UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

 

 

 

FORM 10-K

 

 

 

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

 

For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 20132015

 

OR

 

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

 

Commission File

        Number

  

Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter;

State of Incorporation; Address of Principal

Executive Offices; and Telephone Number

  IRS Employer
Identification Number

1-16169

  

EXELON CORPORATION

(a Pennsylvania corporation)

10 South Dearborn Street

P.O. Box 805379

Chicago, Illinois 60680-5379

(312) 394-7398(800) 483-3220

  23-2990190

333-85496

  

EXELON GENERATION COMPANY, LLC

(a Pennsylvania limited liability company)

300 Exelon Way

Kennett Square, Pennsylvania 19348-2473

(610) 765-5959

  23-3064219

1-1839

  

COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY

(an Illinois corporation)

440 South LaSalle Street

Chicago, Illinois 60605-1028

(312) 394-4321

  36-0938600

000-16844

  

PECO ENERGY COMPANY

(a Pennsylvania corporation)

P.O. Box 8699

2301 Market Street

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101-8699

(215) 841-4000

  23-0970240

1-1910

  

BALTIMORE GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY

(a Maryland corporation)

2 Center Plaza

110 West Fayette Street

Baltimore, Maryland 21201-3708

(410) 234-5000

  52-0280210

 

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

 

Title of Each Class

  Name of Each Exchange on
Which Registered

EXELON CORPORATION:

  

Common Stock, without par value

  New York and Chicago

Series A Junior Subordinated Debentures

New York

Corporate Units

  New York

PECO ENERGY COMPANY:

  

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

  New York

BALTIMORE GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY:

  

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

  New York

 

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

 

COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY:

Common Stock Purchase Warrants, 1971 Warrants and Series B Warrants


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

 

Exelon Corporation

 Yes  x  No  ¨

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

 Yes  x  No  ¨

Commonwealth Edison Company

 Yes  x  No  ¨

PECO Energy Company

 Yes  x  No  ¨

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

 Yes  x  No  ¨

 

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

 

Exelon Corporation

 Yes  ¨  No  x

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

 Yes  ¨  No  x

Commonwealth Edison Company

 Yes  ¨  No  x

PECO Energy Company

 Yes  ¨  No  x

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

 Yes  ¨  No  x

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

   Large Accelerated  Accelerated  Non-Accelerated  SmallSmaller Reporting
Company

Exelon Corporation

  ü      

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

      ü  

Commonwealth Edison Company

      ü  

PECO Energy Company

      ü  

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

      ü  

 

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

 

Exelon Corporation

  Yes  ¨   No  x 

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

  Yes  ¨   No  x 

Commonwealth Edison Company

  Yes  ¨   No  x 

PECO Energy Company

  Yes  ¨   No  x 

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

  Yes  ¨   No  x 

 

The estimated aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by nonaffiliates of each registrant as of June 30, 20132015 was as follows:

 

Exelon Corporation Common Stock, without par value

  26,430,683,70627,049,825,290

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

  Not applicable

Commonwealth Edison Company Common Stock, $12.50 par value

  No established market

PECO Energy Company Common Stock, without par value

  None

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, without par value

  None

 

The number of shares outstanding of each registrant’s common stock as of January 31, 20142016 was as follows:

 

Exelon Corporation Common Stock, without par value

  857,419,806919,924,742

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

  not applicable

Commonwealth Edison Company Common Stock, $12.50 par value

  127,016,904127,016,973

PECO Energy Company Common Stock, without par value

  170,478,507

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, without par value

  1,000

 

Documents Incorporated by Reference

Portions of the Exelon Proxy Statement for the 20142016 Annual Meeting of

Shareholders and the Commonwealth Edison Company 20142016 information statement are

incorporated by reference in Part III.

 

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


TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

   Page No. 

GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

   1  

FILING FORMAT

   5  

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

   5  

WHERE TO FIND MORE INFORMATION

   5  

PART I

    

ITEM 1.

  

BUSINESS

   6  
  

General

   6  
  

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

   7  
  

Commonwealth Edison Company

   2019  
  

PECO Energy Company

   2219  
  

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

   2619  
  

Employees

   3023  
  

Environmental Regulation

   3124  
  

Executive Officers of the Registrants

   3630  

ITEM 1A.

  

RISK FACTORS

   4134  

ITEM 1B.

  

UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

   6461  

ITEM 2.

  

PROPERTIES

   6562  
  

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

   6562  
  

Commonwealth Edison Company

   6865  
  

PECO Energy Company

   6865  
  

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

   6966  

ITEM 3.

  

LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

   7067  
  

Exelon Corporation

   7067  
  

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

   7067  
  

Commonwealth Edison Company

   7067  
  

PECO Energy Company

   7067  
  

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

   7067  

ITEM 4.

  

MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES

   7067  

PART II

    

ITEM 5.

  

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

   7168  

ITEM 6.

  

SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

   7472  
  

Exelon Corporation

   7472  
  

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

   7573  
  

Commonwealth Edison Company

   7674  
  

PECO Energy Company

   7674  
  

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

   7775  

ITEM 7.

  

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

   7876  
  

Exelon Corporation

   7876  
  

Executive Overview

   7876  
  

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

   97100  
  

Results of Operations

   113117  
  

Liquidity and Capital Resources

   144148  
  

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

   173182  
  

Commonwealth Edison Company

   175184  
  

PECO Energy Company

   177186  
  

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

   179188  


   Page No. 

ITEM 7A.

  

QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

   161169  
  

Exelon Corporation

   161169  
  

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

   174170  
  

Commonwealth Edison Company

   176171  
  

PECO Energy Company

   178171  
  

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

   180172  

ITEM 8.

  

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

   181190  
  

Exelon Corporation

   191201  
  

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

   196207  
  

Commonwealth Edison Company

   201213  
  

PECO Energy Company

   206219  
  

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

   211225  
  

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

   216230  
  

1. Significant Accounting Policies

   216230  
  

2. Variable Interest Entities

   231247  
  

3. Regulatory Matters

   237256  
  

4. MergerMergers, Acquisitions, and AcquisitionsDispositions

   265283  
  

5. Investment in CENGConstellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC

   273289  
  

6. Accounts Receivable

   275293  
  

7. Property, Plant and Equipment

   276294  
  

8. Impairment of Long LivedLong-Lived Assets

   280297  
  

9. Implications of Potential Early Plant Retirements

300

10. Jointly Owned Electric Utility Plant

   282

10. Intangible Assets

283301  
  

11. Intangible Assets

302

12. Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities

   287307  
  

12.13. Derivative Financial Instruments

   310322  
  

13.14. Debt and Credit Agreements

   327

14. Income Taxes

336338  
  

15. Asset Retirement ObligationsIncome Taxes

   345348  
  

16. Asset Retirement BenefitsObligations

   353356  
  

17. SeveranceRetirement Benefits

   371365  
  

18. Preferred and Preference SecuritiesContingently Redeemable Noncontrolling Interest

   374381  
  

19. Common Stock

375

20. Earnings Per Share andShareholder’s Equity

   382  
  

21. Changes in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income20. Stock-Based Compensation Plans

   383  
  

21. Earnings Per Share

389

22. Changes in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income

390

23. Commitments and Contingencies

   384394  
  

23.24. Supplemental Financial Information

   410

24. Segment Information

418411  
  

25. Related Party TransactionsSegment Information

   423419  
  

26. Quarterly DataRelated Party Transactions

   431424  
  

27. Subsequent EventsQuarterly Data

   433432  

ITEM 9.

  

CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

   434435  

ITEM 9A.

  

CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

434

Exelon Corporation

434

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

434

Commonwealth Edison Company

434

PECO Energy Company

434

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

434

ITEM 9B.

OTHER INFORMATION

   435  
  

Exelon Corporation

   435  
  

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

   435  
  

Commonwealth Edison Company

   435  
  

PECO Energy Company

   435  
  

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

   435  

ITEM 9B.

OTHER INFORMATION

436

Exelon Corporation

436

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

436

Commonwealth Edison Company

436

PECO Energy Company

436

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

436


   Page No. 

PART III

    

ITEM 10.

  

DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

   436437  

ITEM 11.

  

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

   437438  

ITEM 12.

  

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

   438439  

ITEM 13.

  

CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE

   439440  

ITEM 14.

  

PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES

   440441  

PART IV

    

ITEM 15.

  EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES   441442  

SIGNATURES

   472476  
  

Exelon Corporation

   472476  
  

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

   473477  
  

Commonwealth Edison Company

   474478  
  

PECO Energy Company

   475479  
  

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

   476

CERTIFICATION EXHIBITS

477480  


GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

 

Exelon Corporation and Related Entities

Exelon

  Exelon Corporation

Generation

  Exelon Generation Company, LLC

ComEd

  Commonwealth Edison Company

PECO

  PECO Energy Company

BGE

  Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

BSC

  Exelon Business Services Company, LLC

Exelon Corporate

  Exelon’s holding company

CENG

  Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC

Constellation

  Constellation Energy Group, Inc.

Antelope Valley, AVSR

Antelope Valley Solar Ranch One

Exelon Transmission Company

  Exelon Transmission Company, LLC

Exelon Wind

  Exelon Wind, LLC and Exelon Generation Acquisition Company, LLC

Ventures

  Exelon Ventures Company, LLC

AmerGen

  AmerGen Energy Company, LLC

BondCo

  RSB BondCo LLC

ComEd Financing III

  ComEd Financing III

PEC L.P.

  PECO Energy Capital, L.P.

PECO Trust III

  PECO Energy Capital Trust III

PECO Trust IV

  PECO Energy Capital Trust IV

BGE Trust II

  BGE Capital Trust II

PETT

  PECO Energy Transition Trust

Registrants

  Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE, collectively

Other Terms and Abbreviations

1998 restructuring settlement

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

Act 11

  Pennsylvania Act 11 of 2012

Act 129

  Pennsylvania Act 129 of 2008

AEC

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

AEPS

  Pennsylvania Alternative Energy Portfolio Standards

AEPS Act

  Pennsylvania Alternative Energy Portfolio Standards Act of 2004, as amended

AESO

  Alberta Electric Systems Operator

AFUDC

  Allowance for Funds Used During Construction

ALJ

  Administrative Law Judge

AMI

  Advanced Metering Infrastructure

AMP

Advanced Metering Program

ARC

  Asset Retirement Cost

ARO

  Asset Retirement Obligation

ARP

  Title IV Acid Rain Program

ARRA of 2009

  American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009

Block contracts

  Forward Purchase Energy Block Contracts

CAIR

  Clean Air Interstate Rule

CAISO

  California ISO

CAMR

  Federal Clean Air Mercury Rule

CAP

Customer Assistance Program

Other Terms and Abbreviations

CERCLA

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

CFL

  Compact Fluorescent Light

Clean Air Act

  Clean Air Act of 1963, as amended

1


Other Terms and Abbreviations

Clean Water Act

  Federal Water Pollution Control Amendments of 1972, as amended

Competition Act

  Pennsylvania Electricity Generation Customer Choice and Competition Act of 1996

CPI

  Consumer Price Index

CPUC

  California Public Utilities Commission

CSAPR

  Cross-State Air Pollution Rule

CTC

  Competitive Transition Charge

D.C. Circuit Court

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

DOE

  United States Department of Energy

DOJ

  United States Department of Justice

DSP

  Default Service Provider

DSP Program

  Default Service Provider Program

EDF

  Electricite de France SA and its subsidiaries

EE&C

  Energy Efficiency and Conservation/Demand Response

EGR

ExGen Renewables I, LLC

EGS

Electric Generation Supplier

EGTP

ExGen Texas Power, LLC

EIMA

  Illinois Energy Infrastructure Modernization Act

EPA

  United States Environmental Protection Agency

ERCOT

  Electric Reliability Council of Texas

ERISA

  Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended

EROA

  Expected Rate of Return on Assets

ESPP

  Employee Stock Purchase Plan

FASB

  Financial Accounting Standards Board

FERC

  Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

FRCC

  Florida Reliability Coordinating Council

FTC

  Federal Trade Commission

GAAP

  Generally Accepted Accounting Principles in the United States

GDP

Gross Domestic Product

GHG

  Greenhouse Gas

GRT

  Gross Receipts Tax

GSA

  Generation Supply Adjustment

GWh

  Gigawatt hourHour

HAP

  Hazardous air pollutantsAir Pollutants

Health Care Reform Acts

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

IBEW

  International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

ICC

  Illinois Commerce Commission

ICE

  Intercontinental Exchange

Illinois Act

  Illinois Electric Service Customer Choice and Rate Relief Law of 1997

Illinois EPA

  Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

Illinois Settlement Legislation

  Legislation enacted in 2007 affecting electric utilities in Illinois

Integrys

Integrys Energy Services, Inc.

IPA

  Illinois Power Agency

IRC

  Internal Revenue Code

Other Terms and Abbreviations

IRS

  Internal Revenue Service

ISO

  Independent System Operator

ISO-NE

  ISO New England Inc.

ISO-NY

  ISO New York

kV

  Kilovolt

kW

  Kilowatt

kWh

  Kilowatt-hour

LIBOR

  London Interbank Offered Rate

LILO

  Lease-In, Lease-Out

LLRW

  Low-Level Radioactive Waste

2


Other Terms and Abbreviations

LTIP

  Long-Term Incentive Plan

MATS

  U.S. EPA Mercury and Air Toxics Standard Rule

MBR

  Market Based Rates Incentive

MDE

  Maryland Department of the Environment

MDPSC

  Maryland Public Service Commission

MGP

  Manufactured Gas Plant

MISO

  Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

mmcf

  Million Cubic Feet

Moody’s

  Moody’s Investor Service

MOPR

  Minimum Offer Price Rule

MRV

  Market-Related Value

MW

  Megawatt

MWh

  Megawatt hourHour

NAAQS

  National Ambient Air Quality Standards

n.m.

  not meaningful

NAV

  Net Asset Value

NDT

  Nuclear Decommissioning Trust

NEIL

  Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited

NERC

  North American Electric Reliability Corporation

NGS

Natural Gas Supplier

NJDEP

  New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

Non-Regulatory Agreements Units

  Nuclear generating units or portions thereof whose decommissioning-related activities are not subject to contractual elimination under regulatory accounting including Calvert Cliffs, Nine Mile Point, Ginna, Clinton, Oyster Creek, Three Mile Island, Zion (a former ComEd unit), and portions of Peach Bottom (a former PECO unit)

NOSA

Nuclear Operating Services Agreement

NOV

  Notice of Violation

NPDES

  National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

NRC

  Nuclear Regulatory Commission

NSPS

  New Source Performance Standards

NWPA

  Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982

NYMEX

  New York Mercantile Exchange

OCI

  Other Comprehensive Income

OIESO

  Ontario Independent Electricity System Operator

OPEB

  Other Postretirement Employee Benefits

PA DEP

  Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection

PAPUC

  Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission

PGC

  Purchased Gas Cost Clause

PHI

Pepco Holdings, Inc.

Other Terms and Abbreviations

PJM

  PJM Interconnection, LLC

POLR

  Provider of Last Resort

POR

  Purchase of Receivables

PPA

  Power Purchase Agreement

PPL

PPL Holtwood, LLC

Price-Anderson Act

  Price-Anderson Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act of 1957

PRP

  Potentially Responsible Parties

PSEG

  Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated

PURTA

  Pennsylvania Public Realty Tax Act

PV

  Photovoltaic

RCRA

  Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, as amended

REC

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

Regulatory Agreement Units

  Nuclear generating units whose decommissioning-related activities are subject to contractual elimination under regulatory accounting including the former ComEd units (Braidwood, Byron, Dresden, LaSalle, Quad Cities) and the former PECO units (Limerick, Peach Bottom, Salem)

RES

  Retail Electric Suppliers

RFP

  Request for Proposal

3


Other Terms and Abbreviations

Rider

  Reconcilable Surcharge Recovery Mechanism

RGGI

  Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative

RMC

  Risk Management Committee

ROE

Return on Common Equity

RPM

  PJM Reliability Pricing Model

RPS

  Renewable Energy Portfolio Standards

RTEP

  Regional Transmission Expansion Plan

RTO

  Regional Transmission Organization

S&P

  Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services

SEC

  United States Securities and Exchange Commission

Senate Bill 1

  Maryland Senate Bill 1

SERC

  SERC Reliability Corporation (formerly Southeast Electric Reliability Council)

SERP

  Supplemental Employee Retirement Plan

SGIG

  Smart Grid Investment Grant

SGIP

  Smart Grid Initiative Program

SILO

  Sale-In, Lease-Out

SMP

  Smart Meter Program

SMPIP

  Smart Meter Procurement and Installation Plan

SNF

  Spent Nuclear Fuel

SOA

Society of Actuaries

SOS

  Standard Offer Service

SPP

  Southwest Power Pool

Tax Relief Act of 2010

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

TEG

Termoelectrica del Golfo

TEP

Termoelectrica Penoles

Upstream

  Natural gas and oil exploration and production activities

VIE

  Variable Interest Entity

WECC

  Western Electric Coordinating Council

4


FILING FORMAT

 

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

 

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

 

Certain of the matters discussed in thisThis Report arecontains certain forward-looking statements, within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, that are subject to risks and uncertainties. The factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements made by a RegistrantRegistrants include those factors discussed herein, including those factors discussed with respect to such Registrant discussed in (a) ITEM 1A. Risk Factors, (b) ITEM 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and (c) ITEM 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data: Note 2223; and (d) other factors discussed herein and in other filings with the SEC by the Registrants. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which apply only as of the date of this Report. None of the Registrants undertakes any obligation to publicly release any revision to its forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this Report.

 

WHERE TO FIND MORE INFORMATION

 

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

5


PART I

 

ITEM 1.BUSINESS

 

General

 

Corporate Structure and Business and Other Information

 

Exelon, incorporated in Pennsylvania in February 1999, is a utility services holding company engaged, through Generation, in the energy generation and power marketing business, and through ComEd, PECO and BGE, in the energy delivery businesses discussed below. Exelon’s principal executive offices are located at 10 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois 60603, and its telephone number is 312-394-7398.800-483-3220.

 

Generation

 

Generation’s integrated business consists of its ownedthe generation, physical delivery and contracted electric generating facilities and investments in generation ventures that are marketedmarketing of power across multiple geographical regions through its leading customer-facing activities. These customer-facing activities include, wholesale energy marketing operations and its competitive retail customer supply of electricbusiness, Constellation, which sells electricity and natural gas to both wholesale and retail customers. Generation also sells renewable energy and other energy-related products and services, including renewable energy products, risk management services and engages in natural gas and oil exploration and production activities.activities (Upstream). Generation has six reportable segments consisting of the Mid-Atlantic, Midwest, New England, New York, ERCOT and Other Power Regions.

 

Generation was formed in 2000 as a Pennsylvania limited liability company. Generation began operations as a result of a corporate restructuring, effective January 1, 2001, in which Exelon separated its generation and other competitive businesses from its regulated energy delivery businesses at ComEd and PECO.

Generation’s principal executive offices are located at 300 Exelon Way, Kennett Square, Pennsylvania 19348, and its telephone number is 610-765-5959.

 

ComEd

 

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

 

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

 

PECO

 

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

 

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

BGE

 

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

6


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

 

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

 

Operating Segments

 

See Note 2425—Segment Information of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on Exelon’s operating segments.

 

Pending Merger with Constellation Energy Group,Pepco Holdings, Inc.

 

On March 12, 2012, Exelon completed the merger contemplated by the Merger Agreement among Exelon, Bolt Acquisition Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of Exelon (Merger Sub), and Constellation. As a result of that merger, Merger Sub was merged into Constellation (the Initial Merger) and Constellation became a wholly owned subsidiary of Exelon. Following the completion of the Initial Merger,April 29, 2014, Exelon and ConstellationPHI signed an agreement and plan of merger (as subsequently amended and restated as of July 18, 2014) to combine the two companies in an all cash transaction. The resulting company will retain the Exelon name and be headquartered in Chicago. The merger is expected to be completed a seriesin the first quarter of internal corporate organizational restructuring transactions. Constellation merged with and into Exelon, with Exelon continuing as the surviving corporation (the Upstream Merger). Simultaneously with the Upstream Merger, Constellation’s interest in RF HoldCo LLC, which holds Constellation’s interest in BGE, was transferred to Exelon Energy Delivery Company, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Exelon that also owns Exelon’s interests in ComEd and PECO. Following the Upstream Merger and the transfer of RF HoldCo LLC, Exelon contributed to Generation certain subsidiaries, including those with generation and customer supply operations that were acquired from Constellation as a result of the Initial Merger and the Upstream Merger.2016. See Note 44—Mergers, Acquisitions, and Dispositions of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on the Constellationpending transaction.

 

Generation

 

Generation, one of the largest competitive electric generation companies in the United States as measured by owned and contracted MW, physically delivers and markets power across multiple geographic regions through its customer-facing business, Constellation. Constellation sells electricity and natural gas, including renewable energy, to both wholesale and retail customers. The retail sales include commercial, industrial and residential customers. Generation leverages its energy generation portfolio to ensure delivery of energy to both wholesale and retail customers under long-term and short-term contracts, and in wholesale power markets. Generation operates in well-developed energy markets and employs an integrated hedging strategy to manage commodity price volatility. Its generationGeneration’s fleet, including its nuclear plants which consistently operate at high capacity factors, also provideprovides geographic and supply source diversity. These factors help Generation mitigate the current challenging conditions inemanating from competitive energy markets. Generation operates as an integrated business, leveraging its owned and contracted electric generation capacity to market and sell power to wholesale and retail customers. Generation’s customers include distribution utilities, municipalities, cooperatives, financial institutions, and commercial, industrial, governmental, and residential customers in competitive markets. Generation also sells natural gasGeneration’s customer facing activities foster development and renewable energy anddelivery of other innovative energy-related products and services andfor its customers. Generation also engages in natural gas and oil exploration and production activities.activities (Upstream).

 

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

7


another public utility or an existing operational generating facility; affiliate transactions; intercompany financings and cash management arrangements; certain internal corporate

reorganizations; and certain holding company acquisitions of public utility and holding company securities. Additionally, ERCOT is not subject to regulation by FERC but performs a similar function in Texas to that performed by RTOs in markets regulated by FERC. Specific operations of Generation are also subject to the jurisdiction of various other Federal, state, regional and local agencies, including the NRC and Federal and state environmental protection agencies. Additionally, Generation is subject to mandatory reliability standards promulgated by the NERC, with the approval of FERC.

 

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

 

Significant AcquisitionsConstellation Energy Nuclear Group, Inc.

 

Generation owns a 50.01% interest in CENG, a joint venture with EDF. CENG is governed by a board of ten directors, five of which are appointed by Generation and five by EDF. CENG owns a total of five nuclear generating facilities on three sites, Calvert Cliffs, R.E. Ginna and Nine Mile Point. CENG’s ownership share in the total capacity of these units is 4,007 MW. See ITEM 2. PROPERTIES for additional information on these sites.

Generation and EDF also entered into a Put Option Agreement on April 1, 2014, pursuant to which EDF has the option, exercisable beginning on January 1, 2016 and thereafter until June 30, 2022, to sell its 49.99% interest in CENG to Generation for a fair market value price determined by agreement of the parties, or absent agreement, a third-party arbitration process. In addition, under limited circumstances, the period for exercise of the put option may be extended for 18 months.

Prior to April 1, 2014, Exelon and Generation accounted for their investment in CENG under the equity method of accounting. The transfer of the nuclear operating licenses and the execution of the NOSA on April 1, 2014, resulted in the derecognition of the equity method investment in CENG and the recording of all assets, liabilities and EDF’s noncontrolling interest in CENG at fair value on a fully consolidated basis in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. Refer to Note 5— Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding the integration transaction.

Significant Acquisitions

Integrys Energy Services, Inc.On November 1, 2014, Generation acquired the competitive retail electric and natural gas business activities of Integrys Energy Group, Inc. through the purchase of all of the stock of its wholly owned subsidiary, Integrys Energy Services, Inc. (Integrys) for a purchase price of $332 million, including net working capital. The generation and solar asset businesses of Integrys were excluded from the transaction. See Note 4—Mergers, Acquisitions, and Dispositions of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on the above acquisition.

Merger with Constellation Energy Group, Inc.On March 12, 2012, Constellation merged into Exelon with Exelon continuing as the surviving corporation pursuant to the transactions contemplated by the Agreement and Plan of Merger. Since the merger transaction, Generation includes the former Constellation generation and customer supply operations.

Antelope Valley Solar Ranch OneOne..On September 30, 2011, Exelon announcedcompleted the completion of its acquisition of all of the interests in Antelope Valley, a 230-MW242-MW solar photovoltaic (PV) project under development in northern Los Angeles County, California, from First Solar, Inc., which is developing, building, operating, and maintaining the project. The first portion of the project began operationsfacility became fully operational in December 2012, with six additional blocks coming online in 2013. Exelon has been informed by First Solar of issues relating to delays in the certification of certain components relating to the final two blocks of the project, which will delay commercial operation of these two blocks until the first half of 2014. The delay will not have a material financial effect on Exelon. Exelon expects the project to be in full commercial operation in the first half of 2014. The acquisition supports the Exelon commitment to renewable energy as part of Exelon 2020. The project has a 25-year PPA approved by the CPUC, with Pacific Gas & Electric Company for the full output of the plant. Upon completion,plant, which has been approved by the facility will add 230 MWs to Generation’s renewable generation fleet.CPUC. Total capitalized costs for the facility are expected to beincurred through completion of the project were approximately $1.1 billion. Total capitalized costs incurred through December 31, 2013 were approximately $968 million.

 

Wolf Hollow Generating Station.On August 24, 2011, Generation completed the acquisition of all of the equity interests of Wolf Hollow, LLC (Wolf Hollow), a combined-cycle natural gas-fired power plant in north Texas, for a purchase price of $311 million which increased Generation’s owned capacity within the ERCOT power market by 720704 MWs.

 

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

 

Significant DispositionsAsset Divestitures.As of December 31, 2015, Generation has sold certain generating assets with total pre-tax proceeds of $1.8 billion (after-tax proceeds of approximately $1.4 billion). The proceeds are expected to be used primarily to finance a portion of the acquisition of PHI.

 

Maryland Clean Coal Stations. On November 30, 2012, a subsidiary of Generation sold the Brandon Shores generating station and H.A. Wagner generating station in Anne Arundel County, Maryland, and the C.P. Crane generating station in Baltimore County, Maryland to Raven Power Holdings LLC, a subsidiary of Riverstone Holdings LLC to comply with certain of the regulatory approvals required by the merger with Constellation Energy Group, Inc. for net proceeds of approximately $371 million, which resulted in a pre-tax lossimpairment charge of $272 million.

See Note 44—Mergers, Acquisitions, and Dispositions and Note 8—Impairment of Long-Lived Assets of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

8


Generating Resources

 

At December 31, 2013,2015, the generating resources of Generation consisted of the following:

 

Type of Capacity

  MW 

Owned generation assets (a)(b)

  

Nuclear

   17,26319,460  

Fossil (primarily natural gas)

   12,1659,682  

Renewable (including Hydroelectric)(b)(c)

   3,7103,599  
  

 

 

 

Owned generation assets

   33,13832,741  

Long-term power purchase contracts(c)

   9,426

Investment in CENG(d)

1,9997,419  
  

 

 

 

Total generating resources

   44,56340,160  
  

 

 

 

 

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

 

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

 

Mid-Atlantic represents operations in the eastern half of PJM, which includes Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, Delaware, the District of Columbia and parts of North Carolina (approximately 37%36% of capacity).

Midwest represents operations in the western half of PJM, which includes portions of Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky and Tennessee; and the United States footprint of MISO excluding(excluding MISO’s Southern Region,Region), which covers all or most of North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, and the remaining parts of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan and Ohio not covered by PJM; and parts of Montana, Missouri and Kentucky (approximately 34%37% of capacity).

 

New England represents the operations within ISO-NE covering the states of Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Vermont (approximately 8%7% of capacity).

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

See Note 25—Segment Information of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on revenues from external customers and revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense for each of Generation’s reportable segments.

Nuclear Facilities

 

Generation has ownership interests in elevenfourteen nuclear generating stations currently in service, consisting of 1924 units with an aggregate of 17,26319,460 MW of capacity. Generation wholly owns all of its nuclear generating stations, except for Quad Cities Generating Station (75% ownership), Peach Bottom Generating Station (50% ownership), and Salem Generating Station (Salem) (42.59% ownership), which are consolidated on Exelon’s and Generation’s financial statements relative to its proportionate ownership interest in each unit. In addition, Generation owns a 50.01% interest, collectively, in the CENG generating stations (Calvert Cliffs, Nine Mile Point [excluding LIPA’s 18% ownership interest in Nine Mile Point Unit 2] and R.E. Ginna) which are 100% consolidated on Exelon and Generation’s financial statements as of April 1, 2014. See Note 5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

Generation’s nuclear generating stations are all operated by

9


Generation, with the exception of the two units at Salem, which are operated by PSEG Nuclear, LLC (PSEG Nuclear), an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of PSEG. In 20132015, 2014 and 2012,2013 electric supply (in GWh) generated from the nuclear generating facilities was 57%68%, 67% and 53%57%, respectively, of Generation’s total electric supply, which also includes fossil, hydroelectric and renewable generation and electric supply purchased for resale. The majority of this output was dispatched to support Generation’s wholesale and retail power marketing activities. See ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS for further discussion of Generation’s electric supply sources.

Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, Inc.

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

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

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

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

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

10


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

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

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

Currently, Exelon and Generation account for its investment in CENG under the equity method of accounting. The transfer of the operational control to Exelon and Generation will result in Exelon and Generation being required to consolidate the financial position and results of operations of CENG. When that accounting change occurs, Exelon and Generation will derecognize its equity method investment in CENG and will record all assets, liabilities and the non-controlling interest in CENG at fair value on Exelon and Generation’s balance sheets. Any difference between the former carrying value and newly recorded fair value at that date will be recognized as a gain or loss upon consolidation, which could be material to Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations. See Note 5—Investment in CENG of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding CENG.

 

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

During 20132015, 2014 and 2012,2013, the nuclear generating facilities operated by Generation achieved capacity factors of 94.1%93.7%, 94.3% and 92.7%94.1%, respectively. The capacity factors reflect ownership percentage of stations operated by Generation and include CENG as of April 1, 2014. Generation manages its scheduled refueling outages to minimize their duration and to maintain high nuclear generating capacity factors, resulting in a stable generation base for Generation’s wholesale and retail marketing and trading activities. During scheduled refueling outages, Generation performs maintenance and equipment upgrades in order to minimize the occurrence of unplanned outages and to maintain safe, reliable operations.

 

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

 

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

11


assesses unit performance indicators and inspection results, and communicates its assessment on a semi-annual basis. As of December 31, 2013,January 6, 2016, the NRC categorized Dresden units 2Clinton and 3, LaSalleDresden unit 2 and Clinton in the Regulatory Response Column, which is the second highest of five performance bands. All other units operated by Generation are categorized in the Licensee Response Column as of December 31, 2013,2015, which is the highest performance band. On January 1, 2014, Dresden units 2 and 3 returned to the Licensee Response Column. The NRC may modify, suspend or revoke operating licenses and impose civil penalties for failure to comply with the Atomic Energy Act, the regulations under such Act or the terms of the operating licenses. Changes in regulations by the NRC may require a substantial increase in capital expenditures for nuclear generating facilities and/or increased operating costs of nuclear generating units.

 

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

Licenses. Generation has 40-year operating licenses from the NRC for each of its nuclear units and has received 20-year operating license renewals for Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3, Dresden Units 2 and 3, Quad Cities Units 1 and 2, Oyster Creek Unit 1, Calvert Cliffs Units 1 and 2, Nine Mile Point Units 1 and 2, R.E. Ginna Unit 1, Three Mile Island Unit 1.1, Limerick Units 1 and 2, Byron Units 1 and 2 and Braidwood Units 1 and 2. Additionally, PSEG has 40-year operating licenses from the NRC and has received 20-year operating license renewals for Salem Units 1 and 2. On December 8, 2010, Exelon announced that Generation will permanently cease generation operations at Oyster Creek by December 31, 2019. The following table summarizes the current operating license expiration dates for Generation’s nuclear facilities in service:

 

Station

  Unit   In-Service
Date (a)
   Current License
Expiration
 

Braidwood(b)

   1    1988    2026 
   2    1988    2027 

Byron(b)

   1    1985    2024 
   2    1987    2026 

Clinton

   1    1987    2026 

Dresden (c)

   2    1970    2029 
   3    1971    2031 

LaSalle

   1    1984    2022 
   2    1984    2023 

Limerick(d)

   1    1986    2024 
   2    1990    2029 

Oyster Creek (c)(e)

   1    1969    2029 

Peach Bottom (c)

   2    1974    2033 
   3    1974    2034 

Quad Cities (c)

   1    1973    2032 
   2    1973    2032 

Salem (c)

   1    1977    2036 
   2    1981    2040 

Three Mile Island (c)

   1    1974    2034 

12


Station

  Unit   In-Service
Date (a)
   Current License
Expiration
 

Braidwood (c)

   1     1988     2046  
   2     1988     2047  

Byron (c)

   1     1985     2044  
   2     1987     2046  

Calvert Cliffs (c)

   1     1975     2034  
   2     1977     2036  

Clinton (d)

   1     1987     2026  

Dresden (c)

   2     1970     2029  
   3     1971     2031  

LaSalle (b)

   1     1984     2022  
   2     1984     2023  

Limerick (c)

   1     1986     2044  
   2     1990     2049  

Nine Mile Point (c)

   1     1969     2029  
   2     1988     2046  

Oyster Creek (c)(e)

   1     1969     2029  

Peach Bottom (c)

   2     1974     2033  
   3     1974     2034  

Quad Cities (c)

   1     1973     2032  
   2     1973     2032  

R.E. Ginna (c)

   1     1970     2029  

Salem (c)

   1     1977     2036  
   2     1981     2040  

Three Mile Island (c)

   1     1974     2034  

 

(a)Denotes year in which nuclear unit began commercial operations.
(b)On May 29, 2013,In December 2014, Generation submitted applications to the NRC to extend the operating licenses of Braidwood Units 1 and 2 and ByronLaSalle Units 1 and 2 by 20 years.
(c)Stations for which the NRC has issued a renewed operating licenses.
(d)In June 2011,Although timing has been delayed, Generation submitted applicationscurrently plans to seek license renewal for Clinton and has advised the NRC to extendthat any license renewal application would not be filed until the operating licensesfirst quarter of Limerick Units 1 and 2 by 20 years.2021.
(e)In December 2010, Exelon announced that Generation will permanently cease generation operations at Oyster Creek by December 31, 2019.

 

Generation expects to applycurrently has a license renewal application pending for LaSalle Units 1 and obtain approval2. Generation has advised the NRC that any license renewal application for Clinton would not be filed until the first quarter of license renewals for the remaining nuclear units.2021. The operating license renewal process takes approximately four to five years from the commencement of the renewal process until completion of the NRC’s review. The NRC review process takes approximately two years from the docketing of an application. Each requested license renewal is expected to be for 20 years beyond the original operating license expiration. Depreciation provisions are based on the estimated useful lives of the stations, which reflect the actual and assumed renewal of operating licenses for all of Generation’s operating nuclear generating stations except for Oyster Creek.

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

 

Nuclear Uprate Program. Generation is engaged in individual projects as part of a planned power uprate program across its nuclear fleet. When economically viable, the projects take advantage of new production and measurement technologies, new materials and application of expertise gained from a half-century of nuclear power operations. Based on ongoing reviews, theOnce all projects are completed in 2016, Generation will have placed in-service 538 MWs of new nuclear uprate implementation plan was adjusted during 2013 to cancel certain projects. The Measurement Uncertainty Recapture uprate projects at the Dresden and Quad Cities nuclear stations were cancelled as a result of the cost of additional plant modifications identified during final design work which, when combined with then current market conditions, made the projects not economically viable. Additionally, the market conditions prompted Generation to cancel the previously deferred extended power uprate projects at the LaSalle and Limerick nuclear stations. During 2013, Generation recorded a pre-tax charge to operating and maintenance expense and interest expense of approximately $111 million and $8 million, respectively, to accrue remaining costs and reverse the previously capitalized costs.generation.

 

UnderAs of December 31, 2015, under the nuclear uprate program, Generation has placed into service projects representing 316536 MWs of new nuclear generation at a cost of $952$1,436 million, which has been capitalized to property, plant and equipment on Exelon’s and Generation’s consolidated balance sheets. At December 31, 2013, Generation has capitalized $203 million to construction work in progress within property, plant and equipment for nuclear uprate projects expected to be placed in service by the end of 2016, consisting of 200 MWs of new nuclear generation, that are in the installation phase across four nuclear stations; Peach Bottom in Pennsylvania and Byron, Braidwood and Dresden in Illinois. The remaining spend associated with these projects is expected to be approximately $300 million through the end of 2016. Generation believes that it is probable that these projects will be completed. If a project is expected not to be completed as planned, previously capitalized costs will be reversed through earnings as a charge to operating and maintenance expense and interest.Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

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

 

13


As of December 31, 2013,2015, Generation had approximately 59,90075,800 SNF assemblies (14,400(18,800 tons) stored on site in SNF pools or dry cask storage (this includes SNF assemblies at Zion Station, for which Generation retains ownership even though the responsibility for decommissioning Zion Station has been assumed by another party; see Note 1516—Asset Retirement Obligations of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding Zion Station Decommissioning). All currently operating Generation-owned nuclear sites have on-site dry cask storage, except for Clinton and Three Mile Island. Clinton and Three Mile Island, will currently lose full core reserve,in which is when the on-site storage pool will no longer have sufficient space to receive a full complement of fuel from the reactor core, in 2015 and 2023, respectively. Drydry cask storage will be in operation at Clinton in 2016 and is expectedprojected to be in operation at Three Mile Island prior to the closing of their respective on-site storage pools.in 2023. On-site dry cask storage in concert with on-site storage pools will be capable of meeting all current and future SNF storage requirements at Generation’s sites through the end of the license renewal periods and through decommissioning.

 

For a discussion of matters associated with Generation’s contracts with the DOE for the disposal of SNF, see Note 2223—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

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

 

Generation is currently utilizing on-site storage capacity at its nuclear generation stations for limited amounts of LLRW and has been shippingships its Class A LLRW, which representrepresents 93% of LLRW generated at its stations, to disposal facilities in Utah and South Carolina. The disposal facility in South Carolina at present is only receiving LLRW from LLRW generators in South Carolina, New Jersey (which includes Oyster Creek and Salem), and Connecticut.

Generation utilizes on-site storage capacity at all its stations to stage for shipping campaigns and store, as needed, Class B and Class C LLRW. Generation has received NRC approvala contract through 2032 to ship Class B

and Class C LLRW to a disposal facility in Texas. The agreement provides for its Peach Bottomdisposal of all current Class B and LaSalle stations that will allow storageClass C LLRW currently stored at these siteseach station as well as the Class B and Class C LLRW generated during the term of the agreement. However, because the production of LLRW from Generation’s nuclear fleet will exceed the capacity at the Texas site (3.9 million curies for 15 years beginning in 2012), Generation will still be required to utilize on-site storage at its remaining stations with limited capacity.for Class B and Class C LLRW. Generation nowcurrently has enough storage capacity to store all Class B and C LLRW for the life of all stations in Generation’s nuclear fleet. During 2012, Generation entered into a six year contract to ship Class B and Class C LLRW to Texas. The terms of the agreement will provide for disposal of all current Class B and Class C LLRW stored at the stations, as well as the waste generated during the term of the agreement. Although Texas started accepting waste for disposal in 2012, the Texas site is curie limited (3.9 million curies for 15 years). With this limit, the annual facility volume will not match industry production of activated hardware, and on-site storage is expected to be required for the Generation boiling water reactors. Generation continues to pursue alternative disposal strategies for LLRW, including an LLRW reduction program to minimize cost impacts and on-site storage.

 

Nuclear Insurance. Generation is subject to liability, property damage and other risks associated with major incidents at any of its nuclear stations, including the CENG nuclear stations. Generation has reduced its financial exposure to these risks through insurance and other industry risk-sharing provisions. See “Nuclear Insurance” within Note 2223—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for details.

 

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

 

14


Decommissioning. NRC regulations require that licensees of nuclear generating facilities demonstrate reasonable assurance that funds will be available in specified minimum amounts at the end of the life of the facility to decommission the facility. See ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS—Exelon Corporation, Executive Overview; ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS, Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates, Nuclear Decommissioning, Asset Retirement Obligations and Nuclear Decommissioning Trust Fund Investments; and Notes 3, 11Note 3—Regulatory Matters, Note 12—Fair Value of Financial Assets and 15Liabilities and Note 16—Asset Retirement Obligations of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding Generation’s NDT funds and its decommissioning obligations.

 

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

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

 

On September 1, 2010, Generation and EnergySolutions completed the transactions contemplated by the ASA. Specifically, Generation transferred to ZionSolutions substantially all of the assets (other than land) associated with Zion Station, including assets held in related NDT funds. In consideration for Generation’s transfer of those assets, ZionSolutions assumed decommissioning and other liabilities, excluding the obligation to dispose of SNF, associated with Zion Station. Pursuant to the ASA, ZionSolutions will periodically request reimbursement from the Zion Station-related NDT funds for costs incurred related to the decommissioning efforts at Zion Station. However, ZionSolutions is subject to certain restrictions on its ability to request reimbursement; specifically, if certain milestones as defined in the ASA are not met, all or a portion of requested reimbursements shall be deferred until such milestones are met. See Note 1516—Asset Retirement Obligations of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding Zion Station Decommissioning and see Note 22—Variable Interest Entities of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion of variable interest entity considerations related to ZionSolutions.

Fossil and Renewable Facilities (including Hydroelectric)

 

Generation has ownership interests in 15,87513,281 MW of capacity in fossil and renewable generating facilities currently in service. Generation wholly owns all of its fossil and renewable generating stations, with the exception of: (1) jointly owned facilities that include Keystone, Conemaugh, and Wyman; (2) an ownership interestsinterest through an equity method investmentsinvestment in Colver, Malacha, Safe Harbor, and Sunnyside; and (3) certain wind project entities with minority interest owners,owners; and (4) an ownership interest in the Albany Green Energy, LLC project entity, see Note 22— Variable Interest Entities of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on these wind project entities. Generation’s fossil and renewable generating stations are all operated by Generation, with the exception of Colver, Conemaugh, Keystone, LaPorte, Malacha, Safe Harbor, Sunnyside and Wyman, which are operated by third parties. In 20132015, 2014 and 2012,2013, electric supply (in GWh) generated from owned fossil and renewable generating facilities was 15%8%, 13% and 12%15%, respectively, of Generation’s total electric supply. The majority of this output was dispatched to support Generation’s wholesale and retail power

15


marketing activities. For additional information regarding Generation’s electric generating facilities, see ITEM 2. PROPERTIES—Exelon Generation Company, LLC and ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS—Exelon Corporation, Executive Overview for additional information on Generation Renewable Development.

 

Licenses. Fossil and renewable generation plants are generally not licensed, and, therefore, the decision on when to retire plants is, fundamentally, a commercial one. FERC has the exclusive authority to license most non-Federal hydropower projects located on navigable waterways or Federal lands, or connected to the interstate electric grid. On August 29, 2012 and August 30, 2012, Generation submitted hydroelectric license applications to the FERC for 46-year licenses for the Conowingo Hydroelectric Project (Conowingo) and the Muddy Run Pumped Storage Facility Project and the Conowingo Hydroelectric Project,(Muddy Run), respectively. On December 22, 2015, FERC issued a new 40-year license for Muddy Run. The license term expires on December 1, 2055. Based on the latest FERC procedural schedule, the FERC licensing process iswas not expected to be completed prior to the expiration of Muddy Run’s current license on August 31, 2014, and the expiration of Conowingo’s license on September 1, 2014. However,FERC is required to issue an annual license for a facility until the new license is issued. On September 10, 2014, FERC issued an annual license for Conowingo, effective as of the expiration of the previous license. If FERC does not issue a new license prior to the expiration of annual license, the annual license will renew automatically. The stations will continue to operate under annual licenses until FERC takes action onare currently being depreciated over their estimated useful lives, which includes the 46-year license applications.renewal period. Refer to Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Insurance. Generation maintains business interruption insurance for its renewable and fossil projects, and delay in start-up insurance for its renewable and fossil projects currently under construction. Generation does not purchase business interruption insurance for its wholly owned fossil and hydroelectric operations.operations, unless required by financing agreements; see Note 14—Debt and Credit Agreements of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on financing agreements. Generation maintains both property damage and liability insurance. For property damage and liability claims for these operations, Generation is self-insured to the extent that losses are within the policy deductible or exceed the amount of insurance maintained. Such losses could have a material adverse effect on Exelon’s and Generation’s financial condition and their results of operations and cash flows. For information regarding property insurance, see ITEM 2. PROPERTIES—Generation.Exelon Generation Company, LLC.

Long-Term Power Purchase Contracts

 

In addition to energy produced by owned generation assets, Generation sources electricity and other related output from plants it does not own under long-term contracts. The following tables summarize Generation’s long-term contracts to purchase unit-specific physical power with an original term in excess of one year in duration, by region, in effect as of December 31, 2013:2015:

 

Region

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

Mid-Atlantic(a)

   16   2016 - 2032   799    16    2016 - 2032   805  

Midwest

   7   2015 - 2022   1,734    7    2016 - 2022   1,536  

New England

   14   2014 - 2020   1,291    8    2016 - 2017   650  

ERCOT

   5   2014 - 2026   1,489    5    2020 - 2031   1,501  

Other Regions

   11   2014 - 2030   4,113 

Other Power Regions

   12    2016 - 2030   2,927  
  

 

     

 

   

 

     

 

 

Total

   53      9,426    48       7,419  
  

 

     

 

   

 

     

 

 

 

   2014   2015   2016   2017   2018 

Capacity Expiring (MW)

   1,300    1,705     651    1,337    100 
   2016   2017   2018   2019   2020 

Capacity Expiring (MW)

   586     1,761     101     627     980  

 

(a)Excludes contracts with CENG.

16


Fuel

 

The following table shows sources of electric supply in GWh for 20132015 and 2012:2014:

 

  Source of Electric Supply (a)   Source of Electric Supply 
        2013               2012               2015               2014       

Nuclear(a)

   142,126    139,862    175,474     166,454  

Purchases—non-trading portfolio(b)

   69,791    91,994    61,592     48,200  

Fossil

   30,785    27,760 

Fossil (primarily natural gas)

   14,937     26,324  

Renewable(c)

   6,420    4,079    5,982     6,429  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total supply

   249,122    263,695    257,985     247,407  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Represents Generation’sIncludes the proportionate share of output where Generation has an undivided ownership interest in jointly-owned generating plants and includes the total output of its generating plants.plants that are fully consolidated (e.g., CENG). Nuclear generation for 2015 and 2014 includes physical volumes of 33,415 GWh and 25,053 GWh, respectively, for CENG.
(b)Includes purchases pursuant to Generation’sPurchased power for 2015 and 2014 includes physical volumes of 0 GWh and 5,346 GWh, respectively, as a result of the PPA with CENG. See Note 25On April 1, 2014, Generation assumed operational control of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.CENG’s nuclear fleet. As a result, 100% of CENG volumes are included in nuclear generation after April 1, 2014.
(c)Includes hydroelectric, wind, and solar generating assets.

 

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

 

The cycle of production and utilization of nuclear fuel includes the mining and milling of uranium ore into uranium concentrates, the conversion of uranium concentrates to uranium hexafluoride, the enrichment of the uranium hexafluoride and the fabrication of fuel assemblies. Generation has uranium concentrate inventory and supply contracts sufficient to meet all of its uranium concentrate requirements through 2016.2018. Generation’s contracted conversion services are sufficient to meet all of its uranium conversion requirements through 2020.2018. All of Generation’s enrichment requirements have been contracted through 2018.2020. Contracts for fuel fabrication have been obtained through 2018.2022. Generation does not anticipate difficulty in obtaining the necessary uranium concentrates or conversion, enrichment or fabrication services to meet the nuclear fuel requirements of its nuclear units.

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

 

Generation uses financial instruments to mitigate price risk associated with certain commodity price exposures. Generation also hedges forward price risk, using both over-the-counter and exchange-traded instruments. See ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS, ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS, Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates and Note 1213—Derivative Financial Instruments of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding derivative financial instruments.

 

Power Marketing

 

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

17


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

 

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

 

Price Supply Risk Management

 

Generation also manages the price and supply risks for energy and fuel associated with generation assets and the risks of power marketing activities. Generation implements a three-year ratable sales plan to align its hedging strategy with its financial objectives. Generation also enters into transactions that are outside of this ratable sales plan. Generation is exposed to relatively greater commodity price risk in 20142016 and beyond for which a larger portionportions of its electricity portfolio may bethat are unhedged. Generation has been and will continue to be proactive in using hedging strategies to mitigate this risk in subsequent years. As of December 31, 2013,2015, the percentage of expected generation hedged for the major reportable segments was 92%-95%90%-93%, 62%-65%60%-63% and 30%-33%28%-31% for 2014, 2015,2016, 2017, and 2016,2018, respectively. The percentage of expected generation hedged is the amount of equivalent sales divided by the expected generation.

Expected generation representsis the amountvolume of energy estimated to be generated or purchased throughthat best represents our commodity position in energy markets from owned or contracted for capacity including purchasedbased upon a simulated dispatch model that makes assumptions regarding future market conditions, which are calibrated to market quotes for power, from CENG.fuel, load following products, and options. Equivalent sales represent all hedging products, which include economic hedges and certain non-derivative contracts, including sales to ComEd, PECO and BGE to serve their retail load. A portion of Generation’s hedging strategy may be implemented through the use of fuel products based on assumed correlations between power and fuel prices, which routinely change in the market. The corporate risk management group and Exelon’s RMC monitor the financial risks of the wholesale and retail power marketing activities. Generation also uses financial and commodity contracts for proprietary trading purposes, but this activity accounts for only a small portion of Generation’s efforts. The proprietary trading portfolio is subject to a risk management policy that includes stringent risk management limits, including volume, stop-loss and value-at-risk limits, to manage exposure to market risk. Additionally, the corporate risk management group and Exelon’s RMC monitor the financial risks of the wholesale and retail power marketing activities. See ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK for additional information.

 

18


At December 31, 2013,2015, Generation’s short and long-term commitments relating to the purchase of energy and capacity from and to unaffiliated utilities and others were as follows:

 

(in millions)

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

2014

  $412   $117   $25   $824   $1,378 

2015

   367    110    13    —      490 

2016

   284    76    2    —      362   $262    $229    $15    $506  

2017

   223    25    2    —      250    197     269     21     487  

2018

   112    3    2    —      117    92     115     23     230  

2019

   97     34     24     155  

2020

   40     1     16     57  

Thereafter

   414    3    32    —      449    221     1     35     257  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total

  $1,812   $334   $76   $824   $3,046   $909    $649    $134    $1,692  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Net capacity purchases include PPAs and other capacity contracts including those that are accounted for as operating leases. Amounts presented in the commitments represent Generation’s expected payments under these arrangements at December 31, 2013,2015, net of fixed capacity payments expected to be received (“Capacity offsets”) by Generation under contracts to resell such acquired capacity to third parties under long-term capacity sale contracts. As of December 31, 2015, capacity offsets were $146 million, $149 million, $150 million, $151 million, $142 million, and $462 million for years 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, and thereafter, respectively. Expected payments include certain fixed capacity charges which may be reduced based on plant availability.
(b)The table excludes renewable energy purchases that are contingent in nature.
(c)Transmission rights purchases include estimated commitments for additional transmission rights that will be required to fulfill firm sales contracts.

 

As part of reaching a comprehensive agreement with EDF in October 2010, the existing power purchase agreements with CENG were modified to be unit-contingent through the end of their original term in 2014. Under these agreements Generation purchases 85% of the nuclear plant output owned by CENG that is not sold to third parties. CENG has the ability to fix the energy price on a forward basis by entering into monthly energy hedge transactions for a portion of the future sale, while any unhedged portions will be provided at market prices by default. Additionally, beginning in 2015 and continuing to the end of the life of the respective plants, Generation agreed to purchase 50.01% of the nuclear plant output owned by CENG at market prices. This purchase agreement will continue to be effective under the Master Agreement discussed above, except that if the put option under the Master Agreement is exercised, then the EDF PPA will be transferred to Generation upon the completion of the Put Option Agreement transaction. Generation discloses in the table above commitments to purchase from CENG at fixed prices. All commitments to purchase from CENG at market prices, which include all purchases subsequent to December 31, 2014, are excluded from the table. Generation continues to own a 50.01% membership interest in CENG that is accounted for as an equity method investment. See Note 25 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for more details on this arrangement.

Capital Expenditures

 

Generation’s business is capital intensive and requires significant investments in nuclear fuel and energy generation assets and in other internal infrastructure projects. Generation’s estimated capital expenditures for 20142016 are as follows:

 

(in millions)

        

Nuclear fuel(a)(b)

  $900   $1,150  

Production plant

   900 

Growth

   1,350  

Production plant(b)

   950  

Renewable energy projects

   300    25  

Uprates

   150 

Maryland commitments

   100 

Other

   50    125  
  

 

   

 

 

Total

  $2,400   $3,600  
  

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Includes Generation’s share of the investment in nuclear fuel for the co-owned Salem plant.
(b)Includes the CENG units on a fully consolidated basis.

19


ComEd

 

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

 

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

ComEd’s franchises are sufficient to permit it to engage in the business it now conducts. ComEd’s franchise rights are generally nonexclusive rights documented in agreements and, in some cases, certificates of public convenience issued by the ICC. With few exceptions, the franchise rights have stated expiration dates ranging from 20142016 to 2066. ComEd anticipates working with the appropriate agenciesgovernmental bodies to extend or replace the franchise agreements prior to expiration.

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

Retail Electric Services

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

Under Illinois law, ComEd is required to deliver electricity to all customers. ComEd’s obligation to provide generation supply service, which is referred to as a POLR obligation, primarily varies by customer size. ComEd’s obligation to provide such service to residential customers and other small customers with demands of under 100 kWs continues for all customers who do not choose a competitive electric generation supplier or who choose to return to ComEd after taking service from a competitive electric generation supplier. ComEd does not have a fixed-price generation supply service obligation to most of its largest customers with demands of 100 kWs or greater, as this group of customers has previously been declared competitive. Customers with competitive declarations may still purchase power and energy from ComEd, but only at hourly market prices.

20


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

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

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

On May 24, 2011, the ICC issued an order in ComEd’s 2010 electric distribution rate case (2010 Rate Case), which became effective on June 1, 2011. The order approved a $143 million increase to ComEd’s annual delivery service revenue requirement and a 10.5% rate of return on common equity. The order has been appealed to the Court by several parties. On May 16, 2013, the Court dismissed as moot the appeals of the ICC’s order in the 2010 Rate Case as ComEd now recovers distribution costs under EIMA through a pre-established formula rate tariff. See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on ComEd’s electric distribution rate cases.

Procurement-Related Proceedings. Since June 2009, the IPA designs, and the ICC approves, an electricity supply portfolio for ComEd and the IPA administers a competitive process under which ComEd procures its electricity supply from various suppliers, including Generation. As required by EIMA, in February 2012 the IPA completed procurement events for energy and REC requirements for the June 2013 through December 2017 period. See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on ComEd’s procurement plans. See Note 22 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on ComEd’s energy commitments.

Continuous Power Interruption. The Illinois Public Utilities Act provides that in the event an electric utility, such as ComEd, experiences a continuous power interruption of four hours or more that affects (in ComEd’s case) more than 30,000 customers, the utility may be liable for actual damages suffered by customers as a result of the interruption and may be responsible for reimbursement of local governmental emergency and contingency expenses incurred in connection with the interruption. Recovery of consequential damages is barred. The affected utility may seek from the ICC a waiver of these liabilities when the utility can show that the cause of the interruption was unpreventable damage due to weather events or conditions, customer tampering, or certain other causes enumerated in the law. See Note 22—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

21


Smart Meter, Smart Grid and Energy Efficiency Programs

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

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

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

Construction Budget

ComEd’s business is capital intensive and requires significant investments primarily in energy transmission and distribution facilities, to ensure the adequate capacity, reliability and efficiency of its system. Based on PJM’s RTEP, ComEd has various construction commitments, as discussed in Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. ComEd’s most recent estimate of capital expenditures for electric plant additions and improvements for 2014 is $1,775 million, which includes RTEP projects and infrastructure modernization resulting from EIMA. See ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS, Liquidity and Capital Resources for further information.

 

PECO

 

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

22


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

 

PECO’s combined electric and natural gas retail service territory has an area of approximately 2,100 square miles and an estimated population of 4.0 million. PECO provides electric distribution service in an area of approximately 1,900 square miles, with a population of approximately 3.9 million, including approximately 1.5 million in the City of Philadelphia. PECO provides natural gas distribution service in an area of approximately 1,900 square miles in southeastern Pennsylvania adjacent to the City of Philadelphia, with a population of approximately 2.4 million. PECO delivers electricity to approximately 1.6 million customers and natural gas to approximately 501,000 customers.

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

 

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

PECO’s natural gas sales are generally higher during the winter months when cold temperatures create demand for winter heating. PECO’s highest daily natural gas send out occurred on January 7, 2014 and was 760 mmcf.

Retail Electric Services

PECO’s retail electric sales and distribution service revenues are derived pursuant to rates regulated by the PAPUC. Pennsylvania permits competition by competitive electric generation suppliers for the supply of retail electricity while retail transmission and distribution service remains regulated under the Competition Act. At December 31, 2013, there were 87 competitive electric generation suppliers serving PECO customers. At December 31, 2013, the number of retail customers purchasing energy from a competitive electric generation supplier was 531,500 representing approximately 34% of total retail customers. Retail deliveries purchased from competitive electric generation suppliers represented approximately 68% of PECO’s retail kWh sales for the year ended December 31, 2013. Customers that choose a competitive electric generation supplier are not subject to rates for PECO’s electric supply procurement costs and retail transmission service charges. PECO presents on customer bills its electric supply Price to Compare, which is updated quarterly, to assist customers with the evaluation of offers from competitive electric generation suppliers.

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

23


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

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

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

The second DSP Program also includes a number of retail market enhancements recommended by the PAPUC in its previously issued Retail Markets Intermediate Work Plan Order. PECO was also directed to allow its low-income Customer Assistance Program (CAP) customers to purchase their generation supply from competitive electric generation suppliers beginning April 1, 2014. On May 1, 2013, PECO filed a Petition for Approval of its CAP Shopping Plan with the PAPUC, which the PAPUC granted and denied in part on January 9, 2014. PECO and other parties to the proceeding filed petitions for reconsideration of the Commission’s decision on February 10, 2014, and these petitions are currently pending before the PAPUC.

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

Smart Meter, Smart Grid and Energy Efficiency Programs

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

24


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

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

Energy Efficiency Programs. PECO’s PAPUC-approved Phase I EE&C plan had a four-year term that began on June 1, 2009 and concluded on May 31, 2013. The Phase I Plan sets forth how PECO would meet the required reduction targets established by Act 129’s EE&C provisions, which included a 3% reduction in electric consumption in PECO’s service territory and a 4.5% reduction in PECO’s annual system peak demand in the 100 hours of highest demand by May 31, 2013. The peak demand period ended on September 30, 2012 and PECO communicated its compliance with the reduction targets in a preliminary report with the PAPUC on March 1, 2013. The final compliance report was filed with the PAPUC on November 15, 2013.

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

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

Natural Gas

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

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

Procurement Proceedings. PECO’s natural gas supply is purchased from a number of suppliers primarily under long-term firm transportation contracts for terms of up to three years in accordance with its annual PAPUC PGC settlement. PECO’s aggregate annual firm supply under these firm transportation contracts is 34 million dekatherms. Peak natural gas is provided by PECO’s liquefied natural gas (LNG) facility and propane-air plant. PECO also has under contract 21 million dekatherms of underground storage through service agreements. Natural gas from underground storage represents approximately 30% of PECO’s 2013-2014 heating season planned supplies.

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

25


Construction Budget

PECO’s business is capital intensive and requires significant investments primarily in electric transmission and electric and natural gas distribution facilities to ensure the adequate capacity, reliability and efficiency of its system. PECO, as a transmission facilities owner, has various construction commitments under PJM’s RTEP as discussed in Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. PECO’s most recent estimate of capital expenditures for plant additions and improvements for 2014 is $625 million, which includes RTEP projects and capital expenditures related to the smart meter and smart grid project net of expected SGIG DOE reimbursements.

BGE

 

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

BGE serves an estimated population of 2.8 million in its 2,300 square mile combined electric and gas retail service territory. BGE provides electric distribution service in an area of approximately 2,300 square miles and gas distribution service in an area of approximately 800 square miles, both with a population of approximately 2.8 million, including approximately 621,000 in the City of Baltimore. BGE delivers electricity to approximately 1.2 million customers and natural gas to approximately 655,000 customers.

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

 

BGE’s kWhComEd, PECO and BGE

Utility Operations

Service Territories. The following table presents the size of retail service territories, populations of each retail service territory and the number of retail customers within each retail service territory for ComEd, PECO and BGE as of December 31, 2015:

   Retail Service Territories
(in square miles)
   Retail Service Territory  Population
(in millions)
   Number of Retail Customers
(in millions)
 
   Total   Electric   Natural gas   Total  Electric   Natural gas   Total   Electric   Natural gas 

ComEd

   11,400     11,400     n/a     9.0(a)   9.0     n/a     3.8     3.8     n/a  

PECO

   2,100     1,900     1,900     4.6(b)   4.0     3.1     2.1     1.6     0.5  

BGE

   2,300     2,300     800     3.0(c)   3.0     1.7     1.3     1.3     0.7  

(a)Includes approximately 2.8 million in the city of Chicago.
(b)Includes approximately 1.6 million in the city of Philadelphia.
(c)Includes approximately 0.6 million in the city of Baltimore.

Peak Deliveries.ComEd, PECO and BGE electric sales and peak electricity load are generally higher during the summer and winter months, when temperature extremes create demand for either summer cooling or winter heating. BGE’s highest peak load occurred on July 21, 2011For PECO and was 7,236 MW; its highest peak load during winter months occurred on January 7, 2014 and was 6,526 MW.

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

 

The demandfollowing table summarizes peak deliveries for electricityComEd, PECO and gas is affected by weather and usage conditions. The MDPSC has allowed BGE to record a monthly adjustment to itsfor electric and gas distribution revenues from all residential customers, commercial electric customers, the majoritydeliveries during peak demand months as of large industrial electric customers, and all firm service gas customers to eliminate the effect of abnormal weather and usage patterns per

December 31, 2015:

 

   Electric Peak Deliveries
(in GW)
   Natural Gas Peak Deliveries
(in mmcfs)
 
   Summer
peak date
   Summer
deliveries
   Winter peak
date
   Winter
deliveries
       Winter peak    
date
   Winter
    deliveries    
 

ComEd

   7/20/2011     23.75     1/6/2014     16.51     n/a     n/a  

PECO

   7/22/2011     8.98     1/7/2014     7.17     2/15/2015     777  

BGE

   7/21/2011     7.23     2/20/2015     6.71     2/19/2015     777  

26


customerElectric and Natural Gas Distribution Services. ComEd, PECO and BGE are allowed to recover reasonable costs and fair and prudent capital expenditures associated with electric and natural gas distribution services and earn a return on those capital expenditures, subject to commission approval. ComEd recovers costs through a performance-based rate formula, pursuant to EIMA. ComEd is required to file an update to the performance-based rate formula on an annual basis. PECO’s and BGE’s electric and gas distribution volumes, thereby recovering a specified dollar amount of distribution revenues per customer,costs are recovered through traditional rate case proceedings. In certain instances, ComEd, PECO and BGE use specific recovery mechanisms as approved by customer class, regardless of changesthe ICC, PAPUC, and MDPSC, respectively.

Through the ICC, ComEd is obligated to deliver electricity to customers in consumption levels. This adjustment allows BGE to recognize revenues at MDPSC-approved levels per customer, regardless of what actual distribution volumes were for a billing periodtheir respective service territories and also retain significant default service obligations (referred to as “revenue decoupling”). Therefore, while these revenues are affected by customer growth, they will not be affected by actual weather or usage conditions. BGE bills or credits affectedPOLR) to provide electricity to certain groups of customers in subsequent months for the difference between approved revenue levels under revenue decoupling and actual customer billings.

Retail Electric Services

BGE’s retail electric sales and distributiontheir respective service revenues are derived from electricity deliveries at rates regulated by the MDPSC. As a result of the deregulation of electric generation in Maryland effective July 1, 2000, all customers canareas who do not choose a competitive electric generation supplier. WhileThrough the PAPUC and MDPSC, PECO and BGE, does not sell electric supply to all customers in its service territory, BGE continuesrespectively, are obligated to deliver electricity and natural gas to all customers in their respective service territories and provides meter reading, billing, emergency response,also retain significant default service obligations (referred to as DSP and regular maintenance services. CustomerSOS for electric and PGC and MBR for natural gas, respectively) to provide electricity or natural gas to certain groups of customers in their respective service areas who do not choose a competitive electric generation supplier or a competitive natural gas supplier. ComEd is permitted to recover electric costs, and PECO and BGE are permitted to recover electric and natural gas procurement costs from retail customers. Therefore, fluctuations in electric and natural gas procurement costs have no impact on electric and natural gas revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense.

ComEd customers have the choice program activityto purchase electricity, and PECO and BGE customers have the choice to purchase electricity and natural gas from competitive electric generation and natural gas suppliers. The customer’s choice of suppliers does not impact the volume of deliveries, but affects revenuerevenues collected from customers related to supplied energy; however, thatenergy and natural gas service. Customer choice program activity has minimalno impact on electric and gas revenue net of purchased power expense or BGE’s financial position. At December 31, 2013, there were 73 competitive electric generation suppliers serving BGE customers. At December 31, 2013, the number of retailand fuel expense. For those customers purchasing energy fromthat choose a competitive electric generation or natural gas supplier, was approximately 399,000, representing 32% of totalComEd, PECO and BGE may act as the billing agent but do not record revenues or purchased power and fuel expense related to the electric and natural gas procurement costs. ComEd, PECO and BGE remain the distribution service providers for all customers in their respective service territories and charge a regulated rate for distribution service.

Retail customers participating in customer choice programs, and retail customers. Retail deliveries purchased from competitive electric generation and natural gas suppliers represented approximately 61%(as a percentage of BGE’s retail kWhGWh and mmcf sales, respectively) for ComEd, PECO and BGE consisted of the year endedfollowing at December 31, 2013.2015, 2014 and 2013:

   December 31, 2015 
   Number of retail customers   % of total retail customers  Deliveries as a % of retail sales
(for the year ended)
 
       Electric           Natural gas           Electric          Natural gas          Electric          Natural gas     

ComEd(a)

   1,655,400     n/a     42  n/a    76  n/a  

PECO

   563,400     81,100     35  16  70  25

BGE

   343,000     154,000     27  23  61  56
   December 31, 2014 
   Number of retail customers   % of total retail customers  Deliveries as a % of retail sales
(for the year ended)
 
   Electric   Natural gas   Electric  Natural gas  Electric  Natural gas 

ComEd

   2,426,900     n/a     63  n/a    80  n/a  

PECO

   546,900     78,400     34  16  70  22

BGE

   364,000     161,000     29  25  60  53
   December 31, 2013 
   Number of retail customers   % of total retail customers  Deliveries as a % of retail sales
(for the year ended)
 
   Electric   Natural gas   Electric  Natural gas  Electric  Natural gas 

ComEd

   2,630,200     n/a     68  n/a    81  n/a  

PECO

   531,500     66,400     34  13  68  19

BGE

   399,000     172,000     32  26  61  54

(a)In September 2015, the City of Chicago discontinued its participation in the customer choice program and began purchasing its electricity from ComEd. Approximately 670,000 customers were impacted by the City of Chicago’s decision which resulted in the reduction in the number of customers participating in customer choice programs in 2015.

Procurement-Related Proceedings.ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s electric supply for its customers is primarily procured through contracts as required by the ICC, PAPUC and MDPSC, respectively. ComEd, PECO and BGE procure electricity supply from various approved bidders, including Generation. Charges incurred for electric supply procured through contracts with Generation are included in Purchased power from affiliates on ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

 

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

PECO and BGE is obligated by the MDPSChave annual firm supply from transportation contracts of 132,000 mmcf and 128,000 mmcf, respectively. In addition, to provide several variations of SOS to commercial and industrial customers depending on customer load.

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

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

On May 17, 2013, BGE filed an application for an increase to its electric base rates with the MDPSC. On December 13, 2013, the MDPSC issued an order in BGE’s 2013 electric distribution rate case authorizing an increase in annual distribution service revenue of $34 million. The electric distribution rate increase was set using an allowed return on equity of 9.75%. The approved electric distribution rate became effective for services rendered on or after December 13, 2013.

27


Smart Meter and Energy Efficiency Programs

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

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

Natural Gas

BGE’s natural gas sales are derived pursuant to a MBR mechanism that applies to customers who buy their gas from BGE. Under this mechanism, BGE’s actual cost of gas is compared to a market index (a measure of the market price of gas in a given period). The difference between BGE’s actual cost and the market index is shared equally between shareholders and customers. Customer choice program activity affects revenue collected from customers related to supplied natural gas; however, that activity has minimum impact on gas revenue net of purchased power expense or BGE’s financial position. At December 31, 2013, there were 41 competitive natural gas suppliers serving BGE customers. At December 31, 2013, the number of retail customers purchasing fuel from a competitive natural gas supplier was approximately 172,000 representing 26% of total retail customers. Retail deliveries purchased from competitive natural gas suppliers represented approximately 54% of BGE’s retail mmcf sales for the year ended December 31, 2013.

BGE must secure fixed price contracts for at least 10%, but not more than 20%, of forecasted system supply requirements for flowing (i.e., non-storage) gas for the November through March period. These fixed price contracts are recovered under the MBR mechanism and are not subject to sharing. BGE meets its natural gas load requirements through firm pipeline transportation and storage entitlements. BGE’s current pipeline firm transportation entitlements to serve its firm loads are 362 mmcf per day.

BGE’s current maximum storage entitlements are 284 mmcf per day. To supplement its gas supply at times of heavy winter demands and to be available in temporary emergencies affecting gas supply, BGE has:

a liquefied natural gas facility for the liquefaction and storage of natural gas with a total storage capacity of 1,055 mmcf and a daily capacity of 332 mmcf,

a liquefied natural gas facility for natural gas system pressure support with a total storage capacity of 6 mmcf and a daily capacity of 6 mmcf, and

a propane air facility and a mined cavern with a total storage capacity equivalent to 546 mmcf and a daily capacity of 85 mmcf.

BGE has under contract sufficient volumes of propane for the operation of the propane air facility and is capable of liquefying sufficient volumes of natural gas during the summer months for operations

28


of its liquefied natural gas facility during peak winter periods. BGE historically has been able to arrange short-term contracts or exchange agreements with other gas companies in the event of short-term disruptions to gas supplies or to meet additional demand.temporary emergencies, PECO and BGE have available storage capacity from the following sources:

 

   Peak Natural Gas Sources (in mmcf) 
   Liquefied Natural
Gas Facility
   Propane-Air Plant   Underground Storage
Service Agreements (a)
 

PECO

   1,200     150     18,000  

BGE

   1,055     546     22,000  

(a)Natural gas from underground storage represents approximately 28% and 31% of PECO and BGE’s 2015-2016 heating season planned supplies, respectively.

PECO and BGE have long-term interstate pipeline contracts and also participatesparticipate 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 shareholdersthe utilities and customers. PECO and BGE makesmake these sales as part of a program to balance its supply of, and cost of natural gas.

 

Natural Gas Distribution Rate Cases.Energy Efficiency Programs. In December 2010, the MDPSC issued a rate order authorizingComEd, PECO and BGE are also allowed to increase the gas distribution base revenue requirement for service rendered on or after December 4, 2010recover costs associated with energy efficiency and demand response programs. Each commission approved program seeks to meet mandated electric consumption reduction targets and implement demand response measures to reduce peak demand. The programs are designed to meet standards required by no more than $9.8 million. In March 2011, the MDPSC issued a comprehensive rate order setting forth the details of the decision contained in its abbreviated combined electric and gas distribution rate order issued in December 2010.each respective regulatory agency.

 

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

On May 17, 2013, BGE filed an application for an increase to its gas base rates with the MDPSC. On December 13, 2013, the MDPSC issued an order in BGE’s 2013 natural gas distribution rate case authorizing an increase in annual distribution service revenue of $12 million. The gas distribution rate increase was set using an allowed return on equity of 9.60%. The approved natural gas distribution rate became effective for services rendered on or after December 13, 2013.

Construction Budget

BGE’s business isbusinesses are capital intensive and requires significant investments, primarily in electric transmission and distribution and natural gas distributiontransportation and electric transmissiondistribution facilities, to ensure the adequate capacity, reliability and efficiency of its system. BGE, as a transmission facilities owner, has various construction commitments under PJM’s RTEP as discussed in Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s most recent estimateestimates of capital expenditures for plant additions and improvements for 2014 is approximately $6002016 are $2,425 million, which includes capital expenditures related to the SGIP net of expected SGIG DOE reimbursements.$675 million and $825 million, respectively.

 

ComEd, PECO and BGE each have ICC, PAPUC and MDPSC, respectively, approved smart meter and smart grid deployment programs to enhance their distribution systems. The following table summarizes ComEd’s smart meter and PECO’s and BGE’s smart meter and smart grid technology spending and meter installations as of December 31, 2015:

   December 31, 2015 
   Total Spend from
Inception to Date
   Total Meters to be Installed   Meters Installed to Date 
   

 

   (in millions)   

 

 
   Projected   Actual   Electric   Natural gas   Electric   Natural gas 

ComEd(a)

  $2,615    $1,526     4.0     n/a     2.0     n/a  

PECO(b)

   818     803     1.7     0.5     1.7     0.5  

BGE(c)

   527     512     1.3     0.7     1.2     0.6  

(a)ComEd has committed to invest approximately $2.6 billion over a ten year period to modernize and storm-harden its distribution system and to implement smart grid technology. These amounts represent capital expenditures associated with ComEd’s commitment.
(b)PECO will seek recovery of costs associated with PECO’s gas AMI through the traditional rate case process.
(c)BGE is seeking recovery of its smart grid initiative costs as part of its 2015 electric and gas distribution rate case. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Transmission ServicesServices.

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

 

PJM is the ISO and the FERC-approved RTO for the Mid-Atlantic and Midwest regions. PJM is the transmission provider under, and the administrator of, the PJM Open Access Transmission Tariff (PJM Tariff),. PJM operates the PJM energy, capacity and other markets, and, through central dispatch, controls

29


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

 

ComEd’sComEd’s and BGE’s transmission rates are established based on a formula that was approved by FERC in January 2008.2008 and April 2006, respectively. FERC’s order establishes the agreed-upon treatment of costs and revenues in the determination of network service transmission rates and the process for updating the formula rate calculation on an annual basis.

 

PECO default servicePECO’s customers are charged for PECO’s PJM retail transmission services through a rider designed to recover PECO’s PJM transmission network service charges and RTEP charges on a full and current basis through a Transmission Service Charge (applicable to default service only) and through a Non-Bypassable Transmission Charge (applicable to all distribution customers) in accordance with the 2010 electricPECO’s approved distribution rate case settlement.rates.

 

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

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

See Note 3Regulatory Matters, Note 25—Segment Information of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements and ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS, Liquidity and Capital Resources for additional information regarding transmission services.further information.

 

Employees

 

As of December 31, 2013,2015, Exelon and its subsidiaries had 25,82929,762 employees in the following companies, of which 8,6029,649 or 33%32% were covered by collective bargaining agreements (CBAs):

 

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

Generation

   1,690    100    1,973    3,763    11,973    1,688     102     2,424     4,214     14,512  

ComEd

   3,487    —      —      3,487    5,895    3,996     —       —       3,996     6,765  

PECO

   —      1,254    —      1,254    2,418    —       1,327     —       1,327     2,641  

BGE

   —      —      —      —      3,303    —       —       —       —       3,293  

Other(d)

   71    —      27    98    2,240    69     —       43     112     2,551  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total

   5,248    1,354    2,000    8,602    25,829    5,753     1,429     2,467     9,649     29,762  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)A separate CBA between ComEd and IBEW Local 15 ratified on October 10, 2012, covers approximately 3261 employees in ComEd’s System Services Group.Group and was extended to April 1, 2016. Generation’s and ComEd’s separate CBAs with IBEW Local 15 were extended through February 28, 2014.expires in 2019.
(b)1,2541,327 PECO craft and call center employees in the Philadelphia service territory are covered by CBAs with IBEW Local 614. The CBAs expire on March 31, 2015.614, both expiring in 2021. Additionally, Exelon Power, an operating unit of Generation, has an agreement with IBEW Local 614, which expires on November 3,in 2016 and covers 107102 employees.
(c)

During 2015, Generation finalized its CBA with Clinton Local 51 which will expire in 2020; its two CBAs with Local 369 at Mystic 7 and Mystic 8/9, both expiring in 2020; and four Security Officer unions at Braidwood, Byron, Clinton and TMI, all expiring between 2018 and 2021, respectively. During 2014, Generation finalized CBAs with TMI Local 777 and Oyster Creek Local 1289, expiring in 2019 and 2021, respectively and CENG finalized its CBA with Nine Mile Point which will expire in 2020. Additionally, during 2014, Generation finalized CBAs with the Security Officer unions at Dresden, LaSalle, Limerick and Quad Cities, which expire between 2017 and 2018. Lastly, during 2014, an agreement was negotiated with Las Vegas District Energy and IUOE Local 501, which will expire in 2018. During 2013, Generation finalized aits CBA with the Security Officer union at Oyster Creek, which will expireexpiring in 2016. Additionally, during 2013, three2016; as well as two other 3-year agreements were negotiated: Power, IBEW Local 614, which will expire in 2016;agreements: New England ENEH, UWUA Local 369, which will expire in 2017; and New Energy IUOE Local 95-95A, which will expire in 2016. During 2012, Generation finalized CBAs with the Security Officer unions at Byron, Clinton and TMI, which expire between 2015 and 2016. During 2011, Generation finalized CBAs with the Security Officer unions at Braidwood,

30


Dresden, LaSalle and Quad Cities, which expire between 2014 and 2015. During 2010, Generation entered into a CBA with the Security Officer union at Limerick, which expires in 2014. Additionally, during 2009, a 5-year agreement was reached with Oyster Creek Nuclear Local 1289, which expires in 2015.

(d)Other includes shared services employees at BSC.

 

Environmental Regulation

 

General

 

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

 

The Exelon boardBoard of directorsDirectors is responsible for overseeing the management of environmental matters. Exelon has a management team to address environmental compliance and strategy, including the CEO; the Senior Vice President, Corporate Strategy and Chief Sustainability Officer; the Corporate Environmental Strategy Director and the Environmental Regulatory Strategy Director, as well as senior management of Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE. Performance of those individuals directly involved in environmental compliance and strategy is reviewed and affects compensation as part of the annual individual performance review process. The Exelon boardBoard of Directors has delegated to its corporate governance committee the authority to oversee Exelon’s compliance with laws and regulations and its strategies and efforts to protect and improve the quality of the environment, including Exelon’s climate change and sustainability policies and programs, and Exelon 2020, Exelon’s comprehensive business and environmental plan, as discussed in further detail below. The Exelon boardBoard of Directors has also delegated to its generation oversight committeeGeneration Oversight Committee the authority to oversee environmental, health and safety issues relating to Generation. The respective boardsBoards of ComEd, PECO and BGE, which each include directors who also serve on the Exelon board,Board of Directors, oversee environmental, health and safety issues related to ComEd, PECO and BGE.

 

Air Quality

 

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

 

See Note 22 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial StatementsITEM 7.—MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS for additional information regarding clean air regulation and legislation in the forms of the CSAPR, and CAIR, the regulation of hazardous air pollutants from coal- and oil-fired electric generating facilities under MATS, and regulation of GHG emissions, in addition to NOVs issued to Generation and ComEd for alleged violations of the Clean Air Act.emissions.

Water Quality

 

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

31


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

See Note 22 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding the impact to Exelon of state permitting agencies’ administration of the Phase II rule implementing Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act.

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

 

Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act. Section 316(b) requires that the cooling water intake structures at electric power plants reflect the best technology available to minimize adverse environmental impacts, and is implemented through state-level NPDES permit programs. All of Generation’s power generation facilities with cooling water systems are subject to the regulations. Facilities without closed-cycle recirculating systems (e.g., cooling towers) are potentially most affected by changes to the existing regulations. For Generation, those facilities are Calvert Cliffs, Clinton, Dresden, Eddystone, Fairless Hills, Ginna, Gould Street, Handley, Mountain Creek, Mystic 7, Nine Mile Point Unit 1, Oyster Creek, Peach Bottom, Quad Cities, Riverside, Salem and Schuylkill.

On October 14, 2014, the EPA’s final Section 316(b) rule became effective. The rule requires that a series of studies and analyses be performed to determine the best technology available to minimize adverse impacts on aquatic life, followed by an implementation period for the selected technology. The timing of the various requirements for each facility is related to the status of its current NPDES permit and the subsequent renewal period. There is no fixed compliance schedule, as this is left to the discretion of the state permitting director.

Until the compliance requirements are determined by the applicable state permitting director on a site-specific basis for each plant, Generation cannot estimate the effect that compliance with the rule will have on the operation of its generating facilities and its future results of operations, cash flows, and financial position. Should a state permitting director determine that a facility must install cooling towers to comply with the rule, that facility’s economic viability would be called into question. However, the potential impact of the rule has been significantly reduced since the final rule does not mandate cooling towers as a national standard and sets forth technologies that are presumptively compliant, and the state permitting director is required to apply a cost-benefit test and can take into consideration site-specific factors.

New York Facilities. In July 2011, the New York Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) issued a policy regarding the best available technology for cooling water intake structures. Through its policy, the DEC established closed-cycle cooling or its equivalent as the performance goal for all existing facilities, but also provided that the DEC will select a feasible technology whose costs are not wholly disproportionate to the environmental benefits to be gained and allows for a site-specific determination where the entrainment performance goal cannot be achieved. The Ginna and Nine Mile Point Unit 1 power generation facilities received renewals of their state water discharge permits in 2014.

Salem. In June 2001, the NJDEP issued a renewed NPDES permit for Salem, expiring in July 2006, allowing for the continued operation of Salem with its existing cooling water system. In February 2006, PSEG filed a renewal application with the NJDEP allowing Salem to continue operating under its existing NPDES permit until a new permit was issued. On June 30, 2015, NJDEP issued a draft NPDES permit for Salem. The draft permit does not require installation of cooling towers and allows Salem to continue to operate utilizing the existing once-through cooling water system with certain required system modifications. The draft permit was subject to a public notice and comment period and the NJDEP may make revisions before issuing the final permit expected during the first half of 2016.

Solid and Hazardous Waste

 

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

 

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

 

See Note 2223—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding solid and hazardous waste regulation and legislation.

 

Environmental Remediation

 

ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s environmental liabilities primarily arise from contamination at former MGP sites. ComEd, pursuant to an ICC order, and PECO, pursuant to settlements of natural gas distribution rate cases with the PAPUC, have an on-going process to recover environmental remediation costs of the MGP sites through a provision within customer rates. While BGE does not have a rider for MGP clean-up costs, BGE has historically received recovery of actual clean-up costs on a site-specific basis in distribution rates. The amount to be expended in 20142016 at Exelon for compliance with environmental remediation related to contamination at former MGP sites and other gas purification sites is expected to total $40$38 million, consisting of $33$32 million and $6 million and $1 millionrespectively, at ComEd PECO and BGE, respectively.PECO.

 

Generation’s environmental liabilities primarily arise from contamination at current and former generation and waste storage facilities. As of December 31, 2013,2015, Generation has established an appropriate liability to comply with environmental remediation requirements including contamination attributable to low level radioactive residues at a storage and reprocessing facility named Latty Avenue, and at a disposal facility named West Lake Landfill, both near St. Louis, Missouri related to operations conducted by Cotter Corporation, a former ComEd subsidiary.

 

32


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

 

See Notes 33—Regulatory Matters and 2223—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding the Registrants’ environmental remediation efforts and related impacts to the Registrants’ results of operations, cash flows and financial position.positions.

Global Climate Change

 

Exelon believes the evidence of global climate change is compelling and that the energy industry, though not alone, is a significant contributor to the human-caused emissions of GHGs that many in the scientific community believe contribute to global climate change, and as reported by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in their Fifth Assessment Report Summary for Policy Makers issuesissued in September 2013. Exelon, as a producer of electricity from predominantly low-carbon generating facilities (such as nuclear, hydroelectric, wind and solar photovoltaic), has a relatively small GHG emission profile, or carbon footprint, compared to other domestic generators of electricity. By virtue of its significant investment in low-carbon intensity assets, Generation’s emission intensity, or rate of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e)(CO2e) emitted per unit of electricity generated, is among the lowest in the industry. Exelon does produce GHG emissions, primarily at its fossil fuel-firednatural gas-fired generating plants; CO2,CO2, methane and nitrous oxide are all emitted in this process, with CO2CO2 representing the largest portion of these GHG emissions. GHG emissions from combustion of fossil fuels represent the majority of Exelon’s direct GHG emissions in 2013,2015, although only a small portion of Exelon’s electric supply is from fossil generating plants. Other GHG emission sources at Exelon include natural gas (methane) leakage on the natural gas systems, sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)(SF6) leakage in its electric transmission and distribution operations and refrigerant leakage from its chilling and cooling equipment as well as fossil fuel combustion in its motor vehicles and usagefossil fuel generation of electricity atused to power its facilities. Despite its focus onlow-carbon generation, Exelon believes its operations could be significantly affected by the possible physical risks of climate change and by mandatory programs to reduce GHG emissions. See ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS for information regarding the market and financial, regulatory and legislative, and operational risks associated with climate change.

 

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

 

International Climate Change Regulation. At the international level, the United States has not yet ratified the United Nations Kyoto Protocol, which was extended at the 2012 meeting ofis a Party to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The Parties to the UNFCCC adopted the Paris Agreement at the 21stsession of the UNFCCC Conference of the Parties (COP 18).21) on December 12, 2015. The Kyoto Protocol now requires participating developed countries to cap GHG emissions at certain levels until 2020, whenParis Agreement defines the new global agreement on emissions reduction is scheduled to become effective. This new global agreement for GHG emissions reductions was agreed to only in concept during the COP18, with a timeline for establishingUNFCCC’s objective of limiting the global targetstemperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. All Parties are required to develop their own national emission reductions and to update those reductions at least every five years. The Developed Country Parties, including the United States, are required to take the lead by 2015. On November 22, 2013, at the 2013 COP 19 held in Warsaw, Poland, participating countries further agreed to provide their “intended nationally determined contributions” by the first quarter of 2015 in preparation for formally setting global target in 2015.undertaking economy-wide absolute emission reduction targets. The other major issues discussed at COP 19 were demands from developing countries for increased climate finance, and for a new mechanism to help especially vulnerable nations cope with unavoidable “loss and damage” resulting from climate change. Developed countries, whichUnited States had previously promisedsubmitted its national emission reductions to mobilizeachieve a 2020 target of reducing net emissions in the range of 17% below the 2005 level and to achieve net greenhouse gas emission reductions of 26%—28% below the 2005 level by 2025. The United States has indicated that it intends to achieve these reductions through a variety of mechanisms, including regulations to cut carbon pollution from new and existing power plants. The Paris Agreement will enter into force on the thirtieth day after the date on which at least 55 Parties accounting for at least an estimated 55% of total of $100 billion a year by 2020, refused to set a quantified interim goal for ramping up climate finance.global greenhouse gas emissions have ratified the Agreement.

 

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

33


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

 

The U.S. EPA is addressing the issue of carbon dioxide (CO2)(CO2) emissions regulation for new and existing electric generating units through the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) under

Section 111 of the Clean Air Act. Pursuant to the Climate Action Plan, President Obama’s June 25, 2013 memorandumObama directed the EPA to U.S. EPA, the Agency re-proposed aregulate new and modified fossil fired generating units under Section 111(b) regulationof the Clean Air Act. The EPA finalized the rule in August 2015, and the final rule has been challenged in the U.S. Court of Appeals for new units in September 2013 that may result in material coststhe District of compliance for CO2 emissions for new fossil-fuel electric generating units, particularly coal-fired units. Columbia.

Under the President’s memorandum, the U.S. EPA iswas also required to proposefinalize a rule to establish CO2 emission reduction requirements for existing fossil-fuel generating stations under Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act. The final rule, no later than June 1, 2014known as the Clean Power Plan, became effective on December 22, 2015. The rule sets GHG emission reduction targets for each state, with reductions beginning in 2022, and the target achieved by 2030. States must submit an implementation plan to establish CO2the EPA by September 2016, unless granted an extension of up to two years. States are granted latitude to select from a number of compliance options, which are designed to achieve the reductions in the most cost-effective manner. The final rule has been challenged in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. On February 9, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a stay of the Clean Power Plan until the disposition of the petitions challenging the rule now before the Court of Appeals, and, if such petitions are filed in the future, before the U.S. Supreme Court. While the ultimate impact of the Clean Power Plan rule is expected to be favorable, Exelon and Generation cannot at this time predict to what extent the states’ actions to comply with the Clean Power Plan’s emission regulations for existing stationary sources.reduction targets will impact their future financial position, results of operations and cash flows.

 

Regional and State Climate Change Legislation and Regulation. After a two-year program review, the nine northeast and mid-Atlantic states currently participating in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Reduction Initiative (RGGI) released an updated RGGI Model Rule and Program Review Recommendations Summary on February 7, 2013. Under the updated RGGI program which must be approved pursuant to the applicable legislative and/or regulatory process in each RGGI state, the regional RGGI CO2CO2 budget would bewas reduced, starting in 2014, from its currentprevious 165 million ton level to 91 million tons, with a 2.525 percent reduction in the cap level each year between 2015-2020.from 2015 through 2020. Included in the new program are provisions for cost containment reserve (CCR) allowances, which will become available if the total demand for allowances, above the CCR trigger price, exceeds the number of CO2CO2 allowances available for purchase at auction. (CCR trigger prices are $4 in 2014, $6 in 2015, $8 in 2016 and $10 in 2017; after 2017 risingthe CCR price increases by 2.5 percent thereafter to account for inflation)each year). Such an outcome could put modest upward pressure on wholesale power prices; however, the specifics are currently uncertain.

 

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

 

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

 

The Maryland Commission on Climate Change was chartered in 2007 and released its climate action plana greenhouse gas reduction strategy with 42 recommendations on August 27, 2008, recommending that the state begin implementing 42 greenhouse gas reduction strategies. One of the Plan’s2008. The plan’s primary policy recommendations,recommendation to formally adopt science-based regulatory goals to reduce Maryland’s GHG emissions was realized with the passage of the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Act of 2009 (GGRA). The law which requires Maryland to reduce its GHG emissions by 25 percent below 2006 levels by 2020. It also directed the MDE to work with other state agenciesMaryland Department of Environment to prepare and implement an implementationaction plan to meet this goal. The implementation planwhich was published in October of 2013. Maryland targetedMaryland’s electricity consumption reduction goals, required under the “Empower“EmPOWER Maryland” program, and mandatory State participation in the recently updated and enhanced RGGI Program, are listed as thatthe energy sector’s contribution in the plan. The plan also advocatesadvocated raising the renewable portfolio standard requirement from 22%20% by 2022 to 25% by 2022. The Department of Environment was required to submit a December 2015 report to the Governor and General Assembly

on progress towards the 25% mandate; its costs and benefits; the need for target adjustments; and the status of federal programs. In 2016, the Legislature will review the progress report, its economic impacts on manufacturing sector and other information and determine whether to continue, adjust or eliminate the requirement to achieve a 25% reduction by 2020.

