimarily reflects the income statement impact of an increase in Generation’s asset retirement obligation for asbestos at retired fossil plants for the yearsyear ended December 31, 2012 and 2011 primarily related to2013 (net of taxes of $(5) million). Primarily reflects the impact of an increase in Generation’s decommissioning obligation for spent nuclear fuel at retired nuclear units (net of taxes of $4 million and $11 million, respectively). Also reflectsfor the reduction in Generation’s asset retirement obligation for certain retired fossil-fueled generating stations inyear ended December 31, 2012 (net of taxes of $(3) million) and the reduction in PECO’s asset retirement obligation in 2011 (net of taxes of $(1) million). See Note 13 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.
(e)Reflects certain costs incurred in the years ended December 31, 20122013 and 20112012 (net of taxes of $161$33 million and $31$161 million, respectively) associated with the Constellation merger, including transaction costs, employee-related expenses (e.g. severance, retirement, relocation and retention bonuses) integration initiatives, certain pre-acquisition contingencies, and CENG transaction costs, partially offset in 2013 by a one-time benefit pursuant to the BGE 2012 electric and gas distribution rate case order for the recovery of previously incurred integration initiatives.costs. See Note 44—Merger and Acquisitions of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.
(f)Reflects certain costs incurred in the yearsyear ended December 31, 2012 and 2011 associated with various acquisitions (net of taxes of $2 million and $3 million, respectively)million). See Note 4 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.
(g)Reflects a non-cash bargain purchase gain (negative goodwill) for the year ended December 31, 2011 in connection with the acquisition of Wolf Hollow, net of acquisition costs (net of taxes of $15 million). See Note 4 of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.
(h)Reflects a one-time benefit in 2011 to recover previously incurred costs as a result of the May 2011 ICC rate order (net of taxes of $5 million). See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.
(i)Reflects the non-cash impacts of the remeasurement of state deferred income taxes, primarily as a result of the mergerchanges in 2012forecasted apportionment in 2013 and as a result of revised estimates of state apportionmentsthe merger in 2011.2012. See Note 1214—Income Taxes of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.
(j)(h)Reflects the non-cash impact for the yearyears ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 (net of taxes of $219 million and $491 million)million, respectively) of the amortization of intangible assets, net, related to commodity contracts recorded at fair value at the Constellation merger date. See Note 34—Merger and Acquisitions of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

82


(k)(i)RepresentsReflects the non-cash amortization of certain debt for the yearyears ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 (net of taxes of $5 million and $6 million)million, respectively) recorded at fair value at the Constellation merger date expected to bewhich was retired in the second quarter of 2013. See Note 194—Merger and Acquisitions of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.
(j)Reflects a non-cash charge to earnings for the year ended December 31, 2013 (net of taxes of $102 million) resulting from the first quarter 2013 remeasurement of a like-kind exchange tax position taken on ComEd’s 1999 sale of fossil generating assets. See Note 14 of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial statements for additional information.
(k)Reflects 2013 impairment and related charges to earnings for the year ended December 31, 2013 (net of taxes of $69 million) primarily related to Generation’s cancellation of nuclear uprate projects and the impairment of certain wind generating assets.
(l)Reflects costs incurred for the year ended December 31, 2012 associated with the Constellation merger (net of taxes of $101 million) as part of the Maryland order approving the merger transaction. See Note 4 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.
(m)Reflects costs incurred for the year ended December 31, 2012 (net of taxes of $23 million) as part of a settlement with the FERC to resolve a dispute related to Constellation’s pre-merger hedging and risk management transactions. See Note 1214 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.
(n)Reflects costs incurred to establish estimated liabilities for the yearyears ended December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012 (net of taxes of $10 million and $5 million)million, respectively) pursuant to the Midwest Generation bankruptcy, primarily related to lease payments under a coal rail car lease and estimated payments for asbestos-related personal injury claims.

 

As discussed above, Exelon has incurred and will continue to incur costs associated with the Constellation merger, including meeting the various commitments set forth by regulators and agreed-upon with other interested parties as part of the merger approval process, and integrating the former Constellation businesses into Exelon.

 

For the year ended December 31, 2012,2013, expense has been recognized for costs incurred to achieve the merger, prior to consideration of regulatory accounting treatment, as follows:

 

  Pre-tax Expense   Pre-tax Expense 
  Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2012   Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2013 

Merger and Integration Costs:

  Generation (a)   ComEd   PECO   BGE (a)   Exelon (a)   Generation (a)   ComEd   PECO   BGE (a)   Exelon (a) 

Transaction(b)

  $—      $—      $—      $—      $58 

Maryland Commitments

   35    —       —       139    328 

Employee-Related(c)

   138    3    11    2    164 

Other(d)

   167    2    6    7    196 

Employee-Related(b)

   48    4    3    1    58 

Other(c)

   58    12    6    5    84 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total

  $340   $5   $17   $148   $746   $106   $16   $9   $6   $142 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 
  Pre-tax Expense 
  Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2012 

Merger and Integration Costs:

  Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE(a)   Exelon(a) 

Maryland Commitments

   35    —      —      139    328 

Employee-Related(b)

   138    24    11    24    207 

Other(c)

   167    17    6    7    211 

Transaction(d)

  $—     $—     $—     $—     $58 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total

  $340   $41   $17   $170   $804 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)For Exelon, Generation and BGE, includes the operations of the acquired businesses from the date of the merger March 12, 2012 through the year ended December 31, 2012.2013.

81


(b)Costs primarily for employee severance, pension and OPEB expense and retention bonuses. ComEd established regulatory assets of $2 million and $21 million for the years ended December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively. BGE established regulatory assets of $0 million and $22 million for the years ended December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively. The majority of these costs are expected to be recovered over a five-year period.
(c)Costs to integrate Constellation processes and systems into Exelon and to terminate certain Constellation debt agreements. ComEd established a regulatory asset of $9 million and $15 million for the years ended December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively, for certain other merger and integration costs. BGE established a regulatory asset of $12 million and $0 million for the years ended December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively, for certain other merger and integration costs.
(d)External, third-party costs paid to advisors, consultants, lawyers and other experts to assist in the due diligence and regulatory approval processes and in the closing of the transaction.
(c)Costs primarily for employee severance, pension and OPEB expense and retention bonuses. ComEd and BGE established regulatory assets of $21 million and $22 million, respectively; the majority of these costs are expected to be recovered over a five-year period. These costs are not included in the table above.
(d)Costs to integrate Constellation processes and systems into Exelon and to terminate certain Constellation debt agreements. ComEd established a regulatory asset of $15 million for certain other merger and integration costs, which are not included in the table above.

 

83


As of December 31, 2012,2013, Exelon projects incurringexpects to incur total additional Constellation merger-related expenses in 20132014 and 20142015 of approximately $135$34 million.

 

In addition, pursuantPursuant to the conditions set forth by the MDPSC in its approval of the merger transaction, Generation expectsExelon committed to incur capital expendituresprovide a package of benefits to BGE customers, and make certain investments in the City of Baltimore and the State of Maryland, resulting in an estimated direct investment in the State of Maryland of approximately $1 billion. The direct investment includes $95 million to $120 million for the requirement to cause construction of a headquarters building in Baltimore for itsGeneration’s competitive energy businesses (expectedbusinesses. On March 20, 2013, Generation signed a twenty-year lease agreement that is contingent upon the developer obtaining financing for the construction of the building. Once required approvals are received and financing condition is satisfied, construction of the building will commence. The building is expected to be completedready for occupancy in 1 to 2 years) and up totwo years following commencement of construction. The direct investment estimate also includes $625 million forin expenditures relating to the development of 285-300 MW of new electric generation facilities in Maryland (expected to be completed over the next ten years). The accounting treatment for the construction costs of the new headquarters building in Baltimore may vary depending on the structure of the transaction.

 

Exelon’s Strategy and Outlook for 20132014 and Beyond

 

Exelon’s value proposition and competitive advantage come from its scope and scale across the energy value chain and its core strengths of operational excellence and financial discipline.

 

On March 12, 2012, the Exelon and Constellation merger was completed. The merger creates incremental strategic value by matching Exelon’s clean generation fleet with Constellation’s leading customer-facing platform, as well as creating economies of scale through expansion across the energy value chain. Exelon supports customer switching to alternative electric generation suppliers and the addition of Constellation’s competitive retail businessoperations provides another outlet for Exelon to grow its business in competitive markets.

 

Generation is managed as an integrated business and is located in multiple geographic regions, with multiple supply sources and provides various energy commodities through multiple distribution channels. Generation’s nuclear, fossil fuel, hydroelectric and renewableselectricity generation strategy is to pursue opportunities that provide generation to load matching and that diversify the generation fleet by expanding itsGeneration’s regional and technological footprint. Generation leverages its energy generation portfolio to ensure delivery of energy to both wholesale and retail customers under long-term and short-term contracts, and in wholesale power markets. Generation’s customer-facingcustomer facing activities enhance its existing customer platform, expand the business across statesfoster development and developdelivery of other innovative energy-related products and services for its customers. Generation operates in well-developed energy markets and employs an integrated hedging strategy to manage commodity price volatility. Its generation fleet, including its nuclear plants which consistently operate at high capacity factors, also provide geographic and supply source diversity. These factors help mitigate the current challenging conditions in competitive energy markets.

 

Exelon’s utility strategy is to improve reliability and operations and enhance the customer experience, while ensuring ratemaking mechanisms provide the utilities fair financial returns. Exelon seeks to leverage its scale and expertise across the utilities platform bythrough enhanced standardization and sharing of best practices to achieve improved operational and financial results. Combined, the utilities plan to invest approximately $15 billion over the next five years in smart meter technology, transmission projects, gas infrastructure, and electric system improvement projects, providing greater reliability and improved service for our customers and a stable return for the company.

 

Exelon’s financial priorities are to maintain investment grade credit metrics at each of Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE, and to return value to Exelon’s shareholders with a sustainable dividend throughout the energy commodity market cycle and through earnings growth from attractive investment opportunities.

 

84


In pursuing its strategies, Exelon has exposure to various market and financial risks, including the risk of price fluctuations in the power markets. Power prices are a function of supply and demand, which in turn are driven by factors such as (1) the price of fuels, in particular, the prices of natural gas and coal, which drive the market prices that Generation’s power plantsGeneration can obtain for theirthe output

82


of its power plants, (2) the rate of expansion of subsidized low carbonlow-carbon generation in the markets in which Generation’s output is sold, (3) the impactseffects on energy demand ofdue to factors such as weather, economic conditions and implementation of energy efficiency and demand response programs, and (4) the impacts of increased competition in the retail channel. Exelon continues to assess infrastructure, operational, commercial, policy, and legal solutions to these market pricing issues.

 

Power Markets

 

Price of Fuels.The use of new technologies to recover natural gas from shale deposits is increasing natural gas supply and reserves, which places downward pressure on natural gas prices and, therefore, on wholesale and retail power prices, which results in a reduction in Exelon’s revenues. Since the third quarter of 2011, forward natural gas prices for 20132014 and 20142015 have declined significantly; in part reflecting an increase in supply due to strong natural gas production (due to shale gas development).

 

Subsidized Generation.The rate of expansion of subsidized low carbonlow-carbon generation such as wind and solar energy in the markets in which Generation’s output is sold can negatively impact wholesale power prices, and in turn, Generation’s results of operations.

 

Various states have implemented or proposed legislation, regulations or other policies to subsidize new generation development, which thereby wouldmay result in artificially depressdepressed wholesale energy and capacity prices. For example, the New Jersey legislature enacted into law in January 2011, the Long Term capacity Pilot Program (LCAPP). LCAPP provides eligible generators with 15-year fixed contracts for the sale of capacity in the PJM capacity market. Under LCAPP, the local utilities in New Jersey are required to pay (or receive) the difference between generators receive in the capacity market and the price guaranteed under the 15 year contract. New Jersey ultimately selected three proposals to participate in LCAPP and build new generation in the state. In addition, on April 12, 2012, the MDPSC issued an order directing the Maryland electric utilities to enter into a 20-year contract for differences (CfD) with CPV Maryland, LLC (CPV), under which CPV will construct an approximately 700 MW combined cycle gas turbine in Waldorf, Maryland, that it projected will be in commercial operation by June 1, 2015. CPV has subsequently sought to extend that date. The CfD mandates that utilities (including BGE) pay (or receive) the difference between CPV’s contract price and the revenues it receives for capacity and energy from clearing the unit in the PJM capacity market.

Similarly, in January 2011, New Jersey passed legislation that provides guaranteed cost recovery through a CfD for the development of up to 2,000 MWs of new base load or mid-merit generation, so long as it clears in PJM’s capacity market. Three generation developers were chosen for the New Jersey CfD, for which contracts were executed in 2011 by the state’s utilities under protest. Similarly, in Illinois, legislation has been debated for over four years that passed in the Senate and is currently being considered in the House which would require consumers to subsidize the development of an Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle plant by purchasing its electricity through 30 year power purchase agreements at prices significantly above market prices. A new version was recently introduced in the current General Assembly but its prospects are unclear at this time.

 

Exelon and others filed a complaint in federal district court challenging the constitutionality and other aspects of the New Jersey legislation. Similarly, Exelon and others are also challenging the selection of the three generation developers in New Jersey state court proceedings and the MDPSC actions in Maryland state court. On October 25, 2013, the U.S. District Court in New Jersey issued a judgment order finding that the New Jersey legislation violates the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution and the New Jersey SOCA contract is unenforceable. Similarly, on October 24, 2013, the U.S. District Court in Maryland issued a judgment order finding that the MDPSC’s Order directing BGE and two other Maryland electric distribution companies to enter into a CfD violates the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution, as described in Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. In addition, on October 1, 2013, a Maryland State Circuit Court upheld the MDPSC Orders as being within the MDPSC’s statutory authority under Maryland state law. This decision is separate from the judgment in the federal litigation that the MDPSC Order is unconstitutional and the CfD unenforceable under federal law. The federal judgment, if upheld, would prevent enforcement of the CfD even if the Circuit Court decision stands. The non-prevailing parties have sought appeals in federal appellate court in both the New Jersey and

85


Maryland federal litigation. Finally, on October 23, 2013, the New Jersey state court dismissed the New Jersey state proceeding without prejudice, subject to the final outcome of the New Jersey federal litigation.

 

As required under their CfDs,contracts, two of the New Jersey generator developers and one in Maryland offered and cleared in PJM’s capacity market auctionauctions held in May 2012. Given2012 and 2013. In addition, CPV has announced its intention to move forward with construction of its New Jersey plant, with or without the challenged state subsidy. Nonetheless to the extent that the state-required customer subsidy providedsubsidies are included under their respective CfDs,contracts, Exelon believes that these projects may have artificially suppressed capacity prices in PJM in this auctionthese auctions and may continue to do so in future auctions to the detriment of Exelon’s market driven position. PJM’s capacity market rules include a Minimum Offer Pricing Rule (MOPR) that is intended to preclude sellers from artificially suppressingWhile the competitive price signals for generation capacity. However, Exelon does not believe that the existing MOPR worked effectively with respect to the abovementioned generator developers. Accordingly, Exelon worked with other market stakeholders, PJMU.S. District Court decisions in Maryland and PJM’s independent market monitor to develop a new MOPR that would more effectively preclude such artificial price suppression,

83


and PJM, after extensive stakeholder consideration, filed its new MOPR seeking FERC approval in December, 2012. On February 5, 2013, the FERC issued a letter finding that PJM’s new MOPR filing is deficient and requested PJM provide additional information on several aspects of PJM’s MOPR proposal. PJM has 30 days to respond, and a FERC decision is expected within 60 days thereafter. See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further details of PJM’s MOPR.

ANew Jersey are positive developments, continuation of these state efforts, if successful and unabated by an effective MOPR,minimum offer price rule (MOPR), could continue to result in artificially depressed wholesale capacity and/or energy prices. Other states could seek to establish similar programs, which could substantially impairimpact Exelon’s market driven position and could have a materialsignificant effect on Exelon’s financial results of operations, financial position and cash flows.

 

Energy Demand.The continued sluggish economy inPJM’s capacity market rules include a MOPR, which is intended to preclude sellers from artificially suppressing the United Statescompetitive price signals for generation capacity. However, as described above, Exelon does not believe that the existing MOPR will work effectively with respect to generator developers who have a state-sponsored subsidy and has ledconcerns with certain other aspects of PJM’s rules related to a decline in demand for electricity. ComEdthe capacity auction. Accordingly, Exelon is projecting load volumesworking with other market stakeholders on several proposed changes to remain essentially flat in 2013 compared to 2012, while PECOthe PJM tariff aimed at ensuring that capacity resources (including those with state-sponsored subsidy contracts, excessive imported capacity resources and BGE are projecting a decline of 0.5% and 2.0%, respectively, in 2013 compared to 2012. The projected declines at PECO and BGE are a result of energy efficiency initiatives, the additional day in 2012 for the leap year and weak economic conditions in their service territories. The demand for electricity has also declined due to significantly milder than normal weather in 2012 and 2011. In addition, energy efficiency andcertain limited availability demand response programs will resultresources) cannot inappropriately affect capacity auction prices in decreased demand for energy. PJM.

See Note 33—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussionadditional information on the Maryland Order.

Exelon remains active in advocating for competitive markets, opposing policies that ask either taxpayers or consumers to subsidize or give preferential treatment to specific generation providers or technologies, or that would threaten the reliability and value of the integrated electricity grid.

Energy Demand. The continued tepid economic environment and growing energy efficiency initiatives have limited the demand for electricity across each of the Exelon utility companies. ComEd is projecting load volumes to decrease by 0.2% in 2014 compared to 2013, while PECO and demand response programs.BGE are projecting an increase of 0.3% and 0.6%, respectively, in 2014 compared to 2013.

 

Retail Competition.Generation’s retail business competesoperations compete for customers in a competitive environment, which impactsaffect the margins that Generation can earn and the volumes that it is able to serve. Recently, sustained low forward natural gas and power prices and low market volatility have caused retail competitors to aggressively pursue market share, and wholesale generators (including Generation) to use thetheir retail channeloperations to hedge generation output. These factors have negatively impactedadversely affected overall gross margins and profitability in Generation’s business.retail operations.

 

Strategic Policy Alignment

 

Exelon routinely reviews its hedging policy, dividend policies,policy, operating and capital costs, capital spending plans, strength of its balance sheet and credit metrics, and sufficiency of its liquidity position, by performing various stress tests with differing variables, such as commodity price movements, increases in margin-related transactions, changes in hedging practices, and the impacts of hypothetical credit downgrades.

 

86


Exelon’s Boardboard of Directorsdirectors declared the first quarter 2013 dividend of $0.525 per share, and in response to low forward energy prices and weaker financial expectations, among other factors, Exelon’s Board of Directors approved a revised dividend policy going forward. The first quarter dividend is payablewas paid on March 8, 2013 to shareholders of record on February 19, 2013. The first quarter dividend is2013 and was based on Exelon’s previous policydividend of $2.10 per share on an annualized basis, while thebasis. The second, third and fourth quarter dividends were based on Exelon’s new dividend policy contemplates a regularof $0.31 per share quarterly dividend beginning in the second quarter of 2013 (or $1.24($1.24 per share on an annualized basis). Consistent with past practice, allAll future quarterly dividends will require approval by Exelon’s Boardboard of Directors.directors.

 

If recent power price volatilityExelon and demand trends continue, they could adversely affectGeneration evaluate the Registrants’ ability to fund other discretionary useseconomic viability of cash such as growth projects and dividends. In addition, economic conditions may no longer supporteach of their generating units on an ongoing basis. Decisions regarding the future of economically challenged generating assets will be based primarily on the economics of continued operation of certain generating facilities, whichthe individual plants. If Exelon and Generation do not see a path to sustainable profitability in any of their plants, Exelon and Generation will take steps to retire those plants to avoid sustained losses. Retirement of plants could adverselymaterially affect Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations, financial position, and cash flows through increased depreciation rates,among other things, potential impairment charges, accelerated depreciation and accelerated future decommissioning costs.

expenses over the plants remaining useful lives, and ongoing reductions to operating revenues, operating and maintenance expenses, and capital expenditures.

 

84


Hedging Strategy

 

Exelon’s policy to hedge commodity risk on a ratable basis over three-year periods is intended to reduce the financial impact of market price volatility. Generation is exposed to commodity price risk associated with the unhedged portion of its electricity portfolio. Generation enters into non-derivative and derivative contracts, including financially-settled swaps, futures contracts and swap options, and physical options and physical forward contracts, all with credit-approved counterparties, to hedge this anticipated exposure. Generation has hedges in place that significantly mitigate this risk for 20132014 and 2014.2015. However, Generation is exposed to relatively greater commodity price risk in the subsequent years with respect to which a larger portion of its electricity portfolio is currently unhedged. As of December 31, 2012,2013, the percentage of expected generation hedged for the major reportable segments was 94%-97%92%-95%, 62%-65% and 27%-30%30%-33% for 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2015,2016, respectively. The percentage of expected generation hedged is the amount of equivalent sales divided by the expected generation. Expected generation represents the amount of energy estimated to be generated or purchased through owned or contracted capacity. Equivalent sales represent all hedging products, which include economic hedges and certain non-derivative contracts including Generation’s sales of energy to ComEd, PECO and BGE relating to serve their respective retail load.load obligations. Generation has been and will continue to be proactive in using hedging strategies to mitigate commodity price risk in subsequent years as well.

 

Generation procures coal, oil and natural gas through long-term and short-term contracts and spot-market purchases. Nuclear fuel is obtained predominantly through long-term uranium concentrate supply contracts, contracted conversion services, contracted enrichment services and contracted fuel fabrication services. The supply markets for uranium concentrates and certain nuclear fuel services, coal, oil and natural gas are subject to price fluctuations and availability restrictions. Supply market conditions may make Generation’s procurement contracts subject to credit risk related to the potential non-performance of counterparties to deliver the contracted commodity or service at the contracted prices. Approximately 60% of Generation’s uranium concentrate requirements from 20132014 through 20172018 are supplied by three producers. In the event of non-performance by these or other suppliers, Generation believes that replacement uranium concentrates can be obtained, although at prices that may be unfavorable when compared to the prices under the current supply agreements. Non-performance by these counterparties could have a material adverse impact on Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations, cash flows and financial position. ComEd, PECO and BGE mitigate such exposure as a result of thethrough regulatory mechanisms that allow them to recover procurement costs from retail customers.

 

87


New Growth Opportunities

 

Nuclear Uprate Program.GenerationExelon is engagedcurrently pursuing growth in individual projects as part of a planned powerboth the utility and generation businesses focused primarily on smart meter and smart grid initiatives at the utilities and on renewables development and the nuclear uprate program across its nuclear fleet. Using proven technologies,at Generation. The utilities also anticipate making significant future investments in infrastructure modernization and improvement initiatives. Management continually evaluates growth opportunities aligned with Exelon’s existing businesses in electric and gas distribution, electric transmission, generation, customer supply of electric and natural gas products and services, and natural gas exploration and production activities, leveraging Exelon’s expertise in those areas.

Transmission Development Project. Exelon and AEP Transmission Holding Company, LLC (AEP) are working collaboratively to develop an extra high-voltage transmission project from the projects take advantagewestern Ohio border through Indiana to the northern portion of new productionIllinois. Referred to as the Reliability Interregional Transmission Extension (RITE) Line project, the project is expected to strengthen the high-voltage transmission system and measurement technologies, new materialsimprove overall system reliability. RITELine Illinois, LLC (RITELine Illinois) and applicationRITELine Indiana, LLC (RITELine Indiana) have been formed as project companies to develop and own the project. RITELine Illinois will own the transmission assets located in Illinois and is owned 75% by ComEd and 25% by RITELine Transmission Development Company, LLC (RTD). RITELine Indiana will own the transmission assets located in Indiana and is owned by AEP (75%) and RTD (25%). Exelon Transmission Company, LLC and AEP each own 50% of expertise gained from a half-century of nuclear power operations.RTD. The uprates are being undertaken pursuant to an organized, strategically sequenced implementation plan. The implementation effort includes a periodic review and refinementtotal cost of the plan in lightRITE Line project is expected to be approximately $1.6 billion, with the Illinois portion of changing market conditions. Decisionsthe line expected to implement uprates at particular nuclear plants,cost approximately $1.2 billion. The ultimate cost and scope of the amount of expenditures to implement the plan, and the actual MWs of additional capacity attributable to the uprate program will be determinedproject are dependent on a project-by-project basis in accordance with Exelon’s normalnumber of factors, including RTO requirements, interregional transmission planning process requirements, state siting requirements, routing of the line, and equipment and commodity costs. Exelon and AEP are currently pursuing the project evaluation standards and ultimately will depend on market conditions, economic and policy considerations, and other factors.segments that are electrically equivalent in nature for inclusion in interregional planning process between PJM and MISO; if approved through that process, the project would then need to be approved through the respective planning processes of PJM and MISO.

 

BasedOn July 18, 2011, RITELine Illinois and RITELine Indiana filed at FERC for incentive rates and a formula rate for the RITE Line project. On October 14, 2011, FERC issued an order on recent reviews, the nuclear uprate implementation plan was adjusted during 2012, primarily asincentive and formula rate filing. The order grants a resultbase rate of market conditions, including low natural gas pricesreturn on common equity of 9.9%, plus a 50 basis point adder for the project being in a RTO and a 100 basis point adder for the continued sluggish economy,risks and challenges of the project, resulting in a total rate of return on common equity of 11.4%. The order grants a hypothetical capital structure of 45% debt and 55% equity until any part of the deferral or cancellationproject enters commercial operations. The order also grants 100% recovery for construction work in progress, 100% recovery for abandonment, if the line is abandoned through no fault of certain projects. In addition,the RITELine developers, and the ability to implement several projects requirestreat pre-construction costs as a regulatory asset. All incentives, including the successful resolution of various technical matters. The resolution of these matters may further affect the timing and amountabandonment incentive, are contingent on inclusion of the power increases associated

project in the PJM RTEP. The RITELine companies filed for rehearing on several rate of return on common equity issues and argued that the right to collect abandoned costs should not be subject to the project being included in the RTEP. The RITELine companies also made a compliance filing as called for in the October 14, 2011 Order. FERC accepted this filing on March 16, 2012.

 

85Smart Meter and Smart Grid Initiatives.


ComEd’s Smart Meter and Smart Grid Investments. ComEd plans to invest approximately $1.3 billion on smart meters and smart grid under EIMA, including $1.0 billion through the AMI Deployment Plan. On June 5, 2013, the ICC issued an interim order approving ComEd’s accelerated AMI deployment plan consistent with the power uprate initiative. Following these reviews, any projects that may be undertaken are expected to be completedprovisions of Senate Bill 9. The deployment plan provides for the installation of 4 million electric smart meters, of which more than 60,000 meters were installed by the end of 2021,2013.

PECO’s Smart Meter and may result in between 1,125Smart Grid Investments. In 2010, the PAPUC approved PECO’s Smart Meter Procurement and 1,200 MWsInstallation Plan, under which PECO will install more than 1.6 million smart

88


meters. PECO plans to spend up to a total of additional capacity$595 million and $120 million on its smart meter and smart grid infrastructure, respectively, of which $200 million will be funded by SGIG.

BGE Smart Grid Initiative. In August 2010, the MDPSC approved a comprehensive smart grid initiative for BGE which includes the planned installation of 2 million electric and gas smart meters at an overnightexpected total cost of approximately $3.4 billion in 2013 dollars. Overnight costs do not include financing costs or cost escalation.$480 million, before considering the $200 million SGIG for smart grid and other related initiatives.

 

Approximately 75%See Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the planned uprate MWs projects are either completeCombined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on the Smart Meter and in service or in the installation or design and engineering phases across seven nuclear stations including Limerick and Peach Bottom in Pennsylvania and Byron, Braidwood, Dresden, LaSalle and Quad Cities in Illinois. The remaining 25% of uprate MWs, if and when completed, would come from an extended power uprate project at Limerick currently scheduled to begin in 2017. From the program announcement in 2008 through December 31, 2012, Generation has placed in service 310 MWs of nuclear generation through the uprate program at a cost of approximately $810 million, which has been capitalized to property, plant and equipment on Exelon’s and Generation’s consolidated balance sheets. At December 31, 2012, an additional approximate $310 million has been capitalized to construction work in progress (CWIP) within property, plant and equipment on Exelon’s and Generation’s consolidated balance sheets, of which approximately $200 million (202 MWs) relates to projects currently in the installation phase. The remaining $110 million (346 MWs) in CWIP relates to projects currently in the design and engineering phase that continue to be evaluated in accordance with Exelon’s normal project evaluation standards. The completion of those projects in the design and engineering phase will ultimately depend on market conditions, economic and policy considerations, and other factors. As of December 31, 2012, Generation believes it is more likely than not that all projects in CWIP will ultimately be placed in service. If a project in the design and engineering phase is expected to not be completed as planned, previously capitalized costs would be reversed through earnings as a charge to operating and maintenance expense.Smart Grid Initiatives.

 

Generation Renewable Development.On September 30, 2011, Exelon announced the completion of its acquisition of all of the interests in Antelope Valley, a 230-MW solar photovoltaic (PV) project under development in northern Los Angeles County, California, from First Solar, Inc., which developedis developing, building, operating, and will build, operate, and maintainmaintaining the project. The first portion of the project began operations in December 2012, with six additional blocks coming online in 2013. Exelon has been informed by First Solar of issues relating to come online and an expectationdelays in the certification of certain components relating to the final two blocks of the project, which will delay commercial operation of these two blocks until the first half of 2014. The delay will not have a material financial effect on Exelon. Exelon expects the project to be in full commercial operation byin the endfirst half of the third quarter of 2013.2014. The acquisition supports the Exelon commitment to renewable energy as part of Exelon 2020. The project has a 25-year PPA approved by the CPUC, with Pacific Gas & Electric Company for the full output of the plant.plant, which has been approved by the CPUC. Upon completion, the facility will add 230 MWs to Generation’s renewable generation fleet. Total capitalized costs for the facility are expected to be approximately $1.3$1.1 billion. Total capitalized costs incurred through December 31, 20122013 were $679approximately $968 million. Additionally,In addition, Generation constructed and placed into service six wind facilities in 2012, resulting in approximately 400 MWs of additional renewable generation. Total costs forwind generation in 2012 at a cost of $710 million and another 50 MW will be added to Generation’s wind portfolio in 2014 with the facilities were approximately $700 million. See Note 4expansion of its Beebe project in Michigan, the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.output of which will be fully contracted under a 20-year PPA.

 

Transmission Development Project.Nuclear Uprate Program.Exelon Generation is engaged in individual projects as part of a planned power uprate program across its nuclear fleet. When economically viable, the projects take advantage of new production and AEP Transmission Holding Company, LLC (AEP) are working collaborativelymeasurement technologies, new materials and application of expertise gained from a half-century of nuclear power operations. Based on ongoing reviews, the nuclear uprate implementation plan was adjusted during 2013 to develop an extra high-voltage transmission project fromcancel certain projects. The Measurement Uncertainty Recapture uprate projects at the western Ohio border through IndianaDresden and Quad Cities nuclear stations were cancelled as a result of the cost of additional plant modifications identified during final design work which, when combined with then current market conditions, made the projects not economically viable. Additionally, the market conditions prompted Generation to cancel the northern portionpreviously deferred extended power uprate projects at the LaSalle and Limerick nuclear stations. During 2013, Generation recorded a pre-tax charge to operating and maintenance expense and interest expense of Illinois. Referredapproximately $111 million and $8 million, respectively, to asaccrue remaining costs and reverse the Reliability Interregional Transmission Extension (RITE) Line project,previously capitalized costs.

Under the project isnuclear uprate program, Generation has placed into service projects representing 316 MWs of new nuclear generation at a cost of $952 million, which has been capitalized to property, plant and equipment on Exelon’s and Generation’s consolidated balance sheets. At December 31, 2013, Generation has capitalized $203 million to construction work in progress within property, plant and equipment for nuclear uprate projects expected to strengthenbe placed in service by the high-voltage transmission systemend of 2016, consisting of 200 MWs of new nuclear generation, that are in the installation phase across four nuclear stations; Peach Bottom in Pennsylvania and improve overall system reliability. RITELine Illinois, LLC (RITELine Illinois)Byron, Braidwood and RITELine Indiana, LLC (RITELine Indiana) have been formed as project companies to develop and own the project. RITELine Illinois will own the transmission assets locatedDresden in Illinois and is owned 75% by ComEd and 25% by RITELine Transmission Development Company, LLC (RTD). RITELine Indiana will own the transmission assets located in Indiana and is owned by AEP (75%) and RTD (25%). Exelon Transmission Company, LLC and AEP each own 50% of RTD.Illinois. The total cost of the RITE Line projectremaining spend associated with these projects is expected to be approximately $1.6 billion, with$300 million through the Illinois portionend of the line2016. Generation believes that it is probable that these projects will be completed. If a project is expected not to cost approximately $1.2 billion. The ultimate cost of the line is dependent onbe completed as planned, previously capitalized costs will be reversed through earnings as a charge to operating and maintenance expense and interest.

 

8689


number of factors, including RTO requirements, state siting requirements, routing of the line, and equipment and commodity costs. Exelon and AEP are pursuing the project for inclusion in PJM’s RTEP under yet-to-be finalized planning criteria. The current estimated in-service date is 2019.

On July 18, 2011, RITELine Illinois and RITELine Indiana filed at FERC for incentive rates and a formula rate for the RITE Line project. On October 14, 2011, FERC issued an order on the incentive and formula rate filing. The order grants a base rate of return on common equity of 9.9%, plus a 50 basis point adder for the project being in a RTO and a 100 basis point adder for the risks and challenges of the project, resulting in a total rate of return on common equity of 11.4%. The order grants a hypothetical capital structure of 45% debt and 55% equity until any part of the project enters commercial operations. The order also grants 100% recovery for construction work in progress, 100% recovery for abandonment, if the line is abandoned through no fault of the RITELine developers, and the ability to treat pre-construction costs as a regulatory asset. All incentives, including the abandonment incentive, are contingent on inclusion of the project in the PJM RTEP. The RITELine companies filed for rehearing on several rate of return on common equity issues and argued that the right to collect abandoned costs should not be subject to the project being included in the RTEP. The RITELine companies also made a compliance filing as called for in the October 14, 2011 Order. FERC accepted this filing on March 16, 2012.

Smart Meter and Smart Grid Initiatives.

ComEd’s Smart Meter and Smart Grid Investments. On December 5, 2012, the ICC approved ComEd’s revised AMI Deployment Plan which includes the planned installation of 4 million electric smart meters. ComEd plans to invest approximately $1.3 billion on smart meters and smart grid under EIMA, including $1.0 billion through the AMI Deployment Plan.

PECO’s Smart Meter and Smart Grid Investments. In 2010, the PAPUC approved PECO’s Smart Meter Procurement and Installation Plan, under which PECO will install more than 1.6 million smart meters. PECO plans to spend up to a total of $595 million and $120 million on its smart meter and smart grid infrastructure respectively, before considering the $200 million SGIG.

BGE Smart Grid Initiative. In August 2010, the MDPSC approved a comprehensive smart grid initiative for BGE which includes the planned installation of 2 million electric and gas smart meters at an expected total cost of approximately $480 million, before considering the $200 million SGIG for smart grid and other related initiatives.

See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on the utility infrastructure projects.

Liquidity

 

ExelonEach of the Registrants annually evaluates its financing plan, dividend practices and credit line sizing, focusing on maintaining its investment grade ratingratings while meeting its cash needs to fund capital requirements, retire debt, pay dividends, fund pension and other postretirement benefit obligations and invest in new and existing ventures. The Registrants expect cash flows to be sufficient to meet operating expenses, financing costs and capital expenditure requirements.

 

Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE have unsecured syndicated revolving credit facilities with aggregate bank commitments of $0.5 billion, $5.3 billion, $1.0 billion, $0.6 billion and $0.6 billion, respectively. Generation also has a bilateral credit facilityfacilities with aggregate maximum availability of $0.3$0.4 billion.

87


On January 23, 2013, Generation entered into a two year $75 million bilateral letter of credit facility with a bank. This facility will solely be utilized by Generation to issue letters of credit. See Liquidity and Capital Resources for additional information.

 

Exposure to Worldwide Financial Markets. Exelon has exposure to worldwide financial markets. The ongoing European debt crisis has contributed to the instability in global credit markets. Further disruptions in the European markets could reduce or restrict the Registrants’ ability to secure sufficient liquidity or secure liquidity at reasonable terms. As of December 31, 2012,2013, approximately 31%30%, or $2.5 billion, of the Registrants’ aggregate total commitments were with European banks. The credit facilities include $8.3$8.4 billion in aggregate total commitments of which $6.5$6.6 billion was available as of December 31, 2012.2013. There were no borrowings under the Registrants’ credit facilities as of December 31, 2012.2013. See Note 1113—Debt and Credit Agreements of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on the credit facilities.

 

February 5, 2014 Winter Ice Storm. On February 5, 2014, a winter storm which brought a mix of snow, ice and freezing rain to the region interrupted electric service delivery to nearly 715,000 customers in PECO’s service territory. Restoration efforts are continuing and will include significant costs associated with employee overtime, support from other utilities and incremental equipment, contracted tree trimming crews and supplies. PECO estimates that restoration efforts will result in $60 million to $80 million of incremental operating and maintenance expense and $30 million to $40 million of incremental capital expenditures for the first quarter of 2014.

Tax Matters

 

Exelon has exposure related to various uncertain tax positions which Exelon manages through planning and implementation of tax planning strategies. See Note 1214—Income Taxes of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Environmental Legislative and Regulatory Developments.

 

Exelon supports the promulgation of certain environmental regulations by the U.S. EPA, including air, water and waste controls for electric generating units. See discussion below for further details. The air and waste regulations will have a disproportionate adverse impact on fossil-fuel power plants, requiring significant expenditures of capital and variable operating and maintenance expense, and will likely result in the retirement of older, marginal facilities. Due to their low emission generation portfolio,portfolios, Generation and CENG will not be significantly directly affected by these regulations, representing a competitive advantage relative to electric generators that are more reliant on fossil-fuel plants. Various bills have been introduced in the U.S. Congress that would prohibit or impede the U.S. EPA’s rulemaking efforts. The timing of the consideration of such legislation is unknown.

 

Air Quality. In recent years, the U.S. EPA has been implementing a series of increasingly stringent regulations under the Clean Air Act relating to NAAQS for conventional air pollutants (e.g., NOx, SO2 and particulate matter) as well as stricter technology requirements to control HAPs (e.g., acid gases, mercury and other heavy metals) from electric generation units. The U.S. EPA continues to review and update its NAAQS with a tightened particulate matter NAAQS issued in December 2012 and a review

90


of the current 2008 ozone NAAQS that is expected to result in a final revisedproposed revision of the ozone NAAQS sometime in fall 2014. These updates will potentially result in more stringent emissions limits on fossil-fuel electric generating stations. There continues to be opposition among fossil-fuel generation owners to the potential stringency and timing of these air regulations.

 

In July 2011, the U.S. EPA published CSAPR and in June 2012, it issued final technical corrections. CSAPR requiredrequires 28 upwind states in the eastern half of the United States to significantly improve air quality by reducing power plant emissions that cross state lines and contribute to ground-level ozone and fine particle pollution in downwind states. On August 21, 2012, a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court held that the U.S. EPA had exceeded its authority in certain material aspects with respect to CSAPR and vacated the rule and remanded it to the U.S. EPA for further rulemaking consistent with its decision. The Court also ordered that CAIR remain in effect pending finalization of CSAPR on remand. Until the U.S. EPA re-issues CSAPR, Exelon cannot determine the impacts of the rule, including any that would impact power prices.

In June 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court granted the U.S. EPA’s petition to review the D.C. Circuit Court’s CSAPR decision. Oral argument was held on December 10, 2013. A decision is expected sometime during 2014.

 

88


On December 16, 2011, the U.S. EPA signed a final rule to reduce emissions of toxic air pollutants from power plants and signed revisions to the NSPS for electric generating units. The final rule, known as MATS, requires coal-fired electric generation plants to achieve high removal rates of mercury, acid gases and other metals. To achieve these standards, coal units with no pollution control equipment installed (uncontrolled coal units) will have to make capital investments and incur higher operating expenses. It is expected that owners of smaller, older, uncontrolled coal units will retire the units rather than make these investments. Coal units with existing controls that do not meet the MATS rule may need to upgrade existing controls or add new controls to comply. Owners of oil units not currently meeting the proposed emission standards may choose to convert the units to light oils or natural gas, install control technologies, or retire the units. Numerous entities have challenged MATS in the D.C. Circuit Court, and Exelon has beenwas granted permission by the Court to intervene in support of the rule. A decision by the Court is expected sometime in 2013.will not occur until 2014. The outcome of the appeal, and its impact on power plant operators’ investment and retirement decisions, is uncertain.

 

The cumulative impact of these air regulations could be to require power plant operators to expend significant capital to install pollution control technologies, including wet flue gas desulfurization technology for SO2 and acid gases, and selective catalytic reduction technology for NOx. Exelon, along with the other co-owners of Conemaugh Generating Station are moving forward with plans to improve the existing scrubbers and install Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) controls to meet the mercury removal requirements of MATS by January 1, 2015. In addition, Keystone already has SCR and Flue-gas desulfurization (FGD) controls in place.

 

On January 15, 2013, EPA issued a final rule for New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)NSPS and National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for reciprocating internal combustion engines (RICE NESHAP/NSPS). The final rule allows diesel backup generators to operate for up to 100 hours annually under certain emergency circumstances without meeting emissions limitations, but requires units that operate over 15 hours to burn low sulfur fuel and report key engine information. The final rule eliminates after May 2014 the 50 hour exemption for peak shaving and other non-emergency demand response that was included in the proposed rule and, therefore, is not expected to result in additional megawatts of demand response to be bid into the PJM capacity auction.

 

In the absence of Federal legislation, the U.S. EPA is also moving forward with the regulation of GHG emissions under the Clean Air Act, including permitting requirementsAct. The U.S. EPA is addressing the issue of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions regulation for new and existing electric generating units through the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Title V operating permit sectionsSection 111 of the Clean Air ActAct. Pursuant to President

91


Obama’s June 25, 2013 memorandum to U.S. EPA, the Agency re-proposed a Section 111(b) regulation for new and modified stationary sourcesunits in September 2013 that became effective January 2, 2011. On April 13, 2012,may result in material costs of compliance for CO2 emissions for new fossil-fuel electric generating units, particularly coal-fired units. Under the President’s memorandum, the U.S. EPA published proposedis also required to propose a Section 111(d) rule no later than June 1, 2014 to establish CO2 emission regulations for NSPSexisting stationary sources. Pursuant to the President’s Climate Action Plan, the U.S. EPA re-proposed regulations for the GHG emissions from new fossil-fueledfossil fueled power plants greater than 25 MW that would require the plants to limit CO2 emissions. Under the PSD regulations, new and modified major stationary sources could be required to install best available control technology, to be determined on a case-by-case basis.September 20, 2013. The U.S. EPA is also expected to establish in 2013propose by June 2014 GHG emission regulations for existing stationary sources under Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act, and it is not yet known whatto issue final regulations by June 2015. While the nature and impact of the final regulations will be.is not yet known, to the extent that the rule results in emission reductions from fossil fuel fired plants, imposing some form of direct or indirect price of carbon in competitive electricity markets, Exelon’s overall low-carbon generation portfolio results would benefit.

 

Exelon supports comprehensive climate change legislation or regulation, including a cap-and-trade program for GHG emissions, which balances the need to protect consumers, business and the economy with the urgent need to reduce national GHG emissions.

 

Water Quality. Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act requires that cooling water intake structures at electric power plants reflect the best technology available to minimize adverse environmental impacts, and is implemented through state-level NPDES permit programs. On March 28, 2011, the U.S. EPA issued a proposed rule, and is required under a Settlement Agreement to issue a final rule by July 27, 2013.November 4, 2013; on October 30, 2013 the U.S. EPA invoked theforce majeure provision of the Settlement Agreement to extend the final rule deadline until November 20, 2013 due to the early October 2013 federal government shutdown. The U.S. EPA and the plaintiffs have stated that the deadline will be extended again for a brief period, but have not yet agreed on a date. The proposed rule does not require closed cycle cooling (e.g., cooling towers) as the

89


best technology available, and also provides some flexibility in the use of cost-benefit considerations and site-specific factors. The proposed rule affords the state permitting agency wide discretion to determine the best technology available, which, depending on the site characteristics, could include closed cycle cooling, advanced screen technology at the intake, or retention of the current technology.

 

It is unknown at this time whether the final regulations will require closed-cycle cooling. The economic viability of Generation’s facilities without closed-cycle cooling water systems will be called into question by any requirement to construct cooling towers. Should the final rule not require the installation of cooling towers, and retain the flexibility afforded the state permitting agencies in applying a cost—benefitcost-benefit test and to consider site-specific factors, the impact of the rule would be minimized even though the costs of compliance could be material to Generation.

 

Hazardous and Solid Waste. Under proposed U.S. EPA rules issued on June 21, 2010, coal combustion residuals (CCR) would be regulated for the first time under the RCRA. The U.S. EPA is considering several options, including classification of CCR either as a hazardous or non-hazardous waste, under RCRA. Under either option, the U.S. EPA’s intention is the ultimate elimination of surface impoundments as a waste treatment process. For plants affected by the proposed rules, this would result in significant capital expenditures and variable operating and maintenance expenditures to convert to dry handling and disposal systems and installation of new waste water treatment facilities. The GenerationGeneration’s plants that would be affected by the proposed rules are Keystone and Conemaugh in Pennsylvania, which have on-site landfills that meet the requirements of Pennsylvania solid waste regulations for non-hazardous waste disposal. However, until the final rule is adopted, the impact on these facilities is unknown. The U.S. EPA has not announcedentered into a target date for finalization of the CCR rules.Consent Decree which requires that a final rule be issued by December 19, 2014.

 

See Note 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further detail related to environmental matters, including the impact of environmental regulation.

 

92


Other Regulatory and Legislative Actions

 

Japan Earthquake and Tsunami and the Industry’s ResponseResponse..On March 11, 2011, Japan experienced a 9.0 magnitude earthquake and ensuing tsunami that seriously damaged the nuclear units at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station, which are operated by Tokyo Electric Power Co.

 

Generation believes its nuclear generating facilities do not haveIn July 2011, an NRC Task Force formed in the same operating risks asaftermath of the Fukushima Daiichi plant because they meet the NRC’s requirement that specifies all plants must be able to withstand the most severe natural phenomena historically reported for each plant’s surrounding area, with a significant margin for uncertainty. In addition, Generation’s plants are not located in significant earthquake zones or in regions where tsunamis are a threat. Generation believes its nuclear generating facilities are able to shut down safely and keep the fuel cooled through multiple redundant systems specifically designed to maintain electric power when electricity is lost from the grid. Further, Generation’s nuclear generating facilities also undergo frequent scenario drills to ensure the proper function of the redundant safety protocols.

Since the events in Japan took place, Generation has continued to work with regulators and nuclear industry organizations to understand the events in Japan and apply lessons learned. Early on, the nuclear industry took a number of specific steps to respond, including actions requested by the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) to perform tests that verified Generation’s emergency equipment is available and functional, conduct walk-downs on its procedures related to critical safety equipment, confirm event response procedures and readiness to protect the spent fuel pool, and verify current qualifications of operators and support staff needed to implement the procedures. Generation has been addressing additional actions requested by INPO for improving and maintaining core and spent fuel pool cooling during an extended loss of power for at least 24 hours.

90


In April 2011, the NRC named six senior managers and staff to its task force for examining the agency’s regulatory requirements, programs, processes, and implementation in light of information from the Fukushima Daiichi site in Japan, following the March 11 earthquake and tsunami (Task Force). On July 12, 2011, the NRC Task Force issued a report of its review of the accident, including recommendations for future regulatory action by the NRC to be taken in the near and longer term. The NRC staff and the Task Force’s reportForce concluded that nuclear reactors in the United States are operating safely and do not present an imminent risk to public health and safety. The Task Force’s report did not recommend any changes to the existing nuclear licensing process in the United States or changes in the storage of spent nuclear fuel within the plant’s spent nuclear fuel pools. During the fourth quarter of 2011, the NRC staff issued its recommendations for prioritizing and implementing the Task Force recommendations and an implementation schedule which was approved by the NRC subject to a number of conditions. The NRC staff confirmed the Task Force’s conclusions that none of the findings arising from the Task Force review presented an imminent risk to public health and safety.

 

In March 2012, the NRC authorized its staff to issue three immediately effective orders (Tier 1 orders) to commercial reactor licensees operating in the United States for compliance no later than December 31, 2016. In addition, in 2012, the NRC staff recommended to the NRC the installation of engineered containment filtered venting systems for boiling-water reactors (BWR) with Mark I and Mark II containment structures. In summary, through the initial and/or subsequent orders and the NRC approved implementation guidance, the Tier 1 orders currently: (1) require licensees: (1)licensees to provide sufficient onsite portable equipment and resources to maintain or restore cooling capabilities for the containment, core and spent fuel pool and to maintain containment integrity until offsite equipment is available and have offsite equipment and resources available to sustain cooling functions indefinitely; (2) to improve the venting systemsprovide requirements for vents for BWR’s with boiling water reactor Mark I orand Mark II containments (or forto remain functional during severe accident conditions including the Mark II plants, install new systems) that help prevent or mitigateability to vent the containment following core damage in the event of a serious accident by making the systems accessibledamage; and operable in the event of a prolonged station blackout and inadequate cooling; and (3) require licensees to install instrumentation to provide a reliable indication of water level in the spent fuel pool. Finally, the NRC has directed the NRC staff to produce a technical evaluation to support rulemaking that considers filtering and performance-based strategies as options for BWR’s with Mark I and Mark II containments. The NRC staff must then develop a final rule by March 2017.

 

Additionally, in 2012, the NRC hashad issued a detailed information request to every operating commercial nuclear power plant in the United States. The information requested requires: (1) use of the current NRC guidance to reevaluate current seismic and flood risk hazards against the design basis and provide a plan of actions to address vulnerabilities, including risks exceeding the design basis; (2) performance of walk downs to ensure the ability to respond to seismic and external flooding events and provide a corrective action plan to the NRC to address deficiencies; and (3) assessment of the means to provide power for communications equipment during a severe natural event and identify staffing required to implement the emergency plan for an event affecting all units with an extended loss of alternating current power and impeded access to the site. In November 2012,The nuclear industry proposed, and the NRC staff recommendedapproved, an augmented approach to the NRCseismic hazard analysis to accommodate industry wide availability of qualified technical resources needed to perform the installation of engineered containment filtered venting systems for boiling-water reactors with Mark I and Mark II containment structures.required analysis. The NRC is currently reviewing the staff recommendations.approved this augmented approach.

 

Generation has assessed the impacts of the Tier 1 orders and information requests and will continue monitoring the additional recommendations under review by the NRC staff, both from an operational and a financial impact standpoint. A comprehensive review of the NRC Tier 1 orders and information requests, as well as preliminary engineering assumptions and analysis, indicate that the financial impact of compliance for the period from 2014 through 2018 is expected to be between approximately $350 million and $50$375 million of capital and $50 million of operating expense, respectively, from 2013 through 2017, as previously anticipated in Generation’s planning projections. In addition,As Generation completes the design and installation planning for its actions, Generation will update these estimates. Further, Generation estimates incremental costs of $15 to $20 million per unit at eleven Mark I and II units for the installation of filtered vents, if ultimately required by the NRC. Generation’s current assessments are specific to the Tier 1 recommendations as

93


the NRC has not taken specific action with respect to the Tier 2 and Tier 3 recommendations. Exelon and Generation are unable to conclude at this time to what extent any actions to comply with the requirements of Tier 2 and Tier 3 will impact their future financial position, results of operations, and cash flows. Generation will continue to engage in nuclear industry assessments and actions and stakeholder input. See Item 1A. Risk Factors, for further discussion of the risk factors.

 

91


Financial Reform Legislation. 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 over-the-counter swaps (Swaps), including mandatory clearing, exchange trading, margin requirements, and other transparency requirements. The Dodd-Frank Act, however, also preserves the ability of end users in the energy industry to hedge their risks. In April 2012, the CFTC issued its rule defining swap dealers and major swap participants. Exelon has determined that it will conduct its commercial business in a manner that does not require registration as a swap dealer or major swap participant. Notwithstanding, there are additional rulemakings that have not yet been issued, including the capital and margin rules, which will further define the scope of the regulations and provide clarity as to the impact on the Registrants’ business, as well as to potential new opportunities. Depending on these final rules, the Registrants could be subject to significant new obligations.

 

The proposed regulations addressing collateral and capital requirements and exchange margin cash postings, when final, could require Generation to increase collateral requirements or cash postings in lieu of letters of credit currently issued to collateralize Swaps. Exelon had previously estimated that it could be required to make up to $1 billion of additional collateral postings under its bilateral credit lines. Given the swap dealer and the major swap participant definitions will not apply to Generation, the actual amount of collateral postings that will be required may be lower than Exelon’s previous expectations due to the following factors: (a) the majority of Generation’s physical wholesale portfolio does not meet the final CFTC Swap definition; (b) there will be minimal incremental costs associated with Generation’s positions that are currently cleared and subject to exchange margin; and (c) Generation will not be a swap dealer or major swap participant and proposed capital requirements applicable to these entities will not apply to Generation.

 

The actual level of collateral required will depend on many factors, including but not limited to market conditions, the outcome of final margin rules for Swaps, the extent of its trading activity in Swaps, and Generation’s credit ratings. Nonetheless, Generation has adequate credit facilities and flexibility in its hedging program to meet its anticipated collateral requirements estimated based on conservative assumptions.

 

In addition, the new regulations will impose new and ongoing compliance and infrastructure costs on Generation, which may amount to several million dollars per year.

 

Exelon and Generation continuescontinue to monitor the rulemaking procedures and cannot predict the ultimate outcome that the financial reform legislation will have on itstheir results of operations, cash flows or financial position.

 

ComEd, PECO and BGE could also be subject to various Dodd-Frank Act requirements to the extent they enter into Swap transactions. However, at this time, management of ComEd, PECO and BGE do not expect to be materially affected by this legislation.

Energy Infrastructure Modernization Act.Act. Since 2011, ComEd’s distribution rates are established through a performance-based rate formula, pursuant to EIMA. EIMA also provides a structure for substantial capital investment by utilities over a ten-year period to modernize Illinois’ electric utility infrastructure. In addition, as long as ComEd is subjectParticipating utilities are required to EIMA, ComEd will fund customer assistance programs for low-income customers, which amounts will not be recoverable through rates.file an annual update to the performance-based

 

94


formula rate tariff on or before May 1, with resulting rates effective in January of the following year. This annual formula rate update is based on prior year actual costs and current year projected capital additions. The update also reconciles any differences between the revenue requirement(s) in effect for the prior year and actual costs incurred for that year. Throughout each year, ComEd files an annual reconciliationrecords regulatory assets or regulatory liabilities and corresponding increases or decreases to operating revenues for any differences between the revenue requirement(s) in effect and ComEd’s best estimate of the revenue requirement expected to be approved by the ICC for that year’s reconciliation.

Formula Rate Tariff

In March 2013, the Illinois legislature passed Senate Bill 9 to clarify the intent of EIMA on the three issues decided in effectthe Rehearing Order: an allowed return on ComEd’s pension asset; the use of year-end rather than average rate base and capital structure in the annual reconciliation; and the use of ComEd’s weighted average cost of capital interest rate rather than a given yearshort-term debt rate to apply to the annual reconciliation. On May 22, 2013, Senate Bill 9 became effective after the Illinois legislature overrode the Governor’s veto of that Bill. On June 5, 2013, the ICC approved ComEd’s updated distribution formula rate structure to reflect the actual costs thatimpacts of Senate Bill 9.

In October 2013, the ICC determines are prudently and reasonably incurred for such year. Underopened an investigation (the Investigation), in response to a complaint filed by the terms of EIMA, ComEd’s targetIllinois Attorney General, to change the formula rate of return on common equity is subject to reduction if ComEd does not deliverstructure by requesting three changes: the reliability and customer service benefits, as defined, it has committed to over the ten-year lifeelimination of the investment program.income tax gross-up on the weighted average cost of capital used to calculate interest on the annual reconciliation balance, the netting of associated accumulated deferred income taxes against the annual reconciliation balance in calculating interest, and the use of average rather than year-end rate base for determining any ROE collar adjustment. On November 26, 2013, the ICC issued its final order in the Investigation, rejecting two of the proposed changes but accepting the proposed change to eliminate the income tax gross-up on the weighted average cost of capital used to calculate interest on the annual reconciliation balance. The accepted change became effective in January 2014, and is estimated to reduce ComEd’s 2014 revenue by approximately $8 million. ComEd and intervenors requested rehearing, however all rehearing requests were denied by the ICC. ComEd and intervenors have filed appeals with the Illinois Appellate Court. ComEd cannot predict the results of any such appeals. See 33—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

Annual Reconciliation

 

92On May 30, 2013, ComEd updated its revenue requirement allowed in the December 2012 Order to reflect the impacts of Senate Bill 9, which resulted in a reduction to the current revenue requirement in effect of $14 million. The rates took effect in July 2013.


2013 Filing. On April 29, 2013, ComEd filed its annual distribution formula rate, which was updated on May 30, 2013 to reflect the impacts of Senate Bill 9. The ICC’s final order, issued on December 19, 2013, increased the revenue requirement by $341 million, reflecting an increase of $160 million for the initial revenue requirement for 2013 and an increase of $181 million for the annual reconciliation for 2012. The rate increase was set using an allowed return on capital of 6.94% (inclusive of an allowed return on common equity of 8.72%). The rates took effect in January 2014. ComEd requested a rehearing on specific issues, which was denied by the ICC. ComEd and intervenors also filed appeals. ComEd cannot predict the results of any such appeals. See 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

FERC Ameren Order.In July 2012, FERC issued an order to Ameren Corporation indicating(Ameren) finding that Ameren had improperly included acquisition premiums/ goodwill in its transmission formula rate, particularly in its capital structure and in the application of AFUDC. FERC also directed Ameren to make

95


refunds for the implied increase in rates in prior years. Ameren has filed for rehearing regarding the July 2012 FERC order. ComEd believes that the FERC order authorizing its transmission formula rate is distinguishable from the circumstances that led to the July 2012 FERC order in the Ameren case. However, if ComEd were required to exclude acquisition premiums/ goodwill from its transmission formula rate, the impact could be material to ComEd’s results of operations and cash flows.

Reliability and Quality of Service Standards.During its 2011 legislative session, the Maryland General Assembly passed legislation:

directing the MDPSC to enact service quality and reliability regulations by July 1, 2012 relating to the delivery of electricity to retail electric customers,

increasing existing penalties for failure to meet these and other MDPSC regulations, and

directing the MDPSC to undertake certain studies addressing utility liability for certain customer damages, electric utility service restoration plans, and modifications to existing revenue decoupling mechanisms for extended service interruptions.

In May 2011, the Governor of Maryland signed this legislation into law. The related new service quality and reliability regulations became effective on May 28, 2012. These regulations could have a material impact on BGE’s financial results of operations, cash flows and financial position. BGE did seek recovery of these costs in the current base rate case filed on July 27, 2012.

2012 Maryland Electric and Gas Distribution Rate Case.On July 27, 2012, BGE filed an application for increases to its electric and gas base rates with the MDPSC. The requested rate of return on equity in the application is 10.5%. On October, 22, 2012, BGE updated its application to request an increase of $131 million and $45 million to its electric and gas base rates, respectively. The new electric and gas distribution base rates are expected to take effect in late February 2013. BGE cannot predict how much of the requested increases, if any, the MDPSC will approve.

 

FERC Order No. 1000 Compliance (ComEd, PECO and BGE). In FERC Order No. 1000, the FERC required public utility transmission providers to enhance their transmission planning procedures and their cost allocation methods applicable to certain new regional and interregional transmission projects. As part of the changes to the transmission planning procedures, the FERC removedrequired removal from all FERC-approved tariffs and agreements a federal right of first refusal to build certain new transmission facilities. In compliance with the regional transmission planning requirements of Order No. 1000, PJM as the transmission provider submitted a compliance filing to FERC on October 25, 2012. On the same day, certain of the PJM transmission owners including ComEd, PECO and BGE (collectively, the PJM Transmission Owners) submitted a filing asserting that their contractual rights embodied in the PJM governing documents continue to justify their right of first refusal to construct new reliability (and related) transmission projects and that the FERC should not be allowed to override such rights absent a showing that it is in the public interest to do so under the FERC’s “Mobile-Sierra” standard of review. This is a heightened standard of review which the PJM Transmission Owners argued could not be satisfied based on the facts applicable to them. Although this heightened standard of review should make it more difficult for theOn March 22, 2013, FERC or any third party to overrideissued an order on the PJM Transmission Owners’ right to build such transmission projects, there is risk thatCompliance Filing and the FERC will find that the heightened standardfiling of review does not apply to protect thethese PJM Transmission Owners rights and/or find(1) rejecting the arguments of such PJM Transmission Owners that whateverthe PJM governing documents were entitled to review under theMobile-Sierra standard, is applied has been satisfied. Such a(2) accepting most of the PJM filing, removing the right-of-first refusal from the PJM tariffs; and (3) directing PJM to remove certain exceptions that it included in its compliance filing that FERC findingfound did not comply with Order No. 1000. FERC’s order could enable third parties to seek to build certain regional transmission projects that had previously been reserved for the PJM Transmission Owners, potentially reducing ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s financial return on new investments in energy transmission facilities. Numerous parties sought rehearing of the FERC’s March 22, 2013 order, including the PJM Transmission Owners who sought rehearing of the FERC’s rejection of their Mobile-Sierra and related arguments. The compliance filing was made on July 22, 2013. On January 16, 2014, FERC issued an order stating that PJM’s filing while subject to further orders, is effective as of January 1, 2014.

FERC Transmission Complaint. On February 27, 2013, consumer advocates and regulators from the District of Columbia, New Jersey, Delaware and Maryland, and the Delaware Electric Municipal Cooperatives (the parties), filed a complaint at FERC against BGE and the Pepco Holdings, Inc. companies relating to their respective transmission formula rates. As of December 31, 2013, BGE cannot predict the likelihood or a reasonable estimate of the amount of a change, if any, in the allowed base return on equity, or a reasonable estimate of the refund period start date. While BGE cannot predict the outcome of this matter, if FERC orders a reduction of BGE’s base return on equity to 8.7%, the annual impact would be a reduction in revenues of approximately $10 million. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

The Maryland Strategic Infrastructure Development and Enhancement Program. In February 2013, the Maryland General Assembly passed legislation intended to accelerate gas infrastructure replacements in Maryland by establishing a mechanism for gas companies to promptly recover reasonable and prudent costs of eligible infrastructure replacement projects separate from base rate proceedings. Under the new law, following a proceeding before the MDPSC and with the MDPSC’s approval of the eligible infrastructure replacement projects along with a corresponding surcharge, BGE could begin charging gas customers a monthly surcharge for infrastructure costs incurred after June 1, 2013. On August 2, 2013, BGE filed its infrastructure replacement plan and associated surcharge. The new surcharge rates are expected to take effect in the first quarter of 2014. BGE cannot predict the

 

9396


outcome of this proceeding or how much of the requested plan and related surcharge the MDPSC will approve. The MDPSC held evidentiary hearings on BGE’s proposed plan and surcharge on November 12, 2013 through November 14, 2013. On January 29, 2014, the MDPSC issued a decision conditionally approving the first five years of BGE’s plan and surcharge. BGE must submit a list detailing specific projects planned for 2014 to the MDPSC for approval within 30 days of the decision. Upon approval of the project list by the MDPSC, BGE will be able to implement the surcharge rates on gas customers’ bills. The new surcharges are expected to take effect in the second quarter of 2014. In addition, BGE will be subject to an annual independent audit to review plan performance and progress. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

 

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires that management apply accounting policies and make estimates and assumptions that affect results of operations and the amounts of assets and liabilities reported in the financial statements. Management discusses these policies, estimates and assumptions with its accounting and disclosure governance committee on a regular basis and provides periodic updates on management decisions to the audit committee of the Exelon board of directors. Management believes that the areasaccounting policies described below require significant judgment in thetheir application, of accounting policy or in making estimates and assumptions that are inherently uncertain and that may change in subsequent periods. Additional discussion of the application of these accounting policies can be found in the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

Nuclear Decommissioning Asset Retirement Obligations (Exelon and Generation)

 

Generation must make significant estimates and assumptions in accounting for its obligation to decommission its nuclear generating plants in accordance with the authoritative guidance for AROs. Generation’s ARO associated with decommissioning its nuclear units was $4.7$4.9 billion at December 31, 2012.

2013. The authoritative guidance requires that Generation estimate its obligation for the future decommissioning of its nuclear generating plants. To estimate that liability, Generation uses an internally-developed, probability-weighted, discounted cash flow model which, on a unit-by-unit basis, considers multiple outcome scenarios. The nuclear decommissioning obligation is adjusted on a regular basis due to the passage of time and revisions to the key assumptions for the expected timing or estimated amounts of the future undiscounted cash flows required to decommission the nuclear plants, based upon the methodologies and significant estimates and assumptions described as follows:

 

Decommissioning Cost Studies.Generation uses unit-by-unit decommissioning cost studies to provide a marketplace assessment of the costs and timing of decommissioning activities, which are validated by comparison to current decommissioning projects within its industry and other estimates. Decommissioning cost studies are updated, on a rotational basis, for each of Generation’s nuclear units at least every five years.

 

Cost Escalation Factors.Generation uses cost escalation factors to escalate the decommissioning costs from the decommissioning cost studies discussed above through the assumed decommissioning period for each of the units. Cost escalation studies, updated on an annual basis, are used to determine escalation factors, and are based on inflation indices for labor, equipment and materials, energy, LLRW disposal and other costs.

 

Probabilistic Cash Flow Models.Generation’s probabilistic cash flow models include the assignment of probabilities to various scenarios for decommissioning costs, approaches and timing on a unit-by-unit basis. Probabilities assigned to cost levels include an assessment of the likelihood of costs 20% higher (high-cost scenario) or 15% lower (low-cost scenario) than the base cost scenario. Probabilities are assigned to alternative decommissioning approaches which assess the likelihood of performing DECON (a method of decommissioning shortly after the cessation of operation in which the equipment, structures, and portions of a facility and site containing radioactive contaminants are removed and safely buried in a LLRW landfill or decontaminated to a level that permits property to be released for

97


unrestricted use), Delayed DECON (similar to the DECON scenario but with a delay to allow for spent fuel to be removed from the site prior to onset of decommissioning activities) or SAFSTOR (a method of decommissioning in which the nuclear facility is placed and maintained in such condition that the nuclear facility can be safely stored and subsequently decontaminated to levels that permit release for unrestricted use generally within 60 years after cessation of operations)

94


decommissioning. Probabilities assigned to the timing scenarios incorporate the likelihood of continued operation through current license lives or through anticipated license renewals. Generation’s probabilistic cash flow models also include an assessment of the timing of DOE acceptance of SNF for disposal, which Generation assumed would begin in 2025 in 2013 and 2020 in 2012 and 2011, respectively.2012. The change in the SNF acceptance date was based on management’s estimates of the amount of time required for the DOE to select a site location and develop the necessary infrastructure. For more information regarding the estimated date that DOE will begin accepting SNF, see Note 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

License Renewals. Generation assumes a successful 20-year renewal for each of its nuclear generating station licenses, except for Oyster Creek, in determining its nuclear decommissioning ARO. See Note 19The current NRC license for Oyster Creek expires in 2029. On December 8, 2010, Exelon announced that Generation will permanently cease generation operations at Oyster Creek by December 31, 2019. As a result of this decision the Combined Notesexpected economic life of Oyster Creek was reduced by 10 years to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information oncorrespond to Exelon’s current best estimate as to the timing of ceasing generation operations at the Oyster Creek.Creek unit in 2019. Generation has successfully secured 20-year operating license renewal extensions for ten of its nuclear units (including the two Salem units co-owned by Generation, but operated by PSEG), and none of Generation’s applications for an operating license extension have been denied. Generation is in various stages of the process of pursuing similar extensions on its remaining nine operating nuclear units. Generation’s assumption regarding license extension for ARO determination purposes is based in part on the good current physical condition and high performance of these nuclear units; the favorable status of the ongoing license renewal proceedings with the NRC, and the successful renewals for ten units to date. Generation estimates that the failure to obtain license renewals at any of these nuclear units (assuming all other assumptions remain constant) would increase its ARO on average approximately $250$210 million per unit as of December 31, 2012.2013. The size of the increase to the ARO for a particular nuclear unit is dependent upon the current stage in its original license term and its specific decommissioning cost estimates. If Generation does not receive license renewal on a particular unit, the increase to the ARO may be mitigated by Generation’s ability to delay ultimate decommissioning activities under a SAFSTOR method of decommissioning.

 

Discount Rates.The probability-weighted estimated future cash flows using these various scenarios are discounted using credit-adjusted, risk-free rates (CARFR) applicable to the various businesses in which each of the nuclear units originally operated. The accounting guidance required Generation to establish an ARO at fair value at the time of the initial adoption of the current accounting standard. Subsequent to the initial adoption, the ARO is adjusted for changes to estimated costs, timing of future cash flows and modifications to decommissioning assumptions, as described above.

 

Under the current accounting framework, the ARO is not required or permitted to be re-measured from period to period, for changes in the CARFR that occur in isolation. This differs from the accounting requirements for other long-dated obligations, such as pension and other post-employment benefits that are required to be re-measured as and when corresponding discount rates change. If Generation’s future nominal cash flows associated with the ARO were to be discounted at current prevailing CARFRs, the obligation would increase from approximately $4.7$4.9 billion to approximately $7.5$5.5 billion. The ultimate decommissioning obligation will be funded by the NDTs. The NDTs are recorded on Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 20122013 at fair value of approximately $7.2$8.1 billion and have an estimated targeted annual pre-tax return of 5.3%5.9 % to 6.2%.6.7 %.

 

To illustrate the significant impact that changes in the CARFR, when combined with changes in projected amounts and expected timing of cash flows, can have on the valuation of the ARO: i) had

98


Generation used the 20112012 CARFRs rather than the 20122013 CARFRs in performing its third quarter 20122013 ARO update, Generation would have reduced the ARO by approximately $50$10 million as compared to the actual increasedecrease to the ARO of $669$140 million; and ii) if the CARFR used in performing the third quarter 20122013 ARO update (which also reflected increases in the amounts and changes to the timing of projected cash flows) was increased or decreased by 100 basis points, the ARO would have increaseddecreased by $110$300 million and $1.6 billion,increased $40 million, respectively, as compared to the actual increasedecrease of $669$140 million.

 

95


ARO Sensitivities. Changes in the assumptions underlying the foregoing items could materially affect the decommissioning obligation. The impact to the ARO of a change in any one of these assumptions is highly dependent on how the other assumptions will change as well. As an example, the significant changesExelon had a historical increase of approximately $670 million in the value of the ARO during 2012 werewhich was driven primarily by Generation modifying the assumed timing of the DOE acceptance of SNF for disposal from 2020 to 2025 during the third quarter 2012 annual ARO update.2025. The modification of the assumed DOE acceptance date impactedaffected the calculation of the ARO in isolation as follows; i) the change in the timing of DOE acceptance of SNF increased the total number of years in which decommissioning activities are estimated to occur, by five years on average, thereby increasing the total expected nominal cash flows required to decommission the units; ii) the nominal cash flows were subjected to additional escalation as a result of the extension of the decommissioning period increasing the total estimated costs required to decommission the units; and iii) the escalated cash flows were then discounted at the then current CARFRs which havehad dramatically decreased in 2012 given the current low interest rate environment. The change in the timing and amount of cash flows as a result of the change in the assumed DOE acceptance date in combination with the significant decrease in the 2012 CARFRs were the primary drivers of the third quarter 2012 ARO update total increase of $669 million.during that time period.

 

The following table illustrates the effects of changing certain ARO assumptions, discussed above, while holding all other assumptions constant (dollars in millions):

 

Change in ARO Assumption

  Increase to
ARO at
December 31, 2012
   Increase (Decrease) to
ARO at
December 31, 2013
 

Cost escalation studies

    

Uniform increase in escalation rates of 25 basis points

  $820   $560 

Probabilistic cash flow models

    

Increase the likelihood of the high-cost scenario by 10 percentage points and decrease the likelihood of the low-cost scenario by 10 percentage points

  $250   $190 

Increase the likelihood of the DECON scenario by 10 percentage points and decrease the likelihood of the SAFSTOR scenario by 10 percentage points

  $360   $290 

Increase the likelihood of operating through current license lives by 10 percentage points and decrease the likelihood of operating through anticipated license renewals by 10 percentage points

  $490   $430 

Extend the estimated date for DOE acceptance of SNF to 2030

  $700   $50 

Extend the estimated date for DOE acceptance of SNF to 2030 coupled with an increase in discount rates of 100 basis points

  $30   $(230

Extend the estimated date for DOE acceptance of SNF to 2030 coupled with a decrease in discount rates of 100 basis points

  $1,570   $600 

 

For more information regarding accounting for nuclear decommissioning obligations, see Notes 1 and 1315 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

Goodwill (Exelon and ComEd)

 

As of December 31, 2012,2013, Exelon’s and ComEd’s carrying amount of goodwill was approximately $2.6 billion, relating to the acquisition of ComEd in 2000 as part of the PECO/Unicom Merger. Under the provisions of the authoritative guidance for goodwill, ComEd is required to perform an assessment for possible impairment of its goodwill at least annually or more frequently if an event occurs such as a significant negative regulatory outcome, or circumstances change that would more likely than not reduce the fair value of the ComEd reporting unit

99


below its carrying amount. Under the authoritative guidance, a reporting unit is an operating segment or operating component and is the level at which goodwill is tested for impairment. In September 2011, the FASB issued authoritative guidance amending existing guidance on the annual assessment of goodwill for impairment. Under the revised

96


guidance, which became effective January 1, 2012, entitiesEntities assessing goodwill for impairment have the option of first performing a qualitative assessment rather than theto determine whether a quantitative assessment previously required.is necessary. In performing a qualitative assessment, entities should assess, among other things, macroeconomic conditions, industry and market considerations, overall financial performance, cost factors, and entity-specific events. If an entity determines, on the basis of qualitative factors, that the fair value of the reporting unit is more likely than not greater than the carrying amount, no further testing is required. If an entity bypasses the qualitative assessment or performs the qualitative assessment, but determines that it is more likely than not that its fair value is less than its carrying amount, a quantitative two-step, fair value basedvalue-based test is performed. The first step compares the fair value of the reporting unit to its carrying amount, including goodwill. If the carrying amount of the reporting unit exceeds its fair value, the second step is performed. The second step requires an allocation of fair value to the individual assets and liabilities using purchase price allocation accounting guidance in order to determine the implied fair value of goodwill. If the implied fair value of goodwill is less than the carrying amount, an impairment loss is recorded as a reduction to goodwill and a charge to operating expense. Application of the goodwill impairment test requires management judgment, including the identification of reporting units and determining the fair value of the reporting unit, which management estimates using a weighted combination of a discounted cash flow analysis and a market multiples analysis. Significant assumptions used in these fair value analyses include discount and growth rates, utility sector market performance and transactions, projected operating and capital cash flows for ComEd’s business and the fair value of debt. In applying the second step (if needed), management must estimate the fair value of specific assets and liabilities of the reporting unit.

 

ComEd performedManagement concluded the remeasurement of the like-kind exchange position and the charge to ComEd’s earnings in the first quarter of 2013 triggered an interim goodwill impairment assessment as of May 31, 2012,and, as a result, ComEd tested its goodwill for impairment as of the ICC’s final Order (Order) in ComEd’s 2011 formula rate proceeding under the EIMA that reduced ComEd’s annual revenue requirement being recovered in current rates by $168 million.January 31, 2013. The first step of the interim impairment assessment comparing the estimated fair value of ComEd to its carrying value, including goodwill, indicated no impairment of goodwill; therefore, the second step was not required. Based on the results

ComEd performed a quantitative assessment as of November 1, 2013, for its 2013 annual goodwill impairment assessment. The first step of the interim goodwill test performed as of May 31, 2012,impairment assessment comparing the estimated fair value of ComEd would have needed to decrease by more than 10 percent for ComEd to failits carrying value, including goodwill, indicated no impairment of goodwill; therefore, the firstsecond step of the impairment test.

ComEd performed a qualitative assessment as of November 1, 2012, for its 2012 annual goodwill impairment assessment and while certain factors indicated a reduction in fair value since May 31, 2012, ComEd determined its fair value was not more likely than not less than its carrying value. Therefore, ComEd did not perform a quantitative assessment.required.

 

While neither the interim nor the annual assessments indicated an impairment of ComEd’s goodwill, a change in management’s assumption regardingcertain assumptions used to estimate the outcomefair value of the IRS challenge of Exelon’s and ComEd’s like-kind exchange income tax position, adverseComEd are highly sensitive to changes. Adverse regulatory actions, such as early termination of EIMA, or changes in significant assumptions, described aboveincluding discount and growth rates, utility sector market performance and transactions, projected operating and capital cash flows from ComEd’s business, and the fair value of debt, could potentially result in a future impairment of ComEd’s goodwill, which could be material. Based on the results of the annual goodwill test performed as of November 1, 2013, the estimated fair value of ComEd will assess whether its goodwill has been impaired inwould have needed to decrease by more than 10% for ComEd to fail the first quarter of 2013 in connection with the reassessmentstep of the like-kind exchange positionimpairment test. See Note 1—Significant Accounting Policies, Note 10—Intangible Assets and the associated charge to ComEd’s earnings. See Notes 1, 8 and 12Note 14—Income Taxes of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Purchase Accounting (Exelon and Generation)

 

In accordance with the authoritative accounting guidance, the purchase price of an acquired business is generally allocated to the assets acquired and liabilities assumed at their estimated fair values on the date of acquisition. Any unallocated purchase price amount is recognized as goodwill on the balance sheet if it exceeds the estimated fair value and as a bargain purchase gain on the income statement if it is below the estimated fair value. Determining the fair value of assets acquired and

 

97100


liabilities assumed requires management’s judgment, the utilization of independent valuation experts and involves the use of significant estimates and assumptions with respect to the timing and amounts of future cash inflows and outflows, discount rates, market prices and asset lives, among other items. The judgments made in the determination of the estimated fair value assigned to the assets acquired and liabilities assumed, as well as the estimated useful life of each asset and the duration of each liability, can materially impact the financial statements in periods after acquisition, such as through depreciation and amortization expense. See Note 44—Merger and Acquisitions of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Unamortized Energy Assets and Liabilities (Exelon and Generation)

 

Unamortized energy contract assets and liabilities represent the remaining unamortized balances of non-derivative energy contracts that Generation has acquired. The initial amount recorded represents the fair value of the contract at the time of acquisition, and the balance is amortized over the life of the contract in relation to the present value of the underlying cash flows. Amortization expense and income are recorded through purchased power and fuel expense or operating revenues. Refer to Note 4—Mergers and Acquisitions and Note 8—10—Intangible Assets for further discussion.

 

Impairment of Long-lived Assets (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE regularly monitor and evaluate their long-lived assets and asset groups, excluding goodwill, for impairment when circumstances indicate the carrying value of those assets may not be recoverable. Conditions that could have an adverse impact on the cash flows and fair value of the long-lived assets are deteriorating business climate, including current energy prices and market conditions, condition of the asset, specific regulatory disallowance, or plans to dispose of a long-lived asset significantly before the end of its useful life, among others. Continued declines in natural gas prices have impacted fundamental views of market power prices, which could indicate a potential impairment to the Registrants’ long-lived assets and asset groups, which are primarily made up of generating assets. The Registrants regularly monitor their long-lived assets for these circumstances to determine whether or not an impairment evaluation is required.

 

The review of long-lived assets and asset groups for impairment requires significant assumptions about operating strategies and estimates of future cash flows, which require assessments of current and projected market conditions. For the generation business, forecasting future cash flows requires assumptions regarding forecasted commodity prices for the sale of power, costs of fuel and the expected operations of assets. A variation in the assumptions used could lead to a different conclusion regarding the recoverability of an asset or asset group and, thus, could have a significant effect on the consolidated financial statements. An impairment evaluation is based on an undiscounted cash flow analysis at the lowest level at which cash flows of the long-lived assets or asset groups are largely independent of other groups of assets and liabilities. For the generation business, the lowest level of independent cash flows is determined by evaluation of several factors, including the geographic dispatch of the generation units and the hedging strategies related to those units and associated intangible contract assets recorded on the balance sheet. The cash flows from the generation units are generally evaluated at a regional portfolio level with cash flows generated from Generation’s customer supply and risk management activities, including cash flows from contracts that are accounted for as intangible contract assets and liabilities recorded on the balance sheet. For ComEd, PECOIn certain cases generation assets may be evaluated on an individual basis where those assets are contracted on a long-term basis with a third party and BGE, the lowest leveloperations are independent of independent cash flows is determined by evaluation of several factors including the ratemaking jurisdiction in which they operate and the type of service or commodity provided. For ComEd, the lowest level of independent cash flows is transmission and distribution and for PECO and BGE, the lowest level of independent cash flows is transmission, distribution and gas.

other generation assets (typically contracted renewables).

 

98


Impairment may occur when the carrying value of the asset or asset group exceeds the future undiscounted cash flows. When the undiscounted cash flow analysis indicates a long-lived asset or asset group is not recoverable, the amount of the impairment loss is determined by measuring the excess of the carrying amount of the long-lived asset or asset group over its fair value. The fair value of the long-lived asset or asset group is dependent upon a market participant’s view of the exit price of the assets. This includes significant assumptions of the estimated future cash flows generated by the assets and market discount rates. Events and circumstances frequently do not occur as expected and

101


there will usually be differences between prospective financial information and actual results, and those differences may be material. Accordingly, to the extent that any of the information used in the fair value analysis requires adjustment, the resulting fair market value would be different. As such, the determination of fair value is driven by both internal assumptions that include significant unobservable inputs (Level 3) such as revenue and generation forecasts, projected capital, and maintenance expenditures and discount rates, as well as information from various public, financial and industry sources. An impairment determination would require the affected Registrant to reduce either the long-lived asset or asset group, including any intangible contract assets and liabilities, and current period earnings by the amount of the impairment.

 

Generation evaluates unproved gas producing properties at least annually to determine if they are impaired. Impairment for unproved gas property occurs if there are no firm plans to continue drilling, lease expiration is at risk, or historical experience necessitatesindicates a valuation allowance.decline in carrying value below fair value.

 

Exelon holds certain investments in coal-fired plants in Georgia and Texas subject to long-term leases. Exelon determinesThe investments are accounted for as direct financing lease investments. The investments represent the investment in these plants by incorporating an estimate of theestimated residual values of the leased assets which equates to the fixed purchase option prices established at the inceptionend of the leases.respective lease terms. On an annual basis, Exelon reviews the estimated residual values of these plants to determineits direct financing lease investments and records an impairment charge if the current estimate of their residualreview indicates an other than temporary decline in the fair value is lower than the one originally established. In determining the current estimate of the residual valuevalues below their carrying values. Exelon estimates the expectation of future market conditions, including commodity prices, is considered. If the current estimatefair value of the residual value is lower thanvalues of its direct financing lease investments using a discounted cash flow analysis, which takes into consideration the residual value established atexpected revenues to be generated and costs to be incurred to operate the inception ofplants over their remaining useful lives subsequent to the lease and the decline is considered to be other than temporary, a loss will be recognized with a corresponding reduction to the carrying amount of the investment. To date, no such losses have been recognized.end dates.

 

Generation also evaluates its equity method investments including CENG, to determine whether or not they are impaired based on whether the investment has experienced an other than temporarya decline in value.value that is not temporary in nature. Additionally, if one of Generation’s equity method investments recognize an impairment, Generation would record its proportionate share of that impairment loss through its equity earnings (losses) of unconsolidated affiliates. Generation would also evaluate the investment for an other than temporarya decline in value at that time.time that is not temporary in nature.

 

See Note 48 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion of asset impairment evaluations made by Generation.Exelon.

 

Depreciable Lives of Property, Plant and Equipment (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The Registrants have significant investments in electric generation assets and electric and natural gas transmission and distribution assets. Depreciation of these assets is generally provided over their estimated service lives on a straight-line basis using the composite method. The estimation of service lives requires management judgment regarding the period of time that the assets will be in use. As circumstances warrant, the estimated service lives are reviewed to determine if any changes are needed. Depreciation rates incorporate assumptions on interim retirements based on actual historical retirement experience. To the extent interim retirement patterns change, this could have a significant impact on the amount of depreciation expense recorded in the income statement. Changes to depreciation estimates resulting from a change in the estimated end of service lives could have a

99


significant impact on the amount of depreciation expense recorded in the income statement. See Note 1 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding depreciation and estimated service lives of the property, plant and equipment of the Registrants.

 

The estimated service lives of the nuclear generating facilities are based on the estimated useful lives of the stations, which assume a 20-year license renewal extension of the operating licenses for all of Generation’s operating nuclear generating stations except for Oyster Creek. While Generation has

102


received license renewals for certain facilities, and has applied for or expects to apply for and obtain approval of license renewals for the remaining facilities, circumstances may arise that would prevent Generation from obtaining additional license renewals. Generation also evaluates every three to five yearsannually the estimated service lives of its fossil fuel generating and renewable facilities based on feasibility assessments as well as economic and capital requirements. The estimated service lives of hydroelectric facilities are based on the remaining useful lives of the stations, which assume a license renewal extension of the Conowingo and Muddy Run operating licenses. A change in depreciation estimates resulting from Generation’s extension or reduction of the estimated service lives could have a significant effect on Generation’s results of operations. Generation completed a depreciation rate study during the first quarter of 2010, which resulted in the implementation of new depreciation rates effective January 1, 2010. Constellation completed a depreciation rate study during the fourth quarter of 2010, which resulted in the implementation of new depreciation rates effective during the fourth quarter of 2010.

 

ComEd is required to file a depreciation rate study at least every five years with the ICC. ComEd filedcompleted a depreciation rate study in 2014 and filed the updated depreciation rates with both FERC and the ICC in January 2009, which resulted2014. This is expected to result in the implementation of new depreciation rates effective January 1, 2009.first quarter 2014.

 

PECO is required to file a depreciation rate study at least every five years with the PAPUC. In April 2010, PECO filed a depreciation rate study with the PAPUC for both its electric and gas assets, which resulted in the implementation of new depreciation rates effective January 1, 2010 for electric transmission assets and January 1, 2011 for electric distribution and gas assets.

 

The MDPSC does not mandate the frequency or timing of BGE’s depreciation studies. In December 2006, BGE filed revised depreciation rates with the MDPSC for both its electric distribution and gas assets. Revisions to depreciation rates from this filing were finalized July 1, 2010.

 

Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Exelon sponsors defined benefit pension plans and other postretirement benefit plans for substantially all Generation, ComEd, PECO, BGE and BSC employees. See Note 1416—Retirement Benefits of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding the accounting for the defined benefit pension plans and other postretirement benefit plans.

 

The measurement of the plan obligations and costs of providing benefits under Exelon’s defined benefit pension and other postretirement benefit plans involves various factors, including the development of valuation assumptions and accounting policy elections. When developing the required assumptions, Exelon considers historical information as well as future expectations. The measurement of benefit obligations and costs is impactedaffected by several assumptions including the discount rate applied to benefit obligations, the long-term expected rate of return on plan assets, the anticipated rate of increase of health care costs, Exelon’s expected level of contributions to the plans, the incidence of participant mortality, the expected remaining service period of plan participants, the level of compensation and rate of compensation increases, employee age, length of service, and the long-term expected investment rate credited to employees of certain plans, among others. The assumptions are updated annually and upon any interim remeasurement of the plan obligations. The impact of assumption

100


changes or experience different from that assumed on pension and other postretirement benefit obligations is recognized over time rather than immediately recognized in the income statement. Gains or losses in excess of the greater of ten percent of the projected benefit obligation or the MRV of plan assets are amortized over the expected average remaining service period of plan participants. Pension and other postretirement benefit costs attributed to the operating companies are labor costs and are ultimately allocated to projects within the operating companies, some of which are capitalized.

 

103


Pension and other postretirement benefit plan assets include equity securities, including U.S. and international securities, and fixed income securities, as well as certain alternative investment classes such as real estate, private equity and hedge funds. See Note 1416—Retirement Benefits of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information on fair value measurements of pension and other postretirement plan assets, including valuation techniques and classification under the fair value hierarchy in accordance with authoritative guidance.

 

Expected Rate of Return on Plan Assets.The long-term expected rate of return on plan assets assumption used in calculating pension costs was 7.50%, 7.50%, and 8.00% for 2013, 2012 and 8.50% for 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively. The weighted average expected return on assets assumption used in calculating other postretirement benefit costs was 6.45%, 6.68%, and 7.08% in 2013, 2012 and 7.83% in 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively. The pension trust activity is non-taxable, while other postretirement benefit trust activity is partially taxable. The current year EROA is based on asset allocations from the prior year end. In 2010, Exelon began implementation of a liability drivenliability-driven investment strategy in order to reduce the volatility of its pension assets relative to its pension liabilities. As a result of this modification, over time, Exelon determined that it will decrease equity investments and increase investments in fixed income securities and alternative investments in order to achieve a balanced portfolio of liability hedging and return-generating assets. The change in the overall investment strategy would tend to lower the expected rate of return on plan assets in future years as compared to the previous strategy. See Note 1416—Retirement Benefits of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding Exelon’s asset allocations. Exelon used an EROA of 7.50%7.00% and 6.45%6.59% to estimate its 20132014 pension and other postretirement benefit costs, respectively.

 

Exelon calculates the expected return on pension and other postretirement benefit plan assets by multiplying the EROA by the MRV of plan assets at the beginning of the year, taking into consideration anticipated contributions and benefit payments to be made during the year. In determining MRV, the authoritative guidance for pensions and postretirement benefits allows the use of either fair value or a calculated value that recognizes changes in fair value in a systematic and rational manner over not more than five years. For the majority of pension plan assets, Exelon uses a calculated value that adjusts for 20% of the difference between fair value and expected MRV of plan assets. Use of this calculated value approach enables less volatile expected asset returns to be recognized as a component of pension cost from year to year. For other postretirement benefit plan assets and certain pension plan assets, Exelon uses fair value to calculate the MRV.

 

Actual asset returns have an impact on the costs reported for the Exelon-sponsored pension and other postretirement benefit plans. The actual asset returns across the Registrants’ pension and other postretirement benefit plans for the year ended December 31, 20122013 were 12.8%6.73% and 12.5%11.41%, respectively, compared to an expected long-term return assumption of 7.50% and 6.68%6.45%, respectively.

 

Discount Rate.The discount rates used to determine the pension and other postretirement benefit obligations were 3.92%4.80% and 4.00%4.90%, respectively, at December 31, 2012.2013. The discount rates at December 31, 20122013 represent weighted-average rates for both legacy Exelon and Constellation pension and other postretirement benefit plans. At December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, the discount rates were determined by developing a spot rate curve based on the yield to maturity of a universe of high-quality non-callable (or callable with make whole provisions) bonds with similar maturities to the related pension and other postretirement benefit obligations. The spot rates are used to discount the estimated

101


distributions under the pension and other postretirement benefit plans. The discount rate is the single level rate that produces the same result as the spot rate curve. Exelon utilizes an analytical tool developed by its actuaries to determine the discount rates.

 

The discount rate assumptions used to determine the obligation at year end are used to determine the cost for the following year. Exelon will use discount rates of 3.92%4.80% and 4.00%4.90% to estimate its 20132014 pension and other postretirement benefit costs, respectively.

 

Health Care Reform Legislation.In March 2010, the Health Care Reform Acts were signed into law, which contain a number of provisions that impact retiree health care plans provided by employers.

104


One such provision reduces the deductibility, for Federal income tax purposes, of retiree health care costs to the extent an employer’s postretirement health care plan receives Federal subsidies that provide retiree prescription drug benefits at least equivalent to those offered by Medicare. Although this change did not take effect immediately, the Registrants were required to recognize the full accounting impact in their financial statements in the period in which the legislation was enacted. Additionally, as a result of this deductibility change for employers and other Health Care Reform provisions that impact the federal prescription drug subsidy options provided to employers, Exelon changed the manner in which it will receive prescription drug subsidies beginning in 2013.

 

The Health Care Reform Acts include a provision that imposes an excise tax on certain high-cost plans beginning in 2018, whereby premiums paid over a prescribed threshold will be taxed at a 40% rate. Although the excise tax does not go into effect until 2018, accounting guidance requires Exelon to incorporate the estimated impact of the excise tax in its annual actuarial valuation. The application of the legislation is still unclear and Exelon continues to monitor the Department of Labor and IRS for additional guidance. Effective in 2002, Constellation amended its other postretirement benefit plans for all subsidiaries other than Nine Mile Point by capping retiree medical coverage for future retirees who were under the age of 55 on January 1, 2002 at 2002 levels. Therefore, the excise tax is not expected to have a material impact on the legacy Constellation other postretirement benefit plans. However, certain key assumptions are required to estimate the impact of the excise tax on the other postretirement obligation for legacy Exelon plans, including projected inflation rates (based on the CPI) and whether pre- and post-65 retiree populations can be aggregated in determining the premium values of health care benefits. Exelon reflected its best estimate of the expected impact in its annual actuarial valuation.

 

Health Care Cost Trend Rate.Assumed health care cost trend rates have a significant effect on the costs reported for Exelon’s other postretirement benefit plans. Accounting guidance requires that annual health care cost estimates be developed using past and present health care cost trends (both for Exelon and across the broader economy), as well as expectations of health care cost escalation, changes in health care utilization and delivery patterns, technological advances and changes in the health status of plan participants. Therefore, the trend rate assumption is subject to significant uncertainty, particularly when considering potential impacts of the 2010 Health Care Reform Acts. Exelon assumed an initial health care cost trend rate of 6.50% at December 31, 2012,for 2013, decreasing to an ultimate health care cost trend rate of 5.00% in 2017.

 

102


Sensitivity to Changes in Key Assumptions.The following tables illustrate the effects of changing certain of the actuarial assumptions discussed above, while holding all other assumptions constant (dollars in millions):

 

Actuarial Assumption

  Change in
Assumption
  Pension Other Postretirement
Benefits
 Total   Change in
Assumption
  Pension Other Postretirement
Benefits
 Total 

Change in 2012 cost:

      

Change in 2013 cost:

      

Discount rate(a)

  0.5%  $(61 $(26 $(87  0.5%  $(63 $(34 $(97
  (0.5%)   60   29   89   (0.5%)   68   48   116 

EROA

  0.5%   (66  (9  (75  0.5%   (68  (10  (78
  (0.5%)   66   9   75   (0.5%)   68   10   78 

Health care cost trend rate

  1.00%   N/A    81   81   1.00%   N/A   90   90 
  (1.00%)   N/A    (56  (56  (1.00%)   N/A   (62  (62

Change in benefit obligation at
December 31, 2012:

      

Change in benefit obligation at
December 31, 2013:

      

Discount rate(a)

  0.5%   (987  (340  (1,327  0.5%   (904  (297  (1,201
  (0.5%)   1,094   367   1,461   (0.5%)   965   318   1,283 

Health care cost trend rate

  1.00%   N/A    845   845   1.00%   N/A   858   858 
  (1.00%)   N/A    (569  (569  (1.00%)   N/A   (607  (607

105


 

(a)In general, the discount rate will have a larger impact on the pension and other postretirement benefit cost and obligation as the rate moves closer to 0%. Therefore, the discount rate sensitivities above cannot necessarily be extrapolated for larger increases or decreases in the discount rate. Additionally, Exelon implemented a liability-driven investment strategy for a portion of its pension asset portfolio in 2010. The sensitivities shown above do not reflect the offsetting impact that changes in discount rates may have on pension asset returns.

 

Average Remaining Service Period.For pension benefits, Exelon amortizes its unrecognized prior service costs and certain actuarial gains and losses, as applicable, based on participants’ average remaining service periods. The average remaining service period of defined benefit pension plan participants was 11.8 years, 11.9 years, 12.1 years and 12.412.1 years for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, respectively.

 

For other postretirement benefits, Exelon amortizes its unrecognized prior service costs over participants’ average remaining service period to benefit eligibility age and amortizes its transition obligations and certain actuarial gains and losses over participants’ average remaining service period to expected retirement. The average remaining service period of postretirement benefit plan participants related to benefit eligibility age was 8.7 years, 8.9 years 6.6 years and 6.86.6 years for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, respectively. The average remaining service period of postretirement benefit plan participants related to expected retirement was 9.8 years, 10.1 years 8.7 years and 9.08.7 years for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, respectively.

 

Regulatory Accounting (Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE account for their regulated electric and gas operations in accordance with the authoritative guidance for accounting for certain types of regulations, which requires Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE to reflect the effects of cost-based rate regulation in their financial statements. This guidance is applicable to entities with regulated operations that meet the following criteria: (1) rates are established or approved by a third-party regulator; (2) rates are designed to recover the entities’ cost of providing services or products; and (3) a reasonable expectation that rates are set at levels that will recover the entities costs from customers. Regulatory assets represent incurred costs that have been deferred because of their probable future recovery from customers through regulated rates. Regulatory liabilities represent (1) the excess recovery of costs or accrued credits that have been deferred because it is probable such amounts will be returned to

103


customers through future regulated rates; or (2) billings in advance of expenditures for approved regulatory programs. As of December 31, 2012,2013, Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE have concluded that the operations of ComEd, PECO and BGE meet the criteria to apply the authoritative guidance. If it is concluded in a future period that a separable portion of those operations no longer meets the criteria of this guidance, Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE would be required to eliminate any associated regulatory assets and liabilities and the impact would be recognized in the Consolidated Statements of Operations and could be material. See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding regulatory matters, including the regulatory assets and liabilities tables of Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE.

 

For each regulatory jurisdiction in which they conduct business, Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE assess whether the regulatory assets and liabilities continue to meet the criteria for probable future recovery or settlement at each balance sheet date and when regulatory events occur. This assessment includes consideration of recent rate orders, historical regulatory treatment for similar costs in ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s jurisdictions, and factors such as changes in applicable regulatory and political environments. Furthermore, Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE make other judgments related to the financial statement impact of their regulatory environments, such as the types of adjustments to rate base that will be acceptable to regulatory bodies, if any, to which costs will be recoverable through rates. Refer to the revenue recognition discussion below for additional information on the annual revenue

106


reconciliations associated with ComEd’s distribution formula rate tariff, pursuant to EIMA, and FERC-approved transmission formula rate tariffs for ComEd and BGE. Additionally, estimates are made in accordance with the authoritative guidance for contingencies as to the amount of revenues billed under certain regulatory orders that may ultimately be refunded to customers upon finalization of applicable regulatory or judicial processes. These assessments are based, to the extent possible, on past relevant experience with regulatory bodies in ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s jurisdictions, known circumstances specific to a particular matter and hearings held with the applicable regulatory body. If the assessments and estimates made by Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE are ultimately different than actual regulatory outcomes, the impact on their results of operations, financial position, and cash flows could be material.

 

The Registrants treat the impacts of a final rate order received after the balance sheet date but prior to the issuance of the financial statements as a non-recognized subsequent event, as the receipt of a final rate order is a separate and distinct event that has future impacts on the parties affected by the order.

 

Accounting for Derivative Instruments (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The Registrants utilize derivative instruments to manage their exposure to fluctuations in interest rates, changes in interest rates related to planned future debt issuances and changes in the fair value of outstanding debt. Generation uses a variety of derivative and non-derivative instruments to manage the commodity price risk of its electric generation facilities, including power sales, fuel and energy purchases and other energy-related products marketed and purchased. Additionally, Generation enters into energy-related derivatives for proprietary trading purposes. ComEd has entered into contracts to procure energy, capacity and ancillary services. In addition, ComEd hashad a financial swap contract with Generation that extends intoexpired May 31, 2013 and currently holds floating-to-fixed energy swaps with several unaffiliated suppliers that extend into 2032. PECO hasand BGE have entered into derivative natural gas contracts to hedge itstheir long-term price risk in the natural gas market. PECO has also entered into derivative contracts to procure electric supply through a competitive RFP process as outlined in its PAPUC-approved DSP Program. BGE has also entered into derivative contracts to procure electric supply through a competitive auction process as outlined in its MDPSC-approved SOS Program. ComEd, PECO and BGE do not enter into derivatives for proprietary trading purposes. The Registrants’ derivative activities are in accordance with Exelon’s Risk Management Policy (RMP). See Note 1012 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding the Registrants’ derivative instruments.

 

104


The Registrants account for derivative financial instruments under the applicable authoritative guidance. Determining whether or not a contract qualifies as a derivative under this guidance requires that management exercise significant judgment, including assessing the market liquidity as well as determining whether a contract has one or more underlyings and one or more notional amounts. Further, interpretive guidance related to the authoritative literature continues to evolve, including how it applies to energy and energy-related products. Changes in management’s assessment of contracts and the liquidity of their markets, and changes in authoritative guidance related to derivatives, could result in previously excluded contracts being subject to the provisions of the authoritative derivative guidance. Generation has determined that contracts to purchase uranium, exchange traded contracts to purchase and sell capacity in certain ISO’s, certain emission products and RECs do not meet the definition of a derivative under the current authoritative guidance since they do not provide for net settlement and neither the uranium, certain capacity, emission nor the REC markets are sufficiently liquid to conclude that physical forward contracts are readily convertible to cash. If these markets do become sufficiently liquid in the future and Generation would be required to account for these contracts as derivative instruments, the fair value of these contracts would be accounted for consistent with Generation’s other derivative instruments. In this case, if market prices differ from the underlying prices of the contracts, Generation would be required to record mark-to-market gains or losses, which may have a significant impact to Exelon’s and Generation’s financial positions and results of operations.

 

107


Under current authoritative guidance, all derivatives are recognized on the balance sheet at their fair value, except for certain derivatives that qualify for, and are elected under, the normal purchases and normal sales exception. Further, derivatives that qualify and are designated for hedge accounting are classified as fair value or cash flow hedges. For fair value hedges, changes in fair values for both the derivative and the underlying hedged exposure are recognized in earnings each period. For cash flow hedges, the portion of the derivative gain or loss that is effective in offsetting the change in the hedged cash flows of the underlying exposure is deferred in accumulated OCI and later reclassified into earnings when the underlying transaction occurs. Gains and losses from the ineffective portion of any hedge are recognized in earnings immediately. For commodity transactions, effective with the date of merger with Constellation, Generation no longer utilizes the election provided for by the cash flow hedge designation and de-designated all of its existing cash flow hedges prior to the merger. Because the underlying forecasted transactions remain probable, the fair value of the effective portion of these cash flow hedges was frozen in accumulated OCI and will be reclassified to results of operations when the forecasted purchase or sale of the energy commodity occurs, or becomes probable of not occurring. None of Constellation’s designated cash flow hedges for commodity transactions prior to the merger were re-designated as cash flow hedges. The effect of this decision is that all economic hedges for commodities are recorded at fair value through earnings for the combined company. For economic hedges that are not designated for hedge accounting andIn addition, for energy-related derivatives entered into for proprietary trading purposes, changes in the fair value of the derivatives are recognized in earnings each period exceptperiod. For economic hedges that are not designated for hedge accounting for ComEd, PECO and BGE, in which changes in the fair value each period are recorded as a regulatory asset or liability.

 

Normal Purchases and Normal Sales Exception. As part of Generation’s energy marketing business, Generation enters into contracts to buy and sell energy to meet the requirements of its customers. These contracts include short-term and long-term commitments to purchase and sell energy and energy-related products in the retail and wholesale markets with the intent and ability to deliver or take delivery. While some of these contracts are considered derivative financial instruments under the authoritative guidance, certain of these qualifying transactions have been designated as normal purchases and normal sales and are thus not required to be recorded at fair value, but rather on an accrual basis of accounting. Determining whether a contract qualifies for the normal purchases and normal sales exception requires that management exercise judgment on whether the contract will physically deliver and requires that management ensure compliance with all of the associated qualification and documentation requirements. Revenues and expenses on contracts that qualify as normal purchases and normal sales are recognized when the underlying physical transaction is completed. Contracts which qualify for the normal purchases and normal sales exception are those for which physical delivery is probable, quantities are expected to be used or sold in the normal course of business over a reasonable period of time and is not financially settled on a net basis. As part of Generation’s energy marketing business, Generation enters into contracts to buy and sell energy to meet the requirements of its customers. These contracts include short-term and long-term commitments to purchase and sell energy and energy-related products in the retail and wholesale

105


markets with the intent and ability to deliver or take delivery. While some of these contracts are considered derivative financial instruments under the authoritative guidance, certain of these qualifying transactions have been designated as normal purchases and normal sales and are thus not required to be recorded at fair value, but rather on an accrual basis of accounting. The contracts that ComEd has entered into with Generation and other suppliers as part of ComEd’s energy procurement process, PECO’s full requirement contracts and block contracts under the PAPUC-approved DSP program, most of PECO’s natural gas supply agreements and all of BGE’s full requirement contracts and natural gas supply agreements that are derivatives qualify for the normal purchases and normal sales exception. If it were determined that a transaction designated as a normal purchase or a normal sale no longer met the scope exceptions, the fair value of the related contract would be recorded on the balance sheet and immediately recognized through earnings at Generation or offset by a regulatory asset or liability at ComEd, PECO and BGE. Thereafter, future changes in fair value would be recorded in the balance sheet and recognized through earnings at Generation. Triggering events that could result in a contract’s loss of the normal purchase and normal sale designation, because it is no longer probable that the contract will result in physical delivery, include changes in business requirements, changes in counterparty credit and financial rather than physical contract settlements.

 

Commodity Contracts.Identification of a commodity contract as an economic hedge requires Generation to determine that the contract is in accordance with the RMP and the forecasted future transaction is probable.RMP. Generation reassesses its economic hedges on a regular basis to determine if they continue to be within the guidelines of the RMP.

 

As a part of accounting for derivatives, the Registrants make estimates and assumptions concerning future commodity prices, load requirements, interest rates, the timing of future transactions and their probable cash flows, the fair value of contracts and the expected changes in the fair value in deciding whether or not to enter into derivative transactions, and in determining the initial accounting treatment for derivative transactions. In accordance with the authoritative guidance for fair value measurements, the Registrants categorize these derivatives under a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes

108


the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value. Derivative contracts are traded in both exchange-based and non-exchange-based markets. Exchange-based derivatives that are valued using unadjusted quoted prices in active markets are categorized in Level 1 in the fair value hierarchy. Certain non-exchange-based derivatives valuedderivatives’ pricing is verified using indicative price quotations available through brokers or over-the-counter, on-line exchanges are categorized in Level 2. These price quotations reflect the average of the bid-ask mid-point prices and are obtained from sources that the Registrants believe provide the most liquid market for the commodity. The price quotations are reviewed and corroborated to ensure the prices are observable and representative of an orderly transaction between market participants. This includes consideration of actual transaction volumes, market delivery points, bid-ask spreads and contract duration. The Registrant’s non-exchange-based derivatives are traded predominately at liquid trading points. The remainder of non-exchange-basedremaining derivative contracts isare valued using the Black model, an industry standard option valuation model. The Black model takes into account inputs such as contract terms, including maturity, and market parameters, and assumptions of the future prices of energy, interest rates, volatility, credit worthiness and credit spread. For non-exchange-based derivatives that trade in liquid markets, such as generic forwards, swaps and options, the model inputs are generally observable. Such instruments are categorized in Level 2. For non-exchange-based derivatives that trade in less liquid markets with limited pricing information, such as the financial swap contract between Generation and ComEd, the model inputs generally would include both observable and unobservable inputs. In instances where observable data is unavailable, consideration is given to the assumptions that market participants would use in valuing the asset or liability. This includes assumptions about market risks such as liquidity, volatility and contract duration. Such instruments are categorized in Level 3 as the model inputs generally are not observable. The Registrants consider nonperformance risk, including credit risk in the valuation of derivative contracts categorized in Level 1, 2 and 3, including both historical and current market data in its assessment of nonperformance risk, including credit risk. The impacts of credit and nonperformance risk to date have generally not been material to the financial statements.

 

106


Interest Rate and Foreign Exchange Derivative Instruments.The Registrants may utilize fixed-to-floating interest rate swaps, which are typically designated as fair value hedges, as a means to achieve the targeted level of variable-rate debt as a percent of total debt. Additionally, the Registrants may use forward-starting interest rate swaps and treasury rate locks to lock in interest-rate levels in anticipation of future financings and floating to fixed swaps for project financing. In addition, Generation enters into interest rate derivative contracts to economically hedge risk associated with the interest rate component of commodity positions. The characterization of the interest rate derivative contracts between the economic hedge and proprietary trading activity is driven by the corresponding characterization of the underlying commodity position that gives rise to the interest rate exposure. Generation does not utilize interest rate derivatives with the objective of benefiting from shifts or change in market interest rates. To manage foreign exchange rate exposure associated with international energy purchases in currencies other than U.S. dollars, Generation utilizes foreign currency derivatives, which are typically designated as economic hedges. The fair value of the agreements is calculated by discounting the future net cash flows to the present value based on the terms and conditions of the agreements and the forward interest rate and foreign exchange curves. As these inputs are based on observable data and valuations of similar instruments, the interest rate swapsand foreign exchange derivatives are primarily categorized in Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy. Certain exchange based interest rate derivatives that are valued using unadjusted quoted prices in active markets are categorized in Level 21 in the fair value hierarchy.

 

See ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK and Notes 911 and 1012 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding the Registrants’ derivative instruments.

 

Taxation (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Significant management judgment is required in determining the Registrants’ provisions for income taxes, primarily due to the uncertainty related to tax positions taken, as well as deferred tax assets and

109


liabilities and valuation allowances. In accordance with applicable authoritative guidance, the Registrants account for uncertain income tax positions using a benefit recognition model with a two-step approach including a more-likely-than-not recognition threshold and a measurement approach based on the largest amount of tax benefit that is greater than 50% likely of being realized upon ultimate settlement. If it is not more-likely-than-not that the benefit of the tax position will be sustained on its technical merits, no benefit is recorded. Uncertain tax positions that relate only to timing of when an item is included on a tax return are considered to have met the recognition threshold. Management evaluates each position based solely on the technical merits and facts and circumstances of the position, assuming the position will be examined by a taxing authority having full knowledge of all relevant information. Significant judgment is required to determine whether the recognition threshold has been met and, if so, the appropriate amount of unrecognized tax benefits to be recorded in the Registrants’ consolidated financial statements.

 

The Registrants evaluate quarterly the probability of realizing deferred tax assets by reviewing a forecast of future taxable income and their intent and ability to implement tax planning strategies, if necessary, to realize deferred tax assets. The Registrants also assess their ability to utilize tax attributes, including those in the form of carryforwards, for which the benefits have already been reflected in the financial statements. The Registrants record valuation allowances for deferred tax assets when the Registrants conclude it is more-likely-than-not such benefit will not be realized in future periods.

 

Actual income taxes could vary from estimated amounts due to the future impacts of various items, including changes in income tax laws, the Registrants’ forecasted financial condition and results of operations, failure to successfully implement tax planning strategies, as well as results of audits and examinations of filed tax returns by taxing authorities. While the Registrants believe the resulting tax balances as of December 31, 20122013 and 20112012 are appropriately accounted for in accordance with the applicable authoritative guidance, the ultimate outcome of tax matters could result in favorable or unfavorable adjustments to their consolidated financial statements and such adjustments could be material. See Note 1214 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding taxes.

 

107


Accounting for Loss Contingencies (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

In the preparation of their financial statements, the Registrants make judgments regarding the future outcome of contingent events and record liabilities for loss contingencies that are probable and can be reasonably estimated based upon available information. The amounts recorded may differ from the actual expense incurred when the uncertainty is resolved. The estimates that the Registrants make in accounting for loss contingencies and the actual results that they record upon the ultimate resolution of these uncertainties could have a significant effect on their consolidated financial statements.

 

Environmental Costs. Environmental investigation and remediation liabilities are based upon estimates with respect to the number of sites for which the Registrants will be responsible, the scope and cost of work to be performed at each site, the portion of costs that will be shared with other parties, the timing of the remediation work, changes in technology, regulations and the requirements of local governmental authorities. Periodic studies are conducted at ComEd, PECO and BGE to determine future remediation requirements and estimates are adjusted accordingly. In addition, periodic reviews are performed at Generation to assess the adequacy of its environmental reserves. These matters, if resolved in a manner different from the estimate, could have a significant effect on the Registrants’ results of operations, financial position and cash flows. See Note 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information.

 

Other, Including Personal Injury Claims. The Registrants are self-insured for general liability, automotive liability, workers’ compensation, and personal injury claims to the extent that losses are

110


within policy deductibles or exceed the amount of insurance maintained. The Registrants have reserves for both open claims asserted and an estimate of claims incurred but not reported (IBNR). The IBNR reserve is estimated based on actuarial assumptions and analysis and is updated annually. Future events, such as the number of new claims to be filed each year, the average cost of disposing of claims, as well as the numerous uncertainties surrounding litigation and possible state and national legislative measures could cause the actual costs to be higher or lower than estimated. Accordingly, these claims, if resolved in a manner different from the estimate, could have a material effect on the Registrants’ results of operations, financial position and cash flows.

 

Revenue Recognition (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Revenues related toSources of Revenue and Selection of Accounting Treatment. The Registrants earn revenues from various business activities including: the sale of energy are recordedand energy-related products, such as natural gas, capacity, and other commodities in non-regulated markets (wholesale and retail); the sale and delivery of electricity and natural gas in regulated markets; and the provision of other energy-related non-regulated products and services.

The appropriate accounting treatment for revenue recognition is based on the nature of the underlying transaction and applicable accounting standards. The Registrants primarily use accrual and mark-to-market accounting as discussed in more detail below.

Accrual Accounting. Under accrual accounting, the Registrants record revenues in the period when service isservices are rendered or energy is delivered to customers. The Registrants generally use accrual accounting to recognize revenues for sales of electricity, natural gas, and other commodities as part of their physical delivery activities. The Registrants enter into these sales transactions using a variety of instruments, including non-derivative agreements, derivatives that qualify for and are designated as normal purchases and normal sales (NPNS) of commodities that will be physically delivered, sales to utility customers under regulated service tariffs, and spot-market sales, including settlements with independent system operators.

Mark-to-Market Accounting.The Registrants record revenues using the mark-to-market method of accounting for transactions that meet the definition of a derivative for which they are not permitted, or have not elected, the NPNS exception. These mark-to-market transactions primarily relate to risk management activities and economic hedges of other accrual activities. Mark-to-market revenues include: inception gains or losses on new transactions where the fair value is observable and realized; and unrealized gains and losses from changes in the fair value of open contracts.

Use of Estimates. Estimates are based upon actual costs incurred and investments in rate base for the period and the rates of return on common equity and associated regulatory capital structure allowed under the applicable tariff. The estimated reconciliations can be affected by, among other things, variances in costs incurred and investments made and actions by regulators or courts.

Unbilled Revenues. The determination of Generation’s, ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s retail energy sales to individual customers however, is based on systematic readings of customer meters generally on a monthly basis. At the end of each month, amounts of energy delivered to customers since the date of the last meter reading are estimated, and corresponding unbilled revenue is recorded. The measurement of unbilled revenue is affected by the following factors: daily customer usage measured by generation or gas throughput volume, customer usage by class, losses of energy during delivery to customers and applicable customer rates. Increases or decreases in volumes delivered to the utilities’ customers and favorable or unfavorable rate mix due to changes in usage patterns in customer classes in the period could be significant to the calculation of unbilled revenue. In addition, volumes may fluctuate monthly as a result of customers electing to use an alternate supplier, which could be

111


significant to the calculation of unbilled revenue since unbilled commodity receivables are not recorded for these customers. Changes in the timing of meter reading schedules and the number and type of customers scheduled for each meter reading date would also have an effect on the measurement of unbilled revenue; however, total operating revenues would remain materially unchanged.

 

See Note 6 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

Regulated Transmission & Distribution Revenues.ComEd’s EIMA distribution formula rate tariff pursuant to EIMA, provides for annual reconciliations to the distribution revenue requirement. As of the balance sheet dates, ComEd has recorded its best estimates of the distribution revenue impact resulting from changes in rates that ComEd believes are probable of approval by the ICC in accordance with the formula rate mechanism. Estimates are based

108


upon actual costs incurred and investments in rate base for the period and the rates of return on common equity and associated regulatory capital structure allowed under the applicable tariff. The estimated reconciliation can be impactedaffected by, among other things, variances in costs incurred and investments made and actions by regulators or courts.

 

ComEd’s and BGE’s FERC transmission formula rate tariffs pursuant to FERC, provide for annual reconciliations to the transmission revenue requirements. As of the balance sheet dates, ComEd and BGE have recorded the best estimate of their respective transmission revenue impact resulting from changes in rates that ComEd and BGE believe are probable of approval by FERC in accordance with the formula rate mechanism. Estimates are based upon actual costs incurred and investments in rate base for the period and the rates of return on common equity and associated regulatory capital structure allowed under the applicable tariff. The estimated reconciliation can be impactedaffected by, among other things, variances in costs incurred and investments made and actions by regulators or courts.

Estimates are based upon actual costs incurred and investments in rate base for the period and the rates of return on common equity and associated regulatory capital structure allowed under the applicable tariff. The estimated reconciliations can be impacted by, among other things, variances in costs incurred and investments made and actions by regulators or courts.

The determination of Generation’s energy sales, excluding the retail business, is based on estimated amounts delivered as well as fixed quantity sales. At the end of each month, amounts of energy delivered to customers during the month are estimated and the corresponding unbilled revenue is recorded. Increases in volumes delivered to the wholesale customers in the period, as well as price, would increase unbilled revenue.

 

Allowance for Uncollectible Accounts (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The allowance for uncollectible accounts reflects the Registrants’ best estimates of losses on the accounts receivable balances. For Generation, the allowance is based on accounts receivable aging historical specific customer payment experience and other currently available information. ComEd and PECO estimate the allowance for uncollectible accounts on customer receivables by applying loss rates developed specifically for each company to the outstanding receivable balance by risk segment. Risk segments represent a group of customers with similar credit quality indicators that are computed based on various attributes, including delinquency of their balances and payment history. Loss rates applied to the accounts receivable balances are based on historical average charge-offs as a percentage of accounts receivable in each risk segment. BGE estimates the allowance for uncollectible accounts on customer receivables by assigning reserve factors for each aging bucket. These percentages were derived from a study of billing progression which determined the reserve factors by aging bucket. ComEd, PECO and BGE customers’ accounts are generally considered delinquent if the amount billed is not received by the time the next bill is issued, which normally occurs on a monthly basis. ComEd, PECO and BGE customer accounts are written off consistent with approved regulatory requirements. ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s provisions for uncollectible accounts will continue to be affected by changes in volume, prices and economic conditions as well as changes in ICC, PAPUC and MDPSC regulations, respectively. See Note 56 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding accounts receivable.

 

112


Results of Operations by Business Segment

 

The comparisons of operating results and other statistical information for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011 set forth below include intercompany transactions, which are eliminated in Exelon’s consolidated financial statements.

 

109


Net Income (Loss) on Common Stock by Business Segment

 

  2012(a) 2011   Favorable
(unfavorable)
2012 vs. 2011
variance
 2010   Favorable
(unfavorable)
2011 vs. 2010
variance
   2013   2012(a) Favorable
(unfavorable)
2013 vs. 2012
variance
 2011   Favorable
(unfavorable)
2012 vs. 2011
variance
 

Exelon

  $1,160  $2,495   $(1,335 $2,563   $(68  $1,719   $1,160  $559  $2,495   $(1,335

Generation

   558   1,771    (1,213  1,972    (201   1,070    562   508   1,771    (1,209

ComEd

   379   416    (37  337    79    249    379   (130  416    (37

PECO

   381   389    (8  324    65    388    377   11   385    (8

BGE

   (9  123    (132  134    (11   197    (9  206   123    (132

 

(a)For BGE, reflects BGE’s operations for the year ended December 31, 2012. For Exelon and Generation, includes the operations of the Constellation and BGE from the date of the merger, March 12, 2012, through December 31, 2012.

 

Results of Operations—Generation

 

 2012(b) 2011 Favorable
(unfavorable)
2012 vs. 2011
variance
 2010 Favorable
(unfavorable)
2011 vs. 2010
variance
  2013 2012(b) Favorable
(unfavorable)
2013 vs. 2012
variance
 2011 Favorable
(unfavorable)
2012 vs. 2011
variance
 

Operating revenues

 $14,437  $10,447  $3,990  $10,025  $422  $15,630  $14,437  $1,193  $10,447  $3,990 

Purchased power and fuel expense

  7,061   3,589   (3,472  3,463   (126  8,197   7,061   (1,136  3,589   (3,472
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense(a)

  7,376   6,858   518   6,562   296   7,433   7,376   57   6,858   518 

Other operating expenses

          

Operating and maintenance

  5,028   3,148   (1,880  2,812   (336  4,534   5,028   494   3,148   (1,880

Depreciation and amortization

  768   570   (198  474   (96  856   768   (88  570   (198

Taxes other than income

  369   264   (105  230   (34  389   369   (20  264   (105
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total other operating expenses

  6,165   3,982   (2,183  3,516    (466  5,779   6,165   386   3,982   (2,183
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Equity in losses of unconsolidated affiliates

  (91  (1  (90  —     (1

Equity in earnings (losses) of unconsolidated affiliates

  10   (91  101   (1  (90

Operating income

  1,120   2,875   (1,755  3,046   (171  1,664   1,120   544   2,875   (1,755
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

          

Interest expense

  (301  (170  (131  (153  (17  (357  (301  (56  (170  (131

Other, net

  239   122   117   257   (135  368   239   129   122   117 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

  (62  (48  (14  104    (152  11   (62  73   (48  (14
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Income before income taxes

  1,058   2,827   (1,769  3,150   (323  1,675   1,058   617   2,827   (1,769

Income taxes

  500   1,056   556   1,178   122   615   500   (115  1,056   556 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net income

  558   1,771   (1,213  1,972   (201  1,060   558   502   1,771   (1,213

Net loss attributable to noncontrolling interest

  (4  —     (4  —     —   

Net loss attributable to non-controlling interest

  (10  (4  (6  —     4 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net income on common stock

 $562  $1,771  $(1,209 $1,972  $(201

Net income attributable to membership interest

 $1,070  $562  $508  $1,771  $(1,209
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)

Generation evaluates its operating performance using the measure of revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense. Generation believes that revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense is a useful measurement because it provides

113


information that can be used to evaluate its operational performance. Revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense is not a presentation defined under GAAP and may not be comparable to other companies’ presentations or deemed more useful than the GAAP information provided elsewhere in this report.

(b)Includes the operations of Constellation from the date of the merger, March 12, 2012, through December 31, 2012.

 

110


Net Income Attributable to Membership Interest

 

Year Ended December 31, 2013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012.Generation’s net income attributable to membership interest increased compared to the same period in 2012 primarily due to higher revenues, net of purchased power and fuel expense, lower operating and maintenance expense and higher earnings from Generation’s interest in CENG; partially offset by impairment of certain generating assets, higher depreciation expense, higher property taxes, and higher interest expense. The increase in revenues, net or purchased power and fuel expense was primarily due to increased capacity prices and higher nuclear volume partially offset by lower realized energy prices, higher nuclear fuel costs, and lower mark-to-market gains in 2013. The decrease in operating and maintenance expense was largely due to 2012 costs associated with a settlement with FERC in 2012 and decreases in transaction costs and employee-related costs associated with the merger.

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011.Generation’s net income attributable to membership interest decreased compared to the same period in 20112012 primarily due to higher operating expenses, the loss on the sale of Brandon Shores, Wagner and C.P. Crane (collectively Maryland generating stations) and the amortization of acquired energy contracts recorded at fair value at the merger date; offset by higher revenues, net of purchased power and fuel expense and favorable NDT fund performance. The increase in operating expenses was due to the addition of Constellation’s financial results from March 12, 2012, costs related to a 2012 settlement with FERC and transaction and employee-related severance costs associated with the merger. The increase in revenues, net of purchased power and fuel expense was also primarily due to the merger. See Note 4 for additional information regarding the loss on the sale of three Maryland generating stations.

Year Ended December 31, 2011 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2010.Generation’s net income decreased compared to the same period in 2010 primarily due to mark-to-market losses on economic hedging activities and higher operating and maintenance expenses. Generation’s 2011 results were further affected by increased nuclear fuel costs, less favorable NDT fund performance in 2011 and higher nuclear refueling outage costs associated with the increased number of refueling outage days in 2011. These unfavorable impacts were partially offset by higher revenues due to the expiration of the PECO PPA on December 31, 2010 and favorable market and portfolio conditions in the ERCOT region.

 

Revenue Net of Purchased Power and Fuel Expense

 

Generation’s six reportable segments are based on the geographic location of its assets, and are largely representative of the footprints of an ISO/RTO and/or NERC region. Descriptions of each of Generation’s six reportable segments are as follows:

 

  

Mid-Atlantic represents operations in the eastern half of PJM, which includes Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, Delaware, the District of Columbia and parts of North Carolina.

 

  

Midwest represents operations in the western half of PJM, which includes portions of Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky and Tennessee, and the entire United States footprint of MISO excluding MISO’s Southern Region, which covers all or most of North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, the remaining parts of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan and Ohio not covered by PJM, and parts of Montana, Missouri and Kentucky.

 

  

New England represents the operations within ISO-NE covering the states of Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Vermont.

 

  

New York represents operations within ISO-NY,New York ISO, which covers the state of New York in its entirety.

 

  

ERCOT represents operations within Electric Reliability Council of Texas, covering most of the state of Texas.

 

  

Other Regions not considered individually significant:

 

  

South represents operations in the FRCC, MISO’s Southern Region, and the remaining portions of the SERC not included within MISO or PJM, which includes all or most of

114


Florida, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, North Carolina, South Carolina and parts of Missouri, Kentucky and Texas. Generation’s South region also includes operations in the SPP, covering Kansas, Oklahoma, most of Nebraska and parts of New Mexico, Texas, Louisiana, Missouri, Mississippi and Arkansas.

 

111


  

West represents operations in the WECC, which includes California ISO, and covers the states of California, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, Idaho, Colorado, and parts of New Mexico, Wyoming and South Dakota.

 

  

Canada represents operations across the entire country of Canada and includes the AESO, OIESO and the Canadian portion of MISO.

 

The following business activities are not allocated to a region, and are reported under Other: retail and wholesale gas, investments in natural gas exploration and production activities, proprietary trading, energy efficiency and demand response, the design, construction, and operation of renewable energy, heating, cooling, and cogeneration facilities, and home improvements, sales of electric and gas appliances, servicing of heating, air conditioning, plumbing, electrical, and indoor quality systems. Further, the following activities are not allocated to a region, and are reported in Other: compensation under the reliability-must-run rate schedule; results of operations from the Maryland Clean-Coal assets sold in Q4the fourth quarter of 2012; unrealized mark-to-market impact of economic hedging activities; amortization of certain intangible assets relating to commodity contracts recorded at fair value as a result of the merger; and other miscellaneous revenues.

 

Generation evaluates the operating performance of its power marketing activities and allocates resources using the measure of revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense which is a non-GAAP measurement. Generation’s operating revenues include all sales to third parties and affiliated sales to ComEd, PECO and BGE. Purchased power costs include all costs associated with the procurement and supply of electricity including capacity, energy and ancillary services. Fuel expense includes the fuel costs for internally generated energy and fuel costs associated with tolling agreements.

 

For the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to 2012 and 2012 compared to 2011, and 2011 compared to 2010, Generation’s revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense by region were as follows:

 

      2012 vs. 2011   2011 vs. 2010       2013 vs. 2012   2012 vs. 2011 
  2012(a) 2011 Variance % Change 2010 Variance % Change   2013 2012 (a) Variance % Change 2011 Variance % Change 

Mid-Atlantic(b)(f)

  $3,433  $3,350  $83   2.5 $2,501  $849   33.9  $3,270  $3,433  $(163  (4.7)%  $3,350  $83   2.5

Midwest(c)

   2,998   3,547   (549  (15.5)%   4,081   (534  (13.1)%    2,586   2,998   (412  (13.7)%   3,547   (549  (15.5)% 

New England

   196   9   187   n.m.    11   (2  n.m.     185   196   (11  (5.6)%   9   187   n.m.  

New York(f)

   76   —     76   n.m.    —     —     n.m.     (4  76   (80  (105.3)%   —     76   n.m.  

ERCOT

   405   84   321   n.m.    (65  149   n.m.     436   405   31   7.7  84   321   n.m.  

Other Regions(d)

   131   (14  145   n.m.    (66  52   n.m.     201   131   70   53.4  (14  145   n.m.  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

    

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

Total electric revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense

  $7,239  $6,976  $263   3.8 $6,462  $514   8.0  $6,674  $7,239  $(565  (7.8)%  $6,976  $263   3.8

Proprietary Trading

   (14  24   (38  n.m.    27   (3  (11.1)%    (8  (14  6   42.9  24   (38  n.m.  

Mark-to-market gains (losses)

   515   (288  803   n.m.    86   (374  n.m.     504   515   (11  (2.1)%   (288  803   n.m.  

Other(e)

   (364  146   (510  n.m.    (13  159   n.m.     263   (364  627   n.m.    146   (510  n.m.  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

    

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

Total revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense

  $7,376  $6,858  $518   7.6 $6,562  $296   4.5  $7,433  $7,376  $57   0.8 $6,858  $518   7.6
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

    

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

(a)Includes results for Constellation business transferred to Generation beginning on March 12, 2012, the date the merger was completed.

115


(b)Results of transactions with PECO and BGE are included in the Mid-Atlantic region.
(c)Results of transactions with ComEd are included in the Midwest region.
(d)Other Regions includes South, West and Canada, which are not considered individually significant.
(e)Other represents activities not allocated to a region. See text above for a description of included activities. Also includes amortization of intangible assets related to commodity contracts recorded at fair value at merger date of $488 million and $1,098 million pre-tax for the twelve months ended December 31, 2012.2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively.
(f)Includes $487$542 million and $306$450 million of purchasepurchased power from CENG in the Mid-Atlantic and New York regions, respectively.respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2013. Includes $487 million and $306 million of purchased power from CENG in the Mid-Atlantic and New York regions, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2012. See Note 2225 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

112


Generation’s supply sources by region are summarized below:

 

          2012 vs. 2011     2011 vs. 2010           2013 vs. 2012     2012 vs. 2011 

Supply source (GWh)

  2012(a)   2011   Variance   % Change 2010   Variance % Change   2013   2012(a)   Variance % Change 2011   Variance   % Change 

Nuclear generation(b)

                        

Mid-Atlantic

   47,337    47,287    50    0.1  47,517    (230  (0.5)%    48,881    47,337    1,544   3.3  47,287    50    0.1

Midwest

   92,525    92,010    515    0.6  92,493    (483  (0.5)%    93,245    92,525    720   0.8  92,010    515    0.6
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 
   139,862    139,297    565    0.4  140,010    (713  (0.5)%    142,126    139,862    2,264   1.6  139,297    565    0.4

Fossil and renewables(b)

                        

Mid-Atlantic(b)(d)

   8,808    7,572    1,236    16.3  9,426    (1,854  (19.7)%    11,714    8,808    2,906   33.0  7,572    1,236    16.3

Midwest

   971    596    375    62.9  68    528   n.m.     1,478    971    507   52.2  596    375    62.9

New England

   9,965    8    9,957    n.m.    10    (2  (20.0)%    10,896    9,965    931   9.3  8    9,957    n.m.  

ERCOT(e)

   6,182    2,030    4,152    n.m.    1,129    901   79.8

Other Regions(f)

   5,913    1,432    4,481    n.m.    84    1,348   n.m.  

ERCOT

   6,453    6,182    271   4.4  2,030    4,152    n.m.  

Other Regions(e)

   6,664    5,913    751   12.7  1,432    4,481    n.m.  
  

 

   

 

   

 

    

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 
   31,839    11,638    20,201    n.m.    10,717    921   8.6   37,205    31,839    5,366   16.9  11,638    20,201    n.m.  

Purchased power

                        

Mid-Atlantic(c)

   20,830    2,898    17,932    n.m.    1,918    980   51.1   14,092    20,830    (6,738  (32.3)%   2,898    17,932    n.m.  

Midwest

   9,805    5,970    3,835    64.2  7,032    (1,062  (15.1)%    4,408    9,805    (5,397  (55.0)%   5,970    3,835    64.2

New England

   9,273    —      9,273    n.m.    —      —     n.m.     7,655    9,273    (1,618  (17.4)%   —       9,273    n.m.  

New York(c)

   11,457    —      11,457    n.m.    —      —     n.m.     13,642    11,457    2,185   19.1  —       11,457    n.m.  

ERCOT(e)

   23,302    7,537    15,765    n.m.    9,494    (1,957  (20.6)% 

Other Regions(f)

   17,327    2,503    14,824    n.m.    2,618    (115  (4.4)% 

ERCOT

   15,063    23,302    (8,239  (35.4)%   7,537    15,765    n.m.  

Other Regions(e)

   14,931    17,327    (2,396  (13.8)%   2,503    14,824    n.m.  
  

 

   

 

   

 

    

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 
   91,994    18,908    73,086    n.m.    21,062    (2,154  (10.2)%    69,791    91,994    (22,203  (24.1)%   18,908    73,086    n.m.  

Total supply by region(g)(f)

                        

Mid-Atlantic(h)(g)

   76,975    57,757    19,218    33.3  58,861    (1,104  (1.9)%    74,687    76,975    (2,288  (3.0)%   57,757    19,218    33.3

Midwest(i)(h)

   103,301    98,576    4,725    4.8  99,593    (1,017  (1.0)%    99,131    103,301    (4,170  (4.0)%   98,576    4,725    4.8

New England

   19,238    8    19,230    n.m.    10    (2  n.m.     18,551    19,238    (687  (3.6)%   8    19,230    n.m.  

New York

   11,457    —      11,457    n.m.    —      —     n.m.     13,642    11,457    2,185   19.1  —       11,457    n.m.  

ERCOT

   29,484    9,567    19,917    n.m.    10,623    (1,056  (9.9)%    21,516    29,484    (7,968  (27.0)%   9,567    19,917    n.m.  

Other Regions(f)

   23,240    3,935    19,305    n.m.    2,702    1,233   45.6

Other Regions(e)

   21,595    23,240    (1,645  (7.1)%   3,935    19,305    n.m.  
  

 

   

 

   

 

    

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total supply

   263,695    169,843    93,852    55.3  171,789    (1,946  (1.1)%    249,122    263,695    (14,573  (5.5)%   169,843    93,852    55.3
  

 

   

 

   

 

    

 

   

 

    

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Includes results for the Constellation business transferred to Generation beginning on March 12, 2012, the date the merger was completed.
(b)Includes the proportionate share of output where Generation has an undivided ownership interest in jointly-owned generating plants and does not include ownership through equity method investments (e.g., CENG).
(c)Purchased power includes physical volumes of 12,067 GWh and 9,925 GWh in the Mid-Atlantic and 12,165 GWh and 9,350 GWh in New York as a result of the PPA with CENG for the yearyears ended December 31, 2012.2013 and 2012 respectively.
(d)Excludes generation under the reliability-must-run rate schedule and generation of Brandon Shores, H.A. Wagner, and C.P. Crane, the generating facilities divested in Q4the fourth quarter of 2012 as a result of the Exelon and Constellation merger.
(e)Generation from Wolf Hollow is included in purchased power through the acquisition date of August 24, 2011, and included within Fossil and Renewables subsequent to the acquisition date.
(f)Other Regions includes South, West and Canada, which are not considered individually significant.
(g)(f)Excludes physical proprietary trading volumes of 8,762 GWh, 12,958 GWh 5,742 GWh and 3,6255,742 GWh for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011 respectively.

116


(h)(g)Includes sales to PECO through the competitive procurement process of 5,070 GWh, 7,762 GWh, 7,041 GWh, and 42,0037,041 GWh for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011 respectively. Sales to BGE of 5,595 GWh and 3,766 GWh were included for the yearyears ended December 31, 2012.2013 and 2012 respectively.
(i)(h)Includes sales to ComEd under the RFP procurement of 7,491 GWh, 4,152 GWh 4,731 GWh and 8,2184,731 GWh for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011 respectively.

 

113


The following table presents electric revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense per MWh of electricity sold during the year ended December 31, 2013 as compared to the same period in 2012 and 2012 as compared to the same period in 2011 and 2011 as compared to the same period in 2010.2011.

 

        2012 vs. 2011   2011 vs. 2010         2013 vs. 2012   2012 vs. 2011 

$/MWh

  2012(a)   2011 % Change 2010 % Change   2013 2012(a)   % Change 2011 % Change 

Mid-Atlantic(b)

  $44.60   $58.00   (23.1)%  $42.48   36.5  $43.78  $44.60    (1.8)%  $58.00   (23.1)% 

Midwest(c)

   29.02    35.99   (19.4)%   40.98   (12.2)%    26.09   29.02    (10.1)%   35.99   (19.4)% 

New England

   10.19    n.m.    n.m.    —     n.m.     9.97   10.19    (2.1)%   n.m.    n.m.  

New York

   6.63    n.m.    n.m.    —     n.m.     (0.29  6.63    (104.4)%   n.m.    n.m.  

ERCOT

   13.74    8.78   56.5  (6.24  n.m.     20.26   13.74    47.5  8.78   56.5

Other Regions(d)

   5.64    (3.56  n.m.    (23.97  85.1   9.31   5.64    65.0  (3.56  n.m.  

Electric revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense per MWh(e)(f)

  $27.45   $41.07   (33.2)%  $37.62   9.2  $26.79  $27.45    (2.4)%  $41.07   (33.2)% 

 

(a)Includes financial results for the Constellation business transferred to Generation beginning on March 12, 2012, the date the merger was completed.
(b)Includes sales to PECO of $405 million (5,070 GWh), $536 million (7,762 GWh), and $508 million (7,041 GWh) and $2,091 million (42,003 GWh) for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, respectively. Sales to BGE of $455 million (5,595 GWh) and $322 million (3,766 GWH)GWh) were included for the yearyears ended December 31, 2012.2013 and 2012 respectively. Excludes compensation under the reliability-must-run rate schedule and the financial results of Brandon Shores, H.A. Wagner, and C.P. Crane, the generating facilities divested in Q4the fourth quarter of 2012 as a result of the merger.
(c)Includes sales to ComEd of $283 million (7,491 GWh), $162 million (4,152 GWh), and $179 million (4,731 GWh) and $288 million (8,218 GWhs) and settlements of the ComEd swap of $230 million, $627 million $474 million and $385$474 million for years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, respectively.
(d)Other Regions includes South, West and Canada, which are not considered individually significant.
(e)Revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense per MWh represents the average margin per MWh of electricity sold during the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, respectively, and excludes the mark-to-market impact of Generation’s economic hedging activities.
(f)Excludes Generation’s other business activities not allocated to a region, including retail and wholesale gas, activity,upstream natural gas, proprietary trading, portfolio activity,energy efficiency, energy management and demand response. Also excludes Generation’s compensation under the reliability-must-run rate schedule, and fuel sales. Also excludes results from energy efficiency, energy management and demand response, upstream natural gas and the design and construction of renewable energy facilities. In addition, excludes the financial results of Brandon Shores, H.A. Wagner, and C.P. Crane, the generating facilities divested in Q4the fourth quarter of 2012 as a result of the Exelon and Constellation merger. Also excludesmerger, and amortization of certain intangible assets relating to commodity contracts recorded at fair value atas a result of the Exelon and Constellation merger date.of $488 million and $1,098 million, respectively.

 

Mid-Atlantic

Year Ended December 31, 2013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012. The decrease in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in the Mid-Atlantic of $163 million was primarily due to lower realized power prices and increased nuclear fuel costs, partially offset by the addition of Constellation in 2012, higher capacity revenues, and higher nuclear revenues.

 

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011. The increase in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in the Mid-Atlantic of $83 million was primarily due to the addition of Constellation in 2012 and higher capacity revenues, partially offset by lower realized power prices and increased nuclear fuel costs.

117


Midwest

 

Year Ended December 31, 20112013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 20102012. The $849 million increasedecrease in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in the Mid-AtlanticMidwest of $412 million was primarily due to lower realized power prices, increased margins on the volumes previously sold under Generation’s PPA with PECO, which expired on December 31, 2010,nuclear fuel costs, and lower capacity revenues, partially offset by increasedhigher nuclear fuel costs.

Midwestrevenues.

 

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011. The decrease in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in the Midwest of $549 million was primarily due to lower capacity revenues, increased nuclear fuel costs, and lower realized power prices, partially offset by decreased congestion costs.

 

New England

Year Ended December 31, 20112013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 20102012. The $534$11 million decrease in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in the Midwest wasNew England is primarily due to

114


decreased lower realized margins in 2011 for the volumes previously sold by Generation under the 2006 ComEd auction contracts and increased nuclear fuel costs. These decreases wereenergy prices, partially offset by increased capacity revenues, favorable settlements under the ComEd swap andaddition of Constellation in 2012. Prior to the additional revenue following the acquisition of Exelon Wind in December 2010.

merger, New England was not a significant contributor to revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense at Generation.

 

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011. The $187 million increase in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in New England was as athe result of the Constellation merger. Prior to the merger, New England was not a significant contributor to revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense at Generation.

 

New York

 

Year Ended December 31, 2013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012. The $80 million decrease in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in New York was primarily due to decreased realized energy prices, partially offset by the addition of Constellation. Prior to the merger, New York was not a significant contributor to revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense at Generation.

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011.2011. The $76 million increase in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in New York was as athe result of the Constellation merger. Prior to the merger, New York was not a significant contributor to revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense at Generation.

 

ERCOT

 

Year Ended December 31, 2013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012.The $31 million increase in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in ERCOT was primarily due to increased realized energy prices and the addition of Constellation in 2012, partially offset by a decrease due to the termination of an energy supply contract with a retail power supply company that was previously a consolidated variable interest entity. As a result of the termination, Generation no longer has a variable interest in the retail supply company and ceased consolidation of the entity during the third quarter of 2013.

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011.The $321 million increase in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in ERCOT was primarily as a result of the addition of Constellation merger,in 2012, partially offset by a decrease in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in the legacy Generation ERCOT portfolio driven by the performance of Generation’s generating units during extreme weather events that occurred in Texas in February and August 2011.

118


Other Regions

 

Year Ended December 31, 20112013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 20102012.. The $149$70 million increase in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in the ERCOTOther Regions was primarily driven byas a result of the performanceaddition of Generation’s generating units during extreme weather events that occurredConstellation in Texas2012, in February and August 2011.

Other Regionsaddition to increased renewable generation.

 

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011.The $145 million increase in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in Other Regions was primarily as a result of the Constellation merger.

 

Mark-to-market

Year Ended December 31, 20112013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2010.2012The $52. Generation is exposed to market risks associated with changes in commodity prices and enters into economic hedges to mitigate exposure to these fluctuations. Mark-to-market gains on economic hedging activities were $504 million increase in revenue net2013 compared to gains of purchased power$515 million in 2012. See Notes 11 and fuel expense in Other Regions was due12 of the Combined Notes to the impact of additional revenue from the acquisition of Exelon Wind in December 2010, as well as higher margins due to overall favourable market conditions.

Mark-to-marketConsolidated Financial Statements for information on gains and losses associated with mark-to-market derivatives.

 

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011. Generation is exposed to market risks associated with changes in commodity prices and enters into economic hedges to mitigate exposure to these fluctuations. Mark-to-market gains on economic hedging activities were $515 million in 2012 compared to losses of $288 million in 2011. See Notes 7Note 11 and 8 of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for information on gains and losses associated with mark-to-market derivatives.

115


Year Ended December 31, 2011 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2010. Generation is exposed to market risks associated with changes in commodity prices and enters into economic hedges to mitigate exposure to these fluctuations. Mark-to-market losses on economic hedging activities were $288 million in 2011 compared to gains of $86 million in 2010. See Notes 7 and 812 of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for information on gains and losses associated with mark-to-market derivatives.

 

Other

Year Ended December 31, 2013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012. The $627 million increase in other revenue net of purchased power and fuel was primarily due to reduced amortization expense of the acquired energy contracts recorded at fair value at the merger date. In addition, the increase is also attributable to results from activities acquired as part of the 2012 merger with Constellation including retail gas, energy efficiency, energy management and demand response, upstream natural gas, and the design and construction of renewable energy facilities. These increases were partially offset by the reduction in revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense from the sale of Brandon Shores, H.A. Wagner and C.P. Crane, the generating facilities divested in the fourth quarter of 2012 as a result of the Exelon and Constellation merger. See Note 4 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding contract intangibles and assets planned for divestiture as a result of the Constellation merger.

 

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011. The $510 million decrease in other revenue net of purchased power and fuel was primarily due to theincreased amortization expense of the acquired energy contracts recorded at fair value at the merger date. This decrease was partially offset by results from activities acquired as part of the 2012 merger with Constellation including retail gas, energy efficiency, energy management and demand response, upstream natural gas and the design and construction of renewable energy facilities. In addition, other revenue net of purchased power and fuel includes the results of Brandon Shores, H.A. Wagner and C.P. Crane, the generating facilities divested in Q4fourth quarter of 2012 as a result of the Exelon and Constellation merger. See Note 4 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding contract intangibles and assets planned for divestiture as a result of the Constellation merger.

 

Year Ended December 31, 2011 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2010. The $159 million increase in other revenue net of purchased power and fuel was primarily due the impacts of the impairment charge of certain emissions allowances recognized in 2010, additional other wholesale fuel sales in 2011 as well as compensation under the reliability-must-run rate schedule further described in Note 15 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Nuclear Fleet Capacity Factor and Production Costs

 

The following table presents nuclear fleet operating data for 2012,2013, as compared to 20112012 and 2010,2011, for the Exelon-operatedGeneration-operated plants. The nuclear fleet capacity factor presented in the table is defined

119


as the ratio of the actual output of a plant over a period of time to its output if the plant had operated at full average annual mean capacity for that time period. Nuclear fleet production cost is defined as the costs to produce one MWh of energy, including fuel, materials, labor, contracting and other miscellaneous costs, but excludes depreciation and certain other non-production related overhead costs. Generation considers capacity factor and production costs useful measures to analyze the nuclear fleet performance between periods. Generation has included the analysis below as a complement to the financial information provided in accordance with GAAP. However, these measures are not a presentation defined under GAAP and may not be comparable to other companies’ presentations or be more useful than the GAAP information provided elsewhere in this report.

 

  2012 2011 2010   2013 2012 2011 

Nuclear fleet capacity factor(a)

   92.7  93.3  93.9   94.1  92.7  93.3

Nuclear fleet production cost per MWh(a)

  $19.50  $18.86  $17.31   $19.83  $19.50  $18.86 

 

(a)Excludes Salem, which is operated by PSEG Nuclear, LLC, and CENG’s nuclear facilities, which are operated by CENG. Reflects ownership percentage of stations operated by Exelon.

Year Ended December 31, 2013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012. The nuclear fleet capacity factor, which excludes Salem, increased primarily due to a lower number of planned refueling outage days in 2013, partially offset by a higher number of non-refueling outage days. For 2013 and 2012, planned refueling outage days totaled 233 and 274, respectively, and non-refueling outage days totaled 75 and 73, respectively. Higher nuclear fuel costs and higher plant operating and maintenance costs, partially offset by higher number of net MWhs generated resulted in a higher production cost per MWh during 2013 as compared to 2012.

 

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011. The nuclear fleet capacity factor, which excludes Salem, decreased primarily due to a higher number of non-refueling outage days, partially offset by a lower number of planned refueling outage days in 2012. For 2012 and 2011, planned refueling outage days totaled 274 and 283, respectively, and non-refueling outage days totaled 73 and 52, respectively. Higher nuclear fuel costs resulted in a higher production cost per MWh during 2012 as compared to 2011.

116


Year Ended December 31, 2011 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2010. The nuclear fleet capacity factor, which excludes Salem, decreased primarily due to a higher number of planned refueling outage days. For 2011 and 2010, planned refueling outage days totaled 283 and 261, respectively. Lower generation, higher nuclear fuel costs and higher plant operating and maintenance costs resulted in a higher production cost per MWh during 2011 as compared to 2010.

 

Operating and Maintenance Expense

The changes in operating and maintenance expense for 2013 compared to 2012, consisted of the following:

   Increase
(Decrease)
 

Plant retirements and divestitures(a)

  $(440

FERC settlement(b)

   (195

Constellation merger and integration costs

   (107

Maryland commitments

   (35

Bodily injury costs(c)

   (16

Nuclear refueling outage costs, including the co-owned Salem plant(d)

   (14

Corporate allocations(e)

   (5

Labor, other benefits, contracting and materials(f)

   160 

Impairment and related charges of certain generating assets

   160 

Midwest generation bankruptcy charges

   11 

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefits expense

   5 

Other

   (18
  

 

 

 

Decrease in operating and maintenance expense

  $(494
  

 

 

 

120


(a)Reflects the operating and maintenance expense associated with the generating assets retired or divested during 2012.
(b)Reflects costs incurred as part of a March 2012 settlement with the FERC to resolve a dispute related to Constellation’s prior period hedging and risk management transactions.
(c)Reflects decreased asbestos-related bodily injury expense for 2013 compared to 2012.
(d)Reflects the impact of decreased planned refueling outage days during 2013.
(e)The decrease in cost allocations during 2013 primarily reflects merger synergy savings for Exelon’s corporate operations and shared service entities, partially offset by the impact of an increased share of corporate allocated costs due to the merger.
(f)Includes cost of sales of our other business activities that are not allocated to a region.

 

The changes in operating and maintenance expense for 2012 compared to 2011, consisted of the following:

 

  Increase
(Decrease)
   Increase
(Decrease)
 

Labor, other benefits, contracting and materials(a)

  $845   $845 

Loss on the sale of Maryland Clean Coal assets(a)(b)

   278    278 

FERC settlement(b)(c)

   195    195 

Constellation merger and integration costs

   182    182 

Corporate allocations(c)(d)

   175    175 

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefits expense

   76    76 

Maryland commitments(d)(e)

   35    35 

Nuclear refueling outage costs, including the co-owned Salem plant(e)(f)

   (52   (52

Other

   146    146 
  

 

   

 

 

Increase in operating and maintenance expense

  $1,880   $1,880 
  

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Includes cost of sales of our other business activities that are not allocated to a region.
(b)Represents expense recorded during the third quarter of 2012 due to the reduction in book value. Upon completion of the November 30, 2012 transaction, Generation recorded a $6 million gain within Other, net in its Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. The net loss on the sale of the Maryland Clean Coal assets was $272 million. See Note 4 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.
(b)(c)Reflects costs incurred as part of a March 2012 settlement with the FERC to resolve a dispute related to Constellation’s prior period hedging and risk management transactions.
(c)(d)Reflects an increased share of corporate allocated costs due to the merger.
(d)(e)Reflects costs incurred as part of the Maryland order approving the merger.
(e)(f)Reflects the impact of decreased planned refueling outages during 2012.

 

The changes in operating and maintenance expense for 2011 compared to 2010, consisted of the following:

   Increase
(Decrease)
 

Labor, other benefits, contracting and materials

  $113 

Nuclear refueling outage costs, including the co-owned Salem Plant(a)

   74 

Exelon Wind(b)

   39 

Asset retirement obligation reduction(c)

   28 

2010 nuclear insurance credit(d)

   20 

Corporate allocations(e)

   19 

Acquisition costs(f)

   14 

Other(g)

   29 
  

 

 

 

Increase in operating and maintenance expense

  $336 
  

 

 

 

(a)Reflects the impact of increased planned refueling outages during 2011.
(b)Includes $30 million in 2011 associated with labor, other benefits, contracting and materials at Exelon Wind.
(c)Reflects an increase in Generation’s decommissioning obligation for spent fuel at Zion station. See Note 13 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information.
(d)Reflects the impact of the return of property and business interruption insurance premiums in 2010. No premiums were returned for 2011.

117


(e)Primarily reflects increased lobbying costs related to EPA and competitive market matters.
(f)Reflects increase in certain costs associated with the acquisitions of Constellation, Exelon Wind, Wolf Hollow and Antelope Valley incurred in 2011. See Note 4 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information.
(g)Includes additional environmental remediation costs recorded during 2011.

Depreciation and Amortization

Year Ended December 31, 2013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012. The increase in depreciation and amortization expense was primarily a result of higher plant balances due to the addition of Constellation facilities and ongoing capital additions.

 

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011. The increase in depreciation and amortization expense was primarily a result of higher plant balances due to the addition of Constellation facilities; and capital additions and other upgrades to legacy plants.

 

Taxes Other Than Income

Year Ended December 31, 20112013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 20102012. The increase in depreciation and amortization expense was primarily a result of higher plant balances due to the acquisitionaddition of Exelon Wind, capital additions and other upgrades to existing facilities. Higher plant balances resultedConstellation’s financial results in an increase in depreciation and amortization expense of $61 million. The remaining increase in depreciation and amortization expense was due to the impact of increases in asset retirement costs (ARC) for Generation’s nuclear generating facilities.

Taxes Other Than Income2012.

 

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011. The increase was primarily due to the addition of Constellation’s financial results in 2012.

 

Year Ended December 31, 2011 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2010. The increase was primarily due to increased gross receipt taxes related to retail sales in the Mid-Atlantic region. These gross receipt taxes are recovered in revenue, and as a result, have no impact to Generation’s results of operations.121


Equity in LossesEarnings (Losses) of Unconsolidated Affiliates

 

Year Ended December 31, 20122013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 20112012. Equity in lossesearnings (losses) of unconsolidated affiliates increased primarily due to $50 million favorable net income generated from Exelon’s equity investment in 2012 primarily reflected $172CENG and a reduction of $58 million related to theof amortization of the basis difference in CENG recorded at fair value at the merger date, partially offset by $73 million of net income generated from Exelon’s equity investment in CENG.date.

 

Interest Expense

Year Ended December 31, 2013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012. The increase in interest expense is primarily due to the increase in long-term debt as a result of the merger and increased project financing.

 

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011. The increase in interest expense is primarily due to the increase in long-term debt as a result of the merger.

 

Other, Net

Year Ended December 31, 20112013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 20102012. The increase of $129 million in interest expense isother, net primarily duereflects $85 million of credit facility termination fees recorded in 2012 and increased net realized and unrealized gains related to debt issuancesthe NDT funds of Generation’s Non-Regulatory Agreement Units compared to net realized and unrealized gains in 2010, further2012, as described in Note 11the table below. Additionally, the increase reflects income related to the contractual elimination of income tax expense associated with the NDT funds of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. The increase in long-term debt resulted in higher interest expense of approximately $27 million.

Other, NetRegulatory Agreement Units.

 

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011. The increase of $117 million in other, net primarily reflects a $36 million bargain purchase gain associated with the August 2011 acquisition of Wolf Hollow, $32 million of interest income from a one-time NDT fund special transfer tax deduction in 2011, net realized and unrealized gains related to the NDT funds of Generation’s Non-Regulatory Agreement Units compared to net realized and unrealized losses in 2011, as described in the table below.below, offset by $85 million of credit facility termination fees recorded in 2012. Additionally, the increase reflects $117 million and $18 million of income in 2012 and 2011, respectively, related to the contractual elimination of income tax expense associated with the NDT funds of the Regulatory Agreement Units, $85 million of credit facility termination fees

118


recorded in 2012, a $36 million bargain purchase gain associated with the August 2011 acquisition of Wolf Hollow and the impact of a $32 million one-time interest income from the NDT fund special transfer tax deduction in 2011.

Year Ended December 31, 2011 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2010. The decrease in other, net primarily reflects net unrealized losses in 2011 related to the NDT funds of Generation’s Non-Regulatory Agreement Units compared to net unrealized gains in 2010, as described in the table below. Additionally, the decrease reflects the contractual elimination of $18 million of income tax expense associated with the NDT funds of the Regulatory Agreement Units in 2011 compared to the contractual elimination of $96 million of income tax expense in 2010. These decreases are partially offset by the $32 million impact of one-time interest income from the NDT fund special transfer tax deduction recognized in 2011 and a $36 million bargain purchase gain associated with the August 2011 acquisition of Wolf Hollow.Units.

 

The following table provides unrealized and realized gains (losses) on the NDT funds of the Non-Regulatory Agreement Units recognized in other,Other, net for 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010:2011:

 

  2012   2011 2010   2013   2012   2011 

Net unrealized gains (losses) on decommissioning trust funds

  $105   $(4 $104   $146   $105   $(4

Net realized gains (losses) on sale of decommissioning trust funds

  $51   $(10 $2   $24   $51   $(10

 

Effective Income Tax Rate.

 

Generation’s effective income tax rates for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011 and 2010 were 47.3%36.7%, 37.4%47.3% and 37.4%, respectively. See Note 1214 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding the components of the effective income tax rates.

 

122


Results of Operations—ComEd

 

   2012  2011  Favorable
(unfavorable)
2012 vs. 2011
variance
  2010  Favorable
(unfavorable)
2011 vs. 2010
variance
 

Operating revenues

  $5,443  $6,056  $(613 $6,204  $(148

Purchased power expense

   2,307   3,035   728   3,307   272 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Revenue net of purchased power expense (a)

   3,136   3,021   115   2,897   124 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other operating expenses

      

Operating and maintenance

   1,345   1,189   (156  1,069   (120

Depreciation and amortization

   610   554   (56  516   (38

Taxes other than income

   295   296   1   256   (40
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other operating expenses

   2,250   2,039   (211  1,841   (198
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating income

   886   982   (96  1,056   (74
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

      

Interest expense, net

   (307  (345  38   (386  41 

Other, net

   39   29   10   24   5 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

   (268  (316  48   (362  46 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Income before income taxes

   618   666   (48  694   (28

Income taxes

   239   250   11   357   107 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income

  $379  $416  $(37 $337  $79 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

119


  2013  2012  Favorable
(Unfavorable)
2013 vs. 2012
Variance
  2011  Favorable
(Unfavorable)
2012 vs. 2011
Variance
 

Operating revenues

 $4,464  $5,443  $(979 $6,056  $(613

Purchased power expense

  1,174   2,307   1,133   3,035   728 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Revenues net of purchased power expense (a)

  3,290   3,136   154   3,021   115 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other operating expenses

     

Operating and maintenance

  1,368   1,345   (23  1,189   (156

Depreciation and amortization

  669   610   (59  554   (56

Taxes other than income

  299   295   (4  296   1 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other operating expenses

  2,336   2,250   (86  2,039   (211
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating income

  954   886   68   982   (96
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

     

Interest expense, net

  (579  (307  (272  (345  38 

Other, net

  26   39   (13  29   10 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

  (553  (268  (285  (316  48 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Income before income taxes

  401   618   (217  666   (48

Income taxes

  152   239   87   250   11 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income

 $249  $379  $(130 $416  $(37
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

(a)ComEd evaluates its operating performance using the measure of revenuerevenues net of purchased power expense. ComEd believes that revenuerevenues net of purchased power expense is a useful measurement because it provides information that can be used to evaluate its operational performance. In general, ComEd only earns margin based on the delivery and transmission of electricity. ComEd has included its discussion of revenuerevenues net of purchased power expense below as a complement to the financial information provided in accordance with GAAP. However, revenuerevenues net of purchased power expense is not a presentation defined under GAAP and may not be comparable to other companies’ presentations or deemed more useful than the GAAP information provided elsewhere in this report.

