Use these links to rapidly review the document
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents



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

FORM 10-K


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

For the fiscal year endedDECEMBER 31, 20092010

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


1-12869

 

CONSTELLATION ENERGY GROUP, INC.

 

52-1964611

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

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

1-1910 BALTIMORE GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY 52-0280210

2 CENTER PLAZA, 110 WEST FAYETTE STREET,             BALTIMORE, MARYLAND                21202
(Address of principal executive offices)                                                                                                   (Zip Code)

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

MARYLAND
(States of incorporation of both registrants)

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

Title of each class
  
 
Name of each exchange on
which registered
Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Common Stock—Without Par Value ) New York Stock Exchange
Chicago Stock Exchange

Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Series A Junior Subordinated Debentures
  
6.20% Trust Preferred Securities ($25 liquidation amount per preferred security) issued by BGE Capital Trust II, fully and unconditionally guaranteed, based on several obligations, by Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

 

)

 

New York Stock Exchange

SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(G) OF THE ACT:
Not Applicable

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

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

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

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

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

          Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrants' knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. o

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

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

          Indicate by check mark whether Constellation Energy Group, Inc. is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of "large accelerated filer," "accelerated filer" and "smaller reporting company" in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

Large accelerated filerý        Accelerated filer o        Non-accelerated filer o        Smaller reporting company o

          Indicate by check mark whether Baltimore Gas and Electric Company is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See definitions of "large accelerated filer," "accelerated filer" and "smaller reporting company" in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

          Large accelerated filer o        Accelerated filer��filer o        Non-accelerated filer ý        Smaller reporting company o

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

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

          Aggregate market value of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Common Stock, without par value, held by non-affiliates as of June 30, 20092010 was approximately $5,309,415,341$6,490,790,907 based upon New York Stock Exchange composite transaction closing price.

CONSTELLATION ENERGY GROUP, INC. COMMON STOCK, WITHOUT PAR VALUE
201,091,187199,850,572 SHARES OUTSTANDING ON JANUARY 29, 2010.31, 2011.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Part of Form 10-K
 
Document Incorporated by Reference
III Certain sections of the Proxy Statement for the 20102011 Annual Meeting of Shareholders for Constellation Energy Group, Inc.

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




Table of Contents


TABLE OF CONTENTS

 
  
  
 Page 
    Forward Looking Statements  1 
PART I        
 Item 1  Business  2 
            Overview  2 
            Merchant EnergyGeneration Business  32
        NewEnergy Business4 
            Baltimore Gas and Electric Company  10
        Other Nonregulated Businesses148 
            Consolidated Capital Requirements  1512 
            Environmental Matters  1512 
            Employees  1816 
 Item 1A  Risk Factors  1916 
 Item 2  Properties  2623 
 Item 3  Legal Proceedings  2825 
 Item 4  Submission of Matters to Vote of Security Holders[Removed and Reserved]  2825 
    Executive Officers of the Registrant (Instruction 3 to Item 401(b) of Regulation S-K)  2825 
PART II        
 Item 5  Market for Registrant's Common Equity, Related Shareholder Matters, Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities, and Unregistered Sales of Equity and Use of Proceeds  2926 
 Item 6  Selected Financial Data  3027 
 Item 7  Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations  3229 
 Item 7A  Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk  7670 
 Item 8  Financial Statements and Supplementary Data  7771 
 Item 9  Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure  161163 
 Item 9A and 9A(T)  Controls and Procedures  161163 
 Item 9B  Other Information  161163 
PART III        
 Item 10  Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance  161163 
 Item 11  Executive Compensation  161163 
 Item 12  Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Shareholder Matters  162164 
 Item 13  Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence  162164 
 Item 14  Principal Accountant Fees and Services  162164 
PART IV        
 Item 15  Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules  163165 
 Signatures  170172 

Table of Contents


Forward Looking Statements

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

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

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


1


Table of Contents


PART I

Item 1. Business


Overview

Constellation Energy is an energy company that includes a merchant energygeneration business (Generation), a customer supply business (NewEnergy), and BGE, a regulated electric and gas public utility in central Maryland. References in this report to "we" and "our" are to Constellation Energy and its subsidiaries, collectively. References in this report to the "regulated business(es)" are to BGE.

        Our merchant energyGeneration business develops, owns, owns interests in, and operates electric generation facilities and a fuel processing facility located in various regions of the United States. This business also includes an operation that manages certain contractually controlled physical assets, including generating facilities and owns an interest in a joint venture that owns and operates nuclear generating facilities.

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

        BGE is a regulated electric transmission and distribution utility company and a regulated gas distribution utility company with a service territory that covers the City of Baltimore and all or part of 10 counties in central Maryland. BGE was incorporated in Maryland in 1906.

        Our other nonregulated businesses:

        On November 6, 2009, we completed the sale of a 49.99% membership interest in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group LLC and affiliates (CENG), our nuclear generation and operation business, to EDF Group and affiliates (EDF) for total consideration of approximately $4.7 billion ($4.5 billion at close plus expense reimbursements). Our remaining 50.01% investment in CENG isthat restructured the relationship between our two companies, eliminated an integral partoutstanding asset put arrangement, and transferred to EDF the full ownership of our prior nuclear business.

        In connection with closing the transaction with EDF, we and EDF agreed to comply with certain conditions contained in an order from the Maryland Public Service Commission (Maryland PSC)development joint venture, UniStar Nuclear Energy, LLC (UNE). We discuss these conditions in detail inItem 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis—Business Environment—Regulation—Maryland.

        Prior to 2009, our merchant energy business included significant trading operations and an international commodities operation and grew rapidly. As that business grew, so too did its need for capital, particularly to fund the business' collateral requirements. We had previously met these collateral requirements through the use of cash and lines of credit, and we believed that we could meet any unexpected short-term capital needs by maintaining a significant amount of available liquidity, primarily from our unused credit facilities. Furthermore, by maintaining an investment grade credit rating, we believed we would continue to be able to access the capital markets if additional liquidity needs arose.

        Therefore, as a capital- and asset-intensive business, Constellation Energy was significantly impacted by the events in the financial and credit markets during 2008. To address the liquidity issues arising from the credit and market events of 2008, we explored a series of strategic initiatives to improve our liquidity and reduce our business risk. During 2009, we completed transactions to sell our international commodities operation, our gas trading operation, our shipping joint venture, and our uranium market participant. These transactions helped improve our liquidity and reduce our business risk and resulted in substantial changes to our business in 2009. We discuss these transactionsthis comprehensive agreement in more detail inNote 24 to Consolidated Financial Statements.

        We plan to execute the following objectives that we believe will strengthen the Company:


Table of Contents

        We believe that focusing on the above objectives will allow us to preserve the flexibility to respond to long-term opportunities. For a further discussion of the above matters and how they have impacted us and our strategy, please refer to
Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis—Strategy.

Operating Segments

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


 Unaffiliated Revenues  Unaffiliated Revenues 

 Merchant
Energy
 Regulated
Electric
 Regulated
Gas
 Holding
Company
and Other
Nonregulated
  Generation NewEnergy Regulated
Electric
 Regulated
Gas
 Holding
Company
and
Other
 

2010

 8% 68% 19% 5% %

2009

 75% 18% 5% 2% 4 73 18 5  

2008

 80 14 5 1  4 77 14 5  

2007

 83 12 4 1 

 


 Net Income (Loss) Attributable
to Common Stock (1)
  Net (Loss) Income Attributable to Common Stock 

 Merchant
Energy
 Regulated
Electric
 Regulated
Gas
 Holding
Company
and Other
Nonregulated
  Generation NewEnergy Regulated
Electric
 Regulated
Gas
 Holding
Company
and
Other
 

2010

 (128)% 14% 10% 4% %

2009

 98% 2% 1% (1)% 107 (9) 1 1  

2008

 (103)  3   (27) (76)  3  

2007

 83 12 3 2 

 


 Total Assets  Total Assets 

 Merchant
Energy
 Regulated
Electric
 Regulated
Gas
 Holding
Company
and Other
Nonregulated
  Generation NewEnergy Regulated
Electric
 Regulated
Gas
 Holding
Company
and
Other
 Eliminations 

2010

 49% 19% 26% 7% 4% (5)%

2009

 58% 21% 6% 15% 53 18 21 6 19 (17)

2008

 62 21 6 11  50 32 21 6 15 (24)

2007

 73 20 6 1 
(1)
Excludes income from discontinued operations in 2007 as discussed in more detail in Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.


Merchant EnergyGeneration Business

Introduction

Our merchant energy business generates and sells power and gas to both regulated and nonregulated wholesale and retail marketers and consumers of energy products, manages all commodity price risk for our nonregulated businesses, enters into structured energy contracts, and trades energy. We conduct these activities across the United States and Canada.

        Our merchant energy business includes:

        During 2009, our merchant energy business:

        During 2009 and prior, we analyze our merchant energy business in terms of Generation, Customer Supply and Global Commodities activities.


Table of Contents


2010 Segments

As a result of our strategic initiatives completed in 2009 and the transformation of our business, our merchant energy business will become two separate reportable segments in 2010: Generation and Customer Supply.

        Generation will consist of all of our generating assets, which include:

        Customer Supply will consist of the following:

Generation

We develop, own, operate, and maintain fossil and renewable generating facilities, hold a 50.01% interest in a nuclear joint venture that owns nuclear generating facilities, and hold interests in qualifying facilities, and power projects in the United States and Canada totaling 7,118 MW.9,030 MW as of December 31, 2010 (excludes our January 2011 acquisition of Boston Generating assets), and manage approximately 1,100 MW associated with certain of our long-dated tolling agreements. These agreements provide us with the contractual rights to purchase power from third party generation plants over an extended period of time. The output of our owned and contractually-controlledcontractually controlled plants is managed by our Global Commodities operationNewEnergy business and is hedged through a combination of power sales to wholesale and retail market participants. We also provide operation and maintenance services, including testing and start-up, to owners of electric generating facilities. Our merchant energyNewEnergy business meets the load-serving requirements under various contracts using the output from our generating fleet and from purchases in the wholesale market.

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

Investment in Nuclear Generating Facilities

On November 6, 2009, we completed the sale of a 49.99% membership interest in CENG,Constellation Energy Nuclear Group LLC and affiliates (CENG), our subsidiary that owns our nuclear generating facilities


2


Table of Contents

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


 Calvert Cliffs Nine Mile Point Ginna  Calvert Cliffs Nine Mile Point Ginna 

 MWH Capacity
Factor
 MWH (1) Capacity
Factor
 MWH Capacity
Factor
  MWH Capacity
Factor
 MWH (1) Capacity
Factor
 MWH Capacity
Factor
 

 (MWH in millions)
  (MWH in millions)
 

2010

 14.0 94% 12.6 93% 4.9 97%

2009

 14.5 96% 13.1 97% 4.6 91% 14.5 96 13.1 97 4.6 91 

2008

 14.7 96 12.8 94 4.7 94  14.7 96 12.8 94 4.7 94 

2007

 14.3 94 12.3 90 4.9 98 
(1)
Represents our and CENG's (after November 6, 2009) proportionate ownership interest

        In connection with the closing of the transaction with EDF on November 6, 2009, we entered into a power purchase agreement (PPA) with CENG Under the terms of the PPA,under which we will purchase up85 to 90% of the output of CENG's nuclear plants that is not sold to third parties under pre-existing agreements overPPAs for an initial five year period. Additionally, pursuant to an amendment to the five-year termPPA entered into in 2010, beginning on January 1, 2015, and continuing to the end of the PPA.lives of the respective nuclear plants, we will purchase 50.01% and EDF will purchase 49.99% of the output of CENG's nuclear plants. We discuss this PPA in more detail inNote 16 to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Calvert Cliffs

CENG owns 100% of Calvert Cliffs Unit 1 and Unit 2. Unit 1 entered service in 1974 and is licensed to operate until 2034. Unit 2 entered service in 1976 and is licensed to operate until 2036.

Nine Mile Point

CENG owns 100% of Nine Mile Point Unit 1 and 82% of Unit 2. The remaining interest in Nine Mile Point Unit 2 is owned by the Long Island Power Authority (LIPA). Unit 1 entered service in 1969 and is licensed to operate until 2029. Unit 2 entered service in 1988 and is licensed to operate until 2046. The Nine Mile Point Unit 1 power purchase agreement with the former plant's owners ended in August 2009.

        Nine Mile Point Unit 2 sells 90% of the plant's output to the former owners of the plant at an average


Table of Contents

price of nearlyapproximately $35 per MWH under a PPA that terminates in November 2011. The PPA is unit contingent (if the output is not available because the plant is not operating, there is no requirement to provide output from other sources). The remaining 10% of the output of Nine Mile Point Unit 2 is managed by CENG and sold into the wholesale market.primarily to us and EDF.

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

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

Ginna

CENG owns 100% of the Ginna nuclear facility. Ginna entered service in 1970 and is licensed to operate until 2029. Ginna sells approximately 90% of the plant's output and capacity to the former owner for 10 years ending in 2014 at an average price of $44.00 per MWH under a long-term unit-contingent PPA. The remaining 10% of the output of Ginna is managed by CENG and sold into the wholesale market.

New Nuclear

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

Qualifying Facilities and Power Projects

We hold up to a 50% voting interest in 1815 operating energy projects, totaling approximately 771758 MW, that consist of electric generation (primarily relying on alternative fuel sources), fuel processing, or fuel handling facilities. SixteenThirteen of the electric generation projects are considered qualifying facilities under the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978. Each electric generating plant sells its output to a local utility under long-term contracts.

Customer SupplyContracted Generation

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


3


Table of Contents


NewEnergy Business

We are a leading supplier of electricity, natural gas, and other energy products and services to wholesale and retail electric and natural gas customers.

        In 2009, our wholesale customer supply operation served approximately 65 million peak MWHs of wholesale full requirements load-serving products. During 2009, our retail customer supply activities served approximately 56 million MWHs of peak load and approximately 350 mmBTUs of natural gas.

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

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

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

Global Commodities        During 2010, our NewEnergy business:

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

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

Wholesale Customer Supply

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

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

Retail Customer Supply

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

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

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

Structured Products

Our Global Commodities operationNewEnergy business uses energy and energy-related commodities and contracts in order to manage our portfolio of energy purchases and sales to customers through structured transactions. Our Global Commodities operationNewEnergy business assists customers with customized risk management products in the power, gas, coal, and freight markets (e.g., generation tolls and gas transport and storage, and global coal and freight logistics)storage). During 2009, we reduced our participation in the coal, freight, and gas trading markets through the


Table of Contents

completion of the divestitures of our international commodities and Houston-based gas trading operations. We discuss our 2009 divestitures in more detail inNote 2 to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Energy Investments

Our Global Commodities operationNewEnergy business has investments in energy assets that primarily include natural gas activities. During 2009, we sold our previous investments in coal sourcing activities as well as our interest in dry bulk cargo vessels. We discuss each of these investments below.

Coal and International Services

We participated in global coal sourcing activities by providing coal and coal-related logistical services for the variable or fixed supply needs of global customers. We sold this operation in March 2009. We also owned a 50% interest in a shipping joint venture that owned and operated five freight ships for the delivery of coal and other dry bulk freight products. We sold our 50% interest in this shipping joint venture to our partner during 2009.

Natural Gas Services

Our Global Commodities operationNewEnergy business includes upstream (exploration and production) and downstream (transportation and storage) natural gas operations. Our upstream natural gas activities include the development, exploration, and exploitation of natural gas properties, as well as an approximately 28.5% interest in Constellation Energy Partners LLC (CEP), a limited liability company that we formed. CEP is principally engaged in the acquisition, development, and exploitation of natural gas properties. We no longer have any active involvement in the day-to-day operations of CEP. Our Houston-based downstream activities included providing natural gas to various customers, including large utilities, commercial and industrial customers, power generators, wholesale marketers, and retail aggregators. We sold our Houston-based downstream activities during 2009.

Portfolio Management and Trading

Our Global Commodities operationNewEnergy business transacts in energy and energy-related commodities in order to manage our portfolio of energy purchases and sales to customers through structured transactions. We use economic value


4


Table of Contents

at risk, which measures the market risk in our total portfolio, encompassing all aspects of our merchant energyNewEnergy business, along with daily value at risk limits, stop loss limits, position limits, generation hedge ratios, and liquidity guidelines to restrict the level of risk in our portfolio.

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

        We use both derivative and nonderivative contracts in managing our portfolio of energy sales and purchase contracts. Although a substantial portion of our portfolio is hedged, we are able to identify opportunities to deploy risk capital to increase the value of our accrual positions, which we characterize as portfolio management.

        Active portfolio management is intended to allow our merchant energyNewEnergy business to:

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

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

        Beginning in the fourth quarter of 2008 and continuing throughout 2009,2010, we reduced the risk and scale of our portfolio management and trading activities. Energy trading activities were scaled back and are being used primarily for hedging our generation assetsGeneration and Customer Supply operations,NewEnergy businesses, price discovery and verification, and for deploying limited risk capital. These efforts materially impacted our portfolio management and trading activities' contribution to our operating results.


Table of Contents

Fuel Sources

Our power plants use diverse fuel sources. Our plants' fuel mix based on capacity owned at December 31, 20092010 and owned generation based on actual output by fuel type in 2009 wereduring 2010 was as follows:

Fuel
 Capacity
Owned
 Generation  Capacity
Owned
 Generation 

Nuclear (1)

 27% 65% 21% 45%

Coal

 38 30  30 37 

Natural Gas

 13 1  31 13 

Oil

 10   8  

Renewable and Alternative (2)

 6 4  6 5 

Dual (3)

 6   4  
(1)
Reflects our 100% ownership through November 6, 2009 and 50.01% ownership from November 6, 2009 through December 31, 2009 following the sale of a 49.99% membership interest in our nuclear business on November 6, 2009.CENG.

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

(3)
Switches between natural gas and oil.

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

Nuclear

CENG, our nuclear joint venture with EDF, owns the Calvert Cliffs, Nine Mile Point, and Ginna nuclear generating facilities.

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

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

        The uranium markets are competitive, and while prices can be volatile, CENG does not anticipate problems in meeting its future supply requirements.

Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel—Federal FacilitiesFuel

One of the issues associated with the operation and decommissioning of nuclear generating facilities is disposal of spent nuclear fuel. There are no facilities for the reprocessing or permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel currently in operation in the United States, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has not licensed any such facilities. The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, (NWPA) requiredas amended, ("NWPA") requires the federal government, through the Department of Energy (DOE), to develop a repository for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste.

        As required by Although the NWPA, CENG is a party to contracts with the DOE to provide for disposal of spent nuclear fuel from our nuclear generating plants. The NWPA and CENG's contracts with the DOE require payments to the DOE of one tenth of one cent (one mill) per kilowatt hour on nuclear electricity generated and sold to pay for the cost of long-term nuclear fuel storage and disposal. Through November 6, 2009, we paid those fees into the DOE's Nuclear Waste Fund and, for the remainder of 2009, CENG has paid these fees for the Calvert Cliffs, Nine Mile Point and Ginna nuclear generating facilities. The NWPA and CENG's contracts with the DOE required the DOE to begin taking possession of spent nuclear fuel generated by nuclear generating units no later than


5


Table of Contents

January 31, 1998.

        The1998, the DOE has stated that it may notfailed to meet that obligation until 2020 at the earliest. Thisits obligation. The DOE's delay in taking possession of spent fuel has required that CENG to undertake additional actions and incur costs to provide on-site dry fuel storage at all three of its nuclear generating facilities, including the installation of on-site drysites. CENG has installed additional capacity at its independent spent fuel storage capacityinstallation ("ISFSI") at Calvert Cliffs, has constructed an ISFSI at Ginna, and is constructing an ISFSI to be placed in service at Nine Mile Point in 2012.

        Prior to 2010, the DOE had stated that it may not meet its obligation until 2020 at the earliest. During 2010, the DOE requested the withdrawal of its license application to use Yucca Mountain as described in more detail below.a national repository for spent nuclear fuel. At this time, CENG is not able to determine whether the DOE will be able to commence meeting its obligation by 2020.

        In 2004,Each of CENG's plant subsidiaries have filed complaints were filed against the federal government in the United StatesU.S. Court of Federal Claims seeking to recover damages caused by the DOE's failure to meet its contractual obligation to begin disposing of spent nuclear fuel by January 31, 1998. TheseThe cases are currently stayed, pending litigation in other related cases. We are entitled to anyAny funds received from the DOE that reimburse anyrepresent the reimbursement of costs expendedincurred prior to November 6, 2009, the closing of the transaction withdate we sold a 49.99% membership interest in CENG to EDF, for the storage of spent nuclear fuel. Any otherwill belong to us, and any funds received from the DOE representing the default by the DOE shallreimbursement of costs incurred after November 6, 2009 will belong to CENG.

Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel—On-Site Facilities

Calvert Cliffs has a license from the NRC to operate an on-site independent spent fuel storage installation that expires in 2012. Sufficient storage capacity exists within the plant and currently installed independent spent fuel storage installation modules to be able to contain the full contents of the core until 2015. Efforts are currently under way to renew the independent spent fuel installation license and expand its capacity to accommodate operations through 2036. Nine Mile Point and Ginna are developing independent spent fuel storage installations at each of those facilities, which are expected to be completed in 2012 and 2010, respectively. Nine Mile Point and Ginna have sufficient storage capacity within the plant until the expected completion of the on-site independent spent fuel storage installations.


Table of Contents

Cost for Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities

When Constellation Energy sold a 49.99% membership interest in CENG on November 6, 2009, we deconsolidated CENG for financial reporting purposes and, as a result, the decommissioning trust funds were removed from our Consolidated Balance Sheets. CENG is obligated to decommission its nuclear power plants after these plants cease operation. The nuclear decommissioning trust funds and the investment earnings thereon are restricted to meeting the costs of decommissioning the plants in accordance with NRC regulations and relevant state requirements. The decommissioning trust fund strategy is based on estimates of the costs to perform the decommissioning and the timing of incurring those costs. When developing estimates of future fund earnings, CENG considered the asset allocation investment strategy, rates of return earned historically, and current market conditions.

        Decommissioning activities are currently projected to be staged through 2083.the 2080 decade. Any changes in the costs or timing of decommissioning activities, or changes in the fund earnings, could affect the adequacy of the funds to cover the decommissioning of the plants, and if there were to be a shortfall, additional funding would have to be provided.provided by CENG. CENG has the ability to request funding assistance from both Constellation Energy and EDF, as the owners of CENG.

Calvert Cliffs

In March 2008, Constellation Energy, BGE, and a Constellation Energy affiliate entered into a settlement agreement with the State of Maryland, the Public Service Commission of Maryland (Maryland PSC), and certain State of Maryland officials. The settlement agreement became effective on June 1, 2008. Pursuant to the terms of the settlement agreement, BGE customers will bewere relieved of the potential future liability for decommissioning Calvert Cliffs Unit 1 and Unit 2. BGE will continue to collect the $18.7 million annual nuclear decommissioning charge from all electric customers through 2016 and continue to rebate this amount to residential electric customers, as previously required by Maryland Senate Bill 1 which was enacted in June 2006.

Coal

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

 
 Approximate
Annual Coal
Requirement
(tons)
 

Brandon Shores—Units 1 and 2 (combined)

  3,200,0002,800,000 

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

  1,200,0001,000,000 

H. A. Wagner—Units 2 and 3 (combined)

  850,000800,000 
(1)
Assuming 100% sub-bituminous coal

        We receive coal deliveries to these facilities by rail and barge. Over the past few years, we expanded our coal sources through a variety of methods, including restructuring our rail and terminal contracts, increasing the range of coals we can consume, and finding potential other coal supply sources including limited shipments from various international sources. While we primarily use coal produced from mines located in central and northern Appalachia, we are switching tousing sub-bituminous coal from either the Western United States or Indonesia at C.P. Crane and have the ability to switch to using imported coal at Brandon Shores and H.A. Wagner to manage our coal supply. The timely delivery of coal together with the maintenance of appropriate levels of inventory is necessary to allow for continued, reliable generation from these facilities.

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


6


Table of Contents

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

        We own an undivided interest in the Keystone and Conemaugh electric generating plants in Western Pennsylvania. Our ownership interests in these plants are 20.99% in Keystone and 10.56% in Conemaugh.


Table of Contents

All of the Conemaugh and Keystone plants' annual coal requirements are purchased from regional suppliers on the open market. FGD equipment was installed on both of the Keystone units in 2009 and has been installed on both Conemaugh units since the mid-1990s. The FGD SO2 restrictions on coal are 6 lbs/mmbtu (or approximately 3.7% sulfur) for the Keystone plant and approximately 4.9 lbs/mmbtu (or 3% sulfur) for the Conemaugh plant. The blend of coal procured is optimized to ensure compliance with station emission limits at the lowest delivered cost.

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

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

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

Gas

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

Oil

From 20072008 through 2009,2010, our requirements for residual fuel oil (No. 6) amounted to less than 0.5 million barrels of low-sulfur oil per year. Deliveries of residual fuel oil are made from the suppliers' Baltimore Harbor and Philadelphia marine terminals for distribution to the various generating plant locations. Also, based on normal burn practices, we require approximately 8.0 million to 11.0 million gallons of distillates (No. 2 oil and kerosene) annually, but these requirements can vary substantially from year to year depending upon the relationship between energy prices and fuel costs, weather conditions, and operating requirements. Distillates are purchased from the suppliers' Baltimore truck terminals for distribution to the various generating plant locations. We have contracts with various suppliers to purchase oil at spot prices, and for future delivery, to meet our requirements.

Competition

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

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

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

        StatesMany states are considering different types of regulatory initiatives concerning competition in the power and gas industry, which makes a general assessment of the state of competitive assessmentmarkets difficult. Many states continue to support or expand retail competition and industry restructuring. Other states that were considering deregulationrestructuring have slowed their plans or postponed consideration of deregulation.competitive markets. In addition, states that have restructured states oftentheir energy markets routinely consider new market rules and re-regulationincluding return to monopoly service measures that could result in more limited opportunities for competitive energy suppliers like Constellation Energy. The activity around re-regulation, however, has slowed due to the current environment of declining power prices. While there is activity in this area, we believe there is


7


Table of Contents

adequate growth potential in the current deregulatedcompetitive market.

        The market for commercial, industrial, and governmental energy supply continues to grow and we continue to experience increased competition from energy and non-energy market participants on a regional and national basis in our retail customer supply activities. Strong retail competition and the impact of wholesale power prices compared to the rates charged by local utilities affects the contract margin we receive from our customers. The recent credit crisis hasRecent economic conditions have increased overall margins reflecting an appropriate return on capital to support the business. Our experience and expertise in assessing and managing risk and our strong focus on customer service should help us to remain competitive during volatile or otherwise adverse market circumstances.


Table of Contents

Merchant EnergyGeneration and NewEnergy Operating Statistics



 2009
 2008
 2007
 
 2010
 2009
 2008
 
   

Gross Margin(In millions)

Gross Margin(In millions)

 

Gross Margin(In millions)

 

Generation*

 $1,976 $1,919 $1,698 

Generation (1)

 $800 $2,082 $2,042 

Customer Supply

 799 765 889 

NewEnergy

 1,244 1,079 1,040 

Global Commodities

 185 215 648   
 

Total Gross Margin

Total Gross Margin

 $2,960 $2,899 $3,235 

Total Gross Margin

 $2,044 $3,161 $3,082 
   

Generation(In millions)—MWH *

 46.0 50.9 51.6 

Generation(In millions)—MWH (1)(2)

Generation(In millions)—MWH (1)(2)

 35.1 46.0 50.9 
   

Operating statistics do not reflect the elimination of intercompany transactions.

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


(2)
These amounts exclude contracted generation.



Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

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

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

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

Electric Business

Electric Competition

Deregulation

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

Standard Offer Service

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

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

Commercial and Industrial Customers

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


8


Table of Contents

Residential Customers

As a result of the November 1999 Maryland PSC order regarding the deregulation of electric generation in Maryland, BGE's residential electric base rates were frozen until July 2006. However, Maryland Senate Bill 1, enacted in June 2006, delayed full market rates for some residentialResidential customers until June 2007, with the remainder of residential customers goingwent to full market rates in January 2008. Pursuant to a settlement agreement entered into with the State of Maryland, the Maryland PSC, and certain Maryland officials in March 2008, BGE provided residential electric customers approximately $189 million in the form of a one-time $170 per customer rate credit. We discuss the Maryland settlement agreement in more detail inNote 2 to Consolidated Financial Statements and the market risk of our regulated electric business in more detail inItem 7. Management' Discussion and Analysis—Risk Management section.

Pursuant to the order issued by the Maryland PSC in October 2009 approving our transaction with EDF, Constellation Energy agreed to fund a one-time per customer distribution rate credit for BGE residential customers, before the end of Marchin 2010, totaling


Table of Contents

$110.5 $110.5 million, or approximatelywhich approximated $100 per customer, for which we recorded a liability in November 2009.customer. In December 2009, BGE filed a tariff with the Maryland PSC stating we would give residential customers a rate credit of exactly $100 per customer. As a result, we accrued an additional $1.9 million for a total fourth quarter 2009 accrual ofBGE provided rate credits totaling $112.4 million. Constellation Energy made a $66 million equity contribution to BGE in December 2009 to fund the after-tax amount of the rate credit as required by the Maryland PSC order.

        In 2010, the Maryland PSC issued a rate order authorizing BGE to increase electric and gas distribution rates for service rendered on or after December 4, 2010. We discuss this rate order in more detail inItem 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis—Regulation—Maryland—Base Rates section.

Electric Load Management

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

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

        In July 2009, BGE filed withAugust 2010, the Maryland PSC a proposal forapproved a comprehensive smart grid initiative. The proposalinitiative for BGE which includes the planned installation of 2 million residential and commercial electric and gas smart meters. We expect themeters at an expected total cost of the program to be approximately $480 million. In October 2009,Under a grant from the United States Department of Energy selectedDOE, BGE asis a recipient of $200 million in federal funding for our smart grid initiative.and other related initiatives. This grant allows BGE to be reimbursed for smart grid and other related expenditures up to $200 million, substantially reducing the total cost of this initiative. However, the United States Department of Energy may withhold funding until approval is obtained from the Maryland PSC. The Maryland PSC held hearings on this proposed program in late 2009 and early 2010 and expects to issue a ruling in the second quarter of 2010. If BGE's proposal is approved by the Maryland PSC, BGE plans to proceed with this program as soon as practical.these initiatives.

        In the summer of 2009, BGE conducted a second season of a pilot program to evaluate pricing options designed to encourage customers to decrease energy use during peak demand periods. Additionally, BGE originally initiated a limited conservation program that provides incentives to customers to use energy efficient products and to take other actions to conserve energy.        The Maryland PSC approved a full portfolio of conservation programs for implementation in 2009 as well as a customer surcharge to recover the associated costs.

Transmission and Distribution Facilities

BGE maintains approximately 240 substations and approximately 1,300 circuit miles of transmission lines throughout central Maryland. BGE also maintains approximately 24,50024,800 circuit miles of distribution lines. The transmission facilities are connected to those of neighboring utility systems as part of PJM Interconnection (PJM). Under the PJM Tariff and various agreements, BGE and other market participants can use regional transmission facilities for energy, capacity, and ancillary services transactions, including emergency assistance.

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


9


Table of Contents

BGE Electric Operating Statistics



 2009
 2008
 2007
 
 2010
 2009
 2008
 
   

Revenues(In millions)

Revenues(In millions)

 

Revenues(In millions)

 

Residential

 
 

Excluding Delivery Service Only

 $1,808.6 $1,864.0 $1,688.3 

Residential

 $1,878.3 $1,695.9 $1,514.9  

Delivery Service Only

 48.1 14.3 7.6 

Commercial

 

Commercial

 
 

Excluding Delivery Service Only

 531.2 604.0 577.4  

Excluding Delivery Service Only

 467.4 531.2 604.0 
 

Delivery Service Only

 245.0 222.8 217.0  

Delivery Service Only

 249.5 245.0 222.8 

Industrial

 

Industrial

 
 

Excluding Delivery Service Only

 30.4 31.3 31.6  

Excluding Delivery Service Only

 28.7 30.4 31.3 
 

Delivery Service Only

 29.1 27.1 27.8  

Delivery Service Only

 25.6 29.1 27.1 
   

System Sales and Deliveries

 2,714.0 2,581.1 2,368.7 

System Sales and Deliveries

 2,627.9 2,714.0 2,581.1 

Other (1)

 106.7 98.6 87.0 

Other (1)

 124.4 106.7 98.6 
   

Total

 $2,820.7 $2,679.7 $2,455.7 

Total

 $2,752.3 $2,820.7 $2,679.7 
   

Distribution Volumes(In thousands)—MWH

Distribution Volumes(In thousands)—MWH

 

Distribution Volumes(In thousands)—MWH

 

Residential

 12,851 13,023 13,365 

Residential

 

Commercial

  

Excluding Delivery Service Only

 12,344 12,394 12,670 
 

Excluding Delivery Service Only

 3,945 3,957 4,364  

Delivery Service Only

 1,490 457 353 
 

Delivery Service Only

 11,753 11,739 11,921 

Commercial

 

Industrial

  

Excluding Delivery Service Only

 3,707 3,945 3,957 
 

Excluding Delivery Service Only

 270 242 287  

Delivery Service Only

 12,537 11,753 11,739 
 

Delivery Service Only

 2,757 3,002 3,175 

Industrial

 
  

Excluding Delivery Service Only

 267 270 242 

Total

 31,576 31,963 33,112  

Delivery Service Only

 2,519 2,757 3,002 
   

Total

 32,864 31,576 31,963 
 

Customers(In thousands)

Customers(In thousands)

 

Customers(In thousands)

 

Residential

 1,111.9 1,108.5 1,103.1 

Residential

 1,114.7 1,111.9 1,108.5 

Commercial

 118.5 117.6 116.7 

Commercial

 118.6 118.5 117.6 

Industrial

 5.3 5.3 5.5 

Industrial

 5.5 5.3 5.3 
   

Total

 1,235.7 1,231.4 1,225.3 

Total

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

Operating statistics do not reflect the elimination of intercompany transactions.
"Delivery service only" refers to BGE's delivery of electricity that was purchased by the customer from an alternate supplier.



10


Table of Contents

Gas Business

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

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

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

        A market-based rates incentive mechanism applies to customers that 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.

        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. Additionally, in 2009, the Maryland PSC required BGE to obtain some of its summer gas purchases for injection into storage at fixed prices. BGE purchased approximately 5.9 million dekatherms (DTH) of gas for summer storage injections under fixed price contracts with a weighted average price of $4.61 per DTH. These fixed-price contracts are not subject to sharing under the market-based rates incentive mechanism.

        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 338,053 DTH per day.

        BGE's current maximum storage entitlements are 297,091 DTH per day. To supplement its gas supply at times of heavy winter demands and to be available in temporary emergencies affecting gas supply, BGE has:

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

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

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


11


Table of Contents

BGE Gas Operating Statistics



 2009
 2008
 2007
 
 2010
 2009
 2008
 
   

Revenues(In millions)

Revenues(In millions)

 

Revenues(In millions)

 

Residential

 

Residential

 
 

Excluding Delivery Service Only

 $460.7 $567.8 $552.0  

Excluding Delivery Service Only

 $427.0 $460.7 $567.8 
 

Delivery Service Only

 19.0 19.0 19.0  

Delivery Service Only

 22.1 19.0 19.0 

Commercial

 

Commercial

 
 

Excluding Delivery Service Only

 129.1 161.8 154.1  

Excluding Delivery Service Only

 109.0 129.1 161.8 
 

Delivery Service Only

 40.4 46.4 41.2  

Delivery Service Only

 39.8 40.4 46.4 

Industrial

 

Industrial

 
 

Excluding Delivery Service Only

 6.4 8.1 7.8  

Excluding Delivery Service Only

 5.2 6.4 8.1 
 

Delivery Service Only

 15.2 14.5 22.1  

Delivery Service Only

 16.7 15.2 14.5 
   

System Sales and Deliveries

 670.8 817.6 796.2 

System Sales and Deliveries

 619.8 670.8 817.6 

Off-System Sales

 81.1 197.7 157.4 

Off-System Sales

 79.8 81.1 197.7 

Other

 6.4 8.7 9.2 

Other

 9.8 6.4 8.7 
   

Total

 $758.3 $1,024.0 $962.8 

Total

 $709.4 $758.3 $1,024.0 
   

Distribution Volumes(In thousands)—DTH

Distribution Volumes(In thousands)—DTH

 

Distribution Volumes(In thousands)—DTH

 

Residential

 

Residential

 
 

Excluding Delivery Service Only

 37,889 37,675 39,199  

Excluding Delivery Service Only

 37,791 37,889 37,675 
 

Delivery Service Only

 4,270 4,119 4,310  

Delivery Service Only

 4,857 4,270 4,119 

Commercial

 

Commercial

 
 

Excluding Delivery Service Only

 12,066 12,205 12,464  

Excluding Delivery Service Only

 11,606 12,066 12,205 
 

Delivery Service Only

 25,046 29,289 30,367  

Delivery Service Only

 24,329 25,046 29,289 

Industrial

 

Industrial

 
 

Excluding Delivery Service Only

 635 650 658  

Excluding Delivery Service Only

 595 635 650 
 

Delivery Service Only

 20,826 18,432 17,897  

Delivery Service Only

 19,750 20,826 18,432 
   

System Sales and Deliveries

 100,732 102,370 104,895 

System Sales and Deliveries

 98,928 100,732 102,370 

Off-System Sales

 17,542 18,782 19,963 

Off-System Sales

 14,711 17,542 18,782 
   

Total

 118,274 121,152 124,858 

Total

 113,639 118,274 121,152 
   

Customers(In thousands)

Customers(In thousands)

 

Customers(In thousands)

 

Residential

 606.8 605.0 602.3 

Residential

 608.6 606.8 605.0 

Commercial

 42.9 42.8 42.7 

Commercial

 42.9 42.9 42.8 

Industrial

 1.1 1.1 1.2 

Industrial

 1.1 1.1 1.1 
   

Total

 650.8 648.9 646.2 

Total

 652.6 650.8 648.9 
   

Operating statistics do not reflect the elimination of intercompany transactions.
"Delivery service only" refers to BGE's delivery of gas that was purchased by the customer from an alternate supplier.

Franchises

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


Other Nonregulated Businesses

New Nuclear

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

        In August 2007, we formed a joint venture, UniStar Nuclear Energy, LLC (UNE) with EDF. We have a 50% ownership interest in this joint venture to develop, own, and operate new nuclear projects in the United States and Canada. EDF initially invested $350 million of cash in UNE, and we contributed our interest in UniStar and other UniStar-related assets, which had a book value of $49 million, and the right to develop new nuclear projects at our existing nuclear plant locations. In the event that the joint venture is terminated, the remaining equity of UNE, after certain expenses, will be divided equally between Constellation Energy and EDF pursuant to the joint venture agreement.

        In 2008, EDF contributed an additional $175 million to UNE based upon reaching certain licensing milestones. EDF will contribute up to an additional $100 million to UNE, for a total of $625 million, upon reaching additional licensing


Table of Contents

milestones. In 2008, we contributed additional assets which had a book value of $2.0 million.

        In 2009, we and EDF have each contributed an additional $91.6 million to UNE to fund its capital requirements.

        Beginning on January 1, 2010, UNE's results of operations and financial condition will become part of our Generation reportable segment.

Energy Projects and Services

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

        Beginning on January 1, 2010, our Energy Projects and Services operation's results of operations and financial condition will become part of our Customer Supply reportable segment.

Home Products and Retail Marketing

We offer services to customers in Maryland including:

        Beginning on January 1, 2010, our Home Products and Gas Retail Marketing operation's results of operations and financial condition will become part of our Customer Supply reportable segment.


Consolidated Capital Requirements

Our total capital requirements for 20092010 were $1.6$1.0 billion. Of this amount, $1.2$0.4 billion was used in our nonregulatedGeneration and NewEnergy businesses and $0.4$0.6 billion was used in our regulated business. We estimate our total capital requirements will be $1.1$1.0 billion in 2010.2011.

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


Environmental Matters

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


12


Table of Contents

        We continuously monitor federal, state, and local environmental initiatives to determine potential impacts on our financial results. As new laws or regulations are promulgated, we assess their applicability and implement the necessary modifications to our facilities or their operation to maintain ongoing compliance. Our capital expenditures were approximately $1.1$1.2 billion during the five-year period 2005-20092006-2010 to comply with existing environmental standards and regulations, including the Maryland HAA. Our estimated environmental capital requirements for the next three years are approximately $60$35 million in 2010,2011, $20 million in 2012, and $25 million in 2011, and $35 million in 2012.2013.

Air Quality

Federal

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

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)

The NAAQS are federal air quality standards authorized under the CAA that establish maximum ambient air concentrations for the following specific pollutants: ozone (smog), carbon monoxide, lead, particulates, SO2, and nitrogen dioxide.

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

        In December 2008, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit reversed its July 2008 decision to effectively repealfully vacate CAIR, and instead, remanded the issue to the EPA for reconsideration. As a result, thereconsideration with CAIR requirements of CAIRto remain in effect until the EPA takes further action. We cannot predict what additional judicial, legislative or regulatory actions will be taken in response toThe uncertainty around the court's decision or the EPA's reconsiderationadoption of CAIR or whether such actions may affect our financial results. We dohas not believe that the repeal of CAIR would resultresulted in a material change to our emissions reduction plan in Maryland as the emissions reduction requirements of Maryland's HAA and Clean Power Rule (CPR) are more stringent and applyapplied sooner than those under CAIR. However, future changes inas CAIR is replaced, it could affect the market prices of SO2 and NOx


Table of Contents

emission allowances, which could in turn affect our financial results. We discuss

        In July 2010, the impactEPA proposed regulations to replace the regional cap-and-trade program under CAIR with a program that these rulings hadwould require each of 31 eastern states and the District of Columbia to reduce SO2 and NOX emissions. Depending on the scope of any final regulations that may be adopted by the EPA, which is expected to occur in July 2011, and any plans that may be adopted by the states in which our 2008 resultsplants are located, additional regulation could result inItem 7. Management's Discussion additional compliance requirements and Analysis—Merchant Energy Business section.costs that could be material.

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

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

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

Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions

In March 2005, the EPA finalized the Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR) to reduce the emissions of mercury from coal-fired facilities through a market-based cap and trade program. CAMR was to affect all coal or waste coal fired boilers at our generating facilities. However, in February 2008, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit struck down CAMR. In response to thisthat decision and as a result of a court settlement with a number of parties, the EPA announced that it intendsis under a consent order to developpropose a rule by March 2011 and to finalize new hazardous air pollutant emission standards under the CAA by the end ofNovember 2011. Any new standards that require the installation of additional emissions control technology beyond what is required under Maryland's HAA and CPR, which are discussed


13


Table of Contents

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

New Source Review

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

        As discussed inNote 12 to Consolidated Financial Statements, in January 2009, the EPA issued a Notice of Violation to one of our subsidiaries alleging that the Keystone plant located in Pennsylvania, of which we own a 21%20.99% interest, performed various capital projects without complying with the new source review requirements.

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

State

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

        Several other states in the northeastern U.S. continue to consider more stringent and earlier SO2, NOx, and mercury emissions reductions than those required under CAIR and CAMR.

        Maryland has also is in the process of changing its currentadopted opacity regulations consistent with its commitment to resolve long-standing industry concerns about the prior regulations' continuous compliance requirements. Inrequirements and is in the interim, emergencyprocess of obtaining the EPA's approval of Maryland's state implementation plan (SIP) for these regulations. While EPA approval of Maryland's SIP is being obtained, the opacity regulations have beenare being implemented in a manner that will enable our plants to remain in compliance. We anticipate that the permanent regulations that Maryland is inunder the process of adoptingEPA-approved SIP will be consistent with the emergency regulations.regulations as currently implemented.

Capital Expenditure Estimates—Air Quality

We expect to incur additional environmental capital spending as a result of complying with the air quality laws and regulations discussed above. To comply with


Table of Contents

HAA and CPR, we will install additional air emission control equipment at our coal-fired generating facilities in Maryland and at our co-owned coal-fired facilities in Pennsylvania to meet air quality standards. We include in our estimated environmental capital requirements capital spending for these air quality projects, which we expect will be approximately $20 million in 2010, $20 million in 2011, $20$15 million in 2012, $25 million in 2013 and $20$25 million from 2013-2014.2014-2015.

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

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

Global Climate Change

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

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


14


Table of Contents

cause or contribute finding" for greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act and proposed regulationsin 2010 finalized changes to address greenhouse gas emissions. The proposed regulations would require large facilities that emit at least 25,000 tons of greenhouse gases a year, which would include many of our fossil fuel generating facilities, to obtainits air construction and operating permits covering these emissions. The proposed regulations could also eventually require installationpermit programs to incorporate greenhouse gases as pollutants subject to air permits. Beginning in 2011, in certain instances, additional greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the construction or modification of large facilities subject to the EPA's permit programs, which include power plants, will be required to be controlled through the use of the best available control technology, foras determined by the EPA, before an air emissions control or reduction, although it is not possiblepermit will be issued. If we were to determine at this timemodify our generating plants, our costs to comply with these requirements could be material depending on the nature or extent of such controls.modifications made.

        Additionally, in accordance with HAA requirements, Maryland became a full participantand Massachusetts are participants in the Northeast Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) in April 2007.. Under RGGI, the Maryland Department of the Environment auctions 100% ofstates auction carbon dioxide (CO2) allowances associated with Maryland's power plants, which include plants owned by us. Auctions have occurred quarterly since September 2008. Although we did not incur material costs in these auctions, we could incur material costs in the future to purchase allowances necessary to offset CO2 emissions from our plants. Although we participate in RGGI, we believe a patchwork of climate policy and regulatory approaches across different states, regions or industry sectors has the potential to inequitably raise costs to particular businesses and/or drive the reallocation of emissions without actually achieving the desired overall reduction of emissions.

        In addition, to Maryland, California has adopted regulations requiring our generating facilities in California to submit greenhouse gas emissions data to the state, whichstate. More recently, in December 2010, the state intendsCalifornia Air Resources Board approved a declining cap and trade program for electricity suppliers beginning in 2012 aimed at achieving a 15% reduction in CO2 emissions by 2020 as compared with 2012. It is not possible to use to develop a plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.determine the scope of the impact of this program on our business or financial results until the details of the program are made public, but the impact could be material.

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

        However, to the extent greenhouse gas emissions are regulated through a federal, mandatory cap and trade greenhouse gas emissions program, we believe our business could also benefit. Our generation fleet has an overall CO2 emission rate that is lower than the industry average with a substantial amount of the fleet's output coming from nuclear and hydroelectric plants, which generate significantly lower CO2 emissions than fossil fuel plants. We are also at the forefront of the proposed development of new nuclear generation in the United States, which, if successful, would further lower our generation fleet's overall CO2 emission rate. We also have experience trading in the markets for emissions allowances and renewable energy credits and our Customer Supply operationNewEnergy business has expertise in providing


Table of Contents

renewable energy products and services to retail customers.

Water Quality

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

Water Intake Regulations

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

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

        The EPA is expected to propose new regulations in mid-2010. WeMarch 2011 and we will evaluate our compliance options in light of those proposed regulations. Until the Supreme Court and Second Circuit decisions,new regulations are finalized, which is expected in July 2012, water intake compliance will be determined in accordance with the EPA's July 2007 order and relevant state regulations and interpretations, andinterpretations. Depending on the scope of any subsequentnew regulations that may be adopted by the EPA, proposals.our compliance costs could be material.

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


15


Table of Contents

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

Hazardous and Solid Waste

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

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

        As a result of these regulatory proposals and our current ash generation projections, we are exploring our options for the management of ash, including construction of an ash placement facility. Over the next five years, we estimate that our capital expenditures for this project will be approximately $60$20 million. Our estimates are subject to significant uncertainties, including the timing of any regulatory change, its implementation timetable, and the scope of the final requirements. As a result, we cannot predict our capital spending or the scope and timing of this project with certainty, and the actual expenditures, scope and timing could differ significantly from our estimates.

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


Employees

Constellation Energy and its consolidated subsidiaries (excluding CENG, which was deconsolidated on November 6, 2009) had approximately 7,2007,600 employees at December 31, 2009.2010.


Available Information

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

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

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


Table of Contents


Item 1A. Risk Factors

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

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

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


16


Table of Contents

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

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

Our generation investment plans may not achieve the desired financial results.

We may expand our generation capacity over the next several years through increasing the generating power of existing plants, the renovation of retired plants owned by us, and the construction or acquisition of new plants. The renovation, development, construction, and acquisition of additional generation capacity involve numerous risks. Any planned power uprates, construction, or renovation could result in cost overruns, lower than expected plant efficiency, and higher operating and other costs. We intend to use a portion of the proceeds received from the sale of an interest in our nuclear business to acquire new plants in regions where we have significant customer supply operations. Acquired plants may not generate the projected rates of return or sufficiently match generation capacity with customer supply volumes causing an increase in collateral requirements. With respect to the renovation of retired plants or the construction of new plants, we may incur significant sums for preliminary engineering, permitting, legal, and other expenses before it can be established whether a project is feasible, economically attractive, or capable of being financed.

        If we were unable to complete the construction or renovation of a plant, we may not be able to recover our investment in the project. We may also be unable to run any new, acquired or renovated plants as efficiently as projected, which could result in higher-than-projected operating and other costs that adversely affect our financial results. Furthermore, increased energy conservation and use of renewable energy may reduce the value of our nonrenewable generation plants, as well as accelerate the obsolescence of older plants. If we cannot execute our generation investment plans successfully, our business, results of operations and financial condition could be adversely affected.


Table of Contents

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


17


Table of Contents

risks. Any losses relating to counterparty defaults impacting the ISOs are allocated to and borne by all other market participants in the ISO. These risks are exacerbated during periods of commodity price fluctuations. If a counterparty were to default and we were to liquidate all contracts with that entity, our credit loss would include the loss in value of derivative


Table of Contents

contracts recorded at fair value, the amount owed for settled transactions, and additional payments, if any, that we would have to make to settle unrealized losses on accrual contracts. Defaults by suppliers and other counterparties may adversely affect our financial results.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


18


Table of Contents

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


Table of Contents

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

At December 31, 2009,2010, our qualified pension obligations wereobligation was approximately $327$129 million greater than the fair value of our plan assets. The Pension Protection Act requires that we fully fund our obligations by 2015. The performance of the capital markets will affect the value of the assets that are held in trust to satisfy our future obligations under our qualified pension plans. A decline in the market value of those assets or the failure of those assets to earn an adequate return may increase our funding requirements for these obligations, which may adversely affect our liquidity and financial results.

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

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

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

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

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


19


Table of Contents

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

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

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

        Examples of potential future regulatory changes include additional regulation of greenhouse gas emissions at the federal, regional, and/or state level, heightened enforcement of new source review requirements, increased regulation of coal combustion


Table of Contents

by-products, and mandated investment in maximum achievable control technology or renewable energy resources. One or more of these changes could increase our compliance and operating costs or require significant commitments of capital.

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

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

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

We, and BGE in particular, are subject to extensive local, state and federal regulation that could affect our operations and costs.

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

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

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

        The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act provides for a new regulatory regime for derivatives. Final regulations may address collateral requirements, exchange margin cash postings, and other aspects of derivative transactions, which if applicable to us despite being an end user of derivatives, could require us to post additional cash collateral or otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business.


20


Table of Contents

We are also subject to mandatory reliability standards enacted by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) and enforced by the FERC. Compliance with the mandatory reliability standards may subject us to higher operating costs and may result in increased capital expenditures. If we are found to be in noncompliance with the mandatory reliability standards, we could be subject to sanctions, including substantial monetary penalties. The State of Maryland also is considering legislative or regulatory changes that would impose reliability and quality of service standards on electric and gas companies, including penalties for failure to meet those standards.

        Further, federal and/or state regulatory approval may be necessary for us to complete transactions. As part of the regulatory approval process, governmental entities may impose terms and conditions on the transaction or our business that are unfavorable or add significant additional costs to our future operations.

        The regulatory and legislative process may restrict our ability to grow earnings in certain parts of our business, cause delays in or affect business planning and transactions and increase our, or BGE's, costs.

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

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

        Due to recent events in the energy markets, energyEnergy companies have been under increased scrutiny by state legislatures, regulatory bodies, capital markets, and credit rating agencies. This increased scrutiny could lead to substantial changes in laws and regulations affecting us, including modifications to the auction processes in competitive markets and new accounting standards that could change the way we are required to record revenues, expenses, assets, and liabilities. Recent proposalsProposals in the State of Maryland from time to time relating to the structure of the electric industry in Maryland and various options for re-regulation of the industry are examples of how these laws and regulations can change.


Table In addition, other states are seeking more direct ways to affect the results of Contents

Further, additional regulationwholesale capacity markets, including legislation adopted in New Jersey that provides guaranteed cost recovery for the development of up to 2,000 MWs of generation in exchange for the derivatives markets has been proposed recentlynew generation clearing in the United States Congress and by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which could require us to post additional cash collateral and have a material adverse effect on our business.PJM capacity market. We cannot predict the future development of regulation or legislation in these markets or the ultimate effect that this changing regulatory environment will have on our business.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


21


Table of Contents

customers has been furtheris complicated by the decreasedpotential variability in demand resulting from extreme changes in weather and economic and financial instability since 2008.factors affecting our customers. A significant under- or over-estimation of load requirements could result in our merchant energyNewEnergy business not having enough power or having too much power to cover its load obligation, in which case it would be required to buy or sell power from or to third parties at prevailing market prices. Those prices may not be favorable and thus could reduce our revenues and/or increase our operating costs and result in the possibility of reduced earnings or incurring losses.

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

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

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

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

Investment in new business initiatives and markets may not be successful.

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

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

Our businesses are dependent upon our operational systems to process a large amount of data and complex transactions. If any of our financial, accounting, or other data processing systems fail or have other significant shortcomings, our financial results could be adversely affected. Our financial results could also be adversely affected if an employee causes our operational systems to fail, either as a result of inadvertent error or by deliberately tampering with or manipulating our operational systems. In addition, dependence upon


Table of Contents

automated systems may further increase the risk that operational system flaws or employee tampering or manipulation of those systems will result in losses that are difficult to detect.

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

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

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


22


Table of Contents

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

We cannot predict the impact that any future act of war, terrorist attacks mayattack, or catastrophic event might have on the energy industry in general and on our business in particular. In addition, any retaliatory military strikes or sustained military campaign may affect our operations in unpredictable ways, such as changes in insurance markets and disruptions of fuel supplies and markets, particularly oil. The possibility alone that infrastructure facilities, such as electric generation, electric and gas transmission and distribution facilities would be direct targets of, or indirect casualties of, an act of terror, war, or a catastrophic event may affect our operations. Furthermore, terrorist attacksthese catastrophic events could compromise the physical or cyber security of our facilities, which could adversely affect our ability to manage these facilitiesour business effectively.

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

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

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

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

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

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

The sale of non-nuclear generation plants pursuant to the put arrangement with EDF may have an adverse effect on our financial results.

We have entered into a put arrangement with EDF that provides us with additional liquidity of up to $2.0 billion by allowing us to exercise an option to require EDF to acquire certain specified non-nuclear generation plants at pre-agreed prices. To the extent we exercise this option, we will no longer own the plants sold to EDF and will not be able to recognize their financial results, which may have an adverse effect on our future financial results. In addition, exercise of the option may adversely impact our relationship with EDF, which could have an adverse impact on our CENG and UNE nuclear joint ventures with EDF. This put arrangement expires on December 31, 2010.

Our ability to develop new nuclear generation could have an effect on our business and financial results.

We are in the forefront of the proposed development of new nuclear generation in the United States through our UNE joint venture. Nuclear generation development projects are large and complex and there have been no new orders for a nuclear plant in the United States since the 1970s. The costs incurred to


Table of Contents

construct a new nuclear plant would be significant and adequate returns on investment may not be realized for many years, if at all. Feasibility and successful construction of nuclear plants depend on a variety of factors, including receipt of required permits, terms of financing, impact of competing generation and nuclear technologies, materials, labor and nuclear waste disposal costs and regulation of nuclear facilities. These factors could generate higher construction and financial costs, delays, environmental and other liabilities, or an adverse impact to our credit rating. These factors may also lead to a decision not to proceed with the construction of new nuclear facilities, which could have an adverse effect on our business and financial results, including a potential impairment of our investment in UNE.


Item 2. Properties

Constellation Energy occupies approximately 1,130,000856,000 square feet of leased and owned office space in North America, which includes its corporate offices in Baltimore, Maryland. We describe our electric generation properties on the next page. We also have leases for other offices and services located in the Baltimore metropolitan region, and for various real property and facilities relating to our generation projects.

        BGE owns its principal headquarters building located in downtown Baltimore. BGE also leases approximately 4,70016,670 square feet of office space. In addition, BGE owns propane air and liquefied natural gas facilities as discussed inItem 1. Business—Gas Business section.

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

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

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

        Our merchant energyNewEnergy business owns several natural gas producing properties.