 

34


Exelon’s Voluntary Climate Change Efforts. In a world increasingly concerned about global climate change and regulatory action to reduce GHG, Exelon’s low-carbon generating fleet is seen by management as a competitive advantage. Exelon remains one of the largest, lowest carbon electric generators in the United States: nuclear for base load, natural gas for marginal and peak demand, hydro and pumped storage, and supplemental wind and solar renewables. As further legislation and regulation imposing requirements on emissions of GHG and air pollutants are promulgated, Exelon’s low-carbon, low-emission generation fleet will position the company to benefit from its comparative advantage over other generation fleets.

 

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

Renewable and Alternative Energy Portfolio Standards

 

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

 

The Illinois Settlement Legislationutilities are required that procurement plans implemented by electric utilities includeto procure cost-effective renewable energy resources or approved equivalents such as RECs in amounts that equal or exceed 2% of the total electricity that each electric utility supplies to its eligible retail customers by June 1, 2008, increasingcustomers. ComEd is also required to acquire amounts of renewable energy resources to cumulatively increase this percentage to at least 10% by June 1, 2015 with a goaland an ultimate target of at least 25% by June 1, 2025. UtilitiesAll goals are allowed to pass-through any costs from the procurement of these renewable resources or approved equivalents subject to legislated rate impact criteria.criteria set forth by Illinois legislation. As of December 31, 2013,2015, ComEd had purchased sufficient renewable energy resources or equivalents, such as RECs, to comply with the Illinois Settlement Legislation. See Note 3legislation. ComEd currently retires all RECs upon transfer and Note 22acceptance. ComEd is permitted to recover procurement costs of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.RECs from retail customers without mark-up through rates.

 

The AEPS Act became effective for PECO on January 1, 2011, following the expiration of PECO’s transition period.2011. During 2013,2015, PECO was required to supply approximately 4.0%5.0% of electric energy generated from Tier I alternative energy resources (including solar, wind power, low-impact hydropower, geothermal energy, biologically derived methane gas, fuel cells, biomass energy, coal mine methane and black liquor generated within Pennsylvania), as measured in AECs, through May 31, 20132015 and subsequently 4.5%5.5% beginning June 1, 20132015 and continuing through May 31, 2014.2016. PECO was also required to supply 6.2% of electric energy generated from Tier II alternative energy resources (including waste coal, demand-side management, large-scale hydropower, municipal solid waste, generation of electricity utilizing wood and by-products of the pulping process and wood, distributed generation systems and integrated combined coal gasification technology) alternative energy resources, respectively,, as measured in AECs.AECs, through May 31, 2015 and subsequently 8.2% beginning June 1, 2015 and continuing through May 31, 2016. The compliance requirements will incrementally escalate to 8.0% for Tier I and 10.0% for Tier II by 2021. In order to comply with these requirements, PECO entered into agreements with varying terms with accepted bidders, including Generation, to purchase non-solar Tier I, solar Tier 1 and Tier II AECs. PECO also purchases AECs through its DSP Program full requirement contracts.

 

35


Section 7-703 of the Public Utilities Article in Maryland sets forth the RPS requirement, which applies to all retail electricity sales in Maryland by electricity suppliers. The RPS requirement requires that suppliers obtain a specified percentage of the electricity it sells from Tier 1 sources (solar, wind, biomass, methane, geothermal, ocean, fuel cell, small hydroelectric, and poultry litter) and Tier 2

sources (hydroelectric, other than pump storage generation, and waste-to-energy). The RPS requirement began in 2006, requiring that suppliers procure 1.0% and 2.5% from Tier 1 and Tier 2 sources, respectively, escalating in 2022 to 22.0% from Tier 1 sources, including at least 2.0% from solar energy, and a phase out of Tier 2 resource options by 2022. In 2013, 8.2%2015, 10.5% was required from Tier 1 renewable sources, including at least 0.25%0.5% derived from solar energy and 2.5% from Tier 2 renewable sources. TheBGE is subject to requirements established by the Public Utilities Article in Maryland related to the use of alternative energy resources; however, the wholesale suppliers that supply power to the state’s utilitiesBGE through the SOS procurement auctions have the obligation, by contract with those utilities,BGE, to comply with and provide its proportional share ofmeet the RPS requirements.

 

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

 

See Note 3 and Note 223—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Executive Officers of the Registrants as of February 13, 201410, 2016

 

Exelon

 

Name

  Age  

Position

  

Period

Crane, Christopher M.

  5557  Chief Executive Officer, Exelon;  2012 - Present
    Chairman, ComEd, PECO & BGE  2012 - Present
    President, Exelon  2008 - Present
    President, Generation  2008 - 2013
    Chief Operating Officer, Exelon  2008 - 2012
    Chief Operating Officer, Generation  2007 - 2010

Cornew, Kenneth W.

  4850  Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Commercial Officer, Exelon;  2013 - Present
    President and CEO, Generation  2013 - Present
    Executive Vice President and Chief Commercial Officer, Exelon  2012 - 2013
    President and Chief Executive Officer, Constellation  2012 - 2013
    Senior Vice President, Exelon; President, Power Team  2008 - 2012

O’Brien, Denis P.

  5355  Senior Executive Vice President, Exelon; Chief Executive Officer, Exelon Utilities  2012 - Present
    Vice Chairman, ComEd, PECO, BGE  2012 - Present
    Chief Executive Officer, PECO; Executive Vice President, Exelon  2007 - 2012
    President and Director, PECO  2003 - 2012

36


Name

Age

Position

Period

Pramaggiore, Anne R.

  5557  Chief Executive Officer, ComEd  2012 - Present
    President, ComEd  2009 - Present
    Chief Operating Officer, ComEd  2009 - 2012

Name

  Age  Executive Vice President, Customer Operations, Regulatory and External Affairs, ComEd

Position

  2007 - 2009

Period

Adams, Craig L.

  6163  President and Chief Executive Officer, PECO  2012 - Present
    Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, PECO  2007 - 2012

DeFontes Jr., Kenneth W.Butler, Calvin G.

  6346  President and Chief Executive Officer, BGE  20042014 - Present(a)Present
    Senior Vice President, Constellation EnergyRegulatory and External Affairs, BGE  20042013 - 2012

Gillis, Ruth Ann M.

59Executive Vice President, Exelon2008 - Present2014
    Chief Administrative Officer,Senior Vice President, Corporate Affairs, Exelon  20102011 - Present2013
    Senior Vice President, Human Resources, Exelon Business Services Company  20052010 - Present2011
    Chief Diversity Officer, ExelonSenior Vice President, Corporate Affairs, ComEd  2009 - 20122010

Von Hoene Jr., William A.

  6062  Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Strategy Officer, Exelon  2012 - Present
    Executive Vice President, Finance and Legal, Exelon  2009 - 2012
Executive Vice President and General Counsel, Exelon2008 - 2009
Senior Vice President, Exelon Business Services Company2004 - 2009

Thayer, Jonathan W.

  4244  Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Exelon  2012 - Present
    Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Constellation Energy; Treasurer, Constellation Energy  2008 - 2012

Aliabadi, Paymon

  5153  Executive Vice President and Chief Enterprise Risk Officer, Exelon  2013 - Present
    Managing Director, Gleam Capital Management  2012 - 2013
    Principal and Managing Director, Gunvor International  2009 - 2011
Chief Executive Officer, Essent Trading International2004 - 2009

DesParte, Duane M.

  5052  Senior Vice President and Corporate Controller, Exelon  2008 - Present

 

Generation

 

Name

  Age  

Position

  

Period

Cornew, Kenneth W.

  4850  Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Commercial Officer, Exelon;  2013 - Present
    President and CEO, Generation  2013 - Present
    Executive Vice President and Chief Commercial Officer, Exelon  2012 - 2013
    President and Chief Executive Officer, Constellation  2012 - 2013
    Senior Vice President, Exelon; President, Power Team  2008 - 2012

37


Name

Age

Position

Period

Pacilio, Michael J.

53President, Exelon Nuclear; Senior Vice President2010 - Present
and Chief Nuclear Officer, Generation
Chief Operating Officer, Exelon Nuclear2007 - 2010

Nigro, Joseph

  4951  Executive Vice President, Exelon; Chief Executive Officer, Constellation  2013 - Present
    Senior Vice President, Portfolio Management and Strategy  2012 - 2013
    Vice President, Structuring and Portfolio Management, Exelon Power Team  2010 - 2012

Pacilio, Michael J.

55Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, Exelon Generation2015 - Present
President, Exelon Nuclear; Senior Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer, Generation2010 - 2015
Chief Operating Officer, Exelon Nuclear2007 - 2010

Name

Age

Position

Period

Hanson, Bryan C.

50President and Chief Nuclear Officer, Exelon Nuclear; Senior Vice President, Exelon Generation2015 - Present
Chief Operating Officer, Exelon Nuclear2014 - 2015
Senior Vice President of Operations, Generation2010 - 2013
Vice President of Operations, Generation2009 - 2010

DeGregorio, Ronald

  5153  Senior Vice President, Generation; President, Exelon Power  2012 - Present
    Chief Integration Officer, Exelon  2011 - 2012
    Chief Operating Officer, Exelon Transmission Company  2010 - 2011
    Senior Vice President, Mid-AtlanticMid- Atlantic Operations, Exelon Nuclear  2007 - 2010

Wright, Bryan P.

  4749  Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Generation  2013 - Present
    Senior Vice President, Corporate Finance, Exelon  2012 - 2013
    Chief Accounting Officer, Constellation Energy  2009 - 2012
    Vice President and Controller, Constellation Energy  2008 - 2012

Aiken, Robert

  4749  Vice President and Controller, Generation  2012 - Present
    Executive Director and Assistant Controller, Constellation  2011 - 2012
    Constellation
Executive Director of Operational Accounting,2009 - 2011
Constellation Energy Commodities Group  
Vice President of International Accounting,20072009 - 2009
Constellation Energy Commodities Group2011

 

ComEd

 

Name

  Age  

Position

  

Period

Pramaggiore, Anne R.

  5557  Chief Executive Officer, ComEd  2012 - Present
    President, ComEd  2009 - Present
    Chief Operating Officer, ComEd  2009 - 2012
Executive Vice President, Customer Operations, Regulatory and External Affairs, ComEd2007 - 2009

Donnelly, Terence R.

  5355  Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, ComEd  2012 - Present
    Executive Vice President, Operations, ComEd  2009 - 2012
Senior Vice President, Transmission and Distribution, ComEd2007 - 2009

Trpik Jr., Joseph R.

  4446  Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, ComEd  2009 - Present
Vice President & Assistant Corporate Controller, Exelon Business Services Company2007 - 2009
Vice President and Assistant Corporate Controller, Exelon2004 - 2009

38


Name

Age

Position

Period

Jensen, Val

  5859  Senior Vice President, Customer Operations, ComEd  2012 - Present
    Vice President, Marketing and Environmental Programs, ComEd  2008 - 2012

O’Neill, Thomas S.

  5153  Senior Vice President, Regulatory and Energy Policy and General Counsel, ComEd  2010 - Present
    Senior Vice President, Exelon  2009 - 2010
Senior Vice President, New Business Development, Generation; Senior Vice President, New Business Development, Exelon2009 - 2009
Vice President, New Plant Development, Generation2007 - 2009

Marquez Jr., Fidel

  5254  Senior Vice President, Governmental and External Affairs, ExelonComEd  2012 - Present
    Senior Vice President, Customer Operations, ComEd  2009 - 2012

Name

  Age  Vice President of External Affairs and Large Customer Services, ComEd

Position

  2007 - 2009

Period

Brookins, Kevin B.

  5254  Senior Vice President, Strategy & Administration, ComEd  2012 - Present
    Vice President, Operational Strategy and Business Intelligence, ComEd  2010 - 2012
    Vice President, Distribution System Operations, ComEd  2008 - 2010

Anthony, J. Tyler

  4951  Senior Vice President, Distribution Operations, ComEd  2010 - Present
    Vice President, Transmission and Substations, ComEd  2007 - 2010

Kozel, Gerald J.

  4143  Vice President, Controller, ComEd  2013 - Present
    Assistant Corporate Controller, Exelon  2012 - 2013
    Director of Financial Reporting and Analysis, Exelon  2009 - 2012
Manager of Accounting, ComEd2008 - 2009

 

PECO

 

Name

  Age  

Position

  

Period

Adams, Craig L.

  6163  President and Chief Executive Officer, PECO  2012 - Present
    Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, PECO  2007 - 2012

Barnett, Phillip S.

  5052  Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, PECO  2007 - Present
    Treasurer, PECO  2012 - Present

Innocenzo, Michael A.

  4850  Senior Vice President and Chief Operations Officer, PECO  2012 - Present
    Vice President, Distribution System Operations and Smart Grid/Smart Meter, PECO  2010 - 2012
    Vice President, Distribution System Operations  2007 - 2010

39


Name

Age

Position

Period

Webster Jr., Richard G.

  5254  Vice President, Regulatory Policy and Strategy, PECO  2012 - Present
    Director of Rates and Regulatory Affairs  2007 - 2012

Murphy, Elizabeth A.

  5456  Vice President, Governmental and External Affairs, PECO  2012 - Present
    Director, Governmental & External Affairs, PECO  2007 - 2012

Jiruska, Frank J.

  5355  Vice President, Customer Operations, PECO  2013 - Present
Director of Energy and Marketing Services, PECO2010 - 2013

Diaz Jr., Romulo L.

  6769  Vice President and General Counsel, PECO  2012 - Present
    Vice President, Governmental and External Affairs, PECO  2009 - 2012
Associate General Counsel, Exelon2008 - 2009

Bailey, Scott A.

  3739  Vice President and Controller, PECO  2012 - Present
    Assistant Controller, Generation  2011 - 2012
    Director of Accounting, Power Team  2007 - 2011

BGE

 

Name

  Age  

Position

  

Period

DeFontes Jr., Kenneth W.Butler, Calvin G.

  6346  President and Chief Executive Officer, BGE  

20042014 - Present(a)

Present
    Senior Vice President, Constellation EnergyRegulatory and External Affairs, BGE  

20042013 - 2012

2014
Senior Vice President, Corporate Affairs, Exelon2011 - 2013
Senior Vice President, Human Resources, Exelon2010 - 2011
Senior Vice President, Corporate Affairs, ComEd2009 - 2010

Woerner, Stephen J.

  4648President, BGE2014 - Present
  Chief Operating Officer, BGE  

2012 - Present

    Senior Vice President, BGE  

2009 - Present

2014
    Vice President and Chief Integration Officer, Constellation Energy  

2011 - 2012

    Vice President and Chief Information Officer, Constellation Energy  

2010 - 2011

    Vice President, Transformation, Constellation Energy  

2009 - 2010

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

2007 - 2009

Khouzami, Carim V.Vahos, David M.

  3843  Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer BGE  

20132014 - Present

    Vice President Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer,Controller, BGE  

20112012 - 2013

2014
    Executive Director, Investor Relations,Audit, Constellation Energy  

20092010 - 2011

2012
    Director, Corporate Strategy and Development, Constellation Energy

2008 - 2009

Butler, Calvin

44Senior Vice President, Regulatory and External Affairs,Finance, BGE  

20132006 - Present(a)

Senior Vice President, Corporate Affairs, Exelon

2011 - 2013

Senior Vice President, Human Resources, Exelon

2010 - 2011

Senior Vice President, Corporate Affairs, ComEd

2009 - 2010

40


Name

Age

Position

Period

Case, Mark D.

  5254  Vice President, Strategy and Regulatory Affairs, BGE  

2012 - Present

    Senior Vice President, Strategy and Regulatory Affairs, BGE  

2007 - 2012

Dodson, Carol A.Biagiotti, Robert D.

  4945  Vice President, Customer Operations BGE

2013 - Present

and Chief Customer Officer, BGE  

20132015 - Present

    Vice President, Utility Oversight, BSCGas Distribution, BGE  

20122011 - 2013

2015
    Vice President, EngineeringDirector, Gas and Project Management, BGE

2012 - 2012

Senior Vice President, Asset ManagementElectric Field Services, BGE  

20092008 - 2012

2011

Gahagan, Daniel P.

  6062  Vice President and General Counsel, BGE  

2007 - Present

Vahos, David M.Bauer, Matthew N.

  4139  Vice President and Controller, BGE  

2014 - Present

Vice President of Power Finance, Exelon Power2012 - Present

2014
Director, FP&A and Retail, Constellation2012 - 2012
    Executive Director, Audit,Corporate Development, Constellation  

20102009 - 2012

Núñez, Alexander G.

44Vice President, Governmental and External Affairs, BGE2013 - Present
    Director, Finance,State Affairs, BGE  

2012 - 2013

Director, State Affairs, Constellation Energy2006 - 2010

(a)On February 12, 2014, Kenneth W. DeFontes Jr., President and Chief Executive Officer at BGE announced his retirement from BGE on February 28, 2014. Effective March 1, 2014, Calvin G. Butler Jr. will become Chief Executive Officer of BGE and an executive officer of Exelon and Stephen J. Woerner will become President and continue as Chief Operating Officer of BGE.2012

 

ITEM 1A.RISK FACTORS

 

Each of the Registrants operates in a market and regulatory environment that poses significant risks, many of which are beyond thethat Registrant’s control. Management of each Registrant regularly meets with the Chief Enterprise Risk Officer and the RMC, which comprises officers of the Registrants, to identify and evaluate the most significant risks of the Registrants’ businesses, and the appropriate steps to manage and mitigate those risks. The Chief Enterprise Risk Officer and senior executives of the Registrants discuss those risks with the finance and risk committee and audit committeescommittee of the Exelon board of directors and the ComEd, PECO and BGE boards of directors. In addition, the

generation oversight committee of the Exelon board of directors’directors evaluates risks related to the generation business. The risk factors discussed below maycould adversely affect one or more of the Registrants’ results of operations andor cash flows and the market prices of their publicly traded securities. Each of the Registrants has disclosed the known material risks that affect its business at this time. However, there may be further risks and uncertainties that are not presently known or that are not currently believed by a Registrant to be material that maycould adversely affect its performance or financial condition in the future.

 

The Registrants’ mostExelon’s financial conditions and results of operations are affected to a significant risks arise as a consequence of:degree by: (1) Generation’s position as a predominantly nuclear generator selling power into competitive energy markets with a concentration in select regions, and (2) the role of ComEd, PECO and BGE as operators of electric transmission and distribution systems in three of the largest metropolitan areas in the United States. The Registrants’ major risksFactors that affect the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrants fall primarily under the following categories:categories, all of which are discussed in further detail below:

 

  

Market and Financial Risks.Factors. Exelon’s and Generation’s market and financial risks include the riskresults of operations are affected by price fluctuations in the powerenergy markets. Power prices are a function of supply and demand, which in turn are driven by factors such as (1) the price of fuels, in particular the pricesprice of natural gas, and coal, which driveaffects the prices that Generation can obtain for the output of its power plants, (2) the ratepresence of expansion of subsidized low-carbonother generation resources in the markets in which Generation’s output is sold, (3) the effects on energy demand of factors such as weather, economic conditions and implementation of energy efficiency and demand response programs,for electricity in the markets where the Registrants conduct their business, and (4) the impacts of increasedon-going competition in the retail channel.

 

41


  

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

 

  

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

 

  

Risks Related to the Pending Merger with ConstellationPHI.There are various risks and the Pending Master Agreement between Generation and CENG.As a result ofuncertainties associated with the merger agreement announced with Constellation that closedPHI on March 12, 2012, Exelon may encounter unexpected difficulties or costs in meeting commitments it made under various orders and agreements associated with regulatory approvals from the JulyApril 29, 2013 Master Agreement between Exelon, Generation and subsidiaries of Generation with EDF, EDF Inc. (EDFI) (a subsidiary of EDF) and CENG. Exelon and Generation are subject to the risks that integration of CENG’s nuclear fleet may not achieve anticipated results, and that Exelon and Generation may not be able to fully integrate the operations of CENG in the manner expected.2014.

 

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

 

Market and Financial RisksFactors

 

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

 

Generation is exposed to commodity price risk for the unhedged portion of its electricity generation supply portfolio. As such, Generation’s earnings and cash flows are therefore subject to variability as spot and forward market prices in the markets in which it operates rise and fall.

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

42


encouraged through climate legislation or regulation, may displace a higher marginal cost plant, further reducing power prices. In addition, further delay or elimination of EPA air quality regulations could prolong the duration for which the cost of pollution from fossil fuel generation is not factored into market prices.

 

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

 

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

 

Sustained low market prices or depressed demand and over-supply could adversely affect Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations andor cash flows, and such impacts could be emphasized given Generation’s concentration of base-load electric generating capacity within primarily two geographic market regions, namely the Midwest and the Mid-Atlantic. These impacts could adversely affect Exelon’s and Generation’s ability to fund other discretionary uses of cash such as growth projects or to pay dividends. In addition, such conditions may no longer support the continued operation of certain generating facilities, which could adversely affect Exelon’s and Generation’s resultsresult of operations through increasedaccelerated depreciation rates,expense, impairment charges related to inventory that cannot be used at other nuclear units and cancellation of in-flight capital projects, accelerated amortization of plant specific nuclear fuel costs, severance costs, accelerated asset retirement obligation expense relate to future decommissioning activities, and additional funding of decommissioning costs, which maycan be offset in whole or in part by reduced operating and maintenance expenses. A slow recovery in market conditions could result in a prolonged depression of or further decline in commodity prices, including low forward natural gas and power prices and low market volatility, which could also adversely affect Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations, cash flows andor financial position.positions. See Note 9—Implications of Potential Early Plant Retirements of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

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

 

Credit Risk. In the bilateral markets, Generation is exposed to the risk that counterparties that owe Generation money, or are obligated to purchase energy or fuel from Generation, will not perform under their obligations for operational or financial reasons. In the event the counterparties to these arrangements fail to perform, Generation mightcould be forced to purchase or sell energy or fuel in the wholesale markets at less favorable prices and incur additional losses, to the extent of amounts, if any, already paid to the counterparties. In the spot markets, Generation is exposed to risk as a result of default sharing mechanisms that exist within certain markets, primarily RTOs and ISOs, the purpose of which is to spread such risk across all market participants. Generation is also a party to agreements with entities in the energy sector that have experienced rating downgrades or other financial difficulties. In addition, Generation’s retail sales subject it to credit risk through competitive electricity and natural gas supply activities to serve commercial and industrial companies, governmental entities and

43


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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Disruptions in the capital markets and their actual or perceived effects on particular businesses and the greater economy maycould adversely affect the value of the investments held within Generation’s NDTs and Exelon’s employee benefit plan trusts. The Registrants have significant obligations in these areas and Exelon and Generation hold substantial assets in these trusts to meet those obligations. The asset values are subject to market fluctuations and will yield uncertain returns, which maycould fall below the Registrants’ projected return rates. A decline in the market value of the NDT fund investments maycould increase Generation’s funding requirements to decommission its nuclear plants. A decline in the

market value of the pension and other postretirement benefitOPEB plan assets will increase the funding requirements associated with Exelon’s pension and other postretirement benefitOPEB plan obligations. Additionally, Exelon’s pension and other postretirement benefitOPEB plan liabilities are sensitive to changes in interest rates. As interest rates decrease, the liabilities increase, potentially increasing benefit costs and funding requirements. Changes in demographics, including increased numbers of retirements or changes in life expectancy assumptions or changes to Social Security or Medicare eligibility requirements maycould also increase the costs and funding requirements of the obligations related to the pension and other postretirement benefitOPEB plans. If future increases in pension and other postretirement costs as a result of reduced plan assets or other factors cannot be recovered, or cannot be recovered in a timely manner, from ComEd, PECO and BGE customers, the results of operations and financial positions of ComEd, PECO and BGE could be negatively affected. Ultimately, if the Registrants are unable to manage the investments withwithin the NDT funds and benefit plan assets, and are unable to manage the related benefit plan liabilities, their results of operations, cash flows andor financial positions could be negatively affected.

impacted.

 

44


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

 

The Registrants rely on the capital markets, particularly for publicly offered debt, as well as the banking and commercial paper markets, to meet their financial commitments and short-term liquidity needs if internal funds are not available from the Registrants’ respective operations. Disruptions in the capital and credit markets in the United States or abroad cancould adversely affect the Registrants’ ability to access the capital markets or draw on their respective bank revolving credit facilities. The Registrants’ access to funds under their credit facilities is dependent on the ability of the banks that are parties to the facilities to meet their funding commitments. Those banks may not be able to meet their funding commitments to the Registrants if they experience shortages of capital and liquidity or if they experience excessive volumes of borrowing requests from the Registrants and other borrowers within a short period of time. The inability to access capital markets or credit facilities, and longer term disruptions in the capital and credit markets as a result of uncertainty, changing or increased regulation, reduced alternatives or failures of significant financial institutions could result in the deferral of discretionary capital expenditures, changes to Generation’s hedging strategy in order to reduce collateral-posting requirements, or a reduction in dividend payments or other discretionary uses of cash.

 

In addition, the Registrants have exposure to worldwide financial markets, including Europe. Disruptions in the European markets could reduce or restrict the Registrants’ ability to secure sufficient liquidity or secure liquidity at reasonable terms. As of December 31, 2013,2015, approximately 30%25%, or $2.5$2.1 billion of the Registrants’ available credit facilities were with European banks. The credit facilities include $8.4 billion in aggregate total commitments of which $6.6$6.9 billion was available as of December 31, 2013.2015. There were no borrowings under the Registrants’ credit facilities as of December 31, 2013.2015. See Note 1314—Debt and Credit Agreements of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on the credit facilities.

 

The strength and depth of competition in competitive energy markets depend heavily on active participation by multiple trading parties, which could be adversely affected by disruptions in the capital and credit markets and legislative and regulatory initiatives that may affect participants in commodities transactions. Reduced capital and liquidity and failures of significant institutions that participate in the energy markets could diminish the liquidity and competitiveness of energy markets that are important to the respective businesses of the Registrants. Perceived weaknesses in the competitive strength of

the energy markets could lead to pressures for greater regulation of those markets or attempts to replace market structures with other mechanisms for the sale of power, including the requirement of long-term contracts, which could have a material adverse effect on Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations andor cash flows.

 

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

 

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

45


of collateral required to be provided by Generation at any point in time is dependent on a variety of factors, including (1) the notional amount of the applicable hedge, (2) the nature of counterparty and related agreements, and (3) changes in power or other commodity prices. In addition, if Generation were downgraded, it could experience higher borrowing costs as a result of the downgrade. Generation could experience a downgrade in its ratings if any of the credit rating agencies concludes that the level of business or financial risk and overall creditworthiness of the power generation industry in general, or Generation in particular, has deteriorated. Changes in ratings methodologies by the credit rating agencies could also have a negative impact on the ratings of Generation. Generation has project-specific financing arrangements and must meet the requirements of various agreements relating to those financings. Failure to meet those arrangements could give rise to a project-specific financing default which, if not cured or waived, could result in the specific project being required to repay the associated debt or other borrowings earlier than otherwise anticipated, and if such repayment were not made, the lenders or security holders would generally have rights to foreclose against the project assets and related collateral.

 

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

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

 

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

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

 

46


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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

A significant portion of Generation’s power portfolio is used to provide power under procurement contracts with ComEd, PECO, BGE and other customers. To the extent portions of the power portfolio

are not needed for that purpose, Generation’s wholesale output is sold in the wholesale power markets. To the extent its power portfolio is not sufficient to meet the requirements of its customers under the related agreements, Generation must purchase power in the wholesale power markets. Generation’s financial results maycould be negatively affected if it is unable to cost-effectively meet the load requirements of its customers, manage its power portfolio and effectively address the changes in the wholesale power markets.

 

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

 

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

 

47


1999 sale of fossil generating assets. The IRS has challenged Exelon’s 1999 tax position on its like-kind exchange transaction. Exelon and the IRS failed to reach a settlement on the like-kind exchange position and Exelon filed a petition on December 13, 2013 to initiate litigation in the United States Tax Court.Court and the trial took place in August 2015. Exelon was not required to remit any part of the asserted tax or penalty in order to litigate the like-kind exchange position. The litigation could take three to five years including appeals, if necessary.

 

As of December 31, 2013,2015, if the IRS is successful in its challenge to the like-kind exchange position, Exelon’s potential cash outflow, including tax and after-tax interest, exclusive of penalties, that could become currently payable may be as much as $840$760 million, of which approximately $305$280 million would be attributable to ComEd after consideration of Exelon’s agreement to hold ComEd harmless. In addition to attempting to impose tax on the like-kind exchange position, the IRS has asserted approximately $90 million of penalties for a substantial understatement of tax, which could result in an after-tax charge of $87 million to Exelon’s and ComEd’s results of operations should the IRS prevail in asserting the penalties.tax. The timing effects of the final resolution of the like-kind exchange matter are unknown. See Note 1415—Income Taxes of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Tax reserves and the recoverability of deferred tax assets.reserves.The Registrants are required to make judgments in order to estimate their obligations to taxing authorities. These tax obligations include income, real estate, sales and use and employment-related taxes and ongoing appeals issues related to these tax matters. These judgments include reserves for potential adverse outcomes regarding tax positions that have been taken that maycould be subject to challenge by the tax authorities. The Registrants also estimate their ability to utilize tax benefits, including those in the form of carryforwards and tax credits. See Notes 11—Significant Accounting Policies and 14Note 15—Income Taxes of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

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

 

ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s current procurement plans include purchasing power through contracted suppliers and in the spot market. ComEd’s and PECO’s costs of purchased power are charged to customers without a return or profit component. BGE’s SOS rates charged to customers recover BGE’s wholesale power supply costs and include an administrative fee which includes a shareholder return component and an incremental cost component. For PECO, purchased natural gas costs are charged to customers with no return or profit component. For BGE, purchased natural gas costs are charged to customers using a MBR mechanism that compares the actual cost of gas to a market index. The difference between the actual cost and the market index is shared equally

between shareholders and customers. Purchased power and natural gas prices fluctuate based on their relevant supply and demand. Significantly higher rates related to purchased power and natural gas cancould result in declines in customer usage, lower revenues and potentially additional uncollectible accounts expense for ComEd, PECO and BGE. In addition, any challenges by the regulators or ComEd, PECO and BGE as to the recoverability of these costs could have a material effect on the Registrants’ results of operations andor cash flows. Also, ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s cash flows cancould be affected by differences between the time period when electricity and natural gas are purchased and the ultimate recovery from customers.

 

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

48


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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

Long-lived assets represent the single largest asset class on the Registrants’ statement of financial position.positions. Specifically, long-lived assets account for 59%60%, 49%, 61%56%, 66%, 69% and 75%80% of total assets for Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE, respectively, as of December 31, 2013.2015. In addition, the RegistrantsExelon and Generation have significant balances related to unamortized energy contracts. See Notes 4 and 10Note 11—Intangible Assets of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on Exelon’s unamortized energy contracts. The Registrants evaluate the recoverability of the carrying value of long-lived assets to be held and used whenever events or circumstances indicating a potential impairment exist. Factors such as the business climate, including current and future energy and market conditions, environmental regulation, and the condition of assets are considered when evaluating long-lived assets for potential impairment. An impairment would require the Registrants to reduce the carrying value of the long-lived asset through a non-cash charge to expense by the amount of the impairment, and such an impairment could have a material adverse impact on the Registrants’ results of operations.

 

Exelon and Generation have investments in certain generating plant projects, including the CENG nuclear joint venture with a carrying value of $1.9 billion as of December 31, 2013. These investments

49


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

Exelon holds investments in coal-fired plants in Georgia and Texasthat are subject to long-term leases. The investments are accounted for as direct financing lease investments. The investments represent the estimated residual valuesvalue of the leased assets at the end of the respective lease terms.term. On an annual basis, Exelon reviews the estimated residual values of its direct financing lease investments and records a non-cash impairment charge to expense if the review indicates an other than temporary decline in the fair value of the residual values below their carrying values. Such an impairment could have a material adverse impact on Exelon’s results of operations.

 

Exelon and ComEd had approximately $2.6$2.7 billion of goodwill recorded at December 31, 20132015 in connection with the merger between PECO and Unicom Corporation, the former parent company of ComEd. Under GAAP, goodwill remains at its recorded amount unless it is determined to be impaired, which is generally based upon an annual analysis that compares the implied fair value of the goodwill to its carrying value. If an impairment occurs, the amount of the impaired goodwill will be written-off reducingto expense, which will also reduce equity. The actual timing and amounts of any goodwill impairments will depend on many sensitive, interrelated and uncertain variables. A successful IRS challenge to Exelon’s and ComEd’s like-kind exchange income tax position, adverse regulatory actions such as early termination of EIMA, or changes in significant assumptions used in estimating ComEd’s fair value (e.g., discount and growth rates, utility sector market performance and transactions, operating and capital expenditure requirements and the fair value of debt) could result in an impairment. Such an impairment would result in a non-cash charge to expense, which could have a material adverse impact on Exelon’s and ComEd’s results of operations.

 

See ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS—Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates and Notes 7, 8Note 7—Property, Plant and 10Equipment, Note 8—Impairment of Long Lived Assets and Note 11—Intangible Assets of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional discussion on long-lived asset and goodwill impairments.

 

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

 

The Registrants’ businesses are capital intensive and require significant investments by Generation in energy generationelectric generating facilities and by ComEd, PECO and BGE in transmission and

distribution infrastructure projects. These operational systems and infrastructure have been in service for many years. Older equipment,Equipment, even if maintained in accordance with good utility practices, is subject to operational failure, including events that are beyond the Registrants’ control, and maycould require significant expenditures to operate efficiently. The Registrants’ results of operations, financial condition,conditions, or cash flows could be adversely affected if they were unable to effectively manage their capital projects or raise the necessary capital. Furthermore, operational failure of electric or gas systems or infrastructure could result in potential liability if such failure results in damage to property or injury to individuals. See ITEM 1. BUSINESS for further information regarding the Registrants’ potential future capital expenditures.

 

50


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

 

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

 

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

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

Because retail customers where Generation serves load can switch from their respective energy delivery company to a competitive electric generation supplier for their energy needs, planning to meet Generation’s obligation to provide the supply needed to serve Generation’s share of an electric distribution company’s default service obligation is more difficult than planning for retail load before the advent of retail competition. Before retail competition, the primary variables affecting projections of load were weather and the economy. With retail competition, another major factor is retail customers switching to or from competitive electric generation suppliers. If fewer of such customers switch from its retail load serving counterparties than Generation anticipates, the load that Generation must serve will be greater than anticipated, which could, if market prices have increased, increase Generation’s costs (due to its need to go to market to cover its incremental supply obligation) more than the increase in Generation’s revenues. If more customers from its retail load serving counterparties switch than Generation anticipates, the load that Generation must serve will be lower than anticipated, which could, if market prices have decreased, cause Generation to lose opportunities in the market.positions.

 

Regulatory and Legislative RisksFactors

 

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

 

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

51


cash flows are heavily dependent upon the ability of Generation to sell power at market-based rates, as opposed to cost-based or other similarly regulated rates, and Exelon’s, ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s operating results and cash flows are heavily dependent on the ability of ComEd, PECO and BGE to recover their costs for the retail purchase and distribution of power to their customers.

Similarly, there is risk that financial market regulations could increase the Registrants’ compliance costs and limit their ability to engage in certain transactions. In the planning and management of operations, the Registrants must address the effects of regulation on their businesses and changes in the regulatory framework, including initiatives by Federal and state legislatures, RTOs, exchanges, ratemaking agencies and taxing authorities. Additionally, the Registrants need to be cognizant of rulesand understand rule changes or Registrant actions that could result in potential violation of tariffs, market rules and anti-manipulation laws. Fundamental changes in regulations or other adverse legislative actions affecting the Registrants’ businesses would require changes in their business planning models and operations and could adversely affectnegatively impact their results of operations, cash flows andor financial position.positions.

 

Regulatory and legislative developments related to climate change and RPS maycould also significantly affect Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations, cash flows andor financial positions. Various legislative and regulatory proposals to address climate change through GHG emission reductions, if enacted, could result in increased costs to entities that generate electricity through carbon-emitting fossil fuels, which could increase the market price at which all generators in a region, including Generation, may sell their output, thereby increasing the revenue Generation could realize from its low-carbon nuclear assets. However, national regulation or legislation addressing climate change through an RPS could also increase the pace of development of wind energy facilities in the Midwest, which could put downward pressure on wholesale market prices for electricity from Generation’s Midwest nuclear assets, partially offsetting any additional value Exelon and Generation might derive from Generation’s nuclear assets under a carbon constrained regulatory regime that might exist in the future. Similarly, final regulations under Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act may not provide sufficient incentives for states to utilize carbon-free nuclear power as a means of meeting greenhouse gas emission reduction requirements, while continuing a policy of favoring renewable energy sources. Current state level climate change and renewable regulation is already providing incentives for regional wind development. The Registrants cannot predict when or whether any of these various legislative and regulatory proposals may become law or what their effect will be on the Registrants.

 

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

 

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

 

Approximately 60%65% of Generation’s generating resources, which include directly owned assets and capacity obtained through long-term contracts, are located in the area encompassed by PJM. Generation’s future results of operations will depend on 1)(1) FERC’s continued adherence to and support for, policies that favor the preservation of competitive wholesale power markets, such as PJM’s, and (2) the absence of material changes to market structures that would limit or otherwise negatively affect market competitiveness. Generation could also be adversely affected by state laws, regulations or initiatives designed to reduce wholesale prices artificially below competitive levels or to subsidize new generation, such as the subsequently dismissed New Jersey Capacity Legislation and the MDPSC’s RFP for new gas-fired generation in Maryland. See Note 33—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further details related to the New Jersey Capacity Legislation and the Maryland new electric generation requirements.

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

52


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

 

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank)(the Act) was enacted into law onin July 21, 2010. Its primary objective is to eliminate from the financial system the systemic risk that Congress believed was inThe part the cause of the financial crisisAct that unfolded during 2008.applies to Exelon is Title VII, which is known as the Dodd-Frank ushers inWall Street Transparency and Accountability Act (Dodd-Frank). Dodd-Frank requires the creation of a brand new regulatory regime applicablefor over-the-counter swaps (swaps), including mandatory clearing for certain categories of Swaps, incentives to shift swap activity to exchange trading, margin and capital requirements, and other obligations designed to promote transparency. For non security-based swaps including commodity swaps, Dodd-Frank empowers the over-the-counter (OTC)Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) to promulgate regulations implementing the law’s objectives. The primary aim of Dodd-Frank is to regulate the key intermediaries in the swaps market, forwhich entities are either swap dealers (SDs), major swap participants (MSPs), and certain other financial entities, but the law also applies to a lesser degree to end-users of swaps. Generation relies on the OTCOn January 12, 2015, President Obama signed into law a bill that exempts from margin requirements swaps markets as part of its programused by end-users to hedge or mitigate commercial risk. Moreover, the price risk associated with its generation portfolio. In April 2012,CFTC’s Dodd-Frank regulations preserve the CFTC issued its rule defining swap dealersability of end users in the energy industry to hedge their risks using swaps without being subject to mandatory clearing, and major swap participants.accepts or exempts end-users from many of the other substantive regulations. Accordingly, as an end-user, Generation has determined that it will conductis conducting its commercial hedging business as an end user in a manner that does not require registration with the CFTC as an SD or MSP. Generation does not anticipate transacting in the future in a swap dealermanner in which it would become a SD or major swap participant.MSP.

 

NotwithstandingThere are, however, some rulemakings that have not yet been finalized, including the foregoing,capital and margin rules for (non-cleared) swaps. Generation willdoes not expect these rules to directly impact its collateral requirements. However, depending on the substance of these final rules in addition to certain international regulatory requirements still faceunder development and that are similar to Dodd-Frank, Generation’s swap counterparties could be subject to additional regulatory obligations under Dodd-Frank, including some reporting requirements, clearing some additional transactions that it would otherwise enter into over-the-counter, and havingpotentially significant capitalization requirements. These regulations could motivate the SDs and MSPs to adhere to position limits. More fundamentally, however, the total burden that the rules could impose on all market participants could cause liquidity in the bilateral OTC swaps market to decrease substantially. Dodd-Frank may require up to $1 billion of additionalincrease collateral requirements at Generation, to be met withor cash rather than letters of credit in a price stressed environment. postings from their counterparties, including Generation.

Generation continues to monitor the rulemaking proceduresproceedings with respect to the capital and margin rules, but cannot predict the ultimate outcome that the financial reform legislation will have onto what extent, if any, further refinements to Dodd-Frank requirements may impact its results of operations, cash flows or financial position.position, but such impacts could be material.

ComEd, PECO and BGE could also be subject to some Dodd-Frank requirements to the extent they were to enter into swaps. However, at this time, management of ComEd, PECO and BGE continue to expect that their companies will not be materially affected by Dodd-Frank.

 

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

 

Generation has significant generating resources within the service areas of ComEd, PECO and BGE and makes significant sales to each of them. Those facts tend to cause Generation to be directly affected by developments in those markets. Government officials, legislators and advocacy groups are aware of Generation’s affiliation with ComEd, PECO and BGE and its sales to each of them. In periods of rising utility rates, particularly when driven by increased costs of energy production and supply, those officials and advocacy groups may question or challenge costs and transactions incurred by

ComEd, PECO, or BGE, including transactions betweenwith Generation, on the one hand, and ComEd, PECO or BGE, on the other hand, regardlessirrespective of any previous regulatory processes or approvals underlying those transactions. The prospect of such challenges may increase the time, complexity and cost of the associated regulatory proceedings, and the occurrence of such challenges may subject Generation to a level of scrutiny not faced by other unaffiliated competitors in those markets. In addition, government officials and legislators maycould seek ways to force Generation to contribute to efforts to mitigate potential or actual rate increases, through measures such as generation-based taxes and contributions to rate-relief packages.

 

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

 

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

53


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

 

If application of Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act, which establishes a national requirement for reducing the adverse impacts to aquatic organisms at existing generating stations, requires the retrofitting of cooling water intake structures at Salem or other Exelon power plants, this development could result in material costs of compliance. Pursuant to discussions with the NJDEP regarding the application of Section 316(b) to Oyster Creek, Generation agreed to permanently cease generation operations at Oyster Creek by December 31, 2019, ten years before the expiration of its operating license in 2029. On June 30, 2015, NJDEP issued a draft NPDES permit for Salem. The draft permit does not require installation of cooling towers and allows Salem to continue to operate utilizing the existing once-through cooling water system. The draft permit is subject to a public notice and comment period after which the NJDEP may make revisions before issuing the final permit expected during the first half of 2016.

 

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

 

In some cases, a third-party who has acquired assets from a Registrant has assumed the liability the Registrant maycould otherwise have for environmental matters related to the transferred property. If the transferee is unable, or fails, to discharge the assumed liability, a regulatory authority or injured person could attempt to hold the Registrant responsible, and the Registrant’s remedies against the transferee may be limited by the financial resources of the transferee. See Note 2223—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

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

 

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

 

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

 

54


ComEd, PECO and BGE cannot predict the ultimate outcomes of any settlements or the actions by Illinois, Pennsylvania, Maryland or Federal regulators in establishing rates, including the extent, if any, to which certain costs such as significant capital projects will be recovered or what rates of return will be allowed. Nevertheless, the expectation is that ComEd, PECO and BGE will continue to be obligated to deliver electricity to customers in their respective service territories and will also retain significant POLR and default service obligations, referred to as POLR, DSP and SOS for ComEd, PECO and BGE, respectively, to provide electricity and natural gas to certain groups of customers in their respective service areas who do not choose an alternative supplier. The ultimate outcome and timing of regulatory rate proceedings have a significant effect on the ability of ComEd, PECO and BGE, as applicable, to recover their costs and could have a material adverse effect on ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s results of operations, cash flows and financial position. See Note 33—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding rate proceedings.

 

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

 

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

 

Federal and state legislation mandating the implementation of energy conservation programs that require the implementation of new technologies, such as smart meters and smart grid, have increased capital expenditures and could significantly impact ComEd, PECO and BGE, if timely cost recovery is not allowed. Furthermore, regulated energy consumption reduction targets and declines in customer energy consumption resulting from the implementation of new energy conservation technologies could

lead to a decline in the revenues of Exelon, ComEd, and PECO. For additional information, see ITEM 1. BUSINESS “Environmental Regulation-Renewable and Alternative Energy Portfolio Standards.”

 

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

 

As of December 31, 2013,2015, Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE have concluded that the operations of ComEd, PECO and BGE meet the criteria of the authoritative guidance for accounting for the effects of certain types of regulation. If it is concluded in a future period that a separable portion of their businesses no longer meets the criteria, Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE would be required to eliminate the financial statement effects of regulation for that part of their business. That action would include the elimination of any or all regulatory assets and liabilities that had been recorded in their Consolidated Balance Sheets and the recognition of a one-time extraordinary itemcharge in their Consolidated Statements of Operations.Operations and Comprehensive Income. The impact of not meeting the criteria of the authoritative guidance could be material to the financial statements of Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE. At December 31, 2013,2015, the extraordinary gain (loss) could have been as much as $(2.4)$(2.5) billion, $730$978 million and $ 453$559 million (before taxes) as a result of the elimination of ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s regulatory assets and liabilities, respectively. Further, Exelon would record a charge against OCI (before taxes) of up to $2.4$2.5 billion and $568$634 million for ComEd and BGE, respectively, related to Exelon’s net regulatory assets associated with its defined benefit postretirement plans. Exelon also has a net regulatory liability of $45$47 million (before taxes) associated with PECO’s defined benefit postretirement plans that would result in an increase in OCI if reversed. The impacts and resolution of the above items could lead to an additional impairment of ComEd’s goodwill, which could be significant and at least partially offset the extraordinary gain at ComEd discussed above. A significant decrease in equity as a result of any changes could limit the ability of ComEd, PECO and BGE to pay dividends under Federal

55


and state law and no longer meeting the regulatory accounting criteria could cause significant volatility in future results of operations. See Notes 1, 31—Significant Accounting Policies, 3—Regulatory Matters and 1011—Intangible Assets of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding accounting for the effects of regulation, regulatory matters and ComEd’s goodwill, respectively.

 

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

 

Various stakeholders, including legislators and regulators, shareholders and non-governmental organizations, as well as other companies in many business sectors, including utilities, are considering ways to address the effect of GHG emissions on climate change. In 2009, select Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states implemented a model rule, developed via the RGGI, to regulate CO2CO2 emissions from fossil-fired generation. RGGI states are working on updated programs to further limit emissions and the EPA has introduced regulation to address greenhouse gases from new fossil plants that could potentially impact existing plants. If carbon reduction regulation or legislation becomes effective, Exelon and Generation may incur costs either to limit further the GHG emissions from their operations or to procure emission allowance credits. The nature and extent of environmental regulation may also impact the ability of Exelon and its subsidiaries to meet the GHG emission reduction targets of Exelon 2020. For example, more stringent permitting requirements may preclude the construction of lower-carbon nuclear and gas-fired power plants. Similarly, a Federal RPS could increase the cost of compliance by mandating the purchase or construction of more expensive supply alternatives. For more information regarding climate change, see ITEM 1. BUSINESS “Global Climate Change” and Note 2223—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

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

 

As a result of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, users, owners and operators of the bulk power transmission system, including Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE, are subject to mandatory reliability standards promulgated by NERC and enforced by FERC. As operators of natural gas distribution systems, PECO and BGE are also subject to mandatory reliability standards of the U.S. Department of Transportation. The standards are based on the functions that need to be performed to ensure the bulk power system operates reliably and are guided by reliability and market interface principles. Compliance with or changes in the reliability standards maycould subject the Registrants to higher operating costs and/or increased capital expenditures. In addition, the ICC, PAPUC and MDPSC impose certain distribution reliability standards on ComEd, PECO and BGE, respectively. If the Registrants were found not to be in compliance with the mandatory reliability standards, they could be subject to remediation costs as well as sanctions, which could include substantial monetary penalties.

 

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

56


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

 

See Notes 3Note 3—Regulatory Matters and 22Note 23—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

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

 

The Registrants are involved in legal proceedings, claims and litigation arising out of their business operations, the most significant of which are summarized in Note 2223—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. Adverse outcomes in these proceedings could require significant expenditures that could have a material adverse effect on the Registrants’ results of operations.

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

57


environmental review to support the rule. InOn September 2012,19, 2014, the NRC directed NRC Staff to completeissued a revised rule codifying the NRC’s generic determinations regarding the environmental impact statement and to revise the temporaryimpacts of continued storage rule which is now not expected untilof spent nuclear fuel beyond a reactor’s licensed operating life. The Continued Storage Rule became effective on October 3,20, 2014.

 

Any regulatory action relating to the timing and availability of a repository for SNF maycould adversely affect Generation’s ability to decommission fully its nuclear units. InThrough May 15, 2014, in accordance with the NWPA and Generation’s contract with the DOE, Generation payspaid the DOE ongoing feesa fee per kWh of net nuclear generation for the cost of SNF disposal. This fee may be adjusted prospectively in order to ensure full cost recovery. On November 19, 2013, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ordered the DOE to submit to Congress a proposal to reduce the current SNF disposal fee to zero, unless and until there is a viable disposal program. On January 3, 2014, the DOE filed a petition for rehearing which was denied by the D.C. Circuit Court on March 18, 2014. Also, on January 3, 2014, the DOE submitted a proposal to Congress to reduce the current SNF disposal fee to zero. On May 9, 2014, the DOE notified Generation that the SNF disposal fee was set to zero, effective May 16, 2014. Until such time as a new fee structure is in effect, Exelon and Generation must continuewill not accrue any further costs related to pay the current SNF disposal fees. Furthermore, under its contract with the DOE, Generation would be required to pay the DOE a one-time SNF storage fee including interest of approximately $1 billion as of December 31, 2013, prior to the first delivery of SNF. Generation currently estimates 2025 to be the earliest date when the DOE will begin accepting SNF, which could be delayed by further regulatory action. See Note 2223—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on the spent nuclear fuel obligation. Generation cannot predict what, if any, fee will be established in the future for SNF disposal. However, such a fee could be material to Generation’s results of operations or cash flows.

 

License renewals. Generation cannot assure that economics will support the continued operation of the facilities for all or any portion of any renewed license period. If the NRC does not renew the operating licenses for Generation’s nuclear stations or a station cannot be operated through the end of its operating license, Generation’s results of operations could be adversely affected by increased depreciation rates, impairment charges and accelerated future decommissioning costs, since depreciation rates and decommissioning cost estimates currently include assumptions that license renewal will be received. In addition, Generation maycould lose revenue and incur increased fuel and purchased power expense to meet supply commitments.

 

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

Operational RisksFactors

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Generation’s fleet of nuclear and fossil-fueled power plants and ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s distribution and transmission infrastructures could be affected by natural disasters, such as seismic activity, more frequent and more extreme weather events, changes in temperature and precipitation patterns, changes to ground and surface water availability, sea level rise and other related phenomena. Severe weather or other natural

disasters could be destructive, which could result in increased costs, including supply chain costs. An extreme weather event within the Registrants’ service areas can also directly affect their capital assets, causing disruption in service to customers

58


due to downed wires and poles or damage to other operating equipment. ExamplesAn example of such events includean event was the June 2012 “Derecho”February 5, 2014 ice storm, which interrupted electric service delivery to customers in BGE’sPECO’s service territory and the October 2012 category 1 hurricane, Hurricane Sandy, which interrupted electric service delivery to customers in PECO’s and BGE’s service territories and resulted in significant costs to PECO and BGE for restoration efforts.costs.

 

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

 

Exelon does not know the impact that potential terrorist attacks could have on the industry in general and on Exelon in particular. As owner-operators of infrastructure facilities, such as nuclear, fossil and hydroelectric generation facilities and electric and gas transmission and distribution facilities, the Registrants face a risk that their operations would be direct targets of, or indirect casualties of, an act of terror. Any retaliatory military strikes or sustained military campaign maycould affect their operations in unpredictable ways, such as changes in insurance markets and disruptions of fuel supplies and markets, particularly oil. Furthermore, these catastrophic events could compromise the physical or cyber security of Exelon’s facilities, which could adversely affect Exelon’s ability to manage its business effectively. Instability in the financial markets as a result of terrorism, war, natural disasters, pandemic, credit crises, recession or other factors also may result in a decline in energy consumption, which may adversely affect the Registrants’ results of operations and its ability to raise capital. In addition, the implementation of security guidelines and measures has resulted in and is expected to continue to result in increased costs.

 

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

 

In addition, Exelon maintains a level of insurance coverage consistent with industry practices against property and casualty losses subject to unforeseen occurrences or catastrophic events that maycould damage or destroy assets or interrupt operations. However, there can be no assurance that the amount of insurance will be adequate to address such property and casualty losses.

 

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

 

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

factors increase Generation’s operating costs by requiring Generation to produce additional energy from primarily its fossil

59


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

 

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

 

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

 

Operational risk. Operations at any of Generation’s nuclear generation plants could degrade to the point where Generation has to shut down the plant or operate at less than full capacity. If this were to happen, identifying and correcting the causes maycould require significant time and expense. Generation maycould choose to close a plant rather than incur the expense of restarting it or returning the plant to full capacity. In either event, Generation maycould lose revenue and incur increased fuel and purchased power expense to meet supply commitments. In addition, Generation may not achieve the anticipated results under its series of planned power uprates across its nuclear fleet. For plants operated but not wholly owned by Generation, Generation maycould also incur liability to the co-owners. For plants not operated and not wholly owned by Generation, from which Generation receives a portion of the plants’ output, Generation’s results of operations are dependent on the operational performance of the operators and could be adversely affected by a significant event at those plants. Additionally, poor operating performance at nuclear plants not owned by Generation could result in increased regulation and reduced public support for nuclear-fueled energy, which could significantly affect Generation’s results of operations or financial position.positions. In addition, closure of generating plants owned by others, or extended interruptions of generating plants or failure of transmission lines, could affect transmission systems that could adversely affect the sale and delivery of electricity in markets served by Generation.

 

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

 

Nuclear insurance. As required by the Price-Anderson Act, Generation carries the maximum available amount of nuclear liability insurance. The required amount of nuclear liability insurance is $375 million for each operating site. Claims exceeding that amount are covered through mandatory participation in a financial protection pool. In addition, the U.S. Congress could impose revenue-raising measures on the nuclear industry to pay claims exceeding the $13.6$13.5 billion limit for a single incident.

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

60


made distributions to its members but Generation cannot predict the level of future distributions or if they will occur at all. See Note 2223—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional discussion of nuclear insurance.

 

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

 

Forecasting trust fund investment earnings and costs to decommission nuclear generating stations requires significant judgment, and actual results may differ significantly from current estimates. The performance of capital markets also cancould significantly affect the value of the trust funds. Currently, Generation is making contributions to certain trust funds of the former PECO units based on amounts being collected by PECO from its customers and remitted to Generation. While Generation, through PECO, has recourse to collect additional amounts from PECO customers (subject to certain limitations and thresholds), it has no recourse to collect additional amounts from ComEdutility customers or from the previous ownersfor any of Clinton, TMI Unit No. 1 and Oyster Creek generating stations,its other nuclear units if there is a shortfall of funds necessary for decommissioning. If circumstances changed such that Generation would be unable to continue to make contributions to the trust funds of the former PECO units based on amounts collected from PECO customers, or if Generation no longer had recourse to collect additional amounts from PECO customers if there was a shortfall of funds for decommissioning, the adequacy of the trust funds related to the former PECO units maycould be negatively affected and Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations andor financial positionpositions could be significantly affected. See Note 33—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Ultimately, if the investments held by Generation’s NDTs are not sufficient to fund the decommissioning of Generation’s nuclear plants,units, Generation may be required to take steps, such as providing financial guarantees through letters of credit or parent company guarantees or making additional contributions to the trusts, which could be significant, to ensure that the trusts are adequately funded and that current and future NRC minimum funding requirements are met. As a result, Generation’s cash flows andor financial position maypositions could be significantly adversely affected. Additionally, if the pledged assets are not sufficient to fund the Zion station decommissioning activities under the Asset Sale Agreement (ASA), Generation could have to seek remedies available under the ASA to reduce the risk of default by ZionSolutions and its parent. See Note 1516—Asset Retirement Obligations of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

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

 

FERC has the exclusive authority to license most non-Federal hydropower projects located on navigable waterways, Federal lands or connected to the interstate electric grid. The license for the Conowingo Hydroelectric Project expires August 31, 2014,September 1, 2016, and the license for the Muddy Run Pumped Storage Project expires on SeptemberDecember 1, 2014.2055. FERC is required to issue annual licenses for the facilities until a final determination is made on the license renewal. Generation cannot predict whether it will receive all the regulatory approvals for the renewed licenses of its hydroelectric facilities. If FERC does not issue new operating licenses for Generation’s hydroelectric facilities or a station cannot be operated through the end of its operating license, Generation’s results of operations could

be adversely affected by increased depreciation rates and accelerated future decommissioning costs, since depreciation rates and decommissioning cost estimates currently include assumptions that license renewal will be received. Generation maycould also lose revenue and incur increased fuel and purchased power expense to meet supply commitments. In addition, conditions maycould be imposed as part of the license renewal process that maycould adversely affect operations, maycould require a substantial increase in capital expenditures or maycould result in increased operating costs and significantly affect Generation’s results of operations or financial

61


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

 

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

 

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

 

The aforementioned failures or those of other utilities, including prolonged or repeated failures, cancould affect customer satisfaction and the level of regulatory oversight and ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s maintenance and capital expenditures. Regulated utilities, which are required to provide service to all customers within their service territory, have generally been afforded liability protections against claims by customers relating to failure of service. Under Illinois law, however, ComEd cancould be required to pay damages to its customers in some circumstances involving extended outages affecting large numbers of its customers, and those damages could be material to ComEd’s results of operations andor cash flows. See Note 2223—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding proceedings related to storm-related outages in ComEd’s service territory.

 

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

 

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

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

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

62


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

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

 

The Registrants face physical security and information securitycybersecurity risks as the owner-operators of generation, transmission and distribution facilities.facilities and as a participant in commodities trading. Threat sources continue to seek to exploit potential vulnerabilities in the electric and natural gas utility industry associated with protection of sensitive and confidential information, grid infrastructure and other energy infrastructures, and such attacks and disruptions, both physical and cyber, are becoming increasingly sophisticated and dynamic. Continued implementation of advanced digital technologies increase the potentially unfavorable impacts of such attacks. A security breach of the physical assets or information systems of the Registrants, their competitors, interconnected entities in RTOs and ISOs, or regulators could impact the operation of the generation fleet and/or reliability of the transmission and distribution system or subject the Registrants to financial harm associated with theft or inappropriate release of certain types of information, including sensitive customer, vendor, employee, trading or other confidential data. The risk of these system-related events and security breaches occurring continues to intensify, and while we have been, and will likely continue to be, subjected to physical and cyber-attacks, to date we have not experienced a material breach or disruption to our network or information systems or our service operations. However, as such attacks continue to increase in sophistication and frequency, we may be unable to prevent all such attacks in the future. If a significant breach occurred, the reputation of Exelon and its customer supply activities may be adversely affected, customer confidence in the Registrants or others in the industry may be diminished, or Exelon and its subsidiaries may be subject to legal claims, any of which may contribute to the loss of customers and have a negative impact on the business and/or results of operations. Moreover, the amount and scope of insurance we maintain against losses resulting from any such events or security breaches may not be sufficient to cover our losses or otherwise adequately compensate us for any disruptions to our business that may result. ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s deployment of smart meters throughout their service territories may increase the risk of damage from an intentional disruption of the system by third parties. As a requirement of their SGIG grant, the DOE approved PECO’s and BGE’s cyber security plan related to its smart meter deployment and will review the plan annually through the expiration of the grant. As with most companies in today’s environment, Exelon experiences attempts by hackers to infiltrate its corporate network. To date there have been no infiltrations that have resulted in loss of data or any significant effects on business operations. Exelon utilizes a dedicated team of cyber security professionals to ensure the protection of its information and ability to conduct business operations. Despite the measures taken by the Registrants to prevent a security breach, the Registrants cannot accurately assess the probability that a security breach may occur and are unable to quantify the potential impact of such an event. In addition, new or updated security regulations or unforeseen threat sources could require changes in current measures taken by the Registrants or their business operations and could adversely affect their results of operations, cash flows and financial position.

 

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

Certain events, such as an employee strike, loss of contract resources due to a major event, and an aging workforce without appropriate replacements, could lead to operating challenges and increased costs for the Registrants. The challenges include lack of resources, loss of knowledge and a lengthy time period associated with skill development. In this case, costs, including costs for contractors to replace employees, productivity costs and safety costs, could arise. The Registrants mayare particularly affected due to the specialized knowledge required of the technical and support employees for their generation, transmission and distribution operations. If the Registrants are unable to successfully attract and retain an appropriately qualified workforce, their results of operations could be negatively impacted.

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

 

Generation continuously lookscontinues to investpursue growth in new business initiativesits existing businesses and actively participatemarkets and further diversification across the competitive energy value chain. Generation is pursuing investment opportunities in new markets. These include, but are not limited to, unconventionalrenewables, development of natural gas generation, distributed generation, potential expansion of the existing natural gas and oil Upstream and wholesale gas explorationbusinesses, and production, residential power and gas sales, solar and wind generation, and managed load response.entry into

liquefied natural gas. Such initiatives maycould involve significant risks and uncertainties, including distraction of management from current operations, inadequate return on capital, and unidentified issues not discovered in the diligence performed prior to launching an initiative or entering a market. As these markets mature, there maycould be new market entrants or expansion by established competitors that increase competition for customers and resources. Additionally, it is possible that FERC, state public utility commissions or others maycould impose certain other restrictions on such transactions. All of these factors could result in higher costs or lower revenues than expected, resulting in lower than planned returns on investment.

ComEd, PECO and BGE face risks associated with thetheir regulatory-mandated Smart Grid mandated regulatory initiative.initiatives. These risks include, but are not limited to, cost recovery, regulatory concerns, cyber securitycybersecurity and obsolescence of technology. Due to these risks, no assurance can be given that such initiatives will be successful and will not have a material adverse effect on ComEd’s, PECO’s or BGE’s financial results.

63


Risks Related to the Merger

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

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

 

Risks Related to the Pending Master AgreementMerger with CENGPHI

 

Exelon and PHI could encounter difficulties in satisfying the conditions for the completion of the Merger and the Merger could not be completed within the expected time frame or at all.

Consummation of the Merger is subject to the satisfaction or waiver of specified closing conditions, including (1) the receipt of regulatory approvals required to consummate the Merger, (2) the expiration or termination of the applicable waiting period under the HSR Act and (3) other customary closing conditions, including (a) the accuracy of each party’s representations and warranties (subject to customary materiality qualifiers) and (b) each party’s compliance with its obligations and covenants contained in the Merger Agreement. In addition, the obligation of Exelon to consummate the Merger is subject to the required regulatory approvals not, individually or in the aggregate, imposing terms, conditions, obligations or commitments that constitute a burdensome condition (as defined in the Merger Agreement).

In addition, the Merger Agreement provides that either Exelon or PHI could terminate the Merger Agreement if the merger is not completed by October 28, 2015. Exelon and PHI have agreed, among other things, that they will not exercise their rights to terminate the Merger Agreement before March 4, 2016, except under limited circumstances.

See Note 4—Mergers, Acquisitions, and Dispositions of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding the status of the Merger.

The integrationMerger is subject to the receipt of CENG’s nuclear fleet mayconsent or approval from governmental entities that could delay the completion of the Merger or impose conditions that could cause abandonment of the Merger.

Completion of the Merger is conditioned upon the receipt of consents, orders, approvals or clearances, to the extent required, from various regulatory authorities, including the DCPSC and the public utility commissions or similar entities in certain states in which the companies operate. The Merger has been approved by the Delaware Public Service Commission (DPSC), the Maryland Public Service Commission (MDPSC), the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities (NJBPU) and the Virginia State Corporation Commission. Approval of the Merger by the MDPSC is subject to appeals by the Maryland Office of People’s Counsel, the Sierra Club/Chesapeake Climate Action Network and Public Citizen, Inc. in the Circuit Court of Queen Anne’s County, and the approval by the NJBPU expires on June 30, 2016. The HSR Act waiting period applicable to the Merger expired on December 2, 2015. The Merger remains subject to approval by the DCPSC. See Note 4—Mergers, Acquisitions, and Dispositions of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding the status of regulatory approvals.

Exelon and PHI have proposed conditions for approval in the filings that have been made with the DCPSC and other regulatory commissions. The conditions of approval of the Merger by the DCPSC will trigger the “most favored nation” provisions in the approvals of the Merger by the DPSC, MDPSC, and the NJBPU.

Exelon cannot provide assurance that all required regulatory consents or approvals will be obtained or that these consents or approvals will not achievecontain terms, conditions or restrictions that would be unacceptable. The Merger Agreement generally permits Exelon to terminate the Merger Agreement if the final terms of any of the required regulatory consents or approvals include burdensome conditions (as defined in the Merger Agreement).

Failure to obtain regulatory approval could result in Exelon’s payment of a reverse termination fee.

If the Merger Agreement is terminated under certain circumstances due to the failure to obtain regulatory approvals, the failure to obtain regulatory approvals without burdensome conditions, or the breach by Exelon of its anticipatedobligations in respect of obtaining regulatory approvals, Exelon will be required to pay PHI a reverse termination fee of $180 million, which would occur by means of PHI’s election to redeem the outstanding nonvoting preferred securities purchased by Exelon in connection with the execution of the Merger Agreement for no consideration other than the nominal par value of the stock. In these circumstances, Exelon will also be required to reimburse PHI for up to $40 million of its documented out-of-pocket expenses for the Merger.

Failure to complete the Merger could negatively impact the share price and the future business and financial results of Exelon.

If the Merger is not completed, the ongoing businesses of Exelon could be negatively impacted and Exelon will be subject to several risks, including:

having to pay certain significant costs relating to the Merger without receiving the benefits of the Merger, including a termination fee of up to $180 million payable by Exelon to PHI under certain circumstances; and

the share price of Exelon could decline if and Generation may notto the extent that the current market prices reflect an assumption by the market that the Merger will be able to fully integratecompleted.

Exelon and PHI have incurred and will incur significant transaction and Merger-related costs in connection with the operations of CENG in the manner expected.Merger.

 

Exelon Generation and subsidiariesPHI have incurred and expect to incur non-recurring costs associated with combining the operations of Generation entered into a Master Agreement with EDF, EDF Inc. (EDFI) (a subsidiarythe two companies. Most of EDF)these costs will be transaction costs, including fees paid to financial and CENGlegal advisors related to the Merger and related financing arrangements, and employment-related costs, including change-in- control related payments made to certain PHI executives. In addition, until the closing of the Merger, Exelon will be required to pay financing costs without having realized any benefits from the Merger during the period of delay. Exelon will also incur transition costs related to formulating integration plans. Exelon expects that the elimination of costs, as well as the realization of other efficiencies related to the integration of the businesses, will resultexceed incremental transaction and Merger-related costs over time.

Exelon may not realize all the expected benefits of the Merger because of integration difficulties.

The success of the PHI acquisition will depend, in Generation operating the CENG nuclear generation fleet. The Master Agreement was entered into with the expectation that it will result in various benefits, including, among other things, cost savings and operating efficiencies. Achievingpart, on Exelon’s ability to realize all or some of the anticipated benefits of the agreement is subject to a number of uncertainties, including whether CENG can be integrated into Generation in an efficient, effective and timely manner. Integration will take place, and additional agreements will be signed, upon receipt of regulatory approvals for the transfer of CENG’s nuclear operating licences to Generation.

It is possible that thefrom integrating PHI’s business with Exelon’s existing businesses. The integration process could take longer than anticipatedbe complex, costly and could resulttime-consuming. The challenges associated with integrating the operations of PHI’s business include, among others:

delay in implementation of our business plan for the loss of valuable employees, the disruption of Generation’s business, processescombined business;

unanticipated issues or costs in integrating financial, information technology, communications and systems orother systems;

possible inconsistencies in standards, controls, procedures practices,and policies, valuation models, and compensation arrangements.structures between PHI’ s structure and our structure; and

difficulties in retention of key employees.

Exelon and PHI will be subject to various uncertainties while the Merger is pending that could negatively impact their ability to attract and retain key employees, and potentially impact the company’s financial results.

Uncertainty about the effect of the Merger on employees, suppliers and customers could have a negative impact on Exelon and/or PHI. These uncertainties could impair Exelon’s and/or PHI’s ability to attract, retain and motivate key personnel until the Merger is completed and for a period of time thereafter, as employees and prospective employees could experience uncertainty about their future roles with the combined company. In addition, Generation maycurrent and prospective Exelon and PHI employees could determine that they do not desire to work for the combined company for a variety of possible reasons. Moreover, the pendency of Merger regulatory-review proceedings has caused PHI to delay filing base rate cases on behalf of its utilities Pepco, ACE and Delmarva which have difficulty addressing possible differenceshad a material impact to their results of operations and cash flows.

The Merger could divert attention of management at Exelon and PHI, which could detract from efforts to meet business goals.

The pursuit of the Merger and the preparation for the integration could place a burden on management and internal resources. Any significant diversion of management attention away from ongoing business concerns and any difficulties encountered in corporate culturesthe transition and management philosophies. Anyintegration process could affect Exelon’s and/or PHI’s financial results.

Exelon is obligated to complete the Merger whether or not it has obtained the required financing.

Exelon intended to fund the cash consideration in the Merger using a combination of these circumstancesdebt, cash from asset sales, the issuance of equity (including mandatory convertible securities). See Note 4—Mergers, Acquisitions, and Dispositions and Note 14—Debt and Credit Agreements of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding the merger financing. Although Exelon had sufficient cash to fund the cash consideration in the Merger as of September 30, 2015, a $2.75 billion portion of the debt incurred to finance the cash consideration was subject to mandatory special redemption on December 31, 2015. On December 2, 2015, the holders of $1.9 billion of that debt exchanged those debt securities for new notes that extend the mandatory special redemption date from December 31, 2015 to June 30, 2016 (or later under some circumstances), and on December 2, 2015, Exelon redeemed $868 million of the debt. Exelon could be required to raise additional cash to fund the cash consideration in the Merger.

The combined company’s assets, liabilities or results of operations could be negatively impacted by unknown or unexpected events, conditions or actions that might occur at PHI prior to the closing of the Merger.

The PHI assets, liabilities, business, financial condition, cash flows, operating results and prospects to be acquired or assumed by Exelon by reason of the Merger could be negatively impacted before or after the Merger closing as a result of previously unknown events or conditions occurring or existing before the Merger closing. Adverse changes in PHI’s business or operations could occur or arise as a result of actions by PHI, legal or regulatory developments including the emergence or unfavorable resolution of pre-acquisition loss contingencies, deteriorating general business, market, industry or economic conditions, and other factors both within and beyond the control of PHI. A significant decline in the value of PHI assets to be acquired by Exelon or a significant increase in PHI liabilities to be assumed by Exelon could negatively impact the combined company’s future business, operating results, cash flows, financial conditions or prospects.

Exelon could record goodwill that could become impaired and adversely affect Generation’s ability to achieveits operating results.

In accordance with GAAP, the anticipated benefitsMerger will be accounted for as an acquisition of PHI common stock by Exelon and will follow the acquisition method of accounting for business combinations. The assets and liabilities of PHI will be consolidated with those of Exelon. The excess of the agreementpurchase price over the fair values of PHI’s assets and liabilities, if any, will be recorded as and when expected. Failuregoodwill.

The amount of goodwill, which could be material, will be allocated to achieve these anticipated benefitsthe appropriate reporting units of the combined company. Exelon is required to assess goodwill for impairment at least annually by comparing the fair value of reporting units to the carrying value of those reporting units. To the extent the carrying value of any of those reporting units is greater than the fair value, a second step comparing the implied fair value of goodwill to the carrying amount would be required to determine if the goodwill is impaired. Such a potential impairment could result in increased costsa material non-cash charge that would have a material impact on Exelon’s future operating results or decreasesfinancial positions.

Legal proceedings in connection with the Merger, the outcomes of which are uncertain, could delay or prevent the completion of the Merger.

One of the conditions to the closing of the Merger is that no judgment (whether preliminary, temporary or permanent) or other order by any court or other governmental entity shall be in effect that restrains, enjoins or otherwise prohibits or makes illegal the consummation of the Merger.

PHI and its directors have been named as defendants in purported class action lawsuits filed on behalf of named plaintiffs and other public stockholders challenging the proposed Merger and seeking, among other things, to enjoin the defendants from consummating the Merger on the agreed-upon terms. Exelon has been named as a defendant in these lawsuits. Exelon has also been named in a federal court case with similar claims. In September 2014, the parties reached a proposed settlement which is subject to court approval. Final court approval of the proposed settlement is not expected to occur until approximately 90 days after the Merger closing date.

If a plaintiff in these or any other litigation claims that may be filed in the amountfuture is successful in obtaining an injunction prohibiting the parties from completing the Merger on the terms contemplated by the Merger Agreement, the injunction could prevent the completion of the Merger in the expected revenuestime frame or altogether. If completion of the Merger is prevented or delayed, it could result in substantial costs to Exelon. In addition, Exelon could incur significant costs in connection with the lawsuits, including costs associated with the indemnification of PHI’s directors and officers.

The Merger could adversely affect Generation’s future business, financial condition, operating resultsbe completed on terms different from those contained in the Merger Agreement.

Prior to the completion of the Merger, Exelon and prospects.PHI could, by their mutual agreement, amend or alter the terms of the Merger Agreement, including with respect to, among other things, the Merger consideration to be received by PHI stockholders or any covenants or agreements with respect to the parties’ respective operations pending completion of the Merger. In addition, Exelon could choose to waive requirements of the Merger Agreement, including some conditions to closing of the Merger.

 

ITEM 1B.UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

 

Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE

 

None.

64


ITEM 2.PROPERTIES

 

Generation

 

The following table describes Generation’s interests in net electric generating capacity by station at December 31, 2013:2015:

 

Station (a)

 

Region

 

Location

 

No. of
Units

 Percent
Owned (b)
 Primary
Fuel Type
 Primary
Dispatch

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

Region

 

Location

 

No. of

Units

 Percent
Owned (b)
 Primary
Fuel Type
 Primary
Dispatch
Type(c)
 Net
Generation
Capacity (MW) (d)
 

Braidwood

  Midwest    Braidwood, IL   2   Uranium    Base-load    2,389  

Byron

  Midwest    Byron, IL   2   Uranium    Base-load    2,347  

LaSalle

  Midwest    Seneca, IL   2   Uranium    Base-load    2,320  

Dresden

  Midwest    Morris, IL   2   Uranium    Base-load    1,845  

Quad Cities

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

Clinton

  Midwest    Clinton, IL   1   Uranium    Base-load    1,069  

Michigan Wind 2

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

Beebe

  Midwest    Gratiot Co., MI   34   Wind    Base-load    82  

Michigan Wind 1

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

Harvest 2

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

Harvest

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

Beebe 1B

  Midwest    Gratiot Co., MI   21   Wind    Base-load    50  

Ewington

  Midwest    Jackson Co., MN   10  99    Wind    Base-load    20(f) 

Marshall

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

Norgaard

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

City Solar

  Midwest    Chicago, IL   1   Solar    Base-load    9  

AgriWind

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

Cisco

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

Wolf

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

CP Windfarm

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

Blue Breezes

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

Solar Ohio

  Midwest    Toledo, OH   3   Solar    Base-load    3  

Cowell

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

Southeast Chicago

  Midwest    Chicago, IL   8   Gas    Peaking    296  
       

 

 

Total Midwest

        12,163  

Limerick

  Mid-Atlantic    Sanatoga, PA   2   Uranium    Base-load    2,316   Mid-Atlantic    Sanatoga, PA   2   Uranium    Base-load    2,317  

Peach Bottom

  Mid-Atlantic    Delta, PA   2  50   Uranium    Base-load    1,167(f)   Mid-Atlantic    Delta, PA   2  50    Uranium    Base-load    1,299(f) 

Salem

  Mid-Atlantic    
 
Lower Alloways Creek
Township, NJ
  
  
 2  42.59   Uranium    Base-load    1,006(f)   Mid-Atlantic    
 
Lower Alloways Creek
Township, NJ
  
  
 2  42.59    Uranium    Base-load    1,005(f) 

Calvert Cliffs

  Mid-Atlantic    Lusby, MD   2  50.01   Uranium    Base-load    878(f)(h)   Mid-Atlantic    Lusby, MD   2  50.01    Uranium    Base-load    878(f)(g) 

Three Mile Island

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

Keystone

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

Oyster Creek

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

Conowingo

  Mid-Atlantic    Darlington, MD   11   Hydroelectric    Base-load    572   Mid-Atlantic    Darlington, MD   11   Hydroelectric    Base-load    572  

Conemaugh

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

Criterion

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

Colver

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

Fourmile

  Mid-Atlantic    Garrett County, MD   16   Wind    Base-load    40  

Fair Wind

  Mid-Atlantic    Garrett County, MD   12   Wind    Base-load    30  

Solar Maryland MC

  Mid-Atlantic    Various, MD   15   Solar    Base-load    27  

Solar Horizons

  Mid-Atlantic    Emmitsburg, MD   1   Solar    Base-load    16   Mid-Atlantic    Emmitsburg, MD   1   Solar    Base-load    14  

Solar New Jersey 2

  Mid-Atlantic    Various   2   Solar    Base-load    10   Mid-Atlantic    Various, NJ   2   Solar    Base-load    9  

Solar New Jersey 1

  Mid-Atlantic    Various   4   Solar    Base-load    10   Mid-Atlantic    Various, NJ   4   Solar    Base-load    8  

Solar Maryland

  Mid-Atlantic    Various   9   Solar    Base-load    9   Mid-Atlantic    Various, MD   10   Solar    Base-load    7  

Solar Maryland 2

  Mid-Atlantic    Various, MD   3   Solar    Base-load    7  

Solar Federal

  Mid-Atlantic    Trenton, NJ   1   Solar    Base-load    5   Mid-Atlantic    Trenton, NJ   1   Solar    Base-load    4  

Solar Maryland 2

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

Solar New York

  Mid-Atlantic    Various   1   Solar    Base-load   3  

Solar New Jersey 3

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

Muddy Run

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

Eddystone 3, 4

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

Safe Harbor

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

Perryman

  Mid-Atlantic    Aberdeen, MD   6   Oil/Gas    Peaking    463(h) 

Croydon

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

Perryman

  Mid-Atlantic    Belcamp, MD   5   Oil/Gas    Peaking    353 

Handsome Lake

  Mid-Atlantic    Kennerdell, PA   5   Gas    Peaking    268   Mid-Atlantic    Kennerdell, PA   5   Gas    Peaking    268  

Notch Cliff

  Mid-Atlantic    Baltimore, MD   8   Gas    Peaking    118  

Westport

  Mid-Atlantic    Baltimore, MD   1   Gas    Peaking    116  

Riverside

  Mid-Atlantic    Baltimore, MD   4   Oil/Gas    Peaking    228   Mid-Atlantic    Baltimore, MD   3   Oil/Gas    Peaking    113(h) 

Westport

  Mid-Atlantic    Baltimore, MD   1   Gas    Peaking    115 

Notch Cliff

  Mid-Atlantic    Baltimore, MD   8   Gas    Peaking    118 

Richmond

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

Gould Street

  Mid-Atlantic    Baltimore, MD   1   Gas    Peaking    97 

Philadelphia Road

  Mid-Atlantic    Baltimore, MD   4   Oil    Peaking    61 

Eddystone

  Mid-Atlantic    Eddystone, PA   4   Oil    Peaking    60 

Fairless Hills

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

Delaware

  Mid-Atlantic    Philadelphia, PA   4   Oil    Peaking    56 

Southwark

  Mid-Atlantic    Philadelphia, PA   4   Oil    Peaking    52 

Falls

  Mid-Atlantic    Morrisville, PA   3   Oil    Peaking    51 

Moser

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

Chester

  Mid-Atlantic    Chester, PA   3   Oil    Peaking    39 

Schuylkill

  Mid-Atlantic    Philadelphia, PA   2   Oil    Peaking    30 

Salem

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

Pennsbury

  Mid-Atlantic    Morrisville, PA   2   Landfill Gas    Peaking    6 

Keystone

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

Conemaugh

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

 

 

Total Mid-Atlantic

        13,067 

Braidwood

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

LaSalle

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

Byron

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

Dresden

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

Quad Cities

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

Clinton

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

Michigan Wind 2

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

Station(a)

 

Region

  

Location

  

No. of

Units

 Percent
Owned (b)
  Primary
Fuel Type
  Primary
Dispatch
Type(c)
  Net
Generation
Capacity (MW) (d)
 

Gould Street

  Mid-Atlantic    Baltimore, MD   1   Gas    Peaking    97  

Philadelphia Road

  Mid-Atlantic    Baltimore, MD   4   Oil    Peaking    61  

Eddystone

  Mid-Atlantic    Eddystone, PA   4   Oil    Peaking    60  

Fairless Hills

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

Delaware

  Mid-Atlantic    Philadelphia, PA   4   Oil    Peaking    56  

Southwark

  Mid-Atlantic    Philadelphia, PA   4   Oil    Peaking    52  

Falls

  Mid-Atlantic    Morrisville, PA   3   Oil    Peaking    51  

Moser

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

Chester

  Mid-Atlantic    Chester, PA   3   Oil    Peaking    39  

Schuylkill

  Mid-Atlantic    Philadelphia, PA   2   Oil    Peaking    30  

Salem

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

Pennsbury

  Mid-Atlantic    Morrisville, PA   2   Landfill Gas    Peaking    5  
       

 

 

 

Total Mid-Atlantic

        11,725  

Whitetail

  ERCOT    Webb County, TX   57   Wind    Base-load    91  

Sendero

  ERCOT    
 
Jim Hogg and Zapata
County, TX
  
  
 39   Wind    Base-load    78  

Wolf Hollow 1, 2, 3

  ERCOT    Granbury, TX   3   Gas    Intermediate    704  

Mountain Creek 8

  ERCOT    Dallas, TX   1   Gas    Intermediate    565  

Colorado Bend

  ERCOT    Wharton, TX   6   Gas    Intermediate    498  

Handley 3

  ERCOT    Fort Worth, TX   1   Gas    Intermediate    395  

Handley 4, 5

  ERCOT    Fort Worth, TX   2   Gas    Peaking    870  

Mountain Creek 6, 7

  ERCOT    Dallas, TX   2   Gas    Peaking    240  

LaPorte

  ERCOT    Laporte, TX   4   Gas    Peaking    152  
       

 

 

 

Total ERCOT

        3,593  

Solar Massachusetts

  New England    Various, MA   18   Solar    Base-load    8  

Holyoke Solar

  New England    Various, MA   2   Solar    Base-load    4  

Solar Net Metering

  New England    Uxbridge, MA   1   Solar    Base-load    2  

Solar Connecticut

  New England    Various, CT   2   Solar    Base-load    1  

Mystic 8, 9

  New England    Charlestown, MA   6   Gas    Intermediate    1,418  

Mystic 7

  New England    Charlestown, MA   1   Oil/Gas    Intermediate    575  

Wyman

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

West Medway

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

Framingham

  New England    Framingham, MA   3   Oil    Peaking    33  

New Boston

  New England    South Boston, MA   1   Oil    Peaking    16  

Mystic Jet

  New England    Charlestown, MA   1   Oil    Peaking    9  
       

 

 

 

Total New England

        2,219  

Nine Mile Point

  New York    Scriba, NY   2  50.01    Uranium    Base-load    838(f)(g) 

Ginna

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

Solar New York

  New York    Bethlehem, NY   1   Solar    Base-load    2  
       

 

 

 

Total New York

        1,128  

AVSR

  Other    Lancaster, CA   1   Solar    Base-load    242  

Shooting Star

  Other    Kiowa County, KS   65   Wind    Base-load    104  

Exelon Wind 4

  Other    Gruver, TX   38   Wind    Base-load    80  

Bluegrass Ridge

  Other    King City, MO   27   Wind    Base-load    57  

Conception

  Other    Barnard, MO   24   Wind    Base-load    50  

Cow Branch

  Other    Rock Port, MO   24   Wind    Base-load    50  

Mountain Home

  Other    Glenns Ferry, ID   20   Wind    Base-load    42  

High Mesa

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

Echo 1

  Other    Echo, OR   21  99    Wind    Base-load    34(f) 

Solar Arizona

  Other    Various, AZ   55   Solar    Base-load    33  

Cassia

  Other    Buhl, ID   14   Wind    Base-load    29  

Wildcat

  Other    Lovington, NM   13   Wind    Base-load    27  

Sacramento PV Energy

  Other    Sacramento, CA   4   Solar    Base-load    26  

Sunnyside

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

Echo 2

  Other    Echo, OR   10   Wind    Base-load    20  

Tuana Springs

  Other    Hagerman, ID   8   Wind    Base-load    17  

California PV Energy

  Other    Various, CA   37   Solar    Base-load    16  

Greensburg

  Other    Greensburg, KS   10   Wind    Base-load    13  

65


Station (a)

 

Region

  

Location

  

No. of
Units

 Percent
Owned (b)
  Primary
Fuel Type
  Primary
Dispatch

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

Beebe

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

Michigan Wind 1

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

Harvest 2

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

Harvest

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

Ewington

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

Marshall

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

City Solar

  Midwest    Chicago, IL   1   Solar    Base-load    8 

Norgaard

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

AgriWind

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

Cisco

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

Brewster

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

Wolf

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

CP Windfarm

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

Blue Breezes

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

Cowell

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

Solar Ohio

  Midwest    Toledo, OH   2   Solar    Base-load    1 

Southeast Chicago

  Midwest    Chicago, IL   8   Gas    Peaking    296 
       

 

 

 

Total Midwest

        12,055 

Whitetail

  ERCOT    Laredo, TX   57   Wind    Base-load    91 

Wolf Hollow 1, 2, 3

  ERCOT    Granbury, TX   3   Gas    Intermediate    704 

Mountain Creek 8

  ERCOT    Dallas, TX   1   Gas    Intermediate    565 

Colorado Bend

  ERCOT    Wharton, TX   1   Gas    Intermediate    498 

Quail Run

  ERCOT    Odessa, TX   1   Gas    Intermediate    488 

Handley 3

  ERCOT    Fort Worth, TX   1   Gas    Intermediate    395 

Handley 4, 5

  ERCOT    Fort Worth, TX   2   Gas    Peaking    870 

Mountain Creek 6, 7

  ERCOT    Dallas, TX   2   Gas    Peaking    240 

LaPorte

  ERCOT    Laporte, TX   4   Gas    Peaking    152 
       

 

 

 

Total ERCOT

        4,003 

Holyoke Solar

  New England    Various   2   Solar    Base-load    5 

Solar Massachusetts

  New England    Various   5   Solar    Base-load    3 

Solar Net Metering

  New England    Uxbridge, MA   1   Solar    Base-load    2 

Solar Connecticut

  New England    Various   2   Solar    Base-load    1 

Mystic 8, 9

  New England    Charlestown, MA   2   Gas    Intermediate    1,418 

Fore River

  New England    North Weymouth, MA   1   Gas    Intermediate    726 

Mystic 7

  New England    Charlestown, MA   1   Oil/Gas    Intermediate    575 

Wyman

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

Medway

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

Framingham

  New England    Framingham, MA   3   Oil    Peaking    33 

New Boston

  New England    South Boston, MA   1   Oil    Peaking    16 

Mystic Jet

  New England    Charlestown, MA   1   Oil    Peaking    9 
       

 

 

 

Total New England

        2,941 

Nine Mile Point

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

Ginna

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

 

 

 

Total New York

        1,121 

AVSR

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

Shooting Star

  Other    Greensburg, KS   65   Wind    Base-load    104 

Exelon Wind 4

  Other    Gruver, TX   38   Wind    Base-load    80 

Bluegrass Ridge

  Other    King City, MO   27   Wind    Base-load    57 

Conception

  Other    Barnard, MO   24   Wind    Base-load    50 

Cow Branch

  Other    Rock Port, MO   24   Wind    Base-load    50 

Mountain Home

  Other    Glenns Ferry, ID   20   Wind    Base-load    42 

High Mesa

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

Echo 1

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

Sacramento PV Energy

  Other    Sacremento, CA   4   Solar    Base-load    30 

Cassia

  Other    Buhl, ID   14   Wind    Base-load    29 

Wildcat

  Other    Lovington, NM   13   Wind    Base-load    27 

Sunnyside

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

Echo 2

  Other    Echo, OR   10   Wind    Base-load    20 

66


Station (a)

 

Region

 

Location

 

No. of
Units

 Percent
Owned (b)
 Primary
Fuel Type
 Primary
Dispatch

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

Region

 

Location

 

No. of

Units

 Percent
Owned (b)
 Primary
Fuel Type
 Primary
Dispatch
Type(c)
 Net
Generation
Capacity (MW) (d)
 

Tuana Springs

  Other    Hagerman, ID   8   Wind    Base-load    17 

Greensburg

  Other    Greensburg, KS   10   Wind    Base-load    13 

Solar Georgia

  Other    Various, GA   14   Solar    Base-load    12  

Echo 3

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

Exelon Wind 1

  Other    Gruver, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10   Other    Gruver, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10  

Exelon Wind 2

  Other    Gruver, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10   Other    Gruver, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10  

Exelon Wind 3

  Other    Gruver, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10   Other    Gruver, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10  

Exelon Wind 5

  Other    Texhoma, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10   Other    Texhoma, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10  

Exelon Wind 6

  Other    Texhoma, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10   Other    Texhoma, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10  

Exelon Wind 7

  Other    Sunray, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10   Other    Sunray, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10  

Exelon Wind 8

  Other    Sunray, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10   Other    Sunray, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10  

Exelon Wind 9

  Other    Sunray, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10   Other    Sunray, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10  

Exelon Wind 10

  Other    Dumas, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10   Other    Dumas, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10  

Exelon Wind 11

  Other    Dumas, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10   Other    Dumas, TX   8   Wind    Base-load    10  

High Plains

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

Threemile Canyon

  Other    Boardman, OR   6   Wind    Base-load    10 

Solar Arizona

  Other    Various   20   Solar    Base-load    29 

Three Mile Canyon

  Other    Boardman, OR   6   Wind    Base-load    10  

Solar California

  Other    Various, CA   25   Solar    Base-load    10  

Outback Solar

  Other    Christmas Valley, OR   1   Solar    Base-load    6   Other    Christmas Valley, OR   1   Solar    Base-load    5  

Loess Hills

  Other    Rock Port, MO   4   Wind    Base-load    5   Other    Rock Port, MO   4   Wind    Base-load    5  

Mohave Sunrise Solar

  Other    Fort Mohave, AZ   1   Solar    Base-load    5  

Denver Airport Solar

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

California PV Energy

  Other    Ontario, CA   2   Solar    Base-load    3 

Solar California

  Other    Various   4   Solar    Base-load    2 

Hillabee

  Other    Alexander City, AL   1   Gas    Intermediate    670   Other    Alexander City, AL   3   Gas    Intermediate    722  

Malacha

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

West Valley

  Other    Salt Lake City, UT   5   Gas    Peaking    185 

Grand Prairie

  Other    Alberta, Canada   1   Gas    Peaking    75 

Grande Prairie

  Other    Alberta, Canada   1   Gas    Peaking    105  

SEGS 4, 5, 6

  Other    Boron, CA   3  4.2-12.2    Solar    Peaking    8(f)   Other    Boron, CA   3  4.2-12.2    Solar    Peaking    9(f) 
       

 

        

 

 

Total Other

        1,950         1,913  
       

 

        

 

 

Total

        35,137         32,741  
       

 

        

 

 

 

(a)All nuclear stations are boiling water reactors except Braidwood, Byron, Calvert Cliffs, Ginna, Salem and Three Mile Island, which are pressurized water reactors.
(b)100%, unless otherwise indicated.
(c)Base-load units are plants that normally operate to take all or part of the minimum continuous load of a system and, consequently, produce electricity at an essentially constant rate. Intermediate units are plants that normally operate to take load of a system during the daytime higher load hours and, consequently, produce electricity by cycling on and off daily. Peaking units consist of lower-efficiency, quick response steam units, gas turbines and diesels normally used during the maximum load periods.
(d)For nuclear stations, capacity reflects the annual mean rating. Fossil stations reflect a summer rating. Wind and solar facilities reflect name plate capacity.
(e)Generation has agreed to permanently cease generation operation at Oyster Creek by December 31, 2019.
(f)Net generation capacity is stated at proportionate ownership share.
(g)Expected capacity upon project completion is 230MW. See Note 4 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.
(h)Reflects Generation’s 50.01% interest in CENG, a joint venture with EDF. For Nine Mile Point, the co-owner owns 18% of Unit 2. Thus Exelon’s ownership is 50.01% of 82% of Nine Mile Point Unit 2. Generation also hashad a unit-contingent PPA with CENG under which it purchasespurchased 85% of the nuclear plant output owned by CENG that iswas not sold to third parties under the pre-existing PPAs through 2014.
(i)(h)InGeneration has agreed to retire and cease generation operations at the Perryman 2 (51 MWs) and Riverside 4 (74 MWs) units effective February 2014, Generation sold its remaining stake in Malacha.1, 2016 and May 31, 2016, respectively.