 

Net Income

 

Year Ended December 31, 2013, Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012. ComEd’s net income for the year ended December 31, 2013, was lower than the same period in 2012, primarily due to the remeasurement of Exelon’s like-kind exchange tax position, partially offset by increased electric distribution revenues, including the impacts of Senate Bill 9, and increased transmission revenues. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters and Note 14—Income Taxes of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

Year Ended December 31, 2012, Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011.ComEd’s net income for the year ended December 31, 2012, was lower than the same period in 2011, primarily due to lower electric distribution rates, effective June 20, 2012, pursuant to the ICC Order in the initial formula filing under EIMA. Offsetting the impact of the lower rates were increases in revenue resulting from the annual reconciliation of ComEd’s distribution revenue requirement pursuant to EIMA, net of lower allowed return on equity. Additionally, offsetting the impacts of lower electric distribution rates was increased transmission revenue during 2012. See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

The increase in operating and maintenance expenses, reflect increases in contracting and labor expenses as a result of the first year of the ten-year grid modernization project related to EIMA. Operating and maintenance costs also increased as a result of increased pension and other non-pension and postretirement benefits expenses due to the impact of lower actuarially assumed discount rates and expected return on plan assets for 2012 as compared to 2011. Additionally, operating and maintenance costs were higher in 2012 due to one-time net benefits recognized in 2011 pursuant to the May 2011 ICC order in ComEd’s 2010 rate case.

Year Ended December 31, 2011, Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2010.The increase in ComEd’s net income was primarily due to higher electric distribution rates, effective June 1, 2011, pursuant to the ICC order in the 2010 Rate Case, and increased revenues resulting from the annual reconciliation of ComEd’s distribution revenue requirement pursuant to EIMA, which became effective in the fourth quarter of 2011. Net income was also higher due to the re-measurement of uncertain income tax positions in 2010 related to the 1999 sale of ComEd’s fossil generating assets. The re-measurement resulted in increased interest expense and income tax expense recorded in 2010. These increases to net income were partially offset by higher operatingincreased electric distribution revenues and maintenance expense and taxes other than income.increased transmission revenues.

The increase in operating and maintenance expense reflects the benefit recorded in 2010 resulting from the ICC’s approval of ComEd’s uncollectible accounts expense rider mechanism, a reduction in ComEd’s ARO reserve in 2010, and higher labor and contracting expenses incurred in 2011. These increases to operating and maintenance expense were partially offset by one-time net benefits recognized pursuant to the ICC order in ComEd’s 2010 rate case.

 

Operating Revenues andNet of Purchased Power Expense

 

There are certain drivers to revenueof operating revenues that are fully offset by their impact on purchased power expense, such as commodity procurement costs and participation in customer choice programs. ComEd is permitted to recover its electricity procurement costs from retail customers without mark-up. Therefore, fluctuations in electricity procurement costs have no impact on electric revenuerevenues net of purchased power expense. See Note 33—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on ComEd’s electricity procurement process.

 

120123


Electric revenues and purchased power expense are affected by fluctuations in customers’ purchases from competitive electric generation suppliers. All ComEd customers have the abilitychoice to purchase electricity from an alternativea competitive electric generation supplier. The customerCustomer choice of electric generation supplier doesprograms do not impact theComEd’s volume of deliveries, but affects revenue collected from customersdo affect ComEd’s operating revenues related to supplied energy, and generation services. which is fully offset in purchased power expense. Therefore, customer choice programs have no impact on revenues net of purchased power expense.

The number of retail customers purchasing electricity from competitive electric generation suppliersparticipating in customer choice programs was 2,630,185, 1,627,150 and 380,262 at December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively, representing 68%, 43% and 10% of total retail customers, respectively. Retail deliveriesenergy purchased from competitive electric generation suppliers represented 81%, 65% and 56% of ComEd’s retail kWh sales atfor the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively. On March 20,During 2012, the City of Chicago and approximately 170240 Illinois municipalities, including governmental entities such as townships and counties, approved referenda regarding electric supply aggregation. This approvalThe referenda allowed municipalgovernmental officials to identify and sign contracts with alternativecompetitive electric generation suppliers on behalf of the eligible retail electric suppliers. With few exceptions, thesecustomers in the community, while also allowing customers to opt-out of the municipal aggregation program. As of December 31, 2013, there are approximately 330 municipalities that have identified and switched to alternative retail electric suppliersapproved a municipal aggregation referendum in the ComEd service territory. As a result, approximately 69% of residential usage as of December 31, 2012. The City of Chicago and approximately 70 other municipalities and townships passed similar referenda in November 2012. The City of Chicago switching will occur in the first quarter of 2013. All or some of the other 70 municipalities and townships are also expected to switch during the first half of 2013. As contracts with new retail electric suppliers take effect, ComEd expects the percentage of retail deliveries purchased from retail electric suppliers to continue to increase. It2013 is anticipated that by the end of the second quarter 2013 approximately 72% of retail customers and 82% of kWh sales in the ComEd region will bebeing supplied by competitive retail electric suppliers.generation suppliers, and ComEd estimates that over 80% of that usage resulted from municipal aggregation activities.

 

The changes in ComEd’s electric revenuerevenues net of purchased power expense for 2012the year ended 2013 compared to 2011the same period in 2012 consisted of the following:

 

   Increase
(Decrease)
 

Electric distribution revenues

  $40 

Transmission

   40 

Regulatory required programs cost recovery

   32 

Revenues subject to refund, net

   4 

Weather delivery

   2 

Volume delivery

   (4

Other

   1 
  

 

 

 

Total increase

  $115 
  

 

 

 
   Increase
(Decrease)
 

Weather

  $(17

Volume

   (2

Electric distribution revenues, including impacts of Senate Bill 9

   168 

Discrete impacts of the 2012 Distribution Rate Case Order

   13 

Transmission revenues

   14 

Regulatory required programs

   20 

Uncollectible accounts recovery, net

   (58

Other

   16 
  

 

 

 

Total increase

  $154 
  

 

 

 

 

Electric distribution revenuesWeather.

In 2011, the ICC issued an order in the 2010 Rate Case approving an increase in ComEd’s annual revenue requirement. The order became effective June 1, 2011, resulting in higher revenues for the first six months ended June 30, 2012, compared to the same period in 2011. Offsetting this increase was the lower rates which went into effect June 20, 2012, resulting from the May Order issued in ComEd’s 2011 formula rate proceeding under EIMA. Additionally, electric distribution revenues increased as a result of the annual reconciliation of ComEd’s distribution revenue requirement pursuant to EIMA. See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

Transmission

ComEd’s transmission rates are established based on a FERC-approved formula. ComEd’s most recent annual formula rate update, filed in May 2012, reflects actual 2011 expenses and investments plus forecasted 2012 capital additions. Transmission revenues net of purchased power expense vary from year to year based upon fluctuations in the underlying costs, investments being recovered and

121


other billing determinants, such as the highest daily peak load from the previous calendar year. ComEd set a record for the highest daily peak load of 23,753 MWs on July 20, 2011, which was reflected in the determination of transmission revenues billed beginning January 1, 2012, and transmission rates that went into effect on June 1, 2012. See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

Regulatory required programs cost recovery

Revenues related to regulatory required programs are the recoveries from customers for costs of various legislative and/or regulatory programs on a full and current basis through approved regulated rates. Programs include ComEd’s energy efficiency and demand response and purchased power administrative costs. An equal and offsetting amount has been reflected in operating and maintenance expense during the periods presented. Refer to the operating and maintenance expense discussion below for additional information on included programs.

Revenues subject to refund, net

ComEd records revenues subject to refund based upon its best estimate of customer collections that may be required to be refunded. During the year ended December 31, 2012, ComEd did not record material revenues subject to refund associated with any matters. As a result of the September 30, 2010, Illinois Appellate Court (Court) decision in the 2007 Rate Case which ruled against ComEd on the treatment of post-test year accumulated depreciation and the recovery of system modernization costs via Rider SMP, ComEd began recording revenue subject to refund prospectively. In addition, ComEd began recording revenue subject to refund on June 1, 2010, relating to the recovery of Cash Working Capital (CWC) through its energy procurement rider. Based on the 2010 Rate Case order as well as the order on remand associated with the Court order, during the third quarter 2011 ComEd reduced its revenue subject to refund reserve. See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on these proceedings.

Weather—delivery

The demand for electricity is affected by weather conditions. Very warm weather in summer months and very cold weather in other months are referred to as “favorable weather conditions” because these weather conditions result in increased customer usage and delivery of electricity.usage. Conversely, mild weather reduces demand. The favorable weather conditions forFor the year ended December 31, 2012, resulted in an2013, the increase in revenues net of purchased power expense.expense was offset by unfavorable weather conditions as a result of the mild weather in 2013, compared to the same period in 2012.

 

Heating and cooling degree days are quantitative indices that reflect the demand for energy needed to heat or cool a home or business. Normal weather is determined based on historical average heating and cooling degree days for a 30-year period in ComEd’s service territory with cooling degree days generally having a more significant impact to ComEd, particularly during the summer months. The changes in heating and cooling degree days in ComEd’s service territory for the years ended December 31, 2012,2013 and 2011,2012 consisted of the following:

 

              % Change               % Change 

Heating and Cooling Degree-Days

  2012   2011   Normal   From 2011 From Normal   2013   2012   Normal   From 2012 From Normal 

Twelve Months Ended December 31,

                                    

Heating Degree-Days

   5,065    6,134    6,341    (17.4)%   (20.1)%    6,603    5,065    6,341    30.4  4.1

Cooling Degree-Days

   1,324    1,036    842    27.8  57.2   933    1,324    842    (29.5)%   10.8

 

122124


Volume—deliveryVolume.

Revenues net of purchased power expense decreased as a result of lower delivery volume, exclusive of the effects of weather, for the year ended December 31, 2013, reflecting decreased average usage per residential customer for 2012,as compared to 2011.the same period in 2012.

 

OtherElectric Distribution Revenues.

Other EIMA provides for a performance-based formula rate tariff, which requires an annual reconciliation of the revenue requirement in effect to the actual costs that the ICC determines are prudently and reasonably incurred in a given year. Distribution revenues were higher duringvary from year to year based upon fluctuations in the underlying costs, investments being recovered and other billing determinants. During the year ended December 31, 2013, ComEd recorded increased revenues of $168 million, primarily due to increased capital investments, increased operating expenses, and higher allowed return on common equity, including the impacts of Senate Bill 9. These amounts exclude the discrete impacts of the 2012 comparedDistribution Rate Case Orders, discussed separately below. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to 2011.Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

Discrete Impacts of the 2012 Distribution Rate Case Orders. On October 3, 2012, the ICC issued its final order related to ComEd’s 2011 formula rate proceeding under EIMA (Rehearing Order), which reestablished ComEd’s position on the return on its pension asset, resulting in an increase to revenues in 2013. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

Transmission Revenues. ComEd’s transmission rates are established based on a FERC-approved formula. ComEd’s most recent annual formula rate update, filed in April 2013, reflects 2012 actual costs plus forecasted 2013 capital additions. Transmission revenues vary from year to year based upon fluctuations in the underlying costs, investments being recovered and other billing determinants, such as the highest daily peak load from the previous calendar year. During the year ended December 31, 2013, ComEd recorded increased revenues of $14 million primarily due to increased capital investments and higher operating expenses. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

Regulatory Required Programs.Revenues related to regulatory required programs are recoveries from customers for costs of various legislative and regulatory programs on a full and current basis through approved regulated rates. Programs include ComEd’s energy efficiency and demand response and purchased power administrative costs. An equal and offsetting amount has been reflected in operating and maintenance expense during the periods presented. See the operating and maintenance expense discussion below for additional information on included programs.

Uncollectible Accounts Recovery, Net.Represents recoveries under ComEd’s uncollectible accounts tariff. See the operating and maintenance expense discussion below for additional information on this tariff.

Other. Other revenues, which can vary period to period, include rental revenues, revenues related to late payment charges, assistance provided to other utilities through mutual assistance programs and recoveries of environmental costs associated with MGP sites and recoveries under ComEd’s uncollectible accounts tariff.

The changes in ComEd’s electric revenue net of purchased power expense for 2011 compared to 2010 consisted of the following:

   Increase
(Decrease)
 

Pricing (2010 Rate Case)

  $89 

Revenues subject to refund, net

   31 

Distribution formula rate reconciliation

   29 

Regulatory required programs cost recovery

   21 

Transmission

   18 

2007 City of Chicago settlement

   2 

Volume—delivery

   (10

Weather—delivery

   (21

Uncollectible accounts recovery, net

   (33

Other

   (2
  

 

 

 

Total increase

  $124 
  

 

 

 

Pricing (2010 Rate Case)

The ICC issued an order in the 2010 Rate Case approving an increase in ComEd’s annual electric distribution revenue requirement. The order became effective June 1, 2011, resulting insites. Other revenues were higher revenues forduring the year ended December 31, 2011,2013, compared to the same period in 2010. See Note 32012, primarily due to recoveries of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statementsincreased environmental costs associated with MGP sites, for additional information.

Revenues subject to refund, net

As a result of the September 30, 2010, Court decision in the 2007 Rate Case ComEd began recording revenue subject to refund prospectively. In addition, ComEd began recording revenue subject to refund on June 1, 2010, relating to the recovery of Cash Working Capital (CWC) through its energy procurement rider. As a result of the 2010 rate case order, ComEd reduced its revenue subject to refund reserve during the third quarter of 2011. See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

Distribution formula rate reconciliation

EIMA provides for a performance-based formula rate tariff. The legislation provides forwhich an annual reconciliation of the revenue requirement in effect to the actual costs that the ICC determines are prudently and reasonably incurred in a given year. ComEd made its initial reconciliation filing in May

123


2012 and the adjusted rates will take effect in January 2013. At December 31, 2011, ComEd had recorded an estimated reconciliation of approximately $29 million which did not include the reconciliation of significant storm costs discussed under operating and maintenance expense below. See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

Regulatory required programs cost recovery

Revenues related to regulatory required programs are the recoveries from customers of costs for various legislative and/or regulatory programs on a full and current basis through approved regulated rates. An equal and offsetting amount has beenexpense is reflected in operatingdepreciation and maintenance for regulatory required programsamortization expense during the periodperiods presented. See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Transmission125


ComEd’s transmission rates are established based on a FERC-approved formula. ComEd’s 2010 formula rate update, filedThe changes in May 2011, reflects actual 2010 expenses and investments plus forecasted 2011 capital additions. Transmission revenues net of purchased power expense vary from year to year based upon fluctuations in the underlying costs and investments being recovered.

2007 City of Chicago Settlement

ComEd paid $1 million and $3 million in 2011 and 2010, respectively, under the terms of its 2007 settlement agreement with the City of Chicago. Payments were recorded as a reduction to revenues; therefore, the lower payment in 2011 resulted in a net increase inComEd’s revenues net of purchased power expense for 20112012 compared to 2010.2011 consisted of the following:

   Increase
(Decrease)
 

Weather

  $2 

Volume

   (4

Electric distribution revenues

   53 

Discrete impacts of the 2012 Distribution Rate Case Order

   (13

Transmission revenues

   40 

Regulatory required programs

   32 

Uncollectible accounts recovery, net

   (28

Other

   33 
  

 

 

 

Total increase

  $115 
  

 

 

 

 

Volume—deliveryWeather. For the year ended December 31, 2012, revenues net of purchased power expense increased due to favorable weather conditions in 2012 compared to the same period in 2011.

 

The changes in heating and cooling degree days in ComEd’s service territory for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011 consisted of the following:

               % Change 

Heating and Cooling Degree-Days

  2012   2011   Normal   From 2011  From Normal 

Twelve Months Ended December 31,

                   

Heating Degree-Days

   5,065    6,134    6,341    (17.4)%   (20.1)% 

Cooling Degree-Days

   1,324    1,036    842    27.8  57.2

Volume.Revenues net of purchased power expense decreased as a result of lower delivery volume, exclusive of the effects of weather, for the year ended December 31, 2012, reflecting decreased average usage per residential and small commercial and industrial customer for 2011as compared to 2010.the same period in 2011.

 

Weather—deliveryElectric Distribution Revenues. Under EIMA, ComEd recorded increased revenues during the year ended December 31, 2012 of $53 million, primarily due to increased capital investments and increased operating expenses, partially offset by lower allowed return on common equity. These amounts exclude the discrete impacts of the 2012 Distribution Rate Case Orders discussed separately below. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Discrete Impacts of the 2012 Distribution Rate Case Orders.The increaseMay and October 2012 ICC Distribution Rate Case Orders resulted in a reduction to revenues net of purchased power expense$13 million in 20112012 compared to 2010 were partially offset by unfavorable weather conditions, despite setting a new record for highest daily peak load of 23,753 MWs on July 20,the same period in 2011.

The changes in heating and cooling degree days in ComEd’s service territory consisted See Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the following:Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

               % Change 

Heating and Cooling Degree-Days

  2011   2010   Normal   From 2010  From Normal 

Twelve Months Ended December 31,

                   

Heating Degree-Days

   6,134    5,991    6,362    2.4  (3.6)% 

Cooling Degree-Days

   1,036    1,181    855    (12.3)%   21.2

 

Uncollectible accounts recovery, netTransmission Revenues.

Represents recoveries under ComEd’s uncollectible accounts tariff. Refer Based on the FERC-approved formula, ComEd recorded increased revenues during the year ended December 31, 2012 of $40 million, primarily due to uncollectible accounts expense discussion belowincreased operating expenses. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for furtheradditional information.

 

124126


Operating and Maintenance Expense

 

  Year Ended
December 31,
   Increase   Year Ended
December 31,
   Increase   Year Ended
December 31,
   Increase   Year Ended
December 31,
   Increase 
  2012   2011   2012 vs.
2011
   2011   2010   2011 vs.
2010
   2013   2012   2013 vs.
2012
   2012   2011   2012 vs.
2011
 

Operating and maintenance expense—baseline

  $1,198   $1,074   $124   $1,074   $975   $99   $1,202   $1,199   $3   $1,199   $1,075   $124 

Operating and maintenance expense—regulatory required programs(a)

   147    115    32    115    94    21    166    146    20    146    114    32 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total operating and maintenance expense

  $1,345   $1,189   $156   $1,189   $1,069   $120   $1,368   $1,345   $23   $1,345   $1,189   $156 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Operating and maintenance expensesexpense for regulatory required programs are recoveries from customers for costs forof various legislative and/orand regulatory programs that are recoverable from customers on a full and current basis through approved regulated rates. An equal and offsetting amount has been reflected in operating revenues.

 

The changes in operating and maintenance expense for year ended December 31, 2013, compared to the same period in 2012 and changes for the year ended December 31, 2012, compared to the same period in 2011, and changes for the year ended December 31, 2011, compared to the same period in 2010, consisted of the following:

 

  Increase
(Decrease)
2012 vs. 2011
 Increase
(Decrease)
2011 vs. 2010
   Increase
(Decrease)
2013 vs. 2012
 Increase
(Decrease)
2012 vs. 2011
 

Baseline

      

Labor, other benefits, contracting and materials (b)(a)

  $95  $72   $48  $95 

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefits expense

   46   1    3   46 

Discrete impacts from 2010 Rate Case order (a)(b)

   32   (32   —     32 

Corporate Allocations

   —     8 

Storm Related Costs(d)

   (1  2 

Technology Innovation Trust(d)

   (11  15 

Uncollectible accounts expense—one-time impact of 2010 ICC Order(c)

   —     60 

Uncollectible accounts expense, net(c)

   (27  (33

Storm-related costs

   (10  (1

Science and Technology Innovation Trust(c)

   —     (11

Uncollectible accounts expense—provision (d)

   (10  (14

Uncollectible accounts expense—recovery, net (d)

   (48  (14

Other

   (10  6    20   (9
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 
   124   99    3   124 

Regulatory required programs

      

Energy efficiency and demand response programs

   33   25    20   33 

Purchased power administrative costs

   (1  (4   —     (1
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 
   32   21    20   32 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Increase in operating and maintenance expense

  $156  $120   $23  $156 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

 

(a)InThe increase includes contracting costs resulting from new projects associated with EIMA for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding EIMA.
(b)ComEd recorded one-time net benefits in May 2011,2012 as a result of the 2010 Rate Case order ComEd recorded one-time net benefits to reestablish previously expensed plant balances and to recover previously incurred costs related to Exelon’s 2009 restructuring plan.
(b)The increase in 2012 labor, other benefits, contracting and material costs is the result of the first year of a ten year grid modernization project associated with EIMA. See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to the Financial Statements for additional information.
(c)On February 2, 2010, the ICC issued an order adopting ComEd’s proposed tariffs filed in accordance with Illinois legislation providing public utilities the ability to recover from or refund to customers the difference between the utility’s annual uncollectible accounts expense and amounts collected in rates annually through a rider mechanism starting with 2008 and prospectively. As a result of this order, ComEd recorded a regulatory asset of $70 million and an offsetting reduction in operating and maintenance expense for the cumulative under-collections in 2008 and 2009. In addition, ComEd recorded a onetime contribution of $10 million associated with this legislation.
(d)Under EIMA, ComEd may recover costs associated with certain one-time events, such as large storms, over a five-year period. During the fourth quarter of 2011, ComEd recorded a net reduction in operating and maintenance expense for costs related to three significant 2011 storms. In addition, pursuant to EIMA, ComEd makes recurring payments for contribution to a Science and Technology Innovation Trust fund that will be used to fund energy innovation.
(d)ComEd is allowed to recover from or refund to customers the difference between the utility’s annual uncollectible accounts expense and the amounts collected in rates annually through a rider mechanism. In 2013, ComEd recorded a net reduction in operating and maintenance expense related to uncollectible accounts due to the timing of regulatory cost recovery and customers purchasing electricity from competitive electric generation suppliers as a result of municipal aggregation. An equal and offsetting reduction has been recognized in operating revenues for the periods presented.

 

125127


Operating and maintenance expense for regulatory required programs

Operating and maintenance expenses for regulatory required programs are costs for various legislative and/or regulatory programs that are recoverable from customers on a full and current basis through approved regulated rates. An equal and offsetting amount has been reflected in operating revenues. See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

Depreciation and Amortization Expense

 

The changes in depreciation and amortization expense for 2013 compared to 2012 and 2012 compared to 2011, and 2011 compared to 2010, consisted of the following:

 

   Increase
2012 vs. 2011
   Increase
(Decrease)
2011 vs. 2010
 

Depreciation expense associated with higher plant balances(a)

  $22   $20 

Storm Cost Amortization

   4    14 

Other Regulatory Asset Amortization

   14    (2

Other

   16    6 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Increase in depreciation and amortization expense

  $56   $38 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 
   Increase
2013 vs. 2012
   Increase
2012 vs. 2011
 

Depreciation associated with higher plant balances

  $22   $22 

Amortization of storm-related regulatory assets(a)

   4    4 

Amortization of MGP regulatory assets (b)

   27    8 

Amortization of other regulatory assets

   6    6 

Other

   —      16 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Increase in depreciation and amortization expense

  $59   $56 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Under EIMA, ComEd is required to recover costs associated with significant storms over a five-year period through the amortization of a regulatory asset.
(b)An equal and offsetting amount for the amortization expense related to MGP remediation expenditures is reflected in operating revenues during the periods presented.

 

Taxes Other Than Income

Year Ended December 31, 2013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012. Taxes other than income, which can vary period to period, include municipal and state utility taxes, real estate taxes, and payroll taxes. Taxes other than income increased primarily due to increased Illinois electricity distribution taxes.

 

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011.Taxes other than income taxes decreased primarily due to decreased Illinois electricity distribution taxes. Taxes other than income, which can vary period to period, include municipal and state utility taxes, real estate taxes, and payroll taxes.

Year Ended December 31, 2011 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2010. Taxes other than income taxes increased primarily due to the accrual of estimated future refunds of Illinois utility distribution tax recorded in 2010 for the 2008 and 2009 tax years. Previously, ComEd had recorded refunds of the Illinois utility distribution tax when received. Due to sufficient, reliable evidence, ComEd began in June 2010 recording an estimated receivable associated with anticipated Illinois utility distribution tax refunds prospectively.

 

Interest Expense, Net

 

The changes in interest expense, net for 2013 compared to 2012 and 2012 compared to 2011 and 2011 compared to 2010 consisted of the following:

 

  (Decrease)
2012 vs. 2011
 Increase
(Decrease)
2011 vs. 2010
   Increase
(Decrease)
2013 vs. 2012
 Increase
(Decrease)
2012 vs. 2011
 

Interest expense related to uncertain tax positions(a)

  $—     $(63  $281  $—   

Interest expense on debt (including financing trusts)(b)

   (26  20    2   (26

Other

   (12  2    (11  (12
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Decrease in interest expense, net

  $(38 $(41

Increase (decrease) in interest expense, net

  $272  $(38
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

 

(a)During 2010, ComEd recorded $59 millionPrimarily reflects the remeasurement of interest expense associated withExelon’s like-kind exchange tax position in the re-measurementfirst quarter of uncertain income tax positions related2013. See Note 14—Income Taxes of the Combined Notes to the 1999 sale of Fossil Generating Assets.Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.
(b)Interest expense on debt decreased in 2012 due to more favorable interest rates on long-term debt balances year over year.

 

126


Other, Net

 

The changes in other, net for 2013 compared to 2012 and 2012 compared to 2011 and 2011 compared to 2010 consisted of the following:

 

  Increase
(Decrease)
2012 vs. 2011
 Increase
(Decrease)
2011 vs. 2010
   Increase
(Decrease)
2013 vs. 2012
 Increase
(Decrease)
2012 vs. 2011
 

Interest income related to uncertain tax positions(a)

  $16  $8   $(20 $16 

Gain on asset disposal

   5   —   

Other

   (6  (3   2   (6
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Increase in Other, net

  $10  $5   $(13 $10 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

128


(a)Primarily reflects a receivable recorded in the fourth quarter of 2012 related to the final 1999-2001 IRS settlement.

 

Effective Income Tax Rate

 

ComEd’s effective income tax raterates for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, were 37.9%, 38.7% and 2010 was 38.7%, 37.5% and 51.4%, respectively. See Note 1214—Income Taxes of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding the components of the effective income tax rates.

 

Retail Deliveries to customers (in GWhs)

  2012   2011   %
Change
2012 vs
2011
 Weather-
Normal
%
Change
 2010   %
Change
2011 vs
2010
 Weather-
Normal
%
Change
  2013 2012 %
Change
2013 vs
2012
 Weather-
Normal
%
Change
 2011 %
Change
2012 vs
2011
 Weather-
Normal
%
Change
 

Retail Delivery and Sales(a)

           

Retail Deliveries(a)

       

Residential

   28,528    28,273    0.9  (0.6)%   29,171    (3.1)%   (1.3)%   27,800   28,528   (2.6)%   (0.6)%   28,273   0.9  (0.6)% 

Small commercial & industrial

   32,534    32,281    0.8  0.2  32,904    (1.9)%   (0.8)%   32,305   32,534   (0.7)%   0.2  32,281   0.8  0.2

Large commercial & industrial

   27,643    27,732    (0.3)%   (0.3)%   27,717    0.1  0.6  27,684   27,643   0.1  (0.3)%   27,732   (0.3)%   (0.3)% 

Street Lighting & electric railroads

   1,272    1,235    3.0  4.2  1,273    (3.0)%   (1.2)% 

Public authorities & electric railroads

  1,355   1,272   6.5  4.2  1,235   3.0  4.2
  

 

   

 

     

 

     

 

  

 

    

 

   

Total Retail

   89,977    89,521    0.5  (0.1)%   91,065    (1.7)%   (0.5)% 

Total Retail Deliveries

  89,144   89,977   (0.9)%   (0.1)%   89,521   0.5  (0.1)% 
  

 

   

 

     

 

     

 

  

 

    

 

   

 

  As of December 31,   As of December 31, 

Number of Electric Customers

  2012   2011   2010   2013   2012   2011 

Residential

   3,455,546    3,448,481    3,438,677     3,480,398    3,455,546    3,448,481  

Small commercial & industrial

   365,357    365,824    363,393     367,569    365,357    365,824  

Large commercial & industrial

   1,980    2,032    2,005     1,984    1,980    2,032  

Street Lighting & electric railroads

   4,812    4,797    5,078  

Public authorities & electric railroads

   4,853    4,812    4,797  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total

   3,827,695    3,821,134    3,809,153     3,854,804    3,827,695    3,821,134  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

Electric Revenue

  2012   2011   %
Change
2012 vs

2011
 2010   %
Change
2011 vs

2010
   2013   2012   %
Change
2013 vs
2012
   2011   %
Change
2012 vs
2011
 

Retail Delivery and Sales(a)

         

Retail Sales(a)

          

Residential

  $3,037    $3,510     (13.5)%  $3,549     (1.1)%   $2,073    $3,037     (31.7)%    $3,510     (13.5)% 

Small commercial & industrial

   1,339    1,517    (11.7)%   1,639    (7.4)%    1,250    1,339    (6.6)%     1,517    (11.7)% 

Large commercial & industrial

   395    383    3.1  397    (3.5)%    427    395    8.1%     383    3.1

Street Lighting & electric railroads

   44    50    (12.0)%   62    (19.4)% 

Public authorities & electric railroads

   48    44    9.1%     50    (12.0)% 
  

 

   

 

    

 

     

 

   

 

     

 

   

Total Retail

   4,815    5,460    (11.8)%   5,647    (3.3)% 

Total Retail Sales

   3,798    4,815    (21.1)%     5,460    (11.8)% 
  

 

   

 

    

 

     

 

   

 

     

 

   

Other Revenue(b)

   628    596    5.4  557    7.0   666    628    6.1%     596    5.4
  

 

   

 

    

 

     

 

   

 

     

 

   

Total Electric Revenues

  $5,443    $6,056     (10.1)%  $6,204     (2.4)%   $4,464    $5,443     (18.0)%    $6,056     (10.1)% 
  

 

   

 

    

 

     

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

(a)Reflects delivery revenues and volumes from customers purchasing electricity directly from ComEd and customers purchasing electricity from a competitive electric generation supplier. Allsupplier, as all customers are assessed charges for delivery.delivery charges. For customers purchasing electricity from ComEd, revenue also reflects the cost of energy and transmission.

127


(b)Other revenue primarily includes transmission revenue from PJM. Other items include wholesale revenue, rental revenue, revenues related to late payment charges, assistance provided to other utilities through mutual assistance programs, and recoveries of environmental remediation costs associated with MGP sites.sites, and intercompany revenues.

 

129


Results of Operations—PECO

 

  2012 2011 Favorable
(unfavorable)
2012 vs. 2011
variance
 2010 Favorable
(unfavorable)
2011 vs. 2010
variance
   2013 2012 Favorable
(unfavorable)
2013 vs. 2012
variance
 2011 Favorable
(unfavorable)
2012 vs. 2011
variance
 

Operating revenues

  $3,186  $3,720  $(534 $5,519  $(1,799  $3,100  $3,186  $(86 $3,720  $(534

Purchased power and fuel

   1,375   1,864   489   2,762   898    1,300   1,375   75   1,864   489 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense(a)

   1,811   1,856   (45  2,757   (901

Revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense(a)

   1,800   1,811   (11  1,856   (45
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other operating expenses

            

Operating and maintenance

   809   794   (15  733   (61   748   809   61   794   (15

Depreciation and amortization

   217   202   (15  1,060   858    228   217   (11  202   (15

Taxes other than income

   162   205   43   303   98    158   162   4   205   43 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total other operating expenses

   1,188   1,201   13   2,096    895    1,134   1,188   54   1,201   13 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Operating income

   623   655   (32  661   (6   666   623   43   655   (32
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

            

Interest expense, net

   (123  (134  11   (193  59    (115  (123  8   (134  11 

Other, net

   8   14   (6  8   6    6   8   (2  14   (6
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

   (115  (120  5   (185  65    (109  (115  6   (120  5 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Income before income taxes

   508   535   (27  476   59    557   508   49   535   (27

Income taxes

   127   146   19   152   6    162   127   (35  146   19 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net income

   381   389   (8  324   65    395   381   14   389   (8

Preferred security dividends

   4   4   —     4   —      7   4   3   4   —   
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net income on common stock

  $377  $385  $(8 $320  $65   $388  $377  $11  $385  $(8
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)PECO evaluates its operating performance using the measures of revenuerevenues net of purchased power expense for electric sales and revenue net of fuel expense for gas sales. PECO believes revenuerevenues net of purchased power expense and revenuerevenues net of fuel expense are useful measurements of its performance because they provide information that can be used to evaluate its net revenuerevenues from operations. PECO has included the analysis below as a complement to the financial information provided in accordance with GAAP. However, revenuerevenues net of purchased power expense and revenue net of fuel expense figures are not a presentation defined under GAAP and may not be comparable to other companies’ presentations or more useful than the GAAP information provided elsewhere in this report.

 

Net Income

 

Year Ended December 31, 2013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012. The increase in net income was driven primarily by lower operating and maintenance expense partially offset by an increase in income taxes.

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011.The decrease in net income was driven primarily by lower operating revenuerevenues net of purchased power and fuel expense and increased storm costs. The decrease in revenuerevenues net of purchased power and fuel expense was primarily related to unfavorable weather and a decline in electric load. The decrease to net income was partially offset by lower taxes other than income, interest expense and income taxes.

 

Year Ended December 31, 2011 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2010. The increase in net income was primarily driven by new distribution rates effective January 1, 2011 as a result of the 2010 electric and natural gas rate case settlements, decreased interest expense and decreased income tax expense. The increase in net income was partially offset by increased storm costs, increased depreciation expense and the net impact of the 2010 CTC recoveries reflected in electric operating revenues net of purchased power expense and CTC amortization expense, both of which ceased at the end of the transition period on December 31, 2010.

128


Operating Revenues Net of Purchased Power and Fuel Expense

 

There are certain drivers to operating revenue that are offset by their impact on purchased power and fuel expense, such as commodity procurement costs and customer choice programs. PECO’s electric generation rates charged to customers were capped until December 31, 2010 in accordance with the 1998 restructuring settlement. Beginning January 1, 2011, PECO’s electric generation rates are based on actual costs incurred through its approved competitive market procurement process. Electric and gas revenues and purchased power and fuel expensesexpense are affected by fluctuations in commodity procurement costs. PECO’s electric supply and natural gas cost rates charged to customers are subject to adjustments at least quarterly andthat are designed to recover or refund the difference between the actual cost of electric supply and natural gas and the amount included in rates

130


in accordance with the PAPUC’s GSA and PGC, respectively. Therefore, fluctuations in electric supply and natural gas procurement costs have no impact on electric and gas revenues net of purchased power and fuel expenses.expense.

 

Electric and gas revenues and purchased power and fuel expense are also affected by fluctuations in participation in the customer choice program. All PECO customers have the choice to purchase electricity and gas from competitive electric generation and natural gas suppliers, respectively. The customer’s choice of suppliers does not impact the volume of deliveries, but affects revenuerevenues collected from customers related to supplied energy and natural gas service. Customer choice program activity has no impact on electric and gas revenuerevenues net of purchase power and fuel expense. The number of retail customers purchasing energy from a competitive electric generation supplier was 531,500, 496,500, 387,600 and 36,600387,600 at December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, respectively. Retail deliveries purchased from competitive electric generation suppliers represented 68%, 66%, 57% and 1%57% of PECO’s retail kWh sales for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, respectively. The number of retail customers purchasing natural gas from a competitive natural gas supplier was 66,400, 53,600, 24,800 and 6,80024,800 at December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, respectively. Retail deliveries purchased from competitive natural gas suppliers represented 19%, 16%, 11% and 7%11% of PECO’s mmcf sales for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, respectively.

 

The changes in PECO’s operating revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense for the year ended December 31, 20122013 compared to the same period in 20112012 consisted of the following:

 

  Increase (Decrease)   Increase (Decrease) 
  Electric Gas Total   Electric Gas Total 

Weather

  $(17 $(15 $(32  $6  $31  $37 

Volume

   (22  —     (22   (3  (3  (6

Pricing

   (4  3   (1   (14  2   (12

Regulatory required programs

   29   —     29    (6  —     (6

Gross receipts tax

   (8  —     (8

Gas distribution tax repair

   —     (8  (8

Other

   (19  —     (19   (7  (1  (8
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total decrease

  $(33 $(12 $(45  $(32 $21  $(11
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

Weather

 

The demand for electricity and gas is affected by weather conditions. With respect to the electric business, very warm weather in summer months and, with respect to the electric and gas businesses, very cold weather in winter months are referred to as “favorable weather conditions” because these weather conditions result in increased deliveries of electricity and gas. Conversely, mild weather reduces demand. Electric and gasOperating revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense were lowerhigher due to unfavorablethe impact of favorable 2013 winter weather conditions during 2012 in PECO’s service territory.

conditions.

 

129


Heating and cooling degree days are quantitative indices that reflect the demand for energy needed to heat or cool a home or business. Normal weather is determined based on historical average heating and cooling degree days for a 30-year period in PECO’s service territory. The changes in heating and cooling degree days in PECO’s service territory for the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to the same period in 2012 and normal weather consisted of the following:

               % Change 

Heating and Cooling Degree-Days

  2013   2012   Normal   From 2012  From Normal 

Twelve Months Ended December 31,

                   

Heating Degree-Days

   4,474     3,747     4,603    19.4  (2.8)% 

Cooling Degree-Days

   1,411     1,603     1,301    (12.0)%   8.5

131


Volume

The decrease in electric revenues net of purchased power expense related to delivery volume, exclusive of the effects of weather, reflects the impact of energy efficiency initiatives on customer usages as well as a shift in the volume profile across classes from higher priced classes to lower priced classes, partially offset by the oil refineries returning to full production in 2013 as well as moderate economic growth. The decrease in gas revenues net of fuel expense related to delivery volume, exclusive of the effects of weather, primarily reflects a decline in Residential use per customer.

Pricing

The decrease in electric operating revenues net of purchased power expense as a result of pricing is primarily attributable to lower overall effective rates due to increased usage across all major customer classes.

Regulatory Required Programs

This represents the change in operating revenues collected under approved riders to recover costs incurred for the smart meter, energy efficiency and consumer education programs as well as the administrative costs for the GSA and AEPS programs. The riders are designed to provide full and current cost recovery as well as a return. The offsetting costs of these programs are included in operating and maintenance expense, depreciation and amortization expense and income taxes. Refer to the operating and maintenance expense discussion below for additional information on included programs.

Gross Receipts Tax

GRT is an excise tax on total electric revenues. As a result of decreases in operating revenues compared to 2012, GRT decreased. Equal and offsetting decreases in GRT have been reflected in taxes other than income.

Gas Distribution Tax Repair

The decrease in gas distribution tax repair reflects the 2012 tax benefit received from prior period gas distribution repairs for the 2011 tax year. There is an equal and offsetting tax benefit in operating revenues, see NOTE 3—Regulatory Matters for further explanation.

Other

The decrease in other electric revenues net of purchased power expense compared to the year ended December 31, 2012 reflects a decrease in wholesale transmission revenues earned by PECO due to higher peak loads in the previous years.

The changes in PECO’s operating revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to the same period in 2011 consisted of the following:

   Increase (Decrease) 
   Electric  Gas  Total 

Weather

  $(17 $(15 $(32

Volume

   (22  —     (22

Pricing

   (4  3   (1

Regulatory required programs

   29   —     29 

Gross receipts tax

   (27  —     (27

Other

   8   —     8 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total increase (decrease)

  $(33 $(12 $(45
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

132


Weather

Electric and gas revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense were lower due to unfavorable winter weather conditions during 2012 in PECO’s service territory.

The changes in heating and cooling degree days in PECO’s service territory for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to the same period in 2011 and normal weather consisted of the following:

 

              % Change               % Change 

Heating and Cooling Degree-Days(a)

  2012   2011   Normal   From 2011 From Normal   2012   2011   Normal   From 2011 From Normal 

Twelve Months Ended December 31,

                                    

Heating Degree-Days

   3,747    4,157    4,603    (9.9)%   (18.6)%    3,747     4,157     4,603    (9.9)%   (18.6)% 

Cooling Degree-Days

   1,603    1,617    1,301    (0.9)%   23.2   1,603     1,617     1,301    (0.9)%   23.2

 

Volume

 

The decrease in electric revenues net of purchased power expense related to delivery volume, exclusive of the effects of weather, reflected the reduced oil refinery load in PECO’s service territory and the impact of energy efficiency initiatives and weak economic conditions on customer usage. The decrease was partially offset by additional volumes due to the extra day from the leap year. See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding energy efficiency initiatives.

 

Pricing

 

The decrease in electric operating revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense as a result of pricing reflects the refund of the tax cash benefit resulting from the adoption of the safe harbor method of tax accounting for electric distribution property in 2011. The refund was reflected on customer bills as a credit beginning January 1, 2012. The accounting impact of the refund is completely offset by regulatory liability amortization recorded in income tax expense. The decrease in operating revenues net of purchase power and fuel expense as a result of pricing was partially offset by higherprimarily attributable to lower overall effective rates due to decreasedincreased usage per customer across all major customer classes.

 

Regulatory Required Programs

 

This represents the change in operating revenues collected under approved riders to recover costs incurred for the smart meter, energy efficiency and consumer education programs as well as the administrative costs for the GSA and AEPS programs. The riders are designed to provide full and current cost recovery as well as a return. The offsetting costs of these programs are included in operating and maintenance expense, depreciation and amortization expense and income taxes. Refer to the operating and maintenance expense discussion below for additional information on included programs.

 

Other

 

The decrease in other electric revenues net of purchased power expense primarily reflected a decrease in GRT revenuerevenues as a result of lower supplied energy service and a reduction in the GRT rate. There is an equal and offsetting decrease in GRT expense included in taxes other than income.

 

130133


The changes in PECO’s operating revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense for the year ended December 31, 2011 compared to the same period in 2010 consisted of the following:

   Increase (Decrease) 
   Electric  Gas  Total 

Weather

  $(33 $(13 $(46

Volume

   (11  3   (8

CTC recoveries

   (995  —     (995

Pricing

   139   16   155 

Regulatory required programs

   17   —     17 

Other

   (29  5   (24
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total increase (decrease)

  $(912 $11  $(901
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Weather

Electric and gas revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense were lower due to unfavorable weather conditions during 2011 in PECO’s service territory compared to 2010 despite setting a new record for highest electric peak load of 8,983 MWs on July 22, 2011.

The changes in heating and cooling degree days for the twelve months ended 2011 and 2010, consisted of the following:

               % Change 

Heating and Cooling Degree-Days(a)

  2011   2010   Normal   From 2010  From Normal 

Twelve Months Ended December 31,

                   

Heating Degree-Days

   4,157    4,396    4,638    (5.4)%   (10.4)% 

Cooling Degree-Days

   1,617    1,817    1,292    (11.0)%   25.2

Volume

The decrease in electric revenues net of purchased power expense related to delivery volume, exclusive of the effects of weather, reflected weak economic growth, the impact of energy efficiency initiatives on customer usage and the ramp-down of two oil refineries. See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding energy efficiency initiatives.

The increase in gas revenues net of fuel expense related to delivery volume, exclusive of the effects of weather, reflected increased usage per customer across all customer classes.

CTC Recoveries

The decrease in electric revenues net of purchased power expense related to CTC recoveries reflected the absence of the CTC charge component that was included in rates charged to customers in 2010. PECO fully recovered all stranded costs during the final year of the transition period that expired on December 31, 2010.

Pricing

The increase in operating revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense as a result of pricing primarily reflected an increase of new electric and natural gas distribution rates charged to customers that became effective in January 1, 2011 in accordance with the 2010 PAPUC approved electric and natural gas distribution rate case settlements. See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further information.

131


Regulatory Required Programs

This represents the change in operating revenues collected under approved riders to recover costs incurred for the smart meter, energy efficiency and consumer education programs as well as the administrative costs for the GSA and AEPS programs. The riders are designed to provide full and current cost recovery as well as a return. The offsetting costs of these programs are included in operating and maintenance expense, depreciation and amortization expense and income taxes. Refer to the operating and maintenance expense discussion below for additional information on included programs.

Other

The decrease in electric revenues net of purchased power expense primarily reflected a decrease in GRT revenue as a result of lower supplied energy service and retail transmission revenue earned by PECO due to increased participation in the customer choice program. There is an equal and offsetting decrease in GRT expense included in taxes other than income. This decrease was partially offset by an increase in wholesale transmission revenue earned by PECO as a transmission owner for the use of PECO’s transmission facilities in PJM. The rates charged for wholesale transmission are based on the prior year’s peak, and the peak in 2010 was higher than in 2009.

The increase in gas operating revenues net of fuel expense primarily reflected an increase in off-system gas sales activity. Off-system gas sales revenues represent sales of excess gas supply on the wholesale market and the release of pipeline capacity.

Operating and Maintenance Expense

 

  Twelve Months
Ended December 31,
   Increase
(Decrease)

  2012  vs. 2011  
  Twelve Months
Ended December 31,
   Increase
(Decrease)

  2011  vs. 2010  
   Twelve Months
Ended December 31,
   Increase
(Decrease)
  2013 vs. 2012  
  Twelve Months
Ended December  31,
   Increase
(Decrease)
  2012 vs. 2011  
 
      2012           2011            2011           2010             2013           2012            2012           2011       

Operating and Maintenance Expense—Baseline

  $723   $725   $(2 $725   $680   $45   $668   $723   $(55 $723   $725   $(2

Operating and Maintenance Expense—Regulatory

                      

Required Programs(a)

   86    69    17   69    53    16    80    86    (6  86    69    17 
  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total Operating and Maintenance Expense

  $809   $794   $15  $794   $733   $61   $748   $809   $(61 $809   $794   $15 
  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Operating and maintenance expenses for regulatory required programs are costs for various legislative and/or regulatory programs that are recoverable from customers on a full and current basis through approved regulated rates. An equal and offsetting amount has been reflected in operating revenues.

 

132


The changes in operating and maintenance expense for 2013 compared to 2012 and 2012 compared to 2011 and 2011 compared to 2010 consisted of the following:

 

  Increase
(Decrease)
2012 vs. 2011
 Increase
(Decrease)
2011 vs. 2010
   Increase
(Decrease)
2013 vs. 2012
 Increase
(Decrease)
2012 vs. 2011
 

Baseline

      

Labor, other benefits, contracting and materials

  $(29 $26   $10  $(29

Storm-related costs

   9 (a)  13    (49  9(a) 

Uncollectible accounts expense

   (4  4 

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefits expense

   (12  —   

Constellation merger and integration costs

   15   2    (8  15 

2010 non-cash charge resulting from Health Care Legislation

   —     (2

Other

   7   2    4   3 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 
   (2  45    (55  (2

Regulatory Required Programs

      

Smart Meter

   12   9    4   12 

Energy Efficiency

   8   2    (9  8 

GSA

   (1  5    —     (1

Consumer education program

   (1  (1   (1  (1

AEPS

   (1  1    —     (1
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 
   17   16    (6  17 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Increase in operating and maintenance expense

  $15  $61 

Increase (decrease) in operating and maintenance expense

  $(61 $15 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Storm-related costs include $46 million of incremental storm costs incurred in the fourth quarter of 2012 as a result of Hurricane Sandy. This expense was significantly offset by the costs incurred related to Hurricane Irene and other storms throughout 2011.

 

Depreciation and Amortization Expense

 

Year Ended December 31, 2013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012.The changesincrease in depreciation and amortization expense, net for 2013, compared to 2012 was primarily due to ongoing capital expenditures.

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011. The increase in depreciation and amortization expense, net for 2012 compared to 2011 and 2011 comparedwas primarily due to 2010 consisted of the following:ongoing capital expenditures.

   Increase
(Decrease)
2012 vs. 2011
   Increase
(Decrease)
2011 vs. 2010
 

CTC amortization (a)

  $—      $(885

Other(b)

   15    27 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Increase (decrease) in depreciation and amortization expense

  $15   $(858
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)PECO’s scheduled CTC amortization was recorded in accordance with its 1998 restructuring settlement and was fully amortized as of December 31, 2010.
(b)Increase due primarily to ongoing capital expenditures.

 

133134


Taxes Other Than Income

 

The change in taxes other than income for 2013 compared to 2012 and 2012 compared to 2011 and 2011 compared to 2010 consisted of the following:

 

  Increase
(Decrease)
2012 vs. 2011
 Increase
(Decrease)
2011 vs. 2010
   Increase
(Decrease)
2013 vs. 2012
 Increase
(Decrease)
2012 vs. 2011
 

GRT expense(a)

  $(33 $(97  $(12 $(33

Sales and use tax

   (12)(b)   —       8   (12)(a) 

PURTA amortization

   —      (4)(c) 

Other

   2    3     —     2 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Decrease in taxes other than income

  $(43 $(98  $(4 $(43
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

 

(a)The decrease in GRT expense for 2012 compared to 2011 and 2011 compared to 2010 was a result of lower operating revenues. In addition, there was a reduction in the GRT rate in 2012.
(b)The decrease reflects a sales and use tax reserve adjustment in the first quarter of 2012 resulting from the completion of the audit of tax years 2005 through 2010.
(c)The decrease in taxes other than income related to PURTA amortization reflects the impact of regulatory liability amortization recorded in 2011 that offsets the distribution rate reduction made to refund a 2009 PURTA Supplemental Tax settlement to customers.

 

Interest Expense, Net

Year Ended December 31, 2013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012. The decrease in interest expense, net for 2013 compared to 2012 was primarily due to refinancing debt at lower interest rates during the second half of 2012.

 

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011. The decrease in interest expense, net for 2012 compared to 2011 was primarily due to the debt retirement in November 2011.

 

Other, Net

Year Ended December 31, 20112013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2010.2012. The decrease in interest expense,Other, net for 2011 compared to 2010 was primarily due to the retirement of PETT transition bonds on September 1, 2010 and the impact of interest expense incurred in June 2010 related to the change in measurement of uncertain tax positions in accordance with accounting guidance.

See Notes 1 and 12 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information.

Other, Netremained relatively level between periods.

 

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011. The decrease in Other, net for 2012 compared to 2011 was due to decreased AFUDC—Equity. See Note 20 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in the 2012 10-K for additional details of the components of Other, net.

Year Ended December 31, 2011 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2010. The increase in Other, net for 2011 compared to 2010 was primarily due to increased investment income and AFUDC Equity. See Note 20 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information.

 

Effective Income Tax Rate

 

PECO’s effective income tax rates for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011 were 29.1%, 25.0% and 2010 were 25.0%, 27.3% and 31.9%, respectively. The increase in effective income tax rate for the year ended December 31,in 2013 compared 2012 reflects the 2012 impact of the tax benefit received from electing to change the method of accounting for gas distribution property for the 2011 tax year. Comparatively, the effective income tax rate for the

134


year ended December 31, 2011 includes the effect of electing the safe harbor method of tax accounting for electric distribution property for the 2010 tax year. See Note 1214 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding the components of the effective income tax rates.

 

PECO Electric Operating Statistics and Revenue Detail

 

Retail Deliveries to customers (in GWhs)

 2012 2011 % Change
2012 vs. 2011
 Weather-
Normal %
Change
 2010 % Change
2011 vs. 2010
 Weather-
Normal %
Change
  2013 2012 % Change
2013 vs. 2012
 Weather-
Normal %
Change
 2011 % Change
2012 vs. 2011
 Weather-
Normal %
Change
 

Retail Delivery and Sales(a)

       

Retail Deliveries(a)

       

Residential

  13,233   13,687   (3.3)%   (1.7)%   13,913   (1.6)%   1.7  13,341   13,233   0.8  (0.0)%   13,687   (3.3)%   (1.7)% 

Small commercial & industrial

  8,063   8,321   (3.1)%   (2.3)%   8,503   (2.1)%   (0.7)%   8,101   8,063   0.5  (1.1)%   8,321   (3.1)%   (2.3)% 

Large commercial & industrial

  15,253   15,677   (2.7)%   (2.7)%   16,372   (4.2)%   (3.3)%   15,379   15,253   0.8  1.5  15,677   (2.7)%   (2.7)% 

Public authorities & electric railroads

  943   945   (0.2)%   (0.2)%   925   2.2  4.6  930   943   (1.4)%   (1.4)%   945   (0.2)%   (0.2)% 
 

 

  

 

    

 

    

 

  

 

    

 

   

Total Electric Retail

  37,492   38,630   (2.9)%   (2.2)%   39,713   (2.7)%   (0.9)% 

Total Electric Retail Deliveries

  37,751   37,492   0.7  0.3  38,630   (2.9)%   (2.2)% 
 

 

  

 

    

 

    

 

  

 

    

 

   

 

   As of December 31, 

Number of Electric Customers

  2012   2011   2010 

Residential

   1,417,773    1,415,681    1,411,643  

Small commercial & industrial

   148,803    148,570    148,297  

Large commercial & industrial

   3,111    3,110    3,071  

Public authorities & electric railroads

   9,660    9,689    9,670  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total

   1,579,347    1,577,050    1,572,681  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

135


   As of December 31, 

Number of Electric Customers

  2013   2012   2011 

Residential

   1,423,068    1,417,773    1,415,681 

Small commercial & industrial

   149,117    148,803    148,570 

Large commercial & industrial

   3,105    3,111    3,110 

Public authorities & electric railroads

   9,668    9,660    9,689 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total

   1,584,958    1,579,347    1,577,050 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

Electric Revenue

  2012   2011   % Change
2012 vs. 2011
 2010   % Change
2011 vs. 2010
   2013   2012   % Change
2013 vs. 2012
 2011   % Change
2012 vs. 2011
 

Retail Delivery and Sales(a)

         

Retail Sales(a)

         

Residential

  $1,689    $1,934     (12.7)%  $2,069     (6.5)%   $1,592    $1,689     (5.7)%  $1,934     (12.7)% 

Small commercial & industrial

   462    585    (21.0)%   1,061    (44.9)%    433    462    (6.3)%   585    (21.0)% 

Large commercial & industrial

   232    308    (24.7)%   1,364    (77.4)%    224    232    (3.4)%   308    (24.7)% 

Public authorities & electric railroads

   31    38    (18.4)%   89    (57.3)%    30    31    (3.2)%   38    (18.4)% 
  

 

   

 

    

 

     

 

   

 

    

 

   

Total Retail

   2,414    2,865    (15.7)%   4,583    (37.5)%    2,279    2,414    (5.6)%   2,865    (15.7)% 
  

 

   

 

    

 

     

 

   

 

    

 

   

Other Revenue(b)

   226    244    (7.4)%   252    (3.2)%    221    226    (2.2)%   244    (7.4)% 
  

 

   

 

    

 

     

 

   

 

    

 

   

Total Electric Revenues

  $2,640    $3,109     (15.1)%  $4,835     (35.7)%   $2,500   $2,640    (5.3)%  $3,109     (15.1)% 
  

 

   

 

    

 

     

 

   

 

    

 

   

 

(a)Reflects delivery volumes and revenues from customers purchasing electricity directly from PECO and customers purchasing electricity from a competitive electric generation supplier as all customers are assessed distribution charges. For customers purchasing electricity from PECO, revenue also reflects the cost of energy and transmission.
(b)Other revenue includes transmission revenue from PJM and wholesale electric revenues.

 

135


PECO Gas Operating Statistics and Revenue Detail

 

Deliveries to customers (in mmcf)

 2012 2011 % Change
2012 vs. 2011
 Weather-
Normal %
Change
 2010 % Change
2011 vs. 2010
 Weather-
Normal %
Change
  2013 2012 % Change
2013 vs. 2012
 Weather-
Normal %
Change
 2011 % Change
2012 vs. 2011
 Weather-
Normal %
Change
 

Retail Delivery and Sales(b)

       

Retail Deliveries(b)

       

Retail sales

  49,767   54,239   (8.2)%   (0.1)%   56,833   (4.6)%   1.2  57,613   49,767   15.8  (0.1)%   54,239   (8.2)%   (0.1)% 

Transportation and other

  26,687   28,204   (5.4)%   (4.8)%   30,911   (8.8)%   (7.5)%   28,089   26,687   5.3  0.5  28,204   (5.4)%   (4.8)% 
 

 

  

 

    

 

    

 

  

 

    

 

   

Total Gas Deliveries

  76,454   82,443   (7.3)%   (1.6)%   87,744   (6.0)%   (1.8)%   85,702   76,454   12.1  0.1  82,443   (7.3)%   (1.6)% 
 

 

  

 

    

 

    

 

  

 

    

 

   

 

  As of December 31,   As of December 31, 

Number of Gas Customers

  2012   2011   2010   2013   2012   2011 

Residential

   454,502    451,382    448,391    458,356    454,502    451,382 

Commercial & industrial

   41,836    41,373    41,303    42,174    41,836    41,373 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total Retail

   496,338    492,755    489,694    500,530    496,338    492,755 

Transportation

   903    879    838    909    903    879 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total

   497,241    493,634    490,532    501,439    497,241    493,634 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

Gas revenue

  2012   2011   % Change
2012 vs. 2011
 2010   % Change
2011 vs. 2010
   2013   2012   % Change
2013 vs. 2012
 2011   % Change
2012 vs. 2011
 

Retail Delivery and Sales(a)

         

Retail Sales(a)

         

Retail sales

  $509    $576     (11.6)%  $657     (12.3)%   $562    $509     10.4 $576     (11.6)% 

Transportation and other

   37    35    5.7  27    29.6   38    37    2.7  35    5.7
  

 

   

 

    

 

     

 

   

 

    

 

   

Total Gas Deliveries

  $546    $611     (10.6)%  $684     (10.7)% 

Total Gas Revenues

  $600    $546     9.9 $611     (10.6)% 
  

 

   

 

    

 

     

 

   

 

    

 

   

 

(a)Reflects delivery volumes and revenues from customers purchasing natural gas directly from PECO and customers purchasing natural gas from a competitive natural gas supplier as all customers are assessed distribution charges. For customers purchasing natural gas from PECO, revenue also reflects the cost of natural gas.

 

136


Results of Operations—BGE

 

  2012 2011 Favorable
(unfavorable)
2012 vs. 2011
variance
 2010 Favorable
(unfavorable)
2011 vs. 2010
variance
   2013 2012 Favorable
(unfavorable)
2013 vs. 2012
variance
 2011 Favorable
(unfavorable)
2012 vs. 2011
variance
 

Operating revenues

  $2,735  $3,068  $(333 $3,541  $(473  $3,065  $2,735  $330  $3,068  $(333

Purchased power and fuel expense

   1,369   1,593   224   2,147   554    1,421   1,369   (52  1,593   224 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense(a)

   1,366   1,475   (109  1,394   81    1,644   1,366   278   1,475   (109
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other operating expenses

            

Operating and maintenance

   728   680   (48  595   (85   634   728   94   680   (48

Depreciation and amortization

   298   274   (24  249   (25   348   298   (50  274   (24

Taxes other than income

   208   207   (1  200   (7   213   208   (5  207   (1
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total other operating expenses

   1,234   1,161   (73  1,044   (117   1,195   1,234   39   1,161   (73
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Operating income

   132   314   (182  350   (36   449   132   317   314   (182
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

            

Interest expense, net

   (144  (129  (15  (131  2    (122  (144  22   (129  (15

Other, net

   23   26   (3  25   1    17   23   (6  26   (3
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

   (121  (103  (18  (106  3    (105  (121  16   (103  (18
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Income before income taxes

   11   211   (200  244   (33   344   11   333   211   (200

Income taxes

   7   75   68   97   22    134   7   (127  75   68 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net income

   4   136   (132  147   (11   210   4   206   136   (132

Preference stock dividends

   13   13   —      13   —       13   13   —     13   —   
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net (loss) income on common stock

  $(9 $123  $(132 $134  $(11

Net income (loss) attributable to common shareholder

  $197  $(9 $206  $123  $(132
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)BGE evaluates its operating performance using the measures of revenuerevenues net of purchased power expense for electric sales and revenuerevenues net of fuel expense for gas sales. BGE believes revenuerevenues net of purchased power and fuel expense are useful measurements of its performance because they provide information that can be used to evaluate its net revenuerevenues from operations. BGE has included the analysis below as a complement to the financial information provided in accordance with GAAP. However, revenuerevenues net of purchased power and fuel expense figures are not a presentation defined under GAAP and may not be comparable to other companies’ presentations or more useful than the GAAP information provided elsewhere in this report.

 

Net Income

 

Year Ended December 31, 2013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012. The increase in net income was driven primarily by higher distribution rates as a result of the 2012 rate order issued by MDPSC and decreased operating revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense in 2012 related to the accrual of the residential customer rate credit provided as a condition of the MDPSC’s approval of Exelon’s merger with Constellation. Additionally, the increase in net income was also driven by higher operating and maintenance expenses in 2012, primarily related to BGE’s accrual of its portion of the charitable contributions to be provided as a condition of the MDPSC’s approval of the merger and lower storm restoration costs in 2013.

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011. The decrease in net income was driven primarily by decreased operating revenuerevenues net of purchased power and fuel expense related to the residential customer rate credit provided as a condition of the MDPSC’s approval of Exelon’s merger with Constellation. The decrease in net income was also driven by increased operating and maintenance expenses, primarily related to BGE’s accrual of its portion of the charitable contributions to be provided as a condition of the MDPSC’s approval of the merger as well

137


as merger transaction costs, and increased depreciation and amortization expense. None of the customer rate credit, the charitable contributions, or the transaction costs are recoverable from BGE’s customers.

 

Year Ended December 31, 2011 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2010. The decrease in net income was primarily driven by increased storm costs, increased depreciation and amortization expense and increased merger transaction costs. Partially offsetting these unfavorable impacts were increased operating revenues primarily driven by new distribution rates as a result of the 2010 Maryland PSC rate order. None of the transaction costs are recoverable from BGE’s customers.

137


Operating Revenues Net of Purchased Power and Fuel Expense

 

There are certain drivers to operating revenue that are offset by their impact on purchased power expense and fuel expense, such as commodity procurement costs and programs allowing customers to select a competitive electric or natural gas supplier. Electric and gas revenues and purchased power and fuel expense are affected by fluctuations in commodity procurement costs. BGE’s electric and natural gas rates charged to customers are subject to periodic adjustments that are designed to recover or refund the difference between the actual cost of purchased electric power and purchased natural gas and the amount included in rates in accordance with the MDPSC’s market-based SOS and gas commodity programs, respectively.

 

The number of customers electing to select a competitive EGSelectric generation supplier affects electric SOS revenues and purchased power expense. The number of customers electing to select a competitive NGSnatural gas supplier affects gas cost adjustment revenues and purchased natural gas expense. All BGE customers have the choice to purchase energy from a competitive EGS.electric generation supplier. This customer choice of EGSselectric generation suppliers does not impact the volume of deliveries, but affects revenue collected from customers related to SOS. The number of retail customers purchasing electricity from a competitive EGSelectric generation supplier was 399,000, 362,000 314,000 and 228,000314,000 at December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, respectively, representing 29%32%, 29% and 25% of total retail customers, respectively. Retail deliveries purchased from competitive electric generation suppliers represented 61%, 60% and 58% of BGE’s retail kWh sales for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively. The number of retail customers purchasing natural gas from a competitive natural gas supplier was 172,000, 143,000 and 118,000 at December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively, representing 26%, 22% and 18% of total retail customers, respectively. Retail deliveries purchased from competitive EGSs represented 60%, 58% and 50% of BGE’s retail kWh sales for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively. The number of retail customers purchasing natural gas from a competitive NGS was 143,000, 118,000suppliers represented 54%, 56% and 84,000 at December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively, representing 22%, 18% and 13% of total retail customers, respectively. Retail deliveries purchased from competitive NGSs represented 56%, 52% and 49% of BGE’s retail mmcf sales for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, respectively.

 

The changes in BGE’s operating revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense for the year ended December 31, 20122013 compared to the same period in 20112012 consisted of the following:

 

   Increase (Decrease) 
   Electric  Gas  Total 

Residential customer rate credit(a)

  $(82 $(31 $(113

Commodity margin

   (1  (5  (6

Regulatory program cost recovery

   15   4   19 

Transmission

   11   —      11 

Other

   (13  (7  (20
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total decrease

  $(70 $(39 $(109
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
   Increase (Decrease) 
   Electric   Gas   Total 

2012 Residential customer rate credit(a)

  $82   $31   $113 

Pricing

   69    24    93 

Regulatory program cost recovery

   36    6    42 

Other

   26    4    30 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total increase

  $213   $65   $278 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

(a)In accordance with the MDPSC order approving Exelon’s merger with Constellation, the residential customer rate credit is not recoverable from BGE’s customers. Exelon made a $66 million equity contribution to BGE in the second quarter of 2012 to fund the after-tax amount of the rate credit as directed in the MDPSC order approving the merger transaction.

 

Revenue Decoupling.The demand for electricity and gas is affected by weather and usage conditions. The MDPSC has allowed BGE to record a monthly adjustment to its electric and gas distribution revenues from all residential customers, commercial electric customers, the majority of large industrial electric customers, and all firm service gas customers to eliminate the effect of abnormal weather and usage patterns per customer on BGE’s electric and gas distribution volumes, thereby recovering a specified dollar amount of distribution revenues per customer, by customer class,

138


regardless of changes in consumption levels. This allows BGE to recognize revenues at MDPSC-approved levels per customer, regardless of what BGE’s actual distribution volumes were for a billing period. Therefore, while these revenues are affected by customer growth, they will not be affected by actual weather or usage conditions. BGE bills or credits impacted customers in subsequent months for the difference between approved revenue levels under revenue decoupling and actual customer billings.

 

138


Volume.Heating and cooling degree days are quantitative indices that reflect the demand for energy needed to heat a home or business. Normal weather is determined based on historical average heating and cooling degree days for a 30-year period in BGE’s service territory. The changes in heating degree days in BGE’s service territory for the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to the same period in 2012 and normal weather consisted of the following:

Heating and Cooling Degree-Days

  2013   2012   Normal   % Change 
        From 2012  From Normal 

Twelve Months Ended December 31,

                   

Heating Degree-Days

   4,744     3,960     4,661    19.8  1.8

Cooling Degree-Days

   869     1,022     864    (15.0)%   0.6

2012 Residential Customer Rate Credit.

The increase in operating revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense for the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to the same period in 2012 was due to the residential customer rate credit provided in 2012 as a result of the MDPSC’s order approving Exelon’s merger with Constellation.

Pricing.

The increase in operating revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense as a result of pricing for the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to the same period in 2012 was primarily due to the impact of the new electric and natural gas distribution rates charged to customers that became effective February 23, 2013 and December 13, 2013 in accordance with the MDPSC approved electric and natural gas distribution rate case order. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further information.

Regulatory Required Programs.

This represents the change in revenues collected under approved riders to recover costs incurred for the energy efficiency and demand response programs as well as administrative and commercial and industrial customer bad debt costs for SOS. The riders are designed to provide full recovery, as well as a return in certain instances. The costs of these programs are included in operating and maintenance expense, depreciation and amortization expense and taxes other than income taxes. The increase in revenues during the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to the same period in 2012 was due to the recovery of higher energy efficiency program costs.

Other.

Other revenues increased during the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to the same period in 2012. Other revenues, which can vary from period to period, include miscellaneous revenues such as service application and late payment fees.

139


The changes in BGE’s operating revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to the same period in 2011 and normal weather consisted of the following:

 

Heating and Cooling Degree-Days

  2012   2011   Normal   % Change 
        From 2011  From Normal 

Twelve Months Ended December 31,

                   

Heating Degree-Days

   3,960    4,326    4,711    (8.5)%   (15.9)% 

Cooling Degree-Days

   1,022    1,035    858    (1.3)%   19.1
   Increase (Decrease) 
   Electric  Gas  Total 

2012 Residential customer rate credit

  $(82 $(31 $(113

Commodity margin

   (1  (5  (6

Regulatory program cost recovery

   15   4   19 

Transmission

   11   —     11 

Other

   (13  (7  (20
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total decrease

  $(70 $(39 $(109
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

The changes in heating and cooling degree days for the twelve months ended 2012 and 2011, consisted of the following:

Heating and Cooling Degree-Days (a)

  2012   2011   Normal   % Change 
        From 2011  From Normal 

Twelve Months Ended December 31,

                   

Heating Degree-Days

   3,960     4,326     4,711    (8.5)%   (15.9)% 

Cooling Degree-Days

   1,022     1,035     858    (1.3)%   19.1

 

2012 Residential Customer Rate Credit

 

The residential customer rate credit provided as a result of the MDPSC’s order approving Exelon’s merger with Constellation decreased operating revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense for the year ended December 31, 2012.

 

Commodity Margin

 

The commodity margin for both electric and gas revenues decreased during the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to the same period in 2011. Commodity revenues are affected by2011 due to an increase in the number of customers using competitive suppliers as well as the cost of purchased power and natural gas.in 2012.

 

Regulatory Required Programs

 

This represents the change in revenues collected under approved riders to recover costs incurred for the energy efficiency and demand response programs as well as administrative and commercial and industrial customer bad debt costs for SOS. The riders are designed to provide full recovery, as well as a return in certain instances. The costs of these programs are included in operating and maintenance expense, depreciation and amortization expense and taxes other than income taxes. The increase in revenues during the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to the same period in 2011 was due to the recovery of higher energy efficiency programprograms costs.

 

Transmission

 

Transmission revenues increased during the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to the same period in 2011. BGE’s transmission rates are established based on a FERC-approved formula. The rates also include transmission investment incentives approved by FERC in a number of orders covering various new transmission investment projects since 2007.

Other

Other revenues decreased during the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to the same period in 2011. Other revenues, which can vary from period to period, include miscellaneous revenues such as late payment charge revenues and all base distribution revenues, including the impact of revenue decoupling, which decreased2011 due to lower volumes and customer mix.

139


The changes in BGE’s operating revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense for the year ended December 31, 2011 compared to the same period in 2010 consisted of the following:

   Increase (Decrease) 
   Electric  Gas   Total 

Distribution rates increase

  $28  $8   $36 

Commodity margin

   (17  2    (15

Regulatory program cost recovery

   20   1    21 

Transmission

   18   —      18 

Other

   16   5    21 
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total increase

  $65  $16   $81 
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Volume

The changes in heating and cooling degree days for the twelve months ended 2011 and 2010, consisted of the following:

Heating and Cooling Degree-Days(a)

  2011   2010   Normal   % Change 
        From 2010  From Normal 

Twelve Months Ended December 31,

                   

Heating Degree-Days

   4,326    4,716    4,720    (8.3)%   (8.3)% 

Cooling Degree-Days

   1,035    1,122    853    (7.8)%   21.3

Distribution Rates Increase

The MDPSC issued an order approving an increase in BGE’s annual electric distributionhigher revenue requirement. The order became effective December 4, 2010, resulting in higher revenues for the year ended December 31, 2011 compared to the same period in 2010. See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

Commodity Margin

The commodity margin for electric revenues decreased during the year ended December 31, 2011 compared to the same period in 2010. Commodity revenues are affected by the number of customers using competitive suppliers as well as the cost of purchased power and natural gas. Additionally, the decrease is a result of the reinstatement of the credit for the residential return component of the administrative charge on June 1, 2010. This credit will continue through December 2016.

Regulatory Program Cost Recovery

The increase in electric revenues relating to regulatory program cost recovery was due to the recovery of higher energy efficiency program costs and demand response program costs. The costs of these programs are recoverable from customers on a full and current basis through approved regulated rates and have been reflected in operating and maintenance expense, depreciation and amortization expense and taxes other than income taxes.

Transmission

Transmission revenues increased during the year ended December 31, 2011 compared to the same period in 2010.requirements. BGE’s transmission rates are established based on a FERC-approved formula. The rates also include transmission investment incentives approved by FERC in a number of orders covering various new transmission investment projects since 2007.

 

140


Other

 

Other revenues increaseddecreased during the year ended December 31, 20112012 compared to the same period in 2010.2011. Other revenues, which can vary from period to period, include miscellaneous revenues such as service application and late payment charge revenues and all other base distribution revenues, including the impact of revenue decoupling, which increased due to higher volumes and customer mix.fees.

 

Operating and Maintenance Expense

 

  Twelve Months
Ended December 31,
  Increase
(Decrease)
  2012 vs. 2011  
  Twelve Months
Ended December 31,
  Increase
(Decrease)
  2011 vs. 2010  
 
      2012          2011           2011          2010      

Operating and Maintenance
Expense—Baseline

 $728  $679  $49  $679  $591  $88 

Operating and Maintenance
Expense—Regulatory Required Programs 
(a)

  —     1   (1  1   4   (3
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total Operating and Maintenance Expense

 $728  $680  $48  $680  $595  $85 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Operating and maintenance expenses for regulatory required programs are costs for various legislative and/or regulatory programs that are recoverable from customers on a full and current basis through approved regulated rates. An equal and offsetting amount has been reflected in operating revenues.

The changes in operating and maintenance expense for 2013 compared to 2012 and 2012 compared to 2011 and 2011 compared to 2010 consisted of the following:

 

  Increase
(Decrease)
2012 vs. 2011
 Increase
(Decrease)
2011 vs. 2010
   Increase
(Decrease)
2013 vs. 2012
 Increase
(Decrease)
2012 vs. 2011
 

Baseline

   

Charitable contributions(a)

  $28  $—      $(28 $28 

Storm costs deferral(b)

   16   (16   —     16 

Storm-related costs(c)

   7   41    (62  7 

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefits expense

   6   2    —     6 

Labor, other benefits, contracting and materials

   (10  25    20   (10

Merger transaction costs (a)

   (9  30    (21  (9

Uncollectible accounts expense

   —      6 

Other

   11   —       (3  10 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 
   49   88    

Regulatory Required Programs

   

SOS

   (1  (3
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

(Decrease) Increase in operating and maintenance expense

  $(94 $48 
   (1  (3  

 

  

 

 
  

 

  

 

 

Increase in operating and maintenance expense

  $48  $85 
  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)During the first quarter of 2012, BGE accrued $28 million in charitable contributions as a result of BGE’s merger-related commitments. The charitable contribution accrual and merger transaction costs are not recoverable from BGE’s customers.
(b)During the first quarter of 2011, the MDPSC issued a comprehensive rate order permitting the deferral of incremental distribution service restoration expenses associated with 2010 storms as a regulatory asset.
(c)On June 29, 2012, a “Derecho” storm caused extensive damage to BGE’s electric distribution system and created power outages that lasted multiple days. As a result, BGE incurred $62 million of incremental costs during the year ended December 31, 2012, of which $20 million are capital costs. In the fourth quarter of 2012, BGE incurred $38 million of incremental costs as a result of Hurricane Sandy, of which $14 million are capital costs. These amounts compare to $40 million of incremental expenses incurred during the third quarter of 2011 associated with Hurricane Irene, of which $25 million are capital costs, and $14 million of incremental expenses, of which $3 are capital costs, incurred during the first quarter of 2011.

 

141


Depreciation and Amortization Expense

 

The changes in depreciation and amortization expense for 2013 compared to 2012 and 2012 compared to 2011 and 2011 compared to 2010 consisted of the following:

 

  Increase
(Decrease)
2012 vs. 2011
 Increase
(Decrease)
2011 vs. 2010
   Increase
(Decrease)
2013 vs. 2012
   Increase
(Decrease)
2012 vs. 2011
 

Depreciation expense (a)

   $20  $10    $18   $20 

Regulatory asset amortization(b)

   6   13    31    6 

Other

   (2  2    1    (2
  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 

Increase in depreciation and amortization expense

   $24  $25    $50   $24 
  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)DepreciationDeprecation and amortization expense increased due to higher plant balances year over year.
(b)Regulatory asset amortization increased due to higher energy efficiency and demand response programs expenditures year over year

 

141


Taxes Other Than Income

 

The change in taxes other than income for 2013 compared to 2012 and 2012 compared to 2011 and 2011 compared to 2010 consisted of the following:

 

  Increase
(Decrease)
2012 vs. 2011
 Increase
(Decrease)
2011 vs. 2010
   Increase
(Decrease)
2013 vs. 2012
 Increase
(Decrease)
2012 vs. 2011
 

Property tax

  $4  $5   $(2 $4 

Franchise tax

   7   (1

Other

   (3  2    —     (2
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Increase in taxes other than income

  $1  $7   $5  $1 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

 

Interest Expense, Net

Year Ended December 31, 2013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012. The decrease in interest expense, net for 2013 compared to 2012 was primarily due to the interest recorded in 2012 on prior year tax liabilities and lower effective interest rates as a result of the refinancing of debt at a lower interest rate in 2013.

 

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011. The increase in interest expense, net forin 2012 compared to 2011 was primarily due to higher outstanding debt balances.

Year Ended December 31, 2011 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2010. The changebalances and interest recorded in interest expense, net in 2011 compared to 2010 was relatively flat.2012 on prior year tax liabilities.

 

Effective Income Tax Rate

 

BGE’s effective income tax rates for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011 were 39.0%, 63.6% and 2010 were 63.6%, 35.5% and 39.8%, respectively. See Note 1214 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding the components of the effective income tax rates.

 

142


BGE Electric Operating Statistics and Revenue Detail

 

Retail Deliveries to customers (in GWhs)

 2012 2011 % Change
2012 vs. 2011
 Weather-
Normal %
Change
 2010 % Change
2011 vs. 2010
 Weather-
Normal %
Change
  2013 2012 % Change
2013 vs. 2012
 Weather-
Normal %
Change
 2011 % Change
2012 vs. 2011
 Weather-
Normal %

Change
 

Retail Delivery and Sales(a)

       

Retail Deliveries(a)

       

Residential

  12,719   12,652   0.5  n.m.    13,834   (8.5)%   n.m.    13,077   12,719   2.8  n.m.    12,652   0.5  n.m.  

Small commercial & industrial(c)

  15,943   16,276   (2.0)%   n.m.    16,040   1.5  n.m.    3,035   2,990   1.5  n.m.    3,023   (1.1)%   n.m.  

Large commercial & industrial(c)

  1,980   2,464   (19.6)%   n.m.    2,578   (4.4)%   n.m.    14,339   14,956   (4.1)%   n.m.    15,729   (4.9)%   n.m.  

Public authorities & electric railroads

  329   405   (18.8)%   n.m.    400   1.3  n.m.    317   329   (3.6)%   n.m.    405   (18.8)%   n.m.  
 

 

  

 

    

 

    

 

  

 

    

 

   

Total Electric Retail

  30,971   31,797   (2.6)%   n.m.    32,852   (3.2)%   n.m.  

Total Electric Retail Deliveries

  30,768   30,994   (0.7)%   n.m.    31,809   (2.6)%   n.m.  
 

 

  

 

    

 

    

 

  

 

    

 

   

 

  As of December 31,   As of December 31, 

Number of Electric Customers

  2012   2011   2010   2013   2012   2011 

Residential

   1,116,233    1,116,401    1,114,712    1,120,431    1,116,233    1,116,401 

Small commercial & industrial(c)

   119,122    118,568    118,250    112,850    112,994    113,026 

Large commercial & industrial(c)

   5,452    5,823    5,534    11,652    11,580    11,365 

Public authorities & electric railroads

   319    326    326    292    319    326 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total

   1,241,126    1,241,118    1,238,822    1,245,225    1,241,126    1,241,118 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

Electric Revenue

  2012   2011   % Change
2012 vs. 2011
  2010   % Change
2011 vs. 2010
 

Retail Delivery and Sales(a)

         

Residential

  $1,274    $1,456     (12.5)%  $1,857     (21.6)% 

Small commercial & industrial

   600    632    (5.1)%   687    (8.0)% 

Large commercial & industrial

   40    51    (21.6)%   53    (3.8)% 

Public authorities & electric railroads

   30    29    3.4  30    (3.3)% 
  

 

 

   

 

 

    

 

 

   

Total Retail

   1,944    2,168    (10.3)%   2,627    (17.5)% 
  

 

 

   

 

 

    

 

 

   

Other Revenue(b)

   239    228    4.8  204    11.8
  

 

 

   

 

 

    

 

 

   

Total Electric Revenues

  $2,183    $2,396     (8.9)%  $2,831     (15.4)% 
  

 

 

   

 

 

    

 

 

   

142


Electric Revenue

  2013   2012   % Change
2013 vs. 2012
  2011   % Change
2012 vs. 2011
 

Retail Sales(a)

         

Residential

  $1,404    $1,274     10.2 $1,456     (12.5)% 

Small commercial & industrial(c)

   257    248    3.6  268    (7.5)% 

Large commercial & industrial (c)

   439    393    11.7  416    (5.5)% 

Public authorities & electric railroads

   31    30    3.3  29    3.4
  

 

 

   

 

 

    

 

 

   

Total Retail

   2,131    1,945    9.6  2,169    (10.3)% 
  

 

 

   

 

 

    

 

 

   

Other Revenue(b)

   274    238    15.1  152    56.6
  

 

 

   

 

 

    

 

 

   

Total Electric Revenues

  $2,405   $2,183    10.2 $2,321     (5.9)% 
  

 

 

   

 

 

    

 

 

   

 

(a)Reflects delivery revenues and volumes from customers purchasing electricity directly from BGE and customers purchasing electricity from a competitive electric generation supplier as all customers are assessed distribution charges. For customers purchasing electricity from BGE, revenue also reflects the cost of energy and transmission.
(b)Other revenue includes wholesale transmission revenue and late payment charges.

(c)Certain commercial and industrial (C&I) customers were reclassified from small C&I to large C&I in prior years to conform to the current year’s classification of C&I customers.

 

143


BGE Gas Operating Statistics and Revenue Detail

 

Deliveries to customers (in mmcf)

 2012 2011 % Change
2012 vs. 2011
 Weather-
Normal %
Change
 2010 % Change
2011 vs. 2010
 Weather-
Normal %
Change
  2013 2012 % Change
2013 vs. 2012
 Weather-
Normal %
Change
 2011 % Change
2012 vs. 2011
 Weather-
Normal %
Change
 

Retail Delivery and Sales(c)

       

Retail Deliveries (d)

       

Retail sales

  86,946   94,800   (8.3)%   n.m.    98,928   (4.2)%   n.m.    94,020   86,946   8.1  n.m.    94,800   (8.3)%   n.m.  

Transportation and other(d)(e)

  15,751   16,436   (4.2)%   n.m.    14,711   11.7  n.m.    12,210   15,751   (22.5)%   n.m.    16,436   (4.2)%   n.m.  
 

 

  

 

    

 

    

 

  

 

    

 

   

Total Gas Deliveries

  102,697   111,236   (7.7)%   n.m.    113,639   (2.1)%   n.m.    106,230   102,697   3.4  n.m.    111,236   (7.7)%   n.m.  
 

 

  

 

    

 

    

 

  

 

    

 

   

 

  As of December 31,   As of December 31, 

Number of Gas Customers

  2012   2011   2010   2013   2012   2011 

Residential

   610,827    608,943    608,553    611,532    610,827    608,943 

Commercial & industrial

   44,228    44,211    44,041    44,162    44,228    44,211 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total

   655,055    653,154    652,594    655,694    655,055    653,154 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  ��

 

 

 

Gas revenue

  2012   2011   % Change
2012 vs. 2011
 2010   % Change
2011 vs. 2010
   2013   2012   % Change
2013 vs. 2012
 2011   % Change
2012 vs. 2011
 

Retail Delivery and Sales(c)

         

Retail Sales(d)

         

Retail sales

  $494    $580     (14.8)%  $620     (6.5)%   $592    $494     19.8 $580     (14.8)% 

Transportation and other(d)(e)

   58    92    (37.0)%   90    2.2   68    58    17.2  92    (37.0)% 
  

 

   

 

    

 

     

 

   

 

    

 

   

Total Gas Deliveries

  $552    $672     (17.9)%  $710     (5.4)% 

Total Gas Revenues

  $660    $552     19.6 $672     (17.9)% 
  

 

   

 

    

 

     

 

   

 

    

 

   

 

(c)(d)Reflects delivery revenues and volumes from customers purchasing natural gas directly from BGE and customers purchasing natural gas from a competitive natural gas supplier as all customers are assessed distribution charges. The cost of natural gas is charged to customers purchasing natural gas from BGE.
(d)(e)Transportation and other gas revenue includes off-system revenue of 12,210 mmcfs ($55 million), 15,751 mmcfs ($51 million), and 16,436 mmcfs ($82 million) and 14,711 mmcfs ($80 million) for the years ended 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, respectively.

 

143


Liquidity and Capital Resources

 

ExelonExelon’s and GenerationGeneration’s prior year activity presented below includes the activity of Constellation, and BGE in the case of Exelon, from the merger effective date of March 12, 2012 through December 31, 2012. ExelonExelon’s and GenerationGeneration’s activity for 2011 and 2010 is unadjusted for the effects of the merger. BGEBGE’s prior year activity presented below includes its activity for the 12 months ended December 31, 2012 2011 and 2010.2011.

 

The Registrants’ operating and capital expenditures requirements are provided by internally generated cash flows from operations as well as funds from external sources in the capital markets and through bank borrowings. The Registrants’ businesses are capital intensive and require considerable capital resources. Each Registrant’s access to external financing on reasonable terms depends on its credit ratings and current overall capital market business conditions, including that of the utility industry in general. If these conditions deteriorate to the extent that the Registrants no longer have access to the capital markets at reasonable terms, Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE have access to unsecured revolving credit facilities with aggregate bank commitments of $0.5 billion, $5.3 billion, $1.0 billion, $0.6 billion and $0.6 billion, respectively. The Registrants’ revolving credit facilities are in place until 2017.2018. In addition, Generation has a $0.3$0.4 billion in bilateral facilityfacilities with a bank. The bilateral facility at Generation has expirationsbanks which expire in January 2015, December 2015 and March 2016. The Registrant’sRegistrants utilize their credit facilities to support their commercial paper programs, provide for other short-term borrowings and to issue letters of credit. See the “Credit Matters” section below for further discussion. The Registrants expect cash flows to be sufficient to meet operating expenses, financing costs and capital expenditure requirements.

 

144


The Registrants primarily use their capital resources, including cash, to fund capital requirements, including construction expenditures, retire debt, pay dividends, fund pension and other postretirement benefit obligations and invest in new and existing ventures. The Registrants spend a significant amount of cash on capital improvements and construction projects that have a long-term return on investment. Additionally, ComEd, PECO and BGE operate in rate-regulated environments in which the amount of new investment recovery may be delayed or limited and where such recovery takes place over an extended period of time. See Note 1113 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion of the Registrants’ debt and credit agreements.

 

Cash Flows from Operating Activities

 

General

 

Generation’s cash flows from operating activities primarily result from the sale of electric energy and energy-related products and services to customers. Generation’s future cash flows from operating activities may be affected by future demand for and market prices of energy and its ability to continue to produce and supply power at competitive costs as well as to obtain collections from customers.

 

ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s cash flows from operating activities primarily result from the transmission and distribution of electricity and, in the case of PECO and BGE, gas distribution services. ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s distribution services are provided to an established and diverse base of retail customers. ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s future cash flows may be affected by the economy, weather conditions, future legislative initiatives, future regulatory proceedings with respect to their rates or operations, competitive suppliers, and their ability to achieve operating cost reductions.

 

See Notes 3 and 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion of regulatory and legal proceedings and proposed legislation.

 

144


Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits

 

Management considers various factors when making pension funding decisions, including actuarially determined minimum contribution requirements under ERISA, contributions required to avoid benefit restrictions and at-risk status as defined by the Pension Protection Act of 2006, management of the pension obligation and regulatory implications. On July 6, 2012, President Obama signed into law the Moving Ahead for Progress in the Twenty-first Century Act, which contains a pension funding provision that results in lower pension contributions in the near term while increasing the premiums pension plans pay to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. Certain provisions of the law were applied in 2012 while others take effect in 2013. The estimated impacts of the law are reflected in the projected pension contributions below.

Exelon expects to contribute approximately $270$264 million to its pension plans in 2013,2014, of which Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE expect to contribute $118 million, $119 million, $117 million, $12$11 million and $2$0 million, respectively. See Note 1416 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for the Registrants’ 20122013 and 20112012 pension contributions.

 

Unlike the qualified pension plans, Exelon’s other postretirement plans are not subject to regulatory minimum contribution requirements. Management considers several factors in determining the level of contributions to Exelon’s other postretirement benefit plans, including levels of benefit claims paid and regulatory implications (amounts deemed prudent to meet regulatory expectations and best assure continued recovery). Exelon expects to contribute approximately $292$430 million to the other postretirement benefit plans in 2013,2014, of which Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE expect to contribute $117$168 million, $114$197 million, $22$19 million and $18$17 million, respectively. See Note 1416 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for the Registrants’ 20122013 and 20112012 other postretirement benefit contributions.

 

145


See the “Contractual Obligations” section below for management’s estimated future pension and other postretirement benefits contributions.

 

Tax Matters

 

The Registrants’ future cash flows from operating activities may be affected by the following tax matters:

 

In November 2012, the IRS and Exelon finalized and executed definitive agreements to resolve Exelon’s involuntary conversion and CTC positions. Exelon expects that the IRS will assess approximately $300 million of tax and interest in the first quarter of 2013. In order to stop additional interest from accruing on the expected assessment, Exelon had previously made a payment in December 2010 to the IRS of $302 million. In addition Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and PECOBGE expect to receive tax refunds of approximately $375$380 million, $50$60 million, $350$320 million, $10 million and $25$20 million, respectively, between 2013 and 2014 and the remainder paid by Exelon.2015.

 

Given the current economic environment, state and local governments are facing increasing financial challenges, which may increase the risk of additional income tax levies, property taxes and other taxes.

 

In September 2012, PECO filed an application with the IRS to change its method of accounting for gas distribution repairs for the 2011 tax year. The newly adopted method results in a cash tax benefit in 2012 of approximately $38 million and $41 million at Exelon and PECO, respectively. Exelon currently anticipates that the IRS will issue industry guidance during 2013.in the near future. See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for discussion regarding the regulatory treatment of PECO’s tax benefits from the application of the method change.

 

145


The following table provides a summary of the major items affecting Exelon’s cash flows from operations for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010:2011:

 

 2012 2011 2012 vs. 2011
Variance
 2010 2011 vs. 2010
Variance
  2013 2012 2013 vs. 2012
Variance
 2011 2012 vs. 2011
Variance
 

Net income

 $1,171  $2,499  $(1,328 $2,563  $(64 $1,729  $1,171  $558 ��$2,499  $(1,328

Add (subtract):

          

Non-cash operating activities(a)

  5,588   4,848   740   4,340   508   4,159   5,588   (1,429  4,848   740 

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit contributions

  (462  (2,360  1,898   (959  (1,401  (422  (462  40   (2,360  1,898 

Income taxes

  544    492   52   (543  1,035   883   544   339   492   52 

Changes in working capital and other noncurrent assets and liabilities(b)

  (731  (279  (452  122   (401  (185  (731  546   (279  (452

Option premiums paid, net

  (114  (3  (111  (124  121   (36  (114  78   (3  (111

Counterparty collateral received (paid), net

  135   (344  479   (155  (189  215   135   80   (344  479 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net cash flows provided by operations

 $6,131  $4,853  $1,278  $5,244  $(391 $6,343  $6,131  $212  $4,853  $1,278 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Represents depreciation, amortization, depletion and accretion, mark-to-market gains and losses on derivative transactions,net fair value changes related to derivatives, deferred income taxes, provision for uncollectible accounts, pension and non-pension postretirement benefit expense, equity in earnings and losses of unconsolidated affiliates and investments, decommissioning-related items, stock compensation expense, impairment of long-lived assets, and other non-cash charges.
(b)Changes in working capital and other noncurrent assets and liabilities exclude the changes in commercial paper, income taxes and the current portion of long-term debt.

 

146


Cash flows provided by operations for 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011 by Registrant were as follows:

 

  2012   2011   2010   2013   2012   2011 

Exelon(a)

  $6,131   $4,853   $5,244   $6,343   $6,131   $4,853 

Generation(a)

   3,581    3,313    3,032    3,887    3,581    3,313 

ComEd

   1,334    836    1,077    1,218    1,334    836 

PECO

   878    818    1,150    747    878    818 

BGE(a)

   485    476    329    561    485    476 

(a)Exelon’s and Generation’s prior year activity includes the activity of Constellation, and BGE in the case of Exelon, from the merger effective date of March 12, 2012 through December 31, 2012. Exelon’s and Generation’s activity for 2011 is unadjusted for the effects of the merger. BGE’s prior year activity includes its activity for the 12 months ended December 31, 2012 and 2011.

 

Changes in Exelon’s, Generation’s, ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s cash flows from operations were generally consistent with changes in each Registrant’s respective results of operations, as adjusted by changes in working capital in the normal course of business. In addition, significant operating cash flow impacts for the Registrants for 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011 were as follows:

 

Generation

 

During 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, Generation had net (payments) receipts of counterparty collateral of $162 million, $95 million $(410) million and $(1)$(410) million, respectively. Net payments during 20122013 and 20112012 were primarily due to market conditions that resulted in changes to Generation’s net mark-to-market position. Depending upon whether Generation is in a net mark-to-market liability or asset position, collateral may be required to be posted with or collected from its counterparties. This collateral may be in various forms, such as cash, which may be obtained through the issuance of commercial paper, or letters of credit.

 

During 2007, Generation, along with ComEd2013, 2012 and other generators and utilities, reached an agreement with various representatives from the State of Illinois to address concerns about higher electric bills in Illinois. Generation committed to contributing approximately $747 million over four years. As part of the agreement, Generation contributed cash of approximately $23 million in 2010. As of December 31, 2010, Generation had fulfilled its commitments under the Illinois Settlement Legislation.

During 2012, 2011, and 2010, Generation’s accounts receivable from ComEd increased (decreased) by $(16) million, $(15) million $12 million and $(65)$12 million, respectively, primarily due to changes in receivables for energy purchases related to its SFC, ICC-approved RFP contracts and financial swap contract.

 

146


During 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, Generation’s accounts receivable from PECO increased (decreased) by $(17) million, $17 million $(210) million and $74$(210) million, respectively.

 

During 2013, 2012 and 2011, Generation’s accounts receivable from BGE increased (decreased) by $(4) million, $23 million and 2010,$(13) million, respectively.

During 2013, 2012 and 2011, Generation had net payments of approximately $36 million, $114 million $3 million and $124$3 million, respectively, related to purchases and sales of options. The level of option activity in a given year may vary due to several factors, including changes in market conditions as well as changes in hedging strategy.

 

ComEd

 

During 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, ComEd’s net payables to Generation for energy purchases related to its supplier forward contract, ICC-approved RFP contracts and financial swap contract settlements increased (decreased) by $(16) million, $(15) million $12 million and $(65)$12 million, respectively. During 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, ComEd’s payables to other energy suppliers for energy purchases increased (decreased) by $35 million, $20 million $(43) million and $58$(43) million, respectively.

 

147


During 2013, 2012, and 2011,2012, ComEd received $53 million, $37 million and $63 million, respectively, of incremental cash collateral from PJM due to variations in its energy transmission activity levels. As of December 31, 20122013 and December 31, 2011,2012, ComEd had $53 million and $90 million of cash collateral remaining at PJM.PJM of $0M and $53 million, respectively.

 

PECO

 

During 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, PECO’s payables to Generation for energy purchases increased (decreased) by $(17) million, $17 million $(210) million and $74$(210) million, respectively, and payables to other energy suppliers for energy purchases increased (decreased) by $33 million, $(22) million $97 million and $1$97 million, respectively.

 

BGE

 

During 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, BGE’s payables to Generation for energy purchases increased (decreased) by $(4) million, $23 million $(13) million and $0$(13) million, respectively, and payables to other energy suppliers for energy purchases increased (decreased) by $5 million, $40 million and $(60) million, and $54 million, respectively. BGE’s increase in payables to other energy suppliers in 2010 is due to the implementation of the POR program during July 2010. The decrease in payables to other energy suppliers in 2011 is due to full payment to POR suppliers due to the implementation of a new customer billing system during January 2012.

 

Cash Flows from Investing Activities

 

Cash flows used in investing activities for 2013, 2012, 2011, and 20102011 by Registrant were as follows:

 

  2012 2011 2010   2013 2012 2011 

Exelon(d)(f)

  $(4,576 $(4,603 $(3,894  $(5,394 $(4,576 $(4,603

Generation(d)(f)

   (2,629  (3,077  (2,896   (2,916  (2,629  (3,077

ComEd

   (1,212  (1,007  (939   (1,387  (1,212  (1,007

PECO(b)

   (328  (557  (120   (531  (328  (557

BGE(f)

   (573  (592  (177   (571  (573  (592

 

147


Capital expenditures by Registrant for 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011 and projected amounts for 20132014 are as follows:

 

   Projected
2013(c)
   2012   2011   2010 

Generation(d)

  $2,850   $3,554   $2,491   $1,883 

ComEd(e)

   1,400    1,246    1,028    962 

PECO

   569    422    481    545 

BGE

   663    582    592    508 

Other(f)

   43    67    42    (64
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total capital expenditures

  $5,525   $5,871   $4,634   $3,834 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 
   Projected
2014(b)
   2013   2012   2011 (a) 

Exelon(f)

  $5,475   $5,395   $5,789   $4,042 

Generation(c)(f)

   2,400    2,752    3,554    2,491 

ComEd (d)

   1,775    1,433    1,246    1,028 

PECO

   625    537    422    481 

BGE(f)

   600    587    582    592 

Other(e)

   75    86    82    42 

 

(a)Includes $387 million in 2011 related to acquisitions, principally acquisition of Wolf Hollow, Antelope Valley and Shooting Star; and $893 million in 2010, related to the acquisition of Exelon Wind.Star. See Note 4 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.
(b)Includes a cash inflow of $413 million in 2010 as a result of the consolidation of PETT on January 1, 2010. See Note 1 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.
(c)Total projected capital expenditures do not include adjustments for non-cash activity.
(d)(c)Includes nuclear fuel.

148


(e)(d)The projected capital expenditures include approximately $227 million of expected incremental spending. Pursuant to EIMA, ComEd has committed to invest approximately $2.6 billion over a ten year period to modernize and storm-harden its distribution system and to implement smart grid technology. ComEd expects to file an updated investment plan with the ICC in April, 2013.2014.
(f)(e)Other primarily consists of corporate operations and BSC. The negative capital expenditures
(f)Exelon’s and Generation’s prior year activity includes the activity of Constellation, and BGE in the case of Exelon, from the merger effective date of March 12, 2012 through December 31, 2012. Exelon’s and Generation’s activity for Other in 2010 primarily relate to2011 is unadjusted for the transfereffects of information technology hardwarethe merger. BGE’s prior year activity includes its activity for the 12 months ended December 31, 2012 and software assets from BSC to Generation, ComEd and PECO.2011.

 

Projected capital expenditures and other investments are subject to periodic review and revision to reflect changes in economic conditions and other factors.

 

Generation

 

Approximately 35%38% and 20%11% of the projected 20132014 capital expenditures at Generation are for the acquisition of nuclear fuel;fuel and investments in renewable energy generation, including Antelope Valley construction costs, respectively, with the remaining amounts reflecting additions and upgrades to existing facilities (including material condition improvements during nuclear refueling outages). Also included in the projected 20132014 capital expenditures are a portion of the costs of a series of planned power uprates across Generation’s nuclear fleet. See “EXELON CORPORATION—Executive Overview,” for more information on nuclear uprates.

 

On November 30, 2012, a subsidiary of Generation sold three Maryland generating stations and associated assets to Raven Power Holdings LLC, a subsidiary of Riverstone Holdings LLC, and received net proceeds of approximately $371 million in the fourth quarter.$371. In addition, Generation will begin to make cash payments of approximately $32$31 million to Raven Power Holdings LLC over a twelve-month period beginning in June 2013.2014. In 2012, Generation incurred transaction costs of approximately $15 million through the date of closing of the transaction. The sale will generate approximately $195 million of cash tax benefits, of which $155 million will be realized in periods through 2014 with the balance to be received in later years. Therefore, Generation expects net after-tax cash sale proceeds of approximately $495 million through 2014 and approximately $36 million in subsequent years.

 

ComEd, PECO and BGE

 

Approximately 89%91%, 89%72% and 77%89% of the projected 20132014 capital expenditures at ComEd, PECO and BGE, respectively, are for continuing projects to maintain and improve operations, including enhancing reliability and adding capacity to the transmission and distribution systems such as ComEd’s reliability related investments required under EIMA, and ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s

148


construction commitments under PJM’s RTEP. In addition, this includes for ComEdComEd’s capital expenditures related toinclude smart grid/smart meter technology required under EIMA and forEIMA. PECO and BGE capital expenditures include investments related to itstheir respective smart meter program and SGIG project, net of DOE expected reimbursements. The remaining amounts are for capital additions to support new business and customer growth. See Notes 3 and 67 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

As a result of the October 3, 2012 ICC Rehearing Order, ComEd currently plans to defer approximately $400 million of smart meter and other infrastructure spend from the period beginning 2012 through 2014 to 2015 and beyond. ComEd’s deferred approximately $65 million of planned spend in 2012.

In 2010, NERC provided guidance to transmission owners, that recommendsincluding ComEd, PECO, and BGE, performthat recommends the completion of performance assessments of all their transmission lines, with the highest priority lines assessed by December 31, 2011, medium priority lines by December 31, 2012, and the lowest priority lines by December 31, 2013. In compliance with this guidance, ComEd, PECO and BGE submitted their most recent bi-annual reports to NERC in January 2013.2014. ComEd, PECO and BGE will be incurringincur incremental capital expenditures associated with this guidance following the completion of the

149


assessments. Specific projects and expenditures are identified as the assessments are completed. ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s forecasted 20132014 capital expenditures above reflect capital spending for remediation to be completed in 2013.2014.

 

ComEd, PECO and BGE anticipate that they will fund capital expenditures with internally generated funds and borrowings, including ComEd’s capital expenditures associated with EIMA as further discussed in Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

Cash Flows from Financing Activities

 

Cash flows provided by (used in) financing activities for 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011 by Registrant were as follows:

 

  2012 2011 2010   2013 2012 2011 

Exelon

  $(1,085 $(846 $(1,748  $(826 $(1,085 $(846

Generation

   (777  (196  (779   (384  (777  (196

ComEd

   (212  355   (179   61   (212  355 

PECO

   (382  (589  (811   (361  (382  (589

BGE

   128   115   (116   (48  128   115 

 

Debt.Debt Debt.Debt activity for 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011 by Registrant was as follows:

Company

Issuances of long-term debt in 2013

Use of proceeds

Generation

$5 million of variable rate CEU Credit Agreement project financing, due July 22, 2016Used to fund Upstream gas activities

Generation

$227 million of fixed rate DOE Project Financing, due January 5, 2037Used for Antelope Valley solar development

Generation

$1 million of 2.93% Social Security Administration Project Financing, due February 18, 2015Used to install conservation measures for the Social Security Administration Headquarters facility in Maryland

Generation

$9 million of 4.40% Energy Efficiency Financing, due August 31, 2014Used for funding to install energy conservation measures in Beckley, West Virginia

Generation

$613 million of 6.00% Continental Wind Senior Secured Notes, due February 28, 2033Used for general corporate purposes

149


Company

Issuances of long-term debt in 2013

Use of proceeds

ComEd

$350 million of First Mortgage 4.60% Bonds, Series 114, due August 15, 2043Used to repay outstanding commercial paper obligations and for general corporate purposes

PECO

$300 million of First and Refunding Mortgage 1.20% Bonds due October 15, 2016Used to pay at maturity first and refunding mortgage bonds due October 15, 2013 and other general corporate purposes

PECO

$250 million of First and Refunding Mortgage 4.80% Bonds due October 15, 2043Used to pay at maturity first and refunding mortgage bonds due October 15, 2013 and other general corporate purposes

BGE

$300 million of fixed rate 3.35% Notes due July 1, 2023Used to partially refinance Notes due July 1, 2013 and for general corporate purposes

 

Company

  

Issuances of long-term debt in 2012

  

Use of proceeds

Generation

  $78 million of variable rate CEU Credit Agreement project financing, due July 16, 2016  Used to fund Upstream gas activities

Generation

  $220 million of fixed rate DOE Project Financing, due January 5, 2037  Used for Antelope Valley solar development

Generation

  $523 million of 4.25% Senior Notes due June 15, 2022  Used for general corporate purposes and issued in connection with the Exchange Offer

Generation

  $788 million of 5.60% Senior Notes due June 15, 2042  Used for general corporate purposes and issued in connection with the Exchange Offer

Generation

  $38 million of variable rate Clean Horizons project financing due June 7, 2030  Used for funding for Maryland solar development

ComEd

  $350 million of First Mortgage 3.80% Bonds, Series 113, due October 1, 2042  Used to repay outstanding commercial paper obligations and for general corporate purposes.purposes

PECO

  $350 million of First and Refunding Mortgage 2.38% Bonds due September 15, 2022  Used to pay at maturity First Mortgage Bonds due October 1, 2012 and for general corporate purposes

BGE

  $250 million of fixed rate 2.80% Notes due August 15, 2022  Used to repay total outstanding commercial paper obligations and for general corporate purposes

150


Company

  

Issuances of long-term debt in 2011

  

Use of proceeds

ComEd

  $600 million of First Mortgage 1.625% Bonds, Series 110, due January 15, 2014  Used as an interim source of liquidity for a January 2011 contribution to Exelon-sponsored pension plans.plans

ComEd

  $250 million of First Mortgage 1.95% Bonds, Series 111, due September 1, 2016  Used to retire $191 million tax-exempt variable-rate First Mortgage Bonds, Series 2008 D, E, and F, $345 million of First Mortgage Bonds, Series 105, and for other general corporate purposes.purposes

150


Company

Issuances of long-term debt in 2011

Use of proceeds

ComEd

  $350 million of First Mortgage 3.40% Bonds, Series 112, due September 1, 2021  Used to retire $191 million tax-exempt variable-rate First Mortgage Bonds, Series 2008 D, E, and F, $345 million of First Mortgage Bonds, Series 105, and for other general corporate purposes.purposes

BGE

  $300 million of fixed rate 3.50% Notes, due November 15, 2021  Used to repay total outstanding commercial paper obligations and for general corporate purposes

Company

  

IssuancesRetirement of long-term debt in 2010

Use of proceeds2013

Generation

  $9003 million scheduled payments of 7.83% Kennett Square capital lease until September 1, 2020

Generation

$113 million of Senior Notes, consistingvariable rate Solar Revolver project financing with a final maturity of $550 million Senior Notes, 4.00% due October 1, 2020 and $350 million Senior Notes, 5.75% due October 1, 2041July 7, 2014

Generation

  Used to finance the acquisition$2 million of Exelon Wind and for general corporate purposes.2.563% project financing Clean Horizons with a final maturity of September 7, 2030

Generation

$2 million of 2.68% Sacramento Energy Loan Agreement with a final maturity of December 31, 2030

Generation (a)

$450 million of 8.625% Series A Junior Subordinated Debentures with a final maturity of June 15, 2063

ComEd

  $500125 million of First Mortgage Bonds at 4.00% due August 1, 2020Used to refinance7.625% First Mortgage Bonds, Series 102, which matured on August92, due April 15, 20102013

ComEd

$127 million of 7.500% First Mortgage Bonds, Series 94, due July 1, 2013

PECO

$300 million of 5.600% First and for other general corporate purposes.Refunding Mortgage Bonds, due October 15, 2013

BGE

$67 million of 5.72% fixed rate Rate Stabilization Bonds, due April 1, 2017

BGE

$400 million of 6.125% Senior Notes, due July 1, 2013

Company

  

Retirement of long-term debt in 2012

Exelon

  $2 million of 7.30% fixed-rate Medium Term Notes with a maturity date of June 1, 2012.2012

Exelon

  $442 million of 7.60% fixed-rate Senior Notes with a maturity date of April 1, 2032.2032

Generation

  $2 million scheduled payments of 7.83% Kennett Square capital lease until September 20, 2020

Generation

  $46 million of 3-year term rate Armstrong Co. 2009 A, Pollution Control Notes at 5.00% with a final maturity of December 1, 2042.2042

Generation

  $89 million of variable rate project financing CEU Credit Agreement with a final maturity of July 16, 2016.2016

Generation

  $17 million of variable rate Solar Revolver project financing with a final maturity of July 7, 2014.2014

Generation

  $75 million of variable rate MEDCO tax-exempt bonds with a final maturity of April 1, 2024.2024

Generation

  $2 million of variable rate Sacramento Solar Promissory Note with a final maturity of March 12, 2012.2012

ComEd

  $450 million of 6.15% First Mortgage Bonds, Series 98, due March 15, 2012

 

151


Company

  

Retirement of long-term debt in 2012

PECO

  $225 million of 4.75% First and Refunding Mortgage Bonds, due October 1, 2012

PECO

  $150 million of 4.00% First and Refunding Mortgage Bonds, due December 1, 2012

BGE

  $8 million of 5.72% fixed rate Rate Stabilization Bonds, due April 1, 2016

BGE

  $55 million of 5.47% fixed rate Rate Stabilization Bonds, due October 1, 2012

BGE

  $110 million of variable rate Medium Term Notes, due June 15, 2012

Company

Retirement of long-term debt in 2011

Generation

  $2 million scheduled payments of 7.83% Kennett Square capital lease until September 20, 2020

ComEd

  $2 million of 4.75% sinking fund debentures, due December 1, 2011

ComEd

  $50 million of tax-exempt variable-rate First Mortgage Bonds, Series 2008 D, due March 1, 2020

ComEd

  $50 million of tax-exempt variable-rate First Mortgage Bonds, Series 2008 E, due May 1, 2021

ComEd

  $91 million of tax-exempt variable-rate First Mortgage Bonds, Series 2008 F, due March 1, 2017

ComEd

  $345 million of 5.40% First Mortgage Bonds, Series 105, due December 15, 2011

PECO

  $250 million of 5.95% First and Refunding Mortgage Bonds, due November 1, 2011

BGE

  $60 million of 5.47% fixed rate Rate Stabilization Bonds, due October 1, 2012

(a)

Company

RetirementRepresents debt obligations assumed by Exelon as part of the merger on March 12, 2012 that became callable at face value on June 15, 2013. Exelon and subsidiaries of Generation (former Constellation subsidiaries) assumed intercompany loan agreements that mirror the terms and amounts of the third-party debt obligations of Exelon, resulting in intercompany notes payable as of December 31, 2012 included in long-term debt in 2010

to affiliate on Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets and notes receivable from affiliates at Exelon Corporate,

$400 million which are eliminated in consolidation on Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. The third-party debt obligations were reported in Long-term Debt on Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets as of 4.45% 2005 Senior Notes, dueDecember 31, 2012. The debentures were redeemed and the intercompany loan agreements repaid on June 15, 2010

Generation

$1 million scheduled payments of 7.83% Kennett Square capital lease until September 20, 2020

Generation

$13 million of Montgomery County Series 1994 B Tax Exempt Bonds with variable interest rates, due June 1, 2029

Generation

$17 million of Indiana County Series 2003 A Tax Exempt Bonds with variable interest rates, due June 1, 2027

Generation

$19 million of York County Series 1993 A Tax Exempt Bonds with variable interest rates, due August 1, 2016

Generation

$23 million of Salem County Series 1993 A Tax Exempt Bonds with variable interest rates, due March 1, 2025

Generation

$24 million of Delaware County Series 1993 A Tax Exempt Bonds with variable interest rates, due August 1, 2016

Generation

$34 million of Montgomery County Series 1996 A Tax Exempt Bonds with variable interest rates, due March 1, 2034

Generation

$83 million of Montgomery County Series 1994 A Tax Exempt Bonds with variable interest rates, due June 1, 2029

ComEd

$1 million of 4.75% sinking fund debentures, due December 1, 2011

ComEd

$212 million of 4.74% First Mortgage Bonds, due August 15, 2010

PECO

$806 million of 6.52% PETT Transition Bonds, due September 1, 2010

BGE

$57 million of 5.47% fixed rate Rate Stabilization Bonds, due October 1, 20122013.

 

152


From time to time and as market conditions warrant, the Registrants may engage in long-term debt retirements via tender offers, open market repurchases or other viable options to reduce debt on their respective balance sheets.

 

Dividends. Cash dividend payments and distributions during 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011 by Registrant were as follows:

 

  2012   2011 2010   2013   2012   2011 

Exelon

  $1,733   $1,393  $1,389   $1,263   $1,733   $1,397 

Generation

   1,626    172   1,508    625    1,626    172 

ComEd

   105    300   310    220    105    300 

PECO

   347    352   228    333    347    352 

BGE

   13     98(a)   13    13    13    98(a) 

 

(a)Dividends on common stock for $85 million were paid to Constellation for the year ended December 31, 2011.

 

152


First Quarter 2013 Dividend.Revised Dividend Policy

On February 6, 2013, the Exelon Boardboard of Directors declared a first quarter 2013 regular quarterly dividend of $0.525 per share on Exelon’s common stock payable on March 8, 2013, to shareholders of record of Exelon at the end of the day on February 19, 2013.

Revised Dividend Policy.On February 6, 2013, the Exelon Board of Directorsdirectors approved a revised dividend policy which contemplates a regular $0.31 per share quarterly dividend on Exelon’s common stock payable beginning in the second quarter of 2013 (or $1.24 per share on an annualized basis), subject to quarterly declarations by the Exelon Board of Directors. The second

Second Quarter 2013 Dividend

On April 23, 2013, the Exelon board of directors declared a regular quarterly dividend, paid on June 10, 2013 of $0.310 per share on Exelon’s common stock.

Third Quarter 2013 Dividend

On July 23, 2013, the Exelon board of directors declared a regular quarterly dividend, paid on September 10, 2013 of $0.310 per share on Exelon’s common stock.

Fourth Quarter 2013 Dividend

On October 22, 2013, the Exelon board of directors declared a regular quarterly dividend, paid on December 10, 2013 of $0.310 per share on Exelon’s common stock

First Quarter 2014 Dividend

On January 28, 2014, the Exelon Board of Directors declared a first quarter 20132014 regular quarterly dividend of $0.31 per share on Exelon’s common stock is expectedpayable on March 10, 2014, to be approved byshareholders of record of Exelon at the Exelon Boardend of Directors in the second quarter of 2013.day on February 14, 2014.

 

Short-Term Borrowings. Short-term borrowings incurred (repaid) during 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011 by Registrant were as follows:

 

  2012 2011   2010   2013   2012 2011 

Generation

  $13   $(52 $—   

ComEd

  $—     $—      $(155   184    —     —   

BGE

   —      —       (46   135    —     —   

Other(a)

   (197  161    —       —      (140  161 
  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Exelon

  $(197 $161   $(201  $332   $(192 $161 
  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Other primarily consists of corporate operations and BSC.

 

Retirement of Long-Term Debt to Financing Affiliates. There were no retirementretirements of long-term debt to financing affiliates during 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011 by the Registrants.

 

Contributions from Parent/Member. Contributions from Parent/Member (Exelon) during 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011 by Registrant were as follows:

 

  2012   2011   2010   2013   2012   2011 

Generation

  $48   $30   $62   $26   $48   $30 

ComEd(a)

   11    11    2    176    11    11 

PECO(a)

   9    18    223    27    9    18 

BGE

   66    —       —       —      66    —   

 

(a)Reflects payment receivedIn 2013, represents indemnification from Exelon in relation to reduce the receivable from parent of $180 million for the year ended December 31, 2010 and was completely repaid as of December 31, 2010.like-kind exchange transaction.

 

153


Other. Other significant financing activities for Exelon for 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011 were as follows:

 

Exelon received proceeds from employee stock plans of $47 million, $72 million and $38 million during 2013, 2012 and $48 million during 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively.

 

Credit Matters

 

Market Conditions

 

The Registrants fund liquidity needs for capital investment, working capital, energy hedging and other financial commitments through cash flows from continuing operations, public debt offerings, commercial paper markets and large, diversified credit facilities. The credit facilities include $8.3$8.4 billion in aggregate total commitments of which $3.8$6.6 billion was available as of December 31, 2012,2013, and of which no financial institution has more than 10%8% of the aggregate commitments for Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE. The Registrants had access to the commercial paper market during 20122013 to fund their short-term liquidity needs, when necessary. The Registrants routinely review the sufficiency of their liquidity position, including appropriate sizing of credit facility commitments, by performing various stress test scenarios, such as commodity price movements, increases in margin-related transactions, changes in hedging levels and the impacts of hypothetical credit downgrades. The Registrants have continued to closely monitor events in the financial markets and the financial institutions associated with the credit facilities, including monitoring credit ratings and outlooks, credit default swap levels, capital raising and merger activity. See PART I. ITEM 1A Risk Factors for further information regarding the effects of uncertainty in the capital and credit markets.

 

The Registrants believe their cash flowsflow from operating activities, access to credit markets and their credit facilities provide sufficient liquidity. If Generation lost its investment grade credit rating as of December 31, 2012,2013, it would have been required to provide incremental collateral of approximately $1,920 million, which is well within its current available credit facility capacities of approximately $5.6$2.0 billion which includes $1,920 million of collateral obligations for derivatives, non-derivatives, normal purchase normal sales contracts and applicable payables and receivables, net of the contractual right of offset under master netting agreements.agreements, which is well within its current available credit facility capacities of $4.3 billion. If ComEd lost its investment grade credit ratingratings as of December 31, 2012,2013, it would have been required to provide incremental collateral of approximately $218$6 million, which is well within its current available credit facility capacity of approximately $1.0 billion.$816 million, which takes into account commercial paper borrowings as of December 31, 2013. If PECO lost its investment grade credit rating as of December 31, 2012,2013 it would not be required to provide collateral pursuant to PJM’s credit policy and could have been required to provide collateral of approximately $35$42 million related to its natural gas procurement contracts, which, in the aggregate, isare well within PECO’s current available credit facility capacity of approximately $599 million. If BGE lost its investment grade credit rating as of December 31, 2012,2013, it would have been required to provide collateral of $3$2 million pursuant to PJM’s credit policy and could have been required to provide collateral of approximately $124$85 million related to its natural gas procurement contracts, which, in the aggregate, isare well within BGE’s current available credit facility capacity of approximately $600$465 million.

 

Exelon Credit Facilities

 

See Note 1113 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for discussion of the Registrants’ credit facilities and short term borrowing activity.

 

154


Other Credit Matters

 

Capital Structure. At December 31, 2012,2013, the capital structures of the Registrants consisted of the following:

 

  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE   Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

Long-term debt

   45  27  43  36  46   44%  30%  42%  40%  42%

Long-term debt to affiliates(a)

   2   10   2   3   5    2%  8%  2%  4%  5%

Common equity

   52   —     55   55   45    53%  —     55%  56%  49%

Member’s equity

   —     63   —     —     —      —     62%  —     —     —   

Preferred securities

   —     —     —     2   4 

Preference Stock

   —     —     —     —     4%

Commercial paper and notes payable

   1   —     —     4   —      1%  —     1%  —     —   

 

(a)Includes approximately $648 million, $206 million, $184 million and $184$258 million owed to unconsolidated affiliates of Exelon, ComEd, PECO and PECO, respectively, and $258 million owed to a consolidated affiliate of BGE that all qualify as special purpose entities under the applicable authoritative guidance.respectively. These special purpose entities were created for the sole purposes of issuing mandatorily redeemable trust preferred securities of ComEd, PECO and BGE. See Note 2 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding the authoritative guidance for VIEs.

 

Intercompany Money Pool.To provide an additional short-term borrowing option that will generally be more favorable to the borrowing participants than the cost of external financing, Exelon operates an intercompany money pool. As of January 10, 2006, ComEd voluntarily suspended its participation in the money pool. Generation, PECO and BSC may participate in the intercompany money pool as lenders and borrowers, and Exelon may participate as a lender. As a result of the ring-fencing measures required by the MDPSC, BGE does not participate in the intercompany money pool. Funding of, and borrowings from, the intercompany money pool are predicated on whether the contributions and borrowings result in economic benefits. Interest on borrowings is based on short-term market rates of interest or, if from an external source, specific borrowing rates. Maximum amounts contributed to and borrowed from the intercompany money pool by participantparticipants during 2012 are described in the following tableyear ended December 31, 2013, in addition to the net contribution or borrowing as of December 31, 2012:2013, are presented in the following table:

 

  Maximum
Contributed
   Maximum
Borrowed
   December 31, 2012
Contributed
(Borrowed)
   Maximum
Contributed
   Maximum
Borrowed
   December 31, 2013
Contributed
(Borrowed)
 

Generation

  $—      $258   $—      $159   $435   $44 

PECO

   309    —       —       304    —      —   

BSC

   —       206    (119   —      287    (223

Exelon Corporate

   119    N/A     119    237    —      179 

Investments in Nuclear Decommissioning Trust Funds. Exelon and Generation maintain trust funds, as required by the NRC, to fund certain costs of decommissioning Generation’s nuclear plants. The mix of securities in the trust funds is designed to provide returns to be used to fund decommissioning and to offset inflationary increases in decommissioning costs. Generation actively monitors the investment performance of the trust funds and periodically reviews asset allocations in accordance with Generation’s NDT fund investment policy. Generation’s investment policy establishes limits on the concentration of holdings in any one company and also in any one industry. See Note 15—Asset Retirement Obligations of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding the trust funds, the NRC’s minimum funding requirements and related liquidity ramifications.

 

Shelf Registration Statements.The Registrants havemaintain a combined a shelf registration statement unlimited in amount, with the SEC. As of December 31, 2012, that shelf registration statement remained effective and provides for the sale of unspecified amounts of securities. The ability of each Registrant to sell securities off thatthe shelf registration statement or to access the private placement markets will depend on a number of factors at the time of the proposed sale, including other required regulatory approvals, as applicable, the current financial condition of the Registrant, its securities ratings and market conditions.

 

Regulatory Authorizations.The issuance by ComEd, PECO and BGE of long-term debt or equity securities requires the prior authorization of the ICC, PAPUC and MDPSC, respectively. ComEd, PECO and BGE normally obtain the required approvals on a periodic basis to cover their anticipated financing needs for a period of time or in connection with a specific financing. On March 1, 2013, ComEd received $470 million in long-term debt new money authority from the ICC and on February 27, 2012, ComEd received $1.3 billion in long-term debt refinancing authority from the ICC.

155


As of December 31, 2012,2013, ComEd had $1.4$1.3 billion available in long-term debt refinancing authority from the ICC and $106$218 million available in new money long-term debt financing authority from the ICC. On October 24, 2012,During the PAPUC approved PECO’s application for long-termfourth quarter of 2013, ComEd requested and received $1 billion in new money financing authority for $2.5

155


billion, whichfrom the ICC. The authority is effective through December 31, 2015.on January 1, 2014 and expires January 1, 2017. As of December 31, 2012,2013, PECO had $1.9$1.4 billion available in long-term debt financing authority from the PAPUC. As of December 31, 2012,2013, BGE had $1.2 billion$850 million available in long-term financing authority from MDPSC.

 

FERC has financing jurisdiction over ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s short-term financings and all of Generation’s financings. As of December 31, 2012,2013, ComEd, and PECO had short-term financing authority from FERC that expires on December 31, 2013 of $2.5 billion and $1.5 billion, respectively. As of December 31, 2012, BGE had short-term financing authority from FERC, thatwhich expires on December 31, 20142015, of $0.7 billion.$2.5 billion, $2.5 billion and $700 million, respectively. Generation currently has blanket financing authority that it received from FERC in connection with its market-based rate authority. See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Exelon’s ability to pay dividends on its common stock depends on the receipt of dividends paid by its operating subsidiaries. The payments of dividends to Exelon by its subsidiaries in turn depend on their results of operations and cash flows and other items affecting retained earnings. The Federal Power Act declares it to be unlawful for any officer or director of any public utility “to participate in the making or paying of any dividends of such public utility from any funds properly included in capital account.” In addition, under Illinois law, ComEd may not pay any dividend on its stock, unless, among other things, its earnings and earned surplus are sufficient to declare and pay a dividend after provision is made for reasonable and proper reserves, or unless ComEd has specific authorization from the ICC. BGE is subject to certain dividend restrictions established by the MDPSC. First, BGE is prohibited from paying a dividend on its common shares through the end of 2014. Second, BGE is prohibited from paying a dividend on its common shares if (a) after the dividend payment, BGE’s equity ratio would be below 48% as calculated pursuant to the MDPSC’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. Finally, BGE must notify the MDPSC that it intends to declare a dividend on its common shares at least 30 days before such a dividend is paid. There are no other limitations on BGE paying common stock dividends unless: (1) BGE elects to defer interest payments on the 6.20% Deferrable Interest Subordinated Debentures due 2043, and any deferred interest remains unpaid; or (2) any dividends (and any redemption payments) due on BGE’s preference stock have not been paid. At December 31, 2012,2013, Exelon had retained earnings of $9,893$10,358 million, including Generation’s undistributed earnings of $3,168$3,613 million, ComEd’s retained earnings of $721$750 million consisting of retained earnings appropriated for future dividends of $2,360$2,389 million partially offset by $1,639 million of unappropriated retained deficit, PECO’s retained earnings of $593$649 million and BGE’s retained earnings $808$1,005 million. See Note 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding fund transfer restrictions.

 

156


Contractual Obligations

 

The following tables summarize the Registrants’ future estimated cash payments as of December 31, 20122013 under existing contractual obligations, including payments due by period. See Note 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding the Registrants’ commercial and other commitments, representing commitments potentially triggered by future events.

 

Exelon

 

      Payment due within               Payment due within         
  Total   2013   2014-
2015
   2016-
2017
   Due 2018
and beyond
   All
Other
   Total   2014   2015-
2016
   2017-
2018
   Due 2019
and beyond
   All
Other
 

Long-term debt(a)

  $18,915    $976   $3,090   $2,495   $12,354   $—      $19,367   $1,424   $2,953   $2,731   $12,259   $—    

Interest payments on long-term debt (b)

   12,156    957    1,711    1,493    7,995    —       12,845    925    1,692    1,396    8,832    —    

Liability and interest for uncertain tax positions (c)

   305    1    —       —       —       304    1,255    —       —       —       —       1,255 

Capital leases

   30    3    6    8    13    —       41    4    8    10    19    —    

Operating leases (d)

   864    88    156    132    488    —       826    103    180    145    398    —    

Purchase power obligations (e)

   3,516    1,246    1,313    483    474    —       3,046     1,378    852    367    449    —    

Fuel purchase agreements(f)

   9,955    1,554    2,764    2,208    3,429    —       9,606    1,520    2,622    1,967    3,497    —    

Electric supply procurement(f)

   1,721    741    703    277    —       —       1,880    1,062    678    140    —       —    

AEC purchase commitments(f)

   12    4    2    2    4    —       6    1    2    2    1    —    

Curtailment services commitments(f)

   153    49    88    16    —       —       132    45    74    13    —       —    

Long-term renewable energy and

            

REC commitments (g)

   1,659    71    148    156    1,284    —    

Long-term renewable energy and REC commitments (g)

   1,589    72    150    160    1,207    —    

PJM regional transmission expansion commitments(h)

   914    218    442    254    —       —       1,019     208     597     214     —       —    

Spent nuclear fuel obligation

   1,020    —       —       —       1,020    —       1,021    —       —       —       1,021    —    

Pension minimum funding requirement (i)

   2,223    255    599    923    446    —       1,223    264    444    426    89    —    
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total contractual obligations

  $53,443   $6,163   $11,022   $8,447   $27,507   $304   $53,856   $7,006   $10,252   $7,571   $27,772   $1,255 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Includes $648 million due after 2016 to ComEd, PECO and BGE financing trusts.
(b)Interest payments are estimated based on final maturity dates of debt securities outstanding at December 31, 20122013 and do not reflect anticipated future refinancing, early redemptions or debt issuances. Variable rate interest obligations are estimated based on rates as of December 31, 2012.2013. Includes estimated interest payments due to ComEd, PECO and BGE financing trusts.
(c)As of December 31, 2012,2013, Exelon’s liability for uncertain tax positions and related interest payable was $305 million.$906 million and $349 million, respectively. Exelon was unable to reasonably estimate the timing of liability and interest payments and receipts in individual years beyond 12 months due to uncertainties in the timing of the effective settlement of tax positions. Exelon has other unrecognized tax positions that were not recorded on the Consolidated Balance Sheet in accordance with authoritative guidance. See Note 1214 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding unrecognized tax positions.
(d)Excludes PPAs and other capacity contracts that are accounted for as operating leases. These amounts are included within purchase power obligations. Includes estimated cash payments for service fees related to PECO’s meter reading operating lease.
(e)Purchase power obligations include PPAs and other capacity contracts including those that are accounted for as operating leases. Amounts presented represent Generation’s expected payments under these arrangements at December 31, 2012,2013, including those related to CENG. Expected payments include certain fixed capacity charges that are contingentwhich may be reduced based on plant availability. Expected payments exclude renewable PPA contracts that are contingent in nature. These obligations do not include ComEd’s SFCs as these contracts do not require purchases of fixed or minimum quantities. See Notes 3 and 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
(f)Represents commitments to purchase nuclear fuel, natural gas and related transportation, storage capacity and services, procure electric supply, and purchase AECs and curtailment services. See Note 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for electric and gas purchase commitments.
(g)On December 17, 2010,

ComEd entered into 20-year contracts with several unaffiliated suppliers regarding the procurement of long-termfor renewable energy and associated RECs.RECs beginning in June 2012. ComEd is permitted to recover its renewable energy and REC costs from retail customers with no mark-up. The annual commitments represent the maximum settlements with suppliers for renewable energy and RECs under the existing contract terms. Pursuant to the

157


ICC’s December 19, 2012 order, ComEd’s commitments under the existing long-term contracts were reduced for the June 2013 through May 2014 procurement period. The ICC’s December 18, 2013 order approved the reduction of ComEd’s commitments under the long-term contracts for the June 2014 through May 2015 procurement period, however the amount of the reduction will not be finalized and approved by the ICC until March 2014. See Note 3 of Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

157


(h)Under their operating agreements with PJM, ComEd, PECO and BGE are committed to the construction of transmission facilities to maintain system reliability. These amounts represent ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s expected portion of the costs to pay for the completion of the required construction projects. See Note 3 of Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.
(i)These amounts represent Exelon’s estimated minimum pension contributions to its qualified plans required under ERISA and the Pension Protection Act of 2006, as well as contributions necessary to avoid benefit restrictions and at-risk status. For Exelon’s largest qualified pension plan, the projected contributions reflect a funding strategy of contributing the greater of $250 million or the minimum amounts under ERISA to avoid benefit restrictions and at-risk status. These amounts represent estimates that are based on assumptions that are subject to change. The minimum required contributions for years after 20182019 are not included. See Note 1416 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding estimated future pension benefit payments.

 

Generation

 

      Payment due within               Payment due within         
  Total   2013   2014-
2015
   2016-
2017
   Due 2018
and beyond
   All
Other
   Total   2014   2015-
2016
   2017-
2018
   Due 2019
and beyond
   All
Other
 

Long-term debt

  $7,241   $25    $1,163   $774   $5,279   $—      $7,519   $557   $628   $701   $5,633   $—    

Interest payments on long-term debt (a)

   5,041    391    712    660    3,278    —       5,362    368    693    625    3,676    —    

Liability and interest for uncertain tax benefits (b)

   236    —       —       —       —       236    264    —       —       —       —       264 

Capital leases

   30    3    6    8    13    —       33    4    8    10    11    —    

Operating leases (c)

   553    38    76    72    367    —       571    49    98    88    336    —    

Purchase power obligations (d)

   3,516    1,246    1,313    483    474    —       3,046     1,378    852     367    449    —    

Fuel purchase agreements(e)

   8,857    1,276    2,479    2,040    3,062    —       8,490    1,212    2,296    1,807    3,175    —    

Spent nuclear fuel obligation

   1,020    —       —       —       1,020    —       1,021    —       —       —       1,021    —    
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total contractual obligations

  $26,494   $2,979   $5,749   $4,037   $13,493   $236   $26,306   $3,568   $4,575   $3,598   $14,301   $264 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Interest payments are estimated based on final maturity dates of debt securities outstanding at December 31, 20122013 and do not reflect anticipated future refinancing, early redemptions or debt issuances. Variable rate interest obligations are estimated based on rates as of December 31, 2012.2013.
(b)As of December 31, 2012,2013, Generation’s liability for uncertain tax positions and related interest payable was $216$227 million and $20$37 million, respectively. Generation was unable to reasonably estimate the timing of liability and interest payments in individual years beyond 12 months due to uncertainties in the timing of the effective settlement of tax positions.
(c)Excludes PPAs and other capacity contracts that are accounted for as operating leases. These amounts are included within purchase power obligations.
(d)Purchase power obligations include PPAs and other capacity contracts including those that are accounted for as operating leases. Amounts presented represent Generation’s expected payments under these arrangements at December 31, 2012.2013. Expected payments include certain fixed capacity charges that are contingentwhich may be reduced based on plant availability. Expected payments exclude renewable PPA contracts that are contingent in nature. See Note 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
(e)See Note 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding fuel purchase agreements.

 

158


ComEd

 

      Payment due within               Payment due within         
  Total   2013   2014-
2015
   2016-
2017
   Due 2018
and beyond
   All
Other
   Total   2014   2015-
2016
   2017-
2018
   Due 2019
and beyond
   All
Other
 

Long-term debt (a)

  $5,793    $252   $877   $1,090   $3,574   $—      $5,892   $617   $925   $1,265   $3,085   $—    

Interest payments on long-term debt (b)

   3,499    276    506    443    2,274    —       3,704    274    515    393    2,522    —    

Liability and interest for uncertain tax positions (c)

   67    —       —       —       —       67    498    —       —       —       —       498 

Capital leases

   8    —       —       —       8    —    

Operating leases

   109    13    22    17    57    —       47    13    22    9    3    —    

Electric supply procurement

   1,103    367    459    277    —       —       736    323    273    140    —       —    

Long-term renewable energy and associated REC commitments(d)

   1,661    71    147    158    1,285    —       1,589    72    150    160    1,207    —    

PJM regional transmission expansion commitments(e)

   525    175    221    129    —       —       486     134     350     2     —       —    
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total contractual obligations

  $12,757   $1,154   $2,232   $2,114   $7,190   $67   $12,960   $1,433   $2,235   $1,969   $6,825   $498 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Includes $206 million due after 2017 to a ComEd financing trust.
(b)Interest payments are estimated based on final maturity dates of debt securities outstanding at December 31, 20122013 and do not reflect anticipated future refinancing, early redemptions or debt issuances. Variable rate interest obligations are estimated based on rates as of December 31, 2012.2013. Includes estimated interest payments due to the ComEd financing trust.
(c)As of December 31, 2012,2013, ComEd’s liability for uncertain tax positions and related interest payable was $67 million.$324 million and $174 million, respectively. ComEd was unable to reasonably estimate the timing of liability and interest payments in individual years beyond 12 months due to uncertainties in the timing of the effective settlement of tax positions.
(d)On December 17, 2010, ComEd entered into 20-year contracts with several unaffiliated suppliers regarding the procurement of long-termfor renewable energy and associated RECs.RECs beginning in June 2012. ComEd is permitted to recover its renewable energy and REC costs from retail customers with no mark-up. The annual commitments represent the maximum settlements with suppliers for renewable energy and RECs under the existing contract terms. Pursuant to the ICC’s December 19, 2012 order, ComEd’s commitments under the existing long-term contracts were reduced for the June 2013 through May 2014 procurement period. The ICC’s December 18, 2013 order approved the reduction of ComEd’s commitments under the long-term contracts for the June 2014 through May 2015 procurement period, however the amount of the reduction will not be finalized and approved by the ICC until March 2014. See Note 3 of Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.
(e)Under its operating agreement with PJM, ComEd is committed to the construction of transmission facilities to maintain system reliability. These amounts represent ComEd’s expected portion of the costs to pay for the completion of the required construction projects. See Note 3 of Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

PECO

 

       Payment due within         
   Total   2013   2014-
2015
   2016-
2017
   Due 2018
and beyond
   All
Other
 

Long-term debt(a)

   $2,134   $300   $250   $—      $1,584   $—    

Interest payments on long-term debt (b)

   1,238    105    168    158    807    —    

Liability and interest for uncertain tax positions (c)

   1    1    —       —       —       —    

Operating leases

   42    20    16    6    —       —    

Fuel purchase agreements(d)

   444    145    158    64    77    —    

Electric supply procurement(d)

   799    561    238    —       —       —    

AEC purchase commitments(d)

   33    12    11    4    6    —    

PJM regional transmission expansion commitments(e)

   140    28    49    63    —       —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total contractual obligations

  $4,831   $1,172   $890   $295   $2,474   $—    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 
       Payment due within         
   Total   2014   2015-
2016
   2017-
2018
   Due 2019
and beyond
   All
Other
 

Long-term debt(a)

  $2,384   $250   $300   $500   $1,334   $—    

Interest payments on long-term debt(b)

   1,505    104    189    160    1,052    —    

Operating leases

   25    13    6    6    —       —    

Fuel purchase agreements(c)

   507    179    210    52    66    —    

Electric supply procurement(c)

   681    590    91    —       —       —    

AEC purchase commitments(c)

   14    2    4    4    4    —    

PJM regional transmission expansion commitments(d)

   133    32    69    32    —       —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total contractual obligations

  $5,249   $1,170   $869   $754   $2,456   $—    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

(a)Includes $184 million due after 2017 to PECO financing trusts.
(b)Interest payments are estimated based on final maturity dates of debt securities outstanding at December 31, 20122013 and do not reflect anticipated future refinancing, early redemptions or debt issuances.
(c)As of December 31, 2012, PECO’s liability for uncertain tax positions was $1 million. PECO was unable to reasonably estimate the timing of certain liability payments in individual years beyond 12 months due to uncertainties in the timing of the effective settlement of tax positions.

159


(d)Represents commitments to purchase natural gas and related transportation, storage capacity and services, procure electric supply, and purchase AECs. See Note 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

159


(e)(d)Under its operating agreement with PJM, PECO is committed to the construction of transmission facilities to maintain system reliability. These amounts represent PECO’s expected portion of the costs to pay for the completion of the required construction projects. See Note 3 of Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

BGE

 

      Payment due within               Payment due within         
  Total   2013   2014-
2015
   2016-
2017
   Due 2018
and beyond
   All
Other
   Total   2014   2015-
2016
   2017-
2018
   Due 2019
and beyond
   All
Other
 

Long-term debt(a)

   $2,440    $467    $145   $420   $1,408   $—      $2,273   $—      $300   $265   $1,708   $—    

Interest payments on long-term debt (b)

   1,644    118    212    176    1,138    —       1,608    112    220    162    1,114    —    

Liability and interest for uncertain tax positions

   —       —       —       —       —       —    

Operating leases

   73    12    19    13    29    —       61    12    20    15    14    —    

Fuel purchase agreements(c)

   654    133    127    104    290    —       609    129    116    108    256    —    

Electric supply procurement(c)

   1,401    859    542    —       —       —       1,256    783    473    —       —       —    

Curtailment services commitments(c)

   153    49    88    16    —       —       132    45    74    13    —       —    

PJM regional transmission expansion commitments(d)

   249    15    172    62    —       —       400    42    178    180    —       —    
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total contractual obligations

  $6,614   $1,653   $1,305   $791   $2,865   $—      $6,339   $1,123   $1,381   $743   $3,092   $—    
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Includes $258 million due after 2017 to the BGE financing trusts.
(b)Interest payments are estimated based on final maturity dates of debt securities outstanding at December 31, 20122013 and do not reflect anticipated future refinancing, early redemptions or debt issuances.
(c)Represents commitments to purchase natural gas and related transportation, storage capacity and services, procure electric supply, and curtailment services. See Note 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.
(d)Under its operating agreement with PJM, BGE is committed to the construction of transmission facilities to maintain system reliability. These amounts represent BGE’s expected portion of the costs to pay for the completion of the required construction projects. See Note 3 of Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

See Note 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for discussion of the Registrants’ other commitments potentially triggered by future events.

 

For additional information regarding:

 

commercial paper, see Note 1113 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

long-term debt, see Note 1113 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

liabilities related to uncertain tax positions, see Note 1214 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

capital lease obligations, see Note 1113 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

operating leases, energy commitments, fuel purchase agreements, construction commitments and rate relief commitments, see Note 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

the nuclear decommissioning and SNF obligations, see Notes 1315 and 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

regulatory commitments, see Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

160


variable interest entities, see Note 1 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

nuclear insurance, see Note 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

160


new accounting pronouncements, see Note 1 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

ITEM 7A.QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

 

The Registrants are exposed to market risks associated with adverse changes in commodity prices, counterparty credit, interest rates and equity prices. Exelon’s RMC approves risk management policies and objectives for risk assessment, control and valuation, counterparty credit approval, and the monitoring and reporting of risk exposures. The RMC is chaired by the chief risk officer and includes the chief executive officer, chief financial officer, corporate controller, general counsel, treasurer, vice president of strategy, vice president of audit services and officers representing Exelon’s business units. The RMC reports to the Risk Oversight Committeerisk oversight committee of the Exelon Boardboard of Directorsdirectors on the scope of the risk management activities.

 

Commodity Price Risk (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Commodity price risk is associated with price movements resulting from changes in supply and demand, fuel costs, market liquidity, weather conditions, governmental regulatory and environmental policies, and other factors. To the extent the amount of energy Exelon generates differs from the amount of energy it has contracted to sell, Exelon has price risk from commodity price movements. Exelon seeks to mitigate its commodity price risk through the sale and purchase of electricity, fossil fuel, and other commodities.

 

Generation

 

Normal Operations and Hedging Activities.Electricity available from Generation’s owned or contracted generation supply in excess of Generation’s obligations to customers, including portions of ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s retail load, is sold into the wholesale markets. To reduce price risk caused by market fluctuations, Generation enters into physicalnon-derivative contracts as well as financial derivative contracts, including forwards, futures, swaps, and options, with approved counterparties to hedge anticipated exposures. Generation believes these instruments represent economic hedges that mitigate exposure to fluctuations in commodity prices. Generation expects the settlement of the majority of its economic hedges including the ComEd financial swap contract, will occur during 20132014 through 2015. Generation’s energy contracts are accounted for under the accounting guidance for derivatives as further discussed in Note 10 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.2016.

 

In general, increases and decreases in forward market prices have a positive and negative impact, respectively, on Generation’s owned and contracted generation positions which have not been hedged. Generation hedges commodity risk on a ratable basis over the three years leading to the spot market. As of December 31, 2012,2013, the percentage of expected generation hedged for the major reportable segments was 94%-97%92%-95%, 62%-65% and 27%-30%30%-33% for 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2015,2016, respectively. The percentage of expected generation hedged is the amount of equivalent sales divided by the expected generation. Expected generation represents the amount of energy estimated to be generated or purchased through owned or contracted capacity. Equivalent sales represent all hedging products, which include economic hedges and certain non-derivative contracts including sales to ComEd, PECO and BGE to serve their retail load.

 

161


A portion of Generation’s hedging strategy may be accomplished with fuel products based on assumed correlations between power and fuel prices, which routinely change in the market. Market price risk exposure is the risk of a change in the value of unhedged positions. The forecasted market price risk exposure for Generation’s entire non-trading portfolio associated with a $5 reduction in the annual average around-the-clock energy price based on December 31, 2012,2013, market conditions and hedged position would be a decrease in pre-tax net income of approximately $40$30 million, $440$520 million and $810$820 million, respectively, for 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2015.2016. Power price sensitivities are derived by

161


adjusting power price assumptions while keeping all other price inputs constant. Generation expects to actively manage its portfolio to mitigate market price risk exposure for its unhedged position. Actual results could differ depending on the specific timing of, and markets affected by, price changes, as well as future changes in Generation’s portfolio.

 

Proprietary Trading Activities.Generation also enters into certain energy-related derivatives for proprietary trading purposes. Proprietary trading includes all contracts entered into with the intent of benefiting from shifts or changes in market prices as opposed to those entered into with the intent of hedging or managing risk. Proprietary trading activities are subject to limits established by Exelon’s RMC. The proprietary trading portfolio is subject to a risk management policy that includes stringent risk management limits, including volume, stop loss and Value-at-Risk (VaR) limits to manage exposure to market risk. Additionally, the Exelon risk management group and Exelon’s RMC monitor the financial risks of the proprietary trading activities. The proprietary trading activities, which included physical volumes of 8,762 GWh, 12,958 GWh, 5,742 GWh, and 3,6255,742 GWh for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011 respectively, are a complement to Generation’s energy marketing portfolio, but represent a small portion of Generation’s overall revenue from energy marketing activities. Trading portfolio activity for the year ended December 31, 2012,2013, resulted in pre-tax losses of $14$8 million due to net mark-to-market gainslosses of $96$39 million and realized lossesgains of $110$31 million. Generation uses a 95% confidence interval, assuming standard normal distribution, one day holding period, one-tailed statistical measure in calculating its VaR. The daily VaR on proprietary trading activity averaged $1.9$1.0 million of exposure sinceduring the merger date and was deemed immaterial prior toyear. Generation has not segregated proprietary trading activity within the merger. Becausefollowing discussion because of the relative size of the proprietary trading portfolio in comparison to Generation’s total gross margin from continuing operations for the year ended December 31, 20122013 of $7,376 million, Generation has not segregated proprietary trading activity in the following tables.$7,433 million.

 

Fuel Procurement. Generation procures coal and natural gas through long-term and short-term contracts, and spot-market purchases. Nuclear fuel assemblies are obtained primarily through long-term contracts for uranium concentrates, and long-term contracts for conversion services, enrichment services and fuel fabrication services. The supply markets for coal, natural gas, uranium concentrates and certain nuclear fuel services are subject to price fluctuations and availability restrictions. Supply market conditions may make Generation’s procurement contracts subject to credit risk related to the potential non-performance of counterparties to deliver the contracted commodity or service at the contracted prices. Approximately 60% of Generation’s uranium concentrate requirements from 20132014 through 20172018 are supplied by three producers. In the event of non-performance by these or other suppliers, Generation believes that replacement uranium concentrates can be obtained, although at prices that may be unfavorable when compared to the prices under the current supply agreements. Non-performance by these counterparties could have a material impact on Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations, cash flows and financial positions. See Note 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding uranium and coal supply agreement matters.

 

162


ComEd

 

The financial swap contract between Generation and ComEd was deemed prudent by the Illinois Settlement Legislation, thereby ensuring that ComEd willwould be entitled to receive full cost recovery in rates. The change in fair value each period iswas recorded by ComEd with an offset to a regulatory asset or liability. This financial swap contract between Generation and ComEd expiresexpired on May 31, 2013. All realized impacts have been included in Generation’s and ComEd’s results of operations.

 

ComEd’s RFPComEd entered into 20-year contracts are deemed to be derivatives that qualify for the normal purchasesrenewable energy and normal sales exception under derivative accounting guidance. ComEd does not enter into derivatives for speculative or trading purposes.RECs beginning in June 2012. ComEd is permitted full recovery ofto recover its RFP contractsrenewable energy and REC costs from retail customers with no mark-up.

On December 17, 2010, ComEd entered into several 20-year floating-to-fixed energy swap contracts The annual commitments represent the maximum settlements with unaffiliated suppliers regarding the procurement of long-termfor renewable energy and associated RECs. DeliveryRECs under thesethe existing contract terms. Pursuant to the ICC’s Order on December 19,

162


2012, ComEd’s commitments under the existing long-term contracts began inwere reduced for the June 2012. Because ComEd receives full cost recovery2013 through May 2014 procurement period. The ICC’s December 18, 2013 order approved the reduction of ComEd’s commitments under the long-term contracts for energythe June 2014 through May 2015 procurement period, however the amount of the reduction will not be finalized and related costs from retail customers,approved by the change in fair value each period is recorded by ComEd as a regulatory asset or liability.ICC until March 2014. See Notes 3 and 1012 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding energy procurement and derivatives.

 

PECO

 

PECO has contracts to procure electric supply that were executed through the competitive procurement process outlined in its PAPUC-approved DSP Programs, which are further discussed in Note 3 of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements. PECO’s full requirements contracts and block contracts, which are considered derivatives, qualify for the normal purchases and normal sales scope exception under current derivative authoritative guidance.guidance and as a result, are accounted for on an accrual basis of accounting. Under the DSP Programs, PECO is permitted to recover its electric supply procurement costs from retail customers with no mark-up.

 

PECO has also entered into derivative natural gas contracts, which either qualify for the normal purchases and normal sales exception or have no mark-to-market balances because the derivatives are index priced, to hedge its long-term price risk in the natural gas market. PECO’s hedging program for natural gas procurement has no direct impact on its financial position or results of operations as natural gas costs are fully recovered from customers under the PGC.

 

PECO does not enter into derivatives for speculative or proprietary trading purposes. For additional information on these contracts, see Note 1012 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

BGE

 

BGE procures electric supply for default service customers through full requirements contracts pursuant to BGE’s MDPSC-approved SOS program. BGE’s full requirements contracts that are considered derivatives qualify for the normal purchases and normal sales scope exception under current derivative authoritative guidance.guidance and as a result, are accounted for on an accrual basis of accounting. Under the SOS program, BGE is permitted to recover its electricity procurement costs from retail customers, plus an administrative fee which includes a shareholder return component and an incremental cost component. However, through December 2016, BGE provides all residential electric customers a credit for the residential shareholder return component of the administrative charge.

 

163


BGE has also entered into derivative natural gas contracts, which qualify for the normal purchases and normal sales scope exception, to hedge its price risk in the natural gas market. The hedging program for natural gas procurement has no direct impact on BGE’s financial position. However, under BGE’s market-based rates incentive mechanism, BGE’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 BGE’s actual cost and the market index is shared equally between shareholders and customers.

 

BGE does not enter into derivatives for speculative or proprietary trading purposes. For additional information on these contracts, see Note 1012 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

Trading and Non-Trading Marketing Activities. Activities

The following detailed presentation of Exelon’s, Generation’s, ComEd’s and PECO’s trading and non-trading marketing activities is included to address the recommended disclosures by the energy industry’s Committee of Chief Risk Officers (CCRO).

 

163


The following table provides detail on changes in Exelon’s, Generation’s, ComEd’s and PECO’sComEd’s mark-to-market net asset or liability balance sheet position from January 1, 2011,2012, to December 31, 2012.2013. It indicates the drivers behind changes in the balance sheet amounts. This table incorporates the mark-to-market activities that are immediately recorded in earnings, as well as the settlements from OCI to earnings and changes in fair value for the cash flow hedging activities that are recorded in accumulated OCI on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. This table excludes all normal purchase and normal sales contracts. For additionalcontracts and does not segregate proprietary trading activity. See Note 12 of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for more information on the cash flow hedge gains and losses included within accumulated OCI and the balance sheet classification of the mark-to-market energy contract net assets (liabilities) recorded as of December 31, 2012,2013, and December 31, 2011, refer to Note 10 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.2012.

 

   Generation  ComEd  PECO  Intercompany
Eliminations (h)
  Exelon 

Total mark-to-market energy contract net assets (liabilities) at January 1, 2011(a)

  $1,803  $(971 $(9 $—    $823 

Total change in fair value during 2011 of contracts recorded in result of operations

   241   —     —     —     241 

Reclassification to realized at settlement of contracts recorded in results of operations

   (541  —     —     —     (541

Ineffective portion recognized in income(b)

   9   —     —     —     9 

Reclassification to realized at settlement from accumulated OCI(c)

   (968  —     —     456   (512

Effective portion of changes in fair value—recorded in OCI(d)

   827   —     —     (170  657 

Changes in fair value—energy derivatives

   —     171(e)   9(f)   (286  (106

Changes in collateral

   411   —     —     —     411 

Changes in net option premium paid/(received)

   3   —     —     —     3 

Option Premium Amortization(g)

   (137  —     —     —     (137
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total mark-to-market energy contract net assets (liabilities) at December 31, 2011(a)

  $1,648  $(800 $—    $—    $848 

Contracts Acquired at merger date(i)

   140      140 

Total change in fair value during 2012 of contracts recorded in result of operations

   (159  —     —     7   (152

Reclassification to realized at settlement of contracts recorded in results of operations

   775   —     —     —     775 

Ineffective portion recognized in income(b)

   (5  —     —     —     (5

164


   Generation  ComEd  PECO   Intercompany
Eliminations (h)
  Exelon 

Reclassification to realized at settlement from accumulated OCI(c)

   (1,368  —     —      621   (747

Effective portion of changes in fair value—recorded in OCI(d)

   719   —     —      (146  573 

Changes in fair value—energy derivatives

   —     507(e)   —      (482  25 

Changes in collateral

   (89  —     —      —     (89

Changes in net option premium paid/(received)

   114   —     —      —     114 

Option Premium Amortization(g)

   (160  —     —      —     (160

Intercompany Elimination of Existing Derivative Contracts with Constellation

   (103      (103

Other changes in fair value

   (7  —     —      —     (7
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total mark-to-market energy contract net assets (liabilities) at December 31, 2012(a)

  $1,505  $(293 $—     $—    $1,212 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 
  Generation  ComEd  Intercompany
Eliminations (b)
  Exelon 

Total mark-to-market energy contract net assets (liabilities) at January 1, 2012 (a)

 $1,648  $(800 $—    $848 

Contracts acquired at merger date (c)

  140   —     —     140 

Total change in fair value during 2012 of contracts recorded in result of operations

  (159  —     7   (152

Reclassification to realized at settlement of contracts recorded in results of operations

  775   —     —     775 

Ineffective portion recognized in income (d)

  (5  —     —     (5

Reclassification to realized at settlement from accumulated OCI (e)

  (1,368  —     621   (747

Effective portion of changes in fair value—recorded in OCI (f)

  719   —     (146  573 

Changes in fair value—energy derivatives (g)

  —     507   (482  25 

Changes in allocated collateral

  (89  —     —     (89

Changes in net option premium paid/(received)

  114   —     —     114 

Option premium amortization (h)

  (160  —     —     (160

Intercompany elimination of existing derivative contracts with Constellation

  (103  —     —     (103

Other balance sheet reclassifications

  (7  —     —     (7
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total mark-to-market energy contract net assets (liabilities) at December 31, 2012 (a)

 $1,505  $(293 $—    $1,212 

Total change in fair value during 2013 of contracts recorded in result of operations

  444   —     (6  438 

Reclassification to realized at settlement of contracts recorded in results of operations

  21   —     13   34 

Reclassification to realized at settlement from accumulated OCI (e)

  (683  —     219   (464

Changes in fair value—energy derivatives (g)

  —     100   (226  (126

Changes in allocated collateral

  (175  —     —     (175

Changes in net option premium paid/(received)

  36   —     —     36 

Option premium amortization (h)

  (104  —     —     (104

Other balance sheet reclassifications

  4   —     —     4 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total mark-to-market energy contract net assets (liabilities) at December 31, 2013 (a) (i)

 $1,048  $(193 $—    $855 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

(a)Amounts are shown net of collateral paid to and received from counterparties.
(b)Amounts related to the five-year financial swap between Generation and ComEd.
(c)For Generation, includes $660 million of collateral paid to counterparties, offset by $520 million of unrealized losses on commodity derivative positions.

164


(d)For Generation, reflects $5 million and $9 million of changes in cash flow hedge ineffectiveness, of which none was related to Generation’s financial swap contract with ComEd or Generation’s block contracts with PECO for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively.ineffectiveness.
(c)(e)For Generation, includes $621$219 million and $451$621 million of losses from reclassifications from accumulated OCI to recognize gains in net income related to settlements of the five-year financial swap contract with ComEd for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, and 2011, respectively, and $5 million of losses from reclassifications from accumulated OCI to recognize gains in net income related to settlements of the PECO block contracts for the year ended December 31, 2011.respectively.
(d)(f)For Generation, includes $146 million and $170 million of gains related to the changes in fair value of the five-year financial swap with ComEd for the yearsyear ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively.2012. Effective prior to the merger with Constellation, the five-year financial swap between Generation and ComEd was de-designated.de-designated as a cash flow hedge. As a result, all prospective changes in fair value arefor the year ended December 31, 2013 were recorded to operating revenues and eliminated in consolidation.
(e)(g)For ComEd, the changes in fair value are recorded as a change in regulatory assets or liabilities. As of December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, ComEd recorded a regulatory liability of $293$193 million and $800$293 million, respectively, related to its mark-to-market derivative liabilities with Generation and unaffiliated suppliers. DuringAs of December 31, 2013 and 2012, and 2011, this includes $11 million of decreases and $98 million of increases and $170 million of decreases in fair value, respectively, and $215 million and $566 million, and $451 million of realized gains, respectively, for reclassifications from regulatory assets to recognize cost in purchase power expense due to settlements of ComEd’s five-year financial swap with Generation. DuringAs of December 31, 2013 and 2012 and 2011 this includes $34ComEd also recorded $126 million and $110$34 million, respectively, of increases in fair value, and during 2012$7 million and $5 million, respectively, of realized losses due to settlements of $5 million recorded in purchased power expense associated with floating-to-fixed energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers.
(f)For PECO, the changes in fair value are recorded as a change in regulatory assets or liabilities. During the year ended December 31, 2011, PECO’s mark-to-market derivative liability was fully amortized, including $5 million related to PECO’s block contracts with Generation, in accordance with the terms of the contracts.
(g)(h)Includes $160$104 million and $137$160 million of amounts reclassified to realized at settlement of contracts recorded to results of operations related to option premiums due to the settlement of the underlying transactions for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, and 2011, respectively.
(h)Amounts related to the five-year financial swap between Generation and ComEd and the block contracts between Generation and PECO are eliminated in consolidation.
(i)For Generation, includes $660 millionIncludes the ending balance related to interest rate derivative contracts and foreign exchange currency swaps to manage the exposure related to the interest rate component of collateral paid to counterparties, offset by $520 millioncommodity positions and international purchases of unrealized losses on commodity derivative positions.commodities in currencies other than U.S. Dollars.

 

Fair Values

 

The following tables present maturity and source of fair value for Exelon, Generation and ComEd mark-to-market commodity contract net assets (liabilities). The tables provide two fundamental pieces of information. First, the tables provide the source of fair value used in determining the carrying amount of the Registrants’ total mark-to-market net assets (liabilities), net of allocated collateral. Second, the tables show the maturity, by year, of the Registrants’ commodity contract net assets (liabilities) net of allocated collateral, giving an indication of when these mark-to-market amounts will settle and either generate or require cash. See Note 911—Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding fair value measurements and the fair value hierarchy.

 

165


Exelon

 

   Maturities Within  Total Fair
Value
 
   2013   2014  2015  2016   2017   2018 and
Beyond
  

Normal Operations, Commodity derivative contracts(a)(b):

           

Actively quoted prices (Level 1)

  $80   $(63 $(32 $10   $2   $—    $(3

Prices provided by external sources
(Level 2)

   325    374   134   16    —      (1  848 

methods (Level 3)(c)

   168    89   50   30    25    5   367 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total

  $573   $400  $152  $56   $27   $4  $1,212 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 
   Maturities Within  Total Fair
Value
 
   2014  2015  2016   2017  2018  2019 and
Beyond
  

Normal Operations, Commodity derivative contracts (a)(b):

         

Actively quoted prices (Level 1)

  $(30 $(26 $17   $(4 $(2 $—    $(45

Prices provided by external sources (Level 2)

   444   143   39    —     —     1   627 

Prices based on model or other valuation methods (Level 3)(c)

   155   151   71    25   (22  (108  272 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total

  $569  $268  $127   $21  $(24 $(107 $854 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

(a)Mark-to-market gains and losses on other non-tradingeconomic hedge and trading derivative contracts that do not qualify as cash flow hedges are recorded in results of operations.
(b)Amounts are shown net of collateral paid to and received from counterparties (and offset against mark-to-market assets and liabilities) of $31$144 million at December 31, 2012.2013.
(c)Includes ComEd’s net assets (liabilities) associated with the floating-to-fixed energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers.

 

165


Generation

 

  Maturities Within Total Fair
Value
   Maturities Within Total Fair
Value
 
  2013   2014 2015 2016   2017   2018 and
Beyond
   2014 2015 2016   2017 2018 2019 and
Beyond
 

Normal Operations, Commodity derivative contracts(a)(b) :

                    

Actively quoted prices (Level 1)

  $80   $(63 $(32 $10   $2   $—     $(3  $(30 $(26 $17   $(4 $(2 $—    $(45

Prices provided by external sources
(Level 2)

   325    374   134   16    —       (1  848    444   143   39    —     —     1   627 

Prices based on model or other valuation methods (Level 3)

   412    106   66   44    38    (6  660    172   170   89    43   (4  (5  465 
  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total

  $817   $417  $168  $70   $40   $(7 $1,505   $586  $287  $145   $39  $(6 $(4 $1,047 
  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Mark-to-market gains and losses on other non-tradingeconomic hedge and trading derivative contracts that are recorded in the results of operations. Amounts include a $226 million gain associated with the five-year financial swap with ComEd.
(b)Amounts are shown net of collateral paid to and received from counterparties (and offset against mark-to-market assets and liabilities) of $31$144 million at December 31, 2012.2013.