23


Table of Contents

        The following table describes our generating facilities:


  
 At December 31, 2009  
  
  
 At December 31, 2010  
  
Plant
 Location
 Capacity
(MW)

 %
Owned

 Capacity
Owned
(MW)

 2009
Capacity
Factor
(%)

 Primary
Fuel

 Location
 Capacity
(MW)

 %
Owned

 Capacity
Owned
(MW)

 2010
Capacity
Factor
(%)

 Primary
Fuel

Calvert Cliffs Unit 1 (1)

 Calvert Co., MD  855 50.0 428 98.4 

Nuclear

 Calvert Co., MD  855 50.0 428 90.0 

Nuclear

Calvert Cliffs Unit 2 (1)

 Calvert Co., MD  850 50.0 425 92.9 

Nuclear

 Calvert Co., MD  850 50.0 425 97.2 

Nuclear

Nine Mile Point Unit 1 (1)

 Scriba, NY  620 50.0 310 91.9 

Nuclear

 Scriba, NY  620 50.0 310 97.5 

Nuclear

Nine Mile Point Unit 2 (1)

 Scriba, NY  1,138 41.0 467 99.5 

Nuclear

 Scriba, NY  1,138 41.0 467 89.7 

Nuclear

R.E. Ginna (1)

 Ontario, NY  581 50.0 291 90.7 

Nuclear

 Ontario, NY  581 50.0 291 97.2 

Nuclear

Brandon Shores

 Anne Arundel Co., MD  1,273 100.0 1,273 59.3 

Coal

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

Coal

H. A. Wagner

 Anne Arundel Co., MD  976 100.0 976 26.8 

Coal/Oil/Gas

 Anne Arundel Co., MD  976 100.0 976 19.2 

Coal/Oil/Gas

C. P. Crane (2)

 Baltimore Co., MD  399 100.0 399 30.4 

Oil/Coal

 Baltimore Co., MD  399 100.0 399 24.2 

Oil/Coal

Keystone (2)

 Armstrong and Indiana Cos., PA  1,711 21.0 359(4) 70.3 

Coal

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

Coal

Conemaugh (2)

 Indiana Co., PA  1,711 10.6 181(4) 81.1 

Coal

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

Coal

Perryman (2)

 Harford Co., MD  347 100.0 347 1.6 

Oil/Gas

 Harford Co., MD  347 100.0 347 2.2 

Oil/Gas

Riverside

 Baltimore Co., MD  228 100.0 228 0.1 

Oil/Gas

 Baltimore Co., MD  228 100.0 228 0.7 

Oil/Gas

Handsome Lake (2)

 Rockland Twp, PA  268 100.0 268 1.5 

Gas

 Rockland Twp, PA  268 100.0 268 2.7 

Gas

Notch Cliff

 Baltimore Co., MD  101 100.0 101 0.3 

Gas

 Baltimore Co., MD  101 100.0 101 2.0 

Gas

Westport

 Baltimore City, MD  116 100.0 116  

Gas

 Baltimore City, MD  116 100.0 116 0.5 

Gas

Gould Street

 Baltimore City, MD  97 100.0 97 0.8 

Gas

 Baltimore City, MD  97 100.0 97 2.6 

Gas

Philadelphia Road

 Baltimore City, MD  61 100.0 61 0.1 

Oil

 Baltimore City, MD  61 100.0 61 0.5 

Oil

Safe Harbor (2)

 Safe Harbor, PA  417 66.7 278 29.3 

Hydro

 Safe Harbor, PA  417 66.7 278 27.1 

Hydro

Grande Prairie (2)

 Alberta, Canada  85 100.0 85 8.3 

Gas

West Valley (2)

 Salt Lake City, UT  200 100.0 200 14.1 

Gas

Panther Creek (2)

 Nesquehoning, PA  80 50.0 40 96.5 

Waste Coal

Colver (2)

 Colver Township, PA  102 25.0 26 100.0 

Waste Coal

Sunnyside (2)

 Sunnyside, UT  51 50.0 26 92.1 

Waste Coal

ACE (2)

 Trona, CA  102 31.1 32 88.0 

Coal

Criterion

 Oakland, MD  70 100.0 70 2.5 

Wind

Grande Prairie

 Alberta, Canada  93 100.0 93 8.4 

Gas

West Valley

 Salt Lake City, UT  200 100.0 200 10.6 

Gas

Hillabee Energy Center

 Alexander City, Alabama  740 100.0 740 36.8 

Gas

Colorado Bend Energy Center

 Wharton, Texas  550 100.0 550 17.0 

Gas

Quail Run Energy Center (2)

 Odessa, Texas  550 100.0 550 15.3 

Gas

Panther Creek

 Nesquehoning, PA  80 50.0 40 96.6 

Waste Coal

Colver

 Colver Township, PA  102 25.0 26 99.2 

Waste Coal

Sunnyside

 Sunnyside, UT  51 50.0 26 84.5 

Waste Coal

ACE

 Trona, CA  102 31.1 32 88.0 

Coal

Jasmin

 Kern Co., CA  35 50.0 18 95.6 

Coal

 Kern Co., CA  35 50.0 18 87.7 

Coal

POSO

 Kern Co., CA  35 50.0 18 94.0 

Coal

 Kern Co., CA  35 50.0 18 92.0 

Coal

Mammoth Lakes G-1

 Mammoth Lakes, CA  8 50.0 4 61.8 

Geothermal

Mammoth Lakes G-2

 Mammoth Lakes, CA  10 50.0 5 100.0 

Geothermal

Mammoth Lakes G-3

 Mammoth Lakes, CA  10 50.0 5 100.0 

Geothermal

Rocklin

 Placer Co., CA  24 50.0 12 84.8 

Biomass

 Placer Co., CA  24 50.0 12 80.6 

Biomass

Fresno

 Fresno, CA  24 50.0 12 86.3 

Biomass

 Fresno, CA  24 50.0 12 83.6 

Biomass

Chinese Station

 Jamestown, CA  20 45.0 9 72.9 

Biomass

 Jamestown, CA  22 45.0 10 58.6 

Biomass

Malacha

 Muck Valley, CA  32 50.0 16 11.4 

Hydro

 Muck Valley, CA  32 50.0 16 10.6 

Hydro

Constellation Solar (6)

 Various  9 100.0 9  

Solar

SEGS IV

 Kramer Junction, CA  33 12.2 4 29.3 

Solar

 Kramer Junction, CA  33 12.2 4 27.1 

Solar

SEGS V

 Kramer Junction, CA  24 4.2 1 37.8 

Solar

 Kramer Junction, CA  24 4.2 1 33.0 

Solar

SEGS VI

 Kramer Junction, CA  34 8.8 3 29.2 

Solar

 Kramer Junction, CA  34 8.8 3 28.4 

Solar

                    

Total Generating Facilities (3)

  12,658   7,118    

Total Generating Facilities (3)(4)

  14,559   9,030    
                    
(1)
We own a 50.01% membership interest in CENG, the joint venture with EDF that holds these nuclear generating assets as a result of the sale of a 49.99% interest in CENG to EDF that was completed in November 2009. We discuss this transaction in more detail in Note 2 to Consolidated Financial Statements.
(2)
In connection withOn December 30, 2010, we signed an Investment Agreement with EDF, we have the optionagreement to sell one or morethe Quail Run Energy Center to High Plains Diversified Energy Corporation (HPDEC) for $185.3 million. The agreement is contingent upon HPDEC obtaining financing through the sale of these facilities to EDF for aggregate proceeds of up to $2 billion through December 31, 2010.municipal bonds.
(3)
The sum of the individual plant capacity megawatts may not equal the total due to the effects of rounding.
(4)
Capacity figures represent summer seasonal claimed capacity amounts. For units with power purchase agreements, we use the contract capacity.
(5)
Reflects our proportionate interest in and entitlement to capacity from Keystone and Conemaugh, which include 2 MW of diesel capacity for Keystone and 1 MW of diesel capacity for Conemaugh.
(6)
Constellation Solar is our operation that constructs, owns, and operates solar facilities.

        In 2009,January 2011, we signed an agreementcompleted the acquisition of Boston Generating's 2,950MW nameplate capacity (2,656 MW of summer seasonal claimed capacity) fleet of generating plants: four natural gas-fired plants, including Mystic 8 and 9 (1,580 MW), Fore River (787 MW), and Mystic 7 (574 MW) as well as a fuel oil plant, Mystic Jet (9 MW). After this acquisition, our total summer seasonal claimed capacity owned increased to acquire the 70 MW Criterion wind project in Garrett County, Maryland. Upon closing, we plan to complete the construction of the project and expect it to be ready for commercial operation in late 2010.approximately 11,686 MW.

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

        In February 2008, we acquired the Hillabee Energy Center, a partially completed 740 MW gas-fired combined cycle power generation facility located in Alabama. We plan to complete the construction
24


Table of this facility and expect it to be ready for commercial operation in the first quarter of 2010.Contents

        As of December 31, 2009,2010, we also have a 50% ownership interest in a waste coal processing facility located in Hazelton, Pennsylvania.


Table of Contents


Item 3. Legal Proceedings

We discuss our legal proceedings in Note 12 to Consolidated Financial Statements.


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

Not applicable.


Executive Officers of the Registrant

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

Mayo A. Shattuck III

 5556 Chairman of the Board (since July 2002), President and Chief Executive Officer (since November 2001) of Constellation Energy Chairman of the Board of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

Michael J. Wallace (1)

 6263 Vice Chairman (since March 2008), Executive Vice President (since January 2004) and Chief Operating Officer (since May 2009) of Constellation Energy President and Chief Executive Officer—Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC

Henry B. Barron

 5960 Executive Vice President of Constellation Energy (since April 2008); and President Chief Executive Officer and Chief NuclearExecutive Officer (since September 2008) of Constellation Energy Nuclear Group Chief Nuclear Officer of Constellation Energy Nuclear Group; and Group Executive and Chief Nuclear Officer—Duke Energy

James L. Connaughton

 4849 Executive Vice President, Corporate Affairs, Public and Environmental Policy (since February 2009) Chairman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality and Director of the White House Office of Environmental Policy

Paul J. Allen

 5859 Senior Vice President (since January 2004) and Chief Environmental Officer (since June 2007) of Constellation Energy None

Charles A. Berardesco

 5152 Senior Vice President (since October 2008), General Counsel (since October 2008) and Corporate Secretary (since July 2004) of Constellation Energy Vice President and Deputy General Counsel—Constellation Energy; and Associate General Counsel—Constellation Energy

Brenda L. Boultwood

 4546 Senior Vice President and Chief Risk Officer of Constellation Energy (since January 2008) Global Head of Strategy and Global Head of Derivative Services, Alternative Investment Services and Head of Treasury Services Risk Management—J.P. Morgan Chase & Company

Kenneth W. DeFontes, Jr.

 5960 Senior Vice President of Constellation Energy (since October 2004); and President and Chief Executive Officer of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company (since October 2004) None

Andrew L. Good

 4243 Senior Vice President, Corporate Strategy and Development of Constellation Energy (since November 2009) Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer—Constellation Energy Resources; Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer—Constellation Energy Commodities Group; and Senior Vice President, Finance—Constellation Energy

Kathleen W. Hyle

 5152 Senior Vice President of Constellation Energy (since September 2005); and Chief Operating Officer of Constellation Energy Resources (since November 2008) Senior Vice President, Finance, and Chief Financial Officer—Constellation Energy Nuclear Group; Chief Financial Officer—UniStar Nuclear Energy; Senior Vice President, Finance—Constellation Energy; and Chief Financial Officer, Constellation NewEnergy

Shon J. ManascoMary L. Lauria

 3946 Senior Vice President and Chief Human Resources Officer of Constellation Energy (since August 2009)October 2010) Vice President Human Resources—and Chief Talent Officer—Constellation Energy Resources; SeniorEnergy; Vice President, Talent Management and Leadership Development—Wyeth; Director, Global Head of Human Resources—Banc of America SecuritiesTalent Management—Johnson & Johnson

Jonathan W. Thayer

 3839 Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Constellation Energy (since October 2008) Vice President and Managing Director, Corporate Strategy and Development—Constellation Energy; Treasurer—Constellation Energy; and Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer—Baltimore Gas and Electric Company
(1)
Mr. Wallace will retire from Constellation Energy effective April 2011.

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


25


Table of Contents


PART II

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

Stock Trading

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

        As of January 29, 2010,31, 2011, there were 35,01633,239 common shareholders of record.

Dividend Policy

Constellation Energy pays dividends on its common stock after its Board of Directors declares them. There are no contractual limitations on Constellation Energy paying common stock dividends, except certain of our credit facilities prohibit us from increasing our common stock dividend withoutunless Constellation Energy elects to defer interest payments on the consent of the lenders.8.625% Series A Junior Subordinated Debentures due June 15, 2063, and any deferred interest remains unpaid.

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

        In January 2010,2011, we announced a quarterly dividend of $0.24 per share payable April 1, 20102011 to holders of record at the close of business on March 10, 2010.2011. This is equivalent to an annual rate of $0.96 per share.

        Quarterly dividends were declared on our common stock during 20092010 and 20082009 in the amounts set forth below.

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

Common Stock Dividends and Price Ranges


 2009 2008  2010 2009 

  
 Price  
 Price   
 Price  
 Price 

 Dividend
Declared
 Dividend
Declared
  Dividend
Declared
 Dividend
Declared
 

 High Low High Low  High Low High Low 

First Quarter

 $0.24 $27.97 $15.05 $0.4775 $107.97 $81.94  $0.24 $36.99 $31.08 $0.24 $27.97 $15.05 

Second Quarter

 0.24 28.05 20.18 0.4775 94.62 78.74  0.24 38.73 32.09 0.24 28.05 20.18 

Third Quarter

 0.24 33.37 25.76 0.4775 85.53 13.00  0.24 35.10 28.21 0.24 33.37 25.76 

Fourth Quarter

 0.24 36.55 30.24 0.4775 30.17 21.70  0.24 33.18 27.64 0.24 36.55 30.24 
                  

Total

 $0.96     $1.91      $0.96     $0.96     
                  

Purchases of Equity Securities by the Issuer and Affiliated Purchasers

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

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

October 1 - October 31, 2009

  114 $32.70     

November 1 - November 30, 2009

  5,954  32.45     

December 1 - December 31, 2009

         
  

Total

  6,068 $32.45     
  
Period
 Total Number
of Shares
Purchased (1)
 Average Price
Paid for Shares
 Total Number
of Shares
Purchased as
Part of Publicly
Announced
Plans or
Programs
 Maximum Dollar
Amount of Shares
that May Yet Be
Purchased Under
the Plans and Programs
(at month end)
 

October 1 - October 31, 2010

  113 $32.34     

November 1 - November 30, 2010

         

December 1 - December 31, 2010

  92,643  30.84     
  

Total

  92,756 $30.84     
  
(1)
Represents shares surrendered by employees to satisfy tax withholding obligations on vested restricted stock and restricted stock units.


26


Table of Contents


Item 6. Selected Financial Data

Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries



 2009
 2008
 2007
 2006
 2005
 
 2010
 2009
 2008
 2007
 2006
 
   


 (In millions, except per share amounts)
 
 (In millions, except per share amounts)
 

Summary of Operations

Summary of Operations

 

Summary of Operations

 

Total Revenues

 $15,598.8 $19,741.9 $21,185.1 $19,271.1 $16,964.7 

Total Revenues

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

Total Expenses

 14,588.5 20,821.9 19,858.8 18,025.2 16,023.8 

Total Expenses

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

Equity (losses) earnings

 (6.1) 76.4 8.1 13.8 3.6 

Equity investment earnings (losses)

 25.0 (6.1) 76.4 8.1 13.8 

Gain on Sale of Interest in CENG

 7,445.6     

Gain on Sale of Interest in CENG

  7,445.6    

Net (Loss) Gain on Divestitures

 (468.8) 25.5  73.8  

Net Gain (Loss) on Divestitures

 245.8 (468.8) 25.5  73.8 
   

Income (Loss) From Operations

 7,981.0 (978.1) 1,334.4 1,333.5 944.5 

(Loss) Income From Operations

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

Gains on Sales of CEP LLC equity

   63.3 28.7  

Gains on Sales of CEP LLC equity

    63.3 28.7 

Other (Expense) Income

 (140.7) (69.5) 157.4 66.8 64.5 

Other (Expense) Income

 (76.7) (140.7) (69.5) 157.4 66.8 

Fixed Charges

 350.1 349.1 292.4 315.5 297.0 

Fixed Charges

 277.8 350.1 349.1 292.4 315.5 
   

Income (Loss) Before Income Taxes

 7,490.2 (1,396.7) 1,262.7 1,113.5 712.0 

(Loss) Income Before Income Taxes

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

Income Tax Expense (Benefit)

 2,986.8 (78.3) 428.3 351.0 163.9 

Income Tax (Benefit) Expense

 (665.7) 2,986.8 (78.3) 428.3 351.0 
   

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

 4,503.4 (1,318.4) 834.4 762.5 548.1 

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

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

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

   (0.9) 187.8 94.4  

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

    (0.9) 187.8 
 

Cumulative Effects of Changes in Accounting Principles, Net of Income Taxes

     (7.2)  
 

Net (Loss) Income

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

Net Income (Loss)

 $4,503.4 $(1,318.4)$833.5 $950.3 $635.3 

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

 50.8 60.0 (4.0) 12.0 13.9 

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

 60.0 (4.0) 12.0 13.9 12.2   
 

Net (Loss) Income Attributable to Common Stock

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

Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Common Stock

 $4,443.4 $(1,314.4)$821.5 $936.4 $623.1   
 

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

 $(4.90)$22.19 $(7.34)$4.51 $4.12 

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

 $22.19 $(7.34)$4.51 $4.12 $2.98  

(Loss) Income from Discontinued Operations

    (0.01) 1.04 
 

(Loss) Income from Discontinued Operations

   (0.01) 1.04 0.53   
 

Cumulative Effects of Changes in Accounting Principles

     (0.04)

(Loss) Earnings Per Common Share Assuming Dilution

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

Earnings (Loss) Per Common Share Assuming Dilution

 $22.19 $(7.34)$4.50 $5.16 $3.47 

Dividends Declared Per Common Share

 $0.96 $0.96 $1.91 $1.74 $1.51 
   

Dividends Declared Per Common Share

 $0.96 $1.91 $1.74 $1.51 $1.34 
 

Certain prior-year amounts have been reclassified to conform with the current year's presentation.

 

Summary of Financial Condition

Summary of Financial Condition

 

Summary of Financial Condition

 

Total Assets

 $23,544.4 $22,284.1 $21,742.3 $21,801.6 $21,473.9 

Total Assets

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

Current Portion of Long-Term Debt

 $56.9 $2,591.5 $380.6 $878.8 $491.3 

Current Portion of Long-Term Debt

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

Capitalization:

 

Capitalization:

 
 

Long-Term Debt

 $4,814.0 $5,098.7 $4,660.5 $4,222.3 $4,369.3  

Long-Term Debt

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

Noncontrolling Interests

 75.3 20.1 19.2 94.5 22.4  

Noncontrolling Interests

 88.8 75.3 20.1 19.2 94.5 
 

BGE Preference Stock Not Subject to Mandatory Redemption

 190.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 190.0  

BGE Preference Stock Not Subject to Mandatory Redemption

 190.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 
 

Common Shareholders' Equity

 8,697.1 3,181.4 5,340.2 4,609.3 4,915.5  

Common Shareholders' Equity

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

Total Capitalization

 $13,776.4 $8,490.2 $10,209.9 $9,116.1 $9,497.2 

Total Capitalization

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

Financial Statistics at Year End

Financial Statistics at Year End

 

Financial Statistics at Year End

 

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges

 14.76 N/A 3.84 4.05 3.04 

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges

 N/A 14.76 N/A 3.84 4.05 

Book Value Per Share of Common Stock

 $43.27 $15.98 $29.93 $25.54 $27.57 

Book Value Per Share of Common Stock

 $39.19 $43.27 $15.98 $29.93 $25.54 

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

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


27


Table of Contents

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Subsidiaries



 2009
 2008
 2007
 2006
 2005
 
 2010
 2009
 2008
 2007
 2006
 
   


 (In millions)
 
 (In millions)
 

Summary of Operations

Summary of Operations

 

Summary of Operations

 

Total Revenues

 $3,579.0 $3,703.7 $3,418.5 $3,015.4 $3,009.3 

Total Revenues

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

Total Expenses

 3,310.6 3,521.2 3,084.2 2,646.3 2,612.8 

Total Expenses

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

Income From Operations

 268.4 182.5 334.3 369.1 396.5 

Income From Operations

 354.2 268.4 182.5 334.3 369.1 

Other Income

 25.4 29.6 26.9 6.0 5.9 

Other Income

 20.8 25.4 29.6 26.9 6.0 

Fixed Charges

 139.3 139.9 125.3 102.6 93.5 

Fixed Charges

 130.3 139.3 139.9 125.3 102.6 
   

Income Before Income Taxes

 154.5 72.2 235.9 272.5 308.9 

Income Before Income Taxes

 244.7 154.5 72.2 235.9 272.5 

Income Taxes

 63.8 20.7 96.0 102.2 119.9 

Income Taxes

 97.1 63.8 20.7 96.0 102.2 
   

Net Income

 90.7 51.5 139.9 170.3 189.0 

Net Income

 147.6 90.7 51.5 139.9 170.3 

Preference Stock Dividends

 13.2 13.2 13.2 13.2 13.2 

Preference Stock Dividends

 13.2 13.2 13.2 13.2 13.2 
   

Net Income Attributable to Common Stock before Noncontrolling Interests

 $77.5 $38.3 $126.7 $157.1 $175.8 

Net Income Attributable to Common Stock before Noncontrolling Interests

 $134.4 $77.5 $38.3 $126.7 $157.1 

Net Loss (Income) Attributable to Noncontrolling Interests

 7.3  (0.1)   

Net Loss (Income) Attributable to Noncontrolling Interests

  7.3  (0.1)  
   

Net Income Attributable to Common Stock

 $84.8 $38.3 $126.6 $157.1 $175.8 

Net Income Attributable to Common Stock

 $134.4 $84.8 $38.3 $126.6 $157.1 
   

Certain prior-year amounts have been reclassified to conform with the current year's presentation.

 

Summary of Financial Condition

Summary of Financial Condition

 

Summary of Financial Condition

 

Total Assets

 $6,453.1 $6,086.2 $5,783.0 $5,140.7 $4,742.1 

Total Assets

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

Current Portion of Long-Term Debt

 $56.5 $90.0 $375.0 $258.3 $469.6 

Current Portion of Long-Term Debt

 $81.7 $56.5 $90.0 $375.0 $258.3 
   

Capitalization

 

Capitalization

 
 

Long-Term Debt

 $2,141.4 $2,197.7 $1,862.5 $1,480.5 $1,015.1  

Long-Term Debt

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

Noncontrolling Interest

 17.6 16.9 16.8 16.7 18.3  

Noncontrolling Interest

  17.6 16.9 16.8 16.7 
 

Preference Stock Not Subject to Mandatory Redemption

 190.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 190.0  

Preference Stock Not Subject to Mandatory Redemption

 190.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 
 

Common Shareholder's Equity

 1,938.8 1,538.2 1,671.7 1,651.5 1,622.5  

Common Shareholder's Equity

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

Total Capitalization

 $4,287.8 $3,942.8 $3,741.0 $3,338.7 $2,845.9 

Total Capitalization

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

Financial Statistics at Year End

Financial Statistics at Year End

 

Financial Statistics at Year End

 

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges

 2.07 1.50 2.84 3.60 4.22 

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges

 2.80 2.07 1.50 2.84 3.60 

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

 1.80 1.33 2.42 2.99 3.45 

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

 2.41 1.80 1.33 2.42 2.99 

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


28


Table of Contents


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

Introduction and Overview

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

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

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

        As you read this discussion and analysis, refer to our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss), which present the results of our operations for 2010, 2009, 2008, and 2007.2008. We analyze and explain the differences between periods in the specific line items of our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss).

        We have organized our discussion and analysis as follows:


Strategy

As a result of significant market events in 2008, we previously disclosed plansOur strategy is to refocusprovide innovative and in some cases, exit parts of our merchantrisk-mitigating energy business. We also sought to increase available liquidity and reduce our business risk. In addition, in November 2009, we completed a transaction to sell to EDF Group and affiliates (EDF) a 49.99% interest in our nuclear generation and operation business. This transaction brought us stability as a stand-alone company as well as improved our liquidity. We discuss the transaction with EDF and our divestitures inNote 2 to Consolidated Financial Statements and our available liquidity and risk management activities later in thisItem 7.

        We are pursuing a strategy of owning and operating generation facilities, providing energy and energy-related products and services throughsolutions to North American wholesale and retail customers. Overall, we strive to serve our Customer Supply activities,customers with diverse products and delivering electricitysolutions to meet their energy needs.

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

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

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

        Our generationGeneration business has a fleet of plants that is strategically located in deregulated markets that support our customer-facing business and includes various fuel types, such as coal, natural gas, oil, nuclear, and renewable sources. In addition to owning generating facilities, we contract for power from other merchant providers, typically through power purchase agreements. We use both our owned generation and our contracted generation to support our wholesale and retail Customer Supply operations.

        Our merchant energy business actively manages our Customer Supply operations with both physical and contractual assets in order to derive incremental value. The combination of our Generation and Customer Supply operations allows us to manage our Customer Supply operations in a collateral-efficient manner. Through our retail sales channels, we are able to manage our generation with lower requirements to post collateral. Additionally, when we use owned or contracted generation, we reduce our collateral posting requirements.

        Wegenerally have load obligations greater than our generation assets.output. Going forward, we intend to buyinvest in generation assets and enter into longer-tenor agreements with merchant generators in regionsthe markets where we currently serve load but do not haveto provide a significantmore efficient and balanced profile between our generation presence. We believe thatproduction and our customer load obligations.

        Our strategy is enabled by better matching generating assets witha fleet of generation facilities and our load obligations,risk management capabilities. This combination of our Generation and NewEnergy businesses also allows us to operate in a manner so we will be able to further reduce our dependence on exchange-traded products, thereby loweringcan minimize our collateral requirements. We believe thatdiscuss our collateral requirements in the proceeds received from the transaction with EDF, along with overall market conditions, provide the resources and potential opportunities to add to our generation assets at attractive prices over the next two to three years.Collateral section.

        At BGE, we areour regulated utility located in central Maryland, provides standard offer service and distributes electricity and gas to customers. BGE is also focusedfocusing on enhancing reliability and customer satisfaction, and is implementing customer demand response initiatives.initiatives, including a comprehensive smart grid initiative and a full portfolio of conservation programs.

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


29


Table of Contents

strong balance sheetquality by making disciplined investment and investment-grade credit quality through the use of a business model that applies cash flow to reduce debt.

        While we pursue the above strategy with Generation and Customer Supply activities, we are continuing a disciplined approach to thecapital management of our collateral requirements and liquidity, including:

        We are also in the forefront of the proposed development of new nuclear generation in the United States through our UniStar Nuclear Energy (UNE) joint venture with EDF. EDF brings operational experience, global scale, and procurement leverage to the development of new nuclear plants in the United States. effective manner.


Business Environment

Various factors affect our financial results. We discuss some of these factors in more detail inItem 1. Business—Competition section. We also discuss these various factors in theForward Looking Statements andItem 1A. Risk Factors sections.

        Throughout 2008, volatility in the financial markets intensified, leading to dramatic declines in equity and commodity prices and substantially reducingreduced liquidity in the credit markets. Most equity indices declined significantly, the cost of credit default swaps and bond spreads increased substantially, and credit markets effectively ceased to be accessible for all but the most highly rated borrowers. In 2009 and 2010, markets in which we operate were affected by declining prices for power, gas, and capacity. We discuss the impact of declining commodity prices on our future earnings in more detail in theGeneration Results section.

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

        Competition also impacts our business.

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

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

Regulation—Maryland

Maryland PSC

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

Purchase of Supplier Receivables

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

Order Approving Transaction withMembership Interest Sale in CENG to EDF

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


Table of Contents

Maryland Settlement Agreement

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


30


Table of Contents

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

Senate Bills 1 and 400

In June 2006, Maryland Senate Bill 1 was enacted, which among other things:

        In connection with these provisions of Senate Bill 1:


Table of Contents

        In April 2007, Maryland Senate Bill 400 was enacted, which made certain modifications to Senate Bill 1. Pursuant to Senate Bill 400, the Maryland PSC was required to initiate several studies, including studies relating to stranded costs, the costs and benefits of various options for re-regulation, and the structure of the electric industry in Maryland.

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

        The Maryland PSC issued a final report in December 2008. In the final report, the Maryland PSC did not recommend returning the former utility generation assets to full cost of service regulation, but rather recommended incremental, forward looking re-regulation when appropriate to ensure a reliable supply of electricity or to obtain economic benefits for customers. In 2009, the Maryland PSC continued to examine how to procure electric supply for Maryland residents, from modifications to the existing auction process to requiring that new generation be built by the utilities or by third parties. We cannot at this time predict the ultimate outcome of these inquiries, studies, and recommendations or their actual effect on our, or BGE's financial results, but it could be material.

        We discuss the market risk of our regulated electric business in more detail in theRisk Management section.

Base Rates

Base rates are the rates the Maryland PSC allows BGE to charge its customers for the cost of providing them delivery service, plus a profit. BGE has both electric base rates and gas base rates.

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

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

        On December 6, 2010, the Maryland PSC issued an abbreviated order authorizing BGE to increase electric distribution rates by no more than $31.0 million and increase gas distribution rates by no more than $9.8 million for service rendered on or after December 4, 2010. The electric distribution rate baseincrease was 9.4% (approved in 1993). BGE's most recently approvedbased upon an 8.06% rate of return with a 9.86% return on equity and a 52% equity ratio. The gas distribution rate baseincrease was 8.49% (approvedbased upon a 7.90% rate of return with a 9.56% return on equity and a 52% equity ratio. BGE implemented the abbreviated order, will evaluate the comprehensive rate order that the Maryland PSC will issue in 2005).the near future and will assess its alternatives. BGE cannot predict the outcome of this assessment.

Revenue Decoupling

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


31


Table of Contents

Maryland PSC-approved levels per customer, regardless of what 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. We then bill or credit impacted customers in subsequent months for the difference between approved revenue levels under revenue decoupling and actual customer billings. We have a similar revenue decoupling mechanism in our gas business.

Demand Response and Advanced Metering Programs

In order to implement an advanced metering pilot program and a demand response program, BGE defers costs associated with theseits demand response programs as a regulatory asset and recovers these costs from customers in future periods.

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

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

Electric Commodity and Transmission ChargesStandard Offer Service

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

Gas Commodity Charge

BGE charges its gas customers separately for the natural gas they purchase. The price BGE charges for the natural gas is based on a market-based rates incentive mechanism approved by the Maryland PSC. We discuss market-based rates in more detail in theRegulated Gas Business—Gas Cost AdjustmentsBusiness section and inNote 6 to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Potential Reliability and Quality of Service Standards

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

Federal Regulation

FERC

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

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


Table of Contents

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

FERC Initiatives

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

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


32


Table of Contents

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

        We are a recipient of SECA payments, payer of SECA charges, and supplier to whom such charges may be shifted. Administrative hearings regarding the SECA charges concluded in May 2006, and an initial decision from the FERC administrative law judge (ALJ) was issued in August 2006. The decision of the ALJ generally found in favor of reducing the overall SECA liability. The decision, if upheld, is expected to significantly reduce the overall SECA liability at issueIn May 2010, FERC issued an order approving in this proceeding. However,part and reversing in part the ALJ also alloweddecision. The FERC order results in additional SECA charges to be shifted to upstream suppliers, subject to certain adjustments. Therefore, certain charges could be shifted to our Global Commodities operation.liabilities being imposed on us. In June 2010, we filed a request for rehearing of the FERC has stated that it would issue a substantive order on the ALJ'sALJ decision, no later than the endas did other interested parties. The rehearing requests are pending at FERC. In July 2010, BGE filed a petition for review of May 2010. Nonetheless, the amounts collected underFERC's approval of the SECA rates are subjectmethodology, and this appeal is being held in abeyance pending action by FERC on the pending rehearing requests. In the interim, PJM and MISO have made filings at FERC to refundcomply with the May 2010 decision and the ultimate outcome of the proceeding establishing SECA rates is uncertain.to impose charges accordingly. Depending on the ultimate outcome, the proceeding may have a material effect on our financial results.

Capacity Markets

In general, capacity market design revisions are routinely proposed and considered on an ongoing basis. Such changes are subject to FERC's review and approval. Currently, we cannot predict the outcome of these proceedings or the possible effect on our, or BGE's, financial results.

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

        In May 2008, five state public service commissions, including the Maryland PSC, consumer advocates, and others filed a complaint against PJM at the FERC, alleging that the RPM produced unreasonable prices during the period from June 1, 2008 through May 31, 2011. The complaint requestsrequested that FERC establish a refund effective date of June 1, 2008, reject the results of the 2007/08 through 2010/11 RPM capacity auction results, and significantly reduce prices for capacity beginning as of June 1, 2008 through 2011/12. In September 2008, FERC dismissed the complaint and in October 2008, the complainants requested a rehearing at FERC. FERC denied rehearing, and ultimately the Maryland PSC and New Jersey Board of Public Utilities appealed the case was appealed and is pending beforeto the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. In February 2011, the court denied the petition for review and held that FERC adequately explained why the RPM auction structure was just and reasonable. The petitioners could seek to appeal the court's decision to the United States Supreme Court. We cannot predict at this time whether the petitioners will seek an appeal or the outcome of this proceeding or the amount of refunds that may be owed by or due to us, if any. However, the outcome, and any refunds that are ultimately assessed, could have a material impact on our financial results.further proceedings.

        In April 2009, the Attorney General of Connecticut, the Connecticut Department of Public Utilities and Office of Consumer Counsel (together, the Connecticut Parties) filed complaints at FERC alleging improper energy bidding behavior since December 1, 2006 by generators located in New York that also received capacity payments within ISO-New England. In May 2009, the Connecticut Parties filed an amended complaint asserting that Constellation Energy Commodities Group, Inc. (CCG) and others received capacity payments while never intending to perform as capacity resources. The revised allegations assert that certain generators engaged in "economic withholding" by submitting energy bids at or near the offer cap. Since December 2006, CCG has received approximately $7 million in payments for capacity offered into ISO-New England associated with Constellation Energy's previously wholly owned nuclear facilities located in NY. In August 2009, FERC issued an order setting this matter for a public hearing before an ALJ to determine the intent of the capacity suppliers (including CCG) in making their energy offers in ISO-New England. CCG is participatingactively participated in the administrative hearing, whichproceeding, and in September 2010 the ALJ issued an Initial Decision finding that the Connecticut Parties failed to prove their case and dismissed the complaint against CCG. The Initial Decision is ongoing and has maintained its


Table of Contents

adherence to all applicable rules and regulations relating to the market activity. However, we cannot predict the outcome of thepending before FERC hearingfor approval or any potential liability that CCG may incur.modification.

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

        In addition to legal challenges to capacity markets and regulatory advocacy before FERC seeking to revise the capacity market structures, states are seeking more direct ways to affect the results of wholesale capacity markets. In January 2011, the New Jersey legislature adopted legislation that would provide for guaranteed cost recovery for the development of up to 2,000 MWs of new base load or mid-merit generation in exchange for the requirement that the new generation clear in the PJM capacity market. Similarly, the Maryland PSC issued a draft Request for Proposals that, subject to an evidentiary hearing confirming the reliability need for such resources, contemplates having Maryland ratepayers fund the development of new generation and to require that eligible new generation clear in the PJM capacity market. Such state efforts are intended to


33


Table of Contents

depress capacity prices, and are subject to legal and regulatory challenge. Depending on the outcome of these challenges, these state efforts could have a material effect on our financial results.

NERC Reliability Standards

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

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

Commodity Futures Trading CommissionFinancial Regulatory Reform

The United States CongressDodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act) was enacted in July 2010. While the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) are evaluating additional lawsDodd-Frank Act is focused primarily on the regulation and regulationsoversight of financial institutions, it also provides for a new regulatory regime for derivatives, including mandatory clearing of certain swaps, exchange trading, margin requirements, and other transparency requirements. The Dodd-Frank Act, however, also preserves the ability of end users in our industry to hedge their risks, which we believe results in the new derivatives requirements not being applicable to us for most of our activities. However, there will be several key rulemakings to implement the derivatives markets, including position limits and eliminating regulatory exemptions for hedging activity. We are unable to determinerequirements, which, depending on the final form any regulations or new laws may take, but such laws orscope of the regulations, could attempt to impose significant obligations on us nonetheless. Final regulations may address collateral requirements and exchange margin cash postings, which if applicable to us despite being an end user of derivatives, could have a materialthe effect of increasing collateral requirements or the amount of exchange margin cash postings in lieu of letters of credit currently issued on our business.over-the-counter contracts. These regulations could also result in additional transactional and compliance costs to the extent they apply to us, and could impact market liquidity.

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

Market Oversight

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

Weather

Merchant Energy BusinessGeneration and NewEnergy Businesses

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

BGE

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

Other Factors

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

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


34


Table of Contents

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

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

    weather conditions,

Table of Contents

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

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

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

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

Environmental Matters and Legal Proceedings

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

Accounting Standards Adopted and Issued

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


Critical Accounting Policies

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

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

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

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

Accounting for Derivatives and Hedging Activities

We utilize a variety of derivative instruments in order to manage commodity price risk, interest rate risk, and foreign currency risk. Because of the extensive nature of the accounting requirements that govern both accounting treatment and documentation, as well as the complexity of the transactions within itsthe scope of these requirements, management is required to exercise judgment in several areas, including the following:

    identification of derivatives,
    selection of accounting treatment for derivatives,
    valuation of derivatives, and
    impact of uncertainty.

        As discussed in more detail below, the exercise of management's judgment in these areas materially impacts our financial statements. While we believe we have appropriate controls in place to apply the derivative accounting requirements, failure to meet these requirements, even inadvertently, could require the use of a different accounting treatment for the affected transactions. In addition, interpretations of these accounting requirements continue to evolve, and future changes in accounting requirements also could affect our financial statements materially. We discuss derivatives and hedging activities in more detail inNote 1 andNote 13 to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Identification of Derivatives

We must evaluate new and existing transactions and agreements to determine whether they are derivatives or if they contain embedded derivatives. Identifying derivatives requires us to exercise judgment in interpreting the definition of a derivative and applying that definition to each individual contract. If a contract is not a derivative, we cannot apply derivative accounting, and we generally must record the effects of the contract in our financial statements upon delivery or settlement under the accrual method of accounting. In contrast, if a contract is a derivative, we must apply derivative accounting,


35


Table of Contents

which provides for several possible accounting treatments as discussed more fully underAccounting Treatment below. As a result, the required accounting treatment and its impact on our financial statements can vary substantially depending upon whether a contract is a derivative or a non-derivative.

Accounting Treatment

We are permitted several possible accounting treatments for derivatives that meet all of the applicable requirements. Mark-to-market is the default accounting treatment for all derivatives unless they qualify, and we affirmatively designate them, for one of the other accounting treatments. Derivatives designated for any of the other elective accounting treatments


Table of Contents

must meet specific, restrictive criteria, both at the time of designation and on an ongoing basis.

        The permissible accounting treatments for derivatives are:

    mark-to-market,
    cash flow hedge,
    fair value hedge, and
    accrual accounting under Normal Purchase/Normal Sale (NPNS).

        Each of the accounting treatments that we use for derivatives affects our financial statements in substantially different ways as summarized below:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Cash flow and fair value hedges—determination that all hedge accounting requirements are satisfied, including the expectation that the derivative will be highly effective in offsetting changes in cash flows or fair value from the risk being hedged and, for cash flow hedges, the probability that the hedged forecasted transaction will occur.
    Accrual accounting under NPNS—determination that the derivative will result in gross physical delivery of the underlying commodity and will not settle net.on a net basis.

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

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


36


    Table of Contents

            As a result of making these judgments, the selection of accounting treatments for derivatives has a material impact on our financial position and results of operations. These impacts affect several components of our financial statements, including assets, liabilities, and accumulated other comprehensive income (AOCI). Additionally, the selection of accounting treatment also affects the amount and timing of the recognition of earnings. The following table summarizes these impacts:

     
     Accounting Treatment
    Effect of Changes
    in Fair Value on:

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

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

    •  Decrease or increase for change in hedged asset or liability

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

    Valuation

    We record mark-to-market and hedge derivatives at fair value, which represents an exit price for the asset or liability from the perspective of a market participant. An exit price is the price at which a market participant could sell an asset or transfer a liability to an unrelated party. While some of our derivatives relate to commodities or instruments for which quoted market prices are available from external sources, many other commodities and related contracts are not actively traded. Additionally, some contracts include quantities and other factors that vary over time. In these cases, we must use modeling techniques to estimate expected future market prices, contract quantities, or both in order to determine fair value.

            The prices, quantities, and other factors we use to determine fair value reflect management's best estimates of inputs a market participant would consider. We record valuation adjustments to reflect uncertainties associated with estimates inherent in the determination of fair value that are not incorporated in market price information or other market-based estimates we use to determine fair value. To the extent possible, we utilize market-based data together with quantitative methods for both measuring the uncertainties for which we record valuation adjustments and determining the level of such adjustments and changes in those levels. We discuss fair value measurements in more detail inNote 13 to Consolidated Financial Statements.

            The judgments we are required to make in order to estimate fair value have a material impact on our financial statements. These judgments affect the selection, appropriateness, and application of modeling techniques, the methods used to identify or estimate inputs to the modeling techniques, and the consistency in applying these techniques over time and across types of derivative instruments. Changes in one or more of these judgments could have a material impact on the valuation of derivatives and, as a result, could also have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.

    Impacts of Uncertainty

    The accounting for derivatives and hedging activities involves significant judgment and requires the use of estimates that are inherently uncertain and may change in subsequent periods. The effect of changes in assumptions and estimates could materially impact our reported amounts of revenues and costs and could be


    Table of Contents

    affected by many factors including, but not limited to, the following:

      uncertainty surrounding inputs to the estimates of fair value due to factors such as illiquid markets or the absence of observable market price information,
      our ability to continue to designate and qualify derivative contracts for NPNS accounting or hedge accounting,


    37


    Table of Contents

      potential volatility in earnings from ineffectiveness on derivatives for which we have elected hedge accounting, and
      our ability to enter into new mark-to-market derivative origination transactions.

    Evaluation of Assets for Impairment and Other Than Temporary Decline in Value

    Long-Lived Assets

    We are required to evaluate certain assets that have long lives (for example, generating property and equipment and real estate) to determine if they are impaired when certain conditions exist. We are required to test our long-lived assets for recoverability whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that their carrying amount may not be recoverable. Examples of such events or changes are:

      a significant decrease in the market price of a long-lived asset,
      a significant adverse change in the manner an asset is being used or its physical condition,
      an adverse action by a regulator or legislature or an adverse change in the business climate,
      an accumulation of costs significantly in excess of the amount originally expected for the construction or acquisition of an asset,
      a current-periodcurrent period loss combined with a history of losses or the projection of future losses, or
      a change in our intent about an asset from an intent to hold to a greater than 50% likelihood that an asset will be sold or disposed of before the end of its previously estimated useful life.

            For long-lived assets classified as held for sale, we recognize an impairment loss to the extent their carrying amount exceeds their fair value less costs to sell. For long-lived assets that we expect to hold and use, we recognize an impairment loss only if the carrying amount of an asset is not recoverable and exceeds its fair value. The carrying amount of an asset is not recoverable if it exceeds the total undiscounted future cash flows expected to result from the use and eventual disposition of the asset. Therefore, when we believe an impairment condition may have occurred, we estimate the undiscounted future cash flows associated with the asset at the lowest level for which identifiable cash flows are largely independent of the cash flows of other assets and liabilities. This necessarily requires us to estimate uncertain future cash flows.

            In order to estimate future cash flows, we consider historical cash flows and changes in the market environment and other factors that may affect future cash flows. To the extent applicable, the assumptions we use are consistent with forecasts that we are otherwise required to make (for example, in preparing our earnings forecasts). If we are considering alternative courses of action to recover the carrying amount of a long-lived asset (such as the potential sale of an asset), we probability-weight the alternative courses of action to estimate the cash flows.

            We use our best estimates in making these evaluations and consider various factors, including forward price curves for energy, fuel costs, and operating costs. However, actual future market prices and project costs could vary from the assumptions used in our estimates, and the impact of such variations could be material.

            If we determine that the undiscounted cash flows from an asset to be held and used are less than the carrying amount of the asset, or if we have classified an asset as held for sale, we must estimate fair value to determine the amount of any impairment loss. The estimation of fair value also involves judgment. We consider quoted market prices in active markets to the extent they are available. In the absence of such information, we may consider prices of similar assets, consult with brokers, or employ other valuation techniques. Often, we will discount the estimated future cash flows associated with the asset using a single interest rate that is commensurate with the risk involved with such an investment or employ an expected present value method that probability-weights a range of possible outcomes. The use of these methods involves the same inherent uncertainty of future cash flows as discussed above with respect to undiscounted cash flows. Actual future market prices and project costs could vary from those used in our estimates, and the impact of such variations could be material.

    Unproved Gas Properties

    We evaluate unproved property at least annually to determine if it is impaired. Impairment for unproved property occurs if there are no firm plans to continue drilling, the lease is near its expiration, or historical experience necessitates a valuation allowance. The determination of whether to continue to develop the lease is based upon the economics (forward prices and the level of gas reserves) associated with extracting the estimated gas reserves, which necessarily involves the exercise of judgment.

    Investments

    We evaluate our equity-methodequity method and cost-methodcost method investments (for example, CENG, UNE CEP(through November 3, 2010), and partnerships that own power projects) to determine whether or not they are impaired. The standard for determining whether an impairment must be recorded is whether the investment has experienced an "other than a temporary" decline in value.

            The evaluation and measurement of investment impairments involves the same uncertainties as described above for long-lived assets that we own directly. Similarly, the estimates that we make with respect to our equity and cost-method investments are subject to variation, and the impact of such variations could be material. Additionally, if the projects in which we hold these investments recognize an impairment, we would record our proportionate share of that impairment loss and would evaluate our investment for an other than temporary decline in value.


    Table of Contents

            We continuously monitor issues that potentially could impact future profitability of our equity-methodequity method investments that own geothermal, coal, hydroelectric, fuel processing projects, as well as our equity investmentsinvestment in our nuclear joint ventures and CEP.venture. These issues include environmental and legislative initiatives as well as events that will impact the viability of new nuclear development.initiatives. We discuss certain risks and uncertainties in more detail in ourForward Looking Statements andItem 1A. Risk Factors sections. However, should future events cause these investments to become uneconomic, our investments in these projects could become impaired.

            Current California statutes and regulations require load-serving entities to increase their procurement of renewable energy


    38


    Table of Contents

    resources and mandate statewide reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. Given the need for electric power and the statutory and regulatory requirements increasing demand for renewable resource technologies, we believe California will continue to foster an environment that supports the use of renewable energy and continues certain subsidies that will make renewable energy projects economical. However, should California legislation and regulatory policies and federal energy policies fail to adequately support renewable energy initiatives, our equity-methodequity method investments in these types of projects could become impaired, and any losses recognized could be material.

    Debt and Equity Securities

    Our available for sale investments in debt and equity securities are subject to impairment evaluations. Our most significant available for sale securities were the nuclear decommissioning trust fund assets. However, upon the completion of our transaction with EDF on November 6, 2009, we no longer reflect the nuclear decommissioning trust fund assets on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. To the extent that CENG impairs its nuclear decommissioning trust fund assets, we will report our share of the impairment as part of our equity investment earnings in CENG.

            We determine whether a decline in fair value of an investment below book value is other than temporary. If we determine that the decline in fair value is other than temporary, the cost basis of the investment must be written down to fair value as a new cost basis. For securities held in our nuclear decommissioning trust fund through November 6, 2009 for which the market value was below book value, the decline in fair value for these securities was considered other than temporary, and the securities were written down to fair value.

    Goodwill

    Goodwill is the excess of the purchase price of an acquired business over the fair value of the net assets acquired. We do not amortize goodwill. We evaluate goodwill for impairment at least annually or more frequently if events and circumstances indicate the business might be impaired. Goodwill is impaired if the carrying value of the business exceeds fair value. Annually, we estimate the fair value of the businesses we have acquired using techniques similar to those used to estimate future cash flows for long-lived assets as discussed on the previous page, which involves judgment. If the estimated fair value of the business is less than its carrying value, an impairment loss is required to be recognized to the extent that the carrying value of goodwill is greater than its fair value.


    Significant Events

    SaleComprehensive Agreement with EDF

    In October 2010, we reached a comprehensive agreement with EDF Group and related entities (EDF) that restructured the relationship between our two companies, eliminated the outstanding asset put arrangement, and transferred to EDF the full ownership of 49.99% Membership InterestUniStar Nuclear Energy, LLC (UNE). We completed the sale of our 50% membership interest in UNE in November 2010. We discuss the terms of the comprehensive agreement inNote 4 to Consolidated Financial Statements.

    Acquisitions

    Criterion Wind Project

    In April 2010, we acquired the Criterion wind project to be constructed in Garrett County, Maryland. We have completed construction and placed the 70 MW project in service in December 2010.

    Texas Combined Cycle Generation Facilities

    In May 2010, we acquired the 550 MW Colorado Bend Energy Center and the 550 MW Quail Run Energy Center natural gas combined cycle generation facilities in Texas for $372.9 million.

    Hillabee Energy Center

    In June 2010, the Hillabee Energy Center, a 740 MW gas-fired combined cycle power generation facility located in Alabama, began commercial dispatch. We had acquired this under construction facility in 2008.

    CPower

    In October 2010, we acquired CPower, an energy management and demand response provider, for approximately $78 million, subject to closing adjustments.

    Boston Generating

    In January 2011, we completed the acquisition of Boston Generating's 2,950 MW fleet of generating plants for approximately $1.1 billion, subject to a working capital true-up adjustment. The fleet acquired includes the following four natural gas-fired power plants and one fuel oil plant located in the Boston, Massachusetts area:

      Mystic 7—574 MW,
      Mystic 8 and 9—1,580 MW,
      Fore River—787 MW, and
      Mystic Jet, a fuel oil plant—9 MW.

            We discuss these transactions in more detail inNote 15 to Consolidated Financial Statements.

    Divestitures

    In January 2010, BGE completed the sale of its interest in a nonregulated subsidiary that owns a district chilled water facility to a third party.

            In August 2010, we completed the sale of our interests in the Mammoth Lakes geothermal generating facility.

            In November 2010, we closed on our comprehensive agreement with EDF in which we sold our interest in UNE.

            In December 2010, we signed an agreement to sell our Quail Run Energy Center, a 550 MW natural gas plant in west Texas, to High Plains Diversified Energy Corporation (HPDEC) for $185.3 million. This agreement is contingent upon HPDEC obtaining financing through the sale of municipal bonds.

            We discuss these transactions in more detail inNote 2 to Consolidated Financial Statements.

    Impairment Losses and Other Costs

    During 2010, we recorded impairment losses on our investments in CENG and UNE and certain of our other equity method investments. We discuss these charges in more detail inNote 2 to EDFConsolidated Financial Statements.

    International Coal Contract Dispute Settlement

    During 2010, we finalized the settlement of a contract dispute with a third party international coal supplier for a net pre-tax gain of $56.6 million. We discuss this settlement inNote 2 to Consolidated Financial Statements.

    Financing Activities

    Issuance of Notes

    In December 2010, we issued $550 million of 5.15% Notes due December 1, 2020.

    Redemption of Notes

    In February 2010, we redeemed certain of our 7.00% Notes due April 1, 2012 as part of a cash tender offer launched in January 2010 and in March 2010 we repurchased certain tax exempt notes.

            In December 2010, we issued a call notice to redeem $213.5 million, which represents the remaining outstanding 7.00% Notes due April 1, 2012. We redeemed these notes in January 2011.

            We discuss these financing transactions in more detailNote 9 to Consolidated Financial Statements.


    39


    Table of Contents

    Healthcare Reform Legislation

    In March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the Healthcare and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (Reconciliation Act) were signed into law. We discuss the impact of these new laws on our earnings in more detail inNote 2 to Consolidated Financial Statements.

    Results of Operations

    In this section, we discuss our earnings and the factors affecting them. We begin with a general overview, and then separately discuss earnings for our operating segments. Significant changes in other (expense) income, fixed charges, and income taxes are discussed in the aggregate for all segments in theConsolidated Nonoperating Income and Expenses section.

            As discussed inItem 1 Business—Overview section and in theStrategy andSignificant Events sections, Constellation Energy's 2010, 2009 and 2008 operating results were materially impacted by a number of significant events, transactions, and changes in our strategic direction. The impact of these items has affected the comparability of our 2010, 2009 and 2008 results to prior periods and will alter Constellation Energy's operating results in the future. In this section, we highlight the 2010, 2009 and 2008 impacts of these items.

    Overview

    Results

     
     2010
     2009
     2008
     
      
     
     (In millions, after-tax)
     

    Net (Loss) Income:

              
     

    Generation

     $(1,255.3)$4,766.7 $(357.7)
     

    NewEnergy

      176.2  (348.2) (1,011.4)
     

    Regulated electric

      110.0  79.1  11.1 
     

    Regulated gas

      37.6  25.5  40.4 
     

    Other nonregulated

      (0.3) (19.7) (0.8)
      

    Net (Loss) Income

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

    Net (Loss) Income attributable to common stock

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

    Change from prior year

     $(5,426.0)$5,757.8    
      

            Our total net (loss) income attributable to common stock for 2010 decreased compared to 2009 by $5.4 billion, or $27.09 per share, mostly because of the following:

     
     Increase/(Decrease) 2010 vs. 2009
     
      
    (In millions, after-tax)
     

    Generation gross margin, primarily due to the deconsolidation of CENG

     $(682)

    Lower Generation operating expenses, primarily labor and benefit costs due to the deconsolidation of CENG

      390 

    Lower Generation accretion expense of asset retirement obligations due to deconsolidation of CENG

      37 

    Lower Generation taxes other than income taxes due to deconsolidation of CENG

      27 

    Lower Generation depreciation and amortization due to deconsolidation of CENG

      28 

    NewEnergy gross margin

      78 

    NewEnergy hedge ineffectiveness

      (55)

    Loss on NewEnergy international coal contract assignments

      (25)

    Regulated businesses, excluding the effects of the 2009 residential customer credit

      (21)

    Other nonregulated businesses

      5 

    Total change inOther Items Included in Operations per table below

      (5,375)

    All other changes

      167 
      

    Total Change

     $(5,426)
      

            Our total net income attributable to common stock for 2009 improved compared to 2008 by $5.8 billion, or $29.53 per share, mostly because of the following:

     
     Increase/(Decrease)
    2009 vs. 2008

     
      
    (In millions, after-tax)
     

    Generation gross margin

     $27 

    NewEnergy gross margin

      (134)

    Absence of sale of NewEnergy upstream gas assets

      (16)

    NewEnergy hedge ineffectiveness

      84 

    Absence of NewEnergy credit loss—coal supplier bankruptcy

      33 

    Regulated businesses, excluding the effects of the 2008 Maryland settlement agreement and the 2009 residential customer credit

      10 

    Other nonregulated businesses

      (8)

    Total change inOther Items Included in Operations per table below

      5,763 

    All other changes

      (1)
      

    Total Change

     $5,758 
      


    40


    Table of Contents

    Other Items Included in Operations (after-tax):

     
     2010
     2009
     2008
     
      
     
     (In millions, after-tax)
     
     

    Impairment losses and other costs

     $(1,487.1)$(96.2)$(468.4)
     

    Gain on Comprehensive Agreement with EDF

      121.3     
     

    Amortization of basis difference in CENG

      (117.5) (17.8)  
     

    Impact of power purchase agreement with CENG (1)

      (113.3)    
     

    International coal contract dispute settlement

      35.4     
     

    Loss on early retirement of 2012 Notes

      (30.9)    
     

    Gain on sale of Mammoth Lakes geothermal generating facility

      24.7     
     

    Credit facility amendment/termination fees

      (13.6) (37.7)  
     

    Deferred income tax expense relating to federal subsidies for providing post-employment prescription drug benefits

      (8.8)    
     

    Gain on sale of 49.99% interest in CENG

        4,456.1   
     

    International commodities operation and gas trading operation (2)

        (371.9)  
     

    BGE residential customer rate credit

        (67.1)  
     

    Impairment of nuclear decommissioning trust assets

        (46.8) (82.0)
     

    Merger termination and strategic alternatives costs

        (13.8) (1,204.4)
     

    Loss on redemption of Zero Coupon Senior Notes

        (10.0)  
     

    Workforce reduction costs

        (9.3) (13.4)
     

    Maryland settlement credit

          (110.5)
     

    Non-qualifying hedges

          (70.1)
     

    Emission allowance write down, net

          (28.7)
      

    Total Other Items

     $(1,589.8)$3,785.5 $(1,977.5)
      

    Change from prior year

     $(5,375.3)$5,763.0    
      
    (1)
    The net impact to the Company of the power purchase agreement with CENG was $185.6 million pre-tax for 2010. This amount represents the amortization of our $0.8 billion "Unamortized energy contract asset" less our 50.01% equity in CENG's amortization of its $0.8 billion "Unamortized energy contract liability."

    (2)
    These amounts include the net losses on the sales of the international commodities operation, gas trading operation, certain other trading operations, and a uranium market participant, the reclassification of losses on previously designated cash-flow hedges from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss because the forecasted transactions were probable of not occurring, and earnings that are no longer part of our core business. The impairment losses and other costs and workforce reduction costs line items for 2009 also include amounts related to the operations we divested.

    Generation Business

    Background

    Our Generation business is discussed in detail inItem 1. Business—Operating Segments section.

            We have presented the results of this business reflecting that we have hedged 100% of generation output and fuel for generation. This is based on executing hedges at prevailing market prices with the NewEnergy business. Taking into account previously executed hedges at the end of each fiscal year, we ensure that the Generation business is fully hedged by the NewEnergy business for the next year. Therefore, all commodity price risk is managed by and presented in the results of our NewEnergy business as discussed below. Generally, changes in the results of our Generation business during the period are due to changes in the availability of the generating assets.

            During 2010, power prices continued to decline, reflecting economic conditions and projected increases in natural gas supplies. However, prices for coal have not declined to the same extent as power prices. The relationship between power and fuel prices directly affects the earnings of our Generation business. Although our NewEnergy business hedges portions of our future power sales and fuel purchases, the amounts we have hedged are higher for the near term and decline over time. We have already locked in prices for our expected generation output for 2011. However, consistent with our hedging approach, we have only hedged a portion of the expected output for 2012, and those hedges are at lower prices. If the current power and fuel price environment continues, we anticipate that our Generation business will have lower earnings in future years, especially in 2012.

            Additionally, we evaluated our generating plants for impairment as a result of power price declines in 2010. Although none of our plants were impaired, further decreases in power prices could result in estimated future cash flows declining below the carrying value of our plants, which would require us to record an impairment charge.


    41


    Table of Contents

    Results

     
     2010
     2009
     2008
     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Revenues

     $2,244.3 $2,774.2 $2,958.5 

    Fuel and purchased energy expenses

      (1,444.8) (692.0) (916.1)
      

    Gross margin

      799.5  2,082.2  2,042.4 

    Operating expenses

      (379.7) (1,008.4) (969.1)

    Impairment losses and other costs

      (2,476.7)   (14.0)

    Workforce reduction costs

          (6.1)

    Merger termination and strategic alternatives costs

        (101.8) (742.3)

    Depreciation, depletion, and amortization

      (136.1) (176.8) (174.3)

    Accretion of asset retirement obligations

      (1.6) (62.1) (67.9)

    Taxes other than income taxes

      (23.6) (67.4) (69.9)

    Equity investment earnings (losses):

              
     

    CENG

      23.6  4.3   
     

    UNE

      (16.8) (24.7) (5.9)
     

    Other

      18.2  20.6  32.7 

    Net gain on divestitures

      242.9  7,445.6   
      

    (Loss) Income from Operations

     $(1,950.3)$8,111.5 $25.6 
      

    Net (Loss) Income

     $(1,255.3)$4,766.7 $(357.7)
      

    Net (Loss) Income attributable to common stock

     $(1,255.3)$4,766.7 $(357.7)
      

    Change from prior year

     $(6,022.0)$5,124.4    
      

    Other Items Included in Operations (after-tax):

              
     

    Impairment losses and other costs

     $(1,487.1)$ $(8.3)
     

    Gain on Comprehensive Agreement with EDF

      121.3     
     

    Amortization of basis difference in CENG

      (117.5) (17.8)  
     

    Impact of power purchase agreement with CENG (1)

      (113.3)    
     

    Loss on early retirement of 2012 Notes

      (30.9)    
     

    Gain on sale of Mammoth Lakes geothermal generating facility

      24.7     
     

    Credit facility amendment/termination fees

      (9.0) (13.7)  
     

    Deferred income tax expense relating to federal subsidies for providing post-employment prescription drug benefits

      (0.8)    
     

    Gain on sale of 49.99% interest in CENG

        4,456.1   
     

    Impairment of nuclear decommissioning trust assets

        (46.8) (82.0)
     

    Loss on redemption of Zero Coupon Senior Notes

        (10.0)  
     

    Merger termination and strategic alternatives costs

        (9.7) (742.3)
     

    Workforce reduction costs

          (3.7)
      

    Total Other Items

     $(1,612.6)$4,358.1 $(836.3)
      

    Change from prior year

     $(5,970.7)$5,194.4    
      

    Above amounts include intercompany transactions eliminated in our Consolidated Financial Statements. Note 3 provides a reconciliation of operating results by segment to our Consolidated Financial Statements.

    (1)
    The net impact to the Company of the power purchase agreement with CENG was $185.6 million pre-tax for2010. This amount represents the amortization of our $0.8 billion "Unamortized energy contract asset" less our 50.01% equity in CENG's amortization of its $0.8 billion "Unamortized energy contract liability."

    Effects of 2009 Transaction with EDF on Statement of Income (Loss)

    Prior to November 6, 2009, CENG was a 100% owned subsidiary, and we consolidated its financial results within our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss). On November 6, 2009, we soldcompleted the sale of a 49.99% membership interest in CENG to EDF, and we deconsolidated CENG. Accordingly, beginning November 6, 2009, we ceased recording CENG's financial results and began to record equity investment earnings from CENG as well as the effect of our nuclear generationPPA and operation business. Theother transactions with CENG. We discuss our transaction with EDF in more detail inNote 2 to Consolidated Financial Statements.

            For the period from January 1, 2009 through November 6, 2009, our Generation results included the following summarizes where we disclosefinancial results of CENG:

    For the period from January 1, 2009 through November 6, 2009
     
      
     
     (In billions)
     

    Revenues

     $1.2 

    Fuel and purchased energy expenses

      0.1 

    Operating expenses

      0.8 

    Depreciation and amortization

      0.1 

    Income from operations

      0.2 

            As a result of the significant impacts of this transaction on us:deconsolidation, our Generation results after November 6, 2009 differ from historical results primarily due to the following factors:

      Revenues—We provide an overviewsell between 85-90% of this transaction inItem 1. Business section.the output of CENG's plants, excluding output sold by CENG directly to third parties, rather than 100% of the plants' total output including volumes contracted to third parties.
      UponFuel and purchased energy expenses—We do not include nuclear fuel expense but instead reflect our purchase of between 85-90% of the closeoutput of this transaction,CENG's plants, excluding output sold directly to third parties, as provided under the terms of the PPA with CENG.
      Operating expenses—We no longer include CENG's plant operating costs or general and administrative expenses.
      Depreciation and amortization expense—We no longer include deprecation of CENG's nuclear plants.

            Additionally, we deconsolidatedrecord our 50.01% share of CENG's financial results and amortization of the CENG and recordedbasis difference in the "Equity Investment (Losses) Earnings" line in our initialConsolidated Statements of Income (Loss). We discuss the accounting for our retained investment in CENG in more detail inNote 2 to Consolidated Financial Statements.

            Beginning in the fourth quarter of 2010, the amortization of the basis difference in CENG will be lower as the basis difference was reduced by the amount of the impairment charge recorded on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.investment in CENG during the quarter ended September 30, 2010. We discuss the significant changesimpairment charge in more detail in theNote 2 to Consolidated Financial Statements.