 

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

 

In addition to the electric generating stations, Generation has working interests in 9 natural gas and oil exploration and production properties (Upstream) across the United States. Production volumes will vary from year to year due to the timing of individual project start-ups, operational outages, reservoir performance, regulatory changes, asset sales, weather events, price effects and other factors.

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

67


ComEd

 

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

 

Transmission and Distribution

 

ComEd’s higher voltage electric transmission lines owned and in service at December 31, 20132015 were as follows:

 

Voltage (Volts)

 

Circuit Miles

 

Circuit Miles

765,000

 90 90

345,000

 2,642 2,656

138,000

 2,292 2,306

 

ComEd’s electric distribution system includes 35,49135,419 circuit miles of overhead lines and 30,62631,040 circuit miles of underground lines.

 

First Mortgage and Insurance

 

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

 

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

 

PECO

 

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

 

Transmission and Distribution

 

PECO’s high voltage electric transmission lines owned and in service at December 31, 20132015 were as follows:

 

Voltage (Volts)

 

Circuit Miles

500,000

 188(a)

230,000

 548

138,000

 156

69,000

 200

 

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

68


PECO’s electric distribution system includes 12,98912,960 circuit miles of overhead lines and 8,9159,218 circuit miles of underground lines.

 

Gas

 

The following table sets forth PECO’s natural gas pipeline miles at December 31, 2013:2015:

 

   Pipeline Miles 

Transmission

   3130  

Distribution

   6,7646,826  

Service piping

   6,0686,220  
  

 

 

 

Total

   12,86313,076  
  

 

 

 

 

PECO has an LNG facility located in West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania that has a storage capacity of 1,200 mmcf and a send-out capacity of 157 mmcf/day and a propane-air plant located in Chester, Pennsylvania, with a tank storage capacity of 1,980,000 gallons150 mmcf and a peaking capability of 25 mmcf/day. In addition, PECO owns 31 natural gas city gate stations and direct pipeline customer delivery points at various locations throughout its gas service territory.

 

First Mortgage and Insurance

 

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

 

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

 

BGE

 

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

 

Transmission and Distribution

 

BGE’s high voltage electric transmission lines owned and in service at December 31, 20132015 were as follows:

 

Voltage (Volts)

 

Circuit Miles

 

Circuit Miles

500,000

 218 218

230,000

 322 322

138,000

 54 55

115,000

 697 703

 

BGE’s electric distribution system includes 9,3919,190 circuit miles of overhead lines and 15,93316,841 circuit miles of underground lines.

69


Gas

 

The following table sets forth BGE’s natural gas pipeline miles at December 31, 2013:2015:

 

   Pipeline Miles 

Transmission

   163161  

Distribution

   7,0547,173  

Service piping

   6,1466,225  
  

 

 

 

Total

   13,36313,559  
  

 

 

 

 

BGE has an LNG facility located in Baltimore, Maryland that has a storage capacity of 1,055 mmcf and a send-out capacity of 332 mmcf/day, an LNG facility located in Westminster, Maryland that has a storage capacity of 6 mmcf and a send-out capacity of 6 mmcf/day, and a propane-air plant located in Baltimore, Maryland, with a storage capacity of 546 mmcf and a send-out capacity of 85 mmcf/day. In addition, BGE owns 12 natural gas city gate stations and 20 direct pipeline customer delivery points at various locations throughout its gas service territory.

 

Property Insurance

 

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

 

Exelon

 

Security Measures

 

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

 

ITEM 3.LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

 

Exelon,Generation,Exelon, Generation, ComEd,PECO andBGE

 

The Registrants are parties to various lawsuits and regulatory proceedings in the ordinary course of their respective businesses. For information regarding material lawsuits and proceedings, see Notes 3Note 3—Regulatory Matters and 22Note 23—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. Such descriptions are incorporated herein by these references.

 

ITEM 4.MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES

 

Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE

 

Not Applicable to the Registrants.

70


PART II

 

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

 

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

 

Exelon

 

Exelon’s common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange. As of January 31, 2014,2016, there were 857,419,806919,924,742 shares of common stock outstanding and approximately 129,928118,487 record holders of common stock.

 

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

 

  2013   2012   2015   2014 
  Fourth
Quarter
   Third
Quarter
   Second
Quarter
   First
Quarter
   Fourth
Quarter
   Third
Quarter
   Second
Quarter
   First
Quarter
   Fourth
Quarter
   Third
Quarter
   Second
Quarter
   First
Quarter
   Fourth
Quarter
   Third
Quarter
   Second
Quarter
   First
Quarter
 

High price

  $30.59   $32.42   $37.80   $34.56   $37.50   $39.82   $39.37   $43.70   $31.37    $34.44    $34.98    $38.25    $38.93    $36.26    $37.73    $33.94  

Low price

   26.64    29.42    29.84    29.10    28.40    34.54    36.27    38.31    25.09     28.41     31.28     31.71     33.07     30.66     33.11     26.45  

Close

   27.39    29.64    30.88    34.48    29.74    35.58    37.62    39.21    27.77     29.70     31.42     33.61     37.08     34.09     36.48     33.56  

Dividends

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

71


Stock Performance Graph

 

The performance graph below illustrates a five-year comparison of cumulative total returns based on an initial investment of $100 in Exelon common stock, as compared with the S&P 500 Stock Index and the S&P Utility Index, for the period 20092011 through 2013.2015.

 

This performance chart assumes:

 

$100 invested on December 31, 20082010 in Exelon common stock, in the S&P 500 Stock Index and in the S&P Utility Index; and

 

All dividends are reinvested.

 

   

Value of Investment at December 31,

   2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015

Exelon Corporation

  $100  $108.67  $78.93  $76.16  $107.03  $83.31

S&P 500

  $100  $98.88  $112.13  $145.33  $161.88  $160.70

S&P Utilities

  $100  $114.25  $110.93  $120.64  $149.94  $137.36

 

Generation

 

As of January 31, 2014,2016, Exelon indirectly held the entire membership interest in Generation.

 

ComEd

 

As of January 31, 2014,2016, there were 127,016,904127,016,973 outstanding shares of common stock, $12.50 par value, of ComEd, of which 127,002,904 shares were indirectly held by Exelon. At January 31, 2014,2016, in addition to Exelon, there were 294299 record holders of ComEd common stock. There is no established market for shares of the common stock of ComEd.

72


PECO

 

As of January 31, 2014,2016, there were 170,478,507 outstanding shares of common stock, without par value, of PECO, all of which were indirectly held by Exelon.

 

BGE

 

As of January 31, 2014,2016, there were 1,000 outstanding shares of common stock, without par value, of BGE, all of which were indirectly held by Exelon.

 

Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE

 

Dividends

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

BGE is subject to certain dividend restrictions established by the MDPSC. First, in connection with the Constellation merger, BGE iswas prohibited from paying a dividend on its common shares through the end of 2014. Second, BGE is prohibited from paying a dividend on its common shares if (a) after the dividend payment, BGE’s equity ratio would be below 48% as calculated pursuant to the MDPSC’s ratemaking precedents or (b) BGE’s senior unsecured credit rating is rated by two of the three major credit rating agencies below investment grade. Finally, BGE must notify the MDPSC that it intends to declare a dividend on its common shares at least 30 days before such a dividend is paid.paid and notify the

MDPSC that BGE’s equity ratio is at least 48% within five business days after dividend payment. There are no other limitations on BGE paying common

73


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

 

Exelon’s Board of Directors approved a revised dividend policy. The approved policy would raise our dividend 2.5% each year for the next three years, beginning with the June 2016 dividend. The Board will take formal action to declare the next dividend in the second quarter.

At December 31, 2013,2015, Exelon had retained earnings of $10,358$12,068 million, including Generation’s undistributed earnings of $3,613$2,701 million, ComEd’s retained earnings of $750$978 million consisting of retained earnings appropriated for future dividends of $2,389$2,617 million, partially offset by $1,639$(1,639) million of unappropriated retained deficits, PECO’s retained earnings of $649$780 million, and BGE’s retained earnings of $1,005$1,320 million.

 

The following table sets forth Exelon’s quarterly cash dividends per share paid during 20132015 and 2012:2014:

 

  2013   2012   2015   2014 

(per share)

  

4th
Quarter

   

3rd
Quarter

   

2nd
Quarter

   

1st
Quarter

   

4th
Quarter

   

3rd
Quarter

   

2nd
Quarter

   

1st
Quarter

   

4th

Quarter

   

3rd

Quarter

   

2nd

Quarter

   

1st

Quarter

   

4th

Quarter

   

3rd

Quarter

   

2nd

Quarter

   

1st

Quarter

 

Exelon

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

 

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

 

  2013   2012   2015   2014 

(in millions)

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

Generation

  $75   $76   $263   $211   $242   $493   $291   $600   $106    $106    $906    $1,356    $205    $205    $205    $31  

ComEd

   55    55    55    55    10    10    10    75    75     75     75     75     77     77     77     76  

PECO

   83    83    83    83    85    86    85    87    70     70     70     70     80     80     80     80  

 

First Quarter 20142016 Dividend.On January 28, 2014,26, 2016, the Exelon Board of Directors declared a first quarter 20142016 regular quarterly dividend of $0.31 per share on Exelon’s common stock payable on March 10, 2014,2016, to shareholders of record of Exelon at the end of the day on February 14, 2014.12, 2016.

ITEM 6.SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

 

Exelon

 

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

 

   For the Years Ended December 31, 

(In millions, except per share data)

  2013   2012(a)   2011   2010   2009 

Statement of Operations data:

          

Operating revenues

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

Operating income

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

Income from continuing operations

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

Income from discontinued operations

   —       —       —       —       1 

Net income

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

Earnings per average common share (diluted):

          

Income from continuing operations

  $2.00   $1.42   $3.75   $3.87   $4.09 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Net income

  $2.00   $1.42   $3.75   $3.87   $4.09 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Dividends per common share

  $1.46   $2.10   $2.10   $2.10   $2.10 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Average shares of common stock outstanding—diluted

   860    819    665    663    662 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

74


   For the Years Ended December 31, 

(In millions, except per share data)

  2015   2014(a)   2013   2012(b)   2011 

Statement of Operations data:

          

Operating revenues

  $29,447    $27,429    $24,888    $23,489    $19,063  

Operating income

   4,409     3,096     3,669     2,373     4,479  

Income from continuing operations

   2,250     1,820     1,729     1,171     2,499  

Net income

   2,250     1,820     1,729     1,171     2,499  

Net income attributable to common shareholders

   2,269     1,623     1,719     1,160     2,495  

Earnings per average common share (diluted):

          

Income from continuing operations

  $2.54    $1.88    $2.00    $1.42    $3.75  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Net income

  $2.54    $1.88    $2.00    $1.42    $3.75  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Dividends per common share

  $1.24    $1.24    $1.46    $2.10    $2.10  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Average shares of common stock outstanding—diluted

   893     864     860     819     665  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

(a)The On April 1, 2014, Generation assumed operational control of CENG’s nuclear fleet. As a result, the 2014 financial results include CENG’s results of operations on a fully consolidated basis.
(b)2012 financial results only include the operationsactivity of Constellation and BGE from the merger effective date of the merger with Constellation (the Merger), March 12, 2012 through December 31, 2012.

 

  December 31,   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2013   2012   2011   2010   2009   2015   2014   2013   2012   2011 

Balance Sheet data:

                    

Current assets

  $10,137   $10,140   $5,713   $6,398   $5,441   $15,334    $11,853    $9,562    $10,009    $5,713  

Property, plant and equipment, net

   47,330    45,186    32,570    29,941    27,341    57,439     52,170     47,330     45,186     32,570  

Noncurrent regulatory assets

   5,910    6,497    4,518    4,140    4,872    6,065     6,076     5,910     6,497     4,518  

Goodwill

   2,625    2,625    2,625    2,625    2,625    2,672     2,672     2,625     2,625     2,625  

Other deferred debits and other assets

   13,922    14,113    9,569    9,136    8,901    13,874     13,645     13,816     14,033     9,498  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total assets

  $79,924   $78,561   $54,995   $52,240   $49,180   $95,384    $86,416    $79,243    $78,350    $54,924  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Current liabilities

  $7,728   $7,791   $5,134   $4,240   $4,238   $9,118    $8,762    $7,686    $7,734    $5,134  

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

   18,271     18,346     12,189     12,004     11,385    24,286     19,853     18,165     18,266     12,118  

Noncurrent regulatory liabilities

   4,388    3,981    3,627    3,555    3,492    4,201     4,550     4,388     3,981     3,627  

Other deferred credits and other liabilities

   26,597    26,626    19,570    18,791    17,338    30,457     29,118     26,064     26,552     19,570  

Contingently redeemable noncontrolling interest(a)

   28     —       —       —       —    

Preferred securities of subsidiary

   —       87    87    87    87    —       —       —       87     87  

Non-controlling interest

   15    106    3    3    —    

Noncontrolling interest

   1,308     1,332     15     106     3  

BGE preference stock not subject to mandatory redemption

   193    193    —       —       —       193     193     193     193     —    

Shareholders’ equity

   22,732    21,431    14,385    13,560    12,640    25,793     22,608     22,732     21,431     14,385  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

  $79,924   $78,561   $54,995   $52,240   $49,180   $95,384    $86,416    $79,243    $78,350    $54,924  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Represents mezzanine equity related to contingently redeemable equity contributions made by a noncontrolling interest holder of one of Generation’s subsidiaries. See Note 18—Contingently Redeemable Noncontrolling Interest for further information.

Generation

 

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

 

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

(In millions)

  2013   2012 (a)   2011   2010   2009   2015   2014(a)   2013   2012(b)   2011 

Statement of Operations data:

                    

Operating revenues

  $15,630   $14,437   $10,447   $10,025   $9,703   $19,135    $17,393    $15,630    $14,437    $10,447  

Operating income

   1,664    1,120    2,875    3,046    3,295    2,275     1,176     1,677     1,113     2,875  

Net income

   1,060    558    1,771    1,972    2,122    1,340     1,019     1,060     558     1,771  

Net income attributable to membership interest

   1,372     835     1,070     562     1,771  

 

(a)The On April 1, 2014, Generation assumed operational control of CENG’s nuclear fleet. As a result, the 2014 financial results include CENG’s results of operations on a fully consolidated basis.
(b)2012 financial results only include the operationsactivity of Constellation from the merger effective date of the merger with Constellation (the Merger), March 12, 2012 through December 31, 2012.

 

   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2013   2012   2011   2010   2009 

Balance Sheet data:

          

Current assets

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

Property, plant and equipment, net

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

Other deferred debits and other assets

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

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total assets

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

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Current liabilities

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

Long-term debt

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

Other deferred credits and other liabilities

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

Non-controlling interest

   17    108    5    5    2 

Member’s equity

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

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total liabilities and member’s equity

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

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2015   2014   2013   2012   2011 

Balance Sheet data:

          

Current assets

  $6,342    $7,311    $5,964    $6,211    $3,217  

Property, plant and equipment, net

   25,843     23,028     20,111     19,531     13,475  

Other deferred debits and other assets

   14,344     14,612     14,625     14,906     10,714  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total assets

  $46,529    $44,951    $40,700    $40,648    $27,406  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Current liabilities

  $4,933    $4,459    $3,842    $3,969    $1,899  

Long-term debt

   8,869     7,582     7,111     7,422     3,647  

Other deferred credits and other liabilities

   19,757     18,859     17,005     16,592     13,152  

Contingently redeemable noncontrolling interest(a)

   28     —       —       —       —    

Noncontrolling interest

   1,307     1,333     17     108     5  

Member’s equity

   11,635     12,718     12,725     12,557     8,703  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total liabilities and member’s equity

  $46,529    $44,951    $40,700    $40,648    $27,406  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

75
(a)Represents mezzanine equity related to contingently redeemable equity contributions made by a noncontrolling interest holder of one of Generation’s subsidiaries. See Note 18—Contingently Redeemable Noncontrolling Interest for further information.


ComEd

 

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

 

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

(In millions)

  2013   2012   2011   2010   2009   2015   2014   2013   2012   2011 

Statement of Operations data:

                    

Operating revenues

  $4,464   $5,443   $6,056   $6,204   $5,774   $4,905    $4,564    $4,464    $5,443    $6,056  

Operating income

   954     886     982     1,056     843    1,017     980     954     886     982  

Net income

   249    379    416    337    374    426     408     249     379     416  

 

  December 31,   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2013   2012   2011   2010   2009   2015   2014   2013   2012   2011 

Balance Sheet data:

                    

Current assets

  $1,540   $1,775   $2,188   $2,151   $1,579   $1,518    $1,723    $1,540    $1,692    $2,127  

Property, plant and equipment, net

   14,666    13,826    13,121    12,578    12,125    17,502     15,793     14,666     13,826     13,121  

Goodwill

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

Noncurrent regulatory assets

   933    666    699    947    1,096    895     852     933     666     699  

Other deferred debits and other assets

   4,354    4,013    4,005    3,351    3,272    3,992     4,365     4,325     3,984     3,975  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total assets

  $24,118   $22,905   $22,638   $21,652   $20,697   $26,532    $25,358    $24,089    $22,793    $22,547  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Current liabilities

  $2,048   $1,655   $2,071   $2,134   $1,597   $2,766    $1,923    $2,032    $1,655    $2,071  

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

   5,264    5,521    5,421    4,860    4,704    6,049     5,870     5,235     5,492     5,391  

Noncurrent regulatory liabilities

   3,512    3,229    3,042    3,137    3,145    3,459     3,655     3,512     3,229     3,042  

Other deferred credits and other liabilities

   5,766    5,177    5,067    4,611    4,369    6,015     6,003     5,782     5,094     5,006  

Shareholders’ equity

   7,528    7,323    7,037    6,910    6,882    8,243     7,907     7,528     7,323     7,037  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

  $24,118   $22,905   $22,638   $21,652   $20,697   $26,532    $25,358    $24,089    $22,793    $22,547  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

PECO

 

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

 

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

(In millions)

  2013   2012   2011   2010   2009   2015   2014   2013   2012   2011 

Statement of Operations data:

                    

Operating revenues

  $3,100   $3,186   $3,720   $5,519   $5,311   $3,032    $3,094    $3,100    $3,186    $3,720  

Operating income

   666    623    655    661    697    630     572     666     623     655  

Net income

   395    381    389    324    353    378     352     395     381     389  

Net income on common stock

   388    377    385    320    349 

Net income attributable to common shareholder

   378     352     388     377     385  

76


  December 31,   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2013   2012   2011   2010   2009   2015   2014   2013   2012   2011 

Balance Sheet data:

                    

Current assets

  $906   $1,094   $1,243   $1,670   $1,006   $842    $645    $821    $1,054    $1,218  

Property, plant and equipment, net

   6,384    6,078    5,874    5,620    5,297    7,141     6,801     6,384     6,078     5,874  

Noncurrent regulatory assets

   1,448    1,378    1,216    968    1,834    1,583     1,529     1,448     1,378     1,216  

Other deferred debits and other assets

   879    803    823    727    882    801     885     868     793     814  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total assets

  $9,617   $9,353   $9,156   $8,985   $9,019   $10,367    $9,860    $9,521    $9,303    $9,122  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Current liabilities

  $891   $1,158   $1,145   $1,163   $939   $944    $653    $889    $1,158    $1,145  

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

   2,131    1,831    1,781    2,156    2,405    2,464     2,416     2,120     1,821     1,772  

Noncurrent regulatory liabilities

   629    538    585    418    317    527     657     629     538     585  

Other deferred credits and other liabilities

   2,901    2,757    2,620    2,278    2,706    3,196     3,013     2,818     2,717     2,595  

Preferred securities

   —      87    87    87    87    —       —       —       87     87  

Shareholders’ equity

   3,065    2,982    2,938    2,883    2,565    3,236     3,121     3,065     2,982     2,938  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

  $9,617   $9,353   $9,156   $8,985   $9,019   $10,367    $9,860    $9,521    $9,303    $9,122  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

BGE

 

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

 

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

(In millions)

  2013   2012 2011   2010   2009   2015   2014   2013   2012 2011 

Statement of Operations data:

                  

Operating revenues

  $3,065   $2,735  $3,068   $3,541   $3,646   $3,135    $3,165    $3,065    $2,735   $3,068  

Operating income

   449    132   314    350    268    558     439     449     132    314  

Net income

   210    4   136    147    91    288     211     210     4    136  

Net income (loss) attributable to common shareholder

   197    (9  123    134    78    275     198     197     (9  123  

 

  December 31,   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2013   2012 (a)   2011 (a)   2010 (a)   2009 (a)   2015   2014   2013   2012 (a)   2011 (a) 

Balance Sheet data:

                    

Current assets

  $1,011   $980   $969   $1,012   $1,205   $845    $951    $1,009    $979    $969  

Property, plant and equipment, net

   5,864    5,498    5,132    4,754    4,470    6,597     6,204     5,864     5,498     5,132  

Noncurrent regulatory assets

   524    522    551    566    602    514     510     524     522     551  

Other deferred debits and other assets

   462    506    551    545    386    339     391     442     486     531  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total assets

  $7,861   $7,506   $7,203   $6,877   $6,663   $8,295    $8,056    $7,839    $7,485    $7,183  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Current liabilities

  $827   $980   $734   $728   $753   $1,134    $794    $800    $980    $675  

Long-term debt, including long-term debt to financing trusts and variable interest entities

   2,199    1,969    2,186    2,060    2,141    1,732     2,109     2,179     1,949     2,166  

Noncurrent regulatory liabilities

   204    214    201    192    188    184     200     204     214     201  

Other deferred credits and other liabilities

   2,076    1,985    1,781    1,634    1,434    2,368     2,200     2,101     1,984     1,840  

Preference stock not subject to mandatory redemption

   190    190    190    190    190    190     190     190     190     190  

Shareholders’ equity

   2,365    2,168    2,111    2,073    1,939    2,687     2,563     2,365     2,168     2,111  

Non-controlling interest

   —       —       —       —       18 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

  $7,861   $7,506   $7,203   $6,877   $6,663   $8,295    $8,056    $7,839    $7,485    $7,183  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)BGE retrospectively reclassified certain regulatory assets and regulatory liabilities to conform to the current year presentation.

77


Item 7.MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

 

Exelon

 

Executive Overview

 

Exelon, a utility services holding company, operates through the following principal subsidiaries:

 

  

Generation,whose integrated business consists of owned, contractedthe generation, physical delivery and investments in electric generating facilities managedmarketing of power across multiple geographical regions through customer supply of electricits customer-facing business, Constellation, which sells electricity and natural gas to both wholesale and retail customers. Generation also sells renewable energy and other energy-related products and services, including renewable energy products, risk management services and natural gas exploration and production activities.services.

As a result of the Constellation merger, Generation owns a 50.01% interest in CENG. During 2014, Generation assumed the operating licenses and corresponding operational control of CENG’s nuclear fleet. As a result, Exelon and Generation fully consolidated CENG’s financial position and results of operations into their financial statements since April 1, 2014.

 

  

ComEd,whose business consists of the purchase and regulated retail sale of electricity and the provision of distributionelectricity transmission and transmissiondistribution services in northern Illinois, including the City of Chicago.

 

  

PECO,whose business consists of the purchase and regulated retail sale of electricity and the provision of electricity distribution and transmission services in southeastern Pennsylvania, including the City of Philadelphia, and the purchase and regulated retail sale of natural gas and the provision of distribution services in the Pennsylvania counties surrounding the City of Philadelphia.

 

  

BGE,whose business consists of the purchase and regulated retail sale of electricity and the provision of distribution and transmission services in central Maryland, including the City of Baltimore, and the purchase and regulated retail sale of natural gas and the provision of electricity distribution and transmission and gas distribution services in central Maryland, including the City of Baltimore.

 

Exelon has nine reportable segments consisting of Generation’s six power marketing reportable segments (Mid-Atlantic, Midwest, New England, New York, ERCOT and Other Power Regions in Generation), ComEd, PECO and BGE. See Note 2425—Segment Information of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding Exelon’s reportable segments.

 

Through its business services subsidiary BSC, Exelon provides its operating subsidiaries with a variety of support services at cost. The costs of these services are directly charged or allocated to the applicable operating segments. Additionally, the results of Exelon’s corporate operations include costs for corporate governance and interest costs and income from various investment and financing activities.

 

Exelon’s consolidated financial information includes the results of its four separate operating subsidiary registrants, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE, which, along with Exelon, are collectively referred to as the Registrants. The following combined Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations is separately filed by Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE. However, none of the Registrants makes any representation as to information related solely to any of the other Registrants.

 

Financial Results. The following consolidated financial results reflect the results of Exelon for the year ended December 31, 20132015 compared to the same period in 2012.2014. The 20122014 financial results only include the operations of Constellation and BGECENG on a fully consolidated basis from the date of the merger with Constellation (the Merger), March 12, 2012,Generation assumed

operational control, April 1, 2014, through December 31, 2012.2014. All amounts presented below are before the impact of income taxes, except as noted.

 

Results in 2013 were unfavorably impacted at Generation by continuing declines in realized power and gas prices, in part driven by the abundance of natural gas supply, continued sluggish demand and subsidized renewable generation; only partially offset by improved returns at the utilities, and the

78


realization of additional post-merger synergies and operational excellence across all businesses. Generation’s financial results continue to be challenged by low natural gas prices, and by the impacts of excess generation from subsidized renewable energy, flat load growth and distorted market designs, especially in its Midwest markets.

 The Years Ended December 31, Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Variance
  The Years Ended December 31, Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Variance
 
 2013 2012  2015 2014 
 Generation ComEd PECO BGE Other Exelon Exelon  Generation ComEd PECO BGE Other Exelon Exelon (a) 

Operating revenues

 $15,630  $4,464  $3,100  $3,065  $(1,371 $24,888  $23,489  $1,399  $19,135   $4,905   $3,032   $3,135   $(760 $29,447   $27,429   $2,018  

Purchased power and fuel

  8,197   1,174   1,300   1,421   (1,368  10,724   10,157   (567

Purchased power and fuel expense

  10,021    1,319    1,190    1,305    (751  13,084    13,003    (81
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Revenue net of purchased power and fuel(a)

  7,433   3,290   1,800   1,644    (3  14,164   13,332   832 

Revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense(b)

  9,114    3,586    1,842    1,830    (9  16,363    14,426    1,937  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other operating expenses

                

Operating and maintenance

  4,534   1,368   748   634   (14  7,270   7,961   691   5,308    1,567    794    683    (30  8,322    8,568    246  

Depreciation and amortization

  856   669   228   348   52   2,153   1,881   (272  1,054    707    260    366    63    2,450    2,314    (136

Taxes other than income

  389   299   158   213   36   1,095   1,019   (76  489    296    160    224    31    1,200    1,154    (46
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total other operating expenses

  5,779   2,336   1,134   1,195   74   10,518   10,861   343   6,851    2,570    1,214    1,273    64    11,972    12,036    64  

Equity in earnings/(losses) of unconsolidated affiliates

  10   —      —      —      —      10   (91  101 

Equity in losses of unconsolidated affiliates

  —      —      —      —      —      —      (20  20  

Gain on sales of assets

  12    1    2    1    2    18    437    (419

Gain on consolidation and acquisition of businesses

  —      —      —      —      —      —      289    (289
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Operating income

  1,664   954   666   449   (77  3,656   2,380   1,276 

Operating income (loss)

  2,275    1,017    630    558    (71  4,409    3,096    1,313  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

                

Interest expense, net

  (357  (579  (115  (122  (183  (1,356  (928  (428  (365  (332  (114  (99  (123  (1,033  (1,065  32  

Other, net

  368   26   6   17   56   473   346   127   (60  21    5    18    (30  (46  455    (501
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

  11   (553  (109  (105  (127  (883  (582  (301  (425  (311  (109  (81  (153  (1,079  (610  (469
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Income (loss) before income taxes

  1,675   401   557   344   (204  2,773   1,798   975   1,850    706    521    477    (224  3,330    2,486    844  

Income taxes

  615   152   162   134   (19  1,044   627   (417  502    280    143    189    (41  1,073    666    (407

Equity in (losses) earnings of unconsolidated affiliates

  (8  —      —      —      1    (7  —      (7
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net income (loss)

  1,060   249   395   210   (185  1,729   1,171   558   1,340    426    378    288    (182  2,250    1,820    430  

Net income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interests and preference stock dividends

  (32  —      —      13    —      (19  197    (216
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net (loss) income attributable to noncontrolling interests, preferred security dividends and preference stock dividends

  (10  —      7   13   —      10   11   1 

Net income (loss) attributable to common shareholders

 $1,372   $426   $378   $275   $(182 $2,269   $1,623   $646  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net income (loss) on common stock

 $1,070  $249  $388  $197  $(185 $1,719  $1,160  $559 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)On April 1, 2014, Generation assumed operational control of CENG’s nuclear fleet. As a result, the 2014 financial results include CENG’s results of operations on a fully consolidated basis from April 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014.
(b)The Registrants’ evaluate operating performance using the measure of revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense. The Registrants’ believe that revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense is a useful measurement because it provides information that can be used to evaluate its operational performance. Revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense is not a presentation defined under GAAP and may not be comparable to other companies’ presentations or deemed more useful than the GAAP information provided elsewhere in this report.

 

Exelon’s net income onattributable to common stockshareholders was $1,719$2,269 million for the year ended December 31, 20132015 as compared to $1,160$1,623 million for the year ended December 31, 2012,2014, and diluted earnings per average common share were $ 2.00$2.54 for the year ended December 31, 20132015 as compared to $1.42$1.88 for the year ended December 31, 2012.2014.

 

Operating revenuesrevenue net of purchased power and fuel expense, which is a non-GAAP measure discussed below, increased by $832$1,937 million as compared to 2012.2014. The year-over-year increase in operating revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense reflects the inclusion of Constellation and BGE’s results for the full period in 2013 and was primarily due to the following favorable factors:

 

DecreaseIncrease of $666 million at Generation primarily due to the inclusion of CENG’s results on a fully consolidated basis in Generation’s2015, benefit of lower cost to serve load (including the absence of higher procurement costs for replacement power in 2014), the cancellation of the DOE spent

nuclear fuel disposal fee, increased capacity prices, the inclusion of Integrys’ results in 2015, favorability from portfolio management optimization activities in the Mid-Atlantic and Midwest regions, and increased load served, partially offset by lower margins resulting from the 2014 sales of generating assets, lower realized energy prices, and the absence of the 2014 fuel optimization opportunities in the South region due to extreme cold weather;

Increase of $848 million at Generation due to mark-to-market gains of $257 million in 2015 from economic hedging activities as compared to losses of $591 million in 2014;

Increase of $132 million at Generation related to amortization expense for the acquired energyof contracts recorded at fair value at the merger date of $610 million;associated with prior acquisitions;

 

79


Increase in BGE’sof $228 million at ComEd primarily due to increased electric distribution and transmission formula rate revenues (reflecting the impacts of increased capital investment, partially offset by lower allowed electric distribution ROE);

Increase of $9 million at PECO primarily due to favorable weather and volume; and

Increase of $82 million at BGE primarily due to increased distribution revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense of $278 million, primarilypursuant to increased rates effective December 2014 as a result of the inclusion of BGE’s results for the full period in 2013, accrual of the residential customer rate credit that was a condition of the MDPSC’s approval of Exelon’s merger with Constellation in 2012, and the impact of the MDPSC approved electric and natural gas distribution rate increases that became effective February 23, 2013;

Increase in Generation’s revenue net of purchased powercase order issued by the Maryland PSC and fuel of $159 million on other activities, including proprietary trading, retail gas, energy efficiency, energy management and demand response, upstream natural gas and the design and construction of customer sited solar facilities, primarily due to the addition of Constellation; and

Increase in ComEd’s revenue net of purchased power expense of $154 million primarily due to increased distribution revenue due to recovery of increased costs and capital investment and higher allowed ROE pursuant to the formula rate under EIMA and the enactment of Senate Bill 9.transmission revenue.

 

The year-over-year increase in operating revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense was partially offset by the following unfavorable factors:

 

Decrease in Generation’s electric revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense of $565$38 million primarilyat ComEd due to lower realized energy prices, lower load volumeunfavorable weather and increased nuclear fuel expense, partially offset by higher capacity revenue, increased nuclear volumes, and lower energy supply costs as a result of the integration of the energy generation and load serving businesses following the merger;

Reduced revenue net of purchased power and fuel at Generation of $136 million in 2013 associated with the Maryland Clean Coal assets that were sold in November 2012 and lost compensation on the reliability-must-run program with PJM for retired fossil generating assets that expired on May 31, 2012; and

Decrease in PECO’s revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense of $11 million primarily due to the decrease in effective rates due to increased usage per customer across all customer classes, decreased cost recovery for energy efficiency and demand response programs, decreased gross receipts tax revenue, and the customer refund in 2013 of the tax cash benefit related to gas property distribution repairs.volume.

 

Operating and maintenance expense decreased by $691$246 million as compared to 20122014 primarily due to the following favorable factors:

 

DecreaseLong-lived asset impairments at Generation of $12 million in operating and maintenance expense associated with the generating assets retired or divested during 2012 of $442 million;2015 compared to $663 million in 2014.

 

Costs incurred in March 2012Decrease of $216$44 million resulting from the absence of 2014 expenses recorded for a Constellation merger commitment at Generation;

Decreased storm costs at PECO and BGE of $78 million and $195$21 million, as part of the Maryland order approving the merger and a settlement with the FERC, respectively;

 

Decrease in Constellation merger and integration costs of $201 million in 2013; and

Decrease inDecreased uncollectible accounts expense at BGE of $58 million at ComEd resulting from the timing of regulatory cost recovery and customers purchasing electricity from competitive electric generation suppliers.$49 million.

 

The year-over-year decrease in operating and maintenance expense was partially offset by the following unfavorable factors:

 

Increase in Generation’s labor, other benefits, contracting and materials costs of $298$323 million primarily due to the additioninclusion of BGECENG’s results on a fully consolidated basis in 2015 and Constellation forincreased contracting spend related to energy efficiency projects;

Increase of $64 million as a result of an increase in the full periodnumber of nuclear refueling outage days at Generation, including Salem, primarily related to the inclusion of CENG’s plants on a fully consolidated basis in 2013;2015;

Increase in labor, contracting and materials costs of $31 million related to preventative maintenance and other projects at ComEd;

Increased storm costs at ComEd of $27 million;

Increased costs associated with ComEd’s uncollectible accounts expense of $27 million; and

 

Long-lived asset impairmentsAn increase in pension and related chargesnon-pension postretirement benefits expense of $174$47 million primarily at Exelon, Generation, and ComEd, resulting from the unfavorable impact of lower assumed pension and OPEB discount rates for 2015 and an increase in 2013, primarily related to Generation’s cancellation of nuclear uprate projectsthe life expectancy assumption for plan participants in 2015, partially offset by cost savings from plan design changes for certain OPEB plans effective April 2014 and the impairment of certain wind generating assets.forward.

80


Depreciation and amortization expense increased by $272$136 million primarily as a result of the inclusion of CENG’s results on a fully consolidated basis in 2015, increased nuclear decommissioning amortization at Generation, and increased depreciation expense across the operating companies for ongoing capital expenditures.

Taxes other than income increased $46 million primarily due to the additioninclusion of BGE and Constellation for the full periodCENG’s results on a fully consolidated basis in 2013, BGE’s and Constellation’s plant balances in 2012, ongoing capital expenditures across the operating companies, the completion of wind and solar facilities placed into service in the second half of 2012 and in 2013 at Generation,2015 and increased regulatory asset amortization related to higher MGP remediation expendituressales and higher costs for energy efficiency and demand response programsuse tax at ComEd and BGE, respectively.Corporate.

 

The favorable increase in Equity in earnings/lossGain on sales of unconsolidated affiliates of $101assets decreased $419 million was primarily due to higher net income from Generation’s equity investment in CENG in 2013 compared to the same period in 2012 and lower amortization of the basis difference of Generation’s ownership interest in CENG recorded at fair value in connection with the merger.

Interest expense increased by $428 million primarily due to an increase in interest expense at ComEd related to the remeasurement of Exelon’s like-kind exchange tax position in the first quarter of 2013, an increase in debt obligations as a result of the mergerabsence of 2014 gains recorded on the sales of ownership interest in certain generating stations.

Gain on consolidation and acquisition of businesses decreased by $289 million due to a $261 million gain upon consolidation of CENG in 2014 resulting from the difference in fair value of CENG’s net assets as of April 1, 2014, and the equity method investment previously recorded on Generation’s and Exelon’s books and the settlement of pre-existing transactions between Generation and CENG, and a $28 million bargain-purchase gain in 2014 related to the Integrys acquisition.

Interest expense decreased by $32 million primarily as a result of mark-to market gains in 2015 as compared to mark-to-market losses in 2014 associated with an increaseinterest rate swap terminated in projectJune 2015, partially offset by higher debt in 2015 related to financing activities associated with the pending PHI merger.

Other, net decreased by $501 million primarily at Generation as a result of the change in 2013.realized and unrealized gains and losses on NDT funds.

 

Exelon’s effective income tax rates for the years ended December 31, 20132015 and 20122014 were 37.6%32.2% and 34.9%26.8%, respectively. See Note 1415—Income Taxes of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding the components of the effective income tax rates.

 

For further detail regarding the financial results for the years ended December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014, including explanation of the non-GAAP measure revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense, see the discussions of Results of Operations by Segment below.

 

Adjusted (non-GAAP) Operating Earnings

 

Exelon’s adjusted (non-GAAP) operating earnings for the year ended December 31, 20132015 were $2,149$2,227 million, or $2.50$2.49 per diluted share, compared with adjusted (non-GAAP) operating earnings of $2,330$2,068 million, or $2.85$2.39 per diluted share, for the same period in 2012.2014. In addition to net income, Exelon evaluates its operating performance using the measure of adjusted (non-GAAP) operating earnings because management believes it represents earnings directly related to the ongoing operations of the business. Adjusted (non-GAAP) operating earnings exclude certain costs, expenses, gains and losses and other specified items. This information is intended to enhance an investor’s overall understanding of year-to-year operating results and provide an indication of Exelon’s baseline operating performance excluding items that are considered by management to be not directly related to the ongoing operations of the business. In addition, this information is among the primary indicators management uses as a basis for evaluating performance, allocating resources, setting incentive compensation targets and planning and forecasting of future periods. Adjusted (non-GAAP) operating earnings is not a presentation defined under GAAP and may not be comparable to other companies’ presentations or deemed more useful than the GAAP information provided elsewhere in this report.

81


The following table provides a reconciliation between net income attributable to common shareholders as determined in accordance with GAAP and adjusted (non-GAAP) operating earnings for the year ended December 31, 20132015 as compared to 2012:2014:

 

   December 31, 
   2013  2012 

(All amounts after tax; in millions, except per share amounts)

     Earnings
per
Diluted
Share
     Earnings
per
Diluted
Share
 

Net Income

  $1,719  $2.00  $1,160  $1.42 

Mark-to-Market Impact of Economic Hedging Activities (a)

   (310  (0.35  (310  (0.38

Unrealized Net Gains Related to NDT Fund Investments(b)

   (78  (0.09)  (56  (0.07)

Plant Retirements and Divestitures (c)

  ��(13  (0.02)  236   0.29 

Asset Retirement Obligation (d)

   7   0.01   1   —    

Merger and Integration Costs (e)

   87   0.08   257   0.31 

Other Acquisition Costs (f)

   —      —      3   —    

Reassessment of State Deferred Income Taxes(g)

   4   —      (117  (0.14

Amortization of Commodity Contract Intangibles(h)

   347   0.41   758   0.93 

Amortization of the Fair Value of Certain Debt(i)

   (7  (0.01)  (9  (0.01)

Remeasurement of Like-Kind Exchange Tax Position(j)

   267   0.31   —      —    

Long-Lived Asset Impairment(k)

   110   0.14   —      —    

Maryland Commitments(l)

   —      —      227   0.28 

FERC Settlement(m)

   —      —      172   0.21 

Midwest Generation Bankruptcy Charges(n)

   16   0.02   8   0.01 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Adjusted (non-GAAP) Operating Earnings

  $2,149  $2.50  $2,330  $2.85 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
   For the years ended December 31, 
   2015  2014 

(All amounts after tax; in millions, except per share amounts)

     Earnings
per
Diluted
Share
     Earnings
per
Diluted
Share
 

Net Income Attributable to Common Shareholders

  $2,269   $2.54   $1,623   $1.88  

Mark-to-Market Impact of Economic Hedging Activities (a)

   (158  (0.18  363    0.42  

Unrealized Losses (Gains) Related to NDT Fund Investments (b)

   115    0.13    (86  (0.10

Plant Retirements and Divestitures (c)

   —      —      (245  (0.28

Asset Retirement Obligation (d)

   (6  (0.01  (13  (0.02

Merger and Integration Costs (e)

   58    0.07    124    0.14  

Amortization of Commodity Contract Intangibles (f)

   (5  —      64    0.07  

Reassessment of State Deferred Income Taxes (g)

   41    0.05    (27  (0.03

Long-Lived Asset Impairments (h)

   21    0.02    435    0.50  

Bargain-Purchase Gain on Integrys Acquisition (i)

   —      —      (28  (0.03

Gain on CENG Integration (j)

   —      —      (159  (0.18

Tax Settlements (k)

   (52  (0.06  (106  (0.12

Mark-to-Market Impact of PHI Merger Related Interest Rate Swaps (l)

   (21  (0.02  61    0.07  

PHI Merger Related Redeemable Debt Exchange (m)

   13    0.01    —      —    

Reduction in State Income Tax Reserve (n)

   (10  (0.01  —      —    

Midwest Generation Bankruptcy Recoveries (o)

   (6  (0.01  —      —    

CENG Non-Controlling Interest (p)

   (32  (0.04  62    0.07  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Adjusted (non-GAAP) Operating Earnings

  $2,227   $2.49   $2,068   $2.39  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

(a)Reflects the impact of (gains) losses for the years ended December 31, 20132015 and 2012, respectively,2014 (net of taxes of $99 million and $232 million, respectively) on Generation’s economic hedging activities (net of taxes of $201 million and $200 million, respectively). In order to better align the impacts of economic hedging with the underlying business activity (e.g. the sale of power and/or the use of fuel), these unrealized (gains) losses are excluded from operating earnings until the transactions are realized.activities. See Note 12—13—Derivative Financial Instruments of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional detail related to Generation’s hedging activities.
(b)Reflects the impact of unrealized gainslosses (gains) for the years ended December 31, 20132015 and 2012, respectively,2014 (net of taxes of $148 million and $77 million, respectively) on Generation’s NDT fund investments for Non-Regulatory Agreement Units (net of taxes of $(144) million and $(132) million, respectively).Units. See Note 15—Nuclear Decommissioning16—Asset Retirement Obligations of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional detail related to Generation’s NDT fund investments.
(c)Reflects the impacts associated with the sale or retirementsales of Generation’s ownership interests in generating stations in the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 (net of taxes of $4 million and $106 million, respectively). See “Results of Operations—Generation” for additional detail related to the generating unit retirements.
(d)Primarily reflects the impact of an increase in Generation’s asset retirement obligation for asbestos at retired fossil plants for the year ended December 31, 20132014 (net of taxes of $(5) million)$163 million, respectively). Primarily reflects
(d)Reflects a non-cash benefit pursuant to the impactannual update of an increase in Generation’sthe Generation nuclear decommissioning obligation for spent nuclear fuel at retired nuclear unitsrelated to the Non-Regulatory Agreement Units for the yearyears ended December 31, 20122015 and 2014 (net of taxes of $(1)$4 million).
(e)Reflects certain costs associated with mergers and acquisitions incurred infor the years ended December 31, 20132015 and 20122014 (net of taxes of $33$38 million and $161$45 million, respectively) associated with the merger, including professional fees, employee-related expenses, (e.g. severance, retirement, relocationintegration activities, upfront credit facilities fees, merger commitments, and retention bonuses) integration initiatives, certain pre-acquisition contingencies and CENG transaction costs, partially offset in 2013 by a one-time benefit pursuantrelated to the BGE 2012 electricConstellation merger, CENG integration and gas distribution rate case order for the recovery of previously incurred integration costs. See Note 4—MergerIntegrys and Acquisitions of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.pending PHI acquisitions.
(f)Reflects certain costs incurred in the yearnon-cash impact for the years ended 2012 associated with various acquisitionsDecember 31, 2015 and 2014 (net of taxes of $2 million).$3 million and $68 million, respectively) of the amortization of commodity contracts recorded at fair value associated with prior acquisitions, if and when applicable.
(g)Reflects the non-cash impacts of the remeasurement of state deferred income taxes, primarily as a result of changes in forecasted apportionment in 2013 and as a result of the merger in 2012. See Note 14—Income Taxes of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.apportionment.
(h)In 2015, reflects charges to earnings primarily related to the impairments of investments in long-term leases and Upstream assets (net of taxes of $13 million). In 2014, reflects charges to earnings related to the impairments of certain generating assets held for sale, investment in long-term leases, Upstream assets, and wind generating assets (net of taxes of $250 million).
(i)Reflects the excess of the fair value of assets and liabilities acquired over the purchase price of Integrys (net of taxes of $16 million).

(j)Reflects the non-cash gain recorded upon consolidation of CENG in accordance with the execution of the NOSA on April 1, 2014 (net of taxes of $102 million).
(k)Reflects a benefit related to the favorable settlement in 2015 and 2014 of certain income tax positions on Constellation’s pre-acquisition tax returns.
(l)Reflects the impact of mark-to-market activity on forward-starting interest rate swaps held at Exelon Corporate related to financing for the pending PHI acquisition for the years ended December 31, 20132015 and 20122014 (net of taxes of $219$14 million and $491$39 million, respectively).
(m)Reflects the costs associated with the exchange and redemption in December 2015 of certain mandatorily redeemable debt issued to finance the PHI merger (net of taxes of $8 million).
(n)Reflects the reduction of a previously recorded state income tax reserve associated with the 2014 sales of Keystone and Conemaugh for the year ended December 31, 2015.
(o)Reflects a benefit for the favorable settlement of a long-term railcar lease agreement pursuant to the Midwest Generation bankruptcy for the year ended December 31, 2015 (net of taxes of $4 million).
(p)Represents Generation’s non-controlling interest related to CENG exclusion items, primarily related to the impact of unrealized gains and losses on NDT fund investments and mark-to-market activity in 2015, and in 2014 the impact of unrealized gains and losses on NDT fund investments, costs incurred associated with the integration, non-cash amortization of intangible assets, net, related to commodity contracts, recorded at fair value at the Constellation merger date. See Note 4—Mergermark-to-market activity, and Acquisitions of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

82


(i)Reflects the non-cash amortization of certain debt for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 (net of taxes of $5 million and $6 million, respectively) recorded at fair value at the Constellation merger date which was retiredchanges in the second quarter of 2013. See Note 4—Merger and Acquisitions of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.
(j)Reflects a non-cash charge to earnings for the year ended December 31, 2013 (net of taxes of $102 million) resulting from the first quarter 2013 remeasurement of a like-kind exchange tax position taken on ComEd’s 1999 sale of fossil generating assets. See Note 14 of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial statements for additional information.
(k)Reflects 2013 impairment and related charges to earnings for the year ended December 31, 2013 (net of taxes of $69 million) primarily related to Generation’s cancellation of nuclear uprate projects and the impairment of certain wind generating assets.
(l)Reflects costs incurred for the year ended December 31, 2012 associated with the Constellation merger (net of taxes of $101 million) as part of the Maryland order approving the merger transaction. See Note 4 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.
(m)Reflects costs incurred for the year ended December 31, 2012 (net of taxes of $23 million) as part of a settlement with the FERC to resolve a dispute related to Constellation’s pre-merger hedging and risk management transactions. See Note 14 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.
(n)Reflects costs incurred to establish estimated liabilities for the years ended December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012 (net of taxes of $10 million and $5 million, respectively) pursuant to the Midwest Generation bankruptcy, primarily related to lease payments under a coal rail car lease and estimated payments for asbestos-related personal injury claims.asset retirement obligations.

 

Merger and Acquisition Costs

As discussedpresented in the table above, Exelon has incurred and will continue to incur costs associated with the Constellation merger,Integrys and PHI acquisitions including meeting the various commitments set forth by regulatorsemployee-related expenses (e.g. severance, retirement, relocation and agreed-upon with other interested parties as part of the merger approval process,retention bonuses), financing costs, integration initiatives, and integrating the former Constellation businesses into Exelon.certain pre-acquisition contingencies.

 

For the yearyears ended December 31, 2013,2015 and 2014, expense has been recognized for costs incurred to achieve the Constellation merger, prior to consideration of regulatory accounting treatment,CENG integration, Integrys acquisition and pending PHI acquisition as follows:

 

   Pre-tax Expense 
   Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2013 

Merger and Integration Costs:

  Generation (a)   ComEd   PECO   BGE (a)   Exelon (a) 

Employee-Related(b)

   48    4    3    1    58 

Other(c)

   58    12    6    5    84 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total

  $106   $16   $9   $6   $142 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 
   Pre-tax Expense 
   Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2012 

Merger and Integration Costs:

  Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE(a)   Exelon(a) 

Maryland Commitments

   35    —      —      139    328 

Employee-Related(b)

   138    24    11    24    207 

Other(c)

   167    17    6    7    211 

Transaction(d)

  $—     $—     $—     $—     $58 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total

  $340   $41   $17   $170   $804 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 
   Pre-tax Expense 
   Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2015 

Merger Integration and Acquisition Expense:

  Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE   Exelon 

Financing (a)

  $—      $—      $—      $—      $21  

Transaction (b)

   —       —       —       —       23  

Other (c)

   32     9     4     5     51  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total

  $32    $9    $4    $5    $95  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 
   Pre-tax Expense 
   Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2014 

Merger Integration and Acquisition Expense:

  Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE   Exelon 

Financing (a)

  $—      $—      $—      $—      $31  

Transaction (b)

   —       —       —       —       26  

Regulatory commitments (d)

   44     —       —       —       44  

Employee-related (e)

   5     —       —       —       5  

Other (c)

   56     4     2     2     65  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total

  $105    $4    $2    $2    $171  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

(a)ForReflects costs incurred at Exelon Generation and BGE, includesrelated to the operationsfinancing of the acquired businesses fromPHI acquisition, including upfront credit facility fees. Excludes mark-to-market activity on forward-starting swaps and costs associated with the dateexchange and redemption of the merger March 12, 2012 through the year ended December 31, 2013.mandatorily redeemable debt.
(b)Costs primarily for employee severance, pension and OPEB expense and retention bonuses. ComEd established regulatory assets of $2 million and $21 million for the years ended December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively. BGE established regulatory assets of $0 million and $22 million for the years ended December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively. The majority of these costs are expected to be recovered over a five-year period.
(c)Costs to integrate Constellation processes and systems into Exelon and to terminate certain Constellation debt agreements. ComEd established a regulatory asset of $9 million and $15 million for the years ended December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively, for certain other merger and integration costs. BGE established a regulatory asset of $12 million and $0 million for the years ended December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively, for certain other merger and integration costs.
(d)External, third-partythird party costs paid to advisors, consultants, lawyers and other experts to assist in the due diligence and regulatory approval processes and in the closing of transactions.
(c)Costs to integrate CENG, Constellation and Integrys processes and systems into Exelon and to terminate certain Constellation debt agreements. Also includes professional fees primarily related to integration for the transaction.pending PHI acquisition.

(d)Reflects costs incurred at Generation for a Constellation merger commitment for the year ended December 31, 2014.
(e)Costs primarily for employee severance, pension and OPEB expense and retention bonuses.

 

83


As of December 31, 2013,2015, Exelon expectsprojects incurring total PHI acquisition and integration related costs of approximately $700 million, excluding the amounts Exelon and PHI are committed, if approved, to incur total additional Constellation merger-related expenses inprovide to the PHI utility’s respective customers. Of this amount, including 2014 and through December 31, 2015, Exelon has incurred approximately $300 million of costs associated with the proposed merger. Included in this amount are costs to fund the merger of which $76 million has been expensed, $56 million has been paid and recorded as deferred debt issuance costs and $60 million has been incurred and charged to common stock. The remaining costs will be primarily within Operating and maintenance expense within Exelon’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income and will also include approximately $34 million.$60 million for integration costs expected to be capitalized to Property, plant and equipment. The increase from the previous estimate of $635 million is due to higher transaction costs primarily driven by the merger delay. This increase in transaction costs is partially offset by lower integration costs.

 

Pursuant to the conditions set forth by the MDPSC in its approval of the Constellation merger transaction, Exelon committed to provide a package of benefits to BGE customers, and make certain investments in the City of Baltimore and the State of Maryland, resulting in an estimated direct investment in the State of Maryland of approximately $1 billion. The direct investment estimate includes $95 million to $120 million for the requirement to cause construction of a headquarters building in Baltimore for Generation’s competitive energy businesses. On March 20, 2013, Generation signed a twenty-yeartwenty year lease agreement for office space that iswas contingent upon the developer obtaining all required approvals, permits and financing for the construction of a building in Baltimore, Maryland. The operating lease became effective during the building. Once required approvals are receivedsecond quarter of 2014 when these outstanding contingencies were met by the developer. Construction began late in the second quarter of 2014 and financing condition is satisfied, construction of the building will commence. The building is expected to be ready for occupancy in two years following commencementby the end of construction. The direct investment estimate also includes $625 million in expenditures relating2016. See Note 23—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information related to the development of 285-300 MW of new electric generation facilities in Maryland (expected to be completed over the next ten years).lease commitments.

 

Exelon’s Strategy and Outlook for 20142016 and Beyond

 

Exelon’s value proposition and competitive advantage come from its scope and scale across the energy value chain and its core strengths of operational excellence and financial discipline. Exelon leverages its integrated business model to create value. Exelon’s regulated and competitive businesses feature a mix of attributes that, when combined, offer shareholders and customers a unique value proposition:

Exelon’s utilities provide a foundation for stable earnings, which translates to a stable currency in our stock.

Generation’s competitive businesses provide free cash flow to invest primarily into the utilities and in long-term, contracted assets.

Exelon believes its strategy provides a platform for optimal success in an energy industry experiencing fundamental and sweeping change.

 

On March 12, 2012,Exelon’s utility strategy is to improve reliability and operations and enhance the customer experience, while ensuring ratemaking mechanisms provide the utilities fair financial returns. The Exelon utilities only invest in rate base where it provides a net benefit to customers and Constellation merger was completed.the community by improving reliability and the service experience or otherwise meeting customer needs. The merger creates incremental strategic value by matching Exelon’s clean generation fleet with Constellation’s leading customer-facing platform, as well as creating economies ofExelon utilities make these investments prudently and at the lowest reasonable cost to customers. Exelon seeks to leverage its scale through expansionand expertise across the energy value chain. Exelon supports customer switchingutilities platform through enhanced standardization and sharing of best practices to alternativeachieve improved operational and financial results. Additionally,

ComEd, PECO and BGE anticipate making significant future investments in smart meter technology, transmission projects, gas infrastructure, and electric generation supplierssystem improvement projects, providing greater reliability and improved service for our customers and a stable return for the addition of Constellation’s competitive retail operations provides another outlet for Exelon to grow its business in competitive markets.company.

 

Generation’s competitive businesses create value for customers by providing innovative solutions and reliable, clean and affordable energy. Generation’s electricity generation strategy is to pursue opportunities that provide generation to load matching and that diversify the generation fleet by expanding Generation’s regional and technological footprint.to reduce earnings volatility. Generation leverages its energy generation portfolio to ensure delivery ofdeliver energy to both wholesale and retail customers under long-term and short-term contracts, and in wholesale power markets.customers. Generation’s customer facing activities foster development and delivery of other innovative energy-related products and services for its customers. Generation operates in well-developed energy markets and employs an integrated hedging strategy to manage commodity price volatility. Its generation fleet, including its nuclear plants which consistently operate at high capacity factors, also provide geographic and supply source diversity. These factors help Generation mitigate the current challenging conditions in competitive energy markets.

Exelon’s utility strategy is to improve reliability and operations and enhance the customer experience, while ensuring ratemaking mechanisms provide the utilities fair financial returns. Exelon seeks to leverage its scale and expertise across the utilities platform through enhanced standardization and sharing of best practices to achieve improved operational and financial results. Combined, the utilities plan to invest approximately $15 billion over the next five years in smart meter technology, transmission projects, gas infrastructure, and electric system improvement projects, providing greater reliability and improved service for our customers and a stable return for the company.

 

Exelon’s financial priorities are to maintain investment grade credit metrics at each of Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE, to maintain optimal capital structure and to return value to Exelon’s shareholders with a sustainablean attractive dividend throughout the energy commodity market cycle and through stable earnings growth from attractive investment opportunities.

growth. Exelon’s Board of Directors approved a revised dividend policy. The approved policy would raise our dividend 2.5% each year for the next three years, beginning with the June 2016 dividend. The Board will take formal action to declare the next dividend in the second quarter.

 

84


InVarious market, financial, and other factors could affect the Registrants’ success in pursuing its strategies, Exelon has exposure to various market and financial risks, including the risk of price fluctuations in the power markets. Power prices are a function of supply and demand, which in turn are driven by factors such as (1) the price of fuels, in particular, the prices of natural gas and coal, which drive the market prices that Generation can obtain for the output of its power plants, (2) the rate of expansion of subsidized low-carbon generation in the markets in which Generation’s output is sold, (3) the effects on energy demand due to factors such as weather, economic conditions and implementation of energy efficiency and demand response programs, and (4) the impacts of increased competition in the retail channel.their strategies. Exelon continues to assess infrastructure, operational, commercial, policy, and legal solutions to these issues. See ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS for additional information regarding market pricing issues.and financial factors.

Continually optimizing the cost structure is a key component of Exelon’s financial strategy. Through a recent focused cost management program the company has committed to reducing operation and maintenance expenses and capital costs by $350 million, of which approximately 35% of run-rate savings are expected to be achieved by the end of 2016 and fully realized in 2018. Savings will be allocated approximately 75%, 14%, 6% and 6% to Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE, respectively. Exelon anticipates the earnings per share savings impact on EPS will be within $0.13 to $0.18 from 2018 forward.

 

Proposed Merger with Pepco Holdings, Inc. (Exelon)

On April 29, 2014, Exelon and Pepco Holdings, Inc. (PHI) signed an agreement and plan of merger (as subsequently amended and restated as of July 18, 2014, the Merger Agreement) to combine the two companies in an all cash transaction. The resulting company will retain the Exelon name. Under the Merger Agreement, PHI’s shareholders will receive $27.25 of cash in exchange for each share of PHI common stock. Based on the outstanding shares of PHI’s common stock as of December 31, 2015, PHI shareholders would receive $6.9 billion in total cash. In addition, in connection with the Merger Agreement, Exelon entered into a subscription agreement under which it has purchased $180 million of a class of nonvoting, nonconvertible and nontransferable preferred securities of PHI. The preferred securities are included in Other non-current assets on Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheet. PHI has the right to redeem the preferred securities at its option for the purchase price paid plus accrued dividends, if any.

On November 2, 2015, Exelon and PHI each filed a new Notification and Report Form with the DOJ under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976 (HSR Act) due to the expiration of the original filing. The HSR Act waiting period expired on December 2, 2015, and the HSR Act no longer precludes completion of the merger.

To date, the PHI stockholders, the Virginia State Corporation Commission, the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities (NJBPU), the Delaware Public Service Commission (DPSC), the Maryland Public Service Commission (MDPSC) and the FERC have approved the merger of PHI and Exelon. The Federal Communications Commission has also approved the transfer of certain PHI communications licenses.

On February 11, 2015, the NJBPU approved the proposed merger and the previously filed settlement signed and filed by Exelon, PHI, Atlantic City Electric (ACE), NJBPU staff, and the Independent Energy Coalition. The settlement provides a package of benefits to ACE customers and the state of New Jersey. This package of benefits includes the establishment of customer rate credit programs, with an aggregate value of $62 million for ACE customers and energy efficiency programs that will provide savings for ACE customers of $15 million. The March 6, 2015, order by the NJBPU approving the merger required that the consummation of the merger must take place no later than November 1, 2015 unless otherwise extended by the Board. On October 15, 2015, the NJBPU extended the November 1, 2015 date to June 30, 2016.

On February 13, 2015, Exelon and PHI announced that they had reached a settlement agreement in the proceeding before the DPSC to review the proposed merger. The settlement, which was amended on April 7, 2015, was signed and filed by Exelon, PHI, Delmarva Power & Light Company (DPL), the DPSC Staff, the Delaware Public Advocate, the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, the Delaware Sustainable Energy Utility, the Mid-Atlantic Renewable Energy Coalition and the Clean Air Council. As part of this settlement, Exelon and PHI proposed a package of benefits to DPL customers and the state of Delaware including the establishment of customer rate credits of $40 million for DPL customers in Delaware, $2 million of funding for energy efficiency programs for DPL low income customers, and $2 million of funding for workforce development. On June 2, 2015, the DPSC issued an order accepting the settlement and approving the merger between Exelon and PHI.

On March 17, 2015, Exelon and PHI announced that they had reached settlements with multiple parties in the Maryland proceeding to review the proposed merger after filing a Request for Adoption of Settlements with the MDPSC. The settlements were signed and filed by Exelon, PHI, Montgomery County, Prince George’s County, the National Consumer Law Center, National Housing Trust, the Maryland Affordable Housing Coalition, the Housing Association of Nonprofit Developers, and a consortium of recreational trail advocacy organizations led by the Mid-Atlantic Off-Road Enthusiasts. Exelon and PHI also announced a settlement with The Alliance for Solar Choice. On May 15, 2015, the MDPSC approved the merger after modifying a number of the conditions in the settlements, resulting in total rate credits of $66 million, funding for energy efficiency programs of $43.2 million, a Green Sustainability Fund of $14.4 million, 20 MWs of renewable generation development and increased penalties related to reliability commitments. On May 18, 2015, Exelon and PHI accepted and committed to fulfill the conditions.

On June 11, 2015, the Maryland Office of People’s Counsel (OPC), the Sierra Club, and the Chesapeake Climate Action Network filed Petitions for Judicial Review of the MDPSC’s approval of the merger with the Circuit Court for Queen Anne’s County. On June 23, 2015, Public Citizen, Inc. filed its Petition for Judicial Review with the Circuit Court for Queen Anne’s County. On July 10, 2015, Exelon and PHI filed a response in opposition to the Petitions for Review.

On July 21, 2015, the OPC filed a motion to stay the MDPSC order approving the merger and to set a schedule for discovery and presentation of new evidence. On July 29, 2015, Public Citizen, Inc. filed a response supporting OPC’s motion to stay, and on July 31, 2015 the Sierra Club and the Chesapeake Climate Action Network filed a joint motion to stay. In July and August, Exelon, PHI, the MDPSC, Prince George’s County and Montgomery County filed responses opposing the motions to stay. The judge issued an order denying the motions for stay on August 12, 2015. On January 8, 2016, the Circuit Court judge affirmed the MDPSC’s order approving the merger and denied the petitions for

judicial review filed by the OPC, the Sierra Club, the Chesapeake Climate Action Network (CCAN) and Public Citizen, Inc. On January 19, 2016, the OPC filed a notice of appeal to the Maryland Court of Special appeals, and on January 21, Sierra Club and CCAN filed a notice of appeal. In the ordinary course this appeal would be resolved no earlier than third quarter 2016.

On August 27, 2015, the District of Columbia Public Service Commission (DCPSC) issued an Opinion and Order denying approval of the merger, concluding that the merger as presented was not in the public interest. Exelon and PHI filed an Application for Reconsideration with the DCPSC on September 28, 2015. On October 6, 2015, Exelon, PHI, the District of Columbia Government, the Office of Peoples Counsel, the District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority, the National Consumer Law Center, National Housing Trust and National Housing Trust—Enterprise Preservation Corporation, and the Apartment and Office Building Association of Metropolitan Washington (collectively, Settling Parties) entered into a Nonunanimous Full Settlement Agreement and Stipulation (Settlement Agreement) with respect to the merger. Exelon and PHI subsequently filed a motion of joint applicants requesting the DCPSC to reopen the approval application to allow for consideration of the Settlement Agreement and granting additional requested relief. The new package of benefits totals $78 million and includes commitments to provide relief of residential customer base rate increases of $26 million, one-time direct bill credits of $14 million, low-income energy assistance of $16 million, improved reliability, a cleaner and greener D.C. through funding energy efficiency programs and development of renewable energy, and investment in local jobs and the local economy through workforce development of $5 million. It also guarantees charitable contributions totaling $19 million over 10 years.

On October 28, 2015, the DCPSC agreed to reopen the approval application to allow for consideration of the Settlement Agreement. Since then, parties supporting and opposing the Settlement filed testimony, participated in formal hearings and, on December 23, 2015, submitted final briefs to the DCPSC. The parties now await a formal decision from the DCPSC. The Merger Agreement provides that either Exelon or PHI may terminate the Merger Agreement if the merger is not completed by October 28, 2015. Pursuant to a Letter Agreement related to the Settlement Agreement, Exelon and PHI have agreed, among other things, that they will not exercise their rights to terminate the Merger Agreement before March 4, 2016, except under limited circumstances. If the DCPSC does not approve the Settlement Agreement by March 4, 2016, either Exelon or PHI may terminate the Settlement Agreement.

The settlements reached and commission orders received to date in Delaware, Maryland and New Jersey include a “most favored nation” provision which, generally speaking, requires allocation of merger benefits proportionately across all the jurisdictions. When applying the most favored nation provision to the settlement terms and other conditions established in the merger approvals received to date, and as proposed in the Settlement Agreement filed with the DCPSC, Exelon and PHI currently estimate direct benefits of $430 million or more on a net present value basis (excluding charitable contributions and renewable generation commitments) will be provided, including rate credits, funding for energy efficiency programs and other required commitments. Exelon and PHI anticipate substantially all of such amounts will be charged to earnings at the time of merger close and will be paid by the end of 2017. An additional $53 million will be charged to earnings for charitable contributions, which are required to be paid over a period of 10 years. Commitments to develop renewable generation, which are expected to be primarily capital in nature, will be recognized as incurred. Upon completion of the merger, the actual nature, amount, timing and financial reporting treatment for these commitments may be materially different from the current projection.

Exelon has been named in suits filed in the Delaware Chancery Court alleging that individual directors of PHI breached their fiduciary duties by entering into the proposed merger transaction and Exelon aided and abetted the individual directors’ breaches. The suits seek to enjoin PHI from completing the merger or seek rescission of the merger if completed. In addition, they also seek unspecified damages and costs. Exelon was also named in a federal court suit making similar claims. In September 2014, the parties reached a proposed settlement that would resolve all claims, which is

subject to court approval. Final court approval of the proposed settlement is not anticipated until approximately 90 days after merger close. Exelon does not believe these suits will impact the completion of the transaction, and they are not expected to have a material impact on Exelon’s results of operations.

Including 2014 and through December 31, 2015, Exelon has incurred approximately $259 million of expense associated with the proposed merger. Of the total costs incurred, $121 million is primarily related to acquisition and integration costs and $138 million are for costs incurred to finance the transaction. The financing costs include $22 million of costs associated with the private exchange offer and redemption of certain Senior Unsecured Notes (see Note 14—Debt and Credit Agreements of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further information on the exchange), as well as, a net loss of $64 million related to the settlement of forward-starting interest-rate swaps. These swaps were terminated in connection with the $4.2 billion issuance of debt; refer to Note 13—Derivative Financial Instruments of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for more information. The financing costs exclude costs to issue equity and the initial debt offering which we recorded to Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.

Under certain circumstances, if the Merger Agreement is terminated, PHI may be required to pay Exelon a termination fee ranging from $259 million to $293 million plus certain expenses. If the Merger Agreement is terminated due to a failure to obtain a required regulatory approval, Exelon may be required to pay PHI a termination fee equal to $180 million through the redemption by PHI of the outstanding nonvoting preferred securities described above for no consideration other than the nominal par value of the stock, plus reimbursement of PHI’s documented out-of-pocket expenses up to a maximum of $40 million.

Merger Financing

Exelon has raised cash to fund the all-cash purchase price, acquisition and integration related costs, and merger commitments, through the issuance of $4.2 billion of debt (of which $3.3 billion remains after execution of the exchange offer, see Note 14—Debt and Credit Agreements for further information on the exchange), $1.15 billion of junior subordinated notes in the form of 23 million equity units, the issuance of $1.9 billion of common stock, cash proceeds of $1.8 billion from asset sales primarily at Generation (after-tax proceeds of approximately $1.4 billion) and the remaining balance from cash on hand and/or short-term borrowings available to Exelon. Exelon will have sufficient cash to fund the all-cash purchase price, acquisition and integration related costs, and merger commitments. See Note 14—Debt and Credit Agreements and Note 19—Shareholder’s Equity of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further information on the debt and equity issuances.

Exelon has listed various potential risks relating to the pending merger with PHI (see ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS), including difficulties that may be encountered in satisfying the conditions to completion of the merger and the potential for developments that might have an adverse effect on Exelon and the ability to realize the expected benefits of the merger. Exelon is taking steps to manage these risks and expects that the merger can be completed on a basis favorable to the company’s shareholders and customers. Refer to Note 4—Mergers, Acquisitions, and Dispositions of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on the merger transaction.

Implications of Potential Early Plant Retirements

Exelon and Generation continue to evaluate the current and expected economic value of each of Generation’s nuclear plants. Factors that will continue to affect the economic value of Generation’s nuclear plants include, but are not limited to: market power prices, results of capacity auctions, potential legislative solutions in New York and Illinois such as the proposed Low Carbon Portfolio Standard (LCPS) legislation, the impact of final rules from the EPA requiring reduction of carbon and other emissions and the efforts of the states to implement those final rules, and the outcome of the Ginna RSSA hearing and settlement procedures and the resulting contractual terms and conditions.

On September 10, 2015, after considering the results of the recent PJM capacity auctions, Exelon and Generation decided to defer decisions about the future operations of its Quad Cities and Byron nuclear plants and will offer both plants in the 2019/2020 auction in May 2016. As a result of clearing the other PJM capacity auction in September 2015 for the 2017/2018 transitional capacity auction, Exelon and Generation will continue to operate its Quad Cities nuclear power plant through at least May 2018. The Byron plant is already obligated to operate through May 2019. On October 29, 2015, Exelon and Generation announced the deferral of any decision about the future operations of its Clinton nuclear plant and plans to bid the plant into the MISO capacity auction for the 2016-2017 planning year April 2016. This decision was driven by MISO’s acknowledgment of the need for market design changes to ensure long-term power system reliability in southern Illinois, the desire to provide Illinois policy makers with additional time to consider needed reforms as well as the potential long-term impact of EPA’s Clean Power Plan. Exelon and Generation previously committed to cease operation of the Oyster Creek nuclear plant by the end of 2019. Exelon and Generation have not made any decisions regarding potential nuclear plant closures at other sites at this time.

As a result of a decision to early retire one or more other nuclear plants, certain changes in accounting treatment would be triggered and Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations and cash flows could be materially affected by a number of items including, among other items: accelerated depreciation expense, impairment charges related to inventory that cannot be used at other nuclear units and cancellation of in-flight capital projects, accelerated amortization of plant specific nuclear fuel costs, employee-related costs (i.e. severance, relocation, retention, etc.), accelerated asset retirement obligation expense related to future decommissioning activities, and additional funding of nuclear decommissioning trust funds. In addition, any early plant retirement would also result in reduced operating costs, lower fuel expense, and lower capital expenditures in the periods beyond shutdown. While there are a number of Generation’s nuclear plants that are at risk of early retirement, the following table provides the balance sheet amounts as of December 31, 2015 for significant assets and liabilities associated with the three nuclear plants currently considered by management to be at the greatest risk of early retirement due to their current economic valuations and other factors:

(in millions)

  Quad Cities  Clinton  Ginna  Total 

Asset Balances

     

Materials and supplies inventory

  $50   $57   $29   $136  

Nuclear fuel inventory, net

   218    107    60    385  

Completed plant, net

   1,030    579    127    1,736  

Construction work in progress

   11    9    11    31  

Liability Balances

     

Asset retirement obligation

   (698  (401  (644  (1,743

NRC License Renewal Term

   2032    2046(a)   2029   

(a)Assumes Clinton seeks and receives a 20-year operating license renewal extension.

In the event a decision is made to retire early one or more nuclear plants, the precise timing of the retirement date, and resulting financial statement impact, is uncertain and would be influenced by a number of factors such as the results of any transmission system reliability study assessments, the nature of any co-owner requirements and stipulations, and decommissioning trust fund requirements, among other factors. However, the earliest retirement date for any plant would usually be the first year in which the unit does not have capacity obligations and just prior to its next scheduled nuclear refueling outage date in that year.

NRC regulations require that licensees of nuclear generating facilities demonstrate reasonable assurance that sufficient funds will be available in certain minimum amounts to decommission the facility. These NRC minimum funding levels are based upon the assumption that decommissioning activities will commence after the end of the current licensed life of each unit. If a unit fails the NRC

minimum funding test, then Generation would be required to take steps, such as providing financial guarantees through letters of credit or parent company guarantees or making additional cash contributions to the NDTF to ensure sufficient funds are available.

As of December 31, 2015, all three of Generation’s plants at the highest risk of early retirement (Quad Cities, Clinton, and Ginna) pass the NRC minimum funding test based on their current license lives. See Note 16—Asset Retirement Obligations for additional information on NRC minimum funding requirements. However, in the event of an early retirement just before their next individual refueling outages, it is estimated that Clinton and Ginna would no longer meet the NRC minimum funding requirements due to the earlier commencement of decommissioning activities and a shorter time period over which the NDTF investments could appreciate in value. Quad Cities would also be at risk. However, the size of the guarantees are ultimately dependent on the decommissioning approach adopted at each site (i.e., DECON, Delayed DECON and SAFSTOR), the associated level of costs, and the decommissioning trust fund investment performance going forward. Considering the three alternative decommissioning approaches available to Generation for each site, parental guarantees of up to $315 million, $260 million, and $65 million for Clinton, Ginna, and Quad Cities, respectively, could be required in order for each site to access its NDTF for radiological decommissioning costs.

In addition, upon issuance of any required financial guarantees, while all three sites would be able to utilize their respective decommissioning trust funds for radiological decommissioning costs, the NRC must approve an additional exemption in order for Generation to utilize the NDTF funds to pay for non-radiological decommissioning costs (i.e. spent fuel management and site restoration costs). If a unit does not receive this exemption, the costs would be borne by Generation. Accordingly, based on current projections, it is expected that some portion of the spent fuel management and/or site restoration costs would need to be funded through supplemental cash from Generation. While the ultimate amounts may vary greatly and could be reduced by alternate decommissioning scenarios and/or reimbursement of certain costs under DOE reimbursement agreements or future litigation, across the three alternative decommissioning approaches available to Generation, for the next 10 years, Clinton and Ginna could incur spent fuel management and site restoration costs of up to $165 million and $115 million, net of taxes, respectively. The costs associated with Ginna would be shared by the plant co-owners at their respective ownership percentages. If Quad Cities fails the exemption test, at its ownership percentage Generation could be required to pay for spent fuel management costs of up to $180 million, net of taxes, but Quad Cities is better positioned to pass the test than the other two plants.

Power Markets

 

Price of Fuels. The use of new technologies to recover natural gas from shale deposits is increasing natural gas supply and reserves, which places downward pressure on natural gas prices and, therefore, on wholesale and retail power prices, which results in a reduction in Exelon’s revenues. Since the third quarter of 2011, forwardForward natural gas prices for 2014 and 2015 have declined significantly;significantly over the last several years; in part reflecting an increase in supply due to strong natural gas production (due to shale gas development).

 

Capacity Market Changes in PJM.In the wake of the January 2014 Polar Vortex that blanketed much of the Eastern and Midwestern United States, it became clear that while a major outage event was narrowly avoided, resources in PJM were not providing the level of reliability expected by customers. As a result, on December 12, 2014, PJM filed at FERC a proposal to make significant changes to its current capacity market construct, the Reliability Pricing Model (RPM). PJM’s proposed changes generally sought to improve resource performance and reliability largely by limiting the excuses for non-performance and by increasing the penalties for performance failures. The proposal permits suppliers to include in capacity market offers additional costs and risk so they can meet these higher performance requirements. While offers are expected to put upward pressure on capacity clearing prices, operational improvements made as a result of PJM’s proposal are expected to improve

reliability, to reduce energy production costs as a result of more efficient operations and to reduce the need for out of market energy payments to suppliers. Generation participated actively in PJM’s stakeholder process through which PJM developed the proposal and also actively participated in the FERC proceeding including filing comments. On June 9, 2015, FERC approved PJM’s filing largely as proposed by PJM, including transitional auction rules for delivery years 2016/2017 through 2017/2018. As a result of this and several related orders, PJM hosted its 2018/2019 Base Residual Auction (results posted on August 21, 2015) and its transitional auction for delivery year 2016/2017 (results posted on August 31, 2015) and its transitional auction for delivery years 2017/2018 (results posted on September 9, 2015).

MISO Capacity Market Results.On April 14, 2015, the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) released the results of its capacity auction covering the June 2015 through May 2016 delivery year. As a result of the auction, capacity prices for the zone 4 region in downstate Illinois increased to $150 per MW per day beginning in June 2015, an increase from the prior pricing of $16.75 per MW per day that was in effect from June 2014 to May 2015. Generation had an offer that was selected in the auction. However, due to Generation’s ratable hedging strategy, the results of the capacity auction have not had a material impact on Exelon’s and Generation’s consolidated results of operations and cash flows.

Additionally, in late May and June 2015, separate complaints were filed at the FERC by each of the State of Illinois, the Southwest Electric Cooperative, Public Citizens, Inc., and the Illinois Industrial Energy Consumers challenging the results of this MISO capacity auction for the 2015/2016 delivery in MISO delivery zone 4. The complaints allege generally that 1) the results of the capacity auction for zone 4 are not just and reasonable, 2) the results should be suspended, set for hearing and replaced with a new just and reasonable rate, 3) a refund date should be established and that 4) certain alleged behavior by one of the market participants other than Exelon or Generation, be investigated.

On October 1, 2015, the FERC announced that it was conducting a non-public investigation (that does not involve Exelon or Generation) into whether market manipulation or other potential violations occurred related to the auction. On December 31, 2015, the FERC issued a decision that certain of the rules governing the establishment of capacity prices in downstate Illinois are “not just and reasonable” on a prospective basis. The FERC ordered that certain rules must be changed for the next auction scheduled for April 2016 that will set capacity prices beginning June 1, 2016. In response to this order, MISO must file certain rule changes with the FERC within 30 days and certain other changes within 90 days. The FERC continues to conduct its non-public investigation to determine if the April 2015 auction results were manipulated and, if so, whether refunds are appropriate. The FERC did establish May 28, 2015, the day the first complaint was filed, as the date from which refunds (if ordered) would be calculated, and it also made clear that the findings in the December 31, 2015 order do not prejudge the investigation or related proceedings. Generation cannot predict the impact the FERC order may ultimately have on future auction results, capacity pricing or decisions related to the potential early retirement of the Clinton nuclear plant, however, such impacts could be material to Generation’s future results of operations and cash flows. See Note 9—Implications of Potential Early Plant Retirements of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on the impacts of the MISO announcement.

MISO has acknowledged the need for capacity market design changes in the zone 4 region and stated that reforms to its capacity market process may be required to drive future investment and that it plans to engage stakeholders to consider such reforms. The FERC has also encouraged such efforts.

Subsidized Generation. The rate of expansion of subsidized generation, including low-carbon generation such as wind and solar energy, in the markets in which Generation’s output is sold can negatively impact wholesale power prices, and in turn, Generation’s results of operations.

Various states have implementedattempted to implement or proposedpropose legislation, regulations or other policies to subsidize new generation development which may result in artificially depressed wholesale energy and capacity prices. For example, the New Jersey legislature enacted into law in January 2011, the Long Term capacityCapacity Pilot Program Act (LCAPP). LCAPP provides eligible generators with 15-year fixed contracts for the sale of capacity in the PJM capacity market. Under LCAPP, the local utilities in New Jersey are required to pay (or receive) the difference between the price eligible generators receive in the capacity market and the price guaranteed under the 15 year15-year contract. New Jersey ultimately selected three proposals to participate in LCAPP and build new generation in the state. In addition, on April 12, 2012, the MDPSC issued an order directing the Maryland electric utilities to enter into a 20-year contract for differences (CfD) with CPV Maryland, LLC (CPV), under which CPV will construct an approximately 700 MW combined cycle gas turbine in Waldorf, Maryland, that it projected willwould be in commercial operation by June 1, 2015. CPV has subsequently sought to extend that date. The CfD mandatesmandated that utilities (including BGE) pay (or receive) the difference between CPV’s contract price and the revenues it receives for capacity and energy from clearing the unit in the PJM capacity market.

 

Exelon and others filed a complaint in federal district court challengingchallenged the constitutionality and other aspects of the New Jersey legislation. Similarly, Exelon and others are also challenging the selection of the three generation developerslegislation in New Jersey state court proceedings andfederal court. The actions taken by the MDPSC actionswere also challenged in Maryland state court. On October 25, 2013, the U.S. District Courtfederal court in New Jersey issuedan action to which Exelon was not a judgment order finding that the New Jersey legislation violates the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution and the New Jersey SOCA contract is unenforceable. Similarly, on October 24, 2013, the U.S. District Court in Maryland issued a judgment order finding that the MDPSC’s Order directing BGE and two other Maryland electric distribution companies to enter into a CfD violates the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution, as described in Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. In addition, on October 1, 2013, a Maryland State Circuit Court upheld the MDPSC Orders as being within the MDPSC’s statutory authority under Maryland state law. This decision is separate from the judgment in the federal litigation that the MDPSC Order is unconstitutional and the CfD unenforceable under federal law.party. The federal judgment, if upheld, would prevent enforcement of the CfD even if the Circuit Court decision stands. The non-prevailing parties have sought appeals in federal appellate courttrial courts in both the New Jersey and

85


Maryland federal litigation. Finally, on October 23, 2013,actions effectively invalidated the actions taken by the New Jersey state court dismissedlegislature and the New Jersey state proceeding without prejudice, subjectMDPSC, respectively. Each of those decisions was upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, respectively. However, the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to review the final outcome ofmatter, and there is risk the New Jersey federal litigation.Supreme Court will overrule the lower courts.

 

As required under their contracts, two ofgenerator developers who were selected in the New Jersey generator developers and one in Maryland programs (including CPV) offered and cleared in PJM’s capacity market auctions held in May 2012 and 2013. In addition, CPV has announced its intention to move forward with construction of its New Jersey plant, with or without the challenged state subsidy. Nonetheless toauctions. To the extent that the state-required customer subsidies are included under their respective contracts, Exelon believes that these projects may have artificially suppressed capacity prices in PJM in these auctions and may continue to do so in future auctions to the detriment of Exelon’s market driven position. While the U.S. District Courtcourt decisions in MarylandNew Jersey and New JerseyMaryland are positive developments, continuation of these state efforts, if successful and unabated by an effective minimum offer price rule (MOPR), for future capacity auctions, could continue to result in artificially depressed wholesale capacity and/or energy prices. Other states could seek to establish programs, which could substantially impact Exelon’s market driven position and could have a significant effect on Exelon’s financial results of operations, financial position and cash flows.

 

PJM’s capacityOne such state is Ohio, where state-regulated utility companies FirstEnergy Ohio (FE) and AEP Ohio (AEP) have initiated actions at the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO) to obtain approval for Riders that would effectively allow these two companies to pass through to all customers in their service territories the differences between their costs and market rules include a MOPR, which is intendedrevenues on PPAs entered into between the utility and its merchant generation affiliate. Collectively more than 6,000MW of primarily coal-fired generation owned by FE and AEP’s affiliates seek ratepayer guaranteed subsidies via the proposed Riders. Thus, the Riders are similar to preclude sellers from artificially suppressing the competitive price signals for generation capacity. However, asCfDs described above Exelon does not believe(except that the PPA Riders in Ohio would apply to certain existing MOPR will work effectivelygeneration facilities whereas the CfDs applied to new generation facilities). While AEP and FE initially filed for these Riders in 2013 and 2014, respectively, it was not until late 2015 that the proposals obtained meaningful traction when PUCO staff entered into a settlement and stipulation with respect to generator developers who have a state-sponsored subsidythe Ohio utilities supporting the proposals and has concerns with certain other aspects of PJM’s rules related torecommending that the capacity auction. Accordingly,PUCO approve the Riders. Exelon is working with other market stakeholders on several proposed changes toa participant in these proceedings. Although the PJM tariff aimed at ensuringmatter is still in hearing and a decision by the PUCO is not expected until late February/early March 2016, it is increasingly likely that capacity resources (including those with state-sponsored subsidy contracts, excessive imported capacity resources and certain limited availability demand response resources) cannot inappropriately affect capacity auction prices in PJM.these subsidies may be approved by the PUCO. Litigation around these approvals is also likely.

 

See Note 3—Regulatory Matters ofExelon opposes the Combined Notesproposals in Ohio, continues to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on themonitor developments in Maryland Order.and New Jersey, and participates in stakeholder and other processes to ensure that similar state subsidies are

not developed. Exelon remains active in advocating for competitive markets, while opposing policies that ask eitherrequire taxpayers and/ or consumers to subsidize or give preferential treatment to specific generation providers or technologies that do not provide superior reliability or environmental benefits, or that would threaten the reliability and value of the integrated electricity grid.

 

Energy Demand. The continued tepidModest economic environment and growinggrowth partially offset by energy efficiency initiatives have limited the demandis resulting in positive growth for electricity across each of the Exelon utility companies.for BGE and PECO; and a decrease in projected load for electricity for ComEd. BGE, PECO and ComEd isare projecting load volumes to decreaseincrease (decrease) by 0.2% in 2014 compared to 2013, while PECO1.5%, 0.4% and BGE are projecting an increase of 0.3% and 0.6%(0.3)%, respectively, in 20142016 compared to 2013.2015.

 

Retail Competition. Generation’s retail operations compete for customers in a competitive environment, which affect the margins that Generation can earn and the volumes that it is able to serve. Recently, sustained lowThe market experienced high price volatility in the first quarter of 2014 which contributed to bankruptcies and consolidations within the industry during the year. However, forward natural gas and power prices are expected to remain low and low market volatility have causedthus we expect retail competitors to aggressively pursuestay aggressive in their pursuit of market share, and that wholesale generators (including Generation) will continue to use their retail operations to hedge generation output. These factors have adversely affected overall gross margins and profitability in Generation’s retail operations.

 

Strategic Policy Alignment

 

Exelon routinely reviews its hedging policy, dividend policy, operating and capital costs, capital spending plans, strength of its balance sheet and credit metrics, and sufficiency of its liquidity position, by performing various stress tests with differing variables, such as commodity price movements, increases in margin-related transactions, changes in hedging practices, and the impacts of hypothetical credit downgrades.

 

86


Exelon’s board of directors declared the first, quarter 2013 dividend of $0.525 per share, and in response to low forward energy prices and weaker financial expectations, among other factors, approved a revised dividend policy going forward. The first quarter dividend was paid on March 8, 2013 to shareholders of record on February 19, 2013 and was based on Exelon’s previous dividend of $2.10 per share on an annualized basis. The second, third and fourth quarter 2015 and first quarter 2016 dividends were based on Exelon’s new dividend policy of $0.31 per share quarterlyeach on Exelon’s common stock. The dividends for the first, second, third and fourth quarter 2015 were paid on March 10, 2015, June 10, 2015, September 10, 2015 and December 10, 2015. The first quarter 2016 dividend ($1.24 per shareis payable on an annualized basis). March 10, 2016.

All future quarterly dividends require approval by Exelon’s board of directors.

Exelon and Generation evaluate Exelon’s Board of Directors approved a revised dividend policy. The approved policy would raise our dividend 2.5% each year for the economic viability of each of their generating units on an ongoing basis. Decisions regardingnext three years, beginning with the future of economically challenged generating assets will be based primarily on the economics of continued operation of the individual plants. If Exelon and Generation do not see a path to sustainable profitability in any of their plants, Exelon and GenerationJune 2016 dividend. The Board will take stepsformal action to retire those plants to avoid sustained losses. Retirement of plants could materially affect Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations, financial position, and cash flows through among other things, potential impairment charges, accelerated depreciation and decommissioning expenses overdeclare the plants remaining useful lives, and ongoing reductions to operating revenues, operating and maintenance expenses, and capital expenditures.next dividend in the second quarter.

 

Hedging Strategy

 

Exelon’s policy to hedge commodity risk on a ratable basis over three-year periods is intended to reduce the financial impact of market price volatility. Generation is exposed to commodity price risk associated with the unhedged portion of its electricity portfolio. Generation enters into non-derivative and derivative contracts, including financially-settled swaps, futures contracts and swap options, and physical options and physical forward contracts, all with credit-approved counterparties, to hedge this anticipated exposure. Generation has hedges in place that significantly mitigate this risk for 20142015 and 2015.2016. However, Generation is exposed to relatively greater commodity price risk in the subsequent years with respect to which a larger portion of its electricity portfolio is currently unhedged. As of December 31, 2013,2015, the percentage of expected generation hedged for the major reportable segments was 92%-95%90%-93%, 62%-65%60%-63% and 30%-33%28%-31% for 2014, 2015,2016, 2017, and 2016,2018 respectively. The percentage of expected generation hedged is the amount of equivalent sales divided by the expected generation. Expected generation representsis the amountvolume of energy estimated to be generated or purchased throughthat best represents our commodity position in energy markets from owned or contracted capacity.for capacity based upon a simulated dispatch model that makes assumptions regarding future market conditions, which are calibrated to market quotes for power, fuel,

load following products, and options. Equivalent sales represent all hedging products, which include economic hedgessuch as wholesale and certain non-derivative contracts including Generation’sretail sales of energy to ComEd, PECOpower, options and BGE relating to their respective retail load obligations.swaps. Generation has been and will continue to be proactive in using hedging strategies to mitigate commodity price risk in subsequent years as well.