 

ComEd

 

   Maturities Within   Fair
Value
 
   2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018 and
Beyond
   

Prices based on model or other valuation methods (a)

  $(244 $(17 $(16 $(14 $(13 $11   $(293
   Maturities Within  Fair
Value
 
   2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019 and
Beyond
  

Prices based on model or other valuation methods (Level 3)(a)

  $(17 $(19 $(18 $(18 $(18 $(103 $(193

 

(a)Represents ComEd’s net assets (liabilities)liabilities associated with the five-year financial swap with Generation and the floating-to-fixed energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers.

 

166


Credit Risk, Collateral, and Contingent Related Features (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The Registrants would be exposed to credit-related losses in the event of non-performance by counterparties that enter into derivative instruments. The credit exposure of derivative contracts, before collateral, is represented by the fair value of contracts at the reporting date. See Note 1012 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a detail discussion of credit risk, collateral, and contingent related features.

 

166


Generation

 

The following tables provide information on Generation’s credit exposure for all derivative instruments, normal purchase normal sales agreements, and applicable payables and receivables, net of collateral and instruments that are subject to master netting agreements, as of December 31, 2012.2013. The tables further delineate that exposure by credit rating of the counterparties and provide guidance on the concentration of credit risk to individual counterparties and an indication of the duration of a company’s credit risk by credit rating of the counterparties. The figures in the tables below do not include credit risk exposure from uranium procurement contracts or exposure through exchanges (i.e.RTOs, ISOs, NYMEX, ICE, etc),and Nodal commodity exchanges, which are discussed below. Additionally, the figures in the tables below do not include exposures with affiliates, including net receivables with ComEd, PECO and BGE of $54$38 million, $56$38 million and $31$27 million, respectively. See Note 2225 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information.

 

Rating as of December 31, 2012

 Total
Exposure
Before Credit
Collateral
 Credit
Collateral (a)
 Net
Exposure
 Number of
Counterparties
Greater than 10%
of Net Exposure
 Net Exposure of
Counterparties
Greater than 10%
of Net Exposure
 

Rating as of December 31, 2013

 Total
Exposure
Before Credit
Collateral
 Credit
Collateral (a)
 Net
Exposure
 Number of
Counterparties
Greater than 10%
of Net Exposure
 Net Exposure of
Counterparties
Greater than 10%
of Net  Exposure
 

Investment grade

 $1,984  $347  $1,637   1  $262  $1,621  $172  $1,449   1  $491 

Non-investment grade

  28   24   4   —      —      27   9   18   —     —   

No external ratings

          

Internally rated—investment grade

  512   10   502   1   271   416   1   415   1   226 

Internally rated—non-investment grade

  41   3   38   —      —      30   2   28   —     —   
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total

 $2,565  $384  $2,181   2  $533  $2,094  $184  $1,910   2  $717 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

   Maturity of Credit Risk Exposure 

Rating as of December 31, 2012

  Less than
2 Years
   2-5
Years
   Exposure
Greater than
5 Years
   Total Exposure
Before Credit
Collateral
 

Investment grade

  $1,553   $319   $112   $1,984 

Non-investment grade

   15    13    —       28 

No external ratings

        

Internally rated—investment grade

   312    193    7    512 

Internally rated—non-investment grade

   41    —       —       41 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total

  $1,921   $525   $119   $2,565 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

   Maturity of Credit Risk Exposure 

Rating as of December 31, 2013

  Less than
2 Years
   2-5
Years
   Exposure
Greater than
5 Years
   Total Exposure
Before Credit
Collateral
 

Investment grade

  $1,146   $340   $135   $1,621 

Non-investment grade

   23    4    —      27 

No external ratings

        

Internally rated—investment grade

   272    138    6    416 

Internally rated—non-investment grade

   30    —      —      30 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total

  $1,471   $482   $141   $2,094 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

167


Net Credit Exposure by Type of Counterparty

  As of
December 31,
2012
   As of
December 31,
2013
 

Financial Institutions

  $256 

Investor-owned utilities, marketers and power producers

  $865    684 

Energy cooperatives and municipalities

   786    907 

Financial Institutions

   422 

Other

   108    63 
  

 

   

 

 

Total

  $2,181   $1,910 
  

 

   

 

 

 

(a)As of December 31, 2012,2013, credit collateral held from counterparties where Generation had credit exposure included $344$155 million of cash and $40$29 million of letters of credit.

 

167


ComEd

 

Credit risk for ComEd is managed by credit and collection policies, which are consistent with state regulatory requirements. ComEd is currently obligated to provide service to all electric customers within its franchised territory. ComEd records a provision for uncollectible accounts, based upon historical experience, to provide for the potential loss from nonpayment by these customers. See Note 1 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for the allowance for uncollectible accounts policy. ComEd is permitted to recover its costs of procuring energy through the Illinois Settlement Legislation as well as the ICC-approved procurement tariffs. ComEd will monitor nonpayment from customers and will make any necessary adjustments to the provision for uncollectible accounts. The Illinois Settlement Legislation prohibits utilities, including ComEd, from terminating electric service to a residential electric space heat customer due to nonpayment between December 1 of any year through March 1 of the following year. ComEd’s ability to disconnect non space-heating residential customers is also impacted by certain weather restrictions, at any time of year, under the Illinois Public Utilities Act. ComEd will monitor the impact of its disconnection practices and will make any necessary adjustments to the provision for uncollectible accounts. ComEd did not have any customers representing over 10% of its revenues as of December 31, 2012.2013. See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding ComEd’s recently approved tariffs to adjust rates annually through a rider mechanism to reflect increases or decreases in annual uncollectible accounts expense.

 

ComEd’s power procurement contracts provide suppliers with a certain amount of unsecured credit. The credit position is based on forward market prices compared to the benchmark prices. The benchmark prices are the forward prices of energy projected through the contract term and are set at the point of supplier bid submittals. If the forward market price of energy exceeds the benchmark price, the suppliers are required to post collateral for the secured credit portion after adjusting for any unpaid deliveries and unsecured credit allowed under the contract. The unsecured credit used by the suppliers represents ComEd’s net credit exposure. ComEd’s counterparty credit risk is mitigated by its ability to recover realized energy costs through customer rates. As of December 31, 2012,2013, ComEd’s credit exposure to energy suppliers was immaterial.

 

PECO

 

Credit risk for PECO is managed by credit and collection policies, which are consistent with state regulatory requirements. PECO is currently obligated to provide service to all retail electric customers within its franchised territory. PECO records a provision for uncollectible accounts to provide for the potential loss from nonpayment by these customers. See Note 1 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for the allowance for uncollectible accounts policy. In accordance with PAPUC regulations, after November 30 and before April 1, an electric distribution utility or natural gas distribution utility shall not terminate service to customers with household incomes at or below 250% of the Federal poverty level. PECO’s provision for uncollectible accounts will continue to be affected by changes in prices as well as changes in PAPUC regulations. PECO did not have any customers representing over 10% of its revenues as of December 31, 2012.

2013.

 

168


PECO’s supplier master agreements that govern the terms of its DSP Program contracts, which define a supplier’s performance assurance requirements, allow a supplier to meet its credit requirements with a certain amount of unsecured credit. The amount of unsecured credit is determined based on the supplier’s lowest credit rating from the major credit rating agencies and the supplier’s tangible net worth. The credit position is based on the initial market price, which is the forward price of energy on the day a transaction is executed, compared to the current forward price curve for energy. To the extent that the forward price curve for energy exceeds the initial market price, the supplier is required to post collateral to the extent the credit exposure is greater than the supplier’s unsecured credit limit. As of December 31, 2012,2013, PECO had no net credit exposure with suppliers.

 

168


PECO does not obtain cash collateral from suppliers under its natural gas supply and asset management agreements; however, the natural gas asset managers have provided $20 million in parental guarantees related to these agreements. As of December 31, 2012,2013, PECO had credit exposure of $7$9 million under its natural gas supply and asset management agreements with investment grade suppliers.

 

BGE

 

Credit risk for BGE is managed by credit and collection policies, which are consistent with state regulatory requirements. BGE is currently obligated to provide service to all electric customers within its franchised territory. BGE records a provision for uncollectible accounts to provide for the potential loss from nonpayment by these customers. BGE will monitor nonpayment from customers and will make any necessary adjustments to the provision for uncollectible accounts. See Note 1 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for uncollectible accounts policy. MDPSC regulations prohibit BGE from terminating service to residential customers due to nonpayment from November 1 through March 31 if the forecasted temperature is 32 degrees or below for the subsequent 72 hour period. BGE is also prohibited by the Maryland Public Utilities Article and MDPSC regulations from terminating service to residential customers due to nonpayment if the forecasted temperature is 95 degrees or above for the subsequent 72 hour period. BGE did not have any customers representing over 10% of its revenues as of December 31, 2012.2013.

 

BGE’s full requirement wholesale electric power agreements that govern the terms of its electric supply procurement contracts, which define a supplier’s performance assurance requirements, allow a supplier, or its guarantor, to meet its credit requirements with a certain amount of unsecured credit. The amount of unsecured credit is determined based on the supplier’s lowest credit rating from the major credit rating agencies and the supplier’s tangible net worth, subject to an unsecured credit cap. The credit position is based on the initial market price, which is the forward price of energy on the day a transaction is executed, compared to the current forward price curve for energy. To the extent that the forward price curve for energy exceeds the initial market price, the supplier is required to post collateral to the extent the credit exposure is greater than the supplier’s unsecured credit limit. The seller’s credit exposure is calculated each business day. As of December 31, 2012,2013, BGE had no net credit exposure with suppliers.

 

BGE’s regulated gas business is exposed to market-price risk. This market-price risk is mitigated by BGE’s recovery of its costs to procure natural gas through a gas cost adjustment clause approved by the MDPSC. BGE does make off-system sales after BGE has satisfied its customers’ demands, which are not covered by the gas cost adjustment clause. At December 31, 2012,2013, BGE had credit exposure of $8$14 million related to off-system sales which is mitigated by parental guarantees, letters of credit, or right to offset clauses within other contracts with those third partythird-party suppliers.

 

169


Collateral (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Generation

 

As part of the normal course of business, Generation routinely enters into physical or financial contracts for the sale and purchase of electricity, fossil fuel and other commodities. These contracts either contain express provisions or otherwise permit Generation and its counterparties to demand adequate assurance of future performance when there are reasonable grounds for doing so. In accordance with the contracts and applicable law, if Generation is downgraded by a credit rating agency, especially if such downgrade is to a level below investment grade, it is possible that a counterparty would attempt to rely on such a downgrade as a basis for making a demand for adequate assurance of future performance. Depending on Generation’s net position with a counterparty, the demand could be for the posting of collateral. In the absence of expressly agreed-to provisions that specify the collateral that must be provided, collateral requested will be a function of the facts and circumstances of the situation at the time of the demand. In this case, Generation believes an amount

169


of several months of future payments (i.e. capacity payments) rather than a calculation of fair value is the best estimate for the contingent collateral obligation, which has been factored into the disclosure below. See Note 1012 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding collateral requirements.

 

Generation sells output through bilateral contracts. The bilateral contracts are subject to credit risk, which relates to the ability of counterparties to meet their contractual payment obligations. Any failure to collect these payments from counterparties could have a material impact on Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations, cash flows and financial position. As market prices rise above contracted price levels, Generation is required to post collateral with purchasers; as market prices fall below contracted price levels, counterparties are required to post collateral with Generation. In order to post collateral, Generation depends on access to bank credit facilities which serve as liquidity sources to fund collateral requirements. Generation depends on access to bank credit lines which serve as liquidity sources to fund collateral requirements. See Note 1113 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

As of December 31, 2012,2013, Generation had $499cash collateral of $72 million posted and cash collateral held of $206 million for counterparties with derivative positions, of which $144 million in net cash collateral deposits were offset against mark-to-market assets and liabilities. As of December 31, 2013, $10 million of cash collateral deposits received from counterparties andposted was not offset against net derivative positions because it was not associated with energy-related derivatives. As of December 31, 2012, Generation had cash collateral held of $499 million and cash collateral posted of $527 million of cash collateral deposits being held byfor counterparties with derivative positions, of which $31 million in net cash collateral deposits were offset against mark-to-market assets and liabilities. As of December 31, 2012, $3 million of cash collateral received was not offset against net derivative positionsmark-to-market assets and liabilities because it was not associated with energy-related derivatives. As of December 31, 2011, Generation was holding $542 million of cash collateral deposits received from counterparties. Net cash collateral deposits received of $540 million were offset mark-to-market assets and liabilities. As of December 31, 2011, $2 million of cash collateral received was not offset against net mark-to-market assets and liabilities. See Note 1922 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding the letters of credit supporting the cash collateral.

 

ComEd

 

As of December 31, 2012,2013, ComEd held immaterial amounts of cash and letters of credit for the purpose of collateral from suppliers in association with energy procurement contracts and held approximately $19 million in the form of cash and letters of credit for both annual and long-term renewable energy contracts. See Notes 3 and 1012 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information.

 

170


PECO

 

As of December 31, 2012,2013, PECO was not required to post collateral under its energy and natural gas procurement contracts. See Note 1012 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information.

 

BGE

 

BGE is not required to post collateral under its electric supply contracts. As of December 31, 2012,2013, BGE was not required to post collateral under its natural gas procurement contracts, nor was it holding collateral under its electric supply and natural gas procurement contracts. See Note 1012 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information.

 

RTOs and ISOs (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE participate in all, or some, of the established, real-time energy markets that are administered by PJM, ISO-NE, ISO-NY, CISO,CAISO, MISO, SPP, AESO, OIESO and ERCOT. In these areas, power is traded through bilateral agreements between buyers and sellers

170


and on the spot markets that are operated by the RTOs or ISOs, as applicable. In areas where there is no spot market, electricity is purchased and sold solely through bilateral agreements. For sales into the spot markets administered by an RTO or ISO, the RTO or ISO maintains financial assurance policies that are established and enforced by those administrators. The credit policies of the RTOs and ISOs may, under certain circumstances, require that losses arising from the default of one member on spot market transactions be shared by the remaining participants. Non-performance or non-payment by a major counterparty could result in a material adverse impact on the Registrants’ results of operations, cash flows and financial positions.

 

Exchange Traded Transactions (Exelon and Generation)

 

Generation enters into commodity transactions on NYMEX, ICE and the Nodal exchange. The NYMEX, ICE and Nodal exchange clearinghouses act as the counterparty to each trade. Transactions on the NYMEX, ICE and Nodal exchange must adhere to comprehensive collateral and margining requirements. As a result, transactions on NYMEX, ICE and Nodal exchange are significantly collateralized and have limited counterparty credit risk.

 

Long-Term Leases (Exelon)

 

Exelon’s consolidated balance sheets,sheet, as of December 31, 2012,2013, included a $693$698 million net investment in coal-fired plants in Georgia and Texas subject to long-term leases. This investment represents the estimated residual value of leased assets at the end of the respective lease terms of approximately $1.5 billion,$1,465 million, less unearned income of $799$767 million. The lease agreements provide the lessees with fixed purchase options at the end of the lease terms which are set at prices above the then expected fair market value of the plants.terms. If the lessees do not exercise the fixed purchase options, the lessees return the leasehold interests to Exelon and Exelon has the ability to require the lessees to return the leasehold interests or to arrange for a third-party to bid on a service contract with a third party for a period following the lease term. If Exelon chooses the service contract option, the leasehold interests will be returned to Exelon at the end of the term of the service contract. In any event, Exelon iswill be subject to residual value risk toif the extentlessees do not exercise the fair value of the assets are less than the residual value.fixed purchase options. This risk is partially mitigated by the fair value of the fixedscheduled payments under the service contract. TheHowever, such payments are not guaranteed. Further, the term of the service contract however, is less than the expected remaining useful life of the plants and, therefore, Exelon’s exposure to residual value risk will not be mitigated by payments under the service contract in this remaining period. Lessee performance under the lease agreements is supported by collateral and credit enhancement measures including letters of credit, surety bonds and credit swaps.measures. Management regularly evaluates the creditworthiness of Exelon’s counterparties to these long-term leases. Since 2008, the entity providing the credit enhancement for one of the lessees did not meet the

171


credit rating requirements of the lease. Consequently, Exelon has indefinitely extended a waiver and reduction of the rating requirement, which Exelon may terminate by giving 90 days notice to the lessee. Exelon monitors the continuing credit quality of the credit enhancement party.

 

Pursuant to the applicable accounting guidance, Exelon is required to review the estimated residual values of its direct financing lease investments at least annually and, if the review indicates a fair value below the carrying value and the decline is determined to be other than temporary, must record an impairment charge in the period the estimate changed. Based on the review performed annual assessments asin the second quarter of July 31, 2012 and 20112013, the estimated residual value of one of Exelon’s direct financing leases experienced an other than temporary decline resulting in a $14 million pre-tax impairment charge in the second quarter of 2013. See Note 8 of the estimated fair value of long-term lease investments and concluded that the estimated fair values at the end of the lease terms exceeded the residual values ($1.5 billion as noted above) established at the lease dates and recorded as investments on Exelon’s balance sheet.Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information. Through December 31, 2012,2013, no events have occurred or circumstances have changed that would require any formal reassessmentExelon to review the estimated residual values of its direct financing lease investments subsequent to the July 2012 review.review performed in the second quarter of 2013.

 

Interest-Rate Risk (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The Registrants use a combination of fixed-rate and variable-rate debt to manage interest rate exposure. The Registrants may also utilize fixed-to-floating interest rate swaps, which are typically designated as fair value hedges, as a means to manage their interest rate exposure. In addition, the

171


Registrants may utilize interest rate derivatives to lock in rate levels in anticipation of future financings, which are typically designated as cash flow hedges. These strategies are employed to manage interest rate risks. At December 31, 2012,2013, Exelon had $800$1,425 million of notional amounts of fixed-to-floating hedges outstanding and $452$190 million of notional amounts of pre-issuancefloating-to-fixed hedges outstanding. Assuming the fair value and cash flow interest rate hedges are 100% effective, a hypothetical 50 bps increase in the interest rates associated with unhedged variable-rate debt (excluding Commercial Paper and PECO Accounts Receivables Facility)Paper) and fixed-to-floating swaps would result in less than $2an approximate $5 million decrease in Exelon Consolidated pre-tax income for the year ended December 31, 2012.2013.

 

Equity Price Risk (Exelon and Generation)

 

Exelon and Generation maintain trust funds, as required by the NRC, to fund certain costs of decommissioning Generation’s nuclear plants. As of December 31, 2012,2013, Generation’s decommissioning trust funds are reflected at fair value on its Consolidated Balance Sheets. The mix of securities in the trust funds is designed to provide returns to be used to fund decommissioning and to compensate Generation for inflationary increases in decommissioning costs; however, the equity securities in the trust funds are exposed to price fluctuations in equity markets, and the value of fixed-rate, fixed-income securities are exposed to changes in interest rates. Generation actively monitors the investment performance of the trust funds and periodically reviews asset allocation in accordance with Generation’s NDT fund investment policy. A hypothetical 10% increase in interest rates and decrease in equity prices would result in a $386$482 million reduction in the fair value of the trust assets. This calculation holds all other variables constant and assumes only the discussed changes in interest rates and equity prices. See Item 7, Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS for further discussion of equity price risk as a result of the current capital and credit market conditions.

 

172


ITEM 7.MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

 

Generation

 

General

 

Generation operates in six segments: Mid-Atlantic, Midwest, New England, New York, ERCOT, and other regionsOther Regions in Generation. The operation of all six segments consists of owned contracted and investments in electric generating facilities, and wholesale and retail customer supply of electric and natural gas products and services, including renewable energy products, risk management services and investments in natural gas exploration and production activities. These segments are discussed in further detail in “ITEM 1. BUSINESS—Generation” of this Form 10-K.

 

Executive Overview

 

A discussion of items pertinent to Generation’s executive overview is set forth under “ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS—Exelon—Executive Overview” of this Form 10-K.

 

Results of Operations

 

Year Ended December 31, 20122013 Compared To Year Ended December 31, 20112012 and Year Ended December 31, 20112012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 20102011

 

A discussion of Generation’s results of operations for 2013 compared to 2012 and 2012 compared to 2011 and 2011 compared to 2010 is set forth under “Results of Operations—Generation” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Results of Operations” of this Form 10-K.

 

Liquidity and Capital Resources

 

Generation’s business is capital intensive and requires considerable capital resources. Generation’s capital resources are primarily provided by internally generated cash flows from operations and, to the extent necessary, external financing, including the issuance of long-term debt, commercial paper, participation in the intercompany money pool or capital contributions from Exelon. Generation’s access to external financing at reasonable terms is dependent on its credit ratings and general business conditions, as well as that of the utility industry in general. If these conditions deteriorate to where Generation no longer has access to the capital markets at reasonable terms, Generation has access to credit facilities in the aggregate of $5.6 billion that Generation currently utilizes to support its commercial paper program and to issue letters of credit.

 

See the “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” and Note 1113 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements of this Form 10-K for further discussion.

 

Capital resources are used primarily to fund Generation’s capital requirements, including construction, retirement of debt, the payment of distributions to Exelon, contributions to Exelon’s pension plans and investments in new and existing ventures. Future acquisitions could require external financing or borrowings or capital contributions from Exelon.

 

Cash Flows from Operating Activities

 

A discussion of items pertinent to Generation’s cash flows from operating activities is set forth under “Cash Flows from Operating Activities” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

173


Cash Flows from Investing Activities

 

A discussion of items pertinent to Generation’s cash flows from investing activities is set forth under “Cash Flows from Investing Activities” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Cash Flows from Financing Activities

 

A discussion of items pertinent to Generation’s cash flows from financing activities is set forth under “Cash Flows from Financing Activities” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Credit Matters

 

A discussion of credit matters pertinent to Generation is set forth under “Credit Matters” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Contractual Obligations and Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

 

A discussion of Generation’s contractual obligations, commercial commitments and off-balance sheet arrangements is set forth under “Contractual Obligations and Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

 

See Exelon, Generation, ComEd and PECO—Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates above for a discussion of Generation’s critical accounting policies and estimates.

 

New Accounting Pronouncements

 

See Note 1 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding new accounting pronouncements.

 

ITEM 7A.QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

 

Generation

 

Generation is exposed to market risks associated with commodity price, credit, interest rates and equity price. These risks are described above under “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk—Exelon.”

 

174


ITEM 7.MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

 

ComEd

 

General

 

ComEd operates in a single business segment and its operations consist of the purchase and regulated retail sale of electricity and the provision of distribution and transmission services to retail customers in northern Illinois, including the City of Chicago. This segment is discussed in further detail in “ITEM 1. BUSINESS—ComEd” of this Form 10-K.

 

Executive Overview

 

A discussion of items pertinent to ComEd’s executive overview is set forth under “EXELON CORPORATION—Executive Overview” of this Form 10-K.

 

Results of Operations

 

Year Ended December 31, 2013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012 and Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011 and Year Ended December 31, 2011 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2010

 

A discussion of ComEd’s results of operations for 2013 compared to 2012 and for 2012 compared to 2011 and for 2011 compared to 2010 is set forth under “Results of Operations—ComEd” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Results of Operations” of this Form 10-K.

 

Liquidity and Capital Resources

 

ComEd’s business is capital intensive and requires considerable capital resources. ComEd’s capital resources are primarily provided by internally generated cash flows from operations and, to the extent necessary, external financing, including the issuance of long-term debt, commercial paper or credit facility borrowings. ComEd’s access to external financing at reasonable terms is dependent on its credit ratings and general business conditions, as well as that of the utility industry in general. At December 31, 2012,2013, ComEd had access to a revolving credit facility with aggregate bank commitments of $1 billion. See the “Credit Matters” section of “Liquidity and Capital Resources” for additional discussion.

 

See the “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” and Note 1113 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements of this Form 10-K for further discussion.

 

Capital resources are used primarily to fund ComEd’s capital requirements, including construction, retirement of debt, and contributions to Exelon’s pension plans. Additionally, ComEd operates in rate-regulated environments in which the amount of new investment recovery may be limited and where such recovery takes place over an extended period of time.

 

Cash Flows from Operating Activities

 

A discussion of items pertinent to ComEd’s cash flows from operating activities is set forth under “Cash Flows from Operating Activities” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Cash Flows from Investing Activities

 

A discussion of items pertinent to ComEd’s cash flows from investing activities is set forth under “Cash Flows from Investing Activities” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

175


Cash Flows from Financing Activities

 

A discussion of items pertinent to ComEd’s cash flows from financing activities is set forth under “Cash Flows from Financing Activities” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Credit Matters

 

A discussion of credit matters pertinent to ComEd is set forth under “Credit Matters” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Contractual Obligations and Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

 

A discussion of ComEd’s contractual obligations, commercial commitments and off-balance sheet arrangements is set forth under “Contractual Obligations and Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

 

See Exelon, Generation, ComEd and PECO—Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates above for a discussion of ComEd’s critical accounting policies and estimates.

 

New Accounting Pronouncements

 

See Note 1 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding new accounting pronouncements.

 

ITEM 7A.QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

 

ComEd

 

ComEd is exposed to market risks associated with commodity price, credit and interest rates. These risks are described above under “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk— Exelon.”

 

176


ITEM 7.MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

 

PECO

 

General

 

PECO operates in a single business segment and its operations consist of the purchase and regulated retail sale of electricity and the provision of distribution and transmission services in southeastern Pennsylvania including the City of Philadelphia, and the purchase and regulated retail sale of natural gas and the provision of distribution service in Pennsylvania in the counties surrounding the City of Philadelphia. This segment is discussed in further detail in “ITEM 1. BUSINESS—PECO” of this Form 10-K.

 

Executive Overview

 

A discussion of items pertinent to PECO’s executive overview is set forth under “EXELON CORPORATION—Executive Overview” of this Form 10-K.

 

Results of Operations

 

Year Ended December 31, 2013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012 and Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011 and Year Ended December 31, 2011 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2010

 

A discussion of PECO’s results of operations for 2013 compared to 2012 and for 2012 compared to 2011 and for 2011 compared to 2010 is set forth under “Results of Operations—PECO” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Results of Operations” of this Form 10-K.

 

Liquidity and Capital Resources

 

PECO’s business is capital intensive and requires considerable capital resources. PECO’s capital resources are primarily provided by internally generated cash flows from operations and, to the extent necessary, external financing, including the issuance of long-term debt, commercial paper or participation in the intercompany money pool. PECO’s access to external financing at reasonable terms is dependent on its credit ratings and general business conditions, as well as that of the utility industry in general. If these conditions deteriorate to where PECO no longer has access to the capital markets at reasonable terms, PECO has access to a revolving credit facility. At December 31, 2012,2013, PECO had access to a revolving credit facility with aggregate bank commitments of $600 million. See the “Credit Matters” section of “Liquidity and Capital Resources” for additional discussion.

 

Capital resources are used primarily to fund PECO’s capital requirements, including construction, retirement of debt, the payment of dividends and contributions to Exelon’s pension plans. Additionally, PECO operates in a rate-regulated environment in which the amount of new investment recovery may be limited and where such recovery takes place over an extended period of time.

 

Cash Flows from Operating Activities

 

A discussion of items pertinent to PECO’s cash flows from operating activities is set forth under “Cash Flows from Operating Activities” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Cash Flows from Investing Activities

 

A discussion of items pertinent to PECO’s cash flows from investing activities is set forth under “Cash Flows from Investing Activities” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

177


Cash Flows from Financing Activities

 

A discussion of items pertinent to PECO’s cash flows from financing activities is set forth under “Cash Flows from Financing Activities” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Credit Matters

 

A discussion of credit matters pertinent to PECO is set forth under “Credit Matters” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Contractual Obligations and Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

 

A discussion of PECO’s contractual obligations, commercial commitments and off-balance sheet arrangements is set forth under “Contractual Obligations and Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

 

See Exelon, Generation, ComEd and PECO—Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates above for a discussion of PECO’s critical accounting policies and estimates.

 

New Accounting Pronouncements

 

See Note 1 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding new accounting pronouncements.

 

ITEM 7A.QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

 

PECO

 

PECO is exposed to market risks associated with credit and interest rates. These risks are described above under “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk—Exelon.”

 

178


ITEM 7.MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

 

BGE

 

General

 

BGE operates in a single business segment and its operations consist of the purchase and regulated retail sale of electricity and the provision of distribution and transmission services in central Maryland, including the City of Baltimore, and the purchase and regulated retail sale of natural gas and the provision of distribution service in central Maryland, including the City of Baltimore. This segment is discussed in further detail in “ITEM 1. BUSINESS—BGE” of this Form 10-K.

 

Executive Overview

 

A discussion of items pertinent to BGE’s executive overview is set forth under “EXELON CORPORATION—Executive Overview” of this Form 10-K.

 

Results of Operations

 

Year Ended December 31, 2013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012 and Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011 and Year Ended December 31, 2011 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2010

 

A discussion of BGE’s results of operations for 2013 compared to 2012 and for 2012 compared to 2011 and for 2011 compared to 2010 is set forth under “Results of Operations—BGE” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Results of Operations” of this Form 10-K.

 

Liquidity and Capital Resources

 

BGE’s business is capital intensive and requires considerable capital resources. BGE’s capital resources are primarily provided by internally generated cash flows from operations and, to the extent necessary, external financing, including the issuance of long-term debt or commercial paper. BGE’s access to external financing at reasonable terms is dependent on its credit ratings and general business conditions, as well as that of the utility industry in general. If these conditions deteriorate to where BGE no longer has access to the capital markets at reasonable terms, BGE has access to a revolving credit facility. At December 31, 2012,2013, BGE had access to a revolving credit facility with aggregate bank commitments of $600 million. See the “Credit Matters” section of “Liquidity and Capital Resources” for additional discussion.

 

Capital resources are used primarily to fund BGE’s capital requirements, including construction, retirement of debt, the payment of dividends and contributions to Exelon’s pension plans. Additionally, BGE operates in a rate-regulated environment in which the amount of new investment recovery may be limited and where such recovery takes place over an extended period of time.

 

Cash Flows from Operating Activities

 

A discussion of items pertinent to BGE’s cash flows from operating activities is set forth under “Cash Flows from Operating Activities” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Cash Flows from Investing Activities

 

A discussion of items pertinent to BGE’s cash flows from investing activities is set forth under “Cash Flows from Investing Activities” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

179


Cash Flows from Financing Activities

 

A discussion of items pertinent to BGE’s cash flows from financing activities is set forth under “Cash Flows from Financing Activities” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Credit Matters

 

A discussion of credit matters pertinent to BGE is set forth under “Credit Matters” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Contractual Obligations and Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

 

A discussion of BGE’s contractual obligations, commercial commitments and off-balance sheet arrangements is set forth under “Contractual Obligations and Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

 

See Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE—Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates above for a discussion of BGE’s critical accounting policies and estimates.

 

New Accounting Pronouncements

 

See Note 1 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding new accounting pronouncements.

 

ITEM 7A.QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

 

BGE

 

BGE is exposed to market risks associated with credit and interest rates. These risks are described above under “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk—Exelon.”

 

180


ITEM 8.FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

 

Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

 

The management of Exelon Corporation (Exelon) is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f). Internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

 

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

 

Exelon’s management conducted an assessment of the effectiveness of Exelon’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012.2013. In making this assessment, management used the criteria inInternal Control—Integrated Framework (1992) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on this assessment, Exelon’s management concluded that, as of December 31, 2012,2013, Exelon’s internal control over financial reporting was effective.

 

The effectiveness of the Exelon’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012,2013, has been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report which appears herein.

 

February 21, 201313, 2014

 

181


Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

 

The management of Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Generation) is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f). Internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

 

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

 

Generation’s management conducted an assessment of the effectiveness of Generation’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012.2013. In making this assessment, management used the criteria inInternal Control—Integrated Framework (1992) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on this assessment, Generation’s management concluded that, as of December 31, 2012,2013, Generation’s internal control over financial reporting was effective.

 

The effectiveness of the Generation’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012,2013, has been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report which appears herein.

 

February 21, 201313, 2014

 

182


Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

 

The management of Commonwealth Edison Company (ComEd) is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f). Internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

 

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

 

ComEd’s management conducted an assessment of the effectiveness of ComEd’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012.2013. In making this assessment, management used the criteria inInternal Control—Integrated Framework (1992) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on this assessment, ComEd’s management concluded that, as of December 31, 2012,2013, ComEd’s internal control over financial reporting was effective.

 

The effectiveness of the ComEd’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012,2013, has been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report which appears herein.

 

February 21, 201313, 2014

 

183


Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

 

The management of PECO Energy Company (PECO) is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f). Internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

 

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

 

PECO’s management conducted an assessment of the effectiveness of PECO’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012.2013. In making this assessment, management used the criteria inInternal Control—Integrated Framework (1992) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on this assessment, PECO’s management concluded that, as of December 31, 2012,2013, PECO’s internal control over financial reporting was effective.

 

The effectiveness of the PECO’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012,2013, has been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report which appears herein.

 

February 21, 201313, 2014

 

184


Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

 

The management of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company (BGE) is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f). Internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

 

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

 

BGE’s management conducted an assessment of the effectiveness of BGE’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012.2013. In making this assessment, management used the criteria inInternal Control—Integrated Framework (1992) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on this assessment, BGE’s management concluded that, as of December 31, 2012,2013, BGE’s internal control over financial reporting was effective.

 

The effectiveness of BGE’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012,2013, has been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report which appears herein.

 

February 21, 201313, 2014

 

185


Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

 

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of Exelon Corporation:

 

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements listed in the index appearing under Item 15(a)(1) present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Exelon Corporation (“the Company”) and its subsidiaries at December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 20122013 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In addition, in our opinion, the financial statement schedules listed in the index appearing under item 15(a)(2) present fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein when read in conjunction with the related consolidated financial statements. Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012,2013, based on criteria established inInternal Control—Integrated Framework (1992) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). The Company’s management is responsible for these financial statements and financial statement schedules, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements, on the financial statement schedules, and on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our integrated audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audits of the financial statements included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.

 

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

 

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

 

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Chicago, Illinois

February 21, 201313, 2014

 

186


Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

 

To the Board of Directors and Member of Exelon Generation Company, LLC:

 

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements listed in the index appearing under Item 15(a)(1) present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Exelon Generation Company, LLC (“the Company”) and its subsidiaries at December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 20122013 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In addition, in our opinion, the financial statement schedule listed in the index appearing under item 15(a)(2) presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein when read in conjunction with the related consolidated financial statements. Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012,2013, based on criteria established inInternal Control—Integrated Framework (1992) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). The Company’s management is responsible for these financial statements and financial statement schedule, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements, on the financial statement schedule, and on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our integrated audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audits of the financial statements included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Baltimore, Maryland

February 13, 2014

187


Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of Commonwealth Edison Company:

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements listed in the index appearing under Item 15(a)(1) present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Commonwealth Edison Company (“the Company”) and its subsidiaries at December 31, 2013 and 2012, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2013 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In addition, in our opinion, the financial statement schedule listed in the index appearing under item 15(a)(2) presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein when read in conjunction with the related consolidated financial statements. Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013, based on criteria established inInternal Control—Integrated Framework (1992) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). The Company’s management is responsible for these financial statements and financial statement schedule, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements, on the financial statement schedule, and on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our integrated audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audits of the financial statements included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.

 

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

 

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

 

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Chicago, Illinois

February 21, 201313, 2014

 

187188


Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

 

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of Commonwealth EdisonPECO Energy Company:

 

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements listed in the index appearing under Item 15(a)(1) present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Commonwealth EdisonPECO Energy Company (“the Company”) and its subsidiaries at December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 20122013 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In addition, in our opinion, the financial statement schedule listed in the index appearing under item 15(a)(2) presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein when read in conjunction with the related consolidated financial statements. Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012,2013, based on criteria established inInternal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). The Company’s management is responsible for these financial statements and financial statement schedule, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements, on the financial statement schedule, and on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our integrated audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audits of the financial statements included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Chicago, Illinois

February 21, 2013

188


Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of PECO Energy Company:

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements listed in the index appearing under Item 15(a)(1) present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of PECO Energy Company and its subsidiaries at December 31, 2012 and 2011, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2012 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In addition, in our opinion, the financial statement schedule listed in the index appearing under item 15(a)(2) presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein when read in conjunction with the related consolidated financial statements. Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012, based on criteria established inInternal Control—Integrated Framework (1992) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). The Company’s management is responsible for these financial statements and financial statement schedule, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements, on the financial statement schedule, and on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our integrated audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audits of the financial statements included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.

 

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

 

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

 

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

February 21, 201313, 2014

 

189


Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

 

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of Baltimore Gas and Electric CompanyCompany:

 

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements listed in the index appearing under Item 15(a)(1) present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company (“the Company”) and its subsidiaries at December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 20122013 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In addition, in our opinion, the financial statement schedule listed in the index appearing under item 15(a)(2) presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein when read in conjunction with the related consolidated financial statements. Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012,2013, based on criteria established inInternal Control—Integrated Framework (1992) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). The Company’s management is responsible for these financial statements and financial statement schedule, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements, on the financial statement schedule, and on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audits (which was an integrated audit in 2012). We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audits of the financial statements included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.

 

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

 

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

 

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Baltimore, Maryland

February 21, 201313, 2014

 

190


Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income

 

  For the Years Ended
December 31,
 
  For the Years Ended
December 31,
 

(In millions, except per share data)

  2012 2011 2010   2013 2012 2011 

Operating revenues

  $23,489  $19,063  $18,644   $24,888  $23,489  $19,063 

Operating expenses

        

Purchased power and fuel

   10,157   7,267   6,435    9,468    9,121    7,130  

Purchased power and fuel from affiliates

   1,256    1,036    137  

Operating and maintenance

   7,961   5,184   4,600    7,270   7,961   5,184 

Depreciation and amortization

   1,881   1,347   2,075    2,153   1,881   1,347 

Taxes other than income

   1,019   785   808    1,095   1,019   785 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total operating expenses

   21,018   14,583   13,918    21,242   21,018   14,583 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Equity in losses of unconsolidated affiliates

   (91  (1  —   

Equity in earnings (losses) of unconsolidated affiliates

   10   (91  (1

Operating income

   2,380   4,479   4,726    3,656   2,380   4,479 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

        

Interest expense, net

   (903  (701  (792   (1,315  (891  (701

Interest expense to affiliates, net

   (25  (25  (25   (41  (37  (25

Other, net

   346   203   312    473   346   203 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

   (582  (523  (505   (883  (582  (523
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Income before income taxes

   1,798   3,956   4,221    2,773   1,798   3,956 

Income taxes

   627   1,457   1,658    1,044   627   1,457 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net income

   1,171   2,499   2,563    1,729   1,171   2,499 

Net Income attributable to noncontrolling interests, preferred security dividends and preference stock dividends

   11   4   —   

Net income attributable to non-controlling interests, preferred security dividends and preference stock dividends

   10   11   4 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net income on common stock

   1,160   2,495   2,563 

Net income attributable to common shareholders

   1,719   1,160   2,495 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other comprehensive loss

    

Comprehensive income (loss), net of income taxes

    

Net income

   1,729   1,171   2,499 

Other comprehensive income (loss)

    

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit plans:

        

Prior service benefit reclassified to periodic costs, net of taxes of $1, $(4) and $(7). respectively

   1   (5  (11

Actuarial loss reclassified to periodic cost, net of taxes of $110, $93 and $79, respectively

   168   136   114 

Transition obligation reclassified to periodic cost, net of taxes of $2, $2 and $2, respectively

   2   4   3 

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit plan valuation adjustment, net of taxes of $(237), $(171) and $(188), respectively

   (371  (250  (288

Change in unrealized gain (loss) on cash flow hedges, net of taxes of $(68), $39 and $(107), respectively

   (120  88   (151

Change in unrealized gain (loss) on marketable securities, net of taxes of $(1), $0 and $0, respectively

   2   —     (1

Change in unrealized gain (loss) on equity investments, net of taxes of $1, $0 and $0, respectively

   1   —     —   

Prior service cost (benefit) reclassified to periodic costs, net of taxes of $0, $1 and $(4), respectively

   —     1   (5

Actuarial loss reclassified to periodic cost, net of taxes of $133, $110 and $93, respectively

   208   168   136 

Transition obligation reclassified to periodic cost, net of taxes of $0, $2 and $2, respectively

   —     2   4 

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit plan valuation adjustment, net of taxes of $430, $(237) and $(171), respectively

   669   (371  (250

Unrealized gain (loss) on cash flow hedges, net of taxes of $(166), $(68) and $39, respectively

   (248  (120  88 

Unrealized gain (loss) on marketable securities, net of taxes of $0, $(1) and $0, respectively

   2   2   —   

Unrealized gain (loss) on equity investments, net of taxes of $71, $1 and $0, respectively

   106   1   —   

Unrealized gain (loss) on foreign currency translation, net of taxes of $0, $0 and $0, respectively

   (10  —     —   
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other comprehensive loss

   (317  (27  (334

Other comprehensive income (loss)

   727   (317  (27
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Comprehensive income

  $854  $2,472  $2,229   $2,456  $854  $2,472 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Average shares of common stock outstanding:

        

Basic

   816   663   661    856   816   663 

Diluted

   819   665   663    860   819   665 

Earnings per average common share:

        

Basic

  $1.42  $3.76  $3.88   $2.01  $1.42  $3.76 

Diluted

  $1.42  $3.75  $3.87   $2.00  $1.42  $3.75 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Dividends per common share

  $2.10  $2.10  $2.10   $1.46  $2.10  $2.10 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

191


Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

  For the Years Ended
December 31,
   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 

(In millions)

  2012 2011 2010   2013 2012 2011 

Cash flows from operating activities

        

Net income

  $1,171  $2,499  $2,563   $1,729  $1,171  $2,499 

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash flows provided by operating activities:

        

Depreciation, amortization, depletion and accretion, including nuclear fuel and energy contract amortization

   4,079   2,316   2,943    3,779   4,079   2,316 

Loss on sale of three Maryland generating stations

   272   —     —       —     272   —   

Deferred income taxes and amortization of investment tax credits

   615   1,457   981    119   615   1,457 

Net fair value changes related to derivatives

   (604  291   (88   (445  (604  291 

Net realized and unrealized (gains) losses on nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments

   (157  14   (105   (170  (157  14 

Other non-cash operating activities

   1,383   770   609    876   1,383   770 

Changes in assets and liabilities:

        

Accounts receivable

   243    57   (232   (97  243   57 

Inventories

   26   (58  (62   (100  26   (58

Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other current liabilities

   (632  (254  472    (90  (632  (254

Option premiums paid, net

   (114  (3  (124   (36  (114  (3

Counterparty collateral received (posted), net

   135   (344  (155   215   135   (344

Income taxes

   544    492   (543   883   544   492 

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit contributions

   (462  (2,360  (959   (422  (462  (2,360

Other assets and liabilities

   (368  (24  (56   102   (368  (24
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net cash flows provided by operating activities

   6,131   4,853   5,244    6,343   6,131   4,853 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Cash flows from investing activities

        

Capital expenditures

   (5,789  (4,042  (3,326   (5,395  (5,789  (4,042

Proceeds from nuclear decommissioning trust fund sales

   7,265   6,139   3,764    4,217   7,265   6,139 

Investment in nuclear decommissioning trust funds

   (7,483  (6,332  (3,907   (4,450  (7,483  (6,332

Cash and restricted cash acquired from Constellation

   964   —      —       —     964   —   

Acquisitions of long lived assets

   (21  (387  (893   —     (21  (387

Proceeds from sale of three Maryland generating stations

   371   —      —    

Proceeds from sale of long-lived assets

   32   371   —   

Proceeds from sales of investments

   28   6   28    22   28   6 

Purchases of investments

   (13  (4  (22   (4  (13  (4

Change in restricted cash

   (34  (3  423    (43  (34  (3

Distribution from CENG

   115   —     —   

Other investing activities

   136   20   39    112   136   20 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net cash flows used in investing activities

   (4,576  (4,603  (3,894   (5,394  (4,576  (4,603
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Cash flows from financing activities

        

Payment of accounts receivable agreement

   (15  —      —       (210  (15  —   

Changes in short-term debt

   (197  161   (155   332   (197  161 

Issuance of long-term debt

   2,027   1,199   1,398    2,055   2,027   1,199 

Retirement of long-term debt

   (1,145  (789  (828   (1,589  (1,145  (789

Retirement of long-term debt of variable interest entity

   —      —      (806

Redemption of preferred securities

   (93  —     —   

Dividends paid on common stock

   (1,716  (1,393  (1,389   (1,249  (1,716  (1,393

Proceeds from employee stock plans

   72   38   48    47   72   38 

Other financing activities

   (111  (62  (16   (119  (111  (62
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net cash flows used in financing activities

   (1,085  (846  (1,748   (826  (1,085  (846
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents

   470   (596  (398   123   470   (596

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

   1,016   1,612   2,010    1,486   1,016   1,612 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

  $1,486  $1,016  $1,612   $1,609  $1,486  $1,016 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

192


Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Balance Sheets

 

  December 31,   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2012   2011   2013   2012 
ASSETS        

Current assets

        

Cash and cash equivalents

  $1,411   $1,016   $1,547   $1,411 

Cash and cash equivalents of variable interest entities

   75    —      62    75 

Restricted cash and investments

   86    40    87    86 

Restricted cash and investments of variable interest entities

   47    —      80    47 

Accounts receivable, net

        

Customer ($289 and $346 gross accounts receivables pledged as collateral as of December 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively)

   2,787    1,613 

Customer ($0 and $289 gross accounts receivables pledged as collateral as of December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively)

   2,721    2,795 

Other

   1,147    1,000    1,175    1,141 

Accounts receivable, net, of variable interest entities

   292    —      260    292 

Mark-to-market derivative assets

   938    432    727    938 

Unamortized energy contract assets

   886    16    374    886 

Inventories, net

        

Fossil fuel

   246    208    276    246 

Materials and supplies

   768    656    829    768 

Deferred income taxes

   131    —      573    131 

Regulatory assets

   759    390    760    764 

Other

   560    342    666    560 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total current assets

   10,133    5,713    10,137    10,140 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Property, plant and equipment, net

   45,186    32,570    47,330    45,186 

Deferred debits and other assets

        

Regulatory assets

   6,497    4,518    5,910    6,497 

Nuclear decommissioning trust funds

   7,248    6,507    8,071    7,248 

Investments

   1,184    751    1,165    1,184 

Investments in affiliates

   22    15    22    22 

Investment in CENG

   1,849    —      1,925    1,849 

Goodwill

   2,625    2,625    2,625    2,625 

Mark-to-market derivative assets

   937    650    607    937 

Unamortized energy contract assets

   1,073    424    710    1,073 

Pledged assets for Zion Station decommissioning

   614    734    458    614 

Deferred income taxes

   58    —      —      58 

Other

   1,128    488    964    1,128 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total deferred debits and other assets

   23,235    16,712    22,457    23,235 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total assets

  $78,554   $54,995   $79,924   $78,561 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

193


Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Balance Sheets

 

  December 31,   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2012 2011   2013 2012 
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY      

Current liabilities

      

Short-term borrowings

  $—    $163   $341  $ 

Short-term notes payable—accounts receivable agreement

   210   225       210 

Long-term debt due within one year

   975   828    1,424   975 

Long-term debt due within one year of variable interest entities

   72   —      85   72 

Accounts payable

   2,446   1,444    2,314   2,378 

Accounts payable of variable interest entities

   202   —      170   202 

Payables to affiliates

   116    112 

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities

   352   112    159   352 

Unamortized energy contract liabilities

   455   —      261   455 

Accrued expenses

   1,800   1,255    1,633   1,796 

Deferred income taxes

   58   1    40   58 

Regulatory liabilities

   321   197    327   368 

Dividends payable

   4   349 

Other

   889   560    858   813 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total current liabilities

   7,784   5,134    7,728   7,791 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Long-term debt

   17,190   11,799    17,325   17,190 

Long-term debt to financing trusts

   648   390    648   648 

Long-term debt of variable interest entities

   508   —      298   508 

Deferred credits and other liabilities

      

Deferred income taxes and unamortized investment tax credits

   11,551   8,253    12,905   11,551 

Asset retirement obligations

   5,074   3,884    5,194   5,074 

Pension obligations

   3,428   2,194    1,876   3,428 

Non-pension postretirement benefit obligations

   2,662   2,263    2,190   2,662 

Spent nuclear fuel obligation

   1,020   1,019    1,021   1,020 

Regulatory liabilities

   3,981   3,627    4,388   3,981 

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities

   281   126    300   281 

Unamortized energy contract liabilities

   528   —      266   528 

Payable for Zion Station decommissioning

   432   563    305   432 

Other

   1,650   1,268    2,540   1,650 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total deferred credits and other liabilities

   30,607   23,197    30,985   30,607 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total liabilities

   56,737   40,520    56,984   56,744 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Commitments and contingencies

      

Preferred securities of subsidiary

   87   87    —     87 

Shareholders’ equity

      

Common stock (No par value, 2,000 shares authorized, 855 and 663 shares outstanding at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively)

   16,632   9,107 

Treasury stock, at cost (35 shares held at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively)

   (2,327  (2,327

Common stock (No par value, 2,000 shares authorized, 857 and 855 shares outstanding at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively)

   16,741   16,632 

Treasury stock, at cost (35 shares held at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively)

   (2,327  (2,327

Retained earnings

   9,893   10,055    10,358   9,893 

Accumulated other comprehensive loss, net

   (2,767  (2,450   (2,040  (2,767
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total shareholders’ equity

   21,431   14,385    22,732   21,431 

BGE preference stock not subject to mandatory redemption

   193   —      193   193 

Noncontrolling interest

   106   3 

Non-controlling interest

   15   106 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total equity

   21,730   14,388    22,940   21,730 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

  $78,554  $54,995   $79,924  $78,561 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

194


Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity

 

(In millions, shares in
thousands)

 Issued
Shares
 Common
Stock
 Treasury
Stock
 Retained
Earnings
 Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Loss
 Noncontrolling
Interest
 Preferred
and
Preference
Stock
 Total
Shareholders’
Equity
  Issued
Shares
 Common
Stock
 Treasury
Stock
 Retained
Earnings
 Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Loss
 Non-controlling
Interest
 Preferred
and
Preference
Stock
 Total
Shareholders’
Equity
 

Balance, December 31, 2009

  694,565  $8,923  $(2,328 $8,134  $(2,089 $—      —     $12,640 

Net income

  —      —      —      2,563   —      —      —      2,563 

Long-term incentive plan activity

  1,380   60   1   (1  —      —      —      60 

Employee stock purchase plan issuances

  644   23   —      —      —      —      —      23 

Common stock dividends

  —      —      —      (1,392  —      —      —      (1,392

Acquisition of Exelon Wind

  —      —      —      —      —      3   —      3 

Other comprehensive income, net of income taxes of $(221)

  —      —      —      —      (334  —      —      (334
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2010

  696,589  $9,006  $(2,327 $9,304  $(2,423 $3  $—     $13,563   696,589  $9,006  $(2,327 $9,304  $(2,423 $3  $—    $13,563 

Net income

  —      —      —      2,495   —      —      4   2,499   —     —     —     2,495   —     —     4   2,499 

Long-term incentive plan activity

  861   76   —      —      —      —      —      76   861   76   —     —     —     —     —     76 

Employee stock purchase plan issuances

  662   25   —      —      —      —      —      25   662   25   —     —     —     —     —     25 

Common stock dividends

  —      —      —      (1,744  —      —      —      (1,744  —     —     —     (1,744  —     —     —     (1,744

Preferred and preference stock dividends

  —      —      —      —      —      —      (4  (4  —     —     —     —     —     —     (4  (4

Other comprehensive loss, net of income taxes of $(41)

  —      —      —      —      (27  —      —      (27  —     —     —     —     (27  —     —     (27
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2011

  698,112  $9,107  $(2,327 $10,055  $(2,450 $3   —     $14,388   698,112  $9,107  $(2,327 $10,055  $(2,450 $3  $—    $14,388 

Net income

  —      —      —      1,160   —      (3  14   1,171 

Net income (loss)

  —     —     —     1,160   —     (3  14   1,171 

Long-term incentive plan activity

  2,432   126   —      —      —      —      —      126   2,432   126   —     —     —     —     —     126 

Employee stock purchase plan issuances

  857   26   —      —      —      —      —      26   857   26   —     —     —     —     —     26 

Common stock dividends

  —      —      —      (1,322  —      —      —      (1,322  —     —     —     (1,322  —     —     —     (1,322

Common stock issuance Constellation merger

  188,124   7,365   —      —      —      —      —      7,365   188,124   7,365   —     —     —     —     —     7,365 

Noncontrolling interest acquired

  —      8   —      —      —      106   —      114 

Non-controlling interest acquired

  —     8   —     —     —     106   —     114 

BGE preference stock acquired

  —      —      —      —      —      —      193   193   —     —     —     —     —     —     193   193 

Preferred and preference stock dividends

  —      —      —      —      —      —      (14  (14  —     —     —     —     —     —     (14  (14

Other comprehensive loss, net of income taxes of $(192)

  —      —      —      —      (317  —      —      (317  —     —     —     —     (317  —     —     (317
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2012

  889,525  $16,632  $(2,327 $9,893  $(2,767 $106   193  $21,730   889,525  $16,632  $(2,327 $9,893  $(2,767 $106  $193  $21,730 

Net income (loss)

  —     —     —     1,719   —     (10  20   1,729 

Long-term incentive plan activity

  1,445   81   —     —     —     —     —     81 

Employee stock purchase plan issuances

  1,064   28   —     —     —     —     —     28 

Common stock dividends

  —     —     —     (1,254  —     —     —     (1,254

Consolidated VIE dividend to non-controlling interest

  —     —     —     —     —     (63  —     (63

Deconsolidation of VIE

  —     —     —     —     —     (18  —     (18

Redemption of preferred securities

  —     —     —     —     —     —     (6  (6

Preferred and preference stock dividends

  —     —     —     —     —     —     (14  (14

Other comprehensive income, net of income taxes of $(468)

  —     —     —     —     727   —     —     727 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2013

  892,034  $16,741  $(2,327 $10,358  $(2,040 $15  $193  $22,940 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

195


Exelon Generation Company, LLC and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income

 

  For the Years Ended
December 31,
 
  For the Years Ended
December 31,
 

(In millions)

  2012 2011 2010   2013 2012 2011 

Operating revenues

        

Operating revenues

  $12,735  $9,286  $6,923   $14,207  $12,735  $9,286 

Operating revenues from affiliates

   1,702   1,161   3,102    1,423   1,702   1,161 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total operating revenues

   14,437   10,447   10,025    15,630   14,437   10,447 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Operating expenses

        

Purchased power and fuel

   7,061   3,589   3,463    6,927   6,017   3,451 

Purchased power and fuel from affiliates

   1,270    1,044    138  

Operating and maintenance

   4,398   2,827   2,521    3,960   4,398   2,827 

Operating and maintenance from affiliates

   630   321   291    574   630   321 

Depreciation and amortization

   768   570   474    856   768   570 

Taxes other than income

   369   264   230    389   369   264 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total operating expenses

   13,226   7,571   6,979    13,976   13,226   7,571 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Equity in losses of unconsolidated affiliates

   (91  (1  —    

Equity in earnings (losses) of unconsolidated affiliates

   10   (91  (1

Operating income

   1,120   2,875   3,046    1,664   1,120   2,875 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

        

Interest expense

   (301  (170  (153   (298  (226  (170

Interest expense to affiliates, net

   (59  (75  —    

Other, net

   239   122   257    368   239   122 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

   (62  (48  104    11   (62  (48
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Income before income taxes

   1,058   2,827   3,150    1,675   1,058   2,827 

Income taxes

   500   1,056   1,178    615   500   1,056 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net income

   558   1,771   1,972    1,060   558   1,771 

Net loss attributable to noncontrolling interests

   (4  —      —    

Net loss attributable to non-controlling interests

   (10  (4  —   
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net income on membership interest

   562   1,771   1,972 

Net income attributable to membership interest

   1,070   562   1,771 
  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Comprehensive income (loss), net of income taxes

    

Net income

   1,060   558   1,771 

Other comprehensive income (loss)

        

Change in unrealized loss on cash flow hedges, net of income taxes of $(262), $(64) and $(102), respectively

   (403  (98  (144

Change in unrealized income on equity investments, net of income taxes of $(1), $0 and $0, respectively

   1   —      —    

Unrealized loss on cash flow hedges, net of income taxes of $(262), $(262) and $(64), respectively

   (398  (403  (98

Unrealized income on equity investments, net of income taxes of $72, $(1) and $0, respectively

   107   1   —   

Unrealized loss on foreign currency translation, net of income taxes of $0, $0 and $0, respectively

   (10  —     —   

Unrealized gain on marketable securities, net of income taxes of $0, $0 and $0, respectively

   2   —     —   
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other comprehensive loss

   (402  (98  (144   (299  (402  (98
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Comprehensive income

  $156  $1,673  $1,828   $761  $156  $1,673 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

196


Exelon Generation Company, LLC and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

 

  For the Years Ended
December 31,
   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 

(In millions)

  2012 2011 2010   2013 2012 2011 

Cash flows from operating activities

        

Net income

  $558  $1,771  $1,972   $1,060  $558  $1,771 

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash flows provided by operating activities:

        

Depreciation, amortization, depletion and accretion, including nuclear fuel and energy contract amortization

   2,966   1,539   1,341    2,559   2,966   1,539 

Loss on sale of three Maryland generating stations

   272   —      —       —     272   —    

Deferred income taxes and amortization of investment tax credits

   408    551   741    315   408   551 

Net fair value changes related to derivatives

   (611  291   (88   (448  (611  291 

Net realized and unrealized (gains) losses on nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments

   (157  14   (105   (170  (157  14 

Other non-cash operating activities

   537   421   182    414   537   421 

Changes in assets and liabilities:

        

Accounts receivable

   248    (122  —       109   248   (122

Receivables from and payables to affiliates, net

   39    208   (5   2   39   208 

Inventories

   31   (47  (70   (88  31   (47

Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other current liabilities

   (499  34   (18   (109  (499  34 

Option premiums paid, net

   (114  (3  (124   (36  (114  (3

Counterparty collateral (posted) received, net

   95   (410  (1   162   95   (410

Income taxes

   114    193   (303   402   114   193 

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit contributions

   (178  (1,070  (445   (149  (178  (1,070

Other assets and liabilities

   (128  (57  (45   (136  (128  (57
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net cash flows provided by operating activities

   3,581   3,313   3,032    3,887   3,581   3,313 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Cash flows from investing activities

        

Capital expenditures

   (3,554  (2,491  (1,883   (2,752  (3,554  (2,491

Proceeds from nuclear decommissioning trust fund sales

   7,265   6,139   3,764    4,217   7,265   6,139 

Investment in nuclear decommissioning trust funds

   (7,483  (6,332  (3,907   (4,450  (7,483  (6,332

Cash and restricted cash acquired from Constellation

   708   —      —       —      708   —    

Proceeds from sale of three Maryland generating stations

   371   —      —    

Proceeds from sale of long-lived assets

   32   371   —    

Acquisitions of long lived assets

   (21  (387  (893   —      (21  (387

Change in restricted cash

   4   —      4    (64  4   —    

Changes in Exelon intercompany money pool

   (44  —      —    

Distribution from CENG

   115   —      —    

Other investing activities

   81   (6  19    30   81   (6
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net cash flows used in investing activities

   (2,629  (3,077  (2,896   (2,916  (2,629  (3,077
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Cash flows from financing activities

        

Change in short-term debt

   (52  —      —       13   (52  —    

Issuance of long-term debt

   1,076   —      898    854   1,076   —    

Retirement of long-term debt

   (145  (2  (215   (570  (145  (2

Distribution to member

   (1,626  (172  (1,508   (625  (1,626  (172

Contribution from member

   48   30   62    26   48   30 

Other financing activities

   (78  (52  (16   (82  (78  (52
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net cash flows used in financing activities

   (777  (196  (779   (384  (777  (196
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents

   175   40   (643

Increase in cash and cash equivalents

   587   175   40 

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

   496   456   1,099    671   496   456 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

  $671  $496  $456   $1,258  $671  $496 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

197


Exelon Generation Company, LLC and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Balance Sheets

 

  December 31, 

(In millions)

  December 31, 
  2012   2011  2013   2012 
ASSETS        

Current assets

        

Cash and cash equivalents

  $596   $496   $1,196   $596 

Cash and cash equivalents of variable interest entities

   75    —       62    75 

Restricted cash and cash equivalents

   —      5    19    —   

Restricted cash and cash equivalents of variable interest entities

   16    —       52    16 

Accounts receivable, net

        

Customer

   1,482    578    1,429    1,482 

Other

   472     257    353    472 

Accounts receivable, net, of variable interest entities

   292    —       260    292 

Mark-to-market derivative assets

   938     432    727    938 

Mark-to-market derivative assets with affiliate

   226    503    —      226 

Receivables from affiliates

   141    109    108    141 

Receivable from Exelon intercompany money pool

   44    —   

Unamortized energy contract assets

   886    16    374    886 

Inventories, net

        

Fossil fuel

   130    120    164    130 

Materials and supplies

   626    556    671    626 

Deferred income taxes

   475    —   

Other

   331    145    505    331 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total current assets

   6,211    3,217    6,439    6,211 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Property, plant and equipment, net

   19,531    13,475    20,111    19,531 

Deferred debits and other assets

        

Nuclear decommissioning trust funds

   7,248    6,507    8,071    7,248 

Investments

   420    42    400    420 

Investment in CENG

   1,849    —       1,925    1,849 

Mark-to-market derivative assets

   924    635    600    924 

Mark-to-market derivative assets with affiliate

   —      191 

Prepaid pension asset

   1,975    2,068    1,873    1,975 

Pledged assets for Zion Station decommissioning

   614    734    458    614 

Unamortized energy contract assets

   1,073    424    710    1,073 

Other

   836    140    645    836 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total deferred debits and other assets

   14,939    10,741    14,682    14,939 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total assets

  $40,681   $27,433   $41,232   $40,681 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

198


Exelon Generation Company, LLC and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Balance Sheets

 

  December 31,   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2012   2011   2013   2012 
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY        

Current liabilities

        

Short-term borrowings

  $—      $2   $22   $—   

Long-term debt due within one year

   24    3    556    24 

Long-term debt due within one year of variable interest entities

   4    —       5    4 

Accounts payable

   1,346    753    1,152    1,326 

Accounts payable of variable interest entities

   202    —       170    202 

Accrued expenses

   1,116    779    976    1,116 

Payables to affiliates

   193    58    181    213 

Deferred income taxes

   128    244    25    128 

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities

   334    103    142    334 

Unamortized energy contract liabilities

   378    —       249    378 

Other

   372    202    389    372 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total current liabilities

   4,097    2,144    3,867    4,097 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Long-term debt

   5,245    3,674    5,559    5,245 

Long-term debt to affiliate

   2,007    —       1,523    2,007 

Long-term debt of variable interest entities

   203    —       86    203 

Deferred credits and other liabilities

        

Deferred income taxes and unamortized investment tax credits

   5,398    3,966    6,295    5,398 

Asset retirement obligations

   4,938    3,767    5,047    4,938 

Non-pension postretirement benefit obligations

   755    703    850    755 

Spent nuclear fuel obligation

   1,020    1,019    1,021    1,020 

Payables to affiliates

   2,397    2,222    2,740    2,397 

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities

   232    29    120    232 

Unamortized energy contract liabilities

   516    —       266    516 

Payable for Zion Station decommissioning

   432    563    305    432 

Other

   776    638    811    776 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total deferred credits and other liabilities

   16,464    12,907    17,455    16,464 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total liabilities

   28,016    18,725    28,490    28,016 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Commitments and contingencies

        

Equity

        

Member’s equity

        

Membership interest

   8,876    3,556    8,898    8,876 

Undistributed earnings

   3,168    4,232    3,613    3,168 

Accumulated other comprehensive income, net

   513    915    214    513 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total member’s equity

   12,557    8,703    12,725    12,557 

Noncontrolling interest

   108    5 

Non-controlling interest

   17    108 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total equity

   12,665    8,708    12,742    12,665 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total liabilities and equity

  $40,681   $27,433   $41,232   $40,681 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

199


Exelon Generation Company, LLC and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Member’s Equity

 

(In millions)

 Member’s Equity Noncontrolling
Interest
  Total
Equity
  Member’s Equity Non-controlling
Interest
  Total
Equity
 
Membership
Interest
 Undistributed
Earnings
 Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income
  Membership
Interest
 Undistributed
Earnings
 Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income
 

Balance, December 31, 2009

 $3,464  $2,169  $1,157  $2  $6,792 

Net Income

  —      1,972   —      —      1,972 

Distribution to member

  —      (1,508  —      —      (1,508

Allocation of tax benefit from member

  62   —      —      —      62 

Acquisition of Exelon Wind

  —      —      —      3   3 

Other comprehensive income, net of income taxes of $(102)

  —      —      (144  —      (144
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2010

 $3,526  $2,633  $1,013  $5  $7,177  $3,526  $2,633  $1,013  $5  $7,177 

Net Income

  —      1,771   —      —      1,771 

Net income

  —     1,771    —     —      1,771 

Distribution to member

  —      (172  —      —      (172  —      (172  —     —      (172

Allocation of tax benefit from member

  30   —      —      —      30   30   —     —     —     30  

Other comprehensive loss, net of income taxes of $(64)

  —      —      (98  —      (98  —     —     (98  —     (98
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2011

 $3,556  $4,232  $915  $5  $8,708  $3,556  $4,232  $915  $5  $8,708 

Net income

  —      562   —      (4  558   —     562   —     (4  558 

Distribution to member

  —      (1,626  —      —      (1,626  —     (1,626  —     —     (1,626

Allocation of tax benefit from member

  48   —      —      —      48   48   —     —     —     48 

Acquisition of Constellation

  5,264   —      —      —      5,264   5,264   —     —     —     5,264 

Noncontrolling interest acquired

  8   —      —      107   115 

Non-controlling interest acquired

  8   —     —     107   115 

Other comprehensive loss, net of income taxes of $(261)

  —      —      (402  —      (402  —     —     (402  —     (402
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2012

 $8,876  $3,168  $513  $108  $12,665  $8,876  $3,168  $513  $108  $12,665 

Net income

  —     1,070   —     (10  1,060 

Distribution to member

  —     (625  —     —     (625

Allocation of tax benefit from member

  26   —     —     —     26 

Consolidated VIE dividend to non-controlling interest

  —     —      (63  (63

Deconsolidation of VIE

  (1  —     —     (18  (19

Non-controlling interest acquired

  (3  —     —     —     (3

Other comprehensive loss, net of income taxes of $(190)

  —     —     (299  —     (299
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2013

 $8,898  $3,613  $214  $17  $12,742 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

200


Commonwealth Edison Company and Subsidiary Companies

Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income

   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 

(in millions)

  2013  2012  2011 

Operating revenues

    

Operating revenues

  $4,461  $5,441  $6,054 

Operating revenues from affiliates

   3   2   2 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total operating revenues

   4,464   5,443   6,056 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating expenses

    

Purchased power

   662   1,518   2,382 

Purchased power from affiliate

   512   789   653 

Operating and maintenance

   1,211   1,182   1,031 

Operating and maintenance from affiliate

   157   163   158 

Depreciation and amortization

   669   610   554 

Taxes other than income

   299   295   296 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total operating expenses

   3,510   4,557   5,074 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating income

   954   886   982 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

    

Interest expense

   (566  (294  (330

Interest expense to affiliates, net

   (13  (13  (15

Other, net

   26   39   29 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

   (553  (268  (316
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Income before income taxes

   401   618   666 

Income taxes

   152   239   250 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income

   249   379   416 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other comprehensive income

    

Unrealized gain on marketable securities, net of income taxes of $0, $0 and $0, respectively

   —     1   —   
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other comprehensive income

   —     1   —   
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Comprehensive income

  $249  $380  $416 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

201


Commonwealth Edison Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income

   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 

(in millions)

  2012  2011  2010 

Operating revenues

    

Operating revenues

  $5,441  $6,054  $6,202 

Operating revenues from affiliates

   2   2   2 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total operating revenues

   5,443   6,056   6,204 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating expenses

    

Purchased power

   1,518   2,382   2,297 

Purchased power from affiliate

   789   653   1,010 

Operating and maintenance

   1,182   1,031   917 

Operating and maintenance from affiliate

   163   158   152 

Depreciation and amortization

   610   554   516 

Taxes other than income

   295   296   256 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total operating expenses

   4,557   5,074   5,148 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating income

   886   982   1,056 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

    

Interest expense

   (294  (330  (373

Interest expense to affiliates, net

   (13  (15  (13

Other, net

   39   29   24 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

   (268  (316  (362
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Income before income taxes

   618   666   694 

Income taxes

   239   250   357 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income

   379   416   337 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other comprehensive income

    

Change in unrealized gain (loss) on marketable securities, net of income taxes of $0, $0 and $0, respectively

   1   —      (1
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other comprehensive income (loss)

   1   —      (1
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Comprehensive income

  $380  $416  $336 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

201


Commonwealth Edison Company and Subsidiary Companies

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

 

  For the Years Ended   For the Years Ended 

(In millions)

  2012 2011 2010   2013 2012 2011 

Cash flows from operating activities

        

Net income

  $379  $416  $337   $249  $379  $416 

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash flows provided by operating activities:

        

Depreciation, amortization and accretion

   610   554   517    669   610   554 

Deferred income taxes and amortization of investment tax credits

   270   700   582    (57  270   700 

Other non-cash operating activities

   252   184   238    28   252   184 

Changes in assets and liabilities:

        

Accounts receivable

   24   5   (46   (12  24   5 

Receivables from and payables to affiliates, net

   (18  (287  (55   (12  (18  (287

Inventories

   (11  (9  (1   (18  (11  (9

Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other current liabilities

   59   (84  342    74   59   (84

Counterparty collateral received (posted), net

   40   66   (154

Counterparty collateral received, net

   53   40   66 

Income taxes

   9   223   (233   178   9   223 

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit contributions

   (138  (977  (317   (122  (138  (977

Other assets and liabilities

   (142  45   (133   188   (142  45 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net cash flows provided by operating activities

   1,334   836   1,077    1,218   1,334   836 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Cash flows from investing activities

        

Capital expenditures

   (1,246  (1,028  (962   (1,433  (1,246  (1,028

Proceeds from sales of investments

   28   6   28    7   28   6 

Purchases of investments

   (13  (4  (22   (4  (13  (4

Change in restricted cash

   (2  —     —   

Other investing activities

   19   19   17    45   19   19 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net cash flows used in investing activities

   (1,212  (1,007  (939   (1,387  (1,212  (1,007
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Cash flows from financing activities

        

Changes in short-term debt

   —      —      (155   184   —     —   

Issuance of long-term debt

   350   1,199   500    350   350   1,199 

Retirement of long-term debt

   (450  (537  (213   (252  (450  (537

Contributions from parent

   —      —      2 

Dividends paid on common stock

   (105  (300  (310   (220  (105  (300

Other financing activities

   (7  (7  (3   (1  (7  (7
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net cash flows provided by (used in) financing activities

   (212  355   (179   61   (212  355 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents

   (90  184   (41   (108  (90  184 

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

   234   50   91    144   234   50 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

  $144  $234  $50   $36  $144  $234 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

202


Commonwealth Edison Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Balance Sheets

 

  December 31,   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2012   2011   2013   2012 
ASSETS        

Current assets

        

Cash and cash equivalents

  $144   $234   $36   $144 

Restricted cash

   —      3    2    —    

Accounts receivable, net

        

Customer

   539    655    451    539 

Other

   452    385    584    452 

Inventories, net

   91    81    109    91 

Deferred income taxes

   83    61    —       83 

Counterparty collateral deposited

   53    90    —       53 

Regulatory assets

   388    657    329    388 

Other

   25    22    29    25 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total current assets

   1,775    2,188    1,540    1,775 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Property, plant and equipment, net

   13,826    13,121    14,666    13,826 

Deferred debits and other assets

        

Regulatory assets

   666    699    933    666 

Investments

   8    21    5    8 

Investments in affiliates

   6    6    6    6 

Goodwill

   2,625    2,625    2,625    2,625 

Receivable from affiliates

   2,039    1,860    2,469    2,039 

Prepaid pension asset

   1,661    1,803    1,583    1,661 

Other

   299    315    291    299 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total deferred debits and other assets

   7,304    7,329    7,912    7,304 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total assets

  $22,905   $22,638   $24,118   $22,905 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

203


Commonwealth Edison Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Balance Sheets

 

  December 31,   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2012   2011   2013   2012 
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY        

Current liabilities

        

Short-term borrowings

  $184   $—   

Long-term debt due within one year

  $252   $450    617    252 

Accounts payable

   379    325    449    379 

Accrued expenses

   295    318    307    295 

Payables to affiliates

   97    111    83    97 

Customer deposits

   136    136    133    136 

Regulatory liabilities

   130    137    170    170 

Mark-to-market derivative liability

   18    9    17    18 

Mark-to-market derivative liability with affiliate

   226    503    —      226 

Deferred income taxes

   16    —   

Other

   122    82    72    82 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total current liabilities

   1,655    2,071    2,048    1,655 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Long-term debt

   5,315    5,215    5,058    5,315 

Long-term debt to financing trust

   206    206    206    206 

Deferred credits and other liabilities

        

Deferred income taxes and unamortized investment tax credits

   4,272    3,993    4,116    4,272 

Asset retirement obligations

   99    89    99    99 

Non-pension postretirement benefits obligations

   273    271    381    273 

Regulatory liabilities

   3,229    3,042    3,512    3,229 

Mark-to-market derivative liability

   49    97    176    49 

Mark-to-market derivative liability with affiliate

   —      191 

Other

   484    426    994    484 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total deferred credits and other liabilities

   8,406    8,109    9,278    8,406 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total liabilities

   15,582    15,601    16,590    15,582 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Commitments and contingencies

        

Shareholders’ equity

        

Common stock

   1,588    1,588    1,588    1,588 

Other paid-in capital

   5,014    5,003    5,190    5,014 

Retained earnings

   721    447    750    721 

Accumulated other comprehensive loss, net

   —      (1
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total shareholders’ equity

   7,323    7,037    7,528    7,323 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

  $22,905   $22,638   $24,118   $22,905 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

204


Commonwealth Edison Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity

 

(In millions)

 Common
Stock
 Other
Paid-In
Capital
 Retained Deficit
Unappropriated
 Retained
Earnings
Appropriated
 Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income (Loss)
 Total
Shareholders’
Equity
  Common
Stock
 Other
Paid-In
Capital
 Retained Deficit
Unappropriated
 Retained
Earnings
Appropriated
 Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income (Loss)
 Total
Shareholders’
Equity
 

Balance, December 31, 2009

 $1,588  $4,990  $(1,639 $1,943  $—     $6,882 

Balance, December 31, 2010

 $1,588  $4,992  $(1,639 $1,970  $(1 $6,910 

Net income

  —      —      416   —      —      416 

Common stock dividends

  —      —      —      (300  —      (300

Allocation of tax benefit from parent

  —      11   —      —      —      11 

Appropriation of retained earnings for future dividends

  —      —      (416  416   —      —    
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2011

 $1,588  $5,003  $(1,639 $2,086  $(1 $7,037 

Net income

  —      —      337   —      —      337   —      —      379   —      —      379 

Common stock dividends

  —      —      —      (310  —      (310  —      —      —      (105  —      (105

Allocation of tax benefit from parent

  —      2   —      —      —      2   —      11   —      —      —      11 

Appropriation of retained earnings for future dividends

  —      —      (337  337   —      —      —      —      (379  379   —      —    

Other comprehensive income, net of income taxes of $0

  —      —      —      —      (1  (1  —      —      —      —      1   1 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2010

 $1,588  $4,992  $(1,639 $1,970  $(1 $6,910 

Balance, December 31, 2012

 $1,588  $5,014  $(1,639 $2,360  $—     $7,323 

Net income

  —      —      416   —      —      416   —      —      249   —      —      249 

Common stock dividends

  —      —      —      (300  —      (300  —      —      —      (220  —      (220

Allocation of tax benefit from parent

  —      11   —      —      —      11 

Parent tax matter indemnification

  —      176   —      —      —      176 

Appropriation of retained earnings for future dividends

  —      —      (416  416   —      —      —      —      (249  249   —      —    

Other comprehensive loss,

      
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2011

 $1,588  $5,003  $(1,639 $2,086  $(1 $7,037 

Net income

  —      —      379   —      —      379 

Common stock dividends

  —      —      —      (105  —      (105

Allocation of tax benefit from parent

  —      11   —      —      —      11 

Appropriation of retained earnings for future dividends

  —      —      (379  379   —      —    

Other comprehensive income net of income taxes of $0

  —      —      —      —      1   1 

Balance, December 31, 2013

 $1,588  $5,190  $(1,639 $2,389  $—     $7,528 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2012

 $1,588  $5,014  $(1,639 $2,360  $—     $7,323 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

205


PECO Energy Company and Subsidiary Companies

Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income

   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 

(In millions)

  2013  2012  2011 

Operating revenues

    

Operating revenues

  $3,099  $3,183  $3,715 

Operating revenues from affiliates

   1   3   5 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total operating revenues

   3,100   3,186   3,720 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating expenses

    

Purchased power and fuel

   908   842   1,369 

Purchased power from affiliate

   392   533   495 

Operating and maintenance

   647   698   698 

Operating and maintenance from affiliates

   101   111   96 

Depreciation and amortization

   228   217   202 

Taxes other than income

   158   162   205 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total operating expenses

   2,434   2,563   3,065 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating income

   666   623   655 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

    

Interest expense

   (103  (111  (122

Interest expense to affiliates, net

   (12  (12  (12

Other, net

   6   8   14 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

   (109  (115  (120
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Income before income taxes

   557   508   535 

Income taxes

   162   127   146 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income

   395   381   389 

Preferred security dividends and redemption

   7   4   4 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income attributable to common shareholder

   388   377   385 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Comprehensive income, net of income taxes

    

Net income

   395   381   389 

Other comprehensive income

    

Unrealized gain on marketable securities, net of income taxes of $0, $0 and $0, respectively

   —     1   —   
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other comprehensive income

   —     1   —   
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Comprehensive income

  $395  $382  $389 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

206


PECO Energy Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income

   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 

(In millions)

  2012  2011  2010 

Operating revenues

    

Operating revenues

  $3,183  $3,715  $5,514 

Operating revenues from affiliates

   3   5   5 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total operating revenues

   3,186   3,720   5,519 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating expenses

    

Purchased power and fuel

   842   1,369   677 

Purchased power from affiliate

   533   495   2,085 

Operating and maintenance

   698   698   644 

Operating and maintenance from affiliates

   111   96   89 

Depreciation and amortization

   217   202   1,060 

Taxes other than income

   162   205   303 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total operating expenses

   2,563   3,065   4,858 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating income

   623   655   661 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

    

Interest expense

   (111  (122  (181

Interest expense to affiliates, net

   (12  (12  (12

Other, net

   8   14   8 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

   (115  (120  (185
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Income before income taxes

   508   535   476 

Income taxes

   127   146   152 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income

   381   389   324 

Preferred security dividends

   4   4   4 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income on common stock

   377   385   320 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Comprehensive income, net of income taxes

    

Net income

   381   389   324 

Other comprehensive income (loss)

    

Amortization of realized gain on settled cash flow swaps, net of income taxes of $0, $0 and $(1), respectively

   —     —     (1

Change in unrealized gain on marketable securities, net of income taxes of $0, $0 and $0, respectively

   1   —     —   
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other comprehensive income (loss)

   1   —     (1
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Comprehensive income

  $382  $389  $323 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

206


PECO Energy Company and Subsidiary Companies

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

 

  For the Years Ended
December 31,
   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 

(In millions)

  2012 2011 2010   2013 2012 2011 

Cash flows from operating activities

        

Net income

  $381  $389  $324   $395  $381  $389 

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash flows provided by operating activities:

        

Depreciation, amortization and accretion

   217   202   1,060    228   217   202 

Deferred income taxes and amortization of investment tax credits

   37   253   (400   20   37   253 

Other non-cash operating activities

   125   100   108    108   125   100 

Changes in assets and liabilities:

        

Accounts receivable

   (14  225   (212   (79  (14  225 

Receivables from and payables to affiliates, net

   13   (217  86    (18  13   (217

Inventories

   21   —      9    2   21   —   

Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other current liabilities

   (47  34   85    41   (47  34 

Income taxes

   174   (45  118    87   174   (45

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit contributions

   (45  (137  (106   (31  (45  (137

Other assets and liabilities

   16   14   78    (6  16   14 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net cash flows provided by operating activities

   878   818   1,150    747   878   818 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Cash flows from investing activities

        

Capital expenditures

   (422  (481  (545   (537  (422  (481

Changes in intercompany money pool contributions

   82   (82  —    

Changes in intercompany money pool

   —     82   (82

Change in restricted cash

   2   (2  414    (2  2   (2

Other investing activities

   10   8   11    8   10   8 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net cash flows used in investing activities

   (328  (557  (120   (531  (328  (557
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Cash flows from financing activities

        

Payment of accounts receivable agreement

   (15  —      —       (210  (15  —   

Issuance of long-term debt

   350   —      —       550   350   —   

Retirement of long-term debt

   (375  (250  —       (300  (375  (250

Retirement of long-term debt of variable interest entity

   —      —      (806

Contributions from parent

   9   18   43    27   9   18 

Dividends paid on common stock

   (343  (348  (224   (332  (343  (348

Dividends paid on preferred securities

   (4  (4  (4   (1  (4  (4

Repayment of receivable from parent

   —      —      180 

Redemption of preferred securities

   (93  —     —   

Other financing activities

   (4  (5  —       (2  (4  (5
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net cash flows used in financing activities

   (382  (589  (811   (361  (382  (589
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents

   168   (328  219    (145  168   (328

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

   194   522   303    362   194   522 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

  $362  $194  $522   $217  $362  $194 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

207


PECO Energy Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Balance Sheets

 

  December 31,   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2012   2011   2013   2012 
ASSETS        

Current assets

        

Cash and cash equivalents

  $362   $194   $217   $362 

Restricted cash and cash equivalents

   —      2    2    —   

Accounts receivable, net ($289 and $329 gross accounts receivable pledged as collateral as of December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively)

    

Accounts receivable, net ($0 and $289 gross accounts receivable pledged as collateral as of December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively)

    

Customer

   364    380    360    364 

Other

   161    376    107    161 

Inventories, net

        

Fossil fuel

   65    87    60    65 

Materials and supplies

   19    18    21    19 

Deferred income taxes

   40    25    83    40 

Receivable from Exelon intercompany money pool

   —      82 

Prepaid utility taxes

   21    1    3    21 

Regulatory assets

   32    39    17    32 

Other

   30    39    36    30 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total current assets

   1,094    1,243    906    1,094 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Property, plant and equipment, net

   6,078    5,874    6,384    6,078 

Deferred debits and other assets

        

Regulatory assets

   1,378    1,216    1,448    1,378 

Investments

   22    22    23    22 

Investments in affiliates

   8    8    8    8 

Receivable from affiliates

   360    365    447    360 

Prepaid pension asset

   373    382    363    373 

Other

   40    46    38    40 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total deferred debits and other assets

   2,181    2,039    2,327    2,181 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total assets

  $9,353   $9,156   $9,617   $9,353 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

208


PECO Energy Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Balance Sheets

 

  December 31,   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2012   2011   2013   2012 
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY        

Current liabilities

        

Short-term notes payable—accounts receivable agreement

  $210   $225   $—      $210 

Long-term debt due within one year

   300    375    250    300 

Accounts payable

   244    262    285    244 

Accrued expenses

   82    83    106    82 

Payables to affiliates

   76    62    58    76 

Customer deposits

   51    53    49    51 

Regulatory liabilities

   169    60    106    169 

Other

   26    25    37    26 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total current liabilities

   1,158    1,145    891    1,158 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Long-term debt

   1,647    1,597    1,947    1,647 

Long-term debt to financing trusts

   184    184    184    184 

Deferred credits and other liabilities

        

Deferred income taxes and unamortized investment tax credits

   2,331    2,170    2,487    2,331 

Asset retirement obligations

   29    28    29    29 

Non-pension postretirement benefits obligations

   284    288    286    284 

Regulatory liabilities

   538    585    629    538 

Other

   113    134    99    113 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total deferred credits and other liabilities

   3,295    3,205    3,530    3,295 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total liabilities

   6,284    6,131    6,552    6,284 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Commitments and contingencies

        

Preferred securities

   87    87    —       87 

Shareholders’ equity

        

Common stock

   2,388    2,379    2,415    2,388 

Retained earnings

   593    559    649    593 

Accumulated other comprehensive income, net

   1    —      1    1 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total shareholders’ equity

   2,982    2,938    3,065    2,982 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

  $9,353   $9,156   $9,617   $9,353 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

209


PECO Energy Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Stockholders’ Equity

 

(In millions)

 Common
Stock
 Receivable
from Parent
 Retained
Earnings
 Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income
 Total
Shareholders’
Equity
  Common
Stock
 Retained
Earnings
 Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income
 Total
Shareholders’
Equity
 

Balance, December 31, 2009

 $2,318  $(180 $426  $1  $2,565 

Net Income

  —      —      324   —      324 

Common stock dividends

  —      —      (224  —      (224

Preferred security dividends

  —      —      (4  —      (4

Repayment of receivable from parent

  —      180   —      —      180 

Allocation of tax benefit from parent

  43   —      —      —      43 

Other comprehensive loss, net of income taxes of $(1)

  —      —      —      (1  (1
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2010

 $2,361  $—     $522  $—     $2,883  $2,361  $522  $—     $2,883 

Net Income

  —      —      389   —      389 

Net income

  —      389   —      389 

Common stock dividends

  —      —      (348  —      (348  —      (348  —      (348

Preferred security dividends

  —      —      (4  —      (4  —      (4  —      (4

Allocation of tax benefit from parent

  18   —      —      —      18   18   —      —      18 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2011

 $2,379  $—     $559  $—     $2,938  $2,379  $559  $—     $2,938 

Net Income

  —      —      381   —      381 

Net income

  —      381   —      381 

Common stock dividends

  —      —      (343  —      (343  —      (343  —      (343

Preferred security dividends

  —      —      (4  —      (4  —      (4  —      (4

Allocation of tax benefit from parent

  9   —      —      —      9   9   —      —      9 

Other comprehensive income, net of income taxes of $0

  —      —      —      1   1   —      —      1   1 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2012

 $2,388  $—     $593  $1  $2,982  $2,388  $593  $1  $2,982 

Net income

  —      395   —      395 

Common stock dividends

  —      (332  —      (332

Preferred security dividends

  —      (1  —      (1

Redemption of preferred securities

  —      (6  —      (6

Allocation of tax benefit from parent

  27   —      —      27 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2013

 $2,415  $649  $1  $3,065 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

210


BALTIMORE GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARY COMPANIESBaltimore Gas and Electric Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOMEConsolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income

 

   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 

(In millions)

  2012  2011  2010 

Operating revenues

    

Operating revenues

  $2,725  $3,060  $3,534 

Operating revenues from affiliates

   10   8   7 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total operating revenues

   2,735   3,068   3,541 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating expenses

    

Purchased power and fuel

   973   1,245   1,719 

Purchased power from affiliate

   396   348   428 

Operating and maintenance

   622   530   469 

Operating and maintenance from affiliates

   106   150   126 

Depreciation and amortization

   298   274   249 

Taxes other than income

   208   207   200 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total operating expenses

   2,603   2,754   3,191 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating income

   132   314   350 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

    

Interest expense

   (144  (129  (131

Other, net

   23   26   25 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

   (121  (103  (106
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Income before income taxes

   11   211   244 

Income taxes

   7   75   97 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income

   4   136   147 

Preference stock dividends

   13   13   13 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income (loss) on common stock

  $(9 $123  $134 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Comprehensive income

  $4  $136  $147 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 

(In millions)

  2013  2012  2011 

Operating revenues

    

Operating revenues

  $3,052  $2,725  $3,060 

Operating revenues from affiliates

   13   10   8 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total operating revenues

   3,065   2,735   3,068 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating expenses

    

Purchased power and fuel

   969   973   1,245 

Purchased power from affiliate

   452   396   348 

Operating and maintenance

   551   622   530 

Operating and maintenance from affiliates

   83   106   150 

Depreciation and amortization

   348   298   274 

Taxes other than income

   213   208   207 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total operating expenses

   2,616   2,603   2,754 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating income

   449   132   314 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

    

Interest expense

   (106  (128  (113

Interest expense to affiliates, net

   (16  (16  (16

Other, net

   17   23   26 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

   (105  (121  (103
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Income before income taxes

   344   11   211 

Income taxes

   134   7   75 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income

   210   4   136 

Preference stock dividends

   13   13   13 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income (loss) attributable to common shareholder

  $197  $(9 $123 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Comprehensive income

  $210  $4  $136 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

211


BALTIMORE GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARY COMPANIESBaltimore Gas and Electric Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWSConsolidated Statements of Cash Flows

 

  For the Years Ended
December 31,
   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 

(In millions)

  2012 2011 2010   2013 2012 2011 

Cash flows from operating activities

        

Net income

  $4  $136  $147   $210  $4  $136 

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash flows provided by operating activities:

        

Depreciation, amortization and accretion

   298   274   249    348   298   274 

Deferred income taxes and amortization of investment tax credits

   104   145   299    125   104   145 

Other non-cash operating activities

   193   129   144    153   193   129 

Changes in assets and liabilities:

        

Accounts receivable

   (45  60   (95   (127  (45  60 

Receivables from and payables to affiliates, net

   26   (44  (24   (14  26   (44

Inventories

   25   (10  8    1   25   (10

Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other current liabilities

   (33  (21  (66   (14  (33  (21

Income taxes

   14   35   (56   (33  14   35 

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit contributions

   (16  (67  (214   (24  (16  (67

Other assets and liabilities

   (85  (161  (63   (64  (85  (161
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net cash flows provided by operating activities

   485   476   329    561   485   476 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Cash flows from investing activities

        

Capital expenditures

   (582  (592  (508   (587  (582  (592

Proceeds from the sale of investments and other assets

   —      —      21 

Changes in intercompany money pool contributions

   —      —      315 

Change in restricted cash

   —      —      (5   2   —      —    

Other investing activities

   9   —      —       14   9   —    
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net cash flows used in investing activities

   (573  (592  (177   (571  (573  (592
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Cash flows from financing activities

        

Changes in short-term debt

   —      —      (46   135   —      —    

Issuance of long-term debt

   250   300   —       300   250   300 

Repayment of long-term debt

   (173  (82  (57

Retirement of long-term debt

   (467  (173  (82

Dividends paid on common stock

   —      (85  —       —      —      (85

Dividends paid on preference stock

   (13  (13  (13   (13  (13  (13

Contributions from parent

   66   —      —       —      66   —    

Other financing activities

   (2  (5  —       (3  (2  (5
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net cash flows provided by (used in) financing activities

   128   115   (116

Net cash flows (used in) provided by financing activities

   (48  128   115 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents

   40   (1  36    (58  40   (1

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

   49   50   14    89   49   50 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

  $89  $49  $50   $31  $89  $49 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

212


BALTIMORE GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARY COMPANIESBaltimore Gas and Electric Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETSConsolidated Balance Sheets

 

  December 31,   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2012   2011   2013   2012 
ASSETS        

Current assets

        

Cash and cash equivalents

  $89   $49   $31   $89 

Restricted cash and cash equivalents of variable interest entity

   30    30    28    30 

Accounts receivable, net

        

Customer

   401    428    480    409 

Other

   117    90    114    111 

Income taxes receivable

   3    21    30    3 

Inventories, net

        

Gas held in storage

   51    74    53    51 

Materials and supplies

   31    34    28    31 

Deferred income taxes

   1    —      2    1 

Prepaid utility taxes

   57    56    57    57 

Regulatory assets

   185    175    181    190 

Other

   8    12    7    8 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total current assets

   973    969    1,011    980 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Property, plant and equipment, net

   5,498    5,132    5,864    5,498 

Deferred debits and other assets

        

Regulatory assets

   522    551    524    522 

Investments

   5    —      5    5 

Investments in affiliates

   8    8    8    8 

Prepaid pension asset

   467    514    423    467 

Other

   26    29    26    26 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total deferred debits and other assets

   1,028    1,102    986    1,028 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total assets

  $7,499   $7,203   $7,861   $7,506 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

213


BALTIMORE GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARY COMPANIESBaltimore Gas and Electric Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETSConsolidated Balance Sheets

 

  December 31,   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2012   2011   2013   2012 
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY        

Current liabilities

        

Short-term borrowings

  $135   $—   

Long-term debt due within one year

  $400   $110    —      400 

Long-term debt of variable interest entity due within one year

   67    63    70    67 

Accounts payable

   195    210    270    235 

Accrued expenses

   106    110    111    102 

Deferred income taxes

   —      59    27    —   

Payables to affiliates

   65    41    55    69 

Customer deposits

   71    84    76    71 

Regulatory liabilities

   22    19    48    29 

Other

   47    38    35    7 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total current liabilities

   973    734    827    980 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Long-term debt

   1,446    1,596    1,746    1,446 

Long-term debt to financing trust

   258    258    258    258 

Long-term debt of variable interest entity

   265    332    195    265 

Deferred credits and other liabilities

        

Deferred income taxes and unamortized investment tax credits

   1,658    1,491    1,773    1,658 

Asset retirement obligations

   8    1    19    8 

Non-pension postretirement benefits obligations

   229    233    217    229 

Regulatory liabilities

   214    201    204    214 

Other

   90    56    67    90 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total deferred credits and other liabilities

   2,199    1,982    2,280    2,199 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total liabilities

   5,141    4,902    5,306    5,148 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Commitments and contingencies

        

Shareholders’ equity

        

Common stock

   1,360    1,294    1,360    1,360 

Retained earnings

   808    817    1,005    808 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total shareholders’ equity

   2,168    2,111    2,365    2,168 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Preference stock not subject to mandatory redemption

   190    190    190    190 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total equity

   2,358    2,301    2,555    2,358 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

  $7,499   $7,203   $7,861   $7,506 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

214


BALTIMORE GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARY COMPANIESBaltimore Gas and Electric Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITYConsolidated Statement of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity

 

(In millions)

 Common
Stock
 Retained
Earnings
 Total
Shareholders’
Equity
 Preference stock
not subject to
mandatory
redemption
 Noncontrolling
Interests
 Total
Equity
   Common
Stock
   Retained
Earnings
 Total
Shareholders’
Equity
 Preference stock
not subject to
mandatory
redemption
   Total
Equity
 

Balance, December 31, 2009

 $1,294  $645  $1,939  $190  $18  $2,147 

Net income

  —     147   147   —     —     147 

Preference stock dividends

  —     (13  (13  —     —     (13

Sale of noncontrolling interest

  —     —     —     —     (18  (18
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2010

 $1,294  $779  $2,073  $190  $—    $2,263   $1,294   $779  $2,073  $190   $2,263 

Net income

  —     136   136   —     —     136    —      136   136   —      136 

Common stock dividends

  —     (85  (85  —     —     (85   —      (85  (85  —      (85

Preference stock dividends

  —     (13  (13  —     —     (13   —      (13  (13  —      (13
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2011

 $1,294  $817  $2,111  $190  $—    $2,301   $1,294   $817  $2,111  $190   $2,301 

Net income

  —     4   4   —     —     4    —      4   4   —      4 

Preference stock dividends

  —     (13  (13  —     —     (13   —      (13  (13  —      (13

Contribution from parent

  66   —     66   —     —     66    66    —     66   —      66 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2012

 $1,360  $808  $2,168  $190  $—    $2,358   $1,360   $808  $2,168  $190   $2,358 

Net income

   —      210   210   —      210 

Preference stock dividends

   —      (13  (13  —      (13
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2013

  $1,360   $1,005  $2,365  $190   $2,555 
  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

215


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

1. Significant Accounting Policies (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Description of Business (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Exelon is a utility services holding company engaged through its principal subsidiaries in the energy generation and energy distribution businesses. Prior to March 12, 2012, Exelon’s principal wholly owned subsidiaries included ComEd, PECO and Generation. On March 12, 2012, Constellation merged into Exelon with Exelon continuing as the surviving corporation pursuant to the transactions contemplated by the Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “Merger(“Merger Agreement”). As a result of the merger transaction, Generation now includes the former Constellation generation and customer supply operations. BGE, formerly Constellation’s regulated utility subsidiary, is now a subsidiary of Exelon. Refer to Note 4—Merger and Acquisitions for further information regarding the merger transaction.

 

The energy generation business includes:

 

  

Generation: The integrated business consistsPhysical delivery and marketing of owned and contracted electric generation capacity and investments in electric generating facilities that are marketed through its leading customer facing activities. The customer facing activities include wholesaleprovision of renewable and retail customer supply of electric and natural gasother energy-related products and services, including renewable energy products, risk management services and investments in natural gas exploration and production activities. Generation has six reportable segments consisting of the Mid-Atlantic, Midwest, New England, New York, ERCOT and Other regions.

 

The energy delivery businesses include:

 

  

ComEd: Purchase and regulated retail sale of electricity and the provision of distribution and transmission services in northern Illinois, including the City of Chicago.

 

  

PECO: Purchase and regulated retail sale of electricity and the provision of distribution and transmission services in southeastern Pennsylvania, including the City of Philadelphia, and the purchase and regulated retail sale of natural gas and the provision of distribution services in the Pennsylvania counties surrounding the City of Philadelphia.

 

  

BGE: Purchase and regulated retail sale of electricity and the provision of distribution and transmission services in central Maryland, including the City of Baltimore, and the purchase and regulated retail sale of natural gas and the provision of distribution services in central Maryland, including the City of Baltimore.

 

Basis of Presentation (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

This is a combined annual report of Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE. The Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements apply to Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE as indicated parenthetically next to each corresponding disclosure. When appropriate, Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE are named specifically for their related activities and disclosures.

 

Exelon did not apply push-down accounting to BGE. As a result, BGE continuesand BGE continued to maintain itsbe subject to reporting requirements as an SEC registrant. The information disclosed for BGE represents the activity of the standalone entity for the twelve months ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011 and the financial position as of December 31, 20122013 and December 31, 2011.2012. However, for Exelon’s consolidated financial reporting, Exelon is reporting BGE activity from the acquisition date of March 12, 2012 through December 31, 2012.2013.

 

Each of the Registrant’s Consolidated Financial Statements includes the accounts of its subsidiaries. All intercompany transactions have been eliminated.

 

216


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Through its business services subsidiary, BSC, Exelon provides its subsidiaries with a variety of support services at cost, including legal, human resources, financial, information technology and supply management services. The costs of BSC, including support services, are directly charged or allocated to the applicable subsidiaries using a cost-causative allocation method. Corporate governance-type costs that cannot be directly assigned are allocated based on a Modified Massachusetts Formula, which is a method that utilizes a combination of gross revenues, total assets and direct labor costs for the allocation base. The results of Exelon’s corporate operations are presented as “Other” within the consolidated financial statements and include intercompany eliminations unless otherwise disclosed.

 

Exelon owns 100% of all of its significant consolidated subsidiaries, either directly or indirectly, except for ComEd, of which Exelon owns more than 99%, PECO, of which Exelon owns 100% of the common stock but none of PECO’s preferred securities and BGE, of which Exelon owns 100% of the common stock but none of BGE’s preference stock. Exelon owned none of PECO’s preferred securities, which PECO redeemed in 2013. Exelon has reflected the third-party interests in ComEd, which totaled less than $1 million at December 31, 20122013 and December 31, 2011,2012, as equity, PECO’s preferred securities as preferred securities of subsidiary through their redemption in 2013, and BGE’s preference stock as BGE preference stock not subject to mandatory redemption in its consolidated financial statements. BGE is subject to some ring-fencing measures established by order of the MDPSC. As part of this arrangement, BGE common stock is held directly by RF Holdco LLC, which is an indirect subsidiary of Exelon. GSS Holdings (BGE Utility), an unrelated party, holds a nominal non-economic interest in RF Holdco LLC with limited voting rights on specified matters.

 

Generation owns 100% of all of its significant consolidated subsidiaries, either directly or indirectly, except for a retail power supply VIE for which Generation has no ownership interest but does have a controlling financial interest through contractual arrangements; Exelon SHC, Inc., of which Generation owns 99% and the remaining 1% is indirectly owned by Exelon, which is eliminated in Exelon’s consolidated financial statements; and certain Exelon Wind projects, of which Generation holds a majority interest ranging from 94% to 99% for certain periods of time, and the remaining interests are included in noncontrollingnon-controlling interest on Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. See Note 2 for further discussion of Exelon’s and Generation’s VIEs and the reversionary interests of the Noncontrollingnon-controlling members for certain of these projects.

 

ComEd owns 100% of all of its significant consolidated subsidiaries, either directly or indirectly, except for RITELine Illinois, LLC, of which ComEd owns 75% and an additional 12.5% is indirectly owned by Exelon. Exelon and ComEd have reflected the third-party interests of 12.5% and 25%, respectively, in RITELine Illinois, LLC, which both totaled less than $1 million at December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, as equity.

 

Exelon consolidates the accounts of entities in which Exelon has a controlling financial interest, after the elimination of intercompany transactions. A controlling financial interest is evidenced by either a voting interest greater than 50% in which Exelon can exercise control over the operations and policies of the investee, or the results of a model that identifies Exelon or one of its subsidiaries as the primary beneficiary of a VIE. Where Exelon does not have a controlling financial interest in an entity, it applies proportional consolidation, equity method accounting or cost method accounting. Exelon applies proportionate consolidation when it has an undivided interest in an asset and is proportionately liable for its share of each liability associated with the asset. Exelon proportionately consolidates its undivided ownership interests in jointly owned electric plants and transmission facilities, as well as its undivided ownership interests in upstream natural gas exploration and production activities. Under proportionate consolidation, Exelon separately records its proportionate share of the assets, liabilities,

217


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

revenues and expenses related to the undivided interest in the asset. Exelon applies equity method accounting when it has significant influence over an investee through an ownership in common stock, which generally approximates a 20% to 50% voting interest. Exelon applies equity method accounting

217


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

to certain investments and joint ventures, including the 50.01% interest in CENG, and certain financing trusts of ComEd, PECO, and PECO.BGE. Under the equity method, Exelon reports its interest in the entity as an investment and Exelon’s percentage share of the earnings from the entity as single line items in its financial statements. Exelon uses the cost method if it holds less than 20% of the common stock of an entity. Under the cost method, Exelon reports its investment at cost and recognizes income only to the extent Exelon receives dividends or distributions.

 

For the year ended December 31, 2013, BGE recorded a $2 million (pre-tax) correcting adjustment to decrease amortization expense related to regulatory assets that were originally recorded during 2012, an adjustment to decrease income tax expense by $4 million related to the recognition and measurement of regulatory assets that should have been recorded in periods prior to 2013, and a $4 million (pre-tax) correcting adjustment to decrease operating and maintenance expense for an overstatement of BGE’s life insurance obligation related to post-employment benefits in prior years. For the year ended December 31, 2012, BGE recorded a $2 million (pre-tax) correcting adjustment to reduce electric distribution revenue related to decoupling of 2011 electric distribution revenue, a $3 million (pre-tax) correcting adjustment to increase electric operations and maintenance expense related to capitalization of electric transmission costs, and a $5 million (pre-tax) correcting adjustment to interest expense to reflect the impacts of amendments of tax positions previously taken on prior-year consolidated income tax returns. In addition, ComEd identified a disclosure adjustment within the renewable energy credits and alternative energy credits section of the 2012 Form 10-K Note 8—Intangible Assets which has been revised in Note 10 of this year’s report. Exelon, ComEd and BGE hashave concluded these correcting adjustments are not material to its results of operations, or cash flows, or financial positions for the yearyears ended December 31, 2013, and December 31, 2012, or any prior period.

 

The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with GAAP for annual financial statements and in accordance with the instructions to Form 10-K and Regulation S-X promulgated by the SEC.

 

Use of Estimates (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The preparation of financial statements of each of the Registrants in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying notes. Areas in which significant estimates have been made include, but are not limited to, the accounting for nuclear decommissioning costs and other AROs, pension and other postretirement benefits, the application of purchase accounting, inventory reserves, allowance for uncollectible accounts, goodwill and asset impairments, derivative instruments, unamortized energy contracts, fixed asset depreciation, environmental costs and other loss contingencies, taxes and unbilled energy revenues. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

 

Reclassifications (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Certain prior year amounts in Exelon’s Generation’s and BGE’s Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows, Exelon’s, Generation’s, PECO’s, ComEd’s and BGE’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive IncomeCash Flows, and in Exelon’s, Generation’s, ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s Consolidated Balance Sheets have been reclassified between line items for comparative purposes.purposes and correction of prior period classification errors identified in 2013. The reclassifications did not affect any of the Registrants’ net income or cash flows from operating activities.

In 2013, Exelon and BGE corrected the presentation of interest expense related to BGE’s financing trust of $12 million and $16 million, respectively, to be presented as Interest expense to

218


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

affiliates, net on their Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income for the year ended December 31, 2012. BGE also reclassified the related Accrued expenses of $4 million to Payables to affiliates on its December 31, 2012 Balance Sheet. Similar adjustments are also reflected in Note 22 – Related Party Transactions. Exelon and Generation also corrected amounts disclosed within Note 22 – Related Party Transactions to increase Purchased power and fuel from affiliates by $114 million and to increase Payables to affiliates by $20 million. In 2013, Generation corrected the presentation of interest expense related to certain debt of $75 million to be presented as Interest expense to affiliates, net on its Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income for the year ended December 31, 2012 and within Note 22 – Related Party Transactions.

 

Accounting for the Effects of Regulation (Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE apply the authoritative guidance for accounting for certain types of regulations,regulation, which requires ComEd, PECO and BGE to record in their consolidated financial statements the effects of cost-based rate regulation for entities with regulated operations that meet the following criteria: 1) rates are established or approved by a third-party regulator; (2) rates are designed to recover the entities’ cost of providing services or products; and (3) there is a reasonable expectation

218


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

that rates are set at levels that will recover the entities’ costs from customers. Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE account for their regulated operations in accordance with regulatory and legislative guidance from the regulatory authorities having jurisdiction, principally the ICC, the PAPUC, and the MDPSC, in the cases of ComEd, PECO and BGE, respectively, under state public utility laws and the FERC under various Federal laws. Regulatory assets and liabilities are amortized and the related expense is recognized in the Consolidated Statements of Operations consistent with the recovery or refund included in customer rates. Exelon believes that it is probable that its currently recorded regulatory assets and liabilities will be recovered and settled, respectively, in future rates. However, Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE continue to evaluate their respective abilities to apply the authoritative guidance for accounting for certain types of regulation, including consideration of current events in their respective regulatory and political environments. If a separable portion of ComEd’s, PECO’s or BGE’s business was no longer able to meet the criteria discussed above, the affected entities would be required to eliminate from their consolidated financial statements the effects of regulation for that portion, which could have a material impact on their results of operations and financial positions. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.

 

The Registrants treat the impacts of a final rate order received after the balance sheet date but prior to the issuance of the financial statements as a non-recognized subsequent event, as the receipt of a final rate order is a separate and distinct event that has future impacts on the parties affected by the order.

Revenues (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Operating Revenues. Operating revenues are recorded as service is rendered or energy is delivered to customers. At the end of each month, the Registrants accrue an estimate for the unbilled amount of energy delivered or services provided to customers. ComEd records its best estimates of the distribution and transmission revenue impacts resulting from changes in rates that ComEd believes are probable of approval by the ICC and FERC in accordance with its formula rate mechanisms. BGE records its best estimate of the transmission revenue impact resulting from changes in rates that BGE believes are probable of approval by FERC in accordance with its formula rate mechanism. See NotesNote 3—Regulatory Matters and 5—Note 6—Accounts Receivable for further information.

 

RTOs and ISOs. In RTO and ISO markets that facilitate the dispatch of energy and energy-related products, the Registrants generally report sales and purchases conducted on a net hourly basis in

219


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

either revenues or purchased power on their Consolidated Statements of Operations, the classification of which depends on the net hourly activity. In addition, capacity revenue and expense classification is based on the net sale or purchase position of the Company in the different RTOs and ISOs.

 

Option Contracts, Swaps and Commodity Derivatives.Certain option contracts and swap arrangements that meet the definition of derivative instruments are recorded at fair value with subsequent changes in fair value recognized as revenue or expense. The classification of revenue or expense is based on the intent of the transaction. For example, gas transactions may be used to hedge the sale of power. This will result in the change in fair value recorded through revenue. As of the merger date, Exelon and Generation have currently elected to de-designate all of their commodity cash flow hedge positions. Premiums receivedAs ComEd receives full cost recovery for energy procurement and paid on option contracts are recognized as revenue or expense over the terms of the contracts. Since ComEd is entitled to full recovery of therelated costs of the financial swap contract with Generation in rates as settlements occur,from retail customers, ComEd records the fair value of theits energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers as well as an offsetting regulatory asset or liability on its Consolidated Balance Sheets. SeeRefer to Note 3—Regulatory Matters and Note 12—Derivative Financial Instruments for further information.

 

Proprietary Trading Activities.Exelon and Generation account for Generation’s trading activities under the provisions of the authoritative guidance for accounting for contracts involved in energy trading and risk management activities, which require energy revenues and costs related to energy trading contracts to be presented on a net basis in the income statement. Commodity derivatives used

219


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

for trading purposes are accounted for using the mark-to-market method with unrealized gains and losses recognized in operating revenues. Refer to Note 10—12—Derivative Financial Instruments for further discussion.information.

 

Income Taxes (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Deferred Federal and state income taxes are provided on all significant temporary differences between the book basis and the tax basis of assets and liabilities and for tax benefits carried forward. Investment tax credits have been deferred on the Registrants’ Consolidated Balance Sheets and are recognized in book income over the life of the related property. In accordance with applicable authoritative guidance, the Registrants account for uncertain income tax positions using a benefit recognition model with a two-step approach; a more-likely-than-not recognition criterioncriterion; and a measurement approach that measures the position as the largest amount of tax benefit that is greater than 50% likely of being realized upon ultimate settlement. If it is not more-likely-than-not that the benefit of the tax position will be sustained on its technical merits, no benefit is recorded. Uncertain tax positions that relate only to timing of when an item is included on a tax return are considered to have met the recognition threshold. The Registrants recognize accrued interest related to unrecognized tax benefits in interest expense or in other income and deductions (interest income) on their Consolidated Statements of Operations.

 

Pursuant to the IRC and relevant state taxing authorities, Exelon and its subsidiaries file consolidated or combined income tax returns for Federal and certain state jurisdictions where allowed or required. See Note 12—14—Income Taxes for further information.

 

Taxes Directly Imposed on Revenue-Producing Transactions (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE present any tax assessedcollect certain taxes from customers such as sales and gross receipts taxes, along with other taxes, surcharges, and fees that are levied by a governmental authority that isstate or local governments on the liabilitysale or distribution of gas and electricity. Some of these taxes are imposed on the customer, but paid by the Registrants, and is directlywhile others are imposed on the Registrants. Where these taxes

220


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

are imposed on the customer, such as sales taxes, they are reported on a revenue-producing transaction between a sellernet basis with no impact to the Consolidated Statements of Operations and a customerComprehensive Income. However, where these taxes are imposed on the Registrants, such as gross receipts taxes or other surcharges or fees, they are reported on a gross (included inbasis. Accordingly, revenues and costs) basis.are recognized for the taxes collected from customers along with an offsetting expense. See Note 20—23—Supplemental Financial Information for Generation’s, ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s utility taxes that are presented on a gross basis.

 

Cash and Cash Equivalents (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The Registrants consider investments purchased with an original maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents.

 

Restricted Cash and Investments (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Restricted cash and investments represent funds that are restricted to satisfy designated current liabilities. As of December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, Exelon Corporate’s restricted cash and investments primarily represented restricted funds for payment of medical, dental, vision and long-term disability benefits. Additionally, Exelon Corporate has funds restricted for merger commitments. In addition, Exelon Corporate’s investments include its direct financing lease investments. As of December 31, 2012,2013, Generation’s restricted cash and investments primarily included cash at one of its consolidated variable interest entitiesAntelope Valley required for debt service and as of 2011, primarily represented funds in escrow related to the acquisition of Shooting Star Wind Project, LLCconstruction and cash at Continental Wind required for paymentdebt service and financing of certain environmental liabilities.operation and maintenance of the underlying entities. As of December 31, 2012, Generation’s restricted cash primarily included cash at Antelope Valley required for debt service and 2011,construction. As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, ComEd’s restricted cash primarily represented cash

220


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

collateral held from suppliers associated with ComEd’s energy and REC procurement contracts. As of December 31, 2011,2013, PECO’s restricted cash primarily represented funds from the sales of assets that were subject to PECO’s mortgage indenture. As of December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, BGE’s restricted cash primarily represented funds restricted at its consolidated variable interest entity for repayment of rate stabilization bonds.

 

Restricted cash and investments not available to satisfy current liabilities are classified as noncurrent assets. As of December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, Exelon’s and Generation’s NDT funds, which are designated to satisfy future decommissioning obligations, were classified as noncurrent assets. As of December 31, 2012,2013, Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE had short-term investments in Rabbi trusts classified as noncurrent assets.

 

Allowance for Uncollectible Accounts (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The allowance for uncollectible accounts reflects the Registrants’ best estimates of losses on the accounts receivable balances. For Generation, the allowance is based on accounts receivable agings,aging, historical experience and other currently available information. ComEd and PECO estimate the allowance for uncollectible accounts on customer receivables by applying loss rates developed specifically for each company to the outstanding receivable balance by risk segment. Risk segments represent a group of customers with similar credit quality indicators that are computed based on various attributes, including delinquency of their balances and payment history. Loss rates applied to the accounts receivable balances are based on historical average charge-offs as a percentage of accounts receivable in each risk segment. BGE estimates the allowance for uncollectible accounts on customer receivables by assigning reserve factors for each aging bucket. These percentages were derived from a study of billing progression which determined the reserve factors by aging bucket. ComEd, PECO and BGE customers’ accounts are generally considered delinquent if the amount billed

221


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

is not received by the time the next bill is issued, which normally occurs on a monthly basis. ComEd, PECO and BGE customer accounts are written off consistent with approved regulatory requirements. ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s provisions for uncollectible accounts will continue to be affected by changes in volume, prices and economic conditions as well as changes in ICC, PAPUC and MDPSC regulations, respectively. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information regarding the regulatory recovery of uncollectible accounts receivable at ComEd.

 

Variable Interest Entities (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Exelon accounts for its investments in and arrangements with VIEs based on the authoritative guidance which includes the following specific requirements:

 

requires an entity to qualitatively assess whether it should consolidate a VIE based on whether the entity (1) has the power to direct matters that most significantly impact the activities of the VIE, and (2) has the obligation to absorb losses or the right to receive benefits of the VIE that could potentially be significant to the VIE,

 

requires an ongoing reconsideration of this assessment instead of only upon certain triggering events,

amends the events that trigger a reassessment of whether an entity is a VIE, and

 

requires the entity that consolidates a VIE (the primary beneficiary) to present separately on the face of its balance sheet (1) the assets of the consolidated VIE, if they can be used to only settle specific obligations of the consolidated VIE, and (2) the liabilities of a consolidated VIE for which creditors do not have recourse to the general credit of the primary beneficiary.

221


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Based on the above accounting guidance, Exelon has adopted the following policies related to variable interest entities:

 

Exelon has presented separately on its Consolidated Balance Sheets, to the extent material, the assets of its consolidated VIEs that can only be used to settle specific obligations of the consolidated VIE, and the liabilities of Exelon’s consolidated VIEs for which creditors do not have recourse to Exelon’s general credit.

 

Exelon has qualitatively assessed whether the equity holders of the entity have the power to direct matters that most significantly impact the entity. Exelon has evaluated all existing entities under the new VIE accounting requirements, both those previously considered VIEs and those considered potential VIEs. Exelon’s accounting for and disclosure about VIEs did not change materially as a result of these assessments.

 

See Note 2—Variable Interest Entities for additional information.

 

Inventories (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Inventory is recorded at the lower of weighted average cost or market. Provisions are recorded for excess and obsolete inventory.

 

Fossil Fuel.Fossil fuel inventory includes the weighted average costs of stored natural gas, propane and oil. The costs of natural gas, propane, coal and oil are generally included in inventory when purchased and charged to fuel expense when used or sold.

 

Materials and Supplies. Materials and supplies inventory generally includes the weighted average costs of transmission, distribution and generating plant materials. Materials are generally charged to inventory when purchased and expensed or capitalized to property, plant and equipment, as appropriate, when installed or used.

222


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Emission Allowances. Emission allowances are included in inventory (for emission allowances exercisable in the current year) and other deferred debits (for emission allowances that are exercisable beyond one year) and are carried at the lower of weighted average cost or market and charged to fuel expense as they are used in operations.

 

Marketable Securities (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

All marketable securities are reported at fair value. Marketable securities held in the NDT funds, certain Generation Rabbi trust investments and BGE’s Rabbi trust investments are classified as trading securities and all other securities are classified as available-for-sale securities. Realized and unrealized gains and losses, net of tax, on Generation’s NDT funds associated with the former ComEd and former PECO nuclear generating units (Regulatory Agreement Units) are included in regulatory liabilities at Exelon, ComEd and PECO and in noncurrent payables to affiliates at Generation and in noncurrent receivables from affiliates at ComEd and PECO. Realized and unrealized gains and losses, net of tax, on Generation’s NDT funds associated with the former AmerGen nuclear generating units, the Zion generating station and portions of the Peach Bottom nuclear generating units not subject to a regulatory agreement (Non-Regulatory Agreement Units) are included in earnings at Exelon and Generation. Realized and unrealized gains and losses, net of tax, on certain Generation Rabbi trust investments and BGE’s Rabbi trust investments are included in earnings at Exelon, Generation and BGE. Unrealized gains and losses, net of tax, for Generation’s, ComEd’s and PECO’s available-for-sale securities are reported in OCI. Any decline in the fair value of ComEd’s and PECO’s available-for-sale securities

below the cost basis is reviewed to determine if such decline is other-than-temporary. If the decline is

222


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

determined to be other-than-temporary, the cost basis of the available-for-sale securities is written down to fair value as a new cost basis and the amount of the write-down is included in earnings. See Note 13— 15—Asset Retirement Obligations for information regarding marketable securities held by NDT funds and Note 20—23—Supplemental Financial Information for additional information regarding ComEd’s and PECO’s regulatory assets and liabilities.

 

Property, Plant and Equipment (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Property, plant and equipment is recorded at original cost. Original cost includes labor, materials and construction overhead. When appropriate, original cost also includes capitalized interest for Generation and Exelon Corporate and AFUDC for regulated property at ComEd, PECO and BGE. The cost of repairs and maintenance, including planned major maintenance activities and minor replacements of property, is charged to maintenance expense as incurred. For constructed assets, Exelon capitalizes construction-related direct labor and material costs. ComEd, PECO and BGE also capitalized indirect construction costs including labor and related costs of departments associated with supporting construction activities.

 

Third parties reimburse ComEd, PECO and BGE for all or a portion of expenditures for certain capital projects. Such contributions in aid of construction costs (CIAC) are recorded as a reduction to Property, Plant and Equipment. DOE SGIG funds reimbursed to PECO and BGE are accounted for as CIAC.

 

For Generation, upon retirement, the cost of property is charged to accumulated depreciation in accordance with the composite method of depreciation. Upon replacement of an asset, the costs to remove the asset, net of salvage, are capitalized to gross plant when incurred as part of the cost of the newly-installed asset and recorded to depreciation expense over the life of the new asset. Removal costs, net of salvage, incurred for property that will not be replaced is charged to operating and maintenance expense as incurred.

223


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

For ComEd, PECO and BGE, upon retirement, the cost of property, net of salvage, is charged to accumulated depreciation in accordance with the composite method of depreciation. ComEd’s and BGE’s depreciation expense includes the estimated cost of dismantling and removing plant from service upon retirement, which is consistent with each utility’s regulatory recovery method. ComEd’s and BGE’s actual incurred removal costs are applied against a related regulatory liability. PECO’s removal costs are capitalized to accumulated depreciation when incurred, and recorded to depreciation expense over the life of the new asset constructed consistent with PECO’s regulatory recovery method.

 

Generation’s oil and gas exploration and production activities consist of working interests in gas producing fields. Generation accounts for these activities under the successful efforts method of accounting. Acquisition, development and exploration costs are capitalized. Costs of drilling exploratory wells are initially capitalized and later charged to expense if reserves are not discovered or deemed not to be commercially viable. Other exploratory costs are charged to expense when incurred.

 

See Note 6—7—Property, Plant and Equipment, Note 7—9—Jointly Owned Electric Utility Plant and Note 20—23—Supplemental Financial Information for additional information regarding property, plant and equipment.

223


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Nuclear Fuel (Exelon and Generation)

 

The cost of nuclear fuel is capitalized within property, plant and equipment and charged to fuel expense using the unit-of-production method. The estimated disposal cost of SNF is established per the Standard Waste Contract with the DOE and is expensed through fuel expense at one mill ($0.001) per kWh of net nuclear generation. On-site SNF storage costs are capitalized or expensed to operating and maintenance expense as incurred based upon the nature of the costs. A portion of the storage costs are being reimbursed by the DOE since a DOE (or government-owned) long-term storage facility has not been completed. See Note 22—Commitments and Contingencies for additional information regarding the SNF disposal fee.

 

Nuclear Outage Costs (Exelon and Generation)

 

Costs associated with nuclear outages, including planned major maintenance activities, are expensed to operating and maintenance expense or capitalized to property, plant and equipment (based on the nature of the activities) in the period incurred.

 

New Site Development Costs (Exelon and Generation)

 

New site development costs represent the costs incurred in the assessment design and constructiondesign of new power generating facilities. Such costs are capitalized when management considers project completion to be probable, primarily based on management’s determination that the project is economically and operationally feasible, management and/or the Exelon Boardboard of Directorsdirectors has approved the project and has committed to a plan to develop it, and Exelon and Generation have received the required regulatory approvals or management believes the receipt of required regulatory approvals is probable. Upon commencement of construction, these costs will be charged to construction work in progress. Capitalized development costs are charged to operatingOperating and maintenance expense when project completion is no longer probable. At December 31, 2013 and 2012, and 2011, Exelon’s and Generation’sthere were no material capitalized development costs totaled approximately $1.2 billion and $376 million, respectively, which arefor projects not yet under construction included in Property, Plantplant and Equipmentequipment, net on Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. Costs included in the balance as of December 31, 2012 primarily relate to the development of the Antelope Valley project along with other, smaller renewable energy projects. See Note 4—Merger and Acquisitions for additional information on Antelope Valley. Costs included in the balance as of December 31, 2011 primarily relate to land rights and other third-party costs directly associated with the development of certain Exelon Wind projects. Approximately $10 million, $4 million $2 million and $6$2 million of costs were expensed by Exelon and Generation for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012, 2011 and 2010,2011, respectively. These costs primarily related to the possible development of new renewable energy projects.

 

224


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Capitalized Software Costs (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Costs incurred during the application development stage of software projects that are internally developed or purchased for operational use are capitalized. Such capitalized amounts are amortized ratably over the expected lives of the projects when they become operational, generally not to exceed five years. Certain other capitalized software costs are being amortized over longer lives based on the expected life or pursuant to prescribed regulatory requirements. The following table presents net unamortized capitalized software costs and amortization of capitalized software costs by year:

 

Net unamortized software costs

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE   Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

December 31, 2013

  $479   $129   $101   $71   $155 

December 31, 2012

  $499   $143   $105   $63   $157    499    143    105    63    157 

December 31, 2011

   280    82    120    67    62 

Amortization of capitalized software costs

  Exelon (a)   Generation (a)   ComEd   PECO   BGE (a)   Exelon (a)   Generation (a)   ComEd   PECO   BGE (a) 

2013

  $198    $67    $52   $33    $36 

2012

  $208    $81    $56   $30    $32    208    81    56    30    32 

2011

   122    41    50    25    25    122    41    50    25    25 

2010

   104    33    41    19    26 

 

(a)Exelon activity for the year ended December 31, 2012 includes the results of Constellation and BGE for March 12, 2012—December 31, 2012. Generation activity for the year ended December 31, 2012 includes the results of Constellation for March 12, 2012—December 31, 2012. BGE activity represents the activity for the years ended December 31, 2012 2011 and 2010.2011.

 

Depreciation, Depletion and Amortization (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Except for the amortization of nuclear fuel, depreciation is generally recorded over the estimated service lives of property, plant and equipment on a straight-line basis using the composite method. ComEd’s and BGE’s depreciation includes a provision for estimated removal costs as authorized by the respective regulators. The estimated service lives for ComEd, PECO and BGE are primarily based on the average service lives from the most recent depreciation study for each respective company. The estimated service lives of the nuclear-fuel generating facilities are based on the remaining useful lives of the stations, which assume a 20-year license renewal extension of the operating licenses (to the extent that such renewal has not yet been granted) for all of Generation’s operating nuclear generating stations except for Oyster Creek. The estimated service lives of the hydroelectric generating facilities are based on the remaining useful lives of the stations, which assume a license renewal extension of the operating licenses. The estimated service lives of the fossil fuel and other renewable generating facilities are based on the remaining useful lives of the stations, which Generation periodically evaluates based on feasibility assessments taking into account economic and capital requirement considerations.

 

See Note 6—7—Property, Plant and Equipment for further information regarding depreciation.

 

Depletion of oil and gas exploration and production activities is recorded using the units-of-production method over the remaining life of the estimated proved reserves at the field level for acquisition costs and over the remaining life of proved developed reserves at the field level for development costs. The estimates for gas reserves are based on internal calculations.

 

Amortization of regulatory assets is recorded over the recovery period specified in the related legislation or regulatory agreement andagreement. When the recovery or refund period is includedless than one year, amortization is recorded to the line item in depreciation and amortization expense on ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.which the deferred cost would have originally been recorded

 

225


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

in the Registrants’ Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. With exception of income tax-related regulatory assets, when the recovery period is more than one year, the amortization is recorded to Depreciation and amortization in the Registrants’ Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. For income tax related regulatory assets, amortization is generally recorded to Income tax expense in the Registrants’ Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

 

See Note 3—Regulatory Matters and 20—Note 23—Supplemental Financial Information for additional information regarding Generation’s nuclear fuel, Generation’s ARC and the amortization of ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s regulatory assets.

 

Asset Retirement Obligations (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The authoritative guidance for accounting for AROs requires the recognition of a liability for a legal obligation to perform an asset retirement activity even though the timing and/or method of settlement may be conditional on a future event. To estimate its decommissioning obligation related to its nuclear generating stations, Generation uses a probability-weighted, discounted cash flow model which, on a unit-by-unit basis, considers multiple outcome scenarios that include significant estimates and assumptions, and are based on decommissioning cost studies, cost escalation rates, probabilistic cash flow models and discount rates. Generation generally updates its ARO annually during the third quarter, unless circumstances warrant more frequent updates, based on its review of updated cost studies and its annual evaluation of cost escalation factors and probabilities assigned to various scenarios. Decommissioning cost studies are updated, on a rotational basis, for each of Generation’s nuclear units at least every five years. The liabilities associated with Exelon’s non-nuclear AROs are adjusted on an ongoing rotational basis, at least once every five years. Changes to the recorded value of an ARO result from the passage of new laws and regulations, revisions to either the timing or amount of estimates of undiscounted cash flows, and estimates of cost escalation factors. AROs are accreted each year to reflect the time value of money for these present value obligations through a charge to operating and maintenance expense in the Consolidated Statements of Operations or, in the case of the majority of ComEd’s, PECO’s, and PECO’sBGE’s accretion, through an increase to regulatory assets. See Note 13—15—Asset Retirement Obligations for additional information.

 

Capitalized Interest and AFUDC (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

During construction, Exelon and Generation capitalize the costs of debt funds used to finance non-regulated construction projects. Capitalization of debt funds is recorded as a charge to construction work in progress and as a non-cash credit to interest expense.

 

Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE apply the authoritative guidance for accounting for certain types of regulation to calculate AFUDC, which is the cost, during the period of construction, of debt and equity funds used to finance construction projects for regulated operations. AFUDC is recorded to construction work in progress and as a non-cash credit to AFUDC that is included in interest expense for debt-related funds and other income and deductions for equity-related funds. The rates used for capitalizing AFUDC are computed under a method prescribed by regulatory authorities.

 

226


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

The following table summarizes total incurred interest, capitalized interest and credits to AFUDC by year:

 

     Exelon (a)   Generation (a)   ComEd   PECO   BGE (a) 

2013

  Total incurred interest(b)  $1,423   $411   $584   $117   $129 
  Capitalized interest   54    54    —      —      —   
  Credits to AFUDC debt and equity   35    —      16    6    13 
     Exelon (a)   Generation (a)   ComEd   PECO   BGE (a) 

2012

  Total incurred interest (b)  $1,003   $368   $310   $125   $149   Total incurred interest(b)  $1,003   $368   $310   $125   $149 
  Capitalized interest   67    67    —      —       —      Capitalized interest   67    67    —      —      —   
  Credits to AFUDC debt and equity   25    —       9    6    15   Credits to AFUDC debt and equity   25    —      9    6    15 

2011

  Total incurred interest (b)  $783   $219   $349   $138   $136   Total incurred interest(b)  $783   $219   $349   $138   $136 
  Capitalized interest   49    49    —       —       —      Capitalized interest   49    49    —      —      —   
  Credits to AFUDC debt and equity   25    —       12    13    22   Credits to AFUDC debt and equity   25    —      12    13    22 

2010

  Total incurred interest (b)  $861   $191   $388   $197   $137 
  Capitalized interest   38    38    —       —       —    
  Credits to AFUDC debt and equity   16    —       5    11    16 

 

(a)Exelon activity for the year ended December 31, 2012 includes the results of Constellation and BGE for March 12, 2012—December 31, 2012. Generation activity for the year ended December 31, 2012 includes the results of Constellation for March 12, 2012—December December��31, 2012. BGE activity represents the activity for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010.
(b)Includes interest expense to affiliates.

 

Guarantees (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The Registrants recognize, at the inception of a guarantee, a liability for the fair market value of the obligations they have undertaken in issuing the guarantee, including the ongoing obligation to perform over the term of the guarantee in the event that the specified triggering events or conditions occur.

 

The liability that is initially recognized at the inception of the guarantee is reduced as the Registrants are released from risk under the guarantee. Depending on the nature of the guarantee, the release from risk of the Registrant may be recognized only upon the expiration or settlement of the guarantee or by a systematic and rational amortization method over the term of the guarantee. See Note 19—22—Commitments and Contingencies for additional information.

 

Asset Impairments (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Long-Lived Assets.The Registrants evaluate the carrying value of their long-lived assets or asset groups, excluding goodwill, when circumstances indicate the carrying value of those assets may not be recoverable. The Registrants determine if long-lived assets and asset groups are impaired by comparing their undiscounted expected future cash flows to their carrying value. Cash flows for long-lived assets and asset groups are determined at the lowest level for which identifiable cash flows are largely independent of the cash flows of other assets and liabilities. Cash flows from Generation plant assets are generally evaluated at a regional portfolio level along with cash flows generated from Generation’s supply and risk management activities, including cash flows from contracts that are recorded as intangible contract assets and liabilities on the balance sheet. For ComEd, PECO,In certain cases generation assets may be evaluated on an individual basis where those assets are contracted on a long-term basis with a third party and BGE, the lowest leveloperations are independent of independent cash flows is determined by evaluation of several factors including the ratemaking jurisdiction in which they operate and the type of service or commodity provided. For ComEd, the lowest level of independent cash flows is transmission and distribution and, for PECO and BGE, the lowest level of independent cash flows is transmission, distribution and gas.other generation assets (typically contracted renewables).

 

An impairment loss is recorded if the undiscounted expected future cash flows are less thanImpairment may occur when the carrying amount of the long-lived asset or asset group. The amount of the impairment loss recorded is the difference between the estimated fair value of the long-lived asset or asset group andexceeds the carrying value.future undiscounted cash flows. When the undiscounted cash flow analysis indicates a long-lived asset or

 

227


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

asset group is not recoverable, the amount of the impairment loss is determined by measuring the excess of the carrying amount of the long-lived asset or asset group over its fair value.

 

Conditions that could have an adverse impact on the expected future cash flows and the fair value of the long-lived assets and asset groups include, among other factors, a deteriorating business climate, including current energy prices and market conditions, revisions to regulatory laws, or plans to dispose of a long-lived asset significantly before the end of its useful life. See Note 8—Impairment of Long-Lived Assets for additional information.

 

Goodwill. Goodwill represents the excess of the purchase price paid over the estimated fair value of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed in the acquisition of a business. Goodwill is not amortized, but is tested for impairment at least annually or on an interim basis if an event occurs or circumstances change that would more likely than not reduce the fair value of a reporting unit below its carrying value. See Note 8—10—Intangible Assets for additional information regarding Exelon’s and ComEd’s goodwill.

 

Equity Method Investments. Exelon and Generation regularly monitor and evaluate equity method investments to determine whether or not they are impaired. An impairment must beis recorded when the investment has experienced an other than temporarya decline in value.value that is not temporary in nature. Additionally, if the project in which Generation holds an investment recognizes an impairment loss, Exelon and Generation would record their proportionate share of that impairment loss and evaluate the investment for an other than temporary decline in value.

Direct Financing Lease Investments. Direct financing lease investments represent the estimated residual values of leased coal-fired plants in Georgia and Texas. Exelon reviews the estimated residual values of its direct financing lease investments and Generation continuously monitor issues that potentially could impact future profitabilityrecords an impairment charge if the review indicates an other than temporary decline in the fair value of the equity method investments.residual values below their carrying values. See Note 8—Impairment of Long-Lived Assets for additional information.

 

Derivative Financial Instruments (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

All derivatives are recognized on the balance sheet at their fair value unless they qualify for certain exceptions, including the normal purchases and normal sales exception. Additionally, derivatives that qualify and are designated for hedge accounting are classified as either hedges of the fair value of a recognized asset or liability or of an unrecognized firm commitment (fair value hedge) or hedges of a forecasted transaction or the variability of cash flows to be received or paid related to a recognized asset or liability (cash flow hedge). For fair value hedges, changes in fair values for both the derivative and the underlying hedged exposure are recognized in earnings each period. For cash flow hedges, the portion of the derivative gain or loss that is effective in offsetting the change in the cost or value of the underlying exposure is deferred in accumulated OCI and later reclassified into earnings when the underlying transaction occurs. Gains and losses from the ineffective portion of any hedge are recognized in earnings immediately. For derivative contracts intended to serve as economic hedges and that are not designated or do not qualify or are not designated for hedge accounting or the normal purchases and normal sales exception, changes in the fair value of the derivatives are recognized in earnings each period. Amounts classified in earnings are included in revenue, purchased power and fuel, interest expense or other, net on the Consolidated Statement of Operations based on the activity the transaction is economically hedging. For energy-related derivatives entered into for proprietary trading purposes, which are subject to Exelon’s Risk Management Policy, changes in the fair value of the derivatives are recognized in earnings each period. All amounts classified in earnings related to proprietary trading are

228


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

included in revenue on the Consolidated Statement of Operations. Cash inflows and outflows related to derivative instruments are included as a component of operating, investing or financing cash flows in the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows, depending on the nature of each transaction.

 

For commodity derivative commodity contracts, effective with the date of the merger with Constellation, Generation no longer utilizes the election provided for by the cash flow hedge designation and de-designated all of its existing cash flow hedges prior to the merger. Because the underlying forecasted transactions remain probable, the fair value of the effective portion of these cash flow hedges was frozen in accumulated OCI and will be reclassified to results of operations when the forecasted purchase or sale of the energy commodity occurs, or becomes probable of not occurring. None of

228


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Constellation’s designated cash flow hedges for commodity transactions prior to the merger were re-designated as cash flow hedges. The effect of this decision is that all derivatives executed to hedge economic risk for commodities are recorded at fair value with changes in fair value recognized through earnings for the combined company.

 

Revenues and expenses on derivative contracts that qualify, and are designated, as normal purchases and normal sales are recognized when the underlying physical transaction is completed. While these contracts are considered derivative financial instruments, they are not required to be recorded at fair value, but rather are recorded on an accrual basis of accounting. Normal purchases and normal sales are contracts where physical delivery is probable, quantities are expected to be used or sold in the normal course of business over a reasonable period of time and will not be financially settled. As part of Generation’s energy marketing business, Generation enters into contracts to buy and sell energy to meet the requirements of its customers. These contracts include short-term and long-term commitments to purchase and sell energy and energy-related products in the energy markets with the intent and ability to deliver or take delivery of the underlying physical commodity. If it were determinedNormal purchases and normal sales are contracts where physical delivery is probable, quantities are expected to be used or sold in the normal course of business over a reasonable period of time and will not be financially settled. Revenues and expenses on derivative contracts that a transactionqualify, and are designated, as a normal purchase or apurchases and normal sale no longer metsales are recognized when the applicable requirements, theunderlying physical transaction is completed. While these contracts are considered derivative financial instruments, they are not required to be recorded at fair value, of the related contract would bebut rather are recorded on the balance sheet and immediately recognized through earnings at Generation or offset by a regulatory asset or liability at ComEd, PECO and BGE.an accrual basis of accounting. See Note 10—12—Derivative Financial Instruments for additional information.

 

Retirement Benefits (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Exelon sponsors defined benefit pension plans and other postretirement benefit plans for essentially all Generation, ComEd, PECO, BGE and BSC employees. Effective March 12, 2012, Exelon became the sponsor of all of Constellation’s defined benefit pension and other postretirement benefit plans and defined contribution savings plans.

 

The measurement of the plan obligations and costs of providing benefits under these plans involve various factors, including numerous assumptions and accounting elections. The assumptions are reviewed annually and at any interim remeasurement of the plan obligations. The impact of assumption changes or experience different from that assumed on pension and other postretirement benefit obligations is recognized over time rather than immediately recognized in the income statement. Gains or losses in excess of the greater of ten percent of the projected benefit obligation or the MRV of plan assets are amortized over the expected average remaining service period of plan participants. See Note 14—16—Retirement Benefits for additional discussion of Exelon’s accounting for retirement benefits.

 

Equity Investment Earnings (Losses) of Unconsolidated Affiliates (Exelon and Generation)

 

Exelon and Generation include equity in earnings from equity method investments in qualifying facilities, power projects and joint ventures, including Generation’s 50.01% interest in CENG, in equity in earnings (losses) of unconsolidated affiliates. Equity in earnings (losses) of unconsolidated affiliates also includes any adjustments to amortize the difference, if any, except for goodwill and land, between

229


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

their cost in an equity method investment and the underlying equity in net assets of the investee at the date of investment. See Note 22—5—Investment in CENG and Note 25—Related Party Transactions for additional discussion of Exelon’s and Generation’s investment in CENG.

 

Exelon and Generation continuously monitor for issues that potentially could impact future profitability of these equity method investments and which could result in the recognition of an impairment loss if such investment experiences an other than temporary decline in value.

 

229


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

New Accounting Pronouncements (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Exelon has identified the following new accounting pronouncements that have been recently adopted or issued that may affect the Registrants.

Fair Value Measurement

In May 2011, the FASB issued authoritative guidance amending existing guidance for measuring fair value and for disclosing information about fair value measurements. The new guidance does not impact the fair value measurements included in the Registrant’s Consolidated Financial Statements as of December 31, 2012. The guidance was effective for the Registrants beginning with the period ended March 31, 2012 and was required to be applied prospectively. The Company updated the existing fair value disclosures during the first quarter of 2012 to comply with the new requirements for this standard. See Note 9—Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities for new disclosures.

Statement of Comprehensive Income

In June 2011, the FASB issued authoritative guidance requiring entities to present net income and other comprehensive income in a single continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate, but consecutive, statements. The new guidance does not change the components that are recognized in net income and the components that are recognized in other comprehensive income. This guidance became effective for the Registrants for periods beginning after December 15, 2011 and was required to be applied retroactively. Each of the Registrants currently presents a single statement of comprehensive income, consistent with the new guidance.

 

Presentation of Items Reclassified out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income

 

In February 2013, the FASB issued authoritative guidance requiring entities to present either in the notes or parenthetically on the face of the financial statements, reclassifications from each component of accumulated other comprehensive income and the impactedaffected income statement line items. Entities only need to disclose the impactedaffected income statement line item for components reclassified to net income in their entirety; otherwise, a cross-reference to the related note should be provided. This guidance iswas effective for the Registrants for periods beginning after December 15, 2012 and iswas required to be applied prospectively. As this guidance provides only disclosure requirements, the adoption of this standard willdid not impact the Registrants’ results of operations, cash flows or financial positions. See Note 21—Changes in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income for the new disclosures.

 

Disclosures About Offsetting Assets and Liabilities

 

In December 2011 (and amended in January 2013), the FASB issued authoritative guidance requiring entities to disclose both gross and net information about recognized derivative instruments, including bifurcated embedded derivatives, repurchase and reverse repurchase agreements, and securities borrowing or lending transactions that are offset on the balance sheet or subject to an enforceable master netting arrangement or similar agreement, irrespective of whether they are offset on the balance sheet. ThisThe guidance iswas effective for the Registrants for periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013 and iswas required to be applied retrospectively. This guidance is primarily applicable to certain derivative transactions for Exelon and Generation. As this guidance provides only disclosure requirements, the adoption of this standard willdid not impact the Registrants’ results of operations, cash flows or financial positions. See Note 12—Derivative Financial Instruments for the new disclosures.

Inclusion of the Fed Funds Effective Swap Rate as a Benchmark Interest Rate for Hedge Accounting Purposes

In July 2013, the FASB issued authoritative guidance permitting entities to designate the Fed Funds Effective Swap Rate as a U.S. benchmark interest rate for hedge accounting purposes. Prior to the issuance of this guidance, only interest rates on direct treasury obligations of the U.S. government and the LIBOR swap rate were considered benchmark interest rates in the U.S. This guidance was effective immediately and can be applied prospectively for qualifying new or redesignated hedging relationships entered into on or after July 17, 2013. Currently, the Registrants do not use the Fed Funds Effective Swap Rate as a benchmark interest rate, but may in the future.

 

230


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

The following recently issued accounting standard is not yet required to be reflected in the combined financial statements of the Registrants.

Presentation of Unrecognized Tax Benefits When Net Operating Loss Carryforwards, Similar Tax Losses or Tax Credit Carryforwards Exist

In July 2013, the FASB issued authoritative guidance requiring entities to present unrecognized tax benefits as a reduction to deferred tax assets for losses or other tax carryforwards that would be available to offset the uncertain tax positions at the reporting date. Currently, the Registrants present their unrecognized tax benefits as liabilities on a gross basis unless an unrecognized tax benefit is directly associated with a tax position taken in a tax year that results in the recognition of a net operating loss or other tax carryforward for that year. This guidance is effective for the Registrants for periods beginning after December 15, 2013 and is required to be applied prospectively, with retroactive application permitted. The Registrants will not retroactively adopt this guidance. This guidance is currently not expected to have an impact on the Registrants upon adoption with the exception of Exelon and Generation in which approximately $11 million of unrecognized tax benefits will be offset against current deferred income assets. The adoption of this standard will not impact the Registrants’ results of operations.

 

2. Variable Interest Entities (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Under the applicable authoritative guidance, a VIE is a legal entity that possesses any of the following characteristics: an insufficient amount of equity at risk to finance its activities, equity owners who do not have the power to direct the significant activities of the entity (or have voting rights that are disproportionate to their ownership interest), or equity owners who do not have the obligation to absorb expected losses or the right to receive the expected residual returns of the entity. Companies are required to consolidate a VIE if they are its primary beneficiary, which is the enterprise that has the power to direct the activities that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance.

 

As ofAt December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Registrant’sExelon, Generation, and BGE consolidated four and five VIEs or VIE groups, respectively, for which the applicable Registrant was the primary beneficiary. As of December 31, 2013, the Registrants had one VIE for which the Registrants were the primary beneficiary, however, the VIE is immaterial and was not included in the consolidated financial statements or in the consolidated VIE table below. As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Registrants had significant interests in eight and nine other VIEs for which the Registrants do not have the power to direct the entities’ activities, respectively, and accordingly, were not the primary beneficiary.

231


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Consolidated Variable Interest Entities

 

The carrying amounts and classification of the consolidated VIEs’ assets and liabilities included in the Registrants’ consolidated financial statements at December 31, 20122013 and 20112012 are as follows:

 

  December 31, 2012   December 31, 2011   December 31, 2013   December 31, 2012 
  Exelon (a)   Generation   BGE (b)   Exelon   Generation   BGE (b)   Exelon (a)   Generation   BGE   Exelon (a)(b)   Generation (b)   BGE 

Current assets

  $550   $519   $30   $15   $15   $30   $484   $446   $28   $550   $519   $30 

Noncurrent assets

   1,802    1,762    —      784    784    —      1,905    1,884    3    1,719    1,680    —   
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total assets

  $2,352   $2,281   $30   $799   $799   $30   $2,389   $2,330   $31   $2,269   $2,199   $30 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Current liabilities

  $685   $613   $71   $181   $181   $69   $566   $481   $74   $684   $612   $71 

Noncurrent liabilities

   837    532    265    77    77    332    774    562    195    775    470    265 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total liabilities

  $1,522   $1,145   $336   $258   $258   $401   $1,340   $1,043   $269   $1,459   $1,082   $336 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Includes certain purchase accounting adjustments not pushed down to the BGE standalone entity.
(b)Amounts related to BGE are presented for the standalone entityIncludes total assets of $146 million and total liabilities of $42 million as of both December 31, 2012 and 2011.related to a retail supply company that is not a consolidated VIE as of December 31, 2013. See additional information below.

 

Except as specifically noted below, the assets in the table above are restricted for settlement of the VIE obligations and the liabilities in the preceding table can only be settled using VIE resources.

 

RSB BondCo LLC.In 2007, BGE formed RSB BondCo LLC (BondCo), a special purpose bankruptcy remote limited liability 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 VIE for which it is the primary beneficiary. As a result, BGE consolidatedconsolidates BondCo.

 

BondCo’s 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 2013, 2012, 2011, and 2010,2011, BGE remitted $83 million, $85 million, $92 million, and $90$92 million, respectively, to BondCo.

231


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

BGE did not provide any additional financial support to BondCo during 2012 or 2011.2013. 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.

 

Retail Gas Group.During 2009, Constellation formed two new entities, which now are part of Generation, 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 partythird-party gas supplier. While Generation owns 100% of these entities, it has been 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 that is provided in the form of a parental guarantee. Generation is the primary beneficiary of the retail gas entity group; accordingly, Generation consolidates the retail gas entity group as a VIE.

232


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

The third partythird-party gas supply arrangement is collateralized as follows:

 

The assets of the retail gas entity group must be used to settle obligations under the third partythird-party gas supply agreement before it can make any distributions to Generation,

 

The third partythird-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, 2012,2013 Exelon provided a $75 million parental guarantee to the third partythird-party gas supplier in support of the retail gas entity group.

 

Other than credit support provided by the parental guarantee, Exelon or Generation do not have any contractual or other obligations to provide additional financial support under the collateralized third partythird-party gas supply agreement. The third partythird-party gas supply creditors do not have any recourse to Exelon’s or Generation’s general credit other than the parental guarantee.

 

Retail Power Supply Entity.Generation also consolidates a retail power supply VIE for which Constellation 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. This entity now sits under Generation Consolidated and the consolidation of this VIE did not have a material impact on Generation’s financial results or financial condition.

Solar Project Entity Group.In 2011, Constellation formed a group of solar project limited liability companies to build, own, and operate solar power facilities, which are now part of Generation. Additionally, on September 30, 2011, Generation acquired all of the equity interests in Antelope Valley Solar Ranch One (Antelope Valley) from First Solar, Inc., a 230-MW solar PV project under construction in northern Los Angeles County, California, from First Solar Inc.California. While Generation owns 100% of these entities, it has been determined that certain of the individual solar project entities are VIEs because the entities require additional subordinated financial support in the form of a parental guarantee of debt, loans from the customers in order to obtain the necessary funds for construction of the solar facilities, or the customers absorb price variability from the entities through the fixed price power and/or REC purchase agreements. Generation is the primary beneficiary of the solar project entities that qualify as VIEs because Generation controls the design, construction, and operation of the solar power facilities. Generation provides capital funding to these solar VIE entities for ongoing construction of the solar power facilities. In addition, these solar VIE entities have an aggregate amount of outstanding debt with third parties of $220$536 million, as of December 31, 2013, for which the creditors have no recourse to Generation.Generation, however there is limited recourse to Generation with respect to remaining equity contributions necessary to complete the Antelope Valley project. For additional information on these project-specific financing arrangements refer to Note 13—Debt and Credit Agreements.

 

232


Combined NotesRetail Power Supply Entity. In August 2013, Generation executed an agreement to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollarsterminate its energy supply contract with a retail power supply company that was previously a consolidated VIE. Generation did not have an ownership interest in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)the entity, but was the primary beneficiary through the energy supply contract. As a result of the termination, Generation no longer has a variable interest in the retail power supply company and ceased consolidation of the entity during the third quarter of 2013. Upon deconsolidation, there was no gain or loss recognized. The assets, liabilities, and non-controlling interest were removed from Exelon’s and Generation’s balance sheet and the change in non-controlling interest is also reflected on the Statement of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity and the Statement of Changes in Member’s Equity for Exelon and Generation, respectively.

 

Wind Project Entity Group. Generation owns and operates a number of wind project limited liability entities, the majority of which were acquired on December 9, 2010 when Generation completed the acquisition of all of the equity interests of John Deere Renewables, LLC (now known as Exelon Wind). Generation has evaluated the significant agreements and ownership structures and risks of each of its wind projects and underlying entities, and determined that certain of the entities are VIEs because either the projects have noncontrollingnon-controlling interest holders that absorb variability from the wind projects, or the customers absorb price variability from the entities through the fixed price power and/or REC purchase agreements. Generation is the primary beneficiary of the wind project entities that

233


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

qualify as VIEs because Generation controls the design, construction, and operation of the wind power facilities. While Generation owns 100% of the majority of the wind project entities, 10 of the projects have noncontrollingnon-controlling equity interests held by third parties, that currently range between 1% and 6%. Of these 10 projects, Generation’s current economic interests in nine of the projects are significantly greater than its stated contractual governance rights and all of these projects have reversionary interest provisions that provide the non-controlling interest holder with a purchase option, certain of which are considered bargain purchase prices, which, if exercised, transfers ownership of the projects to the non-controlling interest holder upon either the passage of time or the achievement of targeted financial returns. The ownership agreements with the noncontrollingnon-controlling interests state that Generation is to provide financial support to the projects in proportion to its current economic interests in the projects that currently range between 94% and 99%. However, no additional support to these projects beyond what was contractually required has been provided during 2012.2013. As of December 31, 2012,2013, the carrying amount of the assets and liabilities that are consolidated as a result of Generation being the primary beneficiary of the wind VIE entities primarily relate to the wind generating assets, PPA intangible assets and working capital amounts.

As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, ComEd and PECO did not have any consolidated VIEs.

 

Unconsolidated Variable Interest Entities

 

Exelon’s and Generation’s variable interests in unconsolidated VIEs generally include three transaction types: (1) equity method investments, (2) energy purchase and sale contracts, and (3) fuel purchase commitments. For the equity method investments, the carrying amount of the investments is reflected on their Consolidated Balance Sheets in investmentsInvestments in affiliates. For the energy purchase and sale contracts and the fuel purchase commitments (commercial agreements), the carrying amount of assets and liabilities in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets that relate to their involvement with the VIEs are predominately related to working capital accounts and generally represent the amounts owed by, or owed to, Exelon and Generation for the deliveries associated with the current billing cycles under the commercial agreements. Further, Exelon and Generation have not provided or guaranteed thematerial debt or equity support, or provided liquidity arrangements or performance guarantees or other commitments associated with these commercial agreements.

 

233As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, Exelon and Generation had significant unconsolidated variable interests in eight and nine, respectively, VIEs for which they were not the primary beneficiary; including certain equity investments and certain commercial agreements. The change in the number of unconsolidated variable interests is driven by the completion of certain obligations which cause the entities to no longer be unconsolidated variable interests offset by the addition of an equity investment in a residential solar provider. The following tables present summary information about the significant unconsolidated VIE entities:

December 31, 2013

  Commercial
Agreement

VIEs
   Equity
Investment
VIEs
   Total 

Total assets(a)

  $128   $332   $460 

Total liabilities(a)

   17    123    140 

Registrants’ ownership interest(a)

   —      86    86 

Other ownership interests(a)

   111    123    234 

Registrants’ maximum exposure to loss:

      

Carrying amount of equity investments

   7    67    74 

Contract intangible asset

   9    —      9 

Debt and payment guarantees

   —      5    5 

Net assets pledged for Zion Station decommissioning(b)

   44    —      44 

234


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements���Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

As of December 31, 2012, Exelon and Generation did have significant variable interests in and exposure to loss associated with nine VIEs for which they were not the primary beneficiary; including certain equity method investments and certain commercial agreements. As of December 31, 2011, Exelon and Generation had a significant variable interest in and exposure to loss associated with one VIE for which they were not the primary beneficiary. The following tables present summary information about the significant unconsolidated VIE entities for which Exelon and Generation have exposure to loss:

December 31, 2012

  Commercial
Agreement
VIEs
   Equity
Method
Investment
VIEs
   Total   Commercial
Agreement
VIEs
   Equity
Investment
VIEs
   Total 

Total assets(a)

  $386   $354   $740   $386   $354   $740 

Total liabilities(a)

   219    114    333    219    114    333 

Registrants’ ownership interest(a)

   —       97    97    —      97    97 

Other ownership interests(a)

   167    143    310    167    143    310 

Registrants’ maximum exposure to loss:

            

Letters of credit

   5    —       5    5    —      5 

Carrying amount of equity method investments

   —       77    77 

Carrying amount of equity investments

   —      77    77 

Contract intangible asset

   8    —       8    8    —      8 

Debt and payment guarantees

   —       5    5    —      5    5 

Net assets pledged for Zion Station decommissioning(b)

   50     —       50     50    —      50 

December 31, 2011

  Commercial
Agreement
VIEs
   Equity
Method
Investment
VIEs
   Total 

Registrants’ maximum exposure to loss:

      

Net assets pledged for Zion Station decommissioning(b)

   43     —       43  

 

(a)These items represent amounts on the unconsolidated VIE balance sheets, not on Exelon’s or Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. These items are included to provide information regarding the relative size of the unconsolidated VIEs.
(b)These items represent amounts on Exelon’s and Generation’s and Exelon’s balance sheetConsolidated Balance Sheets related to the asset sale agreement with ZionSolutions, LLC. The net assets pledged for Zion Station decommissioning includes gross pledged assets of $614$458 million and $734$614 million as of December 31, 20122013 and December 31, 2011,2012, respectively; offset by payables to ZionSolutions LLC of $564$414 million and $691$564 million as of December 31, 20122013 and December 31, 2011,2012, respectively. These items are included to provide information regarding the relative size of the ZionSolutions LLC unconsolidated VIE. See Note 13—15—Asset Retirement Obligations for further discussion.

 

For each unconsolidated VIE, Exelon and Generation assess the risk of a loss equal to their maximum exposure to be remote and, accordingly Exelon and Generation 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 materially affect the fair value or risk of their variable interests in these variable interest entities.

 

Energy Purchase and Sale Agreements. In March 2005, Constellation, to which Generation is now a successor, closed a transaction in which Generation assumed from a counterparty two power sales contracts with previously existing VIEs. 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. Under the power sales contracts, Generation sellssold power to the VIEs which, in turn, sellsold that power to an electric distribution utility through 2013. In connection with this transaction, a third partythird-party acquired the equity of the VIEs and Generation loaned that party a portion of the purchase price. If the electric distribution utility were to default under its obligation to buy power from the VIEs, the equity holder

234


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

could transfer its equity interests to Generation in lieu of repaying the loan. In this event, Generation would have the right to seek recovery of its losses from the electric distribution utility. As a result, Generation has concluded that consolidation iswas not required. During 2013, the third-party repaid their obligations of the loan with Generation which caused the entities to no longer be unconsolidated VIEs.

 

ZionSolutions. Generation has an asset sale agreement with EnergySolutions, Inc. and certain of its subsidiaries, including ZionSolutions, LLC (ZionSolutions), which is further discussed in Note 13— 15—Asset Retirement Obligations. Under this agreement, ZionSolutions can put the assets and liabilities back to Generation when decommissioning is complete. Generation has evaluated this agreement and determined that, through the put option, it has a variable interest in ZionSolutions but is not the primary beneficiary. As a result, Generation has concluded that consolidation is not required. Other than the asset sale agreement, Exelon or Generation do not have any contractual or other obligations to provide additional financial support and ZionSolutions’ creditors do not have any recourse to Exelon’s or Generation’s general credit.

235


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Fuel Purchase Commitments.Generation’s customer supply operations include the physical delivery and marketing of power obtained through its generating capacity, and long-, intermediate-andintermediate- and short-term contracts. Generation also has contracts to purchase fuel supplies for nuclear and fossil generation. These contracts and Generation’s membership in NEIL are discussed in further detail in Note 19—22—Commitments and Contingencies. Generation has evaluated these contracts and its membership with NEIL and determined that it either has no variable interest in an entity or, where Generation does have a variable interest in an entity, the variable interest is not significant and it is not the primary beneficiary; therefore, consolidation is not required.

 

For contracts where Generation has a variable interest, the level of variability being absorbed through the contracts is not considered significant because of the small proportion of the entities’ activities encompassed by the contracts with Generation. Further, Generation has considered which interest holder has the power to direct the activities that most significantly affect the economic performance of the VIE and thus is considered the primary beneficiary and is required to consolidate the entity. The primary beneficiary must also have exposure to significant losses or the right to receive significant benefits from the VIE. In general, the most significant activity of the VIEs is the operation and maintenance of the facilities. Facilities represent power plants, sources of uranium and fossil fuels, or plants used in the uranium conversion, enrichment and fabrication process. Generation does not have control over the operation and maintenance of the facilities considered VIEs, and it does not bear operational risk of the facilities. Furthermore, Generation has no debt or equity investments in the entities and Generation does not provide any other financial support through liquidity arrangements, guarantees or other commitments other than purchase commitments described in Note 19—22—Commitments and Contingencies. Upon consideration of these factors, Generation does not consider itself to have significant variable interests in these entities or be the primary beneficiary of these VIEs and, accordingly, has determined that consolidation is not required.

 

Investment in Energy Development Projects.Generation has several equity investments in energy generating facilities. Generation has evaluated the significant agreements, ownership structures and risks of each of its equity investments, and determined that certain of the entities are VIEs because Generation guarantees the debt of the entity, provides equity support, or provides operating services to the entity. Generation has reviewed the entities and has determined that Generation is not the primary beneficiary of the entities that qualify as VIEs because Generation does not have the power to direct the activities of the VIEs that most significantly impact the VIEs economic performance.

Residential Solar Provider.Generation has an equity investment in a residential solar provider. Generation has evaluated the significant agreements, ownership structure and risks of the entity, and determined that the entity is a VIE because it does not have sufficient equity at risk to fund its operations. Generation has determined that its equity investment in the entity is a variable interest. However, Generation has concluded that we are not the primary beneficiary because Generation does not have the power to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance. Exelon or Generation do not have any contractual or other obligations to provide additional financial support and the residential solar provider’s creditors do not have any recourse to Exelon’s or Generation’s general credit.