    42


    Table of Contents

    Revenues

    Our Generation revenues decreased $529.9 million in 2010 compared to 2009 and decreased $184.3 million in 2009 compared to 2008 primarily due to the following:

     
     2010
    vs. 2009

     2009
    vs. 2008

     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Decrease in volume of output primarily due to the deconsolidation of CENG nuclear generating assets

     $(690)$(397)

    Increase in volume of output due to the beginning of commercial dispatch of the Hillabee Energy Center and the acquisition of the Texas combined cycle generation facilities

      198   

    (Decrease) increase in volume of output due to (higher) lower planned and unplanned outages at our generating plants

      (127) 150 

    Increase in higher contracted power prices for the output of our generating plants

      116  65 

    All other

      (27) (2)
      

    Total decrease in Generation revenues

     $(530)$(184)
      

    Fuel and Purchased Energy Expenses

    Our Generation fuel and purchased energy expenses increased $752.8 million in 2010 compared to 2009 and decreased $224.1 million in 2009 compared to 2008 primarily due to the following:

     
     2010 vs. 2009
     2009 vs. 2008
     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Increase in purchased energy costs due to power purchase agreement with CENG compared with nuclear fuel costs

     $741 $ 

    (Decrease) increase in volume of output due to (higher) lower planned and unplanned outages at our generating plants

      (87) 22 

    Increase (decrease) in fuel costs primarily related to higher (lower) contract prices to operate our generating assets

      59  (273)

    All other

      40  27 
      

    Total increase (decrease) in Generation fuel and purchased energy expenses

     $753 $(224)
      

    Operating Expenses

    Our Generation business operating expenses decreased $628.7 million during 2010 as compared to 2009 due to lower labor and benefit costs of $499.9 million and lower non-labor operating expenses of $128.8 million, the majority of which results from the absence of costs in 2010 due to the deconsolidation of CENG.

            Our Generation business operating expenses increased $39.3 million during 2009 as compared to 2008 due to higher performance-based labor and benefit costs of $74.5 million, partially offset by lower non-labor operating expenses of $35.2 million.

    Impairment Losses and Other Costs

    Our Generation business incurred impairment losses during 2010. These costs are discussed in more detail inNote 2 to Consolidated Financial Statements.

    Depreciation, Depletion and Amortization Expense

    Our Generation business incurred lower depreciation, depletion and amortization expenses of $40.7 million during 2010 compared to 2009 due to a resultdecrease of recording$94.0 million in depreciation on the transaction andnuclear generating facilities resulting from the deconsolidation of CENG on November 6, 2009, partially offset by an increase of $53.4 million in depreciation on our Consolidated Balance Sheetsother generating facilities primarily related to the installation of emission control equipment at our Brandon Shores coal-fired generating plant that went into service in the fourth quarter of 2009, the Texas combined cycle generation facilities we acquired in 2010, and the expected impactHillabee Energy Center, which began commercial dispatch in 2010.

            Our Generation business incurred higher depreciation, depletion and amortization expenses of $2.5 million during 2009 compared to 2008 due to an increase of $12.0 million in depreciation on our ongoing financial resultsnon-nuclear generating assets primarily related to environmental additions at our Brandon Shores coal-fired generating plant that went into service in the fourth quarter of 2009, partially offset by a $9.5 million decrease in depreciation on our nuclear generating assets resulting from the deconsolidation of CENG on November 6, 2009.

    Accretion of Asset Retirement Obligations

    Our Generation business incurred lower accretion of asset retirement obligations expense of $60.5 million in 2010 compared to 2009, which represents the absence of costs from deconsolidating CENG on November 6, 2009.

            Our Generation business incurred lower accretion of asset retirement obligations expense of $5.8 million in 2009 compared to 2008, which represents the absence of costs from deconsolidating CENG on November 6, 2009.

    Taxes Other Than Income Taxes

    Our Generation business incurred lower taxes other than income taxes of $43.8 million in 2010 compared to 2009 and cash flows$2.5 million in this section.

    As2009 compared with 2008, primarily due to lower property taxes as a result of recording the transaction, we have presented certain additional line itemsdeconsolidation of CENG on November 6, 2009.

    Equity Investment Earnings (Losses)

    During 2010, our consolidated financial statements inItem 8, suchequity investment earnings increased $24.8 million as compared to 2009, primarily due to $19.3 million of higher earnings from our investment in CENG, the gain on sale, and the proceeds received$7.9 million of lower losses from the transaction.

    We recorded a significant gain on the sale of the 49.99% membership interest as well as on our retained interest at transaction close. The fair value of our investment in CENG exceededUNE, which was sold in 2010, partially offset by $2.4 million of lower earnings on investments in power projects.

            During 2009, our shareequity investment earnings decreased $26.6 million from 2008 primarily due to $18.8 million of CENG's equity because CENG's assetshigher losses from our investment in UNE and liabilities retained their historical carrying value. This basis difference will be amortized as a reduction$12.1 million of lower earnings on investments in power projects, partially offset by $4.3 million in earnings related to our investment in CENG.

            Additionally, CENG is involved in negotiations with certain tax jurisdictions in New York State with respect to agreements


    43


    Table of Contents

    covering property tax payments on the Nine Mile Point nuclear generating facility. These negotiations may result in an increase in future property tax expenses for CENG, which in turn would reduce our equity investment earnings in earningsCENG based on our 50.01% ownership interest. We are unable to determine the outcome of CENG.these negotiations at this time.

    Net Gain on Divestitures

    During 2010, we sold our Mammoth Lakes geothermal generating facility, recognizing a $38.0 million pre-tax gain, and our 50% interest in UNE in connection with our comprehensive agreement with EDF recognizing a $202.0 million pre-tax gain. We discuss this itemour divestitures in Notesmore detail inNote 2 and 4 to Consolidated Financial Statements.

            During 2009, we completed the sale of a 49.99% membership interest in CENG to EDF. As a result of this sale, we recognized a $7.4 billion pre-tax gain. We discuss the Maryland PSC order approving thethis transaction inNote 2 to Consolidated Financial Statements.Statements

    The closing.

    NewEnergy Business

    Background

    Our NewEnergy business is a competitive provider of energy solutions for various customers. We discuss the impact of competition on our NewEnergy business inItem 1. Business—Competition section.

            Our NewEnergy business focuses on delivery of physical, customer-oriented energy products and services to energy producers and consumers, manages the risk and optimizes the value of our owned and contracted generation assets and NewEnergy activities, and uses our portfolio management and trading capabilities both to manage risk and to deploy limited risk capital. Our NewEnergy business actively transacts in energy and energy-related commodities in order to manage our portfolio of energy purchases and sales to customers through structured transactions.

            We record NewEnergy revenues and expenses in our financial results in different periods depending upon the appropriate accounting treatment that represents the economics of the transaction impactedunderlying transactions in our credit facilities and, therefore, our net available liquidity.business. We discuss our net available liquidityrevenue recognition policies in this section.

    A portion of the proceeds received from the transaction will be used to retire approximately $1 billion of debt prior to its maturity. We discuss our debt retirements to date in Note 9Critical Accounting Policies section andNote 1 to Consolidated Financial Statements.Statements
    Given the significance of our investment.

    Results

     
     2010
     2009
     2008
     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Revenues

     $10,121.4 $11,509.2 $15,851.7 

    Fuel and purchased energy expenses

      (8,877.6) (10,430.0) (14,812.2)
      

    Gross margin

      1,243.8  1,079.2  1,039.5 

    Operating expenses

      (758.7) (763.6) (932.7)

    Impairment losses and other costs

      (0.1) (98.1) (727.8)

    Workforce reduction costs

        (12.6) (9.5)

    Merger termination and strategic alternatives costs

        (44.0) (462.1)

    Depreciation, depletion, and amortization

      (83.4) (82.5) (118.7)

    Accretion of asset retirement obligations

      (0.3) (0.2) (0.5)

    Taxes other than income taxes

      (52.8) (41.2) (54.4)

    Equity investment (losses) earnings

        (6.3) 49.6 

    Net gain (loss) on divestitures

      2.5  (468.8) 25.5 
      

    Income (Loss) from Operations

     $351.0 $(438.1)$(1,191.1)
      

    Net Income (Loss)

     $176.2 $(348.2)$(1,011.4)
      

    Net Income (Loss) attributable to common stock

     $138.6 $(402.3)$(994.2)
      

    Change from prior year

     $540.9 $591.9    
      


    Other Items Included in Operations (after-tax):


     

     

     

     
     

    International coal contract dispute settlement

     $35.4 $ $ 
     

    Credit facility amendment/termination fees

      (4.6) (24.0)  
     

    Deferred income tax expense relating to federal subsidies for providing post-employment prescription drug benefits

      (0.1)    
     

    International commodities operation and gas trading operation (1)

        (371.9)  
     

    Impairment losses and other costs

        (84.7) (460.1)
     

    Workforce reduction costs

        (9.3) (5.8)
     

    Merger termination and strategic alternatives costs

        (4.1) (462.1)
     

    Non-qualifying hedges

          (70.1)
     

    Emission allowance write-down, net

          (28.7)
      

    Total Other Items

     $30.7 $(494.0)$(1,026.8)
      

    Change from prior year

     $524.7 $532.8    
      

    Above amounts include intercompany transactions eliminated in CENG, we are exposed to many of the same risks as CENG. CENG is exposed to risks associated with operating nuclear generating facilities and the risk of a nuclear accident. We discuss our exposure to certain of these risks inNote 12 to Consolidated Financial Statements.

    We entered into the following agreements with CENG:
    Note 3 provides a power purchase agreement,
    a power services agency agreement, and
    an administrative services agreement.
    this Note.

            We have also made the following reclassifications of prior year amounts for comparative purposes:reclassified certain prior-period amounts:

    Revenues

    Sources of Revenue

    We earn revenues from the following primary business activities:

            We report BGE's revenues from standard offer servicethe sale and delivery of electricity and natural gas to its customers as "Regulated electric revenues" and "Regulated gas revenues" in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss). We report all other revenues as "Nonregulated revenues."

            Revenues from nonregulated activities result from contracts or other sales that generally reflect market prices in effect at the time that we executed the contract or the sale occurred. BGE's revenues from regulated activities reflect provisions of orders of the Maryland PSC and the FERC. In certain cases, these orders require BGE to defer the difference between certain portions of its actual costs and the amount presently billable to customers. BGE records these differences as regulatory assets or liabilities, which we discuss in more detail inNote 6. We describe the effects of these orders on BGE's revenues below.

    Regulated Electric

    BGE provides market-based standard offer electric service to its residential, commercial, and industrial customers. BGE charges these customers standard offer service (SOS) rates that are designed to recover BGE's wholesale power supply costs and include an administrative fee consisting of a shareholder return component and an incremental cost component. Pursuant to Senate Bill 1, the energy legislation enacted in Maryland in June 2006, BGE suspended collection of the shareholder return component of the administrative fee for residential SOS service beginning January 1, 2007 for a 10-year period. However, under an order issued by the Maryland PSC in May 2007, as of June 1, 2007, BGE reinstated collection of the residential return component of the SOS administration charge and began providing all residential electric customers a credit for the return component of the administrative charge. As part of the 2008 Maryland settlement agreement, which is discussed in more detail inNote 2, BGE resumed collection of the shareholder return portion of the residential standard offer service administrative charge from June 1, 2008 through May 31, 2010 without having to rebate it to all residential electric customers. BGE will cease collecting the residential shareholder return component again fromStarting June 1, 2010, through December 31, 2016. Senate Bill 1 imposed a 15% rate cap for


    Table of Contents

    BGE is providing all residential electric customers from July 1, 2006 until May 31, 2007 and gave customersa credit for the option to further delay paying full market rates until January 1, 2008.residential return component of the administrative charge, which will continue through December 2016.

            As part of the October 30, 2009 order from the Maryland PSC approving our transaction with EDF, BGE maywas permitted to file an electric distribution rate case at any time beginning in January 2010 and maycould not file a subsequent electric


    86


    Table of Contents

    distribution rate case until January 2011. Any rate increase in the first electric distribution rate case will bewas capped at 5%.

            In May 2010, BGE filed an electric and gas distribution rate case with the Maryland PSC and the Maryland PSC issued an abbreviated order in December 2010. The order authorizes BGE to increase electric distribution rates by $31.0 million and was based on an 8.06% rate of return with a 9.86% return on equity and a 52% equity ratio.

            BGE defers the difference between certain of its actual costs related to the electric commodity and what it collects from customers under the commodity charge portion of SOS rates in a given period. BGE either bills or refunds its customers the difference in the future.

    Regulated Gas

    BGE charges its gas customers for the natural gas they purchase from BGE using "gas cost adjustment clauses." Under these clauses, BGE defers the difference between certain of its actual costs related to the gas commodity and what it collects from customers under the commodity charge in a given period for evaluation under a market-based rates incentive mechanism. For each period subject to that mechanism, BGE compares its actual cost of gas to a market index (a measure of the market price of gas for that period) and shares the difference equally between shareholders and customers through an adjustment to the price of gas service in future periods. This sharing mechanism excludes fixed-price contracts which the Maryland PSC requires BGE to procure for at least 10%, but not more than 20%, of forecasted system supply requirements for the November through March period. As a condition to the October 30, 2009 order from the Maryland PSC approving our transaction with EDF, BGE maywas permitted to file a gas distribution case at any time beginning in January 2010 and maycould not file a subsequent gas distribution rate case until January 2011.

            In May 2010, BGE filed an electric and gas distribution rate case with the Maryland PSC and the Maryland PSC issued an abbreviated order in December 2010. The order authorizes BGE to increase gas distribution rates by $9.8 million and was based on a 7.90% rate of return with a 9.56% return on equity and a 52% equity ratio.

    Selection of Accounting Treatment

    We determine the appropriate accounting treatment for recognizing revenues based on the nature of the transaction, governing accounting standards and, where required, by applying judgment as to the most transparent presentation of the economics of the underlying transactions. We utilize two primary accounting treatments to recognize and report revenues in our results of operations:

            We describe each of these accounting treatments below.

    Accrual Accounting

    Under accrual accounting, we record revenues in the period when we deliver energy commodities or products, render services, or settle contracts. We generally use accrual accounting to recognize revenues for our sales of electricity, gas, coal, and other commodities as part of our physical delivery activities. We 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 BGE's customers under regulated service tariffs, and spot-market sales, including settlements with independent system operators. We discuss the NPNS election later in this Note underDerivatives and Hedging Activities.

            However, we also use mark-to-market accounting rather than accrual accounting for recognizing revenue on our nonregulatedcompetitive retail gas customer supply activities, our fixed quantity competitive retail power customer supply activities for new transactions closed after June 30, 2010, which are managed using economic hedges that we have not designated as cash-flow hedges so as to match the timing of recognition of the earnings impacts of those activities to the greatest extent permissible, and other physical commodity derivatives if we have not designated those contracts as NPNS.

            We record accrual revenues from sales of products or services on a gross basis at the contract, tariff, or spot price because we are a principal to the transaction. Accrual revenues also include certain other gains and losses that relate to these activities or for which accrual accounting is required.

            We include in accrual revenues the effects of hedge accounting for derivative contracts that qualify as hedges of our sales of products or services. Substantially all of the derivatives that we designate as hedges are cash flow hedges. We recognize the effective portion of hedge gains or losses in revenues during the same period in which we record the revenues from the hedged transaction. We record any hedge ineffectiveness in revenues when it occurs. We discuss our hedge accounting policy in theDerivatives and Hedging Activities section later in this Note.

            We may make or receive cash payments at the time we assume previously existing power sale agreements for which the contract price differs from current market prices. We also may designate a derivative as NPNS after its inception. We recognize the value of these derivatives in our Consolidated Balance Sheets as an "Unamortized energy contract" asset or liability. We amortize these assets and liabilities into revenues based on the present value of the underlying cash flows provided by the contracts.


    87


    Table of Contents

            The following table summarizes the primary components of accrual revenues:

     
     Activity
    Component of
    Accrual Revenues

     Nonregulated
    Physical
    Energy
    Delivery

     Regulated
    Electricity
    and Gas
    Sales

     Other
    Nonregulated
    Products and
    Services

     

    Gross amounts receivable for sales of products or services based on contract, tariff, or spot price

     X X X
     

    Reclassification of net gains/losses on cash flow hedges from AOCI

     X    
     

    Ineffective portion of net gains/losses on cash flow hedges

     X    
     

    Amortization of acquired energy contract assets or liabilities

     X    
     

    Recovery or refund of deferred SOS and gas cost adjustment clause regulatory assets/liabilities

       X  
     

    Mark-to-Market Accounting

    We record revenues using the mark-to-market method of accounting for transactions under derivative contracts for which we are not permitted, or do not elect, to use accrual accounting or hedge accounting. These mark-to-market transactions primarily relate to our risk management and trading activities, our nonregulatedcompetitive retail gas customer supply activities, and economic hedges of other accrual activities. Mark-to-market revenues include:

            Under the mark-to-market method of accounting, we record any inception fair value of these contracts as derivative assets and liabilities at the time of contract execution. We record subsequent changes in the fair value of these derivative assets and liabilities on a net basis in "Nonregulated revenues" in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss). We discuss our mark-to-market accounting policy in theDerivatives and Hedging Activities section later in this Note.

    Fuel and Purchased Energy Expenses

    Sources of Fuel and Purchased Energy Expenses

    We incur fuel and purchased energy costs for:

            We report these costs in "Fuel and purchased energy expenses" in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss). We also include certain fuel-related direct costs, such as ancillary services purchased from independent system operators, transmission costs, brokerage fees, and freight costs in the same category in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss).

            Fuel and purchased energy costs from nonregulated activities result from contracts or other purchases that generally reflect market prices in effect at the time that we executed the contract or the purchase occurred. BGE's costs of electricity and gas for resale under regulated activities reflect actual costs of purchases, adjusted to reflect provisions of orders of the Maryland PSC and the FERC. In certain cases, these orders require BGE to defer the difference between certain portions of its actual costs and the amount presently billable to customers. BGE records these differences as regulatory assets or liabilities, which we discuss in more detail inNote 6. We describe the effects of these orders on BGE's fuel and purchased energy expense below.

    Regulated Electric

    BGE provides market-based standard offer electric service to its residential, commercial, and industrial customers. BGE charges these customers SOS rates that are designed to recover BGE's wholesale power supply costs and include an administrative fee consisting of a shareholder return component and an incremental cost component. Starting June 1, 2010, BGE is providing all residential electric customers a credit for the residential return component of the administrative charge, which will continue through December 2016.

            BGE defers the difference between certain of its actual costs related to the electric commodity and what it collects from customers under the commodity charge portion of SOS rates in a given period. BGE either bills or refunds its customers the difference in the future and includes amortization of the deferred amounts in fuel and purchased energy expense. Therefore, BGE'sBGE does not earn a profit on the cost of fuel and purchased energy because its expense approximates the amount of the related commodity charge included in revenues for the period, reflecting actual costs adjusted for the effects of the regulatory deferral mechanism.

    Regulated Gas

    BGE charges its gas customers for the natural gas they purchase from BGE using "gas cost adjustment clauses." These clauses include a market-based rates incentive mechanism that requires BGE to compare its actual cost of gas to a market index (a measure of the market price of gas for that period) and share the difference equally between shareholders and customers. This


    88


    Table of Contents

    sharing mechanism excludes fixed-price contracts which the Maryland PSC requires BGE to procure for at least 10%, but not more than 20%, of forecasted system supply requirements for the November through March period.

            BGE defers the difference between the portion of its actual gas commodity costs subject to the market-based rates incentive mechanism and what it collects from customers under the commodity charge in a given period. BGE either bills or refunds its customers the portion of this difference to which they are entitled through an adjustment to the price of gas service in


    Table of Contents

    future periods and includes amortization of the deferred amounts in fuel and purchased energy expense. Therefore, BGE's fuel and purchased energy expense approximates the amount of the related commodity charge included in revenues for the period, reflecting actual gas costs adjusted for the effects of the regulatory deferral mechanism.

    Selection of Accounting Treatment

    We determine the appropriate accounting treatment for fuel and purchased energy costs based on the nature of the transaction, governing accounting standards and, where required, by applying judgment as to the most transparent presentation of the economics of the underlying transactions. We utilize two primary accounting treatments to recognize and report these costs in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss):

            We describe each of these accounting treatments below.

    Accrual Accounting

    Under accrual accounting, we record fuel and purchased energy expenses in the period when we consume the fuel or purchase the electricity or other commodity for resale. We use accrual accounting to recognize substantially all of our fuel and purchased energy expenses as part of our physical delivery activities. We make these purchases using a variety of instruments, including non-derivative transactions, derivatives that qualify for and are designated as NPNS, and spot-market purchases, including settlements with independent system operators. These transactions also include power purchase agreements that qualify as operating leases, for which fuel and purchased energy consists of both fixed capacity payments and variable payments based on the actual output of the plants. We discuss the NPNS election later in this Note underDerivatives and Hedging Activities.

            In certain cases, we use mark-to-market accounting rather than accrual accounting for recognizing fuel and purchased energy expenses on physical commodity derivatives if we have not designated those contracts as NPNS.

            We include in accrual fuel and purchased energy expenses the effects of hedge accounting for derivative contracts that qualify as hedges of our fuel and purchased energy costs. Substantially all of the derivatives that we designate as hedges are cash flow hedges. We recognize the effective portion of hedge gains or losses in fuel and purchased energy expenses during the same period in which we record the costs from the hedged transaction. We record any hedge ineffectiveness in expense when it occurs. We discuss our use of hedge accounting in theDerivatives and Hedging Activities section later in this Note.

            We may make or receive cash payments at the time we assume previously existing power purchase agreements or other contracts for which the contract price differs from current market prices. We recognize the cash payment at inception in our Consolidated Balance Sheets as an "Unamortized energy contract" asset or liability. We amortize these assets and liabilities into fuel and purchased energy expenses based on the present value of the underlying cash flows provided by the contracts.

            The following table summarizes the primary components of accrual purchased fuel and energy expense:

     
     Activity
    Component of
    Accrual Fuel and
    Purchased Energy
    Expense

     Nonregulated
    Physical
    Energy
    Delivery

     Regulated
    Electricity
    and Gas
    Sales

     Other
    Nonregulated
    Products and
    Services

     

    Actual costs of fuel and purchased energy

     X X X
     

    Reclassification of net gains/losses on cash flow hedges from AOCI

     X    
     

    Ineffective portion of net gains/losses on cash flow hedges

     X    
     

    Amortization of acquired energy contract assets or liabilities

     X    
     

    Deferral or amortization of deferred SOS and gas cost adjustment clause regulatory assets/liabilities

       X  
     

    Mark-to-Market Accounting

    We record fuel and purchased energy expenses using the mark-to-market method of accounting for transactions under derivative contracts for which we are not permitted, or do not elect, to use accrual accounting or hedge accounting in order to match the earnings impacts of those activities to the greatest extent permissible. These mark-to-market transactions primarily relate to our physical international coal purchase contracts.contracts in 2009 and 2008. Mark-to-market costs include:

            Under the mark-to-market method of accounting, we record any inception fair value of these contracts as derivative assets and liabilities at the time of contract execution. We record subsequent changes in the fair value of these derivative assets and liabilities on a net basis in "Fuel and purchased energy expense" in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss). We discuss our mark-to-market accounting policy in theDerivatives and Hedging Activities section later in this Note.


    89


    Table of Contents

    Derivatives and Hedging Activities

    We engage in electricity, natural gas, coal, emission allowances, and other commodity marketing and risk management activities as part of our merchant energyNewEnergy business. In order to manage our exposure to commodity price fluctuations, we enter into energy and energy-related derivative contracts traded in the


    Table of Contents

    over-the-counter markets or on exchanges. These contracts include:

            We use interest rate swaps to manage our interest rate exposures associated with new debt issuances, to manage our exposure to fluctuations in interest rates on variable rate debt, and to optimize the mix of fixed and floating-rate debt. We use foreign currency swaps to manage our exposure to foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations.

    Selection of Accounting Treatment

    We account for derivative instruments and hedging activities in accordance with several possible accounting treatments for derivatives that meet all of the requirements of the accounting standard. Mark-to-market is the default accounting treatment for all derivatives unless they qualify, and we specifically designate them, for one of the other accounting treatments. Derivatives designated for any of the other elective accounting treatments must meet specific, restrictive criteria, both at the time of designation and on an ongoing basis.

            The following are permissible accounting treatments for derivatives:

            Each of the accounting treatments for derivatives affects our financial statements in substantially different ways as summarized below:

     
     Recognition and Measurement
    Accounting
    Treatment

     Balance Sheet
     Income Statement
     
    Mark-to-market •  Derivative asset or liability recorded at fair value •  Changes in fair value recognized in earnings
     
    Cash flow hedge •  Derivative asset or liability recorded at fair value
    •  Effective changes in fair value recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income
     •  Ineffective changes in fair value recognized in earnings
    •  Amounts in accumulated other comprehensive income reclassified to earnings when the hedged forecasted transaction affects earnings or becomes probable of not occurring
     
    Fair value hedge •  Derivative asset or liability recorded at fair value

    •  Changes in fair value recognized in earnings
    •  Book value of hedged asset or liability adjusted for changes in its fair value •  Changes in fair value recognized in earnings
    •  Changes in fair value of hedged asset or liability recognized in earnings
     
    NPNS (accrual) •  Fair value not recorded

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

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

    Mark-to-Market

    We generally apply mark-to-market accounting for risk management and trading activities because changes in fair value more closely reflect the economic performance of the activity. However, we also use mark-to-market accounting for derivatives related to the following physical energy delivery activities:

            We may record origination gains associated with derivatives subject to mark-to-market accounting. Origination gains represent the initial fair value of certain structured transactions that our portfolio management and trading operation executes to meet the risk management needs of our customers. Historically, transactions that result in origination gains have been unique and resulted in individually significant gains from a single transaction. We generally recognize origination gains when we are able to obtain observable market data to validate that the initial fair value of the contract differs from the contract price.

    Cash Flow Hedge

    We generally elect cash flow hedge accounting for most of the derivatives that we use to hedge market price risk for our physical energy delivery (generation(Generation and customer supply)NewEnergy businesses) activities because accrualcash flow hedge accounting more closely aligns the timing of earnings recognition, cash flows, and the underlying business activities. We only use fair value hedge accounting on a limited basis.

            We use regression analysis to determine whether we expect a derivative to be highly effective as a cash flow hedge prior to electing hedge accounting and also to determine whether all derivatives designated as cash flow hedges have been effective. We perform these effectiveness tests prior to designation for all new hedges and on a daily basis for all existing hedges. We calculate the actual amount of ineffectiveness on our cash flow hedges using the "dollar offset" method, which compares changes in the expected cash flows of the hedged transaction to changes in the value of expected cash flows from the hedge.

            We discontinue hedge accounting when our effectiveness tests indicate that a derivative is no longer highly effective as a hedge; when the derivative expires or is sold, terminated or exercised; when the hedged item matures, is sold or repaid; or when we determine that the occurrence of the hedged forecasted


    90


    Table of Contents

    transaction is not probable. When we discontinue hedge accounting but continue to hold the derivative, we begin to apply mark-to-market accounting at that time.

    NPNS

    We elect NPNS accounting for derivative contracts that provide for the purchase or sale of a physical commodity that will be delivered in quantities expected to be used or sold over a reasonable period in the normal course of business. Once we


    Table of Contents

    elect NPNS classification for a given contract, we do not subsequently change the election and treat the contract as a derivative using mark-to-market or hedge accounting. However, if we were to determine that a transaction designated as NPNS no longer qualified for the NPNS election, we would have to record the fair value of that contract on the balance sheet at that time and immediately recognize that amount in earnings.

    Fair Value

    We record mark-to-market and hedge derivatives at fair value, which represents an exit price for the asset or liability from the perspective of a market participant. An exit price is the price at which a market participant could sell an asset or transfer a liability to an unrelated party. While some of our derivatives relate to commodities or instruments for which quoted market prices are available from external sources, many other commodities and related contracts are not actively traded. Additionally, some contracts include quantities and other factors that vary over time. As a result, often we must use modeling techniques to estimate expected future market prices, contract quantities, or both in order to determine fair value.

            The prices, quantities, and other factors we use to determine fair value reflect management's best estimates of inputs a market participant would consider. We record valuation adjustments to reflect uncertainties associated with estimates inherent in the determination of fair value that are not incorporated in market price information or other market-based estimates we use to determine fair value. To the extent possible, we utilize market-based data together with quantitative methods for both measuring the uncertainties for which we record valuation adjustments and determining the level of such adjustments and changes in those levels.

            The valuation adjustments we record include the following:

            We discuss derivatives and hedging activities as well as how we determine fair value in detail inNote 13.

    Balance Sheet Netting

    We often transact with counterparties under master agreements and other arrangements that provide us with a right of setoff of amounts due to us and from us in the event of bankruptcy or default by the counterparty. We report these transactions on a net basis in our Consolidated Balance Sheets.

            We apply balance sheet netting separately for current and noncurrent derivatives. Current derivatives represent the portion of derivative contract cash flows expected to occur within 12 months, and noncurrent derivatives represent the portion of those cash flows expected to occur beyond 12 months. Within each of these categories, we net all amounts due to and from each counterparty under master agreements into a single net asset or liability. We include fair value cash collateral amounts received and posted in determining this net asset and liability amount.

    Unamortized Energy Assets and Liabilities

    Unamortized energy contract assets and liabilities represent the remaining unamortized balance of non-derivative energy contracts that we acquired, certain contracts which no longer qualify as derivatives due to the absence of a liquid market, or derivatives designated as NPNS that we had previously recorded as "Derivative assets or liabilities." The initial amount recorded represents the fair value of the contract at the time of acquisition or designation, and the balance is amortized over the life of the contract in relation to the present value of the underlying cash flows. The amortization of these values is discussed in theRevenues andFuel and Purchased Energy Expenses sections of this Note.

    Credit Risk

    Credit risk is the loss that may result from counterparty non-performance. We are exposed to credit risk, primarily through our merchant energyNewEnergy business. We use credit policies to manage our credit risk, including utilizing an established credit approval process, daily monitoring of counterparty limits, employing credit mitigation measures such as margin, collateral (cash or letters of credit) or prepayment arrangements, and using master netting agreements. We measure credit risk as the replacement cost for open energy commodity and derivative positions (both mark-to-market and accrual) plus amounts owed from counterparties for settled transactions. The replacement cost of open positions represents unrealized gains, less any unrealized losses where we have a legally enforceable right of setoff.

            Electric and gas utilities, municipalities, cooperatives, generation owners, coal producers, and energy marketers comprise the majority of counterparties underlying our assets from our wholesale marketing and risk management activities. We held cash collateral from these counterparties totaling $28.8 million as of December 31, 2010 and $95.2 million as of December 31, 2009 and $258.3 million as of December 31, 2008.2009. These amounts are included in "Customer deposits and collateral" in our Consolidated Balance Sheets.

            We consider a significant concentration of credit risk to be any single obligor or counterparty whose concentration exceeds 10% of our total credit exposure. As of December 31, 2009, we only had one significant counterparty concentration,2010, two


    91


    Table of Contents

    counterparties, CENG which comprisedand a large power cooperative, comprise total exposure concentrations of 25% of our total credit exposure. This exposure is primarily related to the power purchase agreement that we executed with CENG which has a value of $0.8 billion, which is recorded on our balance sheet in "Unamortized energy contract assets." However, no collection of. No counterparties based in a single country other than the United States comprisedin aggregate comprise more than 10% of the total exposure of our total credit exposure.the portfolio.


    Table of Contents

    Equity Investment (Losses) Earnings

    We include equity in earnings from our investments in qualifying facilities and power projects, joint ventures, and Constellation Energy Partners LLC (CEP) in "Equity Investment (Losses) Earnings" in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss) in the period they are earned. "Equity Investment (Losses) Earnings" also includes any adjustments to amortize the difference, if any, except for goodwill and land, between our cost in an equity method investment and our underlying equity in net assets of the investee at the date of investment.

            We consider our investments in generation-related qualifying facilities, power projects, and joint ventures to be integral to our operations.

    Taxes

    We summarize our income taxes inNote 10. BGE and our other subsidiaries record their allocated share of our consolidated federal income tax liability using the percentage complementary method specified in U.S. income tax regulations. As you read this section, it may be helpful to refer toNote 10.

    Income Tax Expense

    We have two categories of income tax expense—current and deferred. We describe each of these below:

    Tax Credits

    We defer the investment tax credits associated with our regulated business, assets previously held by our regulated business, and any investment tax credits that are convertible to cash grants in our Consolidated Balance Sheets. The investment tax credits that are convertible to cash grants are recorded as a reduction to the carrying value of the underlying property and subsequently amortized evenly to incomeearnings over the life of each underlying property. We reduce current income tax expense in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss) for theany investment tax credits that are not convertible to cash grants and other tax credits associated with our nonregulated businesses.

            Through December 31, 2007, we held certain investments in facilities that manufactured solid synthetic fuel produced from coal as defined under the Internal Revenue Code for which we claimed tax credits on our Federal income tax return. Because the federal tax credit for synthetic fuel produced from coal expired on December 31, 2007, these facilities ceased fuel production on that date. We recognized the tax benefit of these credits in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss) when we believed it was highly probable that the credits will be sustained.

    Deferred Income Tax Assets and Liabilities

    We must report some of our revenues and expenses differently for our financial statements than for income tax return purposes. The tax effects of the temporary differences in these items are reported as deferred income tax assets or liabilities in our Consolidated Balance Sheets. We measure the deferred income tax assets and liabilities using income tax rates that are currently in effect.

            A portion of our total deferred income tax liability relates to our regulated business, but has not been reflected in the rates we charge our customers. We refer to this portion of the liability as "Income taxes recoverable through future rates (net)." We have recorded that portion of the net liability as a regulatory asset in our Consolidated Balance Sheets. We discuss this further inNote 6.

    Interest and Penalties

    We recognize interest and penalties related to tax underpayments, assessments, and unrecognized tax benefits in "Income tax expense (benefit)" in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss).

    Unrecognized Tax Benefits

    We recognize in our financial statements the effects of uncertain tax positions if we believe that these positions are "more-likely-than-not" to be realized. We establish liabilities to reflect the portion of those positions we cannot conclude are "more-likely-than-not" to be realized upon ultimate settlement. These are referred to as liabilities for unrecognized tax benefits.

            We discuss our unrecognized tax benefits in more detail inNote 10.

    State and Local Taxes

    State and local income taxes are included in "Income taxes"tax expense (benefit)" in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss).

    Taxes Other Than Income Taxes

    Taxes other than income taxes primarily include property and gross receipts taxes along with franchise taxes and other non-income taxes, surcharges, and fees.

            BGE and our Customer Supply operationsNewEnergy business collect certain taxes from customers such as sales and gross receipts taxes, along with other taxes, surcharges, and fees that are levied by state or local governments on the sale or distribution of gas and electricity. Some of these taxes are imposed on the customer and others are imposed on BGE and our Customer Supply operations.NewEnergy business. Where these taxes, such as sales taxes, are imposed on the customer, we account for these taxes on a net basis with no impact to our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss). However, where these taxes, such as gross receipts taxes or other surcharges or fees, are imposed on BGE or our Customer Supply operations,NewEnergy business, we account for these taxes on a gross basis. Accordingly, we recognize revenues for these taxes collected from customers along with an offsetting tax expense, which are both included in our Consolidated


    92


    Table of Contents

    Statements of Income (Loss). The taxes, surcharges, or fees that are included in revenues were as follows:

    Year Ended December 31,
     2009
     2008
     2007
      2010
     2009
     2008
     
       

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    Constellation Energy (including BGE)

     $106.8 $111.7 $113.4  $122.2 $106.8 $111.7 

    BGE

     76.8 73.2 77.0  81.9 76.8 73.2 
       

    Unrecognized Tax Benefits

    We adopted guidance related to the accounting for uncertainty in income taxes on January 1, 2007.

            We recognize in our financial statements the effects of uncertain tax positions if these positions meet a "more-likely-than-not" threshold. For those uncertain tax positions that we have recognized in our financial statements, we establish liabilities to reflect the portion of those positions we cannot conclude are "more-likely-than-not" to be realized upon ultimate settlement. These are referred to as liabilities for unrecognized tax benefits. We recognize interest and penalties


    Table of Contents

    related to unrecognized tax benefits in "Income tax expense" in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss).

            We discuss our unrecognized tax benefits in more detail inNote 10.

    Earnings Per Share

    Basic earnings per common share (EPS) is computed by dividing net income (loss) attributable to common stock by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding for the year. Diluted EPS reflects the potential dilution of common stock equivalent shares that could occur if securities or other contracts to issue common stock were exercised or converted into common stock.

            Our dilutive common stock equivalent shares primarily consist of stock options and other stock-based compensation awards. The following table presents stock options that were not dilutive and were excluded from the computation of diluted EPS in each period, as well as the dilutive common stock equivalent shares as follows:

    Year Ended December 31,
     2009
     2008
     2007
      2010
     2009
     2008
     
       

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    Non-dilutive stock options

     5.1 2.6   5.6 5.1 2.6 

    Dilutive common stock equivalent shares

     1.0 5.5 2.3  1.6 1.0 5.5 

    As a result of the Company incurring a loss for the yearyears ended December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2008, diluted common stock equivalent shares were not included in calculating diluted EPS.EPS for those reporting periods.

            We issued to MidAmerican Energy Holdings Company (MidAmerican) 19,897,322 shares of Constellation Energy's common stock upon the conversion of the Series A Preferred Stock, which occurred upon the termination of the merger agreement with MidAmerican on December 17, 2008. These additional shares impacted our earnings per share for 2009.

    Stock-Based Compensation

    Under our long-term incentive plans, we have granted stock options, performance-based units, service-based units, performance and service-based restricted stock, and equity to officers, key employees, and members of the Board of Directors. We discuss these awards in more detail inNote 14.

            We recognize compensation expense for all equity-based compensation awards issued to employees that are expected to vest. Equity-based compensation awards include stock options, restricted stock, and any other share-based payments. We recognize compensation cost ratably or in tranches (depending if the award has cliff or graded vesting) over the period during which an employee is required to provide service in exchange for the award, which is typically a one to five-year period. We use a forfeiture assumption based on historical experience to estimate the number of awards that are expected to vest during the service period, and ultimately true-up the estimated expense to the actual expense associated with vested awards. We estimate the fair value of stock option awards on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model and we remeasure the fair value of liability awards each reporting period. We do not capitalize any portion of our stock-based compensation.

    Cash and Cash Equivalents

    All highly liquid investments with original maturities of three months or less are considered cash equivalents.

    Accounts Receivable and Allowance for Uncollectibles

    Accounts receivable, which includes cash collateral posted in our margin account with third party brokers, are stated at the historical carrying amount net of write-offs and allowance for uncollectibles. We establish an allowance for uncollectibles based on our expected exposure to the credit risk of customers based on a variety of factors.

    Materials, Supplies, and Fuel Stocks

    We record our fuel stocks, emissions credits, renewable energy credits, coal held for resale, and materials and supplies at the lower of cost or market. We determine cost using the average cost method for our entire inventory.

    Restricted Cash

    At December 31, 2009,2010, our restricted cash primarily includesincluded cash at one of our consolidated variable interest entities, cash held in escrow for the acquisition of the Boston Generating fleet of generating plants, and BGE's funds restricted for the repayment of the rate stabilization bonds. At December 31, 2009, restricted cash also included proceeds from financing for the acquisition, construction, installation and equipping of certain sewage and solid waste disposal facilities at our Brandon Shores coal-fired generating plant in Maryland and BGE's funds restricted for the repayment of the rate stabilization bonds. At December 31, 2008, restricted cash also included the proceeds that we received on December 17, 2008 from issuance of the Series B Preferred Stock to EDF. These proceeds were restricted for payment of the 14% Senior Note that was held by MidAmerican. We used these proceeds to repay the 14% Senior Note in January 2009.Maryland.

            As of December 31, 20092010 and 2008,2009, BGE's restricted cash primarily represented funds restricted at its consolidated variable interest entity for the repayment of the rate stabilization bonds. We discuss the rate stabilization bonds in more detail inNote 9.

    Financial Investments

    InNote 4, we summarize the financial investments that are in our Consolidated Balance Sheets.

            We report our debt and equity securities at fair value, and we use either specific identification or average cost to determine their cost for computing realized gains or losses.

    Available-for-Sale Securities

    We classify our investments in trust assets securing certain executive benefits that are classified as available-for-sale securities.

            We include any unrealized gains (losses) on our available-for-sale securities in "Accumulated other comprehensive loss" in our Consolidated Statements of Common Shareholders' Equity and Comprehensive Income.Income (Loss).


    93


    Table of Contents

    Evaluation of Assets for Impairment and Other Than Temporary Decline in Value

    Long-Lived Assets

    We evaluate certain assets that have long lives (for example, generating property and equipment and real estate) to determine


    Table of Contents

    if they are impaired when certain conditions exist. We test our long-lived assets and proved gas properties for recoverability whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that their carrying amount may not be recoverable.

            We determine if long-lived assets and proved gas properties are impaired by comparing their undiscounted expected future cash flows to their carrying amount in our accounting records. We record an impairment loss if the undiscounted expected future cash flows are less than the carrying amount of the asset. Cash flows for long-lived assets are determined at the lowest level for which identifiable cash flows are largely independent of the cash flows of other assets and liabilities. Proven gas properties' cash flows are determined at the field level. Undiscounted expected future cash flows for proved gas properties include risk-adjusted probable and possible reserves.

            We are also required to evaluate our equity-method and cost-method investments (for example, CENG and partnerships that own power projects) for impairment. The standard for determining whetherrecord an impairment must be recorded is whetherloss if the investment has experienced aundiscounted expected future cash flows are less than the carrying amount of the asset. The amount of the impairment loss we record equals the difference between the estimated fair value of the asset and its carrying amount in value that is considered an "other than a temporary" decline.our accounting records.

            We evaluate unproved gas producing properties at least annually to determine if they are impaired. Impairment for unproved property occurs if there are no firm plans to continue drilling, lease expiration is at risk, or historical experience necessitates a valuation allowance.

            We use our best estimates in making these evaluations and consider various factors, including forward price curves for energy, fuel costs, legislative initiatives, and operating costs. However, actual future market prices and project costs could vary from those used in our impairment evaluations, and the impact of such variations could be material.

    Investments

    We evaluate our equity-methodequity method and cost-methodcost method investments (for example, CENG, UniStar Nuclear Energy, LLC (UNE), CEP and partnerships that own power projects) to determine whether or not they are impaired. The standard for determining whether an impairment must be recorded is whether the investment has experienced an "other than a temporary" decline in value.

            Additionally, if the projects in which we hold these investments recognize an impairment, we would record our proportionate share of that impairment loss and would evaluate our investment for an other than temporary decline in value.

            We continuously monitor issues that potentially could impact future profitability of our equity-methodequity method investments that own geothermal, coal, hydroelectric, fuel processing projects, as well as our equity investments in our nuclear joint venturesventure and CEP. These issues include environmental and legislative initiatives as well as events that will impact the viability of new nuclear development.initiatives.

    Debt and Equity Securities

    We determine whether a decline in fair value of a debt or equity investment below book value is other than temporary. If we determine that the decline in fair value is other than temporary, we write-down the cost basis of the investment to fair value as a new cost basis.

    Goodwill and Intangible Assets

    Goodwill is the excess of the purchase price of an acquired business over the fair value of the net assets acquired. We do not amortize goodwill. We evaluate goodwill for impairment at least annually or more frequently if events and circumstances indicate the business might be impaired. Goodwill is impaired if the carrying value of the business exceeds fair value. Annually, we estimate the fair value of theour businesses we have acquired using techniques similar to those used to estimate future cash flows for long-lived assets as previously discussed. If the estimated fair value of the business is less than its carrying value, an impairment loss is required to be recognized to the extent that the carrying value of goodwill is greater than its fair value. We amortize intangible assets with finite lives. We discuss the changes in our goodwill and intangible assets in more detail inNote 5.

    Property, Plant and Equipment, Depreciation, Depletion, Amortization, and Accretion of Asset Retirement Obligations

    We report our property, plant and equipment at its original cost, unless impaired.

            Original cost includes:

            We own an undivided interest in the Keystone and Conemaugh electric generating plants in Western Pennsylvania, as well as in the Conemaugh substation and transmission line that transports the plants' output to the joint owners' service territories. Our ownership interests in these plants are 20.99% in Keystone and 10.56% in Conemaugh. These ownership interests represented a net investment of $338.0 million at December 31, 2010 and $339.6 million at December 31, 2009 and $285.1 million at December 31, 2008.2009. Each owner is responsible for financing its proportionate share of the plants' working funds. Working funds are used for operating expenses and capital expenditures. Operating expenses related to these plants are included in "Operating expenses" in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss). Capital costs related to these plants are included in "Nonregulated property, plant and equipment" in our Consolidated Balance Sheets.

            The "Nonregulated property, plant and equipment" in our Consolidated Balance Sheets includes nonregulated generation construction work in progress of $70.9 million at December 31, 2010 and $685.1 million at December 31, 2009 and $1,230.8 million at December 31, 2008.2009.

            When we retire or dispose of property, plant and equipment, we remove the asset's cost from our Consolidated Balance Sheets. We charge this cost to accumulated depreciation for assets that were depreciated under the group, straight-line method. This includes regulated property, plant and equipment and nonregulated generating assets. For all other assets, we remove the accumulated depreciation and amortization amounts


    Table of Contents

    from our Consolidated Balance Sheets and record any gain or loss in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss).

            The costs of maintenance and certain replacements are charged to "Operating expenses" in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss) as incurred.


    94


    Table of Contents

            Our oil and gas exploration and production activities consist of working interests in gas producing fields. We account 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.

    Depreciation and Depletion Expense

    We compute depreciation for our generating, electric transmission and distribution, and gas distribution facilities. We compute depletion for our oil and gas exploitation and production activities. Depreciation and depletion are determined using the following methods:

            Other assets are depreciated primarily using the straight-line method and the following estimated useful lives:

    Asset
     Estimated Useful Lives
     

    Building and improvements

     5 - 50 years

    Office equipment and furniture

     3 - 20 years

    Transportation equipment

     5 - 15 years

    Computer software

     3 - 10 years

    Amortization Expense

    Amortization is an accounting process of reducing an asset amount in our Consolidated Balance Sheets over a period of time that approximates the asset's useful life of the related item.life. When we reduce amounts in our Consolidated Balance Sheets, we increaserecord amortization expense in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss). We discuss the types of assets that we amortize and the periods over which we amortize them in more detail inNote 5.

    Accretion Expense

    We recognize an estimated liability for legal obligations and legal obligations conditional upon a future event associated with the retirement of tangible long-lived assets. Our conditional asset retirement obligations relate primarily to asbestos removal at certain of our generating facilities.

            Prior to November 6, 2009, substantially all of our total asset retirement obligation was associated with the decommissioning of our nuclear power plants—Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant (Calvert Cliffs), Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station (Nine Mile Point) and R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant (Ginna). Upon the close of the transaction with EDF on November 6, 2009, we deconsolidated CENG and removed the asset retirement obligations associated with these nuclear power plants from our Consolidated Balance Sheets. Our remaining asset retirement obligations are associated with our other generating facilities and certain other long-lived assets.

            From time to time, we will perform studies to update our asset retirement obligations. We record a liability when we are able to reasonably estimate the fair value of any future legal obligations associated with retirement that have been incurred and capitalize a corresponding amount as part of the book value of the related long-lived assets.

            The increase in the capitalized cost is included in determining depreciation expense over the estimated useful lives of these assets. Since the fair value of the asset retirement obligations is determined using a present value approach, accretion of the liability due to the passage of time is recognized each period to "Accretion of asset retirement obligations" in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss) until the settlement of the liability. We record a gain or loss when the liability is settled after retirement for any difference between the accrued liability and actual costs. The change in our "Asset retirement obligations" liability during 2009 was as follows:

      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Liability at January 1, 2009

     $987.3 

    Accretion expense

      62.3 

    Liabilities incurred

      0.2 

    Liabilities settled

      (1.0)

    Revisions to cash flows

      5.8 

    Deconsolidation of CENG

      (1,025.2)

    Other

      (0.1)
      

    Liability at December 31, 2009

     $29.3 
      

    Nuclear Fuel

    Through November 6, 2009, we amortized the cost of nuclear fuel, including the quarterly fees we pay to the Department of Energy (DOE) for the future disposal of spent nuclear fuel, based on the energy produced over the life of the fuel. These fees were based on the kilowatt-hours of electricity sold. We report the amortization expense for nuclear fuel in "Fuel and purchased energy expenses" in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss).

    Capitalized Interest and Allowance for Funds Used During Construction

    Capitalized Interest

    Our nonregulated businesses capitalize interest costs for costs incurred to finance our power plant construction projects, real estate developed for internal use, and other capital projects.


    Table of Contents

    Allowance for Funds Used During Construction (AFC)

    BGE finances its construction projects with borrowed funds and equity funds. BGE is allowed by the Maryland PSC and the FERC to record the costs of these funds as part of the cost of construction projects in its Consolidated Balance Sheets. BGE does this through the AFC, which it calculates using rates authorized by the Maryland PSC and the FERC. BGE bills its customers for the AFC plus a return after the utility property is placed in service.

            The AFC rates are 9.4%for the period January 1, 2010 through December 3, 2010 were 9.40% for electric distribution plant, 8.8%8.47% for electric transmission plant, 8.5%8.49% for gas plant, and 9.1%9.08% for common plant. The AFC rates for the period December 4, 2010 through December 31, 2010 were 8.06% for electric distribution plant, 8.47% for electric transmission plant, 7.90% for gas plant, and 8.07% for common plant. BGE compounds AFC annually.

    Long-Term Debt and Credit Facilities

    We defer all costs related to the issuance of long-term debt and credit facilities. These costs include underwriters' commissions, discounts or premiums, other costs such as external legal, accounting, and regulatory fees, and printing costs. We amortize costs related to long-term debt into interest expense over the life


    95


    Table of Contents

    of the debt. We amortize costs related to credit facilities to other (expenses) income (expense) over the terms of the facilities.

            In addition to the fees that are paid upfront for credit facilities, we also incur ongoing fees related to these facilities. We record the ongoing fees in other (expense) income, (expense), and we record interest incurred on cash draws in interest expense.

            When BGE incurs gains or losses on debt that it retires prior to maturity, it amortizes those gains or losses over the remaining original life of the debt in accordance with regulatory requirements.

    Accounting Standards IssuedAdopted

    Accounting for Variable Interest Entities

    In June 2009, the FASB amended the accounting, presentation, and disclosure guidance related to variable interest entities, effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after November 15, 2009.entities.

            The amended standard includes the following significant provisions:

            We adopted this guidance on January 1, 2010 and, as a result of our assessment and implementation of the new requirements, our accounting and disclosures related to VIEs were impacted as follows:

            We are completingdiscuss our evaluation of this standard. Based on our evaluation to date, we believe the primary impact will be increased VIE disclosures, and we do not believe the implementation of this standard will have a material impact on our, or BGE's, financial results.investments in variable interest entities in more detail in Accounting Standards AdoptedNote 4.

    Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated Financial Statements

    In December 2007, the FASB issued amendedEffective January 1, 2009, we adopted guidance relatedrelating to the accounting and reporting of noncontrolling interests in consolidated financial statements. A noncontrolling interest in a subsidiary is now considered an ownership interest in the consolidated entity that should be reported as equity in the consolidated financial statements. This presentation views the consolidated business as a single economic entity and considers minority ownership interests in consolidated subsidiaries as equity in the consolidated entity.

            Under the amended guidance, companies are required to:

            Effective January 1, 2009, weWe presented and disclosed our noncontrolling interests in our Consolidated Financial Statements, in accordance with the amended guidance, and we accounted for the 2009 sale of a 49.99% membership interest in CENG to EDF by deconsolidating CENG, measuring our retained interest at fair value, and recognizing a gain at closing. We discuss this transaction in more detail inNote 2.


    96


    Table of Contents

    Other Events

    2010 Events

     
     Pre-Tax
     After-Tax
     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Impairment losses and other costs

     $(2,476.8)$(1,487.1)

    International coal contract dispute settlement

      56.6  35.4 

    Deferred income tax expense relating to federal subsidies for providing post-employment prescription drug benefits

         (8.8)

    Amortization of basis difference in CENG

      (195.2) (117.5)

    Loss on early retirement of 2012 Notes

      (51.6) (30.9)

    Impact of power purchase agreement with CENG

      (185.6) (113.3)

    Gain on divestitures

      240.0  146.0 
      

    Total other items

     $(2,612.6)$(1,576.2)
      

    Disclosures about Derivative InstrumentsImpairment Losses and Hedging ActivitiesOther Costs

    In March 2008, the FASB issued amended guidance requiring significantly expanded disclosures about derivative instrumentsImpairment Evaluations

    We discuss our policy for evaluation of assets for impairment and hedging activities, but did not change the accounting for derivatives. We adopted the new disclosure requirements on January 1, 2009 and provide these additional disclosuresother than temporary declines in value inNote 131. We perform impairment evaluations for our long-lived assets, equity method and cost method investments, and goodwill when events occur that indicate that the potential for an impairment exists.

            During the third quarter of 2010, the following events resulted in the need for us to perform impairment evaluations of our equity method investments as well as the power plants we own:

            As a result of these evaluations, we recorded impairments of several of our equity method investments. We describe the impairment evaluations we performed in the following sections.

    Equity Method Investments

    We evaluated certain of our equity method investments in light of recent declines in commodity prices and the completion of the process that led to our rejection of the terms and conditions of the DOE loan guarantee for the development of new nuclear assets. The investments we evaluated include our investment in CENG, our investment in UNE, and our investments in certain qualifying facilities.

            We record an impairment if an investment has experienced a decline in fair value to a level less than our carrying value and the decline is "other than temporary." We do not record an impairment if the decline in value is temporary and we have the ability to recover the carrying amount of our investment. In making this determination, we evaluate the reasons for an investment's decline in value, the extent and length of that decline, and factors that indicate whether and when the value will recover.

    CENG

    As of September 30, 2010, the estimated fair value of our investment in CENG was $2.9 billion, which was lower than its carrying value of $5.2 billion. The carrying value of our investment reflected fair value as of the November 9, 2009 closing of EDF's investment in CENG. At that time, we were required to deconsolidate CENG and record our retained investment at fair value. We describe this transaction in more detail inNote 16.

            There is no active market for the ownership interests in CENG or comparable entities that solely own and operate nuclear power plants. Therefore, we were required to exercise significant judgment in estimating the fair value of our investment based upon information that a market participant would consider. We believe our estimate incorporates the best data available as of September 30, 2010 for each input, which we describe below. However, the resulting fair value amount remains an estimate and is subject to change in the future based upon changes in any of the inputs or the underlying operating, market, and economic conditions we considered.

            Because of the absence of relevant market transactions for similar entities, we estimated the fair value of CENG using discounted future cash flows based upon inputs that we believe reflect a market participant's perspective. Our methodology was consistent with the methodology used to estimate fair value in November 2009. The most significant inputs to our estimate of fair value include expectations of nuclear plant performance, future power prices, nuclear fuel and operating costs, forecasted capital expenditures, existing power sales commitments and a discounting factor reflective of an investor's required risk-adjusted return. To the extent possible, we considered available market information and other third-party data for each of the inputs. However, because of the long operating lives of nuclear power plants, we were required to estimate inputs for many years beyond periods for which observable market data is available. Additionally, we compared the inputs to relevant historical information, and we benchmarked our valuation using implied market data of other companies that own nuclear generation facilities.

            Upon completion of our evaluation, we determined that the fair value of our investment in CENG had declined by approximately $2.3 billion on a pre-tax basis as of September 30, 2010. The decline in fair value is primarily attributable to the following factors:


    97


    Table of Contents

            Based upon the extent of the decline below carrying value, the fundamental reasons for the decline, and our assessment that a sufficient improvement in these factors necessary to produce a recovery in fair value is not likely to occur in the near term, we determined that the decline is other than temporary. Therefore, we recorded an approximately $2.3 billion pre-tax impairment charge during the quarter ended September 30, 2010 to write-down our investment to fair value as of that date. We recorded this charge in "Impairment losses and other costs" in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss). To the extent that the fair value of our investment declines further in future quarters, we may record additional write-downs if we determine that any additional declines are other than temporary.

    UNE

    As of September 30, 2010, the estimated fair value of our investment in UNE was zero as compared to its carrying value of $143.4 million.

            Prior to the third quarter of 2010, we believed that we would recover our investment in UNE through the development and operation of a new nuclear power plant. However, during the third quarter of 2010, several factors led to a decline in the fair value of our investment, including:

            As a result of evaluating these factors, we determined that, as of September 30, 2010, we would not be able to recover the value of our investment. Our determination was based primarily on market-related factors that indicated that a market participant would assign little or no value to this entity due to the absence of a DOE loan guarantee.

            We also evaluated whether this decline in fair value was temporary. Based upon the nature of the factors leading to the decline, we determined, at September 30, 2010, that it was unlikely that these matters would be resolved in the near term in a way that would permit recovery in the fair value of our investment. Therefore, we concluded that the decline in the value of our investment in UNE was other than temporary, and we recorded a $143.4 million pre-tax impairment charge during the quarter ended September 30, 2010 to write-down our investment to estimated fair value as of that date. We recorded this charge in "Impairment losses and other costs" in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss).

    Qualifying Facilities

    As a result of the significant declines in power prices during the third quarter of 2010, we determined that the fair values of three of our equity method investments in coal-fired generating plants in California declined substantially below book value. As a result, we recorded a $50.0 million pre-tax impairment charge during the quarter ended September 30, 2010 to write down our investments to fair value as of that date.

            Additionally, as a result of a sale of an ownership interest by our partner in the fourth quarter of 2010, we recorded an $8.4 million pre-tax impairment charge on one other equity method investment in California at December 31, 2010. We recorded these charges in the "Impairment losses and other costs" line in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss).

    Generating Plants

    We evaluated the impact of the events that occurred during the third quarter of 2010 on the recoverability of our generating plants. As discussed inNote 1, we evaluated whether these plants would generate undiscounted cash flows from operations that are at least sufficient to recover the carrying value of our investment. Based upon our consideration of these events, the primary impact of which is a reduction in power prices, and the status of the generating plants' activities, we determined that our generating plants were not impaired as of September 30, or December 31, 2010.

    Goodwill

    We performed our annual impairment review in the quarter ended September 30, 2010 and determined that our goodwill is not impaired.

    International Coal Contract Dispute Settlement

    During 2010, we finalized the settlement of a contract dispute with a third party international coal supplier recognizing net pre-tax earnings of $56.6 million. We divested the majority of our international commodities operations in 2009.

    Deferred Income Tax Expense Relating to Federal Subsidies for Providing Post-Employment Prescription Drug Benefits

    During March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the Healthcare and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 were signed into law. These laws eliminate the tax exempt status of drug subsidies provided to companies under Medicare Part D after December 31, 2012. As a result of this new legislation, we recorded a noncash charge to reflect additional deferred income tax expense of $8.8 million in March 2010.

    Amortization of Basis Difference in CENG

    On November 6, 2009, Constellation Energy sold a 49.99% membership interest in CENG to EDF for total consideration of approximately $4.7 billion (includes $3.5 billion in cash at close, the non-cash redemption of the $1.0 billion Series B Preferred Stock held by EDF, and certain expense reimbursements). As a result, we ceased to have a controlling financial interest in CENG and deconsolidated CENG in the fourth quarter of 2009.


    98


    Table of Contents

            On November 6, 2009, we began to account for our retained investment in CENG using the equity method and report our share of its earnings in our Generation business segment. As a result, we no longer record the individual income statement line items, but instead record our share of the investment's earnings in a single line in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss).

            We had an initial basis difference of approximately $3.9 billion between the initial carrying value of our investment in CENG and our underlying equity in CENG. This basis difference was caused by the requirement to record our investment in CENG at fair value at closing while CENG's assets and liabilities retained their carrying value. We are amortizing this basis difference over the respective useful lives of the assets of CENG or as those assets impact the earnings of CENG.

            Beginning in the fourth quarter of 2010, the amortization of the basis difference in CENG is lower as the basis difference was reduced by the amount of the impairment charge recorded on our investment in CENG during the quarter ended September 30, 2010. The new basis difference as of September 30, 2010 is $1.5 billion.

            For the year ended December 31, 2010, we recorded $195.2 million of pre-tax basis difference amortization as a reduction to our equity investment earnings in CENG. We discuss the components of our equity investment earnings inNote 4.

    Determining Fair Value WhenLoss on Early Retirement of 2012 Notes

    In February 2010, we retired an aggregate principal amount of $486.5 million of our 7.00% Notes due April 1, 2012 as part of a cash tender offer, at a premium of approximately 11%. We recognized a pre-tax loss on this transaction of $51.6 million within "Interest Expense" on our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss).

    Impact of Power Purchase Agreement with CENG

    In connection with the Volume and Levelclosing of Activitythe CENG membership sale transaction with EDF, we entered into a five year power purchase agreement (PPA) with CENG with an initial fair value of $0.8 billion.