 

Generation procures coal, oil and natural gas through long-term and short-term contracts and spot-market purchases. Nuclear fuel is obtained predominantly through long-term uranium concentrate supply contracts, contracted conversion services, contracted enrichment services, or a combination thereof, and contracted fuel fabrication services. The supply markets for uranium concentrates and certain nuclear fuel services, coal, oil and natural gas are subject to price fluctuations and availability restrictions. Supply market conditions may make Generation’s procurement contracts subject to credit risk related to the potential non-performance of counterparties to deliver the contracted commodity or service at the contracted prices. Approximately 60%50% of Generation’s uranium concentrate requirements from 20142016 through 20182020 are supplied by three producers. In the event of non-performance by these or other suppliers, Generation believes that replacement uranium concentrates can be obtained, although at prices that may be unfavorable when compared to the prices under the current supply agreements. Non-performance by these counterparties could have a material adverse impact on Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations, cash flows and financial position.

ComEd, PECO and BGE mitigate such exposurecommodity price risk through regulatory mechanisms that allow them to recover procurement costs from retail customers.

 

87


Growth Opportunities

 

Exelon is currently pursuing growth in both the utility and generation businesses focused primarily on smart meter and smart grid initiatives at the utilities and on renewables development and the nuclear uprate program at Generation. The utilities also anticipate making significant future investments in infrastructure modernization and improvement initiatives. Management continually evaluates growth opportunities aligned with Exelon’s existing businesses, in electricassets and gas distribution, electric transmission, generation, customer supply of electric and natural gas products and services, and natural gas exploration and production activities,markets, leveraging Exelon’s expertise in those areas.areas and offering sustainable returns.

 

Transmission Development Project. Exelon and AEP Transmission Holding Company, LLC (AEP) are working collaboratively to develop an extra high-voltage transmission project from the western Ohio border through Indiana to the northern portion of Illinois. Referred to as the Reliability Interregional Transmission Extension (RITE) Line project, the project is expected to strengthen the high-voltage transmission system and improve overall system reliability. RITELine Illinois, LLC (RITELine Illinois) and RITELine Indiana, LLC (RITELine Indiana) have been formed as project companies to develop and own the project. RITELine Illinois will own the transmission assets located in Illinois and is owned 75% by ComEd and 25% by RITELine Transmission Development Company, LLC (RTD). RITELine Indiana will own the transmission assets located in Indiana and is owned by AEP (75%) and RTD (25%). Exelon Transmission Company, LLC and AEP each own 50% of RTD. The total cost of the RITE Line project is expected to be approximately $1.6 billion, with the Illinois portion of the line expected to cost approximately $1.2 billion. The ultimate cost and scope of the project are dependent on a number of factors, including RTO requirements, interregional transmission planning process requirements, state siting requirements, routing of the line, and equipment and commodity costs. Exelon and AEP are currently pursuing the project and other segments that are electrically equivalent in nature for inclusion in interregional planning process between PJM and MISO; if approved through that process, the project would then need to be approved through the respective planning processes of PJM and MISO.Regulated Energy Businesses

 

On July 18, 2011, RITELine IllinoisThe proposed merger with PHI provides an opportunity to accelerate Exelon’s regulated growth to provide stable cash flows, earnings accretion, and RITELine Indiana filed at FERC for incentive ratesdividend support. Additionally, ComEd, PECO and a formula rate forBGE anticipate investing approximately $18 billion over the RITE Line project. On October 14, 2011, FERC issued an order on the incentivenext five years in electric and formula rate filing. The order grants a base rate of return on common equity of 9.9%, plus a 50 basis point adder for the project being in a RTOnatural gas infrastructure improvements and a 100 basis point adder for the risks and challenges of the project, resulting in a total rate of return on common equity of 11.4%. The order grants a hypothetical capital structure of 45% debt and 55% equity until any part of the project enters commercial operations. The order also grants 100% recovery for construction work in progress, 100% recovery for abandonment, if the line is abandoned through no fault of the RITELine developers, and the ability to treat pre-construction costs as a regulatory asset. All incentives,modernization projects, including the abandonment incentive, are contingent on inclusion of the project in the PJM RTEP. The RITELine companies filed for rehearing on several rate of return on common equity issues and argued that the right to collect abandoned costs should not be subject to the project being included in the RTEP. The RITELine companies also made a compliance filing as called for in the October 14, 2011 Order. FERC accepted this filing on March 16, 2012.

Smart Meter and Smart Grid Initiatives.

ComEd’s Smart Meter and Smart Grid Investments. ComEd plans to invest approximately $1.3 billion on smart meters and smart grid under EIMA, including $1.0 billion through the AMI Deployment Plan. On June 5, 2013, the ICC issued an interim order approving ComEd’s accelerated AMI deployment plan consistent with the provisions of Senate Bill 9. The deployment plan provides for the installation of 4 million electric smart meters, of which more than 60,000 meters were installed by the end of 2013.

PECO’s Smart Meter and Smart Grid Investments. In 2010, the PAPUC approved PECO’s Smart Meter Procurement and Installation Plan, under which PECO will install more than 1.6 million smart

88


meters. PECO plans to spend up to a total of $595 million and $120 million on its smart meter and smart grid infrastructure, respectively, ofinitiatives, storm hardening, advanced reliability technologies, and transmission projects, which $200 million will be funded by SGIG.

BGE Smart Grid Initiative. In August 2010, the MDPSC approved a comprehensive smart grid initiative for BGE which includes the planned installation of 2 million electric and gas smart meters atis projected to result in an expected total costincrease to current rate base of approximately $480 million, before considering$8 billion by the $200 million SGIG for smart gridend of 2020. ComEd, PECO and other related initiatives.BGE invest in rate base where beneficial to customers and the community by increasing reliability and the service experience or otherwise meeting customer needs. These investments are made prudently and at the lowest reasonable cost to customers.

 

See Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on the Smart Meter and Smart Grid Initiatives.Initiatives and infrastructure development and enhancement programs.

 

Generation Renewable Development. On September 30, 2011, Exelon announced the completion of its acquisition of all of the interests in Antelope Valley, a 230-MW solar photovoltaic (PV) project under development in northern Los Angeles County, California, from First Solar, Inc., which is developing, building, operating, and maintaining the project. The first portion of the project began operations in December 2012, with six additional blocks coming online in 2013. Exelon has been informed by First Solar of issues relating to delays in the certification of certain components relating to the final two blocks of the project, which will delay commercial operation of these two blocks until the first half of 2014. The delay will not have a material financial effect on Exelon. Exelon expects the project to be in full commercial operation in the first half of 2014. The acquisition supports the Exelon commitment to renewable energy as part of Exelon 2020. The project has a 25-year PPA with Pacific Gas & Electric Company for the full output of the plant, which has been approved by the CPUC. Upon completion, the facility will add 230 MWs to Generation’s renewable generation fleet. Total capitalized costs for the facility are expected to be approximately $1.1 billion. Total capitalized costs incurred through December 31, 2013 were approximately $968 million. In addition, Generation constructed and placed into service 400 MWs of additional wind generation in 2012 at a cost of $710 million and another 50 MW will be added to Generation’s wind portfolio in 2014 with the expansion of its Beebe project in Michigan, the output of which will be fully contracted under a 20-year PPA.Competitive Energy Businesses

 

Nuclear Uprate Program.Generation continually assesses the optimal structure and composition of our generation assets as well as explores wholesale and retail opportunities within the power and gas sectors. Generation’s long-term growth strategy is engagedto prioritize investments in individual projects as part of a planned power uprate programlong-term contracted generation across its nuclear fleet. When economically viable, the projects take advantage of new productionmultiple technologies and measurement technologies, new materialsidentify and application of expertise gained from a half-century of nuclear power operations. Basedcapitalize on ongoing reviews, the nuclear uprate implementation plan was adjusted during 2013opportunities that provide generation to cancel certain projects. The Measurement Uncertainty Recapture uprate projects at the Dresden and Quad Cities nuclear stations were cancelledload matching as a resultmeans to provide stable earnings, while identifying emerging technologies where strategic investments provide the option for significant future growth or influence in market development. As of the cost of additional plant modifications identified during final design work which, when combined with then current market conditions, made the projects not economically viable. Additionally, the market conditions promptedDecember 31, 2015, Generation has currently approved plans to cancel the previously deferred extended power uprate projects at the LaSalle and Limerick nuclear stations. During 2013, Generation recordedinvest a pre-tax charge to operating and maintenance expense and interest expensetotal of approximately $111 million$2 billion in 2016 through 2018 on capital growth projects (primarily new plant construction and $8 million, respectively, to accrue remaining costs and reverse the previously capitalized costs.

Under the nuclear uprate program, Generation has placed into service projects representing 316 MWs of new nuclear generation at a cost of $952 million, which has been capitalized to property, plant and equipment on Exelon’s and Generation’s consolidated balance sheets. At December 31, 2013, Generation has capitalized $203 million to construction work in progress within property, plant and equipment for nuclear uprate projects expected to be placed in service by the end of 2016, consisting of 200 MWs of new nuclear generation, that are in the installation phase across four nuclear stations; Peach Bottom in Pennsylvania and Byron, Braidwood and Dresden in Illinois. The remaining spend associated with these projects is expected to be approximately $300 million through the end of 2016. Generation believes that it is probable that these projects will be completed. If a project is expected not to be completed as planned, previously capitalized costs will be reversed through earnings as a charge to operating and maintenance expense and interest.distributed generation).

89


Liquidity

 

Each of the Registrants annually evaluates its financing plan, dividend practices and credit line sizing, focusing on maintaining its investment grade ratings while meeting its cash needs to fund capital requirements, retire debt, pay dividends, fund pension and other postretirement benefitOPEB obligations and invest in new and existing ventures. A broad spectrum of financing alternatives beyond the core financing options can be used to meet its needs and fund growth including monetizing assets in the portfolio via project financing, asset sales, and the use of other financing structures (e.g., joint ventures, minority partners, etc.). The Registrants expect cash flows to be sufficient to meet operating expenses, financing costs and capital expenditure requirements.

 

Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE have unsecured syndicated revolving credit facilities with aggregate bank commitments of $0.5 billion, $5.3 billion, $1.0 billion, $0.6 billion and $0.6 billion, respectively. Generation also has bilateral credit facilities with aggregate maximum availability of $0.4 billion. See Liquidity and Capital Resources—Credit Matters—Exelon Credit Facilities below.

 

Exposure to Worldwide Financial Markets. Exelon has exposure to worldwide financial markets. The ongoingmarkets including European debt crisis has contributed to the instability in global credit markets. Further disruptionsbanks. Disruptions in the European markets could reduce or restrict the Registrants’ ability to secure sufficient liquidity or secure liquidity at reasonable terms. As of December 31, 2013,2015, approximately 30%25%, or $2.5$2.1 billion, of the Registrants’ aggregate total commitments were with European banks. The credit facilities include $8.4 billion in aggregate total commitments of which $6.6$6.9 billion was available as of December 31, 2013.2015, due to outstanding letters of credit. There were no borrowings under the Registrants’ credit facilities as of December 31, 2013.2015. See Note 13—14—Debt and Credit Agreements of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on the credit facilities.

 

February 5, 2014 Winter Ice Storm. On February 5, 2014, a winter storm which brought a mix of snow, ice and freezing rain to the region interrupted electric service delivery to nearly 715,000 customers in PECO’s service territory. Restoration efforts are continuing and will include significant costs associated with employee overtime, support from other utilities and incremental equipment, contracted tree trimming crews and supplies. PECO estimates that restoration efforts will result in $60 million to $80 million of incremental operating and maintenance expense and $30 million to $40 million of incremental capital expenditures for the first quarter of 2014.

Tax Matters

 

See Note 14—15—Income Taxes of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Environmental Legislative and Regulatory Developments.

 

Exelon supportsis actively involved in the promulgationEPA’s development and implementation of certain environmental regulations byfor the U.S. EPA, includingelectric industry, in pursuit of its business strategy to provide reliable, clean, affordable and innovative energy products. These efforts have most frequently involved air, water and waste controls for electric generating units. Seeunits, as set forth in the discussion below for further details. The air and wastebelow. These regulations will have a disproportionate adverse impact on fossil-fuel power plants, requiring significant expenditures of capital and variable operating and maintenance expense, and will likely resulthave resulted in the retirement of older, marginal facilities. Retirements of coal-fired power plants will continue as additional EPA regulations take effect, and as air quality standards are updated and further restrict emissions. Due to theirits low emission generation portfolios,portfolio, Generation and CENG will not be significantly directly affected by these regulations, representing a competitive advantage relative to electric generators that are more reliant on fossil-fuel plants. Various bills have been introduced in the U.S. Congress that would prohibit or impede the U.S. EPA’s rulemaking efforts. The timingefforts, and it is uncertain whether any of the consideration of such legislation is unknown.these bills will become law.

 

Air Quality. In recent years, the U.S. EPA has been implementing a series of increasingly stringent regulations under the Clean Air Act relatingapplicable to NAAQS for conventional air pollutants (e.g., NOx, SO2 and particulate matter) as well as stricter technology requirements to control HAPs (e.g., acid gases, mercury and other heavy metals) from electric generationgenerating units. The U.S. EPA continues to review and update its NAAQS with a tightened particulate matter NAAQS issued in December 2012 and a review

90


of the current 2008 ozone NAAQS that is expected to result in a proposed revision of the ozone NAAQS sometime in fall 2014. These updates will potentially resultregulations have resulted in more stringent emissions limits on fossil-fuel electric generating stations. Therestations as states implement their compliance plans.

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The EPA continues to be opposition among fossil-fuel generation ownersreview and update its NAAQS for conventional air pollutants relating to ground-level ozone and emissions of particulate

matter, SO2 and NOx. Following five years of litigation, the potential stringency and timing of these air regulations.

In July 2011,EPA is finalizing the U.S. EPA published CSAPR and in June 2012, it issued final technical corrections. CSAPRCross State Air Pollution Rule that requires 28 upwind states in the eastern half of the United States to significantly improve air quality by reducing power plant emissions that cross state lines and contribute to ground-level ozone and fine particle pollution in downwind states. On August 21, 2012, a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court held that the U.S. EPA had exceeded its authority in certain material aspects with respect to CSAPR and vacated the rule and remanded it to the U.S. EPA for further rulemaking consistent with its decision. The Court also ordered that CAIR remain in effect pending finalization of CSAPR on remand. Until the U.S. EPA re-issues CSAPR, Exelon cannot determine the impacts of the rule, including any that would impact power prices. In June 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court granted the U.S. EPA’s petition to review the D.C. Circuit Court’s CSAPR decision. Oral argument was held on December 10, 2013. A decision is expected sometime during 2014.

 

Mercury and Air Toxics Standard Rule (MATS).On December 16, 2011, the U.S. EPA signed a final rule to reduce emissions of toxic air pollutants from power plants and signed revisions to the NSPS for electric generating units. The final rule, known as MATS, requires coal-fired electric generation plants to achieve high removal rates of mercury, acid gases and other metals. To achieve these standards, coal units with no pollution control equipment installed (uncontrolled coal units) will havemetals, and to make capital investments in pollution control equipment and incur higher operating expenses. It is expected that owners of smaller, older, uncontrolled coal units will retire the units rather than make these investments. Coal units with existing controls that do notThe initial compliance deadline to meet the MATS rulenew standards was April 16, 2015; however, facilities may need to upgrade existing controlshave been granted an additional one or add new controls to comply. Owners of oil units not currently meeting the proposed emission standards may choose to convert the units to light oils or natural gas, install control technologies, or retire the units.two year extension in limited cases. Numerous entities have challenged MATS in the D.C. Circuit Court, and Exelon was granted permission by the Court to interveneintervened in support of the rule. A decisionIn April 2014, the D.C. Circuit Court issued an opinion upholding MATS in its entirety. On appeal, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in June 2015 that the EPA unreasonably refused to consider costs in determining whether it is appropriate and necessary to regulate hazardous air pollutants emitted by electric utilities. The U.S. Supreme Court, however, did not vacate the rule; rather, it was remanded to the D.C. Circuit Court to take further action consistent with the U.S. Supreme Court’s opinion on this single issue. As such, the MATS rule remains in effect. Exelon will not occur until 2014. The outcomecontinue to participate in the remanded proceedings before the D.C. Circuit Court as an intervenor in support of the appeal, and its impact on power plant operators’ investment and retirement decisions, is uncertain.rule.

 

The cumulative impact of these air regulations could be to require power plant operators to expend significant capital to install pollution control technologies, including wet flue gas desulfurization technology for SO2 and acid gases, and selective catalytic reduction technology for NOx. Exelon, along with the other co-owners of Conemaugh Generating Station are moving forward with plans to improve the existing scrubbers and install Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) controls to meet the mercury removal requirements of MATS by January 1, 2015. In addition, Keystone already has SCR and Flue-gas desulfurization (FGD) controls in place.

On January 15, 2013, EPA issued a final rule for NSPS and National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for reciprocating internal combustion engines (RICE NESHAP/NSPS). The final rule allows diesel backup generators to operate for up to 100 hours annually under certain emergency circumstances without meeting emissions limitations, but requires units that operate over 15 hours to burn low sulfur fuel and report key engine information. The final rule eliminates after May 2014 the 50 hour exemption for peak shaving and other non-emergency demand response that was included in the proposed rule and, therefore, is not expected to result in additional megawatts of demand response to be bid into the PJM capacity auction.

In the absence of Federal legislation, the U.S. EPA is also moving forward with the regulation of GHG emissions under the Clean Air Act. The U.S. EPA is addressing the issue of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions regulation for new and existing electric generating units through the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) under Section 111 of the Clean Air Act. Pursuant to President

91


Obama’s June 25, 2013 memorandum to U.S. EPA, the Agency re-proposed a Section 111(b) regulation for new units in September 2013 that may result in material costs of compliance for CO2 emissions for new fossil-fuel electric generating units, particularly coal-fired units. Under the President’s memorandum, the U.S. EPA is also required to propose a Section 111(d) rule no later than June 1, 2014 to establish CO2 emission regulations for existing stationary sources. Pursuant to the President’s Climate Action Plan, the U.S. EPA re-proposed regulations for the GHG emissions from new fossil fueled power plants on September 20, 2013. The U.S. EPA is also expected to propose by June 2014 GHG emission regulations for existing stationary sources under Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act, and to issue final regulations by June 2015. While the nature and impact of the final regulations is not yet known, to the extent that the rule results in emission reductions from fossil fuel fired plants, imposing some form of direct or indirect price of carbon in competitive electricity markets, Exelon’s overall low-carbon generation portfolio results would benefit.

Change.Exelon supports comprehensive climate change legislation or regulation, including a cap-and-trade program for GHG emissions, which balances the need to protect consumers, business and the economy with the urgent need to reduce national GHG emissions. In the absence of Federal legislation, the EPA is moving forward with the regulation of GHG emissions under the Clean Air Act. In addition, there have been recent developments in the international regulation of GHG emissions pursuant to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (“UNFCCC” of “Convention”). See ITEM 1.—BUSINESS,“Global Climate Change” for further discussion.

 

Water Quality. Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act requires that cooling water intake structures at electric power plants reflect the best technology available to minimize adverse environmental impacts, and is implemented through state-level NPDES permit programs. On March 28, 2011, the U.S. EPA issued a proposed rule, and is required under a Settlement Agreement to issue a final rule by November 4, 2013; on October 30, 2013 the U.S. EPA invoked theforce majeure provisionAll of the Settlement Agreement to extend the final rule deadline until November 20, 2013 dueGeneration’s power generation facilities with cooling water systems are subject to the early October 2013 federal government shutdown. The U.S. EPA and the plaintiffs have stated that the deadline will be extended again for a brief period, but have not yet agreed on a date. The proposed rule does not require closed cycle coolingregulations. Facilities without closed-cycle recirculating systems (e.g., cooling towers) asare potentially most affected by changes to the best technology available,existing regulations. Those facilities are Calvert Cliffs, Clinton, Dresden, Eddystone, Fairless Hills, Ginna, Gould Street, Handley, Mountain Creek, Mystic 7, Nine Mile Point Unit 1, Oyster Creek, Peach Bottom, Quad Cities, Riverside, Salem and also provides some flexibility in the use of cost-benefit considerations and site-specific factors. The proposed rule affords the state permitting agency wide discretion to determine the best technology available, which, depending on the site characteristics, could include closed cycle cooling, advanced screen technology at the intake, or retention of the current technology.Schuylkill. See ITEM 1.—BUSINESS ,“Water Quality” for further discussion.

 

It is unknown at this time whetherSolid and Hazardous Waste. In October 2015, the final regulations will require closed-cycle cooling. The economic viabilityfirst federal regulation for the disposal of Generation’s facilities without closed-cycle cooling water systems will be called into question by any requirement to construct cooling towers. Should the final rule not require the installation of cooling towers, and retain the flexibility afforded the state permitting agencies in applying a cost-benefit test and to consider site-specific factors, the impact of the rule would be minimized even though the costs of compliance could be material to Generation.

Hazardous and Solid Waste. Under proposed U.S. EPA rules issued on June 21, 2010, coal combustion residuals (CCR) would be regulated for the first time under the RCRA.from power plants became effective. The U.S. EPA is considering several options, including classification ofrule classifies CCR either as a hazardous or non-hazardous waste under RCRA. Under either option, the U.S. EPA’s intentionregulation, CCR will continue to be regulated by most states subject to coordination with the federal regulations. Generation has previously recorded reserves consistent with state regulation for its owned coal ash sites, and as such, the regulation is not expected to impact Exelon’s and Generation’s financial results. Generation does not have sufficient information to reasonably assess the ultimate eliminationpotential likelihood or magnitude of surface impoundments as a waste treatment process. For plants affected byany remediation requirements that may be asserted under the proposed rules, this would result in significant capital expenditures and variable operating and maintenance expenditures to convert to dry handling and disposal systems and installation of new waste water treatment facilities. Generation’s plants that would be affected by the proposed rules are Keystone and Conemaugh in Pennsylvania, which have on-site landfills that meet the requirements of Pennsylvania solid wastefederal regulations for non-hazardous waste disposal. However, untilcoal ash disposal sites formerly owned by Generation. For these reasons, Generation is unable to predict whether and to what extent it may ultimately be held responsible for remediation and other costs relating to formerly owned coal ash disposal sites under the final rule is adopted, the impact on these facilities is unknown. The U.S. EPA has entered into a Consent Decree which requires that a final rule be issued by December 19, 2014.new regulations.

See Note 2223—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further detail related to environmental matters, including the impact of environmental regulation.

 

92


Other Regulatory and Legislative Actions

 

Japan EarthquakeNRC Task Force Insights from the Fukushima Daiichi Accident (Exelon and Tsunami andGeneration).In July 2011, an NRC Task Force formed in the Industry’s Response.Onaftermath of the March 11, 2011, Japan experienced a 9.0 magnitude earthquake and ensuing tsunami, that seriously damaged the nuclear units at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station, which are operated by Tokyo Electric Power Co.

In July 2011, an NRC Task Force formed in the aftermath of the Fukushima Daiichi events issued a report of its review of the accident, including tiered recommendations for future regulatory action by the NRC to be taken in the near and longer term. The NRC staff and the Task ForceForce’s report concluded that nuclear reactors in the United States are operating safely and do not present an imminent risk to public health and safety. The Task Force’s report did not recommend any changes to the existing nuclear licensing process in the United States or changes in the storage of spent nuclear fuel within the plant’s spent nuclear fuel pools.

In 2012, the NRC authorizedand its staff to issue three immediately effectivehave issued orders (Tier 1 orders) toand implementation guidance for commercial reactor licensees operating in the United States for compliance no later than December 31, 2016. In addition, in 2012, the NRC staff recommended to the NRC the installation of engineered containment filtered venting systems for boiling-water reactors (BWR) with Mark I and Mark II containment structures. In summary, through the initial and/or subsequent orders and the NRC approved implementation guidance, the Tier 1 orders currently: (1) require licensees to provide sufficient onsite portable equipment and resources to maintain or restore cooling capabilities for the core and spent fuel pool and to maintain containment integrity until offsite equipment is available and have offsite equipment and resources available to sustain cooling functions indefinitely; (2) provide requirements for vents for BWR’s with Mark I and Mark II containments to remain functional during severe accident conditions including the ability to vent the containment following core damage; and (3) require licensees to install instrumentation to provide a reliable indication of water level in the spent fuel pool. Finally, the NRC has directed the NRC staff to produce a technical evaluation to support rulemaking that considers filtering and performance-based strategies as options for BWR’s with Mark I and Mark II containments.States. The NRC and its staff must then develop a final rule by March 2017.

Additionally, in 2012, the NRC had issued a detailed information requestare continuing to every operating commercial nuclear power plant in the United States. The information requested requires: (1) use of the current NRC guidance to reevaluate current seismic and flood risk hazards against the design basis and provide a plan of actions to address vulnerabilities, including risks exceeding the design basis; (2) performance of walk downs to ensure the ability to respond to seismic and external flooding events and provide a corrective action plan to the NRC to address deficiencies; and (3) assessment of the means to provide power for communications equipment during a severe natural event and identify staffing required to implement the emergency plan for an event affecting all units with an extended loss of alternating current power and impeded access to the site. The nuclear industry proposed, and the NRC approved, an augmented approach to the seismic hazard analysis to accommodate industry wide availability of qualified technical resources needed to perform the required analysis. The NRC approved this augmented approach.

evaluate additional requirements. Generation has assessed the impacts of the Tier 1 orders and information requests and will continue monitoring the additional recommendations under review by the NRC staff, both from an operational and a financial impact standpoint. A comprehensive review of the NRC Tier 1 orders and information requests, as well as preliminary engineering assumptions and analysis, indicate that the financial impact of compliance for Generation, net of expected co-owner reimbursements, for the period from 20142016 through 20182019 is expected to be between approximately $350$175 million and $375$200 million of capital (which includes approximately $25 million for the CENG plants) and $50$25 million of operating expense as previously anticipated in Generation’s planning projections. As Generation completes the design and installation planning for its actions, Generation will update these estimates. Further, Generation estimates incremental costs of $15 to $20(which includes approximately $5 million per unit at eleven Mark I and II units for the installation of filtered vents, if ultimately required by the NRC.CENG plants). Generation’s current assessments are specific to the Tier 1 recommendations as

93


the NRC has not taken specific action with respect to the Tier 2 and Tier 3 recommendations. Exelon and Generation are unable to conclude at this time to what extent any actions to comply with the requirements of Tier 2 and Tier 3 will impact their future financial position, results of operations, and cash flows. Generation will continue to engage in nuclear industry assessments and actions and stakeholder input. See ItemITEM 1A. Risk Factors,RISK FACTORS for further discussion of the risk factors.additional information.

 

Financial Reform Legislation.Legislation (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO, and BGE).The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank(the Act) was enacted in July 2010. WhileThe part of the Act that applies to Exelon is Title VII, which is known as the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Transparency and Accountability Act is focused primarily on(Dodd-Frank). Dodd-Frank requires the regulation and oversightcreation of financial institutions, it also provides for a new regulatory regime for over-the-counter swaps (Swaps), including mandatory clearing for certain categories of Swaps, incentives to shift Swap activity to exchange trading, margin and capital requirements, and other transparency requirements.obligations designed to promote transparency. For non security-based Swaps including commodity Swaps, Dodd-Frank empowers the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) to promulgate regulations implementing the law’s objectives. The primary aim of Dodd-Frank Act, however,is to regulate the key intermediaries in the Swaps market, which entities are either swap dealers (SDs), major swap participants (MSPs), and certain other financial entities, but the law also preservesapplies to a lesser degree to end-users of Swaps. On January 12, 2015, President Obama signed into law a bill that exempts from margin requirements Swaps used by end-users to hedge or mitigate commercial risk. Moreover, the CFTC’s Dodd-Frank regulations preserve the ability of end users in the energy industry to hedge their risks. In April 2012,risks using Swaps without being subject to mandatory clearing, and excepts or exempts end-users from many of the CFTC issued its rule defining swap dealers and major swap participants. Exelon has determined that it will conductother substantive regulations. Accordingly, as an end-user, Generation is conducting its commercial business in a manner that does not require registration with the CFTC as an SD or MSP. Generation does not anticipate transacting in the future in a swap dealermanner in which it would become a SD or major swap participant. Notwithstanding, thereMSP.

There are, additional rulemakings that have not yet been issued,however, some rules, including the capital and margin rules which will further define the scope of the regulationsfor (non-cleared) Swaps that do not impact Generation’s collateral requirements directly, but may have an indirect impact.

These rules, in addition to certain international regulatory requirements still under development and provide clarity asthat are similar to the impact on the Registrants’ business, as well asDodd-Frank, could subject Generation’s SD or MSP counterparties to potential new opportunities. Depending on these final rules, the Registrants could be subject toadditional and potentially significant new obligations.

The proposed regulations addressing collateral and capitalcapitalization requirements and exchange margin cash postings, when final, could require Generationmotivate the SDs and MSPs to increase collateral requirements or cash postings in lieu of letters of credit currently issued to collateralize Swaps. Exelon had previously estimated that it could be required to make up to $1 billion of additional collateral postings under its bilateral credit lines. Given the swap dealer and the major swap participant definitions will not apply to Generation, the actual amount of collateral postings that will be required may be lower than Exelon’s previous expectations due to the following factors: (a) the majority of Generation’s physical wholesale portfolio does not meet the final CFTC Swap definition; (b) there will be minimal incremental costs associated with Generation’s positions that are currently cleared and subject to exchange margin; and (c) Generation will not be a swap dealer or major swap participant and proposed capital requirements applicable to these entities will not apply tofrom their counterparties, including Generation.

 

The actual level of collateral required will depend on many factors, including but not limited to market conditions, the outcome of final margin rules for Swaps, the extent of its trading activity in Swaps, and Generation’s credit ratings. Nonetheless, Generation has adequate credit facilities and flexibility in its hedging program to meet its anticipated collateral requirements estimated based on conservative assumptions.

In addition, the new regulations will impose new and ongoing compliance and infrastructure costs on Generation, which may amount to several million dollars per year.

Exelon and Generation continue to monitor the rulemaking procedures and cannot predict the ultimate outcome that the financial reform legislation will have on their results of operations,to what extent, if any, further refinements to Dodd-Frank and international regulatory requirements relating to Swaps may impact its cash flows or financial position.position, but such impacts could be material.

 

ComEd, PECO and BGE could also be subject to varioussome Dodd-Frank Act requirements to the extent they were to enter into Swap transactions.Swaps. However, at this time, management of ComEd, PECO and BGE docontinue to expect that their companies will not expect to be materially affected by this legislation.Dodd-Frank.

 

Energy Infrastructure Modernization Act.Market-Based Rates (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE). Since 2011, ComEd’s distribution ratesGeneration, ComEd, PECO and BGE are established through a performance-based rate formula, pursuant to EIMA. EIMA also provides a structurepublic utilities for substantial capital investment by utilities over a ten-year period to modernize Illinois’ electric utility infrastructure. Participating utilitiespurposes of the Federal Power Act and are required to file an annual updateobtain FERC’s acceptance of rate schedules for wholesale electricity sales. Currently, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE have authority to execute wholesale electricity sales at market-based rates. As is customary with market-based rate schedules, FERC has reserved the performance-basedright to suspend market-based rate authority on a retroactive basis if it subsequently determines that Generation, ComEd, PECO or BGE has violated the terms and conditions of its tariff or the Federal Power Act. FERC is also authorized to order refunds in certain instances if it finds that the market-based rates are not just and reasonable under the Federal Power Act.

 

94As required by FERC’s regulations, as promulgated in the Order No. 697 series, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE file market power analyses using the prescribed market share screens to demonstrate that Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE qualify for market-based rates in the regions where they are selling energy, capacity, and ancillary services under market-based rate tariffs. On December 30, 2013, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE filed its updated analysis for the Northeast Region, based on 2012 historic test period data which the FERC accepted on August 5, 2014. On December 23, 2014, Generation filed its updated market power analysis for the Southeast Region which the FERC accepted on July 16, 2015. On December 23, 2014, Generation filed its updated market power analysis for the Central Region which the FERC accepted on November 25, 2015. On December 29, 2015, Generation filed its updated market power analysis for the SPP Region, and the FERC has not yet acted on the filing.


Illinois Low Carbon Portfolio Standard (Exelon, Generation and ComEd). In March 2015, the Low Carbon Portfolio Standard (LCPS) was introduced in the Illinois General Assembly. The legislation would require ComEd and Ameren to purchase low carbon energy credits to match 70 percent of the electricity used on the distribution system. The LCPS is a technology-neutral solution, so all generators of zero or low carbon energy would be able to compete in the procurement process, including wind, solar, hydro, clean coal and nuclear. Costs associated with purchasing the low carbon energy credits would be collected from customers. The LCPS proposal includes consumer protection such as a price cap that would limit the impact to a 2.015% increase based off 2009 monthly bills, or about $2 per month for the average residential electricity customer. The legislation also includes a separate customer rebate provision that would provide a direct bill credit to customers in the event wholesale prices exceed a specified level. The proposed legislation is pending and Exelon and Generation continue to work with stakeholders.

Legislation to Maximize Smart Grid Investments and to Promote a Cleaner and Greener Illinois (Exelon and ComEd).In March 2015, legislation was introduced in the Illinois General Assembly that would (1) build on ComEd’s investment in the Smart Grid to reinforce the resiliency and security of the electrical grid to withstand unexpected challenges, (2) expand energy efficiency

programs to reduce energy waste and increase customer savings, (3) further integrate clean renewable energy onto the power system, and (4) introduce a new demand-based rate design for residential customers that would allow for a more equitable sharing of smart grid costs among customers. The legislation also provides for additional funding for customer assistance programs for low-income customers. The proposed legislation is pending and ComEd continues to work with stakeholders.

Distribution Formula Rate Update Filing (Exelon and ComEd). On April 15, 2015, ComEd filed its annual distribution formula rate tariff on or before May 1, with resulting rates effective in January of the following year. This annual formula rate update is based on prior year actual costs and current year projected capital additions. The update also reconciles any differences between the revenue requirement(s) in effect for the prior year and actual costs incurred for that year. Throughout each year, ComEd records regulatory assets or regulatory liabilities and corresponding increases or decreases to operating revenues for any differences between the revenue requirement(s) in effect and ComEd’s best estimate ofrequest a total decrease to the revenue requirement expected to be approved by the ICC for that year’s reconciliation.

Formula Rate Tariff

In March 2013, the Illinois legislature passed Senate Billof $50 million. On December 9, to clarify the intent of EIMA on the three issues decided in the Rehearing Order: an allowed return on ComEd’s pension asset; the use of year-end rather than average rate base and capital structure in the annual reconciliation; and the use of ComEd’s weighted average cost of capital interest rate rather than a short-term debt rate to apply to the annual reconciliation. On May 22, 2013, Senate Bill 9 became effective after the Illinois legislature overrode the Governor’s veto of that Bill. On June 5, 2013, the ICC approved ComEd’s updated distribution formula rate structure to reflect the impacts of Senate Bill 9.

In October 2013, the ICC opened an investigation (the Investigation), in response to a complaint filed by the Illinois Attorney General, to change the formula rate structure by requesting three changes: the elimination of the income tax gross-up on the weighted average cost of capital used to calculate interest on the annual reconciliation balance, the netting of associated accumulated deferred income taxes against the annual reconciliation balance in calculating interest, and the use of average rather than year-end rate base for determining any ROE collar adjustment. On November 26, 2013,2015, the ICC issued its final order inwhich decreased the Investigation, rejecting tworevenue requirement by $67 million, reflecting an increase of $85 million for the proposed changes but accepting the proposed changeinitial revenue requirement for 2015 and a decrease of $152 million related to eliminate the income tax gross-up on the weighted average cost of capital used to calculate interest on the annual reconciliation balance.for 2014. The accepted change became effectiverates took effect in January 2014, and is estimated to reduce ComEd’s 2014 revenue by approximately $8 million. ComEd and intervenors2016. Intervenors requested a rehearing however all rehearing requests were denied by the ICC. ComEd and intervenors have filed appeals with the Illinois Appellate Court. ComEd cannot predict the results of any such appeals.on specific issues. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.further information related to distribution formula updates.

 

Annual Reconciliation2015 Pennsylvania Electric Distribution Rate Case (Exelon and PECO).On March 27, 2015, PECO filed a petition with the PAPUC requesting an increase of $190 million to its annual service revenues for electric delivery, which requested an ROE of 10.95%. On September 10, 2015, PECO and interested parties filed with the PAPUC a petition for joint settlement for an increase of $127 million in annual distribution service revenue. No overall ROE was specified in the settlement. On December 17, 2015, the PAPUC approved the settlement of PECO’s electric distribution rate case. The approved electric delivery rates became effective on January 1, 2016.

 

On May 30, 2013, ComEd updatedThe settlement includes approval of the In-Program Arrearage Forgiveness (“IPAF”) Program, which provides for forgiveness of a portion of the eligible arrearage balance of its revenue requirement allowedlow-income Customer Assistance Program (CAP) accounts receivable that will be determined as of program inception in the December 2012 Order to reflect the impacts of Senate Bill 9, which resulted in a reductionOctober 2016. The forgiveness will be granted to the extent CAP customers remain current revenue requirement in effectwith payments. The Settlement guarantees PECO’s recovery of $14 million.two-thirds of the arrearage balance through a combination of customer payments and rate recovery, including through future rates cases if necessary. The rates took effect in July 2013.remaining one-third of the arrearage balance will be absorbed by PECO, of which a portion has already been expensed as bad debt for CAP customer’s accounts receivable balances.

Although the actual arrearage balance is not defined until program inception, PECO believes that it can reasonably estimate certain CAP customer accounts receivable balances as of December 31, 2015 that will remain outstanding at program inception. Management determined its best estimate based on historical collectability information. As a result, a regulatory asset of $7 million, representing the previously incurred bad debt expense associated with the estimated eligible accounts receivable balances, was recorded on Exelon’s and PECO’s Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2015. This estimate will be revisited on a quarterly basis through program inception.

 

2013 Filing.PECO Gas Main Extension Program (Exelon and PECO).On November 6, 2014, PECO filed a plan with the PAPUC requesting approval of three initiatives to provide more incentives to customers interested in switching to natural gas service. On October 1, 2015, the PAPUC approved the PECO Gas Main Extension Program, without modification. This approval allows local customers to pay significantly less initially to have natural gas installed at their homes and businesses.

2015 Maryland Electric and Gas Distribution Rate Case (Exelon and BGE).On November 6, 2015, and as amended on January 5, 2016, BGE filed for electric and gas base rate increases with the MDPSC, ultimately requesting an increase of $121 million and $79 million, respectively, of which $103 million and $37 million, respectively, is related to recovery of smart grid initiative costs. BGE requested a ROE for the electric and gas distribution rate case of 10.6% and 10.5%, respectively. The new

electric and gas base rates are expected to take effect in June 2016. BGE is also proposing to recover an annual increase of approximately $30 million for Baltimore City conduit lease fees through a surcharge. BGE cannot predict how much of the requested increase the MDPSC will approve or if it will approve BGE’s request for a conduit fee surcharge.

Transmission Formula Rate Update Filing (Exelon, ComEd and BGE).On April 29, 2013,15, 2015 (and revised on May 19), ComEd filed its annual distribution2015 transmission formula rate which was updated on May 30, 2013 to reflectupdate with the impacts of Senate Bill 9. The ICC’s final order, issued on December 19, 2013,FERC, reflecting an increased the revenue requirement by $341of $86 million, reflectingincluding an increase of $160$68 million for the initial revenue requirement for 2013 and an increase of $181$18 million forrelated to the annual reconciliation for 2012.reconciliation. The rate increase wasfiling establishes the revenue requirement used to set using an allowed return on capital of 6.94% (inclusive of an allowed return on common equity of 8.72%). The rates that took effect in January 2014. ComEd requested a rehearing on specific issues, which was deniedJune 2015, subject to review by the ICC. ComEdFERC and intervenors also filed appeals. ComEd cannot predict the results ofother parties. The time period for any such appeals.challenges to ComEd’s annual update expired in October 2015. No challenges were submitted. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.further information related to transmission formula update.

In April 2015, BGE filed its annual transmission formula rate update with the FERC, reflecting an increased revenue requirement of $10 million, including an increase of $13 million for the initial revenue requirement, inclusive of dedicated facilities charge revenues, and a decrease of $3 million related to the annual reconciliation for 2014. The filing establishes the revenue requirement used to set rates that took effect in June 2015. The time period for any challenges to BGE’s annual update expired in October 2015. No challenges were submitted. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information related to the transmission formula update.

Grand Prairie Gateway Transmission Line (Exelon and ComEd). On December 2, 2013, ComEd filed a request to obtain the ICC’s approval to construct a 60-mile overhead 345kV transmission line that traverses Ogle, DeKalb, Kane and DuPage Counties in Northern Illinois. On May 28, 2014, in a separate proceeding, FERC issued an order granting ComEd’s request to include 100% of the capital costs recorded to construction work in progress during construction of the line in ComEd’s transmission rate base. If the project is cancelled or abandoned for reasons beyond ComEd’s control, FERC approved the ability for ComEd to recover 100% of its prudent costs incurred after May 21, 2014 and 50% of its costs incurred prior to May 21, 2014 in ComEd’s transmission rate base. The costs incurred for the project prior to May 21, 2014 were immaterial. ComEd has acquired numerous easements across the project route through voluntary transactions. ComEd will seek to acquire the property rights on the remaining 28 parcels through condemnation proceedings in the circuit courts. ComEd began construction of the line during the second quarter of 2015 with an in-service date expected in the second quarter of 2017.

 

FERC Ameren Order.Order (Exelon and ComEd). In July 2012, FERC issued an order to Ameren Corporation (Ameren) finding that Ameren had improperly included acquisition premiums/goodwill in its transmission formula rate, particularly in its capital structure and in the application of AFUDC. FERC also directed Ameren to make

95


refunds for the implied increase in rates in prior years. Ameren has filed for rehearing regardingof the July 2012 order, which was denied in June 2014. On July 20, 2015, FERC order.approved a settlement between Ameren and its customers to resolve the matter. ComEd believes that the FERC ordersettlement authorizing its transmission formula rate is distinguishable from the circumstances that led to the July 2012 FERC order in the Ameren case. However, if ComEd were required to exclude acquisition premiums/goodwill from its transmission formula rate, the impact could be material to ComEd’s results of operations and cash flows.

 

FERC Order No. 1000 Compliance (ComEd, PECO and BGE). In FERC Order No. 1000, the FERC required public utility transmission providers to enhance their transmission planning procedures and their cost allocation methods applicable to certain new regional and interregional transmission

projects. As part of the changes to the transmission planning procedures, the FERC required removal from all FERC-approved tariffs and agreements of a right of first refusal to build certain new transmission facilities. In compliance with the regional transmission planning requirements of Order No. 1000, PJM as the transmission provider submitted a compliance filing to FERC onOn October 25, 2012. On the same day,2012, certain of the PJM transmission owners, including ComEd, PECO and BGE (collectively, the PJM Transmission Owners), submitted a filing asserting that their contractual rights embodied in the PJM governing documents continue to justify their right of first refusal to construct new reliability (and related) transmission projects and that the FERC should not be allowed to override such rights absent a showing that it is in the public interest to do so under the FERC’s “Mobile-Sierra” standard of review. This is a heightened standard of review which the PJM Transmission Owners argued could not be satisfied based on the facts applicable to them. On March 22, 2013, FERC issued an order onthat, among other things, rejected the PJM Compliance Filing andarguments of the filing of these PJM Transmission Owners (1) rejecting the arguments of such PJM Transmission Owners that changes to the PJM governing documents were entitled to review under theMobile-Sierra standard, (2) accepting most of the PJM filing, removing the right-of-first refusal from the PJM tariffs; and (3) directing PJM to remove certain exceptions that it included in its compliance filing that FERC found did not comply with Order No. 1000.standard. The FERC’s March 22, 2013 order could enable third parties to seek to build certain regional transmission projects that had previously been reserved for the PJM Transmission Owners, potentially reducing ComEd’s, PECO’sComEd PECO and BGE’s financial return on new investments in energy transmission facilities.

Numerous parties sought rehearing of the FERC’s March 22, 2013 order, including the PJM Transmission Owners. On May 15, 2014, FERC denied the PJM Transmission Owners who sought rehearing request. Several parties filed an appeal of the FERC’s rejectionMay 15, 2014, Order which upheld PJM’s right of their Mobile-Sierrafirst refusal language in the D.C. Circuit. The ultimate outcome of this proceeding cannot be predicted at this time, however, it could be material to Exelon, ComEd, PECO and related arguments. The compliance filing was made on July 22, 2013. On January 16, 2014, FERC issued an order stating that PJM’s filing while subject to further orders, is effective asBGE’s results of January 1, 2014.operations and cash flows.

 

FERC Transmission Complaint.Complaint (Exelon and BGE). On February 27, 2013, consumer advocates and regulators from the District of Columbia, New Jersey, Delaware and Maryland, and the Delaware Electric Municipal Cooperatives (the parties), filed a complaint at FERC against BGE and the Pepco Holdings, Inc.PHI companies relating to their respective transmission formula rates. AsBGE’s formula rate includes a 10.8% base rate of December 31, 2013, BGE cannot predict the likelihood or a reasonable estimate of the amount of a change, if any, in the allowed base return on common equity or(ROE) and a reasonable estimate of the refund period start date. While BGE cannot predict the outcome of this matter, if FERC orders50 basis point incentive for participating in PJM (and certain additional incentive basis points on certain projects). The parties sought a reduction of BGE’sin the base return on equity to 8.7%, and changes to the annual impact wouldformula rate process. Under FERC rules, any revenues subject to refund are limited to a fifteen month period and the earliest date from which the base ROE could be adjusted and refunds required is the date of the complaint.

On August 21, 2014, FERC issued an order in the BGE and PHI companies’ proceeding, which established hearing and settlement judge procedures for the complaint, and set a refund effective date of February 27, 2013.

On December 8, 2014, various state agencies in Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, and D.C. filed a second complaint against BGE regarding the base ROE of the transmission business seeking a reduction from 10.8% to 8.8%. The filing of the second complaint created a second refund window. By order issued on February 9, 2015, FERC established a hearing on the second complaint with the complainants’ requested refund effective date of December 8, 2014. On February 20, 2015, the Chief Judge issued an order consolidating the two complaint proceedings and established an Initial Decision issuance deadline of February 29, 2016.

On November 6, 2015, BGE and the PHI companies and the complainants filed a settlement with FERC covering the issues raised in revenuesthe complaints. The settlement provides for a 10% base ROE, effective March 8, 2016, which will be augmented by the PJM incentive adder of approximately $1050 basis points, and refunds to BGE customers of $13.7 million. The settlement also provides a moratorium on any change in the ROE until June 1, 2018. On December 16, 2015, the Presiding Administrative Law Judge submitted a Certification of the Uncontested Settlement to the FERC Commissioners. The settlement remains subject to FERC approval. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

The Maryland Strategic Infrastructure Development and Enhancement Program.Program (Exelon and BGE). In February 2013, the Maryland General Assembly passed legislation intended to accelerate gas infrastructure replacements in Maryland by establishingwas signed into law. The law established a mechanism, separate from base rate proceedings, for gas companies to promptly recover reasonable and prudent costs of eligible infrastructure replacement projects separate from base rate proceedings. Under the new law, following a proceeding before the MDPSC and with the MDPSC’s approval of the eligible infrastructure replacement projects along with a corresponding surcharge, BGE could begin charging gas customers a monthly surcharge for infrastructure costs incurred after June 1, 2013. The monthly surcharge and infrastructure replacement costs must be approved by the MDPSC and are subject to a cap and require an annual true-up of the surcharge revenues against actual expenditures. Investment levels in excess of the cap would be recoverable in a subsequent gas base rate proceeding at which time all costs for the infrastructure replacement projects would be rolled into gas distribution rates. Irrespective of the cap, BGE is required to file a gas rate case every five years under this legislation.

On August 2, 2013, BGE filed its infrastructure replacement plan and associated surcharge. The new surcharge rates are expected to take effect in the first quarter of 2014. BGE cannot predict the

96


outcome of this proceeding or how much of the requested plan and related surcharge the MDPSC will approve. The MDPSC held evidentiary hearings on BGE’s proposed plan and surcharge on November 12, 2013 through November 14, 2013. On January 29, 2014, the MDPSC issued a decision conditionally approving the first five years of BGE’s plan and surcharge. On November 16, 2015, BGE must submitfiled a surcharge update to be effective January 1, 2016, including a true-up of cost estimates included in the 2015 surcharge, along with its 2016 project list detailing specific projects plannedand projected capital estimates of $113 million to be included in the 2016 surcharge calculation. The MDPSC subsequently approved BGE’s 2016 project list and the proposed surcharge for 2016, which included the 2015 surcharge true-up. As of December 31, 2015, BGE recorded a regulatory asset of less than $1 million, representing the difference between the surcharge revenues and program costs.

In 2014, the residential consumer advocate in Maryland appealed MDPSC’s decision on BGE’s infrastructure replacement plan and associated surcharge with the Baltimore City Circuit Court, who affirmed the MDPSC’s decision. On October 10, 2014, the residential consumer advocate noticed its appeal to the MDPSC for approval within 30 daysMaryland Court of Special Appeals from the decision. Upon approval of the project listjudgment entered by the MDPSC, BGE will be able to implementBaltimore City Circuit Court. During the surcharge rates on gas customers’ bills. The new surcharges are expected to take effect in the secondthird quarter of 2014. In addition,2015, the residential consumer advocate, MDPSC, and BGE will be subject to an annual independent audit to review plan performance and progress.filed briefs. Oral argument in this matter was held before the Court of Special Appeals on November 3, 2015. On January 28, 2016, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals issued a decision affirming the MDPSC’s decision. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

PJM Minimum Offer Price Rule (Exelon and Generation). PJM’s capacity market rules include a Minimum Offer Price Rule (MOPR) that is intended to preclude sellers from artificially suppressing the competitive price signals for generation capacity. The FERC orders approving the MOPR were upheld by the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in February 2014.

Exelon continues to work with PJM stakeholders and through the FERC process to implement several proposed changes to the PJM tariff aimed at ensuring that capacity resources (including those with state-sanctioned subsidy contracts and capacity market speculators) cannot inappropriately affect capacity auction prices in PJM.

 

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

 

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires that management apply accounting policies and make estimates and assumptions that affect results of operations and the amounts of assets and liabilities reported in the financial statements. Management discusses these policies, estimates and assumptions with its accounting and disclosure governance committee on a regular basis and provides periodic updates on management decisions to the audit committee of the Exelon board of directors. Management believes that the accounting policies described below require significant judgment in their application, or estimates and assumptions that are inherently uncertain and that may change in subsequent periods. Additional discussion of the application of these accounting policies can be found in the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Nuclear Decommissioning Asset Retirement Obligations (Exelon and Generation)

 

Generation’s ARO associated with decommissioning its nuclear units was $4.9$8.2 billion at December 31, 2013.2015. The authoritative guidance requires that Generation estimate its obligation for the future decommissioning of its nuclear generating plants. To estimate that liability, Generation uses an internally-developed, probability-weighted, discounted cash flow model which, on a unit-by-unit basis, considers multiple decommissioning outcome scenarios.

As a result of recent nuclear plant retirements in the industry, nuclear operators and third-party service providers are obtaining more information about costs associated with decommissioning activities. At the same time, regulators are gaining more information about decommissioning activities which could result in changes to existing decommissioning requirements. In addition, as more nuclear plants are retired, it is possible that technological advances will be identified that could create efficiencies and lead to a reduction in decommissioning costs. These factors could result in material changes to Generation’s current estimates as more information becomes available and could change the timing and probability assigned to the decommissioning outcome scenarios.

The nuclear decommissioning obligation is adjusted on a regular basis due to the passage of time and revisions to the key assumptions for the expected timing and/or estimated amounts of the future undiscounted cash flows required to decommission the nuclear plants, based upon the methodologies and significant estimates and assumptions described as follows:

 

Decommissioning Cost Studies. Generation uses unit-by-unit decommissioning cost studies to provide a marketplace assessment of the costs and timing of decommissioning activities, which are validated by comparison to current decommissioning projects within its industry and other estimates. Decommissioning cost studies are updated, on a rotational basis, for each of Generation’s nuclear units at least every five years.years, unless circumstances warrant more frequent updates (such as a change in assumed operating life for a nuclear plant). As part of the annual cost study update process, Generation evaluates newly assumed costs or substantive changes in previously assumed costs to determine if the cost estimate impacts are sufficiently material to warrant application of the updated estimates to the AROs across the nuclear fleet outside of the normal five-year rotating cost study update cycle.

 

Cost Escalation Factors.Generation uses cost escalation factors to escalate the decommissioning costs from the decommissioning cost studies discussed above through the assumed decommissioning period for each of the units. Cost escalation studies, updated on an annual basis, are used to determine escalation factors, and are based on inflation indices for labor, equipment and materials, energy, LLRW disposal and other costs. All of the nuclear AROs are adjusted each year for the updated cost escalation factors.

 

Probabilistic Cash Flow Models. Generation’s probabilistic cash flow models include the assignment of probabilities to various scenarios for decommissioning costs,cost levels, decommissioning approaches, and timing of plant shutdown on a unit-by-unit basis. Probabilities assigned to cost levels include an assessment of the likelihood of costs 20% higher (high-cost scenario) or 15% lower (low-cost scenario) than the base cost scenario. Probabilities are also assigned to alternativethree different decommissioning approaches which assess the likelihood of performing DECON (a method of decommissioning shortly after the cessation of operation in which the equipment, structures, and portions of a facility and site containing radioactive contaminants are removed and safely buried in a LLRW landfill or decontaminated to a level that permits property to be released foras follows:

 

1.DECON—a method of decommissioning shortly after the cessation of operation in which the equipment, structures, and portions of a facility and site containing radioactive contaminants are removed and safely buried in a LLRW landfill or decontaminated to a level that permits property to be released for unrestricted use,

97

2.Delayed DECON—similar to the DECON scenario but with a delay to allow for spent fuel to be removed from the site prior to onset of decommissioning activities, or


unrestricted use), Delayed DECON (similar to the DECON scenario but with
3.SAFSTOR—a delay to allow for spent fuel to be removed from the site prior to onset of decommissioning activities) or SAFSTOR (a method of decommissioning in which the nuclear facility is placed and maintained in such condition that the nuclear facility can be safely stored and subsequently decontaminated to levels that permit release for unrestricted use generally within 60 years after cessation of operations.

The actual decommissioning approach selected once a nuclear facility is placedshutdown will be determined by Generation at the time of shutdown and maintained in such condition thatmay be influenced by multiple factors including the funding status of the nuclear facility can be safely stored and subsequently decontaminated to levels that permit release for unrestricted use generally within 60 years after cessationdecommissioning trust fund at the time of operations) decommissioning. Probabilities assigned to theshutdown.

The assumed plant shutdown timing scenarios have historically included the following two alternatives: (1) the probability of operating through the original 40-year nuclear license term, and (2) the probability of operating through an extended 60-year nuclear license term (regardless of whether such 20-year license extension had been received for each unit). During 2015, due to changing market conditions and regulatory environments, Generation began to consider and incorporate assumptions regarding plant shutdown timing scenarios for certain plants other than just the likelihoodtwo scenarios historically considered. In addition to potential early shutdown scenarios, Generation also began in 2015 to incorporate into its ARO estimates some probability of continueda second, 20-year license renewal for some nuclear units. The successful operation through currentof nuclear plants in the U.S. beyond the initial 40-year license lives or through anticipated license renewals. terms has prompted the NRC to consider regulatory and technical requirements for potential plant operations for an 80-year nuclear operating term. As power market and regulatory environment developments occur, Generation evaluates and incorporates, as necessary, the impacts of such developments into its nuclear ARO assumptions and estimates.

Generation’s probabilistic cash flow models also include an assessment of the timing of DOE acceptance of SNF for disposal, whichdisposal. Generation assumed wouldcurrently assumes DOE will begin accepting SNF in 2025 in 2013 and 2012.2025. The SNF acceptance date assumption was based on management’s estimates of the amount of time required for the DOE to select a site location and develop the necessary infrastructure.infrastructure for long-term SNF storage. For more information regarding the estimated date that DOE will begin accepting SNF, see Note 2223—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

License Renewals. Generation assumes a successfulhas received, has applied for, or plans to seek, 20-year renewallicense renewals for eachall of its nuclear generating station licenses, except for Oyster Creek, in determining its nuclear decommissioning ARO. The current NRC license for Oyster Creek expires in 2029. On December 8, 2010, Exelon announced that Generation will permanently cease generation operations at Oyster Creek by December 31, 2019. As a result of this decision the expected economic life of Oyster Creek was reduced by 10 years to correspond to Exelon’s current best estimate as to the timing of ceasing generation operations at the Oyster Creek unit in 2019.units. Generation has successfully secured 20-year operating license renewal extensions (i.e., extending the total license term to 60 years) for tentwenty-one of its nuclear units (including the two Salem units co-owned by Generation, but operated by PSEG),PSEG and noneBraidwood Units 1 and 2 for which the NRC approved the renewed license on January 27, 2016). None of Generation’s previous applications for an operating license extension havehas been denied. The 20-year license renewal for Oyster Creek nuclear unit was obtained in 2009, however, operations will cease by the end of 2019. For its remaining three operating units, Generation is in various stages of the process of pursuing similar extensions on its remaining nineand has filed license renewal applications for two operating nuclear units.units and has until 2021 to seek license renewal for one remaining operating nuclear unit. Generation’s assumptionassumptions regarding successful license extension for the remaining three operating units for ARO determination purposes is based in part on the good current physical condition and high performance of these nuclear units;units, the favorable status of the ongoing license renewal proceedings with the NRC, and the successful renewals for tentwenty-one units to date.

Generation estimates that the failure to obtain initial license renewals to extend the operating life from 40 years to 60 years at any of theseits remaining nuclear units (assuming all other assumptions remain constant) would increase its ARO on average approximately $210$300 million per unit as of December 31, 2013.2015. The size of the increase to the ARO for a particular nuclear unit is dependent upon the current stage in its original license term and its specific decommissioning cost estimates. If Generation does not receive license renewal on a particular unit, the increase to the ARO may be mitigated by Generation’s ability to delay ultimate decommissioning activities under a SAFSTOR method of decommissioning.

Discount Rates. The probability-weighted estimated future cash flows using these various scenarios are discounted using credit-adjusted, risk-free rates (CARFR) applicable to the various businesses in which each of the nuclear units originally operated. The accounting guidance required Generation to establish an ARO at fair value at the time of the initial adoption of the current accounting standard. Subsequent to the initial adoption, the ARO is adjusted for changes to estimated costs, timing of future cash flows and modifications to decommissioning assumptions, as described above. Increases in the ARO as a result of upward revisions in estimated undiscounted cash flows are considered new obligations and are measured using a current CARFR as the increase creates a new cost layer within the ARO. Any decrease in the estimated undiscounted future cash flows relating to the ARO are treated as a modification of an existing ARO and, therefore, are measured using the average historical CARFR rates used in creating the initial ARO cost layers.

 

Under the current accounting framework, the ARO is not required or permitted to be re-measured for changes in the CARFR that occur in isolation. This differs from the accounting requirements for other long-dated obligations, such as pension and other post-employment benefits that are required to be re-measured as and when corresponding discount rates change. If Generation’s future nominal cash flows associated with the ARO were to be discounted at current prevailing CARFRs, the obligation would increase from approximately $4.9$8.2 billion to approximately $5.5$8.5 billion. The ultimate decommissioning obligation will be funded by the NDTs. The NDTs are recorded on Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 20132015 at fair value of approximately $8.1$10.3 billion and have an estimated targeted annual pre-tax return of 5.9 %6.1% to 6.7 %.6.3%.

 

To illustrate the significant impact that changes in the CARFR, when combined with changes in projected amounts and expected timing of cash flows, can have on the valuation of the ARO: i) had

98


Generation used the 20122014 CARFRs rather than the 20132015 CARFRs in performing its third quarter 20132015 ARO update, Generation would have reducedincreased the ARO by approximately $10$940 million as compared to the actual decreaseincrease to the ARO of $140$831 million; and ii) if the CARFR used in performing the third quarter 20132015 ARO update (which also reflected increases in the amounts and changes to the timing of projected cash flows) was increased by 100 basis points or decreased by 10050 basis points, the ARO would have decreasedincreased by $300$100 million and increased $40 million,$1.2 billion, respectively, as compared to the actual decreaseincrease of $140$831 million.

 

ARO Sensitivities. Changes in the assumptions underlying the foregoing items could materially affect the decommissioning obligation. The impact to the ARO of a change in any one of these assumptions is highly dependent on how the other assumptions will change as well. As an example, Exelon had a historical increase of approximately $670 million in the value of the ARO which was driven by Generation modifying the assumed timing of the DOE acceptance of SNF for disposal from 2020 to 2025. The modification of the assumed DOE acceptance date affected the calculation of the ARO in isolation as follows; i) the change in the timing of DOE acceptance of SNF increased the total number of years in which decommissioning activities are estimated to occur, by five years on average, thereby increasing the total expected nominal cash flows required to decommission the units; ii) the nominal cash flows were subjected to additional escalation as a result of the extension of the decommissioning period increasing the total estimated costs required to decommission the units; and iii) the escalated cash flows were discounted at the then current CARFRs which had dramatically decreased during that time period.

The following table illustrates the effects of changing certain ARO assumptions, discussed above, while holding all other assumptions constant (dollars in millions):

 

Change in ARO Assumption

  Increase (Decrease) to
ARO at
December 31, 2013
   Increase (Decrease) to
ARO at
December 31, 2015
 

Cost escalation studies

    

Uniform increase in escalation rates of 25 basis points

  $560 

Uniform increase in escalation rates of 50 basis points

  $1,600  

Probabilistic cash flow models

    

Increase the likelihood of the high-cost scenario by 10 percentage points and decrease the likelihood of the low-cost scenario by 10 percentage points

  $190 

Increase the estimated costs to decommission the nuclear plants by 20 percent

  $1,420  

Increase the likelihood of the DECON scenario by 10 percentage points and decrease the likelihood of the SAFSTOR scenario by 10 percentage points

  $290   $410  

Increase the likelihood of the SAFSTOR scenario by 20 percentage points and decrease the likelihood of the Delayed DECON scenario by 20 percentage points(a)

  $(240

Increase the likelihood of operating through current license lives by 10 percentage points and decrease the likelihood of operating through anticipated license renewals by 10 percentage points

  $430   $540  

Extend the estimated date for DOE acceptance of SNF to 2030

  $50   $(20

Extend the estimated date for DOE acceptance of SNF to 2030 coupled with an increase in discount rates of 100 basis points

  $(230  $(480

Extend the estimated date for DOE acceptance of SNF to 2030 coupled with a decrease in discount rates of 100 basis points

  $600 

Extend the estimated date for DOE acceptance of SNF to 2030 coupled with a decrease in discount rates of 50 basis points

  $270  

(a)The Delayed DECON scenario is currently assumed to be the most likely decommissioning approach for a majority of Exelon’s nuclear plants.

 

For more information regarding accounting for nuclear decommissioning obligations, see Notes 1Note 1—Significant Accounting Policies, Note 9—Implications of Potential Early Plant Retirements and 15Note 16—Asset Retirement Obligations of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

Goodwill (Exelon and ComEd)

 

As of December 31, 2013,2015, Exelon’s and ComEd’s carrying amount of goodwill was approximately $2.6$2.7 billion, relating to the acquisition of ComEd in 2000 as part of the PECO/Unicom Merger. Under the provisions of the authoritative guidance for goodwill, ComEd is required to perform an assessment for possible impairment of its goodwill at least annually or more frequently if an event occurs or circumstances change that would more likely than not reduce the fair value of the ComEd reporting unit

99


below its carrying amount. Under the authoritative guidance, a reporting unit is an operating segment or one level below an operating componentsegment (known as a component) and is the level at which goodwill is tested for impairment. A component of an operating segment is a reporting unit if the component constitutes a business for which discrete financial information is available and its operating results are regularly reviewed by segment management. ComEd has a single operating segment for its combined business. There is no level below this operating segment for which operating results are regularly reviewed by segment management. Therefore, ComEd’s operating segment is considered its only reporting unit.

Entities assessing goodwill for impairment have the option of first performing a qualitative assessment to determine whether a quantitative assessment is necessary. In performing a qualitative assessment, entities should assess, among other things, macroeconomic conditions, industry and market considerations, overall financial performance, cost factors, and entity-specific events. If an entity determines, on the basis of qualitative factors, that the fair value of the reporting unit is more likely than not greater than the carrying amount, no further testing is required. If an entity bypasses the

qualitative assessment or performs the qualitative assessment, but determines that it is more likely than not that its fair value is less than its carrying amount, a quantitative two-step, fair value-based test is performed. The first step compares the fair value of the reporting unit to its carrying amount, including goodwill. If the carrying amount of the reporting unit exceeds its fair value, the second step is performed. The second step requires an allocation of fair value to the individual assets and liabilities using purchase price allocation accounting guidance in order to determine the implied fair value of goodwill. If the implied fair value of goodwill is less than the carrying amount, an impairment loss is recorded as a reduction to goodwill and a charge to operating expense. Application of the goodwill impairment test requires management judgment, including the identification of reporting units and determining the fair value of the reporting unit, which management estimates using a weighted combination of a discounted cash flow analysis and a market multiples analysis. Significant assumptions used in these fair value analyses include discount and growth rates, utility sector market performance and transactions, projected operating and capital cash flows for ComEd’s business and the fair value of debt. In applying the second step (if needed), management must estimate the fair value of specific assets and liabilities of the reporting unit.

Management concluded the remeasurement of the like-kind exchange position and the charge to ComEd’s earnings in the first quarter of 2013 triggered an interim goodwill impairment assessment and, as a result, ComEd tested its goodwill for impairment as of January 31, 2013. The first step of the interim impairment assessment comparing the estimated fair value of ComEd to its carrying value, including goodwill, indicated no impairment of goodwill; therefore, the second step was not required.

ComEd performed a quantitative assessment as of November 1, 2013, for its 2013 annual goodwill impairment assessment. The first step of the interim impairment assessment comparing the estimated fair value of ComEd to its carrying value, including goodwill, indicated no impairment of goodwill; therefore, the second step was not required.

While neither the interim nor the annual assessments indicated an impairment of ComEd’s goodwill, certain assumptions used to estimate the fair value of ComEd are highly sensitive to changes. Adverse regulatory actions, such as early termination of EIMA, or changes in significant assumptions, including discount and growth rates, utility sector market performance and transactions, projected operating and capital cash flows from ComEd’s business, and the fair value of debt, could potentially result in a future impairment of ComEd’s goodwill, which could be material. Based on the results of the annual goodwill test performed as of November 1, 2013, the estimated fair value of ComEd would have needed to decrease by more than 10% for ComEd to fail the first step of the impairment test. See Note 1—Significant Accounting Policies, Note 10—11—Intangible Assets and Note 14—15—Income Taxes of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Purchase Accounting (Exelon and Generation)

 

In accordance with the authoritative accounting guidance, the purchase price of an acquired business is generally allocated to the assets acquired and liabilities assumed in an acquired business are recorded at their estimated fair values on the date of acquisition. Any unallocatedThe difference between the purchase price amount and the net fair value of assets acquired and liabilities assumed is recognized as goodwill on the balance sheet if it exceeds the estimated fair value and as a bargain purchase gain on the income statement if it is below the estimated fair value. Determining the fair value of assets acquired and

100


liabilities assumed requires management’s judgment, the utilization ofoften utilizes independent valuation experts and involves the use of significant estimates and assumptions with respect to the timing and amounts of future cash inflows and outflows, discount rates, market prices and asset lives, among other items. The judgments made in the determination of the estimated fair value assigned to the assets acquired and liabilities assumed, as well as the estimated useful life of each asset and the duration of each liability, can materially impact the financial statements in periods after acquisition, such as through depreciation and amortization expense. See Note 4—MergerMergers, Acquisitions, and AcquisitionsDispositions of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Unamortized Energy Assets and Liabilities (Exelon and Generation)

 

Unamortized energy contract assets and liabilities represent the remaining unamortized balances of non-derivative energy contracts that Generation has acquired. The initial amount recorded represents the fair value of the contract at the time of acquisition, and the balance is amortized over the life of the contract in relation to the present valueexpected realization of the underlying cash flows. Amortization expense and income are recorded through purchased power and fuel expense or operating revenues. Refer to Note 4—Mergers, and Acquisitions, and Dispositions and Note 10—11—Intangible Assets of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion.

 

Impairment of Long-lived Assets (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE regularly monitor and evaluate their long-lived assets and asset groups, excluding goodwill, for impairment when circumstances indicate the carrying value of those assets may not be recoverable. Conditions that could have an adverse impact on the cash flows and fair valueIndicators of the long-lived assets arepotential impairment may include a deteriorating business climate, including currentdecline in energy prices, and market conditions, condition of the asset, specific regulatory disallowance, or plans to dispose of a long-lived asset significantly before the end of its useful life, among others.

The review of long-lived assets and asset groups for impairment requiresutilizes significant assumptions about operating strategies and estimates of future cash flows, which require assessments of current and projected market conditions. For the generation business, forecasting future cash flows requires assumptions regarding forecasted commodity prices for the sale of power, costs of fuel and the expected operations of assets. A variation in the assumptions used could lead to a different conclusion regarding the recoverability of an asset or asset group and, thus, could have a significant effect on the consolidated financial statements. An impairment evaluation is based on an undiscounted cash flow analysis at the lowest level at which cash flows of the long-lived assets or asset groups are largely independent of the cash flows of other groups of assets and liabilities. For the generation business, the lowest level of independent cash flows is determined by the evaluation of several factors, including the geographic dispatch of the generation units and the hedging strategies related to those units andas well as the associated intangible contract assets or liabilities recorded on the balance sheet. The cash flows from the generationgenerating units are generally evaluated at a regional portfolio level with cash flows generated from Generation’sthe customer supply and risk management activities, including cash flows from contracts that are accounted for asrelated intangible contract assets and liabilities recorded on the balance sheet. In certain cases, generationgenerating assets may be evaluated on an individual basis where those assets are contracted on a long-term basis with a third party and operations are independent of other generationgenerating assets (typically contracted renewables).

 

Impairment may occur when the carrying valueOn a quarterly basis, Generation assesses its asset groups for indicators of theimpairment. If indicators are present for a long-lived asset or asset group, exceedsa comparison of the undiscounted expected future undiscounted cash flows.flows to the carrying value is performed. When the undiscounted cash flow analysis indicates a long-lived asset or asset group is not recoverable, the amount of the impairment loss is determined by measuring the excess of the carrying amount of the long-lived asset or asset group over its fair value.value less costs to sell. The fair value of the long-lived asset or asset group is dependent upon a market participant’s view of the exit price of the assets. This includes significant assumptions of the estimated future cash flows generated by the assets and market discount rates. Events and circumstances frequentlyoften do not occur as expected and

101


there will usually be differences between prospective financial information and actual results, and those differences may be material. Accordingly, to the extent that any of the information used in the fair value analysis requires adjustment,judgment, the resulting fair market value would be different. As such, the determination of fair value is driven by both internal assumptions that include significant unobservable inputs (Level 3) such as revenue and generation forecasts, projected capital, and maintenance expenditures and discount rates, as well as information from various public, financial and industry sources. An impairment determination would require the affected Registrant to reduce the value of either the long-lived asset or asset group, including any associated intangible contract assets andor liabilities, andas well as reduce the current period earnings by the amount of the impairment.

 

Generation evaluates unprovednatural gas producingand oil upstream properties at least annuallyon a quarterly basis to determine if they are impaired. Impairment indicators for unprovednatural gas property occursand oil upstream properties are present if there are no firm plans to continue drilling, lease expiration is at risk, or historical experience indicates a decline in carrying value below fair value.value or the price of the underlying commodity significantly declines.

Generation evaluates its equity method investments and other investments in debt and equity securities to determine whether or not they are impaired based on whether the investment has experienced a decline in value that is not temporary in nature.

 

Exelon holds investments in coal-fired plants in Georgia and Texas subject to long-term leases. The investments are accounted for as direct financing lease investments. The investments represent the estimated residual values of the leased assets at the end of the respective lease terms. On an annual basis, Exelon reviews the estimated residual values of its direct financing lease investments and records an impairment charge if the review indicates an other than temporary decline in the fair value of the residual values below their carrying values. Exelon estimates the fair value of the residual values

of its direct financing lease investments usingunder the income approach, which uses a discounted cash flow analysis, whichthat takes into consideration significant unobservable inputs (Level 3) including the expected revenues to be generated and costs to be incurred to operate the plants over their remaining useful lives subsequent to the lease end dates.

Generation Significant assumptions used in estimating the fair value include fundamental energy and capacity prices, fixed and variable costs, capital expenditure requirements, discount rates, tax rates, and the estimated remaining useful lives of the plants. The estimated fair values also evaluates its equity method investments to determine whether or not they are impaired based on whetherreflect the investment has experiencedcash flows associated with the service contracts associated with the plants given that a declinemarket participant would take into consideration all of the terms and conditions contained in value that is not temporary in nature. Additionally, if one of Generation’s equity method investments recognize an impairment, Generation would record its proportionate share of that impairment loss through its equity earnings (losses) of unconsolidated affiliates. Generation would also evaluate the investment for a decline in value at that time that is not temporary in nature.lease agreements.

 

See Note 88—Impairment of Long-Lived Assets of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion of asset impairment evaluations made by Exelon.

 

Depreciable Lives of Property, Plant and Equipment (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The Registrants have significant investments in electric generation assets and electric and natural gas transmission and distribution assets. Depreciation of these assets is generally provided over their estimated service lives on a straight-line basis using the composite method. The Registrants complete depreciation studies every five years, or more frequently if an event, regulatory action, or change in retirement patterns indicate an update is necessary. The estimation of service lives requires management judgment regarding the period of time that the assets will be in use. As circumstances warrant, the estimated service lives are reviewed to determine if any changes are needed. Depreciation rates incorporate assumptions on interim retirements based on actual historical retirement experience. To the extent interim retirement patterns change, this could have a significant impact on the amount of depreciation expense recorded in the income statement. Changes to depreciation estimates resulting from a change in the estimated end of service lives could have a significant impact on the amount of depreciation expense recorded in the income statement. See Note 11—Significant Accounting Policies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding depreciation and estimated service lives of the property, plant and equipment of the Registrants.

 

The estimated service lives of the nuclear generating facilities are based on the estimated useful lives of the stations, which assume a 20-year license renewal extension of the operating licenses for all of Generation’s operating nuclear generating stations except for Oyster Creek. While Generation has

102


received license renewals for certain facilities, and has applied for or expects to apply for and obtain approval of license renewals for the remaining facilities, circumstances may arise that would prevent Generation from obtaining additional license renewals. Generation also evaluates annually the estimated service lives of its generating facilities based on feasibility assessments as well as economic and capital requirements. The estimated service lives of hydroelectric facilities are based on the remaining useful lives of the stations, which assume a license renewal extension of the Conowingo and Muddy Run operating licenses. A change in depreciation estimates resulting from Generation’s extension or reduction of the estimated service lives could have a significant effect on Generation’s results of operations.

Generation completed a depreciation rate study during the first quarter of 2010,2015, which resulted in the implementation of new depreciation rates effective January 1, 2010. Constellation completed a depreciation rate study during the fourth quarter of 2010, which resulted in the implementation of new depreciation rates effective during the fourth quarter of 2010.2015.

 

ComEd is required to file a depreciation rate study at least every five years with the ICC. ComEd completed a depreciation study in 2014 and filed the updated depreciation rates with both FERC and the ICC in January 2014. This is expected to resultresulted in the implementation of new depreciation rates effective first quarter 2014.

PECO is required to file a depreciation rate study at least every five years with the PAPUC. In April 2010,March 2015, PECO filed a depreciation rate study with the PAPUC for both its electric and gas assets, which resulted in the implementation of new depreciation rates effective January 1, 20102015 for electric transmission assets, July 1, 2015 for gas distribution assets and January 1, 20112016 for electric distribution and gas assets.

 

The MDPSC does not mandate the frequency or timing of BGE’s depreciation studies. In December 2006,July 2014, BGE filed revised depreciation rates with the MDPSC for both its electric distribution and gas assets. Revisions to depreciation rates from this filing were finalized July 1, 2010.and effective December 15, 2014.

 

Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Employee Benefits (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Exelon sponsors defined benefit pension plans and other postretirement employee benefit plans for substantially all Generation, ComEd, PECO, BGE and BSC employees. See Note 16—17—Retirement Benefits of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding the accounting for the defined benefit pension plans and other postretirement benefit plans.

 

The measurement of the plan obligations and costs of providing benefits under Exelon’s defined benefit pension and other postretirement benefit plans involves various factors, including the development of valuation assumptions and accounting policy elections. When developing the required assumptions, Exelon considers historical information as well as future expectations. The measurement of benefit obligations and costs is affected by several assumptions including the discount rate applied to benefit obligations, the long-term expected rate of return on plan assets, the anticipated rate of increase of health care costs, Exelon’s expected level of contributions to the plans, the incidence of participant mortality, the expected remaining service period of plan participants, the level of compensation and rate of compensation increases, employee age, length of service, and the long-term expected investment rate credited to employees of certain plans, among others. The assumptions are updated annually and upon any interim remeasurement of the plan obligations. The impact of assumption changes or experience different from that assumed on pension and other postretirement benefit obligations is recognized over time rather than immediately recognized in the income statement. Gains or losses in excess of the greater of ten percent of the projected benefit obligation or the MRV of plan assets are amortized over the expected average remaining service period of plan participants. Pension and other postretirement benefit costs attributed to the operating companies are labor costs and are ultimately allocated to projects within the operating companies, some of which are capitalized.

 

103


Pension and other postretirement benefit plan assets include equity securities, including U.S. and international securities, and fixed income securities, as well as certain alternative investment classes such as real estate, private equity and hedge funds. See Note 16—17—Retirement Benefits of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information on fair value measurements of pension and other postretirement plan assets, including valuation techniques and classification under the fair value hierarchy in accordance with authoritative guidance.

 

Expected Rate of Return on Plan Assets. The long-term expected rate of return on plan assetsEROA assumption used in calculating pension costs was 7.50%7.00%, 7.50%,7.00% and 8.00%7.50% for 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011,2013, respectively. The weighted average expected return on assetsEROA assumption used in calculating other postretirement benefit costs was 6.45%6.46%, 6.68%,6.59% and 7.08%6.45% in 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011,2013, respectively. The pension trust activity is non-taxable, while other postretirement benefit trust activity is partially taxable. The current year EROA is based on asset allocations from the prior year end. In 2010, Exelon began implementation of a liability-driven investment strategy in order to reduce the volatility of its pension assets relative to its pension liabilities. As a result of this modification, overOver time, Exelon determined that it will decreasehas decreased its equity investments and increaseincreased its investments in

fixed income securities and alternative investments within the pension asset portfolio in order to achieve a balanced portfolio of liability hedging and return-generating assets. See Note 16—17—Retirement Benefits of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding Exelon’s asset allocations. Exelon used an EROA of 7.00% and 6.59%6.71% to estimate its 20142016 pension and other postretirement benefit costs, respectively.

 

Exelon calculates the expected return on pension and other postretirement benefit plan assets by multiplying the EROA by the MRV of plan assets at the beginning of the year, taking into consideration anticipated contributions and benefit payments to be made during the year. In determining MRV, the authoritative guidance for pensions and postretirement benefits allows the use of either fair value or a calculated value that recognizes changes in fair value in a systematic and rational manner over not more than five years. For the majority of pension plan assets, Exelon uses a calculated value that adjusts for 20% of the difference between fair value and expected MRV of plan assets. Use of this calculated value approach enables less volatile expected asset returns to be recognized as a component of pension cost from year to year. For other postretirement benefit plan assets and certain pension plan assets, Exelon uses fair value to calculate the MRV.

 

Actual asset returns have an impact on the costs reported for the Exelon-sponsored pension and other postretirement benefit plans. The actual asset returns across the Registrants’ pension and other postretirement benefit plans for the year ended December 31, 20132015 were 6.73%0.29% and 11.41%0.80%, respectively, compared to an expected long-term return assumption of 7.50%7.00% and 6.45%6.46%, respectively.

 

Discount Rate. The discount ratesrate used to determine the majority of pension and other postretirement benefit obligations were 4.80% and 4.90%, respectively,was 4.29% at December 31, 2013.2015. The discount rates at December 31, 20132015 represent weighted-average rates for boththe majority of pension and other postretirement benefit plans. At December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014, the discount rates were determined by developing a spot rate curve based on the yield to maturity of a universe of high-quality non-callable (or callable with make whole provisions) bonds with similar maturities to the related pension and other postretirement benefit obligations. The spot rates are used to discount the estimated distributions under the pension and other postretirement benefit plans. The discount rate is the single level rate that produces the same result as the spot rate curve. Exelon utilizes an analytical tool developed by its actuaries to determine the discount rates.

 

The discount rate assumptions used to determine the obligation at year end are used to determine the cost for the following year. Exelon will useused discount rates of 4.80% and 4.90%ranging from 3.68% to 4.43% to estimate its 20142016 pension and other postretirement benefit costs, respectively.costs.

 

Health Care Reform Legislation. In March 2010, the Health Care Reform Acts were signed into law, which contain a number of provisions that impact retiree health care plans provided by employers.

104


One such provision reduces the deductibility, for Federal income tax purposes, of retiree health care costs to the extent an employer’s postretirement health care plan receives Federal subsidies that provide retiree prescription drug benefits at least equivalent to those offered by Medicare. Although this change did not take effect immediately, the Registrants were required to recognize the full accounting impact in their financial statements in the period in which the legislation was enacted. Additionally, as a result of this deductibility change for employers, and other Health Care Reform provisions that impact the federal prescription drug subsidy options provided to employers, Exelon changed the manner in which it will receive prescription drug subsidies beginning in 2013.

The Health Care Reform Acts includeincluding a provision that imposes an excise tax on certain high-cost plans beginning in 2018, whereby premiums paid over a prescribed threshold will be taxed at a 40% rate. Additional legislation was passed in December 2015 that made some changes to the law, including moving the implementation date of the excise tax from 2018 to 2020. Although the excise tax does not go into effect until 2018,2020, accounting guidance requires Exelon to incorporate the estimated impact of the excise tax in its annual actuarial valuation. The application of the legislation is still unclear and Exelon continues to monitor the Department of Labor and IRS for additional guidance. Effective in 2002, Constellation amended its other postretirement benefit plans for all subsidiaries other than Nine Mile Point by capping retiree medical coverage for future retirees who were under the age of 55 on January 1, 2002 at 2002 levels. Therefore, the excise tax is not expected to have a material impact on the legacy Constellation other postretirement benefit plans. However, certainCertain key assumptions are required to estimate the impact of the excise tax on theExelon’s other postretirement benefit obligation, for legacy Exelon plans, including projected inflation rates (based on the CPI) and whether pre- and post-65 retiree populations can be aggregated in determining the premium values of health care benefits.. Exelon reflected its best estimate of the expected impact in its annual actuarial valuation.

 

Health Care Cost Trend Rate.Assumed health care cost trend rates have a significant effect onimpact the costs reported for Exelon’s other postretirement benefit plans.plans for participant populations with plan designs that do not

have a cap on cost growth. Accounting guidance requires that annual health care cost estimates be developed using past and present health care cost trends (both for Exelon and across the broader economy), as well as expectations of health care cost escalation, changes in health care utilization and delivery patterns, technological advances and changes in the health status of plan participants. Therefore, the trend rate assumption is subject to significant uncertainty, particularly when considering potential impacts of the 2010 Health Care Reform Acts.uncertainty. Exelon assumed an initial health care cost trend rate of 6.50%6.00% for 2013,2015, decreasing to an ultimate health care cost trend rate of 5.00% in 2017.

Mortality.The mortality assumption is composed of a base table that represents the current expectation of life expectancy of the population adjusted by an improvement scale that attempts to anticipate future improvements in life expectancy. Exelon uses a mortality base table for its accounting valuation that is consistent with the IRS required table for funding (referred to as RP-2000). Exelon has a substantial employee population that provides a credible basis for mortality evaluation. Exelon is utilizing the Scale BB 2-Dimensional improvement scale with long-term improvements of 0.75% for its mortality improvement assumption.

 

Sensitivity to Changes in Key Assumptions. The following tables illustrate the effects of changing certain of the actuarial assumptions discussed above, while holding all other assumptions constant (dollars in millions):

 

Actuarial Assumption

  Change in
Assumption
  Pension  Other Postretirement
Benefits
  Total 

Change in 2013 cost:

      

Discount rate(a)

  0.5%  $(63 $(34 $(97
  (0.5%)   68   48   116 

EROA

  0.5%   (68  (10  (78
  (0.5%)   68   10   78 

Health care cost trend rate

  1.00%   N/A   90   90 
  (1.00%)   N/A   (62  (62

Change in benefit obligation at
December 31, 2013:

      

Discount rate(a)

  0.5%   (904  (297  (1,201
  (0.5%)   965   318   1,283 

Health care cost trend rate

  1.00%   N/A   858   858 
  (1.00%)   N/A   (607  (607

105


Actuarial Assumption

  Change in
Assumption
  Pension  Other Postretirement
Benefits
  Total 

Change in 2015 cost:

     

Discount rate (a)

   0.5 $(69 $(19 $(88
   (0.5)%   83    30    113  

EROA

   0.5  (73  (11  (84
   (0.5)%   73    11    84  

Health care cost trend rate(b)

   1.00  N/A    12    12  
   (1.00)%   N/A    (9  (9

Change in benefit obligation at
December 31, 2015:

     

Discount rate (a)

   0.5  (1,042  (249  (1,291
   (0.5)%   1,210    289    1,499  

Health care cost trend rate(b)

   1.00  N/A    100    100  
   (1.00)%   N/A    (89  (89

 

(a)In general, the discount rate will have a larger impact on the pension and other postretirement benefit cost and obligation as the rate moves closer to 0%. Therefore, the discount rate sensitivities above cannot necessarily be extrapolated for larger increases or decreases in the discount rate. Additionally, Exelon implemented a liability-driven investment strategy for a portion of its pension asset portfolio in 2010. The sensitivities shown above do not reflect the offsetting impact that changes in discount rates may have on pension asset returns.
(b)Changes in the plan design of certain other postretirement benefit plans have resulted in reduced sensitivity to the health care cost trend rate.

 

Average Remaining Service Period. For pension benefits, Exelon amortizes its unrecognized prior service costs and certain actuarial gains and losses, as applicable, based on participants’ average remaining service periods. The average remaining service period of defined benefit pension plan participants was 11.9 years, 11.8 years 11.9 years, and 12.111.8 years for the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011,2013, respectively.

 

For other postretirement benefits, Exelon amortizes its unrecognized prior service costs over participants’ average remaining service period to benefit eligibility age and amortizes its transition obligations and certain actuarial gains and losses over participants’ average remaining service period to expected retirement. The average remaining service period of postretirement benefit plan

participants related to benefit eligibility age was 8.710.8 years, 8.99.1 years and 6.68.7 years for the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011,2013, respectively. The average remaining service period of postretirement benefit plan participants related to expected retirement was 9.89.7 years, 10.1 years and 8.79.8 years for the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011,2013, respectively.

 

Regulatory Accounting (Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE account for their regulated electric and gas operations in accordance with the authoritative guidance for accounting for certain types of regulations, which requires Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE to reflect the effects of cost-based rate regulation in their financial statements. This guidance is applicable to entities with regulated operations that meet the following criteria: (1) rates are established or approved by a third-party regulator; (2) rates are designed to recover the entities’ cost of providing services or products; and (3) a reasonable expectation that rates are set at levels that will recover the entitiesentities’ costs from customers. Regulatory assets represent incurred costs that have been deferred because of their probable future recovery from customers through regulated rates. Regulatory liabilities represent (1) the excess recovery of costs or accrued credits that have been deferred because it is probable such amounts will be returned to customers through future regulated rates; or (2) billings in advance of expenditures for approved regulatory programs. As of December 31, 2013,2015, Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE have concluded that the operations of ComEd, PECO and BGE meet the criteria to apply the authoritative guidance. If it is concluded in a future period that a separable portion of those operations no longer meets the criteria of this guidance, Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE would be required to eliminate any associated regulatory assets and liabilities and the impact would be recognized in the Consolidated Statements of Operations and could be material. See Note 33—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding regulatory matters, including the regulatory assets and liabilities tables of Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE.

 

For each regulatory jurisdiction in which they conduct business, Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE assess whether the regulatory assets and liabilities continue to meet the criteria for probable future recovery or settlement at each balance sheet date and when regulatory events occur. This assessment includes consideration of recent rate orders, historical regulatory treatment for similar costs in ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s jurisdictions, and factors such as changes in applicable regulatory and political environments. Furthermore, Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE make other judgments related to the financial statement impact of their regulatory environments, such as the types of adjustments to rate base that will be acceptable to regulatory bodies, if any, to which costs will be recoverable through rates. Refer to the revenue recognition discussion below for additional information on the annual revenue

106


reconciliations associated with ComEd’s distribution formula rate tariff, pursuant to EIMA, and FERC-approved transmission formula rate tariffs for ComEd and BGE. Additionally, estimates are made in accordance with the authoritative guidance for contingencies as to the amount of revenues billed under certain regulatory orders that may ultimately be refunded to customers upon finalization of applicable regulatory or judicial processes. These assessments are based, to the extent possible, on past relevant experience with regulatory bodies in ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s jurisdictions, known circumstances specific to a particular matter and hearings held with the applicable regulatory body. If the assessments and estimates made by Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE are ultimately different than actual regulatory outcomes, the impact on their results of operations, financial position, and cash flows could be material.

 

The Registrants treat the impacts of a final rate order received after the balance sheet date but prior to the issuance of the financial statements as a non-recognized subsequent event, as the receipt of a final rate order is a separate and distinct event that has future impacts on the parties affected by the order.

Accounting for Derivative Instruments (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The Registrants utilize derivative instruments to manage their exposure to fluctuations in interest rates, changes in interest rates related to planned future debt issuances and changes in the fair value of outstanding debt. Generation uses a variety of derivative and non-derivative instruments to manage the commodity price risk of its electric generation facilities, including power sales, fuel and energy purchases and other energy-related products marketed and purchased. Additionally, Generation enters into energy-related derivatives for proprietary trading purposes. ComEd has entered into contracts to procure energy, capacity and ancillary services. In addition, ComEd had a financial swap contract with Generation that expired May 31, 2013 and currently holds floating-to-fixed energy swaps with several unaffiliated suppliers that extend into 2032. PECO and BGE have entered into derivative natural gas contracts to hedge their long-term price risk in the natural gas market. PECO has also entered into derivative contracts to procure electric supply through a competitive RFP process as outlined in its PAPUC-approved DSP Program. BGE has also entered into derivative contracts to procure electric supply through a competitive auction process as outlined in its MDPSC-approved SOS Program. ComEd, PECO and BGE do not enter into derivatives for proprietary trading purposes. The Registrants’ derivative activities are in accordance with Exelon’s Risk Management Policy (RMP). See Note 1213—Derivative Financial Instruments of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding the Registrants’ derivative instruments.

 

The Registrants account for derivative financial instruments under the applicable authoritative guidance. Determining whether or not a contract qualifies as a derivative under this guidance requires that management exercise significant judgment, including assessing the market liquidity as well as determining whether a contract has one or more underlyings and one or more notional amounts. Further, interpretive guidance related to the authoritative literature continues to evolve, including how it applies to energy and energy-related products. Changes in management’s assessment of contracts and the liquidity of their markets, and changes in authoritative guidance related to derivatives, could result in previously excluded contracts being subject to the provisions of the authoritative derivative guidance. Generation has determined that contracts to purchase uranium, contracts to purchase and sell capacity in certain ISO’s, certain emission products and RECs do not meet the definition of a derivative under the current authoritative guidance since they do not provide for net settlement and neither the uranium, certain capacity, emission nor the REC markets are sufficiently liquid to conclude that physical forward contracts are readily convertible to cash. If these markets do become sufficiently liquid in the future and Generation would be required to account for these contracts as derivative instruments, the fair value of these contracts would be accounted for consistent with Generation’s other derivative instruments. In this case, if market prices differ from the underlying prices of the contracts, Generation would be required to record mark-to-market gains or losses, which may have a significant impact to Exelon’s and Generation’s financial positions and results of operations.