ComEd, PECO and BGE

 

ComEd’s, PECO’s, and BGE’s retail operations frequently include the purchase of electricity and RECs through procurement contracts of varying durations. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters and Note 19—22—Commitments and Contingencies for additional information on these contracts. ComEd, PECO

236


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

and BGE have evaluated these types of contracts and have historically determined that either there is no significant variable interest in the entity, or where either ComEd, PECO or BGE does have a significant variable interest in a VIE, ComEd, PECO or BGE would not be the primary beneficiary and, therefore, consolidation would not be required.

 

For contracts where ComEd, PECO or BGE is considered to have a significant variable interest, consideration is given to which interest holder has the power to direct the activities that most

235


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

significantly affect the economic performance of the VIE. In general, the most significant activity of the VIEs is the operation and maintenance of their production or procurement processes related to electricity, RECs, AECs or natural gas. ComEd, PECO and BGE do not have control over the operation and maintenance of the entities and they do not bear operational risk related to the associated activities. Generally, the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities in ComEd’s, PECO’s, and BGE’s Consolidated Balance Sheets that relate to their involvement with VIEs generallyas a result of commercial arrangements represent the amounts owed by the utilities for the purchases associated with the current billing cycles under the contracts. As of December 31, 2012,2013, the total amount of accounts payable owed by the utilities under agreements with these VIEs was not material. In addition, variability from these contracts is mitigated by the fact that the utilities are able to recover costs incurred under purchase agreements through customer rates. Furthermore, ComEd, PECO and BGE do not have any debt or equity investments in anythese VIEs and do not provide any other financial support through liquidity arrangements, guarantees or other commitments other than purchase commitments described in Note 19—22—Commitments and Contingencies. Accordingly, none of ComEd, PECO or BGE considers itself to be the primary beneficiary of any VIEs as a result of commercial arrangements.

 

PECO

PETT, aThe financing trust was created in 1998 byof ComEd, ComEd Financing III, the financing trusts of PECO, to purchasePECO Trust III and own intangible transition property (ITP)PECO Trust IV, and to issue transition bonds to securitize $5 billionthe financing trust of PECO’s stranded cost recovery authorized by the PAPUC pursuant to the Competition Act. PETT wasBGE, BGE Capital Trust II are not consolidated in Exelon’s, ComEd’s, PECO’s or BGE’s financial statements. These financing trusts were created to issue mandatorily redeemable trust preferred securities. ComEd, PECO, and PECO’s financial statements on January 1, 2010 pursuant to authoritative guidance relating to the consolidation of VIEs that became effective on that date. Under the guidance, PECOBGE have concluded that it was the primary beneficiary of PETT due to PECO’s involvement in the design of PETT, its role as servicer, and its right to dissolve PETT and receive any of its remaining assets following retirement of the transition bonds and payment of PETT’s other expenses. The consolidation of PETT didthey do not have a significant impact on PECO’s resultsvariable interest in ComEd Financing III, PECO Trust III, PECO Trust IV or BGE Capital Trust II as each Registrant financed its equity interest in the financing trusts through the issuance of operations or statement of cash flows. Upon retirement of the outstanding transition bonds on September 1, 2010, the remaining cash balance was remitted to PECO,subordinated debt and, PETT was dissolved on September 20, 2010.therefore, has no equity at risk. See Note 13—Debt and Credit Agreements for additional information.

 

3. Regulatory Matters (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The following matters below discuss the current status of material regulatory and legislative proceedings of the Registrants.

 

Illinois Regulatory Matters

 

Energy Infrastructure Modernization Act (Exelon and ComEd).

 

Background

 

Since 2011, ComEd’s distribution rates are established through a performance-based rate formula, pursuant to EIMA. EIMA also provides a structure for substantial capital investment by utilities over a ten-year period to modernize Illinois’ electric utility infrastructure. EIMA allowsParticipating utilities are required to file an annual update to the recovery of costs by a utility through a pre-established performance-based formula rate tariff approved byon or before May 1, with resulting rates effective in January of the ICC.following year. This annual formula rate update is based on prior year actual costs and current year projected capital additions. The update also reconciles any differences between the revenue requirement(s) in effect for the prior year and actual costs incurred for that year. Throughout each year, ComEd made an initial contribution of $15 million (recognized as expense in 2011) to a new Sciencerecords regulatory assets or regulatory liabilities and Technology Innovation Trust fund on July 31, 2012, and will make recurring annual contributions of $4 million, the first of which was made on December 31, 2012, which will be used for customer education for as long as the AMI Deployment Plan remains in effect. In addition, ComEd will contribute $10 million per year for five years, as long as ComEd is subject to EIMA, to fund customer assistance programs for low-income customers, which amounts will not be recoverable through rates. These contributions also began in 2012.

 

236237


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

corresponding increases or decreases to operating revenues for any differences between the revenue requirement(s) in effect and ComEd’s best estimate of the revenue requirement expected to be approved by the ICC for that year’s reconciliation. As of December 31, 2013, and December 31, 2012, ComEd had a net regulatory asset associated with the distribution formula rate of $463 million and $209 million, respectively.

 

Formula Rate Tariff

 

On November 8, 2011, ComEd filed its initial formula rate tariff and associated testimony based on 2010 costs and 2011 plant additions. The primary purpose of that proceeding was to establish the formula rate under which rates will be calculated going-forward, and the initial rates, which went into effect in late June 2012. On May 29, 2012, the ICC issued an Order (May Order) in that proceeding. The May Order reduced the annual revenue requirement by $168 million, or approximately $110 million more than the proposed reduction by ComEd. Of this incremental revenue requirement reduction, approximately $50 million reflected the ICC’s determination that certain costs should be recovered through alternative rate recovery tariffs available to ComEd or will be reflected in a subsequent annual reconciliation, thereby primarily delaying the timing of cash flows. The incremental revenue reduction also reflected a $35 million reduction for the disallowance of return on ComEd’s pension asset, a $10 million reduction for incentive compensation related adjustments, and $15 million of reductions for various adjustments for cash working capital, operating reserves, and other technical items. In the second quarter of 2012, ComEd recorded a total reduction ofdecrease in revenue of approximately $100 million pre-tax to decrease the regulatory asset for 2011 and for the first three months of 2012 consistent with the terms of the May Order.

 

On June 22, 2012, the ICC granted an expedited rehearing on somethree of the issues raised bydecided in the May Order, including ComEd’s pension asset recovery.Order. On October 3, 2012, the ICC issued its final order (Rehearing Order) in that rehearing, adopting ComEd’s position on the return on its pension asset, resulting in an increase in ComEd’sthe annual revenue requirement. InFor the two other areas,issues, the ICC ruled against ComEd by reaffirming use of an average rather than year-end rate base in ComEd’sthe annual reconciliation revenue requirement; and amending its prior order to provide a short-term debt rate as the appropriate interest rate to apply to under/over recoveries of incurred costs. ComEd filed an appeal of the May Order and the Rehearing Order in court on October 4, 2012.annual reconciliation. In the fourth quarter of 2012, ComEd recorded an increase in revenue of approximately $135 million pre-tax consistent with the terms of the Rehearing Order, of which $75 million pre-tax reflects the reinstatement of the 2011 return on pension asset for 2011 and $60 million pre-tax reflects the return on pension asset costs for 2012. New rates reflecting the impacts of the Rehearing Order went into effect in November 2012. ComEd has filed an appeal with the Illinois Appellate Court. ComEd cannot predict the results of any such appeals.

In March 2013, the Illinois legislature passed Senate Bill 9 to clarify the intent of EIMA on the three issues decided in the Rehearing Order: an allowed return on ComEd’s pension asset; the use of year-end rather than average rate base and capital structure in the annual reconciliation; and the use of ComEd’s weighted average cost of capital interest rate rather than a short-term debt rate to apply to the annual reconciliation. On May 22, 2013, Senate Bill 9 became effective after the Illinois legislature overrode the Governor’s veto of that Bill. On June 5, 2013, the ICC approved ComEd’s updated distribution formula rate structure to reflect the impacts of Senate Bill 9.

In October 2013, the ICC opened an investigation (the Investigation), in response to a complaint filed by the Illinois Attorney General, to change the formula rate structure by requesting three changes: the elimination of the income tax gross-up on the weighted average cost of capital used to calculate interest on the annual reconciliation balance, the netting of associated accumulated deferred income taxes against the annual reconciliation balance in calculating interest, and the use of average rather than year-end rate base for determining any ROE collar adjustment. On November 26, 2013, the ICC

238


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

issued its final order in the Investigation, rejecting two of the proposed changes but accepting the proposed change to eliminate the income tax gross-up on the weighted average cost of capital used to calculate interest on the annual reconciliation balance. The accepted change became effective in January 2014, and is estimated to reduce ComEd’s 2014 revenue by approximately $8 million. This change had no financial statement impact on ComEd in 2013. ComEd and intervenors requested rehearing, however all rehearing requests were denied by the ICC. ComEd and intervenors have filed appeals with the Illinois Appellate Court. ComEd cannot predict the results of any such appeals.

 

Annual Reconciliation

2012 Filing. On April 30, 2012, ComEd filed its annual distribution formula rate. On December 20, 2012, the ICC, issued its final order, which increased the revenue requirement by $73 million, in conformity with the formula rate structure provided in the May 2012 and Rehearing Orders. The $73 million reflected an increase of $80 million for the initial revenue requirement for 2012 and a decrease of $7 million for the annual reconciliation for 2011. The rate increase was set using an allowed return on capital of 7.54% (inclusive of an allowed return on common equity of 9.81%). The rates took effect in January 2013. ComEd and intervenors requested a rehearing on specific issues, which was denied by the ICC. ComEd and intervenors also filed appeals with the Illinois Appellate Court. ComEd cannot predict the results of any such appeals.

On May 30, 2013, ComEd updated its revenue requirement allowed in the December 2012 Order to reflect the impacts of Senate Bill 9, which resulted in a reduction to the current revenue requirement in effect of $14 million. The rates took effect in July 2013.

2013 Filing. On April 29, 2013, ComEd filed its annual distribution formula rate, which was updated in August 2013, to request a total increase to the revenue requirement of $353 million of which approximately $42 million related to Senate Bill 9. On December 19, 2013, the ICC issued its final order which increased the revenue requirement by $341 million, reflecting an increase of $160 million for the initial revenue requirement for 2013 and an increase of $181 million for the annual reconciliation for 2012. The rate increase was set using an allowed return on capital of 6.94% (inclusive of an allowed return on common equity of 8.72%). The rates took effect in January 2014. ComEd requested a rehearing on specific issues, which was denied by the ICC. ComEd also filed an appeal. ComEd cannot predict the results of any such appeals.

Expenditures and Capital Investment

As part of the enactment of EIMA legislation ComEd made an initial contribution of $15 million (recognized as expense in 2011) to a new Science and Technology Innovation Trust fund on July 31, 2012, and will make recurring annual contributions of $4 million, the first of which was made on December 31, 2012, which will be used for customer education for as long as the AMI Deployment Plan remains in effect. In addition, ComEd will contribute $10 million per year for five years, as long as ComEd is subject to EIMA, to fund customer assistance programs for low-income customers, which will not be recoverable through rates. These contributions began in 2012.

 

On January 6, 2012, ComEd filed its Infrastructure Investment Plan with the ICC. Under that plan, ComEd will invest approximately $2.6 billion over ten years to modernize and storm-harden its distribution system and to implement smart grid technology. These investments will be incremental to ComEd’s historical level of capital expenditures. The filing with the ICC specifically included ComEd’s $233 million investment plan for 2012. On April 23, 2012, ComEd filed its initial AMI Deployment Plan with the ICC. OnICC, which was approved by the ICC on June 22, 2012, the ICC approved the AMI Deployment Plan with certain modifications. However, as a result of the Rehearing Order above, ComEd is delaying certain elements of the AMI Deployment Plan, including the installation of additional smart meters. ComEd outlined the new deployment schedule within testimony provided in the AMI Plan Rehearing on October 3, 2012. Asand filed a result of the Rehearing Order, ComEd has deferred approximately $50 million of the 2012 AMI Deployment Plan and $15 million of 2012 planned capital investment to future years. On December 5, 2012, the ICC approved ComEd’s revised AMI deployment plan. UnderThe deployment plan provides for the AMI deployment schedule, ComEd will be takinginstallation of 4 million electric smart meters, out of service prior towhich more than 60,000 meters were installed by the end of their original service lives, which resulted in recording accelerated depreciation for the remaining carrying value of the meters. The Order provides for full recovery of the cost of these early retired meters and, therefore, ComEd recorded a regulatory asset of $7 million for the accelerated depreciation of these meters in the fourth quarter of 2012.2013.

 

237239


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Annual Reconciliation

ComEd will file an annual reconciliation of the revenue requirement in effect in a given year to reflect actual costs that the ICC determines are prudently and reasonably incurred for such year. ComEd made its initial 2011 reconciliation filing on April 30, 2012, which reconciled the 2011 revenue requirement in effect to ComEd’s actual 2011 costs incurred. The ICC’s final order, issued on December 20, 2012, increased the revenue requirement by $73 million, in conformity with the formula rate structure provided in the May and Rehearing Orders. The rates took effect in January 2013. A similar reconciliation with respect to 2012 will be filed in second quarter 2013 with any adjustments to rates taking effect in January 2014. As of December 31, 2012, and December 31, 2011, ComEd recorded a net regulatory asset of $209 million and $84 million, respectively, reflecting ComEd’s best estimate of the probable increase in distribution rates expected to be approved by the ICC to provide for recovery of prudent and reasonable costs incurred, consistent with the ICC’s approved distribution formula rate structure per the May and Rehearing Orders.

 

Appeal of 2007 Illinois Electric Distribution Rate Case (Exelon and ComEd).The ICC issued an order in ComEd’s 2007 electric distribution rate case (2007 Rate Case) approving a $274 million increase in ComEd’s annual delivery services revenue requirement, which became effective in September 2008. In the order, the ICC authorized a 10.3% rate of return on common equity. ComEd and several other parties filed appeals of the rate order with the Illinois Appellate Court (Court). The Court issued a decision on September 30, 2010, ruling against ComEd on the treatment of post-test year accumulated depreciation and the recovery of system modernization costs via a rider (Rider SMP).

 

The Courtcourt held the ICC abused its discretion in not reducing ComEd’s rate base to account for an additional 18 months of accumulated depreciation while including post-test year pro forma plant additions through that period (the same position ComEd took in its 2010 electric distribution rate case (2010 Rate Case) discussed below).period. ComEd continued to bill rates as established under the ICC’s order in the 2007 Rate Case until June 1, 2011 when the rates set in the 2010 electric distribution rate case (2010 Rate CaseCase) became effective. In August 2011, ComEd filed testimony in the remand proceeding that no refunds should be required. Thesubsequent ICC subsequently initiated a proceeding on remand. On February 23, 2012,proceedings, the ICC issued an order on remand in the proceeding requiring ComEd to provide a refund of approximately $37 million to customers related to the treatment of post-test year accumulated depreciation issue. On March 26, 2012, ComEd filed a notice of appeal with the Court.

 

However, on September 27, 2013 the Court ruled against ComEd has recognizedon the accumulated depreciation issue and affirmed that ComEd owes a refund to customers of $37 million. As of December 31, 2013, and December 31, 2012, ComEd was fully reserved for accounting purposes its best estimate of anythis liability. ComEd will not seek rehearing or appeal on this matter and is working with the ICC on the process and timing for a refund obligation, as discussed above.to customers.

 

Advanced Metering Program Proceeding (Exelon and ComEd)ComEd’s 2007 Rate Case filing included a system modernization rider, which permitted investments in AMI to study the costs and benefits and to develop the cost estimate of full system-wide implementation. In October 2009, the ICC approved a modified version of ComEd’s system modernization rider proposed in the 2007 Rate Case, Rider AMP (Advanced Metering Program). ComEd collected approximately $24 million under Rider AMP through December 31, 2011.2013. Several other parties, including the Illinois Attorney General, appealed the ICC’s order on Rider AMP. In ComEd’s 2010 electric distribution rate case, the ICC approved ComEd’s transfer of other costs from recovery under Rider AMP to recovery through electric distribution rates. On March 19, 2012, the Court reversed the ICC’s approval of Rider AMP, concluding that the ICC’s October 2009 approval of the rider constituted single-issue ratemaking. ComEd filed a Petition for Leave to Appeal to the Illinois Supreme Court on April 23, 2012. The Illinois Supreme Court2012, which was denied the Petition onin September 26, 2012, and returned the matter was returned to the ICC to calculate a refund amount. ComEd believes any refund obligation associated with Rider AMP should be prospective from no earlier than the date of the Appellate Court’s order on March 19, 2012,2012. As a result, ComEd recorded a regulatory liability of approximately $0.4 million at December 31, 2013, which represents the amounts collected from customers since March 19, 2012. ComEd cannot predict the ultimate outcome of the ICC proceeding and should not have a material impact on ComEd and Exelon.therefore, actual refunds may differ from the estimated accrual recorded at December 31, 2013.

238


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

2010 Illinois Electric Distribution Rate Case (Exelon and ComEd). On June 30, 2010, ComEd requested ICC approval for an increase of $396 million to its annual delivery services revenue requirement. This request was subsequently reduced to $343 million to account for changes in tax law, corrections, acceptance of limited adjustments proposed by certain parties and the amounts expected to be recovered in the AMI pilot program tariff discussed above. The request to increase the annual revenue requirement was to allow ComEd to recover the costs of substantial investments made since its last rate filing in 2007. The requested increase also reflected increased costs, most notably pension and OPEB, since ComEd’s rates were last determined. The original requested rate of return on common equity was 11.5%. In addition, ComEd requested future recovery of certain amounts that were previously recorded as expense that would allow ComEd to recognize a one-time benefit of up to $40 million (pre-tax). The requested increase also included $22 million for increased uncollectible accounts expense, which would increase the threshold for determining over/under recoveries under ComEd’s uncollectible accounts tariff.

On May 24, 2011, the ICC issued an order in ComEd’s 2010 rate case,Rate Case, which became effective on June 1, 2011. The order approved a $143 million increase to ComEd’s annual delivery services revenue requirement and a 10.5% rate of return on common equity. ComEd originally requested a $396 million increase, although it was subsequently reduced to $343 million to account for various adjustments. As expected, the ICC followed the Court’s positionruling on ComEd’s 2007 Rate Case on the post-test year accumulated depreciation issue. The order allowed ComEd to establish or reestablish a net amount of approximately $40

240


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

$40 million of previously expensed plant balances or new regulatory assets, which is reflected as a reduction in operating and maintenance expense and income tax expense for the year ended December 31, 2012.in 2011. The order also affirmed the current regulatory asset for severance costs, which was challenged by an intervener in the 2010 Rate Case. The order has beenwas appealed to the Court by several parties.parties on a number of issues. On May 16, 2013, the Court dismissed as moot the appeals of the ICC’s order in the 2010 Rate Case as ComEd cannot predict the result of these appeals.now recovers distribution costs under EIMA through a pre-established formula rate tariff.

 

Utility Consolidated Billing and Purchase of Receivables (Exelon and ComEd). In November 2008, the Illinois Public Utilities Act was amended to require ComEd to file tariffs establishing Utility Consolidated Billing and Purchase of Receivables services. On December 15, 2010, the ICC approved ComEd’s tariff offering Purchase of Receivables with Consolidated Billing (PORCB) services for RES. Since the first quarter of 2011, ComEd has been required to buy certain RES receivables, primarily residential and small commercial and industrial customers, at the option of the RES, for electric supply service and then include those amounts on ComEd’s bill to customers. Receivables are purchased at a discount to compensate ComEd for uncollectible accounts. ComEd produces consolidated bills for the aforementioned retail customers reflecting charges for electric delivery service and purchased receivables. As of December 31, 2012,2013, the balance of purchased accounts receivable associated with PORCB was $55$105 million. Under the applicable tariff, ComEd recovers from RES and customers the costs for implementing and operating the program. A number of municipalities, including the City of Chicago have announced their intention to switchswitched to RES electric supply as a result of referenda voted on in November 2012. The City of Chicago switching will occur in the first quarter of 2013. The other municipalities are expected to switch during the first half of 2013.supply. As a result, ComEd expectsexperienced a significant increase in the amount of RES receivables it will be required to purchasepurchased in 2013.

Recovery of Uncollectible Accounts (Exelon and ComEd).On February 2, 2010, the ICC issued an order adopting tariffs for ComEd to recover from or refund to customers the difference between the utility’s annual uncollectible accounts expense and amounts collected in rates annually. As a result of the ICC order, ComEd recorded a regulatory asset of $70 million and an offsetting reduction in operating and maintenance expense in the first quarter of 2010 for the cumulative under-collections in 2008 and 2009. In addition, ComEd recorded a one-time charge of $10 million to operating and maintenance expense in the first quarter of 2010 for a contribution to the Supplemental Low-Income Energy Assistance Fund, which is used to assist low-income residential customers.

239


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Illinois Procurement Proceedings (Exelon, Generation and ComEd). ComEd is permitted to recover its electricity procurement costs from retail customers without mark-up. Since June 2009, underas a result of the Illinois Settlement Legislation, the IPA designs, and the ICC approves, an electricity supply portfolio for ComEd and the IPA administers a competitive process under which ComEd procures its electricity supply from various suppliers, including Generation. In order to fulfill a requirement of the Illinois Settlement Legislation, ComEd hedged the price of a significant portion of energy purchased in the spot market with a five-year variable-to-fixed financial swap contract with Generation that expires on May 31, 2013. On February 17, 2012,December 21, 2011, the ICC approved the IPA’s procurement plan covering the period June 2012 through May 2017. As of December 31, 2012, ComEd had completed the ICC-approved procurement process for its energy requirements through May 2013 as well as a portion of its requirements for each of the procurement periods ending in May 2014 and May 2015.

EIMA discussed above contains a provision for the IPA to conduct procurement events for energy and REC requirements for the June 2013 through December 2017 period. The procurement events mandated under EIMA were completed during February 2012.

 

The Illinois Settlement Legislation discussed below requires ComEd to purchase an increasing percentage of itsthe electricity requirementsit purchases for customer deliveries from renewable energy resources. On December 17, 2010,Purchases by customers of electricity from competitive generation suppliers, whether as a result of the customers’ own actions or as a result of municipal aggregation, are not included in this calculation and have the effect of reducing ComEd’s purchase obligation. ComEd entered into several 20-year contracts with several unaffiliated suppliers in December 2010 regarding the procurement of long-term renewable energy and associated RECs. The long-term renewables purchased will count towards satisfying ComEd’s obligationRECs in order to meet its obligations under the state’s RPS andRPS. Under the Illinois Settlement Legislation, all associated costs will beare recoverable from customers.

As a result of reduced ComEd load forecasts, purchases under the existing long-term contracts for energy and the associated RECs were reduced on a pro-rata basis under the terms of those contracts for the June 2013—May 2014 period to keep the purchases under the statutory rate impact cap. The curtailment’s impact on ComEd’s financial position and cash flows was immaterial.

On December 31, 2012,18, 2013, the ICC approved the IPA’s 2014-2019 procurement plan. The plan provides for two separate energy procurements during 2014 to address potential fluctuations in energy demand due to customer switching between ComEd has completedand competitive electric generation suppliers. The Commission also approved the ICC-approved procurement processIPA’s expansion of energy efficiency programs for both ComEd and Ameren. The ICC did not require the acquisition of additional renewable resources in 2014-2015 due to insufficient available funds to procure those resources. Further, the ICC again approved a reduction of purchases under the existing long-term contracts for energy and the associated RECs through on a pro-rata basis under the terms of those contracts for the June 2014—May 2013.2015 period to keep the purchases under the statutory rate impact cap; however the amount of the reduction will not be finalized and approved by the ICC until March 2014. The curtailment’s impact on ComEd’s financial position and

241


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

cash flows is expected to be immaterial. See Note 10—12—Derivative Financial Instruments for additional information regarding ComEd’s financial swap contract with Generation, which expired in May 2013, and long-term renewable energy contracts.

 

On December 19, 2012,During 2013, the ICC issued an order directingapproved, and directed ComEd and Ameren (the Utilities) to enter into 20-year sourcing agreements with FutureGen Industrial Alliance, Inc (FutureGen), under which FutureGen will retrofit and repower an existing plant in Morgan County, Illinois to a 166 MW near zero emissions coal-fueled generation plant, with an assumed commercial operation date in 2017. The proposed term of the agreement is 20 years. The development was approved by the DOE on February 4, 2013. The sourcing agreement is currently being drafted and approved under a separate proceeding, with a final order expected in 2013. The sourcing agreement is expected to stipulateprovides that the Utilities will pay (or receive)FutureGen’s contract prices, which are set annually pursuant to a formula rate. The contract prices are based on the difference between FutureGen’s contract pricesthe costs of the facility and the revenues FutureGen receives forfrom selling capacity and energy from bidding the unit into the MISO markets.or other markets, as well as any other revenue FutureGen receives from the operation of the facility. The order also directs the Utilities to recover (or pass along) the differencethese costs from the Utilities’ distribution system customers, regardless of whether they purchase electricity from the Utilityutility or from an alternativecompetitive electric generation supplier. On January 22,suppliers. In February 2013, ComEd filed an applicationappeal with the Illinois Appellate Court questioning the legality of requiring ComEd to procure power for rehearing, requestingretail customers purchasing electricity from competitive electric generation suppliers.

On August 22, 2013, the ICC reconsider its December order by expanding the parties toUtilities executed the sourcing agreement to also include RES suppliers. On January 29, 2013,with FutureGen in accordance with the ICC deniedorder. However, in the event the order is reversed as a result of the appeal, ComEd’s rehearing request.obligations under the sourcing agreement should be suspended. Depending on the precise termsultimate outcome of the sourcing agreement,appeals, the eventual market conditions and the mannercost of cost recovery,the facility, the sourcing agreement could have a material adverse impact on Exelon’s and ComEd’s cash flows and financial positions.

 

On December 19, 2012, the ICC approved the IPA’s 2013 procurement plan. In response to the increased number ofSee Note 22—Commitments and Contingencies for additional information on ComEd’s customers purchasing their energy from alternative energy suppliers on their own or through municipal aggregation, the plan does not propose any new REC procurements for the period June 2013—May 2014. Additionally, the IPA plan provides that curtailment of the existing long-term contracts for renewable energy and RECs be considered. The ICC concluded that thecommitments.

240


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

magnitude of this curtailment shall be determined based upon the March 2013 forecast update and that any such reduction shall be applied proportionately to each of the long-term contracts consistent with the terms of the contracts on an equal, pro-rata basis.

Illinois Settlement Legislation (Exelon, Generation and ComEd). The Illinois Settlement Legislation was signed into law in August 2007 following a settlement resulting from extensive discussions with legislative leaders in Illinois, ComEd, Generation and other utilities and generators in Illinois to address concerns about higher electric bills without rate freeze, generation tax or other legislation that Exelon believes would be harmful to consumers of electricity, electric utilities, generators of electricity and the State of Illinois. Various Illinois electric utilities, their affiliates and generators of electricity agreed to contribute approximately $1 billion over a period of four years that ended in 2010 to programs to provide rate relief to Illinois electricity customers and funding for the IPA. ComEd committed to issue $64 million in rate relief credits to customers or to fund various programs to assist customers. Generation committed to contribute an aggregate of $747 million, consisting of $435 million to pay ComEd for rate relief programs for ComEd customers, approximately $308 million for rate relief programs for customers of other Illinois utilities and approximately $5 million for partially funding operations of the IPA. The contributions were recognized in the financial statements of Generation and ComEd as rate relief credits were applied to customer bills by ComEd and other Illinois utilities or as operating expenses associated with the programs were incurred. As of December 31, 2010, Generation and ComEd had fulfilled their commitments under the Illinois Settlement Legislation.

During 2010, Generation and ComEd recognized net costs from their contributions pursuant to the Illinois Settlement Legislation in their Consolidated Statements of Operations as follows:

Year Ended December 31, 2010

  Generation   ComEd   Total Credits Issued
to ComEd
Customers
 

Credits to ComEd customers (a)

  $14   $1   $15 

Credits to other Illinois utilities’ customers (a)

   7    n/a     n/a  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total incurred costs

  $21   $1   $15 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Recorded as a reduction in operating revenues.

 

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Resources (Exelon and ComEd). As a result of the Illinois Settlement Legislation, electric utilities in Illinois are required to include cost-effective energy efficiency resources in their plans to meet an incremental annual program energy savings requirement of 0.2% of energy delivered to retail customers for the year ended June 1, 2009, which increases annually to 2.0% of energy delivered in the year commencing June 1, 2015 and each year thereafter. Additionally, during the ten-year period that began June 1, 2008, electric utilities must implement cost-effective demand response measures to reduce peak demand by 0.1% over the prior year for eligible retail customers. The energy efficiency and demand response goals are subject to rate impact caps each year. Utilities are allowed recovery of costs for energy efficiency and demand response programs, subject to approval by the ICC. In February 2008, the ICC issued an order approving substantially all of ComEd’s initial three-year Energy Efficiency and Demand Response Plan, including cost recovery, covering the period from June 2008 through May 2011. In December 2010, the ICC approved ComEd’s second three-year Energy Efficiency and Demand Response Plan covering the period June 2011 through May 2014. The plans are designed to meet the Illinois Settlement Legislation’s energy efficiency and demand response goals through May 2014, including reductions in delivered energy to all retail customers and in the peak demand of eligible retail customers.

 

241EIMA provides for additional energy efficiency in Illinois. Starting in the June 2013—May 2014 period and occurring annually thereafter, as part of the IPA procurement plan, ComEd is to include cost-effective expansion of current energy efficiency programs, and additional new cost-effective program and/or third-party energy efficiency programs that are identified through a request for proposal process. All cost-effective energy efficiency programs are included in the IPA procurement plan for consideration of implementation. While these programs are monitored separately from the Energy Efficiency Portfolio Standard (EEPS), funds for both the EEPS portfolio and IPA energy efficiency programs are collected under the same rider.

242


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Since June 1, 2008, utilities have been required to procure cost-effective renewable energy resources in amounts that equal or exceed 2% of the total electricity that each electric utility supplies to its eligible retail customers. ComEd is also required to acquire amounts of renewable energy resources that will cumulatively increase this percentage to at least 10% by June 1, 2015, with an ultimate target of at least 25% by June 1, 2025. All goals are subject to rate impact criteria set forth in the Illinois Settlement Legislation. As of December 31, 2012,2013, ComEd had purchased sufficient renewable energy resources or equivalents, such as RECs, to comply with the Illinois Settlement Legislation. ComEd currently retires all RECs upon transfer and acceptance. ComEd is permitted to recover procurement costs of RECs from retail customers without mark-up through rates. See Note 19—22—Commitments and Contingencies for information regarding ComEd’s future commitments for the procurement of RECs.

 

Pennsylvania Regulatory Matters

 

2010 Pennsylvania Electric and Natural Gas Distribution Rate Cases (Exelon and PECO). On December 16, 2010, the PAPUC approved the settlement of PECO’s electric and natural gas distribution rate cases, which were filed in March 2010, providing increases in annual service revenue of $225 million and $20 million, respectively. The electric settlement provides for recovery of PJM transmission service costs on a full and current basis through a rider. The approved electric and natural gas distribution rates became effective on January 1, 2011.

 

In addition, the settlements included a stipulation regarding how tax benefits related to the application of any new IRS guidance on repairs deduction methodology are to be handled from a rate-making perspective. The settlements require that the expected cash benefit from the application of any new guidance to tax years prior to 2011 be refunded to customers over a seven-year period. On August 19, 2011, the IRS issued Revenue Procedure 2011-43 providing a safe harbor method of tax accounting for electric transmission and distribution property. PECO adopted the safe harbor and elected a method change for the 2010 tax year. The expected total refund to customers for the tax cash benefit from the application of the safe harbor to costs incurred prior to 2010 is $171 million. On October 4, 2011, PECO filed a supplement to its electric distribution tariff to execute the refund to customers of the tax cash benefit related to the IRC Section 481(a) “catch-up” adjustment claimed on the 2010 income tax return, which is subject to adjustment based on the outcome of IRS examinations. Credits have been reflected in customer bills since January 1, 2012.

 

In September 2012, PECO filed an application with the IRS to change its method of accounting for gas distribution repairs for the 2011 tax year. The expected total refund to customers for the tax cash benefit from the application of the new method to costs incurred prior to 2011 is $54 million. This amount is subject to adjustment based on the outcome of IRS examinations. Credits will behave been reflected in customer bills beginningsince January 1, 2013. PECO currently anticipates that the IRS will issue guidance in 2013early 2014 providing a safe harbor method of accounting for gas transmission and distribution property.

 

The prospective tax benefits claimed as a result of the new methodology will be reflected in tax expense in the year in which they are claimed on the tax return and will be reflected in the determination of revenue requirements in the next electric and natural gas distribution rate cases. See Note 1214 for additional information.

 

The 2010 electric and natural gas distribution rate case settlements did not specify the rate of return upon which the settlement rates are based, but rather provided for an increase in annual revenue. PECO has not filed a transmission rate case since rates have been unbundled.

 

242243


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Pennsylvania Procurement Proceedings (Exelon and PECO).PECO’s currentfirst PAPUC approved DSP Program, under which PECO iswas providing default electric service, hashad a 29-month term that began on January 1, 2011 and endsended May 31, 2013. On October 12, 2012, the PAPUC issued its Opinion and Order approving PECO’s second DSP Program, which was filed with the PAPUC in January 2012. The program, which has a 24-month term from June 1, 2013 through May 31, 2015, complies with electric generation procurement guidelines set forth in Act 129. Under the DSP Programs, PECO is permitted to recover its electric procurement costs from retail default service customers without mark-up through the GSA. The GSA provides for the recovery of energy, capacity, ancillary costs and administrative costs and is subject to adjustments at least quarterly for any over or under collections. In addition, PECO’s second DSP Program provides for the recovery of AEPS compliance costs through the GSA rather than a separate AEPS rider. The filing and implementation costs of the current and second DSP Programs were recorded as regulatory assets and are being recovered through the GSA over the DSP Programs 29-month and 24-month terms, respectively.

During 2012, PECO entered into contracts with PAPUC-approved bidders, including Generation, for its last three competitive procurements under the DSP Program for electric supply for default electric service. Charges incurred for electric supply procured through contracts with Generation are included in purchased power from affiliates on PECO’s Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

 

In the second DSP Program, PECO will procureis procuring electric supply for its default electric customers through five competitive procurements. The load for the residential and small and medium commercial classes will beis served through competitively procured fixed price, full requirements contracts of two years or less. Similar to the current DSP Program, forFor the large commercial and industrial class load, PECO willhas competitively procureprocured contracts for full requirements default electric generation with the price for energy in each contract set to be the hourly price of the spot market during the term of delivery. In December 2012 and February 2013, PECO entered into contracts with PAPUC-approved bidders, including Generation, for its residential and small and medium commercial classes beginningthat began in June 2013. In September 2013, PECO entered into contracts with PAPUC-approved bidders, including Generation, for its residential and small and medium commercial classes that began in December 2013. In January 2014, PECO entered into contracts with PAPUC-approved bidders, including Generation, for its residential and small, medium, and large commercial classes that will begin in June 2014. Charges incurred for electric supply procured through contracts with Generation are included in purchased power from affiliates on PECO’s Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

 

In addition, the second DSP Program includes a number of retail market enhancements recommended by the PAPUC in its previously issued Retail Markets Intermediate Work Plan Order. PECO was also directed to allow its low-income Customer Assistance Program (CAP) customers to purchase their generation supply from EGSselectric generation suppliers beginning April 1, 2014. PECO expects to file its plan for CAP customers byOn May 1, 2013.2013, PECO filed a Petition for Approval of its CAP Shopping Plan with the PAPUC, which the PAPUC granted and denied in part on January 9, 2014. PECO and other parties to the proceeding filed petitions for reconsideration of the Commission’s decision on February 10, 2014, and these petitions are currently pending before the PAPUC.

 

Smart Meter and Smart Grid Investments (Exelon and PECO).Pursuant to Act 129 and the follow-on Implementation Order of 2009, in April 2010, the PAPUC approved PECO’s Smart Meter Procurement and Installation Plan (SMPIP), under which PECO will install more than 1.6 million smart meters and an AMI communication network by 2020. The first phase of PECO’s SMPIP, which was completed on June 19, 2013, included the installation of an AMI communications network and the deployment of 600,000 smart meters to communicate with that network. On January 18,May 31, 2013, PECO and interested parties filed a Joint Petition for Settlement of the universal deployment plan with the PAPUC itswhich was approved without modification on August 15, 2013. The Joint Petition for Settlement supports all material aspects of PECO’s universal deployment plan, for approvalincluding cost recovery, excluding certain amounts discussed below. Universal deployment is the second phase of its proposal toPECO’s SMPIP, under which PECO will deploy the remainder of the 1.6 million smart meters on an accelerated basis by the end of 2014. In total, PECO currently expects to spend up to $595 million, excluding the cost of the original meters (as further described below), on its smart meter infrastructure and approximately $120 million on smart grid investments through 2014 before considering the DOE reimbursements discussed below. As of December 31, 2012, PECO has spent $241 million and $100 million on smart meter and smart grid infrastructure, respectively, not including the DOE reimbursements received to date.

 

243244


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

$120 million on smart grid investments through 2014 of which $200 million will be funded by SGIG as discussed below. As of December 31, 2013, PECO has spent $423 million and $116 million on smart meter and smart grid infrastructure, respectively, not including the DOE reimbursements received to date.

 

Pursuant to the ARRA of 2009, PECO and the DOE entered into a Financial Assistance Agreement to extend PECO $200 million in non-taxable SGIG funds of which $140 million relates to smart meter deployment and $60 million relates to smart grid infrastructure. As part of the agreement, the DOE has a conditional ownership interest in qualifying Federally-funded project property and equipment, which is subordinate to PECO’s existing mortgage. The SGIG funds are being used to offset the total impact to ratepayers of the smart meter deployment required by Act 129. As of December 31, 2012,2013, PECO has received $144$190 million of the $200 million in reimbursements. PECO’s outstanding receivable from the DOE for reimbursable costs was $17$3 million as of December 31, 2012,2013, which has been recorded in otherOther accounts receivable, net on Exelon’s and PECO’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

On August 15, 2012, PECO suspended installation of smart meters for new customers based on a limited number of incidents involving overheating meters. Following its own internal investigation and additional scientific analysis and testing by independent experts completed after September 30, 2012, PECO announced its decision to resume meter deployment work on October 9, 2012. PECO has replaced the previously installed meters with an alternative vendor’s meters. PECO intends to moveis moving forward with the alternative meters during universal deployment and continues to evaluate meters from several vendors and may use more than one meter vendor during universal deployment.

 

Following PECO’s decision, as of October 9, 2012 PECO will no longer use the original smart meters. For the meters that will no longer be used, the accounting guidance requires that any difference between the carrying value and net realizable value be recognized in the current period’s earnings, before considering potential regulatory recovery. The cost of the original meters, including installation and removal costs, owned by PECO was approximately $19$17 million, net of approximately $16 million of reimbursements from the DOE. PECO is seeking full recoveryDOE and approximately $2 million of all incurred costs related to the original deployment of meters. For amounts not recovered from the vendor, PECO will seek regulatory rate recovery in a future filing with the PAPUC. PECO did not seek recovery of original meter costs in the January 2013 universal deployment filing, as resolution with the vendor is still pending. In November 2012,depreciation. PECO requested and received approval from the DOE that the original meters continue to be allowable costs.costs and that any agreement with the vendor will not be considered project income. In addition, PECO remains eligible for the full $200 million in SGIG funds.

As On August 15, 2013, PECO entered into an agreement with the original vendor, which was part of the final agreement discussed below, under which PECO transferred the original uninstalled meters to the vendor and will receive $12 million in return, of which $7 million has been received as of December 31, 2012,2013. On January 23, 2014, PECO believesentered a final agreement with the vendor pursuant to which PECO will be reimbursed for amounts incurred for the original meters and related installation and removal costs, arevia cash payments and rebates on future purchases of licenses, goods and services primarily through 2017. PECO previously had intended to seek regulatory rate recovery in a future filing with the PAPUC of amounts not recovered from the vendor. As PECO believed such costs were probable of rate recovery based on applicable case law and past precedent on reasonably and prudently incurred costs. As a result,costs, a regulatory asset was established at the time of the removals. As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, $5 million and $17 million, representing the cost of the original meters, net of accumulated depreciation and DOE reimbursements,respectively, was recorded on Exelon’s and PECO’s Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2012. IfSheets. Pursuant to the January 23, 2014, vendor agreement, PECO later determines thatwill reclassify the regulatory asset isbalance as a receivable, with no longer probablegain or loss impacts on future results of recovery, PECO would be required to recognize a charge in earnings in the period in which that determination was made.operations.

 

Energy Efficiency Programs (Exelon and PECO). PECO’s PAPUC-approved Phase I EE&C Plan hashad a four-year term that began on June 1, 2009 and will concludeconcluded on May 31, 2013. Spending for Phase I totals more than $328 million pursuant to Act 129’s EE&C reduction targets. The Phase I plan setsset forth how PECO willwould meet the required reduction targets established by Act 129’s EE&C provisions,

245


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

which includeincluded a 3% reduction in electric consumption in PECO’s service territory and a 4.5% reduction in PECO’s annual system peak demand in the 100 hours of highest demand by May 31, 2013. If PECO fails to achieve the required reductions in consumption within the stated deadline, PECO will be subject to civil penalties of up to $20 million, which would not be recoverable from ratepayers.

244


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

The peak demand period ended on September 30, 2012 and PECO will reportcommunicated its compliance with the reduction targets in a preliminary filing with the PAPUC on March 1, 2013. The final compliance report is due tofor all Phase I targets, was filed with the PAPUC byon November 15, 2013.

 

On August 2, 2012,March 29, 2013, PECO filed a Petition with the PAPUC to change the recovery period of certain Direct Load Control (DLC) Program costs necessary to implement the Phase I Plan. The Petition sought approval to allow PECO to recover $12 million in equipment, installation and information technology costs for its Residential DLC program with the amounts collected for the Phase I Plan. As the Phase I Plan was implemented at a cost less than originally budgeted, PECO proposed to recover these expenses from its Phase I Energy Efficiency Program Charge over-collection consistent with PAPUC guidance to recover all Phase I costs through Phase I funding. The PAPUC approved PECO’s Petition on May 9, 2013. A regulatory liability was established for the DLC program costs that will be amortized as a credit to the income statement to offset the related depreciation expense during the same period.

The PAPUC issued its Phase II EE&C implementation order. The order on August 2, 2012, that provides energy consumption reduction requirements for the second phase of Act 129’s EE&C programs, which will gowent into effect on June 1, 2013, but defers a decision on peak demand reduction requirements until 2013. The order tentatively established PECO’s three-year cumulative consumption reduction target at 2.9%. In August 2012, PECO requested an evidentiary hearing regarding the appropriateness of its 2.9% target. The target1,125,852 MWh, which was subsequently reaffirmed by the PAPUC on December 5, 2012. In addition, on September 4, 2012, PECO filed a Petition for Reconsideration of the terms of the PAPUC’s implementation order for Phase II, which was subsequently denied.

 

Pursuant to the Phase II implementation order, PECO filed its three-year EE&C Phase II plan with the PAPUC on November 1, 2012. The plan sets forth how PECO will reduce electric consumption by at least 2.9%1,125,852 MWh in its service territory for the period June 1, 2013 through May 31, 2016, adjusted for weather and extraordinary loads. The implementation order permits PECO to apply any excess savings achieved during Phase I against its Phase II consumption reduction targets, with no reduction to its Phase II budget. In accordance with the Act 129 Phase II implementation order, at least 10% and 4.5% of the total consumption reductions must be through programs directed toward PECO’s public and low income sectors, respectively. If PECO fails to achieve the required reductions in consumption, it will be subject to civil penalties of up to $20 million, which would not be recoverable from ratepayers. Act 129 mandates that the total cost of the plan may not exceed 2% of the electric company’s total annual revenue as of December 31, 2006.

 

On March 15, 2013, PECO filed a Petition for Approval to amend its EE&C Phase II Plan to continue its DLC demand reduction program for mass market customers from June 1, 2013 to May 31, 2014. PECO proposed to fund the estimated $10 million costs of the one-year program by modifying incentive levels for other Phase II programs. On May 9, 2013, the PAPUC approved PECO’s amended EE&C Phase II plan. The costs of DLC program will be recovered through PECO’s Energy Efficiency Program Charge along with all other Phase II Plan costs.

On November 14, 2013, the PAPUC issued a Tentative Order on Act 129 demand reduction programs which seeks comments on a proposed demand response program methodology for future Act 129 demand reduction programs as well as demand response potential and wholesale prices suppression studies. The comment process is scheduled to be completed in the first quarter of 2014. Any decision reached would affect PECO’s EE&C Plan subsequent to its Phase II Plan.

Alternative Energy Portfolio Standards (Exelon and PECO). In November 2004, Pennsylvania adopted the AEPS Act. The AEPS Act mandated that beginning in 2011, following the expiration of

246


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

PECO’s rate cap transition period, certain percentages of electric energy sold to Pennsylvania retail electric customers shall be generated from certain alternative energy resources as measured in AECs. The requirement for electric energy that must come from Tier I alternative energy resources ranges from approximately 3.5% to 8% and the requirement for Tier II alternative energy resources ranges from 6.2% to 10%. The required compliance percentages incrementally increase each annual compliance period, which is from June 1 through May 31, until May 31, 2021. These Tier I and Tier II alternative energy resources include acceptable energy sources as set forth in Act 129 and the AEPS Act.

 

PECO has entered into five-year and ten-year agreements with accepted bidders, including Generation, totaling 452,000 non-solar and 8,000 solar Tier I AECs annually in accordance with a PAPUC approved plan. The plan allowed PECO to bank AECs procured prior to 2011 and use the banked AECs to meet its AEPS Act obligations over two compliance years ending May 2013. The PAPUC also approved the procurement of Tier II AECs and supplemental AECs as well as the sale of excess AECs through independent third partythird-party auctions or brokers. On January 5, 2012, PECO successfully conducted a competitive procurement for 275,000 Tier II AECs to be available toward its AEPS Act obligations for its compliance years ended May 2012 and ending May 2013, which was approved by the PAPUC on January 17, 2012.

 

All AEPS administrative costs and costs of AECs incurred after December 31, 2010 are being recovered on a full and current basis from default service customers through a surcharge.

 

PECO’s second DSP Program eliminated the AEPS rider.surcharge. Beginning in June 2013, AEPS compliance costs will beare being recovered through the GSA.

245


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Natural Gas Choice Supplier Tariff (Exelon and PECO).During 2011, the PAPUC approved PECO’s tariff supplements to its Gas Choice Supplier Coordination Tariff and its Retail Gas Service Tariff to address the new licensing requirements for natural gas suppliers (NGS) set forth in the PAPUC’s final rulemaking order, which became effective January 1, 2011. The new licensing requirements broaden the types of collateral that PECO can require to mitigate its risk related to an NGS default, as well as PECO’s ability to adjust collateral when material changes in supplier creditworthiness occur. PECO has completed its creditworthiness determinations and notified affected NGSs of their new collateral levels. As a result, PECO has obtained $14 million of collateral as of December 31, 2012.

 

Investigation of Pennsylvania Retail Electricity Market (Exelon and PECO).On July 28, 2011, the PAPUC issued an order outlining the next steps in its investigation into the status of competition in Pennsylvania’s retail electric market. The PAPUC found that the existing default service model presents substantial impediments to the development of a vibrant retail market in Pennsylvania and directed its Office of Competitive Markets Oversight to evaluate potential intermediate and long-term structural changes to the default service model. On March 1, 2012, the PAPUC issued the final order describing more detailed recommendations to be implemented prior to the expiration of the electric distribution company’s current default service plan and providing guidelines for electric distribution companies for development of their next default service plan. On October 12, 2012, the PAPUC approved PECO’s second DSP Program, which includes several new programs to continue PECO’s support of retail market competition in Pennsylvania in accordance with the order issued by the PAPUC on December 15, 2011. Further, the PAPUC issued a final order on February 14, 2013, outlining its proposed end-state for default service, which included default service pricing for residential and small commercial customers based on three month full requirements contracts, full requirement contracts using hourly spot market pricing for large commercial and industrial default service customers, and the inclusion of CAP customers in the customer choice programs.

 

Pennsylvania Act 11 of 2012 (Exelon and PECO). On February 13, 2012, Act 11 was signed into law by the Governor. Act 11 seeks to clarify the PAPUC’s authority to approve alternative ratemaking mechanisms, which would allow for the implementation of a distribution system improvement charge (DSIC) in rates designed to recover capital project costs incurred to repair, improve or replace utilities’ aging electric and natural gas distribution systems in Pennsylvania. Act 11 also includes a provision that allows utilities to use a fully projected future test year under which the PAPUC may permit the inclusion of projected capital costs in rate base for assets that will be placed in service during the first year rates are in effect. On August 2, 2012, the PAPUC issued a final order establishing rules and procedures to implement the ratemaking provisions of Act 11.The11. The implementation order requires a utility to have a Long Term Infrastructure Improvement Plan (LTIIP) which outlines how the utility is planning to increase its investment for repairing, improving, or replacing

247


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

aging infrastructure, approved by the Commission prior to implementing a DSIC. PECO filed itsOn May 9, 2013, the PAPUC approved PECO’s LTIIP for its Gas Operations, which was filed on February 8, 2013 with the PAPUC.2013.

 

Maryland Regulatory Matters

 

2011 Maryland Electric and Gas Distribution Rate Case (Exelon and BGE).In March 2011, the MDPSC issued a comprehensive rate order setting forth the details of the decision contained in its abbreviated electric and gas distribution rate order issued in December 2010. As part of the March 2011 comprehensive rate order, BGE was authorized to defer $19 million of costs as regulatory assets.

246


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

These costs are being recovered over a 5-year period that began in December 2010 and include the deferral of $16 million of storm costs incurred in February 2010. The regulatory asset for the storm costs earns a regulated rate of return.

2012 Maryland Electric and Gas Distribution Rate Case (Exelon and BGE).On July 27, 2012, BGE filed an application for increases to its electric and gas base rates with the MDPSC. On February 22, 2013, the MDPSC issued an order in BGE’s 2012 electric and natural gas distribution rate case for increases in annual distribution service revenue of $81 million and $32 million, respectively. The electric distribution rate increase was set using an allowed return on equity of 9.75% and the gas distribution rate increase was set using an allowed return on equity of 9.60%. The approved electric and natural gas distribution rates became effective for services rendered on or after February 23, 2013. As part of the rate order, the MDPSC approved both recovery of and return on merger integration costs incurred during the test year, including severance. As a result, the order affirmed the treatment of $20 million of severance-related costs that BGE had recorded as a regulatory asset in 2012, consistent with prior MDPSC decisions. Additionally, BGE established a new regulatory asset of $8 million related to non-severance merger integration costs, which includes $6 million of costs incurred during 2012. Current MDPSC treatment of these merger integration regulatory assets is to provide recovery over a five year period.

2013 Maryland Electric and Gas Distribution Rate Case (Exelon and BGE). On May 17, 2013, BGE filed an application for increases of $101 million and $30 million to its electric and gas base rates, respectively, with the MDPSC. The requested rates of return on equity in the application were 10.50% and 10.35% for electric and gas distribution, respectively. In addition to these requested rate increases, BGE’s application includes a request for recovery of incremental capital expenditures and operating costs associated with BGE’s proposed short-term reliability improvement plan in response to a MDPSC order through a surcharge separate from base rates. On August 23, 2013, BGE filed an update to its rate request which altered the requested increase to electric base rates from $101 million to $83 million and the requested increase to gas base rates from $30 million to $24 million. On December 13, 2013, the MDPSC issued an order in BGE’s 2013 electric and natural gas distribution rate case for increases in annual distribution service revenue of $34 million and $12 million, respectively. The electric distribution rate increase was set using an allowed return on equity of 9.75% and the gas distribution rate increase was set using an allowed return on equity of 9.60%. The approved electric and natural gas distribution rates became effective for services rendered on or after December 13, 2013. The MDPSC also conditionally approved five of the eight programs included in BGE’s proposed short-term reliability improvement plan. Commencement of the program and recovery are dependent on final MDPSC approval with the surcharge starting no earlier than April 1, 2014.

 

Smart Meter and Smart Grid Investments (Exelon and BGE).In August 2010, the MDPSC approved a comprehensive smart grid initiative for BGE that includes the planned installation of 2 million residential and commercial electric and gas smart meters at an expected total cost of $480 million. The MDPSC’s approval ordered BGE to defer the associated incremental costs, depreciation

248


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

and amortization, and an appropriate return, in a regulatory asset until such time as a cost-effective advanced metering system is implemented. As of December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, BGE recorded a regulatory asset of $66 million and $31 million, respectively, representing incremental costs, depreciation and amortization, and a debt return on fixed assets related to its AMI program. Additionally, the MDPSC has determined that the cost recovery for the non-AMI meters that BGE retires will be considered in a future depreciation proceeding. The MDPSC continues to evaluate the impacts of a customer opt-out feature in BGE’s Smart Grid program. In March 2013, BGE filed a description of the overall additional costs associated with allowing customers to retain their current meter, and for radio frequency (RF)-Free and RF-Minimizing options related to the installation of their smart meters as well as a proposed cost recovery mechanism. The MDPSC held a hearing in August 2013 to consider the filings made by BGE and other Maryland electric utilities. The ultimate resolution related to this feature could affect BGE’s ability to demonstrate cost-effectiveness of the advanced metering system. Under a grant fromOverall, BGE continues to believe the DOE,recovery of smart grid initiative costs in future rates is probable as BGE expects to be able to demonstrate that the program benefits exceed costs. Pursuant to the ARRA of 2009, BGE is a recipient of $200 million in federal funding from the DOE for its smart grid and other related initiatives, which substantially reduces the total cost of these initiatives.initiatives to BGE’s ratepayers. The project to install the smart meters began in late April 2012.

As of December 31, 2012,2013, BGE had received $142$200 million in reimbursements from the DOE. As of December 31, 2012, BGE’s outstanding receivable from the DOE for reimbursable costs was $15 million, which has been recorded in other accounts receivable, net on Exelon’s and BGE’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

New Electric Generation (Exelon and BGE). On April 12, 2012, the MDPSC issued an order directing BGE and two other Maryland utilities to enter into a contract for differences (CfD) with CPV Maryland, LLC (CPV), under which CPV will construct an approximately 700 MW natural gas-fired combined-cycle generation plant in Waldorf, Maryland, that itCPV projected will be in commercial operation by June 1, 2015. The initial term of the proposed contract is 20 years. The CfD mandates that BGE and the other utilities pay (or receive) the difference between CPV’s contract prices and the revenues CPV receives for capacity and energy from clearing the unit in the PJM capacity market. The MDPSC’s Order requires the three Maryland utilities are required to enter into a CfD in amounts proportionate to their relative SOS loadload.

On April 16, 2013, the MDPSC issued an order that required BGE to execute a specific form of contract with CPV, and the parties executed the contract as of the dateJune 6, 2013. As of execution. Depending on the precise terms of the CfD, the eventual market conditions, and the manner of cost recovery, the CfD could have a material adverseDecember 31, 2013, there is no impact on Exelon’s and BGE’s results of operations, cash flows and financial positions. Furthermore, the agreement does not become effective until the resolution of certain items, including all current litigation.

On April 27, 2012, a civil complaint was filed in the United StatesU.S. District Court for the District of Maryland by certain unaffiliated parties that challenges the actions taken by the MDPSC on federalFederal law grounds. AmongOn October 24, 2013, the U.S. District Court issued a judgment order finding that the MDPSC’s Order directing BGE and the two other requests for relief,Maryland utilities to enter into a CfD, which assures that CPV receives a guaranteed fixed price regardless of the plaintiffs seek to enjoinprice set by the federally regulated wholesale market, violates the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution. On November 22, 2013, the MDPSC from executing or otherwise putting into effect any part of its order. TheMDPSC and CPV filed motionsappealed the District Court’s ruling to dismiss the federal lawsuit, which were both denied byUnited States Court of Appeals for the U.S.District Court on August 3, 2012. Fourth Circuit.

On May 4, 2012, BGE filed a petition in the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County, Maryland, seeking judicial review of the MDPSC order.order under state law. That petition was subsequently transferred to the Circuit Court for Baltimore City whereand consolidated with similar appeals that have been filed by other interested parties. All cases have now been consolidated and will be heard together byOn October 1, 2013, the Circuit Court for Baltimore City inJudge issued a Memorandum Opinion and Order finding the first quarterdecisions of 2013.the MDPSC were within its statutory authority under

 

2012 Maryland Electric and Gas Distribution Rate Case (Exelon and BGE).On July 27, 2012, BGE filed an application for increases to its electric and gas base rates with the MDPSC. The requested rate of return on equity in the application is 10.5%. On October 22, 2012, BGE filed an updated application to request an increase of $131 million and $45 million to its electric and gas base rates, respectively. The new electric and gas distribution base rates are expected to take effect in late February 2013. BGE cannot predict how much of the requested increases, if any, the MDPSC will approve.

247249


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Maryland law. This decision is separate from the judgment in the federal litigation that the MDPSC Order is unconstitutional and the CfD is unenforceable under federal law. The federal judgment, if upheld, would prevent enforcement of the CfD even if the Circuit Court decision stands. On October 29, 2013, BGE and the two other Maryland utilities appealed the Circuit Court’s ruling to the Maryland Court of Special Appeals.

Depending on the ultimate outcome of the pending state and federal litigation, on the eventual market conditions, and on the manner of cost recovery as of the effective date of the agreement, the CfD could have a material impact on Exelon and BGE’s results of operations, cash flows and financial positions.

Exelon believes that this and other states’ projects may have artificially suppressed capacity prices in PJM and may continue to do so in future auctions to the detriment of Exelon’s market driven position. In addition to this litigation, Exelon is working with other market participants to implement market rules that will appropriately limit the market suppressing effect of such state activities.

 

Dividend RestrictionsMDPSC Derecho Storm Order (Exelon and BGEBGE). Following the June 2012 Derecho storm which hit the mid-Atlantic region interrupting electrical service to a significant portion of the State of Maryland, the MDPSC issued an order on February 27, 2013 requiring BGE and other Maryland utilities to file several comprehensive reports with short-term and long-term plans to improve reliability and grid resiliency that were due at various times before August 30, 2013.

On September 3, 2013, BGE filed a comprehensive long term assessment examining potential alternatives for improving the resiliency of the electric grid and a staffing analysis reviewing historical staffing levels as well as forecasting staffing levels necessary under various storm scenarios. BGE currently cannot predict the outcome of these proceedings, which may result in increased capital expenditures and operating costs.

)The Maryland Strategic Infrastructure Development and Enhancement Program (Exelon and BGE). In February 2013, the Maryland General Assembly passed legislation intended to accelerate gas infrastructure replacements in Maryland by establishing a mechanism for gas companies to promptly recover reasonable and prudent costs of eligible infrastructure replacement projects separate from base rate proceedings. On May 2, 2013, the Governor of Maryland signed the legislation into law; which took effect June 1, 2013. Under the new law, following a proceeding before the MDPSC and with the MDPSC’s approval of the eligible infrastructure replacement projects along with a corresponding surcharge, BGE pays dividendscould begin charging gas customers a monthly surcharge for infrastructure costs incurred after June 1, 2013. The legislation includes caps on its common stock after its Boardthe monthly surcharges to residential and non-residential customers, and would require an annual true-up of Directors declares them. However,the surcharge revenues against actual expenditures. Investment levels in excess of the cap would be recoverable in a subsequent gas base rate proceeding at which time all costs for the infrastructure replacement projects would be rolled into gas distribution rates. Irrespective of the cap, BGE is required to file a gas rate case every five years under this legislation. On August 2, 2013, BGE filed its infrastructure replacement plan and associated surcharge. The MDPSC held evidentiary hearings on BGE’s proposed plan and surcharge from November 12, 2013 through November 14, 2013. On January 29, 2014, the MDPSC issued a decision conditionally approving the first five years of BGE’s plan and surcharge. BGE must submit a list detailing specific projects planned for 2014 to the MDPSC for approval within 30 days of the decision. Upon approval of the project list by the MDPSC, BGE will be able to implement the surcharge rates on gas customers’ bills. The new surcharges are expected to take effect in second quarter of 2014. In addition, BGE will be subject to certain dividend restrictions established by the MDPSC. First, BGE is prohibited from paying a dividend on its common shares through the end of 2014. Second, BGE is prohibited from paying a dividend on its common shares if (a) after the dividend payment, BGE’s equity ratio would be below 48% as calculated pursuantan annual independent audit to the MDPSC’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. Finally, BGE must notify the MDPSC that it intendsreview plan performance and progress.

250


Combined Notes to declare a dividend on its common shares at least 30 days before such a dividend is paid.Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Federal Regulatory Matters

 

Transmission Formula Rate (Exelon, ComEd and BGE).ComEd’s and BGE’s transmission rates are each established based on a FERC-approved formula.

 

ComEd’s most recent annual formula rate update filed in MayApril 2013 reflects 2012 reflects actual 2011 expenses and investmentscosts plus forecasted 20122013 capital additions. The update resulted in a revenue requirement of $488 million plus a $25 million adjustment related to the reconciliation of 2012 actual costs for a net revenue requirement of $513 million. This compares to the May 2012 updated revenue requirement of $450 million offset by a $5 million reduction related to the reconciliation of 2011 actual costs for a net revenue requirement of $445 million. This compares to the May 2011 updated revenue requirement of $438 million offset by a $16 million reduction related to the reconciliation of 2010 actual costs for a net revenue requirement of $422 million. The increase in the revenue requirement was primarily driven by increased capital investment, higher depreciation, pension and post-retirement healthcare costs, and higher operating and maintenance costs, and the absence of a one-time credit that had been included in 2010 costs. The 20122013 net revenue requirement became effective June 1, 2012,2013, and is being recovered over the period extending through May 31, 2013.2014. The regulatory liabilityasset associated with the true-up is being amortized as the associated amounts are refunded.recovered through rates.

 

ComEd’s updated formula transmission rate currently provides for a weighted average debt and equity return on transmission rate base of 8.91%8.70%, a decrease from the 9.10%8.91% return previously authorized. The decrease in return was primarily due to lower interest rates on ComEd’s long-term debt outstanding. As part of the FERC-approved settlement of ComEd’s 2007 transmission rate case, the rate of return on common equity is 11.5% and the common equity component of the ratio used to calculate the weighted average debt and equity return for the formula transmission rate is currently capped at 55%.

 

BGE’s most recent annual formula rate update filed in April 2012,2013 reflects actual 20112012 expenses and investments plus forecasted 20122013 capital additions on a weighted basis. Thisadditions. The update resulted in a revenue requirement of $158 million offset by a $1 million reduction related to the reconciliation of 2012 actual costs for a net revenue requirement of $157 million. This compares to the April 2012 updated revenue requirement of $156 million plus an additionalincreased by $2 million increase related to the reconciliation of 2011 actual costs for a net revenue requirement of $158 million. This compares to the May 2011 updated net revenue requirement of $140 million. The increasedecrease in the revenue requirement iswas primarily driven by a lower allowed rate of return associated with a reduced equity ratio and reduced rate base, offset partially by higher levels of capital investmentdepreciation and operating expenses.and maintenance costs. The 20122013 net revenue requirement became effective June 1, 2012,2013, and is being recovered over the period extending through May 31, 2013.2014. The regulatory assetliability associated with the 2011 revenue requirement true-up is being amortized as the associated amounts are collected from customers.recovered through rates.

 

BGE’s updated formula transmission rate currently provides for a weighted average debt and equity return on transmission rate base of 8.43%8.35%, a decrease from the 8.96% return8.43% included in the update filed in April 2011.prior year formula update. The decrease in return iswas primarily due to a reduced equity ratiodebt issuance in 2012 and costlower interest rates on BGE’s debt outstanding. As part of debt at 2011 year-end compared to the previous year-end.FERC-approved settlement in 2006 of BGE’s formula2005 transmission rate includes an 11.3%case, the base rate of return on common equity for BGE’s electric transmission business for new transmission projects placed in service on and after January 1, 2006 is 11.3%, inclusive of a 50 basis point incentive for participating in PJM.

FERC Transmission Complaint (Exelon and BGE). On February 27, 2013, consumer advocates and regulators from the District of Columbia, New Jersey, Delaware and Maryland, and the Delaware Electric Municipal Cooperatives (the parties), filed a complaint at FERC against BGE and the Pepco Holdings, Inc. companies relating to their respective transmission formula rates. BGE’s formula rate includes a 10.8% base rate of return on common equity (ROE) for most investments included in its rate base.base and 11.3% for the remaining transmission investment (the latter of which is conditioned upon crediting the first 50 basis points of any incentive ROE adders). The parties seek a reduction in the

 

248251


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

base return on equity to 8.7% and changes to the formula rate process. FERC docketed the matter and set April 3, 2013 as the deadline for interventions, protests and answers. Under FERC rules, the earliest date from which the base return on equity could be adjusted and refunds required is the date of the complaint. On March 19, 2013, BGE filed a motion to dismiss or sever the complaint. As of December 31, 2013, BGE cannot predict the likelihood or a reasonable estimate of the amount of a change, if any, in the allowed base return on equity, or a reasonable estimate of the refund period start date. While BGE cannot predict the outcome of this matter, if FERC orders a reduction of BGE’s base return on equity to 8.7% (while retaining the 50 basis points of any incentives that were credited to the base return on equity for certain new transmission investment), the estimated annual impact would be a reduction in revenues of approximately $10 million.

 

PJM Transmission Rate Design and Operating Agreements (Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE). PJM Transmission Rate Design specifies the rates for transmission service charged to customers within PJM. Currently, ComEd, PECO and BGE incur costs based on the existing rate design, which charges customers based on the cost of the existing transmission facilities within their load zone and the cost of new transmission facilities based on those who benefit.benefit from those facilities. In April 2007, FERC issued an order concluding that PJM’s current rate design for existing facilities is just and reasonable and should not be changed. In the same order, FERC held that the costs of new facilities 500 kV and above should be socialized across the entire PJM footprint and that the costs of new facilities less than 500 kV should be allocated to the customers of the new facilities who caused the need for those facilities. After FERC ultimately denied all requests for rehearing on all issues, several parties filed petitions in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit for review of the decision. On August 6, 2009, that court issued its decision affirming FERC’s order with regard to the costs of existing facilities but reversing and remanding to FERC for further consideration its decision with regard to the costs of new facilities 500 kV and above. On January 21, 2010, FERC issued an order establishing paper hearing procedures to supplement the record. On March 30, 2012, FERC issued an order on remand affirming the cost allocation in its April 2007 order. On March 22, 2013, FERC issued an order denying rehearing of its March 30, 2012 Order and made it clear that the cost allocation at issue concerns only projects approved prior to February 1, 2013. A number of entities have filed requests for rehearing.appeals of the FERC orders. ComEd, anticipatesand BGE anticipate that all impacts of any rate design changes effective after December 31, 2006 and June 30, 2006, respectively, should be recoverable through retail rates and, thus, the rate design changes are not expected to have a material impact on ComEd’stheir respective results of operations, cash flows or financial position. PECO anticipates that all impacts of any rate design changes should be recoverable through the transmission service charge rider approved in PECO’s 2010 electric distribution rate case settlement and, thus, the rate design changes are not expected to have a material impact on PECO’s results of operations, cash flows or financial position. To the extent that any rate design changes are retroactive to periods prior to January 1, 2011, however, there may be an impact on PECO’s results of operations. BGE anticipates that all impacts of any rate design changes effective after the implementation of its standard offer service programs in Maryland should be recoverable through retail rates and, thus, the rate design changes are not expected to have a material impact on BGE’s results of operations, cash flows or financial position.

 

On October 11, 2012, the PJM Transmission Owners filed with FERC a cost allocation for new transmission facilities asking that the new cost allocation methodology apply to all transmission approved by the PJM Board on or after February 1, 2013. The proposed methodology is a hybrid methodology that would socialize 50% of the costs of new facilities at 500kV and above and double-circuit 345kV lines, and allocate the remaining 50% to direct beneficiaries. For all other facilities, the costs would be allocated to the direct beneficiaries. On January 31,March 22, 2013, FERC issued an order stating that the transmission owner filing is interdependent with PJM’s October 25, 2012 Order No. 1000 filing and thus, while FERC acceptedaccepting the cost allocation forwith minor exceptions and requiring a compliance filing it did so subject to refund, and a further order aton those few issues within 120 days of the time FERC issues an orderorder. The compliance filing was made on PJM’s Order No. 1000 Compliance Filing.July 22, 2013.

 

ComEd, PECO and BGE are committed to the construction of transmission facilities under their operating agreements with PJM to maintain system reliability. ComEd, PECO and BGE will work with

252


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

PJM to continue to evaluate the scope and timing of any required construction projects. ComEd, PECO and BGE’s estimated commitments are as follows:

 

   Total   2013   2014   2015   2016   2017 

ComEd

  $525   $175   $86   $135   $128   $1 

PECO

   140    28    23    26    36    27 

BGE

   249    15    53    119    55    7 

249


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

   Total   2014   2015   2016   2017   2018 

ComEd

  $486    $134    $173    $177    $2   $—    

PECO

   133    32    29    40    24    8 

BGE

   400    42    83    95    87    93 

 

PJM Minimum Offer Price Rule (Exelon and Generation).PJM’s capacity market rules include a Minimum Offer Price Rule (MOPR) that is intended to preclude sellers from artificially suppressing the competitive price signals for generation capacity. The proceedings leading to the FERC’s approval of the existing MOPR were extensive. Theextensive, and there have been numerous changes to the MOPR and litigation related to it since it was originally implemented. For example, in 2011 the parties disputed numerous elements of the MOPR including: (i) the default price that should apply to bids found subject to the MOPR, (ii) the duration of the MOPR and (iii) the application of the MOPR to self-supplying capacity and state-sponsored capacity. The FERC orders approving the existingthat MOPR have been appealed to the Third CircuitUnited States Court of Appeals.Appeals for the Third Circuit. A resolution of that appeal is not expected until sometime in 2013.2014.

 

In May 2012 (based on the MOPR provisions the FERC approved in 2011), PJM announced the results of its capacity auction covering 2015 andthe delivery year ending May 31, 2016. Several new units with state-sanctioned subsidy contracts cleared in the auction at prices below the MOPR. Potentially, these states willcould expand such state-sanctioned subsidy programs or other states may seek to establish similar programs. Generation believesbelieved that further revisions to thethat MOPR arewere necessary to ensure that the potential to artificially reduce artificially capacity auction prices is appropriately limited in PJM. In lateearly December 2012, PJM filed a new MOPR for approval at the FERC, which Exelon believes willbelieved would be more effective in preventing state-sanctioned subsidy contracts from artificially reducing capacity prices. Generation was actively involved in the process through which thethose MOPR changes were developed supportsand supported the changes and intends to continue to work with PJM and its stakeholders to obtain necessary approvals.changes. On February 5,May 3, 2013, the FERC issued its order. While the FERC order accepted certain aspects of the proposal that Exelon supported (such as applying the MOPR to all of PJM and not just certain zones within PJM), the FERC required PJM to retain a letter findingkey element of its previous MOPR structure, the unit-specific exemption, an element that PJM’s newExelon had supported removing. Several entities, including two capacity suppliers that Exelon has been working with sought rehearing of that order.

In May 2013 (based on the MOPR filingprovisions the FERC approved earlier that month), PJM announced the results of its capacity auction covering the delivery year ending May 31, 2017. Exelon is deficient and requested thatworking with PJM provide additional informationstakeholders on several aspects of PJM’s MOPR proposal.proposed changes to the PJM has 30 days to respond,tariff aimed at ensuring that capacity resources (including those with state-sanctioned subsidy contracts, excessive imported capacity resources and a FERC decision is expected within 60 days thereafter.certain limited availability demand response resources) cannot inappropriately affect capacity auction prices in PJM.

 

Market-Based Rates (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE).Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE are public utilities for purposes of the Federal Power Act and are required to obtain FERC’s acceptance of rate schedules for wholesale electricity sales. Currently, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE have authority to execute wholesale electricity sales at market-based rates. As is customary with market-based rate schedules, FERC has reserved the right to suspend market-based rate authority on a retroactive basis if it subsequently determines that Generation, ComEd, PECO or BGE has violated the terms and conditions of its tariff or the Federal Power Act. FERC is also authorized to order refunds in certain instances if it finds that the market-based rates are not just and reasonable under the Federal Power Act.

253


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

As required by FERC’s regulations, as promulgated in the Order No. 697 series, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE have filedfile market power analyses using the prescribed market share screens to demonstrate that Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE qualify for market-based rates in the regions where they are selling energy, capacity, and capacityancillary services under market-based rate tariffs. FERC accepted the 2008 filings on September 16, 2008, January 15, 2009 and September 2, 2009 and accepted the 2009 filings on July 28, 2009, October 26, 2009, February 23, 2010 and April 30, 2010, affirming Exelon’s affiliates continued right to make sales at market-based rates. These analyses must examine historic test period data and must be updated every three years on a prescribed schedule. The most recentGeneration, ComEd, PECO and BGE filed an updated analysis for the PJM and Northeast Regions was filedRegion, which includes PJM, in late 2010, based on 2009 historic test period data. On June 22, 2011, FERC issued an order confirming Generation’s continued authority to charge market based rates, based on Generation’s most recent updated analysis filed in 2010, stating that any market power concerns are adequately addressed by PJM’s monitoring and mitigation programs. On December 30, 2013, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE filed its updates analysis for the Northeast Region, based on 2012 historic test period data and FERC has not yet acted on the filing. Similarly, on June 29, 2012, Generation, ComEd, BGE and PECO filed their updated market power analysis for the Central Region which the FERC accepted on November 13, 2012, and on December 23, 2011, Generation filed its updated market power analysis for the Southeast Region which the FERC accepted on October 10, 2012. On December 21, 2012, Generation, ComEd, BGE and PECO filed their updated market power analysis for the SPP region, andwhich the FERC has not yet actedaccepted on this filing.

250


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

October 8, 2013.

 

Reliability Pricing Model (Exelon, Generation and BGE). PJM’s RPM auctionsBase Residual Auctions take place approximately 36 months ahead of the scheduled delivery year. The most recent auction for the delivery year ending May 31, 20162017 occurred in May 2012.2013.

 

License Renewals (Exelon and Generation). On April 8, 2009, the NRC issued a renewed operating license for Oyster Creek that expires in April 2029. On December 8, 2010, Exelon announced that Generation will permanently cease generation operations at Oyster Creek by December 31, 2019.

On June 30, 2011, the NRC issued the renewed operating licenses for Salem Units 1 and 2 expiring in 2036 and 2040, respectively. Exelon is a 42.59% owner of the Salem Units.

On June 22, 2011, Generation submitted applications to the NRC to extend the operating licenses of Limerick Units 1 and 2 by 20 years. The current operating licenses for Limerick Units 1 and 2 expire in 2024 and 2029, respectively. In June 2012, the United States District Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit vacated the NRC’s temporary storage rule on the grounds that the NRC should have conducted a more comprehensive environmental review to support the rule. The temporary storage rule (also referred to as the “waste confidence decision”) recognizes that licensees can safely store spent nuclear fuel at nuclear plants for up to 60 years beyond the original and renewed licensed operating life of the plants and that licensing renewal decisions do not require discussion of the environmental impact of spent fuel stored on site. In August 2012, the NRC placed a hold on issuing new or renewed operating licenses that depend on the temporary storage rule until the court’s decision is addressed. In September 2012, the NRC directed NRC Staff to revise the temporary storage rule through rulemaking no later than September 6,which is now not expected until October 3, 2014. Generation does not expect the NRC to issue license renewals until Septemberthe end of 2014, at the earliest.

On May 29, 2013, Generation submitted applications to the NRC to extend the operating licenses of Byron Units 1 and 2 and Braidwood Units 1 and 2 by 20 years. The current operating licenses for Byron Units 1 and 2 expire in 2024 and 2026, respectively. The current operating licenses for Braidwood Units 1 and 2 expire in 2026 and 2027, respectively. Generation does not expect the NRC to issue license renewals for Byron and Braidwood until 2015 at the earliest.

 

On August 29, 2012 and August 30, 2012, Generation submitted hydroelectric license applications to the FERC for 46-year licenses for the Conowingo Hydroelectric Project (Conowingo) and the Muddy Run Pumped Storage Facility Project (Muddy Run), respectively. The FERC review process is expected to be completed by August 31, 2014, when the current Conowingo license expires.

 

251254


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

The FERC extended the deadline to January 31, 2014 to file a water quality certification application pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) with the MDE for Conowingo. Generation is working with stakeholders to resolve licensing issues, including: (1) water quality, (2) fish passage and habitat, and (3) sediment. On January 30, 2014, Exelon filed a water quality certification application pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA with MDE for Conowingo, addressing these and other issues, although Generation cannot currently predict the conditions that ultimately may be imposed. Resolution of these issues relating to Conowingo may have a material effect on Generation’s results of operations and financial position through an increase in capital expenditures and operating costs.

On August 29, 2013, Exelon filed a water quality certification application pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA with PA DEP for Muddy Run, addressing these and other issues that included certain commitments made by Generation. The financial impact associated with these commitments is estimated to be in the range of $20 million to $30 million, and will include both an increase in capital expenditures as well as an increase in operating expenses. Exelon anticipates that the PA DEP will issue the water quality certification pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA for Muddy Run in the first quarter of 2014.

Based on the latest FERC procedural schedule, the FERC licensing process is not expected to be completed prior to the expiration of Muddy Run’s current license on August 31, 2014, and the expiration of Conowingo’s license on September 1, 2014. However, the stations would continue to operate under annual licenses until FERC takes action on the 46-year license applications. The stations are currently being depreciated over their useful lives, which includes the license renewal period. As of December 31, 2013, $33 million of direct costs associated with relicensing efforts have been capitalized.

 

Regulatory Assets and Liabilities (Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE prepare their consolidated financial statements in accordance with the authoritative guidance for accounting for certain types of regulation. Under this guidance, regulatory assets represent incurred costs that have been deferred because of their probable future recovery from customers through regulated rates. Regulatory liabilities represent the excess recovery of costs or accrued credits that have been deferred because it is probable such amounts will be returned to customers through future regulated rates or represent billings in advance of expenditures for approved regulatory programs.

255


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

The following tables provide information about the regulatory assets and liabilities of Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE as of December 31, 20122013 and 2011. Upon consummation of the merger, the Registrants reclassified certain regulatory asset and liability balances as of December 31, 2011 in order to align the reporting of the regulated utilities.2012.

 

December 31, 2012

 Exelon ComEd PECO BGE 

December 31, 2013

 Exelon ComEd PECO BGE 
 Current Noncurrent Current Noncurrent Current Noncurrent Current Noncurrent  Current Noncurrent Current Noncurrent Current Noncurrent Current Noncurrent 

Regulatory assets

                

Pension and other postretirement benefits

 $304  $3,673  $—     $—     $—     $—     $—     $—     $221  $2,794  $—     $—     $—     $—     $—     $—    

Deferred income taxes

  14   1,382   5   62   —      1,255   9   65   10   1,459   2   65    —      1,317   8   77 

AMI programs

  3   70   3   10   —      29   —      31   5   159   5   35    —      58    —      66 

AMI meter events

  —      17   —      —      —      17   —      —      —      5    —      —      —      5    —      —    

Under-recovered distribution service costs

  18   191   18   191   —      —      —      —      178   285   178   285    —      —      —      —    

Debt costs

  14   68   11   62   3   6   1   9   12   56   9   53   3   3   1   8 

Fair value of BGE long-term debt (a)

  —      256   —      —      —      —      —      —      —      219    —      —      —      —      —      —    

Fair value of BGE supply contract (b)

  77   12   —      —      —      —      —      —      12    —      —      —      —      —      —      —    

Severance

  29   28   25   12   —      —      4   16   16   12   12    —      —      —      4   12 

Asset retirement obligations

  —      90   —      65   —      25   —      —      1   102   1   67    —      25    —      10 

MGP remediation costs

  58   232   51   197   6   33   1   2   40   212   33   178   6   33   1   1 

RTO start-up costs

  3   2   3   2   —      —      —      —      2    —      2    —      —      —      —      —    

Under-recovered electric universal service fund costs

  11   —      —      —      11   —      —      —    

Financial swap with Generation

  —      —      226   —      —      —      —      —    

Renewable energy and associated RECs

  18   49   18   49   —      —      —      —    

Under-recovered energy and transmission costs

  43   —      14   —      1   —      28   —    

DSP Program costs

  1   3   —      —      1   3   —      —    

DSP II Program costs

  1   2   —      —      1   2   —      —    

Under-recovered uncollectible accounts

  —      48    —      48    —      —      —      —    

Under-recovered electric universal Renewable energy

  17   176   17   176    —      —      —      —    

Energy and transmission programs

  53    —      52    —      —      —      1    —    

Deferred storm costs

  3   6   —      —      —      —      3   6   3   3    —      —      —      —      3   3 

Electric generation-related regulatory asset

  16   40   —      —      —      —      16   40   13   30    —      —      —      —      13   30 

Rate stabilization deferral

  67   225   —      —      —      —      67   225   71   154    —      —      —      —      71   154 

Energy efficiency and demand response programs

  56   126   —      —      —      —      56   126   73   148    —      —      —      —      73   148 

Merger integration costs

  2   9     —      —      2   9 

Other

  23   25   14   16   9   8   —      2   31   39   18   26   8   7   4   6 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total regulatory assets

 $759   6,497  $388  $666  $32  $1,378  $185  $522  $760  $5,910  $329  $933  $17  $1,448  $181  $524 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Represents the regulatory asset recorded at Exelon Corporate for the difference in the fair value of the long-term debt of BGE as of the merger date. See Note 4—Merger and Acquisitions for additional information.
(b)Represents the regulatory asset recorded at Exelon Corporate representing the fair value of BGE’s supply contracts as of the merger date. BGE is allowed full recovery of the costs of its electric and gas supply contracts through approved regulated rates. See Note 4—Merger and Acquisitions for additional information.

December 31, 2013

 Exelon  ComEd  PECO  BGE 
   Current  Noncurrent  Current  Noncurrent  Current  Noncurrent  Current  Noncurrent 

Regulatory liabilities

        

Other postretirement benefits

 $2  $43  $—     $—     $—     $—     $—     $—    

Nuclear decommissioning

  —      2,740    —      2,293    —      447    —      —    

Removal costs

  99   1,423   78   1,219    —      —      21   204 

Energy efficiency and demand response programs

  53    —      45    —      8    —      —      —    

DLC program costs

  1   10    —      —      1   10    —      —    

Energy efficiency phase II

  —      21    —      —      —      21    —      —    

Electric distribution tax repairs

  20   114    —      —      20   114    —      —    

Gas distribution tax repairs

  8   37    —      —      8   37    —      —    

Energy and transmission programs

  78    —      9    —      58    —      11    —    

Over-recovered gas and electric universal service fund costs

  8    —      —      —      8    —      —      —    

Revenue subject to refund

  38    —      38    —      —      —      —      —    

Over-recovered electric and gas revenue decoupling

  16    —      —      —      —      —      16    —    

Other

  4    —      —      —      3    —      —      —    
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total regulatory liabilities

 $327  $4,388  $170  $3,512  $106  $629  $48  $204 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

252256


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

December 31, 2012

 Exelon  ComEd  PECO  BGE 
  Current  Noncurrent  Current  Noncurrent  Current  Noncurrent  Current  Noncurrent 

Regulatory assets

        

Pension and other postretirement benefits

 $304  $3,673  $—     $—     $—     $—     $—     $—    

Deferred income taxes

  14   1,382   5   62    —      1,255   9   65 

AMI programs

  3   70   3   10    —      29    —      31 

AMI meter events

  —      17    —      —      —      17    —      —    

Under-recovered distribution service costs

  18   191   18   191    —      —      —      —    

Debt costs

  14   68   11   62   3   6   1   9 

Fair value of BGE long-term debt

  —      256    —      —      —      —      —      —    

Fair value of BGE supply contracts

  77   12    —      —      —      —      —      —    

Severance

  29   28   25   12    —      —      4   16 

Asset retirement obligations

  —      90    —      65    —      25    —      —    

MGP remediation costs

  58   232   51   197   6   33   1   2 

RTO start-up costs

  3   2   3   2    —      —      —      —    

Under-recovered electric universal service fund costs

  11    —      —      —      11    —      —      —    

Financial swap with Generation

  —      —      226    —      —      —      —      —    

Renewable energy

  18   49   18   49    —      —      —      —    

Energy and transmission programs

  43    —      14    —      1    —      28    —    

DSP Program costs

  1   3    —      —      1   3    —      —    

DSP II Program costs

  1   2    —      —      1   2    —      —    

Deferred storm costs

  3   6    —      —      —      —      3   6 

Electric generation-related regulatory asset

  16   40    —      —      —      —      16   40 

Rate stabilization deferral

  67   225    —      —      —      —      67   225 

Energy efficiency and demand response programs

  56   126    —      —      —      —      56   126 

Under-recovered electric revenue decoupling

  5    —      —      —      —      —      5    —    

Other

  23   25   14   16   9   8    —      2 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total regulatory assets

 $764  $6,497  $388  $666  $32  $1,378  $190  $522 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

December 31, 2012

 Exelon  ComEd  PECO  BGE 
   Current  Noncurrent  Current  Noncurrent  Current  Noncurrent  Current  Noncurrent 

Regulatory liabilities

        

Nuclear decommissioning

 $—     $2,397  $—     $2,037  $—     $360  $—     $—    

Removal costs

  97   1,406   75   1,192    —      —      22   214 

Energy efficiency and demand response programs

  131    —      43    —      88    —      —      —    

Electric distribution tax repairs

  20   132    —      —      20   132    —      —    

Gas distribution tax repairs

  8   46    —      —      8   46    —      —    

Over-recovered uncollectible accounts

  6    —      6    —      —      —      —      —    

Energy and transmission programs

  54    —      6    —      48    —      —      —    

Over-recovered gas universal service fund costs

  3    —      —      —      3    —      —      —    

Over-recovered AEPS costs

  2    —      —      —      2    —      —      —    

Revenue subject to refund

  40    —      40    —      —      —      —      —    

Over-recovered gas revenue decoupling

  7    —      —      —      —      —      7    —    
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total regulatory liabilities

 $368  $3,981  $170  $3,229  $169  $538  $29  $214 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2012

 Exelon  ComEd  PECO  BGE 
  Current  Noncurrent  Current  Noncurrent  Current  Noncurrent  Current  Noncurrent 

Regulatory liabilities

        

Nuclear decommissioning

 $—     $2,397  $—     $2,037  $—     $360  $—     $—    

Removal costs

  97   1,406   75   1,192   —      —      22   214 

Energy efficiency and demand response programs

  131   —      43   —      88   —      —      —    

Electric distribution tax repairs

  20   132   —      —      20   132   —      —    

Gas distribution tax repairs

  8   46     8   46   

Over-recovered uncollectible accounts

  6   —      6   —      —      —      —      —    

Over-recovered energy and transmission costs

  54   —      6   —      48   —      —      —    

Over-recovered gas universal service fund costs

  3   —      —      —      3   —      —      —    

Over-recovered AEPS costs

  2   —      —      —      2   —      —      —    
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total regulatory liabilities

 $321  $3,981  $130  $3,229  $169  $538  $22  $214 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

December 31, 2011

 Exelon  ComEd  PECO  BGE 
  Current  Noncurrent  Current  Noncurrent  Current  Noncurrent  Current  Noncurrent 

Regulatory assets

        

Pension and other postretirement benefits

 $204   $2,794   $—     $—     $7   $—     $3   $—    

Deferred income taxes

  5    1,176    5    66    —      1,110    8    68  

AMI and smart meter programs

  2    28    2    6    —      22    —      15  

Under-recovered distribution service costs

  14    70    14    70    —      —      —      —    

Debt costs

  18    81    15    73    3    8    2    10  

Severance

  25    38    25    38    —      —      —      1  

Asset retirement obligations

  —      74    —      50    —      24    —      —    

MGP remediation costs

  30    129    24    91    6    38    1    2  

RTO start-up costs

  3    4    3    4    —      —      —      —    

Under-recovered electric universal service fund costs

  3    —      —      —      3    —      —      —    

Financial swap with Generation

  —      —      503    191    —      —      —      —    

Renewable energy and associated RECs

  9    97    9    97    —      —      —      —    

Under-recovered energy and transmission costs

  57    —      48    —      9    —      50    —    

DSP Program costs

  3    2    —      —      3    2    —      —    

Deferred storm costs

  —      —      —      —      —      —      3    9  

Electric generation-related regulatory asset

  —      —      —      —      —      —      16    56  

Rate stabilization deferral

  —      —      —      —      —      —      63    295  

Energy efficiency and demand response programs

  —      —      —      —      —      —      29    95  

Other

  17    25    9    13    8    12    —      —    
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total regulatory assets

 $390   $4,518   $657   $699   $39   $1,216   $175   $551  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

253257


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

December 31, 2011

 Exelon  ComEd  PECO  BGE 
  Current  Noncurrent  Current  Noncurrent  Current  Noncurrent  Current  Noncurrent 

Regulatory liabilities

        

Nuclear decommissioning

 $—     $2,222   $—     $1,857   $—     $365   $—     $—    

Removal costs

  61    1,185    61    1,185    —      —      18    200  

Energy efficiency and demand response programs

  49    69    49    —      —      69    —      —    

Electric distribution tax repairs

  19    151    —      —      19    151    —      —    

Over-recovered uncollectible accounts

  15    —      15    —      —      —      —      —    

Over-recovered energy and transmission costs

  42    —      12    —      30    —      —      —    

Over-recovered gas universal service fund costs

  3    —      —      —      3    —      —      —    

Over-recovered AEPS costs

  8    —      —      —      8    —      —      —    

Other

  —      —      —      —      —      —      1    1  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total regulatory liabilities

 $197   $3,627   $137   $3,042   $60   $585   $19   $201  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

��

 

 

Pension and other postretirement benefits. As of December 31, 2012,2013, Exelon recordedhad regulatory assets of $3,977$3,015 million and regulatory liabilities of $45 million related to ComEd’s and BGE’s portion of deferred costs associated with Exelon’s pension plans and ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s portion of deferred costs associated with Exelon’s other postretirement benefit plans. PECO’s pension regulatory recovery is based on cash contributions and is not included in the regulatory asset balance.(liability) balances. The regulatory asset (liability) is amortized in proportion to the recognition of prior service costs (gains), transition obligations and actuarial losses (gains) attributable to Exelon’s pension and other postretirement benefit plans determined by the cost recognition provisions of the authoritative guidance for pensions and postretirement benefits. ComEd, PECO and BGE will recover these costs through base rates as allowed in their most recently approved regulated rate orders. The pension and other postretirement benefit regulatory asset balance includes a regulatory asset established at the date of the merger related to BGE’s portion of the deferred costs associated with legacy Constellation’s pension and other postretirement benefit plans. ThatThe BGE-related regulatory asset is being amortized over a period of approximately 12 years, which generally represents the expected average remaining service period of plan participants at the date of the merger. See Note 14—16—Retirement Benefits for additional detail. No return is earned on Exelon’s regulatory asset.

 

Deferred income taxes. These costs represent the difference between the method by which the regulator allows for the recovery of income taxes and how income taxes would be recorded under GAAP. Regulatory assets and liabilities associated with deferred income taxes, recorded in compliance with the authoritative guidance for accounting for certain types of regulation and income taxes, include the deferred tax effects associated principally with liberalizedaccelerated depreciation accounted for in accordance with the ratemaking policies of the ICC, PAPUC and MDPSC, as well as the revenue impacts thereon, and assume continued recovery of these costs in future transmission and distribution rates. For ComEd and BGE, this amount includes the impacts of a reduction in the deductibility, for Federal income tax purposes, of certain retiree health care costs pursuant to the March 2010 Health Care Reform Acts. ComEd was granted recovery of these additional income taxes on May 24, 2011 in the ICC’s 2010 Rate Case order. The recovery period for these costs is through May 31, 2014. For BGE, these additional income taxes are being amortized over a 5-year period that began in March 2011 in accordance with the MDPSC’s March 2011 rate order. See Note 12—14—Income Taxes and Note 14—16—Retirement Benefits for additional information. ComEd, PECO and BGE are not earning a return on the regulatory asset in base rates.

254


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

AMI programs.For ComEd, this amount represents operating and maintenance expenses and meter costs associated with ComEd’s AMI pilot program approved in the May 24, 2011, ICC order in ComEd’s 2010 rate case. The recovery periods for operating and maintenance expenses and meter costs are through May 31, 2014, and January 1, 2020, respectively. In addition,As of December 31, 2013, ComEd recorded approximately $7had regulatory assets of $35 million ofrelated to accelerated depreciation costs resulting from the early retirements of non-AMI meters, as a regulatory asset beginning during the fourth quarter of 2012, which will be amortized over an average ten year period pursuant to the ICC approved AMI Deployment plan. ComEd is earning a return on the meter costs. For PECO, this amount represents accelerated depreciation and filing and implementation costs relating to the PAPUC-approved Smart Meter Procurement and Installation Plan as well as the return on the un-depreciated investment, taxes, and operating and maintenance expenses. The approved plan allows for recovery of filing and implementation costs incurred through December 31, 2010 during 2011 and 2012. In addition, the approved plan provides for recovery of program costs, which includes depreciation on new equipment placed in service, beginning in January 2011 on full and current basis, which includes interest income or expense on the under or over recovery. The approved plan also provides for recovery of accelerated depreciation on PECO’s non-AMI meter assets over a 10-year period ending December 31, 2020. For BGE, this amount represents smart grid pilot program costs as well as the incremental costs associated with implementing full deployment of a smart grid program. Pursuant to a MDPSC order,

258


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

pilot program costs of $11 million were deferred in a regulatory asset, and, beginning with the MDPSC’s March 2011 rate order, is earning BGE’s most current authorized rate of return. In August 2010, the MDPSC approved a comprehensive smart grid initiative for BGE, authorizing BGE to establish a separate regulatory asset for incremental costs incurred to implement the initiative, including the net depreciation and amortization costs associated with the meters, and an authorized rate of return on these costs, a portion of which is not recognized under GAAP until cost recovery begins. Additionally, the MDPSC 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. BGE’s AMI regulatory asset excludes costs for non-AMI meters being replaced by AMI meters, as the MDPSC has ordered that the cost recovery for non-AMI meters will be considered in a future depreciation proceeding.

 

AMI Meter Events.This amount represents the remaining cost value of the original smart meters, net of accumulated depreciation, and DOE reimbursements purchased forand amounts recovered from the first phasevendor, of smart meter deployment that will no longer be used, including installation and removal costs. PECO is seeking full recovery of all incurred costs relatedintended to the original deployment of meters. For amounts not recovered from the vendor, PECO will seek through regulatory rate recovery in a future filing with the PAPUC.PAPUC, any amounts no recovered from the vendor. PECO believesbelieved the amounts incurred for the original meters and related installation and removal costs arewere probable of recovery based on applicable case law and past precedent on reasonably and prudently incurred costs. As such, PECO has deferred these costs on Exelon’s and PECO’s Consolidated Balance Sheet. PECO will not earn a return on the recovery of these costs.

 

Under-recovered distribution services costs. Under EIMA, which became effective in the fourth quarter of 2011, ComEd is allowed recovery of distribution services costs through a formula rate tariff. The legislation provides for an annual reconciliation of the revenue requirement in effect to reflect the actual costs that the ICC determines are prudently and reasonably incurred in a given year. The over recovery associated with the 2011 reconciliation was recovered through rates over a one-year period, that began in January 2013. The under recovery associated with the 2012 reconciliation will be recovered through rates over a one-year period beginning in January 2013 for the 2011 annual reconciliation period.2014. ComEd is earning a return on these costs. The regulatory asset also includes costs associated with certain one-time events, such as large storms, which will be recovered over a five-year period beginningperiod. As of December 31, 2013, the regulatory asset was comprised of $377 million for the annual reconciliation and $86 million related to significant one-time events. In addition to $58 million in January 2013. ComEd is earningdeferred storm costs, net of amortization, the December 31, 2013 balance related to significant one-time events contains $28 million of merger and integration related costs, net of amortization, incurred as a return on these costs.result of the merger. As of December 31, 2012, the regulatory asset was comprised of $125 million for the annual reconciliation and $84 million related to significant

255


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

one-time events. In addition to $58 million in deferred storm costs, net of amortization, the December 31, 2012 balance related to significant one-time events contains $26 million of merger and integration related costs, net of amortization, incurred as a result of the merger. As of December 31, 2012, ComEd and BGE recorded regulatory assets of $5 million and $1 million, respectively, in other regulatory assets for merger and integration-related costs. See Note 4—Mergers and Acquisitions for additional information.

 

Debt costs.Consistent with rate recovery for ratemaking purposes, ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s recoverable losses on reacquired long-term debt related to regulated operations are deferred and amortized to interest expense over the life of the new debt issued to finance the debt redemption or over the life of the original debt issuance if the debt is not refinanced. Interest-rate swap settlements are deferred and amortized over the period that the related debt is outstanding or the life of the original issuance retired. These debt costs are used in the determination of the weighted cost of capital applied to rate base in the rate-making process. ComEd and BGE are not earning a return on the recovery of these costs.costs, while PECO is earning a return on the premium of the cost of the reacquired debt through base rates.

259


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Fair value of BGE long-term debt.These amounts represent the regulatory asset recorded at Exelon for the difference in the fair value of the long-term debt of BGE as of the merger date based on the MDPSC practice to allow BGE to recover its debt costs through rates. Exelon is amortizing the regulatory asset and the associated fair value over the life of the underlying debt.

Fair value of BGE supply contract.These amounts represent the regulatory asset recorded at Exelon representing the fair value of BGE’s supply contracts as of the close of the merger date based on the MDPSC practice to allow BGE to recover its supply contracts through rates. Exelon is amortizing the regulatory asset and the associated fair value over a period of approximately three years.

 

Severance. For ComEd, these costs represent previously incurred severance costs that ComEd was granted recovery of in the December 20, 2006, ICC rehearing rate order and the May 24, 2011, ICC order in ComEd’s 2010 rate case. The recovery periods are through June 30, 2014, and May 31, 2014, respectively. ComEd is not earning a return on these costs. For BGE, these costs represent deferred severance costs that BGE has either previously been granted recovery of in rates or has requested recovery in a current rate case.rates. Costs include the portion of costs associated with a 2008 workforce reduction that relate to BGE’s gas business which were deferred in 2009 as a regulatory asset in accordance with the MDPSC’s orders in prior rate cases and are being amortized over a 5-year period that began in January 2009. Also included are costs associated with a 2010 workforce reduction that were deferred as a regulatory asset and are being amortized over a 5-year period that began in March 2011 in accordance with the MDPSC’s March 2011 rate order. Finally, costs associated with the 2012 BGE voluntary workforce reduction were deferred in 2012 as a regulatory asset in accordance with the MDPSC’s orders in prior rate cases and are being amortized over a 5-year period that began in July 2012. BGE is earning a regulated return on the regulatory asset included in base rates.

 

Asset retirement obligations.These costs represent future legally required removal costs associated with ComEd’s and PECO’s existing asset retirement obligations. PECO will begin to earn a return on, and a recovery of, these costs once the removal activities have been performed. ComEd and BGE will recover these costs through future depreciation expenserates and will earn a return on these costs once the removal activities have been performed. See Note 13—15—Asset Retirement Obligations for additional information.

 

MGP remediation costs. Recovery of these items was granted to ComEd in the July 26, 2006, ICC rate order. For PECO, these costs are recoverable through rates as affirmed in the 2010 approved natural gas distribution rate case settlement. While BGE does not have a rider for MGP clean-up costs, BGE has historically received recovery of actual clean-up costs on a site-specific basis in distribution rates. The period of recovery for both ComEd and PECO will depend on the timing of the actual expenditures. ComEd and PECO are not earning a return on the recovery of these costs. For BGE, $5 million of clean-up costs incurred during the period from July 2000 through November 2005 and an additional $1 million from December 2005 through November 2010 are recoverable through rates in accordance with MDPSC orders. These costs are being amortized over 10-year periods that began in January 2006 and December 2010, respectively. BGE is earning a regulated return on thethis regulatory asset included in base rates.asset. See Note 19—22—Commitments and Contingencies for additional information.

256


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

RTO start-up costs. Recovery of these RTO start-up costs was approved by FERC. The recovery period is through March 31, 2015. ComEd is earning a return on these costs.

 

Under (Over)-recovered universal service fund costs. The universal service fund cost is a recovery mechanism that allows PECO to recover discounts issued to electric and gas customers

260


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

enrolled in assistance programs. As of December 31, 2012,2013, PECO was under-recoveredover-recovered for both its electric program and over-recovered for its gas program.programs. PECO earns interest on under-recovered costs and pays interest on over-recovered costs to customers.

 

Financial swap with Generation. To fulfill a requirement of the Illinois Settlement Legislation, ComEd entered into a five-year financial swap contract with Generation that expiresexpired on May 31, 2013. Since the swap contract was deemed prudent by the Illinois Settlement Legislation, ensuring ComEd of full recovery in rates, the changes in fair value each period arewere recorded by ComEd as well as an offsetting regulatory asset or liability. ComEd doesdid not earn (pay) a return on the regulatory asset (liability). The basis for the mark-to-market derivative asset or liability position iswas based on the difference between ComEd’s cost to purchase energy on the spot market and the contracted price. In Exelon’s consolidated financial statements, the fair value of the intercompany swap recorded by Generation and ComEd iswas eliminated.

 

Renewable Energy and Associated RECs.Energy. On December 17, 2010, ComEd entered into several 20-year floating-to-fixed energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers for the procurement of long-term renewable energy and associated RECs.energy. Delivery under the contracts began in June 2012. Since the swap contracts were deemed prudent by the Illinois Settlement Legislation, ensuring ComEd of full recovery in rates, the changes in fair value each period as well as an offsetting regulatory asset or liability are recorded by ComEd. ComEd does not earn (pay) a return on the regulatory asset (liability). The basis for the mark-to-market derivative asset or liability position is based on the difference between ComEd’s cost to purchase energy on the spot market and the contracted price.

 

Under (Over)-recovered energyEnergy and transmission costs.programs.Starting in 2007, ComEd’s energy and transmission costs are recoverable (refundable) under ComEd’s ICC and/or FERC-approved rates. ComEd earns interest on under-recovered costs and pays interest on over-recovered costs to customers. The PECO energy costs represent the electric and gas supply related costs recoverable (refundable) under PECO’s GSA and PGC, respectively. PECO earns interest on the under-recovered energy and natural gas costs and pays interest on over-recovered energy and natural gas costs to customers. In addition, beginning in 2013, the deferred DSP I and II Program costs are presented on a net basis with PECO’s GSA under (over)-recovered energy costs. The PECO transmission costs represent the electric transmission costs recoverable (refundable) under the TSC under which PECO earns interest on under-recovered costs and pays interest on over-recovered costs to customers. As of December 31, 2013, PECO had a regulatory liability that included the over-recovered electric transmission costs of $8 million, $34 million related to the DSP program and $16 million related to over-recovered natural gas supply costs under the PGC. As of December 31, 2012, PECO had a regulatory asset related to under-recovered electric transmission costs of $1 million and a regulatory liability that included $47 million related to over-recovered electric supply costs under the GSA and $1 million related to over-recovered natural gas supply costs under the PGC. As of December 31, 2011, PECO had a regulatory asset related to under-recovered transmission costs of $9 million and a regulatory liability that included $25 million related to over-recovered electric supply costs under the GSA and $5 million related to over-recovered natural gas supply costs under the PGC. The BGE energy costs represent the electric and gas supply related costs recoverable (refundable) from (to) customers under BGE’s market-based SOS and MBR programs, respectively. BGE does not earn or pay interest on under- or over-recovered costs to customers. See “ITEM 1. BUSINESS—BGE” for further details on BGE’s market-based SOSAs of December 31, 2013, BGE had a regulatory asset of $1 million related to under-recovered electric supply costs and MBR programs.a regulatory liability of $11 million related to over-recovered natural gas supply costs. As of December 31, 2012, BGE had a regulatory asset that includedof $9 million related to under-recovered electric supply costs and a regulatory asset of $19 million related to under-recovered natural gas supply costs.

257


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

DSP Program costs. These amounts represent recoverable administrative costs incurred relating to filing, procurement, and information technology improvements associated with PECO’s PAPUC-approvedPAPUC-

261


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

approved DSP Program for the procurement of electric supply following the expiration of PECO’s generation rate caps on December 31, 2010. The filing and implementation costs of this DSP Program are recoverable through the GSA over its 29-month term, beginningthat began January 1, 2011. The independent evaluator costs associated with conducting procurements is recoverable over a 12-month period after the PAPUC approves the results of the procurements. Costs relating to information technology improvements are recoverable over a 5-year period beginningthat began January 1, 2011. PECO earns a return on the recovery of information technology costs. Beginning in 2013, these costs are included within the energy and transmission programs line item.

 

DSP II Program Costs. These amounts represent recoverable administrative costs incurred relating to the filing and procurement associated with PECO’s second PAPUC-approved DSP program for the procurement of electric supply. The filing and procurement of this DSP Program are recoverable through the GSA over its 24-month term, beginningthat began June 1, 2013. The independent evaluator costs associated with conducting procurements are recoverable over a 12-month period after the PAPUC approves the results of the procurements. PECO is not earning a return on these costs. Beginning in 2013, these costs are included within the energy and transmission programs line item.

 

Deferred storm costs.In the MDPSC’s March 2011 rate order, BGE was authorized to defer $16 million in storm costs incurred in February 2010. These costs are being amortized over a 5-year period that began in December 2010. BGE is earning a regulated return on thethis regulatory asset included in base rates.asset.

 

Electric generation-related regulatory asset.As a result of the deregulation of electric generation, BGE ceased to meet the requirements for accounting for a regulated business for the previous electric generation portion of its business. As a result, BGE wrote-off its entire individual, generation-related regulatory assets and liabilities and established a single, generation-related regulatory asset to be collected through its regulated rates, which is being amortized on a basis that approximates the pre-existing individual regulatory asset amortization schedules. AThe portion of this regulatory asset represents income taxes recoverable through future rates that dodoes not earn a regulated rate of return. These amountsreturn were $37 million as of December 31, 2013, and $47 million as of December 31, 2012, and $56 million as of December 31, 2011.2012. BGE will continue to amortize this amount through 2017.

 

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 MDPSC 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. During 2007, BGE deferred $306 million of electricity purchased for resale expenses and certain applicable carrying charges, which are calculated using the implied interest rates of the rate stabilization bonds, as a regulatory asset related to the rate stabilization plans. During 20122013 and 2011,2012, BGE recovered $67$66 million and $57$67 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.

 

Energy efficiency and demand response programs.These amounts represent costs recoverable (refundable) under ComEd’s ICC approved Energy Efficiency and Demand Response Plan, PECO’s PAPUC-approved EE&C Plan, and the BGE Smart Energy Savers Program®. ComEd

 

258262


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Plan, PECO’s PAPUC-approved EE&C Plan, and BGE’s Smart Energy Savers Program®. ComEd began recovering these costs or refunding over-collections of these costs on June 1, 2008 through a rider. ComEd earns a return on the capital investment incurred under the program but does not earn (pay) interest on under (over) collections. For PECO, this amount represents an over-collection of program costs related to both Phase I and Phase II of its EE&C Plan. PECO does not earn (pay) interest on under (over) collections. PECO began recovering thesethe costs of its Phase I and Phase II EE&C Plans through a ridersurcharge in January 2010 and June 2013, respectively, based on projected spending under the program. Recoveryprograms. Phase I recovery continued over the life of the program, which expired on May 31, 2013 and excess funds collected began being refunded in June 2013. Phase II of the program began on June 1, 2013, and will continue over the life of the program, which expireswill expire on May 31, 2013.2016. Excess funds collected are required to be refunded no later thanbeginning in June 30, 2013.2016. PECO earnsearned a return on the capital investment incurred under Phase I of the program but does not earn (pay) interest on under (over) collections.program. BGE’s Smart Energy Savers Program® includes both MDPSC approved demand response and energy efficiency programs. For the BGE Peak RewardsSM demand response program which began in January 2008, actual marketing and customer bonus costs incurred in the demand response program are being recovered over a 5-year amortization period from the date incurred pursuant to an order by the MDPSC. Fixed assets related to the demand response program are recovered over the life of the equipment. Also included in the demand response program are customer bill credits related to BGE’s Smart Energy Rewards program which began in July 2013. Actual costs incurred in the conservation program are being amortized over a 5- year5-year period with recovery beginning in 2010 pursuant to an order by the MDPSC. BGE earns a regulated rate of return on the capital investments and deferred costs incurred under the program and earns (pays) interest on under (over) collections.

 

Rate caseMerger integration costs.The ICC generally allows ComEdThese amounts represent integration costs to receiveachieve distribution synergies related to the merger transaction. As a result of the MDPSC’s February 2013 rate order, BGE deferred $8 million related to non-severance merger integration costs incurred during 2012 and the first quarter of 2013. Of these costs, $4 million was authorized to be amortized over a 5-year period that began in March 2013. The recovery of the remaining $4 million was deferred. In the MDPSC’s December 2013 rate caseorder, BGE was authorized to recover the remaining $4 million and an additional $4 million of non-severance merger integration costs incurred during 2013. These costs are being amortized over three years. The ICC has issued orders allowing recovery of these costsa 5-year period that began in December 2013. BGE is earning a return on July 26, 2006, September 10, 2008, and May 24, 2011. The recovery period for the two former rate case costs was through September 15, 2011. The recovery period for the 2010 Rate Case costs is through May 31, 2014. Pursuant to the approved settlements of the 2010this regulatory asset included in base rates.

Under (Over)-recovered electric and naturalgas revenue decoupling.These amounts represent the electric and gas distribution rate cases, PECO is allowed recovery of rate case costs over two years ended December 31, 2012. ComEd and PECO dorecoverable from or refundable to customers under BGE’s decoupling mechanism, which does not earn a return on the recoveryrate of these costs.return. As of December 31, 2013, BGE had a regulatory liability of $7 million related to over-recovered electric revenue decoupling and $9 million related to over-recovered natural gas revenue decoupling. As of December 31, 2012, BGE had a regulatory asset of $5 million related to under-recovered electric revenue decoupling and a regulatory liability of $7 million related to over-recovered natural gas revenue decoupling.

 

Nuclear decommissioning.These amounts represent estimated future nuclear decommissioning costs for former ComEd and PECO plants that exceed (regulatory asset) or are less than (regulatory liability) the associated decommissioning trust fund assets. Exelon believes the trust fund assets, including prospective earnings thereon and any future collections from customers, will equalbe sufficient to fund the associated future decommissioning costs at the time of decommissioning. See Note 13—15—Asset Retirement Obligations for additional information.

 

Removal costs. These amounts represent funds ComEd and BGE have received from customers through depreciation rates to cover the future non-legally required cost of removal of property, plant

263


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

and equipment which reduces rate base for ratemaking purposes. This liability is reduced as costs are incurred.

DLC Program Costs. The DLC program costs include equipment, installation, and information technology costs necessary to implement the DLC Program under PECO’s EE&C Phase I Plans. PECO received full cost recovery through Phase I collections and will amortize the costs as a credit to the income statement to offset the related depreciation expense during the same period through September 2025, which is the remaining useful life of the assets. PECO is not paying interest on these over-recovered costs.

 

Electric distribution tax repairs. PECO’s 2010 electric distribution rate case settlement required that the expected cash benefit from the application of Revenue Procedure 2011-43, which was issued on August 19, 2011, to prior tax years be refunded to customers over a seven-year period. Credits began being reflected in customer bills on January 1, 2012. No interest will be paid to customers.

 

Gas distribution tax repairs.PECO’s 2010 natural gas distribution rate case settlement required that the expected cash benefit from the application of new tax repairs deduction methodologies for 2010 and prior tax years be refunded to customers over a seven-year period. In September 2012, PECO filed an application with the IRS to change its method of accounting for gas distribution repairs for the 2011 tax year. Credits will bebegan being reflected in customer bills beginningon January 1, 2013. No interest will be paid to customers.

259


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Under (Over)-recovered uncollectible accounts. As a result of the February 2010 ICC order approving recovery of ComEd’s uncollectible accounts, ComEd has the ability to adjust its rates annually to reflect the increases and decreases in annual uncollectible accounts expense starting with year 2008. ComEd recorded a regulatory asset for the cumulative under-collections in 2008 and 2009. Recovery of the initial regulatory asset was completed over an approximate 14-month time frame which began in April 2010. The recovery or refund of the difference in the uncollectible accounts expense applicable to the years starting with January 1, 2010, will take place over a 12-month time frame beginning in June of the following year. ComEd is not earning a return or paying interest on these under (over)-recovered costs.

 

Under (Over)-recovered AEPS costs current asset (liability).The AEPS costs represent the administrative and AEC costs incurred to comply with the requirements of the AEPS Act, which are recoverable on a full and current basis. PECO earns interest on under-recovered costs and pays interest on over-recovered costs to customers. Beginning in 2013, these costs are included within the energy and transmission programs line item.

Revenue subject to refund.These amounts represent refunds of $37 million and associated interest of $1 million ComEd owes to customers primarily related to the treatment of post-test year accumulated depreciation issue in the 2007 Rate Case. See above discussion of the 2007 Rate Case for further information.

 

Purchase of Receivables Programs (Exelon, ComEd, PECO, and BGE)

 

ComEd, PECO and BGE are required, under separate legislation and regulations in Illinois, Pennsylvania and Maryland, respectively, to purchase certain receivables from retail electric and natural gas suppliers. For retail suppliers participating in the utilities’ consolidated billing, ComEd, PECO and BGE must purchase their customer accounts receivables. ComEd and BGE purchasepurchases receivables at

264


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

a discount to primarily recover uncollectible accounts expense from the suppliers. BGE’s tariff provides that receivables are to be purchased at a discount, primarily to recover uncollectible accounts expense from the suppliers. However, if the discount rate is negative, the tariff provides that the receivable is purchased at a zero discount rate. BGE is currently purchasing certain receivables at a zero discount rate. PECO is required to purchase receivables at face value and is permitted to recover uncollectible accounts expense from customers through distribution rates. Exelon, ComEd, PECO, and BGE do not record unbilled commodity receivables under their POR programs. Purchased billed receivables are classified in other accounts receivable, net on Exelon’s, ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. The following tables provide information about the purchased receivables of the Registrants as of December 31, 20122013 and 2011.2012.

 

As of December 31, 2013

  Exelon ComEd PECO BGE 

Purchased receivables(a)

  $263  $105  $72  $86 

Allowance for uncollectible accounts(b)

   (30  (16  (7  (7
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Purchased receivables, net

  $233  $89  $65  $79 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

As of December 31, 2012

  Exelon ComEd PECO BGE   Exelon ComEd PECO BGE 

Purchased receivables(a)

  $191  $55  $65  $71   $191  $55  $65  $71 

Allowance for uncollectible accounts(b)

   (21  (9  (6  (6   (21  (9  (6  (6
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Purchased receivables, net

  $170  $46  $59  $65   $170  $46  $59  $65 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

As of December 31, 2011

  Exelon ComEd PECO BGE 

Purchased receivables(a)

  $68  $16  $52  $61 

Allowance for uncollectible accounts(b)

   (5  —     (5  (3
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Purchased receivables, net

  $63  $16  $47  $58 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)PECO’s gas POR program became effective on January 1, 2012 and includes a 1% discount on purchased receivables in order to recover the implementation costs of the program. If the costs are not fully recovered when PECO files its next gas distribution rate case, PECO will propose a mechanism to recover the remaining implementation costs as a distribution charge to low volume transportation customers or apply future discounts on purchased receivables from natural gas suppliers serving those customers.
(b)For ComEd and BGE, reflects the incremental allowance for uncollectible accounts recorded, which is in addition to the purchase discount. For ComEd, the incremental uncollectible accounts expense is recovered through its Purchase of Receivables with Consolidated Billing (PORCB) tariff.

 

260


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

4. Merger and Acquisitions

 

Merger with Constellation (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Description of Transaction

 

On March 12, 2012, Exelon completed the merger contemplated by the Merger Agreement among Exelon, Bolt Acquisition Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of Exelon (Merger Sub), and Constellation. As a result of that merger, Merger Sub was merged into Constellation (the Initial Merger) and Constellation became a wholly owned subsidiary of Exelon. Following the completion of the Initial Merger, Exelon and Constellation completed a series of internal corporate organizational restructuring transactions. Constellation merged with and into Exelon, with Exelon continuing as the surviving corporation (the Upstream Merger). Simultaneously with the Upstream Merger, Constellation’s interest in RF HoldCo LLC, which holds Constellation’s interest in BGE, was transferred to Exelon Energy Delivery Company, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Exelon that also owns Exelon’s interests in ComEd and PECO. Following the Upstream Merger and the transfer of RF HoldCo LLC, Exelon contributed to Generation certain subsidiaries, including those with generation and customer supply operations that were acquired from Constellation as a result of the Initial Merger and the Upstream Merger.

 

Constellation’s shareholders received 0.930 shares of Exelon common stock265


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in exchange for eachmillions, except per share of Constellation common stock outstanding as of March 12, 2012. Generally, all outstanding Constellation equity-based compensation awards were converted into Exelon equity-based compensation awards using the same ratio. See Note 17—Common Stock for further information.data unless otherwise noted)

 

Regulatory Matters

 

In December 2011,February 2012, the MDPSC issued an Order approving the Exelon and Constellation reached a settlement with the State of Maryland and the City of Baltimore and other interested parties in connection with the regulatory proceedings related to the merger that were pending before the MDPSC.merger. As part of this settlement and the application for approval of the merger by MDPSC Order, Exelon agreed to provide a package of benefits to BGE customers, the City of Baltimore and the State of Maryland, resulting in an estimated direct investment in the State of Maryland of more thanapproximately $1 billion.

 

261


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

On February 17, 2012, the MDPSC approved the merger with conditions. Many of the conditions were reflective of the settlement agreements described above. The following costs were recognized after the closing of the merger and are included in Exelon’s, Generation’s and BGE’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income for the year ended December 31, 2012:2012.

 

Description

 Payment
Period
 BGE  Generation  Exelon  

Statement of Operations
Location

BGE rate credit of $100 per residential customer(a)

 Q2 2012 $113  $—    $113  Revenues

Customer investment fund to invest in energy efficiency and low-income energy assistance to BGE customers

 2012 to 2014  —     —     113.5  O&M Expense

Contribution for renewable energy, energy efficiency or related projects in Baltimore

 2012 to 2014  —     —     2  O&M Expense

Charitable contributions at $7 million per year for 10 years

 2012 to 2021  28   35   70  O&M Expense

State funding for offshore wind development projects

 Q2 2012  —     —     32  O&M Expense

Miscellaneous tax benefits

 Q2 2012  (2  —     (2 Taxes Other Than Income
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

Total

  $139  $35  $328.5  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

(a)Exelon made a $66 million equity contribution to BGE in the second quarter of 2012 to fund the after-tax amount of the rate credit as directed in the MDPSC order approving the merger transaction.

 

In addition to these costs, theThe direct investment estimate includes $95 million to $120 million forrelating to the requirement to cause construction of a headquarters building in Baltimore for Generation’s competitive energy businesses. TheOn March 20, 2013, Generation signed a 20 year lease agreement that is contingent upon the developer obtaining all required approvals, permits and financing for the construction of the building. Once required approvals are received and financing conditions are met, construction will commence and the building is expected to be completedready for occupancy in 1 toapproximately 2 years. years after building construction commences.

The direct investment estimate also includes $625$600 million to $650 million for Exelon’s and Generation’s commitment to develop or assist in the development of 285—300 MWs of new generation in Maryland, expected to be completed over a period of 10 years. Such costs, which are expected to be primarily capital in nature, will be recognized as incurred. As of December 31, 2012, amounts reflected in the Exelon and Generation consolidated financial statements for these commitments were immaterial.

The settlement agreementMDPSC Order contemplates various options for complying with the new generation development commitments, including building or acquiring generating assets, making subsidy or compliance payments, or in circumstances in which the generation build is delayed, making liquidated damages payments. Exelon and Generation expect that the majority of these commitments will be satisfied by building or acquiring generating assets and, therefore, will be primarily capital in nature and recognized as incurred. If in the future Exelon determines that it is probable that it will make subsidy, compliance or liquidated damages payments related to the new generation development commitments, Exelon will record a liability at that time. As of December 31, 2012,2013, it is reasonably possible that Exelon will be required to make subsidy or

266


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

liquidated damages payments of approximately $40 million rather than build one of the generation projects contemplated by the commitments, given that the generation build is dependent upon the passage of legislation and other conditions that Exelon does not control.

 

PursuantOn July 26, 2013, Generation executed an engineering procurement and construction contract to expand its Perryman, Maryland site with 120MW of new natural gas-fired generation to satisfy certain of these commitments and achievement of commercial operation is expected in 2015. In December 2013, Generation acquired the MDPSC merger approval conditions, BGE is restricted from paying any dividend on its common shares throughFourmile Ridge Project in western Maryland and executed a wind turbine supply agreement for construction of a 32.5 MW project targeted for commercial operation in November 2014. This project will satisfy a portion of the end125 MW Tier I land-based renewables commitment. See Note 22—Commitments and Contingencies for additional information. As of 2014, is required to maintain specified minimumDecember 31, 2013, amounts reflected in the Exelon and Generation consolidated financial statements include $24 million of capital expenditures and O&M expenditure levels in 2012$6 million of development costs included within operating and 2013, and is not permitted to reduce employment levels due to involuntary attritionmaintenance expense associated with pursuit of these commitments for new generation in the merger integration process.

262


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

State of Maryland.

 

Associated with certain of the regulatory approvals required for the merger, Exelon and Constellation agreed to enter into contracts to sellon November 30, 2012, a subsidiary of Generation sold three ConstellationMaryland generating stations located in PJM within 150 days (subsequently extended 30 days by the DOJ) following the merger completion and to complete the divestitures within 30 days after receipt of regulatory approvals. These stations,associated assets, Brandon Shores and H.A. Wagner in Anne Arundel County, Maryland, and C.P. Crane in Baltimore County, Maryland, include base-load, coal-fired generation units plus associated gas/oil units located at the same sites, and total 2,648 MW of generation capacity.

On August 8, 2012, a subsidiary of Generation reached an agreement to sell these three Maryland generating stations and associated assets to Raven Power Holdings LLC (Raven Power), a subsidiary of Riverstone Holdings LLC. The sale was completed on November 30, 2012. The sale agreement included a base price with purchase price adjustments based on fuel inventory, working capital, capital expenditures, and timing of the closing, resulting in net proceeds from the sale of approximately $371 million. Decisions by certain market participants to remove themselves from the bidding process, combined with the deadlines and limitations on the pool of potential buyers imposed by the merger approval orders, resulted in realized sales proceeds below Generation’s estimated fair value of the Maryland generating stations. Consequently, Exelon and Generation recorded a pre-tax loss of $278$272 million in operating and maintenance expense in the third quarter of 2012 to reflect the difference between the estimated sales price at that time and the carrying value. This loss amount was adjusted to $272value of the generating stations and associated assets. In the first quarter of 2013, Exelon and Generation recorded a pre-tax gain of $8 million to reflect the final settlement of the sales price upon closing on November 30, 2012.with Raven Power.

 

In connection with the sale of the Maryland generating stations, Exelon agreed to indemnify Raven Power for certain costs associated with the treatment of hazardous substances at off-site disposal facilities and any claims arising as a result of, or in connection with, any toxic tort, natural resource damages, loss of life or injury to persons due to releases of, or exposure to hazardous substances in connection with Raven Power’s remediation of environmental contamination or Exelon’s non-compliance with environmental laws or permits prior to the closing date of the sale.

 

Pursuant to the MDPSC merger approval conditions, BGE is restricted from paying any dividend on its common shares through the end of 2014, was required to maintain specified minimum capital and O&M expenditure levels in 2012 and 2013, and is not permitted to reduce employment levels due to involuntary attrition associated with the merger integration process for two years following the closing of the merger. Additionally, BGE is subject to other merger approval conditions to enhance BGE’s ring-fencing measures established by order of the MDPSC.

Subsequent to the merger, Generation discovered that, for the first two weeks following the merger, due to a software error, Generation inadvertently bid certain generating units into the PJM energy market at prices that slightly exceeded the cost-based caps to which it had agreed. This error was a violation of the commitments made in connection with merger approvals by DOJ, FERC and the MDPSC. Generation reported the error to the DOJ, FERC and the MDPSC and committed to remedy

267


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

the impacts of its error. The MDPSC held a hearing to review the error, and accepted Generation’s proposed remediation. Subsequent close examination by Generation of its cost-based bids also revealed the need for some minor adjustments to the cost build up for certain of its PJM units. Generation has coordinated with PJM to determine the impact on Generation’s revenues and the market from this error and these adjustments, and Generation has worked with PJM to reverse the financial impacts. In November 2012, Generation reached a settlement with the DOJ regarding this matter. The final resolution did not have a material impact on Exelon’s or Generation’s results of operations, cash flows or financial position.

In addition, in January 2012, Exelon and Constellation reached an agreement with EDF under which EDF withdrew its opposition to the Exelon-Constellation merger. The terms of the agreement address CENG, a joint venture between Constellation and EDF that owns and operates a total of three nuclear facilities with a total of five generating units in Maryland and New York. The agreement reaffirms the terms of the joint venture. The agreement did not include any exchange of monetary consideration, and Exelon does not expect the agreement will have a material effect on Exelon’s and Generation’s future results of operations, financial position and cash flows.

263


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Exelon was named in suits filed in the Circuit Court of Baltimore City, Maryland alleging that individual directors of Constellation breached their fiduciary duties by entering into the proposed merger transaction and Exelon aided and abetted the individual directors’ breaches. Similar suits were also filed in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. The suits sought to enjoin a Constellation shareholder vote on the proposed merger until all material information was disclosed and sought rescission of the proposed merger. During the third quarter of 2011, the parties to the suits reached an agreement in principle to settle the suits through additional disclosures to Constellation shareholders. On June 26, 2012, the court approved the settlement and entered final judgment.

 

Accounting for the Merger Transaction

The total consideration in the merger was based on the opening price of a share of Exelon common stock on March 12, 2012 (in millions):

   Number of Shares/
Awards Issued
   Total Fair
Value
 

Issuance of Exelon common stock to Constellation shareholders and equity award holders at the exchange ratio of 0.930 shares for each share of Constellation common stock; based on the opening price of Exelon common stock on March 12, 2012 of $38.91(a)

   187.45   $7,294 

Issuance of Exelon equity awards to replace existing Constellation equity awards(b)

   11.30    71 
    

 

 

 

Total purchase price

    $7,365 
    

 

 

 

(a)The number of shares issued excludes 0.7 million shares of stock that are held in a custodian account specifically for the settlement of unvested share-based restricted stock awards. The related share value is excluded from the estimated fair value as these awards have not vested and, therefore, are not in the purchase price.
(b)Includes vested Constellation stock options and restricted stock units converted at fair value to Exelon awards on March 12, 2012. The fair value of the stock options was determined using the Black-Scholes model.

All options to purchase Constellation common stock under various equity agreements were converted into options to acquire a number of shares of Exelon common stock (as adjusted for the exchange ratio) at an option price. All Constellation unvested restricted stock awards granted prior to April 28, 2011, that were outstanding immediately prior to the consummation of the Merger, became vested on a pro rata basis (determined based upon the number of months from the start of the applicable restricted period to the closing of the Initial Merger) and converted into Exelon common stock at the exchange ratio in accordance with the applicable stock plan and award agreement terms. All Constellation restricted stock awards that remained unvested on a pro rata basis pursuant to the foregoing formula, and any Constellation unvested restricted stock awards granted after April 28, 2011, have been assumed by Exelon and automatically converted into shares of unvested restricted stock of Exelon at the exchange ratio. Likewise, all restricted stock units granted prior to April 28, 2011 under the Constellation Plans and outstanding immediately prior to the completion of the Initial Merger became vested on a pro rata basis (determined based upon the number of months from the start of the applicable restricted period to the closing of the Initial Merger) and have been assumed by Exelon and automatically converted into a number of shares of Exelon common stock at the exchange ratio.

 

The fair value of Constellation’s non-regulated business assets acquired and liabilities assumed was determined based on significant estimates and assumptions that are judgmental in nature, including projected future cash flows (including timing); discount rates reflecting risk inherent in the future cash flows; and future market prices. There were also judgments made to determine the expected useful lives assigned to each class of assets acquired and duration of liabilities assumed.

264


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

The financial statements of BGE do not include fair value adjustments for assets or liabilities subject to rate-setting provisions for BGE. BGE is subject to the rate-setting authority of FERC and the MDPSC and is accounted for pursuant to the accounting guidance for regulated operations. The rate-setting and cost recovery provisions currently in place for BGE provide revenue derived from costs including a return on investment of assets and liabilities included in rate base. Except for debt, fuel supply contracts and regulatory assets not earning a return, the fair values of BGE’s tangible and intangible assets and liabilities subject to these rate-setting provisions are assumed to approximate their carrying values and, therefore, do not reflect any net adjustments related to these amounts. For BGE’s debt, fuel supply contracts and regulatory assets not earning a return, the difference between fair value and book value of BGE’s assets acquired and liabilities assumed is recorded as a regulatory asset and liability at Exelon Corporate as Exelon did not apply push-down accounting to BGE. See Note 1—Significant Accounting Policies for additional information on BGE’s push-down accounting treatment. Also see Note 3 – 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information on BGE’s regulatory assets.

 

The valuations performed in the first quarter of 2012 to assess the fair values of certain assets acquired and liabilities assumed were considered preliminary as a result of the short time period between the closing of the merger and the end of the first quarter of 2012. The allocation of the purchase price may be modified up to one year from the date of the merger as more information is obtained about the fair value of assets acquired and liabilities assumed. The preliminary valuations performed in the first quarter of 2012 were updated in the second, third and fourth quarters of 2012, with the most significant adjustments to the preliminary valuation amounts having been made to the fair values assigned to the acquired power supply and fuel contracts, unregulated property, plant and equipment and investments in affiliates. The preliminary amounts recognized are subjectThere were no significant adjustments to further revision until the valuations are completed and to the extent that additional information is obtained about the facts and circumstances that existed as of the merger date. Any changes to the fair value assessments may affect the purchase price allocation in the first quarter of 2013 and material changes could require the financial statements to be retroactively amended.

The updated preliminary purchase price allocation was final as of the Initial Merger of Exelon with Constellation and Exelon’s contribution of certain subsidiaries of Constellation to Generation at DecemberMarch 31, 2012 was as follows:2013.

 

Preliminary Purchase Price Allocation, excluding amortization

  Exelon   Generation 

Current assets

  $4,936   $3,638 

Property, plant and equipment

   9,342    4,054 

Unamortized energy contracts

   3,218    3,218 

Other intangibles, trade name and retail relationships

   457    457 

Investment in affiliates

   1,942    1,942 

Pension and OPEB regulatory asset

   740    —   

Other assets

   2,265    1,266 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total assets

   22,900    14,575 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Current liabilities

   3,408    2,804 

Unamortized energy contracts

   1,722    1,512 

Long-term debt, including current maturities

   5,632    2,972 

Noncontrolling interest

   90    90 

Deferred credits and other liabilities and preferred securities

   4,683    1,933 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total liabilities, preferred securities and noncontrolling interest

   15,535    9,311 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total purchase price

  $7,365   $5,264 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

265268


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

The final purchase price allocation of the Merger of Exelon with Constellation and Exelon’s contribution of certain subsidiaries of Constellation to Generation was as follows:

Preliminary Purchase Price Allocation, excluding amortization

  Exelon   Generation 

Current assets

  $4,936   $3,638 

Property, plant and equipment

   9,342    4,054 

Unamortized energy contracts

   3,218    3,218 

Other intangibles, trade name and retail relationships

   457    457 

Investment in affiliates

   1,942    1,942 

Pension and OPEB regulatory asset

   740    —   

Other assets

   2,265    1,266 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total assets

   22,900    14,575 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Current liabilities

   3,408    2,804 

Unamortized energy contracts

   1,722    1,512 

Long-term debt, including current maturities

   5,632    2,972 

Non-controlling interest

   90    90 

Deferred credits and other liabilities and preferred securities

   4,683    1,933 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total liabilities, preferred securities and non-controlling interest

   15,535    9,311 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total purchase price

  $7,365   $5,264 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

Intangible Assets Recorded

 

For the power supply and fuel contracts acquired from Constellation, the difference between the contract price and the market price at the date of the merger was recognized as either an intangible asset or liability based on whether the contracts were in or out-of-the-money. The valuation of the acquired intangible assets and liabilities was estimated by applying either the market approach or the income approach depending on the nature of the underlying contract. The market approach was utilized when prices and other relevant information generated by market transactions involving comparable transactions were available. Otherwise the income approach, which is based upon discounted projected future cash flows associated with the underlying contracts, was utilized. The measure is based upon certain unobservable inputs, which are considered Level 3 inputs, pursuant to applicable accounting guidance. Key estimates and inputs include forecasted power and fuel prices and the discount rate. The fair value amounts are amortized over the life of the contract in relation to the present value of the underlying cash flows as of the merger date. Amortization expense and income are recorded through purchased power and fuel expense or operating revenues.

Exelon and Generation present separately in their Consolidated Balance Sheets the unamortized energy contract assets and liabilities for these contracts. Exelon’s andGeneration’s amortization expense for the year ended December 31, 2013 amounted to $470 million. Generation’s amortization expense for the period March 12, 2012 to December 31, 2012 amounted to $1,098$1,101 million. ThisIn addition, Exelon Corporate has established a regulatory asset and an unamortized energy contract liability related to BGE’s power supply and fuel contracts. The power supply and fuel contracts regulatory asset amortization expense excludeswas $77 million for the year ended December 31, 2013 and $116 million in amortization offor the regulatory asset andperiod March 12, 2012 to December 31, 2012. An equally offsetting amortization of the fuel supplyunamortized energy contract liability has been recorded at Exelon Corporate in the Consolidated Statement of Operations. The weighted-average amortization period is approximately 1.5 years.

 

The fair value of the Constellation trade name intangible asset was determined based on the relief from royalty method of the income approach whereby fair value is determined to be the present value of the license fees avoided by owning the assets. The measure is based upon certain unobservable

269


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

inputs, which are considered Level 3 inputs, pursuant to applicable accounting guidance. Key assumptions include the hypothetical royalty rate and the discount rate. Exelon’s and Generation’s straight line amortization expense for the fair value of the Constellation trade name intangible asset for the year ended December 31, 2013 and for the period March 12, 2012 to December 31, 2012 amounted to $26 million and $20 million. The amortization period is approximately 10 years.million, respectively. The trade name intangible asset is included in deferred debits and other assets within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

The fair value of the retail relationships was determined based on a “multi-period excess method” of the income approach. Under this method, the intangible asset’s fair value is determined to be the estimated future cash flows that will be earned on the current customer base, taking into account expected contract renewals based on customer attrition rates and costs to retain those customers. The measure is based upon certain unobservable inputs, which are considered Level 3 inputs, pursuant to applicable accounting guidance. Key assumptions include the customer attrition rate and the discount rate. The intangible assets for the fair value of the retail relationships are amortized as amortization expense on a straight line basis over the useful life of the underlying assets averaging approximately 12.4 years.assets. Exelon’s and Generation’s straight line amortization expense for year ended December 31, 2013 and for the period March 12, 2012 to December 31, 2012 amounted to $21 million and $15 million.million, respectively. The retail relationships intangible assets are included in deferred debits and other assets within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.

266


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Exelon’s intangible assets and liabilities acquired through the merger with Constellation included in its Consolidated Balance Sheets, along with the future estimated amortization, were as follows as of December 31, 2012:2013:

 

Description

 Weighted
Average
Amortization
  Gross  Accumulated
Amortization
  Net  Estimated amortization expense 
         Estimated amortization expense 

Description

Weighted
Average
Amortization
  Gross  Accumulated
Amortization
  Net  2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
and
Beyond
  Weighted
Average
Amortization
(Years)(b)
 Gross Accumulated
Amortization
 Net 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
and
Beyond
 
 $394  $74  $19  $(31 $(22 $80   1.5  $1,499  $(1,378 $121  $75  $18  $(31 $(21 $11  $69 

Trade name

  10.0   243   (20  223   24   24   24   24   24   103   10.0   243   (46  197   24   24   24   24   24   77 

Retail relationships

  12.4   214   (15  199   19   19   19   19   19   104   12.4   214   (36  178   19   18   18   18   18   87 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total, net

  $1,953  $(1,017 $936  $437  $117  $62  $12  $21  $287   $1,956  $(1,460 $496  $118  $60  $11  $21  $53  $233 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Includes the fair value of BGE’s power and gas supply contracts of $12 million for which an offsetting Exelon Corporate regulatory asset was also recorded.
(b)Weighted average amortization period was calculated as of the date of acquisition.

 

Impact of Merger

 

It is impracticable to determine the current quarter and year-to-date overall financial statement impact for the Constellation subsidiaries contributed down to Generation following the Upstream Merger.Merger for the year ended December 31, 2012. Upon closing of the merger, the operations of these Constellation subsidiaries were integrated into Generation’s operations and are therefore not fully distinguishable after the merger.

 

The impact of BGE on Exelon’s Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income includes operating revenues of $3,065 million and $2,091 million and net lossincome (loss) of $31$210 million and $(31) million during the years ended December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively.

During the year ended December 31, 2012.2013, Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE incurred merger and integration-related costs of $142 million, $106 million, $16 million, $9 million and $6 million, respectively. Of these amounts, Exelon, ComEd and BGE deferred $17 million, $11 million and $6

270


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

million, respectively, as a regulatory asset as of December 31, 2013. Additionally, Exelon and BGE established a regulatory asset of $6 million as of December 31, 2013 for previously incurred 2012 merger and integration-related costs.

 

During the year ended December 31, 2012, Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE incurred merger and integration-related costs of $746$804 million, $340 million, $5$41 million, $17 million and $160$182 million, respectively. TheseOf these amounts, do not include mergerExelon, ComEd and integration-related costs ofBGE deferred $58 million, $36 million and $22 million, incurred at ComEd and BGE, respectively, which have been recorded as a regulatory asset. asset as of December 31, 2012.

The costs incurred are classified primarily within Operating and Maintenance Expense in the Registrants’ respective Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income, with the exception of the BGE customer rate credit and the credit facility fees, which are included as a reduction to operating revenues and other, net, respectively, for the yearyears ended December 31, 2012.

During the year ended December 31, 2011, Exelon, Generation2013 and PECO incurred merger2012. See Note 22—Commitments and integration-related costs of $77 million, $15 million and $2 million, respectively. These costs are classified primarily within Operating and Maintenance Expense in the Registrants’ respective Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.Contingencies for additional information.

 

Severance Costs

The Registrants have an ongoing severance plan under which, in general, the longer an employee worked prior to termination the greater the amount of severance benefits. The Registrants record a liability and expense or regulatory asset for severance once terminations are probable of occurrence and the related severance benefits can be reasonably estimated. For severance benefits that are incremental to its ongoing severance plan (“one-time termination benefits”), the Registrants measure the obligation and record the expense at fair value at the communication date if there are no future service requirements, or, if future service is required to receive the termination benefit, ratably over the required service period.

267


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Upon closing the merger with Constellation, Exelon recorded a severance accrual for the anticipated employee position reductions as a result of the post-merger integration. The majority of these positions are corporate and Generation support positions. Since then, Exelon has identified specific employees to be severed pursuant to the merger-related staffing and selection process; as well as employees that were previously identified for severance but have since accepted another position within Exelon and are no longer receiving a severance benefit. Exelon adjusts its accrual each quarter to reflect its best estimate of remaining severance costs. The amount of severance expense associated with the post-merger integration recognized through December 31, 2012, for Exelon is $138 million, which includes $88 million, $16 million, $7 million and $19 million for Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE, respectively. Estimated costs to be incurred after December 31, 2012 are not material. In addition, certain employees identified during the staffing and selection process also receive pension and other postretirement benefits that are deemed contractual termination benefits. See Note 14—Retirement Benefits for additional information on the contractual termination benefits.

For the year ended December 31, 2012, the Registrants recorded the following severance benefits costs associated with the identified job reductions within operating and maintenance expense in their Consolidated Statements of Operations, except for ComEd and BGE:

Year Ended December 31, 2012

                    

Severance Benefits(a)

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd (b)   PECO   BGE (c) 

Severance charges

  $124   $80   $14   $7   $17 

Stock compensation

   7    4    1    —       1 

Other charges

   7    4    1    —       1 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total severance benefits

  $138   $88   $16   $7   $19 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)The amounts above include $46 million at Generation, $14 million at ComEd, $7 million at PECO, and $7 million at BGE, for amounts billed by BSC through intercompany allocations for the year ended December 31, 2012.
(b)ComEd established regulatory assets of $16 million, as of December 31, 2012, for severance benefits costs. The majority of these costs are expected to be recovered over a five-year period.
(c)Consistent with MDPSC precedent, BGE established a regulatory asset of $19 million, as of December 31, 2012, for severance benefits costs. The majority of these costs are expected to be recovered over a five-year period.

Amounts included in the table below represent the severance liability recorded by Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE for employees of those Registrants and exclude amounts billed through intercompany allocations:

Year Ended December 31, 2012

                 

Severance liability

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO   BGE 

Balance at December 31, 2011

  $—    $—    $—    $—     $—   

Severance charges(a)

   124   38   2   —      11 

Stock compensation

   7   2   —     —      —   

Other charges(b)

   7   2   —     —      1 

Payments

   (27  (9  (1  —      (1
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Balance at December 31, 2012

  $111  $33  $1  $—     $11 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Includes salary continuance and health and welfare severance benefits. Amounts represent ongoing severance plan benefits. Amounts also include one-time termination benefits of $3 million and $1 million for Exelon and Generation, respectively, which they began to recognize in the second quarter of 2012.
(b)Primarily includes life insurance, employer payroll taxes, educational assistance, and outplacement services.

268


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Cash payments under the plan began in the second quarter of 2012. Substantially all cash payments under the plan are expected to be made by the end of 2016.

Pro-forma Impact of the Merger

 

The following unaudited pro forma financial information reflects the consolidated results of operations of Exelon and Generation as if the merger with Constellation had taken place on January 1, 2011. The unaudited pro forma information was calculated after applying Exelon’s and Generation’s accounting policies and adjusting Constellation’s including BGE’s as appropriate, results to reflect purchase accounting adjustments.

 

The unaudited pro forma financial information has been presented for illustrative purposes only and is not necessarily indicative of results of operations that would have been achieved had the merger events taken place on the dates indicated, or the future consolidated results of operations of the combined company.

 

   Generation   Exelon 
   Year Ended December 31,   Year Ended December 31, 

(unaudited)

      2012           2011 (a)            2012           2011 (b)      

Total Revenues

  $17,013   $19,494   $26,700   $30,712 

Net income attributable to Exelon

   1,205    324    2,092    974 

Basic Earnings Per Share

   n.a.     n.a.    $2.56   $1.15 

Diluted Earnings Per Share

   n.a.     n.a.     2.55    1.14 

 

(a)The amounts above include non-recurring costs directly related to the merger of $203 million for the year ended December 31, 2011.
(b)The amounts above include non-recurring costs directly related to the merger of $236 million for the year ended December 31, 2011.

 

Acquisitions (Exelon and Generation)

 

Consistent with the applicable accounting guidance, the fair value of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed was determined as of the acquisition date through the use of significant estimates and assumptions that are judgmental in nature. Some of the more significant estimates and assumptions used include: projected future cash flows (including the amount and timing); discount rates reflecting the risk inherent in the future cash flows; and future power and fuel market prices. Additionally, market prices based on the Market Price Referent (MPR) established by the CPUC for renewable energy resources were used in determining the fair value of the Antelope Valley assets acquired and liabilities assumed. There were also judgments made to determine the expected useful lives assigned to each class of assets acquired and the duration of the liabilities assumed. Generation did not record any goodwill related to any of the respective acquisitions.

 

269271


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

The following table summarizes the acquisition-date fair value of the consideration transferred and the assets and liabilities assumed for each of the companies acquired by Generation during the yearsyear ended December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010:2011:

 

  Acquisitions   Acquisitions 
  2011 2010   2011 
  Wolf
Hollow
 Antelope
Valley
 Exelon
Wind
   Wolf
Hollow
 Antelope
Valley
 

Fair value of consideration transferred

       

Cash

  $305  $75  $893   $305  $75 

Plus: Gain on PPA settlement

   6   —     —      6   —   

Contingent consideration

   —     —     32 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total fair value of consideration transferred

  $311  $75  $925   $311  $75 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Recognized amounts of identifiable assets acquired and liabilities assumed

       

Property, plant and equipment

  $347  $15  $700   $347  $15 

Inventory

   5   —     —      5   —   

Intangible assets(a)

   —     190   224    —     190 

Payable to First Solar, Inc.(b)

   —     (135  —      —     (135

Working capital, net

   (5  —     18    (5  —   

Asset retirement obligations

   —     —     (13

Noncontrolling interest

   —      (3

Other Assets

   —     5   (1   —     5 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total net identifiable assets

  $347  $75  $925   $347  $75 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Bargain purchase gain

  $36  $—    $—     $36  $—   
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

 

(a)See Note 8—10—Intangible Assets for additional information.
(b)Generation concluded that the remaining, yet-to-be paid $135 million in consideration was embedded in the amounts payable under the Engineering, Procurement, Construction (EPC) agreement for First Solar, Inc. to construct the solar facility. For accounting purposes, this aspect of the transaction is considered to be akin to a “seller financing” arrangement. As such, Generation recorded a liability of $135 million associated with the portion of the future payments to First Solar, Inc. under the EPC agreement to reflect Generation’s implicit amounts due First Solar, Inc. for the remainder of the value of the net assets acquired. The $135 million payable to First Solar, Inc. will be relieved as Generation makes payments for costs incurred over the project construction period. At December 31, 2012, $87 million remained payable to First Solar, Inc. During 2013, a subsidiary of Generation paid off the remaining balance of the payable to First Solar, Inc.

 

Wolf Hollow, LLC.On August 24, 2011, Generation completed the acquisition of all of the equity interests of Wolf Hollow, LLC (Wolf Hollow), a combined-cycle natural gas-fired power plant in north Texas, for a purchase price of $311 million which increased Generation’s owned capacity within the ERCOT power market by 720 MWs. The acquisition supports the Exelon commitment to renewable energylow-carbon generation as part of Exelon 2020.

 

Generation recognized an approximately $36 million non-cash bargain purchase gain (i.e., negative goodwill). The gain was included within Other, net in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

 

The pro forma impact of this acquisition would not have been material to Exelon’s or Generation’s results of operations for the yearsyear ended December 31, 2011 and 2010.

270


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

2011.

 

Antelope Valley Solar Ranch One.On September 30, 2011, Generation acquiredannounced the completion of its acquisition of all of the interests in Antelope Valley Solar Ranch One (Antelope Valley), a 230-MW solar PV project under development in northern Los Angeles County, California, from First Solar, Inc., which developedis developing, building, operating, and will build, operate, and maintainmaintaining the project. The first block

272


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

portion of the project began operations in December 2012, with threesix additional blocks coming online in February 2013 and an expectation2013. Exelon has been informed by First Solar of fullissues relating to delays in the certification of certain components relating to the final two blocks of the project, which will delay commercial operation byof these two blocks until the endfirst half of the third quarter of 2013.2014. When fully operational, Antelope Valley will be one of the largest PV solar projects in the world, with approximately 3.8 million solar panels generating enough clean, renewable electricity to power the equivalent of 75,000 average homes per year. The project has a 25-year PPA, approved by the California Public Utilities Commission, with Pacific Gas & Electric Company for the full output of the plant. The acquisition supports Exelon’s commitment to renewable energy as part of Exelon 2020.

 

Exelon expects to invest up to $701$650 million in equity in the project through 2013.2014. The DOE’s Loan Programs Office issued a guarantee for up to $646 million for a non-recourse loan from the Federal Financing Bank to support the financing of the construction of the project. On April 5, 2012, Antelope Valley received the first DOE-guaranteed loan advance of $69 million and terminated the put option that Generation had on the Antelope Valley project. See Note 11—13—Debt and Credit Agreements for additional information on the DOE loan guarantee.

 

The pro forma impact of this acquisition would not have been material to Exelon’s or Generation’s results of operations for the yearsyear ended December 31, 2011 and 2010.2011.

 

Exelon Wind. On December 9, 2010, Generation paid consideration of $893 million to complete the acquisition of all of the equity interests of John Deere Renewables,5. Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC (now known as Exelon Wind), a leading operator(Exelon and developer of wind power. Under the terms of the agreement, Generation added 735 MWs of installed, operating wind capacity located in eight states. The acquisition supports Exelon’s commitment to renewable energy as part of Exelon 2020.Generation)

 

The contingent consideration arrangement requires that Generation pay up to $40 million related to three individual projects with an aggregate capacity of 230 MWs, contingent upon meeting certain contractual commitments related to the commencement of construction of each project. The fair value of the contingent consideration arrangement of $32 million was determined as of the acquisition date based upon a weighted average probability of meeting certain contractual commitments related to the commencement of construction of each project, which is considered an unobservable (Level 3) input pursuant to applicable accounting guidance. During the third quarter of 2011, $16 million of contingent consideration was paid to Deere & Company for one of the projects and the probability of a second project beginning construction, Harvest II, was increased to 100%. As a result of the contingent consideration includedConstellation merger, Generation owns a 50.01% interest in other currentCENG, a nuclear generation business. Generation’s total equity in earnings (losses) on the investment in CENG is as follows:

   Year Ended
December 31,
2013
  Period March 12,
through December 31,
2012
 

Equity investment income

  $123  $73 

Amortization of basis difference in CENG

   (114  (172
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total equity in earnings (losses)—CENG

  $9  $(99
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

As of March 12, 2012, Generation had an initial basis difference of approximately $204 million between the initial carrying value of its investment in CENG and its underlying equity in CENG. This basis difference resulted from the requirement to record the investment in CENG at fair value under purchase accounting while the underlying assets and liabilities within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets was adjustedCENG continue to $10 million to reflectbe accounted for on a historical cost basis. Generation is amortizing this basis difference over the full expected contingent payment related to the Harvest II project and subsequently paid to Deere & Company during the third quarter of 2012. Additionally, $2 million was recorded in operating and maintenance expense within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. The remaining $8 million of contingent consideration is included in other current liabilities within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.

The fair valuerespective useful lives of the assets acquired included customer receivablesand liabilities of $18 million. There are no outstanding customer receivables that were acquiredCENG or as those assets and liabilities affect the earnings of CENG.

Based on tax sharing provisions contained in the Exelon Wind transaction.

The $3 million noncontrolling interest represents the noncontrolling members’ proportionate shareoperating agreement for CENG, Generation may be eligible for distributions from its investment in CENG in excess of its 50.01% ownership interest. Through purchase accounting, Generation has recorded the fair value of the assets acquired and liabilities assumedexpected future distributions. When these distributions are realized, Generation will record a reduction in the transaction.its investment in CENG. Any distributions in excess of Generation’s investment in CENG would be recorded in earnings.

 

271Generation has various agreements with CENG to purchase power and to provide certain services. For further information regarding these agreements see Note 25—Related Party Transactions.

273


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

On July 29, 2013, Exelon, Generation and subsidiaries of Generation entered into a Master Agreement with EDF, EDF Inc. (EDFI) (a subsidiary of EDF) and CENG. The Master Agreement contemplates that the parties will execute a series of additional agreements at a closing that will occur following the receipt of regulatory approvals and the satisfaction of other customary closing conditions. Exelon currently expects that the closing will occur early in the second quarter of 2014.

 

The pro forma impactMaster Agreement requires CENG to make two pre-closing cash distributions to EDF and Generation, if CENG has cash in excess of reserves and the amount of an outstanding credit facility are available, through one of its wholly owned subsidiaries, as owners of the joint venture. Generation received the first distribution of $115 million in December 2013 and recorded it as a reduction to the Investment in CENG on Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. A second distribution will occur prior to the closing provided that CENG has sufficient available cash.

At the closing, Generation, CENG and subsidiaries of CENG will execute a Nuclear Operating Services Agreement (NOSA) pursuant to which Generation will operate the CENG nuclear generation fleet owned by CENG subsidiaries and provide corporate and administrative services for the remaining life of the CENG nuclear plants as if they were a part of the Generation nuclear fleet, subject to EDFI’s rights as a member of CENG. CENG will reimburse Generation for its direct and allocated costs for such services. The NOSA will replace the SSA. At the closing, Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, a subsidiary of CENG, will also assign to Generation its obligations as Operator of Nine Mile Point Unit 2 under an operating agreement with the co-owner. In addition, at the closing the PSAA will be amended and extended until the permanent cessation of power generation by the CENG generation plants.

In addition, at closing, Generation will make a $400 million loan to CENG, bearing interest at 5.25% per annum and payable out of specified available cash flows of CENG and in any event, payable upon the settlement of the Put Option Agreement discussed below, if the put option is exercised, or payable upon the maturity date of the note (which will be 20 years from the closing), whichever occurs first. Immediately following receipt of the proceeds of such loan, CENG will make a $400 million special distribution to EDFI. The parties will also execute a Fourth Amended and Restated Operating Agreement for CENG, pursuant to which, among other things, CENG will commit to make preferred distributions to Generation (after repayment of the $400 million loan) quarterly out of specified available cash flows, until Generation has received aggregate distributions of $400 million plus a return of 8.5% per annum from the date of the special distribution to EDFI.

Generation and EDFI will also enter into a Put Option Agreement at closing pursuant to which EDFI will have the option, exercisable beginning on January 1, 2016 and thereafter until June 30, 2022, to sell its 49.99% interest in CENG to Generation for a fair market value price determined by agreement of the parties, or absent agreement, a third-party arbitration process. The appraisers determining fair market value of EDF’s 49.99% interest in CENG under the Put Option Agreement are instructed to take into account all rights and obligations under the CENG Operating Agreement, including Generation’s rights with respect to any unpaid aggregate preferred distributions and the related return, and the value of Generation’s rights to other distributions. The beginning of the exercise period will be accelerated if Exelon’s affiliates cease to own a majority of CENG and exercise a related right to terminate the Nuclear Operating Services Agreement. In addition, under limited circumstances, the period for exercise of the put option may be extended for 18 months.

Also at closing, Generation will execute an Indemnity Agreement pursuant to which Generation will indemnify EDF and its affiliates against third-party claims that may arise from any future nuclear incident (as defined in the Price Anderson Act) in connection with the CENG nuclear plants or their operations. Exelon will guarantee Generation’s obligations under this acquisition would not have beenindemnity.

274


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Currently, Exelon and Generation account for their investment in CENG under the equity method of accounting. The transfer of the operating licenses and corresponding operational control to Exelon and Generation will result in Exelon and Generation being required to consolidate the financial position and results of operations of CENG. When that accounting change occurs, Exelon and Generation will derecognize their equity method investment in CENG and will record all assets, liabilities and the non-controlling interest in CENG at fair value on Exelon and Generation’s balance sheets. Any difference between the former carrying value and newly recorded fair value at that date will be recognized as a gain or loss upon consolidation, which could be material to Exelon’s orand Generation’s results of operations for the year ended December 31, 2010.operations.

 

5.6. Accounts Receivable (Exelon, Generation, ComEd PECO and BGE)

 

Accounts receivable at December 31, 20122013 and 20112012 included estimated unbilled revenues, representing an estimate for the unbilled amount of energy or services provided to customers, and is net of an allowance for uncollectible accounts as follows:

 

2012

  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

2013

  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

Unbilled customer revenues

  $1,418  $859  $213  $164  $182    $1,151   $584(a)  $201   $161   $205 

Allowance for uncollectible accounts(a)(b)

   (293  (84  (70  (99)(b)   (40   (272  (57  (62  (107)(c)    (46

 

2011

  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

2012

  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

Unbilled customer revenues

  $902  $493  $246  $163  $194    $1,094   $535(a)  $213   $164   $182 

Allowance for uncollectible accounts(a)(b)

   (199  (29  (78  (92)(b)   (37   (293  (84  (70  (99)(c)    (40

 

(a)Represents unbilled portion of retail receivables estimated under Exelon’s unbilled critical accounting policy.
(b)Includes the allowance for uncollectible accounts on customer and other accounts receivable.
(b)(c)Includes an allowance for uncollectible accounts of $7$8 million and $8$7 million at December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, respectively, related to PECO’s current installment plan receivables described below.

 

PECO Installment Plan Receivables (Exelon and PECO).PECO enters into payment agreements with certain delinquent customers, primarily residential, seeking to restore their service, as required by the PAPUC. Customers with past due balances that meet certain income criteria are provided the option to enter into an installment payment plan, some of which have terms greater than one year, to repay past due balances in addition to paying for their ongoing service on a current basis. The receivable balance for these payment agreement receivables is recorded in accounts receivable for the current portion and other deferred debits and other assets for the noncurrent portion. The net receivable balance for installment plans with terms greater than one year was $18$19 million and $21$18 million as of December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, respectively. The allowance for uncollectible accounts reserve methodology and assessment of the credit quality of the installment plan receivables are consistent with the customer accounts receivable methodology discussed in Note 1—Significant Accounting Policies. The allowance for uncollectible accounts balance associated with these receivables at December 31, 20122013 of $15$18 million consists of $1 million, $3$4 million and $11$13 million for low risk, medium risk and high risk segments, respectively. The allowance for uncollectible accounts balance at December 31, 20112012 of $17$15 million consists of $1 million, $3 million and $13$11 million for low risk, medium risk and high risk segments, respectively. The balance of the payment agreement is billed to the customer in equal monthly installments over the term of the agreement. Installment receivables outstanding as of December 31, 20122013 and 20112012 include balances not yet presented on the customer bill, accounts currently billed and an immaterial amount of past due receivables. When a customer defaults on its payment agreement, the terms of which are defined by plan type, the entire balance of the agreement becomes due and the balance is reclassified to current customer accounts receivable and reserved for in accordance with the methodology discussed in Note 1—Significant Accounting Policies.

Accounts Receivable Agreement (Exelon and PECO).PECO is party to an agreement with a financial institution under which it sold an undivided interest, adjusted daily, in up to $225 million of designated accounts receivable, which is accounted for as a secured borrowing. On November 28, 2012, PECO made a principal paydown of $15 million to meet the compliance requirements for the October 2012 reporting period. The remaining principal balance of $210 million is classified as a short-

 

272275


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

termAccounts Receivable Agreement (Exelon and PECO).PECO was party to an agreement with a financial institution under which it transferred an undivided interest, adjusted daily, in its accounts receivable designated under the agreement in exchange for proceeds of $210 million, which was classified as a short-term note payable on Exelon’s and PECO’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.Sheets as of December 31, 2012. The agreement terminated on August 30, 2013 and PECO paid down the outstanding principal of $210 million. The financial institution no longer has an undivided interest in the accounts receivable designated under the agreement. As of December 31, 2012, and 2011, the financial institution’s undivided interest in Exelon’s and PECO’s gross accounts receivable was equivalent to $289 million, and $329 million, respectively, which isrepresented the financial institution’s interest in PECO’s eligible receivables as calculated under the terms of the agreement. See Note 11—Debt and Credit Agreements for additional information regardingThe agreement required PECO to maintain eligible receivables at least equivalent to the accounts receivable agreement.financial institution’s undivided interest.