            Based on energy prices at the time of closing of the EDF transaction, we recorded the approximately $0.8 billion "Unamortized energy contract asset" for the Asset or Liability have Significantly Decreasedvalue of our PPA with CENG, and Identifying Transactions That Are Not OrderlyCENG recorded an approximately ($0.8) billion "Unamortized energy contract liability." Both entities are amortizing these amounts over the initial two years of the five-year term of the PPA, with the total net economic value to be realized by us in the form of lower purchased power costs equal to approximately $0.4 billion as a result of our 50.01% ownership interest in CENG. During 2010, we realized approximately $185.6 million pre-tax in economic value relating to its PPA with CENG.

    Divestitures

    BGE

    In April 2009,January 2010, BGE completed the FASB issued accounting guidance for determining fair value when the volume and levelsale of activity for the assetits interest in a nonregulated subsidiary that owns a district chilled water facility to a third party. BGE received net cash proceeds of $20.9 million. No gain or liability have significantly decreased and for identifying transactions that are not orderly. The guidance provides for estimating fair value when the volume and level of activity for the asset or liability have decreased and assistsloss was recorded on this transaction in identifying circumstances that indicate a transaction is not orderly. Finally, the guidance expands the disclosure requirements for fair value measurements to include2010. BGE has no further disaggregationinvolvement in the tabular disclosures.activities of this entity.

    Mammoth Lakes Geothermal Generating Facility

    In August 2010, we completed the sale of our 50% equity interest in the Mammoth Lakes geothermal generating facility in California. We adoptedreceived net cash proceeds of approximately $72.5 million. In the third quarter of 2010, our Generation business recorded a $38.0 million pre-tax gain on this guidance astransaction. We will have no further involvement in the activities of April 1, 2009this generating facility.

    Comprehensive Agreement with no effectEDF

    In November 2010, we closed on our, or BGE's, financial resultsthe comprehensive agreement with EDF that restructured the relationship between Constellation Energy and providedEDF, eliminated the required disclosures about fair value measurementsoutstanding asset put arrangement, and transferred to EDF the full ownership of UNE. We received approximately $140 million of cash, and $75.2 million of Constellation Energy common stock and recorded a $202.0 million pre-tax gain on this transaction. We discuss the comprehensive agreement with EDF inNote 134. The adoption of this standard only impacted our disclosures.


    2Other Events

    Quail Run Energy Center

    In December 2010, we signed an agreement to sell our Quail Run Energy Center, a 550 MW natural gas plant in west Texas, to High Plains Diversified Energy Corporation (HPDEC) for $185.3 million. This agreement is contingent upon HPDEC obtaining financing through the sale of municipal bonds.


    99


    Table of Contents

    2009 Events

     
     Pre-Tax
     After-Tax
     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Gain on sale of 49.99% membership interest in our nuclear generation and operation business (CENG) to EDF

     $7,445.6 $4,456.1 

    Amortization of basis difference in CENG

      (29.6) (17.8)

    Net loss on divestitures

      (468.8) (293.2)

    Impairment losses and other costs (1)

      (124.7) (96.2)

    Impairment of nuclear decommissioning trust assets through November 6, 2009

      (62.6) (46.8)

    Loss on redemption of Zero Coupon Senior Notes

      (16.0) (10.0)

    Maryland PSC order—BGE residential customer credits

      (112.4) (67.1)

    Merger termination and strategic alternatives costs

      (145.8) (13.8)

    Workforce reduction costs

      (12.6) (9.3)
      

    Total other items

     $6,473.1 $3,901.9 
      
    (1)
    After-tax amount net of noncontrolling interest.

    Gain on Sale of 49.99% Membership Interest in CENG to EDF

    On December 17, 2008, we entered into an Investment Agreement with EDF under which EDF would purchase from us a 49.99% membership interest in CENG for $4.5 billion (subject to certain adjustments).

            In October 2009, the Maryland PSC issued an order approving our transaction withthe sale of a 49.99% membership interest in CENG to EDF subject to the following conditions:

            With the receipt of the Maryland PSC's order, Constellation Energy and EDF closed the transaction on November 6, 2009. Upon closing of the transaction, we sold a 49.99% membership interest in CENG to EDF for total consideration of approximately $4.7 billion (includes $3.5 billion in cash at close, the non-cash redemption of the $1.0 billion Series B Preferred Stock held by EDF, and certain expense reimbursements). As a result, we ceased to haveretained a controlling financial50.01% economic interest in CENG, but we and EDF have equal voting rights over the activities of CENG. Accordingly, we deconsolidated CENG in the fourth quarter of 2009.

            We recorded this transaction as follows:


     
     (In billions)
     
      

    Fair value of the consideration received from EDF

     $4.7 

    Estimated fair value of our retained interest in CENG

      5.1 

    Carrying amount of CENG's assets and liabilities prior to deconsolidation

      (2.4)
      

    Pre-tax gain

     $7.4 
      

            On November 6, 2009, we began to account for our retained investment in CENG using the equity method and report our share of its earnings in the merchant energyour Generation business segment. As a result, we no longer record the individual income statement line items, but instead record our share of the investment's earnings in a single line in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss).

            We estimated the fair value of CENG for purposes of recording our retained interest upon closing of the sale. Our estimate considered the replacement cost, discounted future cash


    100


    Table of Contents

    flows, and comparable market transactions valuation approaches. After correlating the valuations under these three approaches, the ultimate fair value estimate reflects the discounted future expected cash flows of the business using various inputs that we believe are reflective of a market participant's perspective. The most significant inputs include our expectations of nuclear plant performance, future power prices, nuclear fuel and operating costs, forecasted capital expenditures, existing power sales commitments, and a discounting factor reflective of an investor's required risk-adjusted return.

            The fair value of our investment in CENG exceeded our share of CENG's equity because CENG's assets and liabilities retained their historical carrying value. This basis difference totaled approximately $3.9 billion, and we assigned it to the noncurrent assets of CENG based on fair value. We will amortize this difference as a reduction in our equity investment earnings in CENG as follows:

    Difference
     Amortization Period
     

    Property, plant and equipment

     Depreciable life

    Power purchase agreements and revenue sharing agreements

     Term of the agreement
     

    Land and intangibles with indefinite lives

     Upon sale by CENG
     

            For the period November 6, 2009 through December 31, 2009, we recorded $29.6 million of basis difference amortization as a reduction to our equity investment earnings in CENG. We discuss the components of our equity investment earnings inNote 4.

            Also, if we were to sell an additional portion of our investment, we would recognize a proportionate amount of the basis difference.

    Divestitures

    In 2009, we completed many of the strategic initiatives we identified in 2008 to improve liquidity and reduce our business risk.

            The transactions to sell a majority of our international commodities, our Houston-based gas trading and other operations were structured in two parts:

            Under the TRS, we entered into offsetting trades with the buyers that matched the terms of the remaining third party contracts for which we were unable to complete assignment to the buyers as of the transaction dates. This structure transferred the risks associated with changes in commodity prices as of the transaction dates to the buyers in all instances. However, the trades under the TRS are newly executed transactions, and we remain the principal under both the unassigned third party trades and the matching trades with the buyers under the TRS with no right of either financial or legal offset. We continue to pursue the assignment of these remaining contracts to the buyers.

            The matching contracts under the TRS include both derivatives and non-derivatives and were executed at prices that differed from market prices at closing, which resulted in a net cash payment to/from the buyers. We recorded the underlying contracts at fair value on a gross basis as assets or liabilities in our Consolidated Balance Sheets depending on whether the contract prices were above- or below-market prices at closing. As a result, the derivative contracts have been included in "Derivative Assets and Liabilities" and the nonderivative contracts have been included in "Unamortized Energy Contract Assets and Liabilities." The derivative contracts are subject to mark-to-market accounting until they are realized or assigned. The nonderivative contracts will be amortized into earnings as the underlying contracts are realized, or sooner if those contracts are assigned.

            We record the cash proceeds we pay or receive at the inception of energy purchase and sale contracts based upon whether the contracts are in-the-money or out-of-the-money as follows:

    In-the-money contracts—proceeds paid

     Investing Outflow

    Out-of-the-money contracts—proceeds received

     Financing Inflow
     

            After inception, we record the cash flows from all energy purchase and sale contracts as operating activities, except for out-of-the-money derivative contracts that were liabilities at inception. We record the ongoing cash flows from these out-of-the-money derivative contracts as financing activities, regardless of whether they are purchase or sale contracts.


    International Commodities Operation

    In January 2009, we entered into a definitive agreement to sell a majority of our international commodities operation. We completed this transaction on March 23, 2009 and recognized the following impacts during 2009:


    101


    Table of Contents

            We removed the contracts that were assigned from our balance sheet, paid the buyer approximately $90 million, and reflected the impact of this payment on our working capital in the operating activities section of our Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.

            The net cash payment to the buyer upon completion of the TRS was $2.5 million. As part of the consideration, we acquired matching nonderivative contracts that resulted in a net liability of approximately $75 million, which will be amortized into earnings as the underlying contracts are realized, or sooner if the original nonderivative contracts are assigned.

            We have reflected the contracts under the TRS on a gross basis in cash flows from investing and financing activities in our Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows as follows:

    Year Ended December 31, 2009
      
     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Investing activities—Contract and portfolio acquisitions

     $(866.3)

    Financing activities—Proceeds from contract and portfolio acquisitions

      863.8 
      

    Net cash flows from contract and portfolio acquisitions

     $(2.5)
      

            In addition to the March 23, 2009 transaction for a majority of our international commodities operation, on June 30, 2009 we completed the sale of a uranium market participant that we owned. We received cash proceeds of approximately $43 million and recorded a $27.2 million loss on this sale. This loss from our merchant energyNewEnergy business segment is included in the "Net (loss) gain on divestitures" line in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss).

    Houston-Based Gas and Other Trading Operations

    On February 3, 2009, we entered into a definitive agreement to sell our Houston-based gas trading operation. We transferred control of this operation on April 1, 2009. In addition, in the second quarter of 2009 we also sold certain other trading operations. In total, we received proceeds of approximately $61 million, and recorded a $102.5 million net loss on these sales in 2009. The net loss on sale primarily relates to nonderivative accrual contracts, which were not recorded on our Consolidated Balance Sheet, the cost associated with disposing of an entire portfolio and not merely individual contracts, and the cost of capital, including contingent capital, to support the operation.

            The matching derivative and nonderivative transactions under the TRS discussed above were executed at prices that differed from market prices at closing. As a result, we record the ongoing cash flows related to the out-of-the-money derivative contracts that were liabilities at inception as financing cash flows. This resulted in cash outflows related to financing activities of $858.5 million in our Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the year ended December 31, 2009 associated with derivative liabilities that were out-of-the-money.

            The net cash receipt from the buyers upon completion of the TRS was $91.9 million in the second quarter of 2009. We have reflected these contracts on a gross basis in cash flows from investing and financing activities in our Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows as follows:

    Year Ended December 31, 2009
      
     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Investing activities—Contract and portfolio acquisitions

     $(1,287.4)

    Financing activities—Proceeds from contract and portfolio acquisitions

      1,379.3 
      

    Net cash flows from contract and portfolio acquisitions

     $91.9 
      

            In addition, we incurred other costs of $7.0 million for 2009 related to leasehold improvements, furniture, computer hardware and software costs, which are recorded as part of "Impairment losses and other costs" on our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss).

            On April 1, 2009, we executed an agreement with the buyer of our Houston-based gas trading operation under which the buyer will provide us with the gas supply needed to support our NewEnergy retail gas customer supply businessactivities through March 31, 2011. This agreement was structured such that our requirements to post collateral are reduced. The supplier has liens on the assets of the retail gas supply business as well as our investment in the stock of these entities to secure our obligations under the gas supply agreement. In connection with this agreement, we posted approximately $160 million of collateral. This was subsequently reduced to $100 million. The initial $160 million posted represented approximately 25 percent of the previous collateral requirements to support this operation.


    Shipping Joint Venture

    We completed the sale of our equity investment in a shipping joint venture during the third quarter of 2009. No gain or loss was recognized on the sale. We discuss the sale of the shipping joint venture below.

    Other Nonregulated Divestiture

    During the fourth quarter of 2009, one of our nonregulated subsidiaries sold an energy project and recorded a net loss of $4.6 million.

    Impairment Losses and Other Costs

    We discuss our evaluation of assets for impairment and other than temporary declines in value inNote 1. We perform impairment evaluations for our long-lived assets, equity method investments, and goodwill when triggering events occur that indicate the potential for an impairment exists.

    Available for Sale Securities

    We evaluated certain of our investments in equity securities during 2009. The investments we evaluated included our nuclear decommissioning trust fund assets (through November 6, 2009)


    102


    Table of Contents

    and other marketable securities. We record an impairment charge if an investment has experienced a decline in fair value to a level less than our carrying value and the decline is "other than temporary."

            In making this determination, we evaluate the reasons for an investment's decline in value, the extent and duration of that decline, and factors that indicate whether and when the value will recover. For securities held in our nuclear decommissioning trust fund for which the market value is below book value, the decline in fair value is considered other than temporary and we write them down to fair value. We discuss our impairment policy in more detail inNote 1.

            The fair values of certain of the securities held in our nuclear decommissioning trust fund held through November 6, 2009 and other marketable securities declined below book value. As a result, we recorded a $62.6 million pre-tax impairment charge for the year ended December 31, 2009 for our nuclear decommissioning trust fund assets in the "Other income (expense)" line in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss). We also recorded an impairment charge of $0.5 million for other marketable securities not included in our nuclear decommissioning trust funds for the year ended December 31, 2009.

            The estimates we utilize in evaluating impairment of our available for sale securities require judgment and the evaluation of economic and other factors that are subject to variation, and the impact of such variations could be material.

    Equity Method Investments

    Shipping Joint Venture

    We record an impairment if an equity method investment has experienced a decline in fair value to a level less than our carrying value and the decline is other than temporary. During the quarter ended June 30, 2009, we contemplated several potential courses of action together with our partner relating to the strategic direction of our shipping joint venture and our continuing involvement. This led to a decision to explore a plan to sell our 50% interest to a party related to our joint venture partner for negligible proceeds. We completed the sale of this investment in the third quarter of 2009. We have no further involvement in the activities of the joint venture.

            As a result of the events that occurred during the second quarter of 2009, we concluded that the fair value of our investment had declined to a level below the carrying value at June 30, 2009 and that this decline was other than temporary. As such, we recorded a pre-tax impairment charge of $59.0 million associated with our equity investment in our shipping joint venture within the "Impairment losses and other costs" line in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss), and reported the charge in our merchant energyNewEnergy business segment results for 2009.

    Constellation Energy Partners LLC

    As of March 31, 2009, the fair value of our investment in Constellation Energy Partners LLC (CEP) based upon its closing unit price was $10.0 million, which was lower than its carrying value of $24.0 million.

            The decline in fair value of our investment in CEP at that time reflected a number of other factors, including:

    oil.

            As a result of evaluating these factors, we determined that the decline in the value of our investment is other than temporary. Therefore, we recorded a $14.0 million pre-tax impairment charge at March 31, 2009 to write-down our investment to fair value. We recorded this charge in "Impairment losses and other costs" in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss). We did not record an impairment charge for the remainder of 2009.

    District Chilled Water

    During 2009, BGE entered into an agreement to sell its interest in a nonregulated subsidiary that owns a district chilled water facility to a third party. We completed this sale in January 2010. We have no further involvement in the activities of this entity.

            As a result of these events, we concluded that the fair value of our investment in this subsidiary had declined to a level below carrying value at December 31, 2009 and that this decline was other than temporary. As such, we recorded a pre-tax impairment charge of $12.0 million, net of the noncontrolling interest impact of $8.0 million. The gross impairment charge of $20.0 million is recorded within the "Impairment losses and other costs" line in both our and BGE's Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss). The noncontrolling interest portion of $8.0 million is recorded within the "Net Income Attributable to Noncontrolling Interests and BGE Preference Stock Dividends" line in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss) and within the "Net Income Attributable to Noncontrolling Interests" line in BGE's Consolidated Statements of Income.


    Other Costs

    During 2009, we recorded $31.2 million pre-tax charges in the "Impairment losses and other costs" line in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss) primarily related to:

    Loss on Redemption of Zero Coupon Senior Notes

    In November 2009, we redeemed the Zero Coupon Senior Notes early and recognized a pre-tax loss on redemption of $16.0 million within "Interest Expense" on our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss).

    Merger Termination and Strategic Alternatives Costs

    We incurred additional costs during 2009 related to the terminated merger agreement with MidAmerican, the transactions related to EDF, and other strategic alternatives costs. These costs totaled $145.8 million pre-tax for the year ended December 31, 2009, and primarily relate to fees incurred to complete the transactions with EDF and the first quarter of 2009 write-off of the unamortized debt discount associated with the 14% Senior Notes (Senior Notes) that were repaid in full to MidAmerican in January 2009. Upon the closing of the


    103


    Table of Contents

    transaction with EDF on November 6, 2009, certain of the costs incurred in 2008 and 2009 became tax deductible. We reflected this impact in 2009.

    Workforce Reduction Costs

    We incurred workforce reduction costs during the fourth quarter of 2008, primarily related to workforce reduction efforts across all of our operations (Q4 2008 Program), and during the first quarter of 2009, primarily related to the divestiture of a majority of our international commodities operation as well as some smaller restructurings elsewhere in our organization (Q1 2009 Program). For the Q1 2009 Program, we recognized a $12.6 million pre-tax charge during 2009 related to the elimination of approximately 180 positions. We expect both ofsubstantially completed these restructurings will be completed by the end of the first quarter ofworkforce reductions during 2010.

            The following table summarizes the status of the involuntary severance liabilities at December 31, 2009:

     
     Q1 2009
    Program

     Q4 2008
    Program

     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Initial severance liability balance

     $10.8 $19.7 

    Additional expenses recorded in 2009

      1.8   

    Amounts recorded as pension and postretirement liabilities

        (3.0)
      

    Net cash severance liability

      12.6  16.7 

    Cash severance payments

      (12.0) (15.8)
      

    Severance liability balance at December 31, 2009

     $0.6 $0.9 
      

    2008 Events

     
     Pre-Tax
     After-Tax
     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Merger termination and strategic alternatives costs

     $(1,204.4)$(1,204.4)

    Impairment losses and other costs

      (741.8) (470.7)

    Workforce reduction costs

      (22.2) (13.4)

    Emissions allowances write-down

      (46.7) (28.7)

    Net gain on divestitures

      25.5  16.0 

    Gain on sale of dry bulk vessel

      29.0  18.9 

    Maryland settlement credit (after-tax amount reflects the effective tax rate impact on BGE)

      (189.1) (110.5)

    Impairment of nuclear decommissioning trust assets

      (165.0) (82.0)
      

    Total other items

     $(2,314.7)$(1,874.8)
      

    Merger Termination and Strategic Alternatives Costs

    We incurred costs during 2008 related to the terminated merger agreement with MidAmerican, the conversion of Series A Preferred Stock, the execution of the Investment Agreement and related agreements with EDF, and our pursuit of other strategic alternatives. These costs totaled $1.2 billion pre-tax. We did not record a tax benefit for any of these costs in our Consolidated Statement of Income (Loss) in 2008.

            A significant portion of these costs was incurred pursuant to the termination of the merger agreement with MidAmerican and the conversion of the Series A Preferred Stock. Specifically, Constellation Energy incurred the following charges:


            The above amounts do not include $150 million of cash received from EDF in conjunction with the Investment Agreement entered into on December 17, 2008. We recorded this $150 million as additional purchase price at closing.

            BGE recorded $16 million as its allocable portion of these costs through November 30, 2008 when the merger with MidAmerican was still pending. However, in light of the EDF transaction involving an investment in our nonregulated nuclear generation and operation business rather than a merger with Constellation Energy, BGE was not allocated any further costs effective in December 2008 and all of the previously allocated costs recorded by BGE were allocated to the merchant energy segment.Generation and NewEnergy segments.

    Impairment Losses and Other Costs

    Impairment Evaluations

    We discuss our evaluation of assets for impairment and other than temporary declines in value inNote 1. We perform impairment evaluations for our long-lived assets, equity method investments, and goodwill when triggering events occur that would indicate that the potential for an impairment exists. We perform an impairment evaluation for our nuclear decommissioning trust fund assets quarterly.

            In addition, we evaluate goodwill for impairment on an annual basis regardless of whether any triggering events have occurred. Our accounting policy is to perform an annual goodwill impairment review in the third quarter of each year.

            During the third quarter of 2008, the following triggering events resulted in the need for us to perform impairment analyses:


    104


    Table of Contents

            As a result of these evaluations, we recorded impairments of our upstream gas properties, goodwill, and certain investments in debt and equity securities. Additionally, in the fourth quarter of 2008, there were continued declines in commodity prices and the overall stock market. This led to further impairment of our upstream gas properties, and certain investments in debt and equity securities. We describe the impairment evaluations we performed in the following sections.

    Long-Lived Assets

    We evaluate potential impairment of long-lived assets classified as held for use and recognize an impairment loss if the carrying amount of such assets is not recoverable. The carrying amount of an asset held for use is not recoverable if it exceeds the total undiscounted future cash flows expected to result from the use and eventual disposition of the asset.

            This evaluation requires us to estimate uncertain future cash flows. In order to estimate future cash flows, we consider historical cash flows and changes in the market environment and other factors that may affect future cash flows. The assumptions we use are consistent with forecasts that we make for other purposes (for example, in preparing our other earnings forecasts) or have been adjusted to reflect relevant subsequent changes. If we are considering alternative courses of action (such as the potential sale of an asset), we probability-weightprobability- weight the alternative courses of action to estimate the expected cash flows.

            We use our best estimates in making these evaluations and consider various factors, including forward price curves for energy, fuel costs, and operating costs. However, actual future market prices and project costs could vary from the assumptions used in our estimates, and the impact of such variations could be material.

    Upstream Gas Properties

    During 2008, we performed impairment analyses for our upstream gas properties as a result of the following triggering events:

            We evaluated both proved and unproved property for impairments. Unproved property is impaired if there are no firm plans to continue drilling, lease expiration is at risk, or historical experience necessitates a valuation allowance. To the extent that unproved property is part of an asset that contains proved property, we applied the accounting guidance for proved property for evaluating impairment.

            During the third quarter of 2008, we began the process necessary to sell our upstream gas properties, and, while we sold some of these properties by December 31, 2008, we had not yet obtained the formal approval of our Board of Directors for the sale of our other remaining properties. This approval was required to commit to a plan for sale. As a result, we continued to classify these properties as held for use as of December 31, 2008. Accordingly, our impairment evaluation consisted of estimating expected undiscounted cash flows under various scenarios as discussed below and comparing those amounts to the carrying value.

            We evaluated our upstream gas portfolio for impairment at the individual property level, which is the lowest level of identifiable cash flows, since each property has separate financial statements identifying and capturing the related cash flows. We


    evaluated a combination of cash flows from operations scenarios for the remaining period for which we expected to hold these properties as well as estimates of proceeds from each property's ultimate disposal. The primary inputs to our estimates of cash flows from operations were reserve estimates and natural gas and oil prices based upon forward curves and modeled data for unobservable periods. The primary inputs to our estimate of proceeds from disposal were a combination of external market bids, internal models and reserve reports, and information from external advisors assisting in the sale of these assets. We maximized the use of market information to the extent it was available. We evaluated several possible courses of action and timing, and we probability-weighted the cash flows associated with each of these scenarios based upon our best estimates of the expected outcome and timing in order to arrive at each property's expected future cash flows.

            Our evaluation indicated that estimated cash flows were less than the carrying value of three of our seven upstream gas properties at September 30, 2008. At December 31, 2008, our evaluation indicated that estimated cash flows were less than the carrying value for two additional properties and for one property in which that property's estimated cash flows were less than its post-impairment carrying value at September 30, 2008 as well. The primary factors leading to the declines in expected cash flows were the decrease in market prices for natural gas and oil during the third and fourth quarters of 2008 combined with our expectation that we would sell these properties rather than hold them for their full useful lives.


    105


    Table of Contents

            As a result, we recorded the following pre-tax impairment charges:

    Asset Groups
     At
    September 30,
    2008

     At
    December 31,
    2008

     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Interest in proved and unproved natural gas and crude oil reserves in south Texas

     $62.6 $ 

    Interest in proved natural gas reserves in the Rocky Mountains

      73.2   

    Interest in proved and unproved natural gas reserves in the Offshore-Gulf of Mexico

      7.1  3.8 

    Interest in proved and unproved crude oil and natural gas reserves in eastern Oklahoma

        30.0 

    Interest in proved and unproved natural gas reserves in central Oklahoma

        153.2 
      

    Total impairment charges

     $142.9 $187.0 
      

            We recorded these impairment charges in the "Impairment losses and other costs" line in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss), and they are reported in our merchant energyNewEnergy business segment results.

    Generating Plants

    We evaluated the impact of the events that occurred in 2008 on the recoverability of our generating plants. Based upon our consideration of these events and the status of the generating plant's activities, we determined that our generating plants were not impaired as of September 30, 2008 and December 31, 2008.

    Debt and Equity Securities and Investments

    We evaluated certain of our investments in debt and equity securities (both equity-method and cost-method investments) in light of declines in market prices during the third and fourth quarters of 2008. The investments we evaluated included our investment in CEP, other marketable securities, our nuclear decommissioning trust fund assets, and our investment in UNE. We record an impairment if an investment has experienced a decline in fair value to a level less than our carrying value and the decline is other than temporary. We do not record an impairment if the decline in value is temporary and we have the ability and intent to hold the investment until its value recovers.

            In making this determination, we evaluate the reasons for an investment's decline in value, the extent and length of that decline, and factors that indicate whether and when the value will recover. For securities held in our nuclear decommissioning trust fund for which the market value is below book value, the decline in fair value for these securities is considered other than temporary and we write them down to fair value.

            The fair value of our investment in CEP fell below carrying value at the end of August, and continued to decline through the end of 2008. As of September 30, 2008, the fair value of our investment in CEP based upon its closing unit price was $73 million, which was lower than its carrying value of $128 million. As of December 31, 2008, the fair value of our investment in CEP based upon its closing unit price was $17 million, which was lower than its carrying value at December 31, 2008 of $87 million.

            While CEP's estimate of net asset value exceeded our carrying value, the decline in fair value of our investment in CEP reflectsat that time reflected a number of other factors, including:

    oil.

            As a result of evaluating these factors at both September 30, 2008 and December 31, 2008, we determined that the declines in the value of our investment at both dates were other than temporary. Therefore, we recorded a $54.7 million pre-tax impairment charge at September 30, 2008 and an additional $69.7 million pre-tax impairment charge at December 31, 2008 to write-down our investment to fair value. We recorded these charges in "Impairment losses and other costs" in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss). To the


    extent that the market price of our investment declines further in future quarters, we may record additional write-downs if we determine that those additional declines are other than temporary.

            As a result of significant declines in the stock market during 2008, the fair values of certain of our marketable securities and many of the securities held in our nuclear decommissioning trust fund declined below book value. As a result, we recorded impairment charges of $31.0 million and $122.0 million pre-tax at September 30, 2008 and December 31, 2008, respectively, for our nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments in the "Other (expense) income" line in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss). We had previously recorded impairment charges for our nuclear decommissioning trust fund at both March 31, 2008 and June 30, 2008, totaling $12.0 million pre-tax. We also recorded an impairment charge of $7.0 million pre-tax for certain of our other marketable securities in the fourth quarter of 2008. In addition, we recorded other changes in the fair value of our nuclear decommissioning trust fund assets that are not impaired in other comprehensive income. We discuss the assets within our nuclear decommissioning trust funds in more detail inNote 4.

            We also evaluated the impact of the events that occurred in 2008 on the recoverability of our investment in UNE. Based upon our consideration of these events and the status of UNE's activities, we determined that our investment in UNE was not impaired as of December 31, 2008.

            The estimates we utilize in evaluating impairment of our debt and equity securities require judgment and the evaluation of economic and other factors that are subject to variation, and the impact of such variations could be material.


    106


    Table of Contents

    Goodwill

    Goodwill is the excess of the purchase price of an acquired business over the fair value of the net assets acquired. We evaluate goodwill for impairment at least annually or more frequently if events and circumstances indicate the business might be impaired. Goodwill is impaired if the carrying value of the business exceeds fair value. Annually, in the third quarter of each year, we evaluate goodwill for impairment.

            The primary judgment affecting our impairment evaluation is the requirement to estimate fair value of the reporting units to which the goodwill relates. We evaluate impairment at the reportable segment level, which is the lowest level in the organization that constitutes a business for which discreetdiscrete financial information is available.

            Prior to September 30, 2008, substantially all of our goodwill related to our merchant energy segment.segment, one of our reportable segments at that time. The lack of observable market prices for the merchant energy segment required us to estimate fair value, which we determined on a preliminary basis using the income valuation approach by computing discounted cash flows, consistent with prior evaluations. Although our estimate of discounted cash flows exceeded the carrying value of the merchant energy segment, because our common stock continued to trade at a price less than carrying value for the entire company throughout the last half of September and all of October, we also estimated fair value for the merchant energy segment using current market price information.

            The primary inputs and assumptions to our estimate of fair value based upon market information were as follows:

            Using this information, we deducted the estimated fair value of non-merchant energy segment businesses from the fair value of Constellation Energy as a whole in order to estimate the fair value of the merchant energy segment as of September 2008. Based upon this estimate, the fair value of the merchant energy segment was substantially less than its carrying value. The primary difference between this estimate and our modeled estimates using the discounted cash flow income approach is that the market price approach incorporated the market's valuation discount associated with our merchant energy segment due to its significant liquidity and collateral requirements. We believe that this was a more appropriate method for estimating fair value than the modeled valuation techniques because it incorporated observable market information to a greater extent, which reflects current market conditions, and because it required fewer and less subjective judgments and estimates than our modeled estimates.

            As a final consideration during our September 2008 impairment evaluation, we also evaluated the circumstances surrounding MidAmerican's purchase of Constellation Energy and whether the current market price of our common stock should be considered to represent fair value for accounting purposes. While the transaction price for the purchase of Constellation Energy resulted from negotiations that occurred over an abbreviated period of time during which the Company was experiencing financial difficulty, ongoing trading of the stock at levels approximating the transaction price represented the market's present assessment of fair value in a liquid, active market. This is consistent with guidance issued by the Securities Exchange Commission Office of the Chief Accountant and FASB Staff on the determination of fair value in distressed markets.

            Based on our evaluation of these alternative measures of fair value, we determined that the fair value of the merchant energy business segment was less than its carrying value. Therefore, in order to measure the potential impairment of goodwill, we estimated the fair value of the merchant energy segment's assets and liabilities. We determined that the fair value of its assets net of liabilities substantially exceeded the segment's total fair value, indicating that the merchant energy segment's goodwill was impaired as of September 30, 2008. Accordingly, we recorded a pre-tax charge of $266.5 million to write-off the entire balance of our merchant energy segment goodwill substantially all of which was recorded in the third quarter of 2008. This charge is recorded in "Impairment losses and other costs" in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss).


    Other Costs

    In September 2008, we entered into a non-binding agreement to settle a class action complaint that alleged a subsidiary's ash placement operations at a third party site damaged surrounding properties. In December 2008, the settlement was approved by the court. As a result of this agreement, we recorded a $14.0 million pre-tax charge net of an expected insurance recovery.

    Workforce Reduction Costs

    We incurred costs related to workforce reduction efforts initiated at our nuclear generating facilities in 2006 and 2007. We substantially completed both of these workforce reduction efforts during 2008.

    In September 2008, our merchant energyNewEnergy business approved a restructuring of the workforce at our Customer Supply operations.its workforce. We recognized a $2.5 million pre-tax charge during 2008 related to the elimination of approximately 100 positions associated with this restructuring. We substantially completed this workforce reduction during 2009.

            During the fourth quarter of 2008, we approved a restructuring of the workforce across all of our operations. We recognized a $19.7 million pre-tax charge in 2008 related to the elimination of approximately 380 positions.

    Emissions Allowances

    The Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) required states in the eastern United States to reduce emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and established a cap-and-trade program for annual nitrogen oxide (NOx) emission allowances. On July 11, 2008, the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (the "Court") issued an opinion vacating CAIR, subject to petitions for rehearing. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) filed a petition for rehearing. On December 23, 2008, the Court reversed its earlier decision to revoke CAIR and will allowallowed CAIR to remain in effect until it is replaced by a revised rule issued by the EPA that would preserve the environmental rules established by CAIR. The Court did not propose a deadline by which the


    107


    Table of Contents

    EPA must correct the flaws identified with CAIR but it did state that it will accept petitions if the EPA does not remedy the problems previously identified in its July 11, 2008 opinion. The EPA proposed regulations in July 2010, which are pending final adoption.

            As a result of the Court's December 2008 decision, the annual NOx program became effective in 2009 as originally established by CAIR. In addition, since the December 2008 decision, market prices for 2009 NOx allowances have increased significantly, with lesser increases shown in allowances for subsequent years. There was also an increase in trading volumes for annual NOx. For the SO2 program, the EPA will be required to issue a new rule that would replace the allowances issued under Title IV of the Clean Air Act with a new, reduced pool of allowances which would meet or exceed existing CAIR targets. Market prices for SO2 allowances have also risen since the Court's decision.

            We account for our emission allowance inventory at the lower of cost or market, which includes consideration of our expected requirements related to the future generation of electricity. The weighted-average cost of our 2008 SO2 allowance inventory in excess of amounts needed to satisfy these requirements was greater than market value at June 30, 2008 and market prices decreased further for both SO2 and annual NOx emission allowances through September 30, 2008. After giving consideration to the Court's July 11, 2008 decision and the subsequent decline in the market price of these allowances, we recorded a write-down of our SO2 allowance inventory totaling $22.1 million pre-tax to reflect the June 30, 2008 market prices. At September 30, 2008, we recorded an additional write-down of our SO2 emission allowance inventory and recorded a write-down of our annual NOx allowance inventory totaling $58.9 million to reflect the September 30, 2008 prices. These write-downs were recorded in the "Nonregulated revenues" line in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss). The third quarter 2008 write-down was partially offset by mark-to-market gains totaling $22.2 million pre-tax on derivative contracts for the forward sale of emission allowances. This gain reflects the impact of lower market prices on the value of those derivative contracts.

            Due to the increases in SO2 and NOx emission allowance prices stemming from the December 23, 2008 Court ruling, we evaluated the value of our emissions allowances and determined that a partial reversal of prior interim period write-downs was appropriate. At December 31, 2008, we reversed $11.4 million of the second and third quarter of 2008 write-downs. The prices at December 31, 2008 create a new cost basis for SO2 and annual NOx emission allowances and cannot be further written-up in future periods. Our mark-to-market gains on derivative contracts for the forward sale of emission allowances were $0.7 million for the quarter ended December 31, 2008. We cannot predict the outcome of any further judicial, regulatory or legislative developments or their impact on the emission allowance markets.

    Net Gain on Divestitures

    On March 31, 2008, we sold our working interest in oil and natural gas producing properties in Oklahoma to CEP, a related party, and recognized a gain of $14.3 million, net of the minority interest gain of $0.7 million. We discuss this transaction in more detail inNote 16.

            In addition, on June 30, 2008, our merchant energyNewEnergy business sold a portion of its working interests in proved natural gas reserves and unproved properties in Arkansas to an unrelated party for total proceeds of $145.4 million, which is subject to certain purchase price adjustments. Our merchant energyNewEnergy business recognized a $77.7 million pre-tax gain on this sale.

            In December 2008, our merchant energyNewEnergy business sold working interests in proved natural gas reserves in Wyoming, and our equity investment in certain entities that own interests in proved natural gas reserves and unproved properties in Texas and Montana to unrelated parties for total proceeds of $55.7 million, subject to certain purchase price adjustments. Our merchant energyNewEnergy business recognized a $67.2 million pre-tax loss on these sales.

            The net gain is included in "Net (Loss) Gains on Divestitures" line in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss).


    Gain on Sale of Dry Bulk Vessel

    On July 10, 2008, a shipping joint venture, in which our merchant energyNewEnergy business has a 50% ownership interest, sold one of the six dry bulk vessels it owns. Our merchant energyNewEnergy business recognized a $29.0 million pre-tax gain on this sale. The gain is included in "Nonregulated revenues" line in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss).

    Maryland Settlement Agreement—Customer Rate Credit

    In March 2008, Constellation Energy, BGE and a Constellation Energy affiliate entered into a settlement agreement with the State of Maryland, the Maryland PSC and certain State of Maryland officials to resolve pending litigation and to settle other prior legal, regulatory and legislative issues. On April 24, 2008, the Governor of Maryland signed enabling legislation, which became effective on June 1, 2008. Pursuant to the terms of the settlement agreement:


    108


    Table of Contents

    2007 Events
    109


     
     Pre-Tax
     After-Tax
     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Impairment losses and other costs

     $(20.2)$(12.2)

    Workforce reduction costs

      (2.3) (1.4)

    Gain on sales of equity of CEP

      63.3  39.2 

    Loss from discontinued operations

           
     

    High Desert

      (2.4) (0.3)
     

    Puna

        (0.6)
      

    Total loss from discontinued

           
     

    operations

      (2.4) (0.9)
      

    Total other items

     $38.4 $24.7 
      

    Impairment Losses and Other CostsTable of Contents

    In connection with the termination of the merger agreement with FPL Group, Inc. (FPL Group) in October 2006, we acquired certain rights relating to a wind development project in Western Maryland. In the second quarter of 2007, we elected not to make the additional investment that was required at that time to retain our rights in the project; therefore, we recorded a charge of $20.2 million pre-tax to write-off our investment in these development rights.

    Workforce Reduction Costs

    In June 2007, we approved a restructuring of the workforce at the Nine Mile Point nuclear facility related to the elimination of 23 positions. We recognized costs of $2.3 million pre-tax related to recording a liability for severance and other benefits under our existing benefit programs. We completed this workforce reduction in 2008.

    Gain on Sales of Equity of CEP

    In November 2006, CEP, a limited liability company formed by Constellation Energy completed an initial public offering of 5.2 million common units at $21 per unit. In April 2007, CEP acquired 100% ownership of certain coalbed methane properties located in the Cherokee Basin in Kansas and Oklahoma. This


    acquisition was funded through CEP's sale of equity in which we did not participate.

            As a result of the April 2007 equity issuance by CEP, our ownership percentage in CEP fell below 50 percent. Therefore, during the second quarter of 2007, we deconsolidated CEP and began accounting for our investment using the equity method. We discuss the equity method of accounting in more detail inNote 1.

            In July and September 2007, CEP issued additional equity. In connection with our equity ownership in CEP, we recognize gains on CEP's equity issuances in the period that the equity is sold as common units or when converted to common units. The details of the 2007 CEP equity issuances, as well as the gains recognized by us, are summarized below:

     
     Units
    Issued

     Price/
    Unit

     Proceeds
    to CEP

     Pre-tax
    gain

     
      
     
     (In millions, except price/unit)
     

    April 2007 Sale

                 

    Common units

      2.2 $26.12 $58 $12.5 

    Class E units

      0.1  25.84  2  0.4 

    July 2007 Sale

                 

    Common units

      2.7  35.25  94  20.0 

    Class F units

      2.6  35.25  92  11.2 

    September 2007 Sale

                 

    Common units

      2.5  42.50  105  19.2 

    Discontinued operations

    In the fourth quarter of 2006, we completed the sale of six natural gas-fired plants, including the High Desert facility, which was classified as discontinued operations. We recognized an after-tax loss of $0.3 million as a component of "Income (loss) from discontinued operations" for 2007 due to post-closing working capital and income tax adjustments. In addition, during 2007, we recognized an after-tax loss of $0.6 million relating to income tax adjustments arising from the June 2004 sale of a geothermal generating facility in Hawaii that was also previously classified as discontinued operations.


    3Information by Operating Segment

    Our reportable operating segments are—Merchant Energy,are Generation, NewEnergy, Regulated Electric, and Regulated Gas:

            Our remaining nonregulated businesses:

            Prior to June 30, 2009, our merchant energy business segment included additional activities that have been divested as part of our strategy to improve our liquidity and reduce our business risk. The divested activities include:

            On November 6, 2009, we sold a 49.99% membership interest in CENG. As a result, we deconsolidated CENG and removed all of the assets and liabilities from this business from our merchant energy segment. We now account for our retained investment as an equity method investment. We discuss this transaction in more detail inNote 2.

            As a result of the successful execution of these initiatives, as well as our other initiatives that we have undertaken to reduce risk in our merchant energy business, we have reduced our exposure to activities that require contingent capital support and improved our liquidity. In turn, the results for our merchant energy business segment will be materially different from prior periods.

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


    110


    Table of Contents


     Reportable Segments  
      
      
      Reportable Segments  
      
      
     

     Holding
    Company and
    Other
    Nonregulated
    Businesses

      
      
      Holding
    Company and
    Other

      
      
     

     Merchant
    Energy
    Business

     Regulated
    Electric
    Business

     Regulated
    Gas
    Business

     Eliminations
     Consolidated
      Generation
     NewEnergy
     Regulated
    Electric

     Regulated
    Gas

     Eliminations
     Consolidated
     
       

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    2010

     

    Unaffiliated revenues

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

    Intersegment revenues

     1,055.1 428.8 0.2 4.5  (1,488.6)  
     

    Total revenues

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

    Depreciation, depletion, and amortization

     136.1 83.4 205.2 44.0 48.9  517.6 

    Fixed charges

     142.0 3.0 106.3 24.0 (0.2) 2.7 277.8 

    Income tax (benefit) expense

     (873.1) 106.5 72.6 24.5 3.8  (665.7)

    Net (loss) income (1)

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

    Net (loss) income attributable to common stock

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

    Segment assets

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

    Capital expenditures

     327.4 127.2 499.1 103.0   1,056.7 

    2009

      

    Unaffiliated revenues

     $11,769.8 $2,820.7 $753.8 $254.5 $ $15,598.8  $664.2 11,345.8 $2,820.7 $753.8 $14.3 $ $15,598.8 

    Intersegment revenues

     663.7  4.5 0.1 (668.3)   2,110.0 163.4  4.5 0.1 (2,278.0)  
       

    Total revenues

     12,433.5 2,820.7 758.3 254.6 (668.3) 15,598.8  2,774.2 11,509.2 2,820.7 758.3 14.4 (2,278.0) 15,598.8 

    Depreciation, depletion, and amortization

     250.2 218.1 44.0 76.8  589.1  176.8 82.5 218.1 44.0 67.7  589.1 

    Fixed charges

     207.5 113.3 26.0 0.5 2.8 350.1  166.5 39.7 113.3 26.0 2.4 2.2 350.1 

    Income tax expense (benefit)

     2,938.2 50.9 17.1 (19.4)  2,986.8  3,107.1 (179.1) 50.9 17.1 (9.2)  2,986.8 

    Net income (loss) (1)

     4,435.0 79.1 25.5 (36.2)  4,503.4 

    Net income (loss) (2)

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

    Net income (loss) attributable to common stock

     4,381.0 68.9 22.5 (29.0)  4,443.4  4,766.7 (402.3) 68.9 22.5 (12.4)  4,443.4 

    Segment assets

     13,535.6 4,994.5 1,413.4 4,781.7 (1,180.8) 23,544.4  12,402.1 4,167.5 4,994.6 1,413.4 4,573.7 (4,006.9) 23,544.4 

    Capital expenditures

     1,119.0 373.0 66.0 37.0  1,595.0  1,039.2 116.8 373.0 66.0   1,595.0 

    2008

      

    Unaffiliated revenues

     $15,798.6 $2,679.5 $1,004.7 $259.1 $ $19,741.9  $856.2 15,185.4 $2,679.5 $1,004.8 $16.0 $ $19,741.9 

    Intersegment revenues

     891.9 0.2 19.3 0.2 (911.6)   2,102.3 666.3 0.2 19.2 0.1 (2,788.1)  
       

    Total revenues

     16,690.5 2,679.7 1,024.0 259.3 (911.6) 19,741.9  2,958.5 15,851.7 2,679.7 1,024.0 16.1 (2,788.1) 19,741.9 

    Depreciation, depletion, and amortization

     287.1 184.2 43.7 68.2  583.2  174.3 118.7 184.2 43.7 62.3  583.2 

    Fixed charges

     191.4 113.5 26.3 1.7 16.2 349.1  140.7 50.6 113.5 26.3 2.3 15.7 349.1 

    Income tax (benefit) expense

     (99.5) (4.9) 25.5 0.6  (78.3)

    Net (loss) income (2)

     (1,374.6) 11.1 40.4 4.7  (1,318.4)

    Income tax expense (benefit)

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

    Net (loss) income (3)

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

    Net (loss) income attributable to common stock

     (1,357.4) 1.1 37.2 4.7  (1,314.4) (357.7) (994.2) 1.1 37.2 (0.8)  (1,314.4)

    Segment assets (3)

     13,857.9 4,620.3 1,392.4 3,508.5 (1,095.0) 22,284.1 

    Segment assets (4)

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

    Capital expenditures

     1,675.0 388.0 74.0 86.0  2,223.0  1,445.2 315.8 388.0 74.0   2,223.0 

    2007

     

    Unaffiliated revenues

     $17,537.0 $2,455.6 $943.0 $249.5 $ $21,185.1 

    Intersegment revenues

     1,199.4 0.1 19.8 0.3 (1,219.6)  
     

    Total revenues

     18,736.4 2,455.7 962.8 249.8 (1,219.6) 21,185.1 

    Depreciation, depletion, and amortization

     269.9 187.4 46.8 53.7  557.8 

    Fixed charges

     86.9 97.6 27.7 8.6 71.6 292.4 

    Income tax expense

     332.7 64.6 22.8 8.2  428.3 

    Income from discontinued operations

     (0.9)     (0.9)

    Net income (4)

     677.0 107.9 32.0 16.6  833.5 

    Net income attributable to common stock

     678.3 97.9 28.8 16.5  821.5 

    Segment assets

     15,947.7 4,378.4 1,293.6 458.6 (336.0) 21,742.3 

    Capital expenditures

     1,178.0 340.0 62.0 85.0  1,665.0 
    (1)
    Our merchant energyGeneration business recognized the following after-tax items: impairment charges on certain of our equity method investment of $1,487.1 million, loss on the early retirement of 2012 Notes of $30.9 million, amortization of the basis difference in CENG of $117.5 million, impact of the power purchase agreement with CENG of $113.3 million, gain on the sale of Mammoth Lakes geothermal generating facility of $24.7 million, and a gain on the comprehensive agreement with EDF of $121.3 million. Our NewEnergy business recognized earnings relating to an international coal supplier contract dispute settlement of $35.4 million. Our Generation, NewEnergy, regulated electric and holding company and other businesses recognized deferred income tax expense relating to federal subsidies for providing post-employment prescription drug benefits of $0.8 million, $0.1 million, $3.1 million, and $4.8 million, respectively. We discuss these items in more detail in Note 2.

    (2)
    Our Generation business recognized the following after-tax items: gain on sale of a 49.99% membership interest in CENG to EDF of $4,456.1 million, amortization of basis difference in investment in CENG of ($17.8)$17.8 million, loss on the early extinguishment of zero coupon senior notes of $10.0 million, impairment losses and other costs of $84.7 million, workforce reduction costs of $9.3 million, merger termination and strategic alternatives costs of $13.8$9.7 million, and impairment charges of our nuclear decommissioning trust assets through November 6, 2009 of $46.8 million. Our NewEnergy business recognized the following after-tax items: merger termination and strategic alternatives costs of $4.1 million, losses on divestitures, which include losses on the sales of the international commodities and gas trading operations, the reclassification of losses on previously designated cash-flow hedges from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss because the forecasted transactions are probable of not occurring, earnings that are no longer part of our core business, of $371.9 million, impairment losses and impairment chargesother costs of our nuclear decommissioning trust assets through November 6, 2009$84.7 million, and workforce reduction costs of $46.8$9.3 million. Our regulated electric and gas businesses recognized after-tax charges of $56.7 million and $10.4 million, respectively, for the accrual of a residential customer credit. Our holding company and other nonregulated businesses recognized after-tax charges of $11.5 million for impairment losses and other costs and $2.9 million for losses on divestitures.costs. We discuss these items in more detail in Note 2.

    (2)(3)
    Our merchant energyGeneration business recognized the following after-tax charges: workforce reduction costs of $3.7 million, merger termination and strategic alternatives costs of $742.3 million, impairment charges and other costs of $8.3 million, and an impairment charge of our nuclear decommissioning trust assets of $82.0 million. Our NewEnergy business recognized the following after-tax charges: impairment losses and other costs of $470.7$460.1 million, workforce reduction costs of $9.3$5.8 million, merger termination and strategic alternatives costs of $1,204.4$462.1 million, net emission allowance write-down of $28.7 million, a net gain on the sale of upstream gas properties of $16.0 million, and a gain on sale of a dry bulk vessel of $18.9 million, and an impairment charge of our nuclear decommissioning trust assets of $82.0 million. Our regulated electric business recognized after-tax charges related to workforce reduction costs of $2.8 million and the Maryland settlement credit of $110.5 million. Our regulated gas business recognized an after-tax charge related to workforce reduction costs of $1.0 million. Our holding company and other nonregulated businessbusinesses recognized an after-tax charge related to workforce reduction costs of $0.3$0.1 million. We discuss these items in more detail in Note 2.

    (3)(4)
    At December 31, 2008, Holding Company and Other NonregulatedBusinesses segment assets include approximately $1.6 billion of intercompany receivables, from the merchant energy business, primarily relating to the allocation of merger termination costs of approximately $1.2 billion to these businesses, and $1.0 billion of restricted cash related to the issuance of Series B Preferred Stock to EDF. These funds are held at the holding company and are restricted for payment of the 14% Senior Notes held by MidAmerican. The 14% Senior Notes were repaid in full in January 2009.

    (4)
    Our merchant energy business recognized an after-tax loss of $12.2 million related to a cancelled wind development project, an after-tax gain of $39.2 million on sales of CEP equity, and an after-tax charge of $1.4 million for workforce reduction costs as described in more detail in Note 2.


    111


    Table of Contents

    4Investments

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

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

    At December 31,
    At December 31,
     2009
     2008
     At December 31,
     2010
     2009
     
       


     (In millions)
     
     (In millions)
     

    Joint Ventures:

    Joint Ventures:

     

    Joint Ventures:

     

    CENG

     $5,222.9 $ 

    UNE

     122.0 51.0 

    CENG

     $2,991.1 $5,222.9 

    Shipping JV

      59.9 

    UNE

      122.0 

    Qualifying facilities and domestic power projects:

    Qualifying facilities and domestic power projects:

     

    Qualifying facilities and domestic power projects:

     

    Coal

     119.7 119.5 

    Coal

     65.0 119.7 

    Hydroelectric

     55.2 55.6 

    Hydroelectric

     46.3 55.2 

    Geothermal

     40.0 37.0 

    Geothermal

      40.0 

    Biomass

     56.2 58.2 

    Biomass

     55.1 56.2 

    Fuel Processing

     24.3 15.0 

    Fuel Processing

     16.7 24.3 

    Solar

     6.9 6.9 

    Solar

     6.8 6.9 

    CEP

      17.7 

    Other

      0.2 
       

    Total

    Total

     $5,647.2 $421.0 

    Total

     $3,181.0 $5,647.2 
       

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

    At December 31,
     2009
     2008
      2010
     2009
     
       

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    Equity method

     $5,640.3 $414.1  $3,174.2 $5,640.3 

    Cost method

     6.9 6.9  6.8 6.9 
       

    Total

     $5,647.2 $421.0  $3,181.0 $5,647.2 
       

            We are actively involved in our CENG nuclear joint ventures,venture, qualifying facilities and power projects. Our percentage voting interests in these investments accounted for under the equity method range from 20% to 50.01%. Equity in earnings of these investments is as follows:

    Year ended December 31,
     2009
     2008
     2007
      2010
     2009
     2008
     
       

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    CENG

     $33.9 $ $  $218.8 $33.9 $ 

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

     (29.6)    (195.2) (29.6)  
       

    Total equity investment earnings—CENG(1)

     4.3    23.6 4.3  

    UNE

     (24.7) (5.9) 1.9  (16.8) (24.7) (5.9)

    Shipping JV

     (1.8) 37.4 (0.6)  (1.8) 37.4 

    CEP

     (4.6) 7.7 6.1   (4.6) 7.7 

    Qualifying facilities and domestic power projects

     20.7 37.2 0.7  18.2 20.7 37.2 
       

    Total equity investment earnings

     $(6.1)$76.4 $8.1  $25.0 $(6.1)$76.4 
       
    (1)
    For the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, total equity investment (losses) earnings in CENG include $2.0 million and $0.4 million, respectively, of expense related to the portion of cost of certain share-based awards that we fund on behalf of EDF.

            We describe each of these investments below. Additionally, we recorded impairment charges on certain of our equity method investments. We discuss these impairment charges inNote 2.

    Joint Ventures

    CENG

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


    112


    Table of Contents

            Summarized balance sheet information for CENG is as follows:

    At December 31, 2009
      
     
    At December 31,
     2010
     2009
     
       

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    Current assets

     $513.0  $507.4 $513.0 

    Noncurrent assets

     4,404.2  4,583.0 4,404.2 

    Current liabilities

     556.9  630.9 556.9 

    Noncurrent liabilities

     1,716.1  1,338.7 1,716.1 

    Table of Contents

            Summarized income statement information for CENG is as follows:

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

     For the Year Ended
    December 31, 2010

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

     
       

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    Revenues

     $217.6  $1,575.3 $217.6 

    Fuel and purchased energy expenses

     29.8 

    Expenses

     1,174.5 153.0 

    Income from operations

     64.6  400.8 64.6 

    Net income

     68.5  441.6 68.5 

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

    Comprehensive Agreement with EDF

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

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

            In addition, upon receipt of necessary approvals:

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

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

    UNE

    In August 2007, we formed a joint venture, UNE, with EDF. We have a 50% ownership interest in this joint ventureEDF to develop, own, and operate new nuclear projects in the United States and Canada. The agreement withOn November 3, 2010, we sold our 50% ownership interest in UNE to EDF. As a result of this transaction, EDF includes a phased-in investmentis the sole owner of $625 million by EDF in UNE. We and EDF have contributed assets to UNE with the following carrying values:

     
     Investment by 
    Year ended December 31,
     Constellation
    Energy

     EDF
     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    2009 (1)

     $91.6 $91.6 

    2008

      1.7  175.0 

    2007

      48.7  350.0 
    (1)
    Amounts contributed to fund UNE's capital requirements. EDF's contribution does not count toward its $625 million obligation.

            EDF will contribute up to an additional $100 million to UNE, for a total of $625 million, upon reaching additional licensing milestones.

            As of December 31, 2009, UNE's capitalized construction work in progress was approximately $510 million. Such amounts are being capitalized based on UNE's assessment that construction of new nuclear projects is probable. Should that expectation change, previously capitalized costs would be written-off by UNE, and we would be required to recognize our proportionate share of such charges. In the event that our portion of any losses incurred by UNE exceed our investment, we will continue to record those losses in earnings unless it is determined that UNE will cease operations and subsequently be dissolved.

            We also believe that UNE's construction ofno longer have responsibility for developing or financing new nuclear projects is probable. Should that assessment change, we would be required to evaluate our investment in UNE for potential impairment.

    Shipping JV

    In December 2006, we formed a shipping joint venture in which our merchant energy business had a 50% ownership interest. We sold our interest in this joint venture during 2009 for negligible proceeds.plants through UNE.

    Qualifying Facilities and Power Projects

    Our merchant energyGeneration business holds up to a 50% voting interest in 1815 operating domestic energy projects that consist of electric generation, fuel processing, or fuel handling facilities. Of these 1815 projects, 1613 are "qualifying facilities" that receive certain exemptions and pricing under the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 based on the facilities' energy source or the use of a cogeneration process.

    CEP

    In November 2006, CEP, a limited liability company formed by our merchant energyNewEnergy business, completed an initial public offering. As of December 31, 2006, we owned approximately 54% of CEP and consolidated CEP. During the second quarter of 2007, CEP issued additional equity to the public and our ownership percentage fell below 50%. Therefore, we deconsolidated CEP and began accounting for our investment using the equity


    113


    Table of Contents

    method. As of December 31, 2009,2010, we hold a 28.5% voting interest in CEP.

    Investments Classified as Available-for-Sale

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

            This means we do not expect to hold these investments to maturity, and we do not consider them trading securities. We record these investments at fair value on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.

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

    At December 31, 2009
     Adjusted
    Cost

     Unrealized
    Gains

     Unrealized
    Losses

     Fair
    Value

     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Money market funds

     $0.1 $ $ $0.1 

    Mutual funds

      16.1  2.8    18.9 
      

    Totals

     $16.2 $2.8 $ $19.0 
      


    At December 31, 2008
     Adjusted
    Cost

     Unrealized
    Gains

     Unrealized
    Losses

     Fair
    Value

     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Money market funds

     $17.6 $ $ $17.6 

    Marketable equity securities

      700.9  41.5  (2.1) 740.3 

    Corporate debt and U.S Treasuries

      224.8  6.8    231.6 

    State municipal bonds

      46.2  1.3    47.5 
      

    Totals

     $989.5 $49.6 $(2.1)$1,037.0 
      

    Table of Contents

            On November 6, 2009, we removed the nuclear decommissioning trust fund assets from our Consolidated Balance Sheets as part of the deconsolidation of CENG described inNote 2. Prior to November 6, 2009, the investments in our nuclear decommissioning trust funds were managed by third parties who have independent discretion over the purchases and sales of securities. We recognized impairments for any of these investments for which the fair value declines below our book value. We recognized $62.6 million and $165.0 million in pre-tax impairment losses on our nuclear decommissioning trust investments during 2009 and 2008, respectively. There were immaterial impairments in 2007. These impairments are included as part of gross realized losses in the following table.

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

    Year ended December 31,
     2009
     2008
     2007
     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Gross realized gains

     $29.8 $49.6 $33.5 

    Gross realized losses

      (86.9) (210.4) (30.9)
      

    Net realized (losses) gains

     $(57.1)$(160.8)$2.6 
      

    Investments in Variable Interest Entities

    As of December 31, 2009,2010, we consolidated three variable interest entities (VIE)VIEs in which we were the primary beneficiary, and we had significant interests in six VIEs for which we did not have controlling financial interests and, accordingly, were not the primary beneficiary. SeeNote 1 for estimated impacts of new accounting requirements for VIEs in 2010.

    Consolidated Variable Interest Entities

    In 2007, BGE formed RSB BondCo LLC (BondCo), a special purpose bankruptcy-remotebankruptcy- 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 determined that BondCo is a VIE for which it is the primary beneficiary. As a result, BGE, and we, consolidated BondCo.

            The BondCo assets are restricted and can only be used to settle the obligations of BondCo. Further, BGE is required to remit all payments it receives from customers for rate stabilization charges to BondCo. During 2010, 2009, 2008, and 2007,2008, BGE remitted $90.3 million, $85.8 million, $87.2 million, and $38.4$87.2 million, respectively, to BondCo.

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

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

            The gas supply arrangement is collateralized as follows:

            Other than credit support provided by the parental guarantee and the letter of credit, we do not have any contractual or other obligations to provide additional financial support to the retail gas entity group. The retail gas entity group creditors do not have any recourse to our general credit. Finally, we did not provide any financial support to the retail gas entity group during 2009,2010, other than the equity contributions, parental guarantee and the letter of credit.