 

107


Under current authoritative guidance, all derivatives are recognized on the balance sheet at their fair value, except for certain derivatives that qualify for, and are elected under, the normal purchases and normal sales exception. Further, derivatives that qualify and are designated for hedge accounting are classified as fair value or cash flow hedges. For fair value hedges, changes in fair values for both the derivative and the underlying hedged exposure are recognized in earnings each period. For cash flow hedges, the portion of the derivative gain or loss that is effective in offsetting the change in the hedged cash flows of the underlying exposure is deferred in accumulated OCI and later reclassified into earnings when the underlying transaction occurs. Gains and losses from the ineffective portion of any hedge are recognized in earnings immediately. For commodity transactions, effective with the date of the Constellation merger, with Constellation, Generation no longer utilizes the election provided for by the cash flow hedge designation and de-designated all of its existing cash flow hedges prior to the Constellation merger. Because the underlying forecasted transactions remainremained probable, the fair value of the effective portion of these cash flow hedges was frozen in accumulated OCI and will bewas reclassified to results of operations when the forecasted purchase or sale of the energy commodity occurs, or becomes probable of not occurring.occurred. None of

Constellation’s designated cash flow hedges for commodity transactions prior to the Constellation merger were re-designated as cash flow hedges. The effect of this decision is that all economic hedges for commodities are recorded at fair value through earnings for the combined company. In addition, for energy-related derivatives entered into for proprietary trading purposes, changes in the fair value of the derivatives are recognized in earnings each period. For economic hedges that are not designated for hedge accounting for ComEd, PECO and BGE, changes in the fair value each period are recorded as a regulatory asset or liability.

 

Normal Purchases and Normal Sales Exception. As part of Generation’s energy marketing business, Generation enters into contracts to buy and sell energy to meet the requirements of its customers. These contracts include short-term and long-term commitments to purchase and sell energy and energy-related products in the retail and wholesale markets with the intent and ability to deliver or take delivery. While some of these contracts are considered derivative financial instruments under the authoritative guidance, certain of these qualifying transactions have been designated as normal purchases and normal sales and are thus not required to be recorded at fair value, but rather on an accrual basis of accounting. Determining whether a contract qualifies for the normal purchases and normal sales exception requires that management exercise judgment on whether the contract will physically deliver and requires that management ensure compliance with all of the associated qualification and documentation requirements. Revenues and expenses on contracts that qualify as normal purchases and normal sales are recognized when the underlying physical transaction is completed. Contracts which qualify for the normal purchases and normal sales exception are those for which physical delivery is probable, quantities are expected to be used or sold in the normal course of business over a reasonable period of time and is not financially settled on a net basis. The contracts that ComEd has entered into with suppliers as part of ComEd’s energy procurement process, PECO’s full requirement contracts and block contracts under the PAPUC-approved DSP program, most of PECO’s natural gas supply agreements and all of BGE’s full requirement contracts and natural gas supply agreements that are derivatives qualify for the normal purchases and normal sales exception.

 

Commodity Contracts. Identification of a commodity contract as an economic hedge requires Generation to determine that the contract is in accordance with the RMP. Generation reassesses its economic hedges on a regular basis to determine if they continue to be within the guidelines of the RMP.

 

As a part of accounting for derivatives, the Registrants make estimates and assumptions concerning future commodity prices, load requirements, interest rates, the timing of future transactions and their probable cash flows, the fair value of contracts and the expected changes in the fair value in deciding whether or not to enter into derivative transactions, and in determining the initial accounting treatment for derivative transactions. In accordance with the authoritative guidance for fair value measurements, the Registrants categorize these derivatives under a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes

108


the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value. Derivative contracts are traded in both exchange-based and non-exchange-based markets. Exchange-based derivatives that are valued using unadjusted quoted prices in active markets are categorized in Level 1 in the fair value hierarchy. Certain derivatives’ pricing is verified using indicative price quotations available through brokers or over-the-counter, on-line exchanges are categorized in Level 2. These price quotations reflect the average of the bid-ask mid-point prices and are obtained from sources that the Registrants believe provide the most liquid market for the commodity. The price quotations are reviewed and corroborated to ensure the prices are observable and representative of an orderly transaction between market participants. This includes consideration of actual transaction volumes, market delivery points, bid-ask spreads and contract duration. The Registrant’s derivatives are traded predominately at liquid trading points. The remaining derivative contracts are valued using the Black model, an industry standard option valuation model. The Black model takesmodels that take into account inputs such as contract terms, including maturity, and market parameters, and assumptions of the future prices of energy, interest rates, volatility, credit worthiness and credit spread. For derivatives that trade in liquid

markets, such as generic forwards, swaps and options, the model inputs are generally observable. Such instruments are categorized in Level 2. For derivatives that trade in less liquid markets with limited pricing information, the model inputs generally would include both observable and unobservable inputs. In instances where observable data is unavailable, consideration is given to the assumptions that market participants would use in valuing the asset or liability. This includes assumptions about market risks such as liquidity, volatility and contract duration. Such instruments are categorized in Level 3 as the model inputs generally are not observable. The Registrants consider nonperformance risk, including credit risk in the valuation of derivative contracts categorized in Level 1, 2 and 3, including both historical and current market data in its assessment of nonperformance risk, including credit risk. The impacts of credit and nonperformance risk to date have generally not been material to the financial statements.

 

Interest Rate and Foreign Exchange Derivative Instruments. The Registrants may utilize fixed-to-floating interest rate swaps, which are typically designated as fair value hedges, as a means to achieve the targeted level of variable-rate debt as a percent of total debt. Additionally, the Registrants may use forward-starting interest rate swaps and treasury rate locks to lock in interest-rate levels in anticipation of future financings and floating to fixed swaps for project financing. In addition, Generation enters into interest rate derivative contracts to economically hedge risk associated with the interest rate component of commodity positions. The characterization of the interest rate derivative contracts between the economic hedge and proprietary trading activity is driven by the corresponding characterization of the underlying commodity position that gives rise to the interest rate exposure. Generation does not utilize interest rate derivatives with the objective of benefiting from shifts or change in market interest rates. To manage foreign exchange rate exposure associated with international energy purchases in currencies other than U.S. dollars, Generation utilizes foreign currency derivatives, which are typically designated as economic hedges. The fair value of the agreements is calculated by discounting the future net cash flows to the present value based on the terms and conditions of the agreements and the forward interest rate and foreign exchange curves. As these inputs are based on observable data and valuations of similar instruments, the interest rate and foreign exchange derivatives are primarily categorized in Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy. Certain exchange based interest rate derivatives that are valued using unadjusted quoted prices in active markets are categorized in Level 1 in the fair value hierarchy.

 

See ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK and Notes 11Note 12—Fair Value of Financial Assets and 12Liabilities and Note 13—Derivative Financial Instruments of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding the Registrants’ derivative instruments.

 

Taxation (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Significant management judgment is required in determining the Registrants’ provisions for income taxes, primarily due to the uncertainty related to tax positions taken, as well as deferred tax assets and

109


liabilities and valuation allowances. In accordance with applicable authoritative guidance, the Registrants account for uncertain income tax positions using a benefit recognition model with a two-step approach including a more-likely-than-not recognition threshold and a measurement approach based on the largest amount of tax benefit that is greater than 50% likely of being realized upon ultimate settlement. If it is not more-likely-than-not that the benefit of the tax position will be sustained on its technical merits, no benefit is recorded. Uncertain tax positions that relate only to timing of when an item is included on a tax return are considered to have met the recognition threshold. Management evaluates each position based solely on the technical merits and facts and circumstances of the position, assuming the position will be examined by a taxing authority having full knowledge of all relevant information. Significant judgment is required to determine whether the recognition threshold has been met and, if so, the appropriate amount of unrecognized tax benefits to be recorded in the Registrants’ consolidated financial statements.

The Registrants evaluate quarterly the probability of realizing deferred tax assets by reviewing a forecast of future taxable income and their intent and ability to implement tax planning strategies, if necessary, to realize deferred tax assets. The Registrants also assess their ability to utilize tax attributes, including those in the form of carryforwards, for which the benefits have already been reflected in the financial statements. The Registrants record valuation allowances for deferred tax assets when the Registrants conclude it is more-likely-than-not such benefit will not be realized in future periods.

 

Actual income taxes could vary from estimated amounts due to the future impacts of various items, including changes in income tax laws, the Registrants’ forecasted financial condition and results of operations, failure to successfully implement tax planning strategies, as well as results of audits and examinations of filed tax returns by taxing authorities. While the Registrants believe the resulting tax balances as of December 31, 20132015 and 20122014 are appropriately accounted for in accordance with the applicable authoritative guidance, the ultimate outcome of tax matters could result in favorable or unfavorable adjustments to their consolidated financial statements and such adjustments could be material. See Note 1415—Income Taxes of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding taxes.

 

Accounting for Loss Contingencies (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

In the preparation of their financial statements, the Registrants make judgments regarding the future outcome of contingent events and record liabilities for loss contingencies that are probable and can be reasonably estimated based upon available information. The amounts recorded may differ from the actual expense incurred when the uncertainty is resolved. The estimates that the Registrants make in accounting for loss contingencies and the actual results that they record upon the ultimate resolution of these uncertainties could have a significant effect on their consolidated financial statements.

 

Environmental Costs. Environmental investigation and remediation liabilities are based upon estimates with respect to the number of sites for which the Registrants will be responsible, the scope and cost of work to be performed at each site, the portion of costs that will be shared with other parties, the timing of the remediation work, changes in technology, regulations and the requirements of local governmental authorities. Periodic studies are conducted at ComEd, PECO and BGE to determine future remediation requirements and estimates are adjusted accordingly. In addition, periodic reviews are performed at Generation to assess the adequacy of its environmental reserves. These matters, if resolved in a manner different from the estimate, could have a significant effect on the Registrants’ results of operations, financial position and cash flows. See Note 2223—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information.

 

Other, Including Personal Injury Claims. The Registrants are self-insured for general liability, automotive liability, workers’ compensation, and personal injury claims to the extent that losses are

110


within policy deductibles or exceed the amount of insurance maintained. The Registrants have reserves for both open claims asserted and an estimate of claims incurred but not reported (IBNR). The IBNR reserve is estimated based on actuarial assumptions and analysis and is updated annually. Future events, such as the number of new claims to be filed each year, the average cost of disposing of claims, as well as the numerous uncertainties surrounding litigation and possible state and national legislative measures could cause the actual costs to be higher or lower than estimated. Accordingly, these claims, if resolved in a manner different from the estimate, could have a material effect on the Registrants’ results of operations, financial position and cash flows.

Revenue Recognition (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Sources of Revenue and SelectionDetermination of Accounting Treatment. The Registrants earn revenues from various business activities including: the sale of energy and energy-related products, such as natural gas, capacity, and other commodities in non-regulated markets (wholesale and retail); the sale and delivery of electricity and natural gas in regulated markets; and the provision of other energy-related non-regulated products and services.

 

The appropriate accounting treatment for revenue recognition is based on the nature of the underlying transaction and applicable accounting standards. The Registrants primarily use accrual and mark-to-market accounting as discussed in more detail below.

 

Accrual Accounting. Under accrual accounting, the Registrants record revenues in the period when services are rendered or energy is delivered to customers. The Registrants generally use accrual accounting to recognize revenues for sales of electricity, natural gas and other commodities as part of their physical delivery activities. The Registrants enter into these sales transactions using a variety of instruments, including non-derivative agreements, derivatives that qualify for and are designated as normal purchases and normal sales (NPNS) of commodities that will be physically delivered, sales to utility customers under regulated service tariffs and spot-market sales, including settlements with independent system operators.

 

Mark-to-Market Accounting.The Registrants record revenues and expenses using the mark-to-market method of accounting for transactions that meet the definition of a derivative for which they are not permitted, or have not elected, the NPNS exception. These mark-to-market transactions primarily relate to risk management activities and economic hedges of other accrual activities. Mark-to-market revenues and expenses include: inception gains or losses on new transactions where the fair value is observable and realized; and unrealized gains and losses from changes in the fair value of open contracts.

 

Use of Estimates. Estimates are based upon actual costs incurred and investments in rate base for the period and the rates of return on common equity and associated regulatory capital structure allowed under the applicable tariff. The estimated reconciliations can be affected by, among other things, variances in costs incurred and investments made and actions by regulators or courts.

 

Unbilled Revenues. The determination of Generation’s, ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s retail energy sales to individual customers is based on systematic readings of customer meters generally on a monthly basis. At the end of each month, amounts of energy delivered to customers since the date of the last meter reading are estimated, and corresponding unbilled revenue is recorded. The measurement of unbilled revenue is affected by the following factors: daily customer usage measured by generation or gas throughput volume, customer usage by class, losses of energy during delivery to customers and applicable customer rates. Increases or decreases in volumes delivered to the utilities’ customers and favorable or unfavorable rate mix due to changes in usage patterns in customer classes in the period could be significant to the calculation of unbilled revenue. In addition, volumesrevenues may fluctuate monthly as a result of customers electing to use an alternate supplier, which could be

111


significant to the calculation of unbilled revenue since unbilled commodity receivables are not recorded for these customers. Changes in the timing of meter reading schedules and the number and type of customers scheduled for each meter reading date would also have an effect on the measurement of unbilled revenue; however, total operating revenues would remain materially unchanged.

 

See Note 66—Accounts Receivable of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Regulated Transmission & Distribution Revenues. ComEd’s EIMA distribution formula rate tariff provides for annual reconciliations to the distribution revenue requirement. As of the balance

sheet dates, ComEd has recorded its best estimates of the distribution revenue impact resulting from changes in rates that ComEd believes are probable of approval by the ICC in accordance with the formula rate mechanism. Estimates are based upon actual costs incurred and investments in rate base for the period and the rates of return on common equity and associated regulatory capital structure allowed under the applicable tariff. The estimated reconciliation can be affected by, among other things, variances in costs incurred, and investments made, allowed ROE and actions by regulators or courts.

 

ComEd’s and BGE’s FERC transmission formula rate tariffs provide for annual reconciliations to the transmission revenue requirements. As of the balance sheet dates, ComEd and BGE have recorded the best estimate of their respective transmission revenue impact resulting from changes in rates that ComEd and BGE believe are probable of approval by FERC in accordance with the formula rate mechanism. Estimates are based upon actual costs incurred and investments in rate base for the period and the rates of return on common equity and associated regulatory capital structure allowed under the applicable tariff. The estimated reconciliation can be affected by, among other things, variances in costs incurred and investments made and actions by regulators or courts.

 

Allowance for Uncollectible Accounts (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The allowance for uncollectible accounts reflects the Registrants’ best estimates of losses on the accounts receivable balances. For Generation, the allowance is based on accounts receivable aging historical experience and other currently available information. ComEd, PECO and PECOBGE estimate the allowance for uncollectible accounts on customer receivables by applying loss rates developed specifically for each company to the outstanding receivable balance by customer risk segment. Risk segments represent a group of customers with similar credit quality indicators that are computed based on various attributes, including delinquency of their balances and payment history. Loss rates applied to the accounts receivable balances are based on historical average charge-offs as a percentage of accounts receivable in each risk segment. BGE estimates the allowance for uncollectible accounts on customer receivables by assigning reserve factors for each aging bucket. These percentages were derived from a study of billing progression which determined the reserve factors by aging bucket. ComEd, PECO and BGE customers’ accounts are generally considered delinquent if the amount billed is not received by the time the next bill is issued, which normally occurs on a monthly basis. ComEd, PECO and BGE customer accounts are written off consistent with approved regulatory requirements. ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s provisions for uncollectible accounts will continue to be affected by changes in volume, prices and economic conditions as well as changes in ICC, PAPUC and MDPSC regulations, respectively. See Note 66—Accounts Receivable of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding accounts receivable.

 

112


Results of Operations by Business Segment

 

The comparisons of operating results and other statistical information for the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 20112013 set forth below include intercompany transactions, which are eliminated in Exelon’s consolidated financial statements.

 

Net Income (Loss) onAttributable to Common StockShareholders by Business SegmentRegistrant

 

  2013   2012(a) Favorable
(unfavorable)
2013 vs. 2012
variance
 2011   Favorable
(unfavorable)
2012 vs. 2011
variance
   2015   2014   Favorable
(unfavorable)
2015 vs. 2014
variance
   2013   Favorable
(unfavorable)
2014 vs. 2013
variance
 

Exelon

  $1,719   $1,160  $559  $2,495   $(1,335  $2,269    $1,623    $646    $1,719    $(96

Generation

   1,070    562   508   1,771    (1,209   1,372     835     537     1,070     (235

ComEd

   249    379   (130  416    (37   426     408     18     249     159  

PECO

   388    377   11   385    (8   378     352     26     388     (36

BGE

   197    (9  206   123    (132   275     198     77     197     1  

(a)For BGE, reflects BGE’s operations for the year ended December 31, 2012. For Exelon and Generation, includes the operations of the Constellation and BGE from the date of the merger, March 12, 2012, through December 31, 2012.

Results of Operations—Generation

 

 2013 2012(b) Favorable
(unfavorable)
2013 vs. 2012
variance
 2011 Favorable
(unfavorable)
2012 vs. 2011
variance
   2015 2014 (a) Favorable
(unfavorable)
2015 vs. 2014
variance
 2013 Favorable
(unfavorable)
2014 vs. 2013
variance
 

Operating revenues

 $15,630  $14,437  $1,193  $10,447  $3,990   $19,135   $17,393   $1,742   $15,630   $1,763  

Purchased power and fuel expense

  8,197   7,061   (1,136  3,589   (3,472   10,021    9,925    (96  8,197    (1,728
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense(a)(b)

  7,433   7,376   57   6,858   518    9,114    7,468    1,646    7,433    35  
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other operating expenses

        

Operating and maintenance

  4,534   5,028   494   3,148   (1,880   5,308    5,566    258    4,534    (1,032

Depreciation and amortization

  856   768   (88  570   (198   1,054    967    (87  856    (111

Taxes other than income

  389   369   (20  264   (105   489    465    (24  389    (76
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total other operating expenses

  5,779   6,165   386   3,982   (2,183   6,851    6,998    147    5,779    (1,219

Equity in (losses) earnings of unconsolidated affiliates

   —      (20  20    10    (30

Gain on sales of assets

   12    437    (425  13    424  

Gain on consolidation and acquisition of businesses

   —      289    (289  —      289  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Equity in earnings (losses) of unconsolidated affiliates

  10   (91  101   (1  (90

Operating income

  1,664   1,120   544   2,875   (1,755   2,275    1,176    1,099    1,677    (501
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

           

Interest expense

  (357  (301  (56  (170  (131   (365  (356  (9  (357  1  

Other, net

  368   239   129   122   117    (60  406    (466  355    51  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

  11   (62  73   (48  (14   (425  50    (475  (2  52  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Income before income taxes

  1,675   1,058   617   2,827   (1,769   1,850    1,226    624    1,675    (449

Income taxes

  615   500   (115  1,056   556    502    207    (295  615    408  

Equity in losses of unconsolidated affiliates

   (8  —      8    —      —    
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net income

  1,060   558   502   1,771   (1,213   1,340    1,019    321    1,060    (41

Net loss attributable to non-controlling interest

  (10  (4  (6  —     4 

Net income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interest

   (32  184    (216  (10  194  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net income attributable to membership interest

 $1,070  $562  $508  $1,771  $(1,209  $1,372   $835   $537   $1,070   $(235
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)

On April 1, 2014, Generation assumed operational control of CENG’s nuclear fleet. As a result, beginning on April 1, 2014, the financial results include CENG’s results of operations on a fully consolidated basis.

(b)Generation evaluates its operating performance using the measure of revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense. Generation believes that revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense is a useful measurement because it provides

113


information that can be used to evaluate its operational performance. Revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense is not a presentation defined under GAAP and may not be comparable to other companies’ presentations or deemed more useful than the GAAP information provided elsewhere in this report.

(b)Includes the operations of Constellation from the date of the merger, March 12, 2012, through December 31, 2012.

 

Net Income Attributable to Membership Interest

 

Year Ended December 31, 20132015 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012.2014.Generation’s net income attributable to membership interest increased compared to the same period in 20122014 primarily due to higher revenues,revenue net of purchasedpurchase power and fuel expense and lower operating and maintenance expense and higher earnings from Generation’s interest in CENG;expense; partially offset by impairmentthe absence of certainthe 2014 gains recorded on the sales of Generation’s ownership interest in generating assets, higher depreciation expense, higher property taxes,stations, the absence of the 2014 gain recorded upon the consolidation of CENG, decreased other income and higher interestincreased income tax expense. The increase in revenues,

revenue, net or purchasedof purchase power and fuel expense was primarily due to the inclusion of CENG’s results on fully consolidated basis in 2015, the benefit of lower cost to serve load (including the absence of higher procurement costs for replacement power in 2014), the cancellation of the DOE spent nuclear fuel disposal fee, increased capacity prices, the inclusion of Integrys’ results in 2015, favorability from portfolio management optimization activities, increased load served, and higher nuclear volumemark-to-market gains in 2015 compared to mark-to-market losses in 2014, partially offset by lower margins resulting from the 2014 sale of generating assets, lower realized energy prices, higher nuclearand the absence of the 2014 fuel costs, and lower mark-to-market gainsoptimization opportunities in 2013.the South region due to extreme cold weather. The decrease in operating and maintenance expense was largely due to 2012 costs associated withthe reduction of long-lived asset impairment charges in 2015 versus 2014, partially offset by increased labor, contracting and materials expense due to the inclusion of CENG’s results on a settlement with FERCfully consolidated basis in 20122015 and decreasesincreased energy efficiency projects. The decrease in transaction costsother income is primarily the result of the change in realized and employee-related costs associated with the merger.unrealized gains and losses on NDT fund investments in 2015 as compared to 2014.

 

Year Ended December 31, 20122014 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011.2013.Generation’s net income attributable to membership interest decreased compared to the same period in 20122013 primarily due to higher operating expenses,and maintenance expense and higher depreciation expense; partially offset by higher revenue, net of purchase power and fuel expense, higher other income, the lossgains recorded on the sale of Brandon Shores, Wagner and C.P. Crane (collectively MarylandGeneration’s ownership interest in generating stations)stations, the bargain-purchase gain recorded related to the Integrys acquisition, and the amortizationgain recorded upon consolidation of acquired energy contracts recorded at fair value at the merger date; offset by higher revenues, net of purchased power and fuel expense and favorable NDT fund performance.CENG. The increase in operating expensesand maintenance expense was largely due to increased labor contracting and materials expense due to the additioninclusion of Constellation’s financialCENG’s results from March 12, 2012, costson a fully consolidated basis beginning April 1, 2014 and impairment charges related to a 2012 settlement with FERC1) generating assets held-for-sale, 2) certain Upstream assets, and transaction and employee-related severance costs associated with the merger.3) wind generating assets. The increase in revenues,revenue, net of purchased power and fuel expense was also primarily due to the merger. See Note 4inclusion of CENG’s results beginning April 1, 2014, a decrease in fuel costs related to the cancellation of DOE spent nuclear fuel disposal fees, an increase in capacity prices, and favorable portfolio management activities in the New England and South regions, partially offset by lower realized energy prices related to executing Exelon’s ratable hedging strategy, higher procurement costs for additional information regardingreplacement power due to extreme cold weather in the lossfirst quarter of 2014, and unrealized mark-to-market losses in 2014. The increase in other income is primarily the result of increased realized and unrealized gains on the sale of three Maryland generating stations.NDT fund investments.

 

Revenue Net of Purchased Power and Fuel Expense

 

The basis for Generation’s six reportable segments are based onis the geographic locationintegrated management of its assets,electricity business that is located in different geographic regions, and are largely representative of the footprints of an ISO/RTO and/or NERC region.regions, which utilize multiple supply sources to provide electricity through various distribution channels (wholesale and retail). Generation’s hedging strategies and risk metrics are also aligned with these same geographic regions. Descriptions of each of Generation’s six reportable segments are as follows:

 

  

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

 

  

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

 

  

New England represents the operations within ISO-NE covering the states of Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Vermont.

  

New York represents operations within New York ISO,ISO-NY, which covers the state of New York in its entirety.

 

  

ERCOT represents operations within Electric Reliability Council of Texas, covering most of the state of Texas.

 

  

Other Power Regions not considered individually significant::

 

  

South represents operations in the FRCC, MISO’s Southern Region, and the remaining portions of the SERC not included within MISO or PJM, which includes all or most of

114


Florida, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, North Carolina, South Carolina and parts of Missouri, Kentucky and Texas. Generation’s South region also includes operations in the SPP, covering Kansas, Oklahoma, most of Nebraska and parts of New Mexico, Texas, Louisiana, Missouri, Mississippi and Arkansas.

 

  

West represents operations in the WECC, which includes California ISO, and covers the states of California, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, Idaho, Colorado, and parts of New Mexico, Wyoming and South Dakota.

 

  

Canada represents operations across the entire country of Canada and includes the AESO, OIESO and the Canadian portion of MISO.

 

The following business activities are not allocated to a region, and are reported under Other: retail and wholesale gas, investments in natural gas, exploration and productionas well as other miscellaneous business activities proprietary trading, energy efficiency and demand response, heating, cooling, and cogeneration facilities, and home improvements, salesthat are not significant to Generation’s overall operating revenues or results of electric and gas appliances, servicing of heating, air conditioning, plumbing, electrical, and indoor quality systems.operations. Further, the following activities are not allocated to a region, and are reported in Other: compensation under the reliability-must-run rate schedule; results of operations from the Maryland Clean-Coal assets soldtable below in the fourth quarter of 2012;Other: unrealized mark-to-market impact of economic hedging activities; amortization of certain intangible assets relating to commodity contracts recorded at fair value as a result of the merger;from mergers and acquisitions; and other miscellaneous revenues.

 

Generation evaluates the operating performance of its power marketing activities and allocates resources using the measure of revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense, which is a non-GAAP measurement. Generation’s operating revenues include all sales to third parties and affiliated sales to ComEd, PECO and BGE. Purchased power costs include all costs associated with the procurement and supply of electricity including capacity, energy and ancillary services. Fuel expense includes the fuel costs for internally generated energyowned generation and fuel costs associated with tolling agreements.

 

For the yearyears ended December 31, 20132015 compared to 20122014 and 2012December 31, 2014 compared to 2011,2013, Generation’s revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense by region were as follows:

 

      2013 vs. 2012   2012 vs. 2011      2015 vs. 2014   2014 vs. 2013 
  2013 2012 (a) Variance % Change 2011 Variance % Change  2015 2014 Variance % Change 2013 Variance % Change 

Mid-Atlantic(b)(f)

  $3,270  $3,433  $(163  (4.7)%  $3,350  $83   2.5

Mid-Atlantic (a)(b)(e)

 $3,571   $3,431   $140    4.1 $3,270   $161    4.9

Midwest(c)

   2,586   2,998   (412  (13.7)%   3,547   (549  (15.5)%   2,892    2,599    293    11.3  2,586    13    0.5

New England

   185   196   (11  (5.6)%   9   187   n.m.    461    351    110    31.3  185    166    89.7

New York(f)(e)

   (4  76   (80  (105.3)%   —     76   n.m.    634    483    151    31.3  (4  487    n.m.  

ERCOT

   436   405   31   7.7  84   321   n.m.    293    317    (24  (7.6)%   436    (119  (27.3)% 

Other Regions(d)

   201   131   70   53.4  (14  145   n.m.  

Other Power Regions

  250    327    (77  (23.5)%   201    126    62.7
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total electric revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense

  $6,674  $7,239  $(565  (7.8)%  $6,976  $263   3.8  8,101    7,508    593    7.9  6,674    834    12.5

Proprietary Trading

   (8  (14  6   42.9  24   (38  n.m.    1    42    (41  (97.6)%   (8  50    n.m.  

Mark-to-market gains (losses)

   504   515   (11  (2.1)%   (288  803   n.m.    257    (591  848    n.m.    504    (1,095  n.m.  

Other(e)(d)

   263   (364  627   n.m.    146   (510  n.m.    755    509    246    48.3  263    246    93.5
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense

  $7,433  $7,376  $57   0.8 $6,858  $518   7.6 $9,114   $7,468   $1,646    22.0 $7,433   $35    0.5
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)IncludesOn April 1, 2014, Generation assumed operational control of CENG’s nuclear fleet. As a result, beginning April 1, 2014, the financial results for Constellation business transferred to Generation beginninginclude CENG’s results on March 12, 2012, the date the merger was completed.a fully consolidated basis.

115


(b)Results of transactions with PECO and BGE are included in the Mid-Atlantic region.
(c)Results of transactions with ComEd are included in the Midwest region.
(d)Other Regions includes South, West and Canada, which are not considered individually significant.
(e)Other represents activities not allocated to a region. See text above for a description of included activities. Also includes an $8 million increase to RNF, a $124 million decrease to RNF, and a $488 million decrease to RNF for the amortization of intangible assets related to commodityenergy contracts recorded at fair value at merger date of $488 million and $1,098 million pre-tax for the twelve monthsyears ended December 31, 20132015, 2014, and December 31, 2012,2013, respectively.
(f)(e)Includes $113 million and $169 million of purchased power from CENG prior to its consolidation on April 1, 2014 in the Mid-Atlantic and New York regions, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2014. Includes $542 million and $450 million of purchased power from CENG in the Mid-Atlantic and New York regions, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2013. Includes $487 million and $306 million of purchased power from CENG in the Mid-Atlantic and New York regions, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2012. See Note 2526—Related Party Transactions of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Generation’s supply sources by region are summarized below:

 

           2013 vs. 2012      2012 vs. 2011 

Supply source (GWh)

  2013   2012(a)   Variance  % Change  2011   Variance   % Change 

Nuclear generation(b)

            

Mid-Atlantic

   48,881    47,337    1,544   3.3  47,287    50    0.1

Midwest

   93,245    92,525    720   0.8  92,010    515    0.6
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 
   142,126    139,862    2,264   1.6  139,297    565    0.4

Fossil and renewables(b)

            

Mid-Atlantic(b)(d)

   11,714    8,808    2,906   33.0  7,572    1,236    16.3

Midwest

   1,478    971    507   52.2  596    375    62.9

New England

   10,896    9,965    931   9.3  8    9,957    n.m.  

ERCOT

   6,453    6,182    271   4.4  2,030    4,152    n.m.  

Other Regions(e)

   6,664    5,913    751   12.7  1,432    4,481    n.m.  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 
   37,205    31,839    5,366   16.9  11,638    20,201    n.m.  

Purchased power

            

Mid-Atlantic(c)

   14,092    20,830    (6,738  (32.3)%   2,898    17,932    n.m.  

Midwest

   4,408    9,805    (5,397  (55.0)%   5,970    3,835    64.2

New England

   7,655    9,273    (1,618  (17.4)%   —       9,273    n.m.  

New York(c)

   13,642    11,457    2,185   19.1  —       11,457    n.m.  

ERCOT

   15,063    23,302    (8,239  (35.4)%   7,537    15,765    n.m.  

Other Regions(e)

   14,931    17,327    (2,396  (13.8)%   2,503    14,824    n.m.  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 
   69,791    91,994    (22,203  (24.1)%   18,908    73,086    n.m.  

Total supply by region(f)

            

Mid-Atlantic(g)

   74,687    76,975    (2,288  (3.0)%   57,757    19,218    33.3

Midwest(h)

   99,131    103,301    (4,170  (4.0)%   98,576    4,725    4.8

New England

   18,551    19,238    (687  (3.6)%   8    19,230    n.m.  

New York

   13,642    11,457    2,185   19.1  —       11,457    n.m.  

ERCOT

   21,516    29,484    (7,968  (27.0)%   9,567    19,917    n.m.  

Other Regions(e)

   21,595    23,240    (1,645  (7.1)%   3,935    19,305    n.m.  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total supply

   249,122    263,695    (14,573  (5.5)%   169,843    93,852    55.3
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 
        2015 vs. 2014     2014 vs. 2013 

Supply Source (GWh)

 2015  2014  Variance  % Change  2013  Variance  % Change 

Nuclear Generation (a)

       

Mid-Atlantic

  63,283    58,809    4,474    7.6  48,881    9,928    20.3

Midwest

  93,422    94,000    (578  (0.6)%   93,245    755    0.8

New York

  18,769    13,645    5,124    37.6  —      13,645    n.m.  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total Nuclear Generation

  175,474    166,454    9,020    5.4  142,126    24,328    17.1

Fossil and Renewables (a)

       

Mid-Atlantic

  2,774    11,025    (8,251  (74.8)%   11,714    (689  (5.9)% 

Midwest

  1,547    1,372    175    12.8  1,478    (106  (7.2)% 

New England

  2,983    5,233    (2,250  (43.0)%   10,896    (5,663  (52.0)% 

New York

  3    4    (1  (25.0)%   —      4    n.m.  

ERCOT

  5,763    7,164    (1,401  (19.6)%   6,453    711    11.0

Other Power Regions

  7,848    7,955    (107  (1.3)%   6,664    1,291    19.4
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total Fossil and Renewables

  20,918    32,753    (11,835  (36.1)%   37,205    (4,452  (12.0)% 

Purchased Power

       

Mid-Atlantic (b)

  8,160    6,082    2,078    34.2  14,092    (8,010  (56.8)% 

Midwest

  2,325    2,004    321    16.0  4,408    (2,404  (54.5)% 

New England

  24,309    12,354    11,955    96.8  7,655    4,699    61.4

New York (b)

  —      2,857    (2,857  (100.0)%   13,642    (10,785  (79.1)% 

ERCOT

  10,070    8,651    1,419    16.4  13,459    (4,808  (35.7)% 

Other Power Regions

  16,728    14,795    1,933    13.1  14,931    (136  (0.9)% 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total Purchased Power

  61,592    46,743    14,849    31.8  68,187    (21,444  (31.4)% 

Total Supply/Sales by Region (c)

       

Mid-Atlantic (d)

  74,217    75,916    (1,699  (2.2)%   74,687    1,229    1.6

Midwest(d)

  97,294    97,376    (82  (0.1)%   99,131    (1,755  (1.8)% 

New England

  27,292    17,587    9,705    55.2  18,551    (964  (5.2)% 

New York

  18,772    16,506    2,266    13.7  13,642    2,864    21.0

ERCOT

  15,833    15,815    18    0.1  19,912    (4,097  (20.6)% 

Other Power Regions

  24,576    22,750    1,826    8.0  21,595    1,155    5.3
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total Supply/Sales by Region

  257,984    245,950    12,034    4.9  247,518    (1,568  (0.6)% 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

(a)Includes results for the Constellation business transferred to Generation beginning on March 12, 2012, the date the merger was completed.
(b)Includes the proportionate share of output where Generation has an undivided ownership interest in jointly-owned generating plants and does not include ownership through equity method investmentsincludes the total output of plants that are fully consolidated (e.g., CENG). Nuclear generation for the year ended December 31, 2015 includes physical volumes of 14,646 GWh in Mid-Atlantic and 18,769 GWh in New York for CENG and for the year ended December 31, 2014 includes physical volumes of 11,409 GWh in Mid-Atlantic and 13,645 GWh in New York for CENG. Prior to the integration date of April 1, 2014, CENG volumes were included in purchased power.

(c)(b)Purchased power includes physical volumes of 12,0672,489 GWh and 9,92512,067 GWh in the Mid-Atlantic and 12,1652,857 GWh and 9,35012,165 GWh in New York as a result of the PPA with CENG for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, and 2012 respectively. Since the integration date of April 1, 2014, CENG volumes are included in nuclear generation.
(d)Excludes generation under the reliability-must-run rate schedule and generation of Brandon Shores, H.A. Wagner, and C.P. Crane, the generating facilities divested in the fourth quarter of 2012 as a result of the Exelon and Constellation merger.
(e)Other Regions includes South, West and Canada, which are not considered individually significant.
(f)(c)Excludes physical proprietary trading volumes of 8,7627,310 GWh, 12,95810,571 GWh, and 5,7428,762 GWh for the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014, and 2011 respectively.

116


(g)Includes sales to PECO through the competitive procurement process of 5,070 GWh, 7,762 GWh, and 7,041 GWh for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011 respectively. Sales to BGE of 5,595 GWh and 3,766 GWh were included for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 respectively.
(h)Includes sales to ComEd under the RFP procurement of 7,491 GWh, 4,152 GWh and 4,731 GWh for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011 respectively.

The following table presents electric revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense per MWh of electricity sold during the year ended December 31, 2013 as compared to the same period in 2012 and 2012 as compared to the same period in 2011.

          2013 vs. 2012     2012 vs. 2011 

$/MWh

  2013  2012(a)   % Change  2011  % Change 

Mid-Atlantic(b)

  $43.78  $44.60    (1.8)%  $58.00   (23.1)% 

Midwest(c)

   26.09   29.02    (10.1)%   35.99   (19.4)% 

New England

   9.97   10.19    (2.1)%   n.m.    n.m.  

New York

   (0.29  6.63    (104.4)%   n.m.    n.m.  

ERCOT

   20.26   13.74    47.5  8.78   56.5

Other Regions(d)

   9.31   5.64    65.0  (3.56  n.m.  

Electric revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense per MWh(e)(f)

  $26.79  $27.45    (2.4)%  $41.07   (33.2)% 

(a)Includes financial results for the Constellation business transferred to Generation beginning on March 12, 2012, the date the merger was completed.
(b)Includes sales to PECO of $405 million (5,070 GWh), $536 million (7,762 GWh) and $508 million (7,041 GWh) for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Sales to BGE of $455 million (5,595 GWh) and $322 million (3,766 GWh) were included for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 respectively. Excludes compensation under the reliability-must-run rate schedule and the financial results of Brandon Shores, H.A. Wagner, and C.P. Crane, the generating facilities divested in the fourth quarter of 2012 as a result of the merger.
(c)Includes sales to ComEd of $283 million (7,491 GWh), $162 million (4,152 GWh) and $179 million (4,731 GWhs) and settlements of the ComEd swap of $230 million, $627 million and $474 million for years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively.
(d)Other Regions includes South, WestIncludes affiliate sales to PECO and Canada, which are not considered individually significant.
(e)Revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense per MWh represents the average margin per MWh of electricity sold during the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively, and excludes the mark-to-market impact of Generation’s economic hedging activities.
(f)Excludes Generation’s other business activities not allocated to a region, including retail and wholesale gas, upstream natural gas, proprietary trading, energy efficiency, energy management and demand response. Also excludes Generation’s compensation under the reliability-must-run rate schedule, the financial results of Brandon Shores, H.A. Wagner, and C.P. Crane, the generating facilities divestedBGE in the fourth quarter of 2012 as a result ofMid-Atlantic region and affiliate sales to ComEd in the Exelon and Constellation merger, and amortization of certain intangible assets relating to commodity contracts recorded at fair value as a result of the Exelon and Constellation merger of $488 million and $1,098 million, respectively.Midwest region.

 

Mid-Atlantic

 

Year Ended December 31, 20132015 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012. The decrease in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in the Mid-Atlantic of $163 million was primarily due to lower realized power prices and increased nuclear fuel costs, partially offset by the addition of Constellation in 2012, higher capacity revenues, and higher nuclear revenues.

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 20112014. The increase in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in the Mid-Atlantic of $83$140 million was primarily due to the additioninclusion of ConstellationCENG’s results on a fully consolidated basis for the full year in 20122015, the benefit of lower cost to serve load (which includes the absence of higher procurement costs for replacement power due to extreme cold weather in the first quarter of 2014), increased load volumes served, higher nuclear volumes, the cancellation of the DOE spent nuclear fuel disposal fee, and higher capacity revenues,favorability from portfolio management optimization activities, partially offset by lower realizedcapacity revenues, and lower generation volumes due to the sale of generating assets.

Year Ended December 31, 2014 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2013. The increase in revenue net of purchased power prices and increasedfuel expense in the Mid-Atlantic of $161 million was primarily due to the consolidation of CENG, the cancellation of the DOE spent nuclear fuel costs.disposal fees in 2014, and favorable portfolio management optimization activities, partially offset by higher procurement costs for replacement power, lower nuclear volumes (excluding CENG), lower capacity revenues, and lower realized energy prices related to executing Generation’s ratable hedging strategy.

 

117


Midwest

 

Year Ended December 31, 20132015 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 20122014. The decreaseincrease in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in the Midwest of $412$293 million was primarily due to lower realized power prices,higher capacity revenues, increased load volumes served, the inclusion of Integrys’ results in 2015, the cancellation of the DOE spent nuclear fuel costs,disposal fee in 2014, and lower capacity revenues,favorability from portfolio management optimization activities, partially offset by higherlower nuclear revenues.volumes.

 

Year Ended December 31, 20122014 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 20112013. The decreaseincrease in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in the Midwest of $549$13 million was primarily due to lowerhigher capacity revenues, increasedprices, higher nuclear volumes, and the cancellation of the DOE spent nuclear fuel costs, and lower realized power prices,disposal fee, partially offset by decreased congestion costs.lower realized energy prices related to executing Generation’s ratable hedging strategy.

 

New England

 

Year Ended December 31, 20132015 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 20122014. The $11 million decrease in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in New England is primarily due to lower realized energy prices, partially offset by the addition of Constellation in 2012. Prior to the merger, New England was not a significant contributor to revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense at Generation.

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011. The $187 million increase in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in New England of $110 million was the result of the Constellation merger. Priorprimarily due to the merger, New England was notbenefit of lower cost to serve load, increased load volumes served, the inclusion of Integrys’ results in 2015, and favorability from portfolio management optimization activities, partially offset by lower generation volumes due to the sale of a significant contributorgenerating asset.

Year Ended December 31, 2014 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2013. The increase in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense at Generation.in New England of $166 million was primarily due to higher realized energy prices and favorable impacts from the restructuring of a fuel supply contract, partially offset by lower generation volume.

 

New York

 

Year Ended December 31, 20132015 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012.2014. The $80$151 million decreaseincrease in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in New York was primarily due to decreasedthe

inclusion of CENG’s results on a fully consolidated basis for the full year in 2015, increased nuclear volumes and the inclusion of Integrys’ results in 2015, partially offset by lower realized energy prices partially offset by the addition of Constellation. Prior to the merger, New York was not a significant contributor to revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense at Generation.decreased capacity revenues.

 

Year Ended December 31, 20122014 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 20112013. The $76$487 million increase in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in New York was the result of the Constellation merger. Priorprimarily due to the merger, New York was not a significant contributor to revenue netconsolidation of purchased power and fuel expense at Generation.CENG.

 

ERCOT

 

Year Ended December 31, 20132015 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012.2014.The $31$24 million increasedecrease in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in ERCOT was primarily due to increasedlower realized energy prices and a decrease in generation volumes due to the additionsale of Constellation in 2012,a generating asset, partially offset by athe absence of higher procurement costs for replacement power in 2014 and decreased fuel costs.

Year Ended December 31, 2014 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2013. The $119 million decrease in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in ERCOT was primarily due to higher procurement costs for replacement power in the second quarter of 2014 and the termination of an energy supply contract with a retail power supply company that was previously a consolidated variable interest entity. As a result of the termination, Generation no longer has a variable interest in the retail supply company and ceased consolidation of the entity during the third quarter of 2013. The decreases were partially offset by higher generation volume in the first quarter of 2014.

Other Power Regions

 

Year Ended December 31, 20122015 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011.2014.The $321 million increase in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in ERCOT was primarily as a result of the addition of Constellation in 2012, partially offset by a decrease in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in Other Power Regions of $77 million was primarily due to the legacy Generation ERCOT portfolio drivenamortization of contracts recorded at fair value associated with prior acquisitions, lower realized energy prices, the absence of the 2014 fuel optimization opportunities, partially offset by the performance of Generation’s generating units during extreme weather events that occurred in Texas in Februaryincreased generation from power purchase agreements, and August 2011.

118


Other Regionsdecreased fuel costs.

 

Year Ended December 31, 20132014 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012.2013.The $70$126 million increase in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in Other Power Regions was primarily as a result of the addition of Constellation in 2012, in additiondue to increased renewable generation.higher generation volumes and higher realized energy prices.

Proprietary Trading

 

Year Ended December 31, 20122015 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011.2014.The $145$41 million decrease in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in Proprietary trading was primarily due to the absence of gains on congestion trading products.

Year Ended December 31, 2014 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2013. The $50 million increase in revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in Other RegionsProprietary trading was primarily as a result of the Constellation merger.due to gains on congestion trading products.

 

Mark-to-market

 

Year Ended December 31, 2013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012. Generation is exposed to market risks associated with changes in commodity prices and enters into economic hedges to mitigate exposure to these fluctuations. Mark-to-market gains on economic hedging activities were $504 million in 2013 compared to gainsSee Note 12—Fair Value of $515 million in 2012. See Notes 11Financial

Assets and 12Liabilities and Note 13—Derivative Financial Instruments of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for information on gains and losses associated with mark-to-market derivatives.

Year Ended December 31, 2015 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2014. Mark-to-market gains on economic hedging activities were $257 million in 2015 compared to losses of $591 million in 2014.

 

Year Ended December 31, 20122014 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 20112013. Generation is exposed to market risks associated with changes in commodity prices and enters into economic hedges to mitigate exposure to these fluctuations. Mark-to-market gainslosses on economic hedging activities were $515$591 million in 20122014 compared to lossesgains of $288$504 million in 2011. See Note 11 and 12 of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for information on gains and losses associated with mark-to-market derivatives.2013.

 

Other

 

Year Ended December 31, 20132015 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012.2014. The $627$246 million increase in other revenue net of purchased power and fuel was primarily due to reducedthe amortization expense of the acquired energy contracts recorded at fair value atassociated with prior acquisitions, the merger date. In addition, theinclusion of Integrys’ gas results in 2015, and an increase is also attributable to results from activities acquired as part of the 2012 merger with Constellation including retail gas,in distributed generation and energy efficiency energy management and demand response, upstream natural gas, and the design and construction of renewable energy facilities. These increases were partially offset by the reduction in revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense from the sale of Brandon Shores, H.A. Wagner and C.P. Crane, the generating facilities divested in the fourth quarter of 2012 as a result of the Exelon and Constellation merger.activity. See Note 411—Intangible Assets of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding energy contract intangibles and assets planned for divestiture as a result of the Constellation merger.intangibles.

 

Year Ended December 31, 20122014 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011.2013. The $510$246 million decreaseincrease in other revenue net of purchased power and fuel was primarily due to increasedthe amortization expense of the acquired energy contracts recorded at fair value at the merger date. This decrease wasassociated with prior acquisitions, partially offset by resultsa loss on gas inventory from activities acquired as partlower of the 2012 merger with Constellation including retail gas, energy efficiency, energy management and demand response, upstream natural gas and the design and construction of renewable energy facilities. In addition, other revenue net of purchased power and fuel includes the results of Brandon Shores, H.A. Wagner and C.P. Crane, the generating facilities divestedcost or market adjustments in fourth quarter of 2012 as a result of the Exelon and Constellation merger.2014. See Note 411—Intangible Assets of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding energy contract intangibles and assets planned for divestiture as a result of the Constellation merger.intangibles.

 

Nuclear Fleet Capacity Factor and Production Costs

 

The following table presents nuclear fleet operating data for 2013,2015, as compared to 20122014 and 2011,2013, for the Generation-operated plants. The nuclear fleet capacity factor presented in the table is defined

119


as the ratio of the actual output of a plant over a period of time to its output if the plant had operated at full average annual mean capacity for that time period. Nuclear fleet production cost is defined as the costs to produce one MWh of energy, including fuel, materials, labor, contracting and other miscellaneous costs, but excludes depreciation and certain other non-production related overhead costs. Generation considers capacity factor and production costs useful measuresmeasure to analyze the nuclear fleet performance between periods. Generation has included the analysis below as a complement to the financial information provided in accordance with GAAP. However, these measures are not a presentation defined under GAAP and may not be comparable to other companies’ presentations or be more useful than the GAAP information provided elsewhere in this report.

 

   2013  2012  2011 

Nuclear fleet capacity factor(a)

   94.1  92.7  93.3

Nuclear fleet production cost per MWh (a)

  $19.83  $19.50  $18.86 
   2015  2014  2013 

Nuclear fleet capacity factor (a)

   93.7  94.3  94.1

 

(a)Excludes Salem, which is operated by PSEG Nuclear, LLC, and CENG’s nuclear facilities, which are operated by CENG.LLC. Reflects ownership percentage of stations operated by Exelon. As of April 1, 2014, CENG is included at ownership.

 

Year Ended December 31, 20132015 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 20122014. The nuclear fleet capacity factor, which excludes Salem, decreased in 2015 compared to 2014 primarily due to a higher number of refueling outage days and non-outage energy losses, partially offset by a lower number of unplanned outage days. For 2015 and 2014, planned refueling outage days totaled 290 and 275, respectively, and non-refueling outage days totaled 82 and 92, respectively

Year Ended December 31, 2014 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2013. The nuclear fleet capacity factor, which excludes Salem, increased primarily duein 2014 compared to a lower number of planned refueling outage2013. While total days offline

were greater in 2014 as compared to 2013, the larger capacity units were online for more days in 2013, partially offset by a higher number2014. Additionally, with the addition of non-refueling outage days.the CENG nuclear facilities there were more days offline in 2014 associated with units where Exelon’s ownership percentage diminishes the impact on capacity factor. For 20132014 and 2012,2013, planned refueling outage days totaled 233275 and 274,233, respectively, and non-refueling outage days totaled 92 and 75, and 73, respectively. Higher nuclear fuel costs and higher plant operating and maintenance costs, partially offset by higher number of net MWhs generated resulted in a higher production cost per MWh during 2013 as compared to 2012.

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011. The nuclear fleet capacity factor, which excludes Salem, decreased primarily due to a higher number of non-refueling outage days, partially offset by a lower number of planned refueling outage days in 2012. For 2012 and 2011, planned refueling outage days totaled 274 and 283, respectively, and non-refueling outage days totaled 73 and 52, respectively. Higher nuclear fuel costs resulted in a higher production cost per MWh during 2012 as compared to 2011.

 

Operating and Maintenance Expense

 

The changes in operating and maintenance expense for 20132015 compared to 2012,2014, consisted of the following:

 

   Increase
(Decrease)
 

Plant retirements and divestitures(a)

  $(440

FERC settlement(b)

   (195

Constellation merger and integration costs

   (107

Maryland commitments

   (35

Bodily injury costs(c)

   (16

Nuclear refueling outage costs, including the co-owned Salem plant(d)

   (14

Corporate allocations(e)

   (5

Labor, other benefits, contracting and materials(f)

   160 

Impairment and related charges of certain generating assets

   160 

Midwest generation bankruptcy charges

   11 

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefits expense

   5 

Other

   (18
  

 

 

 

Decrease in operating and maintenance expense

  $(494
  

 

 

 

120


   Increase
(Decrease) (a)
 

Impairment and related charges of certain generating assets(b)

  $(651

Maryland merger commitments

   (44

Merger and integration costs

   (28

Midwest Generation bankruptcy charges

   (14

Decrease in asbestos bodily injury reserve

   (12

ARO update

   8  

Regulatory fees and assessments

   10  

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefits expense

   15  

Corporate allocations(c)

   16  

Accretion expense

   18  

Nuclear refueling outage costs, including the co-owned Salem plant(d)

   64  

Labor, other benefits, contracting and materials(e)

   323  

Other

   37  
  

 

 

 

Decrease in operating and maintenance expense

  $(258
  

 

 

 

 

(a)ReflectsOn April 1, 2014, Generation assumed operational control of CENG’s nuclear fleet. As a result, the operating results include CENG’s results of operations on a fully consolidated basis from April 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014 and maintenance expense associated withfor the generating assets retired or divested during 2012.entire year in 2015.
(b)Reflects costs incurred as partPrimarily relates to impairments of a March 2012 settlement with the FERC to resolve a dispute related to Constellation’s prior period hedgingcertain generating assets held-for-sale, Upstream assets, and risk management transactions.wind generating assets during 2014 that did not reoccur in 2015.
(c)Reflects decreased asbestos-related bodily injury expense for 2013 compared to 2012.
(d)Reflects the impact of decreased planned refueling outage days during 2013.
(e)The decrease in cost allocations during 2013 primarily reflects merger synergy savings for Exelon’s corporate operations and shared service entities, partially offset by the impact of an increased share of corporate allocated costs primarily due to the merger.inclusion of CENG beginning April 1, 2014.
(f)(d)IncludesReflects the unfavorable impacts of increased nuclear outages in 2015.
(e)Reflects an increase of labor, other benefits, contracting and materials costs primarily due to the inclusion of CENG on a fully consolidated basis in 2015. Also includes cost of sales of our other business activities that are not allocated to a region.

 

The changes in operating and maintenance expense for 20122014 compared to 2011,2013, consisted of the following:

 

   Increase
(Decrease)
 

Labor, other benefits, contracting and materials(a)

  $845 

Loss on the sale of Maryland Clean Coal assets(b)

   278 

FERC settlement(c)

   195 

Constellation merger and integration costs

   182 

Corporate allocations(d)

   175 

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefits expense

   76 

Maryland commitments(e)

   35 

Nuclear refueling outage costs, including the co-owned Salem plant(f)

   (52

Other

   146 
  

 

 

 

Increase in operating and maintenance expense

  $1,880 
  

 

 

 
   Increase
(Decrease) (a)
 

Impairment and related charges of certain generating assets(b)

  $506  

Labor, other benefits, contracting and materials(c)

   361  

Accretion expense

   78  

Corporate allocations(d)

   69  

Regulatory fees and assessments

   51  

Maryland merger commitments

   44  

Nuclear refueling outage costs, including the co-owned Salem plant (e)

   54  

Increase in asbestos bodily injury reserve

   16  

Midwest Generation bankruptcy charges

   (26

ARO update

   (29

Merger and integration costs

   (29

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefits expense

   (81

Other

   18  
  

 

 

 

Increase in operating and maintenance expense

  $1,032  
  

 

 

 

 

(a)IncludesOn April 1, 2014, Generation assumed operational control of CENG’s nuclear fleet. As a result, the 2014 operating results include CENG’s results of operations on a fully consolidated basis from April 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014.
(b)Reflects the operating and maintenance expense associated with the impairment of certain generating assets held-for-sale, Upstream assets, and wind generating assets during 2014.
(c)Reflects an increase of labor, other benefits, contracting and materials costs primarily due to the inclusion of CENG beginning April 1, 2014. Also includes cost of sales of our other business activities that are not allocated to a region.
(b)Represents expense recorded during the third quarter of 2012 due to the reduction in book value. Upon completion of the November 30, 2012 transaction, Generation recorded a $6 million gain within Other, net in its Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. The net loss on the sale of the Maryland Clean Coal assets was $272 million. See 4 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.
(c)Reflects costs incurred as part of a March 2012 settlement with the FERC to resolve a dispute related to Constellation’s prior period hedging and risk management transactions.
(d)Reflects an increased share of corporate allocated costs primarily due to the merger.inclusion of CENG beginning April 1, 2014.
(e)Reflects costs incurred as part of the Maryland order approving the merger.
(f)Reflects the impact of decreased planned refueling outages during 2012.increased nuclear outage days primarily due to the inclusion of CENG beginning April 1, 2014.

 

Depreciation and Amortization

 

Year Ended December 31, 20132015 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 20122014. The increase in depreciation and amortization expense was primarily a result of higher plant balances due to the additioninclusion of Constellation facilitiesCENG’s results on a fully consolidated basis in 2015, increased nuclear decommissioning amortization, and an increase in ongoing capital additions.expenditures.

 

Year Ended December 31, 20122014 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 20112013. The increase in depreciation and amortization expense was primarily a result of higher plant balances due to the additioninclusion of Constellation facilities;CENG’s results on a fully consolidated basis beginning April 1, 2014 and an increase in ongoing capital additions and other upgrades to legacy plants.expenditures.

 

Taxes Other Than Income

 

Year Ended December 31, 20132015 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 20122014. The increase in taxes other than income was primarily due to the additioninclusion of Constellation’s financialCENG’s results on a fully consolidated basis in 2012.2015.

 

Year Ended December 31, 20122014 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 20112013. The increase in taxes other than income was primarily due to the additioninclusion of Constellation’s financialCENG’s results in 2012.on a fully consolidated basis beginning April 1, 2014.

 

121


Equity in Earnings (Losses) of Unconsolidated Affiliates

 

Year Ended December 31, 20132015 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 20122014. The year-over-year change in Equity in earnings (losses) of unconsolidated affiliates increasedis primarily due to $50 million favorable net income generated from Exelon’s equity investment in CENG and a reduction of $58 million of amortizationthe result of the basis differenceconsolidation of CENG’s results of operations beginning April 1, 2014, which were previously accounted for under the equity method of accounting.

Year Ended December 31, 2014 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2013. The year-over-year change in CENG recorded at fair value atEquity in earnings (losses) of unconsolidated affiliates is primarily the merger date.result of the consolidation of CENG’s results of operations beginning April 1, 2014, which were previously accounted for under the equity method of accounting.

 

Gain (Loss) on Sales of Assets

Year Ended December 31, 2015 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2014. The decrease in gain (loss) on sales of assets in primarily related to the absence of $411 million of gains recorded on the sale of Generation’s ownership interests in Safe Harbor Water Power Corporation, Fore River and West Valley generating stations in 2014. Refer to Note 4—Mergers, Acquisitions and Dispositions in the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

Year Ended December 31, 2014 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2013. The increase in gain (loss) on sales of assets is primarily related to $411 million of gains recorded on the sale of

Generation’s ownership interests in Safe Harbor Water Power Corporation, Fore River and West Valley generating stations in 2014. Refer to Note 4—Mergers, Acquisitions and Dispositions in the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

Gain on Consolidation and Acquisition of Businesses

Year Ended December 31, 2015 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2014. The decrease in gain on consolidation and acquisition of businesses reflects the absence of a $261 million gain upon consolidation of CENG resulting from the difference in fair value of CENG’s net assets as of April 1, 2014 and the equity method investment previously recorded on Generation’s and Exelon’s books and the settlement of pre-existing transactions between Generation and CENG recorded in 2014, and the absence of a $28 million bargain-purchase gain related to the Integrys acquisition recorded in 2014.

Interest Expense

 

Year Ended December 31, 2013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012. The increasechanges in interest expense is primarily duefor 2015 compared to the increase in long-term debt as a result2014 and 2014 compared to 2013 consisted of the merger and increased project financing.following:

 

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011. The increase in interest expense is primarily due to the increase in long-term debt as a result of the merger.

   Increase
(Decrease)
2015 vs. 2014
  Increase
(Decrease)
2014 vs. 2013
 

Interest expense on long-term debt

  $53   $33  

Interest expense on interest rate swaps

   22    4  

Interest expense on tax settlements

   (37  (21

Other interest expense

   (29  (17
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Increase (decrease) in interest expense, net

  $9   $(1
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

Other, Net

 

Year Ended December 31, 20132015 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 20122014. The decrease in Other, net primarily reflects the net decrease in realized and unrealized gains related to the NDT fund investments of Generation’s Non-Regulatory Agreement Units as described in the table below. Other, net also reflects $(22) million and $67 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively, related to the contractual elimination of income tax expense associated with the NDT fund investments of the Regulatory Agreement Units. Refer to Note 15—Asset Retirement Obligations of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding NDT fund investments.

Year Ended December 31, 2014 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2013. The increase of $129 million in other,Other, net primarily reflects $85$31 million of credit facility termination fees recorded in 2012favorable tax settlements related to Constellation’s pre-acquisition tax returns and the increased net realized and unrealized gains related to the NDT fundsfund investments of Generation’s Non-Regulatory Agreement Units compared to net realized and unrealized gains in 2012,2013, as described in the table below. Additionally,Other, net also reflects $67 million and $122 million for the increase reflects incomeyear ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively, related to the contractual elimination of income tax expense (benefit) associated with the NDT fundsfund investments of the Regulatory Agreement Units.

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared Refer to Year Ended December 31, 2011. The increaseNote 15—Asset Retirement Obligations of $117 million in other, net primarily reflects a $36 million bargain purchase gain associated with the August 2011 acquisition of Wolf Hollow, $32 million of interest income from a one-timeCombined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding NDT fund special transfer tax deduction in 2011, net realized and unrealized gains related to the NDT funds of Generation’s Non-Regulatory Agreement Units compared to net realized and unrealized losses in 2011, as described in the table below, offset by $85 million of credit facility termination fees recorded in 2012. Additionally, the increase reflects income related to the contractual elimination of income tax expense associated with the NDT funds of the Regulatory Agreement Units.investments.

 

The following table provides unrealized and realized gains (losses) on the NDT fundsfund investments of the Non-Regulatory Agreement Units recognized in Other, net for 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011:2013:

 

   2013   2012   2011 

Net unrealized gains (losses) on decommissioning trust funds

  $146   $105   $(4

Net realized gains (losses) on sale of decommissioning trust funds

  $24   $51   $(10
   2015  2014   2013 

Net unrealized (losses) gains on decommissioning trust funds

  $(197 $134    $146  

Net realized gains on sale of decommissioning trust funds

  $66   $77    $24  

Effective Income Tax Rate.

 

Generation’s effective income tax rates for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 2012were 27.1%, 16.9% and 2011 were 36.7%, 47.3% and 37.4%, respectively. See Note 1414—Income Taxes of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding the components of the effective income tax rates.

 

122


Results of Operations—ComEd

 

 2013 2012 Favorable
(Unfavorable)
2013 vs. 2012
Variance
 2011 Favorable
(Unfavorable)
2012 vs. 2011
Variance
  2015 2014 Favorable
(Unfavorable)
2015 vs. 2014
Variance
 2013 Favorable
(Unfavorable)
2014 vs. 2013
Variance
 

Operating revenues

 $4,464  $5,443  $(979 $6,056  $(613

Operating revenue

 $4,905   $4,564   $341   $4,464   $100  

Purchased power expense

  1,174   2,307   1,133   3,035   728   1,319    1,177    (142  1,174    (3
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Revenues net of purchased power expense (a)

  3,290   3,136   154   3,021   115 

Revenue net of purchased power expense (a)(b)

  3,586    3,387    199    3,290    97  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other operating expenses

          

Operating and maintenance

  1,368   1,345   (23  1,189   (156  1,567    1,429    (138  1,368    (61

Depreciation and amortization

  669   610   (59  554   (56  707    687    (20  669    (18

Taxes other than income

  299   295   (4  296   1   296    293    (3  299    6  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total other operating expenses

  2,336   2,250   (86  2,039   (211  2,570    2,409    (161  2,336    (73
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Gain on sales of assets

  1    2    (1  —      2  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Operating income

  954   886   68   982   (96  1,017    980    37    954    26  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

          

Interest expense, net

  (579  (307  (272  (345  38   (332  (321  (11  (579  258  

Other, net

  26   39   (13  29   10   21    17    4    26    (9
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

  (553  (268  (285  (316  48   (311  (304  (7  (553  249  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Income before income taxes

  401   618   (217  666   (48  706    676    30    401    275  

Income taxes

  152   239   87   250   11   280    268    (12  152    (116
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net income

 $249  $379  $(130 $416  $(37 $426   $408   $18   $249   $159  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)ComEd evaluates its operating performance using the measure of revenuesRevenue net of purchased power expense. ComEd believes that revenuesRevenue net of purchased power expense is a useful measurement because it provides information that can be used to evaluate its operational performance. In general, ComEd only earns margin based on the delivery and transmission of electricity. ComEd has included its discussion of revenuesRevenue net of purchased power expense below as a complement to the financial information provided in accordance with GAAP. However, revenuesRevenue net of purchased power expense is not a presentation defined under GAAP and may not be comparable to other companies’ presentations or deemed more useful than the GAAP information provided elsewhere in this report.
(b)For regulatory recovery mechanisms, including ComEd’s electric distribution and transmission formula rates, and riders, revenues increase and decrease i) as fully recoverable costs fluctuate (with no impact on net earnings), and ii) pursuant to changes in rate base, capital structure and ROE (which impact net earnings).

 

Net Income

 

Year Ended December 31, 2013,2015 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012.2014. ComEd’s netNet income for the year ended December 31, 2013,2015 was lowerhigher than the same period in 2012,2014 primarily due to increased electric distribution and transmission formula rate earnings (reflecting the impacts of increased capital investment, partially offset by lower allowed electric distribution ROE), partially offset by unfavorable weather and volume.

Year Ended December 31, 2014 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2013. ComEd’s Net income for the year ended December 31, 2014 was higher than the same period in 2013 primarily due to the 2013 remeasurement of Exelon’s like-kind exchange tax position and increased electric distribution and transmission formula rate earnings (reflecting the impacts of increased capital investment), partially offset by increased electric distribution revenues, including the impacts of Senate Bill 9, and increased transmission revenues. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters and Note 14—Income Taxes of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

Year Ended December 31, 2012, Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011. ComEd’s net income for the year ended December 31, 2012, was lower than the same period in 2011, primarily due to increased operating and maintenance expenses, partially offset by increased electric distribution revenues and increased transmission revenues.unfavorable weather.

 

Operating RevenuesRevenue Net of Purchased Power Expense

 

There are certain drivers of operating revenuesOperating revenue that are fully offset by their impact on purchasedPurchased power expense, such as commodity procurement costs and participation in customer choice programs. ComEd is permitted to recover electricity procurement costs from retail customers without mark-up. Therefore, fluctuations in electricity procurement costs have no impact on revenuesRevenue net of purchased power expense. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on ComEd’s electricity procurement process.

 

123


All ComEd customers have the choice to purchase electricity from a competitive electric generation supplier. Customer choice programs do not impact ComEd’s volume of deliveries, but do affect ComEd’s operating revenuesOperating revenue related to supplied energy, which is fully offset in purchasedPurchased power expense. Therefore, customer choice programs have no impact on revenuesRevenue net of purchased power expense.

 

The number of retail customers participating in customer choice programs was 2,630,185, 1,627,150 and 380,262 at December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively, representing 68%, 43% and 10% of total retail customers, respectively. Retail energydeliveries purchased from competitive electric generation suppliers represented 81%, 65% and 56%(as a percentage of ComEd’s retail kWh salessales) for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, 2012consisted of the following:

   For the Years Ended December 31, 
   2015  2014  2013 

Electric

   76  80  81

Retail customers purchasing electric generation from competitive electric generation suppliers at December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2011, respectively. During 2012,2013 consisted of the following:

   December 31, 2015  December 31, 2014  December 31, 2013 
   Number of
customers
   % of total
retail
customers
  Number of
customers
   % of total
retail
customers
  Number of
customers
   % of total
retail
customers
 

Electric

   1,655,400     42  2,426,900     63  2,630,200     68

Under an Illinois law allowing municipalities to arrange the purchase of electricity for their participating residents, the City of Chicago previously participated in ComEd’s customer choice program and approximately 240 Illinois municipalities, including governmental entities sucharranged the purchase of electricity from Constellation (formerly Integrys), for those participating residents. In September 2015, the City of Chicago discontinued its participation in the customer choice program and many of those participating residents resumed their purchase of electricity from ComEd. ComEd’s Operating revenue has increased as townships and counties, approved referenda regarding electric supply aggregation. The referenda allowed governmental officials to identify and sign contracts with competitive electric generation suppliers on behalfa result of the eligible retail customersCity of Chicago switching, but that increase is fully offset in the community, while also allowing customers to opt-out of the municipal aggregation program. As of December 31, 2013, there are approximately 330 municipalities that have approved a municipal aggregation referendum in the ComEd service territory. As a result, approximately 69% of residential usage as of December 31, 2013 is being supplied by competitive electric generation suppliers, and ComEd estimates that over 80% of that usage resulted from municipal aggregation activities.Purchased power expense.

The changes in ComEd’s revenuesRevenue net of purchased power expense for the year ended 2013December 31, 2015 compared to the same period in 20122014, and for the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to the same period in 2013, consisted of the following:

 

  Increase
(Decrease)
   Increase
(Decrease)
2015 vs. 2014
 Increase
(Decrease)
2014 vs. 2013
 

Weather

  $(17  $(16 $(16

Volume

   (2   (22  —    

Electric distribution revenues, including impacts of Senate Bill 9

   168 

Discrete impacts of the 2012 Distribution Rate Case Order

   13 

Transmission revenues

   14 

Electric distribution revenue

   180    (2

Transmission revenue

   48    30  

Regulatory required programs

   20    (1  52  

Uncollectible accounts recovery, net

   (58   27    41  

Pricing and customer mix

   (4  5  

Revenue subject to refund

   9    (9

Other

   16    (22  (4
  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total increase

  $154 

Increase in revenue net of purchased power

  $199   $97  
  

 

   

 

  

 

 

 

Weather.The demand for electricity is affected by weather conditions. Very warm weather in summer months and very cold weather in other months are referred to as “favorable weather conditions” because these weather conditions result in increased customer usage. Conversely, mild weather reduces demand. For the yearyears ended December 31, 2013, the increase in revenues2015 and 2014, unfavorable weather conditions reduced Operating revenue net of purchased power expense was offset by unfavorable weather conditions as a result of the mild weather in 2013,when compared to the same period in 2012.prior years.

 

Heating and cooling degree days are quantitative indices that reflect the demand for energy needed to heat or cool a home or business. Normal weather is determined based on historical average heating and cooling degree days for a 30-year period in ComEd’s service territory with cooling degree days generally having a more significant impact to ComEd, particularly during the summer months. The changes in heating and cooling degree days in ComEd’s service territory for the years ended December 31, 20132015, 2014 and 20122013 consisted of the following:

 

               % Change 

Heating and Cooling Degree-Days

  2013   2012   Normal   From 2012  From Normal 

Twelve Months Ended December 31,

                   

Heating Degree-Days

   6,603    5,065    6,341    30.4  4.1

Cooling Degree-Days

   933    1,324    842    (29.5)%   10.8

   For the Years Ended
December 31,
       % Change 

Heating and Cooling Degree-Days

          2015                   2014           Normal   2015 vs. 2014  2015 vs. Normal 

Heating Degree-Days

   6,091     7,027     6,341     (13.3)%   (3.9)% 

Cooling Degree-Days

   806     799     842     0.9  (4.3)% 

 

   For the Years Ended
December 31,
       % Change 

Heating and Cooling Degree-Days

          2014                   2013           Normal   2014 vs. 2013  2014 vs. Normal 

Heating Degree-Days

   7,027     6,603     6,341     6.4  10.8

Cooling Degree-Days

   799     933     842     (14.4)%   (5.1)% 

124


Volume. RevenuesRevenue net of purchased power expense decreased as a result of lower delivery volume, exclusive of the effects of weather, for the year ended December 31, 2013,2015, reflecting decreased average usage per residential customer and the impacts of energy efficiency programs, as compared to the same period in 2012.2014. For the year ended December 31, 2014, Revenue net of purchased power expense remained relatively consistent, as compared to the same period in 2013.

 

Electric Distribution Revenues.Revenue.EIMA provides for a performance-based formula rate tariff, which requires an annual reconciliation of the revenue requirement in effect to the actual costs that the ICC determines are prudently and reasonably incurred in a given year. Distribution revenues varyUnder EIMA, electric distribution

revenue varies from year to year based upon fluctuations in the underlying costs, investments being recovered, allowed ROE, and other billing determinants. ComEd’s allowed ROE is the annual average rate on 30-year treasury notes plus 580 basis points, subject to a collar of plus or minus 50 basis points. Therefore, the collar limits favorable and unfavorable impacts of weather and load on revenue. During the year ended December 31, 2013, ComEd recorded2015, electric distribution revenue increased revenues of $168$180 million, primarily due to higher Operating and maintenance expense and increased capital investments,investment, partially offset by lower allowed ROE due to decreased treasury rates. During the year ended December 31, 2014, electric distribution revenue decreased $2 million, primarily due to lower Operating and maintenance expense resulting from certain OPEB plan design changes, partially offset by increased operating expenses,capital investment. See Operating and higher allowed return on common equity, including the impacts of Senate Bill 9. These amounts exclude the discrete impacts of the 2012 Distribution Rate Case Orders, discussed separately below. SeeMaintenance Expense below and Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

Discrete Impacts of the 2012 Distribution Rate Case Orders. On October 3, 2012, the ICC issued its final order related to ComEd’s 2011 formula rate proceeding under EIMA (Rehearing Order), which reestablished ComEd’s position on the return on its pension asset, resulting in an increase to revenues in 2013. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Transmission Revenues.Revenue. ComEd’s transmission rates are established based onUnder a FERC-approved formula. ComEd’s most recent annual formula, rate update, filed in April 2013, reflects 2012 actual costs plus forecasted 2013 capital additions. Transmission revenues varytransmission revenue varies from year to year based upon fluctuations in the underlying costs, investments being recovered and other billing determinants, such as the highest daily peak load from the previous calendar year. During the yearyears ended December 31, 2013,2015 and 2014, ComEd recorded increased revenues of $14 milliontransmission revenue primarily due to higher Operating and maintenance expense and increased capital investmentsinvestment. See Operating and higher operating expenses. SeeMaintenance Expense below and Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Regulatory Required Programs.Revenues relatedThis represents the change in Operating revenue collected under approved riders to regulatory required programs are recoveries from customersrecover costs incurred for costs of various legislative and regulatory programs on a full and current basis through approved regulated rates. Programs includesuch as ComEd’s energy efficiency and demand response and purchased power administrative costs. The riders are designed to provide full and current cost recovery. An equal and offsetting amount has been reflectedincluded in operatingOperating and maintenance expense during the periods presented.expense. See the operatingOperating and maintenance expense discussion below for additional information on included programs.

 

Uncollectible Accounts Recovery, Net.RepresentsUncollectible accounts recovery, net, represents recoveries under ComEd’s uncollectible accounts tariff. See the operatingOperating and maintenance expense discussion below for additional information on this tariff.

 

Pricing and Customer Mix.For the year ended December 31, 2015, the decrease in Revenue net of purchased power as a result of pricing and customer mix is primarily attributable to lower overall effective rates due to increased usage across all major customer classes and change in customer mix. For the year ended December 31, 2014, the increase in Revenue net of purchased power as a result of pricing and customer mix is primarily attributable to higher overall effective rates due to decreased usage across all major customer classes and change in customer mix.

Revenue Subject to Refund.ComEd records revenue subject to refund based upon its best estimate of customer collections that may be required to be refunded. Revenue net of purchase power expense was higher for the year ended December 31, 2015, due to the one-time revenue refund recorded in 2014 associated with the 2007 Rate Case.

Other.Other revenues,revenue, which can vary period to period, includeincludes rental revenues, revenuesrevenue, revenue related to late payment charges, assistance provided to other utilities through mutual assistance programs, and recoveries of environmental costs associated with MGP sites. Other revenues were higher during the year ended December 31, 2013, compared to the same period in 2012, primarily due tosites, and recoveries of increased environmental costs associated with MGP sites, for which an equal and offsetting amount expense is reflected in depreciation and amortization expense during the periods presented.energy procurement costs.

125


The changes in ComEd’s revenues net of purchased power expense for 2012 compared to 2011 consisted of the following:

   Increase
(Decrease)
 

Weather

  $2 

Volume

   (4

Electric distribution revenues

   53 

Discrete impacts of the 2012 Distribution Rate Case Order

   (13

Transmission revenues

   40 

Regulatory required programs

   32 

Uncollectible accounts recovery, net

   (28

Other

   33 
  

 

 

 

Total increase

  $115 
  

 

 

 

Weather. For the year ended December 31, 2012, revenues net of purchased power expense increased due to favorable weather conditions in 2012 compared to the same period in 2011.

The changes in heating and cooling degree days in ComEd’s service territory for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011 consisted of the following:

               % Change 

Heating and Cooling Degree-Days

  2012   2011   Normal   From 2011  From Normal 

Twelve Months Ended December 31,

                   

Heating Degree-Days

   5,065    6,134    6,341    (17.4)%   (20.1)% 

Cooling Degree-Days

   1,324    1,036    842    27.8  57.2

Volume. Revenues net of purchased power expense decreased as a result of lower delivery volume, exclusive of the effects of weather, for the year ended December 31, 2012, reflecting decreased average usage per residential customer as compared to the same period in 2011.

Electric Distribution Revenues. Under EIMA, ComEd recorded increased revenues during the year ended December 31, 2012 of $53 million, primarily due to increased capital investments and increased operating expenses, partially offset by lower allowed return on common equity. These amounts exclude the discrete impacts of the 2012 Distribution Rate Case Orders discussed separately below. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

Discrete Impacts of the 2012 Distribution Rate Case Orders.The May and October 2012 ICC Distribution Rate Case Orders resulted in a reduction to revenues of $13 million in 2012 compared to the same period in 2011. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

Transmission Revenues. Based on the FERC-approved formula, ComEd recorded increased revenues during the year ended December 31, 2012 of $40 million, primarily due to increased operating expenses. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

126


Operating and Maintenance Expense

 

  Year Ended
December 31,
   Increase   Year Ended
December 31,
   Increase   Year Ended
December 31,
   Increase
(Decrease)
 Year Ended
December 31,
   Increase
(Decrease)
 
  2013   2012   2013 vs.
2012
   2012   2011   2012 vs.
2011
   2015   2014   2015 vs.
2014
 2014   2013   2014 vs.
2013
 

Operating and maintenance expense—baseline

  $1,202   $1,199   $3   $1,199   $1,075   $124   $1,353    $1,214    $139   $1,214    $1,205    $9  

Operating and maintenance expense—regulatory required programs (a)

   166    146    20    146    114    32    214     215     (1  215     163     52  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total operating and maintenance expense

  $1,368   $1,345   $23   $1,345   $1,189   $156   $1,567    $1,429    $138   $1,429    $1,368    $61  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Operating and maintenance expense for regulatory required programs are recoveriescosts for various legislative and/or regulatory programs that are recoverable from customers for costs of various legislative and regulatory programs on a full and current basis through approved regulated rates. An equal and offsetting amount has been reflected in operating revenues.Operating revenue.

 

The changes in operatingOperating and maintenance expense for year ended December 31, 2013,2015, compared to the same period in 20122014, and changes for the year ended December 31, 2012,2014, compared to the same period in 2011,2013, consisted of the following:

 

  Increase
(Decrease)
2013 vs. 2012
 Increase
(Decrease)
2012 vs. 2011
   Increase
(Decrease)
2015 vs. 2014
 Increase
(Decrease)
2014 vs. 2013
 

Baseline

      

Labor, other benefits, contracting and materials (a)

  $48  $95   $31   $56  

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefits expense(b)

   3   46    19    (85

Discrete impacts from 2010 Rate Case order (b)

   —     32 

Storm-related costs

   (10  (1   27    (11

Science and Technology Innovation Trust(c)

   —     (11

Uncollectible accounts expense—provision (d)

   (10  (14

Uncollectible accounts expense—recovery, net (d)

   (48  (14

Other

   20   (9

Uncollectible accounts expense—provision (c)

   (7  12  

Uncollectible accounts expense—recovery, net (c)

   34    29  

Other(d)

   35    8  
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 
   3   124    139    9  

Regulatory required programs

      

Energy efficiency and demand response programs

   20   33    (1  52  

Purchased power administrative costs

   —     (1
  

 

  

 

 
   20   32 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Increase in operating and maintenance expense

  $23  $156   $138   $61  
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

 

(a)The increase includesPrimarily reflects increased contracting costs related to preventative maintenance and other projects for the year ended December 31, 2015, and increased contracting costs resulting from new projects associated with EIMA for the yearsyear ended December 31, 2013 and 2012.2014. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding EIMA.
(b)ComEd recorded one-time net benefitsThe increase from 2014 to 2015 primarily reflects the unfavorable impact of lower assumed pension and OPEB discount rates and an increase in May 2012 as a resultthe life expectancy assumption for plan participants, partially offset by cost savings from plan design changes for certain OPEB plans effective April 2014 and forward. The decrease from 2013 to 2014 primarily reflects the cost savings from plan design changes for certain OPEB plans effective April 2014 and forward. See Note 16—Retirement Benefits of the 2010 Rate Case order to reestablish previously expensed plant balances and to recover previously incurred costs related to Exelon’s 2009 restructuring plan.Exelon 2014 Form 10-K for additional information regarding plan changes.
(c)Under EIMA, ComEd makes recurring payments for contribution to a Science and Technology Innovation Trust fund that will be used to fund energy innovation.
(d)ComEd is allowed to recover from or refund to customers the difference between the utility’s annual uncollectible accounts expense and the amounts collected in rates annually through a rider mechanism. In 2013,2015 and 2014, ComEd recorded a net reductionincrease in operatingOperating and maintenance expense related to uncollectible accounts due to the timing of regulatory cost recovery and customers purchasing electricity from competitive electric generation suppliers as a result of municipal aggregation.recovery. An equal and offsetting reductionamount has been recognized in operating revenuesOperating revenue for the periods presented.
(d)Primarily reflects increased information technology support services from BSC during 2015.

127


Depreciation and Amortization Expense

 

The changes in depreciationDepreciation and amortization expense for 20132015 compared to 20122014, and 20122014 compared to 2011,2013, consisted of the following:

 

   Increase
2013 vs. 2012
   Increase
2012 vs. 2011
 

Depreciation associated with higher plant balances

  $22   $22 

Amortization of storm-related regulatory assets(a)

   4    4 

Amortization of MGP regulatory assets (b)

   27    8 

Amortization of other regulatory assets

   6    6 

Other

   —      16 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Increase in depreciation and amortization expense

  $59   $56 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 
   Increase
(Decrease)
2015 vs.  2014
  Increase
(Decrease)
2014 vs.  2013
 

Depreciation expense (a)

  $43   $46  

Amortization regulatory assets (b)

   (28  (21

Other

   5    (7
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Increase in depreciation and amortization expense

  $20   $18  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

(a)Under EIMA, ComEd is requiredDepreciation expense increased due to recover costs associated with significant storms over a five-year period throughongoing capital expenditure during the amortization of a regulatory asset.years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014.
(b)An equalFor the years ended December 31, 2015 and offsetting amount for the2014, primarily relates to a decrease in MGP regulatory asset amortization expense related to MGP remediation expenditures is reflected in operating revenuesand ComEd’s severance regulatory assets fully amortizing during the periods presented.2014.

 

Taxes Other Than Income

 

Year Ended December 31, 2013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012.Taxes other than income, which can vary periodyear to period,year, include municipal and state utility taxes, real estate taxes, and payroll taxes. Taxes other than income increased primarily due to increased Illinois electricity distribution taxes.

Year Endedremained relatively consistent for the year ended December 31, 2012 Compared2015, compared to Year Endedthe same period in 2014, and for the year ended December 31, 2011.Taxes other than income taxes decreased primarily due2014, compared to decreased Illinois electricity distribution taxes.the same period in 2013.

 

Interest Expense, Net

 

The changes in interestInterest expense, net, for 2013the year ended 2015 compared to 2012the same period in 2014, and 2012for the year ended 2014 compared to 2011the same period in 2013, consisted of the following:

 

  Increase
(Decrease)
2013 vs. 2012
 Increase
(Decrease)
2012 vs. 2011
   Increase
(Decrease)
2015 vs. 2014
 Increase
(Decrease)
2014 vs. 2013
 

Interest expense related to uncertain tax positions (a)

  $281  $—     $2   $(275)(a) 

Interest expense on debt (including financing trusts)(b)

   2   (26   13    16  

Other

   (11  (12   (4  1  
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Increase (decrease) in interest expense, net

  $272  $(38  $11   $(258
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Primarily reflectsThe reduction in interest expense in 2014 from 2013 is primarily attributable to the remeasurement of Exelon’s like-kind exchange tax position recorded in the first quarter of 2013. See Note 14—15—Income Taxes of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

Other, Net

The changes in other, net for 2013 compared to 2012 and 2012 compared to 2011 consisted of the following:

   Increase
(Decrease)
2013 vs. 2012
  Increase
(Decrease)
2012 vs. 2011
 

Interest income related to uncertain tax positions (a)

  $(20 $16 

Gain on asset disposal

   5   —   

Other

   2   (6
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Increase in Other, net

  $(13 $10 
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

128


(a)(b)Primarily reflects a receivable recordedan increase in the fourth quarter of 2012 relatedinterest expense due to the final 1999-2001 IRS settlement.issuance of First Mortgage Bonds for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014. See Note 14—Debt and Credit Agreements of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on ComEd’s debt obligations.

 

Effective Income Tax Rate

 

ComEd’s effective income tax rates for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, 2012were 39.7%, 39.6% and 2011, were 37.9%, 38.7% and 37.5%, respectively. See Note 14—15—Income Taxes of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding the components of the effective income tax rates.

ComEd Electric Operating Statistics and Revenue Detail

 

Retail Deliveries to customers (in GWhs)

 2013 2012 %
Change
2013 vs
2012
 Weather-
Normal
%
Change
 2011 %
Change
2012 vs
2011
 Weather-
Normal
%
Change
   2015   2014   %
Change
2015 vs
2014
 Weather-
Normal
%

Change
 2013   %
Change
2014 vs
2013
 Weather-
Normal
%

Change
 

Retail Deliveries(a)

                  

Residential

  27,800   28,528   (2.6)%   (0.6)%   28,273   0.9  (0.6)%    26,496     27,230     (2.7)%   (1.5)%   27,800     (2.1)%   0.3

Small commercial & industrial

  32,305   32,534   (0.7)%   0.2  32,281   0.8  0.2   31,717     32,146     (1.3)%   (0.9)%   32,305     (0.5)%   (0.3)% 

Large commercial & industrial

  27,684   27,643   0.1  (0.3)%   27,732   (0.3)%   (0.3)%    27,210     27,847     (2.3)%   (2.0)%   27,684     0.6  0.7

Public authorities & electric railroads

  1,355   1,272   6.5  4.2  1,235   3.0  4.2   1,309     1,358     (3.6)%   (2.6)%   1,355     0.2  (0.7)% 
 

 

  

 

    

 

     

 

   

 

     

 

    

Total Retail Deliveries

  89,144   89,977   (0.9)%   (0.1)%   89,521   0.5  (0.1)% 

Total retail deliveries

   86,732     88,581     (2.1)%   (1.4)%   89,144     (0.6)%   0.2
 

 

  

 

    

 

     

 

   

 

     

 

    

 

  As of December 31,   As of December 31, 

Number of Electric Customers

  2013   2012   2011   2015   2014   2013 

Residential

   3,480,398    3,455,546    3,448,481     3,550,239     3,502,386     3,480,398  

Small commercial & industrial

   367,569    365,357    365,824     370,932     369,053     367,569  

Large commercial & industrial

   1,984    1,980    2,032     1,976     1,998     1,984  

Public authorities & electric railroads

   4,853    4,812    4,797     4,820     4,815     4,853  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total

   3,854,804    3,827,695    3,821,134     3,927,967     3,878,252     3,854,804  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

Electric Revenue

  2013   2012   %
Change
2013 vs
2012
   2011   %
Change
2012 vs
2011
   2015   2014   %
Change
2015 vs
2014
 2013   %
Change
2014 vs
2013
 

Retail Sales(a)

                

Residential

  $2,073    $3,037     (31.7)%    $3,510     (13.5)%   $2,360    $2,074     13.8 $2,073     —  

Small commercial & industrial

   1,250    1,339    (6.6)%     1,517    (11.7)%    1,337     1,335     0.1  1,250     6.8

Large commercial & industrial

   427    395    8.1%     383    3.1   443     434     2.1  427     1.6

Public authorities & electric railroads

   48    44    9.1%     50    (12.0)%    42     46     (8.7)%   48     (4.2)% 
  

 

   

 

     

 

     

 

   

 

    

 

   

Total Retail Sales

   3,798    4,815    (21.1)%     5,460    (11.8)% 

Total retail

   4,182     3,889     7.5  3,798     2.4
  

 

   

 

     

 

     

 

   

 

    

 

   

Other Revenue(b)

   666    628    6.1%     596    5.4

Other revenue (b)

   723     675     7.1  666     1.4
  

 

   

 

     

 

     

 

   

 

    

 

   

Total Electric Revenues

  $4,464    $5,443     (18.0)%    $6,056     (10.1)% 

Total electric revenue

  $4,905    $4,564     7.5 $4,464     2.2
  

 

   

 

     

 

     

 

   

 

    

 

   

 

(a)Reflects delivery revenuesrevenue and volumesvolume from customers purchasing electricity directly from ComEd and customers purchasing electricity from a competitive electric generation supplier, as all customers are assessed delivery charges. For customers purchasing electricity from ComEd, revenue also reflects the cost of energy and transmission.
(b)Other revenue primarily includes transmission revenue from PJM. Other items include wholesale revenue also includes rental revenue, revenuesrevenue related to late payment charges, assistance provided torevenue from other utilities throughfor mutual assistance programs and recoveries of environmental remediation costs associated with MGP sites, and intercompany revenues.sites.

129


Results of Operations—PECO

 

  2013 2012 Favorable
(unfavorable)
2013 vs. 2012
variance
 2011 Favorable
(unfavorable)
2012 vs. 2011
variance
   2015 2014 Favorable
(unfavorable)
2015 vs. 2014
variance
 2013 Favorable
(unfavorable)
2014 vs. 2013
variance
 

Operating revenues

  $3,100  $3,186  $(86 $3,720  $(534

Operating revenue

  $3,032   $3,094   $(62 $3,100   $(6

Purchased power and fuel

   1,300   1,375   75   1,864   489    1,190    1,261    71    1,300    39  
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense(a)

   1,800   1,811   (11  1,856   (45

Revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense(a)

   1,842    1,833    9    1,800    33  
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other operating expenses

            

Operating and maintenance

   748   809   61   794   (15   794    866    72    748    (118

Depreciation and amortization

   228   217   (11  202   (15   260    236    (24  228    (8

Taxes other than income

   158   162   4   205   43    160    159    (1  158    (1
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total other operating expenses

   1,134   1,188   54   1,201   13    1,214    1,261    47    1,134    (127
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Gain on sale of assets

   2    —      2    —      —    
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Operating income

   666   623   43   655   (32   630    572    58    666    (94
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

            

Interest expense, net

   (115  (123  8   (134  11    (114  (113  (1  (115  2  

Other, net

   6   8   (2  14   (6   5    7    (2  6    1  
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

   (109  (115  6   (120  5    (109  (106  (3  (109  3  
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Income before income taxes

   557   508   49   535   (27   521    466    55    557    (91

Income taxes

   162   127   (35  146   19    143    114    (29  162    48  
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net income

   395   381   14   389   (8   378    352    26    395    (43

Preferred security dividends

   7   4   3   4   —   

Preferred security dividends and redemption

   —      —      —      7    7  
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net income on common stock

  $388  $377  $11  $385  $(8

Net income attributable to common shareholder

  $378   $352   $26   $388   $(36
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)PECO evaluates its operating performance using the measures of revenuesrevenue net of purchased power expense for electric sales and revenue net of fuel expense for gas sales. PECO believes revenuesrevenue net of purchased power expense and revenuesrevenue net of fuel expense are useful measurements of its performance because they provide information that can be used to evaluate its net revenuesrevenue from operations. PECO has included the analysis below as a complement to the financial information provided in accordance with GAAP. However, revenuesrevenue net of purchased power expense and revenue net of fuel expense figures are not a presentation defined under GAAP and may not be comparable to other companies’ presentations or more useful than the GAAP information provided elsewhere in this report.

 

Net Income Attributable to Common Shareholder

 

Year Ended December 31, 20132015 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012.2014. The increase inPECO’s net income attributable to common shareholder for the year ended December 31, 2015 was drivenhigher than the same period in 2014, primarily by lower operatingdue to a decrease in Operating and maintenance expense partially offset by an increasedue to a decrease in income taxes.storm costs.