 

6.7. Property, Plant and Equipment (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Exelon

 

The following table presents a summary of property, plant and equipment by asset category as of December 31, 20122013 and 2011:2012:

 

  Average Service Life
(years)
  2012   2011   Average Service Life
(years)
  2013   2012 

Asset Category

            

Electric—transmission and distribution

  5 - 90  $26,576   $21,716   5 - 90  $28,123   $26,576 

Electric—generation(a)

  1 - 53   19,004    13,682   1 - 52   20,420    19,004 

Gas—transportation and distribution

  5 - 90   3,108    1,793   5 - 90   3,296    3,108 

Common—electric and gas

  5 - 50   1,029    564   5 - 50   1,101    1,029 

Nuclear fuel(b)(a)

  1 - 8   4,815    4,225   1 - 8   5,196    4,815 

Construction work in progress

  N/A   1,926    1,110   N/A   1,890    1,926 

Other property, plant and equipment(c)(b)

  3 - 72   912    439   1 - 51   1,017    912 
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

Total property, plant and equipment

     57,370    43,529      61,043    57,370 

Less: accumulated depreciation(d)(c)

     12,184    10,959      13,713    12,184 
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

Property, plant and equipment, net

    $45,186   $32,570     $47,330   $45,186 
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Includes assets acquired through acquisitions. See Note 4—Mergers and Acquisitions for additional information.
(b)Includes nuclear fuel that is in the fabrication and installation phase of $894$947 million and $674$894 million at December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, respectively.
(c)(b)Includes Generation’s buildings under capital lease with a net carrying value of $20$23 million and $23$20 million at December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, respectively. The original cost basis of the buildings was $53$59 million and total accumulated amortization was $33$36 million and $30$33 million as of December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, respectively. Also includes ComEd’s buildings under capital lease with a net carrying value of $8 million and $0 million at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. The original cost basis of the buildings was $8 million and total accumulated amortization was $0 million and $0 million as of December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. Includes land held for future use and non utility property at ComEd, PECO and BGE. These balances also include capitalized acquisition, development and exploration costs related to oil and gas production activities at Generation.
(d)(c)Includes accumulated amortization of nuclear fuel in the reactor core at Generation of $2,078$2,371 million and $1,784$2,078 million as of December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, respectively.

276


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

The following table presents the annual depreciation provisions as a percentage of average service life for each asset category.

 

Average Service Life Percentage by Asset Category

  2012  2011  2010 

Electric—transmission and distribution

   2.76  2.59  2.53

Electric—generation

   3.15  3.12  2.86

Gas

   2.03  1.73  1.75

Common—electric and gas

   7.61  8.05  7.25

273


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Average Service Life Percentage by Asset Category

  2013  2012  2011 

Electric—transmission and distribution

   2.91  2.76  2.59

Electric—generation

   3.35  3.15  3.12

Gas

   2.06  2.03  1.73

Common—electric and gas

   7.53  7.61  8.05

 

Generation

 

The following table presents a summary of property, plant and equipment by asset category as of December 31, 20122013 and 2011:2012:

 

  Average Service Life
(years)
  2012   2011   Average Service Life
(years)
  2013   2012 

Asset Category

            

Electric—generation(a)

  1 - 53  $19,004   $13,682   1 - 52  $20,420   $19,004 

Nuclear fuel(b)(a)

  1 - 8   4,815    4,225   1 - 8   5,196    4,815 

Construction work in progress

  N/A   1,352    827   N/A   1,129    1,352 

Other property, plant and equipment(c)(b)

  5 - 57   374    54   1 - 51   400    374 
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

Total property, plant and equipment

     25,545    18,788      27,145    25,545 

Less: accumulated depreciation(d)(c)

     6,014    5,313      7,034    6,014 
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

Property, plant and equipment, net

    $19,531   $13,475     $20,111   $19,531 
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Includes assets acquired through acquisitions. See Note 4—Mergers and Acquisitions for additional information.
(b)Includes nuclear fuel that is in the fabrication and installation phase of $894$947 million and $674$894 million at December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, respectively.
(c)(b)Includes buildings under capital lease with a net carrying value of $20$23 million and $23$20 million at December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, respectively. The original cost basis of the buildings was $53$59 million and total accumulated amortization was $33$36 million and $30$33 million as of December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. These balances also include capitalized acquisition, development and 2011, respectively.exploration costs related to oil and gas production activities.
(d)(c)Includes accumulated amortization of nuclear fuel in the reactor core of $2,078$2,371 million and $1,784$2,078 million as of December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, respectively.

 

The annual depreciation provisions as a percentage of average service life for electric generation assets were 3.15%3.35%, 3.12%3.15% and 2.86%3.12% for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, respectively.

 

License Renewals. Generation’s depreciation provisions are based on the estimated useful lives of its generating stations, which assume the renewal of the licenses for all nuclear generating stations (except for Oyster Creek) and the hydroelectric generating stations. As a result, the receipt of license renewals has no impact on the Consolidated Statements of Operations. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information regarding license renewals.

 

Plant Retirements

Schuylkill Station and Riverside Station. On October 31, 2012, Generation notified PJM of its intention to permanently retire Schuylkill Generating Station Unit 1 by February 1, 2013, and Riverside Generating Station Unit 6 by June 1, 2014. Schuylkill Unit 1 is a 166 MW peaking oil unit located in

277


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, which was placed in service in 1958. Riverside Unit 6 is a 115 MW peaking gas/kerosene unit that was placed in service in 1970, located in Baltimore, Maryland. On December 1, 2013, Generation notified PJM of its intention to permanently retire Riverside Generating Station Unit 4 by June 1, 2016. Riverside Unit 4 is a 74 MW intermediate gas unit that was placed in service in 1951 also located in Baltimore, Maryland. The units are being retired because they are no longer economic to operate due to their age, relatively high capital and operating costs and declining revenue expectations. On November 30, 2012, PJM notified Generation that it did not identify any transmission system reliability issues associated with the proposed Schuylkill Unit 1 retirement date, and as a result, Schuylkill Unit 1 was retired on January 1, 2013. On January 7, 2013 and December 23, 2013, PJM notified Generation that it did not identify any transmission system reliability issues associated with the retirements of Riverside Units 6 and 4, respectively. The early retirements will not have a material impact on Generation or Exelon’s results of operations, cash flows or financial position.

Eddystone Station and Cromby Station.In December 2009, Exelon announced its intention to permanently retire three coal-fired generating units and one oil/gas-fired generating unit, effective May 31, 2011, in response to the economic outlook related to the continued operation of these four units. However, PJM determined that transmission reliability upgrades would be necessary to alleviate reliability impacts and that those upgrades would be completed in a manner that will permit Generation’s retirement of two of the units on that date and two of the units subsequent to May 31, 2011. On May 31, 2011, Cromby Generating Station (Cromby) Unit 1 and Eddystone Generating Station (Eddystone) Unit 1 were retired. On May 27, 2011, the FERC approved a settlement providing for a reliability-must-run rate schedule, which defined compensation to be paid to Generation for continuing to operate Cromby Unit 2 and Eddystone Unit 2. The monthly fixed-cost recovery during the reliability-must-run period for Eddystone Unit 2 was approximately $6 million, and covered operating costs, plus a return on net assets, of the two units during the reliability-must-run period. In addition, Generation was reimbursed for variable costs, including fuel, emissions costs, chemicals, auxiliary power and for project investment costs during the reliability-must-run period. Eddystone Unit 2 and Cromby Unit 2 operated under the reliability-must-run agreement from June 1, 2011 until their respective retirement dates, Cromby Unit 2 on December 31, 2011 and Eddystone Unit 2 on May 31, 2012.

During the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012, and 2011, Generation incurred $1 million, $11 million, and $2 million of shut down costs reflected within Operating and maintenance expense in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. Expense for the write down of inventory was not material for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011.

278


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

ComEd

 

The following table presents a summary of property, plant and equipment by asset category as of December 31, 20122013 and 2011:2012:

 

  Average Service Life
(years)
  2012   2011   Average Service Life
(years)
  2013   2012 

Asset Category

            

Electric—transmission and distribution

  5 - 75  $16,480   $15,637   5 - 75  $17,334   $16,480 

Construction work in progress

  N/A   294    187   N/A   456    294 

Other property, plant and equipment(a)

  72   50    47   50   60    50 
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

Total property, plant and equipment

     16,824    15,871      17,850    16,824 

Less: accumulated depreciation

     2,998    2,750      3,184    2,998 
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

Property, plant and equipment, net

    $13,826   $13,121     $14,666   $13,826 
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Represents land held for future useIncludes buildings under capital lease with a net carrying value of $8 million and non utility property.$0 million at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. The original cost basis of the buildings was $8 million and total accumulated amortization was $0 million and $0 million as of December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

274


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

The annual depreciation provisions as a percentage of average service life for electric transmission and distribution assets were 2.79%2.97%, 2.67%2.79% and 2.64%2.67% for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, respectively.

 

PECO

 

The following table presents a summary of property, plant and equipment by asset category as of December 31, 20122013 and 2011:2012:

 

  Average Service Life
(years)
  2012   2011   Average Service Life
(years)
  2013   2012 

Asset Category

                 

Electric—transmission and distribution

  5 - 65  $6,355   $6,079   5 - 65  $6,669   $6,355 

Gas—transportation and distribution

  5 - 70   1,859    1,793   5 - 70   1,932    1,859 

Common—electric and gas

  5 - 50   568    564   5 - 50   600    568 

Construction work in progress

  N/A   76    83   N/A   101    76 

Other property, plant and equipment(a)

  50   17    17   50   17    17 
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

Total property, plant and equipment

     8,875    8,536      9,319    8,875 

Less: accumulated depreciation

     2,797    2,662      2,935    2,797 
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

Property, plant and equipment, net

    $6,078   $5,874     $6,384   $6,078 
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Represents land held for future use and non utility property.

 

The following table presents the annual depreciation provisions as a percentage of average service life for each asset category.

 

Average Service Life Percentage by Asset Category

  2012 2011 2010   2013 2012 2011 

Electric—transmission and distribution

   2.51  2.33  2.17   2.73  2.51  2.33

Gas

   1.77  1.73  1.75   1.79  1.77  1.73

Common—electric and gas

   7.54  8.05  7.25   6.65  7.54  8.05

279


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

BGE

 

The following table presents a summary of property, plant and equipment by asset category as of December 31, 20122013 and 2011:2012:

 

  Average Service Life
(years)
  2012   2011   Average Service Life
(years)
  2013   2012 

Asset Category

            

Electric—transmission and distribution

  5 - 90  $5,767   $5,483   5 - 90  $6,100   $5,767 

Gas—transmission and distribution

  5 - 90   1,548    1,387 

Gas—distribution

  5 -90   1,660    1,548 

Common—electric and gas

  5 - 40   554    415   5 - 40   578    554 

Construction work in progress

  N/A   193    298   N/A   196    193 

Other property, plant and equipment(a)

  20   31    15   20   32    31 
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

Total property, plant and equipment

     8,093    7,598      8,566    8,093 

Less: accumulated depreciation

     2,595    2,466      2,702    2,595 
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

Property, plant and equipment, net

    $5,498   $5,132     $5,864   $5,498 
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Represents land held for future use and non utility property.

 

275


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Average Service Life Percentage by Asset Category

  2012 2011 2010   2013 2012 2011 

Electric—transmission and distribution

   2.92  2.89  2.88   2.91  2.92  2.89

Gas

   2.33  2.41  2.42   2.36  2.33  2.41

Common—electric and gas

   7.68  8.40  7.24   8.45  7.68  8.40

 

See Note 1—Significant Accounting Polices for further information regarding property, plant and equipment policies and accounting for capitalized software costs for Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE. See Note 11—13—Debt and Credit Agreements for further information regarding Exelon’s, ComEd’s, and PECO’s property, plant and equipment subject to mortgage liens.

 

7.8. Impairment of Long-Lived Assets (Exelon and Generation)

Long-Lived Assets (Exelon and Generation)

Generation evaluates long-lived assets for recoverability whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount may not be recoverable. In the third quarter of 2013, lower projected wind production and a decline in power prices suggested that the carrying value of certain wind projects may be impaired. Generation concluded that the estimated undiscounted future cash flows and fair value of eleven wind projects, primarily located in West Texas and Minnesota, were less than their respective carrying values at September 30, 2013. The fair value analysis was primarily based on the income approach using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3) including revenue and generation forecasts, projected capital and maintenance expenditures and discount rates. As a result, long-lived assets held and used with a carrying amount of approximately $75 million were written down to their fair value of $32 million and a pre-tax impairment charge of $43 million was recorded during the third quarter in operating and maintenance expense in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations. Of the $43 million, $4 million was attributable to non-controlling interests for certain of the wind projects.

280


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Nuclear Uprate Program (Exelon and Generation)

Generation is engaged in individual projects as part of a planned power uprate program across its nuclear fleet. When economically viable, the projects take advantage of new production and measurement technologies, new materials and application of expertise gained from a half-century of nuclear power operations. Based on ongoing reviews, the nuclear uprate implementation plan was adjusted during 2013 to cancel certain projects. The Measurement Uncertainty Recapture (MUR) uprate projects at the Dresden and Quad Cities nuclear stations were cancelled as a result of the cost of additional plant modifications identified during final design work which, when combined with then current market conditions, made the projects not economically viable. Additionally, the market conditions prompted Generation to cancel the previously deferred extended power uprate projects at the LaSalle and Limerick nuclear stations. During 2013, Generation recorded a pre-tax charge to operating and maintenance expense and interest expense of approximately $111 million and $8 million, respectively, to accrue remaining costs and reverse the previously capitalized costs.

Like-Kind Exchange Transaction (Exelon)

Prior to the PECO/Unicom Merger in October 2000, UII, LLC (formerly Unicom Investments, Inc.) (UII), a wholly owned subsidiary of Exelon, entered into a like-kind exchange transaction pursuant to which approximately $1.6 billion was invested in coal-fired generating station leases located in Georgia and Texas with two separate entities unrelated to Exelon. The generating stations were leased back to such entities as part of the transaction. See Note 14—Income Taxes for further information. For financial accounting purposes, the investments are accounted for as direct financing lease investments. UII holds the leasehold interests in the generating stations in several separate bankruptcy remote, special purpose companies it directly or indirectly wholly owns. The lease agreements provide the lessees with fixed purchase options at the end of the lease terms. If the lessees do not exercise the fixed purchase options, Exelon has the ability to require the lessees to return the leasehold interests or to arrange for a third-party to bid on a service contract for a period following the lease term. If Exelon chooses the service contract option, the leasehold interests will be returned to Exelon at the end of the term of the service contract. In any event, Exelon will be subject to residual value risk if the lessees do not exercise the fixed purchase options. This risk is partially mitigated by the fair value of the scheduled payments under the service contract. However, such payments are not guaranteed. Further, the term of the service contract is less than the expected remaining useful life of the plants and, therefore, Exelon’s exposure to residual value risk will not be mitigated by payments under the service contract in this remaining period. In the fourth quarter of 2000, under the terms of the lease agreements, UII received a prepayment of $1.2 billion for all rent, which reduced the investment in the leases. There are no minimum scheduled lease payments to be received over the remaining term of the leases.

Pursuant to the applicable accounting guidance, Exelon is required to review the estimated residual values of its direct financing lease investments at least annually and record an impairment charge if the review indicates an other than temporary decline in the fair value of the residual values below their carrying values. Exelon estimates the fair value of the residual values of its direct financing lease investments under the income approach, which uses a discounted cash flow analysis, which takes into consideration significant unobservable inputs (Level 3) including the expected revenues to be generated and costs to be incurred to operate the plants over their remaining useful lives subsequent to the lease end dates. Significant assumptions used in estimating the fair value include fundamental energy and capacity prices, fixed and variable costs, capital expenditure requirements, discount rates, tax rates, and the estimated remaining useful lives of the plants. The estimated fair values also reflect the cash flows associated with the service contract option discussed above given that a market participant would take into consideration all of the terms and conditions contained in the lease agreements.

281


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Based on the review performed in the second quarter of 2013, the estimated residual value of one of Exelon’s direct financing leases experienced an other than temporary decline given reduced long-term energy and capacity price expectations. As a result, Exelon recorded a $14 million pre-tax impairment charge in the second quarter of 2013, which was recorded in investments and operating and maintenance expense in the Consolidated Balance Sheet and the Consolidated Statement of Operations, respectively. Changes in the assumptions described above could potentially result in future impairments of Exelon’s direct financing lease investments, which could be material. Through December 31, 2013, no events have occurred that would require Exelon to review the estimated residual values of its direct financing lease investments subsequent to the review performed in the second quarter of 2013.

As of December 31, 2012, Exelon concluded that the estimated fair values of the residual values at the end of the lease terms exceeded the residual values established at the lease dates.

At December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, the components of the net investment in long-term leases were as follows:

   December 31, 2013   December 31, 2012 

Estimated residual value of leased assets

  $1,465   $1,492 

Less: unearned income

   767    807 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Net investment in long-term leases

  $698   $685 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

9. Jointly Owned Electric Utility Plant (Exelon, Generation, PECO and BGE)

 

Exelon, Generation, PECO and BGE’s undivided ownership interests in jointly owned electric plants and transmission facilities at December 31, 20122013 and 20112012 were as follows:

 

 Nuclear generation Fossil fuel generation Transmission Other  Nuclear generation Fossil fuel generation Transmission Other 
 Quad Cities Peach
Bottom
 Salem (a) Keystone (b) Conemaugh (b) Wyman PA (c) DE/NJ (d) Other (e)  Quad Cities Peach
Bottom
 Salem (a) Keystone (b) Conemaugh (b) Wyman PA (c) DE/NJ (d) Other (e) 

Operator

  Generation    Generation    
 
PSEG
Nuclear
  
  
  GenOn    GenOn    FP&L    First Energy    PSEG     Generation    Generation    
 
PSEG
Nuclear
  
  
  GenOn    GenOn    FP&L    
 
First
Energy
  
  
  PSEG   

Ownership interest

  75.00  50.00  42.59  41.98  31.28  5.89  Various    42.55  44.24  75.00%  50.00%  42.59%  41.98%  31.28%  5.89%  Various    42.55%  44.24

Exelon’s share at December 31,
2013:

         

Plant (f)

 $941  $883  $501  $725  $399  $3  $14  $64  $2 

Accumulated depreciation(f)

  226   326   134   268   220   3   7   34   1 

Construction work
in progress

  27   174   24   6   121   —     —     —     —   

Exelon’s share at December 31, 2012:

                  

Plant (f)

 $874  $796  $494  $624  $322  $3  $13  $65  $1  $874  $796  $494  $624  $322  $3  $13  $65  $1 

Accumulated depreciation (f)

  187   302   119   153   158   3   7   33   —     187   302   119   153   158   3   7   33   —   

Construction work in progress

  44   115   11   10   57   —      1   —      —      44   115   11   10   57   —     1   —     —   

Exelon’s share at December 31, 2011:

         

Plant (f)

 $822  $650  $420  $366  $271  $3  $5  $66  $1 

Accumulated depreciation (f)

  156   285   103   137   154   3   3   33   —    

Construction work in progress

  37   111   61   5   15   —      —      —      —    

 

(a)Generation also owns a proportionate share in the fossil fuel combustion turbine at Salem, which is fully depreciated. The gross book value was $3 million at December 31, 20122013 and 2011.2012.
(b)Generation’s ownership interest in Keystone and Conemaugh has increased as a result of Exelon’s merger with Constellation in 2012. See Note 44—Merger and Acquisitions for additional information.
(c)PECO and BGE own a 22% and 7% share, respectively, in 127 miles of 500 kV lines located in Pennsylvania; PECO and BGE also own a 20.7% and 10.56% share, respectively, of a 500 kV substation immediately outside of the Conemaugh fossil generating station which supplies power to the 500 kV lines including, but not limited to, the lines noted above.

282


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

(d)PECO owns a 42.55% share in 131 miles of 500 kV lines located in Delaware and New Jersey as well as a 42.55% share in a 500kV substation immediately outside of the Salem nuclear generating station in New Jersey which supplies power to the 500kV lines including, but not limited to, the lines noted above.
(e)Generation has a 44.24% ownership interest in Merrill Creek Reservoir located in New Jersey.
(f)Excludes asset retirement costs.

 

Exelon’s, Generation’s, PECO’s and BGE’s undivided ownership interests are financed with their funds and all operations are accounted for as if such participating interests were wholly owned facilities. Exelon’s, Generation’s, PECO’s and BGE’s share of direct expenses of the jointly owned

276


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

plants are included in fuel and operating and maintenance expenses on Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and in operating and maintenance expenses on PECO’s and BGE’s Consolidated Statements of Operations.

 

8.10. Intangible Assets (Exelon, Generation, ComEd and PECO)

 

Goodwill

 

Exelon’s and ComEd’s gross amount of goodwill, accumulated impairment losses and carrying amount of goodwill for the years ended December 31, 20122013 and 20112012 were as follows:

 

   2012 and 2011 
   Gross
Amount (a)
   Accumulated
Impairment
Losses
   Carrying
Amount
 

Balance, January 1,

  $4,608   $1,983   $2,625 

Impairment losses

   —       —       —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Balance, December 31,

  $4,608   $1,983   $2,625 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 
   Gross
Amount (a)
   Accumulated
Impairment
Losses
   Carrying
Amount
 

Balance, January 1, 2012

  $4,608   $1,983   $2,625 

Impairment losses

   —      —      —   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2013

  $4,608   $1,983   $2,625 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

(a)Reflects goodwill recorded in 2000 from the PECO/Unicom (predecessor parent company of ComEd) merger net of amortization, resolution of tax matters and other non-impairment-related changes as allowed under previous authoritative guidance.

 

Goodwill is not amortized, but is subject to an assessment for impairment at least annually, or more frequently if events occur or circumstances indicate that goodwill is more likely than not impaired, such as a significant negative regulatory outcome,change that would more likely than not reduce the fair value of the ComEd reporting unit below its carrying amount. Under the authoritative guidance for goodwill, a reporting unit is an operating segment or one level below an operating segment (known as a component) and is the level at which goodwill is tested for impairment. A component of an operating segment is a reporting unit if the component constitutes a business for which discrete financial information is available and is regularly reviewed by segment management. ComEd has a single operating segment for its combined business. There is no level below this operating segment for which discrete financial information is regularly reviewed by segment management. Therefore, ComEd’s operating segment is considered its only reporting unit.

 

In September 2011, the FASB issued authoritative guidance amending existing guidance on the annual assessment of goodwill for impairment. Under the revised guidance, which became effective January 1, 2012, entitiesEntities assessing goodwill for impairment have the option of first performing a qualitative assessment before calculating the fair value of the reporting unit (i.e., step one of the two-step fair value based impairment test). If an entity determines, on the basis of qualitative factors, that the fair value of the reporting unit is more likely than not less than the carrying amount, the two-step fair value based impairment test is required. Otherwise, no further testing is required.

 

If an entity bypasses the qualitative assessment or performs the qualitative assessment, but determines that it is more likely than not that its fair value is less than its carrying amount, a quantitative two-step, fair value based test is performed. The first step compares the fair value of the reporting unit to its carrying amount, including goodwill. If the carrying amount of the reporting unit

283


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

exceeds its fair value, the second step is performed. The second step requires an allocation of fair value to the individual assets and liabilities using purchase price allocation in order to determine the implied fair value of goodwill. If the implied fair value of goodwill is less than the carrying amount, an impairment loss is recorded as a reduction to goodwill and a charge to operating expense.

Exelon assesses goodwill impairment at its ComEd reporting unit. Accordingly, any Any goodwill impairment charge at ComEd will affect Exelon’s consolidated results of operations. Under the effective

ComEd’s valuation approach is based on a market participant view, pursuant to authoritative guidance for fair value measurement, Exelon and ComEd estimate the fair value of the ComEd reporting unit usingutilizes a weighted combination of a discounted cash flow analysis and a market multiples analysis. The discounted cash flow analysis relies on a single scenario reflecting “base case”

277


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

or “best estimate” projected cash flows for ComEd’s business and includes an estimate of ComEd’s terminal value based on these expected cash flows using the generally accepted Gordon Dividend Growth formula, which derives a valuation using an assumed perpetual annuity based on the entity’s residual cash flows. The discount rate is based on the generally accepted Capital Asset Pricing Model and represents the weighted average cost of capital of comparable companies. The market multiples analysis utilizes multiples of business enterprise value to earnings, before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) of comparable companies in estimating fair value. Significant assumptions used in estimating the fair value include discount and growth rates, utility sector market performance and transactions, projected operating and capital cash flows from ComEd’s business and the fair value of debt. Management performs a reconciliation of the sum of the estimated fair value of all Exelon reporting units to Exelon’s enterprise value based on its trading price to corroborate the results of the discounted cash flow analysis and the market multiple analysis.

 

2012 Interim2013 Goodwill Impairment Assessment.Assessments.In May 2012, the ICC issued a final Order (Order) in ComEd’s 2011 formula rate proceeding under EIMA that reduced ComEd’s annual revenue requirement being recovered in current rates by $168 million. Management concluded that the Order represented an event that requiredremeasurement of the like-kind exchange position and the charge to ComEd’s earnings in the first quarter of 2013 triggered an interim goodwill impairment assessment and, as a result, ComEd tested its goodwill for impairment as of MayJanuary 31, 2012.2013. The first step of the interim impairment assessment comparing the estimated fair value of ComEd to its carrying value, including goodwill, indicated no impairment of goodwill; therefore, the second step was not required. Consistent with prior

ComEd performed a quantitative assessment as of November 1, 2013, for its 2013 annual goodwill impairment assessment. The first step of the annual impairment tests,assessment comparing the estimated fair value of ComEd to its carrying value, including goodwill, indicated no impairment of goodwill; therefore, the second step was determined using a weighted combination of a discounted cash flow analysisnot required.

In both the interim and a market multiples analysis. The discounted cash flow analysis relies on a single scenario reflecting “base case” or management’s best estimate of projected cash flows for ComEd’s business. In performingannual assessments, the discounted cash flow analysis for the interim goodwill test, management assumed thatreflected Exelon’s indemnity to hold ComEd would ultimately prevail in appealing certain aspectsharmless from any unfavorable impacts of the May Order, specifically the return on ComEd’s pension asset and the use of year-end rate base in determining ComEd’s annual revenue requirement being recovered in current rates. The disallowancesafter-tax interest amounts related to the pension asset return and year-end rate base were estimatedlike-kind exchange position on ComEd’s equity. While neither the interim nor the annual assessments indicated an impairment of ComEd’s goodwill, certain assumptions used to reduce ComEd’s revenue requirement recovered in rates by approximately $75—$130 million annually. The assessment also reflected several favorableestimate the fair value of ComEd are highly sensitive to changes. Adverse regulatory actions, such as early termination of EIMA, or changes in certainsignificant assumptions, including discount and growth rates, utility sector market assumptions sinceperformance and transactions, projected operating and capital cash flows from ComEd’s business, and the annualfair value of debt could potentially result in a future impairment assessment in 2011, including the weighted average cost of capital and market multiples.

ComEd’s goodwill, which could be material. Based on the results of the interimannual goodwill test performed as of November 1, 2013, the estimated fair value of ComEd would have needed to decrease by more than 10 percent10% for ComEd to fail the first step of the impairment test.

 

On October 3,Prior Goodwill Impairment Assessments.Management concluded that the May 2012 the ICC issued its Rehearingfinal Order in response to ComEd’s expedited rehearing request.2011 formula rate proceeding triggered an interim goodwill impairment assessment and, as a result, ComEd tested its goodwill for impairment as of May 31, 2012. The Rehearing Order adopted ComEd’s position onfirst step of the return on its pension asset resulting in an increase in ComEd’s annual revenue. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for further detail.

 

284


2012 Annual Goodwill Impairment Assessment.Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

interim impairment assessment comparing the estimated fair value of ComEd to its carrying value, including goodwill, indicated no impairment of goodwill; therefore, the second step was not required. ComEd performed a qualitative assessment as of November 1, 2012, for its 2012 annual goodwill impairment assessment and while certain factors indicated a reduction in fair value since May 31, 2012, ComEd determined that its fair value was not more likely than not less than its carrying value. Therefore, ComEd did not perform a quantitative assessment. As part of its qualitative assessment, ComEd evaluated, among other things, management’s best estimate of projected operating and capital cash flows for ComEd’s business (including the impacts of the RehearingMay 2012 Order) as well as changes in certain other market conditions, such as the discount rate and EBITDA multiples.

 

While neither the interim nor the annual assessments indicated an impairment of ComEd’s goodwill, a change in management’s assumption regarding the outcome of the IRS’ challenge of Exelon’s and

278


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

ComEd’s like-kind exchange income tax position, adverse regulatory actions such as early termination of EIMA, or changes in the significant assumptions described above could potentially result in a future impairment of ComEd’s goodwill, which could be material. ComEd will assess whether its goodwill has been impaired in the first quarter of 2013 in connection with the reassessment of the like-kind exchange position and the associated charge to ComEd’s earnings. See Note 12 for additional information.

Prior Goodwill Impairment Assessments.The 2011 and 2010 annual goodwill impairment assessments were performed as of November 1, 2011 and November 1, 2010, respectively. In each case, the first step of the annual impairment analysis, comparing the fair value of ComEd to its carrying value, including goodwill, indicated no impairment of goodwill; therefore, the second step was not required. ComEd will assess whether its goodwill has been impaired in the first quarter of 2013 in connection with the reassessment of the like-kind exchange position and the charge to ComEd’s earnings. See Note 12 for additional information.

Other Intangible Assets

 

For discussion surrounding Exelon’s and Generation’s unamortized energy contracts, trade name and retail relationships recorded in conjunction with the Merger, refer to Note 4—Merger and Acquisitions.

 

Exelon’s, Generation’s and ComEd’s other intangible assets, included in unamortized energy contract assets and deferred debits and other assets in their Consolidated Balance Sheets, consisted of the following as of December 31, 2012:2013:

 

            Estimated amortization expense  Weighted
Average
Amortization
Years (e)
        Estimated amortization expense 
  Gross   Accumulated
Amortization
 Net   2013   2014   2015   2016   2017  Gross Accumulated
Amortization
 Net 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 

Generation(f)

                        

Exelon Wind acquisition (a)

  $224   $(26 $198   $14   $14   $14   $14   $14   18.0  $224  $(41 $183  $14  $14  $14  $14  $14 

Antelope Valley acquisition (b)

   190    —      190    7    8    8    8    8   25.0   190   (4  186   8   8   8   8   8 

ComEd

                        

Chicago settlement–1999 agreement (c)

   100    (72  28    3    3    3    3    4 

Chicago settlement–2003 agreement (d)

   62    (34  28    4    4    4    4    3 

Chicago settlement—1999 agreement (c)

  21.8   100   (76  24   3   3   3   4   4 

Chicago settlement—2003 agreement (d)

  17.9   62   (38  24   4   4   4   3   3 
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total intangible assets

  $576   $(132 $444   $28   $29   $29   $29   $29   $576  $(159 $417  $29  $29  $29  $29  $29 
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Refer to Note 4—Merger and Acquisitions for additional information regardingIn December 2010, Generation acquired all of the equity interests of John Deere Renewables, LLC (later named Exelon Wind.Wind), adding 735 MWs of installed, operating wind capacity located in eight states.
(b)Refer to Note 4—Merger and Acquisitions for additional information regarding Antelope Valley.
(c)In March 1999, ComEd entered into a settlement agreement with the City of Chicago associated with ComEd’s franchise agreement. Under the terms of the settlement, ComEd agreed to make payments to the City of Chicago each year from 1999 to 2002. The intangible asset recognized as a result of these payments is being amortized ratably over the remaining term of the franchise agreement, which ends in 2020.
(d)In February 2003, ComEd entered into separate agreements with the City of Chicago and with Midwest Generation, LLC (Midwest Generation). Under the terms of the settlement agreement with the City of Chicago, ComEd agreed to pay the City of Chicago a total of $60 million over a ten-year period, beginning in 2003. The intangible asset recognized as a result of the settlement agreement is being amortized ratably over the remaining term of the City of Chicago franchise agreement, which ends in 2020. As required by the settlement, ComEd also made a payment of $2 million to a third partythird-party on the City of Chicago’s behalf. Under the terms of the agreement with Midwest Generation, ComEd received payments of $32 million from Midwest Generation to relieve Midwest Generation’s obligation under the 1999 fossil sale agreement with ComEd to build the generation facility in the City of Chicago. The payments received by ComEd, which have been recorded in other long-term liabilities, are being recognized ratably (approximately $2 million annually) as an offset to amortization expense over the remaining term of the franchise agreement.
(e)Weighted-average amortization period was calculated at the date of acquisition for acquired assets or settlement agreement.
(f)Excludes $67 million of other miscellaneous unamortized energy contracts that have been acquired at various points in time.

 

279285


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

The following table summarizes the amortization expense related to intangible assets for each of the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010:2011:

 

For the Year Ended December 31,

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   Exelon   Generation   ComEd 

2013

  $27   $20   $7 

2012

  $20   $13   $7    20    13    7 

2011

   19    12    7    19    12    7 

2010

   8    1    7 

 

Acquired Intangible Assets

 

Accounting guidance for business combinations requires that the acquirer must recognize separately identifiable intangible assets in the application of purchase accounting. The valuation of the acquired intangible assets discussed below were estimated by applying the income approach, which is based upon discounted projected future cash flows associated with the respective PPAs. Key assumptions used in the valuation of these intangible assets include forecasted power prices and discount rates. Those measures are based upon certain unobservable inputs, which are considered Level 3 inputs, pursuant to applicable accounting guidance. The intangible assets are amortized as a decrease in operating revenue within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income over the term of the underlying PPAs.

 

Exelon Wind. The output of the acquired wind turbines has been sold under PPA contracts. The excess of the contract price of the PPAs over market prices was recognized as intangible assets at the acquisition date. Generation determined that the estimated acquisition-date fair value of the intangible assets was approximately $224 million, which is recorded in unamortized energy contract assets within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.

Key assumptions used in the valuation of the intangible assets include forecasted power prices and discount rate. The measure is based upon certain unobservable inputs, which are considered Level 3 inputs, pursuant to applicable accounting guidance. The intangible assets are amortized on a straight-line basis over the period in which the associated contract revenues are recognized. The amortization expense is reflected as a decrease in operating revenue within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. The weighted-average amortization period for these intangibles is approximately 18 years.

 

Antelope Valley.Upon completion of the development project, all of the output will be sold under a PPA with Pacific Gas & Electric Company. The excess of the contract price of the PPA over forecasted MPR-based market prices was recognized as an intangible asset at the acquisition date. Generation determined that the estimated acquisition-date fair value of the intangible asset was approximately $190 million, which is recorded in unamortized energy contract assets within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. While Generation expects to perform under the PPA once the construction of this project is complete, there is a risk of impairment if the project does not reach commercial operation.

Key assumptions used in the valuation of the intangible asset include forecasted MPR-based market prices and discount rate. The measure is based upon certain unobservable inputs, which are considered Level 3 inputs, pursuant to applicable accounting guidance. The fair value amounts areis amortized over the life of the contract in relation to the present value of the underlying cash flows as of the acquisition date. The intangible asset will be amortized as a decrease in operating revenue within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income over the 25 year term of the underlying PPA.

280


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Renewable Energy Credits and Alternative Energy Credits (Exelon, Generation, ComEd and PECO).

 

Exelon’s, Generation’s, ComEd’s and PECO’s other intangible assets, included in other current assets and other deferred debits and other assets on the Consolidated Balance Sheets, include RECs (Exelon, Generation and ComEd) and AECs (Exelon and PECO). Revenue for RECs that are part of a bundled power sale is recognized when the power is produced and delivered to the customer. As of December 31, 2012,2013, and 2011,2012, PECO had current AECs of $17$19 million and $14$17 million, respectively, and noncurrent AECs of $9$5 million and $16$9 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2012,2013, and 2011,2012, Generation had current RECs of $61$158 million and $0$61 million, respectively, and noncurrent RECs of $45$0 million and $6$45 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2012,2013, and 2011,2012, ComEd, had current RECs of $18$3 million and $9$4 million, respectively, and noncurrent RECs of $49 million and $97, respectively. See Notes 1—Significant Accounting Policies,Note 3—Regulatory Matters and Note 19—22—Commitments and Contingencies for additional information on RECs and AECs.

286


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

9.11. Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Fair Value of Financial Liabilities Recorded at the Carrying Amount

 

The following tables present the carrying amounts and fair values of the Registrants’ short-term liabilities, long-term debt, SNF obligation, trust preferred securities (long-term debt to financing trusts or junior subordinated debentures), and preferred securities as of December 31, 2012,2013, and 2011:2012:

 

Exelon

 

  December 31, 2012   December 31, 2011   December 31, 2013   December 31, 2012 
  Carrying
Amount
   Fair Value   Carrying
Amount
   Fair
Value
   Carrying
Amount
   Fair Value   Carrying
Amount
   Fair
Value
 
  Level 1   Level 2   Level 3      Level 1   Level 2   Level 3   

Short-term liabilities

  $214   $4   $210    $—      $737   $737   $344   $3   $341   $—     $214   $214 

Long-term debt (including amounts due within one year)

   18,745    —       20,244    276    12,627    14,488    19,132    —      18,672    1,079    18,745    20,520 

Long-term debt to financing trusts

   648    —       —       664    390    358    648    —      —      631    648    664 

SNF obligation

   1,020    —       763    —       1,019    886    1,021    —      790    —      1,020    763 

Preferred securities of subsidiary

   87    —       82    —       87    79    —      —      —      —      87    82 

 

Generation

 

  December 31, 2012   December 31, 2011   December 31, 2013   December 31, 2012 
  Carrying
Amount
   Fair Value   Carrying
Amount
   Fair
Value
   Carrying
Amount
   Fair Value   Carrying
Amount
   Fair
Value
 
  Level 1   Level 2   Level 3     Level 1   Level 2   Level 3   

Short-term liabilities

  $—      $—      $—      $—      $2   $2   $22   $—     $22   $—     $—     $—   

Long-term debt (including amounts due within one year)

   7,483    —       7,591    258    3,677    4,231    7,729    —      6,586    1,062    7,483    7,849 

SNF obligation

   1,020    —       763    —       1,019    886    1,021    —      790    —      1,020    763 

 

281ComEd

   December 31, 2013   December 31, 2012 
   Carrying
Amount
   Fair Value   Carrying
Amount
   Fair
Value
 
     Level 1   Level 2   Level 3     

Short-term liabilities

  $184   $—     $184   $—     $—     $—   

Long-term debt (including amounts due within one year)

   5,675    —      6,238    17    5,567    6,548 

Long-term debt to financing trust

   206    —      —      202    206    212 

PECO

   December 31, 2013   December 31, 2012 
   Carrying
Amount
   Fair Value   Carrying
Amount
   Fair
Value
 
     Level 1   Level 2   Level 3     

Short-term liabilities

  $—     $—     $—     $—     $210   $210 

Long-term debt (including amounts due within one year)

   2,197    —      2,358    —      1,947    2,264 

Long-term debt to financing trusts

   184    —      —      180    184    188 

Preferred securities

   —      —      —      —      87    82 

287


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

ComEd

   December 31, 2012   December 31, 2011 
   Carrying
Amount
   Fair Value   Carrying
Amount
   Fair
Value
 
     Level 1   Level 2   Level 3     

Long-term debt (including amounts due within one year)

  $5,567   $—      $6,530   $18   $5,665   $6,540 

Long-term debt to financing trust

   206    —       —       212    206    184 

PECO

   December 31, 2012   December 31, 2011 
   Carrying
Amount
   Fair Value   Carrying
Amount
   Fair
Value
 
     Level 1   Level 2   Level 3     

Short-term liabilities

  $210   $—      $210   $—      $225   $225 

Long-term debt (including amounts due within one year)

   1,947    —       2,264    —       1,972    2,295 

Long-term debt to financing trusts

   184    —       —       188    184    174 

Preferred securities

   87    —       82    —       87    79 

 

BGE

 

  December 31, 2012   December 31, 2011   December 31, 2013   December 31, 2012 
  Carrying
Amount
   Fair Value   Carrying
Amount
   Fair
Value
   Carrying
Amount
   Fair Value   Carrying
Amount
   Fair
Value
 
  Level 1   Level 2   Level 3     Level 1   Level 2   Level 3   

Short-term liabilities

  $138   $3   $135   $—     $—     $—   

Long-term debt (including amounts due within one year)

  $2,178   $—      $2,468   $—      $2,101   $2,377    2,011    —      2,148    —      2,178    2,468 

Long-term debt to financing trusts

   258    —       —       263    258    256    258    —      —      249    258    263 

 

Short-Term Liabilities. The short-term liabilities included in the tables above are comprised of short-term borrowings (Level 2), short-term notes payable related to PECO’s accounts receivable agreement (Level 2), and dividends payable (Level 1). The Registrants’ carrying amounts of the short-term liabilities are representative of fair value because of the short-term nature of these instruments. See Note 11—13—Debt and Credit Agreements for additional information on PECO’s accounts receivable agreement.

 

Long-Term Debt. The fair value amounts of Exelon’s taxable debt securities (Level 2) are determined by a valuation model that is based on a conventional discounted cash flow methodology and utilizes assumptions of current market pricing curves. In order to incorporate the credit risk of the Registrants into the discount rates, Exelon obtains pricing (i.e., U.S. Treasury rate plus credit spread) based on trades of existing Exelon debt securities as well as debt securities of other issuers in the electric utility sector with similar credit ratings in both the primary and secondary market, across the Registrants’ debt maturity spectrum. The credit spreads of various tenors obtained from this information are added to the appropriate benchmark U.S. Treasury rates in order to determine the current market yields for the various tenors. The yields are then converted into discount rates of various tenors that are used for discounting the respective cash flows of the same tenor for each bond or note.

 

282


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Generation hasThe fair value of Generation’s non-government-backed fixed rate project financing debt (Level 3) is based on market and quoted prices for its own and other project financing debt with similar risk profiles. Given the low trading volume in the project financing debt market, the price quotes used to determine fair value will reflect certain qualitative factors, such as market conditions, investor demand, new developments that might significantly impact the project cash flows or off-taker credit, and other circumstances related to the project (e.g., thepolitical and regulatory environment). The fair value of whichGeneration’s government-back fixed rate project financing debt (Level 3) is largely based on a discounted cash flow methodology that is similar to the taxable debt securities methodology described above. Due to the lack of market trading data on similar debt, for certain government-backed debt,the discount rates are derived based on the original loan interest rate spread to the applicable Treasury rate as well as a current market curve derived from government-backed securities. Variable rate project financing debt resets on a quarterly basis and the carrying value approximates fair value.

 

The Registrants also have tax-exempt debt (Level 3). Due to low trading volume in this market, qualitative factors, such as market conditions, investor demand, and circumstances related to the issuer (i.e., political and regulatory environment), may be incorporated into the credit spreads that are used to obtain the fair value as described above.

 

SNF Obligation. The carrying amount of Generation’s SNF obligation (Level 2) is derived from a contract with the DOE to provide for disposal of SNF from Generation’s nuclear generating stations. When determining the fair value of the obligation, the future carrying amount of the SNF obligation

288


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

estimated to be settled in 2025 is calculated by compounding the current book value of the SNF obligation at the 13-week Treasury rate. The compounded obligation amount is discounted back to present value using Generation’s discount rate, which is calculated using the same methodology as described above for the taxable debt securities, and an estimated maturity date of 2025.

 

Long-Term Debt to Financing Trusts. Exelon’s long-term debt to financing trusts is valued based on publicly traded securities issued by the financing trusts. Due to low trading volume of similarthese securities, (Level 3), qualitative factors, such as market conditions, investor demand, and circumstances related to each issue, may be incorporated into the credit spreads that are used to obtain the fair valuethis debt is classified as described above.Level 3.

 

Preferred Securities. The fair value of these securities is determined based on the last closing price prior to quarter end, less accrued interest. The securities are registered with the SEC and are public. PECO redeemed all outstanding series of preferred securities on May 1, 2013. See Note 20—Earnings Per Share and Equity for additional information.

 

Recurring Fair Value Measurements

 

Exelon records the fair value of assets and liabilities in accordance with the hierarchy established by the authoritative guidance for fair value measurements. The hierarchy prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value into three levels as follows:

 

Level 1—quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the Registrants have the ability to access as of the reporting date. Financial assets and liabilities utilizing Level 1 inputs include active exchange-traded equity securities and funds, certain exchange-based derivatives, and money market funds.

 

Level 2—inputs other than quoted prices included within Level 1 that are directly observable for the asset or liability or indirectly observable through corroboration with observable market data. Financial assets and liabilities utilizing Level 2 inputs include fixed income securities, non-exchange-based derivatives, commingled and mutual investment funds priced at NAV per fund share and fair value hedges.

 

Level 3—unobservable inputs, such as internally developed pricing models or third partythird-party valuations for the asset or liability due to little or no market activity for the asset or liability. Financial assets and liabilities utilizing Level 3 inputs include infrequently traded non-exchange-basedsecurities and derivatives, and investments priced using an alternative pricing mechanism and middle market lending usingor third party valuations.valuation.

There were no transfers between Level 1 and Level 2 during the year ended December 31, 2012.

 

283289


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Exelon

 

The following tables present assets and liabilities measured and recorded at fair value on Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets on a recurring basis and their level within the fair value hierarchy as of December 31, 20122013 and December 31, 2011:2012:

 

As of December 31, 2012

  Level 1   Level 2   Level 3   Total 

As of December 31, 2013

  Level 1   Level 2   Level 3   Total 

Assets

                

Cash equivalents (a)

  $995   $—     $—     $995   $1,230   $—     $—     $1,230 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments

                

Cash equivalents

   245    —      —      245    459    —       —       459 

Equity

                

Equity securities

   1,480    —      —      1,480 

Individually held

   1,776    —      —      1,776 

Exchange traded funds

   115    —      —      115 

Commingled funds

   —      1,933    —      1,933    —      2,271    —      2,271 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Equity funds subtotal

   1,480    1,933    —      3,413    1,891    2,271    —      4,162 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Fixed income

                

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

   1,057    —      —      1,057    882    —      —      882 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and political subdivisions of the states

   —      321    —      321    —      294    —      294 

Debt securities issued by foreign governments

   —      93    —      93    —      87    —      87 

Corporate debt securities

   —      1,788    —      1,788    —      1,753    31    1,784 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —      24    —      24    —      10    —      10 

Commercial mortgage-backed securities (non-agency)

   —      45    —      45    —      40    —      40 

Residential mortgage-backed securities (non-agency)

   —      11    —      11    —      7    —      7 

Mutual funds

   —      23    —      23    —      18    —      18 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Fixed income subtotal

   1,057    2,305    —      3,362    882    2,209    31    3,122 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Middle market lending

   —      —      183    183    —      —      314    314 

Private Equity

   —      —      5    5 

Other debt obligations

   —      15    —      15    —      14    —      14 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments subtotal (b)

   2,782    4,253    183    7,218    3,232    4,494    350    8,076 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Pledged assets for Zion decommissioning

                

Cash equivalents

   —      23    —      23    —      26    —      26 

Equity

                

Equity securities

   14    —      —      14 

Commingled funds

   —      9    —      9 

Individually held

   16    —      —      16 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Equity funds subtotal

   14    9    —      23    16    —      —      16 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Fixed income

                

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

   118    12    —      130    45    4    —      49 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States

       —     

and political subdivisions of the states

   —      37    —      37 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and political subdivisions of the states

   —      20    —      20 

Corporate debt securities

   —      249    —      249    —      227    —      227 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —      49    —      49 

Commercial mortgage-backed securities (non-agency)

   —      6    —      6 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Fixed income subtotal

   118    353    —      471    45    251    —      296 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Middle market lending

   —      —      89    89    —      —      112    112 

Other debt obligations

   —      1    —      1    —      1    —      1 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Pledged assets for Zion decommissioning subtotal (c)

   61    278    112    451 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

284290


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

As of December 31, 2013

  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 

Rabbi trust investments

     

Cash equivalents

   2   —     —     2 

Mutual funds (d)(e)

   54   —     —     54 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Rabbi trust investments subtotal

   56   —     —     56 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market derivative assets

     

Economic hedges

   493   2,582   885   3,960 

Proprietary trading

   324   1,315   122   1,761 

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral (f)

   (863  (3,131  (430  (4,424
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market assets subtotal

   (46  766   577   1,297 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative assets

   30   39   —     69 

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral

   (30  (2  —     (32
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative assets subtotal

   —     37   —     37 

Other Investments

   —     —     15   15 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total assets

   4,533   5,575   1,054   11,162 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Liabilities

     

Commodity mark-to-market derivative liabilities

     

Economic hedges

   (540  (1,890  (590  (3,020

Proprietary trading

   (328  (1,256  (119  (1,703

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral (f)

   869   3,007   404   4,280 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market liabilities subtotal (h)

   1   (139  (305  (443
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative liabilities

   (31  (17  —     (48

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral

   31   1   —     32 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative liabilities subtotal

   —     (16  —     (16
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Deferred compensation obligation

   —     (114  —     (114
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total liabilities

   1   (269  (305  (573
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total net assets

  $4,534  $5,306  $749  $10,589 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

As of December 31, 2012

  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 

Pledged assets for Zion decommissioning subtotal (c)

   132   386   89   607 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Rabbi trust investments

     

Cash equivalents

   2   —     —     2 

Mutual funds (d)

   69   —     —     69 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Rabbi trust investments subtotal

   71   —     —     71 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market derivative assets

     

Economic hedges

   861   3,173   641   4,675 

Proprietary trading

   1,042   2,078   73   3,193 

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral (f)

   (1,823  (4,175  (58  (6,056
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market assets subtotal (g)

   80   1,076   656   1,812 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative assets

   —     114   —     114 

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral

   —     (51  —     (51
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative assets subtotal

   —     63   —     63 

Other Investments

   2   —     17   19 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total assets

   4,062   5,778   945   10,785 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Liabilities

     

Commodity mark-to-market derivative liabilities

     

Economic hedges

   (1,041  (2,289  (236  (3,566

Proprietary trading

   (1,084  (1,959  (78  (3,121

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral (f)

   2,042   4,020   25   6,087 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market liabilities subtotal (g)(h)

   (83  (228  (289  (600
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative liabilities

   —     (84  —     (84

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral

   —     51   —     51 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative liabilities subtotal

   —     (33  —     (33

Deferred compensation

   —     (102  —     (102
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total liabilities

   (83  (363  (289  (735
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total net assets

  $3,979  $5,415  $656  $10,050 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

285291


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

As of December 31, 2012

  Level 1   Level 2   Level 3   Total 

Assets

        

Cash equivalents (a)

  $995   $—     $—     $995 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments

        

Cash equivalents

   245    —      —      245 

Equity

        

Individually held

   1,480    —      —      1,480 

Commingled funds

   —      1,933    —      1,933 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Equity funds subtotal

   1,480    1,933    —      3,413 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income

        

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

   1,057    —      —      1,057 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and political subdivisions of the states

   —      321    —      321 

Debt securities issued by foreign governments

   —      93    —      93 

Corporate debt securities

   —      1,788    —      1,788 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —      24    —      24 

Commercial mortgage-backed securities (non-agency)

   —      45    —      45 

Residential mortgage-backed securities (non-agency)

   —      11    —      11 

Mutual funds

   —      23    —      23 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income subtotal

   1,057    2,305    —      3,362 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Middle market lending

   —      —      183    183 

Other debt obligations

   —      15    —      15 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments subtotal (b)

   2,782    4,253    183    7,218 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Pledged assets for Zion decommissioning

        

Cash equivalents

   —      23    —      23 

Equity

        

Individually held

   14    —      —      14 

Commingled funds

   —      9    —      9 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Equity funds subtotal

   14    9    —      23 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income

        

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

   118    12    —      130 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and political subdivisions of the states

   —      37    —      37 

Corporate debt securities

   —      249    —      249 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —      49    —      49 

Commercial mortgage-backed securities (non-agency)

   —      6    —      6 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income subtotal

   118    353    —      471 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Middle market lending

   —      —      89    89 

Other debt obligations

   —      1    —      1 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Pledged assets for Zion decommissioning subtotal (c)

   132    386    89    607 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Rabbi trust investments

        

Cash equivalents

   2    —      —      2 

Mutual funds (d)(e)

   69    —      —      69 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Rabbi trust investments subtotal

   71    —      —      71 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

As of December 31, 2011

  Level 1   Level 2   Level 3   Total 

Assets

        

Cash equivalents (a)

  $861   $—      $—      $861 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments

        

Cash equivalents

   562    —       —       562 

Equity

        

Equity securities

   1,275    —       —       1,275 

Commingled funds

   —       1,822    —       1,822 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Equity funds subtotal

   1,275    1,822    —       3,097 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income

        

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

   1,014    33    —       1,047 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and political subdivisions of the states

   —       541    —       541 

Debt securities issued by foreign governments

   —       16    —       16 

Corporate debt securities

   —       778    —       778 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —       357    —       357 

Commercial mortgage-backed securities (non-agency)

   —       83    —       83 

Residential mortgage-backed securities (non-agency)

   —       5    —       5 

Mutual funds

   —       47    —       47 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income subtotal

   1,014    1,860    —       2,874 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Middle market lending

   —       —       13    13 

Other debt obligations

   —       18    —       18 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments subtotal (b)

   2,851    3,700    13    6,564 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Pledged assets for Zion decommissioning Equity

        

Equity securities

   35    —       —       35 

Commingled funds

   —       30    —       30 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Equity funds subtotal

   35    30    —       65 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income

        

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

   54    26    —       80 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and political subdivisions of the states

   —       65    —       65 

Corporate debt securities

   —       314    —       314 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —       121    —       121 

Commercial mortgage-backed securities (non-agency)

   —       10    —       10 

Commingled funds

   —       20    —       20 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income subtotal

   54    556    —       610 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Middle market lending

   —       —       37    37 

Other debt obligations

   —       13    —       13 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Pledged assets for Zion decommissioning subtotal (c)

   89    599    37    725 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Rabbi trust investments

        

Cash equivalents

   2    —       —       2 

Mutual funds (d)(e)

   34    —       —       34 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

286292


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

As of December 31, 2011

  Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total 

Rabbi trust investments subtotal

   36   —      —      36 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

As of December 31, 2012

  Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total 

Commodity mark-to-market derivative assets

          

Cash flow hedges

   —      857   —      857 

Economic hedges

   —      1,653   124   1,777    861   3,173   641   4,675 

Proprietary trading

   —      240   48   288    1,042   2,078   73   3,193 

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral (f)

   —      (1,827  (28  (1,855   (1,823  (4,175  (58  (6,056
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market assets (g)

   —      923   144   1,067 

Commodity mark-to-market assets subtotal (g)

   80   1,076   656   1,812 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative assets

   —     114   —     114 

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral

   —     (51  —     (51
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative assets

   —      15   —      15 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative assets subtotal

   —     63   —     63 

Other Investments

   2   —     17   19 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total assets

   3,837   5,237   194   9,268    4,062   5,778   945   10,785 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Liabilities

          

Commodity mark-to-market derivative liabilities

          

Cash flow hedges

   —      (13  —      (13

Economic hedges

   (1  (1,137  (119  (1,257   (1,041  (2,289  (236  (3,566

Proprietary trading

   —      (236  (28  (264   (1,084  (1,959  (78  (3,121

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral (f)

   —      1,295   20   1,315    2,042   4,020   25   6,087 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market liabilities (h)

   (1  (91  (127  (219

Commodity mark-to-market liabilities (g)(h)

   (83  (228  (289  (600
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Interest rate mark-to-market liabilities

   —      (19  —      (19   —     (84  —     (84

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral

   —     51   —     51 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Deferred compensation

   —      (73  —      (73

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative liabilities subtotal

   —     (33  —     (33

Deferred compensation obligation

   —     (102  —     (102
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total liabilities

   (1  (183  (127  (311   (83  (363  (289  (735
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total net assets

  $3,836  $5,054  $67  $8,957   $3,979  $5,415  $656  $10,050 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Excludes certain cash equivalents considered to be held-to-maturity and not reported at fair value.
(b)Excludes net assets (liabilities) of $30$(5) million and $(57)$30 million at December 31, 20122013 and December 31, 2011,2012, respectively. These items consist of receivables related to pending securities sales, interest and dividend receivables, and payables related to pending securities purchases.
(c)Excludes net assets of $7 million and $9 million at both December 31, 20122013 and December 31, 2011,2012, respectively. These items consist of receivables related to pending securities sales, interest and dividend receivables, and payables related to pending securities purchases.
(d)The mutual funds held by the Rabbi trusts include $53 million related to deferred compensation and $1 million related to Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan at December 31, 2013, and $53 million related to deferred compensation and $16 million related to Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan. These funds are classified as Level 1 as they are valued based upon quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets.Plan at December 31, 2012.
(e)Excludes $28$32 million and $25$28 million of the cash surrender value of life insurance investments at December 31, 20122013 and December 31, 2011,2012, respectively.
(f)Includes collateral postings (received) from counterparties. Collateral (received) from counterparties, net of collateral paid to counterparties, totaled $6 million, $(124) million and $(26) million allocated to Level 1, Level 2 and Level 3 mark-to-market derivatives, respectively, as of December 31, 2013. Collateral (received) from counterparties, net of collateral paid to counterparties, totaled $219 million, $(155) million and $(33) million allocated to Level 1, Level 2 and Level 3 mark-to-market derivatives, respectively, as of December 31, 2012. Collateral (received) from counterparties, net of collateral paid to counterparties, totaled $532 million and $8 million allocated to Level 2 and Level 3 mark-to-market derivatives, respectively, as of December 31, 2011.
(g)The Level 3 balance does not include current and noncurrent assets for Generation and current and noncurrent liabilities for ComEd of $226 million and $0 million at December 31, 2012 and $503 million and $191 million at December 31, 2011, respectively, related to the fair value of Generation’s financial swap contract with ComEd.
(h)The Level 3 balance includes the current and noncurrent liability of $17 million and $176 million at December 31, 2013, respectively, and $18 million and $49 million at December 31, 2012, respectively, and $9 million and $97 million at December 31, 2011, respectively, related to floating-to-fixed energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers.

 

287293


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

The following tables present the fair value reconciliation of Level 3 assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis during the years ended December 31, 20122013 and 2011:2012:

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2012

 Nuclear
Decommissioning
Trust Fund
Investment
 Pledged Assets
for Zion Station
Decommissioning
 Mark-to-Market
Derivatives (b)
 Other
Investments
 Total 

Balance as of January 1, 2012

 $13  $37  $17  $—    $67 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2013

 Nuclear
Decommissioning
Trust Fund
Investment
 Pledged Assets
for Zion Station
Decommissioning
 Mark-to-Market
Derivatives
 Other
Investments
 Total 

Balance as of January 1, 2013

 $183  $89  $367  $17  $656 

Total realized / unrealized gains (losses)

          

Included in net income

  —     —     (119(a)   —     (119  2   —      (44)(a)   —      (42

Included in other comprehensive income

  —     —     —     —     —     —      —      —      2   2 

Included in regulatory assets

  1   —     39   —     40   8   —      (126)(b)   —      (118

Included in payable for Zion Station decommissioning

  —     —     —     —     —   

Change in collateral

  —     —     (32  —     (32  —      —      7   —      7 

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements

          

Purchases

  169   63   334 (c)   17   583   203   62   28   4   297 

Sales

  —     (11  —��    —     (11  (28  (39  (11  (8  (86

Settlements

  (18  —     —     —     (18

Transfers into Level 3

  —     —     39   —     39   —      —      86 (c)   1   87 

Transfers out of Level 3

  —     —     89   —     89   —      —      (35  (1  (36
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2012

 $183  $89  $367  $17  $656 

Balance as of December 31, 2013

 $350  $112  $272  $15  $749 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

The amount of total gains included in income attributed to the change in unrealized gains (losses) related to assets and liabilities held as of December 31, 2012

 $—    $—    $37  $—    $37 

The amount of total gains included in income attributed to the change in unrealized gains related to assets and liabilities held as of December 31, 2013

 $1  $��     $167  $
 

  
 
 
 $168 

 

(a)Includes a reduction for the reclassification of $156$211 million of realized lossesgains due to settlement of derivative contracts recorded in results of operations for the year ended December 31, 2013.
(b)Excludes decreases in fair value of $11 million of and realized losses reclassified due to settlements of $215 million associated with Generation’s financial swap contract with ComEd for the year ended December 31, 2013. All items eliminate upon consolidation in Exelon’s Consolidated Financial Statements.
(c)Includes an increase of transfers into Level 3 arising from reductions in market liquidity, which resulted in less observable contract tenures in various locations.

294


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

For the Year Ended December 31, 2012

 Nuclear
Decommissioning
Trust Fund
Investments
  Pledged Assets  for
Zion
Decommissioning
  Mark-to-Market
Derivatives(b)
  Other
Investments
  Total 

Balance as of January 1, 2012

 $13  $37  $17  $—    $67 

Total realized / unrealized gains (losses)

     

Included in income

  —      —      59(a)   —      59 

Included in regulatory liabilities

  1   —      39   —      40 

Change in collateral

  —      —      (32  —      (32

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements

     

Purchases

  169   63   334(c)   17   583 

Sales

  —      (11  —      —      (11

Transfers into Level 3

  —      —      39   —      39 

Transfers out of Level 3

  —      —      (89  —      (89
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2012

 $183  $89  $367  $17  $656 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

The amount of total gains included in income attributed to the change in unrealized gains related to assets and liabilities as of December 31, 2012

 $—     $—     $214  $—    $214 

(a)Includes a reduction for the reclassification of $155 million of realized gains due to the settlement of derivative contracts recorded in results of operations for the year ended December 31, 2012.
(b)Excludes $98 million of increases in fair value and $566 million of realized losses due to settlements for the year ended December 31, 2012 of Generation’s financial swap contract with ComEd, which eliminates upon consolidation in Exelon’s Consolidated Financial Statements. This position was de-designated as a cash flow hedge prior to the merger date. All prospective changes in fair value and reclassifications of realized amounts are being recorded to income offset by the amortization of the frozen mark in OCI.
(c)Includes $323$310 million of fair value from contracts and $17$14 million of other investments acquired as a result of the merger.

288


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

For the Year Ended December 31, 2011

 Nuclear
Decommissioning
Trust Fund
Investments
  Pledged Assets for
Zion
Decommissioning
  Mark-to-Market
Derivatives
  Total 

Balance as of January 1, 2011

 $—    $—    $50  $50 

Total realized / unrealized gains (losses)

    

Included in income

  1   —     99   100 

Included in other comprehensive income

  —     —     (25)(a)   (25

Included in regulatory liabilities

  2   —     (106)(b)   (104

Change in collateral

  —     —     6   6 

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements

    

Purchases

  10   60   10   80 

Sales

  —     (23  —     (23

Transfers out of Level 3

  —     —     (17  (17
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2011

 $13  $37  $17  $67 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

The amount of total gains included in income attributed to the change in unrealized gains (losses) related to assets and liabilities as of December 31, 2011

 $1  $—    $131  $132 

(a)Includes the reclassification of $32 million of realized losses due to the settlement of derivative contracts recorded in results of operations for the year ended December 31, 2011.
(b)Excludes $170 million of increases in fair value and $451 million of realized losses due to settlements associated with Generation’s financial swap contract with ComEd and $5 million of changes in the fair value of Generation’s block contracts with PECO for the year ended December 31, 2011. All items eliminate upon consolidation if Exelon’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

The following tables present the income statement classification of the total realized and unrealized gains (losses) included in income for Level 3 assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis during the years ended December 31, 20122013 and 2011:2012:

 

   Operating
Revenue
  Purchased
Power and
Fuel
 

Total gains (losses) included in income for the year ended December 31, 2012

  $(153 $34 

Change in the unrealized gains relating to assets and liabilities held for the year ended December 31, 2012

  $13  $24 
   Operating
Revenue
  Purchased
Power and
Fuel
 

Total gains (losses) included in income for the year ended December 31, 2011

  $108  $(8

Change in the unrealized gains (losses) relating to assets and liabilities held for the year ended December 31, 2011

  $137  $(5
   Operating
Revenue
  Purchased
Power and
Fuel
   Other,
net(a)
 

Total gains (losses) included in income for the year ended December 31, 2013

  $(152 $108   $2 

Change in the unrealized gains relating to assets and liabilities held for the year ended December 31, 2013

  $40  $127   $1 

   Operating
Revenue
   Purchased
Power and
Fuel
  Other,
net
 

Total gains included in income for the year ended December 31, 2012

  $54   $5  $—   

Change in the unrealized gains (losses) relating to assets and liabilities held for the year ended December 31, 2012

  $230   $(16 $—   

(a)Other, net activity consists of realized and unrealized gains (losses) included in income for the NDT funds held by Generation.

 

289295


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Generation

 

The following tables present assets and liabilities measured and recorded at fair value on Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets on a recurring basis and their level within the fair value hierarchy as of December 31, 20122013 and December 31, 2011:2012:

 

As of December 31, 2012

  Level 1   Level 2   Level 3   Total 

As of December 31, 2013

  Level 1   Level 2   Level 3   Total 

Assets

                

Cash equivalents (a)

  $487   $—      $—      $487   $1,006   $—      $—      $1,006 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments

                

Cash equivalents

   245    —       —       245    459    —       —       459 

Equity

                

Equity securities

   1,480    —       —       1,480 

Individually held

   1,776    —       —       1,776 

Exchange traded funds

   115    —       —       115 

Commingled funds

   —       1,933    —       1,933    —       2,271    —       2,271 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Equity funds subtotal

   1,480    1,933    —       3,413    1,891    2,271    —       4,162 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Fixed income

                

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

   1,057    —       —       1,057    882    —       —       882 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and political subdivisions of the states

   —       321    —       321    —       294    —       294 

Debt securities issued by foreign governments

   —       93    —       93    —       87    —       87 

Corporate debt securities

   —       1,788    —       1,788    —       1,753    31    1,784 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —       24    —       24    —       10    —       10 

Commercial mortgage-backed securities (non-agency)

   —       45    —       45    —       40    —       40 

Residential mortgage-backed securities (non-agency)

   —       11    —       11    —       7    —       7 

Mutual funds

   —       23    —       23    —       18    —       18 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Fixed income subtotal

   1,057    2,305    —       3,362    882    2,209    31    3,122 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Middle market lending

   —       —       183    183    —       —       314    314 

Private Equity

   —       —       5    5 

Other debt obligations

   —       15    —       15    —       14    —       14 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments subtotal (b)

   2,782    4,253    183    7,218    3,232    4,494    350    8,076 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Pledged assets for Zion Station decommissioning

                

Cash equivalents

   —       23    —       23    —       26    —       26 

Equity

                

Equity securities

   14    —       —       14 

Commingled funds

   —       9    —       9 

Individually held

   16    —       —       16 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Equity funds subtotal

   14    9    —       23    16    —       —       16 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Fixed income

                

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

   118    12    —       130    45    4    —       49 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and political subdivisions of the states

   —       37    —       37    —       20    —       20 

Corporate debt securities

   —       249    —       249    —       227    —       227 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —       49    —       49 

Commercial mortgage-backed securities (non-agency)

   —       6    —       6 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Fixed income subtotal

   118    353    —       471 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Middle market lending

   —       —       89    89 

Other debt obligations

   —       1    —       1 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Pledged assets for Zion Station decommissioning subtotal (c)

   132    386    89    607 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

290296


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

As of December 31, 2013

  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 

Fixed income subtotal

   45   251   —      296 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Middle market lending

   —      —      112   112 

Other debt obligations

   —      1   —      1 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Pledged assets for Zion Station decommissioning subtotal (c)

   61   278   112   451 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Rabbi trust investments

     

Mutual funds (d)

   13   —      —      13 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Rabbi trust investments subtotal

   13   —      —      13 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market derivative assets

     

Economic hedges

   493   2,582   885   3,960 

Proprietary trading

   324   1,315   122   1,761 

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral (e)

   (863  (3,131  (430  (4,424
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market assets subtotal

   (46  766   577   1,297 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest Rate mark-to-market derivative assets

   30   32   —      62 

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral

   (30  (2  —      (32
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest Rate mark-to-market derivative assets subtotal

   —      30   —      30 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other investments

   —      —      15   15 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total assets

   4,266   5,568   1,054   10,888 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Liabilities

     

Commodity mark-to-market derivative liabilities

     

Economic hedges

   (540  (1,890  (397  (2,827

Proprietary trading

   (328  (1,256  (119  (1,703

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral (e)

   869   3,007   404   4,280 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market liabilities subtotal

   1   (139  (112  (250
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative liabilities

   (31  (13  —      (44

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral

   31   1   —      32 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative liabilities subtotal

   —      (12  —      (12
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Deferred compensation obligation

   —      (29  —      (29
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total liabilities

   1   (180  (112  (291
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total net assets

  $4,267  $5,388  $942  $10,597 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

As of December 31, 2012

  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 

Rabbi trust investments

     

Cash equivalents

   1   —      —      1 

Mutual funds (d)(e)

   13   —      —      13 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Rabbi trust investments subtotal

   14   —      —      14 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market derivative assets

     

Economic hedges

   861   3,173   867   4,901 

Proprietary trading

   1,042   2,078   73   3,193 

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral (f)

   (1,823  (4,175  (58  (6,056
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market assets subtotal (g)

   80   1,076   882   2,038 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest Rate mark-to-market derivative assets

   —      101   —      101 

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral

   —      (51  —      (51
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest Rate mark-to-market derivative assets subtotal

   —      50   —      50 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other investments

   2   —      17   19 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total assets

   3,497   5,765   1,171   10,433 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Liabilities

     

Commodity mark-to-market derivative liabilities

     

Economic hedges

   (1,041  (2,289  (169  (3,499

Proprietary trading

   (1,084  (1,959  (78  (3,121

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral (f)

   2,042   4,020   25   6,087 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market liabilities subtotal

   (83  (228  (222  (533
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative liabilities

   —      (84  —      (84

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral

   —      51   —      51 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative liabilities subtotal

   —      (33  —      (33
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Deferred compensation

   —      (28  —      (28
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total liabilities

   (83  (289  (222  (594
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total net assets

  $3,414  $5,476  $949  $9,839 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

291297


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

As of December 31, 2012

 Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 

Assets

    

Cash equivalents (a)

 $487  $—     $—     $487 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments

    

Cash equivalents

  245   —      —      245 

Equity

    

Individually held

  1,480   —      —      1,480 

Commingled funds

  —      1,933   —      1,933 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Equity funds subtotal

  1,480   1,933   —      3,413 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Fixed income

    

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

  1,057   —      —      1,057 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and political subdivisions of the states

  —      321   —      321 

Debt securities issued by foreign governments

  —      93   —      93 

Corporate debt securities

  —      1,788   —      1,788 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

  —      24   —      24 

Commercial mortgage-backed securities (non-agency)

  —      45   —      45 

Residential mortgage-backed securities (non-agency)

  —      11   —      11 

Mutual funds

  —      23   —      23 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Fixed income subtotal

  1,057   2,305   —      3,362 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Middle market lending

  —      —      183   183 

Other debt obligations

  —      15   —      15 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments subtotal (b)

  2,782   4,253   183   7,218 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Pledged assets for Zion Station decommissioning

    

Cash equivalents

  —      23   —      23 

Equity

    

Individually held

  14   —      —      14 

Commingled funds

  —      9   —      9 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Equity funds subtotal

  14   9   —      23 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Fixed income

    

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

  118   12   —      130 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and political subdivisions of the states

  —      37   —      37 

Corporate debt securities

  —      249   —      249 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

  —      49   —      49 

Commercial mortgage-backed securities (non-agency)

  —      6   —      6 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Fixed income subtotal

  118   353   —      471 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Middle market lending

  —      —      89   89 

Other debt obligations

  —      1   —      1 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Pledged assets for Zion Station decommissioning subtotal (c)

  132   386   89   607 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Rabbi trust investments

    

Cash equivalents

  1   —      —      1 

Mutual funds (d)

  13   —      —      13 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

As of December 31, 2011

  Level 1   Level 2  Level 3  Total 

Assets

      

Cash equivalents (a)

  $466   $—     $—     $466 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments

      

Cash equivalents

   562    —      —      562 

Equity

      

Equity securities

   1,275    —      —      1,275 

Commingled funds

   —       1,822   —      1,822 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Equity funds subtotal

   1,275    1,822   —      3,097 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Fixed income

      

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

   1,014    33   —      1,047 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and political subdivisions of the states

   —       541   —      541 

Debt securities issued by foreign governments

   —       16   —      16 

Corporate debt securities

   —       778   —      778 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —       357   —      357 

Commercial mortgage-backed securities (non-agency)

   —       83   —      83 

Residential mortgage-backed securities (non-agency)

   —       5   —      5 

Mutual funds

   —       47   —      47 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Fixed income subtotal

   1,014    1,860   —      2,874 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Middle market lending

   —       —      13   13 

Other debt obligations

   —       18   —      18 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments subtotal (b)

   2,851    3,700   13   6,564 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Pledged assets for Zion Station decommissioning

      

Equity

      

Equity securities

   35    —      —      35 

Commingled funds

   —       30   —      30 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Equity funds subtotal

   35    30   —      65 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Fixed income

      

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

   54    26   —      80 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and political subdivisions of the states

   —       65   —      65 

Corporate debt securities

   —       314   —      314 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —       121   —      121 

Commercial mortgage-backed securities (non-agency)

   —       10   —      10 

Commingled funds

   —       20   —      20 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Fixed income subtotal

   54    556   —      610 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Middle market lending

   —       —      37   37 

Other debt obligations

   —       13   —      13 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Pledged assets for Zion Station decommissioning subtotal (c)

   89    599   37   725 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Rabbi trust investments (d)(e)

   4    —      —      4 

Commodity mark-to-market derivative assets

      

Cash flow hedges

   —       857   694   1,551 

Other derivatives

   —       1,653   124   1,777 

Proprietary trading

   —       240   48   288 

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral (f)

   —       (1,827  (28  (1,855
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market assets subtotal (g)

   —       923   838   1,761 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total assets

   3,410    5,222   888   9,520 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

292298


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

As of December 31, 2011

  Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total 

As of December 31, 2012

 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total 

Rabbi trust investments subtotal

  14   —      —      14 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market derivative assets

    

Economic hedges

  861   3,173   867   4,901 

Proprietary trading

  1,042   2,078   73   3,193 

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral (f)

  (1,823  (4,175  (58  (6,056
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market assets subtotal

  80   1,076   882   2,038 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative assets

  —      101   —      101 

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral

  —      (51  —      (51
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative assets subtotal

  —      50   —      50 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other investments

  2   —      17   19 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total assets

  3,497   5,765   1,171   10,433 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Liabilities

         

Commodity mark-to-market derivative liabilities

         

Cash flow hedges

   —      (13  —      (13

Other derivatives

   (1  (1,137  (13  (1,151

Economic hedges

  (1,041  (2,289  (169  (3,499

Proprietary trading

   —      (236  (28  (264  (1,084  (1,959  (78  (3,121

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral (f)

   —      1,295   20   1,315   2,042   4,020   25   6,087 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market liabilities subtotal

   (1  (91  (21  (113  (83  (228  (222  (533
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative liabilities

   —      (19  —      (19  —      (84  —      (84

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral

  —      51   —      51 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Deferred compensation

   —      (18  —      (18

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative liabilities subtotal

  —      (33  —      (33)  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Deferred compensation obligation

  —      (28  —      (28
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total liabilities

   (1  (128  (21  (150  (83  (289  (222  (594
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total net assets

  $3,409  $5,094  $867  $9,370  $3,414  $5,476  $949  $9,839 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Excludes certain cash equivalents considered to be held-to-maturity and not reported at fair value.
(b)Excludes net assets (liabilities) of $30$(5) million and $(57)$30 million at December 31, 20122013 and December 31, 2011,2012, respectively. These items consist of receivables related to pending securities sales, interest and dividend receivables, and payables related to pending securities purchases.
(c)Excludes net assets of $7 million and $9 million at both December 31, 20122013 December 31, 2011,2012, respectively. These items consist of receivables related to pending securities sales, interest and dividend receivables, and payables related to pending securities purchases.
(d)The $13 million mutual funds held by the Rabbi trusts are classified as Level 1 as they are valued based upon quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets.
(e)Excludes $8$10 million and $7$8 million of the cash surrender value of life insurance investments at December 31, 20122013 and December 31, 2011,2012, respectively.
(f)(e)Includes collateral postings (received) from counterparties. Collateral (received) from counterparties, net of collateral paid to counterparties, totaled $6 million, $(124) million and $(26) million allocated to Level 1, Level 2 and Level 3 mark-to-market derivatives, respectively, as of December 31, 2013. Collateral (received) from counterparties, net of collateral paid to counterparties, totaled $219 million, $(155) million and $(33) million allocated to Level 1, Level 2 and Level 3 mark-to-market derivatives, respectively, as of December 31, 2012. Collateral (received) from counterparties, net of collateral paid to counterparties, totaled $532 million and $8 million allocated to Level 2 and Level 3 mark-to-market derivatives, respectively, as of December 31, 2011.
(g)(f)The Level 3 balance includes current and noncurrent assets for Generation of $226 million and $0 million at December 31, 2012 and $503 million and $191 million at December 31, 2011, respectively, related to the fair value of Generation’s financial swap contract with ComEd, which eliminates upon consolidation in Exelon’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

293299


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

The following tables present the fair value reconciliation of Level 3 assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis during the years ended December 31, 2012,2013, and 2011:.2012:

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2012

 Nuclear
Decommissioning
Trust Fund
Investments
 Pledged Assets for
Zion Station
Decommissioning
 Mark-to-Market
Derivatives
 Other
Investments
 Total 

Balance as of January 1, 2012

 $13  $37  $817   —    $867 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2013

 Nuclear
Decommissioning
Trust Fund
Investments
 Pledged Assets for
Zion Station
Decommissioning
 Mark-to-Market
Derivatives
 Other
Investments
 Total 

Balance as of January 1, 2013

 $183  $89  $660  $17  $949 

Total unrealized / realized gains (losses)

          

Included in income

  —     —     (112)(a)   —     (112  2   —     (51)(a)(b)    —     (49

Included in other comprehensive income

  —     —     (475)(b)   —     (475  —     —     (219)(b)    2   (217

Included in noncurrent payables to affiliates

  1   —     —     —     1   8   —     —     —     8 

Change in collateral

  —     —     (32  —     (32  —     —     7   —     7 

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements

          

Purchases

  169   63   334(c)   17   583   203   62   28   4   297 

Sales

  —     (11  —     —     (11  (28  (39  (11  (8  (86

Settlements

  (18  —     —     —     (18

Transfers into Level 3

  —     —     39    39   —     —     86(c)    1   87 

Transfers out of Level 3

  —     —     89   —     89   —     —     (35  (1  (36
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2012

 $183  $89  $660  $17  $949 

Balance as of December 31, 2013

 $350  $112  $465  $15  $942 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

The amount of total losses included in income attributed to the change in unrealized gains (losses) related to assets and liabilities held as of December 31, 2012

 $—    $—    $(12 $—    $(12

The amount of total losses included in income attributed to the change in unrealized gains related to assets and liabilities held as of December 31, 2013

 $1  $—    $156  $—    $157 

 

(a)Includes a reduction for the reclassification of $100$207 million of realized gains due to the settlement of derivative contracts recorded in results of operations for the year ended December 31, 2013.
(b)Includes $11 million of increases in fair value and realized losses due to settlements of $215 million associated with Generation’s financial swap contract with ComEd for the year ended December 31, 2013. All items eliminate upon consolidation in Exelon’s Consolidated Financial Statements.
(c)Includes an increase of transfers into Level 3 arising from reductions in market liquidity, which resulted in less observable contract tenures in various locations.

300


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

For the Year Ended December 31, 2012

 Nuclear
Decommissioning
Trust Fund
Investments
  Pledged Assets for
Zion Station
Decommissioning
  Mark-to-Market
Derivatives
  Other
Investments
  Total 

Balance as of January 1, 2012

 $13  $37  $817  $—    $867 

Total realized / unrealized gains (losses)

     

Included in income

  —     —     66(a)   —     66 

Included in other comprehensive income

  —     —     (475)(b)   —     (475

Included in noncurrent payables to affiliates

  1   —     —     —     1 

Changes in collateral

  —     —     (32  —     (32

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements

     

Purchases

  169   63   334(c)   17   583 

Sales

  —     (11  —     —     (11

Transfers into Level 3

  —     —     39   —     39 

Transfers out of Level 3

  —     —     (89  —     (89
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2012

 $183  $89  $660   17  $949 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

The amount of total gains included in income attributed to the change in unrealized gains related to assets and liabilities as of December 31, 2012

 $—    $—    $165  

$

—  

 

 $165 

(a)Includes a reduction for the reclassification of $99 million of realized gains due to the settlement of derivative contracts recorded in results of operations for the year ended December 31, 2012.
(b)Includes $98 million of increases in fair value and $566 million of realized losses reclassified from OCI due to settlements of $566 million associated with Generation’s financial swap contract with ComEd for the year ended December 31, 2012. This position was de-designated as a cash flow hedge prior to the merger date. All prospective changes in fair value and reclassifications of realized amounts are being recorded to income offset by the amortization of the frozen mark in OCI. All items eliminate upon consolidation in Exelon’s Consolidated Financial Statements.
(c)Includes $323$310 million of fair value from contracts and $17$14 million of other investments acquired as a result of the merger.

294


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

For the Year Ended December 31, 2011

  Nuclear
Decommissioning
Trust Fund
Investments
   Pledged Assets for
Zion Station
Decommissioning
  Mark-to-Market
Derivatives
  Total 

Balance as of January 1, 2011

  $—      $—    $1,030  $1,030 

Total realized / unrealized gains (losses)

      

Included in income

   1    —      99(a)   100 

Included in other comprehensive income

   —       —      (311)(b)   (311

Included in payable for Zion Station decommissioning

   2    —      —      2 

Changes in collateral

   —       —      6   6 

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements

      

Purchases

   10    60   10   80 

Sales

   —       (23  —      (23

Transfers out of Level 3—Liability

   —       —      (17  (17
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2011

  $13   $37  $817  $867 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

The amount of total gains included in income attributed to the change in unrealized gains related to assets and liabilities as of December 31, 2011

  $1   $—    $131  $132 

(a)Includes the reclassification of $32 million of realized losses due to the settlement of derivative contracts recorded in results of operations for the year ended December 31, 2011.
(b)Includes $170 million of increases in fair value and $451 million of realized losses reclassified from OCI due to settlements associated with Generation’s financial swap contract with ComEd for the year ended December 31, 2011, and $5 million of decreases in fair value due to settlement of Generation’s block contracts with PECO for the year ended December 31, 2011. All items eliminate upon consolidation in Exelon’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

The following tables present the income statement classification of the total realized and unrealized gains (losses) included in income for Level 3 assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis during the years ended December 31, 2012,2013, and 2011:2012:

 

   Operating
Revenue
  Purchased
Power and
Fuel
 

Total gains (losses) included in income for the year ended December 31, 2012

  $(146 $34 

Change in the unrealized gains (losses) relating to assets and liabilities held for the year ended December 31, 2012

  $(25 $13 
   Operating
Revenue
  Purchased
Power and
Fuel
 

Total gains (losses) included in income for the year ended December 31, 2011

  $108  $(8

Change in the unrealized gains (losses) relating to assets and liabilities held for the year ended December 31, 2011

  $137  $(5
  Operating
Revenue
  Purchased
Power and
Fuel
  Other -
net(a)
 

Total gains (losses) included in income for the year ended December 31, 2013

 $(158 $107  $2 

Change in the unrealized gains relating to assets and liabilities held for the year ended December 31, 2013

 $30  $126  $1 
  Operating
Revenue
  Purchased
Power and
Fuel
  Other -
net (a)
 

Total gains included in income for the year ended December 31, 2012

 $61  $5  $—   

Change in the unrealized gains (losses) relating to assets and liabilities held for the year ended December 31, 2012

 $181  $(16 $—   

 

295301


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

(a)Other, net activity consists of realized and unrealized gains (losses) included in income for the NDT funds held by Generation.

 

ComEd

 

The following tables present assets and liabilities measured and recorded at fair value on ComEd’s Consolidated Balance Sheets on a recurring basis and their level within the fair value hierarchy as of December 31, 20122013 and December 31, 2011:2012:

 

As of December 31, 2013

  Level 1   Level 2 Level 3 Total 

Assets

      

Rabbi trust investments

      

Mutual funds

   5    —     —     5 
  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Rabbi trust investments subtotal

   5    —     —     5 
  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total assets

   5    —     —     5 
  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Liabilities

      

Deferred compensation obligation

   —      (8  —     (8

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities(b)

   —      —     (193  (193
  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total liabilities

   —      (8  (193  (201
  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total net assets (liabilities)

  $5   $(8 $(193 $(196
  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

As of December 31, 2012

  Level 1   Level 2 Level 3 Total   Level 1   Level 2 Level 3 Total 

Assets

            

Cash equivalents

  $111   $—     $—     $111   $111   $ —    $—    $111 

Rabbi trust investments

            

Mutual funds

   8    —      —      8    8    —     —     8 
  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Rabbi trust investment subtotal

   8    —      —      8 

Rabbi trust investments subtotal

   8    —     —     8 
  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total assets

   119    —      —      119    119    —     —     119 
  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Liabilities

            

Deferred compensation obligation

   —       (8  —      (8   —      (8  —     (8

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities (b)(c)

   —       —      (293  (293

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities(a)(b)

   —      —     (293  (293
  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total liabilities

   —       (8  (293  (301   —      (8  (293  (301
  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total net assets (liabilities)

  $119   $(8 $(293 $(182  $119   $(8 $(293 $(182
  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

As of December 31, 2011

  Level 1   Level 2 Level 3 Total 

Assets

      

Cash equivalents (a)

  $173   $—     $—     $173 

Rabbi trust investments

      

Cash equivalents

   2    —      —     ��2 

Mutual funds

   19    —      —      19 
  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Rabbi trust investment subtotal

   21    —      —      21 
  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total assets

   194    —      —      194 
  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Liabilities

      

Deferred compensation obligation

   —       (8  —      (8

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities(b)(c)

   —       —      (800  (800
  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total liabilities

   —       (8  (800  (808
  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total net assets (liabilities)

  $194   $(8 $(800 $(614
  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Excludes certain cash equivalents considered to be held-to-maturity and not reported at fair value.
(b)The Level 3 balance includes the current and noncurrent liability of $226 million and $0 million at December 31, 2012, respectively, and $503 million and $191 million at December 31, 2011, respectively, related to the fair value of ComEd’s financial swap contract with Generation which eliminates upon consolidation in Exelon’s Consolidated Financial Statements.
(c)(b)The Level 3 balance includes the current and noncurrent liability of $17 million and $176 million at December 31, 2013, respectively, and $18 million and $49 million at December 31, 2012, respectively, and $9 million and $97 million at December 31, 2011, respectively, related to floating-to-fixed energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers.

296


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

The following tables present the fair value reconciliation of Level 3 assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis during the year ended and December 31, 2012,2013, and 2011:2012:

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2012

  Mark-to-Market
Derivatives
 

Balance as of January 1, 2012

  $(800

Total realized / unrealized gains included in regulatory assets(a)(b)

   507 
  

 

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2012

  $(293
  

 

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2013

  Mark-to-Market
Derivatives
 

Balance as of January 1, 2013

  $(293

Total realized / unrealized gains included in regulatory assets(a)(b)

   100 
  

 

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2013

  $(193
  

 

 

 

 

(a)Includes $98$11 million of decreases in fair value and realized gains due to settlements of $215 million associated with ComEd’s financial swap contract with Generation for the year ended December 31, 2013. All items eliminate upon consolidation in Exelon’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

302


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

(b)Includes $133 million of increases in the fair value and realized losses due to settlements of $7 million recorded in purchased power expense associated with floating-to-fixed energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers for the year ended December 31, 2013.

Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2012

  Mark-to-Market
Derivatives
 

Balance as of January 1, 2012

  $(800

Total realized / unrealized gains included in regulatory assets(a)(b)

   507 
  

 

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2012

  $(293
  

 

 

 

(a)Includes $98 million of increases in fair value and $566 million of realized gains due to settlements associated with ComEd’s financial swap contract with Generation for the year ended December 31, 2012. All items eliminate upon consolidation in Exelon’s Consolidated Financial Statements.
(b)Includes $34 million of increasesdecreases in the fair value and realized losses due to settlements of $5 million recorded in purchased power expense associated with floating-to-fixed energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers for the year ended December 31, 2012.

Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2011

  Mark-to-Market
Derivatives
 

Balance as of January 1, 2011

  $(971

Total realized / unrealized gains included in regulatory assets(a)(b)

   171 
  

 

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2011

  $(800
  

 

 

 

(a)Includes $170 million of increases in fair value and $451 million of realized gains due to settlements associated with ComEd’s financial swap contract with Generation for the year ended December 31, 2011. All items eliminate upon consolidation in Exelon’s Consolidated Financial Statements.
(b)Includes $110 million of decreases in fair value of floating-to-fixed energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers for the year ended December 31, 2011.

 

PECO

 

The following tables present assets and liabilities measured and recorded at fair value on PECO’s Consolidated Balance Sheets on a recurring basis and their level within the fair value hierarchy as of December 31, 20122013 and December 31, 2011:2012:

 

As of December 31, 2012

  Level 1   Level 2 Level 3   Total 

As of December 31, 2013

  Level 1   Level 2 Level 3   Total 

Assets

              

Cash equivalents

  $346   $—    $—      $346   $175   $—    $—     $175 

Rabbi trust investments—mutual funds (b)(c)

   9    —      —       9 

Rabbi trust investments

       

Mutual funds(a)

   9    —     —      9 
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

Rabbi trust investments subtotal

   9    —     —      9 
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

Total assets

   355    —      —       355    184    —     —      184 
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

Liabilities

              

Deferred compensation obligation

   —       (18  —       (18   —      (17  —      (17
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

Total liabilities

   —       (18  —       (18   —      (17  —      (17
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

Total net assets (liabilities)

  $355   $(18 $ —      $337   $184   $(17 $—     $167 
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

As of December 31, 2012

  Level 1   Level 2  Level 3   Total 

Assets

       

Cash equivalents

  $346   $—    $—     $346 

Rabbi trust investments

       

Mutual funds(a)

   9    —     —      9 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Rabbi trust investments subtotal

   9    —     —      9 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total assets

   355    —     —      355 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Liabilities

       

Deferred compensation obligation

   —      (18  —      (18
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total liabilities

   —      (18  —      (18
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total net assets (liabilities)

  $355   $(18 $—     $337 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

297303


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

As of December 31, 2011

  Level 1   Level 2  Level 3   Total 

Assets

       

Cash equivalents(a)

  $175   $—    $—      $175 

Rabbi trust investments—mutual funds(b)(c)

   9    —      —       9 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total assets

   184    —      —       184 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Liabilities

       

Deferred compensation obligation

   —       (21  —       (21
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total liabilities

   —       (21  —       (21
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total net assets (liabilities)

  $184   $(21 $—      $163 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

(a)Excludes certain cash equivalents considered to be held-to-maturity$14 million and not reported at fair value.
(b)The mutual funds held by the Rabbi trusts are classified as Level 1 as they are valued based upon quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets.
(c)Excludes $13 million of the cash surrender value of life insurance investments at December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, respectively.

 

PECO had no Level 3 assets or liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis during the year ended December 31, 2012.

The following table presents the fair value reconciliation of Level 3 assets2013 and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis during the year ended December 31, 2011:

Year Ended December 31, 2011

  Mark-to-Market
Derivatives
 

Balance as of January 1, 2011

  $(9

Total realized gains included in regulatory assets

   9(a) 
  

 

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2011

  $—    
  

 

 

 

(a)Includes an increase of $5 million related to the settlement of PECO’s block contracts with Generation, which eliminates upon consolidation in Exelon’s Consolidated Financial Statements. Generation’s block contracts with PECO expired on December 31, 2011.

298


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

2012.

 

BGE

 

The following tables present assets and liabilities measured and recorded at fair value on BGE’s Consolidated Balance Sheets on a recurring basis and their level within the fair value hierarchy as of December 31, 20122013 and December 31, 2011:2012:

 

As of December 31, 2012

  Level 1   Level 2 Level 3   Total 

As of December 31, 2013

  Level 1   Level 2 Level 3   Total 

Assets

              

Cash equivalents

  $33   $—    $—     $33   $31   $—    $—     $31 

Rabbi trust investments—mutual funds

   5    —      —       5 

Rabbi trust investments

       

Mutual funds

   6    —     —      6 
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

Rabbi trust investments subtotal

   6    —     —      6 
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

Total assets

   38    —      —       38    37    —     —      37 
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

Liabilities

              

Deferred compensation obligation

   —       (5  —       (5   —      (6  —      (6
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

Total liabilities

   —       (5  —       (5   —      (6  —      (6
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

Total net assets (liabilities)

  $38   $(5 $—     $33   $37   $(6 $—     $31 
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

 

As of December 31, 2011

  Level 1   Level 2   Level 3   Total 

As of December 31, 2012

  Level 1   Level 2 Level 3   Total 

Assets

               

Cash equivalents

  $33   $—      $—      $33   $33   $—    $—     $33 

Rabbi trust investments

       

Mutual funds

   5    —     —      5 
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

Rabbit trust investments subtotal

   5    —     —      5 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

Total assets

   33    —      —      33    38    —     —      38 
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

Liabilities

               

Deferred compensation obligation

   —      (5  —      (5
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

Total liabilities

   —      (5  —      (5
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

Total net assets (liabilities)

  $33   $—     $—      $33   $38   $(5 $—     $33 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

 

BGE had no Level 3 assets or liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis during the year ended December 31, 2012.2013.

 

Valuation Techniques Used to Determine Fair Value

 

The following describes the valuation techniques used to measure the fair value of the assets and liabilities shown in the tables above.

304


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Cash Equivalents (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE).The Registrants’ cash equivalents include investments with maturities of three months or less when purchased. The cash equivalents shown in the fair value tables are comprised of investments in mutual and money market funds. The fair values of the shares of these funds are based on observable market prices and, therefore, have been categorized in Level 1 in the fair value hierarchy.

 

Nuclear Decommissioning Trust Fund Investments and Pledged Assets for Zion Station Decommissioning (Exelon and Generation).The trust fund investments have been established to satisfy Generation’s nuclear decommissioning obligations as required by the NRC. The NDT funds hold debt and equity securities directly and indirectly through commingled funds. Generation’s investment policies place limitations on the types and investment grade ratings of the securities that may be held by the trusts. These policies limit the trust funds’ exposures to investments in highly illiquid markets and other alternative investments. Investments with maturities of three months or less when purchased, including certain short-term fixed income securities are considered cash equivalents and included in the recurring fair value measurements hierarchy as Level 1.1 or Level 2.

299


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

With respect to individually held equity securities, the trustees obtain prices from pricing services, whose prices are obtained from direct feeds from market exchanges, which Generation is able to independently corroborate. The fair values of equity securities held directly by the trust funds are based on quoted prices in active markets and are categorized in Level 1. Equity securities held individually are primarily traded on the New York Stock Exchange and NASDAQ-Global Select Market, which contain only actively traded securities due to the volume trading requirements imposed by these exchanges.

 

For fixed income securities, multiple prices from pricing services are obtained whenever possible, which enables cross-provider validations in addition to checks for unusual daily movements. A primary price source is identified based on asset type, class or issue for each security. The trustees monitor prices supplied by pricing services and may use a supplemental price source or change the primary price source of a given security if the portfolio managers challenge an assigned price and the trustees determine that another price source is considered to be preferable. Generation has obtained an understanding of how these prices are derived, including the nature and observability of the inputs used in deriving such prices. Additionally, Generation selectively corroborates the fair values of securities by comparison to other market-based price sources. U.S. Treasury securities are categorized as Level 1 because they trade in a highly liquid and transparent market. The fair values of fixed income securities, excluding U.S. Treasury securities, are based on evaluated prices that reflect observable market information, such as actual trade information or similar securities, adjusted for observable differences and are categorized in Level 2. The fair values of private placement fixed income securities are determined using a third party valuation that contains certain significant unobservable inputs and are categorized in Level 3.

 

Equity and fixed income commingled funds and fixed income mutual funds are maintained by investment companies and hold certain investments in accordance with a stated set of fund objectives. The fair values of fixed income commingled and mutual funds held within the trust funds, which generally hold short-term fixed income securities and are not subject to restrictions regarding the purchase or sale of shares, are derived from observable prices. The objectives of the remaining equity commingled funds in which Exelon and Generation invest primarily seek to track the performance of certain equity indices by purchasing equity securities to replicate the capitalization and characteristics of the indices. In general, equity commingled funds are redeemable on the 15th of the month and the last business day of the month; however, the fund manager may designate any day as a valuation date for the purpose of purchasing or redeeming units. Commingled and mutual funds are categorized in Level 2 because the fair value of the funds are based on NAVs per fund share (the unit of account), primarily derived from the quoted prices in active markets on the underlying equity securities.

305


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Middle market lending are investments in loans or managed funds which invest in private companies. Generation elected the fair value option for its investments in certain limited partnerships that invest in middle market lending managed funds. The fair value of these loans is determined using a combination of valuation models including cost models, market models, and income models. Investments in middle market lending are categorized as Level 3 because the fair value of these securities is based largely on inputs that are unobservable and utilize complex valuation models. Investments in middle market lending typically cannot be redeemed until maturity of the term loan.

 

Rabbi Trust Investments (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE).The Rabbi trusts were established to hold assets related to deferred compensation plans existing for certain active and retired members of Exelon’s executive management and directors. The investments in the Rabbi trusts are included in investments in the Registrants’ Consolidated Balance Sheets. The investments are in fixed-income commingled fundsSheets and consist primarily of mutual funds, including short-term investment funds. These funds are maintained by investment companies and hold certain investments in accordance with a stated set of

300


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

fund objectives, which are consistent with Exelon’s overall investment strategy. The values of some of theseMutual funds are publicly quoted. For fixed-income commingled fundsquoted and mutual funds which are not publicly quoted, the fund administrators value the funds using the NAV per fund share, derived from the quoted prices in active markets of the underlying securities. These funds have been categorized as Level 2. Fixed-income commingled funds and mutual funds which are publicly quoted, such as money market funds, have been categorized as Level 1 given the clear observability of the prices.

 

Mark-to-Market Derivatives (Exelon, Generation, ComEd and PECO)ComEd). Derivative contracts are traded in both exchange-based and non-exchange-based markets. Exchange-based derivatives that are valued using unadjusted quoted prices in active markets are categorized in Level 1 in the fair value hierarchy. Certain non-exchange-based derivatives’ pricing is verified using indicative price quotations available through brokers or over-the-counter, on-line exchanges and are categorized in Level 2. These price quotations reflect the average of the bid-ask, mid-point prices and are obtained from sources that the Registrants believe provide the most liquid market for the commodity. The price quotations are reviewed and corroborated to ensure the prices are observable and representative of an orderly transaction between market participants. This includes consideration of actual transaction volumes, market delivery points, bid-ask spreads and contract duration. The remainder of non-exchange-based derivative contracts isare valued using the Black model, an industry standard option valuation model. The Black model takes into account inputs such as contract terms, including maturity, and market parameters, including assumptions of the future prices of energy, interest rates, volatility, credit worthiness and credit spread. For non-exchange-based derivatives that trade in liquid markets, such as generic forwards, swaps and options, model inputs are generally observable. Such instruments are categorized in Level 2. The Registrants’ non-exchange-based derivatives are predominately at liquid trading points. For non-exchange-based derivatives that trade in less liquid markets with limited pricing information such as the financial swap contract between Generation and ComEd, model inputs generally would include both observable and unobservable inputs. These valuations may include an estimated basis adjustment from an illiquid trading point to a liquid trading point for which active price quotations are available. Such instruments are categorized in Level 3.

Transfers in and out of levels are recognized as of the end of the reporting period the transfer occurred. Given derivatives categorized within Level 1 are valued using exchange-based quoted prices within observable periods, transfers between Level 2 and Level 1 were not material. Transfers into Level 2 from Level 3 generally occur when the contract tenure becomes more observable. Transfers into Level 3 from Level 2 generally occur due to changes in market liquidity or assumptions for certain commodity contracts.

 

Exelon may utilize fixed-to-floating interest rate swaps, which are typically designated as fair value hedges, as a means to achieve its targeted level of variable-rate debt as a percent of total debt. In addition, the Registrants may utilize interest rate derivatives to lock in interest rate levels in anticipation of future financings. These interest rate derivatives are typically designated as cash flow hedges. Exelon determines the current fair value by calculating the net present value of expected payments and receipts under the swap agreement, based on and discounted by the market’s expectation of

306


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

future interest rates. Additional inputs to the net present value calculation may include the contract terms, counterparty credit risk and other market parameters. As these inputs are based on observable data and valuations of similar instruments, the interest rate swaps are categorized in Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy. See Note 10—12—Derivative Financial Instruments for further discussion on mark-to-market derivatives.

 

Deferred Compensation Obligations (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE).The Registrants’ deferred compensation plans allow participants to defer certain cash compensation into a notional investment account. The Registrants include such plans in other current and noncurrent liabilities in their Consolidated Balance Sheets. The value of the Registrants’ deferred compensation obligations is based on the market value of the participants’ notional investment accounts. The notional investments are comprised primarily of mutual funds, which are based on observable market prices. However, since the deferred compensation obligations themselves are not exchanged in an active market, they are categorized inas Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy.

301


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Additional Information Regarding Level 3 Fair Value Measurements (Exelon, Generation, ComEd)

 

Mark-to-Market Derivatives (Exelon, Generation, ComEd). For valuations that include both observable and unobservable inputs, if the unobservable input is determined to be significant to the overall inputs, the entire valuation is categorized in Level 3. This includes derivatives valued using indicative price quotations whose contract tenure extends into unobservable periods. In instances where observable data is unavailable, consideration is given to the assumptions that market participants would use in valuing the asset or liability. This includes assumptions about market risks such as liquidity, volatility and contract duration. Such instruments are categorized in Level 3 as the model inputs generally are not observable. Exelon’s RMC approves risk management policies and objectives for risk assessment, control and valuation, counterparty credit approval, and the monitoring and reporting of risk exposures. The RMC is chaired by the chief risk officer and includes the chief financial officer, corporate controller, general counsel, treasurer, vice president of strategy, vice president of audit services and officers representing Exelon’s business units. The RMC reports to the Exelon Boardboard of Directorsdirectors on the scope of the risk management activities and is responsible for approving all valuation procedures at Exelon. Forward price curves for the power market utilized by the front office to manage the portfolio are reviewed and verified by the middle office and used for financial reporting by the back office. The Registrants consider credit and nonperformance risk in the valuation of derivative contracts categorized in Level 2 and 3, including both historical and current market data in its assessment of credit and nonperformance risk by counterparty. Due to master netting agreements and collateral posting requirements, the impacts of credit and nonperformance risk were not material to the financial statements. Transfers in and out of levels are recognized as of the end of the reporting period the transfer occurred. Given derivatives categorized within Level 1 are valued using exchange-based quoted prices within observable periods, transfers between Level 2 and Level 1 generally do not occur. Transfers into Level 2 from Level 3 generally occur when the contract tenure becomes more observable. Transfers into Level 3 from Level 2 generally occur due to changes in market liquidity or assumptions for certain commodity contracts.

 

Disclosed below is detail surrounding the Registrants’ significant Level 3 valuations. The most significant position is the long term intercompany swap with ComEd, which is further discussed in Note 10—Derivative Financial Instruments. The calculated fair value includes marketability discounts for margining provisions and notional size. Generation’s remaining Level 3 balance generally consists of forward sales and purchases of power and natural gas, coal purchases, certain transmission congestion contracts, and project financing debt. Generation utilizes 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, commodity price volatility, contractual volumes, delivery location, interest rates, credit quality of counterparties and credit enhancements.

307


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

For commodity derivatives, the primary input to the valuation models is the forward commodity price curve for each instrument. Forward commodity price curves are derived by risk management for liquid locations and by the traders and portfolio managers for illiquid locations. All locations are reviewed and verified by risk management considering 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 the derivatives depends on a number of factors, including commodity type, delivery location, and delivery period. Price volatility varies by commodity and location. When appropriate, Generation discounts future cash flows using risk free interest rates with adjustments to reflect the credit quality of each counterparty for assets and

302


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Generation’s own credit quality for liabilities. The level of observability of a forward commodity price is generally due to the delivery location and delivery period. Certain delivery locations including PJM West Hub (for power) and Henry Hub (for natural gas) are highly liquid and prices are observable for up to three years in the future. The observability period of volatility is generally shorter than the underlying power curve used in option valuations. The forward curve for a less liquid location is estimated by using the forward curve from the liquid location and applying a spread to represent the cost to transport the commodity to the delivery location. This spread does not typically represent a majority of the instrumentsinstrument’s market price. As a result, the change in fair value is closely tied to liquid market movements and not a change in the applied spread. The change in fair value associated with a change in the spread is generally immaterial. An average spread calculated across all Level 3 power and gas delivery locations is generally less than $4approximately $3.92 and $.25$0.12 for power and natural gas, respectively. Many of the commodity derivatives are short term in nature and thus a majority of the fair value may be based on observable inputs even though the contract as a whole must be classified as Level 3. See ITEM 3.7A.—QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK for information regarding the maturity by year of the Registrant’s mark-to-market derivative assets and liabilities.

 

On December 17, 2010, ComEd entered into several 20-year floating to fixed energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers for the procurement of long-term renewable energy and associated RECs. See Note 10—12—Derivative Financial Instruments for more information. The fair value of these swaps has been designated as a Level 3 valuation due to the long tenure of the positions and internal modeling assumptions. The modeling assumptions include using natural gas heat rates to project long term forward power curves adjusted by a renewable factor that incorporates time of day and seasonality factors to reflect accurate renewable energy pricing. In addition, marketability reserves are applied to the positions based on the tenor and supplier risk. The table below discloses the significant inputs to the forward curve used to value these positions.

 

Type of trade

 Fair Value at
December 31, 2012 (d)
  Valuation
Technique
 Unobservable
Input
 

Range

Mark-to-market derivatives—Economic Hedges (Generation)(a)

 $473  Discounted
Cash Flow
 Forward power
price
 $14 - $79
   Forward gas
price

Volatility

 $3.26 - $6.27
  Option Model percentage 28% - 132%

Mark-to-market derivatives—Proprietary trading (Generation)(a)

 $(6 Discounted
Cash Flow
 Forward power
price

Volatility

 $15 - $106
  Option Model percentage 16% - 48%

Mark-to-market derivatives—Transactions with affiliates (Generation and ComEd)(b)

 $226  Discounted
Cash Flow
 Marketability
reserve
 8% - 9%

Mark-to-market derivatives (ComEd)

 $(67 Discounted
Cash Flow
 Forward heat
rate
(c)
 8% - 9.5%
   Marketability
reserve
 3.5% - 8.3%
   Renewable
factor
 81% - 123%

303308


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

The table below discloses the significant inputs to the forward curve used to value these positions.

Type of trade

 Fair Value at
December 31, 2013 (c)
  Valuation
Technique
 Unobservable
Input
 Range 

Mark-to-market derivatives—Economic Hedges (Generation) (a)

 $488  Discounted
Cash Flow
 Forward power
price
  $8 - $176(d) 
   Forward gas
price

Volatility

  $2.98 - $16.63(d) 
  Option Model percentage  15% - 142%  

Mark-to-market derivatives—Proprietary trading (Generation) (a)

 $3  Discounted
Cash Flow
 Forward power
price

Volatility

  $10 - $176(d) 
  Option Model percentage  14% - 19%  

Mark-to-market derivatives (ComEd)

 $(193 Discounted
Cash Flow
 Forward heat
rate
(b)
  8 - 9 
   Marketability
reserve
  3.5% - 8%  
   Renewable
factor
  84% -128%  

a)The valuation techniques, unobservable inputs and ranges are the same for the asset and liability positions.
b)Quoted forward natural gas rates are utilized to project the forward power curve for the delivery of energy at specified future dates. The natural gas curve is extrapolated beyond its observable period to the end of the contract’s delivery.
c)The fair values do not include cash collateral held on Level 3 positions of $26 million as of December 31, 2013.
d)The upper ends of the ranges are driven by the winter power and gas prices in the New England region. Without the New England region, the upper ends of the ranges for power and gas would be approximately $100 and $5.70, respectively.

Type of trade

 Fair Value at
December 31, 2012 (d)
  Valuation
Technique
 Unobservable
Input
 

Range

Mark-to-market derivatives—Economic Hedges (Generation)(a)

 $473  Discounted
Cash Flow
 Forward power
price
 $14 - $79
   Forward gas
price

Volatility

 $3.26 - $6.27
  Option Model percentage 28% - 132%

Mark-to-market derivatives—Proprietary trading (Generation)(a)

 $(6 Discounted
Cash Flow
 Forward power
price

Volatility

 $15 - $106
  Option Model percentage 16% - 48%

Mark-to-market derivatives—Transactions with affiliates (Generation and ComEd)(b)

 $226  Discounted
Cash Flow
 Marketability
reserve
 8% - 9%

Mark-to-market derivatives (ComEd)

 $(67 Discounted
Cash Flow
 Forward heat
rate
(c)
 8% - 9.5%
   Marketability
reserve
 3.5% - 8.3%
   Renewable
factor
 81% - 123%

309


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

 

a)The valuation techniques, unobservable inputs and ranges are the same for the asset and liability positions.
b)Includes current assets for Generation and current liabilities for ComEd of $226 million, related to the fair value of the five-year financial swap contract between Generation and ComEd that ended in May 2013, which eliminates in consolidation.
c)Quoted forward natural gas rates are utilized to project the forward power curve for the delivery of energy at specified future dates. The natural gas curve is extrapolated beyond its observable period to the end of the contract’s delivery.
d)The fair values do not include cash collateral held on Level 3 positions of $33 million as of December 31, 2012.

 

The inputs listed above would have a direct impact on the fair values of the above instruments if they were adjusted. The significant unobservable inputs used in the fair value measurement of Generation’s commodity derivatives are forward commodity prices and for options is volatility. Increases (decreases) in the forward commodity price in isolation would result in significantly higher (lower) fair values for long positions (contracts that give usGeneration the obligation or option to purchase a commodity), with offsetting impacts to short positions (contracts that give usGeneration the obligation or right to sell a commodity). Increases (decreases) in volatility would increase (decrease) the value for the holder of the option (writer of the option). Generally, a change in the estimate of forward commodity prices is unrelated to a change in the estimate of volatility of prices. An increase to the reserves listed above would decrease the fair value of the positions. An increase to the heat rate or renewable factors would increase the fair value accordingly. Generally, interrelationships exist between market prices of natural gas and power. As such, an increase in natural gas pricing would potentially have a similar impact on forward power markets.

 

Nuclear Decommissioning Trust Fund Investments and Pledged Assets for Zion Station Decommissioning (Exelon and Generation). For middle market lending, certain corporate debt securities, and private equity investments the fair value of these loans is determined using a combination of valuationsvaluation models including cost models, market models and income models. The valuation estimates are based on valuations of comparable companies, discounting the forecasted cash flows of the portfolio company, estimating the liquidation or collateral value of the portfolio company or its assets, considering offers from third parties to buy the portfolio company, its historical and projected financial results, as well as other factors that may impact value. Significant judgment is required in the applicationsapplication of discounts or premiums applied to the prices of comparable companies for factors such as size, marketability, credit risk and relative performance.

 

Because Generation relies on third partythird-party fund managers to develop the quantitative unobservable inputs without adjustment for the valuations of its’ middle market lending,Level 3 investments, quantitative information about significant unobservable inputs used in valuing these investments is not reasonably available to Generation. This includes information regarding the sensitivity of the fair values to changes in the unobservable inputs. Generation gains an understanding of the fund managers’ inputs and assumptions used in preparing the valuations. Generation performed procedures to assess the reasonableness of the valuations. For a sample of its’ middle market lending,Level 3 investments, Generation reviewed independent valuations and reviewed the assumptions in the detailed pricing models used by the fund managers.

 

As of December 31, 2013, Generation has outstanding commitments to invest in middle market lending, corporate debt securities, and private equity investments of approximately $448 million. These commitments will be funded by Generation’s existing nuclear decommissioning trust funds.

10.12. Derivative Financial Instruments (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The Registrants are exposed to certain risks related to ongoing business operations. The primary risks managed by using derivative instruments are commodity price risk and interest rate risk.

310


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Commodity Price Risk (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

To the extent the amount of energy Exelon generates differs from the amount of energy it has contracted to sell, the Registrants are exposed to market fluctuations in the prices of electricity, fossil

304


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

fuels and other commodities. The Registrants employ established policies and procedures to manage their risks associated with market fluctuations by entering into physical contracts as well asand financial derivative contracts, including swaps, futures, forwards, options and short-term and long-term commitments to purchase and sell energy and energy-related products. The Registrants believe these instruments, which are classified as either economic hedges or non-derivatives, mitigate exposure to fluctuations in commodity prices.

 

Derivative accounting guidance requires that derivative instruments be recognized as either assets or liabilities at fair value, with changes in fair value of the derivative recognized in earnings each period. Other accounting treatments are available through special election and designation, provided they meet specific, restrictive criteria both at the time of designation and on an ongoing basis. These alternative permissible accounting treatments include normal purchase normal sale (NPNS), cash flow hedge, and fair value hedge. For commodity transactions, effective with the date of merger with Constellation, Generation will no longer utilizeutilizes the special election provided for by the cash flow hedge designation and de-designated all of its existing cash flow hedges prior to the merger. Because the underlying forecasted transactions remain at least reasonably possible, the fair value of the effective portion of these cash flow hedges was frozen in accumulated OCI and will be reclassified to results of operations when the forecasted purchase or sale of the energy commodity occurs, or becomes probable of not occurring. None of Constellation’s designated cash flow hedges for commodity transactions prior to the merger were re-designated as cash flow hedges. The effect of this decision is that all derivative economic hedges for commodities are recorded at fair value through earnings for the combined company, referred to as economic hedges in the following tables. The Registrants have applied the NPNS scope exception to certain derivative contracts for the forward sale of generation, power procurement agreements, and natural gas supply agreements. Non-derivative contracts for access to additional generation and certain sales to load-serving entities are accounted for primarily under the accrual method of accounting, which is further discussed in Note 19—22—Commitments and Contingencies. Additionally, Generation is exposed to certain market risks through its proprietary trading activities. The proprietary trading activities are a complement to Generation’s energy marketing portfolio but represent a small portion of Generation’s overall energy marketing activities.

 

Economic Hedging.The Registrants are exposed to commodity price risk primarily relating to changes in the market price of electricity, fossil fuels, and other commodities associated with price movements resulting from changes in supply and demand, fuel costs, market liquidity, weather conditions, governmental regulatory and environmental policies, and other factors. Within Exelon, Generation has the most exposure to commodity price risk. Generation uses a variety of derivative and non-derivative instruments to manage the commodity price risk of its electric generation facilities, including power sales, fuel and energy purchases, natural gas transportation and pipeline capacity agreements and other energy-related products marketed and purchased. In order to manage these risks, Generation 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. The objectives for entering into such hedges include fixing the price for a portion of anticipated future electricity sales at a level that provides an acceptable return on electric generation operations, fixing the price of a portion of anticipated fuel purchases for the operation of power plants, and fixing the price for a portion of anticipated energy purchases to supply load-serving customers. The portion of forecasted transactions hedged may vary based upon management’s policies and hedging objectives, the market, weather conditions, operational and other factors. Generation is also exposed to

311


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

differences between the locational settlement prices of certain economic hedges and the hedged generating units. This price difference is actively managed through other instruments which include

305


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

derivative congestion products, whose changes in fair value are recognized in earnings each period, and auction revenue rights, which are accounted for on an accrual basis.

 

In general, increases and decreases in forward market prices have a positive and negative impact, respectively, on Generation’s owned and contracted generation positions that have not been hedged. Generation hedges commodity price risk on a ratable basis over three-year periods. As of December 31, 2012,2013, the percentage of expected generation hedged for the major reportable segments was 94%-97%92%-95%, 62%-65% and 27%-30%30%-33% for 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2015,2016, respectively. The percentage of expected generation hedged is the amount of equivalent sales divided by the expected generation. Expected generation represents the amount of energy estimated to be generated or purchased through owned or contracted capacity. Equivalent sales represent all hedging products, which include economic hedges and certain non-derivative contracts, including Generation’s sales to ComEd, PECO and BGE to serve their retail load.

 

In order to fulfill a requirement of the Illinois Settlement Legislation, Generation and ComEd has locked inentered into a fixed price for a significant portion of its commodity price risk through the five-year financial swap contract that expired May 31, 2013. The financial swap was designed to hedge spot market purchases, which, along with ComEd’s remaining energy procurement contracts, met its load service requirements. The terms of the financial swap contract required Generation that expires onto pay the around-the-clock market price for a portion of ComEd’s electricity supply requirement, while ComEd paid a fixed price.

As the contract expired May 31, 2013, which is discussedall realized impacts have been included in more detail below. Generation’s and ComEd’s results of operations. In Exelon’s consolidated financial statements, all financial statement effects of the financial swap recorded by Generation and ComEd are eliminated.

In addition, the physical contracts that Generation has entered into with ComEd and that ComEd has entered into with Generation and other suppliers as part of the ComEd power procurement process, which are further discussed in Note 3—Regulatory Matters, qualify and are accounted for under the NPNS exception. Based on the Illinois Settlement Legislation and ICC-approved procurement methodologies permitting ComEd to recover its electricity procurement costs from retail customers with no mark-up, ComEd’s price risk related to power procurement is limited.

 

In order to fulfill a requirement of the Illinois Settlement Legislation, Generation and ComEd entered into a five-year financial swap contract effective August 28, 2007. The financial swap is designed to hedge spot market purchases, which, along with ComEd’s remaining energy procurement contracts, meet its load service requirements. The remaining swap contract volume is 3,000 MWs through May 2013. The terms of the financial swap contract require Generation to pay the around-the-clock market price for a portion of ComEd’s electricity supply requirement, while ComEd pays a fixed price. The contract is to be settled net, for the difference between the fixed and market pricing, and the financial terms only cover energy costs and do not cover capacity or ancillary services. The financial swap contract is a derivative financial instrument that was originally designated by Generation as a cash flow hedge. As discussed previously, effective with the date of merger with Constellation, Generation de-designated this swap as a cash flow hedge and began recording changes in fair value through current earnings as of that date. Generation records the fair value of the swap on its balance sheet and originally recorded changes in fair value to OCI. The value frozen in OCI as of the date of merger for this swap is reclassified into Generation’s earnings as the swap settles. ComEd has not elected hedge accounting for this derivative financial instrument. Since the financial swap contract was deemed prudent by the Illinois Settlement Legislation, ComEd receives full cost recovery for the contract in rates and, therefore, the change in fair value each period is recorded as a regulatory asset or liability on ComEd’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information regarding the Illinois Settlement Legislation. In Exelon’s consolidated financial statements, all financial statement effects of the financial swap recorded by Generation and ComEd are eliminated.

On December 17, 2010, ComEd entered into several 20-year floating-to-fixed energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers for the procurement of long-term renewable energy and associated RECs. Delivery under the contracts began in June 2012. Pursuant to the ICC’s Order on December 19, 2012, ComEd’s commitments under the existing long-term contracts for energy and associated RECs were reduced in the first quarter of 2013. These contracts are designed to lock in a portion of the long-term commodity price risk resulting from the renewable energy resource procurement requirements in the Illinois Settlement Legislation. ComEd has not elected hedge

306


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

accounting for these derivative financial instruments. ComEd records the fair value of the swap contracts on its balance sheet. Because ComEd receives full cost recovery for energy procurement and related costs from retail customers, the change in fair value each period is recorded by ComEd as a regulatory asset or liability. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.

 

PECO has contracts to procure electric supply that were executed through the competitive procurement process outlined in its PAPUC-approved DSP Programs, which are further discussed in Note 3—Regulatory Matters. Based on Pennsylvania legislation and the DSP Programs permitting

312


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

PECO to recover its electric supply procurement costs from retail customers with no mark-up, PECO’s price risk related to electric supply procurement is limited. PECO locked in fixed prices for a significant portion of its commodity price risk through full requirements contracts and block contracts. PECO’sPECO has certain full requirements contracts and block contracts, whichthat are considered derivatives and qualify for the normal purchases and normal salesNPNS scope exception under current derivative authoritative guidance. For block contracts designated as normal purchases after inception, the mark-to-market balances previously recorded on PECO’s Consolidated Balance Sheet were amortized over the terms of the contracts, which ended on December 31, 2011.

 

PECO’s natural gas procurement policy is designed to achieve a reasonable balance of long-term and short-term gas purchases under different pricing approaches in order to achieve system supply reliability at the least cost. PECO’s reliability strategy is two-fold. First, PECO must assure that there is sufficient transportation capacity to satisfy delivery requirements. Second, PECO must ensure that a firm source of supply exists to utilize the capacity resources. All of PECO’s natural gas supply and asset management agreements that are derivatives either qualify for the normal purchases and normal salesNPNS scope exception and have been designated as such, or have no mark-to-market balances because the derivatives are index priced. Additionally, in accordance with the 20122013 PAPUC PGC settlement and to reduce the exposure of PECO and its customers to natural gas price volatility, PECO has continued its program to purchase natural gas for both winter and summer supplies using a layered approach of locking-in prices ahead of each season with long-term gas purchase agreements (those with primary terms of at least twelve months). Under the terms of the 20122013 PGC settlement, PECO is required to lock in (i.e., economically hedge) the price of a minimum volume of its long-term gas commodity purchases. PECO’s gas-hedging program is designed to cover about 30% of planned natural gas purchases in support of projected firm sales. The hedging program for natural gas procurement has no direct impact on PECO’s financial position or results of operations as natural gas costs are fully recovered from customers under the PGC.

 

BGE has contracts to procure SOS electric supply that are executed through a competitive procurement process approved by the MDPSC. The SOS rates charged recover BGE’s wholesale power supply costs and include an administrative fee. The administrative fee includes an incremental cost component and a shareholder return component for commercial and industrial rate classes. BGE’s price risk related to electric supply procurement is limited. BGE locks in fixed prices for all of its Standard Offer ServiceSOS requirements through full requirements contracts. Certain of BGE’s full requirements contracts, which are considered derivatives, qualify for the normal purchases and normal salesNPNS scope exception under current derivative authoritative guidance. Other BGE full requirements contracts are not derivatives.

 

BGE provides natural gas to its customers under a MBR mechanism approved by the MDPSC. Under this mechanism, BGE’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 BGE’s actual cost and the market index is shared equally between shareholders and customers. BGE must also secure fixed price contracts for at least 10%, but not more than 20%, of forecasted system supply requirements for flowing

307


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

(i.e. (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 incentiveMBR mechanism. BGE also ensures it has sufficient pipeline transportation capacity to meet customer requirements. All of BGE’s natural gas supply and asset management agreements qualify for the normal purchases and normal salesNPNS scope exception and result in physical delivery.

 

Proprietary Trading.Generation also enters into certain energy-related derivatives for proprietary trading purposes. Proprietary trading includes all contracts entered into with the intent of benefiting from shifts or changes in market prices as opposed to those entered into with the intent of hedging or managing risk. Proprietary trading activities are subject to limits established by Exelon’s RMC. The proprietary trading activities, which included settled physical sales volumes of 8,762 GWh, 12,958 GWh 5,742 GWh and 3,6255,742 Gwh for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, are a complement to

313


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Generation’s energy marketing portfolio but represent a small portion of Generation’s revenue from energy marketing activities. ComEd, PECO and BGE do not enter into derivatives for proprietary trading purposes.

 

Interest Rate and Foreign Exchange Risk (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The Registrants use a combination of fixed-rate and variable-rate debt to manage interest rate exposure. The Registrants may also utilize fixed-to-floating interest rate swaps, which are typically designated as fair value hedges, as a means to manage their interest rate exposure. In addition, the Registrants may utilize interest rate derivatives to lock in rate levels in anticipation of future financings, which are typically designated as cash flow hedges. These strategies are employed to manage interest rate risks. At December 31, 2012,2013, Exelon had $800$1,425 million of notional amounts of fixed-to-floating hedges outstanding and $452$190 million of notional amounts of pre-issuancefloating-to-fixed hedges outstanding. Assuming the fair value and cash flow interest rate hedges are 100% effective, a hypothetical 50 bps increase in the interest rates associated with unhedged variable-rate debt (excluding Commercial Paper and PECO Accounts Receivables Facility)Paper) and fixed-to-floating swaps would result in less than $2an approximate $5 million decrease in Exelon Consolidated pre-tax income for the year ended December 31, 2012.2013. To manage foreign exchange rate exposure associated with international energy purchases in currencies other than U.S. dollars, Generation utilizes foreign currency derivatives, which are typically designated as economic hedges. Below is a summary of the interest rate and foreign currency hedges as of December 31, 2012.2013.

 

  Generation  Other  Exelon 

Description

 Derivatives
Designated as
Hedging
Instruments
  Economic
Hedges
  Proprietary
Trading(a)
  Collateral
and  Netting
(b)
  Subtotal  Derivatives
Designated as
Hedging
Instruments
  Total 

Mark-to-market derivative assets (Current Assets)

 $—    $3  $20  $(19 $4  $—    $4 

Mark-to-market derivative assets (Noncurrent Assets)

  38  $8  $32   (32  46   13   59 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total mark-to-market derivative assets

 $38  $11  $52  $(51 $50  $13  $63 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities (Current Liabilities)

 $(1 $(1 $(19 $19  $(2 $—     $(2

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities (Noncurrent Liabilities)

  (31 $—     $(32  32   (31  —     (31
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total mark-to-market derivative liabilities

 $(32 $(1 $(51 $51  $(33 $—     $(33
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total mark-to-market derivative net assets (liabilities)

 $6  $10  $1  $—     $17  $13  $30 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

308


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

  Generation  Other  Exelon 

Description

 Derivatives
Designated as
Hedging
Instruments
  Economic
Hedges
  Proprietary
Trading (a)
  Collateral
and  Netting
(b)
  Subtotal  Derivatives
Designated as
Hedging
Instruments
  Total 

Mark-to-market derivative assets (Current Assets)

 $—    $3  $15  $(19 $(1 $—    $(1

Mark-to-market derivative assets (Noncurrent Assets)

  26   3   15   (13  31   7   38 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total mark-to-market derivative assets

 $26  $6  $30  $(32 $30  $7  $37 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities (Current Liabilities)

 $(1 $(1 $(18 $19  $(1 $—    $(1

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities (Noncurrent Liabilities)

  (10  (1  (13  13   (11  (4  (15
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total mark-to-market derivative liabilities

 $(11 $(2 $(31 $32  $(12 $(4 $(16
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total mark-to-market derivative net assets (liabilities)

 $15  $4  $(1 $—    $18  $3  $21 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

(a)Generation enters into interest rate derivative contracts to economically hedge risk associated with the interest rate component of commodity positions. The characterization of the interest rate derivative contracts between the proprietary trading activity in the above table is driven by the corresponding characterization of the underlying commodity position that gives rise to the interest rate exposure. Generation does not utilize proprietary trading interest rate derivatives with the objective of benefiting from shifts or changes in market interest rates.
(b)Represents the netting of fair value balances with the same counterparty and any associated cash collateral.

314


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

The following table provides a summary of the interest rate hedge balances recorded by the Registrants as of December 31, 2012:

  Generation  Other  Exelon 

Description

 Derivatives
Designated as
Hedging
Instruments
  Economic
Hedges
  Proprietary
Trading (a)
  Collateral
and  Netting
(b)
  Subtotal  Derivatives
Designated as
Hedging
Instruments
  Total 

Mark-to-market derivative assets (Current Assets)

 $—    $3  $20  $(19 $4  $—    $4 

Mark-to-market derivative assets (Noncurrent Assets)

  38   8   32   (32  46   13   59 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total mark-to-market derivative assets

 $38  $11  $52  $(51 $50  $13  $63 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities (Current Liabilities)

 $(1 $(1 $(19 $19  $(2 $—    $(2

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities (Noncurrent Liabilities)

  (31  —     (32  32   (31  —     (31
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total mark-to-market derivative liabilities

  (32  (1  (51  51   (33  —     (33
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total mark-to-market derivative net assets (liabilities)

 $6  $10  $1  $—    $17  $13  $30 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Generation enters into interest rate derivative contracts to economically hedge risk associated with the interest rate component of commodity positions. The characterization of the interest rate derivative contracts between the proprietary trading activity in the above table is driven by the corresponding characterization of the underlying commodity position that gives rise to the interest rate exposure. Generation does not utilize proprietary trading interest rate derivatives with the objective of benefiting from shifts or changes in market interest rates.
(b)Represents the netting of fair value balances with the same counterparty and any associated cash collateral.

 

Fair Value Hedges.Hedges. For derivative instruments that are designated and qualify as fair value hedges, the gain or loss on the derivative as well as the offsetting loss or gain on the hedged item attributable to the hedged risk are recognized in current earnings. Exelon includes the gain or loss on the hedged items and the offsetting loss or gain on the related interest rate swaps in interest expense as follows:

 

   Gain (Loss) on Swaps   Gain (Loss) on Borrowings 
   Twelve Months
Ended December 31,
   Twelve Months Ended
December 31,
 

Income Statement Classification

  2012  2011   2010   2012  2011  2010 

Interest expense(a)

  $(6 $1   $4   $(6 $(1 $(4
     Twelve Months Ended December 31, 
   

Income Statement Location

  2013  2012  2011   2013   2012  2011 
     Gain (Loss) on Swaps   Gain (Loss) on Borrowings 

Generation

 

Interest expense  (a)

  $(15 $(6 $—      $—     $(6 $—   

Exelon

 

Interest expense

  $(24 $(9 $1   $11   $(3 $(1

 

(a)For the yearyears ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, the loss on theGeneration swaps included $16 million and $12 realized in the table above includes $12earnings, respectively, with $2 million reclassified to earnings, withand an immaterial amount excluded from hedge effectiveness testing.testing, respectively.

 

At December 31, 2012,During the third and December 31, 2011,fourth quarters of 2013, Exelon had $650entered into $625 million and $100 million, respectively, of notional amounts of fixed-to-floating fair value hedges outstanding related to interest rate swaps, which expire in 2020. At December 31, 2013, Exelon and Generation had total outstanding fixed-to-floating fair value hedges related to interest rate swaps of $1,275 million and $550 million, with unrealized gaingains of $26 million and $23 million, respectively. At December 31, 2012, Exelon and Generation had outstanding fixed-to-floating fair value hedges related to interest rate swaps of $650 million and $550 million that expire in 2015, with unrealized gains of $49 million and $15$38 million, respectively, which expire in 2015. Upon merger closing, $550 million of fixed-to-floating interest rate swaps previously at Constellation with a fair value of $44 million, as of March 12, 2012, were re-designated as fair value hedges.respectively. During the years ended December 31, 2012,2013 and December 31, 2011,2012, the impact on the results of operations as a result of ineffectiveness from fair value hedges was immaterial.a $2 million gain and immaterial, respectively.

315


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Cash Flow Hedges.Hedges. In anticipation of the Continental Wind, LLC non-recourse project financing that was completed on September 30, 2013, Exelon entered into forward-starting interest rate swaps that were designated as cash flow hedges to hedge the change in benchmark interest rates. Upon settlement of the swaps, a $26 million effective gain in OCI was deferred and will be amortized into interest expense over the life of the debt. See Note 13—Debt and Credit Agreements for additional information on the project financing.

In connection with the DOE guaranteed loan for the Antelope Valley acquisition, as discussed in Note 11—13—Debt and Credit Agreements, Generation entered into a floating-to-fixed forward starting interest rate swap with a notional amount of $485 million and a mandatory early termination date of April 5, 2014, by which date Generation anticipates the DOE loan to be fully drawn.2014. The swap hedges approximately 75% of Generation’s future interest rate exposure associated with the financing and was designated as a cash flow hedge. As such, the effective portion of the hedge will beis recorded in other comprehensive income within Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets, with any ineffectiveness recorded in Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. Net gains (or losses) from settlement of the hedges, to the extent effective, will beare amortized as an adjustment to the interest expense over the term of the DOE guaranteed loan.

 

AsEvery time Generation draws down on the loan, an offsetting hedge (fixed-to-floating) is executed and a portion of the cash flow hedge will bewith a notional amount equal to the offsetting hedge, is de-designated and the related gains or losses going forward will beare reflected in earnings. In order to mitigate this earnings, impact, a series ofwhich are largely offset by the losses or gains in the offsetting hedge transactions are executed as Generation draws on the loan.hedge.

 

Antelope Valley received its first loan advance on April 5, 2012, and severala series of additional advances subsequently, as described in Note 11—Debt and Credit Agreements.subsequently. Generation has entered into a series of fixed-to-floating interest rate swaps with an aggregated notional amount of $165$350 million, approximately 75% of the loan advance amount to offset portions of the original interest rate hedge, which are de-designatednot designated as cash flow hedges. The remaining cash flow hedge has a notional amount of

309


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

$320 $135 million. At December 31, 2012,2013, Generation’s mark-to-market non-current derivative liability relating to the interest rate swapswaps in connection with the loan agreement to fund Antelope Valley was $28$10 million.

 

During the third quarter of 2011, a subsidiary of Constellation entered into floating-to-fixed forward starting interest rate swaps to manage a portion of the interest rate exposure for anticipated long-term borrowings to finance Sacramento PV Energy. The swaps have a total notional amount of $29$28 million as of December 31, 20122013 and expire in 2027. After the closing of the merger with Constellation, the swaps were re-designated as cash flow hedges. At December 31, 2012,2013, the subsidiary had a $4$1 million non-current derivative liability related to these swaps.

 

During the third quarter of 2012, a subsidiary of Exelon Generation entered into a floating-to-fixed forward starting interest rate swap to manage a portion of the interest rate exposure forof anticipated long-term borrowings to finance Constellation Solar Horizons. The swap has a notional amount of $29$27 million as of December 31, 20122013, and expires in 2030. This swap is designated as a cash flow hedge. At December 31, 2012,2013, the subsidiary had an immaterial non-currenta $2 million derivative liabilityasset related to the swap.

 

During the third quarter of 2012, Exelon entered into $75 million floating-to-fixed forward starting interest rate hedges to manage interest rate risks associated with anticipated future debt issuance. These swaps are designated as cash flow hedges. At December 31, 2012, there is $1 million non-current derivative asset related to these swaps.

During the years ended December 31, 2012,2013, and 2011,2012, the impact on the results of operations as a result of ineffectiveness from cash flow hedges was immaterial.

 

Economic Hedges. At December 31, 2012,2013, Generation had $144 million in notional amounts of interest rate derivative contracts to economically hedge risk associated with the interest rate

316


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

component of commodity positions and $195 million in notional amounts of foreign currency exchange rate swaps that are marked-to-market to manage the exposure associated with international purchases of commodities in currencies other than U.S. dollars.

At December 31, 2013, Exelon and Generation had $150 million ofin notional amounts of fixed-to-floating interest rate swaps that are marked-to-market, with an unrealized gaingains of $5$2 million. These swaps, which were acquired as part of the merger with Constellation, expire in 2014. During the year ended December 31, 2013, and the period from March 12 to December 31, 2012, the impact on the results of operations was immaterial.

 

Fair Value Measurement and Accounting for the Offsetting of Amounts Related to Certain Contracts (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Fair value accounting guidance and disclosures about offsetting assets and liabilities requires the fair value of derivative instruments to be shown in the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements on a gross basis, even when the derivative instruments are subject to legally enforceable master netting agreements and qualify for net presentation in the Consolidated Balance Sheet. A master netting agreement is an agreement between two counterparties that may have derivative and non-derivative contracts with each other providing for the net settlement of all referencing contracts via one payment stream, which takes place either as the contracts deliver, when collateral is requested or in the event of default. Generation’s use of cash collateral is generally unrestricted unless Generation is downgraded below investment grade (i.e. to BB+ or Ba1). In the table below, Generation’s energy related cash flow hedges,energy-related economic hedges and proprietary trading derivatives are shown gross and the impact of the netting of fair value balances with the same counterparty that are subject to legally enforceable master netting agreements, as well as netting of cash collateral, is aggregated in the collateral and netting column. As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, $10 million of cash collateral posted and $3 million of cash collateral received, respectively, was not offset against derivative positions because such collateral was not associated with any energy-related derivatives or as of the balance sheet date there were no positions to offset. Excluded from the tables below are economic hedges that qualify for the NPNS scope exception and other non-derivative contracts that are accounted for under the accrual method of accounting.

 

310ComEd’s use of cash collateral is generally unrestricted unless ComEd is downgraded below investment grade (i.e. to BB+ or Ba1).

Cash collateral held by PECO and BGE must be deposited in a non affiliate major U.S. commercial bank or foreign bank with a U.S. branch office that meet certain qualifications.

317


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

The following table provides a summary of the derivative fair value balances recorded by the Registrants as of December 31, 2013:

   Generation  ComEd  Exelon 

Derivatives

  Economic
Hedges
  Proprietary
Trading
  Collateral
and
Netting (a)
  Subtotal (b)  Economic
Hedges (c)
  Total
Derivatives
 

Mark-to-market
derivative assets (current assets)

  $2,616  $1,476  $(3,364 $728  $—    $728 

Mark-to-market
derivative assets (noncurrent assets)

   1,344   285   (1,060  569   —     569 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total mark-to-market
derivative assets

  $3,960  $1,761  $(4,424 $1,297  $—    $1,297 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Mark-to-market
derivative liabilities (current liabilities)

  $(2,023 $(1,410 $3,292  $(141 $(17 $(158

Mark-to-market
derivative liabilities (noncurrent liabilities)

   (804  (293  988   (109  (176  (285
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total mark-to-market
derivative liabilities

  $(2,827 $(1,703 $4,280  $(250 $(193 $(443
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total mark-to-market
derivative net assets (liabilities)

  $1,133  $58  $(144 $1,047  $(193 $854 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Exelon and Generation net all available amounts allowed under the derivative accounting guidance on the balance sheet. These amounts include unrealized derivative transactions with the same counterparty under legally enforceable master netting agreements and cash collateral. In some cases Exelon and Generation may have other offsetting exposures, subject to a master netting or similar agreement, such as trade receivables and payables, transactions that do not qualify as derivatives, letters of credit and other forms of non-cash collateral. These are not reflected in the table above.
(b)Current and noncurrent assets are shown net of collateral of $84 million and $72 million, respectively, and current and noncurrent liabilities are shown net of collateral of $(12) million and $0 million, respectively. The total cash collateral posted, net of cash collateral received and offset against mark-to-market assets and liabilities was $144 million at December 31, 2013.
(c)Includes current and noncurrent liabilities relating to floating-to-fixed energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers.

318


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

The following table provides a summary of the derivative fair value balances recorded by the Registrants as of December 31, 2012:

 

 Generation ComEd Exelon  Generation ComEd Exelon 

Derivatives

 Economic
Hedges (a)
 Proprietary
Trading
 Collateral
and
Netting (b)
 Subtotal
(c)
 Economic
Hedges
(a)(d)
 Intercompany
Eliminations (a)
 Total
Derivatives
  Economic
Hedges(a)
 Proprietary
Trading
 Collateral
and
Netting (b)
 Subtotal (c) Economic
Hedges (a)(d)
 Intercompany
Eliminations (a)
 Total
Derivatives
 

Mark-to-market
derivative assets (current assets)

 $2,883  $2,469  $(4,418 $934  $—     $—     $934  $2,883  $2,469  $(4,418 $934  $—    $—    $934 

Mark-to-market
derivative assets with affiliate (current assets)

  226   —      —      226   —      (226  —      226   —     —     226   —     (226  —   

Mark-to-market
derivative assets (noncurrent assets)

  1,792   724   (1,638  878   —      —      878   1,792   724   (1,638  878   —     —     878 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total mark-to-market
derivative assets

 $4,901  $3,193  $(6,056 $2,038  $—     $(226 $1,812  $4,901  $3,193  $(6,056 $2,038  $—    $(226 $1,812 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Mark-to-market
derivative liabilities (current liabilities)

 $(2,419 $(2,432 $4,519  $(332 $(18 $—     $(350 $(2,419 $(2,432 $4,519  $(332 $(18 $—    $(350

Mark-to-market
derivative liability with affiliate (current liabilities)

  —      —      —      —      (226  226   —      —     —     —     —     (226  226   —   

Mark-to-market
derivative liabilities (noncurrent liabilities)

  (1,080  (689  1,568   (201  (49  —      (250  (1,080  (689  1,568   (201  (49  —     (250
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total mark-to-market
derivative liabilities

 $(3,499 $(3,121 $6,087  $(533 $(293 $226  $(600 $(3,499 $(3,121 $6,087  $(533 $(293 $226  $(600
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total mark-to-market
derivative net assets (liabilities)

 $1,402  $72  $31  $1,505  $(293 $—     $1,212  $1,402  $72  $31  $1,505  $(293 $—    $1,212 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Includes current and noncurrent assets for Generation and current and noncurrent liabilities for ComEd of $226 million related to the fair value of the five-year financial swap contract between Generation and ComEd, as described above. For Generation, excludes $28 million non currentof noncurrent liability relating to an interest rate swap in connection with a loan agreement to fund Antelope Valley as discussed above.
(b)RepresentsExelon and Generation net all available amounts allowed under the netting of fair value balancesderivative accounting guidance on the balance sheet. These amounts include unrealized derivative transactions with the same counterparty under legally enforceable master netting agreements and cash collateral. In some cases Exelon and Generation may have other offsetting exposures, subject to a master netting or similar agreement, such as trade receivables and payables, transactions that do not qualify as derivatives, and letters of credit. These are not reflected in the application of collateral.table above.
(c)Current and noncurrent assets are shown net of collateral of $113 million and $201 million, respectively, and current and noncurrent liabilities are shown net of collateral of $(214)$ (214) million and $(131) million, respectively. The total cash collateral posted, net of cash collateral received and offset against mark-to-market assets and liabilities was $31 million at December 31, 2012.
(d)Includes current and noncurrent liabilities relating to floating-to-fixed energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers.

311


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

The following table provides a summary of the derivative fair value balances recorded by the Registrants as of December 31, 2011:

   Generation  ComEd  Other  Exelon 

Derivatives

 Cash Flow
Hedges (a)
  Economic
Hedges
  Proprietary
Trading
  Collateral
and
Netting(b)
  Subtotal (c)  Economic
Hedges
(a)(d)
  Economic
Hedges
  Intercompany
Eliminations
(a)
  Total
Derivatives
 

Mark-to-market
derivative assets (current assets)

 $438  $1,195  $217  $(1,418 $432  $—     $—     $—     $432 

Mark-to-market
derivative assets with affiliate (current assets)

  503   —      —      —      503   —      —      (503  —    

Mark-to-market
derivative assets (noncurrent assets)

  419   582   71   (437  635   —      15   —      650 

Mark-to-market
derivative assets with affiliate (noncurrent assets)

  191   —      —      —      191   —      —      (191  —    
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total mark-to-market
derivative assets

 $1,551  $1,777  $288  $(1,855 $1,761  $—     $15  $(694 $1,082 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Mark-to-market
derivative liabilities (current liabilities)

 $(9 $(965 $(194 $1,065  $(103 $(9 $—     $—     $(112

Mark-to-market
derivative liability with affiliate (current liabilities)

  —      —      —      —      —      (503  —      503   —    

Mark-to-market
derivative liabilities (noncurrent liabilities)

  (4  (186  (70  250   (10  (97  —      —      (107

Mark-to-market
derivative liability with affiliate (noncurrent liabilities)

  —      —      —      —      —      (191  —      191   —    
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total mark-to-market
derivative liabilities

 $(13 $(1,151 $(264 $1,315  $(113 $(800 $—     $694  $(219
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total mark-to-market
derivative net assets (liabilities)

 $1,538  $626  $24  $(540 $1,648  $(800 $15  $—     $863 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Includes current and noncurrent assets for Generation and current and noncurrent liabilities for ComEd of $503 million and $191 million, respectively, related to the fair value of the five-year financial swap contract between Generation and ComEd, as described above. For Generation, excludes $19 million non current liability relating to an interest rate swap in connection with a loan agreement to fund Antelope Valley as discussed above.
(b)Represents the netting of fair value balances with the same counterparty and the application of collateral.
(c)Current and noncurrent assets are shown net of collateral of $338 million and $187 million, respectively, and current and noncurrent liabilities are shown inclusive of collateral of $15 million and $0$ (131) million, respectively. The total cash collateral received, net of cash collateral posted and offset against mark-to-market assets and liabilities was $540$ (31) million at December 31, 2011.2012.
(d)Includes current and noncurrent liabilities relating to floating-to-fixed energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers.

 

Cash Flow Hedges (Exelon, Generation and ComEd). Economic hedges that qualify as cash flow hedges primarily consist of forward power sales and power swaps on base load generation. As discussed previously, effective prior to the merger with Constellation, Generation de-designated all of its cash flow hedges relating to commodity price risk. Because the underlying forecasted transactions remain at least reasonably possible, the fair value of the effective portion of these cash flow hedges was frozen in accumulated OCI and will beis reclassified to results of operations when the forecasted purchase or sale of the energy commodity occurs, or becomes probable of not occurring. Generation began recording prospective changes in the fair value of these instruments through current earnings from the date of de-designation. The net unrealized gains associated with the de-designated cash flow hedges prior to the merger was $1,928 million including $693 million related to the

 

312319


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

intercompany swap with ComEd.changes in the fair value of these instruments through current earnings from the date of de-designation. Approximately $684$195 million of these net pre-tax unrealized gains within accumulated OCI are expected to be reclassified from accumulated OCI during the next twelve months by Generation, including approximately $219 million related to the financial swap with ComEd.Generation. Generation expects the settlement of the majority of its cash flow hedges including the ComEd financial swap contract, will occur during 2013 through 2014.

 

Exelon discontinues hedge accounting prospectively when it determines that the derivative is no longer effective in offsetting changes in the cash flows of a hedged item or when it is no longer probable that the forecasted transaction will occur. For the yearsyear ended December 31, 2012, and 2011, amountsthe amount reclassified into earnings as a result of the discontinuance of cash flow hedges werewas immaterial.

 

The tabletables below providesprovide the activity of accumulated OCI related to cash flow hedges for the years ended December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, containing information about the changes in the fair value of cash flow hedges and the reclassification from accumulated OCI into results of operations. The amounts reclassified from accumulated OCI, when combined with the impacts of the actual physical power sales, result in the ultimate recognition of net revenues at the contracted price.

 

  Income Statement
Location
   Total Cash Flow Hedge OCI Activity,
Net of Income Tax
   Income Statement
Location
   Total Cash Flow Hedge OCI  Activity,
Net of Income Tax
 
  Generation Exelon    Generation Exelon 
  Energy Related
Hedges
 Total Cash Flow
Hedges
    Energy-Related
Hedges
 Total Cash Flow
Hedges
 

Accumulated OCI derivative gain at January 1, 2011

    $1,011(a)(d)  $400 

Effective portion of changes in fair value

     504(b)   402(e) 

Reclassifications from accumulated OCI to net income

   Operating Revenues     (585)(c)   (309

Ineffective portion recognized in income

   Purchased Power     (5  (5
    

 

  

 

 

Accumulated OCI derivative gain at December 31, 2011

     925(a)(d)   488 

Accumulated OCI derivative gain at January 1, 2012

    $925(a)(d)  $488 

Effective portion of changes in fair value

     432(b)   330(e) 

Effective portion of changes in fair value

  

   432(b)   330(e) 

Reclassifications from accumulated OCI to net income

   Operating Revenues     (828)(c)   (453   Operating Revenues     (828)(c)   (453

Ineffective portion recognized in income

   Operating Revenues     3   3    Operating Revenues     3   3 
    

 

  

 

     

 

  

 

 

Accumulated OCI derivative gain at December 31, 2012

    $532(a)(d)  $368      532(a)(d)   368 

Effective portion of changes in fair value

Effective portion of changes in fair value

  

   —     29(e) 

Reclassifications from accumulated OCI to net income

   Operating Revenues     (413)(c)   (277
    

 

  

 

     

 

  

 

 

Accumulated OCI derivative gain at December 31, 2013

    $119(d)  $120 
    

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Includes $133 million $420 million and $589$420 million of gains, net of taxes, related to the fair value of the five-year financial swap contract with ComEd for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011 and 2010, respectively, and $3 million of gains, net of taxes, related to the fair value of the block contracts with PECO for the year ended December 31, 2010..
(b)Includes $88 million and $104 million of gains, net of taxes, related to the effective portion of changes in fair value of the five-year financial swap contract with ComEd for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively, and $2 million of gains, net of taxes, of the effective portion of changes in fair value of the block contracts with PECO for the year ended December 31, 2010.2012. As of the merger date, cash flow hedges were discontinued, as such, this amount represents changes in fair value prior to the merger date.
(c)Includes $375$133 million and $273$375 million of losses, net of taxes, reclassified from accumulated OCI to recognize gains in net income related to settlements of the five-year financial swap contract with ComEd for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, and 2011, respectively, and $3 million of losses, net of taxes, reclassified from accumulated OCI to recognize gains in net income related to settlements of the block contracts with PECO for the year ended December 31, 2011.respectively.

313


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

(d)Excludes $20$5 million of losses and $10$20 million of losses, net of taxes, related to interest rate swaps and treasury rate locks for the years ended December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, respectively.
(e)Includes $9$15 million and $12$9 million of losses, net of taxes, related to the effective portion of changes in fair value of interest rate swaps and treasury rate locks at Generation for the year ended December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, respectively.

 

During the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012, and 2011 and 2010 Generation’s former energy-related cash flow hedge activity impact to pre-tax earnings based on the reclassification adjustment from accumulated OCI to earnings was a $683 million, $1,368 million $968 million and $1,125$968 million pre-tax gain, respectively. Given that the cash flow hedges had primarily consisted of forward power sales and

320


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

power swaps and did not include power and gas options or sales, the ineffectiveness of Generation’s cash flow hedges was primarily the result of differences between the locational settlement prices of the cash flow hedges and the hedged generating units. This price difference was actively managed through other instruments, which include financial transmission rights, whose changes in fair value are recognized in earnings each period, and auction revenue rights. Changes in cash flow hedge ineffectiveness primarily due to changes in market prices were losses of $5 million and gainsa gain of $10 million and $1 million for the years ended December 31, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, respectively.

 

Exelon’s former energy-related cash flow hedge activity impact to pre-tax earnings based on the reclassification adjustment from accumulated OCI to earnings was a $464 million, $747 million pre-tax gain for the year ended December 31, 2012, and a $512 million and $754 million pre-tax gain for the years ended 2011December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2010,2011, respectively. Changes in cash flow hedge ineffectiveness, primarily due to changes in market prices, were losses of $5 million and gains of $10 million and $1 million for the years ended December 31, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, respectively. Neither Exelon nor Generation will not incur changes in cash flow hedge ineffectiveness in future periods as all commodityenergy-related cash flow hedge positions were de-designated prior to the merger date.

 

Economic Hedges (Exelon and Generation). These instruments represent hedges that economically mitigate exposure to fluctuations in commodity prices and include financial options, futures, swaps, and physical forward sales and purchases.purchases, but for which the fair value or cash flow hedge elections were not made. Additionally, Generation enters into interest rate derivative contracts and foreign exchange currency swaps to manage the exposure related to the interest rate component of commodity positions and international purchases of commodities in currencies other than U.S. Dollars. For the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, the following net pre-tax mark-to-market gains (losses) of certain purchase and sale contracts were reported in operating revenues or purchased power and fuel expense at Exelon and Generation in the Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income and are included in “Net fair value changes related to derivatives” in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows. In the 3rd quarter of 2012, Generation completed a non-cash exchange by issuing a new in-the-money derivative with a new counterparty in exchange for novating to them existing in-the-money trades with the old counterparty for a total of $51 million. This transaction did not have any Income Statement effect to Generation. In the tables below, “Change in fair value” represents the change in fair value of the derivative contracts held at the reporting date. The “Reclassification to realized at settlement” represents the recognized change in fair value that was reclassified to realized due to settlement of the derivative during the period.

 

  Generation Intercompany
Eliminations
 Exelon 

Year Ended December 31, 2013

  Operating
Revenues
 Purchased
Power
and Fuel
   Total Operating
Revenues (a)
 Total 

Change in fair value

  $285  $180   $465   $(6 $459 

Reclassification to realized at settlement

   (65  104    39   13   52 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net mark-to-market gains

  $220  $284   $504  $7  $511 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 
  Generation Intercompany
Eliminations
 Exelon   Generation Intercompany
Eliminations
 Exelon 

Year Ended December 31, 2012

  Operating
Revenues
 Purchased
Power

and Fuel
   Total Operating
Revenues(a)
 Total   Operating
Revenues
 Purchased
Power
and Fuel
   Total Operating
Revenues (a)
 Total 

Change in fair value

  $(362 $215   $(147 $(94 $(241  $(362 $215   $(147 $(94 $(241

Reclassification to realized at settlement

   429   238    667   101   768    429   238    667   101   768 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net mark-to-market gains (losses)

  $67  $453   $520  $7  $527 

Net mark-to-market gains

  $67  $453   $520  $7  $527 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

314321


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

  Exelon and Generation    

Year Ended December 31, 2011 (As Reported)

  Operating
Revenues
 Purchased
Power

and Fuel
 Total      Operating
Revenues
 Purchased
Power

and Fuel
 Total    

Change in fair value

  $87  $131  $218       $87  $131  $218    

Reclassification to realized at settlement

   (296  (219  (515      (296  (219  (515   
  

 

  

 

  

 

      

 

  

 

  

 

    

Net mark-to-market (losses) (b)

  $(209 $(88 $(297     $(209 $(88 $(297   
  

 

  

 

  

 

      

 

  

 

  

 

    
  Exelon and Generation      Exelon and Generation    

Year Ended December 31, 2011 (Pro Forma)

  Operating
Revenues
 Purchased
Power

and Fuel
 Total      Operating
Revenues
 Purchased
Power

and Fuel
 Total    

Change in fair value

  $258  $(40 $218      $258   $(40 $218    

Reclassification to realized at settlement

   (516  1   (515      (516  1   (515   
  

 

  

 

  

 

      

 

  

 

  

 

    

Net mark-to-market (losses) (b)

  $(258 $(39 $(297     $(258 $(39 $(297   
  

 

  

 

  

 

      

 

  

 

  

 

    
  Exelon and Generation    

Year Ended December 31, 2010 (As Reported)

  Operating
Revenues
 Purchased
Power

and Fuel
 Total    

Change in fair value

  $—    $389  $389    

Reclassification to realized at settlement

   —     (304  (304   
  

 

  

 

  

 

    

Net mark-to-market (losses) (b)

  $—    $85  $85    
  

 

  

 

  

 

    

 

(a)Prior to the merger, the five-year financial swap contract between Generation and ComEd was de-designated. As a result, all prospective changes in fair value are recorded to operating revenues and eliminated in consolidation.
(b)Exelon and Generation have historically presented mark-to-market gains and losses within purchased power expense for all non-trading, energy-related derivatives that were not accounted for as cash flow hedges. In 2011, Exelon and Generation classified the mark-to-market gains and losses for contracts, where the underlying hedged transaction was an expected sale to hedge power, to operating revenues.

 

Proprietary Trading Activities (Exelon and Generation). For the years ended December 31, 2012,2013, and 2011,2012, Exelon and Generation recognized the following net unrealized mark-to-market gains (losses), net realized mark-to-market gains (losses) and total net mark-to-market gains (losses) (before income taxes) relating to mark-to-market activity on derivative instruments entered into for proprietary trading purposes. Gains and losses associated with proprietary trading are reported as operating revenue in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income and are included in “Net fair value changes related to derivatives” in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows. In the tables below, “Change in fair value” represents the change in fair value of the derivative contracts held at the reporting date. The “Reclassification to realized at settlement” represents the recognized change in fair value that was reclassified to realized due to settlement of the derivative during the period.

 

   Location on  Income
Statement
   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 
    2012  2011  2010 

Change in fair value

   Operating Revenue    $(12 $23  $26 

Reclassification to realized at settlement

   Operating Revenue     108   (26  (24
    

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net mark-to-market gains

   Operating Revenue    $96  $(3 $2 
    

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

315


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

   Location on Income
Statement
   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 
    2013  2012  2011 

Change in fair value

   Operating Revenue    $(21 $(12 $23 

Reclassification to realized at settlement

   Operating Revenue     (18  108   (26
    

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net mark-to-market gains (losses)

   Operating Revenue    $(39 $96  $(3
    

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

Credit Risk (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The Registrants would be exposed to credit-related losses in the event of non-performance by counterparties that enter into derivative instruments. The credit exposure of derivative contracts, before collateral, is represented by the fair value of contracts at the reporting date. For energy-related derivative instruments, Generation enters into enabling agreements that allow for payment netting with its counterparties, which reduces Generation’s exposure to counterparty risk by providing for the offset of amounts payable to the counterparty against amounts receivable from the counterparty. Typically,

322


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

each enabling agreement is for a specific commodity and so, with respect to each individual counterparty, netting is limited to transactions involving that specific commodity product, except where master netting agreements exist with a counterparty that allow for cross product netting. In addition to payment netting language in the enabling agreement, Generation’s credit department establishes credit limits, margining thresholds and collateral requirements for each counterparty, which are defined in the derivative contracts. Counterparty credit limits are based on an internal credit review process that considers a variety of factors, including the results of a scoring model, leverage, liquidity, profitability, credit ratings by credit rating agencies, and risk management capabilities. To the extent that a counterparty’s margining thresholds are exceeded, the counterparty is required to post collateral with Generation as specified in each enabling agreement. Generation’s credit department monitors current and forward credit exposure to counterparties and their affiliates, both on an individual and an aggregate basis.

 

The following tables provide information on Generation’s credit exposure for all derivative instruments, NPNS, and applicable payables and receivables, net of collateral and instruments that are subject to master netting agreements, as of December 31, 2012.2013. The tables further delineate that exposure by credit rating of the counterparties and provide guidance on the concentration of credit risk to individual counterparties. The figures in the tables below do not include credit risk exposure from uranium procurement contracts or exposure through exchanges (i.e.RTOs, ISOs, NYMEX, ICE),ICE and Nodal commodity exchanges, further discussed in ITEM 7A—QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK. Additionally, the figures in the tables below do not include exposures with affiliates, including net receivables with ComEd, PECO and BGE of $54$38 million, $56$38 million and $31$27 million, respectively.

 

Rating as of December 31, 2012

 Total
Exposure
Before Credit
Collateral
 Credit
Collateral (a)
 Net
Exposure
 Number of
Counterparties
Greater than 10%
of Net Exposure
 Net Exposure of
Counterparties
Greater than 10%
of Net Exposure
 

Rating as of December 31, 2013

 Total
Exposure
Before Credit
Collateral
 Credit
Collateral (a)
 Net
Exposure
 Number of
Counterparties

Greater  than 10%
of Net Exposure
 Net Exposure  of
Counterparties

Greater than 10%
of Net Exposure
 

Investment grade

 $1,984  $347  $1,637   1  $262  $1,621  $172  $1,449  $1  $491 

Non-investment grade

  28   24   4   —     —     27   9   18   —     —   

No external ratings

          

Internally rated—investment grade

  512   10   502   1   271   416   1   415   1   226 

Internally rated—non-investment grade

  41   3   38   —     —     30   2   28   —     —   
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total

 $2,565  $384  $2,181   2  $533  $2,094  $184  $1,910  $2  $717 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

Net Credit Exposure by Type of Counterparty

  December 31, 2012 

Investor-owned utilities, marketers and power producers

  $865 

Energy cooperatives and municipalities

   786 

Financial Institutions

   422 

Other

   108 
  

 

 

 

Total

  $2,181 
  

 

 

 

316


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Net Credit Exposure by Type of Counterparty

  December 31, 2013 

Financial Institutions

  $256 

Investor-owned utilities, marketers, power producers

   684 

Energy cooperatives and municipalities

   907 

Other

   63 
  

 

 

 

Total

  $1,910 
  

 

 

 

 

(a)As of December 31, 2012,2013, credit collateral held from counterparties where Generation had credit exposure included $344$155 million of cash and $40$29 million of letters of credit.credit .