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

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

     2010
     2009
     

     (In millions)
       
      (In millions)
     

    Current assets

     $608.9  $516.6 $608.9 

    Noncurrent assets

     67.7  57.7 67.7 
       

    Total Assets

     $676.6  $574.3 $676.6 
       

    Current liabilities

     
    $

    509.9
      $345.5 $509.9 

    Noncurrent liabilities

     420.3  399.0 420.3 
       

    Total Liabilities

     $930.2  $744.5 $930.2 
       

    Table of Contents

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

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

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


    114


    Table of Contents

    Unconsolidated Variable Interest Entities

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

            The nature of these entities and our involvement with them are described in the following table:

    VIE Category
     Nature of
    Entity
    Financing

    Nature of Constellation Energy Involvement
    Obligations or Requirement to Provide Financial Support
     Nature of
    Constellation
    Energy
    Involvement

    Obligations or
    Requirement
    to Provide
    Financial
    Support

    Initial
    Date of
    Involvement

     

    Power contract monetization entities
    (2 (2 entities)

     Combination of debt and equity financing Power sale agreements, loans, and guarantees $34.724.9 million and $34.7 million in letters of credit at December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively March 2005

    Power projects and fuel supply entities
    (4 (4 entities)

     

    Combination of debt and equity financing

     

    Equity investments and guarantees

     

    $2.05.0 million and $2.0 million debt guarantee and working capital funding at December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively

     

    Prior to 2003

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

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

            The following is summary information available as of December 31, 2010 about these entities:

     
     Power
    Contract
    Monetization
    VIEs

     All
    Other
    VIEs

     Total
     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Total assets

     $492.9 $288.3 $781.2 

    Total liabilities

      382.6  113.2  495.8 

    Our ownership interest

        48.7  48.7 

    Other ownership interests

      110.3  126.4  236.7 

    Our maximum exposure to loss

      24.9  46.4  71.3 

    Carrying amount and location of variable interest on balance sheet:

              
      

    —Other investments

        41.4  41.4 

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

     
     Power
    Contract
    Monetization
    VIEs

     All
    Other
    VIEs

     Total
     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Total assets

     $568.3 $338.6 $906.9 

    Total liabilities

      460.4  77.9  538.3 

    Our ownership interest

        62.6  62.6 

    Other ownership interests

      107.9  198.1  306.0 

    Our maximum exposure to loss

      34.7  64.6  99.3 

    Carrying amount and location of variable interest on balance sheet:

              
      

    ���Other investments

        62.6  62.6 

            Our maximum exposure to loss is the loss that we would incur in the unlikely event that our interests in all of these entities were to become worthless and we were required to fund the full amount of all guarantees associated with these entities. Our maximum exposure to loss as of December 31, 2010 and 2009 consists of the following:

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

    Power Contract Monetization VIEs

    In March 2005, our merchant energyNewEnergy business closed a transaction in which we assumed from a counterparty two power sales contracts with previously existing VIEs. 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, we sell power to the VIEs which, in turn, sell that power to an electric distribution utility through 2013. In connection with this transaction, a third party acquired the equity of the VIEs and we 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 could transfer its equity interests to us in lieu of repaying the loan. In this event, we would have the right to seek recovery of our losses from the electric distribution utility.


    115


    Table of Contents

    5Intangible Assets

    Goodwill

    Goodwill is the excess of the cost of an acquisition over the fair value of the net assets acquired. As of December 31, 2010 and 2009, our goodwill balance was primarily related to our other nonregulated businesses. Prior to September 30, 2008,retail energy reporting unit within our goodwill balance was primarily related to our merchant energyNewEnergy business acquisitions.segment. Goodwill is not amortized; rather, it is evaluated for impairment at least annually. We evaluated our goodwill in 2008 and recorded a $266.5 million impairment charge in 2008, which related solely to our merchant energy segment. We discuss this impairment charge in more detail inNote 2.

            The changes in the gross amount of goodwill and the accumulated impairment losses for the years ended December 31, 20092010 and 20082009 are as follows:

    At December 31,
    At December 31,
     2009
     2008
     At December 31,
     2010
     2009
     
       


     (In millions)
     
     (In millions)
     

    Balance as of January 1,:

     

    Balance as of January 1,

    Balance as of January 1,

     

    Gross goodwill

     $271.1 $261.3 

    Gross goodwill

     $292.0 $271.1 

    Accumulated impairment losses

     (266.5)  

    Accumulated impairment losses

     (266.5) (266.5)
       

    Net goodwill

    Net goodwill

     4.6 261.3 

    Net goodwill

     25.5 4.6 

    Goodwill acquired(1)

    Goodwill acquired(1)

     18.6 9.8 

    Goodwill acquired(1)

     51.5 18.6 

    Impairment losses

    Impairment losses

      (266.5)

    Impairment losses

       

    Other purchase price adjustments

    Other purchase price adjustments

     2.3  

    Other purchase price adjustments

      2.3 
       

    Balance as of December 31,

    Balance as of December 31,

     

    Balance as of December 31,

     

    Gross goodwill

     292.0 271.1 

    Gross goodwill

     343.5 292.0 

    Accumulated impairment losses

     (266.5) (266.5)

    Accumulated impairment losses

     (266.5) (266.5)
       

    Net goodwill

    Net goodwill

     $25.5 $4.6 

    Net goodwill

     $77.0 $25.5 
       
    (1)
    We discuss the goodwill acquired in 2010 in more detail in Note 15.

            For tax purposes, $18.6$169.4 million of our gross goodwill balance at December 31, 20092010 is deductible.

    Intangible Assets Subject to Amortization

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


     2009
      
      
      
      2010
      
      
      
     
    At December 31,
    At December 31,
      
      
     2008
     At December 31,
      
      
     2009
     
       

     Gross
    Carrying
    Amount

     Accumul-
    ated
    Amortiz-
    ation

     Net
    Asset

     Gross
    Carrying
    Amount

     Accumul-
    ated
    Amortiz-
    ation

     Net
    Asset

      Gross
    Carrying
    Amount

     Accumul-
    ated
    Amortiz-
    ation

     Net
    Asset

     Gross
    Carrying
    Amount

     Accumul-
    ated
    Amortiz-
    ation

     Net
    Asset

     
       

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    Software

     $580.5 $(347.3)$233.2 $554.9 $(291.5)$263.4  $596.8 $(397.1)$199.7 $580.5 $(347.3)$233.2 

    Permits and licenses

     2.2 (0.8) 1.4 64.9 (10.0) 54.9  2.7 (1.0) 1.7 2.2 (0.8) 1.4 

    Operating manuals and procedures

        38.6 (8.6) 30.0 

    Other

     29.0 (13.9) 15.1 43.9 (22.6) 21.3  22.3 (8.2) 14.1 29.0 (13.9) 15.1 
       

    Total

     $611.7 $(362.0)$249.7 $702.3 $(332.7)$369.6  $621.8 $(406.3)$215.5 $611.7 $(362.0)$249.7 
       

    BGE had intangible assets with a gross carrying amount of $250.2 million and accumulated amortization of $171.4 million at December 31, 2010 and $242.5 million and accumulated amortization of $148.8 million at December 31, 2009 and $217.0 million and accumulated amortization of $131.4 million at December 31, 2008 that are included in the table above. Substantially all of BGE's intangible assets relate to software.

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

    Year Ended December 31,
     2009
     2008
     2007
      2010
     2009
     2008
     
       

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    Nonregulated businesses

     $74.2 $66.8 $51.9  $64.8 $74.2 $66.8 

    BGE

     23.6 20.1 20.2  25.8 23.6 20.1 
       

    Total Constellation Energy

     $97.8 $86.9 $72.1  $90.6 $97.8 $86.9 
       

            The following is our, and BGE's, estimated amortization expense related to our intangible assets for 20102011 through 20142015 for the intangible assets included in our, and BGE's, Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2009:2010:

    Year Ended December 31,
     2010
     2011
     2012
     2013
     2014
      2011
     2012
     2013
     2014
     2015
     
       

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    Estimated amortization expense—Nonregulated businesses

     $56.7 $45.1 $25.7 $9.9 $4.4  $58.5 $37.4 $19.5 $8.8 $3.9 

    Estimated amortization expense—BGE

     24.6 21.9 15.3 11.6 7.4  23.7 17.2 13.2 8.6 6.7 
       

    Total estimated amortization expense—Constellation Energy

     $81.3 $67.0 $41.0 $21.5 $11.8  $82.2 $54.6 $32.7 $17.4 $10.6 
       

    Unamortized Energy Contracts

    As discussed inNote 1, unamortized energy contract assets and liabilities represent the remaining unamortized balance of nonderivative energy contracts acquired, certain contracts which no longer qualify as derivatives due to the absence of a liquid market, or derivatives designated as normal purchases and normal sales, which we previously recorded as derivative assets and liabilities. Unamortized energy contract assets also include the power purchase agreement entered into with CENG with aan initial fair value of approximately $0.8 billion. SeeNote 16 for more details on this power purchase agreement.

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


     2009
      
      
      
      2010
      
      
      
     
    At December 31
    At December 31
      
      
     2008
     At December 31
      
      
     2009
     
       

     Carrying
    Amount

     Accumul-
    ated
    Amortiz-
    ation

     Net
    Liability

     Carrying
    Amount

     Accumul-
    ated
    Amortiz-
    ation

     Net
    Liability

      Carrying
    Amount

     Accumul-
    ated
    Amortiz-
    ation

     Net
    Asset

     Carrying
    Amount

     Accumul-
    ated
    Amortiz-
    ation

     Net
    Liability

     
       

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    Unamortized energy contracts, net

     $(1,587.1)$1,584.5 $(2.6)$(2,332.3)$1,286.8 $(1,045.5) $(1,360.9)$1,473.8 $112.9 $(1,587.1)$1,584.5 $(2.6)
       

            We recognized amortization expense of $106.8 million, $353.1 million, $390.4 million, and $423.7$390.4 million related to these energy contract assets for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, 2008, and 20072008 for our nonregulated businesses.

            The table below presents the estimated amortization for these assets and liabilities over the next five-years:

    Year Ended December 31,
     2010
     2011
     2012
     2013
     2014
      2011
     2012
     2013
     2014
     2015
     
       

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    Estimated amortization

     $45.6 $295.1 $(89.8)$(92.3)$(72.1) $414.1 $(49.2)$(71.8)$(71.3)$(68.8)
       


    116


    Table of Contents

    6Regulatory Assets (net)

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

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

    At December 31,
    At December 31,
     2009
     2008
     At December 31,
     2010
     2009
     
       


     (In millions)
     
     (In millions)
     

    Deferred fuel costs

    Deferred fuel costs

     

    Deferred fuel costs

     

    Rate stabilization deferral

     $477.5 $536.3 

    Rate stabilization deferral

     $415.6 $477.5 

    Other

     14.3 24.4 

    Other

     8.8 14.3 

    Electric generation-related regulatory asset

    Electric generation-related regulatory asset

     102.5 118.0 

    Electric generation-related regulatory asset

     86.9 102.5 

    Net cost of removal

    Net cost of removal

     (210.1) (198.0)

    Net cost of removal

     (210.5) (210.1)

    Income taxes recoverable through future rates (net)

    Income taxes recoverable through future rates (net)

     67.6 63.2 

    Income taxes recoverable through future rates (net)

     68.3 67.6 

    Deferred smart energy savers program costs

     22.1 15.6 

    Deferred Smart Energy Savers ProgramSM costs

    Deferred Smart Energy Savers ProgramSM costs

     64.3 10.8 

    Deferred Advanced Meter Infrastructure costs

    Deferred Advanced Meter Infrastructure costs

     12.2 11.3 

    Deferred postretirement and postemployment benefit costs

    Deferred postretirement and postemployment benefit costs

     9.6 12.9 

    Deferred postretirement and postemployment benefit costs

     8.4 9.6 

    Deferred environmental costs

    Deferred environmental costs

     6.5 7.7 

    Deferred environmental costs

     5.6 6.5 

    Workforce reduction costs

    Workforce reduction costs

     1.5  

    Workforce reduction costs

     1.3 1.5 

    Other (net)

    Other (net)

     (4.6) (5.7)

    Other (net)

     (8.1) (4.6)
       

    Total regulatory assets (net)

    Total regulatory assets (net)

     486.9 574.4 

    Total regulatory assets (net)

     452.8 486.9 

    Less: Current portion of regulatory assets (net)

    Less: Current portion of regulatory assets (net)

     72.5 79.7 

    Less: Current portion of regulatory assets (net)

     78.7 72.5 
       

    Long-term portion of regulatory assets (net)

    Long-term portion of regulatory assets (net)

     $414.4 $494.7 

    Long-term portion of regulatory assets (net)

     $374.1 $414.4 
       

    Deferred Fuel Costs

    Rate Stabilization Deferral

    In June 2006, Senate Bill 1 was enacted in Maryland and imposed a rate stabilization measure that capped rate increases by BGE for residential electric customers at 15% from July 1, 2006 to May 31, 2007. As a result, BGE recorded a regulatory asset on its Consolidated Balance Sheets equal to the difference between the costs to purchase power and the revenues collected from customers, as well as related carrying charges based on short-term interest rates from July 1, 2006 to May 31, 2007. In addition, as required by Senate Bill 1, the Maryland PSC approved a plan that allowed residential electric customers the option to further defer the transition to market rates from June 1, 2007 to January 1, 2008. During 2007, BGE deferred $306.4 million of electricity purchased for resale expenses and certain applicable carrying charges as a regulatory asset related to the rate stabilization plans. During 20092010 and 2008,2009, BGE recovered $51.4$61.8 million and $57.1$51.4 million, respectively, of electricity purchased for resale expenses and carrying charges related to the rate stabilization plan regulatory asset. BGE began amortizing the regulatory asset associated with the deferral which ended in May 2007 to earnings over a period not to exceed ten years when collection from customers began in June 2007. Customers who participated in the deferral from June 1, 2007 to December 31, 2007 are repayingrepaid the deferred charges without interest over a 21-month period which began in April 2008 and ended in December 2009.

    Other

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

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

    Electric Generation-Related Regulatory Asset

    As a result of the deregulation of electric generation, BGE ceased to meet the requirements for 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. BGE 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.

            A portion of this regulatory asset represents income taxes recoverable through future rates that do not earn a regulated rate of return. These amounts were $53.3 million as of December 31, 2010 and $62.8 million as of December 31, 2009 and $72.4 million as of December 31, 2008.2009. We will continue to amortize this amount through 2017.

    Net Cost of Removal

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

            Historically, under the group depreciation method, the anticipated costs of removing assets upon retirement were provided for over the life of those assets as a component of depreciation expense. However, effective January 1, 2003, the recognition of expected net future costs of removal is shown as a component of depreciation expense or accumulated depreciation.

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


    117


    Table of Contents

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

    Income Taxes Recoverable Through Future Rates (net)

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

    Deferred Smart Energy Savers ProgramSM Costs

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

    Deferred Advanced Meter Infrastructure Costs

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

    Deferred Postretirement and Postemployment Benefit Costs

    We record a regulatory asset for the deferred postretirement and postemployment benefit costs in excess of the costs we included in the rates we charged our customers through 1997. We began amortizing these costs over a 15-year period in 1998.

    Deferred Environmental Costs

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

    Workforce Reduction Costs

    The portion of the costs associated with our 2008 workforce reduction program that relate to BGE's gas business were deferred in 2009 as a regulatory asset in accordance with the Maryland PSC's orders in prior rate cases and are being amortized over a 5-year period that began in January 2009.

    Other (Net)

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


    118


    Table of Contents

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

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

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

    At December 31,
     2009
     2008
      2010
     2009
     
       

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    Pension benefits

     $411.7 $936.7  $218.0 $411.7 

    Postretirement benefits

     322.3 415.4  334.9 322.3 

    Postemployment benefits

     50.6 59.9  55.0 50.6 
       

    Total defined benefit obligations

     784.6 1,412.0  607.9 784.6 

    Less: Amount recorded in other current liabilities

     40.7 57.7  33.2 40.7 
       

    Total noncurrent defined benefit obligations

     $743.9 $1,354.3  $574.7 $743.9 
       

    Pension Benefits

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

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

            We fund the qualified plans by contributing at least the minimum amount required under IRS regulations. We calculate the amount of funding using an actuarial method called the projected unit credit cost method. The assets in all of the plans at December 31, 2009 and 2008 were mostly marketable equity and fixed income securities.

    Postretirement Benefits

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

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

            In 2003, the President signed into law the Medicare Prescription Drug Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 (the Act). This legislation provides a prescription drug benefit for Medicare beneficiaries, a benefit that we provide to our Medicare eligible retirees. Our actuaries concluded that prescription drug benefits available under our postretirement medical plan are "actuarially equivalent" to Medicare Part D and thus qualify for the subsidy under the Act. This subsidy reduced our 20092010 Accumulated Postretirement Benefit Obligation by $28.4$30.9 million and our 20092010 postretirement medical payments by $2.8$2.2 million.

    Liability Adjustments

    At December 31, 20092010 and 2008,2009, our pension obligations were greater thanand the fair value of our plan assets for our qualified and our nonqualified pension plans were as follows:


     Qualified Plans  
      
     
    At December 31, 2009
     Nine Mile
     Other
     Non-Qualified
    Plans

     Total
     
    At December 31, 2010
     Qualified
    Plan

     Non-Qualified
    Plans

     Total
     
       

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    Accumulated benefit obligation

     $ $1,277.5 $84.1 $1,361.6  $1,405.2 $87.8 $1,493.0 

    Fair value of assets

      1,058.1  1,058.1  1,408.1  1,408.1 
       

    Unfunded obligation

     $ $219.4 $84.1 $303.5 

    Net (asset) unfunded obligation

     $(2.9)$87.8 $84.9 
       

     


     Qualified Plans  
      
     

     Non-Qualified
    Plans

      
     
    At December 31, 2008
     Nine Mile
     Other
     Total
     
     
    At December 31, 2009
     Qualified
    Plan

     Non-Qualified
    Plans

     Total
     

     (In millions)
       

    Accumulated benefit obligation

     $123.7 $1,417.3 $99.8 $1,640.8  $1,277.5 $84.1 $1,361.6 

    Fair value of assets

     63.3 804.3  867.6  1,058.1  1,058.1 
       

    Unfunded obligation

     $60.4 $613.0 $99.8 $773.2 

    Net unfunded obligation

     $219.4 $84.1 $303.5 
       

            We are required to reflect the funded status of our pension plans in terms of the projected benefit obligation, which is higher than the accumulated benefit obligation because it includes the impact of expected future compensation increases on the pension obligation. We reflect the funded status of our


    119


    Table of Contents


    postretirement benefits in terms of the accumulated postretirement benefit obligation.


    Table of Contents

            The following table summarizes the impacts of funded status adjustments recorded during 20092010 and 2008:2009:


      
      
     Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)   
      
     Accumulated Other
    Comprehensive
    Income (Loss)
     

      
     Postretirement
    Benefit
    Liability

       
     Postretirement
    Benefit
    Liability

     

     Pension
    Liability

    Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) Pension
    Liability

    Accumulated Other
    Comprehensive
    Income (Loss)

     Postretirement
    Benefit
    Liability

     After-tax
     Postretirement
    Benefit
    Liability

     After-tax

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    December 31, 2010

     $73.7 $10.9 $(84.6)$(54.6)
     

    December 31, 2009

     $(49.3)$1.0 $48.3 $25.4  $(49.3)$1.0 $48.3 $25.4 
       

    November 6, 2009 (1)

     $(211.7)$(20.9)$232.6 $138.0  $(211.7)$(20.9)$232.6 $138.0 
       

    December 31, 2008

     $590.7 $(9.5)$(581.2)$(347.1)
     
    (1)
    We performed a remeasurement of our pension and postretirement obligations at November 6, 2009 in connection with the separation of a portion of those plans upon the deconsolidation of CENG.

    Obligations and Assets

    As a result of workforce reduction initiatives, pension and postretirement special termination benefits were recorded in 2009, 2008 and 2007. We discuss the workforce reduction initiatives further inNote 2.

    We show the change in the benefit obligations and plan assets of the pension and postretirement benefit plans in the following tables. Postretirement benefit plan amounts are presented net of expected reimbursements under Medicare Part D.


     Pension
    Benefits
     Postretirement
    Benefits
      Pension
    Benefits
     Postretirement
    Benefits
     

     2009
     2008
     2009
     2008
      2010
     2009
     2010
     2009
     
       

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    Change in benefit obligation (1)

      

    Benefit obligation at January 1

     $1,804.3 $1,644.2 $415.4 $421.5  $1,469.8 $1,804.3 $322.3 $415.4 

    Service cost

     50.8 55.4 6.3 6.1  37.9 50.8 2.4 6.3 

    Interest cost

     101.1 100.2 22.6 24.0  84.7 101.1 17.7 22.6 

    Plan amendments

     2.4 12.1     2.4 (3.3)  

    Plan participants' contributions

       10.2 10.8    10.5 10.2 

    Actuarial loss (gain)

     55.8 102.4 1.0 (9.5) 124.0 55.8 14.2 1.0 

    Separation of CENG Plan

     (410.5)  (98.6)  

    Separation of CENG plans

     (3.0) (410.5)  (98.6)

    Settlements

     (19.0)     (5.2) (19.0)   

    Special termination benefits

     0.1 2.2  0.8  0.6 0.1 0.1  

    Benefits paid (2)(3)

     (115.2) (112.2) (34.6) (38.3) (82.7) (115.2) (29.0) (34.6)
       

    Benefit obligation at December 31

     $1,469.8 $1,804.3 $322.3 $415.4  $1,626.1 $1,469.8 $334.9 $322.3 
       
    (1)
    Amounts reflect projected benefit obligation for pension benefits and accumulated postretirement benefit obligation for postretirement benefits.

    (2)
    Pension benefits paid include annuity payments and lump-sum distributions.

    (3)
    Postretirement benefits paid are net of Medicare Part D reimbursements.


     Pension
    Benefits
     Postretirement
    Benefits
      Pension
    Benefits
     Postretirement
    Benefits
     

     2009
     2008
     2009
     2008
      2010
     2009
     2010
     2009
     
       

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    Change in plan assets

      

    Fair value of plan assets at January 1

     $867.6 $1,258.5 $ $  $1,058.1 $867.6 $ $ 

    Actual return on plan assets

     217.6 (364.9)    148.8 217.6   

    Employer contribution (1)

     341.5 86.2 24.4 27.5  289.1 341.5 18.5 24.4 

    Plan participants' contributions

       10.2 10.8    10.5 10.2 

    Separation of CENG Plan

     (234.4)      (234.4)   

    Settlements

     (19.0)     (5.2) (19.0)   

    Benefits paid (2)(3)

     (115.2) (112.2) (34.6) (38.3) (82.7) (115.2) (29.0) (34.6)
       

    Fair value of plan assets at December 31

     $1,058.1 $867.6 $ $  $1,408.1 $1,058.1 $ $ 
       
    (1)
    Includes benefit payments for unfunded plans.

    (2)
    Pension benefits paid include annuity payments and lump-sum distributions.

    (3)
    Postretirement benefits paid are net of Medicare Part D reimbursements.

    Net Periodic Benefit Cost and Amounts Recognized in Other Comprehensive Income

    We show the components of net periodic pension benefit cost in the following table:

    Year Ended December 31,
     2009
     2008
     2007
      2010
     2009
     2008
     
       

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    Components of net periodic pension benefit cost

      

    Service cost

     $50.8 $55.4 $49.4  $37.9 $50.8 $55.4 

    Interest cost

     101.1 100.2 94.7  84.7 101.1 100.2 

    Expected return on plan assets

     (118.9) (111.3) (102.6) (101.8) (118.9) (111.3)

    Amortization of unrecognized prior service cost

     10.9 10.9 5.2  3.9 10.9 10.9 

    Recognized net actuarial loss

     38.3 24.7 32.7  34.4 38.3 24.7 

    Amount capitalized as construction cost

     (10.2) (10.2) (11.7) (10.2) (10.2) (10.2)
       

    Net periodic pension benefit cost (1)

     $72.0 $69.7 $67.7  $48.9 $72.0 $69.7 
       
    (1)
    Net periodic pension benefit cost excludes settlement charges of $1.5 million and termination benefits of $0.6 million in 2010, settlement charge of $9.0 million and termination benefits of $0.1 million in 2009, and termination benefits of $2.2 million in 2008, and termination benefits of $1.2 million in 2007.2008. BGE's portion of our net periodic pension benefit costs, excluding amount capitalized, was $30.9 million in 2010, $27.9 million in 2009, and $25.5 million in 2008, and $32.1 million in 2007.2008. The vast majority of our retirees arewere BGE employees.


    120


    Table of Contents

            We show the components of net periodic postretirement benefit cost in the following table:

    Year Ended December 31,
     2009
     2008
     2007
      2010
     2009
     2008
     
       

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    Components of net periodic postretirement benefit cost

      

    Service cost

     $6.3 $6.1 $6.5  $2.4 $6.3 $6.1 

    Interest cost

     22.6 24.0 24.4  17.7 22.6 24.0 

    Amortization of transition obligation

     2.1 2.1 2.1  2.1 2.1 2.1 

    Recognized net actuarial loss

     2.2 2.0 4.1  0.4 2.2 2.0 

    Amortization of unrecognized prior service cost

     (3.4) (3.5) (3.5) (2.6) (3.4) (3.5)

    Amount capitalized as construction cost

     (6.3) (7.6) (7.7) (5.4) (6.3) (7.6)
       

    Net periodic postretirement benefit cost (1)

     $23.5 $23.1 $25.9  $14.6 $23.5 $23.1 
       
    (1)
    Net periodic postretirement benefit cost excludes termination benefits of $0.1 million in 2010 and $0.8 million in 2008 and $0.3 million in 2007.2008. BGE's portion of our net periodic postretirement benefit cost, excluding amounts capitalized, was $17.2 million in 2010, $18.7 million in 2009, and $20.4 million in 2008, and $22.7 million in 2007.2008.

            In determining net periodic pension benefit cost, we apply our expected return on plan assets to a market-related value of plan assets that recognizes asset gains and losses ratably over a five-year period.

            The following is a summary of amounts we have recorded in "Accumulated other comprehensive income"loss" and of expected amortization of those amounts over the next twelve months:


     Pension
    Benefits
     Postretirement
    Benefits
      
      Pension
    Benefits
     Postretirement
    Benefits
      
     

     Expected
    Amortiz-
    ation Next
    12 Months

      Expected
    Amortiz-
    ation Next
    12 Months

     

     2009
     2008
     2009
     2008
      2010
     2009
     2010
     2009
     
       

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    Unrecognized actuarial loss

     $702.2 $999.8 $51.5 $78.7 $36.3  $741.4 $702.2 $65.3 $51.5 $49.5 

    Unrecognized prior service cost

     9.9 22.5 (13.9) (22.6) 1.3  6.1 9.9 (14.0) (13.9) 1.1 

    Unrecognized transition obligation

       6.2 8.5 2.1    3.5 6.2 1.8 
       

    Total

     $712.1 $1,022.3 $43.8 $64.6 $39.7  $747.5 $712.1 $54.8 $43.8 $52.4 
       

    Expected Cash Benefit Payments

    The pension and postretirement benefits we expect to pay in each of the next five calendar years and in the aggregate for the subsequent five years are shown in the following table. These estimated benefits are based on the same assumptions used to measure the benefit obligation at December 31, 2009,2010, but include benefits attributable to estimated future employee service.


      
     Postretirement Benefits  Pension
    Benefits

     Postretirement
    Benefits (1)

     

     Pension
    Benefits

     Before
    Medicare
    Part D

     Subsidy
     After
    Medicare
    Part D

       
     

     (In millions)
     

    2010

     $102.7 $26.8 $2.2 $24.6 

    2011

     94.3 27.1 2.2 24.9  $105.5 $23.0 

    2012

     101.3 27.2 2.3 24.9  100.5 23.3 

    2013

     107.0 27.5 2.4 25.1  108.1 23.8 

    2014

     111.4 27.8 2.4 25.4  111.3 24.4 

    2015-2019

     655.5 139.5 11.7 127.8 

    2015

     147.9 24.8 

    2016-2020

     669.3 127.4 
     
    (1)
    Postretirement benefit payments are net of Medicare Part D reimbursements.

    Assumptions

    We made the assumptions below to calculate our pension and postretirement benefit obligations and periodic cost.


     Pension
    Benefits
     Postretirement
    Benefits
      
     Pension
    Benefits
     Postretirement
    Benefits
      

     Assumption
    Impacts
    Calculation of

     Assumption
    Impacts
    Calculation of


     2009
     2008
     2009
     2008
     2010
     2009
     2010
     2009

    Discount rate

     6.00% 6.00% 6.00% 6.00%Benefit Obligation and Periodic Cost 5.50% 6.00% 5.50% 6.00%Benefit Obligation and Periodic Cost

    Expected return on plan assets

     8.50 8.75 N/A N/A Periodic Cost 8.50 8.50 N/A N/A Periodic Cost

    Rate of compensation increase

     4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Benefit Obligation and Periodic Cost 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Benefit Obligation and Periodic Cost

            Our discount rate is based on a bond portfolio analysis of high quality corporate bonds whose maturities match our expected benefit payments. Our 8.50% overall expected long-term rate of return on plan assets reflected our long-term investment strategy in terms of asset mix targets and expected returns for each asset class.

            We determineclass at the beginning of 2010. Effective in 2011, we reduced our expected long-term rate of return assumption to 8.00% reflecting our updated investment strategy, asset mix, and expected return on plan assets by applying expected futurefor each asset returns provided by external sources by asset class to our targeted long-term asset allocations. We then review actual historical plan asset returns for comparability and supplement this approach with peer group surveys when available.class.

            Annual health care inflation rate assumptions also impact the calculation of our postretirement benefit obligation and periodic cost. We assumed the following health care inflation rates to produce average claims by year as shown below:

    At December 31,
     2009
     2008
      2010
     2009
     
       

    Next year

     8.0% 8.0% 8.5% 8.0%

    Following year

     7.5% 7.5% 7.5% 7.5%

    Ultimate trend rate

     5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0%

    Year ultimate trend rate reached

     2016 2015  2017 2016 

            A one-percentage point increase in the health care inflation rate from the assumed rates would increase the accumulated postretirement benefit obligation by approximately $19.0$21.6 million as of December 31, 20092010 and would increase the combined


    Table of Contents


    service and interest costs of the postretirement benefit cost by approximately $1.7$1.2 million annually.

            A one-percentage point decrease in the health care inflation rate from the assumed rates would decrease the accumulated postretirement benefit obligation by approximately $16.6$18.8 million


    121


    Table of Contents

    as of December 31, 20092010 and would decrease the combined service and interest costs of the postretirement benefit cost by approximately $1.4$1.1 million annually.

    Qualified Pension Plan Assets

    Investment Strategy

    We invest our qualified pension plan assets using the following investment objectives:

            To achieve these objectives, Constellation Energy, through a management Investment Committee (the Committee), has adopted an investment strategy that divides its pension investment program into two primary portfolios:

            Currently, the Committee allocates a substantial portion60% of its plan assets to return seeking assets to help reduce existing deficits in the funded status of the plan. As the funded status of our plans improve, the Committee expects to reduce its exposure to return seeking assets and increase its liability hedging assets to reduce its total risk.

    Return Seeking Assets

    The purpose of return seeking assets is to provide investment returns in excess of the growth of pension liabilities. This category includes a diversified portfolio of public equities, private equity, real estate, hedge funds, high yield bonds and other instruments. These assets are likely to have lower correlations with the pension liabilities and lead to higher funded status risk over shorter periods of time.

    Liability Hedging Assets

    The purpose of liability hedging assets, such as long duration bonds and interest rate derivatives, is to hedge against interest rate changes. Exposure to liability hedging assets is intended to reduce the volatility of plan funded status, contributions, and pension expense.

    Risk Management

    The Committee manages plan asset risk using several approaches. First, the assets are invested in two diverse portfolios, each of which contains investments across a spectrum of asset classes. Second, the Committee considers the long-term investment horizon of the plan, which is greater than ten years. The long-term horizon enables the Committee to tolerate the risk of investment losses in the short-term with the expectation of higher returns in the long-term. Third, the Committee employs a thorough due diligence program prior to selecting an investment, and a rigorous ongoing monitoring program once assets are invested. The Committee evaluates risk on an ongoing basis.

    Asset Allocation

    Plan assets are diversified across various asset classes and securities based on the investment strategy approved by the Committee. This policy allocation is long-term oriented and consistent with the risk tolerance and funded status. The target asset allocation as well as the actual allocations for 2010 and 2009 and 2008 isare provided below.


      
     Actual
    Allocation

     

     Target
    Allocation

      Target
    Allocation
     Actual
    Allocation
     
    At December 31,
     2009
     2008
      2010
     2009
     2010
     2009
     
     

    Global equity securities

     48%* 57% 57% 42% 48% 42% 57%

    Fixed income securities

     30 27 26  40 30 37 27 

    Alternative investments

     15 7 11  12 15 8 7 

    High yield bonds

     7 7 6  6 7 6 7 

    Cash and cash equivalents

      2     7 2 

    Derivative instruments

         
       

    Total

     100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
       
    *
    50% passively invested; 50% actively invested

            The target asset allocation also allows for investments in financial instruments, including asset-backed securities and collateralized mortgage obligations, which are exposed to risks such as interest rate and market andrisk as well as overall market volatility. These instruments are sensitive to changes in economic conditions. Such changes could materially affect the amounts reported.

            The actual portfolio will bewas rebalanced in earlyDecember 2010 to reflect the recently approvedin accordance with policy target allocation.allocations and an improvement in funded status. The Committee will thenalso rebalance our portfolio periodically when the actual allocations fall outside of the ranges prescribed in the investment policy. Further,policy or as the Committee will rebalance to de-risk the portfolio as funded status improves.

    Fair Value Hierarchy

    We determine the fair value of the plan assets using unadjusted quoted prices in active markets (Level 1) or pricing inputs that are observable (Level 2) whenever that information is available. We use unobservable inputs (Level 3) to estimate fair value only when relevant observable inputs are not available. We classify assets within this fair value hierarchy based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement of each individual asset taken as a whole.


    122


    Table of Contents

            The following table setstables set forth by level, within the fair value hierarchy, the investments in the Plans' master trust at fair value as of December 31, 2010 and 2009:

    At December 31, 2010
    At December 31, 2010
     Level 1
     Level 2
     Level 3
     Total
    Fair
    Value

     
     

     Level 1
     Level 2
     Level 3
     Total
    Fair
    Value

     
     (In millions)
     

    Global equity securities:

    Global equity securities:

     
     

    Marketable equity securities

     $143.6 $ $ $143.6 

     (In millions)
     

    Common collective trusts

      447.5  447.5 

    Global equity securities

     $215.4 $383.0 $ $598.4 

    Fixed income securities

      289.2  289.2 

    Fixed income securities:

    Fixed income securities:

     

    Corporate debt securities

      327.9  327.9 

    Government / agency securities

    Government / agency securities

      113.0  113.0 

    Municipal bonds

    Municipal bonds

      54.8  54.8 

    Guarantee insurance contracts

    Guarantee insurance contracts

      21.6  21.6 

    High yield bonds

     0.6 75.6  76.2 

    High yield bonds

      86.9  86.9 

    Cash equivalents

      19.9  19.9 

    Cash equivalents

     93.6   93.6 

    Derivative instruments

    Derivative instruments

      0.9  0.9 

    Alternative investments

       74.4 74.4 

    Alternative investments

       118.3 118.3 
       

    Total

     $216.0 $767.7 $74.4 $1,058.1 

    Total

     $237.2 $1,052.6 $118.3 $1,408.1 
       


    At December 31, 2009
     Level 1
     Level 2
     Level 3
     Total
    Fair
    Value

     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Global equity securities

     $215.4 $383.0 $ $598.4 

    Fixed income securities

        289.2    289.2 

    High yield bonds

      0.6  75.6    76.2 

    Cash equivalents

      19.9      19.9 

    Alternative investments

          74.4  74.4 
      

    Total

     $235.9 $747.8 $74.4 $1,058.1 
      

            The following is a description of the valuation methodologies used for assets measured at fair value:

            The following table summarizes the changes in the fair value of the Level 3 assets for the yearyears ended December 31, 2010 and 2009:

    Year ended December 31, 2009
      
     


     Year Ended
    December 31,
     


     2010
     2009
     
       


     (In millions)
     
     (In millions)
     

    Balance at beginning of period

    Balance at beginning of period

     $96.3 

    Balance at beginning of period

     $74.4 $96.3 

    Actual return on plan assets:

    Actual return on plan assets:

     

    Actual return on plan assets:

     

    Assets still held at year end

     (2.5)

    Assets still held at year end

     (32.1) (2.5)

    Assets sold during the year

     6.4 

    Assets sold during the year

     37.0 6.4 

    Purchases, sales, and settlements

    Purchases, sales, and settlements

     (10.8)

    Purchases, sales, and settlements

     22.2 (10.8)

    Transfers into and out of Level 3

     (15.0)

    Transfers into Level 3

    Transfers into Level 3

     16.8   

    Transfers out of Level 3

    Transfers out of Level 3

        
       

    Balance at end of period

     $74.4 

    Net transfers into and out of Level 3

    Net transfers into and out of Level 3

     16.8 (15.0)
       

    Balance at end of year

    Balance at end of year

     $118.3 $74.4 
     

    Contributions and Benefit Payments

    We contributed $319.4$279.7 million to our qualified pension plans in 2009, even though there2010. $243.0 million of this contribution was no IRS required minimum contribution in 2009. We expectan acceleration of estimated calendar year 2011 and 2012 contributions. Therefore, we do not plan to contribute $37 millionmake contributions to our qualified pension plans in 2010.2011 and 2012. Our non-qualified pension plans and our postretirement benefit programs are not funded. We estimate that we will incur approximately $10$7 million in pension benefits for our non-qualified pension plans and approximately $25$23 million for retiree health and life insurance costs net of Medicare Part D during 2010.2011.


    123


    Table of Contents

    Other Postemployment Benefits

    We provide the following postemployment benefits:

            We recognized expense associated with our other postemployment benefits of $9.9 million in 2010, $5.3 million in 2009, and $1.9 million in 2008, and $16.7 million in 2007.2008. BGE's portion of expense associated with other postemployment benefits was $7.6 million in 2010, $4.4 million in 2009, and $2.2 million in 2008, and $10.2 million in 2007.2008.

            We assumed the discount rate for other postemployment benefits to be 4.00% in 2010 and 4.75% in 2009 and 5.00% in 2008.2009. This assumption impacts the calculation of our other postemployment benefit obligation and periodic cost.

    Employee Savings Plan Benefits

    We sponsored two defined contribution plans until November 6, 2009, when upon the close of the sale of a 49.99% interest in CENG to EDF, we deconsolidated CENG and the defined contribution plan related to Nine Mile Point was removed from our books. ToFor all remaining eligible employees of Constellation Energy, we continue to sponsor a defined contribution savings plan. The savings plan is a qualified 401(k) plan under the Internal Revenue Code. In a defined contribution plan, the benefits a participant is to receive result from regular contributions to a participant account. Matching contributions to participant accounts are made under these plans. Matching contributions were as follows:

    Year Ended December 31,
     2009
     2008
     2007
      2010
     2009
     2008
     
       

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    Nonregulated businesses

     $14.8 $17.6 $16.1  $9.9 $14.8 $17.6 

    BGE

     5.7 5.8 5.8  6.3 5.7 5.8 
       

    Total Constellation Energy

     $20.5 $23.4 $21.9  $16.2 $20.5 $23.4 
       


    124


    Table of Contents

    8Credit Facilities and Short-Term Borrowings

    Our short-term borrowings may include bank loans, commercial paper, and bank lines of credit. Short-term borrowings mature within one year from the date of issuance. We pay commitment fees to banks for providing us lines of credit. When we borrow under the lines of credit, we pay market interest rates. We enter into these facilities to ensure adequate liquidity to support our operations.

    Constellation Energy

    Our liquidity requirements are funded with credit facilities and cash. We fund our short-term working capital needs with existing cash and with our credit facilities, which support direct cash borrowings and the issuance of commercial paper, if available. We also use our credit facilities to support the issuance of letters of credit, primarily for our merchant energyNewEnergy business.

            Constellation Energy had bank lines of credit under committed credit facilities totaling $4.0$4.2 billion at December 31, 20092010 for short-term financial needs as follows:

    Type of Credit
    Facility

    Type of Credit
    Facility

     Amount
    (In billions)

     Expiration Date
     Capacity Type
     Amount
    (In billions)

     Expiration Date
     Capacity Type

    Syndicated Revolver (1)

    Syndicated Revolver (1)

     $2.32 July 2012 Letters of credit and cash

    Syndicated Revolver (1)

     $2.50 October 2013 Letters of credit and cash

    Commodity-linked

    Commodity-linked

     0.50 August 2014 Letter of credit 0.50 August 2014 Letter of credit and cash

    Bilateral

    Bilateral

     0.55 September 2014 Letters of credit 0.55 September 2014 Letters of credit

    Bilateral

    Bilateral

     0.25 December 2014 Letters of credit and cash 0.25 December 2014 Letters of credit and cash

    Bilateral

    Bilateral

     0.25 June 2014 Letters of credit and cash 0.25 June 2014 Letters of credit and cash

    Bilateral

    Bilateral

     0.15 September 2013 Letters of credit 0.15 September 2013 Letters of credit
              

    Total

     $4.20    

    Total

     $4.02         
         
    (1)
    Facility size was reduced from $3.85 billion to $2.32 billion as a result of the completion of the transaction with EDF.

            Collectively, these facilities currently support the issuance of letters of credit and/or cash borrowings up to $4.0 billion.        At December 31, 2009,2010, we had approximately $1.7$1.6 billion in letters of credit issued, including $0.4 billion in letters of credit issued under the commodities-linked credit facility discussed below, and no commercial paper outstanding under these facilities.

            The commodity-linked credit facility currently allows for the issuance of letters of credit and, as modified in 2010, for cash borrowings, up to a maximum capacity of $0.5 billion. This commodity-linked facility is designed to help manage our contingent collateral requirements associated with the hedging of our Customer Supply operationsNewEnergy business because its capacity increases up to the maximum capacity as natural gas price levels decrease compared to a reference price that is adjusted periodically. As of

            At December 31, 2009, there were no letters2010, Constellation Energy had $32.4 million of creditshort-term notes outstanding under this facility.with a weighted-average effective interest rate of 6.56%.

    BGE

    BGE has a $575.0$600.0 million revolving credit facility expiring in December 2011. BGE can borrow directly from the banks, use the facility to allow commercial paper to be issued, if available, or issue letters of credit. The size of the facility may be increased up to $600 million with additional commitments by lenders. At December 31, 2009,2010, BGE had $46.0 million inno commercial paper outstanding with a weighted average effective interest rate of 0.39%.outstanding. There were immaterial letters of credit outstanding at December 31, 2009.2010.

    Net Available Liquidity

    The following table provides a summary of our net available liquidity at December 31, 2009:2010:


     As of December 31, 2009
     

     Constellation
    Energy

     BGE
     Total
    Consolidated

     
    At December 31, 2010
     Constellation
    Energy
    (excluding BGE)

     BGE
     
       

     (In billions)
      (In billions)
     

    Credit facilities (1)

     $3.5 $0.6 $4.1  $3.7 $0.6 

    Less: Letters of credit issued

     (1.7)  (1.7)

    Less: Letters of credit issued (1)

     (1.2)  

    Less: Cash drawn on credit facilities

           
       

    Undrawn facilities

     1.8 0.6 2.4  2.5 0.6 

    Less: Commercial paper outstanding

           
       

    Net available facilities

     1.8 0.6 2.4  2.5 0.6 

    Add: Cash

     3.4  3.4 

    Less: Reserved cash (2)

     (1.3)  (1.3)
     

    Cash and facility liquidity

     3.9 0.6 4.5 

    Add: EDF put arrangement

     1.1  1.1 

    Add: Cash and cash equivalents (2)

    �� 2.0  

    Less: Reserved cash (3)

     (1.2)  
       

    Net available liquidity

     $5.0 $0.6 $5.6  $3.3 $0.6 
       
    (1)
    Excludes $0.5 billion commodity-linked credit facility due to its contingent nature.nature and $0.4 billion in letters of credit posted against it.

    (2)
    BGE's cash balance at December 31, 2010 was $50.0 million.

    (3)
    Represents management's expectation at December 31, 2010 of payments to be made for income taxesthe January 2011 acquisition of the Boston Generating plants ($1.0 billion) and bond repurchases in the first quarterJanuary 2011 retirement of 2010.the 2012 Notes ($0.2 billion).

    Other Sources of Liquidity

    In December 2008, we executed an Investment Agreement with EDF that includes an asset put arrangement that provides us with an option at any time through December 31, 2010 to sell certain non-nuclear generation assets, at pre-agreed prices, to EDF for aggregate proceeds of no more than $2 billion pre-tax, or approximately $1.4 billion after-tax. The amount of after-tax proceeds will be impacted by the assets actually sold and the related tax impacts at that time.

            Exercise of the put arrangement is conditioned upon the receipt of regulatory approvals and third party consents, the absence of any material liens on such assets, and the absence of a material adverse effect, as defined in the Investment Agreement. During April 2009, we received regulatory approvals and consents for the majority of the assets covered by the put arrangement. As of December 31, 2009, we have approximately $1.1 billion after-tax of liquidity available through the put


    Table of Contents

    arrangement. We expect to receive regulatory approval for an additional asset in the second quarter of 2010, which will increase the net after-tax liquidity from the put arrangement to approximately $1.4 billion.

            We believe that the actions that we have taken and our current net available liquidity will be sufficient to support our ongoing liquidity requirements. Our liquidity projections include assumptions for commodity price changes, which are subject to significant volatility, and we are exposed to certain operational risks that could have a significant impact on our liquidity.

    Credit Facility Compliance and Covenants

    The credit facilities of Constellation Energy and BGE have limitedcontain a material adverse change clauses, nonerepresentation but draws on the facilities are not conditioned upon Constellation Energy and BGE making this representation at the time of whichthe draw. However, to the extent a material adverse change has occurred and prevents Constellation Energy or BGE from making other representations that are required at the time of the draw, the draw would prohibit draws under the existing facilities.be prohibited.

            Certain credit facilities of Constellation Energy contain a provision requiring Constellation Energy to maintain a ratio of debt to capitalization equal to or less than 65%. At December 31, 2009,2010, the debt to capitalization ratio as defined in the credit agreements was 34%36%.

            Under our $2.32 billion credit facility, we granted a lien on certain of our generating facilities and pledged our ownership interests in our nuclear business to the lenders upon the completion of the transaction with EDF.

            The credit agreement of BGE contains a provision requiring BGE to maintain a ratio of debt to capitalization equal to or less than 65%. At December 31, 2009,2010, the debt to capitalization ratio for BGE as defined in this credit agreement was 45%43%.


    125


    Table of Contents

            Decreases in Constellation Energy's or BGE's credit ratings would not trigger an early payment on any of our, or BGE's, credit facilities. However, the impact of a credit ratings downgrade on our financial ratios associated with our credit facility covenants would depend on our financial condition at the time of such a downgrade and on the source of funds used to satisfy the incremental collateral obligation resulting from a credit ratings downgrade. For example, if we were to use existing cash balances or exercise the put option with EDF to fund the cash portion of any additional collateral obligations resulting from a credit ratings downgrade, we would not expect a material impact on our financial ratios. However, if we were to issue long-term debt or use our credit facilities to fund any additional collateral obligations, our financial ratios could be materially affected. Failure by Constellation Energy, or BGE, to comply with these covenants could result in the acceleration of the maturity of the borrowings outstanding and preclude us from issuing letters of credit under these facilities.


    126


    Table of Contents

    9Capitalization

    We detail in the table below our total capitalization, which includes long-term debt, common stock, noncontrolling interests, and preference stock, as of December 31, 20092010 and 2008.2009.

    At December 31,
    At December 31,
     2009
     2008
     At December 31,
     2010
     2009
     
       


     (In millions)
     
     (In millions)
     

    Long-Term Debt

    Long-Term Debt

     

    Long-Term Debt

     

    Long-term debt of Constellation Energy

     

    Long-term debt of Constellation Energy

     
     

    Zero Coupon Senior Notes, due June 19, 2023

     $ $256.7  

    8.625% Series A Junior Subordinated Debentures, due June 15, 2063

     $450.0 $450.0 
     

    8.625% Series A Junior Subordinated Debentures, due June 15, 2063

     450.0 450.0  

    7.00% Fixed-Rate Notes, due April 1, 2012

     213.5 700.0 
     

    8% Series B Mandatorily Redeemable Preferred Stock

      1,000.0  

    4.55% Fixed-Rate Notes, due June 15, 2015

     550.0 550.0 
     

    14% Senior Notes, due December 31, 2009

      1,000.0  

    5.15% Fixed-Rate Notes, due December 1, 2020

     550.0  
     

    6.125% Fixed-Rate Notes, due September 1, 2009

      500.0  

    7.60% Fixed-Rate Notes, due April 1, 2032

     700.0 700.0 
     

    7.00% Fixed-Rate Notes, due April 1, 2012

     700.0 700.0  

    Fair Value of Interest Rate Swaps

     36.2 38.6 
     

    4.55% Fixed-Rate Notes, due June 15, 2015

     550.0 550.0   
     

    7.60% Fixed-Rate Notes, due April 1, 2032

     700.0 700.0  

    Total long-term debt of Constellation Energy

     2,499.7 2,438.6 
     

    Fair Value of Interest Rate Swaps

     38.6 55.9   
     

    Long-term debt of nonregulated businesses

     
     

    Total long-term debt of Constellation Energy

     2,438.6 5,212.6  

    Tax-exempt debt transferred from BGE effective July 1, 2000

     
      

    4.10% Pollution control loan, due July 1, 2014

     20.0 20.0 

    Long-term debt of nonregulated businesses

      

    Tax-exempt variable rate notes, due April 1, 2024

     75.0 75.0 
     

    Tax-exempt debt transferred from BGE effective July 1, 2000

      

    Tax-exempt variable rate notes, due December 1, 2025

      47.0 
     

    Port facilities loan, due June 1, 2013

      10.0  

    Tax-exempt variable rate notes, due December 1, 2037

      65.0 
     

    4.10% Pollution control loan, due July 1, 2014

     20.0 20.0  

    5.00% Mortgage note, due June 15, 2010

      0.4 
     

    Floating-rate pollution control loan, due June 1, 2027

      8.8  

    7.3% Fixed Rate Note, due June 1, 2012

     1.7 1.7 
     

    Tax-exempt variable rate notes, due April 1, 2024

     75.0 75.0  

    Asset-based lending agreement due July 16, 2012

     18.0 27.1 
     

    Tax-exempt variable rate notes, due December 1, 2025

     47.0 47.0   
     

    Tax-exempt variable rate notes, due December 1, 2037

     65.0 65.0  

    Total long-term debt of nonregulated businesses

     114.7 236.2 
     

    District Cooling facilities loan, due December 1, 2031

      25.0   
     

    5.00% Mortgage note, due June 15, 2010

     0.4 1.6 

    Other long-term debt of BGE

     
     

    4.25% Mortgage note, due March 15, 2009

      0.2  

    6.125% Notes, due July 1, 2013

     400.0 400.0 
     

    7.3% Fixed Rate Note, due June 1, 2012

     1.7 1.8  

    5.90% Notes, due October 1, 2016

     300.0 300.0 
     

    Asset-based lending agreement due July 16, 2012

     27.1   

    5.20% Notes, due June 15, 2033

     200.0 200.0 
      

    6.35% Notes, due October 1, 2036

     400.0 400.0 
     

    Total long-term debt of nonregulated businesses

     236.2 254.4  

    Medium-term notes, Series E

     131.5 131.5 
       

    Other long-term debt of BGE

      

    Total other long-term debt of BGE

     1,431.5 1,431.5 
     

    6.125% Notes, due July 1, 2013

     400.0 400.0   
     

    5.90% Notes, due October 1, 2016

     300.0 300.0 

    6.20% deferrable interest subordinated debentures due October 15, 2043 to BGE wholly owned BGE Capital Trust II relating to trust preferred securities

     257.7 257.7 
     

    5.20% Notes, due June 15, 2033

     200.0 200.0 

    Rate stabilization bonds

     454.4 510.9 
     

    6.35% Notes, due October 1, 2036

     400.0 400.0 

    Unamortized discount and premium

     (3.9) (4.0)
     

    Medium-term notes, Series E

     131.5 143.0 

    Current portion of long-term debt

     (305.3) (56.9)
       
     

    Total other long-term debt of BGE

     1,431.5 1,443.0 

    Total long-term debt

     $4,448.8 $4,814.0 
       

    6.20% deferrable interest subordinated debentures due October 15, 2043 to BGE wholly owned BGE Capital Trust II relating to trust preferred securities

     257.7 257.7 

    Rate stabilization bonds

     510.9 564.4 

    Unamortized discount and premium

     (4.0) (41.9)

    Current portion of long-term debt

     (56.9) (2,591.5)
     

    Total long-term debt

     $4,814.0 $5,098.7 
     


    127


    Table of Contents

    At December 31,
    At December 31,
     2009
     2008
     At December 31,
     2010
     2009
     
       


     (In millions)
     
     (In millions)
     

    Equity:

    Equity:

     

    Equity:

     

    Noncontrolling Interests

    Noncontrolling Interests

     
    $

    75.3
     
    $

    20.1
     

    Noncontrolling Interests

     
    $

    88.8
     
    $

    75.3
     

    BGE Preference Stock

    BGE Preference Stock

     

    BGE Preference Stock

     

    Cumulative preference stock not subject to mandatory redemption, 6,500,000 shares authorized 7.125%, 1993 Series, 400,000 shares outstanding, callable at $101.42 per share until June 30, 2010, and at lesser amounts thereafter

     40.0 40.0 

    Cumulative preference stock not subject to mandatory redemption, 6,500,000 shares authorized 7.125%, 1993 Series, 400,000 shares outstanding, callable at $101.07 per share until June 30, 2011, and at lesser amounts thereafter

     40.0 40.0 

    6.97%, 1993 Series, 500,000 shares outstanding, callable at $101.39 per share until September 30, 2010, and at lesser amounts thereafter

     50.0 50.0 

    6.97%, 1993 Series, 500,000 shares outstanding, callable at $101.05 per share until September 30, 2011, and at lesser amounts thereafter

     50.0 50.0 

    6.70%, 1993 Series, 400,000 shares outstanding, callable at $101.68 per share until December 31, 2010, and at lesser amounts thereafter

     40.0 40.0 

    6.70%, 1993 Series, 400,000 shares outstanding, callable at $101.01 per share until December 31, 2011, and at lesser amounts thereafter

     40.0 40.0 

    6.99%, 1995 Series, 600,000 shares outstanding, callable at $102.10 per share until September 30, 2010, and at lesser amounts thereafter

     60.0 60.0 

    6.99%, 1995 Series, 600,000 shares outstanding, callable at $101.75 per share until September 30, 2011, and at lesser amounts thereafter

     60.0 60.0 
       

    Total BGE preference stock not subject to mandatory redemption

     190.0 190.0 

    Total BGE preference stock not subject to mandatory redemption

     190.0 190.0 
       

    Common Shareholders' Equity

    Common Shareholders' Equity

     

    Common Shareholders' Equity

     

    Common stock without par value, 600,000,000 shares authorized; 200,985,414 and 199,128,908 shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. (At December 31, 2009, 5,790,545 shares were reserved for the long-term incentive plans, 7,041,111 shares were reserved for the shareholder investment plan, and 527,959 shares were reserved for the employee savings plan.)

     3,229.6 3,164.5 

    Common stock without par value, 600,000,000 shares authorized; 199,788,658 and 200,985,414 shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. (At December 31, 2010, 12,818,160 shares were reserved for the long-term incentive plans, 8,788,849 shares were reserved for the shareholder investment plan, and 1,884,258 shares were reserved for the employee savings plan.)

     3,231.7 3,229.6 

    Retained earnings

     6,461.0 2,228.7 

    Retained earnings

     5,270.8 6,461.0 

    Accumulated other comprehensive loss

     (993.5) (2,211.8)

    Accumulated other comprehensive loss

     (673.3) (993.5)
       

    Total common shareholders' equity

     8,697.1 3,181.4 

    Total common shareholders' equity

     7,829.2 8,697.1 
       

    Total Equity

    Total Equity

     8,962.4 3,391.5 

    Total Equity

     8,108.0 8,962.4 
       

    Total Capitalization

    Total Capitalization

     $13,776.4 $8,490.2 

    Total Capitalization

     $12,556.8 $13,776.4 
       

    BGE Common Shareholder Equity

    At December 31,
     2010
     2009
     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Common Stock

     $1,293.1 $1,293.1 

    Retained Earnings

      779.5  645.1 

    Accumulated other comprehensive income

      0.6  0.6 
      

    Total BGE common shareholder equity

     $2,073.2 $1,938.8 
      

    Certain prior-period amounts have been reclassified to conform with the current period's presentation.

    Long-term Debt

    Long-term debt matures in one year or more from the date of issuance. The long-term debt of Constellation Energy and BGE do not contain material adverse change clauses. We detail our long-term debt in the table above.

    Constellation Energy

    Mandatorily Redeemable Series B Preferred Stock5.15% Notes due December 1, 2020

    OnIn December 17, 2008, Constellation Energy entered into an Investment Agreement with EDF. Simultaneously with the execution2010, we issued $550 million of the Investment Agreement, Constellation Energy issued 10,000 shares of 8% Series B Preferred Stock (Series B Preferred Stock)5.15% Notes due December 1, 2020. Interest is payable semi-annually on June 1 and December 1, beginning June 1, 2011. At any time prior to EDF for $1 billion, which was restricted for the repayment of our 14% Senior Notes. On November 6, 2009, the date EDF completed the purchase of the 49.99% interest in CENG pursuant to the Investment Agreement, EDF surrendered to Constellation EnergySeptember 1, 2020, we may redeem some or all of the sharesnotes at a price equal to the greater of 100% of the Series B Preferred Stockprincipal amount of the notes outstanding to be redeemed and the sum of the present values of the remaining scheduled payments of principal and interest on the notes being redeemed, discounted to the redemption date on a semi-annual basis at the Treasury rate plus 30 basis points, plus accrued interest. After September 1, 2020, we may redeem some or all of the notes at a price equal to 100% of the principal amount of the notes outstanding to be redeemed plus accrued interest on the principal amount being redeemed to the redemption date.

            Additionally, in December 2010, we issued a notice to redeem $213.5 million of our 7.00% Notes, which represented the remaining outstanding 7.00% Notes due April 1, 2012. As such, we classified these notes as partial payment"Current portion of long-term debt" in our Consolidated Balance Sheets. In January 2011, we redeemed these notes with part of the proceeds from the issuance of the $550 million 5.15% Notes, terminated the associated interest rate swaps, and recognized a pre-tax loss of approximately $5 million on this transaction.

            During February 2011, we entered into interest rate swaps qualifying as fair value hedges related to $350 million of our fixed rate debt maturing in 2015. We also entered into $150 million of interest rate swaps related to our fixed rate debt maturing in 2020 that do not qualify as fair value hedges, and will be marked to market through earnings. These swaps effectively converted $500 million notional amount of fixed rate debt to floating rate for the purchaseterm of the interest in CENG.swaps.

            We discuss our interest rate swaps inNote 13.


    128


    Table of Contents

    Upstream Gas Property Asset-Based Lending Agreement

    In July 2009, we entered into a three year asset-based lending agreement associated with certain upstream gas properties that we own. At December 31, 2009,2010, the borrowing base committed under the facility was $100 million, of which $27.1$18.0 million has been utilized and reflected in "Long-term debt" in our Consolidated Balance Sheets. The size of the facility may be increased up to $200 million with additional commitments by the lenders. Any debt issued under this facility is secured by the upstream gas properties, and the lenders do not have recourse against Constellation Energy in the event of a default. Interest is payable quarterly in March, June, September, and December.

            This asset-based lending agreement contains a provision that requires certain of our entities that own our upstream gas properties to maintain a current ratio of one-to-one. As of December 31, 2009,2010, these entities were in compliance with this provision.

    Voluntary Debt Retirements

    The repurchase of the following notes isAs part of our previously announcedvoluntary commitment to repayreduce our debt by $1 billion with funds received from the EDF transaction, we retired the following debt completing this commitment.

    7.00% Notes due April 1, 2012

    In February 2010, we retired an aggregate principal amount of debt following the close$486.5 million of our 7.00% Notes due April 1, 2012 pursuant to a cash tender offer, at a premium of approximately 11%. We recorded a loss on this transaction with EDF in November 2009.of $51.6 million within "Interest expense" on our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss).

    Tax-Exempt Notes

    During 2009, we retired approximately $150 million of variable rate tax exempt notes prior to maturity. In March, 2010, we repurchased our outstanding $47 million and $65 million variable rate tax-exempt notes. Since these notes are variable rate instruments, there was no gain or loss recorded upon repurchase.

    Zero Coupon Senior Notes

    In November 2009, we redeemed an aggregate principal amount of $267.6 million for the Zero Coupon Senior Notes early and recognized a pre-tax loss on redemption of $16.0 million. We recorded the loss within "Interest expense" in the Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss).

    Cash Tender Offer for Outstanding 7.00% Notes due April 1, 2012

    In February 2010, we retired an aggregate principal amount of $486.5 million of our 7.00% Notes due April 1, 2012 pursuant to a cash tender offer, at a premium of approximately 11%.


    Tax-Exempt Notes

    During 2009, we retired approximately $150 million of variable rate tax exempt notes prior to maturity. On February 15, 2010, we issued a notice to call our outstanding $47 million and $65 million variable rate tax-exempt notes. These notes are expected to be repurchased on March 10, 2010. Since these notes are variable rate instruments, we do not expect to record any gain or loss upon repurchase.

    BGE

    Secured Indenture

    BGE entered into a secured indenture in July 2009. The secured indenture creates a first priority lien on substantially all of BGE's electric utility distribution equipment and fixtures and on BGE's franchises, permits, and licenses that are transferable and necessary for the operation of the equipment and fixtures. As of December 31, 2009,2010, BGE has not issued any secured bonds under this indenture.