 

Year Ended December 31, 20122014 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011.2013. The decrease inPECO’s net income attributable to common shareholder for the year ended December 31, 2014 was drivenlower than the same period in 2013, primarily due to an increase in Operating and maintenance expense due to an increase in storm costs partially offset by lower operating revenuesan increase in Operating revenue net of purchasedpurchase power and fuel expense and increased storm costs. Thea decrease in revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense was primarily related to unfavorable weather and a decline in electric load. The decrease to net income was partially offset by lower taxes other than income, interest expense and income taxes.Income tax expense.

Operating RevenuesRevenue Net of Purchased Power and Fuel Expense

 

Electric and natural gas revenuesrevenue and purchased power and fuel expense are affected by fluctuations in commodity procurement costs. PECO’s electric supply and natural gas cost rates charged to customers are subject to adjustments at least quarterlyas specified in the PAPUC-approved tariffs that are designed to recover or refund the difference between the actual cost of electric supply and natural gas and the amount included in rates

130


in accordance with the PAPUC’sPECO’s GSA and PGC, respectively. Therefore, fluctuations in electric supply and natural gas procurement costs have no impact on electric and natural gas revenuesrevenue net of purchased power and fuel expense.

 

Electric and natural gas revenuesrevenue and purchased power and fuel expense are also affected by fluctuations in participation in the customer choice program.Customer Choice Program. All PECO customers have the choice to purchase electricity and natural gas from competitive electric generation and natural gas suppliers, respectively. The customer’s choice of suppliers does not impact the volume of deliveries, but affects revenuesrevenue collected from customers related to supplied energy and natural gas service. Customer choice programChoice Program activity has no impact on electric and natural gas revenuesrevenue net of purchase power and fuel expense. The number of retail customers purchasing energy from a competitive electric generation supplier was 531,500, 496,500, and 387,600 at December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively.

Retail deliveries purchased from competitive electric generation and natural gas suppliers represented 68%, 66%,(as a percentage of kWh and 57% of PECO’s retail kWhmmcf sales, respectively) for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014, and 2013 2012 and 2011, respectively. The numberconsisted of retailthe following:

   For the Years Ended December 31, 
   2015  2014  2013 

Electric

   70  70  68

Natural Gas

   25  22  19

Retail customers purchasing electric generation and natural gas from a competitive electric generation and natural gas supplier was 66,400, 53,600, and 24,800suppliers at December 31, 2015, 2014, and 2013 2012 and 2011, respectively. Retail deliveries purchased from competitive natural gas suppliers represented 19%, 16%, and 11%consisted of PECO’s mmcf sales for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively.following:

   December 31, 2015  December 31, 2014  December 31, 2013 
   Number of
customers
   % of total
retail
customers
  Number of
customers
   % of total
retail
customers
  Number of
customers
   % of total
retail
customers
 

Electric

   563,400     35  546,900     34  531,500     34

Natural Gas

   81,100     16  78,400     16  66,400     13

 

The changes in PECO’s operating revenuesOperating revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense for the yearyears ended December 31, 20132015 and December 31, 2014 compared to the same periodperiods in 20122014 and 2013, respectively, consisted of the following:

 

  2015 vs. 2014 2014 vs. 2013 
  Increase (Decrease)   Increase (Decrease) Increase (Decrease) 
  Electric Gas Total   Electric Gas Total Electric Gas Total 

Weather

  $6  $31  $37   $28   $(19 $9   $(15 $13   $(2

Volume

   (3  (3  (6   4    7    11    2    5    7  

Pricing

   (14  2   (12   4    2    6    (1  (3  (4

Regulatory required programs

   (6  —     (6   (6  —      (6  33    —      33  

Gross receipts tax

   (8  —     (8

Gas distribution tax repair

   —     (8  (8

Other

   (7  (1  (8   (12  1    (11  (1  —      (1
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total decrease

  $(32 $21  $(11

Total increase (decrease)

  $18   $(9 $9   $18   $15   $33  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

WeatherWeather.

The demand for electricity and natural gas is affected by weather conditions. With respect to the electric business, very warm weather in summer months and, with respect to the electric

and natural gas businesses, very cold weather in winter months are referred to as “favorable weather conditions” because these weather conditions result in increased deliveries of electricity and natural gas. Conversely, mild weather reduces demand. Operating revenuesrevenue net of purchased power and fuel expense werefor the year ended December 31, 2015 was higher primarily due to the impact of favorable 20132015 summer and first quarter winter weather conditions.conditions, partially offset by the impact of unfavorable fourth quarter 2015 winter weather conditions in PECO’s service territory.

Operating revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense for the year ended December 31, 2014, was lower due to the impact of unfavorable 2014 summer and fourth quarter weather conditions, partially offset by the impact of favorable first quarter 2014 winter weather conditions in PECO’s service territory.

 

Heating and cooling degree days are quantitative indices that reflect the demand for energy needed to heat or cool a home or business. Normal weather is determined based on historical average heating and cooling degree days for a 30-year period in PECO’s service territory. The changes in heating and cooling degree days in PECO’s service territory for the yearyears ended December 31, 20132015 and December 31, 2014 compared to the same periodperiods in 20122014 and 2013, respectively, and normal weather consisted of the following:

 

              % Change   For the Years Ended
December 31,
       % Change 

Heating and Cooling Degree-Days

  2013   2012   Normal   From 2012 From Normal       2015           2014       Normal   2015 vs. 2014 2015 vs. Normal 

Twelve Months Ended December 31,

                  

Heating Degree-Days

   4,474     3,747     4,603    19.4  (2.8)%    4,245     4,749     4,613     (10.6)%   (8.0)% 

Cooling Degree-Days

   1,411     1,603     1,301    (12.0)%   8.5   1,720     1,311     1,301     31.2  32.2

   For the Years Ended
December 31,
       % Change 

Heating and Cooling Degree-Days

      2014           2013       Normal   2014 vs. 2013  2014 vs. Normal 

Heating Degree-Days

   4,749     4,474     4,603     6.1  3.2

Cooling Degree-Days

   1,311     1,411     1,301     (7.1)%   0.8

 

131


VolumeVolume.

The decreaseincrease in electric revenuesOperating revenue net of purchased power expense related to delivery volume, exclusive of the effects of weather, reflects the impact of energy efficiency initiatives on customer usages as well as a shift in the volume profile across classes from higher priced classes to lower priced classes, partially offset by the oil refineries returning to full production in 2013 as well as moderate economic growth. The decrease in gas revenues net ofand fuel expense related to delivery volume, exclusive of the effects of weather, for the year ended December 31, 2015, primarily reflects the impact of moderate economic and customer growth partially offset by energy efficiency initiatives on customer usages for gas and residential and small commercial and industrial electric classes. Additionally, the increase represents a declineshift in Residential use per customer.

Pricingthe volume profile across classes from large commercial and industrial classes to residential and small commercial and industrial classes for electric.

 

The decreaseincrease in Operating revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense related to delivery volume, exclusive of the effects of weather, for the year ended December 31, 2014, primarily reflects the impact of moderate economic and customer growth partially offset by energy efficiency initiatives on customer usages for gas and residential electric and a shift in the volume profile across classes from commercial and industrial classes to residential classes for electric.

Pricing.The increase in electric operating revenuesrevenue net of purchased power expense as a result of pricing for the year ended December 31, 2015 is primarily attributable to increased monthly customer demand in the commercial and industrial classes. The increase in natural gas operating revenue net of fuel expense as a result of pricing for the year ended December 31, 2015, is primarily attributable to higher overall effective rates due to decreased retail gas usage.

The decrease in natural gas operating revenue net of fuel expense as a result of pricing for the year ended December 31, 2014, is primarily attributable to lower overall effective rates due to increased usage across all major customer classes.retail gas usage.

Regulatory Required ProgramsPrograms.

This represents the change in operating revenuesrevenue collected under approved riders to recover costs incurred for theregulatory programs such as smart meter, energy efficiency and consumer education programs as well as the administrative costs for the GSA and AEPS programs.GSA. The riders are designed to provide full and current cost recovery as well as a return. The offsetting costs of these programs are included in operatingOperating and maintenance expense, depreciationDepreciation and amortization expense and incomeIncome taxes. Refer to the operatingOperating and maintenance expense discussion below for additional information on included programs.

 

Gross Receipts TaxOther.

GRT is an excise tax on total electric revenues. As a result of decreases in operating revenues compared to 2012, GRT decreased. Equal and offsetting decreases in GRT have been reflected in taxes other than income.

Gas Distribution Tax Repair

The decrease in gas distribution tax repair reflects the 2012 tax benefit received from prior period gas distribution repairs for the 2011 tax year. There is an equal and offsetting tax benefit in operating revenues, see NOTE 3—Regulatory Matters for further explanation.

Other

The decrease in other electric revenuesrevenue net of purchased power expense compared to the year ended December 31, 2012 reflects a decrease in wholesale transmission revenues earned by PECO due to higher peak loads in the previous years.

The changes in PECO’s operating revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to the same period in 2011 consisted of the following:

   Increase (Decrease) 
   Electric  Gas  Total 

Weather

  $(17 $(15 $(32

Volume

   (22  —     (22

Pricing

   (4  3   (1

Regulatory required programs

   29   —     29 

Gross receipts tax

   (27  —     (27

Other

   8   —     8 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total increase (decrease)

  $(33 $(12 $(45
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

132


Weather

Electric and gas revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense were lower due to unfavorable winter weather conditions during 2012 in PECO’s service territory.

The changes in heating and cooling degree days in PECO’s service territory for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to the same period in 2011 and normal weather consisted of the following:

               % Change 

Heating and Cooling Degree-Days(a)

  2012   2011   Normal   From 2011  From Normal 

Twelve Months Ended December 31,

                   

Heating Degree-Days

   3,747     4,157     4,603    (9.9)%   (18.6)% 

Cooling Degree-Days

   1,603     1,617     1,301    (0.9)%   23.2

Volume

The decrease in electric revenues net of purchased power expense related to delivery volume, exclusive of the effects of weather, reflected the reduced oil refinery load in PECO’s service territory and2015 reflects the impact of energy efficiency initiatives and weak economic conditions on customer usage. See Note 3 oflower wholesale transmission revenue, which is impacted by the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding energy efficiency initiatives.

Pricingprevious year’s peak demand, which was lower in 2014 than in 2013.

 

The decrease in electric operating revenues net of purchased power expense as a result of pricing is primarily attributable to lower overall effective rates due to increased usage across all major customer classes.

Regulatory Required Programs

This represents the change in operating revenues collected under approved riders to recover costs incurred for the smart meter, energy efficiency and consumer education programs as well as the administrative costs for the GSA and AEPS programs. The riders are designed to provide full and current cost recovery as well as a return. The offsetting costs of these programs are included in operating and maintenance expense, depreciation and amortization expense and income taxes. Refer to the operating and maintenance expense discussion below for additional information on included programs.

Other

The decrease in other electric revenues net of purchased power expense primarily reflected a decrease in GRT revenues as a result of lower supplied energy service and a reduction in the GRT rate. There is an equal and offsetting decrease in GRT expense included in taxes other than income.

133


Operating and Maintenance Expense

 

   Twelve Months
Ended December 31,
   Increase
(Decrease)
  2013 vs. 2012  
  Twelve Months
Ended December  31,
   Increase
(Decrease)
  2012 vs. 2011  
 
       2013           2012            2012           2011       

Operating and Maintenance Expense—Baseline

  $668   $723   $(55 $723   $725   $(2

Operating and Maintenance Expense—Regulatory

           

Required Programs (a)

   80    86    (6  86    69    17 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total Operating and Maintenance Expense

  $748   $809   $(61 $809   $794   $15 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 
   Year Ended
December 31,
   Increase
(Decrease)
  Year Ended
December 31,
   Increase
(Decrease)
 
       2015           2014       2015 vs. 2014      2014           2013       2014 vs. 2013 

Operating and maintenance expense—baseline

  $685    $761    $(76 $761    $668    $93  

Operating and maintenance expense—regulatory required programs(a)

   109     105    $4    105     80    $25  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total operating and maintenance expense

  $794    $866    $(72 $866    $748    $118  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

(a)Operating and maintenance expenses for regulatory required programs are costs for various legislative and/or regulatory programs that are recoverable from customers on a full and current basis through approved regulated rates. An equal and offsetting amount has been reflected in operating revenues.revenue.

 

The changes in operatingOperating and maintenance expense for 20132015 compared to 20122014 and 20122014 compared to 20112013 consisted of the following:

 

   Increase
(Decrease)
2013 vs. 2012
  Increase
(Decrease)
2012 vs. 2011
 

Baseline

   

Labor, other benefits, contracting and materials

  $10  $(29

Storm-related costs

   (49  9(a) 

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefits expense

   (12  —   

Constellation merger and integration costs

   (8  15 

Other

   4   3 
  

 

 

  

 

 

 
   (55  (2

Regulatory Required Programs

   

Smart Meter

   4   12 

Energy Efficiency

   (9  8 

GSA

   —     (1

Consumer education program

   (1  (1

AEPS

   —     (1
  

 

 

  

 

 

 
   (6  17 
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Increase (decrease) in operating and maintenance expense

  $(61 $15 
  

 

 

  

 

 

 
   Increase
(Decrease)
2015 vs. 2014
  Increase
(Decrease)
2014 vs. 2013
 

Baseline

   

Labor, other benefits, contracting and materials

  $1   $12  

Storm-related costs

   (78)(a)   100(b) 

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefits expense

   3    (5

Merger integration costs

   2    (7

Corporate allocation

   9    5  

Uncollectible accounts expense

   (22  (9

Other

   9    (3
  

 

 

  

 

 

 
   (76  93  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Regulatory required programs

   

Smart meter

   (3  7  

Energy efficiency

   8    17  

Other

   (1  1  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 
   4    25  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Increase (decrease) in operating and maintenance expense

  $(72 $118  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

(a)Storm-related costs include $46Reflects a reduction of $67 million ofin incremental storm costs, incurred in the fourth quarter of 2012primarily as a result of Hurricane Sandy. This expense was significantly offset by the February 5, 2014 ice storm.
(b)Reflects an increase of $85 million in incremental storm costs, incurred related to Hurricane Ireneincluding the February 5, 2014 ice storm and other storms throughout 2011.the significant July 2014 storms.

 

Depreciation and Amortization Expense

 

Year Ended December 31, 2013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012.The increasechanges in depreciationDepreciation and amortization expense net for 2013,2015 compared to 2012 was primarily due2014 and 2014 compared to ongoing capital expenditures.2013, consisted of the following:

 

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011. The increase in depreciation and amortization expense, net for 2012 compared to 2011 was primarily due to ongoing capital expenditures.

   Increase
(Decrease)
2015 vs. 2014
   Increase
(Decrease)
2014 vs. 2013
 

Depreciation expense

  $13    $8  

Regulatory asset amortization

   11     —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Increase in depreciation and amortization expense

  $24    $8  
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

134


Taxes Other Than Income

 

The change in taxesTaxes other than income, which can vary year to year, include municipal and state utility taxes, real estate taxes, and payroll taxes. Taxes other than income remained relatively consistent for 2013the year ended December 31, 2015, compared to 2012the same period in 2014, and 2012the year ended December 31, 2014, compared to 2011 consisted of the following:same period in 2013.

   Increase
(Decrease)
2013 vs. 2012
  Increase
(Decrease)
2012 vs. 2011
 

GRT expense

  $(12 $(33

Sales and use tax

   8   (12)(a) 

Other

   —     2 
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Decrease in taxes other than income

  $(4 $(43
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

(a)The decrease reflects a sales and use tax reserve adjustment in the first quarter of 2012 resulting from the completion of the audit of tax years 2005 through 2010.

 

Interest Expense, Net

 

Year EndedInterest expense, net remained relatively consistent for the year ended December 31, 2013 Compared2015, compared to Year Endedthe same period in 2014, and the year ended December 31, 2012. The decrease in interest expense, net for 20132014, compared to 2012 was primarily due to refinancing debt at lower interest rates during the second half of 2012.

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011. The decreasesame period in interest expense, net for 2012 compared to 2011 was primarily due to the debt retirement in November 2011.2013.

 

Other, Net

 

Year Ended December 31, 2013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012.Other, net remained relatively level between periods.

Year Endedconsistent for the year ended December 31, 2012 Compared2015, compared to Year Endedthe same period in 2014, and the year ended December 31, 2011. The decrease in Other, net for 20122014, compared to 2011 was due to decreased AFUDC—Equity. See Note 20 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statementssame period in the 2012 10-K for additional details of the components of Other, net.2013.

 

Effective Income Tax Rate

 

PECO’s effective income tax rates for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 2012were 27.4%, 24.5% and 2011 were 29.1%, 25.0% and 27.3%, respectively. The increase in effective income tax rate in 2013 compared 2012 reflects the 2012 impact of the tax benefit received from electing to change the method of accounting for gas distribution property for the 2011 tax year. See Note 1414—Income Taxes of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regardingfurther discussion of the components of thechange in effective income tax rates.

 

PECO Electric Operating Statistics and Revenue Detail

 

Retail Deliveries to customers (in GWhs)

 2013 2012 % Change
2013 vs. 2012
 Weather-
Normal %
Change
 2011 % Change
2012 vs. 2011
 Weather-
Normal %
Change
 

Retail Deliveries to Customers (in GWhs)

 2015 2014 %
Change

2015 vs.
2014
 Weather-
Normal
%

Change
 2013 %
Change

2014 vs.
2013
 Weather-
Normal
%

Change
 

Retail Deliveries(a)

              

Residential

  13,341   13,233   0.8  (0.0)%   13,687   (3.3)%   (1.7)%   13,630    13,222    3.1  0.3  13,341    (0.9)%   0.5

Small commercial & industrial

  8,101   8,063   0.5  (1.1)%   8,321   (3.1)%   (2.3)%   8,118    8,025    1.2  0.6  8,101    (0.9)%   —  

Large commercial & industrial

  15,379   15,253   0.8  1.5  15,677   (2.7)%   (2.7)%   15,365    15,310    0.4  (0.5)%   15,379    (0.4)%   (0.1)% 

Public authorities & electric railroads

  930   943   (1.4)%   (1.4)%   945   (0.2)%   (0.2)%   881    937    (6.0)%   (6.0)%   930    0.8  0.8
 

 

  

 

    

 

    

 

  

 

    

 

   

Total Electric Retail Deliveries

  37,751   37,492   0.7  0.3  38,630   (2.9)%   (2.2)% 

Total electric retail deliveries

  37,994    37,494    1.3  (0.1)%   37,751    (0.7)%   0.1
 

 

  

 

    

 

    

 

  

 

    

 

   

   As of December 31, 

Number of Electric Customers

  2015   2014   2013 

Residential

   1,444,338     1,434,011     1,423,068  

Small commercial & industrial

   149,200     149,149     149,117  

Large commercial & industrial

   3,091     3,103     3,105  

Public authorities & electric railroads

   9,805     9,734     9,668  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total

   1,606,434     1,595,997     1,584,958  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

135


   As of December 31, 

Number of Electric Customers

  2013   2012   2011 

Residential

   1,423,068    1,417,773    1,415,681 

Small commercial & industrial

   149,117    148,803    148,570 

Large commercial & industrial

   3,105    3,111    3,110 

Public authorities & electric railroads

   9,668    9,660    9,689 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total

   1,584,958    1,579,347    1,577,050 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Electric Revenue

  2013   2012   % Change
2013 vs. 2012
 2011   % Change
2012 vs. 2011
   2015   2014   %
Change

2015 vs.
2014
 2013   %
Change

2014 vs.
2013
 

Retail Sales(a)

                  

Residential

  $1,592    $1,689     (5.7)%  $1,934     (12.7)%   $1,599    $1,555     2.8 $1,592     (2.3)% 

Small commercial & industrial

   433    462    (6.3)%   585    (21.0)%    428     423     1.2  433     (2.3)% 

Large commercial & industrial

   224    232    (3.4)%   308    (24.7)%    221     217     1.8  224     (3.1)% 

Public authorities & electric railroads

   30    31    (3.2)%   38    (18.4)%    31     32     (3.1)%   30     6.7
  

 

   

 

    

 

     

 

   

 

    

 

   

Total Retail

   2,279    2,414    (5.6)%   2,865    (15.7)% 

Total retail

   2,279     2,227     2.3  2,279     (2.3)% 
  

 

   

 

    

 

     

 

   

 

    

 

   

Other Revenue(b)

   221    226    (2.2)%   244    (7.4)% 

Other revenue (b)

   207     221     (6.3)%   221     —  
  

 

   

 

    

 

     

 

   

 

    

 

   

Total Electric Revenues

  $2,500   $2,640    (5.3)%  $3,109     (15.1)% 

Total electric operating revenue

  $2,486    $2,448     1.6 $2,500     (2.1)% 
  

 

   

 

    

 

     

 

   

 

    

 

   

 

(a)Reflects delivery volumes and revenuesrevenue from customers purchasing electricity directly from PECO and customers purchasing electricity from a competitive electric generation supplier as all customers are assessed distribution charges. For customers purchasing electricity from PECO, revenue also reflects the cost of energy and transmission.
(b)Other revenue includes transmission revenue from PJM and wholesale electric revenues.revenue.

 

PECO Gas Operating Statistics and Revenue Detail

 

Deliveries to customers (in mmcf)

 2013 2012 % Change
2013 vs. 2012
 Weather-
Normal %
Change
 2011 % Change
2012 vs. 2011
 Weather-
Normal %
Change
   2015   2014   %
Change

2015 vs.
2014
 Weather-
Normal
%

Change
 2013   %
Change

2014 vs.
2013
 Weather-
Normal
%

Change
 

Retail Deliveries(b)(a)

                  

Retail sales

  57,613   49,767   15.8  (0.1)%   54,239   (8.2)%   (0.1)%    59,003     62,734     (5.9)%   3.3  57,613     8.9  2.2

Transportation and other

  28,089   26,687   5.3  0.5  28,204   (5.4)%   (4.8)%    27,879     27,208     2.5  1.2  28,089     (3.1)%   (1.0)% 
 

 

  

 

    

 

     

 

   

 

     

 

    

Total Gas Deliveries

  85,702   76,454   12.1  0.1  82,443   (7.3)%   (1.6)% 

Total natural gas deliveries

   86,882     89,942     (3.4)%   2.6  85,702     4.9  1.2
 

 

  

 

    

 

     

 

   

 

     

 

    

 

  As of December 31,   As of December 31, 

Number of Gas Customers

  2013   2012   2011   2015   2014   2013 

Residential

   458,356    454,502    451,382    467,263     462,663     458,356  

Commercial & industrial

   42,174    41,836    41,373    43,160     42,686     42,174  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total Retail

   500,530    496,338    492,755 

Total retail

   510,423     505,349     500,530  

Transportation

   909    903    879    827     855     909  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total

   501,439    497,241    493,634    511,250     506,204     501,439  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

Gas revenue

  2013   2012   % Change
2013 vs. 2012
 2011   % Change
2012 vs. 2011
   2015   2014   %
Change

2015 vs.
2014
   2013   %
Change

2014 vs.
2013
 

Retail Sales(a)

                   

Retail sales

  $562    $509     10.4 $576     (11.6)%   $511    $608     (16.0)%    $562     8.2

Transportation and other

   38    37    2.7  35    5.7   35     38     (7.9)%     38     —  
  

 

   

 

    

 

     

 

   

 

     

 

   

Total Gas Revenues

  $600    $546     9.9 $611     (10.6)% 

Total natural gas operating revenue

  $546    $646  ��  (15.5)%    $600     7.7
  

 

   

 

    

 

     

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

(a)Reflects delivery volumes and revenuesrevenue from customers purchasing natural gas directly from PECO and customers purchasing natural gas from a competitive natural gas supplier as all customers are assessed distribution charges. For customers purchasing natural gas from PECO, revenue also reflects the cost of natural gas.

 

136


Results of Operations—BGE

 

  2013 2012 Favorable
(unfavorable)
2013 vs. 2012
variance
 2011 Favorable
(unfavorable)
2012 vs. 2011
variance
   2015 2014 Favorable
(unfavorable)
2015 vs. 2014
variance
 2013 Favorable
(unfavorable)
2014 vs. 2013
variance
 

Operating revenues

  $3,065  $2,735  $330  $3,068  $(333

Operating revenue

  $3,135   $3,165   $(30 $3,065   $100  

Purchased power and fuel expense

   1,421   1,369   (52  1,593   224    1,305    1,417    112    1,421    4  
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense(a)

   1,644   1,366   278   1,475   (109   1,830    1,748    82    1,644    104  
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other operating expenses

            

Operating and maintenance

   634   728   94   680   (48   683    717    34    634    (83

Depreciation and amortization

   348   298   (50  274   (24   366    371    5    348    (23

Taxes other than income

   213   208   (5  207   (1   224    221    (3  213    (8
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total other operating expenses

   1,195   1,234   39   1,161   (73   1,273    1,309    36    1,195    (114
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Gain on sales of assets

   1    —      1    —      —    
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Operating income

   449   132   317   314   (182   558    439    119    449    (10
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

            

Interest expense, net

   (122  (144  22   (129  (15   (99  (106  7    (122  16  

Other, net

   17   23   (6  26   (3   18    18    —      17    1  
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

   (105  (121  16   (103  (18   (81  (88  7    (105  17  
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Income before income taxes

   344   11   333   211   (200   477    351    126    344    7  

Income taxes

   134   7   (127  75   68    189    140    (49  134    (6
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net income

   210   4   206   136   (132   288    211    77    210    1  

Preference stock dividends

   13   13   —     13   —      13    13    —      13    —    
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net income (loss) attributable to common shareholder

  $197  $(9 $206  $123  $(132

Net income attributable to common shareholder

  $275   $198   $77   $197   $1  
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)BGE evaluates its operating performance using the measures of revenuesrevenue net of purchased power expense for electric sales and revenuesrevenue net of fuel expense for gas sales. BGE believes revenuesrevenue net of purchased power and fuel expense are useful measurements of its performance because they provide information that can be used to evaluate its net revenuesrevenue from operations. BGE has included the analysis below as a complement to the financial information provided in accordance with GAAP. However, revenuesrevenue net of purchased power and fuel expense figures are not a presentation defined under GAAP and may not be comparable to other companies’ presentations or more useful than the GAAP information provided elsewhere in this report.

 

Net Income Attributable to Common Shareholder

 

Year Ended December 31, 20132015 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012.2014. TheNet income attributable to common shareholder was higher primarily due to an increase in net income was driven primarily by higher distribution rates as a result of the 2012 rate order issued by MDPSC and decreased operating revenuesRevenue net of purchased power and fuel expense in 2012 related to the accrualas a result of the residential customerDecember 2014 electric and gas distribution rate credit providedorder issued by the MDPSC, an increase in transmission formula rate revenues and a reduction in Operating and maintenance expense as a conditionresult of the MDPSC’s approval of Exelon’s merger with Constellation. Additionally, the increasea decrease in net income was also driven by higher operatingbad debt expense and maintenance expenses in 2012, primarily related to BGE’s accrual of its portion of the charitable contributions to be provided as a condition of the MDPSC’s approval of the merger and lower storm restoration costs in 2013.the BGE service territory.

 

Year Ended December 31, 20122014 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011.2013. The decreaseNet income attributable to common shareholder remained relatively consistent primarily due to an increase in net income was driven primarily by decreased operating revenues

Revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense related to the residential customer rate credit provided as a conditionresult of the MDPSC’s approval of Exelon’s merger with Constellation. The decreaseDecember 2013 and 2014 electric and gas distribution rate orders issued by the MDPSC offset by increases in net income was also driven by increased operatingOperating and maintenance expenses, primarily related to BGE’s accrual of its portion of the charitable contributions to be provided as a condition of the MDPSC’s approval of the merger as well

137


as merger transaction costs,expense and increased depreciation and amortizationDepreciation expense. None of the customer rate credit, the charitable contributions, or the transaction costs are recoverable from BGE’s customers.

 

Operating RevenuesRevenue Net of Purchased Power and Fuel Expense

 

There are certain drivers to operatingOperating revenue that are offset by their impact on purchasedPurchased power expense and fuel expense, such as commodity procurement costs and programs allowing customers to select a competitive electric or natural gas supplier. Electric and gas revenuesrevenue and purchasedPurchased power and fuel expense are affected by fluctuations in commodity procurement costs. BGE’s electric and natural gas rates charged to customers are subject to periodic adjustments that are designed to recover or refund the difference between the actual cost of purchased electric power and purchased natural gas and the amount included in rates in accordance with the MDPSC’s market-based SOS and gas commodity programs, respectively.

 

BGE is obligated to provide market-based SOS to all of its electric customers. The SOS rates charged recover BGE’s wholesale power supply costs and include an administrative fee. The administrative fee includes a shareholder return component, which for residential SOS customers is being returned to residential distribution customers through December 31, 2016, and an incremental cost component. Bidding to supply BGE’s market-based SOS occurs through a competitive bidding process approved by the MDPSC. Successful bidders, which may include Generation, will execute contracts with BGE for terms of three months or two years. BGE is obligated by the MDPSC to provide several variations of SOS to commercial and industrial customers depending on customer load. Charges incurred for electric supply procured through contracts with Generation are included in Purchased power from affiliates on BGE’s Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

The number of customers electing to select a competitive electric generation supplier affects electric SOS revenuesrevenue and purchased power expense. The number of customers electing to select a competitive natural gas supplier affects gas cost adjustment revenuesrevenue and purchased natural gas expense. All BGE customers have the choice to purchase energy from a competitive electric generation supplier and/or natural gas from a competitive natural gas supplier. This customer choice of electric generation suppliers does not impact the volume of deliveries, but affects revenue collected from customers related to SOS. The number of retail customers purchasing electricity from a competitive electric generation supplier was 399,000, 362,000 and 314,000 at December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively, representing 32%, 29% and 25% of total retail customers, respectively.

Retail deliveries purchased from competitive electric generation and natural gas suppliers represented 61%, 60%(as a percentage of kWh and 58% of BGE’s retail kWhmmcf sales, for the years endedrespectively) at December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 2012 and 2011, respectively. The numberconsisted of retailthe following:

   For the Years Ended December 31, 
   2015  2014  2013 

Electric

   61  60  61

Natural Gas

   56  53  54

Retail customers purchasing electric generation and natural gas from a competitive electric generation and natural gas supplier was 172,000, 143,000 and 118,000suppliers at December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 2012 and 2011, respectively, representing 26%, 22% and 18%consisted of total retail customers, respectively. Retail deliveries purchased from competitive natural gas suppliers represented 54%, 56% and 52% of BGE’s retail mmcf sales for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively.following:

 

   December 31, 2015  December 31, 2014  December 31, 2013 
   Number of
Customers
   % of total retail
customers
  Number of
Customers
   % of total retail
customers
  Number of
Customers
   % of total retail
customers
 

Electric

   343,000     27  364,000     29  399,000     32

Natural Gas

   154,000     23  161,000     25  172,000     26

The changes in BGE’s operating revenuesOperating revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense for the year ended December 31, 20132015 compared to the same period in 20122014 and for the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to the same period in 2013, respectively, consisted of the following:

 

   Increase (Decrease) 
   Electric   Gas   Total 

2012 Residential customer rate credit(a)

  $82   $31   $113 

Pricing

   69    24    93 

Regulatory program cost recovery

   36    6    42 

Other

   26    4    30 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total increase

  $213   $65   $278 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)In accordance with the MDPSC order approving Exelon’s merger with Constellation, the residential customer rate credit is not recoverable from BGE’s customers. Exelon made a $66 million equity contribution to BGE in the second quarter of 2012 to fund the after-tax amount of the rate credit as directed in the MDPSC order approving the merger transaction.
   2015   2014 
   Increase (Decrease)   Increase (Decrease) 
   Electric   Gas   Total   Electric  Gas  Total 

Distribution rate increase

  $20    $35    $55    $57   $28   $85  

Regulatory required programs

   4     2     6     13    (1  12  

Transmission revenue

   11     —       11     10    —      10  

Other

   10     —       10     (13  10    (3
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total increase

  $45    $37    $82    $67   $37   $104  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

Revenue Decoupling. The demand for electricity and gas is affected by weather and usage conditions. The MDPSC has allowed BGE to record a monthly adjustment to its electric and gas distribution revenuesrevenue from all residential customers, commercial electric customers, the majority of large industrial electric customers, and all firm service gas customers to eliminate the effect of abnormal weather and usage patterns per customer on BGE’s electric and gas distribution volumes, thereby recovering a specified dollar amount of distribution revenuesrevenue per customer, by customer class,

138


regardless of changes in consumption levels. This allows BGE to recognize revenuesrevenue at MDPSC-approved levels per customer, regardless of what BGE’s actual distribution volumes were for a billing period. Therefore, while these revenues arethis revenue is affected by customer growth, theyit will not be affected by actual weather or usage conditions. BGE bills or credits impacted customers in subsequent months for the difference between approved revenue levels under revenue decoupling and actual customer billings.

 

Heating and cooling degree days are quantitative indices that reflect the demand for energy needed to heat a home or business. Normal weather is determined based on historical average heating and cooling degree days for a 30-year period in BGE’s service territory. The changes in heating and cooling degree days in BGE’s service territory for the year ended December 31, 20132015 compared to the same period in 20122014 and for the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to the same period in 2013, respectively, and normal weather consisted of the following:

 

  For the Year Ended
December 31,
   Normal   % Change 

Heating and Cooling Degree-Days

  2013   2012   Normal   % Change   2015   2014   2015 vs. 2014 From Normal 
  From 2012 From Normal 

Twelve Months Ended December 31,

                  

Heating Degree-Days

   4,744     3,960     4,661    19.8  1.8   4,666     5,091     4,663     (8.3)%   0.1

Cooling Degree-Days

   869     1,022     864    (15.0)%   0.6   924     732     875     26.2  5.6

   For the Year Ended
December 31,
   Normal   % Change 

Heating and Cooling Degree-Days

  2014   2013     2014 vs. 2013  From Normal 

Heating Degree-Days

   5,091     4,744     4,662     7.3  9.2

Cooling Degree-Days

   732     869     876     (15.8)%   (16.4)% 

 

2012 Residential CustomerDistribution Rate Credit.Increase

. The increase in operating revenues net of purchased power and fuel expensedistribution revenue for the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to the same period in 2012 was due to the residential customer rate credit provided in 2012 as a result of the MDPSC’s order approving Exelon’s merger with Constellation.

Pricing.

The increase in operating revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense as a result of pricing for the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to the same period in 20122015 was primarily due to the impact of the new electric and natural gas distribution rates charged to customers that became effective February 23, 2013 andin December 13, 20132014 in accordance with the MDPSC approved electric and natural gas distribution rate case order.

The increase in distribution revenue for the year ended December 31, 2014 was primarily due to the impact of new electric and natural gas distribution rates charged to customers that became

effective in December 2013 and 2014, in accordance with the MDPSC approved electric and natural gas distribution rate case orders. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further information.

 

Regulatory Required Programs.

This represents the change in revenuesrevenue collected under approved riders to recover costs incurred for the energy efficiency and demand response programs as well as administrative and commercial and industrial customer bad debt costs for SOS. The riders are designed to provide full recovery, as well as a return in certain instances. The costs of these programs are included in operatingOperating and maintenance expense, depreciationDepreciation and amortization expense and taxesTaxes other than income taxes. The increase in revenues duringBGE’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

Transmission Revenue.Under a FERC-approved formula, transmission revenue varies from year to year based upon fluctuations in the yearunderlying costs, investments being recovered and other billing determinants. During the years ended December 31, 2013 compared to2015 and 2014, the same periodincrease in 2012transmission revenue was primarily due to higher Operating and maintenance expense and increased capital investment. See Operating and Maintenance Expense below and Note 3—Regulatory Matters of the recovery of higher energy efficiency program costs.Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Other.

Other revenues increased during the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to the same period in 2012. Other revenues,revenue, which can vary from period to period, includeincludes miscellaneous revenuesrevenue such as service application and late payment fees.

139


The changes in BGE’s operating revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to the same period in 2011 consisted of the following:

   Increase (Decrease) 
   Electric  Gas  Total 

2012 Residential customer rate credit

  $(82 $(31 $(113

Commodity margin

   (1  (5  (6

Regulatory program cost recovery

   15   4   19 

Transmission

   11   —     11 

Other

   (13  (7  (20
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total decrease

  $(70 $(39 $(109
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

The changes in heating and cooling degree days for the twelve months ended 2012 and 2011, consisted of the following:

Heating and Cooling Degree-Days (a)

  2012   2011   Normal   % Change 
        From 2011  From Normal 

Twelve Months Ended December 31,

                   

Heating Degree-Days

   3,960     4,326     4,711    (8.5)%   (15.9)% 

Cooling Degree-Days

   1,022     1,035     858    (1.3)%   19.1

2012 Residential Customer Rate Credit

The residential customer rate credit provided as a result of the MDPSC’s order approving Exelon’s merger with Constellation decreased operating revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense for the year ended December 31, 2012.

Commodity Margin

The commodity margin for both electric and gas revenues decreased during the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to the same period in 2011 due to an increase in the number of customers using competitive suppliers in 2012.

Regulatory Required Programs

This represents the change in revenues collected under approved riders to recover costs incurred for the energy efficiency and demand response programs as well as administrative and commercial and industrial customer bad debt costs for SOS. The riders are designed to provide full recovery, as well as a return in certain instances. The costs of these programs are included in operating and maintenance expense, depreciation and amortization expense and taxes other than income taxes. The increase in revenues during the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to the same period in 2011 was due to the recovery of higher energy efficiency programs costs.

Transmission

Transmission revenues increased during the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to the same period in 2011 due to higher revenue requirements. BGE’s transmission rates are established based on a FERC-approved formula. The rates also include transmission investment incentives approved by FERC in a number of orders covering various new transmission investment projects since 2007.

140


Other

Other revenues decreased during the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to the same period in 2011. Other revenues, which can vary from period to period, include miscellaneous revenues such as service application and late payment fees.

 

Operating and Maintenance Expense

 

The changes in operating and maintenance expense for 20132015 compared to 20122014 and 20122014 compared to 20112013 consisted of the following:

 

   Increase
(Decrease)
2013 vs. 2012
  Increase
(Decrease)
2012 vs. 2011
 

Charitable contributions(a)

  $(28 $28 

Storm costs deferral(b)

   —     16 

Storm-related costs(c)

   (62  7 

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefits expense

   —     6 

Labor, other benefits, contracting and materials

   20   (10

Merger transaction costs (a)

   (21  (9

Other

   (3  10 
  

 

 

  

 

 

 
   
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

(Decrease) Increase in operating and maintenance expense

  $(94 $48 
  

 

 

  

 

 

 
   Increase
(Decrease)
2015 vs. 2014
  Increase
(Decrease)
2014 vs. 2013
 

Baseline

   

Labor, other benefits, contracting and materials

  $12   $22  

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefits expense

   (1  8  

Storm-related costs(a)

   (21  21  

Uncollectible accounts expense(b)

   (49  17  

Merger integration costs

   3    5  

Other

   22    10  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

(Decrease) increase in operating and maintenance expense

  $(34 $83  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

(a)During the first quarterStorm-related costs decreased due to lack of 2012, BGE accrued $28 million in charitable contributions as a result of BGE’s merger-related commitments. The charitable contribution accrual and merger costs are not recoverable from BGE’s customers.
(b)During the first quarter of 2011, the MDPSC issued a comprehensive rate order permitting the deferral of incremental distribution service restoration expenses associated with 2010major storms as a regulatory asset.
(c)On June 29, 2012, a “Derecho” storm caused extensive damage to BGE’s electric distribution system and created power outages that lasted multiple days. As a result, BGE incurred $62 million of incremental costs duringfor the year ended December 31, 2012, of which $20 million are capital costs. In2015 compared to the fourth quarter of 2012, BGE incurred $38 million of incremental costs as a result of Hurricane Sandy, of which $14 million are capital costs. These amounts comparesame period in 2014.
(b)Uncollectible accounts expense decreased primarily due to $40 million of incremental expenses incurred duringimproved customer behavior and favorable weather for the third quarter of 2011 associated with Hurricane Irene, of which $25 million are capital costs, and $14 million of incremental expenses, of which $3 are capital costs, incurred duringyear ended December 31, 2015 compared to the first quarter of 2011.same period in 2014.

Conduit Lease with City of Baltimore

On September 23, 2015, the Baltimore City Board of Estimates approved an increase in rental fees for access to the Baltimore City conduit system effective November 1, 2015, which is expected to result in an increase to operating and maintenance expense of approximately $24 million in 2016 subject to an annual increase based on the Consumer Price Index. On October 16, 2015, BGE filed a lawsuit against the City in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City to protect its customers from any improper use by the City of the conduit fee revenues and to place constraints on the City’s ability to set the conduit fee in the future.

Among the relief sought by BGE was a preliminary injunction preventing the City from enforcing its substantial increase in the conduit fee rate during the course of the litigation. A hearing was held in the Circuit Court for Baltimore County on December 15, 2015. While BGE’s motion for preliminary injunction was denied, the Court’s decision was premised upon several important concessions or acknowledgments made by the City in its written papers and at the hearing. Most importantly, the City conceded that it can charge BGE only for the actual costs of conduit maintenance and that a true-up process is required to the extent that the City fails to spend the amount collected for conduit maintenance.

As part of its electric and gas distribution rate case filed on November 6, 2015, and as amended on January 5, 2016, BGE is proposing to recover the annual increase in conduit fees, effective November 1, 2015 of approximately $30 million through a surcharge. BGE cannot predict if the MDPSC will approve BGE’s request for a conduit fee surcharge.

 

Depreciation and Amortization Expense

 

The changes in depreciation and amortization expense for 20132015 compared to 20122014 and 20122014 compared to 20112013 consisted of the following:

 

  Increase
(Decrease)
2013 vs. 2012
   Increase
(Decrease)
2012 vs. 2011
   Increase
(Decrease)
2015 vs. 2014
 Increase
(Decrease)
2014 vs. 2013
 

Depreciation expense(a)

   $18   $20   $2   $25  

Regulatory asset amortization(b)

   31    6    (6  (1

Other

   1    (2   (1  (1
  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Increase in depreciation and amortization expense

   $50   $24 

(Decrease) increase in depreciation and amortization expense

  $(5 $23  
  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Deprecation and amortizationDepreciation expense increased due to higher plant balancesongoing capital expenditures during the year over year.ended December 31, 2015 compared to 2014 and 2014 compared 2013. The increase for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to 2014 was offset by the effect of revised depreciation rates established in accordance with the MDPSC approved December 2014 electric and natural gas distribution rate case order.
(b)Regulatory asset amortization increaseddecreased for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to the same period in 2014 due to higher energy efficiency anda reduction in regulatory asset amortization related to demand response programs expenditures year over yearand revised recovery periods for certain regulatory assets in accordance with the MDPSC approved December 2014 electric and natural gas distribution rate case order.

 

141


Taxes Other Than Income

 

The change in taxes other than income for 20132015 compared to 20122014 and 20122014 compared to 20112013 consisted of the following:

 

  Increase
(Decrease)
2013 vs. 2012
 Increase
(Decrease)
2012 vs. 2011
   Increase
(Decrease)
2015 vs. 2014
 Increase
(Decrease)
2014 vs. 2013
 

Property tax

  $(2 $4   $3   $2  

Franchise tax

   7   (1   1    4  

Other

   —     (2   (1  2  
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Increase in taxes other than income

  $5  $1   $3   $8  
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Interest Expense, Net

 

Year Ended December 31, 2013 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2012.The decrease in interestInterest expense, net for 20132015 compared to 2012 was primarily due2014 and 2014 compared to the interest recorded in 2012 on prior year tax liabilities and lower effective interest rates as a result2013 consisted of the refinancing of debt at a lower interest rate in 2013.following:

 

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2011. The increase in interest expense, net in 2012 compared to 2011 was primarily due to higher outstanding debt balances and interest recorded in 2012 on prior year tax liabilities.

   Increase
(Decrease)
2015 vs. 2014
  Increase
(Decrease)
2014 vs. 2013
 

Interest expense on debt (including financing trusts)

  $(4 $(10

Interest expense related to capitalization of interest / AFUDC

   (2  (6

Interest expense related to uncertain tax positions

   (1  —    
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Decrease in interest expense, net

  $(7 $(16
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

Effective Income Tax Rate

 

BGE’s effective income tax rates for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 2012were 39.6%, 39.9% and 2011 were 39.0%, 63.6% and 35.5%, respectively. See Note 1415—Income Taxes of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding the components of the effective income tax rates.

 

BGE Electric Operating Statistics and Revenue Detail

 

Retail Deliveries to customers (in GWhs)

 2013 2012 % Change
2013 vs. 2012
 Weather-
Normal %
Change
 2011 % Change
2012 vs. 2011
 Weather-
Normal %

Change
  2015 2014 % Change
2015 vs. 2014
 Weather-
Normal %
Change
 2013 % Change
2014 vs. 2013
 Weather-
Normal %
Change
 

Retail Deliveries(a)

              

Residential

  13,077   12,719   2.8  n.m.    12,652   0.5  n.m.    12,598    12,974    (2.9)%   n.m.    13,077    (0.8)%   n.m.  

Small commercial & industrial(c)

  3,035   2,990   1.5  n.m.    3,023   (1.1)%   n.m.    3,119    3,086    1.1  n.m.    3,035    1.7  n.m.  

Large commercial & industrial(c)

  14,339   14,956   (4.1)%   n.m.    15,729   (4.9)%   n.m.    14,293    14,191    0.7  n.m.    14,339    (1.0)%   n.m.  

Public authorities & electric railroads

  317   329   (3.6)%   n.m.    405   (18.8)%   n.m.    294    311    (5.5)%   n.m.    317    (1.9)%   n.m.  
 

 

  

 

    

 

    

 

  

 

    

 

   

Total Electric Retail Deliveries

  30,768   30,994   (0.7)%   n.m.    31,809   (2.6)%   n.m.  

Total electric deliveries

  30,304    30,562    (0.8)%   n.m.    30,768    (0.7)%   n.m.  
 

 

  

 

    

 

    

 

  

 

    

 

   

 

  As of December 31,   As of December 31, 

Number of Electric Customers

  2013   2012   2011   2015   2014   2013 

Residential

   1,120,431    1,116,233    1,116,401    1,137,934     1,125,369     1,120,431  

Small commercial & industrial(c)

   112,850    112,994    113,026    113,138     112,972     112,850  

Large commercial & industrial(c)

   11,652    11,580    11,365    11,906     11,730     11,652  

Public authorities & electric railroads

   292    319    326    285     290     292  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total

   1,245,225    1,241,126    1,241,118    1,263,263     1,250,361     1,245,225  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

142


Electric Revenue

  2013   2012   % Change
2013 vs. 2012
 2011   % Change
2012 vs. 2011
   2015   2014   % Change
2015 vs. 2014
 2013   % Change
2014 vs. 2013
 

Retail Sales(a)

                  

Residential

  $1,404    $1,274     10.2 $1,456     (12.5)%   $1,449    $1,404     3.2 $1,404     —  

Small commercial & industrial(c)

   257    248    3.6  268    (7.5)%    273     271     0.7  257     5.4

Large commercial & industrial (c)

   439    393    11.7  416    (5.5)%    469     491     (4.5)%   439     11.8

Public authorities & electric railroads

   31    30    3.3  29    3.4   32     32     —    31     3.2
  

 

   

 

    

 

     

 

   

 

    

 

   

Total Retail

   2,131    1,945    9.6  2,169    (10.3)% 

Total retail

   2,223     2,198     1.1  2,131     3.1
  

 

   

 

    

 

     

 

   

 

    

 

   

Other Revenue(b)

   274    238    15.1  152    56.6

Other revenue

   267     262     1.9  274     (4.4)% 
  

 

   

 

    

 

     

 

   

 

    

 

   

Total Electric Revenues

  $2,405   $2,183    10.2 $2,321     (5.9)% 

Total electric operating revenue

  $2,490    $2,460     1.2 $2,405     2.3
  

 

   

 

    

 

     

 

   

 

    

 

   

 

(a)Reflects delivery revenuesrevenue and volumes from customers purchasing electricity directly from BGE and customers purchasing electricity from a competitive electric generation supplier as all customers are assessed distribution charges. For customers purchasing electricity from BGE, revenue also reflects the cost of energy and transmission.
(b)Other revenue includes wholesale transmission revenue and late payment charges.
(c)Certain commercial and industrial (C&I) customers were reclassified from small C&I to large C&I in prior years to conform to the current year’s classification of C&I customers.

 

BGE Gas Operating Statistics and Revenue Detail

 

Deliveries to customers (in mmcf)

 2013 2012 % Change
2013 vs. 2012
 Weather-
Normal %
Change
 2011 % Change
2012 vs. 2011
 Weather-
Normal %
Change
  2015 2014   % Change
2015 vs. 2014
 Weather-
Normal %
Change
 2013 % Change
2014 vs. 2013
 Weather-
Normal %
Change
 

Retail Deliveries (d)(a)

               

Retail sales

  94,020   86,946   8.1  n.m.    94,800   (8.3)%   n.m.    96,618    99,194     (2.6)%   n.m.    94,020    5.5  n.m.  

Transportation and other(e)(c)

  12,210   15,751   (22.5)%   n.m.    16,436   (4.2)%   n.m.    6,238    9,242     (32.5)%   n.m.    12,210    (24.3)%   n.m.  
 

 

  

 

    

 

    

 

  

 

     

 

   

Total Gas Deliveries

  106,230   102,697   3.4  n.m.    111,236   (7.7)%   n.m.  

Total natural gas deliveries

  102,856    108,436     (5.1)%   n.m.    106,230    2.1  n.m.  
 

 

  

 

    

 

    

 

  

 

     

 

   

 

  As of December 31,   As of December 31, 

Number of Gas Customers

  2013   2012   2011   2015   2014   2013 

Residential

   611,532    610,827    608,943    616,994     609,626     611,532  

Commercial & industrial

   44,162    44,228    44,211    44,119     44,200     44,162  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total

   655,694    655,055    653,154    661,113     653,826     655,694  
  

 

   

 

  ��

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

Gas revenue

  2013   2012   % Change
2013 vs. 2012
 2011   % Change
2012 vs. 2011
   2015   2014   % Change
2015 vs. 2014
 2013   % Change
2014 vs. 2013
 

Retail Sales(d)(a)

                  

Retail sales

  $592    $494     19.8 $580     (14.8)%   $607    $622     (2.4)%  $592     5.1

Transportation and other(e)(c)

   68    58    17.2  92    (37.0)%    38     83     (54.2)%   68     22.1
  

 

   

 

    

 

     

 

   

 

    

 

   

Total Gas Revenues

  $660    $552     19.6 $672     (17.9)% 

Total natural gas operating revenue

  $645    $705     (8.5)%  $660     6.8
  

 

   

 

    

 

     

 

   

 

    

 

   

 

(d)(a)Reflects delivery revenuesrevenue and volumes from customers purchasing natural gas directly from BGE and customers purchasing natural gas from a competitive natural gas supplier as all customers are assessed distribution charges. The cost of natural gas is charged to customers purchasing natural gas from BGE.
(e)(b)Transportation and other gas revenue includes off-system revenue of 6,238 mmcfs ($35 million), 9,242 mmcfs ($72 million), and 12,210 mmcfs ($55 million), 15,751 mmcfs ($51 million), and 16,436 mmcfs ($82 million) for the years ended 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011,2013, respectively.
(c)Other revenue includes operating revenue with affiliates.

143


Liquidity and Capital Resources

 

Exelon’s and Generation’s prior year activity presented below includes the activity of Constellation, and BGE in the case of Exelon,CENG, from the mergerintegration date effective date of March 12, 2012 through December 31, 2012. Exelon’sApril 1, 2014. All results included throughout the liquidity and Generation’s activity for 2011 is unadjusted for the effects of the merger. BGE’s prior year activitycapital resources section are presented below includes its activity for the 12 months ended December 31, 2012 and 2011.on a GAAP basis.

 

The Registrants’ operating and capital expenditures requirements are provided by internally generated cash flows from operations as well as funds from external sources in the capital markets and through bank borrowings. The Registrants’ businesses are capital intensive and require considerable capital resources. Each Registrant’s access to external financing on reasonable terms depends on its credit ratings and current overall capital market business conditions, including that of the utility industry in general. If these conditions deteriorate to the extent that the Registrants no longer have access to the capital markets at reasonable terms, Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE have access to unsecured revolving credit facilities with aggregate bank commitments of $0.5 billion, $5.3 billion, $1.0$1 billion, $0.6 billion and $0.6 billion, respectively. The Registrants’Exelon Corporate, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE’s syndicated revolving credit facilities areexpire in place until 2018.2018 and 2019. In addition, Generation has $0.4 billion in bilateral facilities with banks which expire inhave various expirations between March 2016 and January 2015, December 2015 and March 2016.2019. The Registrants utilize their credit facilities to support their commercial paper programs, provide for other short-term borrowings and to issue letters of credit. See the “Credit Matters” section below for further discussion. The Registrants expect cash flows to be sufficient to meet operating expenses, financing costs and capital expenditure requirements.

 

The Registrants primarily use their capital resources, including cash, to fund capital requirements, including construction expenditures, retire debt, pay dividends, fund pension and other postretirement benefit obligations and invest in new and existing ventures. The Registrants spend a significant amount of cash on capital improvements and construction projects that have a long-term return on investment. Additionally, ComEd, PECO and BGE operate in rate-regulated environments in which the amount of new investment recovery may be delayed or limited and where such recovery takes place over an extended period of time.

See Note 1314—Debt and Credit Agreements of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion of the Registrants’ debt and credit agreements.

 

PHI Merger Financing

Exelon has raised cash to fund the all-cash purchase price, acquisition and integration related costs, and merger commitments, through the issuance of $4.2 billion of debt (of which $3.3 billion remains after execution of the exchange offer, see Note 14—Debt and Credit Agreements for further information on the exchange), $1.15 billion of junior subordinated notes in the form of 23 million equity units, the issuance of $1.9 billion of common stock, cash proceeds of $1.8 billion from asset sales primarily at Generation (after-tax proceeds of approximately $1.4 billion) and the remaining balance from cash on hand and/or short-term borrowings available to Exelon. Exelon will have sufficient cash to fund the all-cash purchase price, acquisition and integration related costs, and merger commitments. See Note 14—Debt and Credit Agreements and Note 19—Shareholder’s Equity for further information on the debt and equity issuances. In the event the PHI merger is terminated, the Board of Directors could direct Exelon to use its existing cash on hand to retire debt, to return capital to shareholders or for other general corporate purposes.

Cash Flows from Operating Activities

 

General

 

Generation’s cash flows from operating activities primarily result from the sale of electric energy and energy-related products and services to customers. Generation’s future cash flows from operating

activities may be affected by future demand for and market prices of energy and its ability to continue to produce and supply power at competitive costs as well as to obtain collections from customers.

 

ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s cash flows from operating activities primarily result from the transmission and distribution of electricity and, in the case of PECO and BGE, gas distribution services. ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s distribution services are provided to an established and diverse base of retail customers. ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s future cash flows may be affected by the economy, weather conditions, future legislative initiatives, future regulatory proceedings with respect to their rates or operations, competitive suppliers, and their ability to achieve operating cost reductions.

 

See Notes 33—Regulatory Matters and 2223—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion of regulatory and legal proceedings and proposed legislation.

 

144


Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits

 

Management considers various factors when making pension funding decisions, including actuarially determined minimum contribution requirements under ERISA, contributions required to avoid benefit restrictions and at-risk status as defined by the Pension Protection Act of 2006, management of the pension obligation and regulatory implications. On July 6, 2012, President Obama signed into law the Moving Ahead for Progress in the Twenty-first Century Act, which contains a pension funding provision that results in lower pension contributions in the near term while increasing the premiums pension plans pay to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. Certain provisions of the law were applied in 2012 while others taketook effect in 2013. On August 8, 2014, this funding relief was extended for five years. On November 2, 2015 the funding relief was extended for an additional three years and premiums pension plans pay to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation were further increased. The estimated impacts of the law are reflected in the projected pension contributions below.

 

Exelon expects to contribute approximately $264make qualified pension plan contributions of $250 million to its qualified pension plans in 2014,2016, of which Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE expect to contribute $118$134 million, $119$30 million, $11$28 million and $0$31 million, respectively. Exelon’s and Generation’s expected qualified pension plan contributions above include $25 million related to the legacy CENG plans that will be funded by CENG as provided in an Employee Matters Agreement (EMA) between Exelon and CENG. Exelon’s non-qualified pension plans are not funded. Exelon expects to make non-qualified pension plan benefit payments of $21 million in 2016, of which Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE will make payments of $9 million, $2 million, $1 million and $1 million respectively. See Note 1617—Retirement Benefits of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for the Registrants’ 20132015 and 20122014 pension contributions.

 

To the extent interest rates decline significantly or the pension plans do not earn the expected asset return rates, annual pension contribution requirements in future years could increase. Additionally, the contributions above could change if Exelon changes its pension funding strategy.

Unlike the qualified pension plans, Exelon’s other postretirement benefit plans are not subject to regulatorystatutory minimum contribution requirements. Management considersrequirements and certain plans are not funded. Exelon’s management has historically considered several factors in determining the level of contributions to Exelon’sits funded other postretirement benefit plans, including levels of benefit claims paid and regulatory implications (amounts deemed prudent to meet regulatoryregulator expectations and best assure continued recovery). Exelon expects to contribute approximately $430 million to themake other postretirement benefit plan contributions, including benefit payments related to unfunded plans, of approximately $35 million in 2014,2016, of which Generation, ComEd, PECO, and BGE

expect to contribute $168$13 million, $197$3 million, $19$1 million, and $17$18 million, respectively. See Note 1617— Retirement Benefits of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for the Registrants’ 20132015 and 20122014 other postretirement benefit contributions.

 

See the “Contractual Obligations” section below for management’s estimated future pension and other postretirement benefits contributions.

 

Tax Matters

 

The Registrants’ future cash flows from operating activities may be affected by the following tax matters:

 

In the event of a fully successful IRS challenge to Exelon’s like-kind exchange position, Exelon would be required to either post a bond or pay the tax and interest for the tax years before the court to appeal the decision. If an adverse decision is reached in 2016, the potential tax and after-tax interest, exclusive of penalties, that could become payable may be as much as $860 million, of which approximately $300 million would be attributable to ComEd after consideration of Exelon’s agreement to hold ComEd harmless from any unfavorable impacts of the after-tax interest amounts on ComEd’s equity, and the balance at Exelon. It is expected that Exelon’s remaining tax years affected by the litigation will be settled following a final appellate decision which could take several years.

Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGEComEd expect to receive tax refunds of approximately $380$430 million, $60 million, $320 million, $10$190 million, and $20$260 million, respectively, between 2014 and 2015.in 2016. PECO expects to make tax payments of approximately $7 million related to IRS positions settling in 2016.

 

Given the current economic environment, stateState and local governments are facingcontinue to face increasing financial challenges, which may increase the risk of additional income tax levies, property taxes and other taxes.taxes or the imposition, extension or permanence of temporary tax levies.

 

In September 2012,On December 18, 2015, President Obama signed H.R. 2029, the Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes (PATH) Act. The Act included an extension of 50% bonus depreciation for 2015—2017. It also includes provisions for 40% and 30% bonus depreciation allowance for qualified property placed in service in 2018 and 2019, respectively. As a result of the 50% bonus depreciation extension for 2015, Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO, filed an application withand BGE are estimated to generate incremental cash in 2016 of approximately $690 million, $350 million, $220 million, $70 million, and $50 million, respectively. Furthermore, the IRS to change its methodextension of accounting for gas distribution repairs for the 2011 tax year. The newly adopted method results50% bonus depreciation resulted in a decrease to Generation’s Domestic Production Activities Deduction, reducing cash tax benefitbenefits and increasing income tax expense by approximately $65 million in 20122015. Due to the extension of bonus depreciation, ComEd’s 2015 revenue requirement decreased by approximately $38$10 million and $41 million at Exelon and PECO, respectively. Exelon currently anticipates that the IRS will issue industry guidance in the near future. See Note 3 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for discussion regarding the regulatory treatment of PECO’s tax benefits from the application of the method change.(after-tax).

145


The following table provides a summary of the major items affecting Exelon’s cash flows from operations for the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011:2013:

 

 2013 2012 2013 vs. 2012
Variance
 2011 2012 vs. 2011
Variance
   2015(c) 2014 2015 vs. 2014
Variance
 2013 2014 vs. 2013
Variance
 

Net income

 $1,729  $1,171  $558 ��$2,499  $(1,328  $2,250   $1,820   $430    1,729   $91  

Add (subtract):

           

Non-cash operating activities(a)

  4,159   5,588   (1,429  4,848   740    5,630    5,884    (254  4,159    1,725  

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit contributions

  (422  (462  40   (2,360  1,898    (502  (617  115    (422  (195

Income taxes

  883   544   339   492   52    97    (143  240    883    (1,026

Changes in working capital and other noncurrent assets and liabilities(b)

  (185  (731  546   (279  (452   (264  (806  542    (185  (621

Option premiums paid, net

  (36  (114  78   (3  (111

Counterparty collateral received (paid), net

  215   135   80   (344  479 

Option premiums received (paid), net

   58    38    20    (36  74  

Collateral received (posted), net

   347    (1,719  2,066    215    (1,934
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net cash flows provided by operations

 $6,343  $6,131  $212  $4,853  $1,278   $7,616   $4,457   $3,159   $6,343   $(1,886
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Represents depreciation, amortization, depletion and accretion, net fair value changes related to derivatives, deferred income taxes, provision for uncollectible accounts, pension and non-pension postretirement benefit expense, equity in earnings and losses of unconsolidated affiliates and investments, decommissioning-related items, stock compensation expense, impairment of long-lived assets, and other non-cash charges. See note 24 —Supplemental Financial Information for further detail on non-cash operating activity.
(b)Changes in working capital and other noncurrent assets and liabilities exclude the changes in commercial paper, income taxes and the current portion of long-term debt.
(c)On April 1, 2014, Generation assumed operational control of CENG’s nuclear fleet. As a result, the 2015 and 2014 activity includes CENG on a fully consolidated basis beginning April 1, 2014.

 

Cash flows provided by operations for 2013, 2012the year ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 20112013 by Registrant were as follows:

 

  2013   2012   2011   2015   2014   2013 

Exelon (a)

  $6,343   $6,131   $4,853   $7,616    $4,457    $6,343  

Generation(a)

   3,887    3,581    3,313    4,199     1,826     3,887  

ComEd

   1,218    1,334    836    1,896     1,326     1,218  

PECO

   747    878    818    770     712     747  

BGE(a)

   561    485    476    782     740     561  

 

(a)Exelon’sOn April 1, 2014, Generation assumed operational control of CENG’s nuclear fleet. As a result, the 2015 and Generation’s prior year2014 activity includes the activity of Constellation, and BGE in the case of Exelon, from the merger effective date of March 12, 2012 through December 31, 2012. Exelon’s and Generation’s activity for 2011 is unadjusted for the effects of the merger. BGE’s prior year activity includes its activity for the 12 months ended December 31, 2012 and 2011.CENG on a fully consolidated basis beginning April 1, 2014.

 

Changes in Exelon’s, Generation’s, ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s cash flows from operations were generally consistent with changes in each Registrant’s respective results of operations, as adjusted by changes in working capital in the normal course of business.business, except as discussed below. In addition, significant operating cash flow impacts for the Registrants for 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 20112013 were as follows:

 

Generation

 

During 2013, 2012 and 2011, Generation had net (payments) receipts of counterparty collateral of $162 million, $95 million and $(410) million, respectively. Net payments during 2013 and 2012 were primarily due to market conditions that resulted in changes to Generation’s net mark-to-market position. Depending upon whether Generation is in a net mark-to-market liability or asset position, collateral may be required to be posted with or collected from its counterparties. ThisIn addition, the collateral may beposting and collection requirements differ depending on whether the transactions are on an exchange or in various forms, such asthe OTC markets. During 2015, 2014 and 2013, Generation had net collections/(payments) of counterparty cash which may be obtained through the issuancecollateral of commercial paper, or letters of credit.

During 2013, 2012 and 2011, Generation’s accounts receivable from ComEd increased (decreased) by $(16)$407 million, $(15)$(1,748) million and $12$162 million, respectively, primarily due to market conditions that resulted in changes in receivables for energy purchases related to its SFC, ICC-approved RFP contracts and financial swap contract.

146


During 2013, 2012 and 2011, Generation’s accounts receivable from PECO increased (decreased) by $(17) million, $17 million and $(210) million, respectively.

Generation’s net mark-to-market position, as well as Exelon’s decision to post more cash collateral in 2014 compared to using letters of credit in 2015 to support the PHI merger financing.

 

During 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011, Generation’s accounts receivable from BGE increased (decreased) by $(4) million, $23 million and $(13) million, respectively.

During 2013, 2012 and 2011, Generation had net paymentscollections/(payments) of approximately $36$58 million, $114$38 million and $3$(36) million, respectively, related to purchases and sales of options. The level of option activity in a given year may vary due to several factors, including changes in market conditions as well as changes in hedging strategy.

 

ComEd

 

During 2015, 2014 and 2013, 2012 and 2011, ComEd’s net payables tofor Generation for energy purchases related to its supplier forward contract, ICC-approved RFP contracts and financial swap contract settlements increased increased/(decreased) by $(16)$(28) million, $(15)$5 million and $12 million, respectively. During 2013, 2012 and 2011, ComEd’s payables to other energy suppliers for energy purchases increased (decreased) by $35 million, $20 million and $(43) million, respectively.

During 2013, 2012, and 2012, ComEd received $53 million, $37 million and $63 million, respectively, of incremental cash collateral from PJM due to variations in its energy transmission activity levels. As of December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, ComEd had cash collateral remaining at PJM of $0M and $53 million, respectively.

PECO

During 2013, 2012 and 2011, PECO’s payables to Generation for energy purchases increased (decreased) by $(17) million, $17 million and $(210)$(16) million, respectively, and payables to other energy suppliers for energy purchases increased by $2 million, $27 million and $35 million, respectively.

During 2015, ComEd posted $31 million of cash collateral to PJM. During 2014, ComEd posted no cash collateral to PJM. ComEd’s collateral posted with PJM has increased year over year primarily due to higher RPM credit requirements and higher PJM billings resulting from increased load being served by ComEd as a result of City of Chicago customers switching back to ComEd.

PECO

During 2015, 2014 and 2013, PECO’s payables to Generation for energy purchases increased/(decreased) by $33$7 million, $(22)$(9) million and $97$(17) million, respectively, and payables to other energy suppliers for energy purchases increased/(decreased) by $(38) million, $10 million and $39 million, respectively.

 

BGE

 

During 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011,2013, BGE’s payables to Generation for energy purchases increased increased/(decreased) by $(4)$(9) million, $23$13 million and $(13)$(4) million, respectively, and payables to other energy suppliers for energy purchases increased (decreased)decreased by $5$(25) million, $40$(7) million and $(60)$(12) million, respectively.

 

Cash Flows from Investing Activities

 

Cash flows used in investing activities for 2013, 2012,the year ended December 31, 2015, 2014, and 20112013 by Registrant were as follows:

 

  2013 2012 2011   2015 2014 2013 

Exelon(f)(a)

  $(5,394 $(4,576 $(4,603  $(7,822 $(4,599 $(5,394

Generation(f)(a)

   (2,916  (2,629  (3,077   (4,069  (1,767  (2,916

ComEd

   (1,387  (1,212  (1,007   (2,362  (1,655  (1,387

PECO

   (531  (328  (557   (588  (649  (531

BGE(f)

   (571  (573  (592   (675  (622  (571

(a)On April 1, 2014, Generation assumed operational control of CENG’s nuclear fleet. As a result, the 2015 and 2014 activity includes CENG on a fully consolidated basis beginning April 1, 2014.

Generation

 

147Generation has entered into several agreements to acquire equity interests in privately held development stage entities which develop energy-related technology. The agreements contain a series of scheduled investment commitments, including in-kind services contributions. There are approximately $327 million of anticipated expenditures remaining through 2018 to fund anticipated planned capital and operating needs of the associated companies, of which up to $172 million will be contributed by a non-controlling interest holder. See Note 23—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further details of Generation’s equity interests.


Capital expenditures by Registrant for 2013, 2012the year ended December 31, 2015, 2014, and 20112013 and projected amounts for 20142016 are as follows:

 

  Projected
2014(b)
   2013   2012   2011 (a)   Projected
2016(a)
   2015   2014   2013 

Exelon(f)(b)

  $5,475   $5,395   $5,789   $4,042   $7,600    $7,624    $6,077    $5,395  

Generation(f)(e)

   2,400    2,752    3,554    2,491    3,600     3,841     3,012     2,752  

ComEd (d)(c)

   1,775    1,433    1,246    1,028    2,425     2,398     1,689     1,433  

PECO

   625    537    422    481    675     601     661     537  

BGE(f)

   600    587    582    592    825     719     620     587  

Other(e)(d)

   75    86    82    42    75     65     95     86  

 

(a)Includes $387 million in 2011 related to acquisitions, principally acquisition of Wolf Hollow, Antelope Valley and Shooting Star. See Note 4 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.
(b)Total projected capital expenditures do not include adjustments for non-cash activity.
(c)(b)IncludesOn April 1, 2014, Generation assumed operational control of CENG’s nuclear fuel.fleet. As a result, the 2015 and 2014 activity includes CENG on a fully consolidated basis beginning April 1, 2014.
(d)(c)PursuantThe capital expenditures and 2016 projections include $610 million of expected incremental spending pursuant to EIMA, ComEd has committed to invest approximately $2.6 billion over a ten year period to modernize and storm-harden its distribution system and to implement smart grid technology. ComEd expects to file an updated investment plan with the ICC in April, 2014.
(e)(d)Other primarily consists of corporate operations and BSC.
(f)(e)Exelon’s and Generation’s prior year activity includes the activity of Constellation, and BGE in the case of Exelon, from the merger effective date of March 12, 2012 through December 31, 2012. Exelon’s and Generation’s activity for 2011 is unadjustedcapital expenditures for the effectsprojected full year 2016 includes nuclear fuel of the merger. BGE’s prior year activity includes its activity for the 12 months ended December 31, 2012$1.1 billion and 2011.growth expenditures of $1.4 billion.

 

Projected capital expenditures and other investments are subject to periodic review and revision to reflect changes in economic conditions and other factors.

 

In 2014, Exelon and its affiliates initiated a comprehensive project to ensure corporate-wide compliance with Version 5 of the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) Critical Infrastructure Protection Standards (CIP V.5) which will become effective on April 1, 2016. Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE will be incurring incremental capital expenditures through 2016 associated with the CIP V.5 compliance implementation project, which are included in projected capital expenditures above.

Generation

 

Approximately 38%32% and 11%15% of the projected 20142016 capital expenditures at Generation are for the acquisition of nuclear fuel and investments in renewable energy generation, including Antelope Valleythe construction costs,of new natural gas plants, respectively, with the remaining amounts reflecting investment in renewable energy and additions and upgrades to existing facilities (including material condition improvements during nuclear refueling outages). Also included in the projected 2014Generation anticipates that they will fund capital expenditures are a portion of the costs of a series of planned power uprates across Generation’s nuclear fleet. See “EXELON CORPORATION—Executive Overview,” for more information on nuclear uprates.with internally generated funds and borrowings.

On November 30, 2012, a subsidiary of Generation sold three Maryland generating stations and associated assets to Raven Power Holdings LLC, a subsidiary of Riverstone Holdings LLC, and received net proceeds of approximately $371. In addition, Generation will begin to make cash payments of approximately $31 million to Raven Power Holdings LLC over a twelve-month period beginning in June 2014. In 2012, Generation incurred transaction costs of approximately $15 million through the date of closing of the transaction. The sale will generate approximately $195 million of cash tax benefits, of which $155 million will be realized in periods through 2014 with the balance to be received in later years. Therefore, Generation expects net after-tax cash sale proceeds of approximately $495 million through 2014 and approximately $36 million in subsequent years.

ComEd, PECO and BGE

 

Approximately 91%86%, 72%98% and 89%97% of the projected 20142016 capital expenditures at ComEd, PECO and BGE, respectively, are for continuing projects to maintain and improve operations, including enhancing reliability and adding capacity to the transmission and distribution systems such as ComEd’s reliability related investments required under EIMA, and ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s

148


construction commitments under PJM’s RTEP. In addition to the capital expenditure for continuing projects, ComEd’s capitaltotal expenditures include smart grid/smart meter technology required under EIMA.EIMA and for PECO and BGE, total capital expenditures include investments related to their respective smart meter program and SGIG project, net of DOE expected reimbursements. The remaining amounts are for capital additions to support new business and customer growth. See Notes 3 and 7 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.program.

 

In 2010, NERC provided guidance to transmission owners includingthat recommends ComEd, PECO, and BGE that recommends the completion of performanceperform assessments of their transmission lines, with the highest priority lines assessed by December 31, 2011, medium priority lines by December 31, 2012, and the lowest priority lines by December 31, 2013.lines. In compliance with this guidance, ComEd, PECO and BGE submitted their most recentfinal bi-annual reports to NERC in January 2014. ComEd, PECO and BGE will incurhave been incurring incremental capital expenditures associated with this guidance following the completion of the assessments. Specific projects and expenditures are identified as the assessments are completed. ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s forecasted 20142016 capital expenditures above reflect capital spending for remediation to be completed in 2014.2017.

 

ComEd, PECO and BGE anticipate that they will fund capital expenditures with a combination of internally generated funds and borrowings and additional capital contributions from parent, including ComEd’s capital expenditures associated with EIMA as further discussed in Note 33—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

Cash Flows from Financing Activities

 

Cash flows provided by (used in) financing activities for 2013, 2012the year ended December 31, 2015, 2014, and 20112013 by Registrant were as follows:

 

  2013 2012 2011   2015 2014 2013 

Exelon(a)

  $(826 $(1,085 $(846  $4,830   $411   $(826

Generation(a)

   (384  (777  (196   (479  (537  (384

ComEd

   61   (212  355    467    359    61  

PECO

   (361  (382  (589   83    (250  (361

BGE

   (48  128   115    (162  (85  (48

 

(a)On April 1, 2014, Generation assumed operational control of CENG’s nuclear fleet. As a result, the 2014 activity includes CENG on a fully consolidated basis.

Debt.Debt.

See Note 14—Debt and Credit Agreements of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further details of the Registrants’ debt issuances and retirements. Debt activity for 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 20112013 by Registrant was as follows:

During the year ended December 31, 2015, the following long term debt was issued:

Company

  

Type

  Interest Rate Maturity  Amount   

Use of Proceeds

Exelon Corporate  Senior Unsecured Notes(a)  1.55% June 9, 2017  $550    Finance a portion of the pending merger with PHI and related costs and expenses, and for general corporate purposes
Exelon Corporate  Senior Unsecured Notes(a)  2.85% June 15, 2020   900    Finance a portion of the pending merger with PHI and related costs and expenses, and for general corporate purposes
Exelon Corporate  Senior Unsecured Notes(a)(b)  3.95% June 15, 2025   1,250    Finance a portion of the pending merger with PHI and related costs and expenses, and for general corporate purposes
Exelon Corporate  Senior Unsecured Notes(a)(b)  4.95% June 15, 2035   500    Finance a portion of the pending merger with PHI and related costs and expenses, and for general corporate purposes
Exelon Corporate  Senior Unsecured Notes (a)(b)  5.10% June 15, 2045   1,000    Finance a portion of the pending merger with PHI and related costs and expenses, and for general corporate purposes
Exelon Corporate  Long Term Software License Agreement  3.95% May 1, 2024   111    Procurement of software licenses
Generation  Senior Unsecured Notes(c)  2.95% January 15,
2020
   750    Fund the optional redemption of Exelon’s $550 million, 4.550% Senior Notes and for general corporate purposes

Company

  

Type

  Interest Rate Maturity  Amount   

Use of Proceeds

Generation  AVSR DOE Nonrecourse Debt(d)  2.29 - 2.96% January 5,
2037
   39    Antelope Valley solar development
Generation  Energy Efficiency Project Financing(e)  3.71% July 31, 2017   42    Funding to install energy conservation measures in Coleman, Florida
Generation  Energy Efficiency Project Financing(e)  3.55% November 15,
2016
   19    Funding to install energy conservation measures in Frederick, Maryland
Generation  Tax Exempt Pollution Control Revenue Bonds(f)  2.50 - 2.70% 2019 - 2020   435    General corporate purposes
Generation  Albany Green Energy Project Financing  LIBOR +
1.25%
 November 17,
2017
   100    Albany Green Energy biomass generation development
Generation  Nuclear Fuel Procurement Contract  3.15% September 30,
2020
   57    Procurement of nuclear fuel
ComEd  First Mortgage Bonds, Series 118  3.70% March 1,
2045
   400    Refinance maturing mortgage bonds, repay a portion of ComEd’s outstanding commercial paper obligations and for general corporate purposes
ComEd  First Mortgage Bonds, Series 119  4.35% November 15,
2045
   450    Repay a portion of ComEd’s outstanding commercial paper obligations and for general corporate purposes.
PECO  First and Refunding Mortgage Bonds  3.15% October 15,
2025
   350    General corporate purposes

 

(a)See Note 14—Debt and Credit Agreements of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for discussion of the merger financing.
(b)In connection with the issuance of PHI merger financing, Exelon terminated its floating-to-fixed interest rate swaps that had been designated as cash flow hedges. See Note 13—Derivative Financial Instruments of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information.
(c)In connection with the issuance of Senior Unsecured Notes, Exelon terminated floating-to-fixed interest rate swaps that had been designated as cash flow hedges. See Note 13—Derivative Financial Instruments of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information on the swap termination.
(d)See Note 14—Debt and Credit Agreements of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for discussion of nonrecourse debt.

Company

(e)

Issuances of long-term debt in 2013

Use of proceeds

Generation

$5 million of variable rate CEU Credit Agreement project financing, due July 22, 2016Used to fund Upstream gas activities

Generation

$227 million of fixed rate DOEFor Energy Efficiency Project Financing, due January 5, 2037the maturity dates represent the expected date of project completion, upon which the respective customer assumes the outstanding debt.
(f)Used for Antelope Valley solar development

Generation

$The Tax Exempt pollution Control Revenue Bonds have a mandatory put date that ranges from March 1, million of 2.93% Social Security Administration Project Financing, due February 18, 2015Used to install conservation measures for the Social Security Administration Headquarters facility in Maryland

Generation

$9 million of 4.40% Energy Efficiency Financing, due August 31, 2014Used for funding to install energy conservation measures in Beckley, West Virginia

Generation

$613 million of 6.00% Continental Wind Senior Secured Notes, due February 28, 2033Used for general corporate purposes2019—September 1, 2020.

During the year ended December 31, 2014, the following long term debt was issued:

149

Company

  

Type

  Interest
Rate
 Maturity  Amount   

Use of Proceeds

Exelon Corporate  Junior Subordinated Notes  2.50% June 1, 2024  $1,150    Finance a portion of the pending merger with PHI and for general corporate purposes
Generation  Nuclear Fuel Purchase Contract  3.25 - 3.35% June 30, 2018   70    Procurement of uranium
Generation  ExGen Renewables I Nonrecourse Debt  LIBOR +
4.25%
 February 6, 2021   300    General corporate purposes
Generation  ExGen Texas Power Nonrecourse Debt  LIBOR +
4.75%
 September 18, 2021   675    General corporate purposes
Generation  Energy Efficiency Project Financing  4.12% December 31, 2015   12    Funding to install energy conservation measures in Washington, DC
Generation  AVSR DOE Nonrecourse Debt  3.06 - 3.14% January 5, 2037   126    Antelope Valley solar development
ComEd  First Mortgage Bonds, Series 115  2.15% January 15, 2019   300    Refinance maturing mortgage bonds and general corporate purposes

ComEd

  First Mortgage Bonds, Series 116  4.70% January 15, 2044   350    Refinance maturing mortgage bonds and general corporate purposes

ComEd

  First Mortgage Bonds, Series 117  3.10% November 1, 2024   250    Repay commercial paper obligations and general corporate purposes

PECO

  First and Refunding Mortgage Bonds  4.15% October 1, 2044   300    Refinance existing mortgage bonds and general corporate purposes


During the year ended December 31, 2013, the following long term debt was issued:

Company

  

Type

  Interest
Rate
  Maturity  Amount   

Use of Proceeds

Generation  CEU Upstream Nonrecourse Debt  2.21 - 2.44%  July 22, 2016  $5    Fund Upstream gas activities
Generation  AVSR DOE Nonrecourse Debt  2.53 - 3.35%  January 5, 2037   227    Antelope Valley solar development
Generation  Social Security Administration Project Financing  2.93%  February 18, 2015   1    Funding to install conservation measures for the Social Security Administration Headquarters facility in Maryland
Generation  Energy Efficiency Project Financing  4.40%  August 31, 2014   9    Funding to install energy conservation measures in Beckley, West Virginia
Generation  Continental Wind Nonrecourse Debt  6.00%  February 28, 2033   613    General corporate purposes
ComEd  First Mortgage Bonds, Series 114  4.60%  August 15, 2043   350    Repay commercial paper obligations and for general corporate purposes
PECO  First and Refunding Mortgage Bonds  1.20%  October 15, 2016   300    Pay at maturity first and refunding mortgage bonds due October 15, 2013 and other general corporate purposes
PECO  First and Refunding Mortgage Bonds  4.80%  October 15, 2043   250    Pay at maturity first and refunding mortgage bonds due October 15, 2013 and other general corporate purposes
BGE  Notes  3.35%  July 1, 2023   300    Partially refinance Notes due July 1, 2013 and for general corporate purposes

During the year ended December 31, 2015, the following long term debt was retired and/or redeemed:

Company

 

Type

 Interest Rate Maturity Amount 

Exelon Corporate (a)

 Senior Unsecured Notes 4.55% June 15, 2015 $550  

Exelon Corporate

 Senior Notes 4.90% June 15, 2015  800  

Exelon Corporate

 Senior Unsecured Notes(b) 3.95% June 15, 2025  443  

Exelon Corporate

 Senior Unsecured Notes(b) 4.95% June 15, 2035  167  

Exelon Corporate

 Senior Unsecured Notes(b) 5.10% June 15, 2045  259  

Exelon Corporate

 Long Term Software License Agreement 3.95% May 1, 2024  1  

Generation(a)

 Senior Unsecured Notes 4.55% June 15, 2015  550  

Generation

 CEU Upstream Nonrecourse Debt (c) LIBOR + 2.25% January 14, 2019  9  

Generation

 AVSR DOE Nonrecourse Debt(c) 2.29% - 3.56% January 5, 2037  23  

Generation

 Kennett Square Capital Lease 7.83% September 20,
2020
  3  

Generation

 Continental Wind Nonrecourse Debt(c) 6.00% February 28, 2033  20  

Generation

 ExGen Texas Power Nonrecourse Debt(c) LIBOR + 4.75% September 8, 2021  5  

Generation

 ExGen Renewables I Nonrecourse Debt(c) LIBOR + 4.25% February 6, 2021  24  

Generation

 Constellation Solar Horizons Nonrecourse Debt(c) 2.56% September 7, 2030  2  

Generation

 Sacramento PV Energy Nonrecourse Debt(c) 2.58% December 31, 2030  2  

Generation

 Energy Efficiency Project 3.55% November 15, 2016  19  

ComEd

 First Mortgage Bonds, Series 101 4.70% April 15, 2015  260  

BGE

 Rate Stabilization Bonds 5.72% April 1, 2016  75  

(a)As part of the 2012 Constellation merger, Exelon and subsidiaries of Generation assumed intercompany loan agreements that mirrored the terms and amounts of external obligations held by Exelon, resulting in intercompany notes payable at Generation and Exelon Corporate.
(b)See Note 14—Debt and Credit Agreements of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for discussion of the redemption of the Senior Unsecured Notes.
(c)

Company

IssuancesSee Note 14—Debt and Credit Agreements of long-term debt in 2013

Usethe Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for discussion of proceeds

ComEd

$350 million of First Mortgage 4.60% Bonds, Series 114, due August 15, 2043Used to repay outstanding commercial paper obligations and for general corporate purposes

PECO

$300 million of First and Refunding Mortgage 1.20% Bonds due October 15, 2016Used to pay at maturity first and refunding mortgage bonds due October 15, 2013 and other general corporate purposes

PECO

$250 million of First and Refunding Mortgage 4.80% Bonds due October 15, 2043Used to pay at maturity first and refunding mortgage bonds due October 15, 2013 and other general corporate purposes

BGE

$300 million of fixed rate 3.35% Notes due July 1, 2023Used to partially refinance Notes due July 1, 2013 and for general corporate purposesnonrecourse debt.

 

Company

Issuances of long-term debt in 2012

Use of proceeds

Generation

$78 million of variable rate CEU Credit Agreement project financing, due July 16, 2016Used to fund Upstream gas activities

Generation

$220 million of fixed rate DOE Project Financing, due January 5, 2037Used for Antelope Valley solar development

Generation

$523 million of 4.25% Senior Notes due June 15, 2022Used for general corporate purposes and issued in connection with the Exchange Offer

Generation

$788 million of 5.60% Senior Notes due June 15, 2042Used for general corporate purposes and issued in connection with the Exchange Offer

Generation

$38 million of variable rate Clean Horizons project financing due June 7, 2030Used for funding for Maryland solar development

ComEd

$350 million of First Mortgage 3.80% Bonds, Series 113, due October 1, 2042Used to repay outstanding commercial paper obligations and for general corporate purposes

PECO

$350 million of First and Refunding Mortgage 2.38% Bonds due September 15, 2022Used to pay at maturity First Mortgage Bonds due October 1, 2012 and for general corporate purposes

BGE

$250 million of fixed rate 2.80% Notes due August 15, 2022Used to repay total outstanding commercial paper obligations and for general corporate purposes

Company

Issuances of long-term debt in 2011

Use of proceeds

ComEd

$600 million of First Mortgage 1.625% Bonds, Series 110, due January 15, 2014Used as an interim source of liquidity for a January 2011 contribution to Exelon-sponsored pension plans

ComEd

$250 million of First Mortgage 1.95% Bonds, Series 111, due September 1, 2016Used to retire $191 million tax-exempt variable-rate First Mortgage Bonds, Series 2008 D, E, and F, $345 million of First Mortgage Bonds, Series 105, and for other general corporate purposes

On January 5, 2016, Generation paid down $5 million of principal of its 3.56% AVSR DOE Nonrecourse debt.

During the year ended December 31, 2014, the following long term debt was retired and/or redeemed:

 

150


Company

Issuances of long-term debt in 2011

Use of proceeds

ComEd

$350 million of First Mortgage 3.40% Bonds, Series 112, due September 1, 2021Used to retire $191 million tax-exempt variable-rate First Mortgage Bonds, Series 2008 D, E, and F, $345 million of First Mortgage Bonds, Series 105, and for other general corporate purposes

BGE

$300 million of fixed rate 3.50% Notes, due November 15, 2021Used to repay total outstanding commercial paper obligations and for general corporate purposes

Company

  

Type

  Interest Rate  Maturity  Amount 

Generation

  Senior Unsecured Notes  5.35%  January 15, 2014  $500  

Generation

  Pollution Control Notes  4.10%  July 1, 2014   20  

Generation

  Continental Wind Nonrecourse Debt  6.00%  February 28, 2033   20  

Generation

  Kennett Square Capital Lease  7.83%  September 20, 2020   3  

Generation

  ExGen Renewables I Nonrecourse Debt  LIBOR + 4.25%  February 6, 2021   18  

Generation

  ExGen Texas Power Nonrecourse Debt  LIBOR + 4.75%  September 18, 2021   2  

Generation

  AVSR DOE Nonrecourse Debt  2.33% - 3.55%  January 5, 2037   15  

Generation

  Clean Horizons Solar Nonrecourse Debt  2.56%  September 7, 2030   2  

Generation

  Sacramento Solar Nonrecourse Debt  2.56%  December 31, 2030   2  

Generation

  Energy Efficiency Project Financing  4.12%  December 31, 2015   12  

ComEd

  First Mortgage Bonds, Series 110  1.63%  January 15, 2014   600  

ComEd

  Pollution Control Series 1994C  5.85%  January 15, 2014   17  

PECO

  First and Refunding Mortgage Bonds  5.00%  October 1, 2014   250  

BGE

  Rate Stabilization Bonds  5.72%  April 1, 2017   35  

BGE

  Rate Stabilization Bonds  5.72%  October 1, 2014   35  

 

Company

Retirement of long-term debt in 2013

Generation

$3 million scheduled payments of 7.83% Kennett Square capital lease until September 1, 2020

Generation

$113 million of variable rate Solar Revolver project financing with a final maturity of July 7, 2014

Generation

$2 million of 2.563% project financing Clean Horizons with a final maturity of September 7, 2030

Generation

$2 million of 2.68% Sacramento Energy Loan Agreement with a final maturity of December 31, 2030

Generation (a)

$450 million of 8.625% Series A Junior Subordinated Debentures with a final maturity of June 15, 2063

ComEd

$125 million of 7.625% First Mortgage Bonds, Series 92, due April 15, 2013

ComEd

$127 million of 7.500% First Mortgage Bonds, Series 94, due July 1, 2013

PECO

$300 million of 5.600% First and Refunding Mortgage Bonds, due October 15, 2013

BGE

$67 million of 5.72% fixed rate Rate Stabilization Bonds, due April 1, 2017

BGE

$400 million of 6.125% Senior Notes, due July 1, 2013

Company

Retirement of long-term debt in 2012

Exelon

$2 million of 7.30% fixed-rate Medium Term Notes with a maturity date of June 1, 2012

Exelon

$442 million of 7.60% fixed-rate Senior Notes with a maturity date of April 1, 2032

Generation

$2 million scheduled payments of 7.83% Kennett Square capital lease until September 20, 2020

Generation

$46 million of 3-year term rate Armstrong Co. 2009 A, Pollution Control Notes at 5.00% with a final maturity of December 1, 2042

Generation

$89 million of variable rate project financing CEU Credit Agreement with a final maturity of July 16, 2016

Generation

$17 million of variable rate Solar Revolver project financing with a final maturity of July 7, 2014

Generation

$75 million of variable rate MEDCO tax-exempt bonds with a final maturity of April 1, 2024

Generation

$2 million of variable rate Sacramento Solar Promissory Note with a final maturity of March 12, 2012

ComEd

$450 million of 6.15% First Mortgage Bonds, Series 98, due March 15, 2012

During the year ended December 31, 2013, the following long term debt was retired and/or redeemed:

 

151


Company

Retirement of long-term debt in 2012

PECO

$225 million of 4.75% First and Refunding Mortgage Bonds, due October 1, 2012

PECO

$150 million of 4.00% First and Refunding Mortgage Bonds, due December 1, 2012

BGE

$8 million of 5.72% fixed rate Rate Stabilization Bonds, due April 1, 2016

BGE

$55 million of 5.47% fixed rate Rate Stabilization Bonds, due October 1, 2012

BGE

$110 million of variable rate Medium Term Notes, due June 15, 2012

Company

Retirement of long-term debt in 2011

Generation

$2 million scheduled payments of 7.83% Kennett Square capital lease until September 20, 2020

ComEd

$2 million of 4.75% sinking fund debentures, due December 1, 2011

ComEd

$50 million of tax-exempt variable-rate First Mortgage Bonds, Series 2008 D, due March 1, 2020

ComEd

$50 million of tax-exempt variable-rate First Mortgage Bonds, Series 2008 E, due May 1, 2021

ComEd

$91 million of tax-exempt variable-rate First Mortgage Bonds, Series 2008 F, due March 1, 2017

ComEd

$345 million of 5.40% First Mortgage Bonds, Series 105, due December 15, 2011

PECO

$250 million of 5.95% First and Refunding Mortgage Bonds, due November 1, 2011

BGE

$60 million of 5.47% fixed rate Rate Stabilization Bonds, due October 1, 2012

Company

 

Type

 Interest Rate Maturity Amount 

Generation

 Kennett Square Capital Lease 7.83% September 1, 2020  3  

Generation

 Solar Revolver Nonrecourse Debt Variable Rate July 7, 2014  113  

Generation

 Constellation Solar Horizons Nonrecourse Debt 2.56% September 7, 2030  2  

Generation

 Sacramento Energy Nonrecourse Debt 2.68% December 31, 2030  2  

Generation (a)

 Series A Junior Subordinated Debentures 8.63% June 15, 2063  450  

Generation

 Energy Efficiency Project Financing 4.40% August 31, 2014  9  

ComEd

 First Mortgage Bonds, Series 92 7.63% April 15, 2013  125  

ComEd

 First Mortgage Bonds, Series 94 7.50% July 1, 2013  127  

PECO

 First and Refunding Mortgage Bonds 5.60% October 15, 2013  300  

BGE

 Rate Stabilization Bonds 5.72% April 1, 2017  67  

BGE

 Notes 6.13% July 1, 2013  400  

 

(a)Represents debt obligations assumed by Exelon as part of the Constellation merger on March 12, 2012 that became callable at face value on June 15, 2013. Exelon and subsidiaries of Generation (former Constellation subsidiaries) assumed intercompany loan agreements that mirror the terms and amounts of the third-party debt obligations of Exelon, resulting in intercompany notes payable as of December 31, 2012 included in long-term debt to affiliate on Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets and notes receivable from affiliates at Exelon Corporate, which are eliminated in consolidation on Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. The third-party debt obligations were reported in Long-term Debt on Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2012. The debentures were redeemed and the intercompany loan agreements repaid on June 15, 2013.