 

ComEd’s power procurement contracts provide suppliers with a certain amount of unsecured credit. The credit position is based on forward market prices compared to the benchmark prices. The benchmark prices are the forward prices of energy projected through the contract term and are set at

323


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

the point of supplier bid submittals. If the forward market price of energy exceeds the benchmark price, the suppliers are required to post collateral for the secured credit portion after adjusting for any unpaid deliveries and unsecured credit allowed under the contract. The unsecured credit used by the suppliers represents ComEd’s net credit exposure. As of December 31, 2012,2013, ComEd’s credit exposure to suppliers was immaterial.

 

ComEd is permitted to recover its costs of procuring energy through the Illinois Settlement Legislation as well as the ICC-approved procurement tariffs.Legislation. ComEd’s counterparty credit risk is mitigated by its ability to recover realized energy costs through customer rates. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for furtheradditional information.

 

PECO’s supplier master agreements that govern the terms of its electric supply procurement contracts, which define a supplier’s performance assurance requirements, allow a supplier to meet its credit requirements with a certain amount of unsecured credit. The amount of unsecured credit is determined based on the supplier’s lowest credit rating from the major credit rating agencies and the supplier’s tangible net worth. The credit position is based on the initial market price, which is the forward price of energy on the day a transaction is executed, compared to the current forward price curve for energy. To the extent that the forward price curve for energy exceeds the initial market price, the supplier is required to post collateral to the extent the credit exposure is greater than the supplier’s unsecured credit limit. The unsecured credit used by the suppliers represents PECO’s net credit exposure. As of December 31, 2012,2013, PECO had no net credit exposure with suppliers.

 

PECO is permitted to recover its costs of procuring electric supply through its PAPUC-approved DSP Program. PECO’s counterparty credit risk is mitigated by its ability to recover realized energy costs through customer rates. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for furtheradditional information.

 

PECO’s natural gas procurement plan is reviewed and approved annually on a prospective basis by the PAPUC. PECO’s counterparty credit risk under its natural gas supply and asset management agreements is mitigated by its ability to recover its natural gas costs through the PGC, which allows PECO to adjust rates quarterly to reflect realized natural gas prices. PECO does not obtain collateral from suppliers under its natural gas supply and asset management agreements; however, the natural gas asset managers have provided $20 million in parental guarantees related to these agreements. As of December 31, 2012,2013, PECO had credit exposure of $7$9 million under its natural gas supply and asset management agreements with investment grade suppliers.

 

BGE is permitted to recover its costs of procuring energy through the MDPSC-approved procurement tariffs. BGE’s counterparty credit risk is mitigated by its ability to recover realized energy costs through customer rates. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for furtheradditional information.

 

BGE’s full requirement wholesale electric power agreements that govern the terms of its electric supply procurement contracts, which define a supplier’s performance assurance requirements, allow a supplier, or its guarantor, to meet its credit requirements with a certain amount of unsecured credit. The amount of unsecured credit is determined based on the supplier’s lowest credit rating from the major credit rating agencies and the supplier’s tangible net worth, subject to an unsecured credit cap.

317


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

The credit position is based on the initial market price, which is the forward price of energy on the day a transaction is executed, compared to the current forward price curve for energy. To the extent that the forward price curve for energy exceeds the initial market price, the supplier is required to post collateral to the extent the credit exposure is greater than the supplier’s unsecured credit limit. The unsecured credit used by the suppliers represents BGE’s net credit exposure. The seller’s credit exposure is calculated each business day. As of December 31, 2012,2013, BGE had no net credit exposure withto suppliers.

324


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

BGE’s regulated gas business is exposed to market-price risk. This market-price risk is mitigated by BGE’s recovery of its costs to procure natural gas through a gas cost adjustment clause approved by the MDPSC. BGE does make off-system sales after BGE has satisfied its customers’ demands, which are not covered by the gas cost adjustment clause. At December 31, 2012,2013, BGE had credit exposure of $8$14 million related to off-system sales which is mitigated by parental guarantees, letters of credit, or right to offset clauses within other contracts with those third partythird-party suppliers.

 

Collateral and Contingent-Related Features (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

As part of the normal course of business, Generation routinely enters into physical or financially settled contracts for the purchase and sale of electric capacity, energy, fuels, emissions allowances and other energy-related products. Certain of Generation’s derivative instruments contain provisions that require Generation to post collateral. Generation also enters into commodity transactions on exchanges (i.e. NYMEX, ICE). The exchanges act as the counterparty to each trade. Transactions on the exchanges must adhere to comprehensive collateral and margining requirements. This collateral may be posted in the form of cash or credit support with thresholds contingent upon Generation’s credit rating from each of the major credit rating agencies. The collateral and credit support requirements vary by contract and by counterparty. These credit-risk-related contingent features stipulate that if Generation were to be downgraded or lose its investment grade credit rating (based on its senior unsecured debt rating), it would be required to provide additional collateral. This incremental collateral requirement allows for the offsetting of derivative instruments that are assets with the same counterparty, where the contractual right of offset exists under applicable master netting agreements. In the absence of expressly agreed-to provisions that specify the collateral that must be provided, collateral requested will be a function of the facts and circumstances of the situation at the time of the demand. In this case, Generation believes an amount of several months of future payments (i.e. capacity payments) rather than a calculation of fair value is the best estimate for the contingent collateral obligation, which has been factored into the disclosure below.

 

The aggregate fair value of all derivative instruments with credit-risk-related contingent features in a liability position that are not fully collateralized (excluding transactions on the exchanges that are fully collateralized) is detailed in the table below:

 

Credit-Risk Related Contingent Feature

 

December 31, 2012

Gross Fair Value of Derivative
Contracts Containing this Feature(a)

 

Offsetting Fair Value of In-the-Money
Contracts Under Master
Netting Arrangements (b)

 

Net Fair Value of Derivative Contracts
Containing This Feature(c)

($1,849)

 $1,426 ($423)

Credit-Risk Related Contingent Feature

 

December 31, 2011

Gross Fair Value of Derivative
Contracts Containing this Feature(a)

 

Offsetting Fair Value of In-the-Money
Contracts Under Master Netting
Arrangements(b)

 

Net Fair Value of Derivative Contracts
Containing This Feature(c)

($1,014)

 $928 ($86)

318


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

  For the Years Ended December 31, 

Credit-Risk Related Contingent Feature

 2013  2012 

Gross Fair Value of Derivative Contracts Containing this Feature (a)

 $(1,056 $(1,849

Offsetting Fair Value of In-the-Money Contracts Under Master Netting Arrangements (b)

 $846  $1,426 
 

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net Fair Value of Derivative Contracts Containing This Feature (c)

 $(210 $(423
 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

(a)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.
(b)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 a Registrant could potentially be required to post collateral.
(c)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.

 

Generation hashad cash collateral posted of $72 million, letters of credit posted of $364 million, cash collateral held of $206 million and letters of credit held of $34 million as of December 31, 2013 for counterparties with derivative positions. Generation had cash collateral posted of $527 million and

325


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

letters of credit posted of $563 million and cash collateral held of $499 million and letters of credit held of $45 million as ofat December 31, 2012 and cash collateral held of $542 million and letters of credit held of $89 million at December 31, 2011.for counterparties with derivative positions. In the event of a credit downgrade below investment grade (i.e. BB+ or Ba1), Exelon Generation Company, LLC and Constellation Energy Commodities Group, Inc. could be required to post additional collateral of $1,920 million$2.0 billion as of December 31, 2012,2013 and $1,612 million as of December 31, 2011.2012. These amounts represent the potential additional collateral required after giving consideration to offsetting derivative and non-derivative positions under master netting agreements.

 

Generation’s and Exelon’s interest rate swaps contain provisions that, in the event of a merger, if theirGeneration’s debt ratings were to materially weaken, it would be in violation of these provisions, resulting in the ability of the counterparty to terminate the agreement prior to maturity. Collateralization would not be required under any circumstance. Termination of the agreement could result in a settlement payment by Exelon or the counterparty on any interest rate swap in a net liability position. The settlement amount would be equal to the fair value of the swap on the termination date. As of December 31, 2012,2013, Generation’s and Exelon’s swaps were in an asset position, with a fair value of $17$18 million and $30$21 million, respectively.

 

See Note 21—24—Segment Information for furtheradditional information regarding the letters of credit supporting the cash collateral.

 

Generation entered into SFCssupply forward contracts with certain utilities, including PECO and BGE, with one-sided collateral postings only from Generation. If market prices fall below the benchmark price levels in these contracts, the utilities are not required to post collateral. However, when market prices rise above the benchmark price levels, counterparty suppliers, including Generation, are required to post collateral once certain unsecured credit limits are exceeded. Under the terms of the financial swap contract between Generation and ComEd, if a party is downgraded below investment grade by Moody’s or S&P, collateral postings would be required by that party depending on how market prices compare to the benchmark price levels. Under the terms of the financial swap contract, collateral postings will never exceed $200 million from either ComEd or Generation. Under the terms of ComEd’s standard block energy contracts, collateral postings are one-sided from suppliers, including Generation, should exposures between market prices and benchmark prices exceed established unsecured credit limits outlined in the contracts. As of December 31, 2012,2013, ComEd held neither cash nor letters of credit for the purpose of collateral from suppliers in association with energy procurement contracts. Under the terms of ComEd’s annual renewable energy contracts, collateral postings are required to cover a fixed value for RECs only. In addition, under the terms of ComEd’s long-term renewable energy contracts, collateral postings are required from suppliers for both RECs and energy. The REC portion is a fixed value and the energy portion is one-sided from suppliers should the forward market prices exceed contract prices. As of December 31, 2012,2013, ComEd held approximately $19 million in the form of cash and letters of credit as margin for both the annual and long-term REC obligations. See Note 1—Significant Accounting Policies for furtheradditional information.

319


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

PECO’s natural gas procurement contracts contain provisions that could require PECO to post collateral. This collateral may be posted in the form of cash or credit support with thresholds contingent upon PECO’s credit rating from the major credit rating agencies. The collateral and credit support requirements vary by contract and by counterparty. As of December 31, 2012,2013, PECO was not required to post collateral for any of these agreements. If PECO lost its investment grade credit rating as of December 31, 2012,2013, PECO could have been required to post approximately $35$42 million of collateral to its counterparties.

 

PECO’s supplier master agreements that govern the terms of its DSP Program contracts do not contain provisions that would require PECO to post collateral.

 

BGE’s full requirements wholesale power agreements that govern the terms of its electric supply procurement contracts do not contain provisions that would require BGE to post collateral.

326


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

BGE’s natural gas procurement contracts contain provisions that could require BGE to post collateral. This collateral may be posted in the form of cash or credit support with thresholds contingent upon BGE’s credit rating from the major credit rating agencies. The collateral and credit support requirements vary by contract and by counterparty. As of December 31, 2012,2013, BGE was not required to post collateral for any of these agreements. If BGE lost its investment grade credit rating as of December 31, 2012,2013, BGE could have been required to post approximately $124$85 million of collateral to its counterparties.

 

Accounting for the Offsetting of Amounts Related to Certain Contracts (Exelon and Generation)

As of December 31, 2012, and December 31, 2011, $3 million and $2 million, respectively, of cash collateral received was not offset against derivative positions because they were not associated with energy-related derivatives.

11.13. Debt and Credit Agreements (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Short-Term Borrowings

 

Exelon, ComEd and BGE meet their short-term liquidity requirements primarily through the issuance of commercial paper. Generation and PECO meet their short-term liquidity requirements primarily through the issuance of commercial paper and borrowings from the intercompany money pool.

 

Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE had the following amounts of commercial paper borrowings at December 31, 20122013 and 2011:2012:

 

  Maximum
Program Size at
December 31,
   Outstanding
Commercial
Paper at
December 31,
   Average Interest Rate on
Commercial Paper Borrowings for
the Year Ended December 31,
   Maximum
Program Size at
December 31,
   Outstanding
Commercial
Paper at
December 31,
   Average Interest Rate on
Commercial Paper Borrowings for
the Year Ended December 31,
 

Commercial Paper Issuer

  2012 (a)   2011 (a)   2012   2011   2012 2011   2013 (a)   2012 (a)   2013   2012   2013 2012 

Exelon Corporate

  $500   $500   $—     $161    0.47  0.42  $500   $500   $—     $—      0.27  0.47

Generation

   5,600    5,600    —      —      0.45  0.48   5,600    5,600    —      —      0.32  0.45

ComEd

   1,000    1,000    —      —      0.50  0.71   1,000    1,000    184    —      0.40  0.50

PECO

   600    600    —      —      —     —      600    600    —      —      n.a.   n.a. 

BGE

   600    400     —      —      0.43  0.38   600    600    135    —      0.31  0.43
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

      

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

    

Total

  $8,300   $8,100   $—     $161      $8,300   $8,300   $319   $—      
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

      

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

    

 

(a)Equals aggregate bank commitments under the revolving and bilateral credit agreements.agreements (with the exception of a $75 million bilateral agreement) that backstop the commercial paper program. See discussion below and Credit Agreements table below for items affecting effective program size.

320


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

In order to maintain their respective commercial paper programs in the amounts indicated above, each Registrant must have revolving credit facilities in place, at least equal to the amount of its commercial paper program. While the amount of its outstanding commercial paper does not reduce available capacity under a Registrant’s credit agreement, a Registrant does not issue commercial paper in an aggregate amount exceeding the then available capacity under its credit agreement.

327


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

At December 31, 2012,2013, the Registrants had the following aggregate bank commitments, credit facility borrowings and available capacity under their respective credit agreements:

 

                                        
              Available Capacity at
December 31, 2012
               Available Capacity at
December 31, 2013
 

Borrower

  Aggregate Bank
Commitment(a)
   Facility Draws   Outstanding
Letters of Credit
   Actual   To Support
Additional
Commercial
Paper
   Aggregate Bank
Commitment (a)
   Facility Draws   Outstanding
Letters of Credit
   Actual   To Support
Additional
Commercial
Paper(b)
 

Exelon Corporate

  $500   $—     $2   $498   $498   $500   $—      $2   $498   $498 

Generation

   5,600    —      1,818    3,782    3,782    5,675    —      1,413    4,262    4,187 

ComEd

   1,000    —      —      1,000    1,000    1,000    —      —      1,000    816 

PECO

   600    —      1    599    599    600    —      1    599    599 

BGE

   600    —      —      600    600    600    —      —      600    465 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total

  $8,300   $—     $1,821   $6,479   $6,479   $8,375   $—     $1,416   $6,959   $6,565 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Excludes additional credit facility agreements for Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE with aggregate commitments of $50 million, $34 million, $34 million and $5 million, respectively, arranged with minority and community banks located primarily within ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s service territories. These facilities expire on October 19, 201317, 2014 and are solely for issuing letters of credit. As of December 31, 2012,2013, letters of credit issued under these agreements totaled $23$20 million, $21$18 million, $21 million and $1 million for Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE, respectively.
(b)Excludes $75 million bilateral credit facility that does not back Generation’s commercial paper program.

 

For the year ended December 31, 2012,2013, there were no borrowings under the Registrants’ credit facilities.

 

The following tables present the short-term borrowings activity for Exelon, Generation, ComEd, and BGE during 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010.2011. PECO did not have any short-term borrowings outstanding during 2013, 2012 2011 or 2010.2011.

 

Exelon

 

  2012 2011 2010   2013 2012 2011 

Average borrowings

  $199  $218  $125   $254  $199  $218 

Maximum borrowings outstanding

   505   600   346    682   505   600 

Average interest rates, computed on a daily basis

   0.48  0.50  0.72   0.37  0.48  0.50

Average interest rates, at December 31

   n.a.    0.44  n.a.     0.35  n.a.    0.44

Generation

        
  2012 2011 2010   2013 2012 2011 

Average borrowings

  $4  $51  $—     $42  $4  $51 

Maximum borrowings outstanding

   165   304   —      291   165   304 

Average interest rates, computed on a daily basis

   0.45  0.48  n.a.     0.32  0.45  0.48 

Average interest rates, at December 31

   n.a.    n.a.    n.a.     n.a.    n.a.    n.a.  

 

321328


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

ComEd

    
   2012  2011  2010 

Average borrowings

  $110  $36  $125 

Maximum borrowings outstanding

   366   407   346 

Average interest rates, computed on a daily basis

   0.50  0.71  0.72

Average interest rates, at December 31

   n.a.    n.a.    n.a.  

BGE

    
   2012  2011  2010 

Average borrowings

  $6  $26  $1 

Maximum borrowings outstanding

   76   190   46 

Average interest rates, computed on a daily basis

   0.43  0.38  0.39

Average interest rates, computed at December 31

   n.a.    n.a.    n.a.  

n.a.Not applicable.

ComEd

    
   2013  2012  2011 

Average borrowings

  $203  $110  $36 

Maximum borrowings outstanding

   446   366   407 

Average interest rates, computed on a daily basis

   0.40  0.50  0.71

Average interest rates, at December 31

   0.37  n.a.    n.a.  

BGE

    
   2013  2012  2011 

Average borrowings

  $35  $6  $26 

Maximum borrowings outstanding

   135   76   190 

Average interest rates, computed on a daily basis

   0.31  0.43  0.38

Average interest rates, computed at December 31

   0.31  n.a.    n.a.  

 

Credit Agreements

 

In connectionOn January 23, 2013, Generation entered into a two year $75 million bilateral letter of credit facility with the Upstream Merger, Exelon assumed alla bank. The credit agreement expires in January 2015. This facility will solely be utilized by Generation to issue letters of Constellation’s obligations undercredit.

On March 14, 2013, ComEd extended its three-year, unsecured revolving credit facility (the “Constellation Credit Agreement”). Effective aswith aggregate bank commitments of $1.0 billion. Under this facility, ComEd may issue letters of credit in the Initial Merger, the Constellation Credit Agreement was amendedaggregate amount of up to $500 million. The credit agreement expires on March 28, 2018, and restatedComEd may request another one-year extension of that term. The credit facility also allows ComEd to (1) permit Exelon and Constellation to consummate the Upstream Merger and the restructuring transaction, (2) reducerequest increases in the aggregate commitments underof up to an additional $500 million. Any such extension or increases are subject to the Constellation Credit Agreement from $2.5 billion to $1.5 billion, and (3) conform someapproval of the representations, warranties, covenants and events of default inlenders party to the Constellation Credit Agreement with representations, warranties, covenants and events of default in the Exelon credit agreement dated as of March 23, 2011, as amended as ofin their sole discretion. Costs incurred to extend the Initial Merger. In connection with the Upstream Merger, Exelon also assumed Constellation’s obligations under four separate bilateral credit facilities and a commodity-linked credit facility whichfor ComEd were also amended to conform with the Constellation Credit Agreement effective as of the Initial Merger. Effective as of the Initial Merger, the Exelon Credit Agreement and the Generation Credit Agreement were amended and restated to conform some of the representations, warranties and covenants with provisions of the Constellation Credit Agreement, as amended effective as of the Initial Merger. Exelon Corporation (as successor to Constellation Energy Group) entered into an amendment to the Amended and Restated Credit Agreement dated March 12, 2012, which changed the maturity date to December 31, 2012. See Note 4—Merger and Acquisitions for further description of the merger transaction.not material.

 

On August 10, 2012,2013, Exelon Corporate, Generation, PECO and BGE amended and extended their respective unsecured syndicated revolving credit facilities, with aggregate bank commitments of $500 million, $5.3 billion, $600 million and $600 million, respectively, through August 10, 2017. Under these facilities, Exelon Corporate, Generation, PECO and BGE may issue letters of credit in the aggregate of up to $200 million, $3.5 billion, $300 million and $600 million, respectively. Each credit facility permits the applicable borrower to request extensions for up to two additional one-year periods. Each credit facility also allows Exelon Corporate, Generation, PECO and BGE to request increases in aggregate commitments up to an additional $250 million, $1.0 billion, $250 million and $100 million, respectively. Any extension or increase of a credit facility is subject to the approval of the lenders party to that credit facility in their sole discretion.The new covenants are substantially consistent with existing covenants. Costs incurred to amend and extend the facilities for Exelon Corporate, Generation, PECO and BGE were not material.

 

322Effective August 10, 2013, Exelon and ComEd entered into amendments to each of their respective revolving credit facilities (the Amendments). The Amendments relate to the IRS’s challenge to the position taken by Exelon on its 1999 federal income tax return with respect to the sale of ComEd’s fossil generating assets in a like-kind exchange tax position. The Amendments are intended to exclude the non-cash impact of the like-kind exchange tax position from the calculation of the interest coverage ratio under each of Exelon and ComEd’s respective credit facilities. See Note 12—Income Taxes for additional information.

On January 27, 2014 ComEd began the process of extending its unsecured syndicated revolving credit facility, with aggregate bank commitments of $1.0 billion. The transaction is expected to close and become effective in March 2014, with a maturity of five years from the close of the transaction. No changes are expected to be made to the facility other than extension of the term for an additional one year period. Generally, it is expected that costs incurred to extend the facility will be amortized over the newly extended life of the facility.

329


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

On March 28, 2012, ComEd replaced its unsecured revolving credit facility with a new unsecured facility with aggregate bank commitments of $1.0 billion. Under this facility, ComEd may issue letters of credit in the aggregate amount of up to $500 million. The credit agreement has an initial term expiring on March 28, 2017, and ComEd may request up to two, one-year extensions of that term. The credit facility also allows ComEd to request increases in the aggregate commitments of up to an additional $500 million. Any such extensions or increases are subject to the approval of the lenders party to the credit agreement in their sole discretion. Costs incurred to replace the credit facility for ComEd were not material.

 

Borrowings under eachExelon Corporate’s, Generation’s, ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s credit agreementagreements bear interest at a rate selected by the borrower based upon either the prime rate or at a fixedLIBOR-based rate, for a specified periodplus an adder based upon a LIBOR-based rate. As of December 31, 2012,the particular registrant’s credit rating. Exelon Corporate, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE have adders of up to 27.5, 7.5,27.5, 27.5, 0.0 and 7.5 basis points for prime based borrowings and 127.5, 107.5,127.5, 127.5, 100.0 and 107.5 basis points for LIBOR-based borrowings, respectively. The fee varies depending upon the respective credit ratings of each entity.borrowings. The maximum adders for prime rate borrowings and LIBOR-based rate borrowings are 65 basis points and 165 basis points, respectively. The amended covenants incredit agreements also require the amendedborrower to pay a facility fee based upon the aggregate commitments under the agreement. The fee varies depending upon the respective credit facilities are substantially consistent withratings of the covenants in the prior facilities, with the exception of BGE, which replaced its debt to capitalization covenant with an interest coverage ratio.

On October 19, 2012, Generation, ComEd and PECO replaced their expiring minority and community bank credit facilities with new minority and community bank credit facility agreements in the amounts of $50 million, $34 million and $34 million, respectively, and BGE entered into a minority and community bank credit facility in the amount of $5 million. These facilities, which expire in October 2013, are solely utilized by the applicable Registrants to issue letters of credit.

On January 23, 2013, Generation entered into a two year $75 million bilateral letter of credit facility with a bank. This facility will solely be utilized by Generation to issue letters of credit.borrower.

 

An event of default under any of the Registrants’ credit facilities would not constitute an event of default under any of the other Registrants’ credit facilities, except that a bankruptcy or other event of default in the payment of principal, premium or indebtedness in principal amount in excess of $100 million in the aggregate by Generation under its credit facility would constitute an event of default under the Exelon corporateCorporate credit facility.

On October 18, 2013, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE refinanced their respective minority and community bank credit facility agreements in the amounts of $50 million, $34 million, $34 million and $5 million, respectively. These facilities, which expire in October 2014, are solely utilized to issue letters of credit.

 

Each credit facility requires the affected borrower to maintain a minimum cash from operations to interest expense ratio for the twelve-month period ended on the last day of any quarter. The ratios exclude revenues and interest expenses attributable to securitization debt, certain changes in working capital, distributions on preferred securities of subsidiaries and, in the case of Exelon and Generation, interest on the debt of its project subsidiaries. The following table summarizes the minimum thresholds reflected in the credit agreements for the year ended December 31, 2012:2013:

 

   Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Credit facility threshold

   2.50 to 1     3.00 to 1     2.00 to 1     2.00 to 1     2.00 to 1  

 

At December 31, 2012,2013, the interest coverage ratios at the Registrants were as follows:

 

   Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Interest coverage ratio

   9.62    14.20    6.14    7.85    5.16 

323


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

   Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Interest coverage ratio

   7.67     11.45    5.20    8.29    7.85  

 

Accounts Receivable Agreement

 

PECO iswas party to an agreement with a financial institution under which it transferred an undivided interest, adjusted daily, in its accounts receivable designated under the agreement in exchange for proceeds of $225$210 million, which was classified as a short-term note payable on Exelon’s and PECO’s Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2012. The agreement terminated on August 30, 2013 and PECO paid down the outstanding principal of $210 million. The financial institution no longer has an undivided interest in the accounts receivable designated under the agreement. As of December 31, 2012, and 2011, the financial institution’s undivided interest in Exelon’s and PECO’s gross accounts receivable was equivalent to $289 million, and $329 million, respectively, which representsrepresented the financial institution’s interest in PECO’s eligible receivables as calculated under the terms of the agreement. The agreement requiresrequired PECO to maintain eligible receivables at least equivalent to the financial institution’s undivided interest. Upon termination or liquidation of this agreement, the financial institution is entitled to recover up to $225 million plus the accrued yield payable from its undivided interest in PECO’s receivables. On August 31, 2012, PECO entered into an Amendment to extend this agreement until August 30, 2013. This Amendment also expands the definition of a tariff receivable to include receivables that have been purchased by PECO and paid for in accordance with the Tariff and revises the compliance criteria for the eligible asset test to allow for the payment of capital within a specified period of time. On November 28, 2012, PECO made a principal paydown of $15 million to meet the eligible asset test requirement of the agreement for the October 2012 reporting period. The remaining principal balance of $210 million is classified as a short-term note payable on Exelon’s and PECO’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. As of December 31, 2012, PECO was in compliance with the requirements of the agreement. In the event the agreement is not further extended, PECO has sufficient short-term liquidity and may seek alternate financing.

 

Long-Term Debt

On June 18, 2012, Generation issued and sold $775 million of Senior Notes. In connection with this debt issuance, Generation entered into forward-starting interest rate swaps in the aggregate notional amount of $470 million. The interest rate swaps were settled on June 15, 2012 with Generation recording a pre-tax loss of approximately $7 million. The loss was recorded to other comprehensive income within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets and is being amortized to income over the life of the related debt as an increase to interest expense.

Concurrently with the new debt issuance, Generation engaged in private offers (the Exchange Offer) to certain eligible holders to exchange any and all of the $700 million outstanding 7.60% Senior Notes due 2032 (Old Notes) of Exelon (which were assumed by Exelon in the merger with Constellation), for:

Generation’s newly issued 4.25% Senior Notes due 2022, plus a cash payment; and

Generation’s newly issued 5.60% Senior Notes due 2042, plus a cash payment.

On June 28, 2012, pursuant to the Exchange Offer, Generation purchased $441 million of the Old Notes in exchange for issuing $535 million of Notes due in 2022 and 2042, plus a cash payment of approximately $60 million. The $441 million of Old Notes were recorded on Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets at $608 million, reflecting a fair value adjustment pursuant to the application of purchase accounting applied as a result of the Constellation merger which resulted in approximately $13 million gain from the Exchange Offer at Generation. The gain was recorded as an increase to Long-term Debt within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets and will be amortized to income over the life of the debt as a reduction in interest expense.

On July 13, 2012, pursuant to the Exchange Offer described above, Generation purchased an additional $1 million of Old Notes in exchange for the Senior Notes due in 2022 and 2042.

324330


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Willis Tower Capital Lease

 

In connection with the debt obligations assumed by Exelon as partsecond quarter of the Upstream Merger on March 12, 2012,2013, ComEd entered into a 20-year capital lease for distribution substation space at Willis Tower in Chicago, Illinois. Exelon and subsidiaries of Generation (former Constellation subsidiaries) assumed intercompany loan agreements that mirror the terms and amounts of the third-party debt obligations of Exelon, resulting in intercompany notes payable included in Long-term Debt to affiliateComEd recorded $8 million on Generation’stheir Consolidated Balance Sheets within property plant and intercompany notes receivableequipment and long-term debt at Exelon Corporate, which are eliminated in consolidation on Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. The third-party debt obligations are reported in Long-term Debt on Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. The intercompany loan agreements are summarized as follows:

$700 million aggregate principal amount of Old Notes, $258 million of which was outstanding as of December 31, 2012 after the Exchange Offer described above;

$550 million aggregate principal amount of 4.55% Fixed-Rate Notes due 2015, all of which was outstanding as of December 31, 2012;

$450 million aggregate principal amount of 8.625% Series A Junior Subordinated Debentures due 2063, all of which was outstanding as of December 31, 2012; and

$550 million aggregate principal amount of 5.15% Notes due 2020, all of which was outstanding as of December 31, 2012.

The intercompany loan agreements and the third-party debt obligations described above were increased by $403 million for a fair value adjustment pursuant to the application of purchase accounting applied as a resultinception of the Constellation merger,lease. ComEd will make lease payments of which $199less than $1 million was outstanding as of December 31, 2012, primarily reflecting the Exchange Offer described aboveannually in 2013-2017 and amortization of purchase accounting adjustment, which is being amortized over the lives of the arrangements as a reduction to interest expense.approximately $7 million in aggregate thereafter.

 

In November 2012, Generation filed a registration statement on Form S-4 to register senior notes to be issued in connection with an exchange offer for the senior notes that were privately issued in June and July 2012. The exchange offer was consummated on February 19, 2013. The registered notes have the same terms and maturity dates as the privately placed senior notes.

325


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)Long-Term Debt

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

The following tables present the outstanding long-term debt at Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE as of December 31, 20122013 and 2011:2012:

 

Exelon

 

    Maturity
Date
   December 31,     Maturity
Date
   December 31, 
  Rates   2012 2011   Rates   2013 2012 

Long-term debt

            

First Mortgage Bonds(a) (b):

      

First Mortgage Bonds (a)(b):

      

Fixed rates

   1.63%  —  7.63%    2012-2042    $7,397  $7,522    1.20%  —  7.63%    2013-2043    $7,746  $7,397 

Unsecured bonds:

   2.80%  —  6.35%    2013-2036     1,850   —   

Rate stabilization bonds:

   5.72%  —  5.82%    2017    332   —   

Unsecured bonds

   2.80%  —  6.35%    2013-2036     1,750   1,850 

Rate stabilization bonds

   5.68%  —  5.82%    2016-2017    265   332 

Senior unsecured notes

   2.00%  —  8.63%    2014-2063     8,021   4,902    2.00%  —  7.60%    2014-2042     7,571   8,021 

Notes payable and other(c)

   6.95%  —  7.83%    2012-2020     177   174 

Pollution control notes:

            

Fixed rates

   4.10%  —  5.00%    2014-2042     20   46    4.10%    2014    20   20 

Non-recourse debt:

            

Fixed rates

   2.33%  —  5.50%    2031-2037     238   —      2.33%  —  5.50%    2031-2037     1,077   238 

Variable rates

   1.96%  —  2.77%    2014-2030     262   —      1.96%  —  2.77%    2013-2053     150   262 

Notes payable and other(c)

   4.50%  —  7.83%    2014-2053     181   177 
     

 

  

 

      

 

  

 

 

Total long-term debt

      18,297   12,644       18,760   18,297 

Unamortized debt discount and premium, net

      (17  (32      (19  (17

Fair value adjustment

      448   —         384   448 

Fair value hedge carrying value adjustment, net

      17   15       7   17 

Long-term debt due within one year

      (1,047  (828      (1,509  (1,047
     

 

  

 

      

 

  

 

 

Long-term debt

     $17,698  $11,799      $17,623  $17,698 
     

 

  

 

      

 

  

 

 

Long-term debt to financing trusts(d)

            

Subordinated debentures to ComEd Financing III

   6.35  2033   $206  $206    6.35  2033   $206  $206 

Subordinated debentures to PECO Trust III

   7.38  2028    81   81    7.38  2028    81   81 

Subordinated debentures to PECO Trust IV

   5.75  2033    103   103    5.75  2033    103   103 

Subordinated debentures to BGE Trust

   6.20  2043    258   —      6.20  2043    258   258 
     

 

  

 

      

 

  

 

 

Total long-term debt to financing trusts

     $648  $390      $648  $648 
     

 

  

 

      

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Substantially all of ComEd’s assets other than expressly excepted property and substantially all of PECO’s assets are subject to the liens of their respective mortgage indentures.
(b)Includes First Mortgage Bonds issued under the ComEd and PECO mortgage indentures securing pollution control bonds and notes.

331


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

(c)Includes capital lease obligations of $30$41 million and $34$30 million at December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, respectively. Lease payments of $3 million, $3 million, $3$4 million, $4 million, $4 million, $5 million, $5 million and $13$19 million will be made in 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and thereafter, respectively.
(d)Amounts owed to these financing trusts are recorded as debt to financing trusts within Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

326Generation

       Maturity
Date
   December 31, 
   Rates     2013  2012 

Long-term debt

       

Senior unsecured notes

   2.00%  —  7.60    2014-2042    $6,271  $6,721 

Social Security Administration

   2.93%     2015    1   —   

Pollution control notes:

       

Fixed rates

   4.10%     2014    20   20 

Non-recourse debt:

       

Fixed rates

   2.33%  —  5.50%     2031-2037     1,077   238 

Variable rates

   1.96%  —  2.77%     2014-2030     150   262 

Notes payable and other(a)

   4.50%  —  7.83%     2014-2022     33   30 
      

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total long-term debt

       7,552   7,271 

Fair value adjustment

       166   199 

Unamortized debt discount and premium, net

       11   13 

Long-term debt due within one year

       (561  (28
      

 

 

  

 

 

 

Long-term debt

      $7,168  $7,455 
      

 

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Includes Generation’s capital lease obligations of $33 million and $30 million at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. Generation will make lease payments of $4 million, $4 million, $4 million, $5 million, $5 million and $11 million in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and thereafter, respectively.

During January 2014, Generation redeemed its $20 million 4.10% pollution control revenue bonds due July 1, 2014 and its $500 million 5.35% senior unsecured notes at maturity.

ComEd

     Maturity
Date
   December 31, 
  Rates    2013  2012 

Long-term debt

     

First Mortgage Bonds (a)(b):

     

Fixed rates

  1.63%  —  7.63  2013-2043    $5,546  $5,447 

Notes payable and other (c)

  6.95%  —  7.49  2014-2053     148   140 
    

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total long-term debt

     5,694   5,587 

Unamortized debt discount and premium, net

     (19  (20

Long-term debt due within one year

     (617  (252
    

 

 

  

 

 

 

Long-term debt

    $5,058  $5,315 
    

 

 

  

 

 

 

Long-term debt to financing trust (d)

     

Subordinated debentures to ComEd Financing III

  6.35  2042   $206  $206 
    

 

 

  

 

 

 

332


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Generation

       Maturity
Date
   December 31, 
   Rates     2012  2011 

Long-term debt

       

Senior unsecured notes(b)

   2.00%  —  8.63%     2014-2063    $6,721  $3,602 

Pollution control notes:

       

Fixed rates

   4.10%  —  5.00%     2014-2042     20   46 

Non-recourse debt:

       

Fixed rates

   2.33%  —  5.50%     2031-2037     238   —   

Variable rates

   1.96%  —  2.77%     2014-2030     262   —   

Notes payable and other(a)

   7.83%     2012-2020     30   34 
      

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total long-term debt

       7,271   3,682 

Fair value adjustment(b)

       199   —   

Unamortized debt discount and premium, net

       13   (5

Long-term debt due within one year

       (28  (3
      

 

 

  

 

 

 

Long-term debt

      $7,455  $3,674 
      

 

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Includes Generation’s capital lease obligations of $30 million and $34 million at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Generation will make lease payments of $3 million, $3 million, $3 million, $4 million, $4 million and $13 million in 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 and thereafter, respectively.
(b)Includes $2,007 million of long-term debt to affiliate, comprised of $1,808 million senior unsecured notes and $199 million fair value adjustment.

ComEd

     Maturity
Date
  December 31, 
  Rates   2012  2011 

Long-term debt

    

First Mortgage Bonds(a) (b):

    

Fixed rates

  1.63%  —  7.63%    2012-2042   $5,447  $5,547 

Notes payable

  6.95  2018   140   140 
   

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total long-term debt

    5,587   5,687 

Unamortized debt discount and premium, net

    (20  (22

Long-term debt due within one year

    (252  (450
   

 

 

  

 

 

 

Long-term debt

   $5,315  $5,215 
   

 

 

  

 

 

 

Long-term debt to financing trust(c)

    

Subordinated debentures to ComEd Financing III

  6.35%    2033  $206  $206 
   

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

(a)Substantially all of ComEd’s assets other than expressly excepted property are subject to the lien of its mortgage indenture.
(b)Includes First Mortgage Bonds issued under the ComEd mortgage indenture securing pollution control bonds and notes.
(c)Includes ComEd’s capital lease obligations of $8 million at December 31, 2013. Lease payments of less than $1 million will be made from 2014 through expiration at 2053.
(d)Amount owed to this financing trust is recorded as debt to financing trust within ComEd’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

327


Combined NotesOn January 10, 2014, ComEd issued $300 million aggregate principal amount of its First Mortgage 2.150% Bonds, Series 115, due January 15, 2019, and $350 million aggregate principal amount of its First Mortgage 4.700% Bonds, Series 116, due January 15, 2044. The proceeds of the Bonds were used by ComEd to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollarsrefinance the $17 million outstanding principal amount of its First Mortgage 5.850% Bonds, Pollution Control Series 1994C, due January 15, 2014, and the $600 million outstanding principal amount of its First Mortgage 1.625% Bonds, Series 110, due January 15, 2014, and to fund other general corporate purposes in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

2014.

 

PECO

 

      Maturity
Date
   December 31,    Maturity
Date
   December 31, 
  Rates   2012 2011  Rates   2013 2012 

Long-term debt

            

First Mortgage Bonds(a) (b):

       

First Mortgage Bonds (a)(b):

     

Fixed rates

   2.38%  —  5.95%     2012-2037    $1,950  $1,975   1.20%  —  5.95  2013-2043    $2,200  $1,950 
      

 

  

 

     

 

  

 

 

Total long-term debt

       1,950   1,975      2,200   1,950 

Unamortized debt discount and premium, net

       (3  (3     (3  (3

Long-term debt due within one year

       (300  (375     (250  (300
      

 

  

 

     

 

  

 

 

Long-term debt

      $1,647  $1,597     $1,947  $1,647 
      

 

  

 

     

 

  

 

 

Long-term debt to financing trusts(c)

            

Subordinated debentures to PECO Trust III

   7.38%     2028   $81  $81   7.38  2028   $81  $81 

Subordinated debentures to PECO Trust IV

   5.75%     2033    103   103   5.75  2033    103   103 
      

 

  

 

     

 

  

 

 

Long-term debt to financing trusts

      $184  $184     $184  $184 
      

 

  

 

     

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Substantially all of PECO’s assets are subject to the lien of its mortgage indenture.
(b)Includes First Mortgage Bonds issued under the PECO mortgage indenture securing pollution control bonds and notes.
(c)AmountAmounts owed to this financing trust isare recorded as debt to financing trusttrusts within PECO’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

BGE

 

   Maturity
Date
   December 31,    Maturity
Date
   December 31, 
 Rates   2012 2011  Rates   2013 2012 

Long-term debt

          

Unsecured bonds

  2.80%  —  6.35%    2013-2036    $1,850  $1,710   2.80%  —  6.35  2013-2036    $1,750  $1,850 

Rate stabilization bonds

  5.47%  —  5.82%    2012-2017     332  $395   5.68%        5.82  2016-2017    265  $332 
    

 

  

 

     

 

  

 

 

Total long-term debt

     2,182   2,105      2,015   2,182 

Unamortized debt discount and premium, net

     (4  (4     (4  (4

Long-term debt due within one year

     (467  (173     (70  (467
    

 

  

 

     

 

  

 

 

Long-term debt

    $1,711  $1,928     $1,941  $1,711 
    

 

  

 

     

 

  

 

 

Long-term debt to financing trusts(a)

          

Subordinated debentures to BGE Capital Trust II

  6.20%    2043   $258  $258   6.20  2043   $258  $258 
    

 

  

 

     

 

  

 

 

Long-term debt to financing trusts

    $258  $258 
    

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Amount owed to this financing trust is recorded as debt to financing trust within BGE’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

328333


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Long-term debt maturities at Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE in the periods 20132014 through 20172018 and thereafter are as follows:

 

Year

  Exelon Generation   ComEd PECO BGE   Exelon Generation   ComEd PECO BGE 

2013

  $979  $28   $252  $300  $467 

2014

   1,483   616     617   250   70   $1,428   $561    $617  $250  $—   

2015

   1,613   553    260   —     75    1,615   555    260   —     —   

2016

   1,041   76    665   —     379    1,346   81    665   300   300 

2017

   1,462   706    425   —     41    1,396   706    425   —     265 

2018

   1,345   5    840   500   —   

Thereafter

   12,367(a)   5,292    3,574(b)   1,584(c)   1,408(d)    12,278(a)   5,644     3,093(b)   1,334(c)   1,708(d) 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total

  $18,945  $7,271   $5,793  $2,134  $2,440   $19,408  $7,552   $5,900  $2,384  $2,273 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Includes $648 million due to ComEd, PECO and BGE financing trusts.
(b)Includes $206 million due to ComEd financing trust.
(c)Includes $184 million due to PECO financing trusts.
(d)Includes $258 million due to BGE financing trust.

 

Exelon Non-Recourse/Limited-RecourseNon-Recourse Debt

 

The following are descriptions of activity with respect to certain indebtedness of Exelon’s project subsidiaries that areis outstanding as of December 31, 2012.2013. The indebtedness described below is specific to certain generating facilities pledged as collateral with a net book value of approximately $1.9 billion at December 31, 2013, and all associated project financing liabilities are non-recourse to Exelon unless otherwise noted.and Generation.

Continental Wind.    On September 30, 2013, Continental Wind, LLC (Continental Wind), an indirect subsidiary of Exelon and Generation, completed the issuance and sale of $613 million aggregate principal amount of Continental Wind’s 6.00% senior secured notes due February 28, 2033. Continental Wind owns and operates a portfolio of wind farms in Idaho, Kansas, Michigan, Oregon, New Mexico and Texas with a total net capacity of 667 MW. The net proceeds were distributed to Generation for its general business purposes. In connection with this non-recourse project financing, Exelon terminated existing interest rate swaps with a total notional amount of $350 million during the third quarter of 2013, and realized a total gain of $26 million upon termination. The gain on the interest rate swaps was recorded within OCI and will reduce the effective interest rate over the life of the debt for Exelon. See Note 12—Derivative Financial Instruments for additional information on the interest rate swaps.

In addition, Continental Wind entered into a $131 million letter of credit facility and $10 million working capital revolver facility. Continental Wind has issued letters of credit to satisfy certain of its credit support and security obligations. As of December 31, 2013, the Continental Wind letter of credit facility had $93 million in letters of credit outstanding related to the project.

ExGen Renewables Energy I LLC.    On February 6, 2014, ExGen Renewables I, LLC (EGR), an indirect subsidiary of Exelon and Generation, completed the issuance and sale of $300 million aggregate principal amount of EGR’s LIBOR plus 425 bps non-recourse senior secured loan, due February 6, 2021. EGR indirectly owns Continental Wind LLC (Continental).

 

Antelope Valley Project Development Debt AgreementAgreement.

The DOE Loan Programs Office issued a guarantee for up to $646 million for a non-recourse loan from the Federal Financing Bank to support the financing of the construction of the Antelope Valley facility. The project is expected to be

334


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

completed atin the endfirst half of 2013.2014. The loan will mature on January 5, 2037. Interest rates on the loan will beare fixed upon each advance at a spread of 37.5 basis points above U.S. Treasuries of comparable maturity.

On April 5, 2012, Antelope Valley received the first DOE-guaranteed loan advance of $69 million. The loan advance terminated the put option that Generation had on the Antelope Valley project. Antelope Valley received additional advances subsequent to the initial advance, and as of December 31, 2012, has received $219 million in DOE-guaranteed funding. See Note 4—Merger and Acquisitions for additional information on Antelope Valley.

 

In addition, Generation has issued letters of credit to support its equity investment in the project. As of December 31, 2012,2013, Generation had $568$334 million in letters of credit outstanding related to the project The letters of credit balance is expected to decline over time as scheduled equity contributions for the project are made.

 

In connection with this agreement, Generation entered into a floating-for-fixed interest rate swap with a notional amount of $485 million to mitigate interest rateinterest-rate risk associated with the financing. As Generation received additional loan advances, theyit subsequently entered into a series of fixed-to-floating interest rate swaps to offset portions of the original interest rate hedge. See Note 10—12—Derivative Financial Instruments for additional information regarding interest rate swaps associated with Antelope Valley.

 

329


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Sacramento PV EnergyEnergy.

In July, 2011, a subsidiary of Generation entered into a $41 million non-recourse project financing supported byfor a 30MW solar facility in Sacramento, California. As of December 31, 2012, $392013, $37 million was outstanding. Borrowings under the facility bear interest at a variable rate, payable quarterly, and are secured by equity interests and assets of the subsidiary. As of December 31, 2012,2013, the subsidiary had interest rate swaps with a notional value of $29 million in order to convert the variable interest payments to fixed payments on 75% of the $39$41 million facility. See Note 10—12—Derivative Financial Instruments for additional information regarding interest rate swaps.

 

Constellation Solar Horizons FinancingFinancing.

In September 2012, a subsidiary of Generation entered into an 18-year $38 million non-recourse variable interest note to recover capital used to build a 16MW16 MW solar facility in Emmitsburg, Maryland. Borrowing will incur interest at a variable rate,Interest is payable quarterly, and arethe note is secured by the equity interests and assets of the subsidiary. As of December 31, 2013, $36 million was outstanding. The subsidiary also executed interest rate swaps for a notional amount of $29 million in order to convert the variable interest payments to fixed payments on 75% of the $38 million facility amount. See Note 10—12—Derivative Financial Instruments for additional information regarding interest rate swaps.

 

Secured Solar Credit Lending Agreement.    AIn December 2013, a Generation subsidiary, Constellation Solar, LLC, paid off the remaining balance of Generation has athe three-year senior secured credit facility that is designed to support the growth of solar operations. Theoperations in the amount committed underof $94 million and terminated the facility is $150 million, which may be increased up to $200 million at the subsidiary’s request with additional commitments by the lenders. As of December 31, 2012, $113 million was outstanding under the facility with interest payable quarterly.facility. The facility is secured by the equity interestswas scheduled to mature in the subsidiary and the entities that own the solar projects as well as the assetsJune of the subsidiary and the projects’ entities. The obligations of the subsidiary are guaranteed by Generation and the projects’ entities. The Generation guarantee will terminate upon the subsidiary obtaining a stand-alone investment grade credit rating or the satisfaction of a number of conditions, at which time the financing will become non-recourse to and Generation.2014.

 

Other Solar Project Financings.    Generation has the following amounts outstanding under solar project loan agreements:

 

$7 million fully amortizing by June 30, 2031 related to a solar project at the Denver International Airport, and

 

$1110 million fully amortizing by December 31, 2031 related to a solar project in Holyoke, Massachusetts.

 

Upstream Gas Property Asset-Based Lending Agreement

 

Generation has a threefive year asset-based lending agreement associated with certain upstream gas properties that it owns. The borrowing base committed under the facility is $150$110 million and can increase to a total of $500 million if the assets support a higher borrowing base and Generation is able

335


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

to obtain additional commitments from lenders. The facility was amended and extended through July 2016.January 2019. Borrowings under this facility are secured by the upstream gas properties, and the lenders do not have recourse against Exelon or Generation in the event of a default. As of December 31, 2012, $722013, $77 million was outstanding under the facility with interest payable quarterly. The facility includes a provision that requires the Generation entities that ownowning the upstream gas properties subject to the agreement to maintain a current ratio of one-to-one. As of December 31, 2012,2013, Generation was in compliantcompliance with this provision.

 

330


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

12.14. Income Taxes (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Income tax expense (benefit) from continuing operations is comprised of the following components:

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2013

  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

Included in operations:

      

Federal

      

Current

  $744  $250  $160  $126 ��$9 

Deferred

   140   360   (27  23   100 

Investment tax credit amortization

   (15  (11  (2  (1  (1

State

      

Current

   181   50   50   16   —   

Deferred

   (6  (34  (29  (2  26 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total

  $1,044  $615  $152  $162  $134 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2012

  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE   Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

Included in operations:

            

Federal

            

Current

  $37  $104  $(40 $88  $(97  $37  $104  $(40 $88  $(97

Deferred

   701   326   237   25   101    701   326   237   25   101 

Investment tax credit amortization

   (11  (6  (2  (2  (1   (11  (6  (2  (2  (1

State

            

Current

   (25  (12  6   4   —      (25  (12  6   4   —   

Deferred

   (75  88   38   12   4    (75  88   38   12   4 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total

  $627  $500  $239  $127  $7   $627  $500  $239  $127  $7 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2011

  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE   Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

Included in operations:

            

Federal

            

Current

  $1  $431  $(329 $(71 $(71  $1  $431  $(329 $(71 $(71

Deferred

   1,200   435   544   223   130    1,200   435   544   223   130 

Investment tax credit amortization

   (12  (7  (3  (2  (1   (12  (7  (3  (2  (1

State

            

Current

   (3  74   (123  (37  —      (3  74   (123  (37  —   

Deferred

   271   123   161   33   17    271   123   161   33   17 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total

  $1,457  $1,056  $250  $146  $75   $1,457  $1,056  $250  $146  $75 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2010

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Included in operations:

      

Federal

      

Current

  $506  $372  $(203 $464  $(201

Deferred

   972   635   496   (276  279 

Investment tax credit amortization

   (12  (7  (3  (2  (1

State

      

Current

   171   65   (22  87   (2

Deferred

   21   113   89   (121  22 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total

  $1,658  $1,178  $357  $152  $97 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

331336


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

The effective income tax rate from continuing operations varies from the U.S. Federal statutory rate principally due to the following:

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2013

 Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

U.S. Federal statutory rate

  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%

Increase (decrease) due to:

     

State income taxes, net of Federal income tax benefit

  4.7   1.6   3.4   1.6   4.9 

Qualified nuclear decommissioning trust fund income

  3.7   6.1   —     —     —   

Tax exempt income

  (0.2  (0.3  —     —     —   

Health care reform legislation

  0.1   —     0.7   —     0.2 

Amortization of investment tax credit, net deferred taxes

  (1.9  (3.0  (0.6  (0.1  —   

Production tax credits and other credits

  (2.1  (3.4  (0.1  —     —   

Plant basis differences

  (1.6  —     (0.8  (7.1  (0.2

Other

  (0.1  0.7   0.3   (0.3  (0.9
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Effective income tax rate

  37.6%  36.7%  37.9%  29.1%  39.0%
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2012

 Exelon (a) Generation (a) ComEd PECO BGE (b)  Exelon (a) Generation (a) ComEd PECO BGE (b) 

U.S. Federal statutory rate

  35.0  35.0  35.0  35.0  35.0  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%

Increase (decrease) due to:

          

State income taxes, net of Federal income tax benefit

  (3.6  4.7   4.6   2.0   24.3   (3.6  4.7   4.6   2.0   24.3 

Qualified nuclear decommissioning trust fund income

  5.4    9.1   —     —      —      5.4   9.1   —     —     —   

Tax exempt income

  (0.2  (0.4  —      —      —      (0.2  (0.4  —     —     —   

Health care reform legislation

  0.1   —      0.4   —      11.6   0.1   —     0.4   —     11.6 

Amortization of investment tax credit, net deferred taxes

  (1.1  (1.3  (0.4  (0.3  (8.6  (1.1  (1.3  (0.4  (0.3  (8.6

Production tax credits and other credits

  (2.2  (3.7  —      —      —      (2.2  (3.7  —     —     —   

Plant basis differences

  (2.4  —      (0.3  (11.5  (9.0  (2.4  —     (0.3  (11.5  (9.0

Merger expenses (c)

  2.4   —      —      —      24.2   2.4   —     —     —     24.2 

Fines and Penalties

  2.6   4.4   —      —      —      2.6   4.4   —     —     —   

Other

  (1.1  (0.5  (0.6  (0.2  (13.9  (1.1  (0.5  (0.6  (0.2  (13.9
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Effective income tax rate

  34.9  47.3  38.7  25.0  63.6  34.9%  47.3%  38.7%  25.0%  63.6%
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2011

 Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE (b) 

U.S. Federal statutory rate

  35.0  35.0  35.0  35.0  35.0  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%

Increase (decrease) due to:

          

State income taxes, net of Federal income tax benefit

  4.4   4.5   3.6   (0.5  5.2   4.4   4.5   3.6   (0.5  5.2 

Qualified nuclear decommissioning trust fund income

  0.5   0.7   —      —      —      0.5   0.7   —     —     —   

Domestic production activities deduction

  (0.3  (0.4  —      —      —      (0.3  (0.4  —     —     —   

Tax exempt income

  (0.2  (0.2  —      —      —      (0.2  (0.2  —     —     —   

Health care reform legislation

  (0.2  —      (1.0  —      (0.5  (0.2  —     (1.0  —     (0.5

Amortization of investment tax credit

  (0.3  (0.3  (0.4  (0.3  (0.5  (0.3  (0.3  (0.4  (0.3  (0.5

Production tax credits

  (0.9  (1.2  —      —      —      (0.9  (1.2  —     —     —   

Plant basis differences

  (1.0  —      (0.3  (6.9  (2.0  (1.0  —     (0.3  (6.9  (2.0

Other

  (0.2  (0.7  0.6   —      (1.7  (0.2  (0.7  0.6   —     (1.7
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Effective income tax rate

  36.8  37.4  37.5  27.3  35.5  36.8%  37.4%  37.5%  27.3%  35.5%
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2010

 Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

U.S. Federal statutory rate

  35.0  35.0  35.0  35.0  35.0

Increase (decrease) due to:

     

State income taxes, net of Federal income tax benefit

  3.0   3.7   6.3   (4.7  5.5 

Qualified nuclear decommissioning trust fund income

  1.7   2.3   —     —     —   

Domestic production activities deduction

  (1.2  (1.5  —     —     —   

Tax exempt income

  (0.1  (0.2  —     —     —   

Health care reform legislation

  1.4   0.7   1.4   1.6   1.1 

Amortization of investment tax credit

  (0.3  (0.2  (0.4  (0.4  (0.4

Plant basis differences

  —     —     (0.1  0.2   (1.0

Uncertain tax position remeasurement

  —     (2.0  9.0   —     —   

Other

  (0.2  (0.4  0.2   0.2   (0.4
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Effective income tax rate

  39.3  37.4  51.4  31.9  39.8
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

332337


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

 

(a)Exelon activity for the twelve months ended December 31, 2012 includes the results of Constellation and BGE for March 12, 2012—December 31, 2012. Generation activity for the twelve months ended December 31, 2012 includes the results of Constellation for March 12, 2012—December 31, 2012.
(b)BGE activity represents the activity for the twelve months ended December 31, 2012 2011 and 2010.2011.
(c)Prior to the close of the merger, the Registrants recorded the applicable taxes on merger transaction costs assuming the merger would not be completed. Upon closing of the merger, the Registrants reversed such taxes for those merger transaction costs that were determined to be non tax-deductible upon successful completion of a merger.

 

The tax effects of temporary differences and carryforwards, which give rise to significant portions of the deferred tax assets (liabilities), as of December 31, 20122013 and 20112012 are presented below:

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2012

  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2013

  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

Plant basis differences

  $(10,689 $(3,545 $(3,537 $(2,437 $(1,553  $(11,612 $(3,879 $(3,523 $(2,573 $(1,538

Accrual based contracts

   (389  (389  —     —      —       (214  (214  —     —     —   

Derivatives and other financial instruments

   (392  (479  (4  —      —       (509  (505  (4  —     —   

Deferred pension and post-retirement obligation

   1,225   (439  (598  (11  (12   1,489    (362  (522  —     (74

Nuclear decommissioning activities

   (604  (604  —      —      —       (647  (646  —     —     —   

Deferred debt refinancing costs

   (537  163   (25  (4  (4   173    79   (21  (3  (5

Regulatory

   (1,611  —     (241  42   (253

Tax loss carryforward

   421   226   32   14   105    252   76   47   11   52 

Tax credit carryforward

   226   226   —      —      —       534   534   —     —     —   

Investment in CENG

   (405  (419  —      —      —       (541  (541  —     —     —   

Other, net

   (25  9   (33  150   (186   804   67   154   122   26 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Deferred income tax liabilities (net)

  $(11,169 $(5,251 $(4,165 $(2,288 $(1,650  $(11,882 $(5,391 $(4,110 $(2,401 $(1,792

Unamortized investment tax credits

   (251  (216  (24  (3  (6   (490  (454  (22  (3  (6
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total deferred income tax liabilities (net) and unamortized investment tax credits

  $(11,420 $(5,467 $(4,189 $(2,291 $(1,656  $(12,372 $(5,845 $(4,132 $(2,404 $(1,798
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2012

  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

Plant basis differences

  $(10,689 $(3,545 $(3,537 $(2,437 $(1,553

Accrual based contracts

   (389  (389  —     —     —   

Derivatives and other financial instruments

   (392  (479  (4  —     —   

Deferred pension and post-retirement obligation

   2,356    (439  (598  (11  (12

Nuclear decommissioning activities

   (604  (604  —     —     —   

Deferred debt refinancing costs

   (537  163   (25  (4  (4

Regulatory

   (1,857  —      (116  50    (253

Tax loss carryforward

   421   226   32   14   105 

Tax credit carryforward

   226   226   —     —     —   

Investment in CENG

   (405  (419  —     —     —   

Other, net

   701    9   83    100    67  
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Deferred income tax liabilities (net)

  $(11,169 $(5,251 $(4,165 $(2,288 $(1,650

Unamortized investment tax credits

   (251  (216  (24  (3  (6
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total deferred income tax liabilities (net) and unamortized investment tax credits

  $(11,420 $(5,467 $(4,189 $(2,291 $(1,656
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2011

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Plant basis differences

  $(7,803 $(2,670 $(3,264 $(2,238 $(1,220

Unrealized gains on derivative financial instruments

   (468  (737  (4  —      —    

Deferred pension and post-retirement obligation

   665   (520  (623  (31  (93

Nuclear decommissioning activities

   (452  (452  —      —      —    

Deferred debt refinancing costs

   (37  —      (31  (6  (4

Other, net

   41   338   16   135   (226
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Deferred income tax liabilities (net)

  $(8,054 $(4,041 $(3,906 $(2,140 $(1,543

Unamortized investment tax credits

   (200  (169  (26  (5  (8
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total deferred income tax liabilities (net) and unamortized investment tax credits

  $(8,254 $(4,210 $(3,932 $(2,145 $(1,551
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

333338


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

The following table provides the Registrants’ carryforwards and any corresponding valuation allowances as of December 31, 2012.2013.

 

  Exelon Generation ComEd   PECO BGE   Exelon Generation ComEd   PECO BGE 

Federal

              

Federal net operating loss

  $635(a)  $303  $91   $—     $154   $377(a)  $36  $139   $—    $31 

Federal capital loss carryforward

   178(b)   178   —       —      —    

Deferred taxes on Federal net operating loss

   132    13    49     —      11  

Federal general business credits carryforward

   226(c)   226   —       —      —       556(b)   556   —      —     —   

State

              

State net operating loss

   3,365(d)   1,649(f)   —       209(h)   950(i) 

State capital loss carryforward

   127(e)   119(g)   —       —      —    

State net operating losses and other credit carryforwards

   3,061(c)   1,498(d)   —      167(e)   768(f) 

Deferred taxes on state tax attributes (net)

   187   99   —       14   51    161   82   —      11   41 

Valuation allowance on state tax attributes

   36   35   —       —      1    13   11   —      —     1 

 

(a)Exelon’s federal net operating loss will expire beginning in 20332031
(b)Exelon’s federal capital loss carryforwards will expire beginning in 2018
(c)Exelon’s federal general business credit carryforwards will expire beginning in 20332032
(d)(c)Exelon’s state net operating losses and other carryforwards, which are presented on a post-apportioned basis, will expire beginning in 2014
(e)Exelon’s state capital loss carryforwards will expire beginning in 2018
(f)(d)Generation’s state net operating losses and other carryforwards, which are presented on a post-apportioned basis, will expire beginning in 2014
(g)Generation’s state capital loss carryforwards will expire beginning in 2018
(h)(e)PECO’s state net operating losses will expire beginning in 20322031
(i)(f)BGE’s state net operating losses will expire beginning in 2026

 

Tabular reconciliation of unrecognized tax benefits

 

The following table provides a reconciliation of the Registrants’ unrecognized tax benefits as of December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010:2011:

 

 Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

Unrecognized tax benefits at January 1, 2013

 $1,024  $876  $67  $44  $—   

Increases based on tax positions related to 2013

  19   19   —     —     —   

Change to positions that only affect timing

  649   36   257   —     —   

Increases based on tax positions prior to 2013

  493   493   —     —     —   

Decreases based on tax positions prior to 2013

  (6  (5  —     —     —   

Decreases from expiration of statute of limitations

  (4  (4  —     —     —   
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 2013

 $2,175  $1,415  $324  $44  $—   
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 
  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

Unrecognized tax benefits at January 1, 2012

  $807  $683  $70  $48  $11  $807  $683  $70  $48  $11 

Merger Balance Transfer

   195   183   —      —      —      195   183   —     —     —   

Increases based on tax positions related to 2012

   34   3   —      —      —      34   3   —     —     —   

Change to positions that only affect timing

   (88  (69  (3  (4  (11  (88  (69  (3  (4  (11

Increases based on tax positions prior to 2012

   91   91   —      —      —      91   91   —     —     —   

Decreases based on tax positions prior to 2012

   (6  (6  —      —      —      (6  (6  —     —     —   

Decreases related to settlements with taxing authorities

   (2  (2  —      —      —      (2  (2  —     —     —   

Decreases from expiration of statute of limitations

   (7  (7  —      —      —      (7  (7  —     —     —   
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 2012

  $1,024  $876  $67  $44  $ —     $1,024  $876  $67  $44  $—   
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 
  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

Unrecognized tax benefits at January 1, 2011

  $787  $664  $72  $44  $73 

Increases based on tax positions related to 2011

   5   1   —      4   —    

Change to positions that only affect timing

   21   24   (2  —      (62

Decreases based on tax positions prior to 2011

   (3  (3  —      —      —    

Decrease from expiration of statute of limitations

   (3  (3  —      —      —    
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 2011

  $807  $683  $70  $48  $11 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

334339


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

   Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Unrecognized tax benefits at January 1, 2010

  $1,498  $633  $471  $372  $112 

Increases based on tax positions related to 2010

   1   —      —      —      —    

Decreases based on tax positions related to 2010

   (2  (2  —      —      —    

Change to positions that only affect timing

   (262  55   (3  (328  (39

Increases based on tax positions prior to 2010

   8   8   —      —      —    

Decreases based on tax positions prior to 2010

   (3  (3  —      —      —    

Decreases related to settlements with taxing authorities

   (452  (26  (396  —      —    

Decrease from expiration of statute of limitations

   (1  (1  —      —      —    
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 2010

  $787  $664  $72  $44  $73 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Unrecognized tax benefits at January 1, 2011

 $787  $664  $72  $44  $73 

Increases based on tax positions related to 2011

  5   1   —     4   —   

Change to positions that only affect timing

  21   24   (2  —     (62

Decreases based on tax positions prior to 2011

  (3  (3  —     —     —   

Decrease from expiration of statute of limitations

  (3  (3  —     —     —   
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 2011

 $807  $683  $70  $48  $11 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

Included in Exelon’s unrecognized tax benefits balance at December 31, 20122013 and 20112012 are approximately $730$1,387 million and $804$730 million, respectively, of tax positions for which the ultimate tax benefit is highly certain, but for which there is uncertainty about the timing of such benefits. The disallowance of such positions would not materially affect the annual effective tax rate but would accelerate the payment of cash to, or defer the receipt of the cash tax benefit from, the taxing authority to an earlier or later period respectively.

 

Unrecognized tax benefits that if recognized would affect the effective tax rate

 

Exelon and Generation have $788 million and $768 million, respectively, of unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 2013 that, if recognized, would decrease the effective tax rate. Exelon and Generation had $294 million and $263 million, respectively, of unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 2012 that, if recognized, would decrease the effective tax rate. Exelon and Generation had $3 million and $3 million, respectively, of unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 2011 that, if recognized, would decrease the effective tax rate.

Total amounts of interest and penalties recognized

The following table represents the net interest receivable (payable), including interest related to uncertain tax positions reflected in the Registrants’ Consolidated Balance Sheets. Prior to the merger legacy Constellation recorded interest related to uncertain tax positions as a tax and not interest.

Net interest receivable (payable) as of

  Exelon   Generation  ComEd   PECO   BGE 

December 31, 2012

  $31   $(20 $107   $2   $—   

December 31, 2011

   74    33   23    28    (1

The following table sets forth the net interest expense, including interest related to uncertain tax positions, recognized in interest expense (income) in other income and deductions in the Registrants’ Consolidated Statements of Operations. The Registrants have not accrued any penalties with respect to uncertain tax positions. Prior to the merger legacy Constellation recorded interest related to uncertain tax positions as a tax and not interest.

Net interest expense (income) for the years ended

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

December 31, 2012

  $(1) $11  $(20 $(1 $9 

December 31, 2011

   (56  (40  (14  (1  (3

December 31, 2010

   110   6   57   35   2 

335


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Reasonably possible that total amount of unrecognized tax benefits could significantly increase or decrease within 12 months after the reporting date

 

Nuclear Decommissioning Liabilities (Exelon and Generation)

 

AmerGen filed income tax refund claims taking the position that nuclear decommissioning liabilities assumed as part of its acquisition of nuclear power plants are taken into account in determining the tax basis in the assets it acquired. The additional basis results primarily in reduced capital gains or increased capital losses on the sale of assets in nonqualified decommissioning funds and increased tax depreciation and amortization deductions. The IRS disagrees with this position and has disallowed the claims. In November 2008, Generation received a final determination from the Appeals division of the IRS (IRS Appeals) disallowing AmerGen’s refund claims. On February 20, 2009, Generation filed a complaint in the United States Court of Federal Claims on February 20, 2009 to contest this determination. In August 2009,During the first and second quarters of 2013, AmerGen and the DOJ completed and filed its answercross motions for summary judgment. On September 17, 2013, the Court granted the government’s motion denying AmerGen’s claims for refund. Exelon is expecting to appeal this decision to the allegations made by Generation in its complaint. WhileUnited States Court of Appeals for the discovery phase of the litigation has been completed, no trial date has yet been assigned but could occur sometime in 2013.Federal Circuit during 2014.

 

During 2012, the parties agreed to take advantage of the court’s Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) program in an effort to resolve the dispute. The court’s ADR program provides a confidential and non-binding mediation process that tries to facilitate settlements. The parties participated in mediation discussions late in 2012 and these discussions are currently ongoing. Due to the possibility of quickerfinal resolution through the ADR program,an appellate decision, Generation believescontinues to believe that it is reasonably possible that the total amount of unrecognized tax benefits maywill significantly decrease in the next twelve months.

 

StateSettlement of Income TaxesTax Audits and Litigation

 

As of December 31, 2013, Exelon and Generation hashad approximately $100$256 million of other federal and state unrecognized tax benefits relatedthat could significantly increase or decrease within the 12 months

340


Combined Notes to variousConsolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

after the reporting date as a result of completing federal and state incomeaudits and expected statute of limitation expirations that if recognized would decrease the effective tax return positions for which it is reasonably possible therate. In January 2014, certain of these unrecognized tax benefits could significantly change within 12 months due towere effectively settled and thus will result in reduced tax expense of $33 million at Generation in the expirationfirst quarter of statutes of limitation or settlements with the state taxing authorities. Furthermore, Generation has approximately $55 million of unrecognized tax benefits related to state income tax refund claims that are currently being litigated. It is reasonably possible the unrecognized tax benefits of $55 million would decrease within 12 months.2014.

 

See Other Tax Matters—Involuntary Conversion, Like Kind Exchange and Competitive Transition Charges section below for information regarding the amount of unrecognized tax benefits associated with this matter that could change significantly within the next 12 months.

 

Total amounts of interest and penalties recognized

The following table represents the net interest receivable (payable), including interest related to uncertain tax positions reflected in the Registrants’ Consolidated Balance Sheets. Prior to the merger legacy Constellation recorded interest related to uncertain tax positions as a tax and not interest.

Net interest receivable (payable) as of

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO   BGE 

December 31, 2013

  $(349 $(37 $(174 $3   $—   

December 31, 2012

   31   (20  107   2    —   

The following table sets forth the net interest expense, including interest related to uncertain tax positions, recognized in interest expense (income) in other income and deductions in the Registrants’ Consolidated Statements of Operations. The Registrants have not accrued any penalties with respect to uncertain tax positions. Prior to the merger legacy Constellation recorded interest related to uncertain tax positions as a tax and not interest.

Net interest expense (income) for the years ended

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

December 31, 2013

  $391  $17  $281  $(1 $—   

December 31, 2012

   (1  11   (20  (1  9 

December 31, 2011

   (56  (40  (14  (1  (3

Description of tax years that remain subjectopen to examinationassessment by major jurisdiction

 

Taxpayer

  Open Years 

Exelon (and predecessors) and subsidiaries consolidated Federal income tax returns

   1999 - 20111999-2012  

Constellation and subsidiaries consolidated Federal income tax returns

   2005 - March2009-March 2012  

Exelon and subsidiaries Illinois unitary income tax returns

   2007 - 20112007-2012  

Constellation combined New York corporate income tax returns

   2008 - March 20122008-2012  

Various separate company Pennsylvania corporate net income tax returns

   2008 - March 20122008-2012  

Various separate companyBGE Maryland corporateCorporate net income tax returns

   2005 - March 20122004-2007, 2009-2012

Various other (Non-BGE) Maryland Corporate net income tax returns

2009-2012  

336


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Other Tax Matters

 

Involuntary Conversion, Like-Kind Exchange and Competitive Transition Charges

 

1999 Sale of Fossil Generating Assets (Exelon and ComEd).Exelon, through its ComEd subsidiary, took two positionsa position on its 1999 income tax return to defer approximately $2.8 billion of tax gain on the sale of ComEd’s fossil generating assets. Exelon deferred approximately $1.6 billion of the gain under the involuntary conversion provisions of the IRC. Exelon believed that it was economically compelled to dispose of ComEd’s fossil generating plants as a result of the Illinois Act and that the proceeds from the sale of the fossil plants were properly reinvested in qualifying replacement property such that the gain could be deferred over the lives of the replacement property under the involuntary conversion provisions. The remaining approximately $1.2 billion of the gain was deferred by reinvesting the proceeds from the sale in qualifying replacement property under the like-kind exchange provisions of the IRC. The like-kind exchange replacement property purchased by

341


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Exelon included interests in three municipal-owned electric generation facilities which were properly leased back to the municipalities. The IRS disagreed with both positionsthis position and asserted that the entire gain of approximately $2.8 billion was taxable in 1999.

 

Competitive Transition Charges (Exelon, ComEd, and PECO). Exelon contended that the Illinois Act and the Competition Act resulted in the taking of certain of ComEd’s and PECO’s assets used in their respective businesses of providing electricity services in their defined service areas. Exelon filed refund claims with the IRS taking the position that CTCs collected during ComEd’s and PECO’s transition periods represent compensation for that taking and, accordingly, were excludible from taxable income as proceeds from an involuntary conversion. The tax basis of property acquired with the funds provided by the CTCs would be reduced such that the benefits of the position are temporary in nature. The IRS disallowed the refund claims for the 1999-2001 tax years.

Status of Involuntary Conversion and CTC Positions. In the second quarter of 2010, the IRS offered to settle the disagreement over the involuntary conversion and CTC positions. Exelon concluded, based on that offer, that it had sufficient new information that a remeasurement of the involuntary conversion and CTC positions was required in accordance with applicable accounting standards. As a result of the required remeasurement, Exelon recorded $65 million (after-tax) of interest expense, of which $36 million (after-tax) and $22 million (after-tax) were recorded at ComEd and PECO, respectively. ComEd also recorded a current tax expense of $70 million offset with a tax benefit recorded at Generation of $70 million. In the third quarter of 2010, Exelon and the IRS reached a nonbinding, preliminary agreement to settle Exelon’s involuntary conversion on terms consistent with the settlement offer received in the second quarter. As a result of the preliminary agreement, Exelon and ComEd eliminated any liability for unrecognized tax benefits and established a current tax payable to the IRS. In November 2012, the IRS and Exelon finalized and executed definitive agreements to resolve Exelon’s involuntary conversion and CTC positions. Exelon paid $302 million in late 2010 in advance of the final settlement and the assessment.

Status of Like-Kind Exchange Position.Exelon has been unable to reach agreement with the IRS regarding the dispute over the like kind exchange position.

The IRS has asserted that the Exelon purchase and leaseback transaction is substantially similar to a leasing transaction, known as a SILO, which the IRS does not respect as the acquisition of an ownership interest in property. A SILO is a “listed transaction” that the IRS has identified as a potentially abusive tax shelter under guidance issued in 2005. Accordingly, the IRS has asserted that the sale of the fossil plants followed by the purchase and leaseback of the municipal owned generation

337


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

facilities does not qualify as a like-kind exchange and the gain on the sale is fully subject to tax. The IRS has also asserted a penalty of approximately $86$87 million for a substantial understatement of tax.

 

Exelon disagrees with the IRS and continues to believe that its like-kind exchange transaction is not the same as or substantially similar to a SILO. Exelon expects to initiate litigation in 2013 to contest the IRS’s disallowance of the like-kind exchange position. Although Exelon has been and remains willing to settle the disagreement on terms commensurate with the hazards of litigation, as of December 31, 2012, Exelon does not believe a settlement is possible. Because Exelon believed, as of December 31, 2012, that it was more-likely-than-not that Exelon would prevail in litigation, Exelon and ComEd had no liability for unrecognized tax benefits with respect to the like kindlike-kind exchange position.

 

On January 9, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the U.S. Court of Federal Claims and reached a decision for the government in Consolidated Edison v. United States. The Court disallowed Consolidated Edison’s deductions stemming from its participation in a LILO transaction that the IRS also has characterized as a tax shelter.

 

In accordance with applicable accounting standards, Exelon is required to assess whether it is more-likely-than-not that it will prevail in litigation. Exelon continues to believe that its transaction is not a SILO and that it has a strong case on the merits. However, in light of the Consolidated Edison decision and Exelon’s current determination that settlement is unlikely, Exelon has concluded that subsequent to December 31, 2012, it is no longer meets the more-likely-than-not standard.that its position will be sustained. As a result, Exelon expects to record in the first quarter of 2013, Exelon recorded a non-cash charge to earnings of approximately $270$265 million, which represents the full amount of interest expense (after-tax) and incremental state income tax expense for periods through March 31, 2013 that would be payable in the event that Exelon is unsuccessful in litigation. Of this amount, approximately $185$170 million will bewas recorded at ComEd. Exelon intends to hold ComEd harmless from any unfavorable impacts of the after-tax interest amounts on ComEd’s equity. As such, ComEd recorded on its consolidated balance sheet as of March 31, 2013, a $172 million receivable and the balance atnon-cash equity contributions from Exelon. Exelon and ComEd will continue to accrue interest on the uncertain tax position, and the charges arising from future interest accruals are not expected to be material to the annual operating earnings of Exelon or ComEd. Further, Exelon intends to hold ComEd harmless from any unfavorable impacts of the after-tax interest amounts on ComEd’s equity. As a result of this hold harmless agreement,In addition ComEd will continue to record on its consolidated balance sheet non-cash equity contributions from Exelon in the amount of the net after-tax interest charges attributable to ComEd in connection with the like-kind exchange position. The IRS also continues to assert an $86 million penalty for a substantial understatement of tax with respect to the like-kind exchange position. Exelon continues to believe that it is unlikely that the $87 million penalty assertion will ultimately be sustained and therefore no liability for the penalty has been recorded.

 

This determinationOn September 30, 2013, the Internal Revenue Service issued a notice of deficiency to Exelon for accounting purposes does not alter Exelon’s intentthe like-kind exchange position. Exelon filed a petition on December 13, 2013 to aggressively litigate the issue through appeals, if necessary, which could take three to five years. Exelon currently expects to initiate the litigation in the United States Tax Court. Exelon was not required to remit any part of the asserted tax or penalty in order to litigate the issue. The litigation could take three to five years including appeals, if necessary. Decisions in the Tax Court whose decisions are not controlled by the Federal Circuit’s decision in Consolidated Edison.

342


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

As of MarchDecember 31, 2013, in the event of a fully successful IRS challenge to Exelon’s like-kind exchange position, the potential tax and after-tax interest, exclusive of penalties, that could become currently payable may be as much as $860$840 million, of which approximately $320$305 million would be attributable to ComEd after consideration of Exelon’s agreement to hold ComEd harmless, and the balance at Exelon. Litigation could take several years such that the estimated cash and interest impacts would likely change by a material amount.

338


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Accounting for Generation Repairs (Exelon and Generation)

 

In 2009, Exelon received approval fromOn April 30, 2013, the IRS issued Revenue Procedure 2013-24 providing guidance for determining the appropriate tax treatment of costs incurred to repair electric generation assets. Generation expects to change its method of accounting for repair costs associateddeducting repairs in accordance with Generation’s power plants. Although the IRS granted Exelon approval to changethis guidance beginning with its method of accounting, the approval did not affirm the methodology used to calculate the deduction. In the second quarter of 2010, Exelon was informed2014 tax year. Generation has estimated that the IRS intended to issue broad industry guidance with respect to electric generation power plants. In anticipationadoption of the issuance of this guidance, the IRS provided notice to Exelon in the third quarter of 2012 that it intended to apply the principles of Large Business & Industry Directive No. 4-0312-004, thereby deferring auditing Generation’s repair deductions until after issuance of the industry guidance and after Exelon has had an opportunity to change its accountingnew method to conform to that new guidance. As awill result in the third quartera cash tax detriment of 2012, Exelon reduced its unrecognized tax benefits by approximately $107 million with an offsetting increase to its deferred tax liabilities and no net impact on results of operations.

The IRS is expected to issue industry guidance during 2013. Exelon and Generation will then determine the financial statement impacts of the generation repair costs accounting method change.

2011 Illinois State Tax Rate Legislation (Exelon, Generation and ComEd)

The Taxpayer Accountability and Budget Stabilization Act, (SB 2505), enacted into law in Illinois on January 13, 2011, increases the corporate tax rate in Illinois from 7.3% to 9.5% for tax years 2011 – 2014, provides for a reduction in the rate from 9.5% to 7.75% for tax years 2015 – 2024 and further reduces the rate from 7.75% to 7.3% for tax years 2025 and thereafter. Pursuant to the rate change, Exelon reevaluated its deferred state income taxes during the first quarter of 2011. Illinois’ corporate income tax rate changes resulted in a charge to state deferred taxes (net of Federal taxes) during the first quarter of 2011 of $7 million, $11 million and $4 million for Exelon, Generation and ComEd, respectively. Exelon’s and ComEd’s charge is net of a regulatory asset of $15$100 - $120 million.

In 2011, the income tax rate change increased Exelon’s Illinois income tax provision (net of Federal taxes) by approximately $7 million, of which $12 million and $5 million of additional tax relates to Exelon Corporate and Generation, respectively, and a $10 million benefit for ComEd. The 2011 tax benefit at ComEd reflects the impact of a 2011 tax net operating loss generated primarily by the bonus depreciation deduction allowed under the Tax Relief Act of 2010 and the electric transmission and distribution property repairs deduction discussed below.

Long-Term State Tax Apportionment (Exelon and Generation)

Exelon and Generation periodically review events that may significantly impact how income is apportioned among the states and, therefore, the calculation of Exelon’s and Generation’s deferred state income taxes. In 2010, the Registrants performed a review of the long-term state tax rates and noted no significant events that would materially impact state apportionment. As such, there was no update to the long-term state apportionment rates in 2010. In 2011 as a result of the 2011 Illinois State Tax Rate Legislation discussed above, Exelon and Generation re-evaluated their long-term state tax apportionment for Illinois and all other states where they have state income tax obligations. The effect of revising the long-term state tax apportionment resulted in the recording of a deferred state tax expense during the first quarter of 2011 of $22 million and $11 million (net of Federal taxes) for Exelon and Generation, respectively. The long-term state tax apportionment also was revised in the fourth quarter of 2011 pursuant to long-term state tax apportionment policy, resulting in recording an additional deferred state tax expense of $1 million and a deferred state tax benefit of $8 million (net of Federal taxes) for Exelon and Generation, respectively.

339


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

As a result of the merger with Constellation, Exelon and Generation reevaluated their long-term state tax apportionment in the first quarter of 2012 for all states where they have state income tax obligations, which include Illinois, Maryland and Pennsylvania, as well as other states. The total effect of revising the long-term state tax apportionment resulted in the recording of a deferred state tax asset of $72 million (net of Federal taxes) for Exelon. Of this, a benefit in the amount of $116 million and $14 million (net of Federal taxes) was recorded for Exelon and Generation, respectively, for the three months ended March 31, 2012. Further, Exelon and Generation recorded deferred state tax liabilities of $44 million and $14 million (net of Federal taxes), respectively, as part of purchase accounting during the three months ended March 31, 2012. The long-term state tax apportionment also was updated in the fourth quarter of 2012, resulting in the recording of a deferred state tax benefit of $3 million (net of Federal taxes) for Exelon, and a deferred state tax expense of $7 million (net of Federal taxes) for Generation. There was no change to the long-term state tax apportionment for BGE, ComEd and PECO.

 

Accounting for Electric Transmission and Distribution Property Repairs (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

On August 19, 2011, the IRS issued Revenue Procedure 2011-43 providing a safe harbor method of tax accounting for repair costs associated with electric transmission and distribution property. ComEd and PECO adopted the safe harbor in the Revenue Procedure for the 2011 and 2010 tax years, respectively. For the year ended December 31, 2011, the adoption of the safe harbor resulted in a $35 million reduction to income tax expense at PECO, while Generation incurred additional income tax expense in the amount of $28 million due to a decrease in its manufacturer’sdomestic production activities deduction, which are reflected in the effective income tax rate reconciliation above in the plant basis differences and domestic production activities deduction lines, respectively. For Exelon, the adoption had a minimal effect on consolidated earnings. In addition, the adoption of the safe harbor resulted in a cash tax benefit at Exelon, ComEd and PECO in the amount of approximately $300 million, $250 million, $95 million respectively, partially offset by a cash tax detriment at Generation in the amount of $28 million related to a decreased domestic production activities deduction.

 

BGE adopted the safe harbor for the short period 2012 pre-merger tax year. For the year ended December 31, 2012, the adoption of the safe harbor resulted in a cash tax benefit at BGE in the amount of $27 million.

 

See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for discussion of the regulatory treatment prescribed in the 2010 electric distribution rate case settlement for PECO’s cash tax benefit resulting from the application of the method change to years prior to 2010.

 

Accounting for Gas Distribution Property Repairs (Exelon, PECO and BGE).

 

In September 2012, PECO filed an application with the IRS to change its method of accounting for gas distribution repairs for the 2011 tax year. The change to the newly adopted method for the 2011 tax year and 2012 resulted in a tax benefit of $26 million at Exelon, of which $29 million in tax benefit is recorded at PECO, partially offset by an expense recorded at Generation to reflect a reduction in its domestic production activities deduction. BGE changed its method of accounting for gas distribution repairs for the 2008 tax year. The IRS is expected to issue industry guidance during 2013.in the near future. Exelon, PECO and BGE will then determine the financial statement impacts of the gas distribution repair costs accounting method changes.changes after guidance is issued.

 

340343


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Accounting for Final Tangible Property Regulations (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO, and BGE)

On September 19, 2013, the Treasury Department and the IRS published final regulations regarding the tax treatment of costs incurred to acquire, produce, or improve tangible property. The Registrants have assessed the financial impact of this guidance and do not expect it to have a material impact. Any changes in method of accounting required to conform to the final regulations will be made for the Registrant’s 2014 taxable year.

2011 Illinois State Tax Rate Legislation (Exelon, Generation and ComEd)

The Taxpayer Accountability and Budget Stabilization Act, (SB 2505), enacted into law in Illinois on January 13, 2011, increases the corporate tax rate in Illinois from 7.3% to 9.5% for tax years 2011—2014, provides for a reduction in the rate from 9.5% to 7.75% for tax years 2015—2024 and further reduces the rate from 7.75% to 7.3% for tax years 2025 and thereafter. Pursuant to the rate change, Exelon re-evaluated its deferred state income taxes during the first quarter of 2011. Illinois’ corporate income tax rate changes resulted in a charge to state deferred taxes (net of Federal taxes) during the first quarter of 2011 of $7 million, $11 million and $4 million for Exelon, Generation and ComEd, respectively. Exelon’s and ComEd’s charge is net of a regulatory asset of $15 million.

In 2011, the income tax rate change increased Exelon’s Illinois income tax provision (net of Federal taxes) by approximately $7 million, of which $12 million and $5 million of additional tax relates to Exelon Corporate and Generation, respectively, and a $10 million benefit for ComEd. The 2011 tax benefit at ComEd reflects the impact of a 2011 tax net operating loss generated primarily by the bonus depreciation deduction allowed under the Tax Relief Act of 2010 and the electric transmission and distribution property repairs deduction discussed below.

Long-Term State Tax Apportionment (Exelon and Generation)

Exelon and Generation periodically review events that may significantly impact how income is apportioned among the states and, therefore, the calculation of Exelon’s and Generation’s deferred state income taxes. In 2011 as a result of the 2011 Illinois State Tax Rate Legislation discussed above, Exelon and Generation re-evaluated their long-term state tax apportionment for Illinois and all other states where they have state income tax obligations, resulting in recording a deferred state tax expense during the first quarter of 2011 of $22 million and $11 million (net of Federal taxes) for Exelon and Generation, respectively. The long-term state tax apportionment also was revised in the fourth quarter of 2011 pursuant to long-term state tax apportionment policy, resulting in recording an additional deferred state tax expense of $1 million and a deferred state tax benefit of $8 million (net of Federal taxes) for Exelon and Generation, respectively.

As a result of the merger with Constellation, Exelon and Generation re-evaluated their long-term state tax apportionment in the first quarter of 2012. The total effect of revising the long-term state tax apportionment resulted in the recording of a deferred state tax asset of $72 million (net of Federal taxes) for Exelon. Of this, a benefit in the amount of $116 million and $14 million (net of Federal taxes) was recorded for Exelon and Generation, respectively, for the three months ended March 31, 2012. Further, Exelon and Generation recorded deferred state tax liabilities of $44 million and $14 million (net of Federal taxes), respectively, as part of purchase accounting during the three months ended March 31, 2012. The long-term state tax apportionment also was updated in the fourth quarter of 2012, resulting in the recording of a deferred state tax benefit of $3 million (net of Federal taxes) for Exelon, and a deferred state tax expense of $7 million (net of Federal taxes) for Generation. There was no change to the long-term state tax apportionment for BGE, ComEd and PECO.

344


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

The long-term state tax apportionment was revised in the fourth quarter of 2013 pursuant to its long-term state tax apportionment policy, resulting in the recording of amounts that are immaterial for Exelon and Generation, respectively.

 

Allocation of Tax Benefits (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Generation, ComEd, PECO and PECOBGE are all party to an agreement with Exelon and other subsidiaries of Exelon that provides for the allocation of consolidated tax liabilities and benefits (Tax Sharing Agreement). The Tax Sharing Agreement provides that each party is allocated an amount of tax similar to that which would be owed had the party been separately subject to tax. In addition, any net benefit attributable to Exelon is reallocated to the other Registrants. That allocation is treated as a contribution to the capital of the party receiving the benefit. During 2013, Generation and PECO recorded an allocation of Federal tax benefits from Exelon under the Tax Sharing Agreement of $26 million and $27 million, respectively. During 2013, ComEd and BGE did not record an allocation of Federal tax benefits from Exelon under the Tax Sharing Agreement as a result of ComEd’s and BGE’s 2013 tax net operating loss generated primarily by the bonus depreciation deduction allowed under the Tax Relief Act of 2010. During 2012, Generation and PECO recorded an allocation of Federal tax benefits from Exelon under the Tax Sharing Agreement of $48 million and $9 million, respectively. During 2012, ComEd and BGE did not record an allocation of Federal tax benefits from Exelon under the Tax Sharing Agreement as a result of ComEd’s and BGE’s 2012 tax net operating loss generated primarily by the bonus depreciation deduction allowed under the Tax Relief Act of 2010. During 2011, Generation and PECO recorded an allocation of Federal tax benefits from Exelon under the Tax Sharing Agreement of $30 million and $18 million, respectively. During 2011, ComEd did not record an allocation of Federal tax benefits from Exelon under the Tax Sharing Agreement as a result of ComEd’s 2011 tax net operating loss generated primarily by the bonus depreciation deduction allowed under the Tax Relief Act of 2010 and the electric transmission and distribution property repairs deduction discussed above. During 2010, Generation, ComEd and PECO recorded an allocation of Federal tax benefits from Exelon under the Tax Sharing Agreement of $60 million, $2 million and $43 million, respectively.

 

ComEd received a non-cash contribution to equity from Exelon in 2012 and 2011 of $11, million and $11 million, respectively, related to tax benefits associated with capital projects constructed by ComEd on behalf of Exelon and Generation.

 

13.15. Asset Retirement Obligations (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Nuclear Decommissioning Asset Retirement Obligations

 

Generation has a legal obligation to decommission its nuclear power plants following the expiration of their operating licenses. To estimate its decommissioning obligation related to its nuclear generating stations for financial accounting and reporting purposes, Generation uses a probability-weighted, discounted cash flow model which, on a unit-by-unit basis, considers multiple outcome scenarios that include significant estimates and assumptions, and are based on decommissioning cost studies, cost escalation rates, probabilistic cash flow models and discount rates. Generation generally updates its ARO annually during the third quarter, unless circumstances warrant more frequent updates, based on its review of updated cost studies and its annual evaluation of cost escalation factors and probabilities assigned to various scenarios.

 

341345


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

The following table provides a rollforward of the nuclear decommissioning ARO reflected on Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets, from January 1, 20112012 to December 31, 2012:2013:

 

  Exelon and
Generation
   Exelon and
Generation
 

Nuclear decommissioning ARO at January 1, 2011

  $3,276 

Accretion expense

   209 

Net increase due to changes in, and timing of, estimated future cash flows

   198 

Costs incurred to decommission retired plants

   (3
  

 

 

Nuclear decommissioning ARO at December 31, 2011(a)

   3,680 

Nuclear decommissioning ARO at January 1, 2012

  $3,680 

Accretion expense

   231    231 

Net increase due to changes in, and timing of, estimated future cash flows

   833    833 

Costs incurred to decommission retired plants

   (3   (3
  

 

   

 

 

Nuclear decommissioning ARO at December 31, 2012(a)

  $4,741    4,741 

Accretion expense

   259 

Net decrease due to changes in, and timing of, estimated future cash flows

   (140

Costs incurred to decommission retired plants

   (5
  

 

   

 

 

Nuclear decommissioning ARO at December 31, 2013 (a)

  $4,855 
  

 

 

 

(a)Includes $10$9 million and $5$10 million as the current portion of the ARO at December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, respectively, which is included in otherOther current liabilities on Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.

During 2013, Generation’s ARO increased by approximately $114 million. The increase is largely driven by an increase in the estimated costs to decommission the Limerick and Three Mile Island nuclear units resulting from the completion of updated decommissioning costs studies received during 2013 and an increase for accretion of the obligation. These increases in the ARO were offset by decreases to the ARO due to changes in long-term escalation rates, primarily for labor and energy costs, as well as changes in the timing of the future nominal cash flows coupled with the fact that cash flows affected by this change in timing are re-measured and discounted at current credit adjusted risk free rates (CARFRs), which have increased from the prior year. The decrease in the ARO due to the changes in, and timing of, estimated cash flows were entirely offset by decreases in Property, plant and equipment within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

During 2012, Generation’s ARO increased by $1,061 million. The increase in the ARO iswas largely driven by the following four factors: i) changes in the timing of the future nominal cash flows resulting from an assumed five year deferral to 2025 of the acceptance date of spent nuclear fuel by the DOE coupled with the fact that; ii) cash flows affected by this change in timing are re-measured and discounted at current credit adjusted risk free rates (CARFRs),CARFRs, which havehad dramatically decreased given the current lowlower interest rate environment; iii) an increase in the estimated costs to decommission the Quad Cities, Dresden and Clinton nuclear units resulting from the completion of updated decommissioning costs studies received during 2012; and iv) accretion of the obligation. The increase in the ARO due to the changes in, and timing of, estimated cash flows resulted in $10 million of expense, which is included in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

 

During 2011, Generation recorded a net increase in the ARO of $404 million primarily due to increases for accretion and an increase in the estimated costs to decommission the Oyster Creek and Zion nuclear units resulting from the completion of updated decommissioning cost studies received in 2011 and an increase in the expected long-term escalation rates for energy, partially offset by decreases in long-term escalation rates for labor and other costs as compared to prior study periods. The increase in the Zion nuclear unit ARO resulted in $28 million of expense, which is included in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income, as the Zion nuclear unit is retired, and as such, is unable to record increases to the ARO through an ARC. Additionally, the Zion nuclear unit is not subject to a regulatory agreement that would provide for offset of the expense.

Zion Station Decommissioning

On September 1, 2010, Generation completed an Asset Sale Agreement (ASA) with EnergySolutions Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiaries, EnergySolutions, LLC (EnergySolutions) and ZionSolutions under which ZionSolutions has assumed responsibility for decommissioning Zion Station, which is located in Zion, Illinois and ceased operation in 1998. Specifically, Generation transferred to ZionSolutions substantially all of the assets (other than land) associated with Zion Station, including assets held in related NDT funds. In consideration for Generation’s transfer of those

342


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

assets, ZionSolutions assumed decommissioning and other liabilities associated with Zion Station. Pursuant to the ASA, ZionSolutions can periodically request reimbursement from the Zion Station-related NDT funds for costs incurred related to the decommissioning efforts at Zion Station. On January 7, 2013, EnergySolutions announced that it had entered a definitive acquisition agreement to be acquired by another company. Generation has reviewed the acquisition as it relates to the ASA to decommission Zion Station. Based on that review, Generation determined that the acquisition will not adversely impact decommissioning activities under the ASA.

On July 14, 2011, three people filed a purported class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois naming ZionSolutions and Bank of New York Mellon as defendants and seeking, among other things, an accounting for use of NDT funds, an injunction against the use of NDT funds, the appointment of a trustee for the NDT funds, and the return of NDT funds to customers of ComEd to the extent legally entitled thereto. If the plaintiffs prevail on the merits of their claims, some or all of the NDT funds may no longer be available to ZionSolutions for decommissioning Zion Station, in which case, the contractual arrangement would require ZionSolutions to utilize a line of credit to complete the decommissioning. In addition, the appointment of a NDT fund trustee in this matter could impact Generation’s future decommissioning activities at other stations by setting a precedent for the appointment of trustees for NDT funds. On July 20, 2012, ZionSolutions and Bank of New York Mellon filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint for failing to state a claim. The matter is currently under review by the court.

ZionSolutions is subject to certain restrictions on its ability to request reimbursements from the Zion Station NDT funds as defined within the ASA. Therefore, the transfer of the Zion Station assets did not qualify for asset sale accounting treatment and, as a result, the related NDT funds were reclassified to pledged assets for Zion Station decommissioning within Generation and Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets and will continue to be measured in the same manner as prior to the completion of the transaction. Additionally, the transferred ARO for decommissioning was replaced with a payable to ZionSolutions in Generation and Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. Changes in the value of the Zion Station NDT assets, net of applicable taxes, will be recorded as a change in the payable to ZionSolutions. At no point will the payable to ZionSolutions exceed the project budget of the costs remaining to decommission Zion Station. Any Zion Station NDT funds remaining after the completion of all decommissioning activities will be returned to ComEd customers. Generation has retained its obligation to transfer the SNF at Zion Station to the DOE for ultimate disposal and has a liability of approximately $79 million and $65 million at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively, which is included within the nuclear decommissioning ARO. Generation also has retained NDT assets to fund its obligation to maintain and transfer the SNF at Zion Station. The following table provides the pledged assets and payable to ZionSolutions, and withdrawals by ZionSolutions at December 31, 2012 and 2011:

   Exelon and Generation 
         2012               2011       

Carrying value of Zion Station pledged assets

  $614   $734 

Payable to Zion Solutions(a)

   564    691 

Current portion of payable to Zion Solutions(b)

   132    128 

Withdrawals by Zion Solutions to pay decommissioning costs

   192    143 

(a)Excludes a liability recorded within Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets related to the tax obligation on the unrealized activity associated with the Zion Station NDT Funds. The NDT Funds will be utilized to satisfy the tax obligations as gains and losses are realized.
(b)Included in other current liabilities within Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.

343


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

ZionSolutions leased the land associated with Zion Station from Generation pursuant to a Lease Agreement. Under the Lease Agreement, ZionSolutions has committed to complete the required decommissioning work according to an established schedule and will construct a dry cask storage facility on the land for the SNF currently held in SNF pools at Zion Station. Rent payable under the Lease Agreement is $1.00 per year, although the Lease Agreement requires ZionSolutions to pay property taxes associated with Zion Station and penalty rents may accrue if there are unexcused delays in the progress of decommissioning work at Zion Station or the construction of the dry cask SNF storage facility. To reduce the risk of default by EnergySolutions or ZionSolutions, EnergySolutions provided a $200 million letter of credit to be used to fund decommissioning costs in the event the NDT assets are insufficient. EnergySolutions has also provided a performance guarantee and entered into other agreements that will provide rights and remedies for Generation and the NRC in the case of other specified events of default, including a special purpose easement for disposal capacity at the EnergySolutions site in Clive, Utah, for all LLRW volume of Zion Station.

Nuclear Decommissioning Trust Fund Investments

 

NDT funds have been established for each generating station unit to satisfy Generation’s nuclear decommissioning obligations. Generally, NDT funds established for a particular unit may not be used to fund the decommissioning obligations of any other unit.

 

The NDT funds associated with the former ComEd, former PECO and former AmerGen units have been funded with amounts collected from ComEd customers, PECO customers and the previous owners of the former AmerGen plants, respectively. Based on an ICC order, ComEd ceased collecting amounts from its customers to pay for decommissioning costs. PECO currently collectsis authorized to collect funds, in

346


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

revenues, for decommissioning the former PECO nuclear plants through regulated rates, and these collections are expected to continuescheduled through the operating lives of the plants. The amounts collected from PECO customers are remitted to Generation and deposited into the NDT funds.funds for the unit for which funds are collected. Every five years, PECO files a rate adjustment with the PaPUCPAPUC that reflects PECO’s calculations of the estimated amount needed to decommission each of the former PECO units based on updated fund balances and estimated decommissioning costs. The rate adjustment is used to determine the amount collectible from PECO customers. The most recent rate adjustment occurred on January 1, 2013, and the effective rates currently yield annual collections of approximately $24 million. The next five-year adjustment is expected to be reflected in rates charged to PECO customers effective January 1, 2018. With respect to the former AmerGen units, Generation does not collect any amounts, nor is there any mechanism by which Generation can seek to collect additional amounts, from customers. Apart from the contributions made to the NDT funds from amounts collected from ComEd and PECO customers, Generation has not made contributions to the NDT funds.

 

Any shortfall of funds necessary for decommissioning, determined for each generating station unit, is ultimately required to be funded by Generation.Generation, with the exception of a shortfall for the current decommissioning activities at Zion Station, where certain decommissioning activities have been transferred to a third-party (see Zion Station Decommissioning below). Generation has recourse to collect additional amounts from PECO customers related to a shortfall of NDT funds for the former PECO units, subject to certain limitations and thresholds, as prescribed by an order from the PAPUC. Generally, PECO, and likewise Generation will not be allowed to collect amounts associated with the first $50 million of any shortfall of trust funds, on an aggregate basis for all former PECO units, compared to decommissioning obligations, as well as 5% of any additional shortfalls. ThisThe initial $50 million and up to 5% of any additional shortfalls would be borne by Generation. No recourse exists to collect additional amounts from ComEd customers for the former ComEd units or from the previous owners of the former AmerGen units. With respect to the former ComEd and PECO units, any funds remaining in the NDTs after all decommissioning has been completed are required to be refunded to ComEd’s or PECO’s customers, subject to certain limitations

344


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

that allow sharing of excess funds with Generation related to the former PECO units. With respect to the former AmerGen units, Generation retains any funds remaining in the NDTsfunds after decommissioning.

At December 31, 2012, and 2011, Exelon and Generation had NDT fund investments totaling $7,248 million and $6,507 million, respectively.

 

During 2012, the NDT fixed income portfolio completed its transition from solely core fixed income investments to a blend of Treasury Inflation Protected Securities (TIPS), investment-grade corporate credit and middle market lending. There was no change in the equity investment strategy. At December 31, 2013, approximately 48% of the funds were invested in equity securities and 52% were invested in fixed income securities. At December 31, 2012, approximately 47% of the funds were invested in equity securities and 53% were invested in fixed income securities.

At December 31, 2011, approximately 48%2013, and 2012, Exelon and Generation had NDT fund investments totaling $8,071 million and $7,248 million, respectively.

The following table provides unrealized gains (losses) on NDT funds for 2013, 2012 and 2011:

   Exelon and Generation 
   For the Years Ended December 31, 
   2013   2012   2011 

Net unrealized gains (losses) on decommissioning trust
funds—Regulatory Agreement Units
(a)

  $406   $386   $(74

Net unrealized gains (losses) on decommissioning trust
funds—Non-Regulatory Agreement Units
(b)(c)

   146    105    (4

347


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

(a)Net unrealized gains (losses) related to Generation’s NDT funds associated with Regulatory Agreement Units are included in Regulatory liabilities on Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets and Noncurrent payables to affiliates on Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.
(b)Excludes $7 million, $73 million and $48 million of net unrealized gains related to the Zion Station pledged assets in 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Net unrealized gains related to Zion Station pledged assets are included in the Payable for Zion Station decommissioning on Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.
(c)Net unrealized gains (losses) related to Generation’s NDT funds with Non-Regulatory Agreement Units are included within Other, net in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

Interest and dividends on NDT fund investments are recognized when earned and are included in Other, net in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. Interest and dividends earned on the NDT fund investments for the Regulatory Agreement Units are eliminated within Other, net in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

Accounting Implications of the Regulatory Agreements with ComEd and PECO. Based on the regulatory agreement with the ICC that dictates Generation’s obligations related to the shortfall or excess of NDT funds necessary for decommissioning the former ComEd units on a unit-by-unit basis, as long as funds held in the NDT funds are expected to exceed the total estimated decommissioning obligation, decommissioning-related activities, including realized and unrealized gains and losses on the NDT funds and accretion of the decommissioning obligation, are generally offset within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. The offset of decommissioning-related activities within the Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income results in an equal adjustment to the noncurrent payables to affiliates at Generation and an adjustment to the regulatory liabilities at Exelon. Likewise, ComEd has recorded an equal noncurrent affiliate receivable from Generation and corresponding regulatory liability. Should the expected value of the NDT fund for any former ComEd unit fall below the amount of the expected decommissioning obligation for that unit, the accounting to offset decommissioning-related activities in the Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income for that unit would be discontinued, the decommissioning-related activities would be recognized in the Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income and the adverse impact to Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations and financial position could be material. As of December 31, 2013, the NDT funds of each of the former ComEd units are expected to exceed the related decommissioning obligation for each of the units. For the purposes of making this determination, the decommissioning obligation referred to is different, as described below, from the calculation used in the NRC minimum funding obligation filings based on NRC guidelines.

Based on the regulatory agreement supported by the PAPUC that dictates Generation’s rights and obligations related to the shortfall or excess of trust funds necessary for decommissioning the seven former PECO nuclear units, regardless of whether the funds held in the NDT funds are expected to exceed or fall short of the total estimated decommissioning obligation, decommissioning-related activities are generally offset within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. The offset of decommissioning-related activities within the Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income results in an equal adjustment to the noncurrent payables to affiliates at Generation and an adjustment to the regulatory liabilities at Exelon. Likewise, PECO has recorded an equal noncurrent affiliate receivable from Generation and a corresponding regulatory liability. Any changes to the PECO regulatory agreements could impact Exelon’s and Generation’s ability to offset decommissioning-related activities within the Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income, and the impact to Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations and financial position could be material.

348


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

The decommissioning-related activities related to the Clinton, Oyster Creek and Three Mile Island nuclear plants (the former AmerGen units) and the portions of the Peach Bottom nuclear plants that are not subject to regulatory agreements with respect to the NDT funds are reflected in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income, as there are no regulatory agreements associated with these units.

Refer to Note 3—Regulatory Matters and Note 25—Related Party Transactions for information regarding regulatory liabilities at ComEd and PECO and intercompany balances between Generation, ComEd and PECO reflecting the obligation to refund to customers any decommissioning-related assets in excess of the related decommissioning obligations.

Zion Station Decommissioning

On September 1, 2010, Generation completed an Asset Sale Agreement (ASA) with EnergySolutions Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiaries, EnergySolutions, LLC (EnergySolutions) and ZionSolutions under which ZionSolutions has assumed responsibility for decommissioning Zion Station, which is located in Zion, Illinois and ceased operation in 1998. Specifically, Generation transferred to ZionSolutions substantially all of the assets (other than land) associated with Zion Station, including assets held in related NDT funds. In consideration for Generation’s transfer of those assets, ZionSolutions assumed decommissioning and other liabilities, excluding the obligation to dispose of SNF, associated with Zion Station. Pursuant to the ASA, ZionSolutions will periodically request reimbursement from the Zion Station-related NDT funds for costs incurred related to the decommissioning efforts at Zion Station. During 2013, EnergySolutions entered a definitive acquisition agreement and was acquired by another Company. Generation reviewed the acquisition as it relates to the ASA to decommission Zion Station. Based on that review, Generation determined that the acquisition will not adversely impact decommissioning activities under the ASA.

On July 14, 2011, three people filed a purported class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois naming ZionSolutions and Bank of New York Mellon as defendants and seeking, among other things, an accounting for use of NDT funds, an injunction against the use of NDT funds, the appointment of a trustee for the NDT funds, and the return of NDT funds to customers of ComEd to the extent legally entitled thereto. On July 20, 2012, ZionSolutions and Bank of New York Mellon filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint for failing to state a claim. On July 29, 2013, United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois dismissed the amended complaint. On August 26, 2013, the plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal with the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. On January 31, 2014, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit dismissed the appeal.

ZionSolutions is subject to certain restrictions on its ability to request reimbursements from the Zion Station NDT funds as defined within the ASA. Therefore, the transfer of the Zion Station assets did not qualify for asset sale accounting treatment and, as a result, the related NDT funds were investedreclassified to pledged assets for Zion Station decommissioning within Generation’s and Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets and will continue to be measured in equity securitiesthe same manner as prior to the completion of the transaction. Additionally, the transferred ARO for decommissioning was replaced with a payable to ZionSolutions in Generation’s and 52% were investedExelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. Changes in fixed income securities.the value of the Zion Station NDT assets, net of applicable taxes, will be recorded as a change in the payable to ZionSolutions. At no point will the payable to ZionSolutions exceed the project budget of the costs remaining to decommission Zion Station. Generation has retained its obligation to the SNF following ZionSolutions completion of its contractual obligations, to transfer the SNF at Zion Station to the DOE for ultimate disposal, and to complete all remaining decommissioning activities associated with the SNF

349


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

storage facility. Generation has a liability of approximately $82 million, which is included within the nuclear decommissioning ARO at December 31, 2013. Generation also has retained NDT assets to fund its obligation to maintain and transfer the SNF at Zion Station and to complete all remaining decommissioning activities for the SNF storage facility. Any shortage of funds necessary to maintain the SNF and decommission the SNF storage facility is ultimately required to be funded by Generation. Any Zion Station NDT funds remaining after the completion of all decommissioning activities will be returned to ComEd customers in accordance with the applicable orders. The following table provides the pledged assets and payable to ZionSolutions, and withdrawals by ZionSolutions at December 31, 2013 and 2012:

   Exelon and Generation 
         2013               2012       

Carrying value of Zion Station pledged assets

  $458   $614 

Payable to Zion Solutions(a)

   414    564 

Current portion of payable to Zion Solutions(b)

   109    132 

Withdrawals by Zion Solutions to pay decommissioning costs(c)

   498    335 

(a)Excludes a liability recorded within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets related to the tax obligation on the unrealized activity associated with the Zion Station NDT Funds. The NDT Funds will be utilized to satisfy the tax obligations as gains and losses are realized.
(b)Included in Other current liabilities within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.
(c)Cumulative withdrawals since September 1, 2010.

ZionSolutions leased the land associated with Zion Station from Generation pursuant to a Lease Agreement. Under the Lease Agreement, ZionSolutions has committed to complete the required decommissioning work according to an established schedule and will construct a dry cask storage facility on the land for the SNF currently held in SNF pools at Zion Station. Rent payable under the Lease Agreement is $1.00 per year, although the Lease Agreement requires ZionSolutions to pay property taxes associated with Zion Station and penalty rents may accrue if there are unexcused delays in the progress of decommissioning work at Zion Station or the construction of the dry cask SNF storage facility. To reduce the risk of default by EnergySolutions or ZionSolutions, EnergySolutions provided a $200 million letter of credit to be used to fund decommissioning costs in the event the NDT assets are insufficient. EnergySolutions has also provided a performance guarantee and entered into other agreements that will provide rights and remedies for Generation and the NRC in the case of other specified events of default, including a special purpose easement for disposal capacity at the EnergySolutions site in Clive, Utah, for all LLRW volume of Zion Station.

 

NRC Minimum Funding Requirements.Requirements. NRC regulations require that licensees of nuclear generating facilities demonstrate reasonable assurance that funds will be available in specified minimum amounts to decommission the facility at the end of its life. The estimated decommissioning obligations as calculated using the NRC methodology differ from the ARO recorded on Generation’s and Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets primarily due to differences in the typestype of costs included in the estimates, the basis for estimating such costs, and assumptions regarding the decommissioning alternatives to be used, potential license renewals, decommissioning cost escalation, and the growth rate in the NDT funds. Under NRC regulations, if the minimum funding requirements calculated under the NRC methodology are less than the future value of the NDT funds, also calculated under the NRC methodology, then the NRC requires either further funding or other financial guarantees.

 

Key assumptions used in the minimum funding calculation using the NRC methodology at December 31, 20122013 include: (1) consideration of costs only for the removal of radiological contamination at each unit; (2) the option on a unit-by-unit basis to use generic, non-site specific cost estimates; (3) consideration of only one decommissioning scenario for each unit; (4) the plants cease

350


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

operation at the end of their current license lives (with no assumed license renewals for those units that have not already received renewals and with an assumed end-of-operations date of 2019 for Oyster Creek); (5) the assumption of current nominal dollar cost estimates that are neither escalated through the anticipated period of decommissioning, nor discounted using the CARFR; and (6) assumed annual after-tax returns on the NDT funds of 2% (3% for the former PECO units, as specified by the PAPUC).

 

In contrast, the key criteria and assumptions used by Generation to determine the ARO and to forecast the target growth in the NDT funds at December 31, 20122013 include: (1) the use of site specific cost estimates that are updated at least once every five years; (2) the inclusion in the ARO estimate of all legally unavoidable costs required to decommission the unit (e.g., radiological decommissioning and full site restoration for certain units, on-site spent fuel maintenance and storage subsequent to ceasing operations and until DOE acceptance, and disposal of certain low-level radioactive waste); (3) the consideration of multiple scenarios where decommissioning activities are completed under three possible scenarios ranging from 10 to 70 years after the cessation of plant operations; (4) the assumption plants cease operating at the end of an extended license life (assuming 20-year license renewal extensions, except Oyster Creek with an assumed end-of-operations date of 2019); (5) the measurement of the obligation at the present value of the future estimated costs and an annual average accretion of the ARO of approximately 5% through a period of approximately 30 years after the end of the extended lives of the units; and (6) an estimated targeted annual pre-tax return on the NDT funds of 5.3%5.9% to 6.2%6.7% (as compared to a historical 5-year annual average pre-tax return of approximately 3.6%11.7%).

345


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Generation is required to provide to the NRC a biennial report by unit (annually for units that have been retired or are within five years of the current approved license life), based on values as of December 31, addressing Generation’s ability to meet the NRC minimum funding levels. Depending on the value of the trust funds, Generation may be required to take steps, such as providing financial guarantees through letters of credit or parent company guarantees or make additional contributions to the trusts, which could be significant, to ensure that the trusts are adequately funded and that NRC minimum funding requirements are met. As a result, Exelon’s and Generation’s cash flows and financial position may be significantly adversely affected.

 

On March 31, 2011,April 1, 2013, Generation insubmitted its NRC-required biennial decommissioning funding status report provided data from which the NRC concluded that the amount of decommissioning funding as of December 31, 20102012. As of December 31, 2012, Generation provided adequate funding assurance for all of its units, including Limerick Unit 1, was less than the amount required by the NRC’s regulations.where Generation performed the calculations againhas in early 2012, which reflected that the amount of decommissioning funding as of December 31, 2011, for Limerick Unit 1 was less than the amount required by the NRC’s regulations. In February 2012, Generation obtainedplace a $115 million parent guarantee in the amount of $115 million to cover the NRC minimum funding assurance requirements for Limerick Unit 1 and informedrequirements. On October 2, 2013, the NRC that it had addressed the minimum funding issues by, among other things, obtaining the parent guarantee. In a letter dated June 28, 2012,issued summary findings from the NRC advised GenerationStaff’s review of the NRC’s determination2013 decommissioning funding status reports for all 104 operating reactors, including the Generation operating units. Based on that review, the amount ofNRC Staff determined that Generation provided decommissioning financialfunding assurance provided in Generation’s plan was equal to or greater than the minimum required under the NRC regulations and that Generation had provided reasonable assurance that funds would be available for theall of its operating units, including Limerick Unit 1 decommissioning process.1.

 

On January 31, 2013, Generation received a letter from the NRC indicating that the NRC has identified potential “apparent violations” of its regulations because of alleged inaccuracies in the Decommissioning FundFunding Status reports for 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2009. The NRC asserted that Generation’s status reports deliberately reflected cost estimates for decommissioning its nuclear plants that were less than what the NRC says are the minimum amounts required by NRC regulations. TheGeneration met with the NRC invited Generation to participate inon April 30, 2013 for a pre-decisional enforcement conference. At that conference Generation will have an opportunityto provide additional information to explain its actions towhy Generation believes that it complied with the NRC. Generation will demonstrate that itregulatory requirements and did not deliberately or intentionallyotherwise provide inaccurateincomplete or incompleteinaccurate information in violation of the regulations and that it applied the regulatory provisions in a reasonable manner and in good faith. The letter from the NRC does not take issue with Generation’s currentits decommissioning funding status. The NRC has publicly confirmed that Generation is currently sufficiently funded for decommissioning activities.status reports. While Generation does not believe that any sanction is appropriate, the ultimate outcome of this proceeding including the amount of a potential fine or sanction, if any, is uncertain. The January 31, 2013 letter from the NRC does not take issue with

351


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Generation’s current funding status, and as reflected in Generation’s April 1, 2013 decommissioning funding status report referenced above, Generation continues to provide adequate funding assurance for each of its units. In the normal course of NRC review, Generation has received a series of data requests that are unrelated to the potential apparent violations and the pre-decisional enforcement conference. Generation continues to cooperate with the NRC and provide the requested information. Generation does not have a definite date on which it will receive a response from the NRC.

In addition, on June 24, 2013, Exelon received a subpoena from the SEC requesting that Exelon provide the SEC with certain documents generally relating to Exelon and Generation’s reporting and funding of the future decommissioning of Exelon’s nuclear power plants. Exelon and Generation are cooperating with the SEC and providing the requested documents.

 

As the future values of trust funds change due to market conditions, the NRC minimum funding status of Generation’s units will change. In addition, if changes occur to the regulatory agreement with the PAPUC that currently allows amounts to be collected from PECO customers for decommissioning the former PECO nuclear plants, the NRC minimum funding status of those plants could change at subsequent NRC filing dates.

Accounting Implications of the Regulatory Agreements with ComEd and PECO. Based on the regulatory agreement with the ICC that dictates Generation’s obligations related to the shortfall or excess of NDT funds necessary for decommissioning the former ComEd units on a unit-by-unit basis, as long as funds held in the NDT funds exceed the total estimated decommissioning obligation, decommissioning-related activities, including realized and unrealized gains and losses on the NDT funds and accretion of the decommissioning obligation, are generally offset within Exelon’s and

346


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. The offset of decommissioning-related activities within the Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income results in an equal adjustment to the noncurrent payables to affiliates at Generation and an adjustment to the regulatory liabilities at Exelon. Likewise, ComEd has recorded an equal noncurrent affiliate receivable from Generation and corresponding regulatory liability. Should the value of the NDT fund for any former ComEd unit fall below the amount of the estimated decommissioning obligation for that unit, the accounting to offset decommissioning-related activities in the Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income for that unit would be discontinued, the decommissioning-related activities would be recognized in the Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income and the adverse impact to Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations and financial position could be material. At December 31, 2012, the NDT funds of each of the former ComEd units exceeded the related decommissioning obligation for each of the units. For the purposes of making this determination, the decommissioning obligation referred to is the ARO reflected on Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheet at December 31, 2012 and is different, as described above, from the calculation used in the NRC minimum funding obligation filings based on NRC guidelines.

Based on the regulatory agreement supported by the PAPUC that dictates Generation’s rights and obligations related to the shortfall or excess of trust funds necessary for decommissioning the seven former PECO nuclear units, regardless of whether the funds held in the NDT funds exceed or fall short of the total estimated decommissioning obligation, decommissioning-related activities are generally offset within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. The offset of decommissioning-related activities within the Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income results in an equal adjustment to the noncurrent payables to affiliates at Generation and an adjustment to the regulatory liabilities at Exelon. Likewise, PECO has recorded an equal noncurrent affiliate receivable from Generation and a corresponding regulatory liability. Any changes to the PECO regulatory agreements could impact Exelon’s and Generation’s ability to offset decommissioning-related activities within the Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income, and the impact to Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations and financial position could be material.

The decommissioning-related activities related to the Clinton, Oyster Creek and Three Mile Island nuclear plants (the former AmerGen units) and the portions of the Peach Bottom nuclear plants that are not subject to regulatory agreements with respect to the NDT funds are reflected in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income, as there are no regulatory agreements associated with these units.

Refer to Note 3—Regulatory Matters and Note 22—Related Party Transactions for information regarding regulatory liabilities at ComEd and PECO and intercompany balances between Generation, ComEd and PECO reflecting the obligation to refund to customers any decommissioning-related assets in excess of the related decommissioning obligations.

347


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

The following table provides unrealized gains (losses) on NDT funds for 2012, 2011 and 2010:

   Exelon and Generation 
   For the Years Ended December 31, 
   2012   2011  2010 

Net unrealized gains (losses) on decommissioning trust
funds—Regulatory Agreement Units
(a)(b)(c)

  $386   $(74 $294 

Net unrealized gains (losses) on decommissioning trust
funds—Non-Regulatory Agreement Units
(c)

   105    (4  104 

(a)Net unrealized gains (losses) related to Generation’s NDT funds associated with Regulatory Agreement Units are included in regulatory liabilities on Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets and noncurrent payables to affiliates on Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.
(b)Excludes $73 million and $48 million of net unrealized gains (losses) related to the Zion Station pledged assets in 2012 and 2011. Net unrealized gains (losses) related to Zion Station pledged assets are included in the payable for Zion Station decommissioning on Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.
(c)Net unrealized gains (losses) related to Generation’s NDT funds are included within other, net in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

Interest and dividends on NDT fund investments are recognized when earned and are included in other, net in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. Interest and dividends earned on the NDT fund investments for the Regulatory Agreement Units, which are subject to regulatory accounting, are eliminated within other, net in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

 

Non-Nuclear Asset Retirement Obligations (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Generation has AROs for plant closure costs associated with its fossil and renewable generating facilities, including asbestos abatement, removal of certain storage tanks, restoring leased land to the condition it was in prior to construction of renewable generating stations and other decommissioning-related activities. ComEd, PECO and BGE have AROs primarily associated with the abatement and disposal of equipment and buildings contaminated with asbestos and PCBs. See Note 1—Significant Accounting Policies for additional information on the Registrants’ accounting policy for AROs.

 

The following table provides a rollforward of the non-nuclear AROs reflected on the Registrants’ Consolidated Balance Sheets from January 1, 20112012 to December 31, 2012:2013:

 

  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE   Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

Non-nuclear AROs at January 1, 2011

  $223  $86  $105  $32  $1 

Net decrease due to changes in, and timing of, estimated future cash flows(a)

   (24  (3  (17  (4  —   

Development projects

   7   7   —     —     —   

Accretion expense(b)

   9   5   3   1   —   

Payments

   (6  (3  (2  (1  —   
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Non-nuclear AROs at December 31, 2011

   209   92   89   28   1 

Non-nuclear AROs at January 1, 2012

  $209  $92  $89  $28  $1 

Net increase due to changes in, and timing of, estimated future cash flows(a)

   27   18   8   1   7    27   18   8   1   7 

Development projects

   47   47   —     —     —      47   47   —     —     —   

Accretion expense(b)

   13   8   4   1   —      13   8   4   1   —   

Merger with Constellation(c)

   58   50       58   50   —     —     —   

Payments

   (11  (8  (2  (1  —      (11  (8  (2  (1  —   
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Non-nuclear AROs at December 31, 2012

  $343  $207  $99  $29  $8    343   207   99   29   8 

Net increase due to changes in, and timing of, estimated future cash flows(a)

   1   (11  —     —     12 

Development projects

   2   2   —     —     —   

Accretion expense(b)

   18   13   4   1   —   

Payments

   (13  (10  (2  —     (1
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Non-nuclear AROs at December 31, 2013(d)

  $351  $201  $101  $30  $19 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

(a)During the year ended December 31, 2013, Generation recorded an increase in operating and maintenance expense of $13 million. ComEd and PECO did not record any adjustments in operating and maintenance expense for the year ended December 31, 2013. During the year ended December 31, 2012, Generation recorded a reduction in operating and maintenance expense of $8 million. ComEd, PECO, and BGE did not record any reductions in operating and maintenance expense for the year ended December 31, 2012.

 

348352


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

(a)During the year ended December 31, 2011, PECO recorded a reduction in operating and maintenance expense of $3 million. Generation and ComEd did not record any reductions in operating and maintenance expense for the year ended December 31, 2011. During the year ended December 31, 2012, Generation recorded a reduction in operating and maintenance expense of $8 million. ComEd and PECO did not record any adjustments in operating and maintenance expense for the year ended December 31, 2012.
(b)For ComEd, PECO, and PECO,BGE, the majority of the accretion is recorded as an increase to a regulatory asset due to the associated regulatory treatment.
(c)Exelon’s ARO includes $8 million of BGE costs incurred prior to the closing of Exelon’s merger with Constellation. Refer to Note 4—Merger and Acquisitions for additional information.
(d)Includes $2 million, $1 million, and $0 million as the current portion of the ARO at December 31, 2013 for ComEd, PECO, and BGE, respectively, which is included in other current liabilities on Exelon’s and each of the respective utilities’ Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

14.16. Retirement Benefits (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

As of December 31, 2012,2013, Exelon sponsored qualified defined benefit pension plans, non-qualified defined benefit pension plans and other postretirement benefit plans for essentially all Generation, ComEd, PECO, BGE and BSC employees. In connection with the acquisition of Constellation in March 2012, Exelon assumed Constellation’s benefit plans and its related assets. The table below shows the pension and postretirement benefit plans in which each operating company participated at December 31, 2012.2013.

 

  Operating Company 

Name of Plan:

 Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE  BSC 

Qualified Pension Plans:

     

Exelon Corporation Retirement Program

  X    X    X     X  

Exelon Corporation Cash Balance Pension Plan

  X    X    X     X  

Exelon Corporation Pension Plan for Bargaining Unit Employees

  X    X      X  

Exelon New England Union Employees Pension Plan

  X      

Exelon Employee Pension Plan for Clinton, TMI and Oyster Creek

  X    X      X  

Pension Plan of Constellation Energy Group, Inc.

  X      X    X  

BG New EnglandConstellation Mystic Power, LLC Union Employees Pension Plan Including Plan A and Plan B

  X      

Non-Qualified Pension Plans:

     

Exelon Corporation Supplemental Pension Benefit Plan and 2000 Excess Benefit Plan

  X    X    X     X  

Exelon Corporation Supplemental Management Retirement Plan

  X    X    X     X  

Benefits Restoration Plan of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Senior Executive Supplemental Plan

  X      X    X  

SeniorConstellation Energy Group, Inc. Supplemental Pension Plan

XXX

Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Benefits Restoration Plan

XXX

Baltimore Gas & Electric Company Executive Supplemental PensionBenefit Plan

XXX

Baltimore Gas & Electric Company Manager Benefit Plan

  X      X    X  

Other Postretirement Benefit Plans:

     

PECO Energy Company Retiree Medical Plan

  X     X     X  

Exelon Corporation Health Care Program

  X    X      X  

Exelon Corporation Employees’ Life Insurance Plan

  X    X    X     X  

Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Retiree Medical Plan

  X      X    X  

Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Retiree Dental Plan

  X      X    X  

Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Employee Life Insurance Plan and Family Life Insurance Plan

  X      X   X

Constellation Mystic Power, LLC Post-Employment Medical Account Savings Plan

X

BGExelon New England Union Post-Employment Medical Savings Account Plan

  X      

 

349353


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Exelon’s traditional and cash balance pension plans are intended to be tax-qualified defined benefit plans. Substantially all non-union employees and electing union employees hired on or after January 1, 2001 participate in cash balance pension plans. Effective January 1, 2009, substantially all newly-hired union-represented employees participate in cash balance pension plans. Exelon has elected that the trusts underlying these plans be treated under the IRC as qualified trusts. If certain conditions are met, Exelon can deduct payments made to the qualified trusts, subject to certain IRC limitations.

 

Benefit Obligations, Plan Assets and Funded Status

 

Exelon recognizes the overfunded or underfunded status of defined benefit pension and other postretirement benefit plans as an asset or liability on its balance sheet, with offsetting entries to Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (AOCI) and regulatory assets (liabilities), in accordance with the applicable authoritative guidance. The measurement date for the plans is December 31.

During the first quarter of 2013, Exelon received an updated valuation of its legacy pension and other postretirement benefit obligations to reflect actual census data as of January 1, 2013. This valuation resulted in an increase to the pension obligation of $8 million and a decrease to the other postretirement benefit obligation of $39 million. Additionally, accumulated other comprehensive loss decreased by approximately $75 million (after tax) and regulatory assets increased by approximately $93 million. During the second quarter of 2013, Exelon received the updated valuation for the legacy Constellation pension and other postretirement obligations to reflect actual census data as of January 1, 2013. This valuation resulted in an increase to the pension obligation of $23 million and a decrease to the other postretirement benefit obligation of $12 million. Additionally, accumulated other comprehensive loss increased by approximately $2 million (after tax) and regulatory assets increased by approximately $14 million.

The following table provides a rollforward of the changes in the benefit obligations and plan assets for the most recent two years for all plans combined:

 

  Pension Benefits Other
Postretirement Benefits
   Pension Benefits Other
Postretirement Benefits
 
  2012 2011     2012         2011       2013 2012     2013         2012     

Change in benefit obligation:

          

Net benefit obligation at beginning of year

  $13,538  $12,524  $4,062  $3,874   $16,800  $13,538  $4,820  $4,062 

Service cost

   280   212   156   142    317   280   162   156 

Interest cost

   698   649   205   207    650   698   194   205 

Plan participants’ contributions

   —     —     34   25    —     —     34   34 

Actuarial loss

   1,520   807   313   4 

Actuarial loss (gain)

   (1,363  1,520   (551  313 

Plan amendments

   —     —     (103  —      1   —     15   (103

Acquisitions/divestitures

   1,880    362     —     1,880   —     362 

Curtailments

   (10  —     (8  —      —     (10  —     (8

Settlements

   (169  —     —     —   

Settlements(a)

   (69  (169  —     —   

Contractual termination benefits

   15   —     6   —      —     15   —     6 

Gross benefits paid

   (952  (654  (219  (201   (877  (952  (223  (219

Federal subsidy on benefits paid

   —     —     12   11    —     —     —     12 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net benefit obligation at end of year

  $16,800  $13,538  $4,820  $4,062   $15,459  $16,800  $4,451  $4,820 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Change in plan assets:

     

Fair value of net plan assets at beginning of year

  $11,302  $8,859  $1,797  $1,655 

Actual return on plan assets

   1,484   1,003   197   29 

Employer contributions

   149   2,094   325   277 

Plan participants’ contributions

   —     —     34   25 

Benefits paid(a)

   (952  (654  (218  (189

Acquisitions/divestitures

   1,543   —     —     —   

Settlements

   (169  —     —     —   
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Fair value of net plan assets at end of year

  $13,357  $11,302  $2,135  $1,797 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

354


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

   Pension Benefits  Other
Postretirement Benefits
 
   2013  2012      2013          2012     

Change in plan assets:

     

Fair value of net plan assets at beginning of year

  $13,357  $11,302  $2,135  $1,797 

Actual return on plan assets

   821   1,484   209   197 

Employer contributions

   339   149   83   325 

Plan participants’ contributions

   —     —     34   34 

Benefits paid(b)

   (877  (952  (223  (218

Acquisitions/divestitures

   —     1,543   —     —   

Settlements(a)

   (69  (169  —     —   
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Fair value of net plan assets at end of year

  $13,571  $13,357  $2,238  $2,135 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

(a)Represents cash settlements only.
(b)Exelon’s other postretirement benefits paid for the yearsyear ended December 31, 2012 and 2011 are net of $1.3 million and $12 million, respectively, of reinsurance proceeds received from the Department of Health and Human Services as part of the Early Retiree Reinsurance Program pursuant to the Affordable Care Act of 2010. In 2013, the Program was no longer accepting applications for reimbursement.

350


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Exelon presents its benefit obligations and plan assets net on its balance sheet within the following line items:

 

  Pension Benefits   Other
Postretirement Benefits
   Pension Benefits   Other
Postretirement Benefits
 
  2012   2011       2012           2011       2013   2012       2013           2012     

Other current liabilities

  $15   $42   $23   $2   $12   $15   $23   $23 

Pension obligations

   3,428    2,194    —      —      1,876    3,428    —      —   

Non-pension postretirement benefit obligations

   —      —      2,662    2,263    —      —      2,190    2,662 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Unfunded status (net benefit obligation less net plan assets)

  $3,443   $2,236   $2,685   $2,265   $1,888   $3,443   $2,213   $2,685 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

The funded status of the pension and other postretirement benefit obligations refers to the difference between plan assets and estimated obligations of the plan. The funded status changes over time due to several factors, including contribution levels, assumed discount rates and actual returns on plan assets. During the fourth quarter of 2012, Exelon completed an optional lump sum election program for select participants in certain of its qualified pension plans, which reduced the obligation and plan assets associated with those plans. This program decreased pension obligations and plan assets by approximately $425 million and $260 million, respectively, resulting in approximately $165 million overall funded status improvement.

 

The following tables provide the projected benefit obligations (PBO), accumulated benefit obligation (ABO), and fair value of plan assets for all pension plans with a PBO or ABO in excess of plan assets.

 

  PBO in
excess of plan assets
   PBO in
excess of plan assets
 
        2012               2011               2013               2012       

Projected benefit obligation

  $16,800   $13,538   $15,452   $16,800 

Fair value of net plan assets

   13,357    11,302    13,564    13,357 

 

   ABO in
excess of plan assets
 
         2012               2011       

Projected benefit obligation

  $16,796   $13,538 

Accumulated benefit obligation

   15,657    12,616 

Fair value of net plan assets

   13,353    11,302 

On a PBO basis, the plans were funded at 80% at December 31, 2012 compared to 83% at December 31, 2011. On an ABO basis, the plans were funded at 85% at December 31, 2012 compared to 90% at December 31, 2011. The ABO differs from the PBO in that the ABO includes no assumption about future compensation levels.
   ABO in
excess of plan assets
 
         2013               2012       

Projected benefit obligation

  $15,452   $16,796 

Accumulated benefit obligation

   14,552    15,657 

Fair value of net plan assets

   13,564    13,353 

 

351355


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

On a PBO basis, the plans were funded at 88% at December 31, 2013 compared to 80% at December 31, 2012. On an ABO basis, the plans were funded at 93% at December 31, 2013 compared to 85% at December 31, 2012. The ABO differs from the PBO in that the ABO includes no assumption about future compensation levels.

 

Components of Net Periodic Benefit Costs

 

The following table providespresents the components of theExelon’s net periodic benefit costs for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010 for all plans combined.2011. The table reflects an increase in 2012 and a reduction in 2011 and 2010 of net periodic postretirement benefit costs of approximately $(17) million $28 million and $38$28 million, respectively, related to a Federal subsidy provided under the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 (Medicare Modernization Act), discussed further below.

 

   Pension Benefits  Other
Postretirement Benefits
 
   2012  2011  2010  2012  2011  2010 

Components of net periodic benefit cost:

       

Service cost

  $280  $212  $190  $156  $142  $124 

Interest cost

   698   649   660   205   207   214 

Expected return on assets

   (988  (939  (799  (115  (111  (109

Amortization of:

       

Transition obligation

   —     —     —     11   9   9 

Prior service cost (credit)

   15   14   14   (17  (38  (56

Actuarial loss

   450   331   254   81   66   74 

Curtailment charges

   —     —     —     (7  —     —   

Settlement charges

   31   —     5   —     —     —   

Contractual termination benefits(a)

   14   —     —     6   —     1 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net periodic benefit cost

  $500  $267  $324  $320  $275  $257 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

The 2013 pension benefit cost for all plans is calculated using an expected long-term rate of return on plan assets of 7.50% and a discount rate of 3.92%. Certain plans were remeasured during the year using a discount rate of 4.21%. The 2013 other postretirement benefit cost is calculated using an expected long-term rate of return on plan assets of 6.45% for funded plans and a discount rate of 4.00% for all plans. Certain plans were remeasured during the year using a discount rate of 4.66%. Certain other postretirement benefit plans are not funded. A portion of the net periodic benefit cost is capitalized within the Consolidated Balance Sheets.

   Pension Benefits  Other
Postretirement Benefits
 
   2013  2012  2011  2013  2012  2011 

Components of net periodic benefit cost:

       

Service cost

  $317  $280  $212  $162  $156  $142 

Interest cost

   650   698   649   194   205   207 

Expected return on assets

   (1,015  (988  (939  (132  (115  (111

Amortization of:

       

Transition obligation

   —     —     —     —     11   9 

Prior service cost (credit)

   14   15   14   (19  (17  (38

Actuarial loss

   562   450   331   83   81   66 

Curtailment benefits

   —     —     —     —     (7  —   

Settlement charges

   9   31   —     —     —     —   

Contractual termination benefits(a)

   —     14   —     —     6   —   
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net periodic benefit cost

  $537  $500  $267  $288  $320  $275 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

(a)ComEd and BGE established regulatory assets of $1 million and $4 million, respectively, for their portion of the contractual termination benefit charge.charge in 2012.

 

Through Exelon’s postretirement benefit plans, the Registrants provide retirees with prescription drug coverage. The Medicare Modernization Act, enacted on December 8, 2003, introduced a prescription drug benefit under Medicare as well as a Federal subsidy to sponsors of retiree health care benefit plans that provide a benefit that is at least actuarially equivalent to the Medicare prescription drug benefit. Management believes the prescription drug benefit provided under Exelon’s postretirement benefit plans meets the requirements for the subsidy. In December 2011, the Company decided that beginning in 2013, it will no longer elect to take the direct Part D subsidy. Beginning in 2013, eligible employees are offered an Employee Group Waiver Plan, a Medicare Part D Plan, with a supplemental “wrap” that closely matches the current prescription drug plan design. See theHealth

356


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Care Reform Legislation section below for further discussion regarding the income tax treatment of Federal subsidies of prescription drug benefits.

 

The effect of the subsidy on the components of net periodic postretirement benefit cost for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011 included in the consolidated financial statements was as follows:

 

   2012  2011   2010 

Amortization of the actuarial experience loss

  $(17 $3   $9 

Reduction in current period service cost

   —     9    10 

Reduction in interest cost on the APBO

   —     16    19 
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total effect of subsidy on net periodic postretirement benefit cost

  $(17 $28   $38 
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

352


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

   2013   2012  2011 

Amortization of the actuarial experience loss

  $—     $(17 $3 

Reduction in current period service cost

   —      —     9 

Reduction in interest cost on the APBO

   —      —     16 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total effect of subsidy on net periodic postretirement benefit cost

  $—     $(17 $28 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

Components of AOCI and Regulatory Assets

 

Under the authoritative guidance for regulatory accounting, a portion of current year actuarial gains and losses and prior service costs (credits) is capitalized within Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets to reflect the expected regulatory recovery of these amounts, which would otherwise be recorded to AOCI. The following tables provide the components of AOCI and regulatory assets (liabilities) for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011 for all plans combined.

 

  Pension Benefits Other
Postretirement Benefits
   Pension Benefits Other
Postretirement Benefits
 
  2012 2011 2010     2012         2011         2010       2013 2012 2011 2013 2012 2011 

Changes in plan assets and benefit obligations recognized in AOCI and regulatory assets:

       

Changes in plan assets and benefit obligations recognized in AOCI and regulatory assets (liabilities):

       

Current year actuarial (gain) loss

  $1,693  $744  $737  $304  $74  $—     $(1,169 $1,693  $744  $(628 $304  $74 

Amortization of actuarial gain (loss)

   (450  (331  (254  (81  (66  (74   (562  (450  (331  (83  (81  (66

Current year prior service (credit) cost

   1   —     —     (109  —     —      —     1   —     15   (109  —   

Amortization of prior service (cost) credit

   (15  (14  (14  17   38   56    (14  (15  (14  19   17   38 

Current year transition (asset) obligation

   —       1      —     —     —     —     1   —   

Amortization of transition asset (obligation)

   —     —     —     (11  (9  (9   —     —     —     —     (11  (9

Curtailments

   (10  —     —     (1  —     —      —     (10  —     —     (1  —   

Settlements

   (31  —     (5  —     —     —      (8  (31  —     —     —     —   
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total recognized in AOCI and regulatory assets(a)

  $1,188  $399  $464  $120  $37  $(27

Total recognized in AOCI and regulatory assets (liabilities) (a)

  $(1,753 $1,188  $399  $(677 $120  $37 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Of the $1,753 million gain related to pension benefits, $1,071 million and $682 million were recognized in AOCI and regulatory assets, respectively, during 2013. Of the $677 million gain related to other postretirement benefits, $352 million and $325 million were recognized in AOCI and regulatory assets (liabilities), respectively, during 2013. Of the $1,188 million loss related to pension benefits, $283 million and $904 million were recognized in AOCI and regulatory assets, respectively, during 2012. Of the $120 million loss related to other postretirement benefits, $39 million and $81 million were recognized in AOCI and regulatory assets, respectively, during 2012. Of the $399 million loss related to pension benefits, $181 million and $218 million were recognized in AOCI and regulatory assets, respectively, during 2011. Of the $37 million loss related to other postretirement benefits, $13 million and $24 million were recognized in AOCI and regulatory assets, respectively, during 2011. Of the $464 million related to pension benefits, $310 million and $154 million were recognized in AOCI and regulatory assets, respectively, during 2010. Of the $(27) million related to other postretirement benefits, $(9) million and $(18) million were recognized in AOCI and regulatory assets, respectively, during 2010.

357


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

The following table provides the components of Exelon’s gross accumulated other comprehensive loss and regulatory assets (liabilities) that have not been recognized as components of periodic benefit cost at December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, respectively, for all plans combined:

 

  Pension Benefits   Other
Postretirement Benefits
   Pension Benefits   Other
Postretirement Benefits
 
  2012   2011       2012         2011       2013   2012       2013         2012     

Transition obligation

  $—     $—     $—    $11 

Prior service cost (credit)

   76    90    (107  (16  $62   $76   $(73 $(107

Actuarial loss

   7,931    6,729    1,185   963    6,192    7,931    474   1,185 
  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total(a)

  $8,007   $6,819   $1,078  $958   $6,254   $8,007   $401  $1,078 
  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Of the $6,254 million related to pension benefits, $3,523 million and $2,731 million are included in AOCI and regulatory assets, respectively, at December 31, 2013. Of the $401 million related to other postretirement benefits, $161 million and $240 million are included in AOCI and regulatory assets (liabilities), respectively, at December 31, 2013. Of the $8,007 million related to pension benefits, $4,594 million and $3,413 million are included in AOCI and regulatory assets, respectively, at December 31, 2012. Of the $1,078 million related to other postretirement benefits, $514 million and $564 million are included in AOCI and regulatory assets, respectively, at December 31, 2012. Of the $6,819 million related to pension benefits, $4,311 million and $2,508 million are included in AOCI and regulatory assets, respectively, at December 31, 2011. Of the $958 million related to other postretirement benefits, $475 million and $483 million are included in AOCI and regulatory assets, respectively, at December 31, 2011.

353


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

The following table provides the components of Exelon’s AOCI and regulatory assets at December 31, 20122013 (included in the table above) that are expected to be amortized as components of periodic benefit cost in 2013.2014. These estimates are subject to the completion of an actuarial valuation of Exelon’s pension and other postretirement benefit obligations, which will reflect actual census data as of January 1, 20132014 and actual claims activity as of December 31, 2012.2013. The valuation is expected to be completed in the first quarter of 20132014 for legacy Exelon plans and in the second quarter of 20132014 for legacy Constellation plans.

 

  Pension Benefits   Other
Postretirement Benefits
   Pension Benefits   Other
Postretirement Benefits
 

Prior service cost (credit)

  $14   $(19  $14   $(16

Actuarial loss

   568    84    427    32 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total(a)

  $582   $65   $441   $16 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Of the $582$441 million related to pension benefits at December 31, 2012, $3152013, $232 million and $267$209 million are expected to be amortized from AOCI and regulatory assets in 2013, respectively. Of the $65$16 million related to other postretirement benefits at December 31, 2012, $292013, $7 million and $36$9 million are expected to be amortized from AOCI and regulatory assets in 2013, respectively.

 

Assumptions

 

The measurement of the plan obligations and costs of providing benefits under Exelon’s defined benefit and other postretirement plans involves various factors, including the development of valuation assumptions and accounting policy elections. When developing the required assumptions, Exelon considers historical information as well as future expectations. The measurement of benefit obligations and costs is impacted by several assumptions including the discount rate applied to benefit obligations, the long-term expected rate of return on plan assets, Exelon’s expected level of contributions to the plans, the long-term expected investment rate credited to employees participating in cash balance plans and the anticipated rate of increase of health care costs. Additionally, assumptions related to plan participants include the incidence of mortality, the expected remaining service period, the level of compensation and rate of compensation increases, employee age and length of service, among other factors.

358


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Expected Rate of Return. In selecting the expected rate of return on plan assets, Exelon considers historical economic indicators (including inflation and GDP growth) that impact asset returns, as well as expectations regarding future long-term capital market performance, weighted by Exelon’s target asset class allocations.

 

354


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

The following assumptions were used to determine the benefit obligations for all of the plans at December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010.2011. Assumptions used to determine year-end benefit obligations are the assumptions used to estimate the subsequent year’s net periodic benefit costs.

 

  Pension Benefits Other Postretirement Benefits  Pension Benefits Other Postretirement Benefits 
        2012             2011             2010             2012             2011             2010              2013             2012             2011             2013             2012             2011       

Discount rate

   3.92  4.74  5.26  4.00  4.80  5.30  4.80  3.92  4.74  4.90  4.00  4.80

Rate of compensation increase

       (a)   3.75  3.75      (a)   3.75  3.75      (a)       (b)   3.75      (a)       (b)   3.75

Mortality table

   
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2013
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2012
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2011
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2013
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2012
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2011
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2014
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2013
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2012
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2014
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2013
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2012
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

Health care cost trend on covered charges

   N/A    N/A    N/A   

 
 
 

 
 
 
 

 

6.50%
decreasing
to

ultimate
trend of
5.00% in
2017

  
  
  

  
  
  
  

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
6.50%
decreasing
to
ultimate
trend of
5.00% in
2017
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
7.00%
decreasing
to
ultimate
trend of
5.00% in
2015
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  N/A    N/A    N/A   

 
 
 

 
 
 
 

 

6.00%
decreasing
to

ultimate
trend of
5.00% in
2017

  
  
  

  
  
  
  

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
6.50%
decreasing
to
ultimate
trend of
5.00% in
2017
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
6.50%
decreasing
to
ultimate
trend of
5.00% in
2017
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

 

(a)3.25% for 2014-2018 and 3.75% thereafter.
(b)3.25% for 2013-2017 and 3.75% thereafter.

 

The following assumptions were used to determine the net periodic benefit costs for all the plans for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010:2011:

 

 Pension Benefits Other Postretirement Benefits  Pension Benefits Other Postretirement Benefits 
       2012             2011             2010             2012             2011             2010              2013             2012             2011             2013             2012             2011       

Discount rate

  3.71%(a)   5.26  5.83  3.72%(a)   5.30  5.83  3.92%(a)   4.74%(b)   5.26  4.00%(a)   4.80%(b)   5.30

Expected return on plan assets

  7.50%(b)   8.00%(b)   8.50%(b)   6.68%(b)   7.08%(b)   7.83%(b)   7.50%(c)   7.50%(c)   8.00%(c)   6.45%(c)   6.68%(c)   7.08%(c) 

Rate of compensation increase

  3.75  3.75  4.00  3.75  3.75  4.00      (d)   3.75  3.75      (d)   3.75  3.75

Mortality table

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2012
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2011
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2010
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2012
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2011
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2010
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
 ��
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2013
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2012
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2011
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2013
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2012
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2011
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

Health care cost trend on covered charges

  N/A    N/A    N/A   

 
 
 

 
 
 
 

 

 

6.50%
decreasing
to

ultimate
trend of
5.00% in
2017

  
  
  

  
  
  
  

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
7.00%
decreasing
to
ultimate
trend of
5.00% in
2015
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
7.50%
decreasing
to
ultimate
trend of
5.00% in
2015
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  N/A    N/A    N/A   

 
 
 

 
 
 
 

 

6.50%
decreasing
to

ultimate
trend of
5.00% in
2017

  
  
  

  
  
  
  

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
6.50%
decreasing
to
ultimate
trend of
5.00% in
2017
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
7.00%
decreasing
to
ultimate
trend of
5.00% in
2015
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

 

355359


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

 

(a)The discount rates above represent the initial discount rates used to establish Exelon’s pension and other postretirement benefits costs for 2012the year ended December 31, 2013. Certain of the benefit plans were 4.74%remeasured during the year using discount rates of 4.21% and 4.80%,4.66% for pension and other postretirement benefits, respectively. Costs for the year ended December 31, 2013 reflect the impact of these remeasurements.
(b)The discount rates above represent the initial discounts rates used to establish Exelon’s pension and other postretirement benefits costs for 2012. Certain of the benefit plans were remeasured during the year due to the Constellation merger, plan settlement and curtailment events, and plan changes using discount rates withinof 3.71% and 3.72% for pension and other postretirement benefits, respectively. Costs for the indicated ranges.year ended December 31, 2012 costs reflect the impact of these remeasurements.
(b)(c)Not applicable to pension and other postretirement benefit plans that do not have plan assets.
(d)3.25% for 2013-2017 and 3.75% thereafter.

 

Assumed health care cost trend rates have a significant effect on the costs reported for the other postretirement benefit plans. A one percentage point change in assumed health care cost trend rates would have the following effects:

 

Effect of a one percentage point increase in assumed health care cost trend:

  

on 2012 total service and interest cost components

  $81 

on postretirement benefit obligation at December 31, 2012

   845 

Effect of a one percentage point decrease in assumed health care cost trend:

  

on 2012 total service and interest cost components

   (56

on postretirement benefit obligation at December 31, 2012

   (569

Effect of a one percentage point increase in assumed health care cost trend:

  

on 2013 total service and interest cost components

  $90 

on postretirement benefit obligation at December 31, 2013

   858 

Effect of a one percentage point decrease in assumed health care cost trend:

  

on 2013 total service and interest cost components

   (62

on postretirement benefit obligation at December 31, 2013

   (607

 

Health Care Reform Legislation

 

In March 2010, the Health Care Reform Acts were signed into law, which contain a number of provisions that impact retiree health care plans provided by employers. One such provision reduces the deductibility, for Federal income tax purposes, of retiree health care costs to the extent an employer’s postretirement health care plan receives Federal subsidies that provide retiree prescription drug benefits at least equivalent to those offered by Medicare. Although this change did not take effect immediately, the Registrants were required to recognize the full accounting impact in their financial statements in the period in which the legislation was enacted. As a result, in the first quarter of 2010, Exelon recorded total after-tax charges of approximately $65 million to income tax expense to reverse deferred tax assets previously established. Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE recorded charges of $24 million, $11 million, $9 million and $3 million, respectively. Additionally, as a result of this deductibility change for employers and other Health Care Reform provisions that impact the federal prescription drug subsidy options provided to employers, Exelon has made a change in the manner in which it will receive prescription drug subsidies beginning in 2013.

 

Additionally, the Health Care Reform Acts also include a provision that imposes an excise tax on certain high-cost plans beginning in 2018, whereby premiums paid over a prescribed threshold will be taxed at a 40% rate. Although the excise tax does not go into effect until 2018, accounting guidance requires Exelon to incorporate the estimated impact of the excise tax in its annual actuarial valuation. The application of the legislation is still unclear and Exelon continues to monitor the Department of Labor and IRS for additional guidance. Certain key assumptions are required to estimate the impact of the excise tax on Exelon’s other postretirement benefit obligation, including projected inflation rates (based on the CPI) and whether pre- and post-65 retiree populations can be aggregated in determining the premium values of health care benefits. Exelon reflected its best estimate of the expected impact in its annual actuarial valuation.

 

356360


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Contributions

 

The following table provides contributions made by Generation, ComEd, PECO, BGE and BSC to the pension and other postretirement benefit plans:

 

  Pension Benefits   Other Postretirement Benefits   Pension Benefits   Other Postretirement Benefits 
  2012   2011   2010   2012 (a)   2011 (a)   2010 (a)   2013   2012   2011(c)   2013 (a)   2012 (a)   2011 (a) 

Generation

  $48   $954   $356   $135   $121   $94   $119   $48   $954   $30   $135   $121 

ComEd

   25    873    260    119    108    60    118    25    873    4    119    108 

PECO

   13    110    73    33    28    35    11    13    110    20    33    28 

BGE(b)

   —       —       —       12    —       —       —      —      —      24    12    —   

BSC

   63    157    77    24    20    14    91    63    157    5    24    20 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Exelon

  $149   $2,094   $766   $323   $277   $203   $339   $149   $2,094   $83   $323   $277 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)The Registrants present the cash contributions above net of Federal subsidy payments received on each of their respective Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows. Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO, and BGE received Federal subsidy payments of $10 million, $5 million, $4 million, $1 million and $2 million, respectively, in 2012, and $11 million, $5 million, $4 million, $1 million and $3 million, respectively, in 2011, and $10 million, $5 million, $3 million, $2 million and $2 million, respectively, in 2010.2011. Effective January 1, 2013, Exelon is no longer receiving this subsidy.
(b)BGE’s pension benefit contributions for 2012 2011, and 20102011 exclude $0 million $54 million, and $197$54 million, respectively, of pension contributions made by BGE prior to the closing of Exelon’s merger with Constellation on March 12, 2012. BGE’s other postretirement benefit payments for 2012 2011, and 20102011 exclude $4 million $13 million, and $17$13 million, respectively, of other postretirement benefit payments made by BGE prior to the closing of Exelon’s merger with Constellation on March 12, 2012. These pre-merger contributions are not included in Exelon’s financial statements but are reflected in BGE’s financial statements.
(c)The increase in 2011 pension contributions was related to Exelon’s $2.1 billion contribution to its pension plans as a result of accelerated cash benefits associated with the Tax Relief Act of 2010.

 

Exelon plans to contribute approximately $255$264 million to its qualified pension plans in 2013,2014, of which Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE will contribute $113$118 million, $116$119 million, $11 million and $0 million, respectively. Unlike the qualified pension plans, Exelon’s non-qualified pension plans are not funded. Exelon plans to make non-qualified pension plan benefit payments of approximately $15$12 million in 2013,2014, of which Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE will pay $6make payments of $5 million, $1 million, $1$0 million and $2$1 million, respectively. Management considers various factors when making pension funding decisions, including actuarially determined minimum contribution requirements under ERISA, contributions required to avoid benefit restrictions and at-risk status as defined by the Pension Protection Act of 2006 (the Act), management of the pension obligation and regulatory implications. The Act requires the attainment of certain funding levels to avoid benefit restrictions (such as an inability to pay lump sums or to accrue benefits prospectively), and at-risk status (which triggers higher minimum contribution requirements and participant notification). Additionally, for Exelon’s largest qualified pension plan, the projected contributions reflect a funding strategy of contributing the greater of $250 million, which approximates service cost, or the minimum amounts under ERISA to avoid benefit restrictions and at-risk status. This level funding strategy helps minimize volatility of future period required pension contributions. On July 6, 2012, President Obama signed into law the Moving Ahead for Progress in the Twenty-first Century Act, which contains a pension funding provision that results in lower minimum pension contributions in the near term while increasing the premiums pension plans pay to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. Certain provisions of the law will bewere applied in 2012 while others take effectwere applied in 2013. The estimated impacts of the law are reflected in the projected pension contributions.

 

Unlike the qualified pension plans, Exelon’s other postretirement plans are not subject to regulatorystatutory minimum contribution requirements. Management considersExelon’s management has historically considered several factors in determining the level of contributions to Exelon’sits other postretirement benefit plans, including levels of benefit claims paid and regulatory implications (amounts deemed prudent to meet regulatory expectations and

 

357361


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

best assure continued rate recovery). In 2014, Exelon expects to contribute approximately $292 million to theanticipates funding its other postretirement benefit plans based on the funding considerations discussed above, with the exception of those plans which remain unfunded. Exelon expects to make other postretirement benefit plan contributions, including benefit payments related to unfunded plans, of approximately $430 million in 2013,2014, of which Generation, ComEd, PECO, and BGE expect to contribute $117$168 million, $114$197 million, $22$19 million, and $18$17 million, respectively.

 

Estimated Future Benefit Payments

 

Estimated future benefit payments to participants in all of the pension plans and postretirement benefit plans at December 31, 20122013 were:

 

  Pension
Benefits
   Other
Postretirement

Benefits
   Pension
Benefits
   Other
Postretirement
Benefits
 
  

2013

  $943   $197 

2014

   807    204   $929   $204 

2015

   891    212    851    210 

2016

   868    220    873    219 

2017

   902    231    902    228 

2018 through 2022

   5,161    1,330 

2018

   1,015    238 

2019 through 2023

   5,257    1,383 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total estimated future benefit payments through 2022

  $9,572   $2,394 

Total estimated future benefit payments through 2023

  $9,827   $2,482 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

Allocation to Exelon Subsidiaries

 

Generation, ComEd, PECO, and BGE account for their participation in Exelon’s pension and other postretirement benefit plans by applying multiemployer accounting. Employee-related assets and liabilities, including both pension and postretirement liabilities, for the legacy Exelon plans were allocated by Exelon to its subsidiaries based on the number of active employees as of January 1, 2001 as part of Exelon’s corporate restructuring. Exelon allocates the components of pension and other postretirement costs to the subsidiaries in the legacy Exelon plans based upon several factors, including the measures of active employee participation in each participating unit. The obligation for Generation, ComEd and PECO reflects the initial allocation and the cumulative costs incurred and contributions made since January 1, 2001. Pension and postretirement benefit contributions are allocated to legacy Exelon subsidiaries in proportion to active service costs recognized and total costs recognized, respectively. For legacy CEG plans, components of pension and other postretirement benefit costs and contributions are allocated to the subsidiaries based on employee participation (both active and retired). Pension assets are allocated such that each subsidiary has a funded status consistent with the overall plan.

 

The following approximate amounts below were included in capital expenditures and operating and maintenance expense for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, respectively, for Generation’s, ComEd’s, PECO’s, BSC’s and BGE’s allocated portion of the Exelon-sponsored pension and other postretirement benefit plans.plan costs. These amounts include the recognized contractual termination benefit charges, curtailment gains, and settlement charges:

 

For the Year Ended December 31,

  Generation   ComEd   PECO   BSC (a)   BGE (b)(c)   Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BSC (a)   BGE (b)(c)   Exelon 

2013

  $347   $309   $43   $71   $55   $825 

2012

  $341   $282   $50   $99   $60   $820    341    282    50    99    60    820 

2011

   249    213    32    48    51    542    249    213    32    48    51    542 

2010

   268    215    46    52    48    581 
(a)These amounts primarily represent amounts billed to Exelon’s subsidiaries through intercompany allocations.

 

358362


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

(a)These amounts primarily represent amounts billed to Exelon’s subsidiaries through intercompany allocations. These amounts are not included in the Generation, ComEd, PECO or BGE amounts above. As of December 31, 2012, ComEd and BGE each reported a regulatory asset of $1 million related to their BSC-billed portion of the second quarter 2012 contractual termination benefit charge.
(b)The amounts included in capital and operating and maintenance expense for the years ended December 31, 2012 2011, and 20102011 include $12 million $51 million, and $48$51 million, respectively, in costs incurred prior to the closing of Exelon’s merger with Constellation on March 12, 2012. These amounts are not included in Exelon’s capital expenditures and operating and maintenance expense for the years ended December 31, 2012 2011, and 2010.2011.
(c)BGE’s pension and other postretirement benefit costs for the year ended December 31, 2012 include a $3 million contractual termination benefit charge, which was recorded as a regulatory asset.asset as of December 31, 2012.

 

Plan Assets

 

Investment Strategy. On a regular basis, Exelon evaluates its investment strategy to ensure that plan assets will be sufficient to pay plan benefits when due. As part of this ongoing evaluation, Exelon may make changes to its targeted asset allocation and investment strategy.

 

Exelon has developed and implemented ana liability hedging investment strategy for its qualified pension plans that has reduced the volatility of its pension assets relative to its pension liabilities. Exelon is likely to continue to gradually increase the liability hedging portfolio as the funded status of its plans improves. The overall objective is to achieve attractive risk-adjusted returns that will balance the liquidity requirements of the plans’ liabilities while striving to minimize the risk of significant losses. This investment strategy would tend to result in a lower expected rate of return on plan assets in future years. Trust assets for Exelon’s other postretirement plans are managed in a diversified investment strategy that prioritizes maximizing liquidity and returns while minimizing asset volatility.

 

Exelon used an EROA of 7.50%7.00% and 6.45%6.59% to estimate its 20132014 pension and other postretirement benefit costs, respectively.

 

Exelon’s pension and other postretirement benefit plan target asset allocations and December 31, 20122013 and 20112012 asset allocations were as follows:

 

Pension Plans

 

    Percentage of Plan Assets
at December 31,
     Percentage of Plan Assets
at December 31,
 

Asset Category

  Target Allocation 2012 2011   Target Allocation 2013 2012 

Equity securities

   34  35  32   31  35  35

Fixed income securities

   40  40   47    38  37   40 

Alternative investments(a)

   26  25   21    31  28   25 
   

 

  

 

    

 

  

 

 

Total

    100  100    100  100
   

 

  

 

    

 

  

 

 

 

Other Postretirement Benefit Plans

 

    Percentage of Plan Assets
at December 31,
     Percentage of Plan Assets
at December 31,
 

Asset Category

  Target Allocation 2012 2011   Target Allocation 2013 2012 

Equity securities

   45  46  37   41  45  46

Fixed income securities

   40  40   53    39  37   40 

Alternative investments(a)

   15  14   10    20  18   14 
   

 

  

 

    

 

  

 

 

Total

    100  100    100  100
   

 

  

 

    

 

  

 

 
(a)Alternative investments include private equity, hedge funds and real estate.