    BGE's Rate Stabilization Bonds

    In June 2007, BondCo, a subsidiary of BGE, issued an aggregate principal amount of $623.2 million of rate stabilization bonds to recover deferred power purchase costs. We discuss BondCo in more detail inNote 4. Below are the details of the rate stabilization bonds at December 31, 2009:2010:

    Principal
     Interest Rate
     Scheduled
    Maturity Date

     Interest Rate
     Scheduled
    Maturity Date

    $171.7

     5.47%October 2012

    $115.2

     5.47%October 2012

    220.0

     5.72 April 2016 5.72 April 2016

    119.2

     5.82 April 2017 5.82 April 2017

            The bonds are secured primarily by a usage-based, non-bypassable charge payable by all of BGE's residential electric customers over a ten year period. The charges will be adjusted semi-annually to ensure that the aggregate charges collected are sufficient to pay principal and interest on the bonds, as well as certain on-going costs of administering and servicing the bonds. BondCo cannot use the charges collected to satisfy any other obligations. BondCo's assets are not assets of any affiliate and are not available to pay creditors of any affiliate of BondCo. If BondCo is unable to make principal and interest payments on the bonds, neither Constellation Energy, nor BGE, are required to make the payments on behalf of BondCo.

    BGE's Other Long-Term Debt

    On July 1, 2000, BGE transferred $278.0 million of tax-exempt debt to our merchant energyGeneration business related to the transferred generating assets. At December 31, 2009,2010, BGE remains contingently liable for the $20 million outstanding balance of this debt.

            BGE's fixed-rate medium-term note, series E, outstanding at December 31, 20092010 has a weighted average interest rate of 6.71%6.73%, maturing between 2011 and 2012.

    BGE Deferrable Interest Subordinated Debentures

    On November 21, 2003, BGE Capital Trust II (BGE Trust II), a Delaware statutory trust established by BGE, issued 10,000,000 Trust Preferred Securities for $250 million ($25 liquidation amount per preferred security) with a distribution rate of 6.20%.

            BGE Trust II used the net proceeds from the issuance of common securities to BGE and the Trust Preferred Securities to purchase a series of 6.20% Deferrable Interest Subordinated Debentures due October 15, 2043 (6.20% debentures) from BGE in the aggregate principal amount of $257.7 million with the same terms as the Trust Preferred Securities. BGE Trust II must redeem the Trust Preferred Securities at $25 per preferred security plus accrued but unpaid distributions when the 6.20% debentures are paid at maturity or upon any earlier redemption. BGE has the option to redeem the 6.20% debentures at any time on or after November 21, 2008 or at any time when certain tax or other events occur.

            BGE Trust II will use the interest paid on the 6.20% debentures to make distributions on the Trust Preferred


    129


    Table of Contents

    Securities. The 6.20% debentures are the only assets of BGE Trust II.

            BGE fully and unconditionally guarantees the Trust Preferred Securities based on its various obligations relating to the trust agreement, indentures, 6.20% debentures, and the preferred security guarantee agreement.

            For the payment of dividends and in the event of liquidation of BGE, the 6.20% debentures are ranked prior to preference stock and common stock.

    Loan Agreement

    On December 18, 2001, BGE's subsidiary, District Chilled Water Partnership (ComfortLink) entered into a $25.0 million loan agreement with the Maryland Energy Financing Administration (MEFA). The terms of the loan exactly match the terms of variable rate, tax exempt bonds due December 1, 2031 issued by MEFA for ComfortLink to finance the cost of building a chilled water distribution system.

            These bonds were repurchased in June 2009.

    Maturities of Long-Term Debt

    As of December 31, 2009,2010, our long-term borrowings mature on the following schedule:

    Year
     Constellation
    Energy (1)

     Nonregulated
    Businesses

     BGE
     Total
      Constellation
    Energy

     Nonregulated
    Businesses

     BGE
     Total
     
       

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    2010

     $ $0.4 $56.5 $56.9 

    2011

      0.1 81.7 81.8  $223.6 $ $81.7 $305.3 

    2012

     722.6 28.7 172.5 923.8   19.7 172.5 192.2 

    2013

       466.6 466.6    466.6 466.6 

    2014

      20.0 70.4 90.4   20.0 70.4 90.4 

    2015

     576.2  74.5 650.7 

    Thereafter

     1,716.0 187.0 1,352.4 3,255.4  1,699.9 75.0 1,277.9 3,052.8 
       

    Total

     $2,438.6 $236.2 $2,200.1 $4,874.9  $2,499.7 $114.7 $2,143.6 $4,758.0 
       

    (1)

    A portion of Constellation Energy's bonds will be retired in 2010 as discussed in the Voluntary Debt Retirements section.

    Weighted-Average Interest Rates for Variable Rate Debt

    Our weighted-average interest rates for variable rate debt outstanding were:

    At December 31,
    At December 31,
     2009
     2008
     At December 31,
     2010
     2009
     
       

    Nonregulated Businesses
    (including Constellation Energy)

    Nonregulated Businesses
    (including Constellation Energy)

     

    Nonregulated Businesses
    (including Constellation Energy)

     

    Loans under credit agreements

     4.50% 2.61%

    Loans under credit agreements

     4.50% 4.50%

    Tax-exempt debt

     1.22% 3.17%

    Tax-exempt debt

     0.30% 1.22%

    Fixed-rate debt converted to floating *

     2.30% 4.88%

    Fixed-rate debt converted to floating *

     1.23% 2.30%
    *
    As discussed in Note 13, as of December 31, 2009,2010, we have interest rate swaps relating to $400.0 million of our fixed-rate debt. In January 2011, we terminated $200.0 million of these swaps.

    Preference Stock

    Each series of BGE preference stock has no voting power, except for the following:

    Dividend Restrictions

    Constellation Energy

    Constellation Energy pays dividends on its common stock after its Board of Directors declares them. There are no contractual limitations on Constellation Energy paying common stock dividends, except certain of our credit facilities prohibit us from increasing our common stock dividend withoutunless Constellation Energy elects to defer interest payments on the consent of the lenders.8.625% Series A Junior Subordinated Debentures due June 15, 2063, and any deferred interest remains unpaid.

    BGE

    BGE pays dividends on its common stock after its Board of Directors declares them. However, pursuant to the order issued by the Maryland PSC on October 30, 2009 in connection with its approval of the transaction with EDF, BGE cannot pay dividends to Constellation Energy if (a) after the dividend payment, BGE's equity ratio would be below 48% as calculated pursuant to the Maryland PSC's ratemaking precedents or (b) BGE's senior unsecured credit rating is rated by two of the three major credit rating agencies below investment grade.


    130


    Table of Contents

    10Taxes

    The components of income tax expense are as follows:

    Year Ended December 31,
    Year Ended December 31,
     2009
     2008
     2007
     Year Ended December 31,
     2010
     2009
     2008
     
       


     (Dollar amounts in millions)
     
     (Dollar amounts in millions)
     

    Income Taxes

    Income Taxes

     

    Income Taxes

     

    Current

     

    Current

     
     

    Federal

     $891.5 $2.8 $168.2  

    Federal

     $(46.9)$891.5 $2.8 
     

    State

     260.4 48.1 40.6  

    State

     102.0 260.4 48.1 
       

    Current taxes charged to expense

     1,151.9 50.9 208.8 

    Current taxes charged to expense

     55.1 1,151.9 50.9 

    Deferred

     

    Deferred

     
     

    Federal

     1,474.5 (101.6) 184.7  

    Federal

     (521.4) 1,474.5 (101.6)
     

    State

     372.5 (21.2) 41.5  

    State

     (194.9) 372.5 (21.2)
       

    Deferred taxes charged (credited) to expense

     1,847.0 (122.8) 226.2 

    Deferred taxes (credited) charged to expense

     (716.3) 1,847.0 (122.8)

    Investment tax credit adjustments

     (12.1) (6.4) (6.7)

    Investment tax credit adjustments

     (4.5) (12.1) (6.4)
       

    Income taxes per Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss)

     $2,986.8 $(78.3)$428.3 

    Income taxes per Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss)

     $(665.7)$2,986.8 $(78.3)
       

            Total income taxes are different from the amount that would be computed by applying the statutory Federal income tax rate of 35% to book income before income taxes as follows:

    Reconciliation of Income Taxes Computed at Statutory Federal Rate to Total Income Taxes

              
     

    (Loss) Income from continuing operations before income taxes

     $7,490.2 $(1,396.7)$1,262.7 
      

    Statutory federal income tax rate

      35% 35% 35%
      
      

    Income taxes computed at statutory federal rate

      2,621.6  (488.8) 441.9 
      

    Increases (decreases) in income taxes due to

              
       

    State income taxes, net of federal income tax benefit

      411.0  17.3  53.4 
       

    Merger-related transaction costs

      (79.3) 416.2   
       

    Interest expense on mandatorily redeemable preferred stock

      23.7  7.8   
       

    Qualified decommissioning impairment loss

      3.1  (28.5)  
       

    Amortization of deferred investment tax credits

      (12.1) (6.4) (6.7)
       

    Synthetic fuel tax credits flowed through to income

        (4.5) (166.2)
       

    Estimated synthetic fuel tax credit phase-out

          110.3 
       

    Nondeductible international losses

      19.2     
       

    Other

      (0.4) 8.6  (4.4)
      
      

    Total income taxes

     $2,986.8 $(78.3)$428.3 
      
     

    Effective income tax rate

      39.9% 5.6% 33.9%
      

    Reconciliation of Income Taxes Computed at Statutory Federal Rate to Total Income Taxes

              
     

    (Loss) Income from continuing operations before income taxes

     $(1,597.5)$7,490.2 $(1,396.7)
      

    Statutory federal income tax rate

      35% 35% 35%
      
      

    Income taxes computed at statutory federal rate

      (559.1) 2,621.6  (488.8)
      

    Increases (decreases) in income taxes due to

              
       

    State income taxes, net of federal income tax benefit

      (60.4) 411.0  17.3 
       

    Merger-related transaction costs

        (79.3) 416.2 
       

    Interest expense on mandatorily redeemable preferred stock

        23.7  7.8 
       

    Qualified decommissioning impairment losses

        3.1  (28.5)
       

    Amortization of deferred investment tax credits

      (4.5) (12.1) (6.4)
       

    Noncontrolling interest operating results

      (13.1) (16.4) 6.0 
       

    Nondeductible international losses

        19.2   
       

    Other

      (28.6) 16.0  (1.9)
      
      

    Total income taxes

     $(665.7)$2,986.8 $(78.3)
      
     

    Effective income tax rate

      41.7% 39.9% 5.6%
      

            BGE's effective tax rate was 39.7% in 2010, 41.3% in 2009, and 28.7% in 2008, and 40.7% in 2007.2008. In general, the primary difference between BGE's effective tax rate and the 35% statutory federal income tax rate for all years relates to Maryland corporate income taxes, net of the related federal income tax benefit. The increasedecrease in BGE's effective tax rate in 2010 is primarily due to the inclusion of a loss on the sale of a noncontrolling interest in pretax earnings in 2009 that was not included in 2010 pretax earnings as a result of the January 2010 sale of that interest. The increase in BGE's 2009 effective tax rate from 2008 is primarily due to higher taxable income. For 2008, BGE had lower taxable income related to the 2008 Maryland settlement agreement, which increased the relative impact of favorable permanent tax adjustments on BGE's 2008 effective tax rate.


    131


    Table of Contents

            The major components of our net deferred income tax liability are as follows:



     Constellation Energy BGE 
     Constellation Energy BGE 
    At December 31,
    At December 31,
     2009
     2008
     2009
     2008
     At December 31,
     2010
     2009
     2010
     2009
     
       


     (In millions)
     
     (In millions)
     

    Deferred Income Taxes

    Deferred Income Taxes

     

    Deferred Income Taxes

     

    Deferred tax liabilities

     

    Deferred tax liabilities

     
     

    Net property, plant and equipment

     $1,474.6 $1,432.5 $920.1 $604.4  

    Net property, plant and equipment

     $1,768.3 $1,189.5 $1,152.3 $920.1 
     

    Qualified nuclear decommissioning trust funds

      310.9    

    Regulatory assets, net

     256.8 263.0 256.8 263.0 
     

    Regulatory assets, net

     263.0 295.5 263.0 295.5  

    Derivative assets and liabilities, net

     (34.1) 329.6   
     

    Derivative assets and liabilities, net

     329.6 310.6    

    Investment in CENG

     1,044.3 2,114.7   
     

    Investment in CENG

     1,802.7     

    Other

     12.1 6.2 (80.0) (55.1)
     

    Other

     33.1 126.6 (55.1) 32.5   
      

    Total deferred tax liabilities

     3,047.4 3,903.0 1,329.1 1,128.0 
     

    Total deferred tax liabilities

     3,903.0 2,476.1 1,128.0 932.4 

    Deferred tax assets

     

    Deferred tax assets

      

    Defined benefit obligations

     249.0 311.7 (79.7) (23.7)
     

    Asset retirement obligation

     7.9 391.6    

    Financial investments and hedging instruments

     111.4 337.0   
     

    Defined benefit obligations

     311.7 552.0 (23.7) 30.8  

    Deferred investment tax credits

     10.9 13.0 3.2 3.8 
     

    Financial investments and hedging instruments

     337.0 949.7    

    Other

     129.8 163.7 20.6 71.5 
     

    Deferred investment tax credits

     13.0 17.8 3.8 4.3   
     

    Other

     155.8 156.0 71.5 13.8  

    Total deferred tax assets

     501.1 825.4 (55.9) 51.6 
       
     

    Total deferred tax assets

     825.4 2,067.1 51.6 48.9 

    Total deferred tax liability, net

     2,546.3 3,077.6 1,385.0 1,076.4 
     

    Less: Current portion of deferred tax liability/(asset)

     56.5 (127.9) 30.1 (11.2)

    Total deferred tax liability, net

     3,077.6 409.0 1,076.4 883.5   

    Less: Current portion of deferred tax (asset)/liability

     (127.9) (268.0) (11.2) 40.2 
     

    Long-term portion of deferred tax liability, net

    Long-term portion of deferred tax liability, net

     $3,205.5 $677.0 $1,087.6 $843.3 

    Long-term portion of deferred tax liability, net

     $2,489.8 $3,205.5 $1,354.9 $1,087.6 
       

    Income Tax Audits

    We file income tax returns in the United States and foreign jurisdictions. With few exceptions, we are no longer subject to U.S. federal, state and local, or non-U.S. income tax examinations by tax authorities for the years before 2005. In 2009, the IRS expanded its current audit of our consolidated federal income tax returns for the tax years 2005 through 2007 to include the 2008 tax year. Although the final outcome of the 2005-2008 IRS audit and future tax audits is uncertain, we believe that adequate provisions for income taxes have been made for potential liabilities resulting from such matters.

    Unrecognized Tax Benefits

    The following table summarizes the change in unrecognized tax benefits during 20092010 and 20082009 and our total unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 20092010 and 2008:2009:


     2009
     2008
      2010
     2009
     
       

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    Total unrecognized tax benefits, January 1

     $189.7 $114.5  $312.5 $189.7 

    Increases in tax positions related to the current year

     101.5 112.2  5.9 101.5 

    Increases in tax positions related to prior years

     148.4   26.0 148.4 

    Reductions in tax positions related to prior years

     (126.3) (15.5) (104.0) (126.3)

    Reductions in tax positions related to audit settlements

      (21.5)

    Reductions in tax positions as a result of a lapse of the applicable statute of limitations

     (0.8)   (0.6) (0.8)
       

    Total unrecognized tax benefits, December 31 (1)

     $312.5 $189.7  $239.8 $312.5 
       
    (1)
    BGE's portion of our total unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 2010 and 2009 and 2008 was $111.8$72.9 million and $4.8$111.8 million, respectively.

            Increases in tax positions related to the current year are primarily due to unrecognized tax benefits related to state income tax accruals associated with the transaction to sell a 49.99% membership interest in CENG to EDF. Increases in tax positions related to prior years are primarily due to unrecognized tax benefits for BGE repair and depreciation deductions including a change of accounting method for tax return purposes for the 2008 tax year for which IRS consent was received in 2009 and which is currently subject to IRS examination. Reductions in prior year tax positions are primarily due to increased certainty in the deductibility of certain costs associated with the termination of our merger with MidAmerican as a result of the structure and sale of a 49.99% membership interest in CENG.

            Total unrecognized tax benefits as of December 31, 2009 of $312.5 million include outstanding claims of approximately $65.8 million, including $52.2 million in state tax credits, for which no tax benefit was recorded on our Consolidated Balance Sheet because refunds were not received and the claims do not meet the "more-likely-than-not" threshold.

            If the total amount of unrecognized tax benefits of $312.5$239.8 million were ultimately realized, our income tax expense would decrease by approximately $177$167 million. However, the $177$167 million includes state tax refund claims of approximately $52$55.9 million that have been disallowed by tax authorities and are subject to appeals. These state refund claims may be resolved by December 31, 2010. For this reason, we believe it is reasonably possible that reductions to our total unrecognized tax benefits of approximately $50 million may occur by December 31, 2010, although these reductions are not expected to materially impact income tax expense.


    132


    Table of Contents

            It is reasonably possible that unrecognized tax benefits could decrease within the next year by approximately $72.9 million as a result of an expected settlement with the IRS regarding BGE's change of accounting method for tax purposes with respect to certain transmission and distribution expenditures. This decrease is not expected to have a material impact on BGE's financial condition or results of operation.

            Interest and penalties recorded in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss) as tax (benefit) expense (benefit) relating to liabilities for unrecognized tax benefits were as follows:

     
     For the Year Ended
    December 31,
     
     
     2009
     2008
     2007
     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Interest and penalties recorded as tax expense (benefit)

     $12.8 $(0.4)$4.7 
      
     
     For the Year Ended
    December 31,
     
     
     2010
     2009
     2008
     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Interest and penalties recorded as tax (benefit) expense

     $(6.3)$12.8 $(0.4)
      

    BGE's portion of interest and penalties was immaterial for all years.

            Accrued interest and penalties recognized in our Consolidated Balance Sheets were $16.8 million, of which BGE's portion was $3.8 million at December 31, 2010, and $23.1 million, of which BGE's portion was $1.6 million, at December 31, 2009, and $10.3 million, of which BGE's portion was $0.7 million, at December 31, 2008.2009.


    133


    Table of Contents

    11Leases

    There are two types of leases—operating and capital. Capital leases qualify as sales or purchases of property and are reported in our Consolidated Balance Sheets. Our capital leases are not material in amount. All other leases are operating leases and are reported in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss). We expense all lease payments associated with our regulated business. Lease expense and future minimum payments for long-term, noncancelable, operating leases are not material to BGE's financial results. We present information about our operating leases below.

    Outgoing Lease Payments

    We, as lessee, lease certain facilities and equipment. The lease agreements expire on various dates and have various renewal options. We also enter into certain power purchase agreements which are accounted for as operating leases. We classify power purchase agreements as leases if the agreement in substance provides us the ability to control the use of the underlying power generating facilities.

            Under these agreements, we are required to make fixed capacity payments, as well as variable payments based on actual output of the plants. We record these payments as "Fuel and purchased energy expenses" in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss). We exclude from our future minimum lease payments table the variable payments related to the output of the plant due to the contingency associated with these payments.

            Through June 2009, we also entered into time charter purchase agreements which entitled us to the use of dry bulk freight vessels in the management of our global coal and logistics services. Certain of these contracts must be accounted for as leases. During 2009 and 2008, we entered intoOur time charter leases withhave terms ranging in duration from 1 to 60 months. These arrangements do not include provisions for material rent increases and do not have provisions for rent holidays, contingent rentals or other incentives. In 2010, 2009, and 2008, we recognized aggregate lease expense of approximately $11 million, $145 million and $477 million, respectively, related to 12, 31 and 49 dry bulk freight vessels, respectively, hired under time charter arrangements. The average term of these arrangements is approximately 32-3 months. We record the payments as "Fuel and purchased energy expenses" in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss).

            We recognized expense related to our operating leases as follows:


     Fuel and
    purchased
    energy
    expenses

     Operating
    expenses

     Total
      Fuel and
    purchased
    energy
    expenses

     Operating
    expenses

     Total
     
       

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    2010

     $227.9 $30.2 $258.1 

    2009

     $385.6 $37.2 $422.8  385.6 37.2 422.8 

    2008

     664.8 38.0 702.8  664.8 38.0 702.8 

    2007

     758.7 40.1 798.8 

            At December 31, 2009,2010, we owed future minimum payments for long-term, noncancelable, operating leases as follows:

    Year
     Power
    Purchase
    Agreements

     Other
     Total
      Power
    Purchase
    Agreements

     Other
     Total
     
       

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    2010

     $194.5 $31.5 $226.0 

    2011

     202.1 28.8 230.9  $171.3 $30.8 $202.1 

    2012

     178.5 25.7 204.2  145.6 26.8 172.4 

    2013

     166.3 24.5 190.8  130.8 24.8 155.6 

    2014

     161.5 22.7 184.2  126.0 22.5 148.5 

    2015

     126.6 26.3 152.9 

    Thereafter

     333.8 62.6 396.4  72.6 35.7 108.3 
       

    Total future minimum lease payments

     $1,236.7 $195.8 $1,432.5  $772.9 $166.9 $939.8 
       

    Sub-Lease Arrangements

    We provide time charters of dry bulk freight vessels as part of the logistical services provided to our global customers that qualify as sub-leases of our time charter purchase contracts. In 2010, 2009, and 2008, we recorded sub-lease income of approximately $25 million, $114 million and $289 million, respectively, related to our time charter sub-leases. We record sub-lease income as part of "Nonregulated revenues" in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss). As of December 31, 2009,2010, the future minimum rentals to be received for these time charters are shown below:

    Year
     Time
    Charter
    Sub-Leases

      Time
    Charter
    Sub-Leases

     
       

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    2010

     $56.5 

    2011

     56.6  $22.4 

    2012

     45.5  24.2 

    2013

     32.0  17.5 

    2014

     24.3  9.8 

    2015

     9.8 

    Thereafter

     114.8  28.6 
       

    Total future minimum lease rentals

     $329.7  $112.3 
       


    134


    Table of Contents

    12Commitments, Guarantees, and Contingencies

    Commitments

    We have made substantial commitments in connection with our merchant energy,Generation, NewEnergy, and regulated electric and gas, and other nonregulated businesses. These commitments relate to:

            Our merchant energy business entersGeneration and NewEnergy businesses enter into various long-term contracts for the procurement and delivery of fuels to supply our generating plant requirements. In most cases, our contracts contain provisions for price escalations, minimum purchase levels, and other financial commitments. These contracts expire in various years between 20102011 and 2018. In addition, our merchant energyNewEnergy business enters into long-term contracts for the capacity and transmission rights for the delivery of energy to meet our physical obligations to our customers. These contracts expire in various years between 20102011 and 2030.

            Our merchant energy businessGeneration and NewEnergy businesses also hashave committed to long-term service agreements and other purchase commitments for our plants.

            Our regulated electric business enters into various long-term contracts for the procurement of electricity. As of December 31, 2009,2010, these contracts expire between 20102011 and 20122013 and represent BGE's estimated requirements to serve residential and small commercial customers as follows:

    Contract Duration
     Percentage of
    Estimated
    Requirements

     
      

    From January 1, 20102011 to September 20102011

      100%

    From October 20102011 to May 20112012

      75 

    From June 20112012 to September 20112012

      50 

    From October 20112012 to May 20122013

      25 

            The cost of power under these contracts is recoverable under the Provider of Last Resort agreement reached with the Maryland PSC.

            Our regulated gas business enters into various long-term contracts for the procurement, transportation, and storage of gas. Our regulated gas business has gas procurement contracts that expire between 2010 andin 2011, and transportation and storage contracts that expire between 2012 and 2027. The cost of gas under these contracts is recoverable under BGE's gas cost adjustment clause discussed inNote 1, and therefore are excluded from the table later in this Note.

            Our other nonregulated businesses have committed to gas purchases, as well as to contribute additional capital for construction programs and joint ventures in which they have an interest.

    We have also committed to long-term service agreements and other obligations related to our information technology systems.

            At December 31, 2009,2010, we estimate our future obligations to be as follows:



     Payments  
     
     Payments  
     


     2010
     2011-
    2012

     2013-
    2014

     Thereafter
     Total
     
     2011
     2012-
    2013

     2014-
    2015

     Thereafter
     Total
     
       


     (In millions)
      
     
     (In millions)
      
     

    Merchant Energy:

     

    Competitive Businesses:

    Competitive Businesses:

     

    Purchased capacity and energy

     $160.9 $303.5 $107.7 $208.7 $780.8 

    Purchased capacity and energy

     $430.6 $503.0 $164.3 $263.6 $1,361.5 

    Purchased energy from CENG (1)

     534.7 1,513.3 2,249.8  4,297.8 

    Purchased energy from CENG (1)

     488.4 1,761.2 1,735.5   3,985.1 

    Fuel and transportation

     540.5 437.5 94.3 217.9 1,290.2 

    Fuel and transportation

     535.7 449.9 250.2 176.0 1,411.8 

    Long-term service agreements, capital, and other

     12.9 7.8 4.9 6.7 32.3 

    Long-term service agreements, capital, and other

     6.6 11.5 7.4 5.4 30.9 
       

    Total merchant energy

     1,249.0 2,262.1 2,456.7 433.3 6,401.1 

    Total competitive businesses

    Total competitive businesses

     1,461.3 2,725.6 2,157.4 445.0 6,789.3 

    Corporate and Other:

    Corporate and Other:

     

    Corporate and Other:

     

    Long-term service agreements, capital, and other

     49.6 11.3 1.7  62.6 

    Long-term service agreements, capital, and other

     22.5 11.6 0.1  34.2 

    Regulated:

    Regulated:

     

    Regulated:

     

    Purchase obligations and other

     15.4 20.2   35.6 

    Purchase obligations and other

     23.9 6.9   30.8 
       

    Total future obligations

    Total future obligations

     $1,314.0 $2,293.6 $2,458.4 $433.3 $6,499.3 

    Total future obligations

     $1,507.7 $2,744.1 $2,157.5 $445.0 $6,854.3 
       
    (1)
    Represents the nominal amountsAs part of payments made to CENG underreaching a comprehensive agreement with EDF in October 2010, we modified our existing power purchase agreement. The total fair valueagreement with CENG to be unit contingent through the end of its original term in 2014. Additionally, beginning in 2015 and continuing to the end of the life of the respective plants, we agreed to purchase 50.01% of the available output of CENG's nuclear plants at closing of $0.8 billion was recordedmarket prices. We have included in the table our commitments under this agreement for five years, the time period for which we have more reliable data. Further, we continue to own a 50.01% membership interest in CENG that we account for as an equity method investment. See Note 16 for more details on our balance sheet in "Unamortized energy contract assets."this agreement.

    Long-Term Power Sales Contracts

    We enter into long-term power sales contracts in connection with our load-serving activities. We also enter into long-term power sales contracts associated with certain of our power plants. Our load-serving power sales contracts extend for terms through 2019 and provide for the sale of energy to electricityelectric distribution utilities and certain retail customers. Our power sales contracts associated with our power plants extend for terms into 2016 and provide for the sale of all or a portion of the actual output of certain of our power plants. Substantially all long-term contracts were executed at pricing that approximated market rates, including profit margin, at the time of execution.


    135


    Table of Contents

    Guarantees

    Our guarantees do not represent incremental Constellation Energy obligations; rather they primarily represent parental guarantees of subsidiary obligations. The following table


    Table of Contents

    summarizes the maximum exposure by guarantor based on the stated limit of our outstanding guarantees:

    At December 31, 2009
     Stated Limit
     
    At December 31, 2010
     Stated Limit
     
       

     (In billions)
      (In billions)
     

    Constellation Energy guarantees

     $10.1  $9.1 

    BGE guarantees

     0.3  0.3 
       

    Total guarantees

     $10.4  $9.4 
       

            At December 31, 2009,2010, Constellation Energy had a total of $10.4$9.4 billion in guarantees outstanding related to loans, credit facilities, and contractual performance of certain of its subsidiaries as described below.

    Contingencies

    Litigation

    In the normal course of business, we are involved in various legal proceedings. We discuss the significant matters below.

    Merger with MidAmerican

    Beginning September 18, 2008, seven shareholders of Constellation Energy filed lawsuits in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, Maryland challenging the then-pending merger with MidAmerican. Four similar suits were filed by other shareholders of Constellation Energy in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland.

            The lawsuits claim that the merger consideration was inadequate and did not maximize value for shareholders, that the sales process leading up to the merger was flawed, and that unreasonable deal protection devices were agreed to in order to ward off competing bids. The federal lawsuits also assert that the conversion of the Preferred Stock issued to MidAmerican into debt is not permitted under Maryland law.

            The termination of the MidAmerican merger renders moot the claims attempting to enjoin the merger with MidAmerican. One of the federal merger cases was voluntarily dismissed on December 31, 2008, and the other federal merger cases were dismissed as moot on May 27, 2009. Plaintiffs' counsel in six of the seven state merger cases have filed dismissals without prejudice of their MidAmerican merger claims. In addition, on October 27, 2009 certain counsel in the state merger cases jointly moved for approval of a settlement regarding claims for attorneys' fees, which the court approved on November 16, 2009. We believe there are meritorious defenses to any claims or requests for relief that might possibly remain regarding this matter.

    Securities Class Action

    Three federal securities class action lawsuits have been 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. 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 Energy between January 30, 2008 and September 16, 2008, and who acquired Debentures in an offering completed in June 2008. The securities class actions generally allege that Constellation Energy, a number of its present or former officers or directors, and the underwriters violated the securities laws by issuing a false and misleading registration statement and prospectus in connection with Constellation Energy's June 27, 2008 offering of Debentures. The securities class actions also allege that Constellation Energy issued false or misleading statements or was aware of material undisclosed information which contradicted public statements including in connection with its announcements of financial results for 2007, the fourth quarter of 2007, the first quarter of 2008 and the second quarter of 2008 and the filing of its first quarter 2008 Form 10-Q. The securities class actions seek, among other things, certification of the cases as class actions, compensatory damages, reasonable costs and expenses, including counsel fees, and rescission damages.

            The Southern District of New York granted the defendants' motion to transfer the two securities class actions filed there to the District of Maryland, and the actions have since been transferred for coordination with the securities class action filed there. On June 18, 2009, the court appointed a lead plaintiff, who filed a consolidated amended complaint on September 17, 2009. On November 17, 2009, the defendants moved to dismiss the consolidated amended complaint in its entirety. On August 13, 2010, the District Court of Maryland issued a ruling on the motion to dismiss, holding that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim with respect to the claims of the common shareholders under the Securities Act of 1934 and restricting the suit to those persons who purchased debentures in the June 2008 offering. We are unable at this time to determine the ultimate outcome of the securities class actions or their possible effect on our, or BGE's financial results.

    ERISA Actions

    In the fall of 2008, multiple class action lawsuits were filed in the United States District Courts for the District of Maryland and the Southern District of New York against Constellation


    Table of Contents

    Energy; Mayo A. Shattuck III, Constellation Energy's Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer; and others in their roles as fiduciaries of the Constellation Energy Employee Savings Plan. The actions, which have been consolidated into one action in Maryland (the Consolidated Action), allege that the defendants, in violation of various sections of ERISA, breached their fiduciary duties to prudently and loyally manage Constellation Energy Savings Plan's assets by designating Constellation Energy common stock as an investment, by failing to properly provide accurate information about the investment, by failing to avoid conflicts of interest, by failing to properly monitor the investment and by failing to properly monitor other fiduciaries. The plaintiffs seek to compel the defendants to reimburse the plaintiffs and the Constellation Energy Savings Plan for all losses resulting from the defendants' breaches of fiduciary duty, to impose a constructive trust on any unjust enrichment, to award actual damages with pre- and post-judgment interest, to award appropriate equitable relief including injunction and restitution and to award costs and expenses, including attorneys' fees. On October 2, 2009, the defendants moved to dismiss the consolidated complaint in its entirety. We are unable at this time to determine the ultimate outcome of the Consolidated Action or its possible effects on our, or BGE's financial results.

    Mercury

    Since September 2002, BGE, Constellation Energy, and several other defendants have been involved in numerous actions filed in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, Maryland alleging mercury poisoning from several sources, including coal plants formerly owned by BGE. The plants are now owned by a subsidiary of Constellation Energy. In addition to BGE and Constellation Energy, approximately 11 other defendants, consisting of pharmaceutical companies, manufacturers of vaccines, and manufacturers of Thimerosal have been sued. Approximately 70 cases, involving claims related to approximately 132 children, have been filed to date, with each claimant seeking $20 million in compensatory damages, plus punitive damages, from us.

            The claims against BGE and Constellation Energy have been dismissed in all of the cases either with prejudice based on rulings by the Court or without prejudice based on voluntary dismissals by the plaintiffs' counsel. Plaintiffs may attempt to pursue appeals of the rulings in favor of BGE and Constellation Energy once the cases are finally concluded as to all defendants. We believe that we have meritorious defenses and intend to defend the actions vigorously. However, we cannot predict the timing, or outcome, of these cases, or their possible effect on our, or BGE's, financial results.


    136


    Table of Contents

    Asbestos

    Since 1993, BGE and certain Constellation Energy subsidiaries have been involved in several actions concerning asbestos. The actions are based upon the theory of "premises liability," alleging that BGE and Constellation Energy knew of and exposed individuals to an asbestos hazard. In addition to BGE and Constellation Energy, numerous other parties are defendants in these cases.

            Approximately 494485 individuals who were never employees of BGE or Constellation Energy have pending claims each seeking several million dollars in compensatory and punitive damages. Cross-claims and third party claims brought by other defendants may also be filed against BGE and Constellation Energy in these actions. To date, most asbestos claims which have been resolved have been dismissed or resolved without any payment and a small minority have been resolved for amounts that were not material to our financial results.

            BGE and Constellation Energy do not know the specific facts necessary to estimate their potential liability for these claims. The specific facts we do not know include:

            Until the relevant facts are determined, we are unable to estimate what our, or BGE's, liability might be. Although insurance and hold harmless agreements from contractors who employed the plaintiffs may cover a portion of any awards in the actions, the potential effect on our, or BGE's, financial results could be material.

    Environmental Matters

    Solid and Hazardous Waste

    In 1999, the EPA proposed to add the 68th Street Dump in Baltimore, Maryland to the Superfund National Priorities List, which is its list of sites targeted for clean-up and enforcement, and sent a general notice letter to BGE and 19 other parties identifying them as potentially liable parties at the site. In March 2004, we and other potentially responsible parties formed the 68th Street Coalition and entered into consent order negotiations with the EPA to investigate clean-up options for the site under the Superfund Alternative Sites Program. In May 2006, a settlement among the EPA and 19 of the potentially responsible parties, including BGE, with respect to investigation of the site became effective. The settlement requires the potentially responsible parties, over the course of several years, to identify contamination at the site and recommend clean-up options. BGE is indemnified by a wholly owned subsidiary of Constellation Energy for most of the costs related to this settlement and clean-up of the site. The potential range of clean-up costs will not be known until the investigation is closer to completion, which is expected by mid-2010.in early 2011. The completed investigation will provide a range of remediation alternatives to the EPA, and the EPA is expected to select one of the alternatives by the end of 2011. In addition, the first quarterallocation of 2011.the costs among the potentially responsible parties is not yet known. The clean-up costs we incur could have a material effect on our financial results.

    Air Quality

    In May 2007, a subsidiary of Constellation Energy entered into a consent decree with the Maryland Department of the


    Table of Contents

    Environment to resolve alleged violations of air quality opacity standards at three fossil fuel plants in Maryland. The consent decree requires the subsidiary to pay a $100,000 penalty, provide $100,000 to a supplemental environmental project, and install technology to control emissions from those plants.

    In January 2009, the EPA issued a notice of violation (NOV) to a subsidiary of Constellation Energy, as well as the other owners and the operator of the Keystone coal-fired power plant in Shelocta, Pennsylvania. We hold an approximately 21%a 20.99% interest in the Keystone plant. The NOV alleges that the plant performed various capital projects beginning in 1984 without complying with the new source review permitting requirements of the Clean Air Act. The EPA also contends that the alleged failure to comply with those requirements are continuing violations under the plant's air permits. The EPA could seek civil penalties under the Clean Air Act for the alleged violations.

            The owners and operator of the Keystone plant are investigating the allegations and have entered into discussions with the EPA. We believe there are meritorious defenses to the allegations contained in the NOV. However, we cannot predict the outcome of this proceeding and it is not possible to determine our actual liability, if any, at this time.

    Water Quality

    In October 2007, a subsidiary of Constellation Energy entered into a consent decree with the Maryland Department of the Environment relating to groundwater contamination at a third party facility that was licensed to accept fly ash, a byproduct generated by our coal-fired plants. The consent decree requires the payment of a $1.0 million penalty, remediation of groundwater contamination resulting from the ash placement operations at the site, replacement of drinking water supplies in the vicinity of the site, and monitoring of groundwater conditions. We recorded a liability in our Consolidated Balance Sheets of approximately $8.4$10.6 million, which includes the $1 million penalty and our estimate of probable costs to remediate contamination, replace drinking water supplies, monitor groundwater conditions, and otherwise comply with the consent decree. We have paid approximately $4.8$6.6 million of these costs as of December 31, 2009,2010, resulting in a remaining liability at December 31, 20092010 of $3.6$4.0 million. We estimate that it is reasonably possible that we could incur additional costs of up to approximately $10 million more than the liability that we accrued.

    Investment in CENG

    On November 6, 2009, we completed the sale of a 49.99% membership interest in CENG to EDF. As a result of the sale, we now hold a 50.01% interest in CENG. As a 50.01% owner in CENG, we are subject to certain capital contribution requirements, which may be greater than the amount planned and, therefore, could have an adverse impact on our financial results.

            In addition, if the fair value of our investment in CENG declines to a level below our carrying value and the decline is considered other-than-temporary, we may write down the


    137


    Table of Contents

    investment to fair value, which would adversely affect our financial results. During 2010, we recorded an impairment on our investment in CENG. We discuss this impairment charge in more detail inNote 2.

            We are also exposed to the same risks to which CENG is exposed. CENG owns and operates three nuclear generating facilities and is exposed to risks associated with operating these facilities and the risks of a nuclear accident.

    Operating Risks

    The operation of nuclear generating facilities involve routine risks, including,

    Nuclear Accidents

    CENG is required to insure itself against public liability claims resulting from nuclear incidents to the full limit of public liability. This limit of liability consists of the maximum available commercial insurance of $375 million and mandatory participation in an industry-wide retrospective premium assessment program. The retrospective premium assessment is $117.5 million per reactor, per incident, increasing the total amount of insurance for public liability to approximately $12.6 billion. Under the retrospective assessment program, CENG can be assessed up to $587.5 million per incident at any commercial reactor in the country, payable at no more than $87.5 million per incident per year. In the event of a nuclear accident, the cost of property damage and other expenses incurred may exceed CENG's insurance coverage. As a result, uninsured losses or the payment of retrospective insurance premiums could each have a significant adverse impact to CENG's, and therefore, our financial results as a 50.01% owner in CENG. Each of Constellation Energy and EDF has guaranteed the obligations of CENG under these insurance programs in proportion to their respective membership interests.

    Property and Accidental Outage Insurance

    CENG's plants are provided property and accidental outage insurance through Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited (NEIL). Prior to July 1, 2010, CENG was the member-insured of NEIL. Effective July 1, 2010, Constellation Energy and EDF became the members-insured through their ownership interest in CENG. As the members-insured, Constellation Energy and EDF have assigned the loss benefits under the insurance to CENG's plants, with CENG named as an additional insured party.

    Non-Nuclear Property Insurance

    Our conventional property insurance provides coverage of $1.0 billion per occurrence for Certified acts of terrorism as defined under the Terrorism Risk Insurance Extension Act of 2005 and the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007. Our conventional property insurance program also provides coverage for non-certified acts of terrorism up to an annual aggregate limit of $1.0 billion. If a terrorist act occurs at any of our facilities, it could have a significant adverse impact on our financial results.


    138


    Table of Contents

    13Derivatives and Fair Value Measurements

    Use of Derivative Instruments

    Nature of Our Business and Associated Risks

    Our business activities primarily include our merchant energy business and ourGeneration, NewEnergy, regulated electric and gas business.businesses. Our merchant energy business includes:Generation and NewEnergy businesses include:

            Our regulated electric and gas businesses engage in electricity and gas transmission and distribution activities in Central Maryland at prices set by the Maryland PSC that are generally designed to recover our costs, including purchased fuel and energy. Substantially all of our risk management activities involving derivatives occur outside our regulated businesses.

            In carrying out our merchant energycompetitive business activities, we purchase and sell power, fuel, and other energy-related commodities in competitive markets. These activities expose us to significant risks, including market risk from price volatility for energy commodities and the credit risks of counterparties with which we enter into contracts. The sources of these risks include, but are not limited to, the following:

    Objectives and Strategies for Using Derivatives

    Risk Management Activities

    To lower our exposure to the risk of unfavorable fluctuations in commodity prices, interest rates, and foreign currency rates, we routinely enter into derivative contracts, such as fixed-price forward physical purchase and sales contracts, futures, financial swaps, and option contracts traded in the over-the-counter markets or on exchanges, for hedging purposes. The objectives for entering into such hedging transactions primarily include:

    Non-Risk Management Activities

    In addition to the use of derivatives for risk management purposes, we also enter into derivative contracts for trading purposes primarily for:

    Accounting for Derivative Instruments

    The accounting requirements for derivatives require recognition of all qualifying derivative instruments on the balance sheet at fair value as either assets or liabilities.

    Accounting Designation

    We must evaluate new and existing transactions and agreements to determine whether they are derivatives, for which there are several possible accounting treatments. Mark-to-market is required as the default accounting treatment for all derivatives unless they qualify, and we specifically designate them, for one of the other accounting treatments. Derivatives designated for any of the elective accounting treatments must meet specific, restrictive criteria, both at the time of designation and on an ongoing basis. The permissible accounting treatments include:

            We discuss our accounting policies for derivatives and hedging activities and their impacts on our financial statements inNote 1.

    NPNS

    We elect NPNS accounting for derivative contracts that provide for the purchase or sale of a physical commodity that will be delivered in quantities expected to be used or sold over a reasonable period in the normal course of business. Once we elect NPNS classification for a given contract, we cannot subsequently change the election and treat the contract as a derivative using mark-to-market or hedge accounting.


    Cash Flow Hedging

    We generally elect cash flow hedge accounting for most of the derivatives that we use to hedge market price risk for our physical energy delivery activities because hedge accounting more closely aligns the timing of earnings recognition and cash flows for the underlying business activities. Management monitors the


    139


    Table of Contents

    potential impacts of commodity price changes and, where appropriate, may enter into or close out (via offsetting transactions) derivative transactions designated as cash flow hedges.

    Commodity Cash Flow Hedges

    Our merchant energy business hasWe have designated fixed-price forward contracts as cash-flow hedges of forecasted sales of energy and forecasted purchases of fuel and energy for the years 20102011 through 2016. Our merchant energy businessWe had net unrealized pre-tax losses on these cash-flow hedges recorded in "Accumulated other comprehensive loss" of $388.0 million at December 31, 2010 and $951.3 million at December 31, 2009 and $2,624.0 million at December 31, 2008.2009.

            We expect to reclassify $631.5$236.6 million of net pre-tax losses on cash-flow hedges from "Accumulated other comprehensive loss" into earnings during the next twelve months based on market prices at December 31, 2009.2010. However, the actual amount reclassified into earnings could vary from the amounts recorded at December 31, 2009,2010, due to future changes in market prices.

            When we determine that a forecasted transaction originally hedged has become probable of not occurring, we reclassify net unrealized gains or losses associated with those hedges from "Accumulated other comprehensive loss" to earnings. We recognized in earnings the following pre-tax amounts on such contracts:

    Year ended December 31,
     2009
     2008
     2007
      2010
     2009
     2008
     
       

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    Pre-tax losses

     $(241.0)$(31.7)$(24.4) $(0.3)$(241.0)$(31.7)
       

            The pre-tax loss reclassified in 2009 resulted from the sale of a majority of our international commodities operation and our termination of certain contracts as part of our efforts to improve liquidity and reduce risk. The forecasted transactions associated with previously designated cash-flow hedge contracts were deemed probable of not occurring.

    Interest Rate Swaps Designated as Cash Flow Hedges

    We use interest rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges to manage our interest rate exposures associated with new debt issuances and to manage our exposure to fluctuations in interest rates on variable rate debt. The effective portion of gains and losses on these interest rate cash flow hedges, net of associated deferred income tax effects, is recorded in "Accumulated other comprehensive loss" in our Consolidated Statements of Shareholders' Equity and Comprehensive Income (Loss). We reclassify gains and losses on the hedges from "Accumulated other comprehensive loss" into "Interest expense" in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss) during the periods in which the interest payments being hedged occur.

            Accumulated other comprehensive loss includes net unrealized pre-tax gains on interest rate cash-flow hedges of prior debt issuances totaling $10.1 million at December 31, 2010 and $11.3 million at December 31, 2009 and $12.0 million at December 31, 2008.2009. We expect to reclassify $2.3$0.9 million of pre-tax net gains on these cash-flow hedges from "Accumulated other comprehensive loss" into "Interest expense" during the next twelve months. We had no hedge ineffectiveness on these swaps.

    Fair Value Hedging

    We elect fair value hedge accounting for a limited portion of our derivative contracts including certain interest rate swaps and certain forward contracts and price and basis swaps associated with natural gas fuel in storage.swaps. The objectives for electing fair value hedging in these situations are to manage our exposure and to optimize the mix of our fixed and floating-rate debt, and to hedge the value of our natural gas in storage. We did not have any fair value hedges related to the value of our natural gas in storage during the last nine months of 2009.debt.

    Interest Rate Swaps Designated as Fair Value Hedges

    We use interest rate swaps designated as fair value hedges to optimize the mix of fixed and floating-rate debt. We record any gains or losses on swaps that qualify for fair value hedge accounting treatment, as well as changes in the fair value of the debt being hedged, in "Interest expense." We record changes in fair value of the swaps in "Derivative assets and liabilities" and changes in the fair value of the debt in "Long-term debt" in our Consolidated Balance Sheets. In addition, we record the difference between interest on hedged fixed-rate debt and floating-rate swaps in "Interest expense" in the periods that the swaps settle.

            During 2004,As of December 31, 2010, we entered intohave interest rate swaps qualifying as fair value hedges relating to $450$400 million of our fixed-rate debt maturing in 2012 and 2015, and converted this notional amount of debt to floating-rate. On July 15, 2009, we terminated an interest rate swap relating to $50 million of the $450 million of our fixed-rate debt and received approximately $4.5 million in cash. The fair value of these hedges was an unrealized gain of $35.7 million at December 31, 2010 and $35.8 million at December 31, 2009 and $55.9 million at December 31, 2008 and was recorded as an increase in our "Derivative assets" and an increase in our "Long-term debt." We had no hedge ineffectiveness on these interest rate swaps.

            In January 2011, we terminated $200 million of these interest rate swaps as a result of retiring all of our fixed-rate debt maturing in 2012 and received $13.8 million in cash.

            During February 2011, we entered into interest rate swaps qualifying as fair value hedges related to $350 million of our fixed rate debt maturing in 2015, and converted this notional amount of debt to floating rate. We also entered into $150 million of interest rate swaps related to our fixed rate debt maturing in 2020 that do not qualify as fair value hedges, which are discussed underMark-to-Market below.

    Hedge Ineffectiveness

    For all categories of commodity contract derivative instruments designated in hedging relationships, we recorded in earnings the following pre-tax gains (losses) related to hedge ineffectiveness:

    Year ended December 31,
     2009
     2008
     2007
      2010
     2009
     2008
     
       

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    Cash-flow hedges

     $11.3 $(121.0)$(31.4) $(91.3)$11.3 $(121.0)

    Fair value hedges

     23.9 20.6 24.4   23.9 20.6 
       

    Total

     $35.2 $(100.4)$(7.0) $(91.3)$35.2 $(100.4)
       

            We did not recognizehave any gain or loss during 2009 and 2008 relating to changes in value for the portion of our fair value hedges for which we have excluded a portion of the change in fair value from our hedge effectiveness assessment.

    Mark-to-Market

    We generally apply mark-to-market accounting for risk management and trading activities for which changes in fair value more closely reflect the economic performance of the underlying business activity. However, we also use


    140


    Table of Contents

    mark-to-market accounting for derivatives related to the following physical energy delivery activities:

    Origination Gains

    We may record origination gains associated with commodity derivatives subject to mark-to-market accounting. Origination gains represent the initial fair value of certain structured transactions that our wholesale marketing, risk management, and trading operation executes to meet the risk management needs of our customers. Historically, transactions that result in origination gains have been unique and resulted in individually significant gains from a single transaction. We generally recognize origination gains when we are able to obtain observable market data to validate that the initial fair value of the contract differs from the contract price. Origination gains recognized in the past three years include:

    Termination or Restructuring of Commodity Derivative Contracts

    We may terminate or restructure in-the-money contracts in exchange for upfront cash payments and a reduction or cancellation of future performance obligations. The termination or restructuring of contracts allows us to lower our exposure to performance risk under these contracts. SuchWe had no such transactions resultedfor commodity derivative contracts in the realization of the following amounts of pre-tax earnings that otherwise would have been recognized over the life of these contracts:2010, 2009 and 2008.

    Quantitative Information About Derivatives and Hedging Activities

    Background

    Effective January 1, 2009, we adopted an accounting standard that addresses disclosures about derivative instruments and hedging activities. This standard does not change the accounting for derivatives; rather, it requires expanded disclosure about derivative instruments and hedging activities regarding:

    Balance Sheet Tables

    We present our derivative assets and liabilities in our Consolidated Balance Sheets on a net basis, including cash collateral, whenever we have a legally enforceable master netting agreement with a counterparty to a derivative contract. We use master netting agreements whenever possible to manage and substantially reduce our potential counterparty credit risk. The net presentation in our Consolidated Balance Sheets reflects our actual credit exposure after giving effect to the beneficial effects of these agreements and cash collateral, and our credit risk is reduced further by other forms of collateral.

            The following table provides information about the types of market risks we manage using derivatives. This table only includes derivatives and does not reflect the price risks we are hedging that arise from physical assets or nonderivative accrual contracts within our generating plants, customer supply,Generation and global commodities activities.NewEnergy businesses.

            As discussed more fully following the table, we present this information by disaggregating our net derivative assets and liabilities into gross components on a contract-by-contract basis before giving effect to the risk-reducing benefits of master netting arrangements and collateral. As a result, we must present each individual contract as an "asset value" if it is in the money or a "liability value" if it is out of the money, regardless of whether the individual contracts offset market or credit risks of other contracts in full or in part. Therefore, the gross amounts in this table do not reflect our actual economic or credit risk associated with derivatives. This gross presentation is intended only to show separately the various derivative contract types we use, such as commodities, interest rate, and foreign exchange.

            In order to identify how our derivatives impact our financial position, at the bottom of the table we provide a reconciliation of the gross fair value components to the net fair value amounts as presented in theFair Value Measurements section of this note and our Consolidated Balance Sheets.


    141


    Table of Contents

            The gross asset and liability values in the tabletables below are segregated between those derivatives designated in qualifying hedge accounting relationships and those not designated in hedge accounting relationships. Derivatives not designated in hedging relationships include our NewEnergy retail power and gas customer supply operation, economic hedges of accrual activities, the total return swaps entered into to effect the sale of the international commodities and Houston-based gas trading operations in 2009, and risk management and trading activities which we have substantially curtailed as part of our effort to reduce risk in our business. We use the end of period accounting designation to determine the classification for each derivative position.

    As of December 31, 2009
     Derivatives
    Designated as Hedging
    Instruments for
    Accounting Purposes

     Derivatives Not
    Designated As Hedging
    Instruments for
    Accounting Purposes

     All Derivatives
    Combined

     
    As of December 31, 2010
    As of December 31, 2010
     Derivatives
    Designated as Hedging
    Instruments for
    Accounting Purposes

     Derivatives Not
    Designated As Hedging
    Instruments for
    Accounting Purposes

     All Derivatives
    Combined

     
       
    Contract type
    Contract type
     Asset
    Values (3)

     Liability
    Values (4)

     Asset
    Values (3)

     Liability
    Values (4)

     Asset
    Values (3)

     Liability
    Values (4)

     Contract type
     Asset
    Values (3)

     Liability
    Values (4)

     Asset
    Values (3)

     Liability
    Values (4)

     Asset
    Values (3)

     Liability
    Values (4)

     
       


     (In millions)
     
     (In millions)
     

    Power contracts

     $1,737.3 $(2,292.1)$11,729.3 $(12,414.3)$13,466.6 $(14,706.4)

    Power contracts

     $1,167.9 $(1,362.8)$6,795.0 $(7,166.5)$7,962.9 $(8,529.3)

    Gas contracts

     1,860.6 (1,380.0) 4,159.1 (3,857.1) 6,019.7 (5,237.1)

    Gas contracts

     1,902.3 (1,832.8) 3,390.1 (3,155.3) 5,292.4 (4,988.1)

    Coal contracts

     20.1 (40.8) 609.5 (627.2) 629.6 (668.0)

    Coal contracts

     97.0 (48.6) 266.0 (259.7) 363.0 (308.3)

    Other commodity contracts (1)

     1.4 (0.8) 83.1 (32.1) 84.5 (32.9)

    Other commodity contracts (1)

       61.4 (61.6) 61.4 (61.6)

    Interest rate contracts

     35.8  28.5 (39.9) 64.3 (39.9)

    Interest rate contracts

     35.7  34.4 (35.7) 70.1 (35.7)

    Foreign exchange contracts

       13.2 (9.0) 13.2 (9.0)

    Foreign exchange contracts

       11.0 (8.4) 11.0 (8.4)
       

    Total gross fair values

    Total gross fair values

     $3,655.2 $(3,713.7)$16,622.7 $(16,979.6)$20,277.9 $(20,693.3)

    Total gross fair values

     $3,202.9 $(3,244.2)$10,557.9 $(10,687.2)$13,760.8 $(13,931.4)

         

         

    Netting arrangements (5)

             (19,261.0) 19,261.0 

    Netting arrangements (5)

             (12,955.5) 12,955.5 

    Cash collateral

             (92.6) 125.6 

    Cash collateral

             (28.4) 0.6 

           

    Net fair values

    Net fair values

             $924.3 $(1,306.7)

    Net fair values

             $776.9 $(975.3)

       

       

    Net fair value by balance sheet line item:

    Net fair value by balance sheet line item:

     

    Net fair value by balance sheet line item:

     

    Accounts receivable (2)

    Accounts receivable (2)

             $(348.7)   

    Accounts receivable (2)

             $(16.4)   

    Derivative assets—current

    Derivative assets—current

             639.1   

    Derivative assets—current

             534.4   

    Derivative assets—noncurrent

    Derivative assets—noncurrent

             633.9   

    Derivative assets—noncurrent

             258.9   

    Derivative liabilities—current

    Derivative liabilities—current

               (632.6)

    Derivative liabilities—current

               (622.3)

    Derivative liabilities—noncurrent

    Derivative liabilities—noncurrent

               (674.1)

    Derivative liabilities—noncurrent

               (353.0)

           

    Total Derivatives

    Total Derivatives

             $924.3 $(1,306.7)

    Total Derivatives

             $776.9 $(975.3)
       
    (1)
    Other commodity contracts include oil, freight, emission allowances, and weather contracts.

    (2)
    Represents the unrealized fair value of exchange traded derivatives, exclusive of cash margin posted.

    (3)
    Represents in-the-money contracts without regard to potentially offsetting out-of-the-money contracts under master netting agreements.

    (4)
    Represents out-of-the-money contracts without regard to potentially offsetting in-the-money contracts under master netting agreements.

    (5)
    Represents the effect of legally enforceable master netting agreements.


    142


    Table of Contents

    As of December 31, 2009
     Derivatives
    Designated as Hedging
    Instruments for
    Accounting Purposes

     Derivatives Not
    Designated As Hedging
    Instruments for
    Accounting Purposes

     All Derivatives
    Combined

     
      
    Contract type
     Asset
    Values (3)

     Liability
    Values (4)

     Asset
    Values (3)

     Liability
    Values (4)

     Asset
    Values (3)

     Liability
    Values (4)

     
      
     
     (In millions)
     
     

    Power contracts

     $1,737.3 $(2,292.1)$11,729.3 $(12,414.3)$13,466.6 $(14,706.4)
     

    Gas contracts

      1,860.6  (1,380.0) 4,159.1  (3,857.1) 6,019.7  (5,237.1)
     

    Coal contracts

      20.1  (40.8) 609.5  (627.2) 629.6  (668.0)
     

    Other commodity contracts (1)

      1.4  (0.8) 83.1  (32.1) 84.5  (32.9)
     

    Interest rate contracts

      35.8    28.5  (39.9) 64.3  (39.9)
     

    Foreign exchange contracts

          13.2  (9.0) 13.2  (9.0)
      

    Total gross fair values

     $3,655.2 $(3,713.7)$16,622.7 $(16,979.6)$20,277.9 $(20,693.3)

             
     

    Netting arrangements (5)

                  (19,261.0) 19,261.0 
     

    Cash collateral

                  (92.6) 125.6 
                    

    Net fair values

                 $924.3 $(1,306.7)

                   

    Net fair value by balance sheet line item:

                       

    Accounts receivable (2)

                 $(348.7)   

    Derivative assets—current

                  639.1    

    Derivative assets—noncurrent

                  633.9    

    Derivative liabilities—current

                     (632.6)

    Derivative liabilities—noncurrent

                     (674.1)
                    

    Total Derivatives

                 $924.3 $(1,306.7)
      
    (1)
    Other commodity contracts include oil, freight, emission allowances, and weather contracts.

    (2)
    Represents the unrealized fair value of exchange traded derivatives, exclusive of cash margin posted.

    (3)
    Represents in-the-money contracts without regard to potentially offsetting out-of-the-money contracts under master netting agreements.

    (4)
    Represents out-of-the-money contracts without regard to potentially offsetting in-the-money contracts under master netting agreements.

    (5)
    Represents the effect of legally enforceable master netting agreements.

            The magnitude of and changes in the gross derivatives components in this tablethese tables do not indicate changes in the level of derivative activities, the level of market risk, or the level of credit risk. The primary factors affecting the magnitude of the gross amounts in the table are changes in commodity prices and the total number of contracts. If commodity prices change, the gross amounts could increase, even if the level of contracts stays the same, because separate presentation is required for contracts that are in the money from those that are out of the money. As a result, the gross amounts of even fully hedged positions could increase if prices change. Additionally, if the number of contracts increases, the gross amounts also could increase. Thus, the execution of new contracts to reduce economic risk could actually increase the gross amounts in the table because of the requirement to present the gross value of each individual contract separately.

            The primary purpose of this tablethese tables is to disaggregate the risks being managed using derivatives. In order to achieve this objective, we prepare this table by separating each individual derivative contract that is in the money from each contract that is out of the money and present such amounts on a gross basis, even for offsetting contracts that have identical quantities for the same commodity, location, and delivery period. We must also present these components excluding the substantive credit-risk reducing effects of master netting agreements and collateral. As a result, the gross "asset" and "liability" amounts for each contract type far exceed our actual economic exposure to commodity price risk and credit risk. Our actual economic exposure consists of the net derivative position combined with our nonderivative accrual contracts, such as those for load-serving, and our physical assets, such as our power plants. Our actual derivative credit risk exposure after master netting agreements and cash collateral is reflected in the net fair value amounts shown at the bottom of the table above. Our total economic and credit exposures, including derivatives, are managed in a comprehensive risk framework that includes risk measures such as economic


    value at risk, stress testing, and maximum potential credit exposure.

    Gain and (Loss) Tables

    The tables below summarize the gain and loss impacts of our derivative instruments segregated into the following categories:

            The tables only include this information for derivatives and do not reflect the related gains or losses that arise from generation and generation-related assets, nonderivative accrual contracts, or NPNS contracts within our Generation Customer Supply, and Global Commodities activities,NewEnergy businesses, other than fair value hedges, for which


    143


    Table of Contents

    we separately show the gain or loss on the hedged asset or liability. As a result, for mark-to-market and cash-flow hedge derivatives, these tables only reflect the impact of derivatives themselves and therefore do not necessarily include all of the income statement impacts of the transactions for which derivatives are used to manage risk. For a more complete discussion of how derivatives affect our financial performance, see our accounting policy for Revenues, Fuel and Purchased Energy Expenses, and Derivatives and Hedging Activities inNote 1.