From time to time and as market conditions warrant, the Registrants may engage in long-term debt retirements via tender offers, open market repurchases or other viable options to reduce debt on their respective balance sheets.

 

Dividends.

Cash dividend payments and distributions duringfor the year ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 2012 and 2011 by Registrant were as follows:

 

  2013   2012   2011   2015   2014   2013 

Exelon(a)

  $1,263   $1,733   $1,397   $1,105    $1,486     1,249  

Generation(a)

   625    1,626    172    2,474     1,066     625  

ComEd

   220    105    300    299     307     220  

PECO

   333    347    352    279     320     333  

BGE(b)

   13    13    98(a)    171     13     13  

 

(a)DividendsOn April 1, 2014, Generation assumed operational control of CENG’s nuclear fleet. As a result, the 2015 and 2014 activity includes CENG on common stock for $85 million werea fully consolidated basis beginning April 1, 2014.
(b)Includes dividends paid to Constellation for the year ended December 31, 2011.on BGE’s preference stock.

 

152


Revised Dividend Policy

On February 6, 2013, the Exelon board of directors approved a revised dividend policy which contemplates a regular $0.31 per share quarterly dividend on Exelon’s common stock payable beginning in the second quarter of 2013 (or $1.24 per share on an annualized basis), subject to quarterly declarationsQuarterly dividends declared by the Exelon Board of Directors.Directors during the year ended December 31, 2015 and for the first quarter of 2016 were as follows:

 

Second Quarter 2013 Dividend

Period

  

Declaration Date

  

Shareholder of Record

Date

  Dividend Payable Date   Cash per Share 

First Quarter 2015

  January 27, 2015  February 13, 2015   March 10, 2015    $0.31  

Second Quarter 2015

  April 28, 2015  May 15, 2015   June 10, 2015    $0.31  

Third Quarter 2015

  July 28, 2015  August 14, 2015   September 10, 2015    $0.31  

Fourth Quarter 2015

  October 27, 2015  November 13, 2015   December 10, 2015    $0.31  

First Quarter 2016 (a)

  January 26, 2016  February 12, 2016   March 10, 2016    $0.31  

 

On April 23, 2013, the Exelon board of directors declared a regular quarterly dividend, paid on June 10, 2013 of $0.310 per share on Exelon’s common stock.

Third Quarter 2013 Dividend

On July 23, 2013, the Exelon board of directors declared a regular quarterly dividend, paid on September 10, 2013 of $0.310 per share on Exelon’s common stock.

Fourth Quarter 2013 Dividend

On October 22, 2013, the Exelon board of directors declared a regular quarterly dividend, paid on December 10, 2013 of $0.310 per share on Exelon’s common stock

First Quarter 2014 Dividend

On January 28, 2014, the Exelon Board of Directors declared a first quarter 2014 regular quarterly dividend of $0.31 per share on Exelon’s common stock payable on March 10, 2014, to shareholders of record of Exelon at the end of the day on February 14, 2014.

(a)Exelon’s Board of Directors approved a revised dividend policy. The approved policy would raise our dividend 2.5% each year for the next three years, beginning with the June 2016 dividend. The Board will take formal action to declare the next dividend in the second quarter.

 

Short-Term Borrowings. Short-term borrowings incurred (repaid) during 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 20112013 by Registrant were as follows:

 

  2013   2012 2011   2015 2014 2013 

Generation(a)

  $13   $(52 $—     $—     $17   $13  

ComEd

   184    —     —      (10  120    184  

BGE

   135    —     —      90    (15  135  

Other(a)(b)

   —      (140  161    —      —      —    
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Exelon(a)

  $332   $(192 $161   $80   $122   $332  
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)On April 1, 2014, Generation assumed operational control of CENG’s nuclear fleet. As a result, the 2015 activity includes CENG on a fully consolidated basis.
(b)Other primarily consists of corporate operations and BSC.

Retirement of Long-Term Debt to Financing Affiliates. There were no retirements of long-term debt to financing affiliates during 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 20112013 by the Registrants.

 

Contributions from Parent/Member. Contributions from Parent/Member (Exelon) during 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 20112013 by Registrant were as follows:

 

  2013   2012   2011   2015   2014   2013 

Generation

  $26   $48   $30   $47    $53    $26  

ComEd (a)

   176    11    11    209     278     176  

PECO

   27    9    18    16     24     27  

BGE

   —      66    —      7     —       —    

 

(a)In 2013, represents indemnificationAdditional contributions from Exelonparent or external debt financing may be required as a result of increased capital investment in relationinfrastructure improvements and modernization pursuant to the like-kind exchange transaction.EIMA, transmission upgrades and expansions and Exelon’s agreement to indemnify ComEd for any unfavorable after-tax impacts associated with ComEd’s LKE tax matter.

 

153


Other. Other significantFor the year ended December 31, 2015, other financing activities primarily consists of debt issuance costs. See Note 14—Debt and Credit Agreements of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements’ for Exelon for 2013, 2012 and 2011 were as follows:additional information.

Exelon received proceeds from employee stock plans of $47 million, $72 million and $38 million during 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively.

 

Credit Matters

 

Market Conditions

 

The Registrants fund liquidity needs for capital investment, working capital, energy hedging and other financial commitments through cash flows from continuing operations, public debt offerings, commercial paper markets and large, diversified credit facilities. The credit facilities include $8.4 billion in aggregate total commitments of which $6.6$6.9 billion was available as of December 31, 2013,2015, and of which no financial institution has more than 8%7% of the aggregate commitments for Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE. The Registrants had access to the commercial paper market during 20132015 to fund their short-term liquidity needs, when necessary. The Registrants routinely review the sufficiency of their liquidity position, including appropriate sizing of credit facility commitments, by performing various stress test scenarios, such as commodity price movements, increases in margin-related transactions, changes in hedging levels and the impacts of hypothetical credit downgrades. The Registrants have continued to closely monitor events in the financial markets and the financial institutions associated with the credit facilities, including monitoring credit ratings and outlooks, credit default swap levels, capital raising and merger activity. See PART I. ITEM 1A Risk Factors1A. RISK FACTORS for further information regarding the effects of uncertainty in the capital and credit markets.

 

The Registrants believe their cash flow from operating activities, access to credit markets and their credit facilities provide sufficient liquidity. If Generation lost its investment grade credit rating as of December 31, 2013,2015, it would have been required to provide incremental collateral of $2.0 billion ofto meet collateral obligations for derivatives, non-derivatives, normal purchase normal sales contracts and applicable payables and receivables, net of the contractual right of offset under master netting agreements, which is well within its current available credit facility capacities of $4.3 billion. If ComEd lost its investment grade credit ratings as of December 31, 2013,2015, it would have been required to provide collateral of $31 million pursuant to PJM’s credit policy and could have been required to provide incremental collateral of $6$19 million which is well within its current available credit facility capacity of $816 million, which takes into account commercial paper borrowings as of December 31, 2013.$998 million. If PECO lost its investment grade credit rating as of December 31, 20132015 it would not behave been required to provide collateral of $2 million pursuant to PJM’s credit policy and could have been required to provide collateral of $42$25 million related to its natural gas procurement contracts, which, in the aggregate, are well within PECO’s current available credit facility capacity of $599 million. If BGE lost its investment grade credit rating as of December 31, 2013,2015 it would have been required to

provide collateral of $2$6 million pursuant to PJM’s credit policy and could have been required to provide collateral of $85$35 million related to its natural gas procurement contracts, which, in the aggregate, are well within BGE’s current available credit facility capacity of $465$600 million.

 

Exelon Credit Facilities

 

Exelon, ComEd and BGE meet their short-term liquidity requirements primarily through the issuance of commercial paper. Generation and PECO meet their short-term liquidity requirements primarily through the issuance of commercial paper and borrowings from the intercompany money pool. The Registrants may use their respective credit facilities for general corporate purposes, including meeting short-term funding requirements and the issuance of letters of credit. See Note 1314—Debt and Credit Agreements of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for discussion of the Registrants’ credit facilities and short term borrowing activity.

 

154


Other Credit Matters

 

Capital Structure. At December 31, 2013,2015, the capital structures of the Registrants consisted of the following:

 

  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE   Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

Long-term debt

   44%  30%  42%  40%  42%   47  37  43  43  34

Long-term debt to affiliates(a)

   2%  8%  2%  4%  5%   1  4  1  3  5

Common equity

   53%  —     55%  56%  49%   51  —      54  54  53

Member’s equity

   —     62%  —     —     —      —      59  —      —      —    

Preference Stock

   —     —     —     —     4%   —      —      —      —      4

Commercial paper and notes payable

   1%  —     1%  —     —      1  —      2  —      4

 

(a)Includes approximately $648$641 million, $206$205 million, $184 million and $258$252 million owed to unconsolidated affiliates of Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE respectively. These special purpose entities were created for the sole purposes of issuing mandatorily redeemable trust preferred securities of ComEd, PECO and BGE. See Note 22—Variable Interest Entities of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding the authoritative guidance for VIEs.

 

Intercompany Money Pool. To provide an additional short-term borrowing option that will generally be more favorable to the borrowing participants than the cost of external financing, Exelon operates an intercompany money pool. Maximum amounts contributed to and borrowed from the money pool by participants during the year ended December 31, 2013,2015, in addition to the net contribution or borrowing as of December 31, 2013,2015, are presented in the following table:

 

  Maximum
Contributed
   Maximum
Borrowed
   December 31, 2013
Contributed
(Borrowed)
   Maximum
Contributed
   Maximum
Borrowed
   December 31, 2015
Contributed
(Borrowed)
 

Generation

  $159   $435   $44   $3    $1,709    $(1,252

PECO

   304    —      —      —       100     —    

BSC

   —      287    (223   —       413     (226

Exelon Corporate

   237    —      179    2,008     —       1,478  

 

Investments in Nuclear Decommissioning Trust Funds. Exelon, Generation and GenerationCENG maintain trust funds, as required by the NRC, to fund certain costs of decommissioning Generation’s nuclear plants. The mix of securities in the trust funds is designed to provide returns to be used to fund decommissioning and to offset inflationary increases in decommissioning costs. Generation actively monitors the investment performance of the trust funds and periodically reviews asset allocations in accordance with Generation’s NDT fund investment policy. Generation’s and CENG’s investment policy establishespolicies establish limits on the concentration of holdings in any one company and also in any one

industry. See Note 15—16—Asset Retirement Obligations of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding the trust funds, the NRC’s minimum funding requirements and related liquidity ramifications.

 

Shelf Registration Statements. The Registrants maintainhave a currently effective combined shelf registration statement unlimited in amount, filed with the SEC.SEC, that will expire in May 2017. The ability of each Registrant to sell securities off the shelf registration statement or to access the private placement markets will depend on a number of factors at the time of the proposed sale, including other required regulatory approvals, as applicable, the current financial condition of the Registrant, its securities ratings and market conditions.

 

Regulatory Authorizations. The issuance by ComEd, PECO and BGE of long-term debt or equity securities requires the prior authorization of the ICC, PAPUC and MDPSC, respectively. ComEd, PECO and BGE normally obtain the required approvals on a periodic basis to cover their anticipated financing needs for a period of time or in connection with a specific financing. On March 1, 2013, ComEd received $470 million in long-term debt new money authority from the ICC and on February 27, 2012, ComEd received $1.3 billion in long-term debt refinancing authority from the ICC.

155


As of December 31, 2013,2015, ComEd had $1.3 billion$442 million available in long-term debt refinancing authority and $218$353 million available in new money long-term debt financing authority from the ICC. DuringIn November 2015, the fourth quarter of 2013, ComEd requested and received $1PAPUC approved PECO’s application for long-term financing for $2.5 billion, in new money financing authority from the ICC. The authoritywhich is effective on January 1, 2014 and expires January 1, 2017.through December 31, 2018. As of December 31, 2013,2015, PECO had $1.4$1.9 billion available in long-term debt financing authority from the PAPUC. As of December 31, 2013,2015, BGE had $850 million$1.4 billion available in long-term financing authority from MDPSC.

 

FERC has financing jurisdiction over ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s short-term financings and all of Generation’s financings. As of December 31, 2013,2015, ComEd, PECO hadand BGE had short-term financing authority from FERC, which expires on December 31, 2015,2017, of $2.5 billion, $2.5$1.5 billion and $700 million, respectively. Generation currently has blanket financing authority it received from FERC in connection with its market-based rate authority. See Note 33—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

Exelon’s ability to pay dividends on its common stock depends on the receipt of dividends paid by its operating subsidiaries. The payments of dividends to Exelon by its subsidiaries in turn depend on their results of operations and cash flows and other items affecting retained earnings. The Federal Power Act declares it to be unlawful for any officer or director of any public utility “to participate in the making or paying of any dividends of such public utility from any funds properly included in capital account.” In addition, under Illinois law, ComEd may not pay any dividend on its stock, unless, among other things, its earnings and earned surplus are sufficient to declare and pay a dividend after provision is made for reasonable and proper reserves, or unless ComEd has specific authorization from the ICC. BGE is subject to certain dividend restrictions established by the MDPSC. First, BGE iswas prohibited from paying a dividend on its common shares through the end of 2014. Second, BGE is prohibited from paying a dividend on its common shares if (a) after the dividend payment, BGE’s equity ratio would be below 48% as calculated pursuant to the MDPSC’s ratemaking precedents or (b) BGE’s senior unsecured credit rating is rated by two of the three major credit rating agencies below investment grade. Finally, BGE must notify the MDPSC that it intends to declare a dividend on its common shares at least 30 days before such a dividend is paid. There are no other limitations on BGE paying common stock dividends unless: (1) BGE elects to defer interest payments on the 6.20% Deferrable Interest Subordinated Debentures due 2043, and any deferred interest remains unpaid; or (2) any dividends (and any redemption payments) due on BGE’s preference stock have not been paid. At December 31, 2013,2015, Exelon had retained earnings of $10,358$12,068 million, including Generation’s undistributed earnings of $3,613$2,701 million, ComEd’s retained earnings of $750$978 million consisting of retained earnings appropriated for future dividends of $2,389$2,617 million partially offset by $1,639 million of unappropriated retained deficit, PECO’s retained earnings of $649$780 million and BGE’s retained earnings $1,005$1,320 million. See Note 2223—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding fund transfer restrictions.

156


Contractual Obligations

 

The following tables summarize the Registrants’ future estimated cash payments as of December 31, 20132015 under existing contractual obligations, including payments due by period. See Note 2223—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding the Registrants’ commercial and other commitments, representing commitments potentially triggered by future events.

 

Exelon

 

       Payment due within         
   Total   2014   2015-
2016
   2017-
2018
   Due 2019
and beyond
   All
Other
 

Long-term debt (a)

  $19,367   $1,424   $2,953   $2,731   $12,259   $—    

Interest payments on long-term debt (b)

   12,845    925    1,692    1,396    8,832    —    

Liability and interest for uncertain tax positions (c)

   1,255    —       —       —       —       1,255 

Capital leases

   41    4    8    10    19    —    

Operating leases (d)

   826    103    180    145    398    —    

Purchase power obligations (e)

   3,046     1,378    852    367    449    —    

Fuel purchase agreements (f)

   9,606    1,520    2,622    1,967    3,497    —    

Electric supply procurement (f)

   1,880    1,062    678    140    —       —    

AEC purchase commitments (f)

   6    1    2    2    1    —    

Curtailment services commitments (f)

   132    45    74    13    —       —    

Long-term renewable energy and REC commitments (g)

   1,589    72    150    160    1,207    —    

PJM regional transmission expansion commitments (h)

   1,019     208     597     214     —       —    

Spent nuclear fuel obligation

   1,021    —       —       —       1,021    —    

Pension minimum funding requirement (i)

   1,223    264    444    426    89    —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total contractual obligations

  $53,856   $7,006   $10,252   $7,571   $27,772   $1,255 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 
       Payment due within         
   Total   2016   2017-
2018
   2019-
2020
   Due 2021
and beyond
   All
Other
 

Long-term debt(a)

  $25,732    $1,483    $3,226    $4,275    $16,748    $—    

Interest payments on long-term debt(b)

   14,459     1,146     2,122     1,863     9,328     —    

Liability and interest for uncertain tax positions(c)

   860     860     —       —       —       —    

Capital leases

   29     4     8     9     8     —    

Operating leases(d)

   1,174     133     195     144     702     —    

Purchase power obligations(e)

   1,692     506     717     212     257     —    

Fuel purchase agreements(f)

   9,382     1,448     2,460     1,919     3,555     —    

Electric supply procurement(f)

   1,563     993     570     —       —       —    

AEC purchase commitments(f)

   6     1     2     3     —       —    

Curtailment services commitments(f)

   99     37     55     7     —       —    

Long-term renewable energy and REC commitments(g)

   1,443     76     155     165     1,047     —    

Other purchase obligations(h)

   4,578     2,420     940     421     797     —    

Construction commitments(i)

   1,272     821     451     —       —      

PJM regional transmission expansion commitments(j)

   737     375     293     69     —       —    

Spent nuclear fuel obligation(k)

   1,021     —       —       —       1,021     —    

Pension minimum funding requirement(l)

   1,412     250     500     500     162     —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total contractual obligations

  $65,459    $10,553    $11,694    $9,587    $33,625    $—    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

(a)Includes $648 million due after 20162021 to ComEd, PECO and BGE financing trusts.
(b)Interest payments are estimated based on final maturity dates of debt securities outstanding at December 31, 20132015 and do not reflect anticipated future refinancing, early redemptions or debt issuances. Variable rate interest obligations are estimated based on rates as of December 31, 2013.2015. Includes estimated interest payments due to ComEd, PECO and BGE financing trusts.
(c)AsIn the event of December 31, 2013,a fully successful IRS challenge to Exelon’s liability for uncertainlike-kind exchange position, Exelon would be required to either post a bond or pay the tax positions and related interest payable was $906 million and $349 million, respectively. Exelon was unable to reasonably estimate the timing of liability and interest paymentsfor the tax years before the court to appeal the decision. If an adverse decision is reached in 2016, the potential tax and receipts in individual years beyond 12 months dueafter-tax interest, exclusive of penalties, that could become payable may be as much as $860 million, of which approximately $300 million would be attributable to uncertainties in the timingComEd after consideration of Exelon’s agreement to hold ComEd harmless from any unfavorable impacts of the effective settlement ofafter-tax interest amounts on ComEd’s equity, and the balance at Exelon. It is expected that Exelon’s remaining tax positions. Exelon has other unrecognized tax positions that were not recorded onyears affected by the Consolidated Balance Sheet in accordance with authoritative guidance. See Note 14 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding unrecognized tax positions.litigation will be settled following a final appellate decision which could take several years.
(d)Excludes PPAs and other capacity contracts that are accounted for asGeneration’s contingent operating leases.lease payments associated with contracted generation agreements. These amounts are included within purchase power obligations. Includes estimated cash payments for service fees related to PECO’s meter reading operating lease.
(e)Purchase power obligations include PPAs and other capacity contracts including those that are accounted for ascontingent operating leases.lease payments associated with contracted generation agreements. Amounts presented represent Generation’s expected payments under these arrangements at December 31, 2013,2015, including those related to CENG. Expected payments include certain fixed capacity charges which may be reduced based on plant availability. Expected payments exclude renewable PPA contracts that are contingent in nature. These obligations do not include ComEd’s SFCs as these contracts do not require purchases of fixed or minimum quantities. See Notes 3 and 22 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.3—Regulatory Matters

(f)Represents commitments to purchase nuclear fuel, natural gas and related transportation, storage capacity and services, procure electric supply, and purchase AECs and curtailment services. See Note 22 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for electric and gas purchase commitments.
(g)

Primarily related to ComEd entered into 20-year contracts for renewable energy and RECs beginning in June 2012. ComEd is permitted to recover its renewable energy and REC costs from retail customers with no mark-up. The annual commitments represent the maximum settlements with suppliers for renewable energy and RECs under the existing contract terms. Pursuant to the

157


ICC’s December 19, 2012 order, ComEd’s commitments under the existing long-term contracts were reduced for the June 2013 through May 2014 procurement period. The ICC’s December 18, 2013 order approved the reduction of ComEd’s commitments under the long-term contracts for the June 2014 through May 2015 procurement period, however the amount of the reduction will not be finalized and approved by the ICC until March 2014. See Note 33—Regulatory Matters of Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

(h)Represents the future estimated value at December 31, 2015 of the cash flows associated with all contracts, both cancellable and non-cancellable, entered into between the Registrants and third-parties for the provision of services and materials, entered into in the normal course of business not specifically reflected elsewhere in this table. These estimates are subject to significant variability from period to period.
(i)Represents commitments for Generation’s ongoing investments in renewables development, new natural gas and biomass generation construction. Amount includes $421 million of remaining commitments related to the construction of new combined-cycle gas turbine units in Texas. Achievement of commercial operations related to this project is expected in 2017.
(j)Under their operating agreements with PJM, ComEd, PECO and BGE are committed to the construction of transmission facilities to maintain system reliability. These amounts represent ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s expected portion of the costs to pay for the completion of the required construction projects. See Note 33—Regulatory Matters of Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.
(i)(k)See Note 23—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding spent nuclear fuel obligations.
(l)These amounts represent Exelon’s estimated minimum pensionexpected contributions to its qualified pension plans. The projected contributions reflect a funding strategy of contributing the greater of $250 million until the qualified plans are fully funded on an accumulated benefit obligation basis, and the minimum amounts under ERISA to avoid benefit restrictions and at-risk status thereafter. The remaining qualified pension plans’ contributions are generally based on the estimated minimum pension contributions required under ERISA and the Pension Protection Act of 2006, as well as contributions necessary to avoid benefit restrictions and at-risk status. For Exelon’s largest qualified pension plan, the projected contributions reflect a funding strategy of contributing the greater of $250 million or the minimum amounts under ERISA to avoid benefit restrictions and at-risk status. These amounts represent estimates that are based on assumptions that are subject to change. The minimum required contributions for years after 20192021 are not included. See Note 1617—Retirement Benefits of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding estimated future pension benefit payments.

 

Generation

 

       Payment due within         
   Total   2014   2015-
2016
   2017-
2018
   Due 2019
and beyond
   All
Other
 

Long-term debt

  $7,519   $557   $628   $701   $5,633   $—    

Interest payments on long-term debt(a)

   5,362    368    693    625    3,676    —    

Liability and interest for uncertain tax benefits (b)

   264    —       —       —       —       264 

Capital leases

   33    4    8    10    11    —    

Operating leases(c)

   571    49    98    88    336    —    

Purchase power obligations(d)

   3,046     1,378    852     367    449    —    

Fuel purchase agreements(e)

   8,490    1,212    2,296    1,807    3,175    —    

Spent nuclear fuel obligation

   1,021    —       —       —       1,021    —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total contractual obligations

  $26,306   $3,568   $4,575   $3,598   $14,301   $264 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 
       Payment due within         
   Total   2016   2017-
2018
   2019-
2020
   Due 2021
and beyond
   All
Other
 

Long-term debt

  $8,898    $87    $849    $2,575    $5,387    $—    

Interest payments on long-term debt (a)

   5,452     424     792     684     3,552     —    

Capital leases

   21     4     8     9     —       —    

Operating leases (c)

   956     86     126     89     655     —    

Purchase power obligations (d)

   1,692     506     717     212     257     —    

Fuel purchase agreements (e)

   8,450     1,211     2,167     1,777     3,295     —    

Other purchase obligations(f)

   2,193     928     392     225     648     —    

Construction commitments(g)

   1,272     821     451     —       —      

Spent nuclear fuel obligation(b)

   1,021     —       —       —       1,021     —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total contractual obligations

  $29,955    $4,067    $5,502    $5,571    $14,815    $—    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

(a)Interest payments are estimated based on final maturity dates of debt securities outstanding at December 31, 20132015 and do not reflect anticipated future refinancing, early redemptions or debt issuances. Variable rate interest obligations are estimated based on rates as of December 31, 2013.2015.
(b)As of December 31, 2013, Generation’s liability for uncertain tax positionsSee Note 23—Commitments and related interest payable was $227 million and $37 million, respectively. Generation was unable to reasonably estimate the timing of liability and interest payments in individual years beyond 12 months due to uncertainties in the timingContingencies of the effective settlement of tax positions.Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding spent nuclear fuel obligations.
(c)Excludes PPAs and other capacity contracts that are accounted for asGeneration’s contingent operating leases. These amounts are included within purchase power obligations.lease payments associated with contracted generation agreements.
(d)Purchase power obligations include PPAs and other capacity contracts including those that are accounted for ascontingent operating leases.lease payments associated with contracted generation agreements. Amounts presented represent Generation’s expected payments under these arrangements at December 31, 2013.2015. Expected payments include certain fixed capacity charges which may be reduced based on plant availability. Expected payments exclude renewable PPA contracts that are contingent in nature. See Note 22 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
(e)See Note 22Represents commitments to purchase fuel supplies for nuclear and fossil generation.

(f)Represents the future estimated value at December 31, 2015 of the Combined Notescash flows associated with all contracts, both cancellable and non-cancellable, entered into between the Registrants and third-parties for the provision of services and materials, entered into in the normal course of business not specifically reflected elsewhere in this table. These estimates are subject to Consolidated Financial Statementssignificant variability from period to period.
(g)Represents commitments for further information regarding fuel purchase agreements.Generation’s ongoing investments in renewables development, new natural gas and biomass generation construction. Amount includes $421 million of remaining commitments related to the construction of new combined-cycle gas turbine units in Texas. Achievement of commercial operations related to this project is expected in 2017.

 

158


ComEd

 

       Payment due within         
   Total   2014   2015-
2016
   2017-
2018
   Due 2019
and beyond
   All
Other
 

Long-term debt(a)

  $5,892   $617   $925   $1,265   $3,085   $—    

Interest payments on long-term debt(b)

   3,704    274    515    393    2,522    —    

Liability and interest for uncertain tax positions(c)

   498    —       —       —       —       498 

Capital leases

   8    —       —       —       8    —    

Operating leases

   47    13    22    9    3    —    

Electric supply procurement

   736    323    273    140    —       —    

Long-term renewable energy and associated REC commitments(d)

   1,589    72    150    160    1,207    —    

PJM regional transmission expansion commitments(e)

   486     134     350     2     —       —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total contractual obligations

  $12,960   $1,433   $2,235   $1,969   $6,825   $498 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 
       Payment due within         
   Total   2016   2017-
2018
   2019-
2020
   Due 2021
and beyond
   All
Other
 

Long-term debt (a)

  $6,765    $665    $1,265    $800    $4,035    $—    

Interest payments on long-term debt (b)

   4,597     297     523     420     3,357     —    

Liability and interest for uncertain tax positions (c)

   300     300     —       —       —       —    

Capital leases

   8     —       —       —       8     —    

Operating leases

   37     14     14     8     1     —    

Electric supply procurement

   739     453     286     —       —       —    

Long-term renewable energy and associated REC commitments (d)

   1,444     76     156     165     1,047     —    

Other purchase obligations(e)

   699     565     94     39     1     —    

PJM regional transmission expansion commitments (f)

   297     204     87     6     —       —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total contractual obligations

  $14,886    $2,574    $2,425    $1,438    $8,449    $—    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

(a)Includes $206 million due after 20172021 to a ComEd financing trust.
(b)Interest payments are estimated based on final maturity dates of debt securities outstanding at December 31, 20132015 and do not reflect anticipated future refinancing, early redemptions or debt issuances. Variable rate interest obligations are estimated based on rates as of December 31, 2013.2015. Includes estimated interest payments due to the ComEd financing trust.
(c)AsIn the event of December 31, 2013, ComEd’s liability for uncertaina fully successful IRS challenge to Exelon’s like-kind exchange position, Exelon would be required to either post a bond or pay the tax positions and related interest payable was $324 million and $174 million, respectively. ComEd was unable to reasonably estimate the timing of liability and interest paymentsfor the tax years before the court to appeal the decision. If an adverse decision is reached in individual years beyond 12 months due2016, the potential tax and after-tax interest, exclusive of penalties, that could become payable may be as much as $860 million, of which approximately $300 million would be attributable to uncertainties in the timingComEd after consideration of Exelon’s agreement to hold ComEd harmless from any unfavorable impacts of the effective settlement ofafter-tax interest amounts on ComEd’s equity, and the balance at Exelon. It is expected that Exelon’s remaining tax positions.years affected by the litigation will be settled following a final appellate decision which could take several years.
(d)Primarily related to ComEd entered into 20-year contracts for renewable energy and RECs beginning in June 2012. ComEd is permitted to recover its renewable energy and REC costs from retail customers with no mark-up. The annual commitments represent the maximum settlements with suppliers for renewable energy and RECs under the existing contract terms. Pursuant to the ICC’s December 19, 2012 order, ComEd’s commitments under the existing long-term contracts were reduced for the June 2013 through May 2014 procurement period. The ICC’s December 18, 2013 order approved the reduction of ComEd’s commitments under the long-term contracts for the June 2014 through May 2015 procurement period, however the amount of the reduction will not be finalized and approved by the ICC until March 2014. See Note 33—Regulatory Matters of Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.
(e)Represents the future estimated value at December 31, 2015 of the cash flows associated with all contracts, both cancellable and non-cancellable, entered into between the Registrants and third-parties for the provision of services and materials, entered into in the normal course of business not specifically reflected elsewhere in this table. These estimates are subject to significant variability from period to period.
(f)Under its operating agreement with PJM, ComEd is committed to the construction of transmission facilities to maintain system reliability. These amounts represent ComEd’s expected portion of the costs to pay for the completion of the required construction projects. See Note 33—Regulatory Matters of Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

PECO

 

       Payment due within         
   Total   2014   2015-
2016
   2017-
2018
   Due 2019
and beyond
   All
Other
 

Long-term debt(a)

  $2,384   $250   $300   $500   $1,334   $—    

Interest payments on long-term debt(b)

   1,505    104    189    160    1,052    —    

Operating leases

   25    13    6    6    —       —    

Fuel purchase agreements(c)

   507    179    210    52    66    —    

Electric supply procurement(c)

   681    590    91    —       —       —    

AEC purchase commitments(c)

   14    2    4    4    4    —    

PJM regional transmission expansion commitments(d)

   133    32    69    32    —       —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total contractual obligations

  $5,249   $1,170   $869   $754   $2,456   $—    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 
       Payment due within         
   Total   2016   2017-
2018
   2019-
2020
   Due 2021
and beyond
   All
Other
 

Long-term debt (a)

  $2,784    $300    $500    $—      $1,984    $—    

Interest payments on long-term debt (b)

   1,771     115     207     176     1,273     —    

Operating leases

   12     3     5     4     —       —    

Fuel purchase agreements (c)

   357     125     137     35     60     —    

Electric supply procurement (c)

   622     516     106     —       —       —    

AEC purchase commitments (c)

   9     2     4     3     —       —    

Other purchase obligations(d)

   215     174     18     22     1     —    

PJM regional transmission expansion commitments (e)

   67     31     32     4     —       —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total contractual obligations

  $5,837    $1,266    $1,009    $244    $3,318    $—    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

(a)Includes $184 million due after 20172021 to PECO financing trusts.
(b)Interest payments are estimated based on final maturity dates of debt securities outstanding at December 31, 20132014 and do not reflect anticipated future refinancing, early redemptions or debt issuances.
(c)Represents commitments to purchase natural gas and related transportation, storage capacity and services, procure electric supply, and purchase AECs. See Note 22
(d)Represents the future estimated value at December 31, 2015 of the Combined Notescash flows associated with all contracts, both cancellable and non-cancellable, entered into between the Registrants and third-parties for the provision of services and materials, entered into in the normal course of business not specifically reflected elsewhere in this table. These estimates are subject to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.significant variability from period to period.

159


(d)(e)Under its operating agreement with PJM, PECO is committed to the construction of transmission facilities to maintain system reliability. These amounts represent PECO’s expected portion of the costs to pay for the completion of the required construction projects. See Note 33—Regulatory Matters of Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

BGE

 

      Payment due within               Payment due within         
  Total   2014   2015-
2016
   2017-
2018
   Due 2019
and beyond
   All
Other
   Total   2016   2017-
2018
   2019-
2020
   Due 2021
and beyond
   All
Other
 

Long-term debt(a)

  $2,273   $—      $300   $265   $1,708   $—      $2,128    $378    $42    $—      $1,708    $—    

Interest payments on long-term debt(b)

   1,608    112    220    162    1,114    —       1,353     82     159     159     953     —    

Operating leases

   61    12    20    15    14    —       65     12     19     15     19     —    

Fuel purchase agreements(c)(d)

   609    129    116    108    256    —       575     112     156     107     200     —    

Electric supply procurement(c)(d)

   1,256    783    473    —       —       —       1,427     860     567     —       —       —    

Curtailment services commitments(c)(d)

   132    45    74    13    —       —       99     37     55     7     —       —    

PJM regional transmission expansion commitments(d)

   400    42    178    180    —       —    

Other purchase obligations(e)

   635     408     208     17     2     —    

PJM regional transmission expansion commitments (c)

   373     140     174     59     —       —    
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total contractual obligations

  $6,339   $1,123   $1,381   $743   $3,092   $—      $6,655    $2,029    $1,380    $364    $2,882    $—    
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Includes $258 million due after 20172021 to the BGE financing trusts.
(b)Interest payments are estimated based on final maturity dates of debt securities outstanding at December 31, 20132015 and do not reflect anticipated future refinancing, early redemptions or debt issuances.
(c)Represents commitments to purchase natural gas and related transportation, storage capacity and services, procure electric supply, and curtailment services. See Note 22 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.
(d)Under its operating agreement with PJM, BGE is committed to the construction of transmission facilities to maintain system reliability. These amounts represent BGE’s expected portion of the costs to pay for the completion of the required construction projects. See Note 33—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial StatementsStatements.
(d)Represents commitments to purchase natural gas and related transportation, storage capacity and services, procure electric supply, and curtailment services.
(e)Represents the future estimated value at December 31, 2015 of the cash flows associated with all contracts, both cancellable and non-cancellable, entered into between the Registrants and third-parties for additional information.the provision of services and materials, entered into in the normal course of business not specifically reflected elsewhere in this table. These estimates are subject to significant variability from period to period.

See Note 2223—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for discussion of the Registrants’ other commitments potentially triggered by future events.

 

For additional information regarding:

 

commercial paper, see Note 1314—Debt and Credit Agreements of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

long-term debt, see Note 1314—Debt and Credit Agreements of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

liabilities related to uncertain tax positions, see Note 1415—Income Taxes of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

capital lease obligations, see Note 1314—Debt and Credit Agreements of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

operating leases energy commitments, fuel purchase agreements, construction commitments and rate relief commitments, see Note 2223—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

the nuclear decommissioning and SNF obligations, see Notes 1516—Asset Retirement Obligations and 2223—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

regulatory commitments, see Note 33—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

variable interest entities, see Note 12—Variable Interest Entities of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

nuclear insurance, see Note 2223—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

160


new accounting pronouncements, see Note 11—Significant Accounting Policies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

ITEM 7A.QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

 

The Registrants are exposed to market risks associated with adverse changes in commodity prices, counterparty credit, interest rates and equity prices. Exelon’s RMC approves risk management policies and objectives for risk assessment, control and valuation, counterparty credit approval, and the monitoring and reporting of risk exposures. The RMC is chaired by the chief riskexecutive officer and includes the chief risk officer, chief strategy officer, chief executive officer of Exelon Utilities, chief commercial officer, chief financial officer corporate controller, general counsel, treasurer, vice presidentand chief executive officer of strategy, vice president of audit services and officers representing Exelon’s business units.Constellation. The RMC reports to the risk oversight committeeFinance and Risk Committee of the Exelon boardBoard of directorsDirectors on the scope of the risk management activities.

 

Commodity Price Risk (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Commodity price risk is associated with price movements resulting from changes in supply and demand, fuel costs, market liquidity, weather conditions, governmental regulatory and environmental policies, and other factors. To the extent the amount of energy Exelon generates differs from the amount of energy it has contracted to sell, Exelon has price risk from commodity price movements. Exelon seeks to mitigate its commodity price risk through the sale and purchase of electricity, fossil fuel, and other commodities.

Generation

 

Normal Operations and Hedging Activities. Electricity available from Generation’s owned or contracted generation supply in excess of Generation’s obligations to customers, including portions of ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s retail load, is sold into the wholesale markets. To reduce price risk caused by market fluctuations, Generation enters into non-derivative contracts as well as derivative contracts, including forwards, futures, swaps, and options, with approved counterparties to hedge anticipated exposures. Generation believes these instruments represent economic hedges that mitigate exposure to fluctuations in commodity prices. Generation expects the settlement of the majority of its economic hedges will occur during 20142016 through 2016.2018.

 

In general, increases and decreases in forward market prices have a positive and negative impact, respectively, on Generation’s owned and contracted generation positions which have not been hedged. Generation hedgesExelon’s hedging program involves the hedging of commodity risk for Exelon’s expected generation, typically on a ratable basis over thea three years leading to the spot market.year period. As of December 31, 2013,2015, the percentageproportion of expected generation hedged is 90%-93%, 60%-63% and 28%-31% for the major reportable segments was 92%-95%, 62%-65%2016, 2017 and 30%-33% for 2014, 2015 and 2016,2018, respectively. The percentage of expected generation hedged is the amount of equivalent sales divided by the expected generation. Expected generation representsis the amountvolume of energy estimated to be generated or purchased throughthat best represents our commodity position in energy markets from owned or contracted capacity.for capacity based upon a simulated dispatch model that makes assumptions regarding future market conditions, which are calibrated to market quotes for power, fuel, load following products, and options. Equivalent sales represent all hedging products, which include economic hedges and certain non-derivative contracts including Generation’s sales to ComEd, PECO and BGE to serve their retail load.

 

A portion of Generation’s hedging strategy may be accomplished with fuel products based on assumed correlations between power and fuel prices, which routinely change in the market. Market price risk exposure is the risk of a change in the value of unhedged positions. The forecasted market price risk exposure for Generation’s entire non-tradingnon-proprietary trading portfolio associated with a $5 reduction in the annual average around-the-clock energy price based on December 31, 2013,2015, market conditions and hedged position would be a decrease in pre-tax net income of approximately $30$50 million, $520$400 million and $820$725 million, respectively, for 2014, 20152016, 2017 and 2016.2018. Power price sensitivities are derived by

161


adjusting power price assumptions while keeping all other price inputs constant. Generation expects to actively manage its portfolio to mitigate market price risk exposure for its unhedged position. Actual results could differ depending on the specific timing of, and markets affected by, price changes, as well as future changes in Generation’s portfolio.

 

Proprietary Trading Activities. Generation also enters into certain energy-related derivatives for proprietary trading purposes. Proprietary trading includes all contracts entered into with the intent of benefiting from shifts or changes in market prices as opposed to those entered into with the intent of hedging or managing risk. Proprietary trading activities are subject to limits established by Exelon’s RMC. The proprietary trading portfolio is subject to a risk management policy that includes stringent risk management limits, including volume, stop loss and Value-at-Risk (VaR) limits to manage exposure to market risk. Additionally, the Exelon risk management group and Exelon’s RMC monitor the financial risks of the proprietary trading activities. The proprietary trading activities, which included physical volumes of 8,7627,310 GWh, 12,95810,571 GWh, and 5,7428,762 GWh for the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 20112013 respectively, are a complement to Generation’s energy marketing portfolio, but represent a small portion of Generation’s overall revenue from energy marketing activities. TradingProprietary trading portfolio activity for the year ended December 31, 2013,2015, resulted in pre-tax lossesgains of $8$1 million due to net mark-to-market losses of $39$8 million and realized gains of $31$9 million. Generation uses a 95% confidence interval, assuming standard normal distribution, one day holding period, one-tailed statistical measure in calculating its VaR. The daily VaR on proprietary trading activity averaged $1.0$0.2 million of exposure during the year. Generation has not segregated proprietary trading activity within the following discussion because of the relative size of the proprietary trading portfolio in comparison to

Generation’s total gross marginRevenue net of purchase power and fuel expense from continuing operations for the year ended December 31, 20132015 of $7,433$9,114 million.

 

Fuel Procurement. Generation procures coal and natural gas through long-term and short-term contracts, and spot-market purchases. Nuclear fuel assemblies are obtained primarilypredominantly through long-term contracts for uranium concentrates and long-termsupply contracts, forcontracted conversion services, contracted enrichment services, or a combination thereof, and contracted fuel fabrication services. The supply markets for coal, natural gas, uranium concentrates and certain nuclear fuel services are subject to price fluctuations and availability restrictions. Supply market conditions may make Generation’s procurement contracts subject to credit risk related to the potential non-performance of counterparties to deliver the contracted commodity or service at the contracted prices. Approximately 60%50% of Generation’s uranium concentrate requirements from 20142016 through 20182020 are supplied by three producers. In the event of non-performance by these or other suppliers, Generation believes that replacement uranium concentrates can be obtained, although at prices that may be unfavorable when compared to the prices under the current supply agreements. Non-performance by these counterparties could have a material adverse impact on Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations, cash flows and financial positions. See Note 22 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial StatementsITEM 7.—MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS for additional information regarding uranium and coal supply agreement matters.

 

ComEd

 

The financial swap contract between Generation and ComEd was deemed prudent by the Illinois Settlement Legislation, thereby ensuring that ComEd would be entitled to receive full cost recovery in rates. The change in fair value each period was recorded by ComEd with an offset to a regulatory asset or liability. This financial swap contract between Generation and ComEd expired on May 31, 2013. All realized impacts have been included in Generation’s and ComEd’s results of operations.

 

ComEd entered into 20-year contracts for renewable energy and RECs beginning in June 2012. ComEd is permitted to recover its renewable energy and REC costs from retail customers with no mark-up. The annual commitments represent the maximum settlements with suppliers for renewable energy and RECs under the existing contract terms. Pursuant to the ICC’s Order on December 19,

162


2012, ComEd’s commitments under the existing long-term contracts were reduced for the June 2013 through May 2014 procurement period. TheIn addition, the ICC’s December 18, 2013 orderOrder approved the reduction of ComEd’s commitments under the long-termthose contracts for the June 2014 through May 2015 procurement period, howeverand the amount of the reduction will not be finalized andwas approved by the ICC untilin March 2014. See Notes 3Note 3—Regulatory Matters and 12Note 13—Derivative Financial Instruments of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding energy procurement and derivatives.

 

PECO

 

PECO has contracts to procure electric supply that were executed through the competitive procurement process outlined in its PAPUC-approved DSP Programs, which are further discussed in Note 33—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements. PECO’sPECO has certain full requirements contracts and block contracts, which are considered derivatives and qualify for the normal purchases and normal sales scope exception under current derivative authoritative guidance, and as a result are accounted for on an accrual basis of accounting. Under the DSP Programs, PECO is permitted to recover its electric supply procurement costs from retail customers with no mark-up.

PECO has also entered into derivative natural gas contracts, which either qualify for the normal purchases and normal sales exception or have no mark-to-market balances because the derivatives are index priced, to hedge its long-term price risk in the natural gas market. PECO’s hedging program for natural gas procurement has no direct impact on its financial position or results of operations as natural gas costs are fully recovered from customers under the PGC.

 

PECO does not enter into derivatives for speculative or proprietary trading purposes. For additional information on these contracts, see Note 1213—Derivative Financial Instruments of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

BGE

 

BGE procures electric supply for default service customers through full requirements contracts pursuant to BGE’s MDPSC-approved SOS program. BGE’s full requirements contracts that are considered derivatives qualify for the normal purchases and normal sales scope exception under current derivative authoritative guidance and as a result, are accounted for on an accrual basis of accounting. Under the SOS program, BGE is permitted to recover its electricity procurement costs from retail customers, plus an administrative fee which includes a shareholder return component and an incremental cost component. However, through December 2016, BGE provides all residential electric customers a credit for the residential shareholder return component of the administrative charge.

 

BGE has also entered into derivative natural gas contracts, which qualify for the normal purchases and normal sales scope exception, to hedge its price risk in the natural gas market. The hedging program for natural gas procurement has no direct impact on BGE’s financial position. However, under BGE’s market-based rates incentive mechanism, BGE’s actual cost of gas is compared to a market index (a measure of the market price of gas in a given period). The difference between BGE’s actual cost and the market index is shared equally between shareholders and customers.

 

BGE does not enter into derivatives for speculative or proprietary trading purposes. For additional information on these contracts, see Note 1213—Derivative Financial Instruments of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

Trading and Non-Trading Marketing Activities

 

The following detailed presentation of Exelon’s, Generation’s ComEd’s and PECO’sComEd’s trading and non-trading marketing activities is included to address the recommended disclosures by the energy industry’s Committee of Chief Risk Officers (CCRO).

163


The following table provides detail on changes in Exelon’s, Generation’s, and ComEd’s commodity mark-to-market net asset or liability balance sheet position from January 1, 2012,2014 to December 31, 2013.2015. It indicates the drivers behind changes in the balance sheet amounts. This table incorporates the mark-to-market activities that are immediately recorded in earnings, as well as the settlements from OCI to earnings and changes in fair value for the cash flow hedging activities that are recorded in accumulatedAccumulated OCI on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. This table excludes all normal purchase and normal sales contracts and does not segregate proprietary trading activity. See Note 1213—Derivative Financial Instruments of the Combined Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for moreadditional information on the balance sheet classification of the mark-to-market energy contract net assets (liabilities) recorded as of December 31, 2013,2015 and December 31, 2012.2014.

 

  Generation  ComEd  Intercompany
Eliminations (b)
  Exelon 

Total mark-to-market energy contract net assets (liabilities) at January 1, 2012 (a)

 $1,648  $(800 $—    $848 

Contracts acquired at merger date (c)

  140   —     —     140 

Total change in fair value during 2012 of contracts recorded in result of operations

  (159  —     7   (152

Reclassification to realized at settlement of contracts recorded in results of operations

  775   —     —     775 

Ineffective portion recognized in income (d)

  (5  —     —     (5

Reclassification to realized at settlement from accumulated OCI (e)

  (1,368  —     621   (747

Effective portion of changes in fair value—recorded in OCI (f)

  719   —     (146  573 

Changes in fair value—energy derivatives (g)

  —     507   (482  25 

Changes in allocated collateral

  (89  —     —     (89

Changes in net option premium paid/(received)

  114   —     —     114 

Option premium amortization (h)

  (160  —     —     (160

Intercompany elimination of existing derivative contracts with Constellation

  (103  —     —     (103

Other balance sheet reclassifications

  (7  —     —     (7
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total mark-to-market energy contract net assets (liabilities) at December 31, 2012 (a)

 $1,505  $(293 $—    $1,212 

Total change in fair value during 2013 of contracts recorded in result of operations

  444   —     (6  438 

Reclassification to realized at settlement of contracts recorded in results of operations

  21   —     13   34 

Reclassification to realized at settlement from accumulated OCI (e)

  (683  —     219   (464

Changes in fair value—energy derivatives (g)

  —     100   (226  (126

Changes in allocated collateral

  (175  —     —     (175

Changes in net option premium paid/(received)

  36   —     —     36 

Option premium amortization (h)

  (104  —     —     (104

Other balance sheet reclassifications

  4   —     —     4 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total mark-to-market energy contract net assets (liabilities) at December 31, 2013 (a) (i)

 $1,048  $(193 $—    $855 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
   Generation  ComEd  Exelon 

Total mark-to-market energy contract net assets (liabilities) at January 1, 2014 (a)

  $1,047   $(193 $854  

Contracts acquired at merger date (c)

   128    —      128  

Total change in fair value during 2014 of contracts recorded in result of operations

   (608  —      (608

Reclassification to realized at settlement of contracts recorded in results of operations

   (21  —      (21

Reclassification to realized at settlement from accumulated OCI

   (195  —      (195

Changes in fair value—energy derivatives (b)

   —      (14  (14

Changes in allocated collateral

   1,503     1,503  

Changes in net option premium paid/(received)

   (38  —      (38

Option premium amortization

   (122  —      (122

Other balance sheet reclassifications (d)

   18    —      18  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total mark-to-market energy contract net assets (liabilities) at December 31, 2014 (a)

   1,712    (207  1,505  

Total change in fair value during 2015 of contracts recorded in result of operations

   412    —      412  

Reclassification to realized at settlement of contracts recorded in results of operations

   (168  —      (168

Reclassification to realized at settlement from accumulated OCI

   (2  —      (2

Changes in fair value—energy derivatives(b)

   —      (40  (40

Changes in allocated collateral

   (172  —      (172

Changes in net option premium paid/(received)

   (58  —      (58

Option premium amortization

   (21  —      (21

Other balance sheet reclassifications (d)

   50    —      50  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total mark-to-market energy contract net assets (liabilities) at December 31, 2015(a)

  $1,753   $(247 $1,506  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

(a)Amounts are shown net of cash collateral paid to and received from counterparties.
(b)Amounts related to the five-year financial swap between Generation and ComEd.
(c)For Generation, includes $660 million of collateral paid to counterparties, offset by $520 million of unrealized losses on commodity derivative positions.

164


(d)For Generation, reflects $5 million of changes in cash flow hedge ineffectiveness.
(e)For Generation, includes $219 million and $621 million of losses from reclassifications from accumulated OCI to recognize gains in net income related to settlements of the five-year financial swap contract with ComEd for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.
(f)For Generation, includes $146 million of gains related to the changes in fair value of the five-year financial swap with ComEd for the year ended 2012. Effective prior to the merger with Constellation, the five-year financial swap between Generation and ComEd was de-designated as a cash flow hedge. As a result, all changes in fair value for the year ended December 31, 2013 were recorded to operating revenues and eliminated in consolidation.
(g)For ComEd, the changes in fair value are recorded as a change in regulatory assets or liabilities. As of December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014, ComEd recorded a regulatory liability of $193$247 million and $293$207 million, respectively, related to its mark-to-market derivative liabilities with Generation and unaffiliated suppliers. As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, this includes $11Includes $55 million of decreases and $98 million of increases in fair value, respectively, and $215 million and $566 million, respectively, for reclassifications from regulatory assets to recognize cost in purchase power expense due to settlements of ComEd’s five-year financial swap with Generation. As of December 31, 2013 and 2012 ComEd also recorded $126 million and $34 million, respectively, of increases in fair value and $7 million and $5 million, respectively, ofan increase for realized losses due to settlements off $(15) million recorded in purchased power expense associated with floating-to-fixed energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers.suppliers for the year ended December 31, 2015. Includes $13 million of decreases in fair value and a reduction for realized gains due to settlements of $1 million for the year ended December 31, 2014.
(h)(c)Includes $104 million and $160$81 million of amounts reclassified to realized at settlementfair value from contracts acquired and $47 million of contracts recorded to results of operations related to option premiums due to the settlementcash collateral as a result of the underlying transactions for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.Integrys acquisition.
(i)(d)Includes the endingOther balance related to interest ratesheet reclassifications include derivative contracts and foreign exchange currency swaps to manage the exposure related to the interest rate componentacquired or sold by Generation through upfront payments or receipts of commodity positions and international purchases of commodities in currencies other than U.S. Dollars.cash, excluding option premiums.

Fair Values

 

The following tables present maturity and source of fair value for Exelon, Generation and ComEd mark-to-market commodity contract net assets (liabilities). The tables provide two fundamental pieces of information. First, the tables provide the source of fair value used in determining the carrying amount of the Registrants’ total mark-to-market net assets (liabilities), net of allocated collateral. Second, the tables show the maturity, by year, of the Registrants’ commodity contract net assets (liabilities) net of allocated collateral, giving an indication of when these mark-to-market amounts will settle and either generate or require cash. See Note 11—12—Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding fair value measurements and the fair value hierarchy.

 

Exelon

 

  Maturities Within Total Fair
Value
   Maturities Within Total
Fair

Value
 
  2014 2015 2016   2017 2018 2019 and
Beyond
   2016   2017   2018 2019 2020 2021 and
Beyond
 

Normal Operations, Commodity derivative contracts (a)(b):

                   

Actively quoted prices (Level 1)

  $(30 $(26 $17   $(4 $(2 $—    $(45  $37    $27    $(19 $(19 $(7 $—     $19  

Prices provided by external sources (Level 2)

   444   143   39    —     —     1   627    540     165     (8  (8  (6  —      683  

Prices based on model or other valuation methods (Level 3)(c)

   155   151   71    25   (22  (108  272    572     255     95    (26  (23  (69  804  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total

  $569  $268  $127   $21  $(24 $(107 $854   $1,149    $447    $68   $(53 $(36 $(69 $1,506  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Mark-to-market gains and losses on other economic hedge and trading derivative contracts that are recorded in results of operations.
(b)Amounts are shown net of collateral paid to and received from counterparties (and offset against mark-to-market assets and liabilities) of $144$1,234 million at December 31, 2013.2015.
(c)Includes ComEd’s net assets (liabilities) associated with the floating-to-fixed energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers.

 

165


Generation

 

  Maturities Within Total Fair
Value
   Maturities Within   Total
Fair

Value
 
  2014 2015 2016   2017 2018 2019 and
Beyond
   2016   2017   2018 2019 2020 2021
and
Beyond
   

Normal Operations, Commodity derivative contracts(a)(b):

                    

Actively quoted prices (Level 1)

  $(30 $(26 $17   $(4 $(2 $—    $(45  $37    $27    $(19 $(19 $(7 $—      $19  

Prices provided by external sources (Level 2)

   444   143   39    —     —     1   627    540     165     (8  (8  (6  —       683  

Prices based on model or other valuation methods (Level 3)

   172   170   89    43   (4  (5  465    595     276     116    (5  (1  70     1,051  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

 

Total

  $586  $287  $145   $39  $(6 $(4 $1,047   $1,172    $468    $89   $(32 $(14 $70    $1,753  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Mark-to-market gains and losses on other economic hedge and trading derivative contracts that are recorded in the results of operations.
(b)Amounts are shown net of collateral paid to and received from counterparties (and offset against mark-to-market assets and liabilities) of $144$1,234 million at December 31, 2013.2015.

ComEd

 

   Maturities Within  Fair
Value
 
   2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019 and
Beyond
  

Prices based on model or other valuation methods (Level 3)(a)

  $(17 $(19 $(18 $(18 $(18 $(103 $(193
   Maturities Within  Fair
Value
 
   2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021 and
Beyond
  

Prices based on model or other valuation methods (Level 3) (a)

  $(23 $(21 $(21 $(21 $(22 $(139 $(247

 

(a)Represents ComEd’s net liabilities associated with the floating-to-fixed energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers.

 

Credit Risk, Collateral, and Contingent Related Features (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The Registrants would be exposed to credit-related losses in the event of non-performance by counterparties that enter into derivative instruments. The credit exposure of derivative contracts, before collateral, is represented by the fair value of contracts at the reporting date. See Note 1213—Derivative Financial Instruments of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a detaildetailed discussion of credit risk, collateral, and contingent related features.

 

166


Generation

 

The following tables provide information on Generation’s credit exposure for all derivative instruments, normal purchase normal sales agreements, and applicable payables and receivables, net of collateral and instruments that are subject to master netting agreements, as of December 31, 2013.2015. The tables further delineate that exposure by credit rating of the counterparties and provide guidance on the concentration of credit risk to individual counterparties and an indication of the duration of a company’s credit risk by credit rating of the counterparties. The figures in the tables below do not includeexclude credit risk exposure from individual retail customers, uranium procurement contracts, orand exposure through RTOs, ISOs, NYMEX, ICE, and Nodal commodity exchanges, which are discussed below. Additionally, the figures in the tables below do not includeexclude exposures with affiliates, including net receivables with ComEd, PECO and BGE of $38$15 million, $38$36 million and $27$31 million, respectively. See Note 2526—Related Party Transactions of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for furtheradditional information.

 

Rating as of December 31, 2013

 Total
Exposure
Before Credit
Collateral
 Credit
Collateral (a)
 Net
Exposure
 Number of
Counterparties
Greater than 10%
of Net Exposure
 Net Exposure of
Counterparties
Greater than 10%
of Net  Exposure
 

Rating as of December 31, 2015

 Total
Exposure
Before Credit
Collateral
 Credit
Collateral (a)
 Net
Exposure
 Number of
Counterparties
Greater than 10%
of Net Exposure
 Net Exposure  of
Counterparties
Greater than 10%
of Net Exposure
 

Investment grade

 $1,621  $172  $1,449   1  $491  $1,397   $50   $1,347    1   $432  

Non-investment grade

  27   9   18   —     —     67    25    42    —      —    

No external ratings

          

Internally rated—investment grade

  416   1   415   1   226   521    —      521    —      —    

Internally rated—non-investment grade

  30   2   28   —     —     77    7    70    —      —    
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total

 $2,094  $184  $1,910   2  $717  $2,062   $82   $1,980    1   $432  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

   Maturity of Credit Risk Exposure 

Rating as of December 31, 2015

  Less than
2 Years
   2-5
Years
   Exposure
Greater than
5 Years
   Total Exposure
Before Credit
Collateral
 

Investment grade

  $1,036    $343    $18    $1,397  

Non-investment grade

   40     19     8     67  

No external ratings

        

Internally rated—investment grade

   452     46     23     521  

Internally rated—non-investment grade

   71     6     —       77  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total

  $1,599    $414    $49    $2,062  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

   Maturity of Credit Risk Exposure 

Rating as of December 31, 2013

  Less than
2 Years
   2-5
Years
   Exposure
Greater than
5 Years
   Total Exposure
Before Credit
Collateral
 

Investment grade

  $1,146   $340   $135   $1,621 

Non-investment grade

   23    4    —      27 

No external ratings

        

Internally rated—investment grade

   272    138    6    416 

Internally rated—non-investment grade

   30    —      —      30 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total

  $1,471   $482   $141   $2,094 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Net Credit Exposure by Type of Counterparty

  As of
December 31,
2013
   As of
December 31,
2015
 

Financial Institutions

  $256 

Investor-owned utilities, marketers and power producers

   684 

Financial institutions

  $187  

Investor-owned utilities, marketers, power producers

   886  

Energy cooperatives and municipalities

   907    872  

Other

   63    35  
  

 

   

 

 

Total

  $1,910   $1,980  
  

 

   

 

 

 

(a)As of December 31, 2013,2015, credit collateral held from counterparties where Generation had credit exposure included $155$13 million of cash and $29$69 million of letters of credit.

 

167


ComEd

 

Credit risk for ComEd is managed by credit and collection policies, which are consistent with state regulatory requirements. ComEd is currently obligated to provide service to all electric customers within its franchised territory. ComEd records a provision for uncollectible accounts, based upon historical experience, to provide for the potential loss from nonpayment by these customers. See Note 11—Significant Accounting Policies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for the allowance for uncollectible accounts policy. ComEd is permitted to recover its costs of procuring energy through the Illinois Settlement Legislation as well as the ICC-approved procurement tariffs. ComEd will monitor nonpayment from customers and will make any necessary adjustments to the provision for uncollectible accounts. The Illinois Settlement Legislation prohibits utilities, including ComEd, from terminating electric service to a residential electric space heat customer due to nonpayment between December 1 of any year through March 1 of the following year. ComEd’s ability to disconnect non space-heating residential customers is also impacted by certain weather restrictions, at any time of year, under the Illinois Public Utilities Act. ComEd will monitor the impact of its disconnection practices and will make any necessary adjustments to the provision for uncollectible accounts. ComEd did not have any customers representing over 10% of its revenues as of December 31, 2013.2015. See Note 33—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding ComEd’s recently approved tariffs to adjust rates annually through a rider mechanism to reflect increases or decreases in annual uncollectible accounts expense.

 

ComEd’s power procurement contracts provide suppliers with a certain amount of unsecured credit. The credit position is based on forward market prices compared to the benchmark prices. The benchmark prices are the forward prices of energy projected through the contract term and are set at the point of supplier bid submittals. If the forward market price of energy exceeds the benchmark price, the suppliers are required to post collateral for the secured credit portion after adjusting for any unpaid deliveries and unsecured credit allowed under the contract. The unsecured credit used by the suppliers represents ComEd’s net credit exposure. ComEd’s counterparty credit risk is mitigated by its ability to

recover realized energy costs through customer rates. As of December 31, 2013,2015, ComEd’s credit exposure to energy suppliers was immaterial.

 

PECO

 

Credit risk for PECO is managed by credit and collection policies, which are consistent with state regulatory requirements. PECO is currently obligated to provide service to all retail electric customers within its franchised territory. PECO records a provision for uncollectible accounts to provide for the potential loss from nonpayment by these customers. See Note 11—Significant Accounting Policies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for the allowance for uncollectible accounts policy. In accordance with PAPUC regulations, after November 30 and before April 1, an electric distribution utility or natural gas distribution utility shall not terminate service to customers with household incomes at or below 250% of the Federal poverty level. PECO’s provision for uncollectible accounts will continue to be affected by changes in prices as well as changes in PAPUC regulations. PECO did not have any customers representing over 10% of its revenues as of December 31, 2013.2015.

 

PECO’s supplier master agreements that govern the terms of its DSP Program contracts, which define a supplier’s performance assurance requirements, allow a supplier to meet its credit requirements with a certain amount of unsecured credit. The amount of unsecured credit is determined based on the supplier’s lowest credit rating from the major credit rating agencies and the supplier’s tangible net worth. The credit position is based on the initial market price, which is the forward price of energy on the day a transaction is executed, compared to the current forward price curve for energy. To the extent that the forward price curve for energy exceeds the initial market price, the supplier is required to post collateral to the extent the credit exposure is greater than the supplier’s unsecured credit limit. As of December 31, 2013,2015, PECO had no net credit exposure with suppliers.

 

168


PECO does not obtain cash collateral from suppliers under its natural gas supply and asset management agreements. As of December 31, 2013, PECO had2015, PECO’s credit exposure of $9 million under its natural gas supply and asset management agreements with investment grade suppliers.suppliers was immaterial.

 

BGE

 

Credit risk for BGE is managed by credit and collection policies, which are consistent with state regulatory requirements. BGE is currently obligated to provide service to all electric customers within its franchised territory. BGE records a provision for uncollectible accounts to provide for the potential loss from nonpayment by these customers. BGE will monitor nonpayment from customers and will make any necessary adjustments to the provision for uncollectible accounts. See Note 11—Significant Accounting Policies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for uncollectible accounts policy. MDPSC regulations prohibit BGE from terminating service to residential customers due to nonpayment from November 1 through March 31 if the forecasted temperature is 32 degrees or below for the subsequent 72 hour period. BGE is also prohibited by the Maryland Public Utilities Article of the Annotated Code of Maryland and MDPSC regulations from terminating service to residential customers due to nonpayment if the forecasted temperature is 95 degrees or above for the subsequent 72 hour period. BGE did not have any customers representing over 10% of its revenues as of December 31, 2013.2015.

 

BGE’s full requirement wholesale electric power agreements that govern the terms of its electric supply procurement contracts, which define a supplier’s performance assurance requirements, allow a supplier, or its guarantor, to meet its credit requirements with a certain amount of unsecured credit. The amount of unsecured credit is determined based on the supplier’s lowest credit rating from the major credit rating agencies and the supplier’s tangible net worth, subject to an unsecured credit cap. The credit position is based on the initial market price, which is the forward price of energy on the day

a transaction is executed, compared to the current forward price curve for energy. To the extent that the forward price curve for energy exceeds the initial market price, the supplier is required to post collateral to the extent the credit exposure is greater than the supplier’s unsecured credit limit. The seller’s credit exposure is calculated each business day. As of December 31, 2013,2015, BGE had no net credit exposure with suppliers.

 

BGE’s regulated gas business is exposed to market-price risk. This market-price risk is mitigated by BGE’s recovery of its costs to procure natural gas through a gas cost adjustment clause approved by the MDPSC. BGE does make off-system sales after BGE has satisfied its customers’ demands, which are not covered by the gas cost adjustment clause. At December 31, 2013,2015, BGE had credit exposure of $14$4 million related to off-system sales which is mitigated by parental guarantees, letters of credit, or right to offset clauses within other contracts with those third-party suppliers.

 

Collateral (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Generation

 

As part of the normal course of business, Generation routinely enters into physical or financial contracts for the sale and purchase of electricity, fossil fuelnatural gas and other commodities. These contracts either contain express provisions or otherwise permit Generation and its counterparties to demand adequate assurance of future performance when there are reasonable grounds for doing so. In accordance with the contracts and applicable law, if Generation is downgraded by a credit rating agency, especially if such downgrade is to a level below investment grade, it is possible that a counterparty would attempt to rely on such a downgrade as a basis for making a demand for adequate assurance of future performance. Depending on Generation’s net position with a counterparty, the demand could be for the posting of collateral. In the absence of expressly agreed-to provisions that specify the collateral that must be provided, collateral requested will be a function of the facts and circumstances of the situation at the time of the demand. In this case, Generation believes an amount

169


of several months of future payments (i.e. capacity payments) rather than a calculation of fair value is the best estimate for the contingent collateral obligation, which has been factored into the disclosure below. See Note 1213—Derivative Financial Instruments of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding collateral requirements.

 

Generation sellstransacts output through bilateral contracts. The bilateral contracts are subject to credit risk, which relates to the ability of counterparties to meet their contractual payment obligations. Any failure to collect these payments from counterparties could have a material impact on Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations, cash flows and financial position. As market prices rise above or fall below contracted price levels, Generation is required to post collateral with purchasers; as market prices fall below contracted price levels, counterparties are required to post collateral with Generation. In order to post collateral, Generation depends on access to bank credit facilities, which serve as liquidity sources to fund collateral requirements. See Note 1314—Debt and Credit Agreements of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

As of December 31, 2013,2015, Generation had cash collateral of $72$1,267 million posted and cash collateral held of $206$21 million for external counterparties with derivative positions, of which $144$1,234 million and $9 million in net cash collateral deposits were offset against mark-to-market assetsenergy derivatives and liabilities.interest rate and foreign exchange derivatives related to underlying energy contracts, respectively. As of December 31, 2013, $102015, $3 million of cash collateral deposits was not offset against net derivative positions because it was not associated with energy-related derivatives or as of the balance sheet date there were no positions to offset. As of December 31, 2014, Generation had cash collateral posted of $1,497 million and cash collateral held of $77 million for external counterparties with derivative positions, of which $1,406 million and $6 million in net cash collateral deposits were offset against

energy derivatives and interest rate and foreign exchange derivatives related to underlying energy contracts, respectively. As of December 31, 2014, $8 million of cash collateral posted was not offset against net derivative positions because it was not associated with energy-related derivatives. As of December 31, 2012, Generation had cash collateral held of $499 million and cash collateral posted of $527 million for counterparties with derivativederivatives or as the balance sheet date there were no positions of which $31 million in net cash collateral deposits were offset against mark-to-market assets and liabilities. As of December 31, 2012, $3 million of cash collateral received was not offset against net mark-to-market assets and liabilities because it was not associated with energy-related derivatives.to offset. See Note 2223—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding the letters of credit supporting the cash collateral.

 

ComEd

 

As of December 31, 2013,2015, ComEd held immaterial amounts of cash and letters of credit for the purpose ofno collateral from suppliers in association with standard block energy procurement contracts and held approximately $19 million in the form of cash for both annual and long-termletters of credit for renewable energy contracts. See Notes 3Note 3—Regulatory Matters and 12Note 13—Derivative Financial Instruments of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for furtheradditional information.

 

PECO

 

As of December 31, 2013,2015, PECO was not required to post collateral under its energy and natural gas procurement contracts. See Note 1213—Derivative Financial Instruments of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for furtheradditional information.

 

BGE

 

BGE is not required to post collateral under its electric supply contracts. As of December 31, 2013,2015, BGE was not required to post collateral under its natural gas procurement contracts nor was it holding collateral under its electric supply and natural gas procurement contracts. See Note 1213—Derivative Financial Instruments of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for furtheradditional information.

 

RTOs and ISOs (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE participate in all, or some, of the established, real-time energy markets that are administered by PJM, ISO-NE, ISO-NY, CAISO, MISO, SPP, AESO, OIESO and ERCOT. In these areas, power is traded through bilateral agreements between buyers and sellers

170


and on the spot markets that are operated by the RTOs or ISOs, as applicable. In areas where there is no spot market, electricity is purchased and sold solely through bilateral agreements. For sales into the spot markets administered by an RTO or ISO, the RTO or ISO maintains financial assurance policies that are established and enforced by those administrators. The credit policies of the RTOs and ISOs may, under certain circumstances, require that losses arising from the default of one member on spot market transactions be shared by the remaining participants. Non-performance or non-payment by a major counterparty could result in a material adverse impact on the Registrants’ results of operations, cash flows and financial positions.

 

Exchange Traded Transactions (Exelon and Generation)

 

Generation enters into commodity transactions on NYMEX, ICE and the Nodal exchange. The NYMEX, ICE and Nodal exchange clearinghouses act as the counterparty to each trade. Transactions on the NYMEX, ICE and Nodal exchange must adhere to comprehensive collateral and margining requirements. As a result, transactions on NYMEX, ICE and Nodal exchange are significantly collateralized and have limited counterparty credit risk.

Long-Term Leases (Exelon)

 

Exelon’s consolidated balance sheet,Consolidated Balance Sheet, as of December 31, 2013,2015, included a $698$352 million net investment in coal-fired plants in Georgia and Texas subject to long-term leases. This investment represents the estimated residual value of leased assets at the end of the respective lease terms of $1,465$639 million, less unearned income of $767$287 million. As of December 31, 2014, Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheet included a $361 million net investment in coal-fired plants in Georgia subject to long-term leases, which represented the estimated residual value of leased assets at the end of the respective lease terms of $685 million, less unearned income of $324 million. The lease agreements provide the lessees with fixed purchase options at the end of the lease terms. If the lessees dolessee does not exercise the fixed purchase options, Exelon has the ability to operate the stations and keep or market the power itself or require the lessees to return the leasehold interests orlessee to arrange for a third-party to bid on a service contract for a period following the lease term. If Exelon chooses the service contract option, the leasehold interests will be returned to Exelon at the end of the term of the service contract. In any event, Exelon will be subject to residual value risk if the lessees dolessee does not exercise the fixed purchase options. This risk is partially mitigated by the fair value of the scheduled payments under the service contract. However, such payments are not guaranteed. Further, the term of the service contract is less than the expected remaining useful life of the plants and, therefore, Exelon’s exposure to residual value risk will not be mitigated by payments under the service contract in this remaining period. Lessee performance under the lease agreements is supported by collateral and credit enhancement measures. Management regularly evaluates the creditworthiness of Exelon’s counterparties to these long-term leases. Exelon monitors the continuing credit quality of the credit enhancement party.

 

Pursuant to the applicable accounting guidance, Exelon is required to review the estimated residual values of its direct financing lease investments at least annually and, if the review indicates a fair value below the carrying value and the decline is determined to be other than temporary, must record an impairment charge in the period the estimate changed. Based on the annual review performed in the second quarterquarters of 2013,2015 and 2014, the estimated residual value of one of Exelon’s direct financing leases for the Georgia generating stations experienced an other than temporary decline resultingdeclines given increases in estimated long-term operating and maintenance costs in the 2015 annual review and reduced long-term energy and capacity price expectations in the 2014 annual review. As a $14result, Exelon recorded a $24 million pre-tax impairment charge in the second quarter of 2013.2015 and 2014 for these stations. See Note 88—Impairment of Long-Lived Assets of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information. Through December 31, 2013, no events have occurred that would require Exelon to review the estimated residual values of its direct financing lease investments subsequent to the review performed in the second quarter of 2013.

 

Interest-RateInterest Rate and Foreign Exchange Risk (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The Registrants use a combination of fixed-rate and variable-rate debt to manage interest rate exposure. The Registrants may also utilize fixed-to-floating interest rate swaps, which are typically designated as fair value hedges, as a means to manage their interest rate exposure. In addition, the

171


Registrants may utilize interest rate derivatives to lock in rate levels in anticipation of future financings, which are typically designated as cash flow hedges. These strategies are employed to manage interest rate risks. At December 31, 2013,2015, Exelon had $1,425$800 million of notional amounts of fixed-to-floating hedges outstanding and $190Exelon and Generation had $738 million of notional amounts of floating-to-fixed hedges outstanding. Assuming the fair value and cash flow interest rate hedges are 100% effective, a hypothetical 50 bps increase in the interest rates associated with unhedged variable-rate debt (excluding Commercial Paper) and fixed-to-floating swaps would result in an approximate $5approximately a $6 million decrease in Exelon Consolidated pre-tax income for the year ended December 31, 2013.2015. To manage foreign exchange rate exposure associated with international energy purchases in currencies other than U.S. dollars, Generation utilizes foreign currency derivatives, which are typically designated as economic hedges.

Equity Price Risk (Exelon and Generation)

 

Exelon and Generation maintain trust funds, as required by the NRC, to fund certain costs of decommissioning Generation’s nuclear plants. As of December 31, 2013,2015, Generation’s decommissioning trust funds are reflected at fair value on its Consolidated Balance Sheets. The mix of securities in the trust funds is designed to provide returns to be used to fund decommissioning and to compensate Generation for inflationary increases in decommissioning costs; however, the equity securities in the trust funds are exposed to price fluctuations in equity markets, and the value of fixed-rate, fixed-income securities are exposed to changes in interest rates. Generation actively monitors the investment performance of the trust funds and periodically reviews asset allocation in accordance with Generation’s NDT fund investment policy. A hypothetical 10% increase in interest rates and decrease in equity prices would result in a $482$454 million reduction in the fair value of the trust assets. This calculation holds all other variables constant and assumes only the discussed changes in interest rates and equity prices. See ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS for further discussion of equity price risk as a result of the current capital and credit market conditions.

172


ITEM 7.MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

 

Generation

 

General

 

Generation’s integrated business consists of the generation, physical delivery and marketing of power across multiple geographical regions through its customer-facing business, Constellation, which sells electricity and natural gas to both wholesale and retail customers. Generation operatesalso sells renewable energy and other energy-related products and services, and engages in natural gas and oil exploration and production activities. Generation has six segments:reportable segments consisting of the Mid-Atlantic, Midwest, New England, New York, ERCOT and Other Regions in Generation. The operation of all six segments consists of owned contracted and investments in electric generating facilities, and wholesale and retail customer supply of electric and natural gas products and services, including renewable energy products, risk management services and investments in natural gas exploration and production activities.Power Regions. These segments are discussed in further detail in “ITEM 1. BUSINESS—Generation”Exelon Generation Company, LLC” of this Form 10-K.

 

Executive Overview

 

A discussion of items pertinent to Generation’s executive overview is set forth under “ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS—Exelon—Exelon Corporation—Executive Overview” of this Form 10-K.

 

Results of Operations

 

Year Ended December 31, 20132015 Compared To Year Ended December 31, 20122014 and Year Ended December 31, 20122014 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 20112013

 

A discussion of Generation’s results of operations for 20132015 compared to 20122014 and 20122014 compared to 20112013 is set forth under “Results of Operations—Generation” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Results of Operations” of this Form 10-K.

 

Liquidity and Capital Resources

 

Generation’s business is capital intensive and requires considerable capital resources. Generation’s capital resources are primarily provided by internally generated cash flows from operations and, to the extent necessary, external financing, including the issuance of long-term debt, commercial paper, participation in the intercompany money pool or capital contributions from Exelon. Generation’s access to external financing at reasonable terms is dependent on its credit ratings and general business conditions, as well as that of the utility industry in general. If these conditions deteriorate to where Generation no longer has access to the capital markets at reasonable terms, Generation has access to credit facilities in the aggregate of $5.6$5.7 billion that Generation currently utilizes to support its commercial paper program and to issue letters of credit.

 

See the “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” and Note 1314 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements of this Form 10-K for further discussion.

 

Capital resources are used primarily to fund Generation’s capital requirements, including construction, retirement of debt, the payment of distributions to Exelon, contributions to Exelon’s pension plans and investments in new and existing ventures. Future acquisitions could require external financing or borrowings or capital contributions from Exelon.

 

Cash Flows from Operating Activities

 

A discussion of items pertinent to Generation’s cash flows from operating activities is set forth under “Cash Flows from Operating Activities” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

173


Cash Flows from Investing Activities

 

A discussion of items pertinent to Generation’s cash flows from investing activities is set forth under “Cash Flows from Investing Activities” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Cash Flows from Financing Activities

 

A discussion of items pertinent to Generation’s cash flows from financing activities is set forth under “Cash Flows from Financing Activities” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Credit Matters

 

A discussion of credit matters pertinent to Generation is set forth under “Credit Matters” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Contractual Obligations and Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

 

A discussion of Generation’s contractual obligations, commercial commitments and off-balance sheet arrangements is set forth under “Contractual Obligations and Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

 

See Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and PECO—BGE—Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates above for a discussion of Generation’s critical accounting policies and estimates.

 

New Accounting Pronouncements

 

See Note 1 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding new accounting pronouncements.

 

ITEM 7A.QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

 

Generation

 

Generation is exposed to market risks associated with commodity price, credit, interest rates and equity price. These risks are described above under “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk—Exelon.”

174


ITEM 7.MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

 

ComEd

 

General

 

ComEd operates in a single business segment and its operations consist of the purchase and regulated retail sale of electricity and the provision of distribution and transmission services to retail customers in northern Illinois, including the City of Chicago. This segment is discussed in further detail in “ITEM 1. BUSINESS—ComEd” of this Form 10-K.

 

Executive Overview

 

A discussion of items pertinent to ComEd’s executive overview is set forth under “EXELON CORPORATION—Executive Overview” of this Form 10-K.

 

Results of Operations

 

Year Ended December 31, 20132015 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 20122014 and Year Ended December 31, 20122014 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 20112013

 

A discussion of ComEd’s results of operations for 20132015 compared to 20122014 and for 20122014 compared to 20112013 is set forth under “Results of Operations—ComEd” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Results of Operations” of this Form 10-K.

 

Liquidity and Capital Resources

 

ComEd’s business is capital intensive and requires considerable capital resources. ComEd’s capital resources are primarily provided by internally generated cash flows from operations and, to the extent necessary, external financing, including the issuance of long-term debt, commercial paper or credit facility borrowings. ComEd’s access to external financing at reasonable terms is dependent on its credit ratings and general business conditions, as well as that of the utility industry in general. At December 31, 2013,2015, ComEd had access to a revolving credit facility with aggregate bank commitments of $1 billion. See the “Credit Matters” section of “Liquidity and Capital Resources” for additional discussion.

 

See the “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” and Note 1314 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements of this Form 10-K for further discussion.

 

Capital resources are used primarily to fund ComEd’s capital requirements, including construction, retirement of debt, and contributions to Exelon’s pension plans. Additionally, ComEd operates in rate-regulated environments in which the amount of new investment recovery may be limited and where such recovery takes place over an extended period of time.

 

Cash Flows from Operating Activities

 

A discussion of items pertinent to ComEd’s cash flows from operating activities is set forth under “Cash Flows from Operating Activities” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Cash Flows from Investing Activities

 

A discussion of items pertinent to ComEd’s cash flows from investing activities is set forth under “Cash Flows from Investing Activities” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

175


Cash Flows from Financing Activities

 

A discussion of items pertinent to ComEd’s cash flows from financing activities is set forth under “Cash Flows from Financing Activities” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Credit Matters

 

A discussion of credit matters pertinent to ComEd is set forth under “Credit Matters” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Contractual Obligations and Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

 

A discussion of ComEd’s contractual obligations, commercial commitments and off-balance sheet arrangements is set forth under “Contractual Obligations and Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

 

See Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and PECO—BGE—Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates above for a discussion of ComEd’s critical accounting policies and estimates.

 

New Accounting Pronouncements

 

See Note 1 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding new accounting pronouncements.

 

ITEM 7A.QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

 

ComEd

 

ComEd is exposed to market risks associated with commodity price, credit and interest rates. These risks are described above under “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk—Exelon.”

176


ITEM 7.MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

 

PECO

 

General

 

PECO operates in a single business segment and its operations consist of the purchase and regulated retail sale of electricity and the provision of distribution and transmission services in southeastern Pennsylvania including the City of Philadelphia, and the purchase and regulated retail sale of natural gas and the provision of distribution service in Pennsylvania in the counties surrounding the City of Philadelphia. This segment is discussed in further detail in “ITEM 1. BUSINESS—PECO” of this Form 10-K.

 

Executive Overview

 

A discussion of items pertinent to PECO’s executive overview is set forth under “EXELON CORPORATION—Executive Overview” of this Form 10-K.

 

Results of Operations

 

Year Ended December 31, 20132015 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 20122014 and Year Ended December 31, 20122014 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 20112013

 

A discussion of PECO’s results of operations for 20132015 compared to 20122014 and for 20122014 compared to 20112013 is set forth under “Results of Operations—PECO” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Results of Operations” of this Form 10-K.

 

Liquidity and Capital Resources

 

PECO’s business is capital intensive and requires considerable capital resources. PECO’s capital resources are primarily provided by internally generated cash flows from operations and, to the extent necessary, external financing, including the issuance of long-term debt, commercial paper or participation in the intercompany money pool. PECO’s access to external financing at reasonable terms is dependent on its credit ratings and general business conditions, as well as that of the utility industry in general. If these conditions deteriorate to where PECO no longer has access to the capital markets at reasonable terms, PECO has access to a revolving credit facility. At December 31, 2013,2015, PECO had access to a revolving credit facility with aggregate bank commitments of $600 million. See the “Credit Matters” section of “Liquidity and Capital Resources” for additional discussion.

 

Capital resources are used primarily to fund PECO’s capital requirements, including construction, retirement of debt, the payment of dividends and contributions to Exelon’s pension plans. Additionally, PECO operates in a rate-regulated environment in which the amount of new investment recovery may be limited and where such recovery takes place over an extended period of time.

 

Cash Flows from Operating Activities

 

A discussion of items pertinent to PECO’s cash flows from operating activities is set forth under “Cash Flows from Operating Activities” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Cash Flows from Investing Activities

 

A discussion of items pertinent to PECO’s cash flows from investing activities is set forth under “Cash Flows from Investing Activities” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

177


Cash Flows from Financing Activities

 

A discussion of items pertinent to PECO’s cash flows from financing activities is set forth under “Cash Flows from Financing Activities” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Credit Matters

 

A discussion of credit matters pertinent to PECO is set forth under “Credit Matters” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Contractual Obligations and Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

 

A discussion of PECO’s contractual obligations, commercial commitments and off-balance sheet arrangements is set forth under “Contractual Obligations and Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

 

See Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and PECO—BGE—Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates above for a discussion of PECO’s critical accounting policies and estimates.

 

New Accounting Pronouncements

 

See Note 1 of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding new accounting pronouncements.

 

ITEM 7A.QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

 

PECO

 

PECO is exposed to market risks associated with credit and interest rates. These risks are described above under “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk—Exelon.”

178


ITEM 7.MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

 

BGE

 

General

 

BGE operates in a single business segment and its operations consist of the purchase and regulated retail sale of electricity and the provision of distribution and transmission services in central Maryland, including the City of Baltimore, and the purchase and regulated retail sale of natural gas and the provision of distribution service in central Maryland, including the City of Baltimore. This segment is discussed in further detail in “ITEM 1. BUSINESS—BGE” of this Form 10-K.

 

Executive Overview

 

A discussion of items pertinent to BGE’s executive overview is set forth under “EXELON CORPORATION—Executive Overview” of this Form 10-K.

 

Results of Operations

 

Year Ended December 31, 20132015 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 20122014 and Year Ended December 31, 20122014 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 20112013

 

A discussion of BGE’s results of operations for 20132015 compared to 20122014 and for 20122014 compared to 20112013 is set forth under “Results of Operations—BGE” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Results of Operations” of this Form 10-K.

 

Liquidity and Capital Resources

 

BGE’s business is capital intensive and requires considerable capital resources. BGE’s capital resources are primarily provided by internally generated cash flows from operations and, to the extent necessary, external financing, including the issuance of long-term debt or commercial paper. BGE’s access to external financing at reasonable terms is dependent on its credit ratings and general business conditions, as well as that of the utility industry in general. If these conditions deteriorate to where BGE no longer has access to the capital markets at reasonable terms, BGE has access to a revolving credit facility. At December 31, 2013,2015, BGE had access to a revolving credit facility with aggregate bank commitments of $600 million. See the “Credit Matters” section of “Liquidity and Capital Resources” for additional discussion.

 

Capital resources are used primarily to fund BGE’s capital requirements, including construction, retirement of debt, the payment of dividends and contributions to Exelon’s pension plans. Additionally, BGE operates in a rate-regulated environment in which the amount of new investment recovery may be limited and where such recovery takes place over an extended period of time.

 

Cash Flows from Operating Activities

 

A discussion of items pertinent to BGE’s cash flows from operating activities is set forth under “Cash Flows from Operating Activities” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of thisForm 10-K.

 

Cash Flows from Investing Activities

 

A discussion of items pertinent to BGE’s cash flows from investing activities is set forth under “Cash Flows from Investing Activities” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of thisForm 10-K.

179


Cash Flows from Financing Activities

 

A discussion of items pertinent to BGE’s cash flows from financing activities is set forth under “Cash Flows from Financing Activities” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of thisForm 10-K.

 

Credit Matters

 

A discussion of credit matters pertinent to BGE is set forth under “Credit Matters” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Contractual Obligations and Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

 

A discussion of BGE’s contractual obligations, commercial commitments and off-balance sheet arrangements is set forth under “Contractual Obligations and Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements” in “EXELON CORPORATION—Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.

 

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

 

See Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE—Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates above for a discussion of BGE’s critical accounting policies and estimates.

 

New Accounting Pronouncements

 

See Note 11—Significant Accounting Policies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding new accounting pronouncements.

 

ITEM 7A.QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

 

BGE

 

BGE is exposed to market risks associated with credit and interest rates. These risks are described above under “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk—Exelon.”

180


ITEM 8.FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

 

Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

 

The management of Exelon Corporation (Exelon) is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f). Internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

 

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

 

Exelon’s management conducted an assessment of the effectiveness of Exelon’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013.2015. In making this assessment, management used the criteria inInternal Control—Integrated Framework (1992)(2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on this assessment, Exelon’s management concluded that, as of December 31, 2013,2015, Exelon’s internal control over financial reporting was effective.

 

The effectiveness of the Exelon’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013,2015, has been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report which appears herein.

 

February 13, 201410, 2016

181


Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

 

The management of Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Generation) is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f). Internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

 

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

 

Generation’s management conducted an assessment of the effectiveness of Generation’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013.2015. In making this assessment, management used the criteria inInternal Control—Integrated Framework (1992)(2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on this assessment, Generation’s management concluded that, as of December 31, 2013,2015, Generation’s internal control over financial reporting was effective.

 

The effectiveness of the Generation’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013,2015, has been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report which appears herein.

 

February 13, 201410, 2016

182


Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

 

The management of Commonwealth Edison Company (ComEd) is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f). Internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

 

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

 

ComEd’s management conducted an assessment of the effectiveness of ComEd’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013.2015. In making this assessment, management used the criteria inInternal Control—Integrated Framework (1992)(2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on this assessment, ComEd’s management concluded that, as of December 31, 2013,2015, ComEd’s internal control over financial reporting was effective.

 

The effectiveness of the ComEd’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013,2015, has been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report which appears herein.

 

February 13, 201410, 2016

183


Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

 

The management of PECO Energy Company (PECO) is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f). Internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

 

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

 

PECO’s management conducted an assessment of the effectiveness of PECO’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013.2015. In making this assessment, management used the criteria inInternal Control—Integrated Framework (1992)(2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on this assessment, PECO’s management concluded that, as of December 31, 2013,2015, PECO’s internal control over financial reporting was effective.

 

The effectiveness of the PECO’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013,2015, has been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report which appears herein.

 

February 13, 201410, 2016

184


Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

 

The management of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company (BGE) is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f). Internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

 

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

 

BGE’s management conducted an assessment of the effectiveness of BGE’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013.2015. In making this assessment, management used the criteria inInternal Control—Integrated Framework (1992)(2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on this assessment, BGE’s management concluded that, as of December 31, 2013,2015, BGE’s internal control over financial reporting was effective.

 

The effectiveness of BGE’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013,2015, has been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report which appears herein.

 

February 13, 201410, 2016

185


Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

 

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of Exelon Corporation:

 

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements listed in the index appearing under Item 15(a)(1) present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Exelon Corporation (“the Company”(the “Company”) and its subsidiaries at December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014 and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 20132015 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In addition, in our opinion, the financial statement schedules listed in the index appearing under itemItem 15(a)(2) present fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein when read in conjunction with the related consolidated financial statements. Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013,2015, based on criteria established inInternal Control—Integrated Framework (1992)(2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). The Company’s management is responsible for these financial statements and financial statement schedules, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control Overover Financial Reporting.Reporting appearing under Item 8. Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements, on the financial statement schedules, and on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our integrated audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audits of the financial statements included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.

 

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

 

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

 

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Chicago, Illinois

February 13, 201410, 2016

186


Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

 

To the Board of Directors and Member of Exelon Generation Company, LLC:

 

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements listed in the index appearing under Item 15(a)(1) present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Exelon Generation Company, LLC (“the Company”(the “Company”) and its subsidiaries at December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014 and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 20132015 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In addition, in our opinion, the financial statement schedule listed in the index appearing under itemItem 15(a)(2) presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein when read in conjunction with the related consolidated financial statements. Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013,2015, based on criteria established inInternal Control—Integrated Framework (1992)(2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). The Company’s management is responsible for these financial statements and financial statement schedule, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control Overover Financial Reporting.Reporting appearing under Item 8. Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements, on the financial statement schedule, and on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our integrated audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audits of the financial statements included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.

 

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

 

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

 

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Baltimore, Maryland

February 13, 201410, 2016

187


Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

 

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of Commonwealth Edison Company:

 

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements listed in the index appearing under Item 15(a)(1) present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Commonwealth Edison Company (“the Company”(the “Company”) and its subsidiaries at December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 20132015 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In addition, in our opinion, the financial statement schedule listed in the index appearing under itemItem 15(a)(2) presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein when read in conjunction with the related consolidated financial statements. Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013,2015, based on criteria established inInternal Control—Integrated Framework (1992)(2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). The Company’s management is responsible for these financial statements and financial statement schedule, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control Overover Financial Reporting.Reporting appearing under Item 8. Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements, on the financial statement schedule, and on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our integrated audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audits of the financial statements included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.