 

359363


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

(a)Alternative investments include private equity, hedge funds and real estate.

 

Concentrations of Credit Risk. Exelon evaluated its pension and other postretirement benefit plans’ asset portfolios for the existence of significant concentrations of credit risk as of December 31, 2012.2013. Types of concentrations that were evaluated include, but are not limited to, investment concentrations in a single entity, type of industry, foreign country, and individual fund. As of December 31, 2012,2013, there were no significant concentrations (defined as greater than 10 percent of plan assets) of risk in Exelon’s pension and other postretirement benefit plan assets.

 

Fair Value Measurements

 

The following table presents Exelon’s pension and other postretirement benefit plan assets measured and recorded at fair value on Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets on a recurring basis and their level within the fair value hierarchy at December 31, 20122013 and 2011:2012:

 

At December 31, 2012(a)  Level 1   Level 2 Level 3   Total 
At December 31, 2013(a)  Level 1   Level 2 Level 3   Total 

Pension plan assets

              

Cash equivalents

  $1   $—     $—      $1 

Equity securities:

              

Individually held

   2,562    —      —       2,562    3,090    —     2    3,092 

Commingled funds

   —       1,111   —       1,111    —       1,167   —       1,167 

Mutual funds(c)

   323    —      —       323 

Mutual funds

   270    —      —       270 
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

Equity securities subtotal

   2,885    1,111   —       3,996    3,360    1,167   2    4,529 
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

Fixed income securities:

              

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

   1,037    —      —       1,037    908    9   —       917 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and by political subdivisions of the states

   —       108   —       108    —       88   —       88 

Foreign debt securities

   —       252   —       252    —       205   —       205 

Corporate debt securities

   —       3,330   —       3,330    —       2,927   41    2,968 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —       117   —       117    —       90   —       90 

Non-Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —       28   —       28    —       26   —       26 

Commingled funds

   —       274   —       274    —       558   —       558 

Mutual funds(c)

   4    291   —       295 

Mutual funds

   5    315   —       320 

Derivative instruments(b):

              

Assets

   —       9   —       9    —       7   —       7 

Liabilities

   —       (21  —       (21   —       (134  —       (134
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

Fixed income securities subtotal

   1,041    4,388   —       5,429    913    4,091   41    5,045 
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

Private equity

   —       —      754    754    —       —      806    806 

Hedge funds

   —       1,080   1,235    2,315    —       1,266   1,039    2,305 

Real estate:

              

Individually held

   280    —      —       280    264    —      —       264 

Commingled funds

   —       75   —       75    —       2   —       2 

Real estate funds

   —       —      426    426    —       —      582    582 
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

Real estate subtotal

   280    75   426    781    264    2   582    848 
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

Pension plan assets subtotal

   4,207    6,654   2,415    13,276    4,537    6,526   2,470    13,533 
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

 

360364


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

At December 31, 2013(a)  Level 1   Level 2   Level 3   Total 

Other postretirement benefit plan assets

        

Cash equivalents

   51    —       —       51 

Equity securities:

        

Individually held

   286    —       —       286 

Commingled funds

   —       515    —       515 

Mutual funds

   164    —       —       164 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Equity securities subtotal

   450    515    —       965 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income securities:

        

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

   17    1    —       18 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and by political subdivisions of the states

   —       149    —       149 

Foreign debt securities

   —       2    —       2 

Corporate debt securities

   —       50    —       50 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —       45    —       45 

Non-Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —       7    —       7 

Commingled funds

   —       218    —       218 

Mutual funds

   305    —       —       305 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income securities subtotal

   322    472    —       794 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Private equity

   —       —       2    2 

Hedge funds

   —       295    4    299 

Real estate:

        

Individually held

   8    —       —       8 

Real estate funds

   —       5    109    114 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Real estate subtotal

   8    5    109    122 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Other postretirement benefit plan assets subtotal

   831    1,287    115    2,233 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total pension and other postretirement benefit plan
assets(c)

  $5,368   $7,813   $2,585   $15,766 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

At December 31, 2012(a)  Level 1   Level 2   Level 3   Total 

Other postretirement benefit plan assets

        

Cash equivalents

   44    —       —       44 

Equity securities:

        

Individually held

   198    —       —       198 

Commingled funds

   —       530    —       530 

Mutual funds(c)

   230    —       —       230 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Equity securities subtotal

   428    530    —       958 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income securities:

        

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

   18    —       —       18 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and by political subdivisions of the states

   —       125    —       125 

Foreign debt securities

   —       3    —       3 

Corporate debt securities

   —       50    —       50 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —       52    —       52 

Non-Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —       6    —       6 

Commingled funds

   —       271    —       271 

Mutual funds(c)

   295    2    —       297 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income securities subtotal

   313    509    —       822 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Private equity

   —       —       1    1 

Hedge funds

   —       188    12    200 

Real estate:

        

Individually held

   7    —       —       7 

Commingled funds

   —       2    —       2 

Real estate funds

   —       6    95    101 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Real estate subtotal

   7    8    95    110 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Other postretirement benefit plan assets subtotal

   792    1,235    108    2,135 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total pension and other postretirement benefit plan
assets(d)(e)

  $4,999   $7,889   $2,523   $15,411 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

361365


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

At December 31, 2012(a)  Level 1   Level 2  Level 3   Total 

Pension plan assets

       

Cash equivalents

  $1   $—     $—      $1 

Equity securities:

       

Individually held

   2,562    —      —       2,562 

Commingled funds

   —       1,111   —       1,111 

Mutual funds

   323    —      —       323 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Equity securities subtotal

   2,885    1,111   —       3,996 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income securities:

       

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

   1,037    —      —       1,037 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and by political subdivisions of the states

   —       108   —       108 

Foreign debt securities

   —       252   —       252 

Corporate debt securities

   —       3,330   —       3,330 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —       117   —       117 

Non-Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —       28   —       28 

Commingled funds

   —       274   —       274 

Mutual funds

   4    291   —       295 

Derivative instruments(b):

       

Assets

   —       9   —       9 

Liabilities

   —       (21  —       (21
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income securities subtotal

   1,041    4,388   —       5,429 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Private equity

   —       —      754    754 

Hedge funds

   —       1,080   1,235    2,315 

Real estate:

       

Individually held

   280    —      —       280 

Commingled funds

   —       75   —       75 

Real estate funds

   —       —      426    426 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Real estate subtotal

   280    75   426    781 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Pension plan assets subtotal

   4,207    6,654   2,415    13,276 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

At December 31, 2011 (a) Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 

Pension plan assets

    

Cash equivalents

 $8  $—     $—     $8 

Equity securities:

    

Individually held

  1,985   —      —      1,985 

Commingled funds

  —      858   —      858 

Mutual funds

  —      389   —      389 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Equity securities subtotal

  1,985   1,247   —      3,232 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Fixed income securities:

    

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

  1,616   48   —      1,664 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and by political subdivisions of the states

  —      88   —      88 

Foreign debt securities

  —      224   —      224 

Corporate debt securities

  —      2,561   —      2,561 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

  —      156   —      156 

Non-Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

  —      28   —      28 

Commingled funds

  —      202   —      202 

Mutual funds

  —      277   —      277 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Fixed income securities subtotal

  1,616   3,584   —      5,200 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Private equity

  —      —      672   672 

Hedge funds(f)

  —      —      1,525   1,525 

Real estate:

    

Individually held

  207   —      —      207 

Commingled funds

  —      125   —      125 

Real estate funds

  —      —      229   229 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Real estate subtotal

  207   125   229   561 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Pension plan assets subtotal

  3,816   4,956   2,426   11,198 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other postretirement benefit plan assets

    

Cash equivalents

  73   —      —      73 

Equity securities:

    

Individually held

  110   —      —      110 

Commingled funds

  —      415   —      415 

Mutual funds

  —      171   —      171 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Equity securities subtotal

  110   586   —      696 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Fixed income securities:

    

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

  26   3   —      29 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and by political subdivisions of the states

  —      93   —      93 

Foreign debt securities

  —      4   —      4 

Corporate debt securities

  —      41   —      41 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

  —      34   —      34 

Non-Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

  —      7   —      7 

Commingled funds

  —      385   —      385 

Mutual funds

  —      256   —      256 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Fixed income securities subtotal

  26   823   —      849 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Private equity

  —      —      1   1 

Hedge funds(f)

  —      —      157   157 

Real estate

    

Individually held

  4   —      —      4 

Commingled funds

  —      1   —      1 

Real Estate funds

  —      —      7   7 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Real estate subtotal

  4   1   7   12 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other postretirement benefit plan assets subtotal

  213   1,410   165   1,788 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total pension and other postretirement benefit plan assets (d)

 $4,029  $6,366  $2,591  $12,986 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

362366


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

At December 31, 2012(a)  Level 1   Level 2   Level 3   Total 

Other postretirement benefit plan assets

        

Cash equivalents

   44    —       —       44 

Equity securities:

        

Individually held

   198    —       —       198 

Commingled funds

   —       530    —       530 

Mutual funds

   230    —       —       230 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Equity securities subtotal

   428    530    —       958 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income securities:

        

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

   18    —       —       18 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and by political subdivisions of the states

   —       125    —       125 

Foreign debt securities

   —       3    —       3 

Corporate debt securities

   —       50    —       50 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —       52    —       52 

Non-Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —       6    —       6 

Commingled funds

   —       271    —       271 

Mutual funds

   295    2    —       297 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income securities subtotal

   313    509    —       822 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Private equity

   —       —       1    1 

Hedge funds

   —       188    12    200 

Real estate:

        

Individually held

   7    —       —       7 

Commingled funds

   —       2    —       2 

Real estate funds

   —       6    95    101 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Real estate subtotal

   7    8    95    110 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Other postretirement benefit plan assets subtotal

   792    1,235    108    2,135 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total pension and other postretirement benefit plan assets (c)

  $4,999   $7,889   $2,523   $15,411 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

(a)See Note 9—11—Fair Value of Assets and Liabilities for a description of levels within the fair value hierarchy.
(b)Derivative instruments have a total notional amount of $2,498$2,651 million and $910$2,498 million at December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, respectively. The notional principal amounts for these instruments provide one measure of the transaction volume outstanding as of the fiscal years ended and do not represent the amount of the company’s exposure to credit or market loss.
(c)In 2012, Exelon reassessed its policy over the criteria that mutual fund investments must meet in order to be categorized within Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy. Therefore, certain mutual fund investments that were categorized within Level 2 in prior periods have been re-categorized as Level 1 investments as of December 31, 2012. The re-categorization of these mutual fund investments resulted in a transfer out of Level 2 of $852 million.
(d)Excludes net assets of $77$43 million and $43$81 million at December 31, 2013 and 2012, and 2011 respectively;respectively, which are required to reconcile to the fair value of net plan assets. These items consist primarily of receivables related to pending securities sales, interest and dividends receivable, and payables related to pending securities purchases.
(e)Includes fixed income commingled fund assets of $66 million as of December 31, 2012. The fair value of these fixed income commingled fund assets of $69 million, as of December 31, 2011, are excluded from the tables above.
(f)In 2012, Exelon refined its policy over the criteria that hedge fund investments must meet in order to be categorized within Level 2 and Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy. Therefore, certain hedge fund investments that were categorized within Level 3 in prior periods have been re-categorized as Level 2 investments as of December 31, 2012. The re-categorization of these hedge fund investments is reflected as transfers out of Level 3 of $1.1 billion.

367


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

The following table presents the reconciliation of Level 3 assets and liabilities measured at fair value for pension and other postretirement benefit plans for the years ended December 31, 20122013 and 2011:2012:

 

  Hedge funds Private equity Real estate Total   Hedge
funds
 Private
equity
 Real
estate
 Debt
securities
   Preferred
stock
   Total 

Pension Assets

              

Balance as of January 1, 2012

  $1,525  $672  $229  $2,426 

Balance as of January 1, 2013

  $1,235  $754  $426  $—      $—      $2,415 

Actual return on plan assets:

              

Relating to assets still held at the reporting date

   138   55   24   217    143   86   63   —       —       292 

Relating to assets sold during the period

   3   —      (4  —       —       (1

Purchases, sales and settlements:

              

Purchases

   447   108   134   689    360   123   226   41    2    752 

Sales

   (6  —      —      (6   (76  —      (91  —       —       (167

Settlements

   (4  (128  (28  (160

Transfers into (out of) Level 3 (a)(b)(c)

   (865  47   67   (751

Settlements (a)

   (3  (157  (38  —       —       (198

Transfers into (out of) Level 3 (b)

   (623  —      —      —       —       (623
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2012

  $1,235  $754  $426  $2,415 

Balance as of December 31, 2013

  $1,039  $806  $582  $41   $2   $2,470 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 

Other Postretirement Benefits

              

Balance as of January 1, 2012

  $157  $1  $7  $165 

Balance as of January 1, 2013

  $12  $1  $95  $—      $—      $108 

Actual return on plan assets:

              

Relating to assets still held at the reporting date

   11   —      3   14    1   —      11   —       —       12 

Relating to assets sold during the period

   —      —      —      —       —       —    

Purchases, sales and settlements:

              

Purchases

   32   —      91   123    —      1   3   —       —       4 

Sales

   —      —      —      —       (1  —      —      —       —       (1

Settlements

   —      —      (1  (1

Transfers into (out of) Level 3(a)(b)(c)

   (188  —      (5  (193

Settlements (a)

   (4  —      —      —       —       (4

Transfers into (out of) Level 3 (b)

   (4  —      —      —       —       (4
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2012

  $12  $1  $95  $108 

Balance as of December 31, 2013

  $4  $2  $109  $—     $—     $115 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

363368


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

  Hedge funds Private equity Real estate Total   Hedge
funds
 Private
equity
 Real
estate
 Debt
securities
   Preferred
stock
   Total 

Pension Assets

              

Balance as of January 1, 2011

  $329  $536  $179  $1,044 

Actual return on plan assets(d):

     

Relating to assets still held at the reporting date

   (26  84   46   104 

Purchases, sales and settlements(d):

     

Purchases

   1,222   121   13   1,356 

Sales

   —      —      —      —    

Settlements

   —      (69  (9  (78

Transfers into (out of) Level 3

   —      —      —      —    
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2011

  $1,525  $672  $229  $2,426 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other Postretirement Benefits

     

Balance as of January 1, 2011

  $5  $—     $8  $13 

Balance as of January 1, 2012

  $1,525  $672  $229  $—      $—      $2,426 

Actual return on plan assets:

              

Relating to assets still held at the reporting date

   (3  —      (1  (4   138   55   24   —       —       217 

Purchases, sales and settlements:

              

Purchases

   155   1   —      156    447   108   134   —       —       689 

Sales

   —      —      —      —       (6  —      —      —       —       (6

Settlements

   —      —      —      —    

Transfers into (out of) Level 3

   —      —      —      —    

Settlements (a)

   (4  (128  (28  —       —       (160

Transfers into (out of) Level 3 (c)(d)(e)

   (865  47   67   —       —       (751
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2011

  $157  $1  $7  $165 

Balance as of December 31, 2012

  $1,235  $754  $426  $—      $—      $2,415 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 

Other Postretirement Benefits

         

Balance as of January 1, 2012

  $157  $1  $7  $—      $—      $165 

Actual return on plan assets:

         

Relating to assets still held at the reporting date

   11   —      3   —       —       14 

Purchases, sales and settlements:

         

Purchases

   32   —      91   —       —       123 

Sales

   —      —      —      —       —       —    

Settlements (a)

   —      —      (1  —       —       (1

Transfers into (out of) Level 3 (c)(d)(e)

   (188  —      (5  —       —       (193
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2012

  $12  $1  $95  $—      $—      $108 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Represents cash settlements only.
(b)As of December 31, 2012, hedge fund investments that contained redemption restrictions limiting Exelon’s ability to redeem the investments within a reasonable period of time were classified as Level 3 investments. As of December 31, 2013, restrictions for certain investments no longer applied, therefore allowing redemption within a reasonable period of time from the measurement date at NAV. As such, these hedge fund investments are reflected as transfers out of Level 3 to Level 2 of $627 million in 2013.
(c)In connection with the acquisition of Constellation in March 2012, Exelon assumed Constellation’s pension plan assets resulting in transfers into Level 3 of $141 million.
(b)(d)In 2012, Exelon refined its policy over the criteria that hedge fund investments must meet in order to be categorized within Level 2 and Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy. Therefore, certain hedge fund investments that were categorized within Level 3 in prior periods have been re-categorized as Level 2 investments as of December 31, 2012. The re-categorization of these hedge fund investments is reflected as transfers out of Level 3 of $1.1 billion.
(c)(e)In 2012, the liquidity terms of a certain real estate investment changed to allow redemption within a reasonable period of time from the redemption date which led to a transfer out of Level 3 to Level 2 of $5 million.
(d)Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified for comparative purposes.

 

Valuation Techniques Used to Determine Fair Value

 

Cash equivalents.equivalents. Investments with maturities of three months or less when purchased, including certain short-termshort—term fixed income securities and money market funds, are considered cash equivalents. The fair values are based on observable market prices and, therefore, are included in the recurring fair value measurements hierarchy as Level 1.

 

Equity securities.securities. With respect to individually held equity securities, including investments in U.S. and international securities, the trustees obtain prices from pricing services, whose prices are obtained from direct feeds from market exchanges, which Exelon is able to independently corroborate. Equity

369


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

securities held individually are primarily traded on exchanges that contain only actively traded securities, due to the volume trading requirements imposed by these exchanges. Equity securities are valued based on quoted prices in active markets and are categorized as Level 1. Certain private placement equity securities are categorized as Level 3 because they are not publicly traded and are priced using significant unobservable inputs.

 

Equity commingled funds and mutual funds are maintained by investment companies that hold certain investments in accordance with a stated set of fund objectives, which are consistent with Exelon’s overall investment strategy. The values of some of these funds are publicly quoted. For mutual funds which are publicly quoted, the funds are valued based on quoted prices in active markets

364


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

and have been categorized as Level 1. For equity commingled funds and mutual funds which are not publicly quoted, the fund administrators value the funds using the net asset value per fund share, derived from the quoted prices in active markets of the underlying securities. These funds have been categorized as Level 2.

 

Fixed income.income. For fixed income securities, which consist primarily of corporate debt securities, foreign government securities, municipal bonds, asset and mortgage-backed securities, commingled funds, mutual funds and derivative instruments, the trustees obtain multiple prices from pricing vendors whenever possible, which enables cross-provider validations in addition to checks for unusual daily movements. A primary price source is identified based on asset type, class or issue for each security. The trustees monitor prices supplied by pricing services and may use a supplemental price source or change the primary price source of a given security if the portfolio managers challenge an assigned price and the trustees determine that another price source is considered to be preferable. Exelon has obtained an understanding of how these prices are derived, including the nature and observability of the inputs used in deriving such prices. Additionally, Exelon selectively corroborates the fair values of securities by comparison to other market-based price sources. Investments in U.S. Treasury securities have been categorized as Level 1 because they trade in highly-liquid and transparent markets. Certain private placement fixed income securities have been categorized as Level 3 because they are priced using certain significant unobservable inputs and are typically illiquid. The fair values of fixed income securities, excluding U.S. Treasury securities and privately placed fixed income securities, are based on evaluated prices that reflect observable market information, such as actual trade information of similar securities, adjusted for observable differences and are categorized as Level 2.

 

Derivative instruments consisting primarily of interest rate swaps to manage risk are recorded at fair value. Derivative instruments are valued based on external price data of comparable securities and have been categorized as Level 2.

 

Fixed income commingled funds and mutual funds, including short-term investment funds, are maintained by investment companies and hold certain investments in accordance with a stated set of fund objectives, which are consistent with Exelon’s overall investment strategy. The values of some of these funds are publicly quoted. For mutual funds which are publicly quoted, the funds are valued based on quoted prices in active markets and have been categorized as Level 1. For fixed income commingled funds and mutual funds which are not publicly quoted, the fund administrators value the funds using the net asset value per fund share, derived from the quoted prices in active markets of the underlying securities. These funds have been categorized as Level 2.

 

Private equity.equity. Private equity investments include those in limited partnerships that invest in operating companies that are not publicly traded on a stock exchange such as leveraged buyouts, growth capital, venture capital, distressed investments and investments in natural resources. Private

370


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

equity valuations are reported by the fund manager and are based on the valuation of the underlying investments, which include inputs such as cost, operating results, discounted future cash flows and market based comparable data. Since these valuation inputs are not highly observable, private equity investments have been categorized as Level 3.

 

Hedge funds.funds. Hedge fund investments include those seeking to maximize absolute returns using a broad range of strategies to enhance returns and provide additional diversification. The fair value of hedge funds is determined using NAV or ownership interest of the investments. Exelon has the ability to redeem these investments at NAV or its equivalent subject to certain restrictions which may include a lock-up period or a gate. For Exelon’s investments that have terms that allow redemption within a reasonable period of time from the measurement date, the hedge fund investments are categorized as Level 2. For investments that have restrictions that may limit

365


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Exelon’s ability to redeem the investments at the measurement date or within a reasonable period of time, the hedge fund investments are categorized as Level 3.

 

Real estate.estate. Real estate investment trusts valued daily based on quoted prices in active markets are categorized as Level 1. Real estate commingled funds are maintained by investment companies and hold certain investments in accordance with a stated set of fund objectives, which are consistent with Exelon’s overall investment strategy. Since these funds are not publicly quoted, the fund administrators value the funds using the net asset value per fund share, derived from the quoted prices in active markets of the underlying securities. These funds have been categorized as Level 2. Other real estate funds are funds with a direct investment in a pool of real estate properties. These funds are valued by investment managers on a periodic basis using pricing models that use independent appraisals from sources with professional qualifications. Since these valuation inputs are not highly observable, these real estate funds have been categorized as Level 3.

 

Defined Contribution Savings Plan (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGEThe Registrants participate in avarious 401(k) defined contribution savings planplans that are sponsored by Exelon. The plan isplans are qualified under applicable sections of the IRC and allowsallow employees to contribute a portion of their pre-tax income in accordance with specified guidelines. Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGEAll Registrants match a percentage of the employee contributioncontributions up to certain limits. The following table presents matching contributions to the savings plan for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010:2011:

 

For the Year Ended December 31,

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE   Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE (a)   BSC (b) 

2013

  $85   $40   $22   $8   $8   $7 

2012

  $67   $30   $19   $7   $7    67    30    19    7    7    5 

2011

   78    40    22    9    7    78    40    22    9    7    7 

2010

   81    42    22    9    6 

(a)BGE’s matching contributions for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011 include $1 million and $7 million of costs, respectively, incurred prior to the closing of Exelon’s merger with Constellation on March 12, 2012. These costs are not included in Exelon’s matching contributions for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011.
(b)These amounts primarily represent amounts billed to Exelon’s subsidiaries through intercompany allocations. These costs are not included in the Generation, ComEd, PECO, or BGE amounts above.

 

15. Plant Retirements17. Severance (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and Generation)BGE)

 

Schuylkill StationThe Registrants have an ongoing severance plan under which, in general, the longer an employee worked prior to termination the greater the amount of severance benefits. The Registrants record a liability and Riverside Stationexpense or regulatory asset for severance once terminations are probable of occurrence

 

On October 31, 2012, Generation notified PJM of its intention to permanently retire Schuylkill Generating Station Unit 1 by February 1, 2013, and Riverside Generating Station Unit 6 by June 1, 2014. Schuylkill Unit 1 is a 166 MW peaking oil unit located in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, which was placed in service in 1958. Riverside Unit 6 is a 115 MW peaking gas/kerosene unit located in Baltimore, Maryland, which was placed in service in 1970. The units are being retired because they are no longer economic to operate due to their age, relatively high capital and operating costs and declining revenue expectations. On November 30, 2012, PJM notified Generation that it did not identify any transmission system reliability issues associated with the proposed Schuylkill Unit 1 retirement date and as a result, Schuylkill Unit 1 was retired on January 1, 2013. On January 7, 2013, PJM notified Generation that it did not identify any transmission system reliability issues associated with the proposed Riverside Unit 6 retirement date. Exelon will determine the final retirement date for Riverside Unit 6 during the second quarter of 2013. The early retirements will not have a material impact on Generation or Exelon’s results of operations, cash flows or financial position.

Oyster Creek

On December 8, 2010, in connection with the executed Administrative Consent Order (ACO) with the NJDEP, Exelon announced that Generation will permanently cease generation operations at Oyster Creek by December 31, 2019.

366371


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

and the related severance benefits can be reasonably estimated. For severance benefits that are incremental to its ongoing severance plan (“one-time termination benefits”), the Registrants measure the obligation and record the expense at fair value at the communication date if there are no future service requirements, or, if future service is required to receive the termination benefit, ratably over the required service period.

 

Eddystone Station and Cromby StationMerger-Related Severance

 

In 2009,Upon closing the merger with Constellation, Exelon announced its intentionrecorded a severance accrual for the anticipated employee position reductions as a result of the post-merger integration. The majority of these positions are corporate and Generation support positions. Since then, Exelon has identified specific employees to permanently retire three coal-fired generating units and one oil/gas-fired generating unit, effective May 31, 2011, in responsebe severed pursuant to the economic outlook relatedmerger-related staffing and selection process as well as employees that were previously identified for severance but have since accepted another position within Exelon and are no longer receiving a severance benefit. Exelon adjusts its accrual each quarter to reflect its best estimate of remaining severance costs. In addition, certain employees identified during the continued operationstaffing and selection process also receive pension and other postretirement benefits that are deemed contractual termination benefits, which the Registrants recorded during the second quarter of these four units. However, PJM determined that transmission reliability upgrades would be necessary to alleviate reliability impacts and that those upgrades would be completed in a manner that will permit Generation’s retirement2012.

The amount of two ofseverance expense associated with the units on that date and two ofpost-merger integration recognized for the units subsequent to May 31, 2011. On May 31, 2011, Cromby Generating Station (Cromby) Unit 1 and Eddystone Generating Station (Eddystone) Unit 1 were retired; Cromby Unit 2 retired onyear ended December 31, 20112013 for Exelon and Eddystone Unit 2 retired on MayGeneration was $6 million and $6 million, respectively. For Generation, $5 million represents amounts billed by BSC through intercompany allocations. There was no severance expense associated with post-merger integration recognized for the year ended December 31, 2012. On May 27, 2011, the FERC approved a settlement providing2013 for a reliability-must-run rate schedule, which defines compensationComEd, PECO and BGE. Estimated costs to be paid to Generation for continuing to operate these units. The monthly fixed-cost recovery during the reliability-must-run period for Eddystone Unit 2 is approximately $6 million. Such revenue is intended to recover total expected operating costs, plus a return on net assets, of the two units during the reliability-must-run period. In addition, Generation is reimbursed for variable costs, including fuel, emissions costs, chemicals, auxiliary power and for project investment costs during the reliability-must-run period. Eddystone Unit 2 and Cromby Unit 2 operated under the reliability-must-run agreement from June 1, 2011 until their respective retirement dates.incurred after December 31, 2013 are not material.

 

SinceFor the announced retirements inyear ended December 2009, Generation31, 2012, the Registrants recorded pre-tax expense of $44 million, which included $18 million of expense for the write down of inventory, $13 million of expense for estimated salary continuance and health and welfarefollowing severance benefits and $13 million of shut downbenefit costs recordedassociated with the identified job reductions within operating and maintenance expense in their Consolidated Statements of Operations, except for those costs that were capitalized as regulatory assets related to ComEd and BGE:

Year Ended December 31, 2012

Severance Benefits(a)

  Exelon (b)   Generation   ComEd (b)   PECO   BGE (b) 

Severance charges

  $124   $80   $14   $7   $17 

Stock compensation

   7    4    1    —       1 

Other charges

   7    4    1    —       1 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total severance benefits

  $138   $88   $16   $7   $19 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)The amounts above include $46 million at Generation, $14 million at ComEd, $7 million at PECO, and $7 million at BGE, for amounts billed by BSC through intercompany allocations for the year ended December 31, 2012.
(b)Exelon, ComEd and BGE established regulatory assets of $35 million, $16 million and $19 million, respectively, for severance benefits costs for the year ended December 31, 2012. The majority of these costs are expected to be recovered over a five-year period.

372


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Amounts included in the table below represent the severance liability recorded by Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE for employees of those Registrants and exclude amounts billed through intercompany allocations:

Severance liability

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO   BGE 

Balance at December 31, 2011

  $—    $—    $—    $—     $—   

Severance charges(a)

   124   38   2   —      11 

Stock compensation

   7   2   —     —      —   

Other charges(b)

   7   2   —     —      1 

Payments

   (27  (9  (1  —      (1
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Balance at December 31, 2012

  $111  $33  $1  $—     $11 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Severance charges

   5   1   —     —      —   

Stock compensation

   1   —     —     —      —   

Payments

   (64  (24  (1  —      (5
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Balance at December 31, 2013

  $53  $10  $—    $—     $6 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Includes salary continuance and health and welfare severance benefits. Amounts primarily represent benefits provided for under Exelon’s ongoing severance plan. One-time termination benefits were not material for the years ended December 31, 2012 and December 31, 2013.
(b)Primarily includes life insurance, employer payroll taxes, educational assistance, and outplacement services.

Cash payments under the plan began in the second quarter of 2012. Substantially all cash payments under the plan are expected to be made by the end of 2016.

Ongoing Severance Plans

The Registrants provide severance and health and welfare benefits under Exelon’s ongoing severance benefit plans to terminated employees in the normal course of business, which were not directly related to the merger with Constellation. These benefits are accrued for when the benefits are considered probable and Generation’scan be reasonably estimated.

For the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012, and 2011, the Registrants recorded the following severance costs associated with these ongoing severance benefits within operating and maintenance expense in their Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.Income:

 

Severance Benefits(a)

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Severance charges—2013

  $18   $16   $2   $—     $—   

Severance charges—2012

   19    14    2    1    3 

Severance charges—2011

   5    5    —      —      4 

During the year ended December 31, 2012, Generation recorded $1 million of expense for the write down of inventory and $11 million of shut down costs. During the year ended December 31, 2011, Generation recorded pre-tax expense of $4 million for estimated salary continuance and health and welfare severance benefits and $2 million of shut down costs.

(a)The amounts above for Generation include $2 million, $0 million, and $1 million for amounts billed by BSC through intercompany allocations for the years ended December 31, 2013, December 31, 2012, and December 31, 2011, respectively. Amounts billed by BSC to ComEd, PECO and BGE were not material.

 

The following table presents the activityseverance liability balances associated with these ongoing severance benefits as of severance obligations for the announced Cromby and Eddystone retirements from January 1, 2011 through December 31, 2012:2013 and 2012 are not material.

 

Severance Benefits Obligation

  Exelon and
Generation
 

Balance at January 1, 2011

  $7 

Severance charges recorded

   4 

Cash payments

   (4
  

 

 

 

Balance at December 31, 2011

   7 

Cash payments

   (4
  

 

 

 

Balance at December 31, 2012

  $3 
  

 

 

 

373


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

16.18. Preferred and Preference Securities (Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

At December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, Exelon was authorized to issue up to 100,000,000 shares of preferred securities, none of which were outstanding.

 

Preferred and Preference Securities of Subsidiaries

 

At December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, ComEd prior preferred securities and ComEd cumulative preference securities consisted of 850,000 shares and 6,810,451 shares authorized, respectively, none of which were outstanding.

 

367


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

At December 31, 2012, and 2011, PECO cumulative preferred securities, no par value, consisted of 15,000,000 shares authorized and the outstanding amounts set forth below. Shares of preferred securities have full voting rights, including the right to cumulate votes in the election of directors. On May 1, 2013, PECO redeemed all of its outstanding preferred securities. PECO had $87 million of cumulative preferred securities that were redeemable at its option at any time for the redemption price established when each series was issued. The redemption premium is treated as a reduction to Net income to arrive at Net income attributable to common shareholders utilized in the calculation of the earnings per share for Exelon.

 

      December 31,       December 31, 
  Redemption
Price(a)
   2012   2011   2012   2011     Redemption
Price (a)
   2013   2012   2013   2012 
  Shares Outstanding   Dollar Amount       Shares Outstanding       Dollar Amount   

Series (without mandatory redemption)

                    

$4.68 (Series D)

  $104.00    150,000    150,000   $15   $15   $104.00    —       150,000   $—     $15 

$4.40 (Series C)

   112.50    274,720    274,720    27    27    112.50    —       274,720    —       27 

$4.30 (Series B)

   102.00    150,000    150,000    15    15    102.00    —       150,000    —       15 

$3.80 (Series A)

   106.00    300,000    300,000    30    30    106.00    —       300,000    —       30 
    

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total preferred securities

     874,720    874,720   $87   $87      —       874,720   $—     $87 
    

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Redeemable, at the option of PECO, at the indicated dollar amounts per share, plus accrued dividends.

 

At December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, BGE cumulative preference stock, $100 par value, consisted of 6,500,000 shares authorized and the outstanding amounts set forth below. Shares of BGE preference stock have 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.

 

       December 31, 
   Redemption
Price(a)
   2012   2011   2012   2011 
     Shares Outstanding   Dollar Amount 

Series (without mandatory redemption)

          

7.125%, 1993 Series

  $100.36    400,000    400,000   $40   $40 

6.97%, 1993 Series

   100.35    500,000    500,000    50    50 

6.70%, 1993 Series

   100.67    400,000    400,000    40    40 

6.99%, 1995 Series

   101.05    600,000    600,000    60    60 
    

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total preference stock

     1,900,000    1,900,000   $190   $190 
    

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

374


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

       December 31, 
   Redemption
Price (a)
   2013   2012   2013   2012 
     Shares Outstanding       Dollar Amount     

Series (without mandatory redemption)

          

7.125%, 1993 Series

  $100.00    400,000    400,000   $40   $40 

6.97%, 1993 Series

   100.00    500,000    500,000    50    50 

6.70%, 1993 Series

   100.34    400,000    400,000    40    40 

6.99%, 1995 Series

   100.70    600,000    600,000    60    60 
    

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total preference stock

     1,900,000    1,900,000   $190   $190 
    

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

(a)Redeemable, at the option of BGE, at the indicated dollar amounts per share, plus accrued and unpaid dividends.

 

368


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

17.19. Common Stock (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

AtThe following table presents common stock authorized and outstanding as of December 31, 20122013 and 2011, Exelon’s common stock without par value consisted of 2,000,000,000 shares authorized and 854,781,389 shares and 663,368,958, shares outstanding, respectively. At December 31, 2012 and 2011, ComEd’s common stock with a $ 12.50 par value consisted of 250,000,000 shares authorized and 127,016,761 shares and 127,016,529 shares outstanding, respectively. At December 31, 2012 and 2011, PECO’s common stock without par value consisted of 500,000,000 shares authorized and 170,478,507 shares outstanding. At December 31, 2012 and 2011, BGE’s common stock without par value consisted of 175,000,000 shares authorized and 1,000 shares outstanding.2012:

           December 31, 
           2013   2012 
   Par Value   Shares Authorized   Shares Outstanding 

Common Stock

        

Exelon

   no par value     2,000,000,000    857,290,484    854,781,389 

ComEd

   $12.50    250,000,000    127,016,896    127,016,761 

PECO

   no par value     500,000,000    170,478,507    170,478,507 

BGE

   no par value     175,000,000    1,000    1,000 

 

ComEd had 74,18273,709 and 75,09674,182 warrants outstanding to purchase ComEd common stock at December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, respectively. The warrants entitle the holders to convert such warrants into common stock of ComEd at a conversion rate of one share of common stock for three warrants. At December 31, 2013 and 2012, 24,570 and 2011, 24,727 and 25,032 shares of common stock, respectively, were reserved for the conversion of warrants.

 

Share Repurchases

 

Share Repurchase Programs.Programs. In April 2004, Exelon’s Board of Directors approved a discretionary share repurchase program that allowed Exelon to repurchase shares of its common stock on a periodic basis in the open market. The share repurchase program was intended to mitigate, in part, the dilutive effect of shares issued under Exelon’s employee stock option plan and Exelon’s ESPP. The aggregate value of the shares of common stock repurchased pursuant to the program cannot exceed the economic benefit received after January 1, 2004 due to stock option exercises and share purchases pursuant to Exelon’s ESPP. The economic benefit consists of the direct cash proceeds from purchases of stock and the tax benefits associated with exercises of stock options. The 2004 share repurchase program had no specified limit on the number of shares that could be repurchased and no specified termination date. In 2008, Exelon management decided to defer indefinitely any share repurchases. Any shares repurchased are held as treasury shares, at cost, unless cancelled or reissued at the discretion of Exelon’s management.

In the third quarter of 2008, Exelon’s Board of Directors approved a share repurchase program for $1.5 billion of its common stock. Subsequently, Exelon’s management determined to defer indefinitely any share repurchases. This decision was made in light of a variety of factors, including: developments affecting the world economy and commodity markets, including those for electricity and gas; the continued uncertainty in capital and credit markets and the potential impact of those events on Exelon’s future cash needs; projected cash needs to support investment in the business, including maintenance capital and nuclear uprates; and value-added growth opportunities.

Under the share repurchase programs, dating back to 2004, 34.735 million shares of common stock are held as treasury stock with a cost of $2.3 billion at December 31, 2012.2013. During 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, Exelon had no common stock repurchases.

 

Stock-Based Compensation Plans

Exelon grants stock-based awards through its LTIP, which primarily includes performance share awards, stock options and restricted stock units. At December 31, 2012, there were approximately 20 million shares authorized for issuance under the LTIP. For the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, exercised and distributed stock-based awards were primarily issued from authorized but unissued common stock shares.

369375


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Stock-Based Compensation Plans

 

As theExelon grants stock-based awards through its LTIP, sponsor, Exelon is the sole issuer of all stock-based compensation awards. All awards are recorded as equity or a liability in Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. The stock-based compensation expense specifically attributable to the employees of Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE is directly recorded to operating and maintenance expense within each of their respective Consolidated Statements of Operations. Stock-based compensation expense attributable to BSC employees is allocated to the Registrants using a cost-causative allocation method.

In connection with the acquisition of Constellation in March 2012, Exelon assumed Constellation’s 1995 Long-Term Incentive Plan, 2002 Senior Management Long-Term Incentive Plan, Amended and Restated 2007 Long-Term Incentive Plan, Amended and Restated Management Long-Term Incentive Plan and Executive Long-Term Incentive Plan (collectively and as amended, if applicable, the “Constellation Plans”). Stock-based awards granted under the Constellation Plans and held by Constellation employees were generally converted into outstanding Exelon stock-based compensation awards with the estimated fair value determined to be $71 million using the Black-Scholes model. Refer to Note 4 - Merger and Acquisitions for further information regarding the merger transaction. Specifically, as of the merger closing: (1) Exelon converted 12,037,093 outstanding shares that were subject to Constellationwhich primarily includes stock options, into 11,194,151 Exelon stock options valued at $65 million; and (2) Exelon converted 165,219 Constellation no-sale restricted stock units into 153,654 Exelon no-sale restrictedand performance share awards. At December 31, 2013, there were approximately 16 million shares authorized for issuance under the LTIP. For the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, exercised and distributed stock-based awards were primarily issued from authorized but unissued common stock units valued at $6 million.shares.

 

Exelon generally grants most of its stock options in the first quarter of each year. In connection with the merger with Constellation, theThe Compensation Committee of Exelon’s Board of Directors elected to delaychanged the annual equity award grant from January 2012 tomix of awards granted under the effective dateLTIP in 2013 by eliminating stock options in favor of the merger on March 12, 2012,use of full value shares, consisting of performance shares and restricted stock. The performance share awards granted in order to ensure that a majority of eligible employees receive grants on the same date and2013 will cliff vest at the same market price.end of a three-year performance period. The performance share awards granted in 2012 and earlier had a one-year performance period and vested ratably over three years. To address the reduction in annual award opportunity resulting from the transition to a three-year cliff vesting performance period, the Compensation Committee also approved a one-time grant of performance share transition awards in 2013, which will vest one-third after one year, with the remaining balance vesting over a two-year performance period.

 

The following table presents the stock-based compensation expense included in Exelon’s Consolidated Statements of Operations for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010:2011:

 

  Year Ended
December 31,
   Year Ended
December 31,
 

Components of Stock-Based Compensation Expense

  2012 2011 2010   2013 2012 2011 

Performance share awards

  $46  $26  $6   $48  $46  $26 

Restricted stock units

   61   50   31 

Stock options

   15   8   10    3   15   8 

Restricted stock units

   50   31   21 

Other stock-based awards

   4   4   4    6   4   4 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total stock-based compensation expense included in operating and maintenance expense

   115   69   41    118   115   69 

Income tax benefit

   (44  (27  (16   (44  (44  (27
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total after-tax stock-based compensation expense

  $71  $42  $25   $74  $71  $42 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

370The following table presents stock-based compensation expense (pre-tax) for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011:

   Year Ended
December 31,
 

Subsidiaries

  2013   2012 (a)   2011 (d) 

Generation

  $48   $42   $31 

ComEd

   9    11    5 

PECO

   5    5    5 

BGE

   6    5    6 

BSC (b)

   50    52    28 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total(c)

  $118   $115   $69 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)BGE’s stock-based compensation expense (pre-tax) for December 31, 2012 excludes $2 million of cost incurred in 2012 prior to the closing of Exelon’s merger with Constellation on March 12, 2012. This amount is not included in Exelon’s stock-based compensation expense for the year ended December 31, 2012 shown in the tables titled Components of Stock-Based Compensation Expense and Subsidiaries above.

376


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

The following table presents stock-based compensation expense (pre-tax) for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010:

   Year Ended December
31,
 

Subsidiaries

  2012 (a)   2011   2010 

Generation

  $42   $31   $21 

ComEd

   11    5    3 

PECO

   5    5    3 

BGE

   5    6    4 

BSC(b)

   52    28    14 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total

  $115   $69   $41 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)For BGE, reflects BGE’s stock-based compensation expense for the year ended December 31, 2012. For Exelon and Generation, includes the stock-based compensation expense of Constellation and BGE from the date of the merger, March 12, 2012, through December 31, 2012.
(b)These amounts primarily represent amounts billed to Exelon’s subsidiaries through intercompany allocations. These amounts are not included in the Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE amounts above.
(c)The stock-based compensation expense (pre-tax) for December 31, 2013 reflects the impact of changes to the retirement eligibility requirements for employees participating in the LTIP. In addition, the stock-based compensation expense at ComEd does not reflect the impact of the ComEd Key Manager Long-Term Performance Program in 2013 for certain employees, which is not considered stock-based compensation expense under the applicable authoritative guidance. In 2012, these employees participated in the Exelon Restricted Stock Award Program.
(d)The total stock-based compensation expense (pre-tax) for December 31, 2011 of $69 million does not include the $6 million expense for BGE as those costs were incurred prior to the closing of Exelon’s merger with Constellation on March 12, 2012.

 

There were no significant stock-based compensation costs capitalized during the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010.2011.

 

Exelon receives a tax deduction based on the intrinsic value of the award on the exercise date for stock options and the distribution date for performance share awards and restricted stock units. For each award, throughout the requisite service period, Exelon recognizes the tax benefit related to compensation costs. The tax deductions in excess of the benefits recorded throughout the requisite service period are recorded to common stock and are included in other financing activities within Exelon’s Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows. The following table presents information regarding Exelon’s tax benefits for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010:2011:

 

  Year Ended
December 31,
   Year Ended
December 31,
 
  2012   2011   2010   2013   2012   2011 

Realized tax benefit when exercised/distributed:

            

Stock options

  $3   $2   $5   $—      $3   $2 

Restricted stock units

   11    8    9    11    11    8 

Performance share awards

   7    7    13    11    7    7 

Stock deferral plan

   —      1    1    1    —      1 

Excess tax benefits included in other financing activities of Exelon’s

            

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows:

            

Stock options

  $2   $1   $3   $—      $2   $1 

 

Stock Options

 

Non-qualified stock options to purchase shares of Exelon’s common stock are granted under the LTIP. The exercise price of the stock options is equal to the fair market value of the underlying stock on the date of option grant. Stock options granted under the LTIP generally become exercisable upon a specified vesting date. The vesting period of stock options is generally four years. All stock options expire ten years from the date of grant.

 

371


Combined NotesThere were no stock options granted in 2013. The Compensation Committee eliminated stock option grants by changing the mix of long-term incentives for senior vice presidents (SVPs) and higher officers from 75% performance shares and 25% stock options to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

67% performance shares and 33% restricted stock units.

 

The value of stock options at the date of grant is expensed over the requisite service period using the straight-line method. The requisite service period for stock options is generally four years. However, certain stock options become fully vested upon the employee reaching retirement-eligibility. The value of the stock options granted to retirement-eligible employees is either recognized immediately upon the date of grant or through the date at which the employee reaches retirement eligibility.

 

377


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Historically, Exelon grantshas granted most of its stock options in the first quarter of each year. Stock options granted during the remaining quarters of 2012 2011 and 20102011 were not significant.

 

The fair value of each option is estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes-Merton option-pricing model. The following table presents the weighted average assumptions used in the pricing model for grants and the resulting weighted average grant date fair value of stock options granted for the years ended December 31, 2012 2011 and 2010:2011:

 

  Year Ended December 31,   Year Ended
December 31,
 
  2012 2011 2010   2012 2011 

Dividend yield

   5.28  4.84  4.56   5.28  4.84

Expected volatility

   23.20  24.40  27.10   23.20  24.40

Risk-free interest rate

   1.30  2.65  2.96   1.30  2.65

Expected life (years)

   6.25   6.25   6.25    6.25   6.25 

Weighted average grant date fair value (per share)

  $4.18  $6.22  $8.08   $4.18  $6.22 

 

The assumptions above relate to Exelon stock options granted during the periodperiods presented and therefore do not include stock options that were converted in connection with the merger with Constellation during the year ended December 31, 2012.

 

The dividend yield is based on several factors, including Exelon’s most recent dividend payment at the grant date and the average stock price over the previous year. Expected volatility is based on implied volatilities of traded stock options in Exelon’s common stock and historical volatility over the estimated expected life of the stock options. The risk-free interest rate for a security with a term equal to the expected life is based on a yield curve constructed from U.S. Treasury strips at the time of grant. For each year presented, the expected life represents the period of time the stock options are expected to be outstanding and is based on the simplified method. Exelon believes that the simplified method is appropriate due to several factors that result in historical exercise data not being sufficient to determine a reasonable estimate of expected term. Exelon uses historical data to estimate employee forfeitures, which are compared to actual forfeitures on a quarterly basis and adjusted as necessary.

 

372The following table presents information with respect to stock option activity for the year ended December 31, 2013:

   Shares  Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price
(per
share)
   Weighted
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Life

(years)
   Aggregate
Intrinsic
Value
 

Balance of shares outstanding at December 31, 2012

   21,903,781  $45.91     

Options reinstated

   751,122   38.60     

Options exercised

 �� (670,957  28.02     

Options forfeited

   (54,743  39.36     

Options expired

   (893,758  49.08     
  

 

 

      

Balance of shares outstanding at December 31, 2013

   21,035,445  $46.07    4.72   $10 
  

 

 

      

Exercisable at December 31, 2013 (a)

   20,188,327  $46.31    4.58   $10 
  

 

 

      

(a)Includes stock options issued to retirement eligible employees.

378


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

The following table presents information with respect to stock option activity for the year ended December 31, 2012:

   Shares  Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price
(per
share)
   Weighted
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Life

(years)
   Aggregate
Intrinsic
Value
 

Balance of shares outstanding at December 31, 2011

   11,553,761  $48.49     

Options granted

   2,372,000   39.66     

Converted Constellation options

   11,194,151   41.35     

Options exercised

   (1,776,041  26.41     

Options forfeited

   (980,986  42.90     

Options expired

   (459,104  49.45     
  

 

 

      

Balance of shares outstanding at December 31, 2012

   21,903,781  $45.91    5.58   $13 
  

 

 

      

Exercisable at December 31, 2012(a)

   19,943,116  $46.40    5.25   $13 
  

 

 

      

(a)Includes stock options issued to retirement eligible employees.

 

The following table summarizes additional information regarding stock options exercised for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010:2011:

 

  Year Ended December 31,   Year Ended
December 31,
 
  2012   2011   2010   2013   2012   2011 

Intrinsic value(a)

  $19   $5   $13   $4   $19   $5 

Cash received for exercise price

   47    13    24    19    47    13 

 

(a)The difference between the market value on the date of exercise and the option exercise price.

 

The following table summarizes Exelon’s nonvested stock option activity for the year ended December 31, 2012:2013:

 

   Shares  Weighted Average
Exercise Price
(per share)
 

Nonvested at December 31, 2011(a)

   877,050  $48.66 

Granted(b)

   2,372,000   39.66 

Converted Constellation options

   11,194,151   41.35 

Vested(b)(c)

   (12,023,432  41.37 

Forfeited

   (459,104  49.45 
  

 

 

  

Nonvested at December 31, 2012(a)

   1,960,665  $40.56 
  

 

 

  
   Shares  Weighted Average
Exercise Price
(per share)
 

Nonvested at December 31, 2012 (a)

   1,960,665  $40.56 

Vested

   (1,058,804  40.89 

Forfeited

   (54,743  39.36 
  

 

 

  

Nonvested at December 31, 2013 (a)

   847,118  $40.22 
  

 

 

  

 

(a)Excludes 2,647,5361,348,913 and 1,348,0002,647,536 of stock options issued to retirement-eligible employees as of December 31, 20122013 and December 31, 2011,2012, respectively, as they are fully vested.
(b)Includes 8,684,709 of converted Constellation options that were vested prior to the Merger on March 12, 2012.
(c)Includes 1,699,000 of stock options issued to retirement-eligible employees in 2012 that vested immediately upon the employee reaching retirement eligibility.

 

At December 31, 2012, $62013, $2 million of total unrecognized compensation costs related to nonvested stock options are expected to be recognized over the remaining weighted-average period of 2.41.6 years.

 

373


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Restricted Stock Units

 

Restricted stock units are granted under the LTIP with the majority being settled in a specific number of shares of common stock after the service condition has been met. The corresponding cost of services is measured based on the grant date fair value of the restricted stock unit issued.

 

The value of the restricted stock units is expensed over the requisite service period using the straight-line method. The requisite service period for restricted stock units is generally three to five years. However, certain restricted stock unit awards become fully vested upon the employee reaching retirement-eligibility. The value of the restricted stock units granted to retirement-eligible employees is either recognized immediately upon the date of grant or through the date at which the employee reaches retirement eligibility. Exelon uses historical data to estimate employee forfeitures, which are compared to actual forfeitures on a quarterly basis and adjusted as necessary.

 

The following table summarizes Exelon’s nonvested restricted stock unit activity for the year ended December 31, 2012:2013:

 

   Shares  Weighted Average
Grant Date Fair
Value (per share)
 

Nonvested at December 31, 2011(a)

   1,074,484  $48.08 

Granted

   1,332,214   39.94 

Converted Constellation restricted stock

   825,735   38.91 

Vested

   (479,805  46.36 

Forfeited

   (76,484  42.21 

Undistributed vested awards(b)

   (646,983  40.75 
  

 

 

  

Nonvested at December 31, 2012(a)

   2,029,161  $42.12 
  

 

 

  
   Shares  Weighted Average
Grant Date Fair
Value (per share)
 

Nonvested at December 31, 2012 (a)

   2,029,161  $42.12 

Granted

   2,828,187   31.06 

Vested

   (842,439  42.90 

Forfeited

   (108,199  36.37 

Undistributed vested awards (b)

   (520,013  32.62 
  

 

 

  

Nonvested at December 31, 2013 (a)

   3,386,697  $34.10 
  

 

 

  

379


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

(a)Excludes 686,121931,628 and 448,827686,121 of restricted stock units issued to retirement-eligible employees as of December 31, 20122013 and December 31, 2011,2012, respectively, as they are fully vested.
(b)Represents restricted stock units that vested but were not distributed to retirement-eligible employees during 2012.2013.

 

The weighted average grant date fair value (per share) of restricted stock units granted for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011 was $31.06, $39.94 and 2010 was $39.94, $43.33, and $44.23, respectively. At December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, Exelon had obligations related to outstanding restricted stock units not yet settled of $58$77 million and $46$58 million, respectively, which are included in common stock in Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. For the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, Exelon settled restricted stock units with fair value totaling $28 million, $25 million $19 million and $22$19 million, respectively. At December 31, 2012, $432013, $64 million of total unrecognized compensation costs related to nonvested restricted stock units are expected to be recognized over the remaining weighted-average period of 1.92.5 years.

 

Performance Share Awards

 

Performance share awards are granted under the LTIP with theLTIP. The 2013 and 2012 performance share awards being settled in 50% common stock and 50% cash over the three-year vesting term. The 2011 performance share awards are being settled entirely50% in common stock overand 50% in cash at the end of the three-year vesting term.performance period except for awards granted to executive vice presidents and higher officers that may be settled 100% in cash if certain ownership requirements are satisfied. The performance shares granted prior to 20112012 generally vest and settle over a three-year period with the holders receiving shares of common stock and/or cash annually during the vesting period.

 

374The one-time 2013 performance share transition awards, which provide an opportunity to earn an award contingent on company performance, will be settled 50% in common stock and 50% in cash, except for awards granted to executive vice presidents and higher officers that may be settled 100% in cash if certain ownership requirements are satisfied. One-third of the award vests and is payable after a one-year performance period while the remaining two-thirds vests and is payable after a two-year performance period.

The payout of the 2013 performance share awards and one-time performance share transition awards are based on the Company’s performance against specific operational and financial goals set annually during the respective performance periods. As a result, the 2013 performance share awards have been divided into equal tranches for the purpose of expense recognition as though the respective award were multiple awards; with each tranche representing a corresponding fiscal year. The one-time performance share transition awards have also been divided into multiple tranches for the purpose of expense recognition. One tranche reflects the one-third of the awards that vests and are payable after a one-year period. The two-thirds of the one-time performance share transition awards that are subject to a two-year performance period have also been divided into equal tranches; with each tranche representing a corresponding fiscal year. The grant date for each tranche of the 2013 performance share and one-time performance share transition awards is the date in which the performance goals for that fiscal year are approved and communicated, which typically occurs at the corresponding January Compensation Committee meeting.

The 2013 performance share awards and one-time performance share transition awards are recorded at fair value at the grant dates for each tranche, with the estimated grant date fair value based on the expected payout of the award, which may range from 50% to 150% of the payout target. The 2013 performance share awards also include a total shareholder return modifier (TSR) that may increase or decrease the award up to 25% and an individual performance modifier (IPM) that can

380


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

decrease the award by up to 50% or increase the award by up to 10% for SVPs and higher officers or up to 20% for vice presidents. The one-time performance share transition award is not affected by either TSR or the IPM.

 

TheseThe common stock portion of the performance share and one-time performance share transition awards is considered an equity award being valued based on Exelon’s stock price on the grant date. The cash portion of the awards is considered a liability award which is remeasured each reporting period based on Exelon’s current stock price. As the value of the common stock and cash portions of the awards are based on Exelon’s stock price during the performance period, coupled with changes in the total shareholder return modifier and expected payout of the award, the compensation costs are subject to volatility until payout is established.

The 2012 performance share awards are recorded at fair value at the date of grant with the estimated grant date fair value based on the expected payout of the award, which may range from 75% to 125% of the payout target. The common stock portion is considered an equity award with the 75% payout floor being valued based on Exelon’s stock price on the grant date. The cash portion of the award is considered a liability award with the 75% payout floor being remeasured each reporting period based on Exelon’s current stock price. The expected payout in excess of the 75% floor for the equity and liability portions are remeasured each reporting period based on Exelon’s current stock price and changes in the expected payout of the award; therefore these portions of the award are subject to volatility until the payout is established.

 

In 2010, the number of performance shares granted was determined based on the performance of Exelon’s common stock relative to certain stock market indices during the three-year period through the end of the year of grant. These performance share awards generally vest and settle over a three-year period. The holders of these performance share awards receive shares of common stock and/or cash annually during the vesting period. Participants are eligible for partial or full distributions in cash if they meet certain stock ownership requirements.

The 2010 performance share awards that were settled in stock were recorded as common stock within the Consolidated Balance Sheets and recorded at fair value at the date of grant. The grant date fair value of equity classified performance share awards granted during the year ended 2010 was estimated using historical data for the previous two plan years and a Monte Carlo simulation model for the current plan year. This model requires assumptions regarding Exelon’s total shareholder return relative to certain stock market indices and the stock beta and volatility of Exelon’s common stock and all stocks represented in these indices. Volatility for Exelon and all comparable companies is based on historical volatility over one year using daily stock price observation. The 2010 performance share awards that were settled in cash were recorded as liabilities within the Consolidated Balance Sheets. The grant date fair value of liability classified performance share awards granted during the year ended 2010 was based on historical data for the previous two plan years and actual results for the current plan year. The liabilities were remeasured each reporting period throughout the requisite service period and as a result, the compensation costs for cash-settled awards were subject to volatility.

For non retirement-eligiblenonretirement-eligible employees, stock-based compensation costs are recognized over the vesting period of three years using the graded-vesting method, a method in which the compensation cost is recognized over the requisite service period for each separately vesting tranche of the award as though the award were multiple awards.method. For performance sharesshare and one-time performance share transition awards granted to retirement-eligible employees, the value of the performance shares isin recognized ratably over the vesting period, which is the year of grant.

 

The following table summarizes Exelon’s nonvested performance share awards activity for the year ended December 31, 2012:2013:

 

   Shares  Weighted Average
Grant Date Fair
Value (per share)
 

Nonvested at December 31, 2011(a)

   346,848  $45.37 

Granted

   1,429,189   39.72 

Vested

   (167,048  47.46 

Forfeited

   (116,388  39.78 

Undistributed vested awards(b)

   (179,867  40.72 
  

 

 

  

Nonvested at December 31, 2012(a)

   1,312,734  $40.08 
  

 

 

  

375


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

   Shares  Weighted Average
Grant Date Fair
Value (per share)
 

Nonvested at December 31, 2012 (a)

   1,312,734  $40.08 

Granted

   2,629,171   31.55 

Vested

   (612,624  40.13 

Forfeited

   (24,451  32.17 

Undistributed vested awards (b)

   (1,290,640  34.28 
  

 

 

  

Nonvested at December 31, 2013 (a)

   2,014,190  $32.74 
  

 

 

  

 

(a)Excludes 204,6431,411,824 and 455,418204,643 of performance share awards issued to retirement-eligible employees as of December 31, 20122013 and December 31, 2011,2012, respectively, as they are fully vested.
(b)Represents performance share awards that vested but were not distributed to retirement-eligible employees during 2012.2013.

 

The weighted average grant date fair value (per share) of performance share awards granted during the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011 was $31.55, $39.71, and 2010 was $39.71, $43.52, and $60.82 respectively. During the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, Exelon settled performance shares with a fair value totaling $26 million, $23 million $22 million and $32$22 million, respectively, of which $12 million, $3 million $10 million and $20$10 million was paid in cash, respectively. As of December 31, 2012, $92013, $34 million of total unrecognized compensation costs related to nonvested performance shares are expected to be recognized over the remaining weighted-average period of 2.21.7 years.

381


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

The following table presents the balance sheet classification of obligations related to outstanding performance share awards not yet settled:

 

  December 31,   December 31, 
  2012   2011   2013   2012 

Current liabilities(a)

  $7   $3   $13   $7 

Deferred credits and other liabilities(b)

   11    —      24    11 

Common stock

   35    30    32    35 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total

  $53   $33   $69   $53 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Represents the current liability related to performance share awards expected to be settled in cash.
(b)Represents the long-term liability related to performance share awards expected to be settled in cash.

 

18.20. Earnings Per Share and Equity (Exelon)

 

Earnings per Share

 

Diluted earnings per share is calculated by dividing net income by the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding, including shares to be issued upon exercise of stock options, performance share awards and restricted stock outstanding under Exelon’s LTIPs considered to be common stock equivalents. The following table sets forth the components of basic and diluted earnings per share and shows the effect of these stock options, performance share awards and restricted stock on the weighted average number of shares outstanding used in calculating diluted earnings per share:

 

  Year Ended December 31,   Year Ended December 31, 
  2012   2011   2010   2013   2012   2011 

Net income on common stock

  $1,160   $2,495   $2,563 

Net income attributable to common shareholders

  $1,719   $1,160   $2,495 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Weighted average common shares outstanding—basic

   816    663    661    856    816    663 

Assumed exercise and/or distributions of stock-based awards

   3    2    2    4    3    2 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Weighted average common shares outstanding—diluted

   819    665    663    860    819    665 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

The number of stock options not included in the calculation of diluted common shares outstanding due to their antidilutive effect was approximately 20 million in 2013, 14 million in 2012 and 9 million in 2011 and 8 million in 2010.2011.

 

Under share repurchase programs, 35 million shares of common stock are held as treasury stock with a cost of $2.3 billion as of December 31, 2012.2013. In 2008, Exelon management decided to defer indefinitely any share repurchases.

 

376Preferred Securities Redemption (Exelon and PECO)

On May 1, 2013, PECO redeemed all of its outstanding preferred securities. PECO had $87 million of cumulative preferred securities that were redeemable at its option at any time for the redemption price established when each series of securities were issued. The redemption premium of $6 million is treated as a reduction to Net income to arrive at Net income attributable to common shareholders utilized in the calculation of earnings per share for Exelon for the year ending December 31, 2013. As a result of the redemption, PECO is now indirectly, wholly-owned by Exelon.

382


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

19.21. Changes in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Exelon, Generation, and PECO)

The following table presents changes in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) (AOCI) by component for the year ended December 31, 2013:

   Gains and
(Losses) on
Cash Flow
Hedges
  Unrealized
Gains and
(Losses) on
Marketable
Securities
   Pension and
Non-Pension
Postretirement
Benefit Plan
items
  Foreign
Currency
Items
  AOCI of
Equity
Investments
   Total 

Exelon(a)

         

Beginning balance

  $368  $—      $(3,137 $—    $2   $(2,767
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

OCI before reclassifications

   29   2    669   (10  101    791 

Amounts reclassified from AOCI(b)

   (277  —      208   —     5    (64
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Net current-period OCI

   (248  2    877   (10  106    727 
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Ending balance

  $120  $2   $(2,260 $(10 $108   $(2,040
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Generation(a)

         

Beginning balance

  $512  $—     $—    $—    $1   $513 
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

OCI before reclassifications

   15   2    —     (10  102    109 

Amounts reclassified from AOCI(b)

   (413  —      —     —     5    (408
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Net current-period OCI

   (398  2    —     (10  107    (299
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Ending balance

  $114  $2   $—    $(10 $108   $214 
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

PECO(a)

         

Beginning balance

  $—    $1   $—    $—    $—     $1 
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

OCI before reclassifications

   —     —      —     —     —      —   

Amounts reclassified from AOCI(b)

   —    

 
—      —     —     —      —   
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Net current-period OCI

   —     —      —     —     —      —   
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Ending balance

  $—    $1   $—    $—    $—     $1 
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)All amounts are net of tax. Amounts in parenthesis represent a decrease in accumulated other comprehensive income.
(b)See next table for details about these reclassifications.

383


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

ComEd, PECO, and BGE did not have any reclassifications out of AOCI to Net Income during the year ended December 31, 2013. The following table presents amounts reclassified out of AOCI to Net Income for Exelon and Generation during the year ended December 31, 2013:

Details about AOCI components

  Items reclassified out of AOCI (a)  

Affected line item in the statement
where Net Income is presented

    Exelon  Generation   

Gains and (losses) on cash flow hedges

    

Energy related hedges

  $464  $683  Operating revenues

Other cash flow hedges

   (3  —    Interest expense
  

 

 

  

 

 

  
   461   683  Total before tax
   (184  (270 Tax expense
  

 

 

  

 

 

  
  $277  $413  Net of tax
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

Amortization of pension and other
postretirement benefit plan items

Prior service costs

  $(2 $—      (b)

Actuarial losses

   (339  —      (b)

Deferred compensation unit plan

   (1  —      (c)
  

 

 

  

 

 

  
   (342  —    Total before tax
   134   —    Tax benefit
  

 

 

  

 

 

  
  $(208 $—    Net of tax
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

Equity investments

    

Capital activity

  $(8 $(8 Equity in losses of unconsolidated affiliates
  

 

 

  

 

 

  
   (8  (8 Total before tax
   3   3  Tax benefit
  

 

 

  

 

 

  
  $(5 $(5 Net of tax
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

Total Reclassifications

  $64  $408  Net of Tax
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

(a)Amounts in parenthesis represent a decrease in net income.
(b)This accumulated other comprehensive income component is included in the computation of net periodic pension and OPEB cost (see note 16 for additional details).
(c)Amortization of the deferred compensation unit plan is allocated to capital and operating and maintenance expense.

22. Commitments and Contingencies (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Nuclear Insurance

Generation is subject to liability, property damage and other risks associated with major incidents at any of its nuclear stations, including the CENG nuclear stations. Generation has reduced its financial exposure to these risks through insurance and other industry risk-sharing provisions.

 

The Price-Anderson Act was enacted to ensure the availability of funds for public liability claims arising from an incident at any of the U.S. licensed nuclear facilities and also to limit the liability of nuclear reactor owners for such claims from any single incident. As of December 31, 2012,2013, the current liability limit per incident was $12.6$13.6 billion and is subject to change to account for the effects of inflation and changes in the number of licensed reactors. An inflation adjustment must be made at least once

384


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

every 5 years and the last inflation adjustment was made effective October 29, 2008.September 10, 2013. In accordance with the Price-Anderson Act, Generation maintains financial protection at levels equal to the amount of liability insurance available from private sources through the purchase of private nuclear energy liability insurance for public liability claims that could arise in the event of an incident. As of January 1, 2013, the amount of nuclear energy liability insurance purchased is $375 million for each operating site. Additionally, the Price-Anderson Act requires a second layer of protection through the mandatory participation in a retrospective rating plan for power reactors (currently 104 reactors) resulting in an additional $12.2$13.2 billion in funds available for public liability claims. Participation in this secondary financial protection pool requires the operator of each reactor to fund its proportionate share of costs for any single incident that exceeds the primary layer of financial protection. Under the Price-Anderson Act, the maximum assessment in the event of an incident for each nuclear operator, per reactor, per incident (including a 5% surcharge), is $117.5$127.3 million, payable at no more than $17.5$19 million per reactor per incident per year. Exelon’s maximum liability per incident is approximately $2.2$2.4 billion.

In addition, the U.S. Congress could impose revenue-raising measures on the nuclear industry to pay public liability claims exceeding the $12.6$13.6 billion limit for a single incident.

 

Generation is required each year to report to the NRC the current levels and sources of property insurance that demonstrates Generation possesses sufficient financial resources to stabilize and decontaminate a reactor and reactor station site in the event of an accident. The property insurance maintained for each facility is currently provided through insurance policies purchased from NEIL, an industry mutual insurance company of which Generation is a member.

 

NEIL may declare distributions to its members as a result of favorable operating experience. In recent years NEIL has made distributions to its members, but Generation cannot predict the level of future distributions or if they will continue at all. NEIL declared a distribution for 2013, of which Generation’s portion was $18.5 million. The distribution was recorded as a reduction to Operating and maintenance expense within Exelon and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. No distributions were declared in 2011 or 2012. Premiums paid to NEIL by its members are subject to assessment for adverse loss experience (the retrospective premium obligation) for adverse loss experience.. NEIL has never exercised this assessment since its formation in 1973, and while Generation cannot predict the level of future assessments, or if they will be imposed at all, as of December 31, 2012,2013, the current maximum aggregate annual retrospective premium obligation for Generation is approximately $278$287 million.

 

NEIL provides “all risk” property damage, decontamination and premature decommissioning insurance for each station for losses resulting from damage to its nuclear plants, either due to accidents or acts of terrorism. As of December 31, 2012,2013, Generation’s current limit for this coverage is $2.1 billion. For property limits in excess of the first $1.25 billion of that limit, Generation participates in an $850 million single limit blanket policy shared by all the Generation operating nuclear sites and the Salem and Hope Creek nuclear sites. This blanket limit is not subject to automatic reinstatement in the event of a loss. In the event of an accident, insurance proceeds must first be used for reactor stabilization and site decontamination. If the decision is made to decommission the facility, a portion of the insurance proceeds will be allocated to a fund, which Generation is required by the NRC to maintain, to provide for decommissioning the facility. In the event of an insured loss, Generation is

377


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

unable to predict the timing of the availability of insurance proceeds to Generation and the amount of such proceeds that would be available. Under the terms of the various insurance agreements, Generation could be assessed up to $220$229 million per year for losses incurred at any plant insured by the insurance company (the retrospective premium obligation). In the event that one or more acts of terrorism cause accidental property damage within a twelve-month period from the first accidental

385


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

property damage under one or more policies for all insured plants, the maximum recovery for all losses by all insureds will be an aggregate of $3.2 billion plus such additional amounts as the insurer may recover for all such losses from reinsurance, indemnity and any other source, applicable to such losses. The $3.2 billion maximum recovery limit is not applicable, however, in the event of a “certified act of terrorism” as defined in the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002, as amended by the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007. The Terrorism Risk Insurance Act expires on December 31, 2014.

 

Additionally, NEIL provides replacement power cost insurance in the event of a major accidental outage at an insured nuclear station. The premium for this coverage is subject to assessment for adverse loss experience. Generation’s maximum share of any assessment is $58 million per year (the retrospective premium obligation). Recovery under this insurance for terrorist acts is subject to the $3.2 billion aggregate limit and secondary to the property insurance described above. This limit would not apply in cases of certified acts of terrorism under the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002, as amended by the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007, as described above.

 

Effective April 1, 2009, NEIL requires its members to maintain an investment grade credit rating or to ensure collectability of their annual retrospective premium obligation by providing a financial guarantee, letter of credit, deposit premium, or some other means of assurance.

 

For its insured losses, Generation is self-insured to the extent that losses are within the policy deductible or exceed the amount of insurance maintained. Uninsured losses and other expenses, to the extent not recoverable from insurers or the nuclear industry, could also be borne by Generation. Any such losses could have a material adverse effect on Exelon’s and Generation’s financial condition, results of operations and liquidity.

 

Spent Nuclear Fuel Obligation

 

Under the NWPA, the DOE is responsible for the development of a geologic repository for and the disposal of SNF and high-level radioactive waste. As required by the NWPA, Generation is a party to contracts with the DOE (Standard Contracts) to provide for disposal of SNF from Generation’s nuclear generating stations. In accordance with the NWPA and the Standard Contracts, Generation pays the DOE one mill ($0.001) per kWh of net nuclear generation for the cost of SNF disposal. This fee may be adjusted prospectively in order to ensure full cost recovery. The NWPA and the Standard Contracts required the DOE to begin taking possession of SNF generated by nuclear generating units by no later than January 31, 1998. The DOE, however, failed to meet that deadline and its performance will be delayed significantly. On November 19, 2013, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ordered the DOE to submit to Congress a proposal to reduce the current SNF disposal fee to zero, unless and until there is a viable disposal program. On January 3, 2014, the DOE filed a petition for rehearing. On the same date, as ordered by the court, the DOE submitted a proposal to Congress to reduce the current SNF disposal fee to zero, subject to any further judicial decision. The DOE’s submitted proposal becomes effective after the 90-days of continuous session of the Congress unless there is Congressional action contrary to the DOE proposal. However, if the court grants the petition for rehearing, the proposal to eliminate the fee (and the review period) will be held in suspense until after the court rules. Until such time as a new fee structure is in effect, Generation must continue to pay the current SNF disposal fees.

 

The 2010 Federal budget (which became effective October 1, 2009) eliminated almost all funding for the creation of the Yucca Mountain repository while the Obama administration devisesdevised a new strategy for long-term SNF management. In early 2010, Secretary of Energy Steven Chu appointed theA Blue Ribbon Commission (BRC) on America’s Nuclear Future to evaluate and recommend a new plan for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle, including used fuel storage, disposal and fees. The Commission released its final report to the U.S. Energy Secretary on January 26, 2012, detailing

 

378386


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Future, appointed by the U.S. Energy Secretary, released a report on January 26, 2012, detailing comprehensive recommendations for creating a safe, long-term solution for managing and disposing of the nation’s spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. The strategy recommended by the Commission encompasses 8 key elements; 1) A new consent-based approach to siting storage and disposal facilities; 2) A new organization to implement the waste management program; 3) Access to utility waste disposal fees for their intended purpose; 4) Prompt efforts to develop a new geological disposal facility; 5) Prompt efforts to develop one or more consolidated storage facilities; 6) Early preparation for the eventual large-scale transport of spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste to consolidated storage and disposal facilities; 7) Support for advances in nuclear energy technology and for workforce development; and 8) Active U.S. leadership in international efforts to address safety, non-proliferation and security concerns.

 

In early 2013, the DOE issued an updated “Strategy for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste” in response to the BRC recommendations. This strategy included a consolidated interim storage facility that is planned to be operational in 2025.

 

Generation uses the 2025 date as the assumed date for when the DOE will begin accepting SNF for purposes of determining nuclear decommissioning asset retirement obligations. The extended delay in SNF acceptance by the DOE has led to Generation’s adoption of dry cask storage at its Dresden, Clinton, Limerick, Oyster Creek, Peach Bottom, Byron, Braidwood, LaSalle and Quad Cities stations. Generation performed sensitivity analyses assuming that the estimated date for the DOE acceptance of SNF was delayed to 2030 and determined that Generation’s aggregate nuclear ARO would be increased by approximately $700 million.

 

In August 2004, Generation and the DOJ, in close consultation with the DOE, reached a settlement under which the government agreed to reimburse Generation, subject to certain damage limitations based on the extent of the government’s breach, for costs associated with storage of SNF at Generation’s nuclear stations pending the DOE’s fulfillment of its obligations. Generation submits annual reimbursement requests to the DOE for costs associated with the storage of SNF. In all cases, reimbursement requests are made only after costs are incurred and only for costs resulting from DOE delays in accepting the SNF.

 

Under the settlement agreement, Generation has received cash reimbursements for costs incurred through April 30, 2012,2013, totaling approximately $639$712 million ($543601 million after considering amounts due to co-owners of certain nuclear stations and to the former owner of Oyster Creek). As of December 31, 2012,2013, the amount of SNF storage costs for which reimbursement will be requested from the DOE under the settlement agreement is $61$71 million, which is recorded within accountsAccounts receivable, other. Of this amount, $13$18 million represents amounts owed to the co-owners of the Peach Bottom and Quad Cities generating facilities.

 

CENG has entered into settlement agreements with the DOE during 2011 and 2012 to recover damages caused by the DOE’s failure to comply with legal and contractual obligations to dispose of spent nuclear fuel related to the Ginna, Calvert Cliffs and Nine Mile Point nuclear power plants. At December 31, 2012, Generation had approximately $22 million recorded as a receivable from CENG with respect to costs incurred by Constellation prior to November 6, 2009,the formation of the CENG joint venture for the Nine Mile Point and Calvert Cliffs nuclear power plants. CENG received the funds for the Nine Mile Point and Calvert Cliffs settlement from the DOE in January 2013 and February 2013, respectively, and remitted the $22 million to Generation.

379


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

The Standard Contracts with the DOE also required the payment to the DOE of a one-time fee applicable to nuclear generation through April 6, 1983. The fee related to the former PECO units has been paid. Pursuant to the Standard Contracts, ComEd previously elected to defer payment of the one-time fee of $277 million for its units (which are now part of Generation), with interest to the date of payment, until just prior to the first delivery of SNF to the DOE. As of December 31, 2012,2013, the unfunded SNF liability for the one-time fee with interest was $1,020$1,021 million. Interest accrues at the 13-week Treasury Rate. The 13-week Treasury Rate in effect, for calculation of the interest accrual at December 31, 2012,2013, was 0.127%0.051%. The liabilities for SNF disposal costs, including the one-time fee, were transferred to Generation as part of theExelon’s 2001 corporate restructuring. The outstanding one-time fee obligations for the Oyster Creek and TMI units remain with the former owners. Clinton has no outstanding obligation. See Note 9—11—Fair Value of Assets and Liabilities for additional information.

 

387


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Energy Commitments

 

Generation’s customer facing activities include the physical delivery and marketing of power obtained through its generation capacity, and long-, intermediate- and short-term contracts. Generation maintains an effective supply strategy through ownership of generation assets and power purchase and lease agreements. Generation has also contracted for access to additional generation through bilateral long-term PPAs. These agreements are firm commitments related to power generation of specific generation plants and/or are dispatchable in nature. Several of Generation’s long-term PPAs, which have been determined to be operating leases, have significant contingent rental payments that are dependent on the future operating characteristics of the associated plants, such as plant availability. Generation recognizes contingent rental expense when it becomes probable of payment. Generation enters into PPAs with the objective of obtaining low-cost energy supply sources to meet its physical delivery obligations to its customers. Generation has also purchased firm transmission rights to ensure that it has reliable transmission capacity to physically move its power supplies to meet customer delivery needs. The primary intent and business objective for the use of its capital assets and contracts is to provide Generation with physical power supply to enable it to deliver energy to meet customer needs. In addition to physical contracts, Generation uses financial contracts for economic hedging purposes and, to a lesser extent, as part of proprietary trading activities.

 

Generation has entered into bilateral long-term contractual obligations for sales of energy to load-serving entities, including electric utilities, municipalities, electric cooperatives and retail load aggregators. Generation also enters into contractual obligations to deliver energy to market participants who primarily focus on the resale of energy products for delivery. Generation provides for delivery of its energy to these customers through firm transmission.

 

As part of reaching a comprehensive agreement with EDF in October 2010, the existing power purchase agreements with CENG were modified to be unit-contingent through the end of their original term in 2014. Under these agreements, CENG has the ability to fix the energy price on a forward basis by entering into monthly energy hedge transactions for a portion of the future sale, while any unhedged portions will be provided at market prices by default. Additionally, beginning in 2015 and continuing to the end of the life of the respective plants, Generation agreed to purchase 50.01% of the availablenuclear plant output of CENG’s nuclear plantsowned by CENG at market prices. Generation discloses in the table below commitments to purchase from CENG at fixed prices. All commitments to purchase at market prices, which include all purchases subsequent to December 31, 2014, are excluded from the table. Generation continues to own a 50.01% membership interest in CENG that is accounted for as an equity method investment. See Note 22—5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC and Note 25—Related Party Transactions for more details on this arrangement.

 

380


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

At December 31, 2012,2013, Generation’s short- and long-term commitments, relating to the purchases from unaffiliated utilities and others of energy, capacity and transmission rights, are as indicated in the following tables:

 

  Net Capacity
Purchases (a)
   Power-Related
Purchases (b)
   Transmission Rights
Purchases(c)
   Purchased Energy
from CENG
   Total   Net Capacity
Purchases (a)
   REC
Purchases (b)
   Transmission Rights
Purchases(c)
   Purchased Energy
from CENG
   Total 

2013

  $374   $95   $28   $777   $1,274 

2014

   353    69    26    516    964   $412   $117   $25   $824   $1,378 

2015

   350    25    13    —      388    367    110    13    —      490 

2016

   266    11    2    —      279    284    76    2    —      362 

2017

   203    3    2    —      208    223    25    2    —      250 

2018

   112    3    2    —      117 

Thereafter

   469    5    34    —      508    414    3    32    —      449 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total

  $2,015   $208   $105   $1,293   $3,621   $1,812   $334   $76   $824   $3,046 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

388


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

(a)Net capacity purchases include PPAs and other capacity contracts including those that are accounted for as operating leases. Amounts presented in the commitments represent Generation’s expected payments under these arrangements at December 31, 2012,2013, net of fixed capacity payments expected to be received by Generation under contracts to resell such acquired capacity to third parties under long-term capacity sale contracts. Expected payments include certain fixed capacity charges which are contingentmay be reduced based on plant availability.
(b)Power-Related Purchases include firm REC purchase agreements. The table excludes renewable energy purchases that are contingent in nature.
(c)Transmission rights purchases include estimated commitments for additional transmission rights that will be required to fulfill firm sales contracts.

 

Pursuant to a PPA with Public Service Company of Oklahoma, a subsidiary of American Electric Power Company, Inc., dated as of April 17, 2009, Generation agreed to sell its rights to up to 520 MWs, or approximately two-thirds of the capacity, energy and ancillary services supplied under its existing long-term contract with Green Country Energy, LLC. The delivery of power under the PPA commenced June 1, 2012 and will run through February 28, 2022.

ComEd purchases its expected energy requirements through an ICC approved competitive bidding process administered by the IPA existing ICC approved RFPs, and spot market purchases hedged with a financial swap contract with Generation expiring in 2013.purchases. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for further information.

 

PECO’s long-term PPA with Generation, under whichSince 2009, PECO obtained all of its electric supply from Generation for a 12-year period, expired on December 31, 2010. During 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012, PECOhas entered into contracts through a competitive procurement process in order to meet a portion of its default service customers’ electric supply requirements for 2011 through 2015.2016. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for further information regarding the DSP Programs.

 

ComEd is subject to requirements established by the Illinois Settlement Legislation and the Energy Infrastructure Modernization Act related to the use of alternative energy resources. PECO is subject to requirements related to the use of alternative energy resources established by the AEPS Act. BGE is subject to requirements established by the Public Utilities Article in Maryland related to the use of alternative energy resources; however, the wholesale suppliers that supply power to BGE through SOS procurement auctions have the obligation, by contract with BGE, to meet the RPS requirement. BGE has entered into contracts with curtailment services providers in accordance with the March 2009 MDPSC order. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information relating to electric generation procurement, alternative energy resources and energy efficiency programs.

 

381


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s electric supply procurement, curtailment services, REC and AEC purchase commitments as of December 31, 20122013 are as follows:

 

      Expiration within   Total   Expiration within 
  Total   2013   2014   2015   2016   2017   2018
and beyond
   2014   2015   2016   2017   2018   2019
and beyond
 

ComEd

                            

Electric supply procurement(a)

  $1,103   $367   $323   $136   $137   $140   $—     $736   $323   $136   $137   $140   $—     $—   

Renewable energy and RECs(b)

   1,661    71    73    74    76    82    1,285    1,589    72    74    76    77    83    1,207 

PECO

                            

Electric supply procurement(c)

   799    561    200    38    —      —      —      681    590    91    —      —      —      —   

AECs(d)

   33    12    9    2    2    2    6    14    2    2    2    2    2    4 

BGE

                            

Electric supply procurement(d)(e)

   1,401    859    467    75    —      —      —      1,256    783    400    73    —      —      —   

Curtailment services(f)

   153    49    47    41    16    —      —      132    45    40    34    13    —      —   

 

(a)ComEd entered into various contracts for the procurement of electricity that started to expire in 2012, and will continue to expire through 2017. ComEd is permitted to recover its electric supply procurement costs from retail customers with no mark-up. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.
(b)ComEd entered into 20-year contracts for renewable energy and RECs beginning in June 2012. ComEd is permitted to recover its renewable energy and REC costs from retail customers with no mark-up. PerThe annual commitments represent the maximum settlements with suppliers for renewable energy and RECs under the existing contract terms. Pursuant to the ICC’s Final Commission Order on December 19, 2012, ComEd’s commitments under the quantities purchased under theseexisting long-term renewable contracts should be curtailed duringwere reduced for the June 2013—2013 through May 2014 period to avoid exceedingprocurement period. The ICC’s December 18, 2013 order approved the statutory rate impact for affected customers as a result of an increased numberreduction of ComEd’s customers purchasing their energy from alternative energy suppliers.commitments under the long-term contracts for the June 2014 through May 2015 procurement period, however the amount of the reduction will not be finalized and approved by the ICC until March 2014. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.

389


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

(c)PECO entered into various contracts for the procurement of electric supply to serve its default service customers that expire between 20132014 and 2015. PECO is permitted to recover its electric supply procurement costs from default service customers with no mark-up in accordance with its PAPUC-approved DSP Programs. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.
(d)PECO is subject to requirements related to the use of alternative energy resources established by the AEPS Act. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.
(e)BGE entered into various contracts for the procurement of electricity beginning 20122013 through 2015.2016. The cost of power under these contracts is recoverable under MDPSC approved fuel clauses. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.
(f)BGE has entered into various contracts with curtailment services providers related to transactions in PJM’s capacity market. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.

 

Fuel Purchase Obligations

 

In addition to the energy commitments described above, Generation has commitments to purchase fuel supplies for nuclear and fossil generation (and with respect to coal, commitments to sell coal).generation. PECO and BGE have commitments to purchase natural gas, related transportation, storage capacity and services to serve customers in their gas distribution service territory. As of December 31, 2012,2013, these net commitments were as follows:

 

      Expiration within   Total   Expiration within 
  Total   2013   2014   2015   2016   2017   2018
and beyond
   2014   2015   2016   2017   2018   2019
and beyond
 

Generation

  $8,857   $1,276   $1,207   $1,272   $976   $1,064   $3,062   $8,490   $1,212   $1,256   $1,040   $1,044   $763   $3,175 

PECO

   444    145    87    71    49    15    77    507    179    112    98    37    15    66 

BGE

   654    133    73    54    52    52    290    609    129    59    57    57    51    256 

 

382Other Purchase Obligations

The Registrants’ other purchase obligations as of December 31, 2013, which primarily represent commitments for services, materials and information technology, are as follows:

   Total   Expiration within 
     2014   2015   2016   2017   2018   2019
and beyond
 

Exelon

  $262   $61   $34   $32   $31   $26   $78 

Generation

   504    170    131    45    42    30    86 

ComEd(a)

   122    88    5    5    5    5    14 

PECO(a)

   40    30    1    1    1    1    6 

BGE(a)

   53    44    2    5    2    —      —   

(a)Purchase obligations include commitments related to smart meter installation. See Note 3- Regulatory Matters for additional information.

390


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Other Purchase Obligations

The Registrants’ other purchase obligations as of December 31, 2012, which primarily represent commitments for services, materials and information technology, are as follows:

       Expiration within 
   Total   2013   2014   2015   2016   2017   2018
and beyond
 

Exelon

  $716   $186   $167   $114   $51   $49   $149 

Generation

   487    127    120    94    32    29    85 

ComEd

   8    2    6    —       —       —       —    

PECO

   45    17    18    1    1    1    7 

BGE

   —       —       —       —       —       —       —    

 

Commercial Commitments

 

Exelon’s commercial commitments as of December 31, 2012,2013, representing commitments potentially triggered by future events, were as follows:

 

       Expiration within 
   Total   2013   2014   2015   2016   2017   2018
and beyond
 

Letters of credit (non-debt)(a)

  $1,889   $1,325   $—      $564   $—      $—      $—    

Surety bonds(b)

   286    225    —       1    6    4    50 

Performance guarantees(c)

   1,897    908    203    —       —       —       786 

Energy marketing contract guarantees(d)

   8,556    8,556    —       —       —       —       —    

Lease guarantees(e)

   48    —       —       —       —       —       48 

Middle market lending commitments(f)

   180     180     —       —       —       —       —    

Nuclear insurance premiums(g)

   2,494     —       —       —       —       —       2,494 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total commercial commitments

  $15,350   $11,194   $203   $565   $6   $4   $3,378 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 
   Total   Expiration within 
     2014   2015   2016   2017   2018   2019
and beyond
 

Letters of credit (non-debt) (a)

  $1,520   $1,217   $298   $—     $5   $—     $—   

Surety bonds (b)

   339    301    2    6    4    1    25 

Performance guarantees(c)

   1,107    350    —      —      —      —      757 

Energy marketing contract guarantees(d)

   3,161    3,161    —      —      —      —      —   

Lease guarantees (e)

   44    —      —      —      —      —      44 

Nuclear insurance premiums(f)

   3,529    —      —      —      —      —      3,529 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total commercial commitments

  $9,700   $5,029   $300   $6   $9   $1   $4,355 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

(a)Letters of credit (non-debt)—Exelon and certain of its subsidiaries maintain non-debt letters of credit to provide credit support for certain transactions as requested by third parties.
(b)Surety bonds—Guarantees issued related to contract and commercial agreements, excluding bid bonds.
(c)Performance guarantees—Guarantees issued to ensure performance under specific contracts, including $211 million issued on behalf of CENG nuclear generating facilities for credit support, $200 million of Trust Preferred Securities of ComEd Financing III, $178 million of Trust Preferred Securities of PECO Trust III and IV and $250 million of Trust Preferred Securities of BGE Capital Trust II.
(d)Energy marketing contract guarantees—Guarantees issued to ensure performance under energy commodity contracts. Amount includes approximately $8.3$3 billion of guarantees previously issued by Constellation on behalf of its Generation and NewEnergy business to allow it the flexibility needed to conduct business with counterparties without having to post other forms of collateral. The majority of these guarantees contain evergreen provisions that require the guarantee to remain in effect until cancelled. Exelon’s estimated net exposure for obligations under commercial transactions covered by these guarantees is approximately $1.5 billion$463 million at December 31, 2012,2013, which represents the total amount Exelon could be required to fund based on December 31, 20122013 market prices.
(e)Lease guarantees—Guarantees issued to ensure payments on building leases.
(f)Middle market lending commitments—Represents commitments to investment in loans or managed funds which invest in private companies. These commitments will be funded by Generation’s existing nuclear decommissioning trust funds. See Note 9—Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities for more information on nuclear decommissioning trust funds and middle market lending.
(g)Nuclear insurance premiums—Represents the maximum amount that Generation would be required to pay for retrospective premiums in the event of nuclear disaster at any domestic site under the Secondary Financial Protection pool as required under the Price-Anderson Act as well as the current aggregate annual retrospective premium obligation that could be imposed by NEIL. See the Nuclear Insurance section within this note for additional details on Generation’s nuclear insurance premiums.

 

383


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Generation’s commercial commitments as of December 31, 2012,2013, representing commitments potentially triggered by future events, were as follows:

 

       Expiration within 
   Total   2013   2014   2015   2016   2017   2018
and beyond
 

Letters of credit (non-debt)(a)

  $1,841   $1,278   $—      $563   $—      $—      $—    

Performance guarantees(b)

   1,153    907    203    —       —       —       43 

Energy marketing contract guarantees(c)

   1,794    1,794    —       —       —       —       —    

Middle market lending commitments(d)

   180     180     —       —       —       —       —    

Nuclear insurance premiums(e)

   2,494     —   ��   —       —       —       —       2,494 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total commercial commitments

  $7,462   $4,159   $203   $563   $—      $—      $2,537 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 
   Total   Expiration within 
     2014   2015   2016   2017   2018   2019
and beyond
 

Letters of credit (non-debt) (a)

  $1,477   $1,174   $298   $—     $5   $—     $—   

Performance guarantees(b)

   357    343    —      —      —      —      14 

Energy marketing contract guarantees (c)

   832    832    —      —      —      —      —   

Nuclear insurance premiums(d)

   3,529    —      —      —      —      —      3,529 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total commercial commitments

  $6,195   $2,349   $298   $—     $5   $—     $3,543 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

(a)Letters of credit (non-debt)—Non-debt letters of credit maintained to provide credit support for certain transactions as requested by third parties.
(b)Performance guarantees—Guarantees issued to ensure performance under specific contracts including $211 million issued on behalf of CENG nuclear generating facilities for credit support.

391


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

(c)Energy marketing contract guarantees—Guarantees issued to ensure performance under energy commodity contracts. Amount includes approximately $1.5 billion$749 million of guarantees previously issued by Constellation on behalf of its Generation and NewEnergy business to allow it the flexibility needed to conduct business with counterparties without having to post other forms of collateral. The majority of these guarantees contain evergreen provisions that require the guarantee to remain in effect until cancelled. Generation’s estimated net exposure for obligations under commercial transactions covered by these guarantees is approximately $0.6$0.2 billion at December 31, 2012,2013, which represents the total amount Generation could be required to fund based on December 31, 20122013 market prices.
(d)Middle market lending commitments—Represents commitments to investment in loans or managed funds which invest in private companies. These commitments will be funded by Generation’s existing nuclear decommissioning trust funds. See Note 9—Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities for more information on nuclear decommissioning trust funds and middle market lending.
(e)Nuclear insurance premiums—Represents the maximum amount that Generation would be required to pay for retrospective premiums in the event of nuclear disaster at any domestic site under the Secondary Financial Protection pool as required under the Price-Anderson Act as well as the current aggregate annual retrospective premium obligation that could be imposed by NEIL. See Nuclear Insurance section within this note for additional details on Generation’s nuclear insurance premiums.

 

ComEd’s commercial commitments as of December 31, 2012,2013, representing commitments potentially triggered by future events, were as follows:

 

      Expiration within   Total   Expiration within 
  Total   2013   2014   2015   2016   2017   2018
and beyond
   2014   2015   2016   2017   2018   2019
and beyond
 

Letters of credit (non-debt)(a)

  $22   $22   $—      $—      $—      $—      $—      $19   $19   $—     $—     $—     $—     $—   

Surety bonds(b)

   8    8    —       —       —       —       —       9    9    —      —      —      —      —   

Performance guarantees(c)

   200    —       —       —       —       —       200    200    —      —      —      —      —      200 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total commercial commitments

  $230   $30   $—      $—      $—      $—      $200   $228   $28   $—     $—     $—     $—     $200 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Letters of credit (non-debt)—ComEd maintains non-debt letters of credit to provide credit support for certain transactions as requested by third parties.
(b)Surety bonds—Guarantees issued related to contract and commercial agreements, excluding bid bonds.
(c)Performance guarantees—Reflects full and unconditional guaranteesguarantee of Trust Preferred Securities of ComEd Financing III which is a 100% owned finance subsidiary of ComEd.

 

384


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

PECO’s commercial commitments as of December 31, 2012,2013, representing commitments potentially triggered by future events, were as follows:

 

       Expiration within 
   Total   2013   2014   2015   2016   2017   2018
and beyond
 

Letters of credit (non-debt)(a)

  $22   $22   $—      $—      $—      $—      $—    

Surety bonds(b)

   3    3    —       —       —       —       —    

Performance guarantees(c)

   178    —       —       —       —       —       178 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total commercial commitments

  $203   $25   $—      $—      $—      $—      $178 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 
   Total   Expiration within 
     2014   2015   2016   2017   2018   2019
and beyond
 

Letters of credit (non-debt) (a)

  $22   $22   $—     $—     $—     $—     $—   

Surety bonds (b)

   3    3    —      —      —      —      —   

Performance guarantees (c)

   178    —      —      —      —      —      178 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total commercial commitments

  $203   $25   $—     $—     $—     $—     $178 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

(a)Letters of credit (non-debt)—PECO maintains non-debt letters of credit to provide credit support for certain transactions as requested by third parties.
(b)Surety bonds—Guarantees issued related to contract and commercial agreements, excluding bid bonds.
(c)Performance guarantees—Reflects full and unconditional guaranteesguarantee of Trust Preferred Securities of PECO Trust III and IV, which is aare 100% owned finance subsidiarysubsidiaries of PECO.

392


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

BGE’s commercial commitments as of December 31, 2012,2013, representing commitments potentially triggered by future events, were as followsfollows:

 

      Expiration within   Total   Expiration within 
  Total   2013   2014   2015   2016   2017   2018
and beyond
   2014   2015   2016   2017   2018   2019
and beyond
 

Letters of credit (non-debt)(a)

  $2   $2   $—      $—      $—      $—      $—      $1   $1   $—     $—     $—     $—     $—   

Surety bonds(b)

   2    2    —       —       —       —       —       9    9    —      —      —      —      —   

Performance guarantees(c)

   250    —       —       —       —       —       250    250    —      —      —      —      —      250 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total commercial commitments

  $254   $4   $—      $—      $—      $—      $250   $260   $10   $—     $—     $—     $—     $250 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Letters of credit (non-debt)—BGE maintains non-debt letters of credit to provide credit support for certain transactions as requested by third parties.
(b)Surety bond—Guarantees issued related to contract and commercial agreements, excluding bid bonds.
(c)Performance guarantee—Reflects full and unconditional guaranteesguarantee of Trust Preferred Securities of BGE Capital Trust II which is a 100% owned finance subsidiaryan unconsolidated VIE of BGE.

 

Construction Commitments

 

Generation has committed to the construction of athe Antelope Valley solar PV facility in Los Angeles County, California. The first portion of the project began operations in December 2012, with six additional phases to comeblocks coming online in 2013 and an expectation of full commercial operation byin the endfirst half of the third quarter of 2013.2014. Generation’s estimated remaining commitment for the project is $636$110 million.

On July 3, 2013, Generation executed a Turbine Supply Agreement to expand its Beebe wind project in Michigan. The estimated remaining commitment under the contract is $50 million for 2013.and achievement of commercial operations is expected in 2014.

On July 26, 2013, Generation executed an engineering procurement and construction contract to expand its Perryman, Maryland generation site with 120 MW of new natural gas-fired generation to satisfy certain merger commitments. The estimated remaining commitment under the contract is $80 million and achievement of commercial operation is expected in 2015. See Note 4—Merger and Acquisitions for additional information.information on commitments to develop or assist in development of new generation in Maryland resulting from the merger.

On December 27, 2013, Generated executed a Turbine Supply Agreement for construction of the 32.5MW Fourmile Wind project in western Maryland. The estimated remaining commitment under the contract is $26 million and achievement of commercial operations is expected in 2014. See 4—Merger and Acquisitions for additional information on commitments to develop or assist in development of new generation in Maryland resulting from the merger.

 

Refer to Note 3—Regulatory Matters for information on investment programs associated with regulatory mandates, such as ComEd’s Infrastructure Investment Plan under EIMA, PECO’s Smart Meter Procurement and Installation Plan, and BGE’s comprehensive smart grid initiative and ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s commitment to construct transmission facilities under their operating agreements with PJM.initiative.

 

Constellation Merger Commitments

 

Exelon’s commercial and construction commitments shown above do not include the merger commitments made to the State of Maryland in conjunction with the Constellation merger. See Note 4—Merger and Acquisitions for additional information on the mergermergers commitments.

 

385393


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Leases

 

Minimum future operating lease payments, including lease payments for vehicles, real estate, computers, rail cars, operating equipment and office equipment, as of December 31, 20122013 were:

 

  Exelon Generation ComEd (b)   PECO (b)   BGE (b)(c)   Exelon Generation ComEd (b)   PECO (b)   BGE (b)(c) 

2013

  $88  $38  $13   $14   $12 

2014

   83   38   11    13    10   $103  $49  $13   $13   $12 

2015

   73   38   11    3    9    91   50   11    3    11 

2016

   69   36   11    3    7    89   49   11    3    9 

2017

   63   36   6    3    6    82    48    7     3     8  

2018

   63   40   2    3    7 

Remaining years

   488   367   57    —      29    398   336   3    —      14 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total minimum future lease payments

  $864(a)  $553(a)  $109   $36   $73   $826(a)  $572(a)  $47   $25   $61 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Excludes Generation’s PPAs and other capacity contracts that are accounted for as contingent operating lease payments.
(b)Amounts related to certain real estate leases and railroad licenses effectively have indefinite payment periods. As a result, ComEd, PECO and BGE have excluded these payments from the remaining years, as such amounts would not be meaningful. ComEd’s, PECO’s, and BGE’s annual obligation for these arrangements, included in each of the years 2013—2017,2014—2018, was $1 million. PECO’s annual obligation for these agreements, included in each of the years 2013—2017, wasmillion, $3 million. BGE’s annual obligation for these agreements, included in each of the years 2013—2017, wasmillion, and $1 million.million respectively.
(c)Includes all future lease payments on a 99 year real estate lease that expires in 2105.

 

The following table presents the Registrants’ rental expense under operating leases for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010:2011:

 

For the Year Ended December 31,

  Exelon   Generation (a)   ComEd   PECO   BGE   Exelon   Generation (a)   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

2013

  $806   $744   $15   $21   $11 

2012

  $930   $872   $18   $27   $12    930    872    18    27    12 

2011

   711    659    18    28    15    711    659    18    28    15 

2010

   722    665    19    31    13 

 

(a)Includes Generation’s PPAs and other capacity contracts that are accounted for as operating leases and are reflected as net capacity purchases in the energy commitments table above. These agreements are considered contingent operating lease payments and are not included in the minimum future operating lease payments table above. Payments made under Generation’s PPAs and other capacity contracts totaled $694 million, $801 million and $630 million during 2013, 2012 and $641 million during 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively.

 

For information regarding capital lease obligations, see Note 11—13—Debt and Credit Agreements.

 

Indemnifications Related to Sale of Sithe (Exelon and Generation)

 

On January 31, 2005, subsidiaries of Generation completed a series of transactions that resulted in Generation’s sale of its investment in Sithe. Specifically, subsidiaries of Generation consummated the acquisition of Reservoir Capital Group’s 50% interest in Sithe and subsequently sold 100% of Sithe to Dynegy Inc. (Dynegy).

 

The estimated maximum possible exposure to Exelon related to the guarantees provided as part of the sales transaction to Dynegy was approximately $200 million at December 31, 2012.2013. Generation believes that it is remote that it will be required to make any additional payments under the guarantee, and currently has no recorded liabilities associated with this guarantee. Generation expects that the exposure covered by this guarantee will expire in 2014. The guarantee is included above in the Commercial Commitments table under performance guarantees.

 

386394


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Indemnifications Related to Sale of TEG and TEP (Exelon and Generation)

 

On February 9, 2007, Tamuin International Inc. (TII), a wholly owned subsidiary of Generation, sold its 49.5% ownership interests in TEG and TEP to a subsidiary of AES Corporation for $95 million in cash plus certain purchase price adjustments. In connection with the transaction, Generation entered into a guarantee agreement under which Generation guarantees the timely payment of TII’s obligations to the subsidiary of AES Corporation pursuant to the terms of the purchase and sale agreement relating to the sale of TII’s ownership interests. Generation would bewas required to perform in the event that TII doesdid not pay any obligation covered by the guarantee that iswas not otherwise subject to a dispute resolution process. Generation’s maximum obligation underPortions of the exposures covered by this guarantee is $95 million asexpired in 2008, and the remaining guarantee expired in the third quarter of December 31, 2012.2013. Generation believes that it is remote that it will bewas not required to make payments under the guarantee, and therefore, has not recorded a liability associated with this guarantee. The exposures covered byno further obligation related to this guarantee expired in part during 2008. Generation expects that the remaining exposure will expire inas of December 31, 2013. The guarantee of $95 million is included above in the Commercial Commitments table under performance guarantees.

 

Environmental Matters

 

GeneralGeneral.. The Registrants’ operations have in the past, and may in the future, require substantial expenditures in order to comply with environmental laws. Additionally, under Federal and state environmental laws, the Registrants are generally liable for the costs of remediating environmental contamination of property nowcurrently or formerly owned by them and of property contaminated by hazardous substances generated by them. The Registrants own or lease a number of real estate parcels, including parcels on which their operations or the operations of others may have resulted in contamination by substances that are considered hazardous under environmental laws. In addition, the Registrants are currently involved in a number of proceedings relating to sites where hazardous substances have been deposited and may be subject to additional proceedings in the future.

 

ComEd, PECO and BGE have identified sites where former MGP activities have or may have resulted in actual site contamination. For many of these sites, ComEd, PECO or BGE is one of several PRPs that may be responsible for ultimate remediation of each location.

 

ComEd has identified 42 sites, 1316 of which have been approved for cleanup by the Illinois EPA or the U.S. EPA and 2726 that are currently under some degree of active study and/or remediation. ComEd expects the majority of the remediation at these sites to continue through at least 2016.

 

PECO has identified 26 sites, 16 of which have been approved for cleanup by the PA DEP and 10 that are currently under some degree of active study and/or remediation. PECO expects the majority of the remediation at these sites to continue through at least 2019.2020.

 

BGE has identified 13 former gas manufacturing or purification sites that it currently owns or owned at one time through a predecessor’s acquisition. Two gas manufacturing sites require some level of remediation and ongoing monitoring under the direction of the MDE. The required costs at these two sites are not considered material. One gas purification site is in the initial stages of investigation at the direction of the MDE.

 

Pursuant to orders from the ICC, PAPUC and MDPSC, respectively, ComEd, PECO and BGE are authorized to and are currently recovering environmental costs for the remediation of former MGP facility sites from customers, for which they have recorded regulatory assets. ComEd, pursuant to an ICC order, and PECO, pursuant to settlements of natural gas distribution rate cases with the PAPUC,

387


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

are currently recovering environmental remediation costs of theformer MGP facility sites through a provision within customer rates. WhileBGE is authorized to and is currently recovering environmental costs for the remediation of former MGP facility sites from customers; however, while BGE does not have a rider for MGP clean-up costs, BGE has historically received recovery of actual clean-up costs in distribution rates. ComEd, PECO and BGE have recorded regulatory assets for the recovery of these

395


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

costs. During the second and third quartersquarter of 2012,2013, ComEd and PECO completed an annual studiesstudy of their future estimated MGP remediation requirements. The results of these studies indicated that additional remediation would be required at certain sites; accordingly, ComEd and PECO increased their reserves and regulatory assets by $146less than $1 million and $7$6 million, respectively. BGE assessed its currently and formerly owned gas manufacturing and purification sites quarterly in 20122013 and determined that a loss was not probable at ten of its sites as of December 31, 2012.2013. As discussed above, the remediation costs at two of BGE’s MGP sites are not considered material. Furthermore, an estimate of a range of possible loss, if any, related to BGE’s gas purification site under investigation cannot be determined as of December 31, 20122013 given that the site is in the early stages of investigation and any potentialthe extent of contamination is currently unknown. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information regarding the associated regulatory assets.

 

ThisThe historical nature of the MGP sites and the fact that many of the sites have been buried and built over, impacts the ability to determine a precise estimate of the ultimate costs prior to initial sampling and determination of the exact scope and method of remedial activity.action. Management determines its best estimate of remediation costs based on probabilistic modeling and deterministic modelingestimates using all available information at the time of each study and the remediation standards currently required by the U.S. EPA. The increase in the reserve at ComEd was predominately tied to 6 sites with a total increase of approximately $111 million. The change was driven by the completion of additional preliminary environmental investigations that identified increases in scope for the remediation of larger areas and to greater depths, along with the requirement for additional groundwater management not previously contemplated in prior studies. ComEd also obtained new information on scope requirements for several sites where another PRP is leading remediation efforts and that ComEd shares responsibility. Prior to completion of any significant clean up, each site remediation plan is approved by the Illinois EPA.appropriate state environmental agency.

 

As of December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, the Registrants have accrued the following undiscounted amounts for environmental liabilities in other current liabilities and other deferred credits and other liabilities within their respective Consolidated Balance Sheets:

 

December 31, 2012

  Total environmental
investigation
and remediation reserve
   Portion of total related to MGP
investigation and remediation
 

December 31, 2013

  Total environmental
investigation
and remediation reserve
   Portion of total related to MGP
investigation and remediation
 

Exelon

  $338   $298   $338   $273 

Generation

   30    —      56    —   

ComEd

   260    254    234    229 

PECO

   47    44    47    44 

BGE

   1    —      1    —   

December 31, 2011

  Total environmental
investigation
and remediation reserve
   Portion of total related to MGP
investigation and remediation
 

Exelon

  $224   $168 

Generation

   47    —   

ComEd

   127    121 

PECO

   50    47 

BGE

   —      —   

 

388


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

December 31, 2012

  Total environmental
investigation
and remediation reserve
   Portion of total related to MGP
investigation and remediation
 

Exelon

  $351   $298 

Generation

   42    —   

ComEd

   261    254 

PECO

   47    44 

BGE

   1    —   

 

The Registrants cannot reasonably estimate whether they will incur other significant liabilities for additional investigation and remediation costs at these or additional sites identified by the Registrants, environmental agencies or others, or whether such costs will be recoverable from third parties, including customers.

 

Water Quality

 

Section 316(b) of the Clean Water ActAct.. Section 316(b) requires that the cooling water intake structures at electric power plants reflect the best technology available to minimize adverse environmental impacts, and is implemented through state-level NPDES permit programs. All of

396


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Generation’s and CENG’s power generation facilities with cooling water systems are subject to the regulations. Facilities without closed-cycle recirculating systems (e.g., cooling towers) are potentially most affected.affected by changes to the existing regulations. For Generation, those facilities are Clinton, Dresden, Eddystone, Fairless Hills, Gould Street, Handley, Mountain Creek, Mystic 7, Oyster Creek, Peach Bottom, Quad Cities, Riverside, Salem and Schuylkill. For CENG, those facilities are Calvert Cliffs, Nine Mile Point Unit 1 and R.E. Ginna.

 

On March 28, 2011, the U.S. EPA issued the proposed regulation under Section 316(b). The proposal does not require closed-cycle cooling (e.g., cooling towers) as the best technology available to address impingement and entrainment. The proposal provides the state permitting agency with discretion to determine the best technology available to limit entrainment (drawing aquatic life into the plants cooling system) mortality, including application of a cost-benefit test and the consideration of a number of site-specific factors. After consideration of these factors, the state permitting agency may require closed cycle cooling, an alternate technology, or determine that the current technology is the best available. The proposed rule also imposes limits on impingement (trapping aquatic life on screens) mortality, which likely will be accomplished by the installation of screens or similaranother technology at the intake. Exelon filed comments on the proposed regulation on August 18, 2011, stating its support for a number of its provisions (e.g., cooling towers not required as best technology available, and the use of site-specific and cost benefit analysis) while also noting a number of technical provisions that require revision to take into account existing unit operations and practices within the industry.

 

In June 2012, the U.S. EPA published two Notices of Data Availability (NODA) seeking public comment on alternate compliance technologies for impingement and the use of a public opinion survey to calculate the so-called “non-use” benefits of the rule. Exelon filed comments for each NODA, supporting the additional flexibility afforded by the impingement NODA, and opposing the NODA relating to calculation of non-use benefits due to its inaccurate and unreliable methodologies that would artificially inflate the benefits of proposed technologies that would otherwise not be cost-effective. On July 18, 2012,June 27, 2013, the U.S. EPA announced that it had agreed to extendamend the court approved Settlement Agreement to extend the deadline to issue a final rule until June 27, 2013.November 4, 2013 and on October 30, 2013 the U.S. EPA invoked theforce majeure provision of the Settlement Agreement to extend the final rule deadline until January 14, 2014 due to the early October 2013 federal government shutdown. The U.S. EPA and the plaintiffs have again agreed to extend the date for issuance of the final rule until April 17, 2014. Until the rule is finalized, the state permitting agencies will continue to apply their best professional judgment to address impingement and entrainment.

Oyster Creek. On January 7, 2010, the NJDEP issued a draft NPDES permit for Oyster Creek that would have required, in the exercise of its best professional judgment, the installation of cooling towers as the best technology available within seven years after the effective date of the permit. On December 8, 2010, Exelon announced that Generation will permanently cease generation operations at Oyster Creek no later than December 31, 2019. The current NRC license for Oyster Creek expires in 2029. In reliance upon Exelon’s determination to cease generation operations no later than December 31, 2019, the NJDEP determined that closed cycle cooling is not the best technology

389


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

available for Oyster Creek given the length of time that would be required to retrofit from the existing once-through cooling system to a closed-cycle cooling system and the limited life span of the plant after installation of a closed-cycle cooling system. Based on its consideration of these and other factors, NJDEP determined that the existing measures at the plant represent the best technology available for the facility’s cooling water intake through cessation of generation operations.

On December 9, 2010, Generation executed an Administrative Consent Order (ACO) with the NJDEP regarding Oyster Creek. The ACO sets forth, among other things, the agreement by Generation to permanently cease generation operations at Oyster Creek if the conditions of the ACO are satisfied. In accordance with the ACO, on December 21, 2011, the NJDEP agreed to issue a final NPDES permit that became effective on April 12, 2012 that does not require the construction of cooling towers or other closed-cycle cooling facilities. The ACO and the final permit apply only to Oyster Creek based on its unique circumstances and does not set any precedent for the ultimate compliance requirements for Section 316(b) at Exelon’s other plants.

As a result of the decision and the ACO, the expected economic useful life of Oyster Creek was reduced by 10 years to correspond to Exelon’s current best estimate as to the timing of ceasing generation operations at the Oyster Creek unit in 2019. The financial impacts relate primarily to accelerated depreciation and accretion expense associated with the changes in decommissioning assumptions related to Generation’s asset retirement obligation over the remaining expected economic useful life of Oyster Creek.

 

Salem and Other Power Generation FacilitiesFacilities.. In June 2001, the NJDEP issued a renewed NPDES permit for Salem, allowing for the continued operation of Salem with its existing cooling water system. NJDEP advised PSEG, in July 2004 that it strongly recommended reducing cooling water intake flow commensurate with closed-cycle cooling as a compliance option for Salem. PSEG submitted an application for a renewal of the permit on February 1, 2006. In the permit renewal application, PSEG analyzed closed-cycle cooling and other options and demonstrated that the continuation of the Estuary Enhancement Program, an extensive environmental restoration program at Salem, is the best technology to meet the Section 316(b) requirements. PSEG continues to operate Salem under the approved June 2001 NPDES permit while the NPDES permit renewal application is being reviewed. If the final permit or Section 316(b) regulations ultimately requires the retrofitting of Salem’s cooling water intake structure to reduce cooling water intake flow commensurate with closed-cycle cooling, Exelon’s and Generation’s share of the total cost of the retrofit and any resulting interim replacement power would likely be in excess of $430 million, based on a 2006 estimate, and would result in increased depreciation expense related to the retrofit investment.

397


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

It is unknown at this time whether the NJDEP permit programs will require closed-cycle cooling at Salem. In addition, the economic viability of Generation’s other power generation facilities, as well as CENG’s, without closed-cycle cooling water systems will be called into question by any requirement to construct cooling towers. Should the final rule not require the installation of cooling towers, and retain the flexibility afforded the state permitting agencies in applying a cost benefit test and to consider site-specific factors, the impact of the rule would be minimized even though the costs of compliance could be material to Generation and CENG.

 

Given the uncertainties associated with the requirements that will be contained in the final rule, Generation cannot predict the eventual outcome or estimate the effect that compliance with any resulting Section 316(b) or interim state requirements will have on the operation of its and CENG’s generating facilities and its future results of operations, cash flows and financial position.

 

390


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Groundwater ContaminationContamination.. In October 2007, a subsidiary of Constellation entered into a consent decree with the MDE relating to groundwater contamination at a third partythird-party facility that was licensed to accept fly ash, a byproduct generated by coal-fired plants. The consent decree required the payment of a $1 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. Prior to the merger,Merger, Constellation recorded a liability in its Consolidated Balance Sheets total liabilities of approximately $23$30 million to comply with the consent decree.decree with an additional $3 million recognized through purchase accounting. During third quarter of 2013, Generation increased its reserve by $2 million based on an update of future estimated remediation costs. The remaining liability as of December 31, 2012,2013, is approximately $3$14 million. In addition, a private party has asserted claims relating to groundwater contamination. Generation has reached an agreement in principle to resolve these claims. The company believes that these claims are without merit andamount of the settlement is vigorously contesting them.not material to the financial condition of Generation.

 

Alleged Conemaugh Clean Streams Act ViolationViolation.. The PA DEP has alleged that GenOn Northeast Management Company (GenOn), the operator of Conemaugh Generating Station, violated the Pennsylvania Clean Streams Law. GenOn reached agreement with PA DEP on a proposed Consent OrderDecree that was approved by the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania on December 4, 2012. Under the Consent Order,Decree, GenOn is obligated to pay a civil penalty of $0.5 million, of which Generation’s responsibility iswas approximately $0.2 million. Generation made the final payment in January 2014 and is complying with the Consent Decree.

 

Air Quality

 

Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR). On July 11, 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit Court) vacated the CAIR, which had been promulgated by the U.S. EPA to reduce power plant emissions of SO2SO2 and NOx.NOx. The D.C. Circuit Court later remanded the CAIR to the U.S. EPA, without invalidating the entire rulemaking, so that the U.S. EPA could correct CAIR in accordance with the D.C. Circuit Court’s July 11, 2008 opinion. On July 7, 2011, the U.S. EPA published the final rule, known as the CSAPR. The CSAPR requires 28 states in the eastern half of the United States to significantly improve air quality by reducing power plant emissions that cross state lines and contribute to ground-level ozone and fine particle pollution in other states.

 

Numerous entities challenged the CSAPR in the D.C. Circuit Court, and some requested a stay of the rule pending the Court’s consideration of the matter on the merits. On December 30, 2011, the Court granted a stay of the CSAPR, and directed the U.S. EPA to continue the administration of CAIR in the interim. On August 21, 2012, a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court held that the U.S. EPA

398


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

has exceeded its authority in certain material aspects of the CSAPR and vacated the rule and remanded it to the U.S. EPA for further rulemaking consistent with its decision. The Court also ordered that CAIR remain in effect pending finalization of CSAPR on remand. On January 24, 2013,The Court’s order was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, denied petitions for reconsideration of the ruling by the three-judge panel.where oral argument was held on December 10, 2013. A decision is expected sometime during 2014.

 

Under the CSAPR, Generationgeneration units were to receive allowances based on historic heat input and intrastate, and limited interstate, trading of allowances was permitted. The CSAPR restricted entirely the use of pre-2012 allowances. Existing SO2 allowances under the ARP would remain available for use under ARP. During the third quarter of 2010, Generation recognized a lower of cost or market impairment charge of $57 million on its ARP SO2 allowances that were not expected to be used by Generation’s fossil-fuel power plants and that had not been sold forward. The impairment was recorded due to the significant decline of allowance market prices because CSAPR regulations would restrict entirely the use of ARP SO2 allowances beginning in 2012. As of December 31, 2012,2013, Generation had $45$56 million of emission allowances carried at the lower of weighted average cost or market.

391


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

EPA Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS). The MATS rule became final on April 16, 2012. The MATS rule reduces emissions of toxic air pollutants, and finalized the new source performance standards for fossil fuel-fired electric utility steam generating units (EGUs). The MATS rule requires coal-fired EGUs to achieve high removal rates of mercury, acid gases and other metals from air emissions. To achieve these standards, coal units with no pollution control equipment installed (uncontrolled coal units) will have to make capital investments and incur higher operating expenses. It is expected that smaller, older, uncontrolled coal units will retire rather than make these investments. Coal units with existing controls that do not meet the required standards may need to upgrade existing controls or add new controls to comply. In addition, the new standards will causerequire oil units to achieve high removal rates of metals. Owners of oil units not currently meeting the proposed emission standards may choose to convert the units to light oils or natural gas, install control technologies or retire the units. The MATS rule requires generating stations to meet the new standards three years after the rule takes effect, April 16, 2015, with specific guidelines for an additional one or two years in limited cases. Numerous entities have challenged MATS in the D.C. Circuit Court, and Exelon was granted permission by the Court to intervene in support of the rule. A decision by the Court is not expected until sometime in 2013.during 2014. The outcome of the appeal, and its impact on power plant operators’ investment and retirement decisions, is uncertain.

 

Exelon, along with the other co-owners of Conemaugh Generating Station are moving forward with plans to improve the existing scrubbers and install Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) controls to meet the mercury removal requirements of MATS.

 

In addition, as of December 31, 2012,2013, Exelon had a $693$698 million net investment in coal-fired plants in Georgia and Texas subject to long-term leases extending through 2028-2032. While Exelon currently estimates the value of these plants at the end of the lease term will be in excess of the recorded residual lease values, after the impairment recorded in the second quarter of 2013, final applications of the CSAPR and MATS regulations could negatively impact the end-of-lease term values of these assets, which could result in a future impairment loss that could be material.

 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The U.S. EPA previously announced that it would complete a review of theall NAAQS by 2014. In December 2012,Oral argument in the U.S.litigation (State of Miss. v. EPA issued a more stringent particulate matter NAAQS. The Agency is currently evaluating its) of the final 2008 ozone NAAQS for potentially more stringent requirements as was previously recommended by the U.S. EPA Clean Air Act Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) when it reviewed the 2008 ozone NAAQS (that is currently the subject of litigation in the D.C. Circuit Court). These final and pending NAAQS reviews could result in more stringent emissions limits on fossil-fired electric generating stations. In July 2012, the D.C. Circuit Court issued separate rules upholding tightened NAAQS established by the U.S. EPA in 2010 for nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide. The rulings clear the way for the U.S. EPA to continue work already underway with state and local agencies on implementing revised SIP’s designed to achieve or maintain the required air quality levels. To the extent not already impacted by CAIR (and in the future by CSAPR after revision upon remand) and MATS, some power plants could be required to achieve further reductions of nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide emissions.

In September 2011, the U.S. EPA withdrew its reconsideration of the NAAQS standard for ozone, which is next scheduled for reconsideration in 2014. Litigation of the ozone standardoccurred in the D.C. Circuit Court continues.in November 2012 and a final Court decision was issued on July 23, 2013 with the 2008 primary ozone standard upheld, but the secondary standard remanded to EPA for reconsideration. Concurrent with litigation of the 2008 ozone standard, the U.S. EPA continues its regular, periodic review of the ozone NAAQS and is expected to propose revisions in the fall of 2014, with preliminary indications that the U.S. EPA will likely propose a tightened standard. It is unclear at this point in time whether the U.S. EPA will be able to respond to the Court remand of the secondary 2008 ozone standard on a timeframe that would be any quicker than

399


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

that of the U.S. EPA’s current, periodic review schedule. In December 2012, the U.S. EPA issued its final revisions to the Agency’s particulate matter (PM) NAAQS. In its final rule, the U.S. EPA lowered the annual PM2.5 standard, but declined to issue a new secondary NAAQS to improve urban visibility. The U.S. EPA indicated in its final rule that by 2020 it expects most areas of the country will be in attainment of the new PM2.5 NAAQS based on

392


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

currently expected regulations, such as the MATS regulation. It is unclear if the vacatur of the CSAPR, one of the regulations that the U.S. EPA is relying on to assist with future PM reduction, would alter the U.S. EPA’s view since either CAIR or a finalized CSAPR regulation would be in effect leading up to 2020. In March 2013, a number of industry coalitions filed a joint lawsuit challenging the new PM2.5 standard. Also during early 2013, the D.C. Circuit remanded several rules for implementation of earlier PM2.5 NAAQS to the U.S. EPA for revision of certain aspects of the rules, with a requirement that the U.S. EPA re-promulgate regulations in conformance with the correct subparts of the Clean Air Act.

 

In addition to these NAAQS, the U.S. EPA also expects to finalize initialfinalized nonattainment designations for certain areas in the United States for the 2010 one-hour SO2 standard in Juneon August 5, 2013, and indicated that additional nonattainment areas will be designated in a future rulemaking. U.S. EPA will require states to submit state implementation plans (SIPs) for nonattainment areas by April 2015. With regard to Texas and Maryland, no nonattainment areas were identified in U.S. EPA’s final designation rule. With regard to Illinois and Pennsylvania, several counties, or portions of counties, in each state were identified as nonattainment. The U.S. EPA will follow the approach outlined in a February 2015. Compliance2013 U.S. EPA strategy document that establishes a process and timeline for the Agency to address additional designations in states’ counties under a future rulemaking. Nonattainment county compliance with the one-hour SO2 standard is required by FebruaryOctober 2018. While significant SO2 reductions will occur as a result of MATS compliance in 2015, Exelon is unable to predict the U.S. EPA’s final one-hourrequirements of pending states’ SIPs to further reduce SO2 standard designation methodology at this pointemissions in time assupport of attainment of the U.S. EPA continues to consider whether to used modeled or monitored data to inform the designation process, nor potential SIP requirements for areas found to be in nonattainment.one hour SO2 standard.

 

Notices and Finding of Violations and Midwest Generation Bankruptcy. In December 1999, ComEd sold several generating stations to Midwest Generation, LLC (Midwest Generation), a subsidiary of Edison Mission Energy (EME). Under the terms of the sale agreement, Midwest Generation and EME assumed responsibility for environmental liabilities associated with the ownership, occupancy, use and operation of the stations, including responsibility for compliance by the stations with environmental laws before their purchase by Midwest Generation. Midwest Generation and EME additionally agreed to indemnify and hold ComEd and its affiliates harmless from claims, fines, penalties, liabilities and expenses arising from third partythird-party claims against ComEd resulting from or arising out of the environmental liabilities assumed by Midwest Generation and EME under the terms of the agreement governing the sale. In connection with Exelon’s 2001 corporate restructuring, Generation assumed ComEd’s rights and obligations with respect to its former generation business, including its rights and obligations under the sale agreement with Midwest Generation and EME.

 

On August 6, 2007, ComEd received a NOV addressed to itDecember 17, 2012 (Petition Date), EME and certain of its subsidiaries, including Midwest Generation, fromfiled for protection under Chapter 11 of the U.S. EPA, alleging, in relevant part, that ComEd andBankruptcy Code.

In 2012, the Bankruptcy Court approved the rejection of a coal rail car lease under which Midwest Generation violated and are continuinghad agreed to violate provisions ofreimburse ComEd for all obligations. The rejection left Generation as the Clean Air Act as a result ofparty responsible to make remaining payments under the modification and/or operation of six electric generation stations located in northern Illinois that havelease. In January 2013, Generation made the final $10 million payment due under the lease agreement which had been owned and operated by Midwest Generation since their purchase from ComEd in 1999. In August 2009, the United States and the State of Illinois filed a complaint against Midwest Generation with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois initiating enforcement proceedings with respect to most of the alleged Clean Air Act violations set forth in the NOV. Neither ComEd nor Exelon was named as a defendant in this original complaint. In March 2010, the District Court granted Midwest Generation’s partial motion to dismiss all but one of the claims against Midwest Generation. The District Court held that Midwest Generation cannot be liable for any alleged violations relating to construction that occurred prior to Midwest Generation’s ownership of the stations. In May 2010, the government plaintiffs filed an amended complaint against Midwest Generation asserting claims substantially similar to those in the original complaint, and added ComEd and EME as defendants. The amended complaint seeks injunctive relief and civil penalties against all defendants, although not all of the claims specifically pertain to ComEd. On March 16, 2011, the District Court granted ComEd’s motion to dismiss the May 2010 complaint in its entirety as it relates to ComEd. On January 3, 2012, upon leave of the District Court, the government parties appealed the dismissal of ComEd to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Exelon, Generation and ComEd are unable to predict the ultimate resolution of the claims alleged in the amended complaint, however, Exelon, Generation and ComEd have concluded that, in light of the March 2011 District Court decision, the likelihood of loss is remote. Therefore, no reserve has been established.accrued at December 31, 2012.

 

393400


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

On December 17, 2012,During the second quarter of 2013, Exelon filed proofs of claim of $21 million with the Bankruptcy Court for amounts owed by EME and certain of its subsidiaries, including Midwest Generation filed for protection under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code (the “Petition Date”).

As a result of the bankruptcy filing, Exelon and Generation have recorded liabilities and receivable reserves as of December 31, 2012, for a total of $13 million, which consists primarily of lease payments under a coal rail car lease, ComEd utility payments and estimated payments for asbestos personal injury claimscertain legal costs. Further, Exelon filed pre-Petition Date. The Bankruptcy Court approvedan environmental claim with an unspecified amount that listed the rejection of the agreement under which Midwest Generation was responsible for obligations under the lease, leaving Generation as the party responsible to make remaining payments under the lease. Exelon and Generation currently expect Midwest Generation or its successor will remain responsible for asbestos personal injury claims filed post-Petitionindemnifications that were in place pre-Petition Date and as such have recorded no liability for such amounts. Requirements for Generation to ultimately satisfy such claims could have a material adverse impact on Exelon’s and Generation’s future results of operations.

other factors associated with the remediation. As of December 31, 2013, Exelon has not recorded a receivable for the Petition Date, Generation had wholesale power transactions with Edison Mission Marketing and Trading, an affiliatefiled proofs of Midwest Generation not includedclaim because recovery of any amount cannot be assured at this point in the bankruptcy proceeding. Generation expects these transactions to be fully settled in the normal course.bankruptcy. Exelon will not record claim recoveries unless and until they are realized.

 

Certain environmental laws and regulations subject current and prior owners of properties or generators of hazardous substances at such properties to liability for remediation costs of environmental contamination. As a prior owner of the generating stations, ComEd (and Generation, through its agreement in theExelon’s 2001 corporate restructuring to assume ComEd’s rights and obligations associated with its former generation business) could face liability (along with any other potentially responsible parties) for environmental conditions at the stations requiring remediation, with the determination of the allocation among the parties subject to many uncertain factors, including the impact of Midwest Generation’s bankruptcy. Additionally, the obligations of EME andOn January 17, 2014, Midwest Generation filed a plan supplement to ComEd underits bankruptcy filing that included a request to reject the sale agreement, including the environmental indemnity, may be discharged in the bankruptcy proceeding. In such circumstances, ComEd (and Generation, through ComEd) may only have an unsecured claim against EME and Midwest Generation for the environmental remediation costs that would have otherwise been obligations of EME and Midwest Generation under the sale agreement. This unsecured claim may yield a fractional, or possibly no, recovery for ComEd and Generation.

indemnity. ComEd and Generation continue to monitor the bankruptcy proceedings andhave reviewed available public information as to potential environmental exposures regarding the Midwest Generation plantstation sites. Midwest Generation publicly disclosed in its third quarter 2012ending September 30, 2013 Form 10-Q that (i) it has accrued a probable amount of approximately $9$8 million for estimated environmental investigation and remediation costs under CERCLA, or similar laws, for the investigation and remediation of contaminated property at four Midwest Generation plant sites, (ii) it has identified stations for which a reasonable estimate for investigation and/ or remediation cannot be made and (iii) it and the Illinois EPA entered into Compliance Commitment Agreements outlining specified environmental remediation measures and groundwater monitoring activities to be undertaken at its Crawford, Powerton, Joliet, Will County and Waukegan generating stations. At this time, however, ComEd and Generation do not have sufficient information to reasonably assess the potential likelihood or magnitude of any such exposures. Further, Midwest Generation’s reorganization process will likely extend beyond one year and the outcome is uncertain, including whether the facilities will continue to operate and the identity or financial wherewithal of potential future plant owners.remediation requirements that may be asserted. For these reasons, ComEd and Generation are unable to predict whether and to what extent they may ultimately be held responsible for remediation and other costs relating to the generating stations and as a result no liability has been recorded atas of December 31, 2012.2013. Any liability imposed on ComEd or Generation for environmental matters relating to the generating stations could have a material adverse impact on their future results of operations and cash flows.

 

394Under a supplemental agreement reached in 2003, Midwest Generation agreed to reimburse ComEd and Generation for 50% of the specific asbestos claims pending as of February 2003 and related expenses less recovery of insurance costs and agreed to a sharing arrangement for liabilities and expenses associated with future asbestos-related claims as specified in the agreement. In addition to the sale agreement, Midwest Generation also requested to reject this supplemental agreement in the January 17, 2014 plan supplement to its bankruptcy filing. Exelon and Generation had previously expected Midwest Generation or its successor would remain responsible for asbestos personal injury claims filed post-Petition Date, and as a result had not recorded a liability for such amounts. Exelon and Generation now believe that the rejection of the 1999 sale and supplemental agreements is probable, and as a result, Generation has increased its reserve for asbestos-related bodily injury claims at December 31, 2013 by $25 million. The increase in the reserve was estimated using actuarial assumptions and analyses available to Generation. Generation’s exposure could differ to the extent new information is received or made available. Midwest Generation publicly disclosed in its quarter ending September 30, 2013 Form 10-Q that they had $53 million recorded related to asbestos bodily injury claims under the contractual indemnity with ComEd. If the agreements are rejected, Exelon and

401


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Generation may be entitled to damages associated with the agreement terminations. These amounts are considered to be contingent gains and would not be recognized until realized.

On October 18, 2013, NRG Energy entered into an agreement to buy EME’s portfolio of generation subject to regulatory approvals. Exelon continues to monitor all aspects of the bankruptcy; the proposed purchase by NRG has not impacted any accounting conclusions as of December 31, 2013.

In May 2010, the United States and State of Illinois initiated a lawsuit against Midwest Generation, ComEd and EME alleging Clean Air Act violations relating to the modification and/or operation of six (coal) electric generation plants in Northern Illinois, which ComEd sold to Midwest Generation/EME in 1999. The government parties sought injunctive relief and civil penalties against all defendants, although not all of the claims specifically pertained to ComEd. On March 16, 2011, the District Court granted ComEd’s motion to dismiss the May 2010 complaint in its entirety as it relates to ComEd. On January 3, 2012, upon leave of the District Court, the government parties appealed the dismissal of ComEd to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. On July 8, 2013, the Circuit Court affirmed the District Court’s dismissal of the complaint against ComEd. On September 19, 2013, the Circuit Court denied the petition for a rehearing filed by the governmental parties. The government parties did not seek United States Supreme Court review of the Seventh Circuit’s decision. The deadline for seeking such review was in December 2013. In light of the Circuit Court decision resolving this matter in favor of ComEd, no reserve has been established.

 

Solid and Hazardous Waste

 

Cotter Corporation.The U.S. EPA has advised Cotter Corporation (Cotter), a former ComEd subsidiary, that it is potentially liable in connection with radiological contamination at a site known as the West Lake Landfill in Missouri. On February 18, 2000, ComEd sold Cotter to an unaffiliated third party.third-party. As part of the sale, ComEd agreed to indemnify Cotter for any liability arising in connection with the West Lake Landfill. In connection with Exelon’s 2001 corporate restructuring, this responsibility to indemnify Cotter was transferred to Generation. On May 29, 2008, the U.S. EPA issued a Record of Decision approving the remediation option submitted by Cotter and the two other PRPs that required additional landfill cover. The current estimated cost of the anticipated landfill cover remediation for the site is approximately $42 million, which will be allocated among all PRPs. Generation has accrued what it believes to be an adequate amount to cover its anticipated share of such liability. By letter dated January 11, 2010, the U.S. EPA requested that the PRPs perform a supplemental feasibility study for a remediation alternative that would involve complete excavation of the radiological contamination. On September 30, 2011, the PRPs submitted the final supplemental feasibility study to the U.S. EPA for review. In June 2012, the U.S. EPA requested that the PRPs perform additional analysis and groundwater sampling as part of the SFSsupplemental feasibility study that could take up to one year to complete, and subsequently requested additional analysis sampling and modeling to be conducted into 2014. In light of these additional requests, it is unknown when the U.S.U.S EPA will propose a remedy for public comment. Thereafter the U.S. EPA will select a final remedy and enter into a Consent Decree with the PRP’sPRPs to effectuate the remedy. A complete excavation remedy would be significantly more expensive than the previously selected additional cover remedy; however, Generation believes the likelihood that the U.S. EPA would require a complete excavation remedy is remote.

 

On August 8, 2011, Cotter was notified by the DOJ that Cotter is considered a PRP with respect to the government’s clean-up costs for contamination attributable to low level radioactive residues at a former storage and reprocessing facility named Latty Avenue near St. Louis, Missouri. The Latty

402


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Avenue site is included in ComEd’s indemnification responsibilities discussed above as part of the sale of Cotter. The radioactive residues had been generated initially in connection with the processing of uranium ores as part of the U.S. government’s Manhattan Project. Cotter purchased the residues in 1969 for initial processing at the Latty Avenue facility for the subsequent extraction of uranium and metals. In 1976, the NRC found that the Latty Avenue site had radiation levels exceeding NRC criteria for decontamination of land areas. Latty Avenue was investigated and remediated by the United States Army Corps of Engineers pursuant to funding under the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program. The DOJ has not yet formally advised the PRPs of the amount that it is seeking, but it is believed to be approximately $90 million. The DOJ and the PRPs agreed to toll the statute of limitations until August 20132014 so that settlement discussions could proceed. Based on Exelon’s preliminary review, it appears probable that Exelon has liability to Cotter under the indemnification agreement and has established an appropriate accrual for this liability.

 

On February 28, 2012, and April 12, 2012, two lawsuits were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri against 15 and 14 defendants, respectively, including Exelon, Generation and ComEd (the “Exelon defendants”). and Cotter. The suits allege that individuals living in the North St. Louis area developed some form of cancer due to the defendants’ negligent or reckless conduct in processing, transporting, storing, handling and/or disposing of radioactive materials. Plaintiffs have asserted claims for negligence, strict liability, emotional distress, medical monitoring, and violations of the Price-Anderson Act. The complaints do not contain specific damage claims. On May 30, 2012, the plaintiffs filed voluntary motions to dismiss the Exelon defendants from both lawsuits which waswere subsequently granted. On October 23,Since May 30, 2012, a third lawsuit wasseveral related lawsuits have been filed in the same court on behalf of three additionalvarious plaintiffs against Cotter and seven other defendants, but not Exelon. The allegations in that complaintthese related lawsuits mirror the two previously-filedinitially filed lawsuits. ItIn the event of a finding of liability, it is reasonably possible that Exelon would be

395


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

considered liable due to its indemnification responsibilities of Cotter described above. DueOn March 27, 2013, the U.S. District Court dismissed all state common law actions brought under the initial two lawsuits; and also found that the plaintiffs had not properly brought the actions under the Price-Anderson Act. On July 8, 2013, the plaintiffs filed amended complaints under the Price-Anderson Act. Cotter moved to dismiss the earlyamended complaints and has motions currently pending before the court. At this stage of the litigation, Exelon cannot estimate a range of loss, if any.

 

68th Street Dump.In 1999, the U.S. EPA proposed to add the 68th Street Dump in Baltimore, Maryland to the Superfund National Priorities List, and notified BGE and 19 others that they are PRPs at the site. In March 2004, BGE and other PRPs formed the 68th Street Coalition and entered into consent order negotiations with the U.S. EPA to investigate clean-up options for the site under the Superfund Alternative Sites Program. In May 2006, a settlement among the U.S. EPA and 19 of the PRPs, including BGE, with respect to investigation of the site became effective. The settlement requires the PRPs, over the course of several years, to identify contamination at the site and recommend clean-up options. The potentially responsible partiesPRPs submitted their investigation of the range of clean-up options in the first quarter of 2011. Although the investigation and options provided to the U.S. EPA are still subject to U.S. EPA review and selection of a remedy, the range of estimated clean-up costs to be allocated among all of the PRPs is in the range of $50 million to $64 million. On September 30, 2013, U.S. EPA issued the Record of Decision identifying its preferred remedial alternative for the site. The estimated cost for the alternative chosen by U.S. EPA is expected to make a final selectionconsistent with the PRPs estimated range of one of the alternatives in 2013.costs noted above. Based on Exelon’s preliminary review, it appears probable that Exelon has liability and has established an appropriate accrual for its share of the estimated clean-up costs. BGE is indemnified by a wholly owned subsidiary of Generation for most of the costs related to this settlement and clean-up of the site.

403


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Rossville Ash Site. The Rossville Ash Site is a 32-acre property located in Rosedale, Baltimore County, Maryland, which was used for the placement of fly ash from 1983-2007. The property is owned by Constellation Power Source Generation, LLC(CPSG). In 2008, CPSG investigated and remediated the property by entering it into the Maryland Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP) to address any historic environmental concerns and ready the site for appropriate future redevelopment. The site was accepted into the program in 2010 and is currently going through the process to remediate the site and receive closure from MDE. Exelon currently estimates the cost to close the site to be approximately $6 million, which has been fully reserved as of December 31, 2013.

 

Sauer Dump. On May 30, 2012, BGE was notified by the U.S. EPA that it is considered a PRP at the Sauer Dump Superfund site in Dundalk, MD.Maryland. The U.S. EPA offered BGE and three other PRPs the opportunity to conduct an environmental investigation and present cleanup recommendations at the site. The letter provided 60 days for the PRPs to decide whether or not to participate in the investigation. In addition, the U.S. EPA is seeking recovery from the PRPs of $1.7 million for past cleanup and investigation costs at the site. On July 30, 2012,March 11, 2013, BGE along with theand three other named PRP’s providedsigned an Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent with the U.S. EPA with a “Good Faith Offer” along with a proposed Settlement Agreementwhich requires the PRP’s to conduct a Remedial Investigation and a Feasibility Study at the Sitesite to determine what, if any, are the appropriate and recommended cleanup activities for the site. The PRPs will seek to reach agreement with the U.S. EPA to conduct the investigation. The ultimate outcome of this proceeding is uncertain. Since the U.S. EPA has not selected a cleanup remedy and the allocation of the cleanup costs among the PRPs has not been determined, an estimate of the range of BGE’s reasonably possible loss, if any, cannot be determined.

 

Climate Change Regulation. Exelon is subject to climate change regulation or legislation at the Federal, regional and state levels. In 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that GHG emissions are pollutants subject to regulation under the new motor vehicle provisions of the Clean Air Act. Consequently, on December 7, 2009, the U.S. EPA issued an endangerment finding under Section 202 of the Clean Air Act regarding GHGs from new motor vehicles and on April 1, 2010 issued final regulations limiting GHG emissions from cars and light trucks effective on January 2, 2011. While such regulations do not specifically address stationary sources, such as a generating plant, it is the U.S. EPA’s position that the regulation of GHGs under the mobile source provisions of the Clean Air Act has triggered the permitting requirements under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Title V operating permit sections of the Clean Air Act for new and modified stationary sources effective January 2, 2011. Therefore, on May 13, 2010, the U.S. EPA issued final regulations (the Tailoring Rule) relating to these provisions of the Clean Air Act for major stationary sources of GHG emissions that apply to new sources that emit greater than 100,000 tons per year, on a CO2 equivalent basis, and to modifications to existing sources that result in emissions increases greater than 75,000 tons per year on a CO2 equivalent basis. These thresholds became effective January 2, 2011, apply for six years and will be reviewed by the U.S. EPA for future applicability thereafter. On July 2, 2012 the

396


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

U.S. EPA declined to lower GHG permit thresholds in its final “Step 3” Tailoring Rule update. The U.S. EPA will review permit thresholds again in a 2015 rulemaking process. On June 26, 2012, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, in aper curium decision, dismissed industry and state petitions challenging the U.S. EPA’s Tailoring Rule based on petitioners’ lack of standing. Further, in the same decision, the court denied all challenges to the U.S. EPA’s endangerment finding, and the Agency’s “Tailpipe Rule” for cars and light trucks. In August 2012, severalduty trucks, the endangerment finding for GHG’s from stationary sources, and the Tailoring Rule. On October 15, 2013 the U.S. Supreme Court granted industry parties filed petitions for an en banc rehearingto review one aspect of the Agency’s GHG regulations with the D.C. Circuit court. On September 6, 2012, the Circuit Court ordered the U.S. EPA, intervening groups, and some states to reply to the industry petitions.

On April 13, 2012, the U.S. EPA published proposed regulations for NSPS for GHG emissions from new fossil fuel power plants, greater than 25 MW, that would require the plants to limit CO2 emissions to a thirty year average of less than 1,000 pounds per MWh (less than 1,800 pounds per MWh for the first ten years and less than 600 pounds per MWh thereafter).PSD permitting regulations. Under the PSD regulations, new and modified major stationary sources could be required to install best available control technology, to be determined on a case by case basis. Generation could be significantly affected by the regulations if it were to build new plants or modify existing plants.

On June 25, 2013, President Obama announced “The President’s Climate Action Plan,” a summary of executive branch actions intended to: reduce carbon emissions; prepare the United States

404


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

for the impacts of climate change; and lead international efforts to combat global climate change and prepare for its impacts. Concurrent with the announcement of the Administration’s plan, the President also issued a Memorandum for the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency that focused on power generation sector carbon reductions under the Section 111 New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) section of the federal Clean Air Act. The memorandum directs the U.S. EPA Administrator to issue two sets of proposed rulemakings with regard to power plant carbon emissions under Section 111 of the Clean Air Act.

The first rulemaking, under Section 111(b) of the Clean Air Act is also expected to establish in 2013 GHG emissionfocus on establishing carbon regulations for existingnew fossil-fuel power plants. This rulemaking was proposed on September 20, 2013 and is to be finalized “in a timely fashion.” In the proposed rule U.S.EPA sets separate standards for fossil-fuel fired utility boilers and natural gas fired stationary sourcescombustion turbines.

The second rulemaking, under Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act.Act is to focus on modified, reconstructed and existing fossil power plants. The rulemaking is to be proposed no later than June 1, 2014, be finalized no later than June 1, 2015, and require that states submit to U.S. EPA their implementation plans no later than June 30, 2016. In developing this rulemaking, U.S. EPA is directed to consider a number of factors, including options to reduce costs, options to ensure the continued use of a range of energy sources and technologies, options that are consistent with reliable and affordable power, and options that allow for the use of market-based instruments, performance standards and other regulatory flexibilities.

 

To the extent that the final Section 111(d) rule results in emission reductions from fossil fuel fired plants, and thereby imposes some form of direct or indirect price of carbon in competitive electricity markets, Exelon’s overall low-carbon generation portfolio results could benefit.

Litigation and Regulatory Matters

 

Asbestos Personal Injury Claims (Exelon, Generation, PECO and BGE).

 

Exelon and GenerationGeneration.. Generation maintains a reserve for claims associated with asbestos-related personal injury actions in certain facilities that are currently owned by Generation or were previously owned by ComEd and PECO. The reserve is recorded on an undiscounted basis and excludes the estimated legal costs associated with handling these matters, which could be material.

 

At December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, Generation had reserved approximately $63$90 million and $49$63 million, respectively, in total for asbestos-related bodily injury claims. As of December 31, 2012,2013, approximately $14$19 million of this amount related to 170224 open claims presented to Generation, while the remaining $49$71 million of the reserve is for estimated future asbestos-related bodily injury claims anticipated to arise through 2050, based on actuarial assumptions and analyses, which are updated on an annual basis. On a quarterly basis, Generation monitors actual experience against the number of forecasted claims to be received and expected claim payments and evaluates whether an adjustment to the reserve is necessary. During

On November 22, 2013, the second quarterSupreme Court of 2012,Pennsylvania held that the Pennsylvania Workers Compensation Act does not apply to an employee’s disability or death resulting from occupational disease, such as diseases related to asbestos exposure, which manifests more than 300 weeks after the employee’s last employment-based exposure, and that therefore the exclusivity provision of the Act does not apply to preclude such employee from suing his or her employer in court. The Supreme

405


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Court’s ruling reverses previous rulings by the Pennsylvania Superior Court precluding current and former employees from suing their employers in court, despite the fact that the same employee was not eligible for workers compensation benefits for diseases that manifest more than 300 weeks after the employee’s last employment-based exposure to asbestos. Currently, Exelon, Generation increased its reserve by approximately $19 million, primarily dueand PECO are unable to increased actualpredict whether and projected numberto what extent they may experience additional claims in the future as a result of this ruling; as such no increase to the asbestos-related bodily injury liability has been recorded as of December 31, 2013. Increased claims activity resulting from this ruling could have a material adverse impact on Exelon, Generation’s and severityPECO’s future results of claims. During 2011operations and 2010, the updates to this reserve did not result in material adjustments.cash flows.

 

BGEBGE.. Since 1993, BGE and certain Constellation (now Generation) subsidiaries have been involved in several actions concerning asbestos. The actions are based upon the theory of “premises liability,” alleging that BGE and Generation knew of and exposed individuals to an asbestos hazard. In addition to BGE and Generation, numerous other parties are defendants in these cases.

 

Approximately 480486 individuals who were never employees of BGE or Generationcertain Constellation subsidiaries 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 Generationcertain Constellation subsidiaries in these actions. To date, most asbestos claims which have been resolved have been dismissed or resolved without any payment by BGE or Generationcertain Constellation subsidiaries and a small minority of these cases has been resolved for amounts that were not material to BGE or Generation’s financial results.

 

397


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Discovery begins in these cases onceafter they are placed on the trial docket. At present, noneonly two of the pending cases are set for trial. Given the limited discovery in these cases, BGE and Generation do not know the specific facts that are necessary to provide an estimate of the reasonably possible loss relating to these claims; as such, no accrual has been made and a range of loss is not estimable. The specific facts not known 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.

 

Insurance and hold harmless agreements from contractors who employed the plaintiffs may cover a portion of any awards in the actions.

 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Investigation (Exelon and Generation).

 

On January 30, 2012, FERC published a notice on its website regarding a non-public investigation of certain of Constellation’s power trading activities in and around the ISO-NY from September 2007 through December 2008. Prior to the merger, Constellation announced on March 9, 2012, that it had resolved the FERC investigation. Under the settlement, Constellation agreed to pay, and has paid, a $135 million civil penalty and $110 million in disgorgement. The disgorgement amount will be disbursed in two ways. First, Constellation will provide $1 million each to six U.S. regional grid operators for the purpose of improving their surveillance and analytic capabilities. The remainder of the disgorgement amount was deposited in a fund that will be administered by a FERC ALJ. State agencies in New York, New England and PJM (the regional grid operator for 13 states and the District of Columbia) will be eligible to make claims against the fund on behalf of electric energy consumers in those states.

 

During the year ended December 31, 2012, Generation recorded expense of $195 million in operating and maintenance expense with the remaining $50 million recorded as a Constellation pre-acquisition contingency. As of December 31, 2012, the full amount of the civil penalty and disgorgement was paid. See Note 4—Merger and Acquisitions for additional information on the merger.

406


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Continuous Power Interruption (ComEd)

 

TheSection 16-125 of the Illinois Public Utilities Act provides that in the event an electric utility, such as ComEd, experiences a continuous power interruption of four hours or more that affects (in ComEd’s case) more than 30,000 customers, the utility may be liable for actual damages suffered by customers as a result of the interruption and may be responsible for reimbursement of local governmental emergency and contingency expenses incurred in connection with the interruption. Recovery of consequential damages is barred. The affected utility may seek from the ICC a waiver of these liabilities when the utility can show that the cause of the interruption was unpreventable damage due to weather events or conditions, customer tampering, or certain other causes enumerated in the law.

 

On August 18, 2011, ComEd sought from the ICC a determination that ComEd is not liable for damage compensation to customers in connection with the July 11, 2011 storm system that produced multiple power interruptions that in the aggregate affected more than 900,000 customers in ComEd’s service territory, as well as for five other storm systems that affected ComEd’s customers during June and July 2011 (Summer 2011 Storm Docket). The ICC is currently conducting a proceeding to assess

398


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

ComEd’s request. In the absence of a favorable determination from the ICC, some ComEd customers affected by the outages could seek recovery of their actual, non-consequential damages, and the local governments in the areas in which those customers are located could seek recovery of emergency and contingency expenses.

On January 25, 2013 the ALJ issued a Proposed Order in the Summer 2011 Storm Docket. The ALJ found that a complete waiver of liability should apply for five of the six storms at issue, and found that for the July 2011 storm, 34,599 interruptions were preventable and therefore no waiver should apply. The ALJ also found that ComEd’s system is designed, constructed and maintained in accordance with good utility practice, thereby rejecting a request by the Illinois Attorney General for the ICC to open an investigation.

In addition, on September 29, 2011, ComEd sought from the ICC a determination that it was not liable for damage compensation related to the February 1, 2011 blizzard (February 2011 Blizzard Docket).

On January 10,June 5, 2013, the ALJ issued a Proposed Order in the February 2011 Blizzard Docket, finding thatICC approved a complete waiver of liability should applyfor five of the six summer storms and the February 2011 blizzard. However, the ICC held that for the storm.July 11, 2011 storm, 34,559 interruptions were preventable and therefore no waiver should apply. As withrequired by the Summer 2011 Storm Docket, the ALJ foundICC’s Order, ComEd notified relevant customers that ComEd’s system is designed, constructed and maintainedthey may be entitled to seek reimbursement of incurred costs in accordance with good utility practice.a claims procedure established under ICC rules and regulations. In addition, the ICC found that ComEd did not systematically fail in its duty to provide adequate, reliable and safe service. As a result, the ICC rejected the Illinois Attorney General’s request for the ICC to open an investigation into ComEd’s infrastructure and storm hardening investments.

 

Following the ICC’s June 26, 2013 denial of ComEd’s request for rehearing, on June 27, 2013 ComEd filed an appeal of both the summer and winter storm dockets with the Illinois Appellate Court regarding the ICC’s interpretation of Section 16-125 of the Illinois Public Utilities Act. ComEd cannot predict the outcome of appeals.

As a result of the ICC’s June 5, 2013 ruling, ComEd established a liability, which was not material, for potential reimbursements for actual damages incurred by the 34,559 customers covered by the ICC’s June 5, 2013 Order. The liability recorded represents the low end of a range of potential losses given that no amount within the range represents a better estimate. ComEd’s ultimate liability will be based on actual claims eligible for reimbursement as well as the outcome of the appeal. Although reimbursements for actual damages will differ from the estimated accrual recorded, at this time ComEd does not expect the difference to be material to ComEd’s results of operations or cash flows.

ComEd has not recorded an accrual for reimbursement of local governmental emergency and contingency expenses as a range of loss, if any, cannot be reasonably estimated at this time, but may be material to ComEd’s results of operations and cash flows.

Telephone Consumer Protection Act Lawsuit (ComEd)

On November 19, 2013, a class action complaint was filed in Cook County on behalf of a single individual and a presumptive class that would include all customers in ComEd’s service territory who

407


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

were enrolled by the Company in ComEd’s Outage Alert text message program. The complaint alleges that ComEd violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) by sending approximately 1.2 million text messages to customers without first obtaining their consent to receive such messages. The complaint seeks certification of a class along with statutory damages, attorneys’ fees, and an order prohibiting ComEd from sending additional text messages. Such statutory damages could range from $500 to $1,500 per text. However, ComEd is preparing a motion to dismiss this class action complaint and will vigorously contest the allegations of this suit. The ultimate outcomesoutcome of these proceedings arethis proceeding is uncertain, and thean amount, of damages, if any, which might be asserted, cannot be reasonably estimated at this time, but may be material to ComEd’s results of operations and cash flows. As a result, ComEd has not established a reserve for this complaint as of December 31, 2013.

 

Securities Class Action (Exelon)

 

Three federal securities class action lawsuits were filed in the United States District Courts for the Southern District of New York and the District of Maryland between September 2008 and November 2008 against Constellation. The cases 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 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, a number of its 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’s June 27, 2008 offering of the Debentures. The securities class actions also allege that Constellation 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,sought, 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 in Maryland to the District of Maryland, and the actions have since been transferred for coordination with the securities class action filed there. On May 9, 2013, the federal court in Maryland preliminarily approved the settlement of Constellation’s 2008 Securities Class Action for a payment of $4 million, which will be paid by Constellation’s insurer. Notice of the settlement was provided to class members in June 18, 2009,2013 and the court appointed a lead plaintiff, who filed a consolidated amended complaintapproved the final settlement 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 Court4, 2013. This settlement will resolve all 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 Exchange Act of 1934 and limiting the suit to those persons who purchased Debentures in

399


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

the June 2008 offering. In August 2011, plaintiffs requested permissionConstellation’s litigation arising from the court to file a third amended complaint in an effort to attempt to revive the claims of the common shareholders. Constellation filed an objection to the plaintiffs’ request for permission to file a third amended complaint and, on March 28, 2012, the District Court of Maryland denied the plaintiffs’ request for permission to revive the claims of the common shareholders. Given that limited discovery has occurred, that the court has not certified any class and the plaintiffs have not quantified their potential damage claims, Exelon is unable at this time to provide an estimate of the range of reasonably possible loss relating to these proceedings or to determine the ultimate outcome of the securities class actions or their possible effect on its financial results.2008 Securities Class Action lawsuit.

 

Fund Transfer Restrictions (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Under applicable law, Exelon may borrow or receive an extension of credit from its subsidiaries. Under the terms of Exelon’s intercompany money pool agreement, Exelon can lend to, but not borrow from the money pool.

 

The Federal Power Act declares it to be unlawful for any officer or director of any public utility “to participate in the making or paying of any dividends of such public utility from any funds properly included in capital account.” What constitutes “funds properly included in capital account” is undefined in the Federal Power Act or the related regulations; however, FERC has consistently interpreted the provision to allow dividends to be paid as long as: (1) the source of the dividends is clearly disclosed;

408


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

(2) the dividend is not excessive; and (3) there is no self-dealing on the part of corporate officials. While these restrictions may limit the absolute amount of dividends that a particular subsidiary may pay, Exelon does not believe these limitations are materially limiting because, under these limitations, the subsidiaries are allowed to pay dividends sufficient to meet Exelon’s actual cash needs.

 

Under Illinois law, ComEd may not pay any dividend on its stock unless, among other things, “[its] earnings and earned surplus are sufficient to declare and pay same after provision is made for reasonable and proper reserves,” or unless it has specific authorization from the ICC. ComEd has also agreed in connection with financings arranged through ComEd Financing III that it will not declare dividends on any shares of its capital stock in the event that: (1) it exercises its right to extend the interest payment periods on the subordinated debt securities issued to ComEd Financing III; (2) it defaults on its guarantee of the payment of distributions on the preferred trust securities of ComEd Financing III; or (3) an event of default occurs under the Indenture under which the subordinated debt securities are issued.

 

PECO’s Articles of Incorporation prohibit payment of any dividend on, or other distribution to the holders of, common stock if, after giving effect thereto, the capital of PECO represented by its common stock together with its retained earnings is, in the aggregate, less than the involuntary liquidating value of its then outstanding preferred securities. At December 31, 2012, such capital was $3.0 billion and amounted to about 34 times the liquidating value of theOn May 1, 2013, PECO redeemed all outstanding preferred securities of $87 million.securities. As a result, the above ratio calculation is no longer applicable. Additionally, PECO may not declare dividends on any shares of its capital stock in the event that: (1) it exercises its right to extend the interest payment periods on the subordinated debentures, which were issued to PEC L.P. or PECO Trust IV; (2) it defaults on its guarantee of the payment of distributions on the Series D Preferred Securities of PEC L.P. or the preferred trust securities of PECO Trust IV; or (3) an event of default occurs under the Indenture under which the subordinated debentures are issued.

 

400


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

BGE pays dividends on its common stock after its Boardboard of Directorsdirectors declares them. However, BGE is subject to certain dividend restrictions established by the MDPSC. First, BGE is prohibited from paying a dividend on its common shares through the end of 2014. Second, BGE is prohibited from paying a dividend on its common shares if (a) after the dividend payment, BGE’s equity ratio would be below 48% as calculated pursuant to the MDPSC’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. Finally, BGE must notify the MDPSC that it intends to declare a dividend on its common shares at least 30 days before such a dividend is paid. There are no other limitations on BGE paying common stock dividends unless: (1) BGE elects to defer interest payments on the 6.20% Deferrable Interest Subordinated Debentures due 2043, and any deferred interest remains unpaid; or (2) any dividends (and any redemption payments) due on BGE’s preference stock have not been paid.

 

Baltimore City Franchise Taxes (BGE)

The City of Baltimore claims that BGE has maintained electric facilities in the City’s public right-of-ways for over one hundred years without the proper franchise rights from the City. BGE is currently reviewing the merits of this claim. BGE has not recorded an accrual for payment of franchise fees for past periods as a range of loss, if any, cannot be reasonably estimated at this time. Franchise fees assessed in future periods may be material to BGE’s results of operations and cash flows.

409


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

General (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE).

 

The Registrants are involved in various other litigation matters that are being defended and handled in the ordinary course of business. The assessment of whether a loss is probable or a reasonable possibility, and whether the loss or a range of loss is estimable, often involves a series of complex judgments about future events. The Registrants maintain accruals for such losses that are probable of being incurred and subject to reasonable estimation. Management is sometimes unable to estimate an amount or range of reasonably possible loss, particularly where (1) the damages sought are indeterminate, (2) the proceedings are in the early stages, or (3) the matters involve novel or unsettled legal theories. In such cases, there is considerable uncertainty regarding the timing or ultimate resolution of such matters, including a possible eventual loss.

 

Income Taxes

 

See Note 12—14—Income Taxes for information regarding the Registrants’ income tax refund claims and certain tax positions, including the 1999 sale of fossil generating assets.

 

20.23. Supplemental Financial Information (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Supplemental Statement of Operations Information

 

The following tables provide additional information about the Registrants’ Consolidated Statements of Operations for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010.2011.