            The following table presentstables present gains and losses on derivatives designated as cash flow hedges. As discussed more fully in our accounting policy, we record the effective portion of unrealized gains and losses on cash flow hedges in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss until the hedged forecasted transaction affects earnings. We record the ineffective portion of gains and losses on cash flow hedges in earnings as they occur. When the hedged forecasted transaction settles and is recorded in earnings, we reclassify the related amounts from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss into earnings, with the result that the combination of revenue or expense from the forecasted transaction and gain or loss from the hedge are recognized in earnings at a total amount equal to the hedged price. Accordingly, the amount of derivative gains and losses recorded in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss and reclassified from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss into earnings does not reflect the total economics of the hedged forecasted transactions. The total impact of our forecasted transactions and related hedges is reflected in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss).

    Cash Flow Hedges
    Cash Flow Hedges
      
      
     Year Ended December 31, 2009
     Cash Flow Hedges
      
      
      
     Year Ended December 31,
     
       


     Gain (Loss) Recorded
    in AOCI
      
      
      
     
     Gain (Loss) Recorded
    in AOCI
      
     Gain (Loss)
    Reclassified from AOCI
    into Earnings
     Ineffectiveness Gain
    (Loss) Recorded
    in Earnings
     


      
     Gain (Loss) Reclassified from AOCI into Earnings
     Ineffectiveness Gain (Loss) Recorded in Earnings
     
     Statement of Income (Loss) Line Item
     
    Contract type:
    Contract type:
     Year Ended December 31, 2009
     Statement of Income (Loss) Line Item
     Contract type:
     2010
     2009
     2010
     2009
     2010
     2009
     
       


      
     (In millions)
      
      
     
     (In millions)
      
     

    Hedges of forecasted sales:

    Hedges of forecasted sales:

       Nonregulated revenues     

    Hedges of forecasted sales:

         

    Nonregulated revenues

             

    Power contracts

     $362.5 $(180.6)$77.5 

    Power contracts

     $144.5 $362.5 $(165.8)$(180.6)$8.9 $77.5 

    Gas contracts

     (65.1) (67.3) 6.3 

    Gas contracts

     (59.1) (65.1) 90.8 (67.3) (0.3) 6.3 

    Coal contracts

     10.0 (229.9)  

    Coal contracts

      10.0  (229.9)   

    Other commodity contracts (1)

     6.8 (0.4) (6.2)

    Other commodity contracts (1)

      6.8 (0.7) (0.4)  (6.2)

    Interest rate contracts

    Interest rate contracts

     (0.3) (0.3)  

    Interest rate contracts

      (0.3)  (0.3)   

    Foreign exchange contracts

    Foreign exchange contracts

     2.5 (1.1)  

    Foreign exchange contracts

      2.5 (1.0) (1.1)   
       

    Total gains (losses)

    Total gains (losses)

     $316.4 Total included in nonregulated revenues $(479.6)$77.6 

    Total gains (losses)

     $85.4 $316.4 

    Total included in nonregulated revenues

     $(76.7)$(479.6)$8.6 $77.6 
       

    Hedges of forecasted purchases:

    Hedges of forecasted purchases:

       Fuel and purchased energy expense     

    Hedges of forecasted purchases:

         

    Fuel and purchased energy expense

             

    Power contracts

     $(1,056.0) $(1,905.3)$(42.2)

    Power contracts

     $(377.4)$(1,056.0) $(1,036.1)$(1,905.3)$(40.7)$(42.2)

    Gas contracts

     103.7 165.8 (15.2)

    Gas contracts

     (141.5) 103.7 216.5 165.8 (64.3) (15.2)

    Coal contracts

     (77.7) (187.6) (8.9)

    Coal contracts

     65.9 (77.7) (34.6) (187.6) 4.9 (8.9)

    Other commodity contracts (2)

     (12.3) 8.2  

    Other commodity contracts (2)

     (0.2) (12.3) (0.3) 8.2 0.2  

    Foreign exchange contracts

    Foreign exchange contracts

        

    Foreign exchange contracts

           
       

    Total losses

    Total losses

     $(1,042.3)Total included in fuel and purchased energy expense $(1,918.9)$(66.3)

    Total losses

     $(453.2)$(1,042.3)

    Total included in fuel and purchased energy expense

     $(854.5)$(1,918.9)$(99.9)$(66.3)
       

    Hedges of interest rates:

    Hedges of interest rates:

       Interest expense     

    Hedges of interest rates:

         

    Interest expense

             

    Interest rate contracts

      0.6  

    Interest rate contracts

       4.3 0.6   
       

    Total gains

    Total gains

     $ Total included in interest expense $0.6 $ 

    Total gains

     $ $ 

    Total included in interest expense

     $4.3 $0.6 $ $ 
       

    Grand total (losses) gains

    Grand total (losses) gains

     $(725.9) $(2,397.9)$11.3 

    Grand total (losses) gains

     $(367.8)$(725.9) $(926.9)$(2,397.9)$(91.3)$11.3 
       
    (1)
    Other commodity sale contracts include oil and freight contracts.

    (2)
    Other commodity purchase contracts include freight and emission allowances.


    144


    Table of Contents

            The following table presents gains and losses on derivatives designated as fair value hedges and, separately, the gains and losses on the hedged item. As discussed earlier, we record the unrealized gains and losses on fair value hedges as well as changes in the fair value of the hedged asset or liability in earnings as they occur. The difference between these amounts represents hedge ineffectiveness. Due to the sale of our Houston-based gas trading operation, we do not have any activity underfor fair value hedges related to gas contracts since the second quarter of 2009.

    Fair Value Hedges
    Fair Value Hedges
     Year Ended December 31, 2009
     Fair Value Hedges
     Year Ended December 31,
     
     


      
     Amount of Gain (Loss)
    Recognized in Income
    on Derivative
     Amount of Gain (Loss)
    Recognized in Income
    on Hedged Item
     
     
     Statement of Income (Loss) Line Item
     
    Contract type:
    Contract type:
     Statement of Income (Loss) Line Item
     Gain (Loss)
    Recognized in Income
    on Derivative

     Gain (Loss)
    Recognized in Income
    on Hedged Item

     Contract type:
     2010
     2009
     2010
     2009
     
       


      
     (In millions)
     
      
     (In millions)
     

    Commodity contracts:

    Commodity contracts:

     

    Commodity contracts:

     

    Gas contracts

     Nonregulated revenues $40.6 $(16.7)

    Gas contracts

     Nonregulated revenues $ $40.6 $ $(16.7)

    Interest rate contracts

    Interest rate contracts

     Interest expense (0.1) 0.7 

    Interest rate contracts

     Interest expense 18.0 (0.1) (15.6) 0.7 
       

    Total gains (losses)

    Total gains (losses)

     $40.5 $(16.0)

    Total gains (losses)

     $18.0 $40.5 $(15.6)$(16.0)
       

            The following table presents gains and losses on mark-to-market derivatives, contracts that have not been designated as hedges for accounting purposes. As discussed more fully inNote 1, we record the unrealized gains and losses on mark-to-market derivatives in earnings as they occur. While we use mark-to-market accounting for risk management and trading activities because changes in fair value more closely reflect the economic performance of the activity, we also use mark-to-market accounting for certain derivatives related to portions of our physical energy delivery activities. Accordingly, the total amount of gains and losses from mark-to-market derivatives does not necessarily reflect the total economics of related transactions.

    Mark-to-Market Derivatives
    Mark-to-Market Derivatives
     Year Ended December 31, 2009
     Mark-to-Market Derivatives
     Year Ended December 31,
     
     


      
     Amount of Gain (Loss)
    Recorded in Income
    on Derivative
     
     
     Statement of Income (Loss) Line Item
     
    Contract type:
    Contract type:
     Statement of Income (Loss) Line Item
     Gain (Loss) Recorded in Income on Derivative
     Contract type:
     2010
     2009
     
       


      
     (In millions)
     
      
     (In millions)
     

    Commodity contracts:

    Commodity contracts:

     

    Commodity contracts:

     

    Power contracts

     Nonregulated revenues $250.9 

    Power contracts

     Nonregulated revenues $(26.2)$250.9 

    Gas contracts

     Nonregulated revenues (360.0)

    Gas contracts

     Nonregulated revenues 41.4 (360.0)

    Coal contracts

     Nonregulated revenues 14.0 

    Coal contracts

     Nonregulated revenues 13.3 14.0 

    Other commodity contracts (1)

     Nonregulated revenues (11.7)

    Other commodity contracts (1)

     Nonregulated revenues (15.4) (11.7)

    Coal contracts

     Fuel and purchased energy expense (109.8)

    Coal contracts

     Fuel and purchased energy expense  (109.8)

    Interest rate contracts

    Interest rate contracts

     Nonregulated revenues (27.2)

    Interest rate contracts

     Nonregulated revenues (2.3) (27.2)

    Foreign exchange contracts

    Foreign exchange contracts

     Nonregulated revenues 7.6 

    Foreign exchange contracts

     Nonregulated revenues (1.2) 7.6 
       

    Total gains (losses)

    Total gains (losses)

     $(236.2)

    Total gains (losses)

     $9.6 $(236.2)
       
    (1)
    Other commodity contracts include oil, freight, emission allowances,uranium, weather, and uranium.emission allowances.

            In computing the amounts of derivative gains and losses in the above tables, we include the changes in fair values of derivative contracts up to the date of maturity or settlement of each contract. This approach facilitates a comparable presentation for both financial and physical derivative contracts. In addition, for cash flow hedges we include the impact of intra-quarter transactions (i.e., those that arise and settle within the same quarter) in both gains and losses recognized in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss and amounts reclassified from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss into earnings.

    Volume of Derivative Activity

    The volume of our derivatives activity is directly related to the fundamental nature and scope of our business and the risks we manage. We own or control electric generating facilities, which exposes us to both power and fuel price risk; we serve electric and gas wholesale and retail customers within our customer supplyNewEnergy business, which exposes us to electricity and natural gas price risk; and we provide risk management services and engage in trading activities, which can expose us to a variety of commodity price risks. We conduct our business activities throughout the United States and internationally. In order to manage the risks associated with these activities, we are required to be an active participant in the energy markets, and we routinely employ derivative instruments to conduct our business.

            Derivative instruments provide an efficient and effective way to conduct our business and to manage the associated risks. We manage our generating resources and customer supply activities based upon established policies and limits, and we use


    145


    Table of Contents

    derivatives to establish a portion of our hedges and to adjust the level of our hedges from time to time. Additionally, we engage in trading activities which enable us to execute hedging transactions in a cost-effective manner. We manage those activities based upon various risk measures, including position limits, economic value at risk (EVaR) and value at risk (VaR),


    and we use derivatives to establish and maintain those activities within the prescribed limits. We are also using derivatives to execute, control, and reduce the overall level of our trading positions and risk as well as to manage a portion of our interest rate risk associated with debt and our foreign currency risk from non-dollar denominated transactions. Accordingly, the use of derivative instruments is integral to the conduct of our business, and derivative instruments are an important tool through which we are able to manage and mitigate the risks that are inherent in our activities.

            The following table presents information designed to provide insight into the overall volume of our derivatives usage. However, the volumes presented in this table are subject to a number of limitations and should only be used as an indication of the extent of our derivatives usage and the risks they are intended to manage.

            First, the volume information is not a complete representation of our market price risk because it only includes derivative contracts. Accordingly, this table does not present a complete picture of our overall net economic exposure, and should not be interpreted as an indication of open or unhedged commodity positions, because the use of derivatives is only one of the means by which we engage in and manage the risks of our business. For example, the table does not include power or fuel quantities and risks arising from our physical assets, non-derivative contracts, and forecasted transactions that we manage using derivatives; a portion of these volumes reducereduces those risks. It also does not include volumes of commodities under nonderivative contracts that we use to serve customers or manage our risks. Our actual net economic exposure from our generating facilities and customer supply activities is reduced by derivatives, and the exposure from our trading activities is managed and controlled through the risk measures discussed above. Therefore, the information in the table below is only an indication of that portion of our business that we manage through derivatives and serves primarily to identify the extent of our derivatives activities and the types of risks that they are intended to manage.

            Additionally, the disclosure of derivative quantities potentially could reveal commercially valuable or otherwise competitively sensitive information that could limit the effectiveness and profitability of our business activities. Therefore, in the table below, we have computed the derivative volumes for commodities by aggregating the absolute value of net positions within commodities for each year. This provides an indication of the level of derivatives activity, but it does not indicate either the direction of our position (long or short), or the overall size of our position. We believe this presentation gives an appropriate indication of the level of derivatives activity without unnecessarily revealing the size and direction of our derivatives positions.

            Finally, the volume information for commodity derivatives represents "delta equivalent" quantities, not gross notional amounts. We make use of different types of commodity derivative instruments such as forwards, futures, options, and swaps, and we believe that the delta equivalent quantity is the most relevant measure of the volume associated with these commodity derivatives. The delta-equivalent quantity represents a risk-adjusted notional quantity for each contract that takes into account the probability that an option will be exercised. Therefore, the volume information for commodity derivatives represents the delta equivalent quantity of those contracts, computed on the basis described above. For interest rate contracts and foreign currency contracts we have presented the notional amounts of such contracts in the table below.


    146


    Table of Contents

            The following table presentstables present the volume of our derivative activities as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, shown by contractual settlement year.

    Quantities (1) Under Derivative Contracts
      
      
     As of December 31, 2010
     
      
    Contract Type (Unit)
     2011
     2012
     2013
     2014
     2015
     Thereafter
     Total
     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Power (MWH)

      21.2    3.8  4.2  2.3  0.2  31.7 

    Gas (mmBTU)

      175.3  90.1  80.2  64.7  24.1    434.4 

    Coal (Tons)

      4.4  2.5  0.1        7.0 

    Oil (BBL)

      0.2  0.1  0.1        0.4 

    Emission Allowances (Tons)

      1.5            1.5 

    Renewable Energy Credits (Number of credits)

      0.4  0.3  0.3  0.3  0.3  0.7  2.3 

    Interest Rate Contracts

     $639.4 $490.7 $941.8 $405.0 $460.0 $175.0 $3,111.9 

    Foreign Exchange Rate Contracts

     $48.7 $8.7 $16.8 $16.8 $15.5 $ $106.5 
      


    Quantities (1) Under Derivative Contracts
      
      
     As of December 31, 2009
     
      
    Contract Type (Unit)
     2010
     2011
     2012
     2013
     2014
     Thereafter
     Total
     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Power (MWH)

      32.7  1.6  3.2  3.2  0.1  0.9  41.7 

    Gas (mmBTU)

      37.3  37.4  22.1  21.0  22.7  21.3  161.8 

    Coal (Tons)

      3.9  3.9  0.2        8.0 

    Oil (BBL)

      0.3            0.3 

    Emission Allowances (Tons)

      7.2            7.2 

    Interest Rate Contracts

     $972.3 $140.6 $440.5 $58.2 $255.0 $200.0 $2,066.6 

    Foreign Exchange Rate Contracts

     $27.9 $72.4 $16.7 $16.7 $16.8 $15.5 $166.0 
      
    (1)
    Amounts in the table are only intended to provide an indication of the level of derivatives activity and should not be interpreted as a measure of any derivative position or overall economic exposure to market risk. Quantities are expressed as "delta equivalents" on an absolute value basis by contract type by year. Additionally, quantities relate only to derivatives and do not include potentially offsetting quantities associated with physical assets and nonderivative accrual contracts.

            In addition to the commodities in the tables above, we also hold derivative instruments related to weather that are insignificant relative to the overall level of our derivative activity.

    Credit-Risk Related Contingent Features

    Certain of our derivative instruments contain provisions that would require additional collateral upon a credit-related event such as an adequate assurance provision or a credit rating


    decrease in the senior unsecured debt of Constellation Energy. The amount of collateral we could be required to post would be determined by the fair value of contracts containing such provisions that represent a net liability, after offset for the fair value of any asset contracts with the same counterparty under master netting agreements and any other collateral already posted. This collateral amount is a component of, and is not in addition to, the total collateral we could be required to post for all contracts upon a credit rating decrease.

            The following table presentstables present information related to these derivatives.derivatives at December 31, 2010 and 2009. Based on contractual provisions, we estimate that if Constellation Energy's senior unsecured debt were downgraded, our total contingent collateral obligation for derivatives in a net liability position was $0.1 billion at December 31, 2010 and $0.2 billion as of December 31, 2009, which represents the additional collateral that we could be required to post with counterparties, including both cash collateral and letters of credit, in the event of a credit downgrade to below investment grade. These amounts are associated with net derivative liabilities totaling $0.9 billion at December 31, 2010 and $1.0 billion at December 31, 2009 after reflecting legally binding master netting agreements and collateral already posted.

            We present the gross fair value of derivatives in a net liability position that have credit-risk-related contingent features in the first column in the table below. This gross fair value amount represents only the out-of-the-money contracts containing such features that are not fully collateralized by cash on a stand-alone basis. Thus, this amount does not reflect the offsetting fair value of in-the-money contracts under legally-binding master netting agreements with the same counterparty, as shown in the second column in the table. These in-the-money contracts would offset the amount of any gross liability that could be required to be collateralized, and as a result, the actual potential collateral requirements would be based upon the net fair value of derivatives containing such features, not the gross amount. The amount of any possible contingent collateral for such contracts in the event of a downgrade would be further reduced to the extent that we have already posted collateral related to the net liability.


    147


    Table of Contents

            Because the amount of any contingent collateral obligation would be based on the net fair value of all derivative contracts under each master netting agreement, we believe that the "net fair value of derivative contracts containing this feature" as shown in the tabletables below is the most relevant measure of derivatives in a net liability position with credit-risk-related contingent features. This amount reflects the actual net liability upon which existing collateral postings are computed and upon which any additional contingent collateral obligation would be based.

    Credit-Risk Related Contingent Feature
    Credit-Risk Related Contingent Feature
     As of December 31, 2009
     Credit-Risk Related Contingent Feature
     As of December 31, 2010
     
       
    Gross Fair Value
    of Derivative
    Contracts Containing
    This Feature (1)

     Offsetting Fair Value
    of In-the-Money
    Contracts Under Master
    Netting Agreements (2)

     Net Fair Value
    of Derivative
    Contracts Containing
    This Feature (3)

     Amount of Posted Collateral (4)
     Contingent Collateral Obligation (5)
      Offsetting Fair Value
    of In-the-Money
    Contracts Under Master
    Netting Agreements (2)

     Net Fair Value
    of Derivative
    Contracts Containing
    This Feature (3)

     Amount of
    Posted
    Collateral (4)

     Contingent
    Collateral
    Obligation (5)

     
       

      
     (In billions)
      
      
       
     (In billions)
      
      
     
    $8.6 $(7.6)$1.0 $0.7 $0.2 
    $4.6 $(3.7)$0.9 $0.7 $0.1 
       


    Credit-Risk Related Contingent Feature
     As of December 31, 2009
     
      
    Gross Fair Value
    of Derivative
    Contracts Containing
    This Feature (1)

     Offsetting Fair Value
    of In-the-Money
    Contracts Under Master
    Netting Agreements (2)

     Net Fair Value
    of Derivative
    Contracts Containing
    This Feature (3)

     Amount of
    Posted
    Collateral (4)

     Contingent
    Collateral
    Obligation (5)

     
      
     
      
     (In billions)
      
      
     
    $8.6 $(7.6)$1.0 $0.7 $0.2 
      
    (1)
    Amount represents the gross fair value of out-of-the-money derivative contracts containing credit-risk-related contingent features that are not fully collateralized by posted cash collateral on an individual, contract-by-contract basis ignoring the effects of master netting agreements.

    (2)
    Amount represents the offsetting fair value of in-the-money derivative contracts under legally-enforceable master netting agreements with the same counterparty, which reduces the amount of any liability for which we potentially could be required to post collateral.

    (3)
    Amount represents the net fair value of out-of-the-money derivative contracts containing credit-risk related contingent features after considering the mitigating effects of offsetting positions under master netting arrangements and reflects the actual net liability upon which any potential contingent collateral obligations would be based.

    (4)
    Amount includes cash collateral posted of $0.6 million and letters of credit of $656.9 million at December 31, 2010 and cash collateral posted of $125.6 million and letters of credit of $585.2 million.million at December 31, 2009.

    (5)
    Amounts represent the additional collateral that we could be required to post with counterparties, including both cash collateral and letters of credit, in the event of a credit downgrade to below investment grade after giving consideration to offsetting derivative and non-derivative positions under master netting agreements.

    Concentrations of Derivative-Related Credit Risk

    We discuss our concentrations of credit risk, including derivative-related positions, inNote 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. At December 31, 2010, two counterparties, a large power cooperative and CENG, comprise total exposure concentrations of 25%.

    Fair Value Measurements

    Effective January 1, 2008, we adopted guidance related to fair value measurements. This guidance defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value, and requires certain disclosures about fair value measurements. We discuss our fair value measurements below.

            We determine the fair value of our assets and liabilities using unadjusted quoted prices in active markets (Level 1) or pricing inputs that are observable (Level 2) whenever that information is available. We use unobservable inputs (Level 3) to estimate fair value only when relevant observable inputs are not available.

            We classify assets and liabilities within the fair value hierarchy based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement of each individual asset and liability taken as a whole. We determine fair value for assets and liabilities classified as Level 1 by multiplying the market price by the quantity of the asset or liability. We primarily determine fair


    value measurements classified as Level 2 or Level 3 using the income valuation approach, which involves discounting estimated cash flows using assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability.

            We present all derivatives recorded at fair value net with the associated fair value cash collateral. This presentation of the net position reflects our credit exposure for our on-balance sheet positions but excludes the impact of any off-balance sheet positions and collateral. Examples of off-balance sheet positions and collateral include in-the-money accrual contracts for which the right of offset exists in the event of default and letters of credit. We discuss our letters of credit in more detail inNote 8.


    148


    Table of Contents

    Recurring Measurements

    BGE's assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis are immaterial. Our merchant energy business segment's assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis consist of the following:following (BGE's assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis are immaterial):



     As of December 31, 2009
     
     As of December 31, 2010
     


     Assets
     Liabilities
     
     Assets
     Liabilities
     
       


     (In millions)
     
     (In millions)
     

    Cash equivalents

    Cash equivalents

     $3,065.4 $ 

    Cash equivalents

     $1,545.4 $ 

    Equity securities

    Equity securities

     46.2  

    Equity securities

     43.7  

    Derivative instruments:

    Derivative instruments:

     

    Derivative instruments:

     

    Classified as derivative assets and liabilities:

     

    Classified as derivative assets and liabilities:

     
     

    Current

     639.1 (632.6) 

    Current

     534.4 (622.3)
     

    Noncurrent

     633.9 (674.1) 

    Noncurrent

     258.9 (353.0)
       
     

    Total classified as derivative assets and liabilities

     1,273.0 (1,306.7) 

    Total classified as derivative assets and liabilities

     793.3 (975.3)

    Classified as accounts receivable*

     (348.7)  

    Classified as accounts receivable (1)

     (16.4)  
       

    Total derivative instruments

     924.3 (1,306.7)

    Total derivative instruments

     776.9 (975.3)
       

    Total recurring fair value measurements

    Total recurring fair value measurements

     $4,035.9 $(1,306.7)

    Total recurring fair value measurements

     $2,366.0 $(975.3)
       
    *(1)
    Represents the unrealized fair value of exchange traded derivatives, exclusive of cash margin posted.

     
     As of December 31, 2009
     
     
     Assets
     Liabilities
     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Cash equivalents

     $3,065.4 $ 

    Equity securities

      46.2   

    Derivative instruments:

           
     

    Classified as derivative assets and liabilities:

           
      

    Current

      639.1  (632.6)
      

    Noncurrent

      633.9  (674.1)
      
      

    Total classified as derivative assets and liabilities

      1,273.0  (1,306.7)
     

    Classified as accounts receivable (1)

      (348.7)  
      
     

    Total derivative instruments

      924.3  (1,306.7)
      

    Total recurring fair value measurements

     $4,035.9 $(1,306.7)
      
    (1)
    Represents the unrealized fair value of exchange traded derivatives, exclusive of cash margin posted.

            Cash equivalents represent exchange-traded money market funds which are included in "Cash and cash equivalents" in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Equity securities primarily represent mutual fund investments which are included in "Other assets" in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Derivative instruments represent unrealized amounts related to all derivative positions, including futures, forwards, swaps, and options. We classify exchange-listed contracts as part of "Accounts Receivable" in our Consolidated Balance Sheets. We classify the remainder of our derivative contracts as "Derivative assets" or "Derivative liabilities" in our Consolidated Balance Sheets.


    149


    Table of Contents


            The tabletables below disaggregates our net derivativeset forth by level within the fair value hierarchy the gross components of the Company's assets and liabilities on a gross contract-by-contract basis. Each individual asset or liability that is remeasuredwere measured at fair value on a recurring basis is requiredas of December 31, 2010 and 2009. For December 31, 2010, our net derivative assets and liabilities are disaggregated on a gross contract-by-contract basis. These gross balances are intended solely to be presented in this table and classified, in its entirety, within the appropriate level in theprovide information on sources of inputs to fair value hierarchy.and proportions of fair value involving objective versus subjective valuations and do not represent either our actual credit exposure or net economic exposure. Therefore, the objective of this table is to provide information about how each individual derivative contract is valued within the fair value hierarchy, regardless of whether a particular contract is eligible for netting against other contracts or whether it has been collateralized.

            The tables below set forth by level within the fair value hierarchy the gross components of the Company's

    At December 31, 2010
     Level 1
     Level 2
     Level 3
     Netting and
    Cash Collateral (1)

     Total Net
    Fair Value

     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Cash equivalents

     $1,545.4 $ $ $ $1,545.4 

    Equity securities

      43.7        43.7 

    Derivative assets:

                    
     

    Power contracts

        7,509.6  453.3       
     

    Gas contracts

      63.9  5,113.3  115.2       
     

    Coal contracts

        355.6  7.4       
     

    Other commodity contracts

      6.6  54.8         
     

    Interest rate contracts

      33.1  37.0         
     

    Foreign exchange contracts

        11.0         
      
     

    Total derivative assets

      103.6  13,081.3  575.9  (12,983.9) 776.9 
      

    Derivative liabilities:

                    
     

    Power contracts

        (7,758.2) (771.1)      
     

    Gas contracts

      (72.7) (4,910.3) (5.1)      
     

    Coal contracts

        (307.4) (0.9)      
     

    Other commodity contracts

      (7.1) (54.5)        
     

    Interest rate contracts

      (35.7)          
     

    Foreign exchange contracts

        (8.4)        
      

    Total derivative liabilities

      (115.5) (13,038.8) (777.1) 12,956.1  (975.3)
      
     

    Net derivative position

      (11.9) 42.5  (201.2) (27.8) (198.4)
      

    Total

     $1,577.2 $42.5 $(201.2)$(27.8)$1,390.7 
      
    (1)
    We present our derivative assets and liabilities that were measured at fair valuein our Consolidated Balance Sheets on a recurring basis as ofnet basis. We net derivative assets and liabilities, including cash collateral, when a legally enforceable master netting agreement exists between us and the counterparty to a derivative contract. At December 31, 2009. These gross balances are intended solely to provide information2010, we included $28.4 million of cash collateral held and $0.6 million of cash collateral posted (excluding margin posted on sources of inputs to fair value and proportions of fair value involving objective versus subjective valuations and do not represent either our actual credit exposure or net economic exposure.

    exchange traded derivatives) in netting amounts in the above table.

    At December 31, 2009
    At December 31, 2009
     Level 1
     Level 2
     Level 3
     Netting and
    Cash Collateral*

     Total Net
    Fair Value

     At December 31, 2009
     Level 1
     Level 2
     Level 3
     Netting and
    Cash Collateral (1)

     Total Net
    Fair Value

     
       


     (In millions)
     
     (In millions)
     

    Cash equivalents

    Cash equivalents

     $3,065.4 $ $ $ $3,065.4 

    Cash equivalents

     $3,065.4 $ $ $ $3,065.4 

    Equity securities—mutual funds

    Equity securities—mutual funds

     46.2    46.2 

    Equity securities—mutual funds

     46.2    46.2 

    Derivative assets

    Derivative assets

     80.7 19,393.9 803.3 (19,353.6) 924.3 

    Derivative assets

     80.7 19,393.9 803.3 (19,353.6) 924.3 

    Derivative liabilities

    Derivative liabilities

     (79.0) (19,519.5) (1,094.8) 19,386.6 (1,306.7)

    Derivative liabilities

     (79.0) (19,519.5) (1,094.8) 19,386.6 (1,306.7)
       

    Net derivative position

     1.7 (125.6) (291.5) 33.0 (382.4)

    Net derivative position

     1.7 (125.6) (291.5) 33.0 (382.4)
       

    Total

    Total

     $3,113.3 $(125.6)$(291.5)$33.0 $2,729.2 

    Total

     $3,113.3 $(125.6)$(291.5)$33.0 $2,729.2 
       
    *(1)
    We present our derivative assets and liabilities in our Consolidated Balance Sheets on a net basis. We net derivative assets and liabilities, including cash collateral, when a legally enforceable master netting agreement exists between us and the counterparty to a derivative contract. At December 31, 2009, we included $92.6 million of cash collateral held and $125.6 million of cash collateral posted (excluding margin posted on exchange traded derivatives) in netting amounts in the above table.

            The factors that cause changes in the gross components of the derivative amounts in the tables above are unrelated to the existence or level of actual market or credit risk from our operations. We describe the primary factors that change the gross components below.

            We prepared this table by separating each individual derivative contract that is in the money from each contract that


    150


    Table of Contents

    is out of the money. We also did not reflect master netting agreements and collateral for our derivatives. As a result, the gross "asset" and "liability" amounts in each of the three fair value levels far exceed our actual economic exposure to commodity price risk and credit risk. Our actual economic exposure consists of the net derivative position combined with our nonderivative accrual contracts, such as those for load-serving, and our physical assets, such as our power plants. Our actual credit risk exposure is reflected in the net derivative asset and derivative liability amounts shown in the Total Net Fair Value column.

            Increases and decreases in the gross components presented in each of the levels in this table also do not indicate changes in the level of derivative activities. Rather, the primary factors affecting the gross amounts are commodity prices and the total number of contracts. If commodity prices change, the gross amounts could increase, even if the level of contracts stays the same, because separate presentation is required for contracts that are in the money from those that are out of the money. As a result, even fully hedged positions could exhibit increases in the gross amounts if prices change. Additionally, if the number of contracts increases, the gross amounts also could increase. Thus, the execution of new contracts to reduce economic risk could actually increase the gross amounts in the table because of the required separation of contracts discussed above.

            Cash equivalents consist of exchange-traded money market funds, which are valued based uponby multiplying unadjusted quoted prices in active markets by the quantity of the asset and are classified within Level 1.

            Equity securities consist of mutual funds, which are valued based uponby multiplying unadjusted quoted prices in active markets by the quantity of the asset and are classified within Level 1.

            Derivative instruments include exchange-traded and bilateral contracts. Exchange-traded derivative contracts include futures and certain options. Bilateral derivative contracts include swaps, forwards, certain options and structured transactions. We utilize models to measure the fair value of bilateral derivative contracts. Generally, we use similar models to value similar instruments. Valuation models utilize various inputs, which include quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets, quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets that are not active, other observable inputs for the asset or liability, and market-corroborated inputs, which are inputs derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data by correlation or other means. However, the primary input to our valuation models is the forward commodity price. We have classified derivative contracts within the fair value hierarchy as follows:

            During 2010, there were no significant transfers of derivatives between Level 1 and Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.

            We utilize models based upon the income approach to measure the fair value of derivative contracts classified as Level 2 or 3. Generally, we use similar models to value similar instruments. In order to determine fair value, we utilize various inputs and factors including market data and assumptions that market participants would use in pricing assets or liabilities as well as assumptions about the risks inherent in the inputs to the valuation technique. The inputs and factors include:

            The primary input to our valuation models is the forward commodity curve for the respective instrument. Forward commodity curves are derived from published exchange transaction prices, executed bilateral transactions, broker quotes, and other observable or public data sources. The relevant forward commodity curve used to value each of our derivatives will depend on a number of factors including commodity type, location, and expected delivery period. Price volatility would vary by commodity and location. When appropriate, we discount future cash flows using risk free interest rates with adjustments to reflect the credit quality of each counterparty for assets and our own credit quality for liabilities.

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

            We describe below the main types of valuation adjustments we record and the process for establishing each. Generally, increases in valuation adjustments reduce our earnings, and decreases in valuation adjustments increase our earnings. However, all or a portion of the effect on earnings of changes in valuation adjustments may be offset by changes in the value of the underlying positions.



    151


    Table of Contents

            We regularly evaluate and validate the inputs we use to estimate fair value by a number of methods, consisting of various market price verification procedures, including the use of pricing services and multiple broker quotes to support the market price of the various commodities in which we transact, as well as review and verification of models and changes to those models. These activities are undertaken by individuals that are independent of those responsible for estimating fair value.

            The Company's assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement requires judgment and may affect the classification of assets and liabilities within the fair value hierarchy. Because of the long-term nature of certain assets and liabilities measured at fair value as well as differences in the availability of market prices and market liquidity over their terms, inputs for some assets and liabilities may fall into any one of the three levels in the fair value hierarchy or some combination thereof. Thus, even though we are required to classify these assets and liabilities in the lowest level in the hierarchy for which inputs are significant to the fair value measurement, a portion of that measurement may be determined using inputs from a higher level in the hierarchy.

            The following table sets forth a reconciliation of changes in Level 3 fair value measurements:measurements, which predominantly relate to power contracts:



     Year Ended December 31,
     
     Year Ended
    December 31,

     


     2009
     2008
     
     2010
     2009
     
       


     (In millions)
     
     (In millions)
     

    Balance at beginning of period

    Balance at beginning of period

     $37.0 $(147.1)

    Balance at beginning of period

     $(291.5)$37.0 

    Realized and unrealized (losses) gains:

    Realized and unrealized (losses) gains:

     

    Realized and unrealized (losses) gains:

     

    Recorded in income

     (486.9) 471.2 

    Recorded in income

     157.0 (297.0)

    Recorded in other comprehensive income

     201.6 (511.9)

    Recorded in other comprehensive income

     95.2 201.6 

    Purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements

    Purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements

     49.1 37.6 

    Purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements

     (69.6) (140.8)

    Transfers into and out of Level 3

     (92.3) 187.2 

    Transfers into Level 3 (1)

    Transfers into Level 3 (1)

     73.6   

    Transfers out of Level 3 (1)

    Transfers out of Level 3 (1)

     (165.9)   

    Net transfers into and out of Level 3

    Net transfers into and out of Level 3

     (92.3) (92.3)
       

    Balance at end of year

    Balance at end of year

     $(291.5)$37.0 

    Balance at end of year

     $(201.2)$(291.5)
       

    Change in unrealized gains recorded in income relating to derivatives still held at end of year

     $(27.8)$800.1 

    Change in unrealized gains recorded in income relating to derivatives still held at end of period

    Change in unrealized gains recorded in income relating to derivatives still held at end of period

     $189.5 $(27.8)
       
    (1)
    Effective January 1, 2010, we are required to present separately the amounts transferred into Level 3 from the amounts transferred out of Level 3. For purposes of this reconciliation, we assumed transfers into and out of Level 3 occurred on the last day of the quarter.

            Realized and unrealized gains (losses) are included primarily in "Nonregulated revenues" for our derivative contracts that are marked-to-market in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss) and are included in "Accumulated other comprehensive loss" for our derivative contracts designated as cash-flow hedges in our Consolidated Balance Sheets. We discuss the income statement classification for realized gains and losses related to cash-flow hedges for our various hedging relationships inNote 1.

            Realized and unrealized gains (losses) include the realization of derivative contracts through maturity. This includes the fair value, as of the beginning of each quarterly reporting period, of


    contracts that matured during each quarterly reporting period. Purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements represent cash paid or


    152


    Table of Contents

    received for option premiums, and the acquisition or termination of derivative contracts prior to maturity. Transfers into Level 3 represent existing assets or liabilities that were previously categorized at a higher level for which the inputs to the model became unobservable. Transfers out of Level 3 represent assets and liabilities that were previously classified as Level 3 for which the inputs became observable based on the criteria discussed previously for classification in either Level 1 or Level 2. Because the depth and liquidity of the power markets varies substantially between regions and time periods, the availability of observable inputs for substantially the full term and value of our bilateral derivative contracts changes frequently. As a result, we also expect derivatives balances to transfer into and out of Level 3 frequently based on changes in the observable data available as of the end of the period.

    Nonrecurring Measurements

    As of December 31, 2009, there were no assets or liabilities measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis. The table below setsets forth by level within the fair value hierarchy our financial assets and liabilities that were measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis as ofduring the year ended December 31, 2008:2010:

     
     Fair Value at
    December 31,
    2008

     Level 1
     Level 2
     Level 3
     Losses for the
    year ended
    December 31,
    2008

     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Equity method investment

     $17.7 $17.7 $ $ $124.4 
      
     
     Fair Value at
    September 30,
    2010

     Fair Value at
    December 31,
    2010

     Level 3
     Losses for the
    year ended
    December 31,
    2010

     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Investment in CENG

     $2,970.4 $N/A $2,970.4 $2,275.0 

    Other investments:

                 
     

    UNE

        N/A    143.4 
     

    Qualifying facilities—coal

      36.7  N/A  36.7  50.0 
     

    Qualifying facilities—hydroelectric

      N/A  14.8  14.8  8.4 
      
     

    Total other investments

      36.7  14.8  51.5  201.8 
      

    Total

     $3,007.1 $14.8 $3,021.9 $2,476.8 
      

            As described more fully inNote 2, duringDuring the third and fourth quarters of 2008quarter ended September 30, 2010, we recorded other-than-temporary impairment charges of $54.7$2,468.4 million and $69.7 million, respectively, on our equity method investmentinvestments including CENG, UNE, and three coal-fired generating facilities located in CEP. TheCalifornia. Additionally, during the quarter ended December 31, 2010, we recorded an other-than-temporary impairment charge of $8.4 million on one of our equity investments that own a hydroelectric generating facility in California. These fair value measurements included significant unobservable inputs, and, as such, the entire amounts of the measurements were classified as Level 3. We discuss these impairment charges, including the inputs and valuation techniques used to estimate the fair value of CEP is a Level 1 measurement because CEP is a publicly traded stock on the New York Stock Exchange and the fair value is a quoted pricethese equity method investments, in an active market.more detail inNote 2.

            There were no nonrecurring measurements in 2009.

    Fair Value of Financial Instruments

    We show the carrying amounts and fair values of financial instruments included in our Consolidated Balance Sheets in the following table:

    At December 31,
    At December 31,
     2009
     2008
     At December 31,
     2010
     2009
     
       


     Carrying Amount
     Fair Value
     Carrying Amount
     Fair Value
     
     Carrying
    Amount

     Fair
    Value

     Carrying
    Amount

     Fair
    Value

     
       


     (In millions)
     
     (In millions)
     

    Investments and other assets—Constellation Energy

    Investments and other assets—Constellation Energy

     $167.6 $166.0 $2,264.5 $2,264.5 

    Investments and other assets—Constellation Energy

     $248.7 $249.2 $167.6 $166.0 

    Fixed-rate long-term debt:

    Fixed-rate long-term debt:

     

    Fixed-rate long-term debt:

     

    Constellation Energy (including BGE)

     4,225.0 4,433.1 6,995.4 6,290.3 

    Constellation Energy (including BGE)

     4,229.3 4,518.4 4,225.0 4,433.1 

    BGE

     2,200.1 2,280.5 2,265.1 1,990.2 

    BGE

     2,143.6 2,301.8 2,200.1 2,280.5 

    Variable-rate long-term debt:

    Variable-rate long-term debt:

     

    Variable-rate long-term debt:

     

    Constellation Energy (including BGE)

     649.9 649.9 736.7 736.7 

    Constellation Energy (including BGE)

     528.7 528.7 649.9 649.9 

    BGE

         

    BGE

         
       

            We use the following methods and assumptions for estimating fair value disclosures for financial instruments:


    153


    Table of Contents

    14Stock-Based Compensation

    Under our long-term incentive plans, we grant stock options, performance and service-based restricted stock, performance- and service-based units, stock units, deferred cash and equity to officers, key employees, and members of the Board of Directors. In May 2007,2010, shareholders approved Constellation Energy's Amended and Restated 2007 Long-Term Incentive Plan, under which we can grant up to a totalincluding an increase in the number of 9,000,000 shares.shares available for issuance by 9,000,000. Any shares covered by an outstanding award under any of our long-term incentive plans that are forfeited or cancelled, expire or are settled in cash will become available for issuance under the Amended and Restated 2007 Long-Term Incentive Plan. At December 31, 2009,2010, there were 5,790,54512,818,160 shares available for issuance under the 2007 Long-Term Incentive Plan. At December 31, 2009,2010, we had stock options, restricted stock, performance units and equity grants outstanding as discussed below. We may issue new shares, reuse forfeited shares, or buy shares in the market in order to deliver shares to employees for our equity grants. BGE officers and key employees participate in our stock-based compensation plans. The expense recognized by BGE in 2010, 2009, 2008, and 20072008 was not material to BGE's financial results.

    Non-Qualified Stock Options

    Options are granted with an exercise price equal to the market value of the common stock at the date of grant, become vested over a period up to three years (expense recognized in tranches), and expire ten years from the date of grant.

            The fair value of our stock-based awards was estimated as of the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option pricing model based on the following weighted- average assumptions:


     2009
     2008
     2007
      2010
     2009
     2008
     
       

    Risk-free interest rate

     1.95% 2.57% 4.69% 1.87% 1.95% 2.57%

    Expected life (in years)

     4.0 4.0 4.0  4.0 4.0 4.0 

    Expected market price volatility factor

     37.8% 25.8% 20.3% 32.5% 37.8% 25.8%

    Expected dividend yield

     4.83% 1.85% 2.5% 2.74% 4.83% 1.85%

            We use the historical data related to stock option exercises in order to estimate the expected life of our stock options. We also use historical data (measured on a daily basis) for a period equal to the duration of the expected life of option awards, information on the volatility of an identified group of peer companies, and implied volatilities for certain publicly traded options in Constellation Energy common stock in order to estimate the volatility factor. We believe that the use of this data to estimate these factors provides a reasonable basis for our assumptions. The risk-free interest rate for the periods within the expected life of the option is based on the U.S Treasury yield curve in effect and the expected dividend yield is based on our current estimate for dividend payout at the time of grant.

            Summarized information for our stock option grants is as follows:



     2009
     2008
     2007
     
     2010
     2009
     2008
     


       
       


     Shares
     Weighted-
    Average
    Exercise Price

     Shares
     Weighted-
    Average
    Exercise Price

     Shares
     Weighted-
    Average
    Exercise Price

     
     Shares
     Weighted-
    Average
    Exercise Price

     Shares
     Weighted-
    Average
    Exercise Price

     Shares
     Weighted-
    Average
    Exercise Price

     
       


     (Shares in thousands)
     
     (Shares in thousands)
     

    Outstanding, beginning of year

    Outstanding, beginning of year

     6,058 $59.99 6,145 $55.90 6,051 $47.23 

    Outstanding, beginning of year

     8,146 $44.36 6,058 $59.99 6,145 $55.90 

    Granted with exercise prices at fair market value

     3,511 20.14 1,434 93.79 1,759 76.22 

    Granted with exercise prices at fair market value

     1,468 35.07 3,511 20.14 1,434 93.79 

    Exercised

     (83) 31.07 (375) 47.02 (1,411) 41.91 

    Exercised

     (235) 23.53 (83) 31.07 (375) 47.02 

    Forfeited/expired

     (1,340) 52.41 (1,146) 84.59 (254) 67.85 

    Forfeited/expired

     (309) 43.41 (1,340) 52.41 (1,146) 84.59 
       

    Outstanding, end of year

    Outstanding, end of year

     8,146 $44.36 6,058 $59.99 6,145 $55.90 

    Outstanding, end of year

     9,070 $43.43 8,146 $44.36 6,058 $59.99 
       

    Exercisable, end of year

    Exercisable, end of year

     4,114 $55.81 4,665 $52.13 4,043 $48.51 

    Exercisable, end of year

     5,316 $52.65 4,114 $55.81 4,665 $52.13 
       

    Weighted-average fair value per share of options granted with exercise prices at fair market value

       $4.24   $18.75   $13.76 

    Weighted-average fair value per share of options granted with exercise prices at fair market value

       $7.60   $4.24   $18.75 
       


    154


    Table of Contents

            The following table summarizes additional information about stock options during 2010, 2009 2008 and 2007:2008:



     2009
     2008
     2007
     
     2010
     2009
     2008
     
       


     (In millions)
     
     (In millions)
     

    Stock Option Expense Recognized

    Stock Option Expense Recognized

     $14.2 $11.0 $15.1 

    Stock Option Expense Recognized

     $9.9 $14.2 $11.0 

    Stock Options Exercised:

    Stock Options Exercised:

     

    Stock Options Exercised:

     

    Cash Received for Exercise Price

     2.6 20.2 43.4 

    Cash Received for Exercise Price

     5.5 2.6 20.2 

    Intrinsic Value Realized by Employee

     0.2 14.1 67.6 

    Intrinsic Value Realized by Employee

     2.7 0.2 14.1 

    Realized Tax Benefit

     0.1 5.7 26.7 

    Realized Tax Benefit

     1.1 0.1 5.7 

    Fair Value of Options that Vested

    Fair Value of Options that Vested

     11.0 98.3 82.7 

    Fair Value of Options that Vested

     54.4 11.0 98.3 

            As of December 31, 2009,2010, we had $4.0$3.8 million of unrecognized compensation cost related to the unvested portion of outstanding stock option awards, of which $2.9$2.8 million is expected to be recognized during 2010.2011.

            The following table summarizes additional information about stock options outstanding at December 31, 20092010 (stock options in thousands):

     
     Outstanding Exercisable  
     
    Range of
    Exercise
    Prices

     Stock
    Options

     Aggregate
    Intrinsic
    Value

     Stock
    Options

     Aggregate
    Intrinsic
    Value

     Weighted-
    Average
    Remaining
    Contractual Life

     
      
     
      
     (In millions)
      
     (In millions)
     (In years)
     
     $  0 – $  20  3,140 $49.4   $  9.2 
     $20 – $  40  1,141  3.1  996  2.1  4.3 
     $40 – $  60  2,306    2,306    5.6 
     $60 – $  80  792    543    7.2 
     $80 – $100  767    269    8.1 
      
        8,146 $52.5  4,114 $2.1    
            
     
     Outstanding Exercisable  
     
     
     Weighted-
    Average
    Remaining
    Contractual
    Life

     
    Range of
    Exercise
    Prices

     Stock
    Options

     Aggregate
    Intrinsic
    Value

     Stock
    Options

     Aggregate
    Intrinsic
    Value

     
      
     
      
     (In millions)
      
     (In millions)
     (In years)
     
     $  0 – $  20  2,896 $31.9  871 $9.6  8.2 
     $20 – $  40  2,422    930    6.8 
     $40 – $  60  2,245    2,245    4.7 
     $60 – $  80  762    762    6.2 
     $80 – $100  745    508    7.1 
      
        9,070 $31.9  5,316 $9.6    
            

    Restricted Stock Awards

    In addition to stock options, we issue service-based common stock based on meeting certain service goals. This stockthat vests to participants at various timesover periods ranging from one to five years if the service goals are met.and fully vested common stock units with sales restrictions ranging from approximately 10 months to 5 years. We account for our service-basedthese awards as equity awards, whereby we recognize the value of the market price of the underlying stock on the date of grant toas compensation expense immediately for fully vested common stock units with sales restrictions or over the service period either ratably or in tranches (depending if the award has cliff or graded vesting). for service-based common stock.

            We recorded compensation expense related to our restricted stock awards of $9.5 million in 2010, $16.7 million in 2009, and $35.3 million in 2008, and $35.8 million in 2007.2008. The tax benefits received associated with our restricted awards were $10.0 million in 2010, $6.7 million in 2009, and $20.1 million in 2008, and $17.6 million in 2007.2008.

            Summarized share information for our restricted stock awards is as follows:



     2009
     2008
     2007
     
     2010
     2009
     2008
     
       


     (Shares in thousands)
     
     (Shares in thousands)
     

    Outstanding, beginning of year

    Outstanding, beginning of year

     1,033 1,322 1,207 

    Outstanding, beginning of year

     1,017 1,033 1,322 

    Granted

     866 365 710 

    Granted

     832 866 365 

    Released to participants

     (701) (536) (552)

    Released to participants

     (713) (701) (536)

    Canceled

     (181) (118) (43)

    Canceled

     (56) (181) (118)
       

    Outstanding, end of year

    Outstanding, end of year

     1,017 1,033 1,322 

    Outstanding, end of year

     1,080 1,017 1,033 
       

    Weighted-average fair value of restricted stock granted (per share)

    Weighted-average fair value of restricted stock granted (per share)

     $19.83 $94.62 $75.29 

    Weighted-average fair value of restricted stock granted (per share)

     $34.83 $19.83 $94.62 
       

    Total fair value of shares for which restriction has lapsed (in millions)

    Total fair value of shares for which restriction has lapsed (in millions)

     $16.5 $49.7 $44.5 

    Total fair value of shares for which restriction has lapsed (in millions)

     $24.9 $16.5 $49.7 
       

            As of December 31, 2009,2010, we had $8.6 million of unrecognized compensation cost related to the unvested portion of outstanding restricted stock awards expected to be recognized within a 29-month43-month period. At December 31, 2009,2010, we have recorded in "Common shareholders' equity" approximately $37.4$18.6 million and approximately $47.8$37.4 million at December 31, 20082009 for the unvested portion of service-based restricted stock granted from 20072008 until 20092010 to officers and other employees that is contingently redeemable in cash upon a change in control.

    Performance-Based Units

    We recognize compensation expense ratably for our performance-based awards, which are classified as liability awards, for which the fair value of the award is remeasured at each reporting period. Each unit is equivalent to $1 in value and cliff vests at the end of a three-year service and performance period. The level of payout is based on the achievement of certain performance goals at the end of the three-year period and will be settled in cash. We reportedrecognized compensation expense of $6.2 million in 2010, compensation expense of $1.5 million in 2009, and a reduction of expense of $3.2 million in 2008 and compensation expense of $17.6 million in 2007 for these awards. During the 12 months ended December 31, 2010, no performance-based unit awards vested. During the 12 months ended December 31, 2009, no performance-based unit awards vested. During the 12 months ended December 31, 2008, our 2005 performance-based unit award vested and we paid $24.2 million in cash to settle the award. During the 12 months ended December 31, 2007, our 2004 performance-based unit award vested and we paid $19.7 million in cash to settle the award. As of December 31, 2009,2010, we had $10.0$11.8 million of unrecognized compensation cost related to the unvested portion of outstanding performance-based unit awards expected to be recognized within a 26-month period.

    Equity-Based Grants

    We recorded compensation expense of $0.8 million in 2010, $0.9 million in 2009, $0.9 million in 2008, and $0.9 million in 20072008 related to equity-based grants to members of the Board of Directors.


    155


    Table of Contents

    15Merger and Acquisitions

    CPower

    In October 2010, we acquired 100% ownership of CPower, an energy management and demand response provider, for $77.8 million in cash, all of which was paid at closing. CPower designs and manages programs that allow its customers to reduce electricity demand at times of peak usage. We have included CPower's results of operations in our consolidated financial statements as part of our NewEnergy business segment since the date of acquisition.

            We recorded the major classes of assets acquired and liabilities assumed as follows:

    At October 11, 2010
      
     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Cash and cash equivalents

     $4.9 

    Other current assets

      10.8 

    Goodwill (1)

      51.5 

    Acquired intangible assets (2)

      13.4 

    Other assets

      12.0 
      

    Total assets acquired

      92.6 
      

    Total liabilities

      (14.8)
      

    Net assets acquired

     $77.8 
      
    (1)
    $3.6 million is deductible for tax purposes.

    (2)
    The weighted average amortization for these intangibles is approximately 2 years.

            The pro-forma impact of this acquisition would not have been material to our results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008.

    Boston Generating

    In January 2011, we completed the acquisition of Boston Generating's 2,950 MW fleet of generating plants for approximately $1.1 billion, subject to a working capital true-up adjustment. The fleet acquired includes the following four natural gas power plants and one fuel oil plant located in the Boston, Massachusetts area:

            Upon signing an asset purchase agreement in August 2010, we deposited $50.0 million into an escrow account and recorded this amount as "Restricted cash—current" on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. This deposit plus interest was applied toward the purchase price at closing in January 2011.

            We will account for this acquisition as a business combination, and, beginning in January 2011, we will include these assets and the related results of operations in our Generation business segment.

    Texas Combined Cycle Generation Facilities

    In May 2010, we acquired 100% ownership of the 550 MW Colorado Bend Energy Center and the 550 MW Quail Run Energy Center natural gas combined cycle generation facilities in Texas for $372.9 million, all of which was paid in cash at closing. We include these facilities as part of our Generation business and have included their results of operations in our consolidated financial statements since the date of acquisition.

            We recorded the major classes of assets acquired and liabilities assumed as follows:

    At May 17, 2010
      
     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Current assets

     $7.1 

    Property, plant and equipment

      368.6 
      

    Total assets acquired

      375.7 
      

    Current liabilities

      (2.8)
      

    Net assets acquired

     $372.9 
      

            The pro-forma impact of this acquisition would not have been material to our results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008.

    Criterion Wind Project

    In April 2010, we acquired 100% ownership of a 70 MW Criterion wind project to be constructed in Garrett County, Maryland. In December 2010, we placed this facility in commercial operation. This wind energy project was developed, constructed, and is owned by our Generation business.

            The pro-forma impact of all of the 2010 acquisitions, collectively, would not have been material to our results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008.

    CLT Efficient TechnologiesEnergy Services Group

    On July 1, 2009, we acquired 100% ownership of CLT Energy Services Group, doing business as CLT Efficient Technologies Group (CLT). for $21.9 million, of which $20.8 million was paid in cash at closing. We include CLT as part of our other nonregulated businessesNewEnergy business and have included its results of operations in our consolidated financial statements since the date of acquisition. CLT is an energy services company that provides energy performance contracting and energy efficiency engineering services.

            We acquired 100% ownership
    156


    Table of CLT for $21.9 million, of which $20.8 million was paid in cash at closing.Contents

            Our final purchase price allocation related to CLT is as follows:

    At July 1, 2009
      
     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Current assets

     $5.7 

    Goodwill (1)

      18.6 

    Other assets

      2.3 
      

    Total assets acquired

      26.6 
      

    Current liabilities

      (4.7)
      

    Net assets acquired

     $21.9 
      
    (1)
    100% deductible for tax purposes.

            The pro-forma impact of the CLT acquisition would not have been material to our results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007.

    Criterion Wind Project
    157


    On November 30, 2009, we signed an agreement to acquire the Criterion wind project in Garrett County, Maryland. The completed cost of this project is expected to be approximately $140 million. This 70 MW wind energy project would be developed, constructed, owned, and operated by us. We expect to close this transaction, subject to certain conditions in the first quarter of 2010 and expect commercial operation of the facility in the fall of 2010.

    Termination of Merger Agreement with MidAmerican

    On December 17, 2008 Constellation Energy and MidAmerican agreed to terminate the Agreement and Plan of Merger the parties entered into on September 19, 2008.

            In connection with the termination and conversion of our Series A Preferred Stock, we made certain payments and issued certain securities to MidAmerican. Specifically, we:

            We discuss the merger termination fee in more detail inNote 2.

    Nufcor International Limited

    On June 26, 2008, we acquired 100% ownership of Nufcor International Limited (Nufcor), a uranium market participant that provides marketing services to uranium producers, utilities and an investment fund in the North American and European markets, for $102.8 million. We included Nufcor as part of our Global Commodities operations in our merchant energy business segment and had included its results of operations in our consolidated financial statements since the date of acquisition until its sale on June 30, 2009. We discuss this divestiture in more detail inNote 2.

    West Valley Power Plant

    On June 1, 2008, we acquired the West Valley Power Plant, a 200 MW gas-fired peaking plant located in Utah for approximately $88.6 million (including direct costs). We accounted for this transaction as an asset acquisition and have included this plant's results of operations in the Generation operations of our merchant energy business segment since the date of acquisition. We allocated the purchase price primarily to the equipment with lesser amounts allocated to land and spare parts inventory.

    Hillabee Energy Center

    On February 14, 2008, we acquired the Hillabee Energy Center, a partially completed 740 MW gas-fired combined cycle power generation facility located in Alabama for $156.9 million (including direct costs), which we accounted for as an asset acquisition. We allocated the purchase price primarily to the equipment with lesser amounts allocated to land and contracts acquired. We plan to complete the construction of this facility and expect it to be ready for commercial operation in the first quarter of 2010.


    Table of Contents

    16Related Party Transactions

    Constellation Energy

    CENG

    On November 6, 2009, upon the sale of a membership interest in CENG, our nuclear generation and operation business, to EDF, we deconsolidated CENG and began accounting for our 50.01% membership interest in CENG as an equity method investment. On November 3, 2010, we closed on a comprehensive agreement with EDF that restructures the relationship between our two companies.

            In connection with the closing of the 2009 transaction with EDF, we entered into a power purchase agreement (PPA) with CENG with aan initial fair value of $0.8 billion whereunder which we will purchase between 85-90% of the output of CENG's nuclear plants that is not sold to third parties under pre-existing PPAs over the five year term of the PPA.

            For As part of the period from2010 comprehensive agreement with EDF, the PPA was modified to be unit contingent for prospective trades beginning in November 6, 20092010 through December 31, 2009,the end of its term in 2014. In addition, beginning on January 1, 2015 and continuing to the end of the life of the respective plants, we recognized $122.5 million in purchased power costs from CENG.will purchase 50.01% of the output of CENG's nuclear plants, and EDF will purchase 49.99% of that output.

            In addition to the PPA, in 2009 we entered into a power services agency agreement (PSA) and an administrative service agreement (ASA). The PSA is a five-year agreement under which we will provide scheduling, asset management and billing services to CENG and recognize average annual revenue of approximately $16 million. For the period from November 6, 2009 through December 31, 2009, we recognized $2.7 million in revenue for services rendered under the PSA with CENG.

    The ASA iswas initially a one year agreement that iswas renewable annually under whichannually. Under the ASA, we will provideprovided administrative support services to CENG for a fee of approximately $66 million for 2010. The fees for administrative support services will beare subject to change in future years based on the level of services provided. The fee for 2011 will be approximately $48 million. The charges under this agreement are intended to represent the actual cost of the services provided to CENG fromby us. ForAs part of the period from November 6, 2009 through December 31, 2009, we recognized $10.0 million for services rendered under2010 comprehensive agreement with EDF, the ASA with CENG as an offsetwas extended through 2017 to operating expenses.include a consumption-based pricing structure in addition to the fixed-price structure.

            The impact of transactions under these agreements is summarized below:

    Agreement
     Amount
    Recognized
    in Earnings
    for the
    Year
    Ended
    December 31,
    2010

     Amount
    Recognized
    in Earnings
    for the
    Period from
    November 6,
    2009 through
    December 31,
    2009

     Income
    Statement
    Classification

     Accounts
    Receivable/
    (Accounts
    Payable) at
    December 31,
    2010

     
      
    (In millions)
     

    PPA

     $900.8 $122.5 Fuel and purchased energy expenses $(47.6)

    PSA

      (16.1) (2.7)Nonregulated revenues   

    ASA

      (66.0) (10.0)Operating expenses  5.5 

    UNE

    We sold our interest in UNE during 2010. We discuss our relationship with UNEthis transaction in more detail inNote 4.

    CEP

    On March 31, 2008, our merchant energyNewEnergy business sold its working interest in 83 oil and natural gas producing wells in Oklahoma to CEP, an equity method investment of Constellation Energy, for total proceeds of approximately $53 million. Our merchant energyNewEnergy business recognized a $14.3 million gain, net of the minority interest gain of $0.7 million on the sale and exclusive of our 28.5% ownership interest in CEP. This gain is recorded in "Gains on Sales of Assets" in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss).

    BGE—Income Statement

    BGE is obligated to provide market-based standard offer service to all of its electric customers for varying periods. Bidding to supply BGE's market-based standard offer service to electric customers will occur from time to time through a competitive bidding process approved by the Maryland PSC.

            Our merchant energyNewEnergy business will supply a portion of BGE's market-based standard offer service obligation to electric customers through May 31, 2012.2013.

            The cost of BGE's purchased energy from nonregulated subsidiaries of Constellation Energy to meet its standard offer service obligation was as follows:

    Year Ended December 31,
     2009
     2008
     2007
      2010
     2009
     2008
     
       

     (In millions)
      (In millions)
     

    Electricity purchased for resale expenses

     $623.5 $802.0 $1,139.6  $428.0 $623.5 $802.0 
       

            In addition, Constellation Energy charges BGE for the costs of certain corporate functions. CertainThese costs are directly assigned to BGE. We allocate other corporate functioncomprised of direct charges as well as costs that are allocated based on a total percentage of expected use by BGE. We believe this method of allocation is reasonable and approximates the cost BGE would have incurred as an unaffiliated entity. Under the Maryland PSC's October 30, 2009 order approving the transaction with EDF, we are limited to allocating no more than 31% of these costs to BGE.

            The following table presents all of the costs Constellation Energy charged to BGE in each period, both directly-charged and allocated.

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

    Charges to BGE

     $184.8 $164.7 $153.6 
      

            Other nonregulated affiliates of BGE also charge BGE for the costs of certain services provided.

            The following table presents the costs Constellation Energy charged to BGE in each period.
    158


    Year ended December 31,
     2009
     2008
     2007
     
      
     
     (In millions)
     

    Charges to BGE

     $164.7 $153.6 $160.8 
      

    Table of Contents

    BGE—Balance Sheet

    Through January 7, 2010, BGE participatesparticipated in a cash pool under a Master Demand Note agreement with Constellation Energy. Under this arrangement, participating subsidiaries may invest in or borrow from the pool at market interest rates. Constellation Energy administers the pool and invests excess cash in short-term investments or issues commercial paper to manage consolidated cash requirements. Under this arrangement, BGE had invested $314.7 million at December 31, 2009 and $148.8 million at December 31, 2008.2009.

            As part of the ring-fencing measures required by the Maryland PSC in its order approving the transaction with EDF, BGE ceased participation in the cash pool on January 7, 2010.

            BGE's Consolidated Balance Sheets include intercompany amounts related to BGE's purchases to meet its standard offer service obligation, BGE's gas purchases, BGE's charges to Constellation Energy and its nonregulated affiliates for certain services it provides them, Constellation Energy and its nonregulated affiliates' charges to BGE, and the participation of BGE's employees in the Constellation Energy defined benefit plans.


    159


    Table of Contents

    17Quarterly Financial Data (Unaudited)

    Our quarterly financial information has not been audited but, in management's opinion, includes all adjustments necessary for a fair statement. Our business is seasonal in nature with the peak sales periods generally occurring during the summer and winter months. Accordingly, comparisons among quarters of a year may not represent overall trends and changes in operations.

    2009 Quarterly Data—Constellation Energy
     2009 Quarterly Data—BGE
     
    2010 Quarterly Data—Constellation Energy
    2010 Quarterly Data—Constellation Energy
      
      
      
      
      
     


      
      
      
     Net
    Income
    (Loss)
    Attributable
    to
    Common
    Stock

      
      
     2010 Quarterly Data—BGE
     


     Revenues
     Income
    (Loss)
    from
    Operations

     Other
    (Expense)
    Income *

     Total
    Fixed
    Charges *

     Net
    Income
    (Loss)

     Net
    Income
    Attributable
    to
    Common
    Stock

     Earnings
    (Loss)
    Per Share
    from
    Operations—
    Diluted

     Earnings
    (Loss)
    Per Share
    of Common
    Stock—
    Diluted

      
     Revenues
     Income
    (Loss)
    from
    Operations

     Net
    Income

     Net
    Income
    Attributable
    to
    Common
    Stock

     
     Revenues
     Income
    (Loss)
    from
    Operations

     Net
    Income
    (Loss)

     Earnings (Loss)
    Per Share
    from
    Operations—
    Diluted

     Earnings (Loss)
    Per Share
    of
    Common
    Stock—
    Diluted

      
     Revenues
     Income
    from
    Operations

     Net
    Income

     Net
    Income
    Attributable
    to
    Common
    Stock

     
           


     (In millions, except per share amounts)
      
     (In millions)
     
     (In millions, except per share amounts)
      
     (In millions)
     
    Quarter EndedQuarter Ended                 Quarter Ended         

    Quarter Ended

                 Quarter Ended         
    March 31 $4,303.4 $(212.1)$(56.3)$93.5 $(119.7)$(123.5)$(0.62)$(0.62)    March 31 $1,193.7 $168.7 $85.0 $81.7 

    March 31

     $3,586.6 $415.1 $191.3 $191.5 $0.95 $0.95     March 31 $1,069.3 $136.9 $64.4 $61.1 
    June 30 3,864.1 230.6 (15.0) 84.5 28.3 8.1 0.04 0.04     June 30 767.4 54.3 16.0 12.7 

    June 30

     3,309.9 181.9 83.8 72.6 0.36 0.36     June 30 751.5 55.9 17.0 13.7 
    September 30 4,027.7 534.3 11.6 80.1 167.4 137.6 0.69 0.69     September 30 866.5 78.7 32.3 28.6 

    September 30

     3,968.9 (2,246.7) (1,375.0) (1,406.5) (6.99) (6.99)    September 30 856.1 75.6 31.8 28.5 
    December 31 3,403.6 7,428.2 (81.0) 92.0 4,427.4 4,421.2 21.96 21.96     December 31 751.4 (33.3) (42.6) (38.2)

    December 31

     3,474.6 406.7 168.1 159.8 0.79 0.79     December 31 784.8 85.8 34.4 31.1 
           
    Year EndedYear Ended                 Year Ended         

    Year Ended

                 Year Ended         
    December 31 $15,598.8 $7,981.0 $(140.7)$350.1 $4,503.4 $4,443.4 $22.19 $22.19     December 31 $3,579.0 $268.4 $90.7 $84.8 

    December 31

     $14,340.0 $(1,243.0)$(931.8)$(982.6)$(4.90)$(4.90)    December 31 $3,461.7 $354.2 $147.6 $134.4 
           

    The sum of the quarterly earnings per share amounts may not equal the total for the year due to the effects of rounding and dilution.

    First quarter results include:

    Second quarter results include:

    Third quarter results include:

    Fourth quarter results include:

            We discuss these items inNote 2.


    160


    Table of Contents

    2009 Quarterly Data—Constellation Energy
     2009 Quarterly Data—BGE
     
     
     Revenues
     Income
    (Loss)
    from
    Operations

     Net
    Income
    (Loss)

     Net
    Income
    Attributable
    to
    Common
    Stock

     Earnings (Loss)
    Per Share
    from
    Operations—
    Diluted

     Earnings (Loss)
    Per Share
    of Common
    Stock—
    Diluted

      
     Revenues
     Income
    (Loss)
    from
    Operations

     Net
    Income

     Net
    Income
    Attributable
    to
    Common
    Stock

     
        
     
     (In millions, except per share amounts)
      
     (In millions)
     
    Quarter Ended                   Quarter Ended             
     March 31 $4,303.4 $(212.1)$(119.7)$(123.5)$(0.62)$(0.62)    March 31 $1,193.7 $168.7 $85.0 $81.7 
     June 30  3,864.1  230.6  28.3  8.1  0.04  0.04     June 30  767.4  54.3  16.0  12.7 
     September 30  4,027.7  534.3  167.4  137.6  0.69  0.69     September 30  866.5  78.7  32.3  28.6 
     December 31  3,403.6  7,428.2  4,427.4  4,421.2  21.96  21.96     December 31  751.4  (33.3) (42.6) (38.2)
        
    Year Ended                   Year Ended             
     December 31 $15,598.8 $7,981.0 $4,503.4 $4,443.4 $22.19 $22.19     December 31 $3,579.0 $268.4 $90.7 $84.8 
        

    The sum of the quarterly earnings per share amounts may not equal the total for the year due to the effects of rounding and dilution.

    First quarter results include:

      a $184.2 million after-tax loss on the sale of a majority of our international commodities operation, the reclassification of losses on previously designated cash-flow hedges from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss, and earnings that are no longer part of our core business,
      a $5.1 million after-tax charge for the impairment of our investment in CEP LLC,
      a $23.8 million after-tax charge for the impairment of certain of our nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments,
      a $6.0 million after-tax charge for certain long-lived assets that ceased to be used in connection with the divestiture of a majority of our international commodities operation and our Houston-based gas trading operation,
      merger termination and strategic alternatives costs totaling $42.3 million after-tax,
      workforce reduction costs totaling $4.2 million after-tax, and
      a $3.7 million after-tax amortization of credit facility amendment fees in connection with the EDF transaction.

    Second quarter results include:

      a $123.8 million after-tax loss on the sale of a majority of our international commodities operation, our Houston-based gas trading operation, certain other trading operations, and a uranium market participant, the reclassification of losses on previously designated cash-flow hedges from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss, and earnings that are no longer part of our core business,
      a $59.0 million after-tax charge for the impairment of our shipping joint venture,
      a $6.1 million after-tax charge for the impairment of certain of our nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments,
      a $4.9 million after-tax charge for certain long-lived assets that ceased to be used in connections with the divestiture of a majority of our international commodities operation and our Houston-based gas trading operation as well as the write-off of an uncollectible advance to an affiliate,
      a $1.5 million after-tax charge for the impairment of our investment in CEP LLC,
      merger termination and strategic alternatives costs totaling $4.0 million after-tax,
      workforce reduction costs totaling $1.1 million after-tax, and
      a $5.2 million after-tax amortization of credit facility amendment fees in connection with the EDF transaction.

    Third quarter results include:

      a $62.9 million after-tax loss on the sale of a majority of our international commodities operation, our Houston-based gas trading operation, certain other trading operations, and a uranium market participant, the reclassification of losses on previously designated cash-flow hedges from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss, and earnings that are no longer part of our core business,

    Table of Contents

      a $19.7 million after-tax charge for the impairment of certain of our nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments (primarily due to income tax adjustments),
      a $9.0 million after-tax charge for certain long-lived assets that ceased to be used in connection with the divestiture of a majority of our international commodities operation and our Houston-based gas trading operation,
      merger termination and strategic alternatives costs totaling $4.9 million after-tax,
      workforce reduction costs totaling $1.6 million after-tax, and
      a $8.2 million after-tax amortization of credit facility amendment fees in connection with the EDF transaction.

    Fourth quarter results include:

      a $4,456.1 million after-tax gain on sale of a 49.99% membership interest in CENG to EDF,
      a $17.8 million after-tax charge for amortization of the basis difference in CENG,


    161


    Table of Contents

      a $1.0 million after-tax loss on the sale of a majority of our international commodities operation, our Houston-based gas trading operation, certain other trading operations, and a uranium market participant, the reclassification of losses on previously designated cash-flow hedges from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss, and earnings that are no longer part of our core business,
      a $3.6 million after-tax charge for certain long-lived assets that ceased to be used in connections with the divestiture of a majority of our international commodities operation and our Houston-based gas trading operation,
      a $7.1 million after-tax charge for the impairment of BGE's nonregulated subsidiary, District Chilled Water, net of noncontrolling interest,
      a $2.8 million after-tax benefit for the impairment of certain of our nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments (primarily due to income tax adjustments),
      a $10.0 million after-tax loss on redemption of our zero coupon senior notes,
      a $67.1 million after-tax charge for a BGE customer rate credit,
      merger termination and strategic alternatives costs benefit totaling $37.4 million after-tax due to a true-up for 2008 and 2009 expenses that became tax deductible upon the close of the transaction with EDF on November 6, 2009,
      workforce reduction costs totaling $2.4 million after-tax, and
      a $20.6 million after-tax credit facility amendment and termination fees in connection with the EDF transaction.

            We discuss these items inNote 2.


    162


    2008 Quarterly Data—Constellation Energy
     2008 Quarterly Data—BGE
     
     
     Revenues
     Income
    (Loss)
    from
    Operations

     Net
    Income
    (Loss)

     Net Income
    (Loss)
    Attributable
    to
    Common
    Stock

     Earnings (Loss)
    Per Share
    from
    Operations—
    Diluted

     Earnings (Loss)
    Per Share
    of Common
    Stock—
    Diluted

      
     Revenues
     Income
    (Loss)
    from
    Operations

     Net
    Income

     Net Income
    (Loss)
    Applicable
    to
    Common
    Stock

     
        
     
     (In millions, except per share amounts)
      
     (In millions)
     
    Quarter Ended                   Quarter Ended             
     March 31 $4,812.2 $254.3 $149.4 $145.7 $0.81 $0.81     March 31 $1,105.8 $137.7 $76.2 $73.0 
     June 30  4,756.1  331.7  175.0  171.5  0.95  0.95     June 30  636.8  (131.1) (104.2) (107.4)
     September 30  5,323.6  (228.4) (222.1) (225.7) (1.27) (1.27)    September 30  977.9  69.6  23.5  19.9 
     December 31  4,850.0  (1,335.7) (1,420.7) (1,405.9) (7.75) (7.75)    December 31  983.2  106.3  56.0  52.8 
        
    Year Ended                   Year Ended             
     December 31 $19,741.9 $(978.1)$(1,318.4)$(1,314.4)$(7.34)$(7.34)    December 31 $3,703.7 $182.5 $51.5 $38.3 
        

    The sum of the quarterly earnings per share amounts may not equal the total for the year due to the effects of rounding and dilution as a result of issuing common shares during the year.

    First quarter results include:

      a $3.9 million after-tax charge for the impairment of certain of our nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments,
      a $6.6 million tax benefit related to the anticipated finalization of the Maryland settlement agreement, and
      a $9.1 million after-tax gain on the sale of certain working interests in an upstream gas property.

    Second quarter results include:

      a $2.4 million after-tax charge for the impairment of certain of our nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments,
      a $13.4 million after-tax charge related to the write-down of our emission allowance inventory,
      a $125.3 million after-tax charge related to the one-time $170 residential electric customer credit related to the Maryland settlement agreement,
      a $2.1 million tax benefit related to the Maryland settlement agreement, and
      a $46.2 million after-tax gain on the sale of certain working interests in upstream gas properties.

    Table of Contents

    Third quarter results include:

      a $169.1 million after-tax charge for the impairment of goodwill,
      a $86.6 million after-tax charge for the impairments of certain of our upstream gas properties,
      a $34.2 million after-tax charge for the impairment of our investment in CEP LLC,
      a $22.8 million after-tax charge related to the write-down of our emission allowance inventory,
      a $15.3 million after-tax charge for the impairment of certain of our nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments,
      a $18.9 million after-tax gain on the sale of a dry bulk vessel in our shipping joint venture,
      merger and strategic alternatives costs totaling $37.3 million after-tax, of which BGE recorded $10.6 million after-tax,
      estimated settlement costs totaling $8.9 million after-tax related to a class action complaint alleging ash placement at a third party site damaged surrounding properties,
      workforce reduction costs totaling $1.6 million after-tax related to our Customer Supply operations, and
      a $2.0 million tax benefit related to the Maryland settlement agreement.

    Fourth quarter results include:

      a $119.8 million after-tax charge for the impairments of certain of our upstream gas properties,
      a $50.6 million loss after-tax for an impairment of our investment in CEP LLC and a marketable security held by our Global Commodities operations,
      a $7.5 million after-tax gain related to the recovery in the value of our emission allowance inventory,
      a $60.4 million after-tax charge for the impairment of certain of our nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments,
      a $39.3 million after-tax loss on the sale of certain upstream gas properties,
      merger termination and strategic alternatives costs totaling $1,167.1 million after-tax, of which BGE recorded a cost reduction of $10.6 million after-tax associated with the re-allocation of costs prior to EDF transaction to our merchant energy segment,
      workforce reduction costs totaling $11.8 million after-tax related to our company-wide reduction in force,
      a $0.6 after-tax benefit for an adjustment to the estimated settlement costs relating to the class action ash placement complaint,
      a $2.1 million after-tax charge for an adjustment to the impairment of goodwill,
      a $1.2 million loss after-tax related to a final true-up of the one-time $170 residential electric customer credit related to the Maryland settlement agreement, and
      a $5.3 million tax benefit related to the Maryland settlement agreement.

            We discuss these items inNote 2.


    Table of Contents



    Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure

    None.


    Items 9A and 9A(T).
    Item 9A. Controls and Procedures

    Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

    The principal executive officer and principal financial officer of Constellation Energy have each evaluated the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures (as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act")) as of December 31, 20092010 (the "Evaluation Date"). Based on such evaluation, such officers have concluded that, as of the Evaluation Date, Constellation Energy's disclosure controls and procedures are effective in providing reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed in the reports that Constellation Energy files and submits under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported when required and is accumulated and communicated to management, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

            The principal executive officer and principal financial officer of BGE have each evaluated the effectiveness of BGE's disclosure controls and procedures as of the Evaluation Date. Based on such evaluation, such officers have concluded that, as of the Evaluation Date, BGE's disclosure controls and procedures are effective in providing reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed in the reports that BGE files and submits under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported when required and is accumulated and communicated to management, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

    Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

    Each of Constellation Energy and BGE maintains a system of internal control over financial reporting as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f). The Management's Reports on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting of each of Constellation Energy and BGE are included inItem 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data included in this report. As BGE is not an accelerated filer as defined in Exchange Act Rule 12b-2, its Management's Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting is not deemed to be filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act as permitted by the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission.

    Changes in Internal Control

    During the quarter ended December 31, 2009,2010, there has been no change in either Constellation Energy's or BGE's internal control over financial reporting (as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, either Constellation Energy's or BGE's internal control over financial reporting.



    Item 9B. Other Information

    None.


    PART III

    BGE meets the conditions set forth in General Instruction I(1)(a) and (b) of Form 10-K for a reduced disclosure format. Accordingly, all items in this section related to BGE are not presented.


    Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance

    The information required by this item with respect to directors and corporate governance will be set forth underProposal No. 1: Election of Directors in the Proxy Statement and incorporated herein by reference.

            The information required by this item with respect to executive officers of Constellation Energy, pursuant to instruction 3 of paragraph (b) of Item 401 of Regulation S-K, is set forth followingItem 4 of Part Iof this Form 10-K underExecutive Officers of the Registrant.


    Item 11. Executive Compensation

    The information required by this item will be set forth underExecutive and Director Compensation andReport of Compensation Committee in the Proxy Statement and incorporated herein by reference.


    163


    Table of Contents



    Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Shareholder Matters

    The additional information required by this item will be set forth underStock Ownership in the Proxy Statement and incorporated herein by reference.

    Equity Compensation Plan Information

    The following table reflects our equity compensation plan information as of December 31, 2009:2010:


     (a)
      
     (c)
     

     Number of securities
    to be issued upon
    exercise of
    outstanding options,
    warrants, and rights

     (b)
     Number of securities remaining
    available for future issuance
    under equity compensation
    plans (excluding securities
    reflected in item (a))

      (a)
     (b)
     (c)
     
    Plan Category
     Weighted-average
    exercise price of
    outstanding options,
    warrants, and rights

      Number of securities
    to be issued upon
    exercise of
    outstanding options,
    warrants, and rights

     Weighted-average
    exercise price of
    outstanding options,
    warrants, and rights

     Number of securities remaining
    available for future issuance
    under equity compensation
    plans (excluding securities
    reflected in item (a))

     
       

     (In thousands)
      
     (In thousands)
      (In thousands)
      
     (In thousands)
     

    Equity compensation plans approved by security holders

     7,432 $44.52 5,791  8,451 $43.44 12,818 

    Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders

     714 $42.63   619 $43.20  
       

    Total

     8,146 $44.36 5,791  9,070 $43.43 12,818 
       

    The plans that do not require shareholder approval are the Constellation Energy Group, Inc. 2002 Senior Management Long-Term Incentive Plan (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(k)10(j)) and the Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Management Long-Term Incentive Plan (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(l)10(k)). A brief description of the material features of each of these plans is set forth below.

    2002 Senior Management Long-Term Incentive Plan

    The 2002 Senior Management Long-Term Incentive Plan became effective May 24, 2002 and authorized the issuance of up to 4,000,000 shares of Constellation Energy common stock in connection with the grant of equity awards. No further awards will be made under this plan. Any shares covered by an outstanding award that is forfeited or cancelled, expires or is settled in cash will become available for issuance under the shareholder-approved Amended and Restated 2007 Long-Term Incentive Plan. Shares delivered pursuant to awards under this plan may be authorized and unissued shares or shares purchased on the open market in accordance with the applicable securities laws. Restricted stock, restricted stock unit, and performance unit award payouts will be accelerated and stock options and stock appreciation rights gains will be paid in cash in the event of a change in control, as defined in the plan. The plan is administered by Constellation Energy's Chief Executive Officer.

    Management Long-Term Incentive Plan

    The Management Long-Term Incentive Plan became effective February 1, 1998 and authorized the issuance of up to 3,000,000 shares of Constellation Energy common stock in connection with the grant of equity awards. No further awards will be made under this plan. Any shares covered by an outstanding award that is forfeited or cancelled, expires or is settled in cash will become available for issuance under the shareholder-approved Amended and Restated 2007 Long-Term Incentive Plan. Shares delivered pursuant to awards under the plan may be authorized and unissued shares or shares purchased on the open market in accordance with applicable securities laws. Restricted stock, restricted stock units, and performance unit award payouts will be accelerated and stock options and stock appreciation rights will become fully exercisable in the event of a change in control, as defined by the plan. The plan is administered by Constellation Energy's Chief Executive Officer.


    Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence

    The additional information required by this item will be set forth underRelated Persons Transactions andDetermination of Independence in the Proxy Statement and incorporated herein by reference.


    Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services

    The information required by this item will be set forth underRatification of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm for 20102011 in the Proxy Statement and incorporated herein by reference.


    164


    Table of Contents


    PART IV

    Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules

     

     

    (a) The following documents are filed as a part of this Report:

     

    1.

     

    Financial Statements:

     

     

    Reports of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm dated February 26, 2010March 1, 2011 of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

     

     

    Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss)—Constellation Energy Group for three years ended December 31, 20092010

     

     

    Consolidated Balance Sheets—Constellation Energy Group at December 31, 20092010 and December 31, 20082009

     

     

    Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows—Constellation Energy Group for three years ended December 31, 20092010

     

     

    Consolidated Statements of Common Shareholders' Equity and Comprehensive Income (Loss)—Constellation Energy Group for three years ended December 31, 20092010

     

     

    Consolidated Statements of Income—Baltimore Gas and Electric Company for three years ended December 31, 20092010

     

     

    Consolidated Balance Sheets—Baltimore Gas and Electric Company at December 31, 20092010 and December 31, 20082009

     

     

    Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows—Baltimore Gas and Electric Company for three years ended December 31, 20092010

     

     

    Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

     

    2.

     

    Financial Statement Schedules:

     

     

    Schedule II—Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

     

     

    Schedules other than Schedule II are omitted as not applicable or not required.

     

    3.

     

    Exhibits Required by Item 601 of Regulation S-K.

     

    Exhibit
    Number
      
      
    *2Agreement and Plan of Share Exchange between Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Constellation Energy Group, Inc. dated as of February 19, 1999. (Designated as Exhibit No. 2 to the Registration Statement on Form S-4 dated March 3, 1999, File No. 33-64799.)
     *2(a) Agreement and Plan of Reorganization and Corporate Separation (Nuclear). (Designated as Exhibit No. 2(a) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 7, 2000, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
     *2(b) Agreement and Plan of Reorganization and Corporate Separation (Fossil). (Designated as Exhibit No. 2(b) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 7, 2000, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
     *2(c) TerminationAsset Purchase Agreement, dated December 17, 2008,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., Constellation Generation II, LLC, Constellation Power Source Generation, Inc., MidAmerican Energy Holdings Company, MEHC Merger Sub Inc., MEHC Investment, Inc. and Electricite de France International S.A. (Designated as Exhibit No. 2.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 17, 2008,August 11, 2010, File No. 1-12869.)
     *2(d) Master Put Option and Membership Interest Purchase Agreement, dated as of December 17, 2008,October 26, 2010, by and amongbetween Electricite de France, S.A. and Constellation Energy Group, Inc., EDF Development, Inc. and Electricite de France International, S.A. (Designated as Exhibit No. 21 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 17, 2008, File No. 1-12869.)
    *2(e)Amendment No. 1 to the Master Put Option and Membership Interest Purchase Agreement. (Designated as Exhibit No. 2.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated September 16, 2009, File No. 1-12869.)
    *2(f)Amendment No. 2 to the Master Put Option and Membership Interest Purchase Agreement. (Designated as Exhibit No. 2.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated September 22, 2009, File No. 1-12869.)
    *2(g)Amendment No. 3 to the Master Put Option and Membership Interest Purchase Agreement. (Designated as Exhibit No. 2.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 30, 2009, File No. 1-12869.)

    Table of Contents

    *2(h)Amendment No. 4 to the Master Put Option and Membership Interest Purchase Agreement. (Designated as Exhibit No. 2.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 12, 2009,1, 2010, File No. 1-12869.)
    *2(e)Put Termination Agreement dated as of November 3, 2010, by and among EDF Inc. (formerly known as EDF Development, Inc.), E.D.F. International S.A., Constellation Nuclear, LLC, and Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC. (Designated as Exhibit No. 2.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 8, 2010, File No. 1-12869.)
     *3(a) Articles Supplementary to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of December 17, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 17, 2008, File No. 1-12869.)
     *3(b) Correction to Articles Supplementary to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of November 25, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3(c) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
     *3(c) Articles Supplementary to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of September 19, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated September 19, 2008, File No. 1-12869.)


    165


    Table of Contents

    Exhibit
    Number


     *3(d) Articles of Amendment to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of July 21, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3(a) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q dated June 30, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
     *3(e) Articles Supplementary to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of April 10, 2007. (Designated as Exhibit 3(a) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 10, 2007, File No. 1-12869.)
     *3(f) Articles Supplementary to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of November 20, 2001. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3(e) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
     *3(g) Certificate of Correction to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of September 13, 1999. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3(c) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1999, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
     *3(h) Articles Supplementary to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc., as of July 19, 1999. (Designated as Exhibit No. 99.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 19, 1999, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
     *3(i) Articles of AmendmentAmended and RestatementRestated Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of April 30, 1999. (Designated as Appendix B to Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 to the Registration Statement on Form S-4 filed March 3, 1999, File No. 33-64799.)
     *3(j) Bylaws of Constellation Energy Group, Inc., as amended to July 18, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 18, 2008, File No. 1-12869.)
     *3(k) Articles of Amendment to the Charter of BGE as of February 2, 2010. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2010, File No. 1-1910.)
     *3(l) Charter of BGE, restated as of August 16, 1996. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 1996, File No. 1-1910.)
     *3(m) Bylaws of BGE, as amended to February 4, 2010. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3.2 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2010, File No. 1-1910.)
     *4(a) Indenture between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and the Bank of New York, Trustee dated as of March 24, 1999. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(a) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated March 29, 1999, File No. 333-75217.)
     *4(b) First Supplemental Indenture between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and the Bank of New York, Trustee dated as of January 24, 2003. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(b) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated January 24, 2003, File No. 333-102723.)
     *4(c) Indenture dated as of July 24, 2006 between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(a) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 filed July 24, 2006, File No. 333-135991.)
     *4(d) First Supplemental Indenture between 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, File No. 1-12869.)

    Table of Contents

     *4(e) 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, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
     *4(f) Indenture dated July 1, 1985, between BGE 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, File No. 2-98443); as supplemented by Supplemental Indentures dated as of October 1, 1987 (Designated as Exhibit 4(a) to the Current Report on Form 8-K, dated November 13, 1987, File No. 1-1910) and as of January 26, 1993 (Designated as Exhibit 4(b) to the Current Report on Form 8-K, dated January 29, 1993, File No. 1-1910.)
     *4(g) Form of Subordinated Indenture between BGE and The Bank of New York, as Trustee in connection with the issuance of the Junior Subordinated Debentures. (Designated as Exhibit 4(d) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated August 5, 2003, File No. 333-107681.)


    166


    Table of Contents

    Exhibit
    Number


     *4(h) Form of Supplemental Indenture between BGE and The Bank of New York, as Trustee in connection with the issuance of the Junior Subordinated Debentures. (Designated as Exhibit 4(e) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated August 5, 2003, File No. 333-107681.)
     *4(i) Form of Preferred Securities Guarantee (Designated as Exhibit 4(f) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated August 5, 2003, File No. 333-107681.)
     *4(j) Form of Junior Subordinated Debenture (Designated as Exhibit 4(e) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated August 5, 2003, File No. 333-107681.)
     *4(k) Form of Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust (including Form of Preferred Security) (Designated as Exhibit 4(c) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated August 5, 2003, File No. 333-107681.)
     *4(l) Indenture dated as of July 24, 2006 between BGE and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee. (Designated as Exhibit 4(b) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 filed July 24, 2006, File No. 333-135991.)
     *4(m) First Supplemental Indenture between BGE and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee, dated as of October 13, 2006. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(a) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
     *4(n) Indenture and Security Agreement dated as of July 9, 2009, between BGE and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee (including form of BGE Officer's Certificate and form of Senior Secured Bond) (Designated as Exhibit Nos. 4(u) and 4(u)(1) to Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated July 9, 2009, File Nos. 333-157637 and 333-157637-01.)
     *4(o) Supplemental Indenture No. 1, dated as of October 1, 2009, to the Indenture and Security Agreement dated as of July 9, 2009, between BGE and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(c) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
     *4(p) BGE Deed of Easement and Right-of-Way Grant dated as of July 9, 2009 (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(u)(2) to Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated July 9, 2009, File Nos. 333-157637 and 333-157637-01.)
     *4(q) Indenture dated as of June 29, 2007, by and between RSB BondCo LLC and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as Trustee and Securities Intermediary. (Designated as Exhibit 4.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 5, 2007, File No. 1-1910.)
     *4(r) Series Supplement to Indenture dated as of June 29, 2007 by and between RSB BondCo LLC and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as Trustee and Securities Intermediary (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(b) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, File No. 1-1910.)
     *4(s) Replacement Capital Covenant dated June 27, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(b) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 30, 2008, File No. 1-12869.)
     *4(t)Officers' Certificate, dated December 14, 2010, establishing the 5.15% Notes due December 1, 2020 of Constellation Energy Group, Inc., with the form of Notes attached thereto. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(b) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 14, 2010, File No. 1-12869.)
    +*10(a) Executive Annual Incentive Plan of Constellation Energy Group, Inc., as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(d) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

    Table of Contents

     +*10(b) Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(b) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
     *10(c) Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan for Non-Employee Directors, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(c) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


    167


    Table of Contents

    Exhibit
    Number


     +*10(d) Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Benefits Restoration Plan, as amended and restated.restated effective June 1, 2010. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(d)10(b) to the AnnualQuarterly Report on Form 10-K10-Q for the yearquarter ended December 31, 2008,June 30, 2010, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
     +*10(e) Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Supplemental Pension Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(e) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
     +*10(f) Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Senior Executive Supplemental Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(f) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
     +*10(g) Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Executive Supplemental Benefits Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(a) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
     +*10(h) Constellation Energy Group, Inc. 1995 Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(b) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
     +*10(i) Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Executive Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit 10(b) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
     +*10(j) Constellation Energy Group, Inc. 2002 Executive Annual Incentive Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit 10(o) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
    +*10(k)Constellation Energy Group, Inc. 2002 Senior Management Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit 10(c) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
     +*10(l)(k) Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Management Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit 10(d) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
     +*10(m)(l) Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Amended and Restated 2007 Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit 10(a) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
    *10(n)Grantor Trust Agreement Dated as of February 27, 2004 between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Citibank, N.A.Plan. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(d)10.1 to the QuarterlyCurrent Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended8-K dated June 30, 2004,4, 2010, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
    *10(o)Grantor Trust Agreement dated as of February 27, 2004 between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and T. Rowe Price Trust Company. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(b) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2004, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.1-12869.)
     +*10(p)(m) Consent of Mayo A. Shattuck III to termination of change-in-control agreement. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 10, 2009, File No. 1-12869.)
     +*10(q)(n) Consent of Michael J. Wallace to termination of change-in-control agreement. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10.2 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 10, 2009, File No. 1-12869.)
     +*10(r)(o) Consent of Henry B. Barron, Jr. to termination of change-in-control agreement. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10.3 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 10, 2009, File No. 1-12869.)
     +*10(s)Offer letter between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Henry B. Barron, Jr. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(d) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

    Table of Contents

    +*10(t)Letter agreement between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Jonathan W. Thayer. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(e) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
    +*10(u)Offer letter between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Brenda Boultwood. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(f) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
    *10(v)(p) 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, File No. 1-1910.)
     *10(w)(q) Administration Agreement dated as of June 29, 2007 by and between RSB BondCo LLC and Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, as administrator (Designated as Exhibit 10.3 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 5, 2007, File No. 1-1910.)
     *10(x)(r) 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, File No. 1-12869.)
     *10(y)(s) Payment Guaranty, dated asAmendment No. 1 to the Second Amended and Restated Operating Agreement of December 17, 2008,Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC, by and betweenamong Constellation Nuclear, LLC, CE Nuclear, LLC, EDF Inc. (formerly known as EDF Development, Inc.), and E.D.F. International S.A.
    10(t)Amendment No. 2 to the Second Amended and Restated Operating Agreement of Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC, by and among Constellation Nuclear, LLC, CE Nuclear, LLC, EDF Inc. (formerly known as EDF Development, Inc.), and Electricite de France,E.D.F. International S.A.


    168


    Table of Contents

    Exhibit
    Number


    *10(u)Amendment No. 3 to the Second Amended and Restated Operating Agreement of Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC, by and among Constellation Nuclear, LLC, CE Nuclear, LLC, EDF Inc. (formerly known as EDF Development, Inc.), and E.D.F. International S.A. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10.410.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 17, 2008,November 3, 2010, File No. 1-12869.)
     *10(z)(v) Amended and Restated InvestorCredit Agreement, dated December 17, 2008, by and betweenas of October 15, 2010, among Constellation Energy Group, Inc., Bank of America, N.A., as a letter of credit issuing bank, swingline lender and Electricite de France International, SAadministrative agent, Banc of America Securities LLC, Citigroup Global Markets Inc., RBS Securities Inc., BNP Paribas Securities Corp., and The Bank of Nova Scotia, as joint lead arranger and book runners, Citibank, N.A. and The Royal Bank of Scotland plc, as co-syndication agents and The Bank of Nova Scotia and BNP Paribas, as co-documentation agents and the other lenders named therein. (Designated as Exhibit 10.710.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 17, 2008,October 21, 2010, File No. 1-12869.)
     *10(aa)(w) LetterTermination Agreement dated April 21, 2009as 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., EDF Development Inc. and E.D.F. International S.A. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(i) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
    *10(bb)Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement, dated as of December 17, 2008, among Constellation Energy Group, Inc., the Lenders named therein, Wachovia Bank, National Association, as Administrative Agent, LC Bank, Swingline Lender and Collateral Agent. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10.610.2 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 17, 2008,November 3, 2010, File No. 1-12869.)
     *+10(cc)(x) Amendment No. 1, dated asForm of April 15, 2009, to the Second Amended and Restated CreditGrant Agreement dated as of December 17, 2008, among Constellation Energy Group, Inc., the Lenders named therein, Wachovia Bank, National Association, as Administrative Agent, LC Bank, Swingline Lender and Collateral Agent. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(h) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)Stock Units with Sales Restriction.
     12(a) Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges.
     12(b) Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Subsidiaries Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges and Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Combined Fixed Charges and Preferred and Preference Dividend Requirements.
     21  Subsidiaries of the Registrant.
     23(a) Consent of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm.
    23(b)Consent of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm (for Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC).
     31(a) Certification of Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
     31(b) Certification of Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
     31(c) Certification of President and Chief Executive Officer of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
     31(d) Certification of Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

    Table of Contents

     32(a) Certification of Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
     32(b) Certification of Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
     32(c) Certification of President and Chief Executive Officer of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
     32(d) Certification of Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
     99(a) Audited Financial Statements of Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC.
     *99(b) Operating Agreement, dated as of February 4, 2010, by and among RF HoldCo LLC, Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and GSS Holdings (BGE Utility), Inc. (Designated as Exhibit No. 99.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2010, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


    169


    Table of Contents

    Exhibit
    Number


     *99(c) Contribution Agreement, dated as of February 4, 2010, by and among Constellation Energy Group, Inc., BGE and RF HoldCo LLC. (Designated as Exhibit No. 99.2 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2010, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
     *99(d) Purchase Agreement, dated as of February 4, 2010, by and between RF HoldCo LLC and GSS Holdings (BGE Utility), Inc. (Designated as Exhibit No. 99.3 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2010, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
     101.INS XBRL Instance Document
     101.SCH XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document
     101.PRE XBRL Taxonomy Presentation Linkbase Document
     101.LAB XBRL Taxonomy Label Linkbase Document
     101.CAL XBRL Taxonomy Calculation Linkbase Document
     101.DEF XBRL Taxonomy Definition Linkbase Document
    +
    Management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement.

    *
    Incorporated by Reference.

            In accordance with Rule 402 of Regulation S-T, the XBRL related information in Exhibit 101 to this Annual Report on Form 10-K shall not be deemed to be "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section, and shall not be incorporated by reference into any registration statement or other document filed under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except as shall be expressly set forth by specific reference in such filing.


    170


    Table of Contents

    CONSTELLATION ENERGY GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    AND
    BALTIMORE GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARIES

    SCHEDULE II—VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS

    Column AColumn A Column B Column C Column D Column E Column A Column B Column C Column D Column E 


      
     Additions  
      
     
      
     Additions  
      
     
    Description
    Description
     Balance at
    beginning
    of period
     Charged
    to costs
    and expenses
     Charged to
    Other Accounts—
    Describe
     (Deductions)—
    Describe
     Balance at
    end of
    period
     
    Description
     Balance at
    beginning
    of period
     Charged
    to costs
    and expenses
     Charged to
    Other Accounts—
    Describe
     (Deductions)—
    Describe
     Balance at
    end of
    period
     


     (In millions)
     
     (In millions)
     

    Reserves deducted in the Balance Sheet from the assets to which they apply:

    Reserves deducted in the Balance Sheet from the assets to which they apply:

     

    Reserves deducted in the Balance Sheet from the assets to which they apply:

     

    Constellation Energy

    Constellation Energy

     

    Constellation Energy

     

    Accumulated Provision for Uncollectibles

     

    Accumulated Provision for Uncollectibles

     
     

    2009

     $240.6 $71.2 $(5.0)(A)$(146.2)(C)$160.6  

    2010

     $160.6 $76.2 $27.6 (B)$(91.5)(C)$172.9 
     

    2008

     44.9 127.1 102.3 (B) (33.7)(C) 240.6  

    2009

     240.6 71.2 (5.0)(A) (146.2)(C) 160.6 
     

    2007

     48.9 31.3  (35.3)(C) 44.9  

    2008

     44.9 127.1 102.3 (B) (33.7)(C) 240.6 

    Valuation Allowance

     

    Valuation Allowance

     
     

    Net unrealized (gain) loss on available for sale securities

      

    Net unrealized (gain) loss on available for sale securities

     
     

    2009

     2.1 (3.6) (1.3)(D)  (2.8) 

    2010

     (2.8)  (0.1)(D)  (2.9)
     

    2008

     (17.3) 7.0 0.3 (D) 12.1 (E) 2.1  

    2009

     2.1 (3.6) (1.3)(D)  (2.8)
     

    2007

     (18.5)  1.2 (D)  (17.3) 

    2008

     (17.3) 7.0 0.3 (D) 12.1 (E) 2.1 
     

    Net unrealized (gain) loss on nuclear decommissioning trust funds

      

    Net unrealized (gain) loss on nuclear decommissioning trust funds

     
     

    2009

     (49.6)  (201.0)(D) 250.6 (F)   

    2010

          
     

    2008

     (256.7)  207.1 (D)  (49.6) 

    2009

     (49.6)  (201.0)(D) 250.6 (F)  
     

    2007

     (206.1)  (50.6)(D)  (256.7) 

    2008

     (256.7)  207.1 (D)  (49.6)

    BGE

    BGE

     

    BGE

     

    Accumulated Provision for Uncollectibles

     

    Accumulated Provision for Uncollectibles

     
     

    2009

     34.2 41.8  (28.8)(C) 47.2  

    2010

     47.2 45.6  (56.9)(C) 35.9 
     

    2008

     21.1 34.5  (21.4)(C) 34.2  

    2009

     34.2 41.8  (28.8)(C) 47.2 
     

    2007

     16.1 21.0  (16.0)(C) 21.1  

    2008

     21.1 34.5  (21.4)(C) 34.2 
    (A)
    Represents amounts recorded as an increase to nonregulated revenues resulting from a settlement with a counterparty that was in default.

    (B)
    Represents amounts recorded as a reduction to nonregulated revenues resulting from liquidated damages claims upon termination of derivatives or other contracts which were determined to be uncollectible.

    (C)
    Represents principally net amounts charged off as uncollectible.

    (D)
    Represents amounts recorded in or reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income.loss.

    (E)
    Represents sale of a marketable security.

    (F)
    Represents decrease due to the deconsolidation of CENG.


    171


    Table of Contents


    SIGNATURES

    Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Constellation Energy Group, Inc., the Registrant, has duly caused this Report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

        CONSTELLATION ENERGY GROUP, INC.
    (REGISTRANT)
      
      
    Date: February 26, 2010March 1, 2011

     

    By

     

    /s/

     

    MAYO A. SHATTUCK III

     

     
        
    Mayo A. Shattuck III
    Chairman of the Board, President and
    Chief Executive Officer

    Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this Report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of Constellation Energy Group, Inc., the Registrant, and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

    Signature
     
    Title
     
    Date

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     
    Principal executive officer and director:    

    By

     

    /s/

     

    M. A. Shattuck III

     

    Chairman of the Board,
    President, Chief Executive
    Officer, and Director

     

    February 26, 2010March 1, 2011
     
     
    M. A. Shattuck III
      
      

    Principal financial officer:

     

     

    By

     

    /s/

     

    J. W. Thayer

     

    Senior Vice President and
    Chief Financial Officer

     

    February 26, 2010March 1, 2011
     
     
    J. W. Thayer
      
      

    Principal accounting officer:

     

     

    By

     

    /s/

     

    B. P. Wright

     

    Vice President, Chief
    Accounting Officer, and
    Controller

     

    February 26, 2010March 1, 2011
     
     
    B. P. Wright
      
      

    Directors:

     

     

    /s/

     

    Y. C. de Balmann

     

    Director

     

    February 26, 2010March 1, 2011

     
        
        Y. C. de Balmann    

    /s/

     

    A. C Berzin

     

    Director

     

    February 26, 2010March 1, 2011

     
        
        A. C. Berzin    

    /s/

     

    J. T. Brady

     

    Director

     

    February 26, 2010March 1, 2011

     
        
        J. T. Brady    

    /s/

     

    J. R. Curtiss

     

    Director

     

    February 26, 2010March 1, 2011

     
        
        J. R. Curtiss    

    /s/

     

    F. A. Hrabowski, III

     

    Director

     

    February 26, 2010March 1, 2011

     
        
        F. A. Hrabowski, III    


    172


    Table of Contents

    Signature
     
    Title
     
    Date

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    /s/

     

    N. Lampton

     

    Director

     

    February 26, 2010March 1, 2011

     
        
        N. Lampton    

    /s/

     

    R. J. Lawless

     

    Director

     

    February 26, 2010March 1, 2011

     
        
        R. J. Lawless    

    /s/

     

    J. L. Skolds

     

    Director

     

    February 26, 2010March 1, 2011

     
        
        J. L. Skolds    

    /s/

     

    M. D. Sullivan

     

    Director

     

    February 26, 2010March 1, 2011

     
        
        M. D. Sullivan    


    173


    Table of Contents

    Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, the Registrant, has duly caused this Report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

      BALTIMORE GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY
    (REGISTRANT)
      
      
    February 26, 2010March 1, 2011

     

    By

     

    /s/

     

    KENNETH W. DEFONTES, JR.

     

     
        
    Kenneth W. DeFontes, Jr.
    President and Chief Executive Officer

    Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this Report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, the Registrant, and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

    Signature
     
    Title
     
    Date

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     
    Principal executive officer and director:    

    By

     

    /s/

     

    K. W. DeFontes, Jr.

     

    President, Chief Executive
    Officer, and Director

     

    February 26, 2010March 1, 2011
     
     
    K. W. DeFontes, Jr.
      
      

    Principal financial and accounting officer:

     

     

     

     

    By

     

    /s/

     

    K. W. HadlockC.V. Khouzami

     

    Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer

     

    February 26, 2010March 1, 2011
     
     
    K. W. HadlockC. V. Khouzami
      
      

    Directors:

     

     

     

     

    /s/

     

    M. D. Sullivan

     

    Chairman of the Board of Directors

     

    February 26, 2010March 1, 2011


    M. D. Sullivan
      
      

    /s/

     

    T. F. Brady

     

    Director

     

    February 26, 2010March 1, 2011

     
        
        T. F. Brady    

    /s/

     

    J. Haskins, Jr.

     

    Director

     

    February 26, 2010March 1, 2011

     
        
        J. Haskins, Jr.    

    /s/

     

    C. D. Hayden

     

    Director

     

    February 26, 2010March 1, 2011

     
        
        C. D. Hayden    

    /s/

     

    M. A. Shattuck III

     

    Director

     

    February 26, 2010March 1, 2011

     
        
        M. A. Shattuck III    

    /s/


    M. J. Wallace


    Director


    March 1, 2011

    M. J. Wallace


    174


    Table of Contents


    EXHIBIT INDEX

    Exhibit
    Number
      
      
     *2(a) Agreement and Plan of Share Exchange between Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Constellation Energy Group, Inc. dated as of February 19, 1999. (Designated as Exhibit No. 2 to the Registration Statement on Form S-4 dated March 3, 1999, File No. 33-64799.)


    *2

    (a)



    Agreement and Plan of Reorganization and Corporate Separation (Nuclear). (Designated as Exhibit No. 2(a) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 7, 2000, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

     

    *2

    (b)


     

    Agreement and Plan of Reorganization and Corporate Separation (Fossil). (Designated as Exhibit No. 2(b) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 7, 2000, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

     

    *2

    (c)


     

    TerminationAsset Purchase Agreement, dated December 17, 2008,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., Constellation Generation II, LLC, Constellation Power Source Generation, Inc., MidAmerican Energy Holdings Company, MEHC Merger Sub Inc., MEHC Investment, Inc. and Electricite de France International S.A. (Designated as Exhibit No. 2.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 17, 2008,August 11, 2010, File No. 1-12869.)

     

    *2

    (d)


     

    Master Put Option and Membership Interest Purchase Agreement, dated as of December 17, 2008,October 26, 2010, by and amongbetween Electricite de France, S.A. and Constellation Energy Group, Inc., EDF Development, Inc. and Electricite de France International,  S.A. (Designated as Exhibit No. 212.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 17, 2008,November 1, 2010, File No. 1-12869.)

     

    *2

    (e)


     

    Amendment No. 1 to the Master Put OptionTermination Agreement dated as of November 3, 2010, by and Membership Interest Purchase Agreement. (Designatedamong EDF Inc. (formerly known as Exhibit No. 2.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated September 16, 2009, File No. 1-12869.EDF Development, Inc.)


    *2

    (f)



    Amendment No. 2 to the Master Put Option, E.D.F. International S.A., Constellation Nuclear, LLC, and Membership Interest Purchase Agreement. (Designated as Exhibit No. 2.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated September 22, 2009, File No. 1-12869.)


    *2

    (g)



    Amendment No. 3 to the Master Put Option and Membership Interest Purchase Agreement. (Designated as Exhibit No. 2.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 30, 2009, File No. 1-12869.)


    *2

    (h)



    Amendment No. 4 to the Master Put Option and Membership Interest Purchase Agreement.Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC. (Designated as Exhibit No. 2.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 12, 2009,8, 2010, File No. 1-12869.)

     

    *3

    (a)


     

    Articles Supplementary to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of December 17, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 17, 2008, File No. 1-12869.)

     

    *3

    (b)


     

    Correction to Articles Supplementary to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of November 25, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3(c) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

     

    *3

    (c)


     

    Articles Supplementary to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of September 19, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated September 19, 2008, File No. 1-12869.)

     

    *3

    (d)


     

    Articles of Amendment to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of July 21, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3(a) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q dated June 30, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

     

    *3

    (e)


     

    Articles Supplementary to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of April 10, 2007. (Designated as Exhibit 3(a) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 10, 2007, File No. 1-12869.)

     

    *3

    (f)


     

    Articles Supplementary to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of November 20, 2001. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3(e) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

    Table of Contents



    *3
    *3
    (g)


     

    Certificate of Correction to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of September 13, 1999. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3(c) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1999, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

     

    *3

    (h)


     

    Articles Supplementary to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc., as of July 19, 1999. (Designated as Exhibit No. 99.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 19, 1999, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

     

    *3

    (i)


     

    Articles of AmendmentAmended and RestatementRestated Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of April 30, 1999. (Designated as Appendix B to Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 to the Registration Statement on Form S-4 filed March 3, 1999, File No. 33-64799.)

     

    *3

    (j)


     

    Bylaws of Constellation Energy Group, Inc., as amended to July 18, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 18, 2008, File No. 1-12869.)

     

    *3

    (k)


     

    Articles of Amendment to the Charter of BGE as of February 2, 2010. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2010, File No. 1-1910.)


    175


    Table of Contents


    Exhibit
    Number


    *3
    (l)


     

    Charter of BGE, restated as of August 16, 1996. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 1996, File No. 1-1910.)

     

    *3

    (m)


     

    Bylaws of BGE, as amended to February 4, 2010. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3.2 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2010, File No. 1-1910.)

     

    *4

    (a)


     

    Indenture between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and the Bank of New York, Trustee dated as of March 24, 1999. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(a) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated March 29, 1999, File No. 333-75217.)

     

    *4

    (b)


     

    First Supplemental Indenture between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and the Bank of New York, Trustee dated as of January 24, 2003. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(b) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated January 24, 2003, File No. 333-102723.)

     

    *4

    (c)


     

    Indenture dated as of July 24, 2006 between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(a) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 filed July 24, 2006, File No. 333-135991.)

     

    *4

    (d)


     

    First Supplemental Indenture between 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, File No. 1-12869.)

     

    *4

    (e)


     

    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, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

     

    *4

    (f)


     

    Indenture dated July 1, 1985, between BGE 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, File No. 2-98443); as supplemented by Supplemental Indentures dated as of October 1, 1987 (Designated as Exhibit 4(a) to the Current Report on Form 8-K, dated November 13, 1987, File No. 1-1910) and as of January 26, 1993 (Designated as Exhibit 4(b) to the Current Report on Form 8-K, dated January 29, 1993, File No. 1-1910.)

     

    *4

    (g)


     

    Form of Subordinated Indenture between BGE and The Bank of New York, as Trustee in connection with the issuance of the Junior Subordinated Debentures. (Designated as Exhibit 4(d) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated August 5, 2003, File No. 333-107681.)

     

    *4

    (h)


     

    Form of Supplemental Indenture between BGE and The Bank of New York, as Trustee in connection with the issuance of the Junior Subordinated Debentures. (Designated as Exhibit 4(e) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated August 5, 2003, File No. 333-107681.)

     

    *4

    (i)


     

    Form of Preferred Securities Guarantee (Designated as Exhibit 4(f) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated August 5, 2003, File No. 333-107681.)

     

    *4

    (j)


     

    Form of Junior Subordinated Debenture (Designated as Exhibit 4(e) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated August 5, 2003, File No. 333-107681.)

    Table of Contents



    *4
    *4
    (k)


     

    Form of Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust (including Form of Preferred Security) (Designated as Exhibit 4(c) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated August 5, 2003, File No. 333-107681.)

     

    *4

    (l)


     

    Indenture dated as of July 24, 2006 between BGE and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee. (Designated as Exhibit 4(b) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 filed July 24, 2006, File No. 333-135991.)

     

    *4

    (m)


     

    First Supplemental Indenture between BGE and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee, dated as of October 13, 2006. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(a) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

     

    *4

    (n)


     

    Indenture and Security Agreement dated as of July 9, 2009, between BGE and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee (including form of BGE Officer's Certificate and form of Senior Secured Bond) (Designated as Exhibit Nos. 4(u) and 4(u)(1) to Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated July 9, 2009, File Nos. 333-157637 and 333-157637-01.)


    176


    Table of Contents


    Exhibit
    Number


    *4
    (o)


     

    Supplemental Indenture No. 1, dated as of October 1, 2009, to the Indenture and Security Agreement dated as of July 9, 2009, between BGE and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(c) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

     

    *4

    (p)


     

    BGE Deed of Easement and Right-of-Way Grant dated as of July 9, 2009 (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(u)(2) to Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated July 9, 2009, File Nos. 333-157637 and 333-157637-01.)

     

    *4

    (q)


     

    Indenture dated as of June 29, 2007, by and between RSB BondCo LLC and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as Trustee and Securities Intermediary. (Designated as Exhibit 4.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 5, 2007, File No. 1-1910.)

     

    *4

    (r)


     

    Series Supplement to Indenture dated as of June 29, 2007 by and between RSB BondCo LLC and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as Trustee and Securities Intermediary (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(b) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, File No. 1-1910.)

     

    *4

    (s)


     

    Replacement Capital Covenant dated June 27, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(b) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 30, 2008, File No. 1-12869.)

     

    *4

    (t)



    Officers' Certificate, dated December 14, 2010, establishing the 5.15% Notes due December 1, 2020 of Constellation Energy Group, Inc., with the form of Notes attached thereto. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(b) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 14, 2010, File No. 1-12869.)


    +*10

    (a)


     

    Executive Annual Incentive Plan of Constellation Energy Group, Inc., as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(d) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

     

    +*10

    (b)


     

    Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(b) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

     

    *10

    (c)


     

    Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan for Non-Employee Directors, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(c) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

     

    +*10

    (d)


     

    Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Benefits Restoration Plan, as amended and restated.restated effective June 1, 2010. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(d)10(b) to the AnnualQuarterly Report on Form 10-K10-Q for the yearquarter ended December 31, 2008,June 30, 2010, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

     

    +*10

    (e)


     

    Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Supplemental Pension Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(e) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

     

    +*10

    (f)


     

    Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Senior Executive Supplemental Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(f) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

     

    +*10

    (g)


     

    Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Executive Supplemental Benefits Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(a) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

    Table of Contents



    +*10

    (h)


     

    Constellation Energy Group, Inc. 1995 Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(b) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

     

    +*10

    (i)


     

    Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Executive Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit 10(b) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

     

    +*10

    (j)


     

    Constellation Energy Group, Inc. 2002 Executive Annual Incentive Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit 10(o) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


    +*10

    (k)



    Constellation Energy Group, Inc. 2002 Senior Management Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit 10(c) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


    177


    Table of Contents


    Exhibit
    Number


    +*10
    (l)(k)


     

    Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Management Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit 10(d) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

     

    +*10

    (m)(l)


     

    Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Amended and Restated 2007 Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit 10(a) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


    *10

    (n)



    Grantor Trust Agreement Dated as of February 27, 2004 between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Citibank, N.A.Plan. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(d)10.1 to the QuarterlyCurrent Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended8-K dated June 30, 2004,4, 2010, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


    *10

    (o)



    Grantor Trust Agreement dated as of February 27, 2004 between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and T. Rowe Price Trust Company. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(b) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2004, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.1-12869.)

     

    +*10

    (p)(m)


     

    Consent of Mayo A. Shattuck III to termination of change-in-control agreement. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 10, 2009, File No. 1-12869.)

     

    +*10

    (q)(n)


     

    Consent of Michael J. Wallace to termination of change-in-control agreement. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10.2 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 10, 2009, File No. 1-12869.)

     

    +*10

    (r)(o)


     

    Consent of Henry B. Barron, Jr. to termination of change-in-control agreement. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10.3 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 10, 2009, File No. 1-12869.)

     

    +*10

    (s)



    Offer letter between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Henry B. Barron, Jr. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(d) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


    +*10

    (t)



    Letter agreement between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Jonathan W. Thayer. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(e) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


    +*10

    (u)



    Offer letter between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Brenda Boultwood. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(f) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


    *10

    (v)(p)


     

    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, File No. 1-1910.)

     

    *10

    (w)(q)


     

    Administration Agreement dated as of June 29, 2007 by and between RSB BondCo LLC and Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, as administrator (Designated as Exhibit 10.3 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 5, 2007, File No. 1-1910.)

     

    *10

    (x)(r)


     

    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, File No. 1-12869.)

    Table of Contents



    10

    (s)



    Amendment No. 1 to the Second Amended and Restated Operating Agreement of Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC, by and among Constellation Nuclear, LLC, CE Nuclear, LLC, EDF Inc. (formerly known as EDF Development, Inc.), and E.D.F. International S.A.

     
    *
    10
    (y)
    (t)


     
    Payment Guaranty, dated as
    Amendment No. 2 to the Second Amended and Restated Operating Agreement of December 17, 2008,Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC, by and betweenamong Constellation Nuclear, LLC, CE Nuclear, LLC, EDF Inc. (formerly known as EDF Development, Inc.), and E.D.F. International S.A.


    *10

    (u)



    Amendment No. 3 to the Second Amended and Restated Operating Agreement of Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC, by and among Constellation Nuclear, LLC, CE Nuclear, LLC, EDF Inc. (formerly known as EDF Development, Inc.), and Electricite de France,E.D.F. International S.A. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10.410.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 17, 2008, File No. 1-12869.)


    *10

    (z)



    Amended and Restated Investor Agreement, dated December 17, 2008, by and between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Electricite de France International, SA (Designated as Exhibit 10.7 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 17, 2008,November 3, 2010, File No. 1-12869.)

     

    *10

    (aa)(v)


     

    LetterCredit Agreement, dated April 21, 2009as of October 15, 2010, among Constellation Energy Group, Inc., EDF DevelopmentBank of America, N.A., as a letter of credit issuing bank, swingline lender and administrative agent, Banc of America Securities LLC, Citigroup Global Markets Inc., RBS Securities Inc., BNP Paribas Securities Corp., and E.D.F. International S.A.The Bank of Nova Scotia, as joint lead arranger and book runners, Citibank, N.A. and The Royal Bank of Scotland plc, as co-syndication agents and The Bank of Nova Scotia and BNP Paribas, as co-documentation agents and the other lenders named therein. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(i) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


    *10

    (bb)



    Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement, dated as of December 17, 2008, among Constellation Energy Group, Inc., the Lenders named therein, Wachovia Bank, National Association, as Administrative Agent, LC Bank, Swingline Lender and Collateral Agent. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10.610.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 17, 2008,October 21, 2010, File No. 1-12869.)

     

    *10

    (cc)(w)


     

    Amendment No. 1, dated as of April 15, 2009, to the Second Amended and Restated CreditTermination Agreement dated as of December 17, 2008,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., the Lenders named therein, Wachovia Bank, National Association, as Administrative Agent, LC Bank, Swingline Lender and Collateral Agent. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(h)10.2 to the QuarterlyCurrent Report on Form 10-Q8-K dated November 3, 2010, File No. 1-12869.)


    +10

    (x)



    Form of Grant Agreement for the quarter ended March 31, 2009, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)Stock Units with Sales Restriction.

     

    12

    (a)


     

    Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges.

     

    12

    (b)


     

    Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Subsidiaries Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges and Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Combined Fixed Charges and Preferred and Preference Dividend Requirements.

     

    21

     


     

    Subsidiaries of the Registrant.


    178


    Table of Contents

    Exhibit
    Number


    23(a)Consent of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm.

     

    23

    (b)


     

    Consent of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm.Firm (for Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC).

     

    31

    (a)


     

    Certification of Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

     

    31

    (b)


     

    Certification of Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

     

    31

    (c)


     

    Certification of President and Chief Executive Officer of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

     

    31

    (d)


     

    Certification of Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

     

    32

    (a)


     

    Certification of Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

     

    32

    (b)


     

    Certification of Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

     

    32

    (c)


     

    Certification of President and Chief Executive Officer of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

     

    32

    (d)


     

    Certification of Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

     

    99

    (a)


     

    Audited Financial Statements of Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC.

     

    *99

    (b)


     

    Operating Agreement, dated as of February 4, 2010, by and among RF HoldCo LLC, Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and GSS Holdings (BGE Utility), Inc. (Designated as Exhibit No. 99.199-1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2010, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

    Table of Contents



    *99
    *99
    (c)


     

    Contribution Agreement, dated as of February 4, 2010, by and among Constellation Energy Group, Inc., BGE and RF HoldCo LLC. (Designated as Exhibit No. 99.299-2 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2010, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

     

    *99

    (d)


     

    Purchase Agreement, dated as of February 4, 2010, by and between RF HoldCo LLC and GSS Holdings (BGE Utility), Inc. (Designated as Exhibit No. 99.399-3 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2010, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

     

    101.INS

     


     

    XBRL Instance Document

     

    101.SCH

     


     

    XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document

     

    101.PRE

     


     

    XBRL Taxonomy Presentation Linkbase Document

     

    101.LAB

     


     

    XBRL Taxonomy Label Linkbase Document

     

    101.CAL

     


     

    XBRL Taxonomy Calculation Linkbase Document

     

    101.DEF

     


     

    XBRL Taxonomy Definition Linkbase Document
    +
    Management contracts or compensatory plan or arrangement.

    *
    Incorporated by Reference.

            In accordance with Rule 402 of Regulation S-T, the XBRL related information in Exhibit 101 to this Annual Report on Form 10-K shall not be deemed to be "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section, and shall not be incorporated by reference into any registration statement or other document filed under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except as shall be expressly set forth by specific reference in such filing.


    179