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2013

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Taxes other than income

          

Utility(a)

  $449   $79   $241   $129   $82 

Property

   302    205    24    14    112 

Payroll

   159    89    27    13    15 

Other

   185    16    7    2    4 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total taxes other than income

  $1,095   $389   $299   $158   $213 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2012

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO  BGE 

Taxes other than income

         

Utility(a)

  $463   $82   $239   $141  $75 

Property

   227    189    22    13   111 

Payroll

   131    78    26    12   18 

Other

   198    20    8    (4  4 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total taxes other than income

  $1,019   $369   $295   $162  $208 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

401410


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2011

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Taxes other than income

          

Utility(a)

  $443   $27   $243   $173   $79 

Property

   177    146    22    9    107 

Payroll

   123    71    25    13    17 

Other

   42    20    6    10    4 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total taxes other than income

  $785   $264   $296   $205   $207 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2010

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Taxes other than income

          

Utility(a)

  $476   $—     $205   $271   $79 

Property

   175    142    20    13    102 

Payroll

   121    70    24    12    16 

Other

   36    18    7    7    3 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total taxes other than income

  $808   $230   $256   $303   $200 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

(a)Generation’s utility tax represents gross receipts tax related to its retail operations and ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s utility taxes represent municipal and state utility taxes and gross receipts taxes related to their operating revenues, respectively. The offsetting collection of utility taxes from customers is recorded in revenues on the Registrants’ Consolidated Statements of Operations.Operations and Comprehensive Income.

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2012

 Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2013

 Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

Other, Net

          

Decommissioning-related activities:

          

Net realized income on decommissioning trust funds (a)

          

Regulatory Agreement Units

 $189  $189  $—    $—    $—   

Non-Regulatory Agreement Units

  102   102   —     —     —   

Regulatory agreement units

 $256  $256  $—    $—    $—   

Non-regulatory agreement units

  77   77   —     —     —   

Net unrealized gains on decommissioning trust funds—

          

Regulatory Agreement Units

  386   386   —     —     —   

Non-Regulatory Agreement Units

  105   105   —     —     —   

Regulatory agreement units

  406   406   —     —     —   

Non-regulatory agreement units

  146   146   —     —     —   

Net unrealized gains on pledged assets—

          

Zion Station decommissioning

  73   73   —     —     —     7   7   —     —     —   

Regulatory offset to decommissioning trust fund-related activities (b)

  (530  (530  —     —     —     (546  (546  —     —     —   
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total decommissioning-related activities

  325   325   —     —     —     346   346   —     —     —   
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Investment income

  20   3   1   2   11(c)   8   (1  —     (1  9(c) 

Long-term lease income

  29   —     —     —     —     28   —     —     —     —   

Interest income related to uncertain income tax positions

  15   2   20   —     —     24   4   —     —     —   

AFUDC-Equity

  17   —     6   4   10 

Credit facility termination fees

  (85  (85  —     —     —   

AFUDC—Equity

  22   —     11   4   7 

Other

  25   (6)  12   2   2   45   19   15   3   1 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other, net

 $346  $239  $39  $8  $23  $473  $368  $26  $6  $17 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2012

 Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Other, Net

     

Decommissioning-related activities:

     

Net realized income on decommissioning trust funds (a)

     

Regulatory agreement units

 $189  $189  $—    $—    $—   

Non-regulatory agreement Units

  102   102   —     —     —   

Net unrealized gains on decommissioning trust funds—

     

Regulatory agreement units

  386   386   —     —     —   

Non-regulatory agreement units

  105   105   —     —     —   

Net unrealized gains on pledged assets—

     

Zion Station decommissioning

  73   73   —     —     —   

Regulatory offset to decommissioning trust fund-related activities (b)

  (530  (530  —     —     —   
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total decommissioning-related activities

  325   325   —     —     —   
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

402411


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2011

 Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Other, Net

     

Decommissioning-related activities:

     

Net realized income on decommissioning trust funds(a)

     

Regulatory Agreement Units

 $177  $177  $—    $—    $—   

Non-Regulatory Agreement Units

  45   45   —     —     —   

Net unrealized losses on decommissioning trust funds—

     

Regulatory Agreement Units

  (74  (74  —     —     —   

Non-Regulatory Agreement Units

  (4  (4  —     —     —   

Net unrealized gains on pledged assets—

     

Zion Station decommissioning

  48   48   —     —     —   

Regulatory offset to decommissioning trust fund-related activities (b)

  (130  (130  —     —     —   
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total decommissioning-related activities

  62   62   —     —     —   
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Investment income

  10   1   1   3   13(c) 

Long-term lease income

  28   —     —     —     —   

Interest income related to uncertain income tax positions

  53   31   14   1   —   

AFUDC-Equity

  17   —     8   9   15 

Bargain purchase gain related to Wolf Hollow acquisition

  36   36   —     —     —   

Other

  (3  (8  6   1   (2
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other, net

 $203  $122  $29  $14  $26 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2012

 Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Investment income

  20   3   1   2   11(c) 

Long-term lease income

  29   —     —     —     —   

Interest income related to uncertain income tax positions

  15   2   20   —     —   

AFUDC—Equity

  17   —     6   4   10 

Credit facility termination fees

  (85  (85  —     —     —   

Other

  25   (6  12   2   2 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other, net

 $346  $239  $39  $8  $23 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2010

 Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Other, Net

     

Decommissioning-related activities:

     

Net realized income on decommissioning trust funds(a)

     

Regulatory Agreement Units

 $176  $176  $—    $—    $—   

Non-Regulatory Agreement Units

  51   51   —     —     —   

Net unrealized gains on decommissioning trust funds—

     

Regulatory Agreement Units

  316   316   —     —     —   

Non-Regulatory Agreement Units

  104   104   —     —     —   

Regulatory offset to decommissioning trust fund-related activities(b)

  (394  (394  —     —     —   
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total decommissioning-related activities

  253   253   —     —     —   
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Investment income

  1   —     —     1   15(c) 

Long-term lease income

  27   —     —     —     —   

Interest income related to uncertain income tax positions

  —     —     6   —     —   

AFUDC-Equity

  11   —     4   7   10 

Realized gain on Rabbi trust investments

  1   —     1   —     —   

Other

  19   4   13   —     —   
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other, net

 $312  $257  $24  $8  $25 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2011

 Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Other, Net

     

Decommissioning-related activities:

     

Net realized income on decommissioning trust funds (a)

     

Regulatory agreement units

 $177  $177  $—    $—    $—   

Non-regulatory agreement units

  45   45   —     —     —   

Net unrealized losses on decommissioning trust funds—

     

Regulatory agreement units

  (74  (74  —     —     —   

Non-regulatory agreement units

  (4  (4  —     —     —   

Net unrealized gains on pledged assets—

     

Zion Station decommissioning

  48   48   —     —     —   

Regulatory offset to decommissioning trust fund-related activities (b)

  (130  (130  —     —     —   
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total decommissioning-related activities

  62   62   —     —     —   
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Investment income

  10   1   1   3   13(c) 

Long-term lease income

  28   —     —     —     —   

Interest income related to uncertain income tax positions

  53   31   14   1   —   

AFUDC—Equity

  17   —     8   9   15 

Bargain purchase gain related to Wolf Hollow acquisition

  36   36   —     —     —   

Other

  (3  (8  6   1   (2
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other, net

 $203  $122  $29  $14  $26 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

(a)Includes investment income and realized gains and losses on sales of investments of the trust funds.
(b)Includes the elimination of NDT fund activity for the Regulatory Agreement Units, including the elimination of net income taxes related to all NDT fund activity for those units. See Note 13—15—Asset Retirement Obligations for additional information regarding the accounting for nuclear decommissioning.
(c)Relates to the cash return on BGE’s rate stabilization deferral. See Note 3 – 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information regarding the rate stabilization deferral.

 

403412


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Supplemental Cash Flow Information

 

The following tables provide additional information regarding the Registrants’ Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010.2011.

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2012

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Depreciation, amortization and accretion

          

Property, plant and equipment

  $1,712    $733   $525   $207   $245 

Regulatory assets

   129    —      80    10    53 

Amortization of intangible assets, net

   40     35    5    —      —   

Amortization of energy contract assets and liabilities(a)

   1,110    1,110    —      —      —   

Nuclear fuel(a)

   848    848    —      —      —   

ARO accretion(b)

   240    240    —      —      —   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total depreciation, amortization and accretion

  $4,079   $2,966   $610   $217   $298 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2013

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Depreciation, amortization, accretion and depletion

          

Property, plant and equipment

  $1,893   $813   $545   $219   $264 

Regulatory assets

   212    —      119    9    84 

Amortization of intangible assets, net

   48    43    5    —      —   

Amortization of energy contract assets and liabilities (a)

   430    507    —      —      —   

Nuclear fuel (a)

   921    921    —      —      —   

ARO accretion (b)

   275    275    —      —      —   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total depreciation, amortization, accretion and depletion

  $3,779   $2,559   $669   $228   $348 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2011

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Depreciation, amortization and accretion

          

Property, plant and equipment

  $1,284   $570   $502   $191   $224 

Regulatory assets

   63    —      52    11    50 

Nuclear fuel(a)

   755    755    —      —      —   

ARO accretion(b)

   214    214    —      —      —   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total depreciation, amortization and accretion

  $2,316   $1,539   $554   $202   $274 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2012

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Depreciation, amortization, accretion and depletion

          

Property, plant and equipment

  $1,712   $733   $525   $207   $245 

Regulatory assets

   129    —      80    10    53 

Amortization of intangible assets, net

   40    35    5    —      —   

Amortization of energy contract assets and liabilities (a)

   1,110    1,110    —      —      —   

Nuclear fuel (a)

   848    848    —      —      —   

ARO accretion (b)

   240    240    —      —      —   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total depreciation, amortization, accretion and depletion

  $4,079   $2,966   $610   $217   $298 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2010

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO BGE 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2011

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Depreciation, amortization and accretion

                   

Property, plant and equipment

  $1,144   $474   $473   $171  $214   $1,284   $570   $502   $191   $224 

Regulatory assets

   931    —      43    889(c)   35    63    —      52    11    50 

Nuclear fuel(a)

   672    672    —      —     —      755    755    —      —      —   

ARO accretion(b)

   196    195    1    —     —      214    214    —      —      —   
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total depreciation, amortization and accretion

  $2,943   $1,341   $517   $1,060  $249   $2,316   $1,539   $554   $202   $274 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Included in revenues or fuel expense, or operating revenues on the Registrants’ Consolidated Statements of Operations.Operations and Comprehensive Income.
(b)Included in operating and maintenance expense on the Registrants’ Consolidated Statements of Operations.Operations and Comprehensive Income.
(c)For PECO, primarily reflects CTC amortization.

 

404413


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

For the Year Ended December 31, 2013

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Cash paid (refunded) during the year:

      

Interest (net of amount capitalized)

  $866  $291  $283  $95  $130 

Income taxes (net of refunds)

   112   (18  33   70   42 

Other non-cash operating activities:

      

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit costs

  $825  $345  $308  $43  $56 

Earnings from equity method investments

   (10  (10  —     —     —   

Provision for uncollectible accounts

   101   10   (15  61   44 

Provision for excess and obsolete inventory

   9   9   —     —     —   

Stock-based compensation costs

   120   —     —     —     —   

Other decommissioning-related activity (a)

   (169  (169  —     —     —   

Energy-related options (b)

   104   104   ��     —     —   

Amortization of regulatory asset related to debt costs

   12   —     9   3   —   

Amortization of rate stabilization deferral

   66   —     —     —     66 

Amortization of debt fair value adjustment

   (34  (34  —     —     —   

Discrete impacts from EIMA (c)

   (271  —     (271  —     —   

Amortization of debt costs

   18   10   1   2   2 

Impairment of investments in direct financing leases (e)

   14   —     —     —     —   

Impairment charges (f)

   149   149   —     —     —   

Other

   (58  —     (4  (1  (15
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other non-cash operating activities

  $876  $414  $28  $108  $153 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Changes in other assets and liabilities:

      

Under/over-recovered energy and transmission costs

  $12  $—    $(35 $9  $38  

Other regulatory assets and liabilities

   (64  —     (43  (16  (71

Other current assets

   (165  (151  (2  13   (8

Other noncurrent assets and liabilities

   322    15   268(g)   (12  (23
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total changes in other assets and liabilities

  $105  $(136 $188  $(6 $(64
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

   Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO   BGE 

Non-cash investing and financing activities:

       

Change in ARC

  $(128 $(128 $—    $—     $4 

Change in capital expenditures not paid

   (38  (107)(h)   (8  13    (48

Consolidated VIE dividend to non-controlling interest

   63   63   —     —      —   

Indemnification of like-kind exchange position (i)

   —     —     176   —      —   

(a)Includes the elimination of NDT fund activity for the Regulatory Agreement Units, including the elimination of operating revenues, ARO accretion, ARC amortization, investment income and income taxes related to all NDT fund activity for these units. See Note 15—Asset Retirement Obligations for additional information regarding the accounting for nuclear decommissioning.
(b)Includes option premiums reclassified to realized at the settlement of the underlying contracts and recorded to results of operations.
(c)Reflects the change in distribution rates pursuant to EIMA, which allows for the recovery of costs by a utility through a pre-established performance-based formula rate tariff. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for more information.
(d)Relates to integration costs to achieve distribution synergies related to the merger transaction. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for more information.
(e)Relates to an other than temporary decline in the estimated residual value of one of Exelon’s direct financing leases. See Note 8—Impairment of Long-Lived Assets for more information.
(f)Relates to the cancellation of uprate projects and write down of certain wind projects at Generation. See Note 8— Impairment of Long-Lived Assets for more information.

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2012

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Cash paid (refunded) during the year:

      

Interest (net of amount capitalized)

  $761  $286  $288  $113  $136 

Income taxes (net of refunds)

   (171  175   (42  (64  (112

Other non-cash operating activities:

      

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit costs

  $820  $341  $282  $50  $57 

Loss in equity method investments

   91   91   —     —     —   

Provision for uncollectible accounts

   164   22   42   60   44 

Provision for obsolete inventory

   6   6   1   —     —   

Stock-based compensation costs

   94   —     —     —     —   

Other decommissioning-related activity(a)

   (145  (145  —     —     —   

Energy-related options(b)

   160   160   —     —     —   

Amortization of regulatory asset related to debt costs

   18   —     13   3   2 

Amortization of rate stabilization deferral

   57   —     —     —     67 

Amortization of debt fair value adjustment

   (34  (34  —     —     —   

Merger-related commitments(d)

   141   32   —     —     27 

Severance cost

   99   34   —     —     —   

Discrete impacts from Energy Infrastructure Modernization Act (EIMA)(c)

   (96  —     (96  —     —   

Amortization of debt costs

   19   11   5   3   2 

Other

   (11  19   5   9   (6
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other non-cash operating activities

  $1,383  $537  $252  $125  $193 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Changes in other assets and liabilities:

      

Under/over-recovered energy and transmission costs

  $71  $—    $28  $20  $26 

Other regulatory assets and liabilities

   (404  —     (68  18   (112

Other current assets

   213   (30  (7  (12  (7

Other noncurrent assets and liabilities

   (248  (98  (95  (10  8 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total changes in other assets and liabilities

  $(368 $(128 $(142 $16  $(85
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

414


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

(g)Relates primarily to interest payable related to like-kind exchange tax position. See Note 14—Income Taxes for discussion of the like-kind exchange tax position.
(h)Includes $55 million of changes in capital expenditures not paid between December 31, 2013 and 2012 related to Antelope Valley.
(i)See Note 14—Income Taxes for discussion of the like-kind exchange tax position.

For the Year Ended December 31, 2012

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Cash paid (refunded) during the year:

      

Interest (net of amount capitalized)

  $761  $286  $288  $113  $136 

Income taxes (net of refunds)

   (171  175   (42  (64  (112

Other non-cash operating activities:

      

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit costs

  $820  $341  $282  $50  $57 

Loss in equity method investments

   91   91   —     —     —   

Provision for uncollectible accounts

   164   22   42   60   44 

Provision for excess and obsolete inventory

   6   6   1   —     —   

Stock-based compensation costs

   94   —     —     —     —   

Other decommissioning-related activity (a)

   (145  (145  —     —     —   

Energy-related options (b)

   160   160   —     —     —   

Amortization of regulatory asset related to debt costs

   18   —     13   3   2 

Amortization of rate stabilization deferral

   57   —     —     —     67 

Amortization of debt fair value adjustment

   (34  (34  —     —     —   

Merger-related commitments (d)

   141   32   —     —     27 

Severance costs

   99   34   —     —     —   

Discrete impacts from EIMA (c)

   (96  —     (96  —     —   

Amortization of debt costs

   19   11   5   3   2 

Other

   (11  19   5   9   (6
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other non-cash operating activities

  $1,383  $537  $252  $125  $193 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Changes in other assets and liabilities:

      

Under/over-recovered energy and transmission costs

  $71  $—    $28  $20  $26 

Other regulatory assets and liabilities

   (404  —     (68  18   (112

Other current assets

   213   (30  (7  (12  (7

Other noncurrent assets and liabilities

   (248  (98  (95  (10  8 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total changes in other assets and liabilities

  $(368 $(128 $(142 $16  $(85
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

   Exelon   Generation  ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Non-cash investing and financing activities:

         

Change in ARC

  $781   $781  $2   $—     $—   

Change in capital expenditures not paid

   160    103(e)  15    26    (4

Merger with Constellation, common stock issued

   7,365    5,264   —      —      —   

 

(a)Includes the elimination of NDT fund activity for the Regulatory Agreement Units, including the elimination of operating revenues, ARO accretion, ARC amortization, investment income and income taxes related to all NDT fund activity for these units. See Note 13—15—Asset Retirement Obligations for additional information regarding the accounting for nuclear decommissioning.
(b)Includes amountsoption premiums reclassified to realized at the settlement of the underlying contracts and recorded to results of operations related to option premiums due to the settlement of underlying transactions.operations.
(c)IncludesReflects the regulatory asset,change in distribution rates pursuant to EIMA, which representsallows for the ICC’s approved distribution formula and associated rulings as of December 31, 2012 and ComEd’s best estimate of the probable increase in distribution rates to provide recovery of prudent and reasonable costs incurred for the 12 months ended December 31, 2012.
(d)by a utility through a pre-established performance-based formula rate tariff. See Note 4—Mergers and Acquisitions3—Regulatory Matters for more information on merger-related commitments.information.
(e)Includes $247 million of capital expenditures not paid as of December 31, 2012 related to Antelope Valley.

 

405415


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2011

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Cash paid (refunded) during the year:

      

Interest (net of amount capitalized)

  $649  $158  $296  $128  $122 

Income taxes (net of refunds)

   (457  347   (676  (65  (54

Other non-cash operating activities:

      

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit costs

  $542  $249  $213  $32  $51 

Provision for uncollectible accounts

   121   —     57   64   44 

Stock-based compensation costs

   67   —     —     —     —   

Other decommissioning-related activity(a)

   16   16   —     —     —   

Energy-related options(b)

   137   137   —     —     —   

Amortization of regulatory asset related to debt costs

   21   —     18   3   2 

Amortization of rate stabilization deferral

   —     —     —     —     57 

Deferral of storm costs

   —     —     —     —     (16

Uncollectible accounts recovery, net

   14   —     14   —     —   

Discrete impacts from 2010 Rate Case order(c)

   (32  —     (32  —     —   

Bargain purchase gain related to Wolf Hollow Acquisition

   (36  (36  —     —     —   

Discrete impacts from Energy Infrastructure Modernization Act (EIMA)(d)

   (82  —     (82  —     —   

Other

   2   55   (4  1   (9
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other non-cash operating activities

  $770  $421  $184  $100  $129 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Changes in other assets and liabilities:

      

Under/over-recovered energy and transmission costs

  $(45 $—    $(49 $4  $(52

Other regulatory assets and liabilities

   —     —     44   26   10 

Other current assets

   (101  (23  (14  (12  (88

Other noncurrent assets and liabilities

   122   (34  64   (4  (31
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total changes in other assets and liabilities

  $(24 $(57 $45  $14  $(161
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
(d)Relates to the integration costs to achieve distribution synergies related to the merger transaction. See Note 4—Mergers and Acquisitions for more information on merger-related commitments.
(e)Includes $127 million of changes in capital expenditures not paid between December 31, 2012 and 2011 related to Antelope Valley.

For the Year Ended December 31, 2011

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Cash paid (refunded) during the year:

      

Interest (net of amount capitalized)

  $649  $158  $296  $128  $122 

Income taxes (net of refunds)

   (457  347   (676  (65  (54

Other non-cash operating activities:

      

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit costs

  $542  $249  $213  $32  $51 

Provision for uncollectible accounts

   121  ��—     57   64   44 

Stock-based compensation costs

   67   —     —     —     —   

Other decommissioning-related activity (a)

   16   16   —     —     —   

Energy-related options (b)

   137   137   —     —     —   

Amortization of regulatory asset related to debt costs

   21   —     18   3   2 

Amortization of rate stabilization deferral

   —     —     —     —     57 

Deferral of storm costs

   —     —     —     —     (16

Uncollectible accounts recovery, net

   14   —     14   —     —   

Discrete impacts from 2010 Rate Case Order (c)

   (32  —     (32  —     —   

Bargain purchase gain related to Wolf Hollow Acquisition

   (36  (36  —     —     —   

Discrete impacts from EIMA (d)

   (82  —     (82  —     —   

Other

   2   55   (4  1   (9
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other non-cash operating activities

  $770  $421  $184  $100  $129 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Changes in other assets and liabilities:

      

Under/over-recovered energy and transmission costs

  $(45 $—    $(49 $4  $(52

Other regulatory assets and liabilities

   —     —     44   26   10 

Other current assets

   (101  (23  (14  (12  (88

Other noncurrent assets and liabilities

   122   (34  64   (4  (31
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total changes in other assets and liabilities

  $(24 $(57 $45  $14  $(161
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

   Exelon   Generation  ComEd   PECO  BGE 

Non-cash investing and financing activities:

        

Change in ARC

  $186   $186  $—     $—    $—   

Change in capital expenditures not paid

   96    125(e)   7    (35  (7

 

(a)Includes the elimination of NDT fund activity for the Regulatory Agreement Units, including the elimination of operating revenues, ARO accretion, ARC amortization, investment income and income taxes related to all NDT fund activity for these units. See Note 13—15—Asset Retirement Obligations for additional information regarding the accounting for nuclear decommissioning.
(b)Includes amountsoption premiums reclassified to realized at the settlement of the underlying contracts and recorded to results of operations related to option premiums due to the settlement of underlying transactions.operations.
(c)In May 2011, as a result of the 2010 Rate Case order, ComEd recorded one-time benefits to reestablish previously expensed plant balances and to recover previously incurred costs related to Exelon’s 2009 restructuring plan. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for more information.
(d)Includes the establishment of a regulatory asset, pursuant to EIMA, for the 2011 annual reconciliation in ComEd’s distribution formula rate tariff and the deferral of costs associated with significant 2011 storms, partially offset by an accrual to fund a new Science and Technology Innovation Trust. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for more information.
(e)Includes $120 million of changes in capital expenditures not paid as ofbetween December 31, 2011 and 2010 related to Antelope Valley.

 

406416


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

For the Year Ended December 31, 2010

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Cash paid (refunded) during the year:

      

Interest (net of amount capitalized)

  $665(a)  $145  $283  $168  $128 

Income taxes (net of refunds)

   1,219   732   15   433   (76

Other non-cash operating activities:

      

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit costs

  $581  $268  $215  $46  $48 

Provision for uncollectible accounts

   108   1   48   59   38 

Provision for obsolete inventory

   12   12   —     —     —   

Stock-based compensation costs

   44   —     —     —     —   

Other decommissioning-related activity(b)

   (91  (91  —     —     —   

Energy-related options(c)

   (73  (73  —     —     —   

ARO adjustment

   (19  (8  (10  (1  —   

Amortization of regulatory asset related to debt costs

   24   —     20   4   2 

Amortization of rate stabilization deferral

   —     —     —     —     62 

Accrual for Illinois utility distribution tax refund(d)

   (25  —     (25  —     —   

Under-recovered uncollectible accounts, net(e)

   (14  —     (14  —     —   

ARP SO2 allowances impairment

   57   57   —     —     —   

Other

   5   16   4   —     (6
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other non-cash operating activities

  $609  $182  $238  $108  $144 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Changes in other assets and liabilities:

      

Under/over-recovered energy and transmission costs

  $61  $—    $58  $3  $6 

Other regulatory assets and liabilities

   —     —     (19  35   (64

Other current assets

   (18  (16  12   (19  (7

Other noncurrent assets and liabilities

   (99  (29  (184)(f)   59   2 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total changes in other assets and liabilities

  $(56 $(45 $(133 $78  $(63
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
   Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Non-cash investing and financing activities:

      

Change in ARC

  $(428 $(428 $—    $—    $—   

Change in capital expenditures not paid

   34   13   7   14   28 

Purchase accounting adjustments

   9   9   —     —     —   

Exelon Wind acquisition(g)

   32   32   —     —     —   

(a)Excludes $167 million of interest paid to the IRS relating to a preliminary agreement reached during the third quarter of 2010. See Note 12—Income Taxes for addition information.
(b)Includes the elimination of NDT fund activity for the Regulatory Agreement Units, including the elimination of operating revenues, ARO accretion, ARC amortization, investment income and income taxes related to all NDT fund activity for these units. See Note 13—Asset Retirement Obligations for additional information regarding the accounting for nuclear decommissioning.
(c)Includes amounts reclassified to realized at settlement of contracts recorded to results of operations related to option premiums due to the settlement of underlying transactions.
(d)During the second quarter of 2010, ComEd recorded a reduction of $25 million to taxes other than income to reflect management’s estimate of future refunds for the 2008 and 2009 tax years associated with Illinois’ utility distribution tax based on an analysis of past refunds and interpretations of the Illinois Public Utility Act. Historically, ComEd has recorded refunds of the Illinois utility distribution tax when received. ComEd believes it now has sufficient, reliable evidence to record and support an estimated receivable associated with the anticipated refund for the 2008 and 2009 tax years.
(e)Includes $70 million of under-recovered uncollectible accounts expense from 2008 and 2009 recorded in the first quarter of 2010 as well as $59 million of amortization of the associated regulatory asset. This amount also includes a credit of $3 million of under collections associated with 2010 activity. ComEd is recovering these costs through a rider mechanism authorized by the ICC. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information regarding the Illinois legislation for recovery of uncollectible accounts.

 

407


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

(f)Relates primarily to a decrease in interest payable associated with a change in uncertain income tax positions. See Note 12—Income Taxes for additional information.
(g)Represents contingent liability recorded in connection with the December 9, 2010 acquisition of Exelon Wind. See Note 4—Acquisition for additional information.

DOE Smart Grid Investment Grant (Exelon, PECO and BGE). For the year ended December 31, 2013, Exelon, PECO and BGE have included in the capital expenditures line item under investing activities of the cash flow statement capital expenditures of $74 million, $27 million and $47 million, respectively, and reimbursements of $95 million, $37 million and $58 million, respectively, related to PECO’s and BGE’s DOE SGIG programs. For the year ended December 31, 2012, Exelon, PECO and BGE have included in the capital expenditures line item under investing activities of the cash flow statement capital expenditures of $103 million, $56 million and $47 million, respectively, and reimbursements of $113 million, $66 million and $47 million, respectively, related to PECO’s and BGE’s DOE SGIG programs. For the year ended December 31, 2011, Exelon, PECO and BGE have included in the capital expenditures line item under investing activities of the cash flow statement capital expenditures of $51 million, $51 million and $23 million, respectively, and reimbursements of $56 million, $56 million and $41 million, respectively, related to PECO’s and BGE’s DOE SGIG programs. See Note 3 - 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information regarding the DOE SGIG.

 

Supplemental Balance Sheet Information

 

The following tables provide additional information about assets and liabilities of the Registrants at December 31, 20122013 and 2011.2012.

 

December 31, 2012

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

December 31, 2013

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Investments

                    

Equity method investments:

                    

Financing trusts(a)

  $22   $—     $6   $8   $8   $22   $—     $6   $8   $8 

Keystone Fuels, LLC

   38    38    —      —      —      32    32    —      —      —   

Conemaugh Fuels, LLC

   26    26    —      —      —      21    21    —      —      —   

CENG

   1,849    1,849    —      —      —      1,925    1,925    —      —      —   

Safe Harbor

   293    293    —      —      —      285    285    —      —      —   

Malacha

   8    8    —      —      —      8    8    —      —      —   

Other investments

   34    33    —      —      —      31     31     —      —      —   
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total equity method investments

   2,270    2,247    6    8    8    2,324     2,302     6    8    8 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Other investments:

                    

Net investment in direct financing leases

   685    —      —      —      —      698     0    —      —      —   

Employee benefit trusts and investments(b)

   100    22    8    22    5    90    23    5    23    5 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total investments

  $3,055   $2,269   $14   $30   $13   $3,112   $2,325   $11   $31   $13 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

December 31, 2012

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Investments

          

Equity method investments:

          

Financing trusts (a)

  $22   $—     $6   $8   $8 

Keystone Fuels, LLC

   38    38    —      —      —   

Conemaugh Fuels, LLC

   26    26    —      —      —   

CENG

   1,849    1,849    —      —      —   

Safe Harbor

   293    293    —      —      —   

Malacha

   8    8    —      —      —   

Other investments

   34    33    —      —      —   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total equity method investments

   2,270    2,247    6    8    8 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Other investments:

          

Net investment in direct financing leases

   685    —      —      —      —   

Employee benefit trusts and investments (b)

   100    22    8    22    5 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total investments

  $3,055   $2,269   $14   $30   $13 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

408417


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

December 31, 2011

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Investments

          

Equity method investments:

          

Financing trusts(a)

  $15   $—     $6   $8   $8 

Keystone Fuels, LLC

   13    13    —      —      —   

Conemaugh Fuels, LLC

   16    16    —      —      —   

Sacramento Solar

   1    1    —      —      —   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total equity method investments

   45    30    6    8    8 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Other investments:

          

Net investment in direct financing leases

   656    —      —      —      —   

Employee benefit trusts and investments(b)

   65    11    21    22    —   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total investments

  $766   $41   $27   $30   $8 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

(a)Includes investments in financing trusts, which were not consolidated within the financial statements of Exelon and are shown as investments in affiliates on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. See Note 1—Significant Accounting Policies for additional information.
(b)The Registrants’ investments in these marketable securities are recorded at fair market value.

 

December 2010 IRS Payment (Exelon). In the third quarter of 2010, Exelon and IRS Appeals reached a nonbinding, preliminary agreement to settle Exelon’s involuntary conversion and CTC positions. In order to stop additional interest from accruing on the expected assessment resulting from the agreement, Exelon paid $302 million to the IRS on December 28, 2010. As of December 31, 2010, Exelon had not funded the specific bank account from which the IRS payment was disbursed resulting in a current liability. This amount was subsequently funded in January 2011. Under the authoritative guidance for offsetting balances, Exelon included this payment in Cash and cash equivalents with an offsetting amount in Other current liabilities on its Consolidated Balance Sheets. See Note 12—Income Taxes for additional information.

409


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Like-Kind Exchange Transaction (Exelon). Prior to the PECO/Unicom Merger in October 2000, UII, LLC (formerly Unicom Investments, Inc.) (UII), a wholly owned subsidiary of Exelon, entered into a like-kind exchange transaction pursuant to which approximately $1.6 billion was invested in passive generating station leases with two separate entities unrelated to Exelon. The generating stations were leased back to such entities as part of the transaction. For financial accounting purposes, the investments are accounted for as direct financing lease investments. UII holds the leasehold interests in the generating stations in several separate bankruptcy remote, special purpose companies it directly or indirectly wholly owns. The lease agreements provide the lessees with fixed purchase options at the end of the lease terms. If the lessees do not exercise the fixed purchase options, Exelon has the ability to require the lessees to return the leasehold interests or to arrange a service contract with a third party for a period following the lease term. If Exelon chooses the service contract option, the leasehold interests will be returned to Exelon at the end of the term of the service contract. In any event, Exelon will be subject to residual value risk if the lessees do not exercise the fixed purchase options. In the fourth quarter of 2000, under the terms of the lease agreements, UII received a prepayment of $1.2 billion for all rent, which reduced the investment in the leases. There are no minimum scheduled lease payments to be received over the remaining term of the leases. At December 31, 2012 and 2011, the components of the net investment in long-term leases were as follows:

   December 31, 
   2012   2011 

Estimated residual value of leased assets

  $1,492   $1,492 

Less: unearned income

   807    836 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Net investment in long-term leases

  $685   $656 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

The following tables provide additional information about liabilities of the Registrants at December 31, 20122013 and 2011.2012.

 

December 31, 2013

  Exelon Generation ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Accrued expenses

Accrued expenses

  

     

Compensation-related accruals (a)

  $683  $337  $135   $47   $55 

Taxes accrued

   315   212   62    24    16 

Interest accrued

   234   72   95    32    29 

Severance accrued

   66   31   3    1    4 

Other accrued expenses

   335(b)   324(b)   12    2    7 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total accrued expenses

  $1,633  $976  $307   $106   $111 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 

December 31, 2012

  Exelon Generation ComEd   PECO   BGE   Exelon Generation ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Accrued expenses

                

Compensation-related accruals(a)

  $708  $371  $125   $45   $38   $708  $371  $125   $45   $38 

Taxes accrued

   353   247   61    3    22    353   247   61    3    22 

Interest accrued

   236   60   96    32    41    232   60   96    32    37 

Severance accrued

   91   42   4    1    5    91   42   4    1    5 

Other accrued expenses

   412(b)  396(b)  9    1    —      412(b)   396(b)   9    1    —   
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total accrued expenses

  $1,800  $1,116  $295   $82   $106   $1,796  $1,116  $295   $82   $102 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 

December 31, 2011

  Exelon Generation ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Accrued expenses

        

Compensation-related accruals(a)

  $520  $264  $127   $48   $42 

Taxes accrued

   297   241   59    5    26 

Interest accrued

   192   56   124    27    41 

Severance accrued

   15   9   2    1    —   

Other accrued expenses

   231(b)   209(b)   6    2    1 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total accrued expenses

  $1,255  $779  $318   $83   $110 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Primarily includes accrued payroll, bonuses and other incentives, vacation and benefits.
(b)Includes $327$228 million and $184$327 million for amounts accrued related to Antelope Valley as of December 31, 20122013 and December 31, 2011,2012, respectively.

 

410


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)

The following tables provide information about accumulated OCI income (loss) recorded (after tax) within Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2012 and 2011:

December 31, 2012

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO   BGE 

Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)

       

Net unrealized gain on cash flow hedges

  $367  $513  $—    $—     $—   

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit plans

   (3,155  (19  —     —      —   

Unrealized loss on marketable securities

   21   19   —     1    —   
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)

  $(2,767 $513  $—    $1   $—   
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

December 31, 2011

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO   BGE 

Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)

       

Net unrealized gain on cash flow hedges

  $488  $915  $—    $—     $—   

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit plans

   (2,938  —     —     —      —   

Unrealized loss on marketable securities

   —     —     (1  —      —   
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)

  $(2,450 $915  $(1 $—     $—   
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

21.24. Segment Information (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

Operating segments for each of the Registrants are determined based on information used by the chief operating decision maker(s) (CODM) in deciding how to evaluate performance and allocate resources at each of the Registrants.

 

Exelon has nine reportable segments, ComEd, PECO, BGE and Generation’s six power marketing reportable segments consisting of the Mid-Atlantic, Midwest, New England, New York, ERCOT and all other regions not considered individually significant referred to collectively as “Other Regions”; including the South, West and Canada. Generation’s expanded number of reportable segments is the result of the acquisition of Constellation on March 12, 2012. ComEd, PECO and BGE each represent a single reportable segment; as such, no separate segment information is provided for these Registrants. Exelon evaluates the performance of ComEd, PECO and BGE based on net income.

The CODMs for ComEd, PECO, and BGE evaluate performance and allocate resources for their respective companies based on net income and return on equity for ComEd, PECO, and BGE each as single integrated businesses.

418


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

The foundation of Generation’s six reportable segments is based on the geographic location of its assets, and is largely representative of the footprints of an ISO / RTO and/or NERC region. Descriptions of each of Generation’s six reportable segments are as follows:

 

  

Mid-Atlantic represents operations in the eastern half of PJM, which includes Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, Delaware, the District of Columbia and parts of North Carolina.

 

  

Midwest represents operations in the western half of PJM, which includes portions of Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky and Tennessee, and the entire United States footprint of MISO excluding MISO’s Southern Region, which covers all or most of North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, the remaining parts of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan and Ohio not covered by PJM, and parts of Montana, Missouri and Kentucky.

 

  

New England represents the operations within ISO-NE covering the states of Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Vermont.

 

  

New York represents operations within ISO-NY, which covers the state of New York in its entirety.

 

  

ERCOT represents operations within Electric Reliability Council of Texas, covering most of the state of Texas.

 

411


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

  

Other Regions not considered individually significant:

 

  

South represents operations in the FRCC, MISO’s Southern Region, and the remaining portions of the SERC not included within MISO or PJM, which includes all or most of Florida, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, North Carolina, South Carolina and parts of Missouri, Kentucky and Texas. Generation’s South region also includes operations in the SPP, covering Kansas, Oklahoma, most of Nebraska and parts of New Mexico, Texas, Louisiana, Missouri, Mississippi and Arkansas.

 

  

West represents operations in the WECC, which includes California ISO, and covers the states of California, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, Idaho, Colorado, and parts of New Mexico, Wyoming and South Dakota.

 

  

Canada represents operations across the entire country of Canada and includes the AESO, OIESO and the Canadian portion of MISO.

 

The CODMs for Exelon and Generation evaluate the performance of Generation’s power marketing activities and allocate resources based on revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense. Generation believes that revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense is a useful measurement of operational performance. Revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense is not a presentation defined under GAAP and may not be comparable to other companies’ presentations or deemed more useful than the GAAP information provided elsewhere in this report. Generation’s operating revenues include all sales to third parties and affiliated sales to ComEd, PECO and BGE. Purchased power costs include all costs associated with the procurement and supply of electricity including capacity, energy and ancillary services. Fuel expense includes the fuel costs for ourGeneration’s own generation and fuel costs associated with tolling agreements. Generation’s other business activities, including retail and wholesale gas, upstream natural gas, proprietary trading, energy efficiency and demand response, the design, construction, and operation of renewable energy, heating, cooling, and cogeneration facilities, and home improvements, sales of electric and gas appliances, servicing of heating, air conditioning, plumbing, electrical, and indoor quality systems, and investments in energy-related proprietary technology are not allocated to regions. Further, Generation’s compensation under the reliability-must-run rate schedule,

419


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

results of operations from the Brandon Shores, Wagner, and C.P. Crane Maryland generating stations, and other miscellaneous revenues, mark-to-market impact of economic hedging activities, and amortization of certain intangible assets relating to commodity contracts recorded at fair value as a result of the merger are also not allocated to a region.

 

412


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

An analysis and reconciliation of the Registrants’ reportable segment information to the respective information in the consolidated financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011 is as follows:

 

 Generation (a) ComEd PECO BGE (b) Other (c) Intersegment
Eliminations
 Exelon  Generation (a) ComEd PECO BGE (b) Other (c) Intersegment
Eliminations
 Exelon 

Operating revenues(d):

              

2013

 $15,630  $4,464  $3,100  $3,065  $1,241  $(2,612 $24,888 

2012

 $14,437  $5,443  $3,186  $2,091  $1,396  $(3,064 $23,489   14,437   5,443   3,186   2,091   1,396   (3,064  23,489 

2011

  10,447   6,056   3,720   —     830   (1,990  19,063   10,447   6,056   3,720   —     830   (1,990  19,063 

2010

  10,025   6,204   5,519   —     755   (3,859  18,644 

Intersegment revenues(e):

              

2013

 $1,367  $3  $1  $13  $1,237  $(2,607 $14 

2012

 $1,702  $2  $3  $9  $1,381  $(3,042 $55   1,660   2   3   9   1,381   (3,049  6 

2011

  1,161   2   5   —     831   (1,990  9   1,161   2   5   —     831   (1,990  9 

2010

  3,102   2   5   —     756   (3,859  6 

Depreciation and amortization

       

Depreciation and amortization

  

      

2013

 $856  $669  $228  $348  $52  $—    $2,153 

2012

 $768  $610  $217  $238  $46  $2  $1,881   768   610   217   238   48   —     1,881 

2011

  570   554   202   —     21   —     1,347   570   554   202   —     21   —     1,347 

2010

  474   516   1,060   —     25   —     2,075 

Operating expenses(d):

       

Operating expenses (d):

  

      

2013

 $13,976  $3,510  $2,434  $2,616  $1,324  $(2,618 $21,242 

2012

 $13,226  $4,557  $2,563  $2,053  $1,662  $(3,043 $21,018   13,226   4,557   2,563   2,053   1,662   (3,043  21,018 

2011

  7,571   5,074   3,065   —     863   (1,990  14,583   7,571   5,074   3,065   —     863   (1,990  14,583 

2010

  6,979   5,148   4,858   —     792   (3,859  13,918 

Equity in earnings (losses) of unconsolidated affiliates

       

Equity in earnings (losses) of
unconsolidated affiliates

   

    

2013

 $10  $—    $—    $—    $—    $—    $10 

2012

 $(91 $—    $—    $—    $—    $—    $(91  (91  —     —     —     —     —     (91

2011

  (1  —     —     —     —     —     (1  (1  —     —     —     —     —     (1

2010

  —     —     —     —     —     —     —   

Interest expense, net:

              

2013

 $357  $579  $115  $122  $183  $—    $1,356 

2012

 $301  $307  $123  $111  $86  $—    $928   301   307   123   111   86   —     928 

2011

  170   345   134   —     77   —     726   170   345   134   —     77   —     726 

2010

  153   386   193   —     85   —     817 

Income (loss) before income taxes:

       

Income (loss) before income
taxes:

   

     

2013

 $1,675  $401  $557  $344  $(191 $(13 $2,773 

2012

 $1,058  $618  $508  $(54 $(276 $(56 $1,798   1,058   618   508   (54  (325  (7  1,798 

2011

  2,827   666   535   —     (59  (13  3,956   2,827   666   535   —     (59  (13  3,956 

2010

  3,150   694   476   —     (91  (8  4,221 

Income taxes:

              

2013

 $615  $152  $162  $134  $(20 $1  $1,044 

2012

 $500  $239  $127  $(23 $(215 $(1 $627   500   239   127   (23  (215  (1  627 

2011

  1,056   250   146   —     9   (4  1,457   1,056   250   146   —     9   (4  1,457 

2010

  1,178   357   152   —     (27  (2  1,658 

Net income (loss):

              

2013

 $1,060  $249  $395  $210  $(171 $(14 $1,729 

2012

 $558  $379  $381  $(31 $(61 $(55 $1,171   558   379   381   (31  (110  (6  1,171 

2011

  1,771   416   389   —     (68  (9  2,499   1,771   416   389   —     (68  (9  2,499 

2010

  1,972   337   324   —     (64  (6  2,563 

Capital expenditures:

              

2013

 $2,752  $1,433  $537  $587  $86  $—    $5,395 

2012

 $3,554  $1,246  $422  $500  $67  $—    $5,789   3,554   1,246   422   500   67   —     5,789 

2011

  2,491   1,028   481   —     42   —     4,042   2,491   1,028   481   —     42   —     4,042 

2010

  1,883   962   545   —     14   (78)(f)   3,326 

Total assets:

              

2013

 $41,232  $24,118  $9,617  $7,861  $8,317  $(11,221 $79,924 

2012

 $40,681  $22,905  $9,353  $7,499  $10,432  $(12,316 $78,554   40,681   22,905   9,353   7,506   10,432   (12,316  78,561 

2011

  27,433   22,638   9,156   —     6,147   (10,379  54,995 

 

413420


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

 

(a)Generation includes the six power marketing reportable segments shown below: Mid-Atlantic, Midwest, New England, New York, ERCOT and Other Regions. Intersegment revenues for Generation for the year ended December 31, 20122013 include revenue from sales to PECO of $543 million$405 and sales to BGE of $322$455 million in the Mid-Atlantic region, and sales to ComEd of $795 million$506 in the Midwest region, net of $7 million related to the unrealized mark-to-market losses related to the ComEd swap, which eliminate upon consolidation. For the yearsyear ended December 31, 20112012 include revenue from sales to PECO of $543 and 2010sales to BGE of $322 million in the Mid-Atlantic region, and sales to ComEd of $795 in the Midwest region, net of $7 million related to the unrealized mark-to-market losses related to the ComEd swap, which eliminate upon consolidation. For the year ended 2011 intersegment revenues for Generation include revenue from sales to PECO of $508 million and $2,092 million, respectively, in the Mid-Atlantic region, and sales to ComEd of $653 million and $1,010 million, respectively, in the Midwest region.
(b)Amounts represent activity recorded at BGE from March 12, 2012, the closing date of the merger, through December 31, 2012.2013.
(c)Other primarily includes Exelon’s corporate operations, shared service entities and other financing and investment activities.
(d)For the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, utility taxes of $79 million, $82 million $27 million and $0$27 million, respectively, are included in revenues and expenses for Generation. For the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, utility taxes of $241 million, $239 million $243 million and $205$243 million, respectively, are included in revenues and expenses for ComEd. For the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, utility taxes of $129 million, $141 million $173 million and $271$173 million, respectively, are included in revenues and expenses for PECO. For the year ended December 31, 2013 and for the period of March 12, 2012 through December 31, 2012, utility taxes of $82 million and $59 million are included in revenues and expenses for BGE.BGE, respectively.
(e)Intersegment revenues exclude sales to unconsolidated affiliates. The intersegment profit associated with Generation’s sale of AECs to PECOcertain products and services by and between Exelon’s segments is not eliminated in consolidation due to the recognition of intersegment profit in accordance with regulatory accounting guidance. See Note 3 for additional information on AECs. For Exelon, these amounts are included in operating revenues in the Consolidated Statements of Operations.
(f)Represents capital projects transferred from BSC to Generation, ComEd and PECO. These projects are shown as capital expenditures at Generation, ComEd and PECO and the capital expenditure is eliminated upon consolidation.

 

Generation total revenues:

 

 2012 2011 2010  2013 2012 2011 
 Revenues
from
external
customers (a)
 Interseg
ment
revenues
 Total
Revenues
 Revenues
from
external
customers (a)
 Interseg
ment
revenues
 Total
Revenues
 Revenues
from
external
customers (a)
 Interseg
ment
revenues
 Total
Revenues
  Revenues
from
external
customers (a)
 Interseg
ment
revenues
 Total
Revenues
 Revenues
from
external
customers (a)
 Interseg
ment
revenues
 Total
Revenues
 Revenues
from
external
customers (a)
 Interseg
ment
revenues
 Total
Revenues
 

Mid-Atlantic

 $5,082  $(44 $5,038  $4,052  $—    $4,052  $3,232  $—    $3,232  $5,182  $22  $5,204  $5,082  $(44 $5,038  $4,052  $—    $4,052 

Midwest

  4,824   24   4,848   5,445   —     5,445   5,762   —     5,762   4,280   (10  4,270   4,824   24   4,848   5,445   —     5,445 

New England

  1,048   45   1,093   11   —     11   14   —     14   1,245   (8  1,237   1,048   45   1,093   11   —     11 

New York

  582   (25  557   —     —     —     —     —     —     735   (21  714   582   (25  557   —     —     —   

ERCOT

  1,365   2   1,367   575   —     575   543   —     543   1,222   (6  1,216   1,365   2   1,367   575   —     575 

Other Regions (b)

  755   78   833   201   —     201   149   —     149   946   22   968   755   78   833   201   —     201 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total Revenues for Reportable Segments

 $13,656  $80  $13,736  $10,284  $—    $10,284  $9,700  $—    $9,700  $13,610  $(1 $13,609  $13,656  $80  $13,736  $10,284  $—    $10,284 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other(c)

  781   (80  701   163   —     163   325   —     325   2,020   1   2,021   781   (80  701   163   —     163 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total Generation Consolidated Operating Revenues

 $14,437  $—    $14,437  $10,447  $—    $10,447  $10,025  $—    $10,025  $15,630  $—    $15,630  $14,437  $—    $14,437  $10,447  $—    $10,447 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Includes all electric sales to third parties and affiliated sales to ComEd, PECO and BGE.
(b)Other regions include the South, West and Canada, which are not considered individually significant.
(c)Other represents activities not allocated to a region. See text above for a description of included activities. Also includes amortization of intangible assets related to commodity contracts recorded at fair value atof $767 million and $1,505 million for the merger date.years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, and elimination of intersegment revenues.

 

414421


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Generation total revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense:

 

 2012 2011 2010  2013 2012 2011 
 RNF from
external
customers (a)
 Interseg
ment
RNF
 Total
RNF
 RNF from
external
customers (a)
 Interseg
ment
RNF
 Total
RNF
 RNF from
external
customers (a)
 Interseg
ment
RNF
 Total
RNF
  RNF from
external
customers (a)
 Interseg
ment
RNF
 Total
RNF
 RNF from
external
customers (a)
 Interseg
ment
RNF
 Total
RNF
 RNF from
external
customers (a)
 Interseg
ment
RNF
 Total
RNF
 

Mid-Atlantic

 $3,477  $(44 $3,433  $3,350  $—    $3,350  $2,501  $—    $2,501  $3,273  $(3 $3,270  $3,477  $(44 $3,433  $3,350  $—    $3,350 

Midwest

  2,974   24   2,998   3,547   —     3,547   4,081   —     4,081   2,585   1   2,586   2,974   24   2,998   3,547   —     3,547 

New England

  151   45   196   9   —     9   11   —     11   217   (32  185   151   45   196   9   —     9 

New York

  101   (25  76   —     —     —     —     —     —     14   (18  (4  101   (25  76   —      —     —   

ERCOT

  403   2   405   84   —     84   (66  —     (66  604   (168  436   403   2   405   84   —     84 

Other Regions (b)

  53   78   131   (14  —     (14  (65  —     (65  334   (133  201   53   78   131   (14  —     (14
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total Revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense for Reportable Segments

 $7,159  $80  $7,239  $6,976  $—    $6,976  $6,462  $—    $6,462  $7,027  $(353 $6,674  $7,159  $80  $7,239  $6,976  $—    $6,976 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other(c)

  217   (80  137   (118  —     (118  100   —     100   406   353   759   217   (80  137   (118  —     (118
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total Generation Revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense

 $7,376  $—    $7,376  $6,858  $—    $6,858  $6,562  $—    $6,562  $7,433  $—    $7,433  $7,376  $—    $7,376  $6,858  $—    $6,858 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Includes purchases and sales from third parties and affiliated sales to ComEd, PECO and BGE.
(b)Other regions includesinclude the South, West and Canada, which are not considered individually significant.
(c)Other represents activities not allocated to a region. See text above for a description of included activities. Also includes amortization of intangible assets related to commodity contracts recorded at fair value atof $488 million and $1,098 million, for the merger date.years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, and the elimination of intersegment revenues.

 

415422


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

22.25. Related Party Transactions (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Exelon

 

The financial statements of Exelon include related party transactions as presented in the tables below:

 

  For the Years Ended
December 31,
   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 
      2012         2011         2010       2013   2012 2011 

Operating revenues from affiliates:

         

PECO(a)

  $6  $9  $6   $10   $6  $9 

CENG(b)

   42   —     —      56    42   —   

BGE

   4    —     —   
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total operating revenues from affiliates

  $48  $9  $6   $70   $48  $9 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Fuel and purchased power from related parties:

    

Purchase power and fuel from affiliates:

     

CENG(c)

  $793  $—    $—     $992   $793  $—   

Keystone Fuels, LLC

   61   68   74    144    119   68 

Conemaugh Fuels, LLC

   68   69   70    98    101   69 

Safe Harbor Water Power Corp

   22    23   —   
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total fuel purchases from related parties

  $922  $137  $144 

Total purchase power and fuel from affiliates

  $1,256   $1,036  $137 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Charitable contribution to Exelon Foundation(d)

  $7  $—    $10 

Interest expense to affiliates, net:

         

ComEd Financing III

  $13  $13  $13   $13   $13  $13 

PECO Trust III

   6   6   6    6    6   6 

PECO Trust IV

   6   6   6    6    6   6 

BGE Capital Trust II(f)

   16    12   —   
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total interest expense to affiliates, net

  $25  $25  $25   $41   $37  $25 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

(Loss) gain in equity method investments:

    

CENG equity investment income

  $73  $—     —   

Amortization of basis difference in CENG(e)

   (172  —     —   

Other

   8   (1  —   

Earnings (losses) in equity method investments:

     

CENG(e)

  $9   $(99 $—   

Qualifying facilities and domestic power projects

   1    8   (1
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total loss in equity method investments

  $(91 $(1 $—   

Total earnings (losses) in equity method investments

  $10   $(91 $(1
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 
    December 31, 
        2012         2011     

Investments in affiliates:

    

ComEd Financing III

   $6  $6 

PECO Energy Capital Corporation

    4   4 

PECO Trust IV

    4   5 

BGE Capital Trust II

    8   —   
   

 

  

 

 

Total investments in affiliates

   $22  $15 
   

 

  

 

 

Receivables from affiliates (current):

    

CENG(b)

   $16  $—   

Payables to affiliates (current):

    

CENG(c)

   $83  $—   

ComEd Financing III

    4   4 

PECO Trust III

    1   1 
   

 

  

 

 

Total payables to affiliates (current)

   $88  $5 
   

 

  

 

 

Long-term debt to BondCo and other financing trusts (including due within one year):

    

ComEd Financing III

   $206  $206 

PECO Trust III

    81   81 

PECO Trust IV

    103   103 

BGE Capital Trust II

    258   —   
   

 

  

 

 

Total long-term debt due to financing trusts

   $648  $390 
   

 

  

 

 

 

416423


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

   December 31, 
   2013   2012 

Investments in affiliates:

    

ComEd Financing III

  $6   $6 

PECO Energy Capital Corporation

   4    4 

PECO Trust IV

   4    4 

BGE Capital Trust II

   8    8 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total investments in affiliates

  $22   $22 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Receivables from affiliates (current):

    

CENG(b)

  $3   $16 

Payables to affiliates (current):

    

CENG(c)

  $85   $83 

ComEd Financing III

   4    4 

PECO Trust III

   1    1 

BGE Capital Trust II

   4    4 

Keystone Fuels, LLC

   12    11 

Conemaugh Fuels, LLC

   9    9 

Other

   1    —   
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total payables to affiliates (current)

  $116   $112 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Long-term debt due to financing trusts:

    

ComEd Financing III

  $206   $206 

PECO Trust III

   81    81 

PECO Trust IV

   103    103 

BGE Capital Trust II

   258    258 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total long-term debt due to financing trusts

  $648   $648 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

(a)The intersegment profit associated with Generation’sthe sale of AECs to PECOcertain products and services by and between Exelon’s segments is not eliminated in consolidation due to the recognition of intersegment profit in accordance with regulatory accounting guidance. For Exelon, these amounts are included in operating revenues in the Consolidated Statement of Operations. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.
(b)Exelon has a shared services agreement (SSA) with CENG, which expires in 2017. Under the SSA, BSC provides a variety of support services to CENG. Pursuant to an agreement between Exelon and EDF, the pricing in the SSA for services reflect actual costs determined on the same basis that BSC charges its affiliates for similar services subject to an annual cap for most SSA services provided. In addition to the SSA, Generation has a power services agency agreement (PSAA) with the CENG plants, which expires on December 31, 2014. The PSAA is a five-year agreement under which Generation provides scheduling, asset management and billing services to the CENG plants for a specified monthly fee. The charges for services reflect the cost of the services. At the closing, as described under the Master Agreement, the PSAA will be amended and extended until the complete and permanent cessation of operation of the CENG generation plants. For further information regarding the Investment in CENG see Note 5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC.
(c)A subsidiaryCENG owns 100% of four nuclear units in Maryland and New York and 82% of Nine Mile Point Unit 2 in New York. Generation has an agreementa PPA under which it is purchasing 85-90%85% of the nuclear plant output of CENG’s nuclear plantsowned by CENG that is not sold to third parties under pre-existing firm and unit contingentunit-contingent PPAs through 2014. Beginning on January 1, 2015 and continuing to the end of the life of the respective plants, Generation will purchase on a unit contingentunit-contingent basis 50.01% of the nuclear plant output owned by CENG and a subsidiary of CENG’s nuclear plants, and EDF will purchase on a unit contingentunit-contingent basis 49.99% of the output.nuclear plant output owned by CENG (EDF PPA). This agreement will continue to be effective and is not affected by the Master Agreement, except that if the put option under the Master Agreement is exercised, then the EDF PPA would transfer to Generation upon completion of the Put Option Agreement transaction. For further information regarding the Investment in CENG see Note 5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC.
(d)Exelon Foundation is a nonconsolidated not-for-profit Illinois corporation. The Exelon Foundation was established in 2007 to serve educational and environmental philanthropic purposes and does not serve a direct business or political purpose of Exelon.
(e)As of March 12, 2012, Generation had an initial basis difference of approximately $204 million between the initial carrying value of its investment in CENG and its underlying equity in CENG. This basis difference resulted from the requirement to record the investment in CENG at fair value under purchase accounting while the underlying assets and liabilities within CENG continue to be accounted for on a historical cost basis. Generation is amortizing this basis difference over the respective useful lives of the assets and liabilities of CENG or as those assets and liabilities impact the earnings of CENG. In future periods, Generation may be eligible for distributions from CENG in excess of its 50.01% ownership interest based on tax sharing provisions contained in the operating agreement for CENG. Through purchase accounting, Generation recorded the fair value of expected future distributions. Generation will record these distributions when realized as a reduction in its investment in CENG. Distributions realized in excess of the fair value recorded would be recorded in earnings in the period earned.

 

417424


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

(e)Generation’s total gain (loss) in equity method investments includes equity investment income (loss) and amortization of basis difference. For further information regarding the Investment in CENG see Note 5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC.
(f)The BGE Capital Trust II portion of Exelon’s interest expense to affiliates, net, for December 31, 2012 excludes $4 million of expense incurred in 2012 prior to the closing of Exelon’s merger with Constellation on March 12, 2012.

 

Transactions involving Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE are further described in the tables below.

 

Generation

 

The financial statements of Generation include related party transactions as presented in the tables below:

 

  For the Years Ended
December 31,
   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 
  2012 2011 2010   2013   2012 2011 

Operating revenues from affiliates:

         

ComEd(a)

  $795  $653  $1,010   $506   $795  $653 

PECO(b)

   543    508   2,092    405    543   508 

BGE(c)

   322   —     —      455    322   —   

CENG(d)

   42    —     —      56    42   —   

BSC

   1    —     —   
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total operating revenues from affiliates

  $1,702  $1,161  $3,102   $1,423   $1,702  $1,161 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Fuel and purchased power from related parties:

    

Purchase power and fuel from affiliates:

     

PECO

  $—    $1  $1   $—     $—    $1 

ComEd

   1    —     —   

BGE

   8    —     —      13    8   —   

CENG(e)

   793   —     —      992    793   —   

Keystone Fuels, LLC

   61   68   74    144    119   68 

Conemaugh Fuels, LLC

   68   69   70    98    101   69 

Safe Harbor Water Power Corporation

   22    23   —   
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total fuel purchases from related parties

  $930  $138  $145 

Total purchase power and fuel from affiliates

  $1,270   $1,044  $138 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Operating and maintenance from affiliates:

         

ComEd(f)

  $2  $2  $2   $2   $2  $2 

PECO(f)

   3   5   4    1    3   5 

BSC(g)

   625    314   285    571    625   314 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total operating and maintenance from affiliates

  $630  $321  $291   $574   $630  $321 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

(Loss) gain in equity method investments

    

CENG equity investment income

   73   —     —   

Amortization of basis difference in CENG(h)

   (172  —     —   

Interest expense to affiliates, net:

     

Exelon Corporate

  $59   $75  $—   

Earnings (losses) in equity method investments

     

CENG(h)

   9    (99  —   

Qualifying facilities and domestic power projects

   8   (1  —      1    8   (1
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total loss in equity method investments

   (91 $(1 $—   

Total earnings (losses) in equity method investments

  $10   $(91 $(1
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Cash distribution paid to member

  $1,626  $172  $1,508   $625   $1,626  $172 

Contribution from member

  $48  $30  $62   $26   $48  $30 

 

418425


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

  December 31,   December 31, 
  2012   2011   2013   2012 

Mark-to-market derivative assets with affiliates (current):

        

ComEd(i)

  $226   $503   $—     $226 
  

 

   

 

 

Receivables from affiliates (current):

        

CENG(d)

  $3   $—   

ComEd(a)(j)

  $54   $70    38    54 

PECO(b)

   56    39    38    56 

BGE(c)

   31    —      27    31 

Other

   2    —   
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total receivables from affiliates (current)

  $141   $109   $108   $141 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Receivable from affiliate (noncurrent)

        

Exelon

  $1   $1 

Mark-to-market derivative assets with affiliates (noncurrent):

    

ComEd(i)

  $—     $191 

Exelon Corporate

  $—     $1 

Payables to affiliates (current):

        

CENG(e)

  $83   $—     $85   $83 

Exelon(k)

   33    7 

Exelon Corporate(k)

   7    33 

BSC(g)

   77    51    66    77 

Keystone Fuels, LLC

   12    11 

Conemaugh Fuels, LLC

   9    9 

Other

   2    —   
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total payables to affiliates (current)

  $193   $58   $181   $213 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Payables to affiliates (noncurrent):

        

ComEd(l)

  $2,037   $1,857   $2,293   $2,037 

PECO(l)

   360    365    447    360 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total payables to affiliates (noncurrent)

  $2,397   $2,222   $2,740   $2,397 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Generation has an ICC-approved RFP contract with ComEd to provide a portion of ComEd’s electricity supply requirements. Generation also sells RECs to ComEd. In addition, Generation had revenue from ComEd associated with the settled portion of the financial swap contract established as part of the Illinois Settlement. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.
(b)Generation had a PPA with PECO to provide the full energy requirementsprovides electric supply to PECO under contracts executed through 2010.PECO’s competitive procurement process. In addition, Generation has five-year and ten-year agreements with PECO to sell non-solar and solar AECs, respectively. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.
(c)Generation provides a portion of BGE’s energy requirements under its MDPSC-approved market-based SOS and gas commodity programs. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.
(d)Exelon has a shared services agreement (SSA) with CENG, which expires in 2017. Under the SSA, BSC provides a variety of support services to CENG. Pursuant to an agreement between Exelon and EDF, the pricing in the SSA for services reflect actual costs determined on the same basis that BSC charges its affiliates for similar services subject to an annual cap for most SSA services provided. In addition to the SSA, Generation has a power services agency agreement with the CENG plants, which expires on December 31, 2014. The PSAA is a five-year agreement under which Generation provides scheduling, asset management and billing services to the CENG plants for a specified monthly fee. The charges for services reflect the cost of the services. At the closing, as described under the Master Agreement, the PSAA will be amended and extended until the complete and permanent cessation of operation of the CENG generation plants. For further information regarding the Investment in CENG see Note 5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC.
(e)A subsidiary

CENG owns 100% of four nuclear units in Maryland and New York and 82% of Nine Mile Point Unit 2 in New York. Generation has an agreementa PPA under which it is purchasing 85-90%85% of the nuclear plant output of CENG’s nuclear plantsowned by CENG that is not sold to third parties under pre-existing firm and unit contingentunit-contingent PPAs through 2014. Beginning on January 1, 2015 and continuing to the end of the life of the respective plants, Generation will purchase on a unit contingentunit-contingent basis 50.01% of the nuclear plant output owned by CENG and a subsidiary of CENG’s nuclear plants, and EDF will purchase on a unit contingentunit-contingent basis 49.99% of the output.nuclear plant output

426


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

owned by CENG. This agreement will continue to be effective and is not affected by the Master Agreement, except that if the put option under the Master Agreement is exercised, then the EDF PPA would transfer to Generation upon completion of the Put Option Agreement transaction. For further information regarding the Investment in CENG see Note 5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC.

(f)Generation requires electricity for its own use at its generating stations. Generation purchases electricity and distribution and transmission services from PECO and only distribution and transmission services from ComEd for the delivery of electricity to its generating stations.
(g)Generation receives a variety of corporate support services from BSC, including legal, human resources, financial, information technology and supply management services. All services are provided at cost, including applicable overhead. A portion of such services is capitalized.

419


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

(h)AsGeneration’s total gain (loss) in equity method investments includes equity income (loss) and amortization of March 12, 2012, Generation had an initial basis difference of approximately $204 million betweendifference. For further information regarding the initial carrying value of its investmentInvestment in CENG and its underlying equitysee Note 5—Investment in CENG. This basis difference resulted from the requirement to record the investment in CENG at fair value under purchase accounting while the underlying assets and liabilities within CENG continue to be accounted for on a historical cost basis. Generation is amortizing this basis difference over the respective useful lives of the assets and liabilities of CENG or as those assets and liabilities impact the earnings of CENG. In future periods, Generation may be eligible for distributions from CENG in excess of its 50.01% ownership interest based on tax sharing provisions contained in the operating agreement for CENG. Through purchase accounting, Generation recorded the fair value of expected future distributions. Generation will record these distributions when realized as a reduction in its investment in CENG. Distributions realized in excess of the fair value recorded would be recorded in earnings in the period earned.Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC.
(i)Represents the fair value of Generation’s five-year financial swap contract with ComEd.ComEd, which ended in 2013.
(j)Generation had a $53 million and $53 million receivable from ComEd at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively, associated with the completed portion of the financial swap contract entered into as part of the Illinois Settlement. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters and Note 10—12—Derivative Financial Instruments for additional information.
(k)As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, the balance consists of interest owed to Exelon Corporation related to the senior unsecured notes. In orderaddition, the balance at December 31, 2012, includes expense related to facilitate payment processing,certain invoices Exelon processes certain invoice paymentsCorporation processed on behalf of Generation.
(l)Generation has long-term payables to ComEd and PECO as a result of the nuclear decommissioning contractual construct whereby, to the extent NDT funds are greater than the underlying ARO at the end of decommissioning, such amounts are due back to ComEd and PECO, as applicable, for payment to their respective customers. See Note 13—15—Asset Retirement Obligations.

 

ComEd

 

The financial statements of ComEd include related party transactions as presented in the tables below:

 

  For the Years Ended
December 31,
   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 
  2012   2011   2010   2013   2012   2011 

Operating revenues from affiliates

            

Generation

  $2   $2   $2   $3   $2   $2 

Purchased power from affiliate

            

Generation(a)

  $789   $653   $1,010   $512   $789   $653 

Operating and maintenance from affiliate

            

BSC(b)

  $163   $158   $152   $157   $163   $158 

Interest expense to affiliates, net:

            

Exelon

  $—     $2   $—   

Exelon Corporate

  $—     $—     $2 

ComEd Financing III

   13    13    13    13    13    13 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total interest expense to affiliates, net

  $13   $15   $13   $13   $13   $15 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Capitalized costs

            

BSC(b)

  $92   $85   $84   $69   $92   $85 

Cash dividends paid to parent

  $105   $300   $310   $220   $105   $300 

Contribution from parent

  $11   $11   $2   $—     $11   $11 

 

420427


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

  December 31,   December 31, 
  2012   2011   2013   2012 

Prepaid voluntary employee beneficiary association trust(c)

  $10   $12   $13   $10 

Investment in affiliate

        

ComEd Financing III

  $6   $6   $6   $6 

Receivable from affiliates (current):

    

Voluntary employee beneficiary association trust

  $3   $—   

BGE

   —      3 
  

 

   

 

 

Total receivable from affiliates (current)

  $3   $3 
  

 

   

 

 

Receivable from affiliates (noncurrent):

        

Generation(d)

  $2,037   $1,857 

Other

   2    3 

Generation(e)(d)

  $2,293   $2,037 

Exelon Corporate(g)

   176    2 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total receivable from affiliates (noncurrent)

  $2,039   $1,860   $2,469   $2,039 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Payables to affiliates (current):

        

Generation(e)(d)

  $54   $70 

Generation(a)(e)

  $38   $54 

BSC(b)

   35    35    30    35 

ComEd Financing III

   4    4    4    4 

Exelon Corporate

   9    2 

Other

   4    2    2    2 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total payables to affiliates (current)

  $97   $111   $83   $97 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Mark-to-market derivative liability with affiliate (current)

        

Generation(f)

  $226   $503   $—     $226 

Mark-to-market derivative liability with affiliate (noncurrent)

        

Generation(f)

  $—     $191 

Long-term debt to ComEd financing trust

        

ComEd Financing III

  $206   $206   $206   $206 

 

(a)ComEd procures a portion of its electricity supply requirements from Generation under an ICC-approved RFP contract. ComEd also purchases RECs from Generation. In addition, purchased power expense includes the settled portion of the financial swap contract with Generation established as part of the Illinois Settlement Legislation. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters and Note 10—12—Derivative Financial Instruments for additional information.
(b)ComEd receives a variety of corporate support services from BSC, including legal, human resources, financial, information technology and supply management services. All services are provided at cost, including applicable overhead. A portion of such services is capitalized.
(c)The voluntary employee benefit association trusts covering active employees are included in corporate operations and are funded by the operating segments. A prepayment to the active welfare plans has accumulated due to actuarially determined contribution rates, which are the basis for ComEd’s contributions to the plans, being higher than actual claim expense incurred by the plans over time. The prepayment is included in other current assets.
(d)ComEd has a long-term receivable from Generation as a result of the nuclear decommissioning contractual construct for generating facilities previously owned by ComEd. To the extent the assets associated with decommissioning are greater than the applicable ARO at the end of decommissioning, such amounts are due back to ComEd for payment to ComEd’s customers.
(e)ComEd had a $53 million and $53 million payable to Generation at December 31, 2012, and 2011, respectively, associated with the completed portion of the financial swap contract entered into as part of the Illinois Settlement Legislation. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters and Note 10—12—Derivative Financial Information for additional information.
(f)To fulfill a requirement of the Illinois Settlement Legislation, ComEd entered into a five-year financial swap with Generation.Generation, which ended in 2013.
(g)In 2013, represents indemnification from Exelon Corporate related to the like-kind exchange transaction.

 

421428


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

PECO

 

The financial statements of PECO include related party transactions as presented in the tables below:

 

  For the Years Ended
December 31,
   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 
  2012   2011   2010   2013   2012   2011 

Operating revenues from affiliates:

            

Generation(a)

  $3   $5   $5   $1   $3   $5 

Purchased power from affiliate

            

Generation(b)

  $533   $495   $2,085   $392   $533   $495 

Operating and maintenance from affiliates:

            

BSC(c)

  $107   $92   $89   $98   $107   $92 

Generation

   4    4    —      3    4    4 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total operating and maintenance from affiliates

  $111   $96   $89   $101   $111   $96 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Interest expense to affiliates, net:

            

PECO Trust III

  $6   $6   $6   $6   $6   $6 

PECO Trust IV

   6    6    6    6    6    6 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total interest expense to affiliates, net

  $12   $12   $12   $12   $12   $12 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Capitalized costs

            

BSC(c)

  $54   $60   $40   $46   $54   $60 

Cash dividends paid to parent

  $343   $348   $224   $332   $343   $348 

Repayment of receivable from parent

  $—     $—     $180 

Contribution from parent

  $9   $18   $43   $27   $9   $18 

 

  December 31,   December 31, 
  2012   2011   2013   2012 

Prepaid voluntary employee beneficiary association trust(d)

  $2   $3   $3   $2 

Investments in affiliates:

        

PECO Energy Capital Corporation

  $4   $4   $4   $4 

PECO Trust IV

   4    4    4    4 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total investments in affiliates

  $8   $8   $8   $8 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Receivable from affiliate (noncurrent):

        

Generation(e)

  $360   $365 

BGE

  $3   $2 

Receivable from affiliate (noncurrent):

    

Generation(b)(e)

  $447   $360 

Payables to affiliates (current):

        

Generation(b)(e)

  $56   $39 

Generation(b)

  $38   $56 

BSC(c)

   18    21    17    18 

Exelon

   1    1 

Exelon Corporate

   2    1 

PECO Trust III

   1    1    1    1 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total payables to affiliates (current)

  $76   $62   $58   $76 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Long-term debt to financing trusts (including amounts due within one year):

    

Long-term debt to financing trusts:

    

PECO Trust III

  $81   $81   $81   $81 

PECO Trust IV

   103    103    103    103 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total long-term debt to financing trusts

  $184   $184   $184   $184 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)PECO provides energy to Generation for Generation’s own use.

 

422429


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

(b)PECO obtained all of its electric supply from Generation through 2010 under a PPA. Beginning January 1, 2011, PECO purchases electric supply from Generation under contracts executed through its competitive procurement process. In addition, PECO has five-year and ten-year agreements with Generation to purchase non-solar and solar AECs, respectively. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information on AECs.
(c)PECO receives a variety of corporate support services from BSC, including legal, human resources, financial, information technology and supply management services. All services are provided at cost, including applicable overhead. A portion of such services is capitalized.
(d)The voluntary employee beneficiary association trusts covering active employees are included in corporate operations and are funded by the operating segments. A prepayment to the active welfare plans has accumulated due to actuarially determined contribution rates, which are the basis for PECO’s contributions to the plans, being higher than actual claim expense incurred by the plans over time.
(e)PECO has a long-term receivable from Generation as a result of the nuclear decommissioning contractual construct, whereby, to the extent the assets associated with decommissioning are greater than the applicable ARO at the end of decommissioning, such amounts are due back to PECO for payment to PECO’s customers.

 

BGE

 

The financial statements of BGE include related party transactions as presented in the tables below:

 

  For the Years Ended
December 31,
   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 
  2012   2011 2010   2013   2012   2011 

Operating revenues from affiliates:

           

Generation(a)

  $10   $8  $7   $13   $10   $8 

Purchased power from affiliate

           

Generation(b)

  $396   $348  $428   $452   $396   $348 

Operating and maintenance from affiliates:

           

BSC(c)

  $106   $150  $126   $83   $106   $150 

Interest expense to affiliates, net:

      

BGE Capital Trust II

  $16   $16   $16 

Capitalized costs

           

BSC(c)

  $21   $29  $49   $15   $21   $29 

Cash dividends paid to parent

  $—     $(85 $—     $—     $—     $(85

Contribution from parent

  $66   $—    $—     $—     $66   $—   

 

  December 31,   December 31, 
  2012   2011   2013   2012 

Prepaid voluntary employee beneficiary association trust(d)

  $1   $—   

Investments in affiliates:

        

BGE Capital Trust II

  $8   $8   $8   $8 

Payables to affiliates (current):

        

Generation(b)

  $31   $41   $27   $31 

BSC(c)

   12    —      20    12 

Exelon(d)

   17    —      1    17 

ComEd

   3    —       —      3 

PECO

   2    —      3    2 

BGE Capital Trust II

   4    4 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total payables to affiliates (current)

  $65   $41   $55   $69 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Long-term debt to BGE financing trust

        

BGE Capital Trust II

  $258   $258   $258   $258 

 

(a)BGE provides energy to Generation for Generation’s own use.

430


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

(b)BGE procures a portion of its electricity and gas supply requirements from Generation under its MDPSC-approved market-based SOS and gas commodity programs. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.

423


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

(c)BGE receives a variety of corporate support services from BSC, including legal, human resources, financial, information technology and supply management services. All services are provided at cost, including applicable overhead. A portion of such services is capitalized.
(d)BGE receives a variety of corporate support services from Exelon Corporate, including payroll and benefits services.

 

23.26. Quarterly Data (Unaudited) (Exelon, Generation, ComEd and PECO)

 

Exelon

 

The data shown below, which may not equal the total for the year due to the effects of rounding and dilution, includes all adjustments that Exelon considers necessary for a fair presentation of such amounts:

 

  Operating Revenues   Operating Income   Net Income
on Common
Stock
   Operating Revenues   Operating Income   Net (Loss) Income
on Common
Stock
 
      2012           2011           2012           2011       2012   2011       2013           2012           2013           2012           2013         2012     

Quarter ended:

                       

March 31

  $4,686   $4,956   $359   $1,202   $200   $668   $6,082   $4,690   $508   $359   $(4 $200 

June 30

   5,954    4,496    714    1,034    286    620    6,141    5,966    1,005    714    490   286 

September 30

   6,565    5,254    603    1,181    296    601    6,502    6,579    1,254    603    738   296 

December 31

   6,284    4,357    704    1,062    378    606    6,163    6,254    889    704    495   378 

 

  Average Basic Shares
Outstanding

(in millions)
   Net Income
per Basic Share
   Average Basic Shares
Outstanding

(in millions)
   Net (Loss) Income
per Basic Share
 
  2012   2011       2012           2011       2013   2012       2013         2012     

Quarter ended:

               

March 31

   705    662   $0.28   $1.01    855    705   $(0.01) $0.28 

June 30

   853��   663    0.34    0.93    856    853    0.57   0.34 

September 30

   854    663    0.35    0.91    857    854    0.86   0.35 

December 31

   854    664    0.44    0.91    856    854    0.60   0.44 
  Average Diluted Shares
Outstanding

(in millions)
   Net Income
per Diluted Share
   Average Diluted Shares
Outstanding

(in millions)
   Net (Loss) Income
per Diluted Share
 
  2012   2011   2012   2011   2013   2012   2013 2012 

Quarter ended:

               

March 31

   707    664   $0.28   $1.01    855    707   $(0.01) $0.28 

June 30

   856    664    0.33    0.93    860    856    0.57   0.33 

September 30

   857    665    0.35    0.90    860    857    0.86   0.35 

December 31

   857    666    0.44    0.91    860    857    0.59   0.44 

431


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

The following table presents the New York Stock Exchange—Composite Common Stock Prices and dividends by quarter on a per share basis:

 

   2012   2011 
   Fourth   Third   Second   First   Fourth  Third   Second   First 
   Quarter   Quarter   Quarter   Quarter   Quarter  Quarter   Quarter   Quarter 

High price

  $37.50   $39.82   $39.37   $43.70   $45.45  $45.27   $42.89   $43.58 

Low price

   28.40    34.54    36.27    38.31    39.93   39.51    39.53    39.06 

Close

   29.74    35.58    37.62    39.21    43.37   42.61    42.84    41.24 

Dividends

   0.525    0.525    0.525    0.525    0.525(a)   0.525    0.525    0.525 

424


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

(a)The fourth quarter 2011 dividend does not include the first quarter 2012 regular quarterly dividend of $0.525 per share, declared by the Exelon Board of Directors on October 25, 2011. The first quarter 2012 dividend is payable on March 9, 2012, to shareholders of record of Exelon at the end of the day on February 15, 2012.
   2013   2012 
   Fourth   Third   Second   First   Fourth   Third   Second   First 
   Quarter   Quarter   Quarter   Quarter   Quarter   Quarter   Quarter   Quarter 

High price

  $30.59   $32.42   $37.80   $34.56   $37.50   $39.82   $39.37   $43.70 

Low price

   26.64    29.42    29.84    29.10    28.40    34.54    36.27    38.31 

Close

   27.39    29.64    30.88    34.48    29.74    35.58    37.62    39.21 

Dividends

   0.310    0.310    0.310    0.525    0.525    0.525    0.525    0.525 

 

Generation

 

The data shown below includes all adjustments that Generation considers necessary for a fair presentation of such amounts:

 

  Operating Revenues   Operating Income   Net Income
on Membership
Interest
   Operating Revenues   Operating (Loss) Income   Net (Loss) Income
on Membership
Interest
 
      2012           2011           2012           2011           2012           2011         2013       2012         2013         2012       2013 2012 

Quarter ended:

                      

March 31

  $2,739   $2,643   $272   $801   $168   $495   $3,533   $2,743   $(64 $272   $(18 $168 

June 30

   3,753    2,455    384    647    166    443    4,070    3,765    603   384    330   166 

September 30

   4,017    2,821   ��174    754    91    386    4,255    4,031    721   174    490   91 

December 31

   3,928    2,528    290    673    137    447    3,772    3,898    405   290    269   137 

 

ComEd

 

The data shown below includes all adjustments that ComEd considers necessary for a fair presentation of such amounts:

 

  Operating Revenues   Operating Income   Net Income   Operating Revenues   Operating Income   Net (Loss) Income 
      2012           2011           2012           2011           2012           2011           2013           2012         2013       2012     2013 2012 

Quarter ended:

                       

March 31

  $1,388   $1,466   $226   $200   $87   $69   $1,160   $1,388   $209   $226   $(81 $87 

June 30

   1,281    1,444    142    254    42    114    1,080    1,281    232    142    96   42 

September 30

   1,484    1,784    218    243    90    112    1,156    1,484    278    218    126   90 

December 31

   1,290    1,362    300    285    160    121    1,068    1,290    236    300    109   160 

 

PECO

 

The data shown below includes all adjustments that PECO considers necessary for a fair presentation of such amounts:

 

  Operating Revenues   Operating Income   Net Income
on Common
Stock
   Operating Revenues   Operating Income   Net Income
on Common
Stock
 
      2012           2011           2012           2011           2012           2011         2013       2012     2013   2012   2013   2012 

Quarter ended:

                        

March 31

  $875   $1,153   $177   $210   $96   $125   $895   $875   $203   $177   $121   $96 

June 30

   715    842    151    161    79    82    672    715    138    151    72    79 

September 30

   806    946    178    153    122    104    728    806    155    178    92    122 

December 31

   790    778    117    131    79    73    805    790    168    117    102    79 

 

425432


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

BGE

 

The data shown below includes all adjustments that BGE considers necessary for a fair presentation of such amounts:

 

  Operating Revenues   Operating
(Loss) Income
   Net (Loss) Income
on Common
Stock
   Operating Revenues   Operating
Income (Loss)
 Net Income (Loss)
attributable to
Common Shareholders
 
      2012           2011           2012         2011           2012         2011         2013       2012     2013   2012 2013   2012 

Quarter ended:

                     

March 31

  $696   $976   $(11 $153   $(33 $78   $880   $697   $163   $(11 $77   $(33

June 30

   616    674    52   54    13   13    653    616    69    52   22    13 

September 30

   720    745    30   23    (4)��  (2   737    720    114    30   50    (4

December 31

   703    673    61   84    15   34    794    703    101    61   47    15 

 

42627. Subsequent Events (Exelon and PECO)

On February 5, 2014, a winter storm which brought a mix of snow, ice and freezing rain to the region interrupted electric service delivery to nearly 715,000 customers in PECO’s service territory. Restoration efforts are continuing and will include significant costs associated with employee overtime, support from other utilities and incremental equipment, contracted tree trimming crews and supplies. PECO estimates that restoration efforts will have a material impact to Exelon’s and PECO’s results of operations and cash flows for the first quarter of 2014.

433


ITEM 9.CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

 

Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE

 

None.

 

ITEM 9A.CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

 

Exelon,Generation,ComEd,PECO andBGE—Disclosure Controls and Procedures

 

During the fourth quarter of 2012,2013, each registrant’s management, including its principal executive officer and principal financial officer, evaluated the effectiveness of that registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures related to the recording, processing, summarizing and reporting of information in that registrant’s periodic reports that it files with the SEC. These disclosure controls and procedures have been designed by each registrant to ensure that (a) information relating to that registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, that is required to be included in filings under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, is accumulated and made known to that registrant’s management, including its principal executive officer and principal financial officer, by other employees of that registrant and its subsidiaries as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure, and (b) this information is recorded, processed, summarized, evaluated and reported, as applicable, within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms. Due to the inherent limitations of control systems, not all misstatements may be detected. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty and that breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. Additionally, controls could be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons or by collusion of two or more people.

 

Accordingly, as of December 31, 2012,2013, the principal executive officer and principal financial officer of each registrant concluded that such registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective to accomplish their objectives.

 

Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE—Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

 

Each registrant continually strives to improve its disclosure controls and procedures to enhance the quality of its financial reporting and to maintain dynamic systems that change as conditions warrant. However, there have been no changes in internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the fourth quarter of 20122013 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, any of Exelon’s, Generation’s, ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE—Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

 

Management is required to assess and report on the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012.2013. As a result of that assessment, management determined that there were no material weaknesses as of December 31, 20122013 and, therefore, concluded that each registrant’s internal control over financial reporting was effective. Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting is included in ITEM 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.

 

427434


ITEM 9B.OTHER INFORMATION

 

Exelon,Generation andComEd

 

Anne R. Pramaggiore, President and Chief Operating Officer of ComEd, Michael J. Pacilio, President, Exelon Nuclear and Chief Nuclear Officer, Generation, and Sunil Garg, President, Exelon Power and Senior Vice President, Generation, each entered into a Change in Control Employment Agreement effective as of February 10, 2011. The terms of these change in control employment agreements are substantially the same as the change in control employment agreements entered into by other senior executives and previously disclosed, except that the agreements with Ms. Pramaggiore and Messrs. Pacilio and Garg do not include excise tax gross-up provisions, consistent with a policy adopted by the compensation committee in April 2009. The form of Change in Control Employment Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit 10-44.

 

PECO andBGE

 

None.

 

428435


PART III

 

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, and Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, and PECO Energy Company meet 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 relating to Generation, BGE, and BGEPECO are not presented.

 

ITEM 10.DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

 

Executive Officers

 

The information required by ITEM 10 relating to executive officers is set forth above in ITEM 1. BUSINESS—Executive Officers of the Registrants at February 21, 2013.13, 2014.

 

Directors, Director Nomination Process, and Audit Committee

 

The information required under ITEM 10 concerning directors and nominees for election as directors at the annual meeting of shareholders (Item 401 of Regulation S-K), the director nomination process (Item 407(c)(3)), the audit committee (Item 407(d)(4) and (d)(5)) and the beneficial reporting compliance (Sec. 16(a)) is incorporated herein by reference to information to be contained in Exelon’s definitive 20132014 proxy statement (2013(2014 Exelon Proxy Statement) and the ComEd and PECO information statements to be filed with the SEC before April 30, 20132014 pursuant to Regulation 14A or 14C, as applicable, under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

 

Code of Ethics

 

Exelon’s Code of Business Conduct is the code of ethics that applies to Exelon’s ComEd’s, and PECO’sComEd’s Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Corporate Controller, and other finance organization employees. The Code of Business Conduct is filed as Exhibit 14 to this report and is available on Exelon’s website atwww.exeloncorp.com. The Code of Business Conduct will be made available, without charge, in print to any shareholder who requests such document from Bruce G. Wilson, Senior Vice President, Deputy General Counsel, and Corporate Secretary, Exelon Corporation, P.O. Box 805398, Chicago, Illinois 60680-5398.

 

If any substantive amendments to the Code of Business Conduct are made or any waivers are granted, including any implicit waiver, from a provision of the Code of Business Conduct, to its Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer or Corporate Controller, Exelon will disclose the nature of such amendment or waiver on Exelon’s website,www.exeloncorp.com, or in a report on Form 8-K.

 

429436


ITEM 11.EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

 

The information required by this item will be set forth underExecutive Compensation Data andReport of the Compensation Committee in the 20132014 Exelon Proxy Statement or the ComEd and PECO 20132014 information statements and incorporated herein by reference.

 

430437


ITEM 12.SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

 

The additional information required by this item will be set forth underOwnership of Exelon Stock in the 20132014 Exelon Proxy Statement or the ComEd and PECO 20132014 information statements and incorporated herein by reference.

 

Securities Authorized for Issuance under Exelon Equity Compensation Plans

 

[A]  [B]   [C]   [D]   [B]   [C]   [D] 

Plan Category

  Number of securities to
be issued upon
exercise of outstanding
options (Note 1)
   Weighted-average
price of outstanding
options
   Number of securities
remaining available
for future issuance
under equity
compensation plans
(Note 2)
   Number of securities to
be issued upon

exercise of outstanding
Options, warrants and
rights (Note 1)
   Weighted-average
price of outstanding
Options, warrants
and rights (note 2)
   Number of securities
remaining available
for future issuance
under equity
compensation plans
(excluding securities
reflected in
column [B] (Note 3)
 

Equity compensation plans approved by security holders

   13,449,422   $48.47    24,302,890    29,447,000    $37.12     36,556,000  

 

(1)IncludesBalance includes stock options, unvested performance shares, and unvested restricted shares that were granted under the Exelon LTIP or predecessor company plans and shares awarded under those plans and deferred into the stock deferral plan, as well as deferred stock units granted to directors as part of their compensation plan describedcompensation. For performance shares and performance share transition awards granted in Item 11, Executive Compensation—Non-employee Director Compensation.2013, the total includes the maximum number of shares that could be granted, if performance, total shareholder return modifier, and individual performance multipliers were all at maximum, a total of 4,599,000 shares. At target, the number of securities to be issued for such awards is 2,586,000. The deferred stock units granted to directors includes 286,600 shares to be issued upon the conversion of deferred stock units awarded to members of the Exelon board of directors, and 94,200 shares to be issued upon the conversion of stock units held by members of the Exelon board of directors that were earned under a legacy Constellation Energy Group plan. Conversion of stock units to shares will occur after the director terminates service to the Exelon board or the board of any of its subsidiary companies. See Note 1719 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.information about the material features of the plans.
(2)Excludes securities toIncludes outstanding restricted stock units and performance shares that can be issued upon exerciseexercised for no consideration. Without such instruments, the weighted-average price of outstanding options, warrants and vesting of shares or deferred stock unitsrights shown in column [B].[C] would be $46.07.
(3)Includes 24,441,000 shares available for issuance from the company’s employee stock purchase plan.

 

No ComEd or PECO securities are authorized for issuance under equity compensation plans.

 

431438


ITEM 13.CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE

 

The additional information required by this item will be set forth underRelated Persons Transactions andDirector Independence in the 20132014 Exelon Proxy Statement or the ComEd and PECO 20132014 information statements and incorporated herein by reference.

 

432439


ITEM 14.PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES

 

The information required by this item will be set forth underThe Ratification of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as Exelon’s Independent Accountant for 20132014 in the Proxy Statement and incorporated herein by reference.

 

433440


PART IV

 

ITEM 15.EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES

 

(a)The following documents are filed as a part of this report:

 

     Exelon

 

1.

  

Financial Statements:

  

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm dated February 21, 201313, 2014 of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

  

Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011

  

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011

  

Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 20122013 and 20112012

  

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011

  

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

2.

  

Financial Statement Schedules:

  

Schedule I—Condensed Financial Information of Parent (Exelon Corporate) at December 31, 20122013 and 20112012 and for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011

  

Schedule II—Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

  

Schedules not included are omitted because of the absence of conditions under which they are required or because the required information is provided in the consolidated financial statements, including the notes thereto.

 

434441


Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

 

Schedule I – Condensed Financial Information of Parent (Exelon Corporate)

 

Condensed Statements of Operations and Other Comprehensive Income

 

  For the Years Ended
December 31,
   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 

(In millions)

  2012 2011 2010   2013 2012 2011 

Operating expenses

        

Operating and maintenance

  $201  $56  $13   $9  $201  $56 

Operating and maintenance from affiliates

   72   44   22    34   72   44 

Other

   6   4   2    12   6   4 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total operating expenses

   279   104   37    55   279   104 

Operating loss

   (279  (104  (37   (55  (279  (104
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

        

Interest expense, net

   (153  (75  (90   (116  (153  (75

Equity in earnings of investments

   1,278   2,662   2,652    1,903   1,278   2,662 

Interest income from affiliates, net

   75   1   —      36   75   1 

Other, net

   7   8   6    (78  7   8 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

   1,207   2,596   2,568 

Total other income

   1,745   1,207   2,596 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Income before income taxes

   928   2,492   2,531    1,690   928   2,492 

Income taxes

   (232  (3  (32   (29  (232  (3
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net income

  $1,160  $2,495  $2,563   $1,719  $1,160  $2,495 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other comprehensive loss

    

Other comprehensive income (loss)

    

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit plans:

        

Prior service benefit reclassified to periodic costs, net of taxes of $1, $(4) and $(7), respectively

   1   (5  (11

Actuarial loss reclassified to periodic cost, net of taxes of $110, $93 and $79, respectively

   170   136   114 

Transition obligation reclassified to periodic cost, net of taxes of $2, $2 and $2, respectively

   2   4   3 

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit plan valuation adjustment, net of taxes of $(237), $(171) and $(188), respectively

   (372  (250  (288

Change in unrealized gain (loss) on cash flow hedges, net of taxes of $(67), $39 and $(107), respectively

   (121  88   (151

Change in unrealized gain (loss) on marketable securities, net of taxes of $(1), $0 and $0, respectively

   1   —     —   

Change in unrealized gain (loss) on equity investments, net of taxes of $(1), $0 and $0, respectively

   2   —     —   

Change in unrealized gain (loss) on foreign currency translation, net of taxes of $0, $0 and $0, respectively

   —     —     (1

Prior service cost (benefit) reclassified to periodic costs, net of taxes of $0, $1 and $(4), respectively

   —     1   (5

Actuarial loss reclassified to periodic cost, net of taxes of $133, $110 and $93, respectively

   208    168   136 

Transition obligation reclassified to periodic cost, net of taxes of $0, $2 and $2, respectively

   —     2   4 

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit plan valuation adjustment, net of taxes of $430, $(237) and $(171), respectively

   669    (371  (250

Unrealized gain (loss) on cash flow hedges, net of taxes of $(166), $(68) and $39, respectively

   (248  (120  88 

Unrealized gain on marketable securities, net of taxes of $0, $(1) and $0, respectively

   2   2   —   

Unrealized gain (loss) on equity investments, net of taxes of $71, $1 and $0, respectively

   106   1   —   

Unrealized gain (loss) on foreign currency translation, net of taxes of $0, $0 and $0, respectively

   (10  —     —   
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other comprehensive loss

   (317  (27  (334

Other comprehensive income (loss)

   727   (317  (27
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Comprehensive income

  $843  $2,468  $2,229   $2,446  $843  $2,468 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

See Notes to Financial Statements

 

435442


Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

 

Schedule I – Condensed Financial Information of Parent (Exelon Corporate)

 

Condensed Statements of Cash Flows

 

  For the Years Ended
December 31,
   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 

(In millions)

  2012 2011 2010   2013 2012 2011 

Net cash flows provided by operating activities

  $2,131  $766  $2,014   $1,053  $2,131  $766 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Cash flows from investing activities

        

Changes in Exelon intercompany money pool

   (60  —      —    

Note receivable from affiliates

   484    —     —   

Capital expenditures

   (30  (28  (7   —     (30  (28

Return on capital from equity method investee

   —     (1  92    —     —     (1

Cash and restricted cash acquired from Constellation

   679   —     —      —     679   —   

Change in restricted cash

   (38  —     —      38   (38  —   

Investment in unconsolidated affiliates

   (67  (65  (290

Investment in affiliates

   (38  (67  (65

Other investing activities

   15    —     —   
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net cash flows used in investing activities

   544   (94  (205

Net cash flows provided by (used in) investing activities

   439    544   (94
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Cash flows from financing activities

        

Changes in Exelon intercompany money pool

   (703  20   (5

Cash receipts from intercompany money pool

   —      (703  20 

Changes in short-term debt

   (161  161   —      10    (161  161 

Retirement of long-term debt

   (77  —     (400   (450  (77  —   

Dividends paid on common stock

   (1,716  (1,393  (1,389   (1,249  (1,716  (1,393

Proceeds from employee stock plans

   73   38   48    47   73   38 

Other financing activities

   30   (1  5    (6  30   (1
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net cash flows used in financing activities

   (2,554  (1,175  (1,741   (1,648  (2,554  (1,175
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents

   121   (503  68    (156  121   (503

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

   38   541   473    159   38   541 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

  $159  $38  $541   $3  $159  $38 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

See Notes to Financial Statements

 

436443


Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

 

Schedule I – Condensed Financial Information of Parent (Exelon Corporate)

 

Condensed Balance Sheets

 

  December 31,   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2012   2011   2013   2012 
ASSETS        

Current assets

        

Cash and cash equivalents

  $159   $38   $3   $159 

Restricted cash and investments

   38    —      —      38 

Accounts receivable, net

        

Other accounts receivable

   25    111    72    25 

Accounts receivable from affiliates

   87    9    22    87 

Deferred income taxes

   —      22    27    —   

Notes receivable from affiliates

   119    —      179    119 

Regulatory assets

   381    —      233     381 

Other

   2    3    1     2 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total current assets

   811    183    537    811 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Property, plant and equipment, net

   59    32    57    59 

Deferred debits and other assets

        

Regulatory assets

   3,932    2,991    3,005    3,932 

Investments in affiliates

   25,576    18,951    26,390    25,576 

Deferred income taxes

   2,437    2,058    1,890    2,437 

Notes receivable from affiliates

   2,007    —      1,522    2,007 

Other

   42    24    17    42 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total deferred debits and other assets

   33,994    24,024    32,824    33,994 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total assets

  $34,864   $24,239   $33,418   $34,864 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

See Notes to Financial Statements

 

437444


Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

 

Schedule I – Condensed Financial Information of Parent (Exelon Corporate)

 

Condensed Balance Sheets

 

  December 31,   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2012 2011   2013 2012 
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY      

Current liabilities

      

Short-term borrowings

  $—    $161 

Long-term debt due within one year

  $10  $—   

Accounts payable

   101   —      43   101 

Payables to affiliates

   —     30 

Unamortized energy contract liabilities

   77   —      12   77 

Accrued expenses

   110   117    106   110 

Deferred income taxes

   55   —      26   55 

Regulatory liabilities

   2    —    

Other

   60   403    54    60 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total current liabilities

   403   711    253   403 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Long-term debt

   3,576   1,313    3,033   3,576 

Long-term debt to affiliate

   176   —   

Deferred credits and other liabilities

      

Regulatory liabilities

   43   —   

Pension obligations

   8,252   6,797    6,444   8,252 

Non-pension postretirement benefit obligations

   1,071   965    393   1,071 

Unamortized energy contract liabilities

   12   —      —     12 

Deferred income taxes

   70   —   

Other

   116   68    271   116 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total deferred credits and other liabilities

   9,451   7,830    7,221   9,451 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total liabilities

   13,430   9,854    10,683   13,430 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Commitments and contingencies

      

Shareholders’ equity

      

Common stock (No par value, 2,000 shares authorized, 890 and 662 shares outstanding at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively)

   16,632   9,107 

Treasury stock, at cost (35 shares held at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively)

   (2,327  (2,327

Common stock (No par value, 2,000 shares authorized, 857 and 855 shares outstanding at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively)

   16,741   16,632 

Treasury stock, at cost (35 shares held at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively)

   (2,327  (2,327

Retained earnings

   9,893   10,055    10,358   9,893 

Accumulated other comprehensive loss, net

   (2,767  (2,450   (2,040  (2,767
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total shareholders’ equity

   21,431   14,385    22,732   21,431 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

BGE preference stock not subject to mandatory redemption

   3   —      3   3 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

  $34,864  $24,239   $33,418  $34,864 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

 

See Notes to Financial Statements

 

438445


Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

 

Schedule I – Condensed Financial Information of Parent (Exelon Corporate)

 

Notes to Financial Statements

 

1. Basis of Presentation

 

Exelon Corporate is a holding company that conducts substantially all of its business operations through its subsidiaries. These condensed financial statements and related footnotes have been prepared in accordance with Rule 12-04, Schedule I of Regulation S-X. These statements should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and notes thereto of Exelon Corporation.

 

Exelon Corporate owns 100% of all of its significant subsidiaries, either directly or indirectly, except for Commonwealth Edison Company (ComEd), of which Exelon Corporate owns more than 99%, PECO Energy Company (PECO), of which Exelon Corporate owns 100% of the common stock but none of PECO’s preferred securities and BGE, of which Exelon owns 100% of the common stock but none of BGE’s preferred stock. Exelon owned none of PECO’s preference securities, which PECO redeemed in 2013.

 

2. Merger with Constellation

 

On March 12, 2012, Exelon Corporation completed the merger contemplated by the Merger Agreement, among Exelon, Bolt Acquisition Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of Exelon (Merger Sub), and Constellation. As a result of that merger, Merger Sub was merged into Constellation (the Initial Merger) and Constellation became a wholly owned subsidiary of Exelon. Following the completion of the Initial Merger, Exelon and Constellation completed a series of internal corporate organizational restructuring transactions. Constellation merged with and into Exelon, with Exelon continuing as the surviving corporation (the Upstream Merger). Simultaneously with the Upstream Merger, Constellation’s interest in RF HoldCo LLC, which holds Constellation’s interest in BGE, was transferred to Exelon Energy Delivery Company, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Exelon that also owns Exelon’s interests in ComEd and PECO. Following the Upstream Merger and the transfer of RF HoldCo LLC, Exelon contributed to Generation certain subsidiaries, including the customer supply and generation businesses that were acquired from Constellation as a result of the Initial Merger and the Upstream Merger.

 

For BGE’s debt, fuel supply contracts and regulatory assets not earning a return, the difference between fair value and book value of BGE’s assets acquired and liabilities assumed is recorded as a regulatory asset at Exelon Corporate as Exelon did not apply push-down accounting to BGE. See Note 4—Merger and Acquisitions of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on the merger with Constellation. Also see Note 1—Significant Accounting Policies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on BGE’s push-down accounting treatment.

 

3. Debt and Credit Agreements

 

Short-Term Borrowings

 

Exelon Corporate meets its short-term liquidity requirements primarily through the issuance of commercial paper. Exelon Corporate had no commercial paper borrowings at both December 31, 20122013 and $161 million at December 31, 2011.2012.

 

Credit Agreements

 

On August 10, 2012,2013, Exelon Corporate amended and extended its unsecured syndicated revolving credit facility with aggregate bank commitments of $500 million through August 10, 2017.2018. As of December 31, 2013, Exelon Corporate had available capacity under those commitments of $498 million. See Note 13—Debt and Credit Agreements of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding Exelon Corporate’s credit agreement.

 

439446


Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

 

Schedule I – Condensed Financial Information of Parent (Exelon Corporate)

 

Notes to Financial Statements

December 31, 2012, Exelon Corporate had available capacity under those commitments of $498 million. See Note 11—Debt and Credit Agreements of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding Exelon Corporate’s credit agreement.

 

Long-Term Debt

 

The following tables present the outstanding long-term debt for Exelon Corporate as of December 31, 20122013 and 2011:December 31, 2012:

 

  Rates   Maturity
Date
   December 31,       Maturity
Date
   December 31, 
  2012   2011   Rates   2013 2012 

Long-term debt

               

Senior unsecured notes

   4.55% – 8.63%     2015-2063    $3,108   $1,300    4.55% – 7.60%     2015-2035    $2,658  $3,108 

Unamortized debt discount and premium, net

       2    (1       2   2 

Fair value adjustment

       455    —          383   455 

Fair value hedge carrying value adjustment, net

       11    14        —     11 

Long-term debt due within one year

       (10  —   
      

 

   

 

       

 

  

 

 

Long-term debt

      $3,576   $1,313       $3,033  $3,576 
      

 

   

 

       

 

  

 

 

 

Exelon Corporate will not have any long-term debt maturities in periods 2013 and 2014. The debt maturities for the periods 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and thereafter are as follows:

 

2015

  $1,350   $1,350 

2016

   —      —   

2017

   —      —   

2018

   —   

Remaining years

   1,758    1,308 
  

 

   

 

 

Total long-term debt

  $3,108   $2,658 
  

 

   

 

 

 

4. Commitments and Contingencies

 

See Note 1922—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for Exelon Corporate’s commitments and contingencies related to environmental matters savings plan claim and fund transfer restrictions.

 

440447


Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

 

Schedule I – Condensed Financial Information of Parent (Exelon Corporate)

 

Notes to Financial Statements

 

5. Related Party Transactions

 

The financial statements of Exelon Corporate include related party transactions as presented in the tables below:

 

  For the Years Ended
December 31,
   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 
  2012 2011 2010 

(In millions)

  2013 2012 2011 

Operating and maintenance from affiliates:

        

Business Services Company, LLC(a)

  $72  $44  $22   $34   $72  $44 

Interest income from affiliates, net

  $75  $1  $—     $36   $75  $1 

Equity in earnings of investments:

        

Exelon Energy Delivery Company, LLC(b)

  $713  $801  $657   $834   $713  $801 

Exelon Ventures Company, LLC(c)

   564   1,769   1,978    1,076    564   1,769 

UII, LLC

   25   18   23    (2  25   18 

Exelon Transmission Company, LLC

   (3  (3  (6   (5  (3  (3

Exelon Consolidations(d)

   (21  77   —      —      (21  77 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total equity in earnings of investments

  $1,278  $2,662  $2,652   $1,903   $1,278  $2,662 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Charitable contributions to Exelon Foundation(e)

  $—    $—    $10 

Cash contributions received from affiliates

  $2,074  $820  $2,056   $1,175   $2,074  $820 

 

   December 31, 
   2012   2011 

Accounts receivable from affiliates (current):

    

Business Services Company, LLC(a)

  $33   $—   

Generation

   33    7 

ComEd

   2    1 

PECO

   2    1 

BGE

   17    —   
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total accounts receivable from affiliates (current)

  $87   $9 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Notes receivable from affiliates (current):

    

Business Services Company, LLC(a)

  $119   $—   

Investments in affiliates:

    

Business Services Company, LLC(a)

  $181   $160 

Exelon Energy Delivery Company, LLC(b)

   12,466    10,040 

Exelon Ventures Company, LLC(c)

   12,444    8,310 

UII, LLC

   472    447 

Exelon Transmission Company, LLC

   4    6 

VEBA

   9    (12
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total investments in affiliates

  $25,576   $18,951 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Notes receivable from affiliates (non-current):

    

Generation

  $2,007   $—   

Payables to affiliates (current)

    

Exelon Consolidations

  $—     $27 

Business Services Company, LLC(a)

   —      3 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total payables to affiliates (current)

  $—     $30 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

441


Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

Schedule I – Condensed Financial Information of Parent (Exelon Corporate)

Notes to Financial Statements

   December 31, 

(in millions)

  2013   2012 

Accounts receivable from affiliates (current):

    

Business Services Company, LLC(a)

  $3   $33 

Generation

   7    33 

ComEd

   9    2 

PECO

   2    2 

BGE

   1    17 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total accounts receivable from affiliates (current)

  $22   $87 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Notes receivable from affiliates (current):

    

Business Services Company, LLC(a)

  $179   $119 

Investments in affiliates:

    

Business Services Company, LLC(a)

  $201   $181 

Exelon Energy Delivery Company, LLC(b)

   12,956    12,466 

Exelon Ventures Company, LLC(c)

   12,750    12,444 

UII, LLC

   470    472 

Exelon Transmission Company, LLC

   3    4 

VEBA

   10    9 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total investments in affiliates

  $26,390   $25,576 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Notes receivable from affiliates (non-current):

    

Generation

  $1,522   $2,007 

Long-term debt to affiliates (non-current):

    

ComEd

  $176   $—   

 

(a)Exelon Corporate receives a variety of corporate support services from BSC, including legal, human resources, financial, information technology and supply management services. All services are provided at cost, including applicable overhead.
(b)Exelon Energy Delivery Company, LLC consists of ComEd, PECO and BGE.
(c)Exelon Ventures Company, LLC primarily consists of Generation.
(d)Equity in earnings of investments for Exelon Consolidations represents the intercompany income component that offsets the corresponding intercompany expense at Generation for upgrades in transmission assets owned by ComEd, which are reflected as assets at Exelon Corporate.
(e)Exelon Foundation is a nonconsolidated not-for-profit Illinois corporation. The Exelon Foundation was established in the fourth quarter of 2007 to serve educational and environmental philanthropic purposes and does not serve a direct business or political purpose of Exelon. Exelon contributes services (i.e. accounting, administrative, legal).

 

442448


Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

 

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

 

Column A

  Column B   Column C Column D Column E   Column B   Column C Column D Column E 
      Additions and adjustments           Additions and adjustments     

Description

  Balance at
Beginning
of Period
   Charged to
Costs and
Expenses
 Charged
to Other
Accounts
 Deductions Balance at
End
of Period
   Balance at
Beginning
of Period
   Charged to
Costs and
Expenses
   Charged
to Other
Accounts
 Deductions Balance at
End

of Period
 
  (in millions) 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2013

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts (a)

  $293   $121   $37(c)  $179(d)  $272 

Deferred tax valuation allowance

   36    1     24   13 

Reserve for obsolete materials

   53    17    —     12   58 
  (in millions) 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2012

               

Allowance for uncollectible accounts(a)

  $199   $144  $136(b)(c)  $186(d)  $293   $199   $144   $136(b)(c)  $186(d)  $293 

Deferred tax valuation allowance

   10    18   18(b)   10   36    10    18    18(b)   10   36 

Reserve for obsolete materials

   60    2   2(b)   11   53    60    2    2(b)   11   53 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2011

               

Allowance for uncollectible accounts(a)

  $211   $121  $32(c)  $165(d)  $199   $211   $121   $32(c)  $165(d)  $199 

Deferred tax valuation allowance

   9    1   —     —     10    9    1    —     —     10 

Reserve for obsolete materials

   56    6   —     2   60    56    6    —     2   60 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2010

       

Allowance for uncollectible accounts(a)

  $214   $109  $19(c)  $131(d)  $211 

Deferred tax valuation allowance

   36    (8  —     19   9 

Reserve for obsolete materials

   45    12   —     1   56 

 

(a)Excludes the non-current allowance for uncollectible accounts related to PECO’s installment plan receivables of $9 million, $8 million, $9 million, $17 million and $11$9 million for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010 and 2009,2011, respectively.
(b)Primarily represents the addition of Constellation’s and BGE’s results as of March 12, 2012, the date of the merger.
(c)Includes charges for late payments and non-service receivables.
(d)Write-off of individual accounts receivable.

 

443449


Exelon Generation Company, LLC and Subsidiary Companies

 

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

 

Generation

 

1.

  

Financial Statements:

  

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm dated February 21, 201313, 2014 of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

  

Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011

  

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011

  

Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 20122013 and 20112012

  

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Member’s Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

2.

Financial Statement Schedules:

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

Schedules not included are omitted because of the absence of conditions under which they are required or because the required information is provided in the consolidated financial statements, including the notes thereto

444


Exelon Generation Company, LLC and Subsidiary Companies

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

Column A

  Column B   Column C  Column D   Column E 
       Additions and adjustments        

Description

  Balance at
Beginning
of Period
   Charged to
Costs and
Expenses
   Charged
to Other
Accounts
  Deductions   Balance at
End

of Period
 
   (in millions) 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2012

         

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $29   $—     $66(a)  $11   $84 

Deferred tax valuation allowance

   —      17    18(a)   —      35 

Reserve for obsolete materials

   59    —      2(a)   11    50 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2011

         

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $32   $—      $—     $3   $29 

Deferred tax valuation allowance

   —      —      —     —      —   

Reserve for obsolete materials

   55    4    —     —      59 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2010

         

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $31   $1   $—    $—     $32 

Deferred tax valuation allowance

   18    —      —     18    —   

Reserve for obsolete materials

   43    12    —     —      55 

(a)Represents the addition of Constellation’s results as of March 12, 2012, the date of the merger.

445


Commonwealth Edison Company and Subsidiary Companies

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

ComEd

1.

Financial Statements:

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm dated February 21, 2013, of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income for the Years Ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010

Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2012 and 2011

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

2.

Financial Statement Schedules:

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

Schedules not included are omitted because of the absence of conditions under which they are required or because the required information is provided in the consolidated financial statements, including the notes thereto

446


Commonwealth Edison Company and Subsidiary Companies

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

Column A

  Column B   Column C  Column D  Column E 
       Additions and adjustments       

Description

  Balance at
Beginning
of Period
   Charged to
Costs and
Expenses
   Charged
to Other
Accounts
  Deductions  Balance at
End

of Period
 
   (in millions) 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2012

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $78   $42   $26(a)  $76(b)  $70 

Reserve for obsolete materials

   1    1    —     —     2 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2011

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $80   $57   $15(a)  $74(b)  $78 

Reserve for obsolete materials

   1    2    —     2   1 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2010

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $77   $48   $16(a)  $61(b)  $80 

Reserve for obsolete materials

   1    —      —     —     1 

(a)Primarily charges for late payments and non-service receivables.
(b)Write-off of individual accounts receivable.

447


PECO Energy Company and Subsidiary Companies

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

PECO

1.

Financial Statements:

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm dated February 21, 2013 of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income for the Years Ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010

Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2012 and 2011

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

2.

Financial Statement Schedules:

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

Schedules not included are omitted because of the absence of conditions under which they are required or because the required information is provided in the consolidated financial statements, including the notes thereto

448


PECO Energy Company and Subsidiary Companies

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

Column A

  Column B   Column C  Column D  Column E 
       Additions and adjustments       

Description

  Balance at
Beginning
of Period
   Charged to
Costs and
Expenses
   Charged
to Other
Accounts
  Deductions  Balance at
End

of Period
 
   (in millions) 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2012

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts(a)

  $92   $60   $8(b)  $61(c)  $99 

Deferred tax valuation allowance

   —      —      —     —     —   

Reserve for obsolete materials

   1    —      —     —     1 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2011

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts(a)

  $99   $64   $17(b)  $88(c)  $92 

Deferred tax valuation allowance

   —      —      —     —     —   

Reserve for obsolete materials

   1    —      —     —     1 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2010

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts(a)

  $106   $60   $3(b)  $70(c)  $99 

Deferred tax valuation allowance

   1    —      —     1   —   

Reserve for obsolete materials

   1    —      —     —     1 

(a)Excludes the non-current allowance for uncollectible accounts related to PECO’s installment plan receivables of $8 million, $9 million, $17 million and $11 million for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
(b)Primarily charges for late payments.
(c)Write-off of individual accounts receivable.

449


Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Subsidiary Companies

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

BGE

1.

Financial Statements:

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm dated February 21, 2013 of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income for the Years Ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010

Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2012 and 2011

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010

  

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

2.

  

Financial Statement Schedules:

  

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

  

Schedules not included are omitted because of the absence of conditions under which they are required or because the required information is provided in the consolidated financial statements, including the notes thereto

 

450


Exelon Generation Company, LLC and Subsidiary Companies

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

Column A

  Column B   Column C  Column D   Column E 
       Additions and adjustments        

Description

  Balance at
Beginning
of Period
   Charged to
Costs and
Expenses
  Charged
to Other
Accounts
  Deductions   Balance at
End

of Period
 
   (in millions) 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2013

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $84   $(16 $—    $11   $57 

Deferred tax valuation allowance

   35    1   —     25    11 

Reserve for obsolete materials

   50    16   —     11    55 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2012

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $29   $—    $66(a)  $11   $84 

Deferred tax valuation allowance

   —      17   18(a)   —      35 

Reserve for obsolete materials

   59    —     2(a)   11    50 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2011

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $32   $—    $—    $3   $29 

Reserve for obsolete materials

   55    4   —     —      59 

(a)Represents the addition of Constellation’s results as of March 12, 2012, the date of the merger.

451


Commonwealth Edison Company and Subsidiary Companies

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

ComEd

1.

Financial Statements:

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm dated February 13, 2014 of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011

Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2013 and 2012

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

2.

Financial Statement Schedules:

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

Schedules not included are omitted because of the absence of conditions under which they are required or because the required information is provided in the consolidated financial statements, including the notes thereto

452


Commonwealth Edison Company and Subsidiary Companies

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

Column A

  Column B   Column C  Column D  Column E 
       Additions and adjustments       

Description

  Balance at
Beginning
of Period
   Charged to
Costs and
Expenses
   Charged
to Other
Accounts
  Deductions  Balance at
End

of Period
 
   (in millions) 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2013

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $70   $33   $29(a)  $70(b)  $62 

Reserve for obsolete materials

   2    1    —     1   2 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2012

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $78   $42   $26(a)  $76(b)  $70 

Reserve for obsolete materials

   1    1    —     —     2 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2011

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $80   $57   $15(a)  $74(b)  $78 

Reserve for obsolete materials

   1    2    —     2   1 

(a)Primarily charges for late payments and non-service receivables.
(b)Write-off of individual accounts receivable.

453


PECO Energy Company and Subsidiary Companies

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

PECO

1.

Financial Statements:

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm dated February 13, 2014 of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011

Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2013 and 2012

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

2.

Financial Statement Schedules:

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

Schedules not included are omitted because of the absence of conditions under which they are required or because the required information is provided in the consolidated financial statements, including the notes thereto

454


PECO Energy Company and Subsidiary Companies

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

Column A

  Column B   Column C  Column D  Column E 
       Additions and adjustments       

Description

  Balance at
Beginning
of Period
   Charged to
Costs and
Expenses
   Charged
to Other
Accounts
  Deductions  Balance at
End

of Period
 
   (in millions) 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2013

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts(a)

  $99   $61   $7(b)  $60(c)  $107 

Reserve for obsolete materials

   1    —       —     —     1 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2012

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts(a)

  $92   $60   $8(b)  $61(c)  $99 

Reserve for obsolete materials

   1    —       —     —     1 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2011

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts(a)

  $99   $64   $17(b)  $88(c)  $92 

Reserve for obsolete materials

   1    —       —     —     1 

(a)Excludes the non-current allowance for uncollectible accounts related to PECO’s installment plan receivables of $9 million, $8 million, and $9 million for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012, and 2011, respectively.
(b)Primarily charges for late payments.
(c)Write-off of individual accounts receivable.

455


Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

 

Column A

  Column B   Column C   Column D  Column E 
       Additions and adjustments        

Description

  Balance at
Beginning
of Period
   Charged to
Costs and
Expenses
   Charged
to Other
Accounts
   Deductions  Balance at
End

of Period
 
   (in millions) 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2012

         

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $38   $45   $—      $43(a)  $40 

Deferred tax valuation allowance

   —      1    —      —      1 

Reserve for obsolete materials

   —      1    —      —      1 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2011

         

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $36   $39   $—      $37(a)  $38 

Deferred tax valuation allowance

   —      —      —      —      —   

Reserve for obsolete materials

   —      —      —      —      —   

For The Year Ended December 31, 2010

         

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $47   $46   $—     $57(a)  $36 

Deferred tax valuation allowance

   —      —      —      —      —   

Reserve for obsolete materials

   —      —      —      —      —   

BGE

1.

Financial Statements:

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm dated February 13, 2014 of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011

Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2013 and 2012

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

2.

Financial Statement Schedules:

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

Schedules not included are omitted because of the absence of conditions under which they are required or because the required information is provided in the consolidated financial statements, including the notes thereto

456


Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Subsidiary Companies

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

Column A

  Column B   Column C  Column D  Column E 
       Additions and adjustments       

Description

  Balance at
Beginning
of Period
   Charged to
Costs and
Expenses
   Charged
to Other
Accounts
  Deductions  Balance at
End

of Period
 
   (in millions) 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2013

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $40   $43   $1(b)  $38(a)  $46 

Deferred tax valuation allowance

   1    —       —     —     1 

Reserve for obsolete materials

   1     —      —     —     1 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2012

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $38   $45   $—    $43(a)  $40 

Deferred tax valuation allowance

   —      1    —     —     1 

Reserve for obsolete materials

   —      1    —     —     1 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2011

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $36   $39   $—    $37(a)  $38 

 

(a)Write-off of individual accounts receivable.
(b)Primarily charges for late payments.

 

451457


(b) Exhibits required by Item 601 of Regulation S-K:

 

Certain of the following exhibits are incorporated herein by reference under Rule 12b-32 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Certain other instruments which would otherwise be required to be listed below have not been so listed because such instruments do not authorize securities in an amount which exceeds 10% of the total assets of the applicable registrant and its subsidiaries on a consolidated basis and the relevant registrant agrees to furnish a copy of any such instrument to the Commission upon request.

 

Exhibit No.

  

Description

2-1  Amended and Restated Agreement and Plan of Merger dated as of October 20, 2000, among PECO Energy Company, Exelon Corporation and Unicom Corporation (File No. 0-01401, Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2000, Exhibit 2-1).
2-2Purchase Agreement dated as of August 30, 2010 by and between Deere & Company and Generation (File No. 1-16169, Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010, Exhibit 2-1).
2-3Agreement and Plan of Merger dated as of April 28, 2011 by and among Exelon Corporation, Bolt Acquisition Corporation and Constellation Energy Group, Inc. (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated April 28, 2011, Exhibit No. 2-1)
2-42-2  Distribution and Assignment Agreement, dated as of March 12, 2012, by and among Exelon Corporation, Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and RF HoldCo LLC (FileNo. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated March 14, 2012, Exhibit No. 2-3).
2-52-3  Contribution and Assignment Agreement, dated as of March 12, 2012, by and among Exelon Corporation, Exelon Energy Delivery Company, LLC and RF HoldCo LLC (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated March 14, 2012, Exhibit No. 2-4).
2-62-4  Contribution Agreement, dated as of March 12, 2012, by and among Exelon Corporation, Exelon Ventures Company, LLC and Exelon Generation Company, LLC (FileNo. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated March 14, 2012, Exhibit No. 2-5).
2-72-5  Purchase Agreement dated as of August 8, 2012 by and between Constellation Power Source Generation, Inc. and Raven Power Holdings, LLCLLC. (File No. 333-85496,Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2012, Exhibit No. 2-1).
2-8Agreement 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, filed by Constellation, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
2-9Agreement 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, filed by Constellation, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
2-10Asset Purchase Agreement, dated as of 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 No. 2.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated August 11, 2010, filed by Constellation, File No. 1-12869.)
2-112-6  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, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File No. 1-12869.)
2-122-7  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, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File No. 1-12869.)

452


Exhibit No.

Description

2-132-8  Contribution Agreement, dated as of February 4, 2010, by and among Constellation Energy Group, Inc., Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and RF HoldCo LLC. (Designated as Exhibit No. 99.2 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2010, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
2-142-9  Purchase Agreement, dated as of February 4, 2010, by and between RF HoldCo LLC and GSS Holdings (Baltimore Gas and Electric Company Utility), Inc. (Designated as Exhibit No. 99.3 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2010, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.
3-1  Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of Exelon Corporation, as amended May 8, 2007 (File No. 001-16169, Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2008,
Exhibit 3-1-2).
3-2  Exelon Corporation Amended and Restated Bylaws, effective as of March 12, 2012 (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated March 14, 2012, Exhibit 3-1).
3-3  Certificate of Formation of Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Registration Statement No. 333-85496, Form S-4, Exhibit 3-1).

458


Exhibit No.

Description

3-4  First Amended and Restated Operating Agreement of Exelon Generation Company, LLC executed as of January 1, 2001 (File No. 333-85496, 2003 Form 10-K, Exhibit 3-8).
3-5  Restated Articles of Incorporation of Commonwealth Edison Company Effective February 20, 1985, including Statements of Resolution Establishing Series, relating to the establishment of three new series of Commonwealth Edison Company preference stock known as the “$9.00 Cumulative Preference Stock,” the “$6.875 Cumulative Preference Stock” and the “$2.425 Cumulative Preference Stock” (File No. 1-1839, 1994 Form 10-K, Exhibit 3-2).
3-6  Commonwealth Edison Company Amended and Restated By-Laws, Effective January 23, 2006 As Further Amended January 28, 2008 and July 27, 2009. (File No. 001-16169,001-1839, Form 8-K dated July 27, 2009, Exhibit 3.1).
3-7  Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of PECO Energy Company (FileNo. 1-01401, 2000 Form 10-K, Exhibit 3-3).
3-8  PECO Energy Company Amended Bylaws (File 000-16844, Form 8-K dated May 6, 2009, Exhibit 99.1).
3-9  Articles of Amendment to the Charter of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company as of February 2, 2010. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2010, filed by Constellation,Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, File No. 1-1910.)
3-10  Articles of Restatement to the Charter of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, restated as of August 16, 1996. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3 to the Quarterly Report onForm 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 1996, filed by Constellation,Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, File No. 1-1910.)
3-11  Bylaws of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, as amended to February 4, 2010. (Designatedand restated as Exhibit No. 3.2 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2010, filed by Constellation, File No. 1-1910.)of May 10, 2012.
3-12  Operating Agreement, dated as of February 4, 2010, by and among RF HoldCo LLC, Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and GSS Holdings (Baltimore Gas and Electric Company(BGE Utility), Inc. (Designated as Exhibit No. 99.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2010, filed by Constellation,Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
4-1  First and Refunding Mortgage dated May 1, 1923 between The Counties Gas and Electric Company (predecessor to PECO Energy Company) and Fidelity Trust Company, Trustee (U.S. Bank National Association, as current successor trustee), (Registration No. 2-2281, Exhibit B-1).

453


Exhibit No.

Description

4-1-1  Supplemental Indentures to PECO Energy Company’s First and Refunding Mortgage:
  

Dated as of

  

File Reference

  

Exhibit No.

  May 1, 1927  2-2881  B-1(c)
  March 1, 1937  2-2881  B-1(g)
  December 1, 1941  2-4863  B-1(h)
  November 1, 1944  2-5472  B-1(i)
  December 1, 1946  2-6821  7-1(j)
  September 1, 1957  2-13562  2(b)-17
  May 1, 1958  2-14020  2(b)-18
  March 1, 1968  2-34051  2(b)-24
  March 1, 1981  2-72802  4-46
  March 1, 1981  2-72802  4-47

459


  

Dated as of

File Reference

Exhibit No.

December 1, 1984

  1-01401, 1984 Form 10-K  4-2(b)
  

March 1, 1993

  1-01401, 1992 Form 10-K  4(e)-86
  

May 1, 1993

  

1-01401, March 31, 1993

Form 10-Q

  4(e)-88
  

May 1, 1993

  1-01401, March 31, 1993 Form 10-Q  4(e)-89
  

April 15, 2004

  0-6844, September 30, 2004 Form 10-Q  4-1-1
  

September 15, 2006

  000-16844, Form 8-K dated September 25, 2006  4.1
  

March 1, 2007

  000-16844, Form 8-K dated March 19, 2007  4.1
  February 15, 20080-16844, Form 8-K dated March 3, 20084.1
February 15, 20080-16844, Form 8-K, dated March 5, 2008
September 15, 2008000-16844, Form 8-K dated October 2, 20084.1

March 15, 2009

  000-16844, Form 8-K dated March 26, 2009  4.1
  

September 1, 2012

  000-16844, Form 8-K dated September 17, 2012  4.1
  October 1, 2012

September 15, 2013

  000-16844, Form 8-K dated October 1, 2012September 23, 2013  4.1

454


Exhibit No.September 15, 2013

  

Description

000-16844, Form 8-K dated September 23, 2013
  4.1
4-2  Exelon Corporation Direct Stock Purchase Plan (Registration StatementNo. 333-183751, Form S-3, Prospectus).
4-3  Mortgage of Commonwealth Edison Company to Illinois Merchants Trust Company, Trustee (BNY Mellon Trust Company of Illinois, as current successor Trustee), dated July 1, 1923, as supplemented and amended by Supplemental Indenture thereto dated August 1, 1944. (Registration No. 2-60201, Form S-7, Exhibit 2-1).
4-3-1  Supplemental Indentures to Commonwealth Edison Company Mortgage.
  

Dated as of

  

File Reference

  

Exhibit No.

  

August 1, 1946

  2-60201, Form S-7  2-1
  

April 1, 1953

  2-60201, Form S-7  2-1
  

March 31, 1967

  2-60201, Form S-7  2-1
  

April 1,1967

  2-60201, Form S-7  2-1
  

February 28, 1969

  2-60201, Form S-7  2-1
  

May 29, 1970

  2-60201, Form S-7  2-1
  

June 1, 1971

  2-60201, Form S-7  2-1
  

April 1, 1972

  2-60201, Form S-7  2-1
  

May 31, 1972

  2-60201, Form S-7  2-1
  

June 15, 1973

  2-60201, Form S-7  2-1
  

May 31, 1974

  2-60201, Form S-7  2-1
  

June 13, 1975

  2-60201, Form S-7  2-1

460


Dated as of

File Reference

Exhibit No.

  

May 28, 1976

  2-60201, Form S-7  2-1
  

June 3, 1977

  2-60201, Form S-7  2-1
  

May 17, 1978

  2-99665, Form S-3  4-3
  

August 31, 1978

  2-99665, Form S-3  4-3
  

June 18, 1979

  2-99665, Form S-3  4-3
  

June 20, 1980

  2-99665, Form S-3  4-3
  

April 16, 1981

  2-99665, Form S-3  4-3
  

April 30, 1982

  2-99665, Form S-3  4-3
  

April 15, 1983

  2-99665, Form S-3  4-3
  

April 13, 1984

  2-99665, Form S-3  4-3
  

April 15, 1985

  2-99665, Form S-3  4-3
  

April 15, 1986

  33-6879, Form S-3  4-9
  

April 15, 1993

33-64028, Form S-34-13

June 15, 1993

1-1839, Form 8-K dated

May 21, 1993

4-1

January 15, 1994

  1-1839, 1993 Form 10-K  4-15
  

March 1, 2002

1-1839, 2001 Form 10-K4-4-1

June 1, 2002

333-99363, Form S-34-1-1(B)

October 7, 2002

333-9715, Form S-44-1-3

455


Dated as of

File Reference

Exhibit No.

January 13, 2003

  

1-1839, Form 8-K dated

January 22, 2003

  4-4
  

March 14, 2003

  

1-1839, Form 8-K dated

April 7, 2003

  4-4
  

February 22, 2006

  1-1839, Form 8-K dated March 6, 2006  4.1
  

August 1, 2006

  1-1839, Form 8-K dated August 28, 2006  4.1
  

September 15, 2006

  1-1839, Form 8-K dated October 2, 2006  4.1
  December 1, 20061-1839, Form 8-K dated December 19, 20064.1

March 1, 2007

  1-1839, Form 8-K dated March 23, 2007  4.1
  

August 30, 2007

  1-1839, Form 8-K dated September 10, 2007  4.1
  

December 20, 2007

  1-1839, Form 8-K dated January 16, 2008  4.1
  

March 10, 2008

  1-1839, Form 8-K dated March 27, 2008  4.1
  

July 12, 2010

  001-01839, Form 8-K dated August 2, 2010  4.1
  

January 4, 2011

  001-01839, Form 8-K dated January 18, 2011  4.1
  

August 22, 2011

  001-01839, Form 8-K dated September 7, 2011  4.1
  

September 17, 2012

  001-01839, Form 8-K dated October 1, 2012  4.1

August 1, 2013

001-01839, Form 8-K dated August 19, 20134.1

January 2, 2014

001-01839, Form 8-K dated January 10, 20144.1

461


Exhibit No.

  

Description

4-3-2  Instrument of Resignation, Appointment and Acceptance dated as of February 20, 2002, under the provisions of the Mortgage of Commonwealth Edison Company dated July 1, 1923, and Indentures Supplemental thereto, regarding corporate trustee (FileNo.
1-1839,
2001 Form 10-K, Exhibit 4-4-2).
4-3-3  Instrument dated as of January 31, 1996, under the provisions of the Mortgage of Commonwealth Edison Company dated July 1, 1923 and Indentures Supplemental thereto, regarding individual trustee (File No. 1-1839, 1995 Form 10-K, Exhibit 4-29).
4-4  Indenture dated as of September 1, 1987 between Commonwealth Edison Company and Citibank, N.A. (U.S. Bank National Association, as current successor trustee), Trustee relating to Notes (Registration No. 33-20619, Form S-3, Exhibit 4-13).

456


Exhibit No.

Description

4-5  Indenture dated December 19, 2003 between Exelon Generation Company, LLC and U.S. Bank National Association (File No. 333-85496, 2003 Form 10-K, Exhibit 4-6).
4-6  Indenture to Subordinated Debt Securities dated as of June 24, 2003 between PECO Energy Company, as Issuer, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee (FileNo. 0-16844, June 30, 2003 Form 10-Q, Exhibit 4.1).
4-7  Form of 4.25% Senior Note due 2022.2022 issued by Exelon Generation Company, LLC. (File 333-85496, Form 8-K dated June 18, 2012, Exhibit 4.1).
4-8  Form of 5.60% Senior Note due 2042.2042 issued by Exelon Generation Company, LLC. (File 333-85496, Form 8-K dated June 18, 2012, Exhibit 4.2).
4-9  Form of 2.80% Senior Note due 2022.2022 issued by Baltimore Gas and Electric Company. (File 1-1910, Form 8-K dated August 17, 2012, Exhibit 4.1).
4-10Form of 3.35% Senior Note due 2023 Baltimore Gas and Electric Company. (File 1-1910, Form 8-K dated June 17, 2013, Exhibit 4.1)
4-11Form of 6.000% Senior Secured Notes due 2033 issued by Exelon Generation Company, LLC (File No. 333-85496, Form 8-K dated September 30, 2013, Exhibit No. 4.2)
4-12  Preferred Securities Guarantee Agreement between PECO Energy Company, as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, dated as of June 24, 2003 (File No. 0-16844, June 30, 2003 Form 10-Q, Exhibit 4.2).
4-114-13  PECO Energy Capital Trust IV Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust among PECO Energy Company, as Sponsor, U.S. Bank Trust National Association, as Delaware Trustee and Property Trustee, and J. Barry Mitchell, George R. Shicora and Charles S. Walls as Administrative Trustees dated as of June 24, 2003 (FileNo. 0-16844, June 30, 2003 Form 10-Q, Exhibit 4.3).
4-124-14  Indenture dated May 1, 2001 between Exelon Corporation and The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, National Association, as trustee (File No. 1-16169, June 30, 2005 Form 10-Q, Exhibit 4-10).
4-134-15  Form of $800,000,000 4.90% senior notes due 2015 dated June 9, 2005 issued by Exelon Corporation (File No. 1-16169, Form 8-K dated June 9, 2005, Exhibit 99.2).
4-144-16  Form of $500,000,000 5.625% senior notes due 2035 dated June 9, 2005 issued by Exelon Corporation (File No. 1-16169, Form 8-K dated June 9, 2005, Exhibit 99.3).
4-154-17  Indenture dated as of September 28, 2007 from Exelon Generation Company, LLC to U.S. Bank National Association, as trustee (File 333-85496, Form 8-K dated September 28, 2007, Exhibit 4.1).
4-164-18  Form of 5.20% Exelon Generation Company, LLC Senior Note due 2019 (File333-85496, Form 8-K dated September 23, 2009, Exhibit 4.1).

462


4-17

Exhibit No.

  

Description

4-19Form of 6.25% Exelon Generation Company, LLC Senior Note due 2039 (File333-85496, Form 8-K dated September 23, 2009, Exhibit 4.2).
4-184-20  Form of 4.00% Exelon Generation Company, LLC Senior Note due 2020 (FileNo. 333-85496, Form 8-K dated September 30, 2010, Exhibit 4.1).
4-194-21  Form of 5.75% Exelon Generation Company, LLC Senior Note due 2041 (FileNo. 333-85496, Form 8-K dated September 30, 2010, Exhibit 4.2).
4-204-22  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, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File No. 333-75217.)

457


Exhibit No.

Description

4-214-23  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, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File No. 333-102723.)
4-224-24  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, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File No. 333-135991.)
4-234-25  First Supplemental Indenture between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee, dated as of June 27, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit 4(a) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 30, 2008, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File No. 1-12869.)
4-244-26  Indenture dated June 19, 2008 between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(a) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2008, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
4-254-27  Indenture, dated as of September 30, 2013, among Continental Wind, LLC, the guarantors party thereto and Wilmington Trust, National Association, as trustee (File No. 333-85496, Form 8-K dated September 30, 2013, Exhibit No. 4.1)
4-28Indenture dated July 1, 1985, between Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and The Bank of New York (Successor to Mercantile-Safe Deposit and Trust Company), Trustee. (Designated as Exhibit 4(a) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3, FileNo. 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, filed by Constellation,Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, File No. 1-1910.)
4-264-29  Indenture and Security Agreement dated as of July 9, 2009, between Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee (including form of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company 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, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 333-157637 and 333-157637-01.)
4-274-30  Indenture dated as of July 24, 2006 between Baltimore Gas and Electric Company 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, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File No. 333-135991.)

463


4-28

Exhibit No.

  

Description

4-31Supplemental Indenture No. 1, dated as of October 1, 2009, to the Indenture and Security Agreement dated as of July 9, 2009, between Baltimore Gas and Electric Company 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, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and1-1910.)
4-294-32  Baltimore Gas and Electric Company 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, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 333-157637 and 333-157637-01.)
4-304-33  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, filed by Constellation,Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, File No. 1-1910.)

458


Exhibit No.

Description

4-314-34  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 No. 4(b) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, filed by Constellation,Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, File No. 1 1910.)
4-324-35  Replacement Capital Covenant dated June 27, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(b) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 30, 2008, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File No. 1-12869.)
4-334-36  Amendment to Replacement Capital Covenant, dated as of March 12, 2012, amending the Replacement Capital Covenant, dated as of June 27, 2008 (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated March 14, 2012, Exhibit No. 99.4)
4-344-37  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, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File No. 1-12869.)
4-354-38  Officers’ Certificate, November 16, 2011, establishing the 3.50% Notes due November 15, 2021 of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, with the form of Notes attached thereto. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(b) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 16, 2011, filed by Constellation,Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, FileNo. 1-1910.)
10-1  Exelon Corporation Deferred Non-Employee Directors’ Deferred Stock Unit Plan (As Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2011). * (File No. 001-16169, 2010 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10.1)
10-2  Exelon Corporation Retirement Program (As Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2010)2013).
10-3  Exelon Corporation Unfunded Deferred Compensation Plan for Directors (as amended and restated Effective January 1, 2011). * (File No. 001-16169, 2010 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10.3)
10-4  Exelon Corporation Long-Term Incentive Plan As Amended and Restated Effective January 28, 2002* (File No. 1-16169, Exelon Proxy Statement dated March 13, 2002, Appendix B).
10-5-1  Form of Restricted Stock Award Agreement under the Exelon Corporation Long-Term Incentive Plan* (File No. 1-16169, 2001 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10-6-1).

464


Exhibit No.

Description

10-5-2  Forms of Transferable Stock Option Award Agreement under the Exelon Corporation Long-Term Incentive Plan* (File No. 1-16169, 2001 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10-6-2).
10-5-3  Forms of Stock Option Award Agreement under the Exelon Corporation Long-Term Incentive Plan* (File No. 1-16169, 2001 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10-6-3).
10-6  Exelon Corporation Employee Savings Plan (As Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2010) (File No. 1-16169, 2010 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10-6)2013).
10-7  Exelon Corporation Cash Balance Pension Plan (As Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2010) (File No. 1-16169, 2010 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10-7)2013).
10-8  Unicom Corporation Deferred Compensation Unit Plan, as amended *(File Nos. 1-11375 and 1-1839, 1995 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10-12).
10-9  Amendment Number One to the Unicom Corporation Deferred Compensation Unit Plan, as amended January 1, 2008 * (File No. 001-16169, 2008 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10.16).
10-10  Unicom Corporation Retirement Plan for Directors, as amended *(Registration Statement No. 333-49780, Form S-8, Exhibit 4-12).
10-11  Commonwealth Edison Company Retirement Plan for Directors, as amended *(Registration Statement No. 333-49780, Form S-8, Exhibit 4-13).

459


Exhibit No.

Description

10-12  Exelon Corporation Supplemental Management Retirement Plan (As Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2009) * (File No. 001-16169, 2008 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10.19).
10-13  PECO Energy Company Supplemental Pension Benefit Plan (As Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2009) (File No. 000-16844, 2008 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10.20).
10-14  Exelon Corporation Annual Incentive Plan for Senior Executives Effective January 1, 2004 (As Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2009) * (File No. 001-16169, 2009 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10.21).
10-15  Form of change in control employment agreement for senior executives Effectiveeffective January 1, 2009 * (File No. 001-16169. 2008 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10.23).
10-16  Form of change in control employment agreement (amended and restated as of January 1, 2009) * (File No. 001-16169, 2008 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10.24).
10-17  Restatement of the Exelon Corporation Employee Stock Purchase Plan, Effective Mayas amended and restated effective July 1, 2004 and Appendix One thereto.2013. (File No. 1-16169, 2004 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10-54)Schedule 14A dated March 14, 2013 Appendix A).
10-18  Exelon Corporation 2006 Long-Term Incentive Plan (Registration StatementNo. 333-122704, Form S-4, Joint Proxy Statement-Prospectus pursuant to Rule 424(b)(3) filed June 3, 2005, Annex H).
10-19  Form of Stock Option Grant Instrument under the Exelon Corporation 2006 Long-Term Incentive Plan (File No. 1-16169, Form 8-K filed January 27, 2006, Exhibit 99.2).
10-20  Exelon Corporation Employee Stock Purchase Plan for Unincorporated Subsidiaries (Registration Statement No. 333-122704, Form S-4, Joint Proxy Statement-Prospectus pursuant to Rule 424(b)(3) filed June 3, 2005, Annex I).
10-21  Exelon Corporation Senior Management Severance Plan (As Amended and Restated Effective JanuaryApril 1, 2009) 2013).* (File No. 001-16169, 2008 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10.29).
10-22  Form of Separation Agreement under Exelon Corporation Senior Management Severance Plan (As Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2009) * (FileNo, 001-16169, 2008 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10.30).
10-23  Facility Credit Agreement, dated as of November 4, 2010, among Exelon Generation Company, LLC and UBS AG, Stamford Branch (File No. 333-85496, Form 8-K dated February 22, 2011, Exhibit No. 10-1).

465


Exhibit No.

Description

10-24  Exelon Corporation Executive Death Benefits Plan dated as of January 1, 2003 * (File No. 1-16169, 2006 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10-52).
10-25  First Amendment to Exelon Corporation Executive Death Benefits Plan, Effective January 1, 2006 * (File No. 1-16169, 2006 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10-53).
10-26  Amendment Number One to the Exelon Corporation 2006 Long-Term Incentive Plan, Effective December 4, 2006 (File No. 1-16169, 2006 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10-54).
10-27  Amendment Number Two to the Exelon Corporation 2006 Long-Term Incentive Plan (As Amended and Restated Effective January 28, 2002), Effective December 4, 2006 (File No. 1-16169, 2006 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10-55).
10-28  Exelon Corporation Deferred Compensation Plan (As Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2005) (File No. 1-16169, 2006 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10-56).
10-29  Exelon Corporation Stock Deferral Plan (As Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2005) (File No. 1-16169, 2006 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10-57).
10-30  Commonwealth Edison Company Long-Term Incentive Plan, Effective January 1, 2007 (File No. 1-16169, March 31, 2007 Form 10-Q, Exhibit 10-1).

460


Exhibit No.

Description

10-31  Amendment Number One to the Exelon Corporation Stock Deferral Plan (As Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2005) (File No. 1-16169, June 30, 2007 Form 10-Q, Exhibit 10-3).
10-32  Restricted stock unit award agreement (File 1-16169, Form 8-K dated August 31, 2007, Exhibit 99.1).
10-33  Amended and Restated Trade Receivables Purchase and Sale Agreement among PECO, Victory Receivables Corporation and The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd. dated as of December 20, 1988, as Amended and Restated as of November 14, 1995, as of January 1, 1999, as of November 14, 2000, as of November 14, 2005 and as Further Amended and Restated as of September 19, 2008 (File 000-16844, Form 8-K dated September 22, 2008, Exhibit 10.1).

Reserved.

10-34Amendment No. 1 to Amended and Restated Trade Receivables Purchase and Sale Agreement among PECO Energy Company, Victory Receivables Corporation and The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd. (File 000-16844, Form 8-K dated September 17, 2009, Exhibit 10.1).
10-35Third Amended and Restated Employment Agreement with John W. Rowe * (File 1-16169, Fork 8-K dated October 29, 2009, Exhibit 99.1).
10-36  Exelon Corporation 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (File No. 1-16169, Schedule 14A dated March 18, 2010, Appendix A).
10-3710-35  Form of Change in Control Employment Agreement Effective February 10, 2011. * (File 1-16169, 2011Form 10-K,Exhibit 10-44).
10-3810-36  Credit Agreement for $500,000,000 dated as of March 23, 2011 between Exelon Corporation and Various Financial Institutions (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated March 23, 2011, Exhibit No. 10-2).
10-3910-37  Credit Agreement for $5,300,000,000 dated as of March 23, 2011 between Exelon Generation Company, LLC and Various Financial Institutions (File No. 333-85496, Form 8-K dated March 23, 2011, Exhibit No. 10-3).
10-4010-38  Credit Agreement for $600,000,000 dated as of March 23, 2011 between PECO Energy Company and Various Financial Institutions (File No. 000-16844, Form 8-K dated March 23, 2011, Exhibit No. 10-4).
10-4110-39  Credit Agreement dated as of March 28, 2012 among Commonwealth Edison Company, Various Financial Institutions, as Lenders, and JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., as Administrative Agent (File No. 000-01839,001-01839, Form 8-K dated March 28, 2012, Exhibit No. 99-1).
10-40Amendment No. 3 to Credit Agreement dated as of March 23, 2011 among Exelon Corporation, as Borrower, the various financial institutions named therein, as Lenders, and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as Administrative Agent (File No. 001-16169,Form 8-K dated August 10, 2013, Exhibit No. 99-1)
10-41Amendment No. 1 to Credit Agreement dated as of March 28, 2012 among Commonwealth Edison Company, as Borrower, the various financial institutions named therein, as Lenders and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as Administrative Agent (File No. 001-1839, Form 8-K dated August 10, 2013, Exhibit No. 99-2).

466


Exhibit No.

Description

10-42  Amendment No. 1 to Credit Agreement, dated as of December 21, 2011, to the Credit Agreement dated as of March 23, 2011, among Exelon Generation Company, LLC, the lenders party thereto and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as administrative agentAdministrative Agent (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated March 14, 2012, Exhibit No. 4-6).
10-43  Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plan, as amended and restated.* (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(b) to the Constellation Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
10-44  Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan for Non-Employee Directors, as amended and restated.* (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(c) to the Constellation Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

461


Exhibit No.

Description

10-45  Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Benefits Restoration Plan, amended and restated effective June 1, 2010.* (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(b) to the Constellation Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
10-46  Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Supplemental Pension Plan, as amended and restated.* (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(e) to the Constellation Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.).
10-47  Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Senior Executive Supplemental Plan, as amended and restated.* (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(f) to the Constellation Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
10-48  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, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
10-49  Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Executive Supplemental Benefits Plan, as amended and restated.* (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(a) to the Constellation Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2008, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
10-50  Constellation Energy Group, Inc. 1995 Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended and restated.* (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(b) to the Constellation Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
10-51  Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Executive Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended and restated.* (Designated as Exhibit 10(b) to the Constellation Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2011, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
10-52  Constellation Energy Group, Inc. 2002 Senior Management Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended and restated.* (Designated as Exhibit 10(a) to the Constellation Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2011, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
10-53  Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Management Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended and restated.* (Designated as Exhibit 10(d) to the Constellation Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

467


Exhibit No.

Description

10-54  Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Amended and Restated 2007 Long-Term Incentive Plan.* (Designated as Exhibit No. 10.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 4, 2010, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File No. 1-12869.)
10-55  Form of Grant Agreement for Stock Units with Sales Restriction.* (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(x) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
10-56  Rate Stabilization Property Servicing 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, filed by Constellation,Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, File No. 1-1910.)

462


Exhibit No.

Description

10-57  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, filed by Constellation,Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, File No. 1-1910.)
10-58  Second Amended and Restated 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. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 12, 2009, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File No. 1-12869.)
10-59  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. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(s) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
10-60  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. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(t) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
10-61  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, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File No. 1-12869.)
10-62  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, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File No. 1-12869.)
10-63  Settlement Agreement between EDF Inc., Exelon Corporation, Exelon Energy Delivery Company, LLC, Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Baltimore Gas and Electric Company dated January 16, 2012. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated January 19, 2012, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
12-110-64  Exelon Corporation ComputationPension Plan of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed ChargesConstellation Energy Group, Inc. (Amended and Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges and Preference Stock Dividends.Restated Effective January 31, 2012)*

468


Exhibit No.

Description

12-210-65First Amendment to the Pension Plan of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. (Amended and Restated Effective January 31, 2012)*
10-66Second Amendment to the Pension Plan of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. (Amended and Restated Effective January 31, 2012)*
10-67Third Amendment to the Pension Plan of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. (Amended and Restated Effective January 31, 2012)*
10-68Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Employee Savings Plan (Amended and Restated Effective January 31, 2012)*
10-69First Amendment to the Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Employee Savings Plan (Amended and Restated Effective January 31, 2012)*
10-70Second Amendment to the Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Employee Savings Plan (Amended and Restated Effective January 31, 2012)*
12-1  Exelon Generation Company, LLCCorporation Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges.
12-2

Exelon Generation Company, LLC Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges.

12-3  

Commonwealth Edison Company Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges.

12-4  

PECO Energy Company Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges and Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges and Preference Stock Dividends.Charges.

12-5  Baltimore Gas and Electric Company Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges and Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges and Preference Stock Dividends.
14  Exelon Code of Conduct, as amended March 12, 2012 (File No. 001-16169,1-16169, Form 8-K dated March 14, 2012, Exhibit No. 14-1).
  Subsidiaries
21-1  Exelon Corporation

463


Exhibit No.

Description

21-2  Exelon Generation Company, LLC
21-3  Commonwealth Edison Company
21-4  PECO Energy Company
21-5  Baltimore Gas and Electric Company
  Consent of Independent Registered Public Accountants
23-1  Exelon Corporation
23-2  Exelon Generation Company, LLC
23-3  Commonwealth Edison Company
23-4  PECO Energy Company
23-5  Baltimore Gas and Electric Company
  

Power of Attorney (Exelon Corporation)

24-1  Ann C. Berzin

Anthony K. Anderson

24-2  John A. Canning, Jr.

Ann C. Berzin

24-3  Christopher M. Crane

John A. Canning, Jr.

24-4

Christopher M. Crane

24-5  

Yves C. de Balmann

24-524-6  

Nicholas DeBenedictis

24-624-7  

Nelson A. Diaz

469


Exhibit No.

Description

24-724-8  

Sue L. Gin

24-824-9  

Paul L. Joskow

24-924-10  

Robert J. Lawless

24-1024-11  

Richard W. Mies

24-1124-12  

William C. Richardson

24-12

Thomas J. Ridge

24-13  

John W. Rogers, Jr.

24-14  

Mayo A. Shattuck III

24-15  

Stephen D. Steinour

24-16  

Donald Thompson

Power of Attorney (Commonwealth Edison Company)

24-1724-16  

James W. Compton

24-1824-17  

Christopher M. Crane

24-1924-18  

A. Steven Crown

24-19

Nicholas DeBenedictis

24-20  

Peter V. Fazio, Jr.

24-21  

Sue L. Gin

24-22  

Michael Moskow

24-23  

Denis O’Brien

24-24

Anne R. Pramaggiore

24-2424-25  

Jesse H. Ruiz

  Power of Attorney (PECO Energy Company)
24-2524-26  

Craig L. Adams

24-2624-27  

Christopher M. Crane

24-2724-28  

M. Walter D’Alessio

24-28

Nelson A. Diaz

464


Exhibit No.

Description

24-29  

Charisse R. Lillie

Nicholas DeBenedictis
24-30  

Thomas J. Ridge

Nelson A. Diaz
24-31  

Rosemarie B. Greco

24-32Charisse R. Lillie
24-33Denis O’Brien
24-34Ronald Rubin

  Power of Attorney (Baltimore Gas and Electric Company)
24-3224-35  

Christopher M. Crane

Ann C. Berzin
24-3324-36  

Michael E. Cryor

Christopher M. Crane
24-3424-37  

James R. Curtiss

Michael E. Cryor
24-3524-38James R. Curtiss
24-39  Kenneth W. DeFontes, Jr.
24-3624-40Joseph Haskins, Jr.
24-41  

Joseph Haskins, Jr.Carla D. Hayden

24-3724-42  

Carla D. HaydenDenis O’Brien

470


Exhibit No.

Description

  Certifications Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 as to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 20102013 filed by the following officers for the following registrants:
31-1  Filed by Christopher M. Crane for Exelon Corporation
31-2  Filed by Jonathan W. Thayer for Exelon Corporation
31-3  Filed by Christopher M. CraneKenneth W. Cornew for Exelon Generation Company, LLC
31-4  Filed by Bryan P. Wright for Exelon Generation Company, LLC
31-5  Filed by Anne R. Pramaggiore for Commonwealth Edison Company
31-6  Filed by Joseph R. Trpik, Jr. for Commonwealth Edison Company
31-7  Filed by Craig L. Adams for PECO Energy Company
31-8  Filed by Phillip S. Barnett for PECO Energy Company
31-9  Filed by Kenneth W. DeFontes Jr. for Baltimore Gas and Electric Company
31-10  Filed by Carim V. Khouzami for Baltimore Gas and Electric Company
  Certifications Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 United States Code as to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 20102013 filed by the following officers for the following registrants:
32-1  Filed by Christopher M. Crane for Exelon Corporation
32-2  

Filed by Jonathan W. Thayer for Exelon Corporation

32-3  

Filed by Christopher M. CraneKenneth W. Cornew for Exelon Generation Company, LLC

32-4  

Filed by Bryan P. Wright for Exelon Generation Company, LLC

32-5  

Filed by Anne R. Pramaggiore for Commonwealth Edison Company

32-6  

Filed by Joseph R. Trpik, Jr. for Commonwealth Edison Company

32-7  

Filed by Craig L. Adams for PECO Energy Company

32-8  

Filed by Phillip S. Barnett for PECO Energy Company

32-9  

Filed by Kenneth W. DeFontes Jr. for Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

32-10  

Filed by Carim V. Khouzami for Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

101.INS**101.INS  

XBRL Instance

101.SCH**101.SCH  

XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema

101.CAL**101.CAL  

XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation

101.DEF**101.DEF  

XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition

101.LAB**101.LAB  

XBRL Taxonomy Extension Labels

465


Exhibit No.

Description

101.PRE**101.PRE  

XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation

 

*Compensatory plan or arrangements in which directors or officers of the applicable registrant participate and which are not available to all employees.
**XBRL information will be considered to be furnished, not filed for the first two years of a company’s submission of XBRL information.

 

466471


SIGNATURES

 

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, in the City of Chicago and State of Illinois on the 21st13th day of February, 2013.2014.

 

EXELON CORPORATIONEXELONCORPORATION
By: 

/s/S/    CHRISTOPHER M. CRANE        

Name: Christopher M. Crane
Title: President and Chief Executive Officer

 

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities indicated on the 21st13th day of February, 2013.2014.

 

Signature

  

Title

/s/S/    CHRISTOPHER M. CRANE        

Christopher M. Crane

  

President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) and Director

/s/S/    JONATHAN W. THAYER        

Jonathan W. Thayer

  

Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)

/s/S/    DUANE M. DESPARTE        

Duane M. DesParte

  

Vice President and Corporate Controller (Principal Accounting Officer)

 

This annual report has also been signed below by Darryl M. Bradford, Attorney-in-Fact, on behalf of the following Directors on the date indicated:

 

Yves C. de BalmannAnthony K. Anderson

Ann C. Berzin

John A. Canning, Jr.

Yves C. de Balmann

Nicholas DeBenedictis

Nelson A. Diaz

Sue L. Gin

Paul L. Joskow

Robert J. Lawless

Richard W. Mies

William C. Richardson

Thomas J. Ridge

John W. Rogers, Jr.

Mayo A. Shattuck III

Stephen D. Steinour

Donald Thompson

  
  
  
  
  
  

 

By:  

/s/S/    DARRYL M. BRADFORD        

  February 21, 201313, 2014
Name:  Darryl M. Bradford   

 

467472


SIGNATURES

 

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, in the City of Chicago and State of Illinois on the 21st13th day of February, 2013.2014.

 

EXELON GENERATIONEXELONGENERATION COMPANY, LLC
By: 

/s/S/    KENNETH W. CHRISTOPHER M. CRANEORNEW        

Name: Christopher M. CraneKenneth W. Cornew
Title: President

 

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities indicated on the 21st13th day of February, 2013.2014.

 

Signature

  

Title

/s/S/    KENNETH W. CHRISTOPHER M. CRANEORNEW        

Christopher M. CraneKenneth W. Cornew

  

President (Principal Executive Officer)

/s/S/    BRYAN P. WRIGHT        

Bryan P. Wright

  

Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)

/s/S/    ROBERT M. AIKEN        

Robert M. Aiken

  

Vice President and Controller (Principal Accounting Officer)

 

468473


SIGNATURES

 

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, in the City of Chicago and State of Illinois on the 21st13th day of February, 2013.2014.

 

COMMONWEALTH EDISONCOMMONWEALTHEDISON COMPANY

By:

 

/s/    ANNE R. PRAMAGGIORE        

Name: Anne R. Pramaggiore
Title: President and Chief Executive Officer

 

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities indicated on the 21st13th day of February, 2013.2014.

 

Signature

  

Title

/s/    ANNE R. PRAMAGGIORE        

Anne R. Pramaggiore

  

President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) and Director

/s/    JOSEPH R. TRPIK, JR.        

Joseph R. Trpik, Jr.

  

Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer)

/s/    GERALDKEVIN J. WADENOZEL        

KevinGerald J. WadenKozel

  

Vice President and Controller (Principal Accounting Officer)

/s/    CHRISTOPHER M. CRANE        

Christopher M. Crane

  

Chairman and Director

/s/    DENIS P. O’BRIEN        

Denis P. O’Brien

  

Vice Chairman and Director

 

This annual report has also been signed below by Anne R. Pramaggiore, Attorney-in-Fact, on behalf of the following Directors on the date indicated:

 

James W. Compton

A. Steven Crown

Nicholas DeBenedictis

Peter V. Fazio, Jr.

  

Sue L. Gin

Michael Moskow

Jesse H. Ruiz

 

By:  

/s/    ANNE R. PRAMAGGIORE        

  February 21, 201313, 2014
Name:  Anne R. Pramaggiore  

 

469474


SIGNATURES

 

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, in the City of Chicago and State of Illinois on the 21st13th day of February, 2013.2014.

 

PECO ENERGYPECOENERGY COMPANY

By:

 

/s/    CRAIG L. ADAMS        

Name: Craig L. Adams
Title: Chief Executive Officer and President

 

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities indicated on the 21st13th day of February, 2013.2014.

 

Signature

  

Title

/s/    CRAIG L. ADAMS        

Craig L. Adams

  

Chief Executive Officer and President (Principal Executive Officer) and Director

/s/    PHILLIP S. BARNETT        

Phillip S. Barnett

  

Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer)

/s/    SCOTT A. BAILEY        

Scott A. Bailey

  

Vice President and Controller (Principal Accounting Officer)

/s/    CHRISTOPHER M. CRANE        

Christopher M. Crane

  

Chairman and Director

/s/    DENIS P. O’BRIEN        

Denis P. O’Brien

  

Vice Chairman and Director

 

This annual report has also been signed below by Craig L. Adams, Attorney-in-Fact, on behalf of the following Directors on the date indicated:

 

M. Walter D’Alessio  

Thomas J. RidgeRosemarie B. Greco

Nelson A. Diaz  Ronald Rubin

Charisse R. Lillie

Nicholas DeBenedictis  Ronald Rubin

 

By:

  

/s/    CRAIG L. ADAMS        

  February 21, 201313, 2014
Name:  Craig L. Adams  

 

470475


SIGNATURES

 

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, in the City of Chicago and State of Illinois on the 21st13th day of February, 2013.2014.

 

BALTIMORE GAS ANDGASAND ELECTRIC COMPANY

By:

 

/s/    KENNETH W. DEFONTES, JR.        

Name: Kenneth W. DeFontes Jr.
Title: Chief Executive Officer and President

 

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities indicated on the 21st13th day of February, 2013.2014.

 

Signature

  

Title

/s/    KENNETH W. DEFONTES, JR.        

Kenneth W. DeFontes Jr.

  

Chief Executive Officer and President (Principal Executive Officer) and Director

/s/    CARIM V. KHOUZAMI        

Carim V. Khouzami

  

Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer)

/s/    DAVID M. VAHOS        

David M. Vahos

  

Vice President and Controller (Principal Accounting Officer)

/s/    CHRISTOPHER M. CRANE        

Christopher M. Crane

  

Chairman and Director

/s/    DENIS P. O’BRIEN        

Denis P. O’Brien

  

Vice Chairman and Director

 

This annual report has also been signed below by Kenneth W. DeFontes, Jr., Attorney-in-Fact, on behalf of the following Directors on the date indicated:

 

Michael E. CryorAnn C. Berzin

James R. Curtiss

  

Joseph Haskins, Jr.

Michael E. Cryor

Carla D. Hayden

James R. Curtiss

 

By:

  

/s/    KENNETH W. DEFONTES, JR.        

  February 21, 201313, 2014
Name:  Kenneth W. DeFontes, Jr.  

 

471476