 

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

 

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

 

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Chicago, Illinois

February 13, 201410, 2016

188


Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

 

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of PECO Energy Company:

 

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements listed in the index appearing under Item 15(a)(1) present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of PECO Energy Company (“the Company”(the “Company”) and its subsidiaries at December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014 and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 20132015 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In addition, in our opinion, the financial statement schedule listed in the index appearing under itemItem 15(a)(2) presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein when read in conjunction with the related consolidated financial statements. Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013,2015, based on criteria established inInternal Control—Integrated Framework (1992)(2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). The Company’s management is responsible for these financial statements and financial statement schedule, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control Overover Financial Reporting.Reporting appearing under Item 8. Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements, on the financial statement schedule, and on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our integrated audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audits of the financial statements included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.

 

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

 

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

 

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

February 13, 201410, 2016

189


Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

 

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company:

 

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements listed in the index appearing under Item 15(a)(1) present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company (“the Company”(the “Company”) and its subsidiaries at December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014 and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 20132015 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In addition, in our opinion, the financial statement schedule listed in the index appearing under itemItem 15(a)(2) presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein when read in conjunction with the related consolidated financial statements. Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013,2015, based on criteria established inInternal Control—Integrated Framework (1992)(2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). The Company’s management is responsible for these financial statements and financial statement schedule, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control Overover Financial Reporting.Reporting appearing under Item 8. Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements, on the financial statement schedule, and on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audits (which was an integrated audit in 2012).audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audits of the financial statements included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.

 

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

 

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

 

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Baltimore, Maryland

February 13, 201410, 2016

[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]

 

190


Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income

 

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

(In millions, except per share data)

  2013 2012 2011   2015 2014 2013 

Operating revenues

  $24,888  $23,489  $19,063     

Competitive businesses revenues

  $18,395   $16,637   $14,277  

Rate-regulated utility revenues

   11,052    10,792    10,611  
  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total operating revenues

   29,447    27,429    24,888  

Operating expenses

        

Purchased power and fuel

   9,468    9,121    7,130  

Competitive businesses purchased power and fuel

   10,007    9,369    6,928  

Rate-regulated utility purchased power and fuel

   3,077    3,103    2,540  

Purchased power and fuel from affiliates

   1,256    1,036    137     —      531    1,256  

Operating and maintenance

   7,270   7,961   5,184    8,322    8,568    7,270  

Depreciation and amortization

   2,153   1,881   1,347    2,450    2,314    2,153  

Taxes other than income

   1,095   1,019   785    1,200    1,154    1,095  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total operating expenses

   21,242   21,018   14,583    25,056    25,039    21,242  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Equity in earnings (losses) of unconsolidated affiliates

   10   (91  (1

Equity in (losses) earnings of unconsolidated affiliates

   —      (20  10  

Gain on sales of assets

   18    437    13  

Gain on consolidation and acquisition of businesses

   —      289    —    
  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Operating income

   3,656   2,380   4,479    4,409    3,096    3,669  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

        

Interest expense, net

   (1,315  (891  (701   (992  (1,024  (1,315

Interest expense to affiliates, net

   (41  (37  (25   (41  (41  (41

Other, net

   473   346   203    (46  455    460  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

   (883  (582  (523   (1,079  (610  (896
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Income before income taxes

   2,773   1,798   3,956    3,330    2,486    2,773  

Income taxes

   1,044   627   1,457    1,073    666    1,044  

Equity in losses of unconsolidated affiliates

   (7  —      —    
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net income

   1,729   1,171   2,499    2,250    1,820    1,729  

Net income attributable to non-controlling interests, preferred security dividends and preference stock dividends

   10   11   4 

Net income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interest and preference stock dividends

   (19  197    10  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net income attributable to common shareholders

   1,719   1,160   2,495   $2,269   $1,623   $1,719  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Comprehensive income (loss), net of income taxes

    

Comprehensive income, net of income taxes

    

Net income

   1,729   1,171   2,499   $2,250   $1,820   $1,729  

Other comprehensive income (loss)

    

Other comprehensive income (loss), net of income taxes

    

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit plans:

        

Prior service cost (benefit) reclassified to periodic costs, net of taxes of $0, $1 and $(4), respectively

   —     1   (5

Actuarial loss reclassified to periodic cost, net of taxes of $133, $110 and $93, respectively

   208   168   136 

Transition obligation reclassified to periodic cost, net of taxes of $0, $2 and $2, respectively

   —     2   4 

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit plan valuation adjustment, net of taxes of $430, $(237) and $(171), respectively

   669   (371  (250

Unrealized gain (loss) on cash flow hedges, net of taxes of $(166), $(68) and $39, respectively

   (248  (120  88 

Unrealized gain (loss) on marketable securities, net of taxes of $0, $(1) and $0, respectively

   2   2   —   

Unrealized gain (loss) on equity investments, net of taxes of $71, $1 and $0, respectively

   106   1   —   

Unrealized gain (loss) on foreign currency translation, net of taxes of $0, $0 and $0, respectively

   (10  —     —   

Prior service benefit reclassified to periodic benefit cost

   (46  (30  —    

Actuarial loss reclassified to periodic benefit cost

   220    147    208  

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit plan valuation adjustment

   (99  (497  669  

Unrealized gain (loss) on cash flow hedges

   9    (148  (248

Unrealized gain on marketable securities

   —      1    2  

Unrealized gain (loss) on equity investments

   (3  8    106  

Unrealized loss on foreign currency translation

   (21  (9  (10

Reversal of CENG equity method AOCI

   —      (116  —    
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other comprehensive income (loss)

   727   (317  (27   60    (644  727  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Comprehensive income

  $2,456  $854  $2,472   $2,310   $1,176   $2,456  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Average shares of common stock outstanding:

        

Basic

   856   816   663    890    860    856  

Diluted

   860   819   665    893    864    860  

Earnings per average common share:

        

Basic

  $2.01  $1.42  $3.76   $2.55   $1.89   $2.01  

Diluted

  $2.00  $1.42  $3.75   $2.54   $1.88   $2.00  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Dividends per common share

  $1.46  $2.10  $2.10   $1.24   $1.24   $1.46  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

191


Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 

(In millions)

  2013  2012  2011 

Cash flows from operating activities

    

Net income

  $1,729  $1,171  $2,499 

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash flows provided by operating activities:

    

Depreciation, amortization, depletion and accretion, including nuclear fuel and energy contract amortization

   3,779   4,079   2,316 

Loss on sale of three Maryland generating stations

   —     272   —   

Deferred income taxes and amortization of investment tax credits

   119   615   1,457 

Net fair value changes related to derivatives

   (445  (604  291 

Net realized and unrealized (gains) losses on nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments

   (170  (157  14 

Other non-cash operating activities

   876   1,383   770 

Changes in assets and liabilities:

    

Accounts receivable

   (97  243   57 

Inventories

   (100  26   (58

Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other current liabilities

   (90  (632  (254

Option premiums paid, net

   (36  (114  (3

Counterparty collateral received (posted), net

   215   135   (344

Income taxes

   883   544   492 

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit contributions

   (422  (462  (2,360

Other assets and liabilities

   102   (368  (24
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows provided by operating activities

   6,343   6,131   4,853 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash flows from investing activities

    

Capital expenditures

   (5,395  (5,789  (4,042

Proceeds from nuclear decommissioning trust fund sales

   4,217   7,265   6,139 

Investment in nuclear decommissioning trust funds

   (4,450  (7,483  (6,332

Cash and restricted cash acquired from Constellation

   —     964   —   

Acquisitions of long lived assets

   —     (21  (387

Proceeds from sale of long-lived assets

   32   371   —   

Proceeds from sales of investments

   22   28   6 

Purchases of investments

   (4  (13  (4

Change in restricted cash

   (43  (34  (3

Distribution from CENG

   115   —     —   

Other investing activities

   112   136   20 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows used in investing activities

   (5,394  (4,576  (4,603
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash flows from financing activities

    

Payment of accounts receivable agreement

   (210  (15  —   

Changes in short-term debt

   332   (197  161 

Issuance of long-term debt

   2,055   2,027   1,199 

Retirement of long-term debt

   (1,589  (1,145  (789

Redemption of preferred securities

   (93  —     —   

Dividends paid on common stock

   (1,249  (1,716  (1,393

Proceeds from employee stock plans

   47   72   38 

Other financing activities

   (119  (111  (62
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows used in financing activities

   (826  (1,085  (846
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents

   123   470   (596

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

   1,486   1,016   1,612 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

  $1,609  $1,486  $1,016 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 

(In millions)

  2015  2014  2013 

Cash flows from operating activities

    

Net income

  $2,250   $1,820   $1,729  

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash flows provided by operating activities:

    

Depreciation, amortization, depletion and accretion, including nuclear fuel and energy contract amortization

   3,987    3,868    3,779  

Impairment of long-lived assets

   36    687    171  

Gain on consolidation and acquisition of businesses

   —      (296  —    

Gain on sales of assets

   (18  (437  (13

Deferred income taxes and amortization of investment tax credits

   752    502    119  

Net fair value changes related to derivatives

   (367  716    (445

Net realized and unrealized losses (gains) on nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments

   131    (210  (170

Other non-cash operating activities

   1,109    1,054    718  

Changes in assets and liabilities:

    

Accounts receivable

   240    (318  (97

Inventories

   4    (380  (100

Accounts payable and accrued expenses

   (121  49    (116

Option premiums received (paid), net

   58    38    (36

Collateral received (posted), net

   347    (1,719  215  

Income taxes

   97    (143  883  

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit contributions

   (502  (617  (422

Other assets and liabilities

   (387  (157  128  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows provided by operating activities

   7,616    4,457    6,343  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash flows from investing activities

    

Capital expenditures

   (7,624  (6,077  (5,395

Proceeds from termination of direct financing lease investment

   —      335    —    

Proceeds from nuclear decommissioning trust fund sales

   6,895    7,396    4,217  

Investment in nuclear decommissioning trust funds

   (7,147  (7,551  (4,450

Cash and restricted cash acquired from consolidations and acquisitions

   —      140    —    

Acquisitions of businesses

   (40  (386  —    

Proceeds from sales of long-lived assets

   147    1,719    32  

Proceeds from sales of investments

   —      7    22  

Purchases of investments

   —      (3  (4

Change in restricted cash

   66    (104  (43

Distribution from CENG

   —      13    115  

Other investing activities

   (119  (88  112  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows used in investing activities

   (7,822  (4,599  (5,394
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash flows from financing activities

    

Payment of accounts receivable agreement

   —      —      (210

Changes in short-term borrowings

   80    122    332  

Issuance of long-term debt

   6,709    3,463    2,055  

Retirement of long-term debt

   (2,687  (1,545  (1,589

Issuance of common stock

   1,868    —      —    

Redemption of preferred securities

   —      —      (93

Distributions to noncontrolling interest of consolidated VIE

   —      (421  —    

Dividends paid on common stock

   (1,105  (1,065  (1,249

Proceeds from employee stock plans

   32    35    47  

Other financing activities

   (67  (178  (119
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows provided by (used in) financing activities

   4,830    411    (826
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Increase in cash and cash equivalents

   4,624    269    123  

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

   1,878    1,609    1,486  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

  $6,502   $1,878   $1,609  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

192


Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Balance Sheets

 

  December 31,   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2013   2012   2015   2014 
ASSETS        

Current assets

        

Cash and cash equivalents

  $1,547   $1,411   $6,502    $1,878  

Cash and cash equivalents of variable interest entities

   62    75 

Restricted cash and investments

   87    86 

Restricted cash and investments of variable interest entities

   80    47 

Restricted cash and cash equivalents

   205     271  

Accounts receivable, net

        

Customer ($0 and $289 gross accounts receivables pledged as collateral as of December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively)

   2,721    2,795 

Customer

   3,187     3,482  

Other

   1,175    1,141    912     1,227  

Accounts receivable, net, of variable interest entities

   260    292 

Mark-to-market derivative assets

   727    938    1,365     1,279  

Unamortized energy contract assets

   374    886    86     254  

Inventories, net

        

Fossil fuel

   276    246    462     579  

Materials and supplies

   829    768    1,104     1,024  

Deferred income taxes

   573    131 

Regulatory assets

   760    764    759     847  

Assets held for sale

   4     147  

Other

   666    560    748     865  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total current assets

   10,137    10,140    15,334     11,853  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Property, plant and equipment, net

   47,330    45,186    57,439     52,170  

Deferred debits and other assets

        

Regulatory assets

   5,910    6,497    6,065     6,076  

Nuclear decommissioning trust funds

   8,071    7,248    10,342     10,537  

Investments

   1,165    1,184    639     544  

Investments in affiliates

   22    22 

Investment in CENG

   1,925    1,849 

Goodwill

   2,625    2,625    2,672     2,672  

Mark-to-market derivative assets

   607    937    758     773  

Unamortized energy contract assets

   710    1,073    484     549  

Pledged assets for Zion Station decommissioning

   458    614    206     319  

Deferred income taxes

   —      58 

Other

   964    1,128    1,445     923  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total deferred debits and other assets

   22,457    23,235    22,611     22,393  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total assets

  $79,924   $78,561 

Total assets (a)

  $95,384    $86,416  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

193


Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Balance Sheets

 

  December 31,   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2013 2012   2015 2014 
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY      

Current liabilities

      

Short-term borrowings

  $341  $   $533   $460  

Short-term notes payable—accounts receivable agreement

      210 

Long-term debt due within one year

   1,424   975    1,500    1,802  

Long-term debt due within one year of variable interest entities

   85   72 

Accounts payable

   2,314   2,378    2,883    3,048  

Accounts payable of variable interest entities

   170   202 

Accrued expenses

   2,376    1,539  

Payables to affiliates

   116    112    8    8  

Regulatory liabilities

   369    310  

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities

   159   352    205    234  

Unamortized energy contract liabilities

   261   455    100    238  

Accrued expenses

   1,633   1,796 

Deferred income taxes

   40   58 

Regulatory liabilities

   327   368 

Renewable energy credit obligation

   302    192  

Other

   858   813    842    931  
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total current liabilities

   7,728   7,791    9,118    8,762  
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Long-term debt

   17,325   17,190    23,645    19,212  

Long-term debt to financing trusts

   648   648    641    641  

Long-term debt of variable interest entities

   298   508 

Deferred credits and other liabilities

      

Deferred income taxes and unamortized investment tax credits

   12,905   11,551    13,776    12,778  

Asset retirement obligations

   5,194   5,074    8,585    7,295  

Pension obligations

   1,876   3,428    3,385    3,366  

Non-pension postretirement benefit obligations

   2,190   2,662    1,618    1,742  

Spent nuclear fuel obligation

   1,021   1,020    1,021    1,021  

Regulatory liabilities

   4,388   3,981    4,201    4,550  

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities

   300   281    374    403  

Unamortized energy contract liabilities

   266   528    117    211  

Payable for Zion Station decommissioning

   305   432    90    155  

Other

   2,540   1,650    1,491    2,147  
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total deferred credits and other liabilities

   30,985   30,607    34,658    33,668  
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total liabilities

   56,984   56,744 

Total liabilities(a)

   68,062    62,283  
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Commitments and contingencies

      

Preferred securities of subsidiary

   —     87 

Contingently redeemable noncontrolling interest

   28    —    

Shareholders’ equity

      

Common stock (No par value, 2,000 shares authorized, 857 and 855 shares outstanding at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively)

   16,741   16,632 

Treasury stock, at cost (35 shares held at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively)

   (2,327  (2,327

Common stock (No par value, 2000 shares authorized, 920 shares and 860 shares outstanding at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively)

   18,676    16,709  

Treasury stock, at cost (35 shares at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively)

   (2,327  (2,327

Retained earnings

   10,358   9,893    12,068    10,910  

Accumulated other comprehensive loss, net

   (2,040  (2,767   (2,624  (2,684
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total shareholders’ equity

   22,732   21,431    25,793    22,608  

BGE preference stock not subject to mandatory redemption

   193   193    193    193  

Non-controlling interest

   15   106 

Noncontrolling interest

   1,308    1,332  
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total equity

   22,940   21,730    27,294    24,133  
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

  $79,924  $78,561   $95,384   $86,416  
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

(a)Exelon’s consolidated assets include $8,268 million and $8,159 million at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, respectively, of certain VIEs that can only be used to settle the liabilities of the VIE. Exelon’s consolidated liabilities include $3,264 million and $2,728 million at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, respectively, of certain VIEs for which the VIE creditors do not have recourse to Exelon. See Note 2–Variable Interest Entities.

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

194


Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity

 

(In millions, shares in
thousands)

 Issued
Shares
 Common
Stock
 Treasury
Stock
 Retained
Earnings
 Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Loss
 Non-controlling
Interest
 Preferred
and
Preference
Stock
 Total
Shareholders’
Equity
  Issued
Shares
 Common
Stock
 Treasury
Stock
 Retained
Earnings
 Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Loss
 Non-controlling
Interest
 Preferred
and
Preference
Stock
 Total
Shareholders’
Equity
 

Balance, December 31, 2010

  696,589  $9,006  $(2,327 $9,304  $(2,423 $3  $—    $13,563 

Net income

  —     —     —     2,495   —     —     4   2,499 

Long-term incentive plan activity

  861   76   —     —     —     —     —     76 

Employee stock purchase plan issuances

  662   25   —     —     —     —     —     25 

Common stock dividends

  —     —     —     (1,744  —     —     —     (1,744

Preferred and preference stock dividends

  —     —     —     —     —     —     (4  (4

Other comprehensive loss, net of income taxes of $(41)

  —     —     —     —     (27  —     —     (27
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2011

  698,112  $9,107  $(2,327 $10,055  $(2,450 $3  $—    $14,388 

Net income (loss)

  —     —     —     1,160   —     (3  14   1,171 

Long-term incentive plan activity

  2,432   126   —     —     —     —     —     126 

Employee stock purchase plan issuances

  857   26   —     —     —     —     —     26 

Common stock dividends

  —     —     —     (1,322  —     —     —     (1,322

Common stock issuance Constellation merger

  188,124   7,365   —     —     —     —     —     7,365 

Non-controlling interest acquired

  —     8   —     —     —     106   —     114 

BGE preference stock acquired

  —     —     —     —     —     —     193   193 

Preferred and preference stock dividends

  —     —     —     —     —     —     (14  (14

Other comprehensive loss, net of income taxes of $(192)

  —     —     —     —     (317  —     —     (317
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2012

  889,525  $16,632  $(2,327 $9,893  $(2,767 $106  $193  $21,730   889,525   $16,632   $(2,327 $9,893   $(2,767 $106   $193   $21,730  

Net income (loss)

  —     —     —     1,719   —     (10  20   1,729   —      —      —      1,719    —      (10  20    1,729  

Long-term incentive plan activity

  1,445   81   —     —     —     —     —     81   1,445    81    —      —      —      —      —      81  

Employee stock purchase plan issuances

  1,064   28   —     —     —     —     —     28   1,064    28    —      —      —      —      —      28  

Common stock dividends

  —     —     —     (1,254  —     —     —     (1,254  —      —      —      (1,254  —      —      —      (1,254

Consolidated VIE dividend to non-controlling interest

  —     —     —     —     —     (63  —     (63

Consolidated VIE dividend to noncontrolling interest

  —      —      —      —      —      (63  —      (63

Deconsolidation of VIE

  —     —     —     —     —     (18  —     (18  —      —      —      —      —      (18  —      (18

Redemption of preferred securities

  —     —     —     —     —     —     (6  (6  —      —      —      —      —      —      (6  (6

Preferred and preference stock dividends

  —     —     —     —     —     —     (14  (14  —      —      —      —      —      —      (14  (14

Other comprehensive income, net of income taxes of $(468)

  —     —     —     —     727   —     —     727 

Other comprehensive income, net of income taxes

  —      —      —      —      727    —      —      727  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2013

  892,034  $16,741  $(2,327 $10,358  $(2,040 $15  $193  $22,940   892,034   $16,741   $(2,327 $10,358   $(2,040 $15   $193   $22,940  

Net income

  —      —      —      1,623    —      184    13    1,820  

Long-term incentive plan activity

  1,574    72    —      —      —      —      —      72  

Employee stock purchase plan issuances

  960    35    —      —      —      —      —      35  

Tax benefit on stock compensation

  —      (8  —      —      —      —      —      (8

Acquisition of noncontrolling interest

  —      (2  —      —      —      6    —      4  

Common stock dividends

  —      —      —      (1,071  —      —      —      (1,071

Preferred and preference stock dividends

  —      —      —      —      —      —      (13  (13

Fair value of financing contract payments

  —      (131  —      —      —      —      —      (131

Noncontrolling interest established upon consolidation of CENG

  —      —      —      —      —      1,548    —      1,548  

Transfer of CENG pension and non-pension postretirement benefit obligations

  —      2    —      —      —      —      —      2  

Consolidated VIE dividend to noncontrolling interest

  —      —      —      —      —      (421  —      (421

Reversal of CENG equity method AOCI, net of income taxes

  —      —      —      —      (116  —      —      (116

Other comprehensive loss, net of income taxes

  —      —      —      —      (528  —      —      (528
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2014

  894,568   $16,709   $(2,327 $10,910   $(2,684 $1,332   $193   $24,133  

Net income (loss)

  —      —      —      2,269    —      (32  13    2,250  

Long-term incentive plan activity

  1,430    70    —      —      —      —      —      70  

Employee stock purchase plan issuances

  1,170    32    —      —      —      —      —      32  

Issuance of common stock

  57,500    1,868    —      —      —      —      —      1,868  

Tax benefit on stock compensation

  —      (3  —      —      —      —      —      (3

Acquisition of noncontrolling interest

  —      —      —      —      —      4    —      4  

Adjustment of contingently redeemable noncontrolling interest due to release of contingency

  —      —      —      —      —      4    —      4  

Common stock dividends

  —      —      —      (1,111  —      —      —      (1,111

Preferred and preference stock dividends

  —      —      —      —      —      —      (13  (13

Other comprehensive loss, net of income taxes

  —      —      —      —      60    —      —      60  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2015

  954,668   $18,676   $(2,327 $12,068   $(2,624 $1,308   $193   $27,294  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

195


[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]

Exelon Generation Company, LLC and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income

 

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

(In millions)

  2013 2012 2011   2015 2014 2013 

Operating revenues

        

Operating revenues

  $14,207  $12,735  $9,286   $18,386   $16,614   $14,207  

Operating revenues from affiliates

   1,423   1,702   1,161    749    779    1,423  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total operating revenues

   15,630   14,437   10,447    19,135    17,393    15,630  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Operating expenses

        

Purchased power and fuel

   6,927   6,017   3,451    10,007    9,368    6,927  

Purchased power and fuel from affiliates

   1,270    1,044    138     14    557    1,270  

Operating and maintenance

   3,960   4,398   2,827    4,688    4,943    3,960  

Operating and maintenance from affiliates

   574   630   321    620    623    574  

Depreciation and amortization

   856   768   570    1,054    967    856  

Taxes other than income

   389   369   264    489    465    389  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total operating expenses

   13,976   13,226   7,571    16,872    16,923    13,976  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Equity in earnings (losses) of unconsolidated affiliates

   10   (91  (1

Equity in (losses) earnings of unconsolidated affiliates

   —      (20  10  

Gain on sales of assets

   12    437    13  

Gain on consolidation and acquisition of businesses

   —      289    —    
  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Operating income

   1,664   1,120   2,875    2,275    1,176    1,677  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

        

Interest expense

   (298  (226  (170   (322  (303  (298

Interest expense to affiliates, net

   (59  (75  —       (43  (53  (59

Other, net

   368   239   122    (60  406    355  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

   11   (62  (48   (425  50    (2
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Income before income taxes

   1,675   1,058   2,827    1,850    1,226    1,675  

Income taxes

   615   500   1,056    502    207    615  

Equity in losses of unconsolidated affiliates

   (8  —      —    
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net income

   1,060   558   1,771    1,340    1,019    1,060  

Net loss attributable to non-controlling interests

   (10  (4  —   

Net income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interests

   (32  184    (10
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net income attributable to membership interest

   1,070   562   1,771   $1,372   $835   $1,070  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Comprehensive income (loss), net of income taxes

    

Comprehensive income, net of income taxes

    

Net income

   1,060   558   1,771   $1,340   $1,019   $1,060  

Other comprehensive income (loss)

    

Unrealized loss on cash flow hedges, net of income taxes of $(262), $(262) and $(64), respectively

   (398  (403  (98

Unrealized income on equity investments, net of income taxes of $72, $(1) and $0, respectively

   107   1   —   

Unrealized loss on foreign currency translation, net of income taxes of $0, $0 and $0, respectively

   (10  —     —   

Unrealized gain on marketable securities, net of income taxes of $0, $0 and $0, respectively

   2   —     —   

Other comprehensive income (loss), net of income taxes

    

Unrealized loss on cash flow hedges

   (3  (132  (398

Unrealized (loss) gain on equity investments

   (3  8    107  

Unrealized loss on foreign currency translation

   (21  (9  (10

Unrealized (loss) gain on marketable securities

   —      (1  2  

Reversal of CENG equity method AOCI

   —      (116  —    
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other comprehensive loss

   (299  (402  (98   (27  (250  (299
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Comprehensive income

  $761  $156  $1,673   $1,313   $769   $761  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

196


Exelon Generation Company, LLC and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

 

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

(In millions)

  2013 2012 2011   2015 2014 2013 

Cash flows from operating activities

        

Net income

  $1,060  $558  $1,771   $1,340   $1,019   $1,060  

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash flows provided by operating activities:

        

Depreciation, amortization, depletion and accretion, including nuclear fuel and energy contract amortization

   2,559   2,966   1,539    2,589    2,519    2,559  

Loss on sale of three Maryland generating stations

   —     272   —    

Impairment of long-lived assets

   12    663    157  

Gain on consolidation and acquisition of businesses

   —      (296  —    

Gain on sales of assets

   (12  (437  (13

Deferred income taxes and amortization of investment tax credits

   315   408   551    49    (198  315  

Net fair value changes related to derivatives

   (448  (611  291    (249  635    (448

Net realized and unrealized (gains) losses on nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments

   (170  (157  14 

Net realized and unrealized losses (gains) on nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments

   131    (210  (170

Other non-cash operating activities

   414   537   421    268    346    270  

Changes in assets and liabilities:

        

Accounts receivable

   109   248   (122   194    (215  109  

Receivables from and payables to affiliates, net

   2   39   208    15    15    2  

Inventories

   (88  31   (47   16    (359  (88

Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other current liabilities

   (109  (499  34 

Option premiums paid, net

   (36  (114  (3

Counterparty collateral (posted) received, net

   162   95   (410

Accounts payable and accrued expenses

   (149  29    (160

Option premiums received (paid), net

   58    38    (36

Collateral received (posted), net

   407    (1,748  162  

Income taxes

   402   114   193    (18  265    402  

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit contributions

   (149  (178  (1,070   (245  (297  (149

Other assets and liabilities

   (136  (128  (57   (207  57    (85
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net cash flows provided by operating activities

   3,887   3,581   3,313    4,199    1,826    3,887  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Cash flows from investing activities

        

Capital expenditures

   (2,752  (3,554  (2,491   (3,841  (3,012  (2,752

Proceeds from nuclear decommissioning trust fund sales

   4,217   7,265   6,139    6,895    7,396    4,217  

Investment in nuclear decommissioning trust funds

   (4,450  (7,483  (6,332   (7,147  (7,551  (4,450

Cash and restricted cash acquired from Constellation

   —      708   —    

Proceeds from sale of long-lived assets

   32   371   —    

Acquisitions of long lived assets

   —      (21  (387

Cash and restricted cash acquired from consolidations and acquisitions

   —      140    —    

Proceeds from sales of long-lived assets

   147    1,719    32  

Acquisitions of businesses

   (40  (386  —    

Change in restricted cash

   (64  4   —       35    (87  (64

Changes in Exelon intercompany money pool

   (44  —      —       —      44    (44

Distribution from CENG

   115   —      —       —      13    115  

Other investing activities

   30   81   (6   (118  (43  30  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net cash flows used in investing activities

   (2,916  (2,629  (3,077   (4,069  (1,767  (2,916
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Cash flows from financing activities

        

Change in short-term debt

   13   (52  —    

Change in short-term borrowings

   —      17    13  

Issuance of long-term debt

   854   1,076   —       1,309    1,112    854  

Retirement of long-term debt

   (570  (145  (2   (89  (586  (570

Retirement of long-term debt to affiliate

   (550  —      —    

Changes in Exelon intercompany money pool

   1,252    —      —    

Distribution to member

   (625  (1,626  (172   (2,474  (645  (625

Distribution to noncontrolling interest of consolidated VIE

   —      (421  —    

Contribution from member

   26   48   30    47    53    26  

Other financing activities

   (82  (78  (52   26    (67  (82
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net cash flows used in financing activities

   (384  (777  (196   (479  (537  (384
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Increase in cash and cash equivalents

   587   175   40 

Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents

   (349  (478  587  

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

   671   496   456    780    1,258    671  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

  $1,258  $671  $496   $431   $780   $1,258  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

197


Exelon Generation Company, LLC and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Balance Sheets

 

(In millions)

  December 31, 
  December 31, 

(In millions)

2013   2012   2015   2014 
        

Current assets

        

Cash and cash equivalents

  $1,196   $596   $431    $780  

Cash and cash equivalents of variable interest entities

   62    75 

Restricted cash and cash equivalents

   19    —      123     158  

Restricted cash and cash equivalents of variable interest entities

   52    16 

Accounts receivable, net

        

Customer

   1,429    1,482    2,095     2,295  

Other

   353    472    360     318  

Accounts receivable, net, of variable interest entities

   260    292 

Mark-to-market derivative assets

   727    938    1,365     1,276  

Mark-to-market derivative assets with affiliate

   —      226 

Receivables from affiliates

   108    141    83     113  

Receivable from Exelon intercompany money pool

   44    —   

Unamortized energy contract assets

   374    886    86     254  

Inventories, net

        

Fossil fuel

   164    130    384     465  

Materials and supplies

   671    626    880     847  

Deferred income taxes

   475    —   

Assets held for sale

   4     147  

Other

   505    331    531     658  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total current assets

   6,439    6,211    6,342     7,311  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Property, plant and equipment, net

   20,111    19,531    25,843     23,028  

Deferred debits and other assets

        

Nuclear decommissioning trust funds

   8,071    7,248    10,342     10,537  

Investments

   400    420    210     104  

Investment in CENG

   1,925    1,849 

Goodwill

   47     47  

Mark-to-market derivative assets

   600    924    733     771  

Prepaid pension asset

   1,873    1,975    1,689     1,704  

Pledged assets for Zion Station decommissioning

   458    614    206     319  

Unamortized energy contract assets

   710    1,073    484     549  

Deferred income taxes

   6     3  

Other

   645    836    627     578  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total deferred debits and other assets

   14,682    14,939    14,344     14,612  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total assets

  $41,232   $40,681 

Total assets(a)

  $46,529    $44,951  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

198


Exelon Generation Company, LLC and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Balance Sheets

 

  December 31,   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2013   2012   2015 2014 
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY       

Current liabilities

       

Short-term borrowings

  $22   $—     $29   $36  

Long-term debt due within one year

   556    24    90    58  

Long-term debt due within one year of variable interest entities

   5    4 

Long-term debt to affiliates due within one year

   —      556  

Accounts payable

   1,152    1,326    1,583    1,759  

Accounts payable of variable interest entities

   170    202 

Accrued expenses

   976    1,116    935    886  

Payables to affiliates

   181    213    104    107  

Deferred income taxes

   25    128 

Borrowings from Exelon intercompany money pool

   1,252    —    

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities

   142    334    182    214  

Unamortized energy contract liabilities

   249    378    100    238  

Renewable energy credit obligation

   302    192  

Other

   389    372    356    413  
  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total current liabilities

   3,867    4,097    4,933    4,459  
  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Long-term debt

   5,559    5,245    7,936    6,639  

Long-term debt to affiliate

   1,523    2,007    933    943  

Long-term debt of variable interest entities

   86    203 

Deferred credits and other liabilities

       

Deferred income taxes and unamortized investment tax credits

   6,295    5,398    5,845    5,707  

Asset retirement obligations

   5,047    4,938    8,431    7,146  

Non-pension postretirement benefit obligations

   850    755    924    915  

Spent nuclear fuel obligation

   1,021    1,020    1,021    1,021  

Payables to affiliates

   2,740    2,397    2,577    2,880  

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities

   120    232    150    105  

Unamortized energy contract liabilities

   266    516    117    211  

Payable for Zion Station decommissioning

   305    432    90    155  

Other

   811    776    602    719  
  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total deferred credits and other liabilities

   17,455    16,464    19,757    18,859  
  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total liabilities

   28,490    28,016 

Total liabilities(a)

   33,559    30,900  
  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Commitments and contingencies

       

Contingently redeemable noncontrolling interests

   28    —    

Equity

       

Member’s equity

       

Membership interest

   8,898    8,876    8,997    8,951  

Undistributed earnings

   3,613    3,168    2,701    3,803  

Accumulated other comprehensive income, net

   214    513 

Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss), net

   (63  (36
  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total member’s equity

   12,725    12,557    11,635    12,718  

Non-controlling interest

   17    108 

Noncontrolling interest

   1,307    1,333  
  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total equity

   12,742    12,665    12,942    14,051  
  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total liabilities and equity

  $41,232   $40,681   $46,529   $44,951  
  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

(a)Generation’s consolidated assets include $8,235 million and $8,118 million at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively, of certain VIEs that can only be used to settle the liabilities of the VIE. Generation’s consolidated liabilities include $3,135 million and $2,512 million at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively, of certain VIEs for which the VIE creditors do not have recourse to Generation. See Note 2–Variable Interest Entities.

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

199


Exelon Generation Company, LLC and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Member’s Equity

 

(In millions)

 Member’s Equity Non-controlling
Interest
  Total
Equity
   Member’s Equity Noncontrolling
Interest
  Total
Equity
 
Membership
Interest
 Undistributed
Earnings
 Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income
  Membership
Interest
 Undistributed
Earnings
 Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income (Loss)
 

Balance, December 31, 2010

 $3,526  $2,633  $1,013  $5  $7,177 

Net income

  —     1,771    —     —      1,771 

Balance, December 31, 2012

  $8,876   $3,168   $513   $108   $12,665  

Net income (loss)

   —      1,070    —      (10  1,060  

Distribution to member

  —      (172  —     —      (172   —      (625  —      —      (625

Allocation of tax benefit from member

  30   —     —     —     30     26    —      —      —      26  

Other comprehensive loss, net of income taxes of $(64)

  —     —     (98  —     (98
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2011

 $3,556  $4,232  $915  $5  $8,708 

Net income

  —     562   —     (4  558 

Distribution to member

  —     (1,626  —     —     (1,626

Allocation of tax benefit from member

  48   —     —     —     48 

Acquisition of Constellation

  5,264   —     —     —     5,264 

Non-controlling interest acquired

  8   —     —     107   115 

Other comprehensive loss, net of income taxes of $(261)

  —     —     (402  —     (402
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2012

 $8,876  $3,168  $513  $108  $12,665 

Net income

  —     1,070   —     (10  1,060 

Distribution to member

  —     (625  —     —     (625

Allocation of tax benefit from member

  26   —     —     —     26 

Consolidated VIE dividend to non-controlling interest

  —     —      (63  (63

Consolidated VIE dividend to noncontrolling interest

   —      —      —      (63  (63

Deconsolidation of VIE

  (1  —     —     (18  (19   (1  —      —      (18  (19

Non-controlling interest acquired

  (3  —     —     —     (3

Other comprehensive loss, net of income taxes of $(190)

  —     —     (299  —     (299

Noncontrolling interest acquired

   (3  —      —      —      (3

Other comprehensive loss, net of income taxes

   —      —      (299  —      (299
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2013

 $8,898  $3,613  $214  $17  $12,742   $8,898   $3,613   $214   $17   $12,742  

Net income

   —      835    —      184    1,019  

Acquisition of noncontrolling interest

   —      —      —      5    5  

Allocation of tax benefit from member

   53    —      —      —      53  

Distribution to member

   —      (645  —      —      (645

Noncontrolling interest established upon consolidation of CENG

   —      —      —      1,548    1,548  

Consolidated VIE dividend to noncontrolling interest

   —      —      —      (421  (421

Reversal of CENG equity method AOCI, net of income taxes

   —      —      (116  —      (116

Other comprehensive loss, net of income taxes

   —      —      (134  —      (134
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2014

  $8,951   $3,803   $(36 $1,333   $14,051  

Net income (loss)

   —      1,372    —      (32  1,340  

Acquisition of non-controlling interest

   (1  —      —      2    1  

Adjustment of contingently redeemable noncontrolling interest due to release of contingency

   —      —      —      4    4  

Allocation of tax benefit from member

   47    —      —      —      47  

Distribution to member

   —      (2,474  —      —      (2,474

Other comprehensive loss, net of income taxes

   —      —      (27  —      (27
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2015

  $8,997   $2,701   $(63 $1,307   $12,942  
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

200


Commonwealth Edison Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income

   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 

(in millions)

  2013  2012  2011 

Operating revenues

    

Operating revenues

  $4,461  $5,441  $6,054 

Operating revenues from affiliates

   3   2   2 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total operating revenues

   4,464   5,443   6,056 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating expenses

    

Purchased power

   662   1,518   2,382 

Purchased power from affiliate

   512   789   653 

Operating and maintenance

   1,211   1,182   1,031 

Operating and maintenance from affiliate

   157   163   158 

Depreciation and amortization

   669   610   554 

Taxes other than income

   299   295   296 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total operating expenses

   3,510   4,557   5,074 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating income

   954   886   982 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

    

Interest expense

   (566  (294  (330

Interest expense to affiliates, net

   (13  (13  (15

Other, net

   26   39   29 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

   (553  (268  (316
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Income before income taxes

   401   618   666 

Income taxes

   152   239   250 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income

   249   379   416 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other comprehensive income

    

Unrealized gain on marketable securities, net of income taxes of $0, $0 and $0, respectively

   —     1   —   
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other comprehensive income

   —     1   —   
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Comprehensive income

  $249  $380  $416 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]

 

201


Commonwealth Edison Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Statements of Cash FlowsOperations and Comprehensive Income

 

   For the Years Ended 

(In millions)

  2013  2012  2011 

Cash flows from operating activities

    

Net income

  $249  $379  $416 

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash flows provided by operating activities:

    

Depreciation, amortization and accretion

   669   610   554 

Deferred income taxes and amortization of investment tax credits

   (57  270   700 

Other non-cash operating activities

   28   252   184 

Changes in assets and liabilities:

    

Accounts receivable

   (12  24   5 

Receivables from and payables to affiliates, net

   (12  (18  (287

Inventories

   (18  (11  (9

Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other current liabilities

   74   59   (84

Counterparty collateral received, net

   53   40   66 

Income taxes

   178   9   223 

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit contributions

   (122  (138  (977

Other assets and liabilities

   188   (142  45 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows provided by operating activities

   1,218   1,334   836 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash flows from investing activities

    

Capital expenditures

   (1,433  (1,246  (1,028

Proceeds from sales of investments

   7   28   6 

Purchases of investments

   (4  (13  (4

Change in restricted cash

   (2  —     —   

Other investing activities

   45   19   19 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows used in investing activities

   (1,387  (1,212  (1,007
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash flows from financing activities

    

Changes in short-term debt

   184   —     —   

Issuance of long-term debt

   350   350   1,199 

Retirement of long-term debt

   (252  (450  (537

Dividends paid on common stock

   (220  (105  (300

Other financing activities

   (1  (7  (7
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows provided by (used in) financing activities

   61   (212  355 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents

   (108  (90  184 

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

   144   234   50 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

  $36  $144  $234 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 

(in millions)

  2015  2014  2013 

Operating revenues

    

Electric operating revenues

  $4,901   $4,560   $4,461  

Operating revenues from affiliates

   4    4    3  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total operating revenues

   4,905    4,564    4,464  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating expenses

    

Purchased power

   1,301    1,001    662  

Purchased power from affiliate

   18    176    512  

Operating and maintenance

   1,372    1,263    1,211  

Operating and maintenance from affiliate

   195    166    157  

Depreciation and amortization

   707    687    669  

Taxes other than income

   296    293    299  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total operating expenses

   3,889    3,586    3,510  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Gain on sales of assets

   1    2        
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating income

   1,017    980    954  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

    

Interest expense

   (319  (308  (566

Interest expense to affiliates, net

   (13  (13  (13

Other, net

   21    17    26  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

   (311  (304  (553
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Income before income taxes

   706    676    401  

Income taxes

   280    268    152  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income

  $426   $408   $249  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Comprehensive income

  $426   $408   $249  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

Commonwealth Edison Company and Subsidiary Companies

202


Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

   For the Years Ended 

(In millions)

  2015  2014  2013 

Cash flows from operating activities

    

Net income

  $426   $408   $249  

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash flows provided by operating activities:

    

Depreciation, amortization and accretion

   707    687    669  

Deferred income taxes and amortization of investment tax credits

   353    433    (57

Other non-cash operating activities

   416    255    28  

Changes in assets and liabilities:

    

Accounts receivable

   (93  (121  (12

Receivables from and payables to affiliates, net

   (19  (11  (12

Inventories

   (40  (16  (18

Accounts payable and accrued expenses

   68    95    91  

Counterparty collateral received (posted), net and cash deposits

   (33  2    53  

Income taxes

   192    (159  178  

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit contributions

   (150  (248  (122

Other assets and liabilities

   69    1    171  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows provided by operating activities

   1,896    1,326    1,218  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash flows from investing activities

    

Capital expenditures

   (2,398  (1,689  (1,433

Proceeds from sales of investments

   —      7    7  

Purchases of investments

   —      (3  (4

Change in restricted cash

   2    (2  (2

Other investing activities

   34    32    45  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows used in investing activities

   (2,362)   (1,655)   (1,387) 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash flows from financing activities

    

Changes in short-term borrowings

   (10  120    184  

Issuance of long-term debt

   850    900    350  

Retirement of long-term debt

   (260  (617  (252

Contributions from parent

   202    273    —    

Dividends paid on common stock

   (299  (307  (220

Other financing activities

   (16  (10  (1
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows provided by financing activities

   467    359    61  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents

   1    30    (108) 

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

   66    36    144  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

  $67   $66   $36  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

Commonwealth Edison Company and Subsidiary Companies

Consolidated Balance Sheet

   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2015   2014 
ASSETS    

Current assets

    

Cash and cash equivalents

  $67    $66  

Restricted cash

   2     4  

Accounts receivable, net

    

Customer

   533     477  

Other

   272     648  

Receivables from affiliates

   199     14  

Inventories, net

   164     125  

Regulatory assets

   218     349  

Other

   63     40  
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total current assets

   1,518     1,723  
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Property, plant and equipment, net

   17,502     15,793  

Deferred debits and other assets

    

Regulatory assets

   895     852  

Investments

   6     6  

Goodwill

   2,625     2,625  

Receivable from affiliates

   2,172     2,571  

Prepaid pension asset

   1,490     1,551  

Other

   324     237  
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total deferred debits and other assets

   7,512     7,842  
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total assets

  $26,532    $25,358  
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

Commonwealth Edison Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Balance Sheets

 

   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2013   2012 
ASSETS    

Current assets

    

Cash and cash equivalents

  $36   $144 

Restricted cash

   2    —    

Accounts receivable, net

    

Customer

   451    539 

Other

   584    452 

Inventories, net

   109    91 

Deferred income taxes

   —       83 

Counterparty collateral deposited

   —       53 

Regulatory assets

   329    388 

Other

   29    25 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total current assets

   1,540    1,775 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Property, plant and equipment, net

   14,666    13,826 

Deferred debits and other assets

    

Regulatory assets

   933    666 

Investments

   5    8 

Investments in affiliates

   6    6 

Goodwill

   2,625    2,625 

Receivable from affiliates

   2,469    2,039 

Prepaid pension asset

   1,583    1,661 

Other

   291    299 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total deferred debits and other assets

   7,912    7,304 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total assets

  $24,118   $22,905 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 
   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2015   2014 
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY    

Current liabilities

    

Short-term borrowings

  $294    $304  

Long-term debt due within one year

   665     260  

Accounts payable

   660     598  

Accrued expenses

   706     331  

Payables to affiliates

   62     84  

Customer deposits

   131     128  

Regulatory liabilities

   155     125  

Mark-to-market derivative liability

   23     20  

Other

   70     73  
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total current liabilities

   2,766     1,923  
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Long-term debt

   5,844     5,665  

Long-term debt to financing trust

   205     205  

Deferred credits and other liabilities

    

Deferred income taxes and unamortized investment tax credits

   4,914     4,561  

Asset retirement obligations

   111     103  

Non-pension postretirement benefits obligations

   259     263  

Regulatory liabilities

   3,459     3,655  

Mark-to-market derivative liability

   224     187  

Other

   507     889  
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total deferred credits and other liabilities

   9,474     9,658  
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total liabilities

   18,289     17,451  
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Commitments and contingencies

    

Shareholders’ equity

    

Common stock

   1,588     1,588  

Other paid-in capital

   5,677     5,468  

Retained earnings

   978     851  
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total shareholders’ equity

   8,243     7,907  
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

  $26,532    $25,358  
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

203


Commonwealth Edison Company and Subsidiary Companies

Consolidated Balance Sheets

   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2013   2012 
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY    

Current liabilities

    

Short-term borrowings

  $184   $—   

Long-term debt due within one year

   617    252 

Accounts payable

   449    379 

Accrued expenses

   307    295 

Payables to affiliates

   83    97 

Customer deposits

   133    136 

Regulatory liabilities

   170    170 

Mark-to-market derivative liability

   17    18 

Mark-to-market derivative liability with affiliate

   —      226 

Deferred income taxes

   16    —   

Other

   72    82 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total current liabilities

   2,048    1,655 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Long-term debt

   5,058    5,315 

Long-term debt to financing trust

   206    206 

Deferred credits and other liabilities

    

Deferred income taxes and unamortized investment tax credits

   4,116    4,272 

Asset retirement obligations

   99    99 

Non-pension postretirement benefits obligations

   381    273 

Regulatory liabilities

   3,512    3,229 

Mark-to-market derivative liability

   176    49 

Other

   994    484 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total deferred credits and other liabilities

   9,278    8,406 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total liabilities

   16,590    15,582 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Commitments and contingencies

    

Shareholders’ equity

    

Common stock

   1,588    1,588 

Other paid-in capital

   5,190    5,014 

Retained earnings

   750    721 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total shareholders’ equity

   7,528    7,323 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

  $24,118   $22,905 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

204


Commonwealth Edison Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity

 

(In millions)

 Common
Stock
 Other
Paid-In
Capital
 Retained Deficit
Unappropriated
 Retained
Earnings
Appropriated
 Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income (Loss)
 Total
Shareholders’
Equity
   Common
Stock
   Other
Paid-In
Capital
   Retained Deficit
Unappropriated
 Retained
Earnings
Appropriated
 Total
Shareholders’
Equity
 

 

Balance, December 31, 2010

 $1,588  $4,992  $(1,639 $1,970  $(1 $6,910 

Net income

  —      —      416   —      —      416 

Common stock dividends

  —      —      —      (300  —      (300

Allocation of tax benefit from parent

  —      11   —      —      —      11 

Appropriation of retained earnings for future dividends

  —      —      (416  416   —      —    
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2011

 $1,588  $5,003  $(1,639 $2,086  $(1 $7,037 

Net income

  —      —      379   —      —      379 

Common stock dividends

  —      —      —      (105  —      (105

Allocation of tax benefit from parent

  —      11   —      —      —      11 

Appropriation of retained earnings for future dividends

  —      —      (379  379   —      —    

Other comprehensive income, net of income taxes of $0

  —      —      —      —      1   1 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2012

 $1,588  $5,014  $(1,639 $2,360  $—     $7,323   $1,588    $5,014    $(1,639 $2,360   $7,323   

Net income

  —      —      249   —      —      249    —       —       249    —      249   

Common stock dividends

  —      —      —      (220  —      (220   —       —       —      (220  (220 

Parent tax matter indemnification

  —      176   —      —      —      176    —       176     —      —      176   

Appropriation of retained earnings for future dividends

  —      —      (249  249   —      —       —       —       (249  249    —     
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

Balance, December 31, 2013

 $1,588  $5,190  $(1,639 $2,389  $—     $7,528 

Balance, Balance at December 31, 2013

  $1,588    $5,190    $(1,639 $2,389   $7,528   

Net income

   —       —       408    —     $408   

Common stock dividends

   —       —       —      (307  (307 

Contribution from parent

   —       273     —      —      273   

Parent tax matter indemnification

   —       5     —      —      5   

Appropriation of retained earnings for future dividends

   —       —       (408  408    —     
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

Balance, December 31, 2014

  $1,588    $5,468    $(1,639 $2,490   $7,907   

Net income

   —       —       426    —      426   

Common stock dividends

   —       —       —      (299  (299 

Contribution from parent

   —       202     —      —      202   

Parent tax matter indemnification

   —       7     —      —      7   

Appropriation of retained earnings for future dividends

   —       —       (426  426    —     
  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

Balance, December 31, 2015

  $1,588    $5,677    $(1,639 $2,617   $8,243   
  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

205


PECO Energy Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income

   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 

(In millions)

  2013  2012  2011 

Operating revenues

    

Operating revenues

  $3,099  $3,183  $3,715 

Operating revenues from affiliates

   1   3   5 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total operating revenues

   3,100   3,186   3,720 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating expenses

    

Purchased power and fuel

   908   842   1,369 

Purchased power from affiliate

   392   533   495 

Operating and maintenance

   647   698   698 

Operating and maintenance from affiliates

   101   111   96 

Depreciation and amortization

   228   217   202 

Taxes other than income

   158   162   205 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total operating expenses

   2,434   2,563   3,065 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating income

   666   623   655 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

    

Interest expense

   (103  (111  (122

Interest expense to affiliates, net

   (12  (12  (12

Other, net

   6   8   14 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

   (109  (115  (120
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Income before income taxes

   557   508   535 

Income taxes

   162   127   146 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income

   395   381   389 

Preferred security dividends and redemption

   7   4   4 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income attributable to common shareholder

   388   377   385 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Comprehensive income, net of income taxes

    

Net income

   395   381   389 

Other comprehensive income

    

Unrealized gain on marketable securities, net of income taxes of $0, $0 and $0, respectively

   —     1   —   
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other comprehensive income

   —     1   —   
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Comprehensive income

  $395  $382  $389 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]

 

206


PECO Energy Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Statements of Cash FlowsOperations and Comprehensive Income

 

   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 

(In millions)

  2013  2012  2011 

Cash flows from operating activities

    

Net income

  $395  $381  $389 

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash flows provided by operating activities:

    

Depreciation, amortization and accretion

   228   217   202 

Deferred income taxes and amortization of investment tax credits

   20   37   253 

Other non-cash operating activities

   108   125   100 

Changes in assets and liabilities:

    

Accounts receivable

   (79  (14  225 

Receivables from and payables to affiliates, net

   (18  13   (217

Inventories

   2   21   —   

Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other current liabilities

   41   (47  34 

Income taxes

   87   174   (45

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit contributions

   (31  (45  (137

Other assets and liabilities

   (6  16   14 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows provided by operating activities

   747   878   818 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash flows from investing activities

    

Capital expenditures

   (537  (422  (481

Changes in intercompany money pool

   —     82   (82

Change in restricted cash

   (2  2   (2

Other investing activities

   8   10   8 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows used in investing activities

   (531  (328  (557
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash flows from financing activities

    

Payment of accounts receivable agreement

   (210  (15  —   

Issuance of long-term debt

   550   350   —   

Retirement of long-term debt

   (300  (375  (250

Contributions from parent

   27   9   18 

Dividends paid on common stock

   (332  (343  (348

Dividends paid on preferred securities

   (1  (4  (4

Redemption of preferred securities

   (93  —     —   

Other financing activities

   (2  (4  (5
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows used in financing activities

   (361  (382  (589
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents

   (145  168   (328

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

   362   194   522 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

  $217  $362  $194 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 

(In millions)

  2015  2014  2013 

Operating revenues

    

Electric operating revenues

  $2,485   $2,446   $2,499  

Natural gas operating revenues

   545    646    600  

Operating revenues from affiliates

   2    2    1  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total operating revenues

   3,032    3,094    3,100  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating expenses

    

Purchased power

   735    740    612  

Purchased fuel

   235    327    296  

Purchased power from affiliate

   220    194    392  

Operating and maintenance

   684    767    647  

Operating and maintenance from affiliates

   110    99    101  

Depreciation and amortization

   260    236    228  

Taxes other than income

   160    159    158  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total operating expenses

   2,404    2,522    2,434  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Gain on sales of assets

   2    —      —    
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating income

   630    572    666  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

    

Interest expense

   (102  (101  (103

Interest expense to affiliates, net

   (12  (12  (12

Other, net

   5    7    6  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

   (109  (106  (109
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Income before income taxes

   521    466    557  

Income taxes

   143    114    162  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income

   378    352    395  

Preferred security dividends and redemption

   —      —      7  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income attributable to common shareholder

  $378   $352   $388  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Comprehensive income

  $378   $352   $395  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

PECO Energy Company and Subsidiary Companies

207


Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 

(In millions)

  2015  2014  2013 

Cash flows from operating activities

    

Net income

  $378   $352   $395  

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash flows provided by operating activities:

    

Depreciation, amortization and accretion

   260    236    228  

Deferred income taxes and amortization of investment tax credits

   90    88    20  

Other non-cash operating activities

   70    92    108  

Changes in assets and liabilities:

    

Accounts receivable

   37    (16  (79

Receivables from and payables to affiliates, net

   3    (6  (18

Inventories

   10    2    2  

Accounts payable and accrued expenses

   (25  58    31  

Income taxes

   (9  (57  87  

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit contributions

   (40  (16  (31

Other assets and liabilities

   (4  (21  4  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows provided by operating activities

   770    712    747  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash flows from investing activities

    

Capital expenditures

   (601  (661  (537

Change in restricted cash

   (1  —      (2

Other investing activities

   14    12    8  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows used in investing activities

   (588  (649  (531
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash flows from financing activities

    

Payment of accounts receivable agreement

   —      —      (210

Issuance of long-term debt

   350    300    550  

Retirement of long-term debt

   —      (250  (300

Contributions from parent

   16    24    27  

Dividends paid on common stock

   (279  (320  (332

Dividends paid on preferred securities

   —      —      (1

Redemption of preferred securities

   —      —      (93

Other financing activities

   (4  (4  (2
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows provided by (used in) financing activities

   83    (250  (361
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents

   265    (187  (145

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

   30    217    362  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

  $295   $30   $217  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

PECO Energy Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Balance Sheets

 

  December 31,   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2013   2012   2015   2014 
ASSETS        

Current assets

        

Cash and cash equivalents

  $217   $362   $295    $30  

Restricted cash and cash equivalents

   2    —      3     2  

Accounts receivable, net ($0 and $289 gross accounts receivable pledged as collateral as of December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively)

    

Accounts receivable, net

    

Customer

   360    364    258     320  

Other

   107    161    146     141  

Receivables from affiliates

   2     3  

Inventories, net

        

Fossil fuel

   60    65    43     57  

Materials and supplies

   21    19    26     22  

Deferred income taxes

   83    40 

Prepaid utility taxes

   3    21    11     10  

Regulatory assets

   17    32    34     29  

Other

   36    30    24     31  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total current assets

   906    1,094    842     645  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Property, plant and equipment, net

   6,384    6,078    7,141     6,801  

Deferred debits and other assets

        

Regulatory assets

   1,448    1,378    1,583     1,529  

Investments

   23    22    28     31  

Investments in affiliates

   8    8 

Receivable from affiliates

   447    360    405     490  

Prepaid pension asset

   363    373    347     344  

Other

   38    40    21     20  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total deferred debits and other assets

   2,327    2,181    2,384     2,414  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total assets

  $9,617   $9,353   $10,367    $9,860  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

208


PECO Energy Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Balance Sheets

 

  December 31,   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2013   2012   2015   2014 
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY    
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDER’S EQUITY    

Current liabilities

        

Short-term notes payable—accounts receivable agreement

  $—      $210 

Long-term debt due within one year

   250    300   $300    $—    

Accounts payable

   285    244    281     337  

Accrued expenses

   106    82    109     91  

Payables to affiliates

   58    76    55     52  

Customer deposits

   49    51    58     52  

Regulatory liabilities

   106    169    112     90  

Other

   37    26    29     31  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total current liabilities

   891    1,158    944     653  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Long-term debt

   1,947    1,647    2,280     2,232  

Long-term debt to financing trusts

   184    184    184     184  

Deferred credits and other liabilities

        

Deferred income taxes and unamortized investment tax credits

   2,487    2,331    2,792     2,602  

Asset retirement obligations

   29    29    27     29  

Non-pension postretirement benefits obligations

   286    284    287     287  

Regulatory liabilities

   629    538    527     657  

Other

   99    113    90     95  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total deferred credits and other liabilities

   3,530    3,295    3,723     3,670  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total liabilities

   6,552    6,284    7,131     6,739  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Commitments and contingencies

        

Preferred securities

   —       87 

Shareholders’ equity

    

Shareholder’s equity

    

Common stock

   2,415    2,388    2,455     2,439  

Retained earnings

   649    593    780     681  

Accumulated other comprehensive income, net

   1    1    1     1  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total shareholders’ equity

   3,065    2,982 

Total shareholder’s equity

   3,236     3,121  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

  $9,617   $9,353 

Total liabilities and shareholder’s equity

  $10,367    $9,860  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

209


PECO Energy Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Stockholders’Shareholder’s Equity

 

(In millions)

 Common
Stock
 Retained
Earnings
 Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income
 Total
Shareholders’
Equity
   Common
Stock
   Retained
Earnings
 Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income
   Total
Shareholder’s
Equity
 

Balance, December 31, 2010

 $2,361  $522  $—     $2,883 

Net income

  —      389   —      389 

Common stock dividends

  —      (348  —      (348

Preferred security dividends

  —      (4  —      (4

Allocation of tax benefit from parent

  18   —      —      18 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2011

 $2,379  $559  $—     $2,938 

Net income

  —      381   —      381 

Common stock dividends

  —      (343  —      (343

Preferred security dividends

  —      (4  —      (4

Allocation of tax benefit from parent

  9   —      —      9 

Other comprehensive income, net of income taxes of $0

  —      —      1   1 
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2012

 $2,388  $593  $1  $2,982   $2,388    $593   $1    $2,982  

Net income

  —      395   —      395    —       395    —       395  

Common stock dividends

  —      (332  —      (332   —       (332  —       (332

Preferred security dividends

  —      (1  —      (1   —       (1  —       (1

Redemption of preferred securities

  —      (6  —      (6

Redemption of preferred dividends

   —       (6  —       (6

Allocation of tax benefit from parent

  27   —      —      27    27     —      —       27  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2013

 $2,415  $649  $1  $3,065   $2,415    $649   $1    $3,065  

Net income

   —       352    —       352  

Common stock dividends

   —       (320  —       (320

Allocation of tax benefit from parent

   24     —      —       24  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2014

  $2,439    $681   $1    $3,121  

Net income

   —       378    —       378  

Common stock dividends

   —       (279  —       (279

Allocation of tax benefit from parent

   16     —      —       16  
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2015

  $2,455    $780   $1    $3,236  
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

210


Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income

   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 

(In millions)

  2013  2012  2011 

Operating revenues

    

Operating revenues

  $3,052  $2,725  $3,060 

Operating revenues from affiliates

   13   10   8 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total operating revenues

   3,065   2,735   3,068 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating expenses

    

Purchased power and fuel

   969   973   1,245 

Purchased power from affiliate

   452   396   348 

Operating and maintenance

   551   622   530 

Operating and maintenance from affiliates

   83   106   150 

Depreciation and amortization

   348   298   274 

Taxes other than income

   213   208   207 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total operating expenses

   2,616   2,603   2,754 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating income

   449   132   314 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

    

Interest expense

   (106  (128  (113

Interest expense to affiliates, net

   (16  (16  (16

Other, net

   17   23   26 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

   (105  (121  (103
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Income before income taxes

   344   11   211 

Income taxes

   134   7   75 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income

   210   4   136 

Preference stock dividends

   13   13   13 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income (loss) attributable to common shareholder

  $197  $(9 $123 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Comprehensive income

  $210  $4  $136 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]

 

211


Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Statements of Cash FlowsOperations and Comprehensive Income

 

   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 

(In millions)

  2013  2012  2011 

Cash flows from operating activities

    

Net income

  $210  $4  $136 

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash flows provided by operating activities:

    

Depreciation, amortization and accretion

   348   298   274 

Deferred income taxes and amortization of investment tax credits

   125   104   145 

Other non-cash operating activities

   153   193   129 

Changes in assets and liabilities:

    

Accounts receivable

   (127  (45  60 

Receivables from and payables to affiliates, net

   (14  26   (44

Inventories

   1   25   (10

Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other current liabilities

   (14  (33  (21

Income taxes

   (33  14   35 

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit contributions

   (24  (16  (67

Other assets and liabilities

   (64  (85  (161
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows provided by operating activities

   561   485   476 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash flows from investing activities

    

Capital expenditures

   (587  (582  (592

Change in restricted cash

   2   —      —    

Other investing activities

   14   9   —    
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows used in investing activities

   (571  (573  (592
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash flows from financing activities

    

Changes in short-term debt

   135   —      —    

Issuance of long-term debt

   300   250   300 

Retirement of long-term debt

   (467  (173  (82

Dividends paid on common stock

   —      —      (85

Dividends paid on preference stock

   (13  (13  (13

Contributions from parent

   —      66   —    

Other financing activities

   (3  (2  (5
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows (used in) provided by financing activities

   (48  128   115 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents

   (58  40   (1

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

   89   49   50 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

  $31  $89  $49 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 

(In millions)

  2015  2014  2013 

Operating revenues

    

Electric operating revenues

  $2,490   $2,460   $2,405  

Natural gas operating revenues

   631    680    647  

Operating revenues from affiliates

   14    25    13  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total operating revenues

   3,135    3,165    3,065  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating expenses

    

Purchased power

   602    733    676  

Purchased fuel

   205    302    293  

Purchased power from affiliate

   498    382    452  

Operating and maintenance

   565    614    551  

Operating and maintenance from affiliates

   118    103    83  

Depreciation and amortization

   366    371    348  

Taxes other than income

   224    221    213  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total operating expenses

   2,578    2,726    2,616  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Gain on sales of assets

   1    —      —    
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating income

   558    439    449  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

    

Interest expense

   (83  (90  (106

Interest expense to affiliates, net

   (16  (16  (16

Other, net

   18    18    17  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other income and (deductions)

   (81  (88  (105
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Income before income taxes

   477    351    344  

Income taxes

   189    140    134  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income

   288    211    210  

Preference stock dividends

   13    13    13  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income attributable to common shareholder

  $275   $198   $197  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Comprehensive income

  $288   $211   $210  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Subsidiary Companies

212


Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 

(In millions)

  2015  2014  2013 

Cash flows from operating activities

    

Net income

  $288   $211   $210  

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash flows provided by operating activities:

    

Depreciation, amortization and accretion

   366    371    348  

Deferred income taxes and amortization of investment tax credits

   165    116    125  

Other non-cash operating activities

   137    180    153  

Changes in assets and liabilities:

    

Accounts receivable

   84    46    (127

Receivables from and payables to affiliates, net

   (2  (1  (14

Inventories

   18    (6  1  

Accounts payable, accrued expenses

   (3  (75  (6

Collateral received (posted), net

   (27  27    —    

Income taxes

   (54  45    (33

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit contributions

   (17  (16  (24

Other assets and liabilities

   (173  (158  (72
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows provided by operating activities

   782    740    561  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash flows from investing activities

    

Capital expenditures

   (719  (620  (587

Change in restricted cash

   26    (22  2  

Other investing activities

   18    20    14  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows used in investing activities

   (675  (622  (571
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash flows from financing activities

    

Changes in short-term borrowings

   90    (15  135  

Issuance of long-term debt

   —      —      300  

Retirement of long-term debt

   (75  (70  (467

Dividends paid on common stock

   (158  —      —    

Dividends paid on preference stock

   (13  (13  (13

Allocations of tax benefit from parent

   7    —      —    

Other financing activities

   (13  13    (3
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows used in financing activities

   (162  (85  (48
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents

   (55  33    (58

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

   64    31    89  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

  $9   $64   $31  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Balance Sheets

 

  December 31,   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2013   2012   2015   2014 
ASSETS        

Current assets

        

Cash and cash equivalents

  $31   $89   $9    $64  

Restricted cash and cash equivalents of variable interest entity

   28    30 

Restricted cash and cash equivalents

   24     50  

Accounts receivable, net

        

Customer

   480    409    300     390  

Other

   114    111    112     82  

Income taxes receivable

   30    3 

Inventories, net

        

Gas held in storage

   53    51    36     57  

Materials and supplies

   28    31    33     30  

Deferred income taxes

   2    1 

Prepaid utility taxes

   57    57    61     59  

Regulatory assets

   181    190    267     214  

Other

   7    8    3     5  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total current assets

   1,011    980    845     951  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Property, plant and equipment, net

   5,864    5,498    6,597     6,204  

Deferred debits and other assets

        

Regulatory assets

   524    522    514     510  

Investments

   5    5    12     12  

Investments in affiliates

   8    8 

Prepaid pension asset

   423    467    319     370  

Other

   26    26    8     9  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total deferred debits and other assets

   986    1,028    853     901  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total assets

  $7,861   $7,506 

Total assets (a)

  $8,295    $8,056  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

213


Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Balance Sheets

 

  December 31,   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2013   2012   2015   2014 
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY        

Current liabilities

        

Short-term borrowings

  $135   $—     $210    $120  

Long-term debt due within one year

   —      400    378     75  

Long-term debt of variable interest entity due within one year

   70    67 

Accounts payable

   270    235    209     215  

Accrued expenses

   111    102    110     131  

Deferred income taxes

   27    —   

Payables to affiliates

   55    69    52     66  

Customer deposits

   76    71    102     92  

Regulatory liabilities

   48    29    38     44  

Other

   35    7    35     51  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total current liabilities

   827    980    1,134     794  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Long-term debt

   1,746    1,446    1,480     1,857  

Long-term debt to financing trust

   258    258    252     252  

Long-term debt of variable interest entity

   195    265 

Deferred credits and other liabilities

        

Deferred income taxes and unamortized investment tax credits

   1,773    1,658    2,081     1,911  

Asset retirement obligations

   19    8    17     17  

Non-pension postretirement benefits obligations

   217    229    209     212  

Regulatory liabilities

   204    214    184     200  

Other

   67    90    61     60  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total deferred credits and other liabilities

   2,280    2,199    2,552     2,400  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total liabilities

   5,306    5,148 

Total liabilities (a)

   5,418     5,303  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Commitments and contingencies

        

Shareholders’ equity

        

Common stock

   1,360    1,360    1,367     1,360  

Retained earnings

   1,005    808    1,320     1,203  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total shareholders’ equity

   2,365    2,168    2,687     2,563  
  

 

   

 

 

Preference stock not subject to mandatory redemption

   190    190    190     190  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total equity

   2,555    2,358    2,877     2,753  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

  $7,861   $7,506   $8,295    $8,056  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

(a)BGE’s consolidated assets include $26 million and $24 million at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, respectively, of BGE’s consolidated VIE that can only be used to settle the liabilities of the VIE. BGE’s consolidated liabilities include $122 million and $197 million at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, respectively, of BGE’s consolidated VIE for which the VIE creditors do not have recourse to BGE. See Note 2—Variable Interest Entities.

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

214


Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Consolidated Statement of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity

 

(In millions)

  Common
Stock
   Retained
Earnings
 Total
Shareholders’
Equity
 Preference stock
not subject to
mandatory
redemption
   Total
Equity
   Common
Stock
   Retained
Earnings
 Total
Shareholders’
Equity
 Preference
stock
not subject to
mandatory
redemption
   Total
Equity
 

Balance, December 31, 2010

  $1,294   $779  $2,073  $190   $2,263 

Net income

   —      136   136   —      136 

Common stock dividends

   —      (85  (85  —      (85

Preference stock dividends

   —      (13  (13  —      (13
  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2011

  $1,294   $817  $2,111  $190   $2,301 

Net income

   —      4   4   —      4 

Preference stock dividends

   —      (13  (13  —      (13

Contribution from parent

   66    —     66   —      66 
  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2012

  $1,360   $808  $2,168  $190   $2,358   $1,360    $808   $2,168   $190    $2,358  

Net income

   —      210   210   —      210    —       210    210    —       210  

Preference stock dividends

   —      (13  (13  —      (13   —       (13  (13  —       (13
  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2013

  $1,360   $1,005  $2,365  $190   $2,555   $1,360    $1,005   $2,365   $190    $2,555  

Net income

   —       211    211    —       211  

Preference stock dividends

   —       (13  (13  —       (13
  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2014

  $1,360    $1,203   $2,563   $190    $2,753  

Net income

   —       288    288    —       288  

Preference stock dividends

   —       (13  (13  —       (13

Common stock dividends

   —       (158  (158  —       (158

Contribution from parent

   7     —      7    —       7  
  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2015

  $1,367    $1,320   $2,687   $190    $2,877  
  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

See the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

215


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

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

Index to Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

The notes to the consolidated financial statements that follow are a combined presentation. The following list indicates the registrants to which the footnotes apply:

Applicable Notes

Registrant

 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27 

Exelon Corporation

                                                                                                            

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

                                                                                                      

Commonwealth Edison Company

                                                                                    

PECO Energy Company

                                                                                          

Baltimore Gas And Electric Company

                                                                                    

 

1. Significant Accounting Policies (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Description of Business (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Exelon is a utility services holding company engaged through its principal subsidiaries in the energy generation and energy distributiondelivery businesses. On April 1, 2014, Generation assumed the operating licenses and corresponding operational control of CENG’s nuclear fleet. As a result, Exelon and Generation consolidated CENG’s financial position and results of operations into their businesses. Prior to March 12, 2012, Exelon’s principal subsidiaries included ComEd, PECOApril 1, 2014, Exelon and Generation. On March 12, 2012, Constellation merged into Exelon with Exelon continuingGeneration accounted for CENG as the surviving corporation pursuant to the transactions contemplated by the Agreement and Plan of Merger (“Merger Agreement”). As a result of the merger transaction, Generation now includes the former Constellation generation and customer supply operations. BGE, formerly Constellation’s regulated utility subsidiary, is now a subsidiary of Exelon.an equity method investment. Refer to Note 4—Merger and Acquisitions5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC for further information regarding the mergerintegration transaction.

 

The energy generation business includes:

 

  

Generation: Physical delivery and marketing of owned and contracted electric generation capacity and provision of renewable and other energy-related products and services, and natural gas exploration and production activities. Generation has six reportable segments consisting of the Mid-Atlantic, Midwest, New England, New York, ERCOT and Other regions.Power Regions.

 

The energy delivery businesses include:

 

  

ComEd: Purchase and regulated retail sale of electricity and the provision of distribution and transmission services in northern Illinois, including the City of Chicago.

 

  

PECO: Purchase and regulated retail sale of electricity and the provision of distribution and transmission services in southeastern Pennsylvania, including the City of Philadelphia, and the purchase and regulated retail sale of natural gas and the provision of distribution services in the Pennsylvania counties surrounding the City of Philadelphia.

 

  

BGE: Purchase and regulated retail sale of electricity and the provision of distribution and transmission services in central Maryland, including the City of Baltimore, and the purchase and regulated retail sale of natural gas and the provision of distribution services in central Maryland, including the City of Baltimore.

 

Basis of Presentation (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

This is a combined annual report of Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE. The Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements apply to Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE as

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

indicated above in the Index to Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements and parenthetically next to each corresponding disclosure. When appropriate, Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE are named specifically for their related activities and disclosures.

 

Exelon did not apply push-down accounting to BGE and BGE continued to be subject to reporting requirements as an SEC registrant. The information disclosed for BGE represents the activity of the standalone entity for the twelve months ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011 and the financial position as of December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012. However, for Exelon’s consolidated financial reporting, Exelon is reporting BGE activity from the acquisition date of March 12, 2012 through December 31, 2013.

Each of the Registrant’s Consolidated Financial Statements includes the accounts of its subsidiaries. All intercompany transactions have been eliminated.

216


Combined Notes As a result of the Registrants’ 2014 divestiture of certain unconsolidated affiliates considered integral to their operations and the consolidation of CENG during 2014, all Equity in earnings (losses) from unconsolidated affiliates have been presented below Income taxes in the Registrants’ Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(DollarsStatements of Operations and Comprehensive Income starting in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)the first quarter of 2015.

 

Through its business services subsidiary, BSC, Exelon provides its subsidiaries with a variety of support services at cost, including legal, human resources, financial, information technology and supply management services. The costs of BSC, including support services, are directly charged or allocated to the applicable subsidiaries using a cost-causative allocation method. Corporate governance-type costs that cannot be directly assigned are allocated based on a Modified Massachusetts Formula, which is a method that utilizes a combination of gross revenues, total assets and direct labor costs for the allocation base. The results of Exelon’s corporate operations are presented as “Other” within the consolidated financial statements and include intercompany eliminations unless otherwise disclosed.

 

Exelon owns 100% of all of its significant consolidated subsidiaries, either directly or indirectly, except for ComEd, of which Exelon owns more than 99%, and BGE, of which Exelon owns 100% of the common stock but none of BGE’s preference stock. Exelon owned none of PECO’s preferred securities, which PECO redeemed in 2013. Exelon has reflected the third-party interests in ComEd, which totaled less than $1 million at December 31, 20132015 and December 31, 2012,2014, as equity, PECO’s preferred securities as preferred securities of subsidiary through their redemption in 2013, and BGE’s preference stock as BGE preference stock not subject to mandatory redemption in its consolidated financial statements. BGE is subject to some ring-fencing measures established by order of the MDPSC. As part of this arrangement, BGE common stock is held directly by RF Holdco LLC, which is an indirect subsidiary of Exelon. GSS Holdings (BGE Utility), an unrelated party, holds a nominal non-economic interest in RF Holdco LLC with limited voting rights on specified matters.

 

Generation owns 100% of all of its significant consolidated subsidiaries, either directly or indirectly, except for certain Exelon Wind projects, of which Generation holds a majority interest ranging from 94% toof 99% for certain periods of time, and theCENG, of which Generation holds a 50.01% interest. The remaining interests are included in non-controllingnoncontrolling interest on Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. See Note 22—Variable Interest Entities for further discussion of Exelon’s and Generation’s VIEs and the reversionary interests of the non-controllingnoncontrolling members for these certain of these projects.subsidiaries.

 

ComEd owns 100% of all of its significant consolidated subsidiaries, either directly or indirectly, except for RITELine Illinois, LLC, of which ComEd owns 75% and an additional 12.5% is indirectly owned by Exelon. Exelon and ComEd have reflected the third-party interests of 12.5% and 25%, respectively, in RITELine Illinois, LLC, which both totaled less than $1 million at December 31, 20132015 and December 31, 2012,2014, as equity.

 

Exelon consolidates the accounts of entities in which Exelon has a controlling financial interest, after the elimination of intercompany transactions. A controlling financial interest is evidenced by either a voting interest greater than 50% in which Exelon can exercise control over the operations and

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

policies of the investee, or the results of a model that identifies Exelon or one of its subsidiaries as the primary beneficiary of a VIE. Where Exelon does not have a controlling financial interest in an entity, it applies proportionalproportionate consolidation, equity method accounting or cost method accounting. Exelon applies proportionate consolidation when it has an undivided interest in an asset and is proportionately liable for its share of each liability associated with the asset. Exelon proportionately consolidates its undivided ownership interests in jointly owned electric plants and transmission facilities, as well as its undivided ownership interests in upstreamUpstream natural gas exploration and production activities. Under proportionate consolidation, Exelon separately records its proportionate share of the assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses related to the undivided interest in the asset. Exelon applies equity method accounting when it has significant influence over an investee through an ownership in common stock, which generally approximates a 20% to 50% voting interest. Exelon applies equity method accounting

217


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

to certain investments and joint ventures, including the 50.01% interest in CENG, and certain financing trusts of ComEd, PECO, and BGE. Under the equity method, Exelon reports its interest in the entity as an investment and Exelon’s percentage share of the earnings from the entity as single line items in its financial statements. Exelon uses the cost method if it holds less than 20% of the common stock of an entity. Under the cost method, Exelon reports its investment at cost and recognizes income only to the extent Exelon receives dividends or distributions.

For the year ended December 31, 2013, BGE recorded a $2 million (pre-tax) correcting adjustment to decrease amortization expense related to regulatory assets that were originally recorded during 2012, an adjustment to decrease income tax expense by $4 million related to the recognition and measurement of regulatory assets that should have been recorded in periods prior to 2013, and a $4 million (pre-tax) correcting adjustment to decrease operating and maintenance expense for an overstatement of BGE’s life insurance obligation related to post-employment benefits in prior years. For the year ended December 31, 2012, BGE recorded a $2 million (pre-tax) correcting adjustment to reduce electric distribution revenue related to decoupling of 2011 electric distribution revenue, a $3 million (pre-tax) correcting adjustment to increase electric operations and maintenance expense related to capitalization of electric transmission costs, and a $5 million (pre-tax) correcting adjustment to interest expense to reflect the impacts of amendments of tax positions previously taken on prior-year consolidated income tax returns. In addition, ComEd identified a disclosure adjustment within the renewable energy credits and alternative energy credits section of the 2012 Form 10-K Note 8—Intangible Assets which has been revised in Note 10 of this year’s report. Exelon, ComEd and BGE have concluded these correcting adjustments are not material to its results of operations, cash flows, or financial positions for the years ended December 31, 2013, and December 31, 2012, or any prior period.

 

The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with GAAP for annual financial statements and in accordance with the instructions to Form 10-K and Regulation S-X promulgated by the SEC.

 

Use of Estimates (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The preparation of financial statements of each of the Registrants in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying notes. Areas in which significant estimates have been made include, but are not limited to, the accounting for nuclear decommissioning costs and other AROs, pension and other postretirement benefits, the application of purchase accounting, inventory reserves, allowance for uncollectible accounts, goodwill and asset impairments, derivative instruments, unamortized energy contracts, fixed asset depreciation, environmental costs and other loss contingencies, taxes and unbilled energy revenues. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

 

Reclassifications (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Certain prior year amounts in Exelon’s and BGE’sthe registrants’ Consolidated Statements of Operations and Cash Flows, and Exelon’s, ComEd’s, and BGE’sComprehensive Income, Consolidated Balance Sheets and Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows have been reclassified between line items for comparative purposes and correction of prior period classification errors identified in 2013.purposes. The reclassifications did not affect any of the Registrants’ net income, financial positions, or cash flows from operating activities.

 

In 2013, Exelon revised the presentation on the Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income for PECO and BGE correctedto reflect separately operating revenues from the sale of electricity and operating revenues from the sale of natural gas, as well as, purchased power expense and purchased fuel expense within the operating expenses section of the Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income. Further, Exelon revised the presentation from total operating revenues to “Rate-regulated utility revenues” and “Competitive businesses revenues” on the face of interestExelon’s consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income for all periods presented. Similarly, Exelon will separately present rate-regulated purchased power and fuel expense related to BGE’s financing trust of $12 million and $16 million, respectively, to be presented as Interest expense tonon-rate regulated

218


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

affiliates, net on their Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income for the year ended December 31, 2012. BGE also reclassified the related Accrued expenses of $4 million to Payables to affiliates on its December 31, 2012 Balance Sheet. Similar adjustments are also reflected in Note 22 – Related Party Transactions. Exelon and Generation also corrected amounts disclosed within Note 22 – Related Party Transactions to increase Purchasedpurchased power and fuel from affiliates by $114 million and to increase Payables to affiliates by $20 million. In 2013, Generation correctedexpense on the presentationface of interest expense related to certain debt of $75 million to be presented as Interest expense to affiliates, net on itsExelon’s consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income for all periods presented. The reclassifications described herein were made for presentation purposes and did not affect any of the year ended December 31, 2012 and within Note 22 – Related Party Transactions.Registrants’ total revenues or net income.

 

Accounting for the Effects of Regulation (Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE apply the authoritative guidance for accounting for certain types of regulation, which requires ComEd, PECO and BGE to record in their consolidated financial statements the effects of cost-based rate regulation for entities with regulated operations that meet the following criteria: 1) rates are established or approved by a third-party regulator; (2) rates are designed to recover the entities’ cost of providing services or products; and (3) there is a reasonable expectation that rates are set at levels that will recover the entities’ costs from customers. Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE account for their regulated operations in accordance with regulatory and legislative guidance from the regulatory authorities having jurisdiction, principally the ICC, the PAPUC, and the MDPSC, in the cases of ComEd, PECO and BGE, respectively, under state public utility laws and the FERC under various Federal laws. Regulatory assets and liabilities are amortized and the related expense or revenue is recognized in the Consolidated Statements of Operations consistent with the recovery or refund included in customer rates. Exelon believes that it is probable that its currently recorded regulatory assets and liabilities will be recovered and settled, respectively, in future rates. However, Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE continue to evaluate their respective abilities to apply the authoritative guidance for accounting for certain types of regulation, including consideration of current events in their respective regulatory and political environments. If a separable portion of ComEd’s, PECO’s or BGE’s business was no longer able to meet the criteria discussed above, the affected entities would be required to eliminate from their consolidated financial statements the effects of regulation for that portion, which could have a material impact on their results of operations and financial positions. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.

 

The Registrants treat the impacts of a final rate order received after the balance sheet date but prior to the issuance of the financial statements as a non-recognized subsequent event, as the receipt of a final rate order is a separate and distinct event that has future impacts on the parties affected by the order.

 

Revenues (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Operating Revenues. Operating revenues are recorded as service is rendered or energy is delivered to customers. At the end of each month, the Registrants accrue an estimate for the unbilled amount of energy delivered or services provided to customers. ComEd records its best estimates of the distribution and transmission revenue impacts resulting from changes in rates that ComEd believes are probable of approval by the ICC and FERC in accordance with its formula rate mechanisms. BGE records its best estimate of the transmission revenue impact resulting from changes in rates that BGE believes are probable of approval by FERC in accordance with its formula rate mechanism. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters and Note 6—Accounts Receivable for further information.

 

RTOs and ISOs. In RTO and ISO markets that facilitate the dispatch of energy and energy-related products, the Registrants generally report sales and purchases conducted on a net hourly basis in

219


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

either revenues or purchased power on their Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income, the classification of which depends on the net hourly activity. In addition, capacity revenue and expense classification is based on the net sale or purchase position of the Company in the different RTOs and ISOs.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Option Contracts, Swaps and Commodity Derivatives.Certain option contracts and swap arrangements that meet the definition of derivative instruments are recorded at fair value with subsequent changes in fair value recognized as revenue or expense. The classification of revenue or expense is based on the intent of the transaction. For example, gas transactions may be used to hedge the sale of power. This will result in the change in fair value recorded through revenue. As of the merger date, Exelon and Generation have currently elected to de-designate all of their commodity cash flow hedge positions. As ComEd receives full cost recovery for energy procurement and related costs from retail customers, ComEd records the fair value of its energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers as well as an offsetting regulatory asset or liability on its Consolidated Balance Sheets. Refer to Note 3—Regulatory Matters and Note 12—13—Derivative Financial Instruments for further information.

 

Proprietary Trading Activities.Exelon and Generation account for Generation’s trading activities under the provisions of the authoritative guidance for accounting for contracts involved in energy trading and risk management activities, which require energy revenues and costs related to energy trading contracts to be presented on a net basis in the income statement. Commodity derivatives used for trading purposes are accounted for using the mark-to-market method with unrealized gains and losses recognized in operating revenues. Refer to Note 12—13—Derivative Financial Instruments for further information.

 

Income Taxes (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Deferred Federal and state income taxes are provided on all significant temporary differences between the book basis and the tax basis of assets and liabilities and for tax benefits carried forward. Investment tax credits have been deferred on the Registrants’ Consolidated Balance Sheets and are recognized in book income over the life of the related property. In accordance with applicable authoritative guidance, the Registrants account for uncertain income tax positions using a benefit recognition model with a two-step approach; a more-likely-than-not recognition criterion; and a measurement approach that measures the position as the largest amount of tax benefit that is greater than 50% likely of being realized upon ultimate settlement. If it is not more-likely-than-not that the benefit of the tax position will be sustained on its technical merits, no benefit is recorded. Uncertain tax positions that relate only to timing of when an item is included on a tax return are considered to have met the recognition threshold. The Registrants recognize accrued interest related to unrecognized tax benefits in interestInterest expense or in otherOther income and deductions (interest income) on their Consolidated Statements of Operations.Operations and Comprehensive Income.

 

Pursuant to the IRC and relevant state taxing authorities, Exelon and its subsidiaries file consolidated or combined income tax returns for Federal and certain state jurisdictions where allowed or required. See Note 14—15—Income Taxes for further information.

 

Taxes Directly Imposed on Revenue-Producing Transactions (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE 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, but paid by the Registrants, while others are imposed on the Registrants. Where these taxes

220


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

are imposed on the customer, such as sales taxes, they are reported on a net basis with no impact to the Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. However, where these taxes are imposed on the Registrants, such as gross receipts taxes or other surcharges or fees, they are

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

reported on a gross basis. Accordingly, revenues are recognized for the taxes collected from customers along with an offsetting expense. See Note 23—24—Supplemental Financial Information for Generation’s, ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s utility taxes that are presented on a gross basis.

 

Cash and Cash Equivalents (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The Registrants consider investments purchased with an original maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents.

 

Restricted Cash and InvestmentsCash Equivalents (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Restricted cash and investmentscash equivalents represent funds that are restricted to satisfy designated current liabilities. As of December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014, Exelon Corporate’s restricted cash and investmentscash equivalents primarily represented restricted funds for payment of medical, dental, vision and long-term disability benefits. Additionally, Exelon Corporate has funds restricted for merger commitments. In addition, Exelon Corporate’s investments include its direct financing lease investments. Asas of December 31, 2013,2015 and 2014, Generation’s restricted cash and investmentscash equivalents primarily included cash at Antelope Valley required for debt service and construction and cash at Continental Wind and ExGen Texas Power, which is required for debt service and financing of operation and maintenance of the underlying entities. As of December 31, 2012, Generation’s restricted cash primarily included cash at Antelope Valley required for debt service2015 and construction. As of December 31, 2013 and 2012,2014, ComEd’s restricted cash primarily represented cash collateral held from suppliers associated with ComEd’s energy and REC procurement contracts. As of December 31, 2013,2015 and 2014, PECO’s restricted cash primarily represented funds from the sales of assets that were subject to PECO’s mortgage indenture. As of December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014, BGE’s restricted cash primarily represented funds restricted at its consolidated variable interest entity for repayment of rate stabilization bonds.bonds and cash collateral held from suppliers.

 

Restricted cash and investmentscash equivalents not available to satisfy current liabilities are classified as noncurrent assets. As of December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014, Exelon’s and Generation’s NDT funds, which are designated to satisfy future decommissioning obligations, were classified as noncurrent assets. As of December 31, 2013,2015, Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE had investments in Rabbi trusts classified as noncurrent assets.

 

Allowance for Uncollectible Accounts (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The allowance for uncollectible accounts reflects the Registrants’ best estimates of losses on the accounts receivable balances. For Generation, the allowance is based on accounts receivable aging, historical experience and other currently available information. ComEd, PECO and PECOBGE estimate the allowance for uncollectible accounts on customer receivables by applying loss rates developed specifically for each company to the outstanding receivable balance by customer risk segment. Risk segments represent a group of customers with similar credit quality indicators that are computed based on various attributes, including delinquency of their balances and payment history. Loss rates applied to the accounts receivable balances are based on historical average charge-offs as a percentage of accounts receivable in each risk segment. BGE estimates the allowance for uncollectible accounts on customer receivables by assigning reserve factors for each aging bucket. These percentages were derived from a study of billing progression which determined the reserve factors by aging bucket. ComEd, PECO and BGE customers’ accounts are generally considered delinquent if the amount billed

221


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

is not received by the time the next bill is issued, which normally occurs on a monthly basis. ComEd, PECO and BGE customer accounts are written off consistent with approved regulatory requirements. ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s provisions for uncollectible accounts will continue to be affected by changes in volume, prices and economic conditions as well as changes in ICC, PAPUC and MDPSC regulations, respectively. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information regarding the regulatory recovery of uncollectible accounts receivable at ComEd.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Variable Interest Entities (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Exelon accounts for its investments in and arrangements with VIEs based on the authoritative guidance which includes the following specific requirements:

 

requires an entity to qualitatively assess whether it should consolidate a VIE based on whether the entity (1) has the power to direct matters that most significantly impact the activities of the VIE, and (2) has the obligation to absorb losses or the right to receive benefits of the VIE that could potentially be significant to the VIE,

 

requires an ongoing reconsideration of this assessment instead of only upon certain triggering events, and

 

requires the entity that consolidates a VIE (the primary beneficiary) to present separately on the face of its balance sheetdisclose (1) the assets of the consolidated VIE, if they can be used to only settle specific obligations of the consolidated VIE, and (2) the liabilities of a consolidated VIE for which creditors do not have recourse to the general credit of the primary beneficiary.

 

Based on the above accounting guidance, Exelon has adopted the following policies related to variable interest entities:

 

Exelon has presented separately on its Consolidated Balance Sheets,disclosed, to the extent material, the assets of its consolidated VIEs that can only be used to settle specific obligations of the consolidated VIE, and the liabilities of Exelon’s consolidated VIEs for which creditors do not have recourse to Exelon’s general credit.

 

Exelon has qualitatively assessed whether the equity holders of the entity have the power to direct matters that most significantly impact the entity.

 

See Note 2—Variable Interest Entities for additional information.

 

Inventories (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Inventory is recorded at the lower of weighted average cost or market. Provisions are recorded for excess and obsolete inventory.

 

Fossil Fuel.Fossil fuel inventory includes the weighted average costs of stored natural gas, propane and oil. The costs of natural gas, propane coal and oil are generally included in inventory when purchased and charged to fuel expense when used or sold.

 

Materials and Supplies. Materials and supplies inventory generally includes the weighted average costs of transmission, distribution and generating plant materials. Materials are generally charged to inventory when purchased and expensed or capitalized to property, plant and equipment, as appropriate, when installed or used.

222


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Emission Allowances. Emission allowances are included in inventory (for emission allowances exercisable in the current year) and other deferred debits (for emission allowances that are exercisable beyond one year) and are carried at the lower of weighted average cost or market and charged to fuel expense as they are used in operations.

 

Marketable Securities (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

All marketable securities are reported at fair value. Marketable securities held in the NDT funds certain Generation Rabbi trust investments and BGE’s Rabbi trust investments are classified as trading securities and all other securities are classified as available-for-sale securities.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Realized and unrealized gains and losses, net of tax, on Generation’s NDT funds associated with the former ComEd and former PECO nuclear generating units (RegulatoryRegulatory Agreement Units)Units are included in regulatory liabilities at Exelon, ComEd and PECO and in noncurrent payables to affiliates at Generation and in noncurrent receivables from affiliates at ComEd and PECO. Realized and unrealized gains and losses, net of tax, on Generation’s NDT funds associated with the former AmerGen nuclear generating units, the Zion generating station and portions of the Peach Bottom nuclear generating units not subject to a regulatory agreement (Non-RegulatoryNon-Regulatory Agreement Units)Units are included in earnings at Exelon and Generation. Realized and unrealized gains and losses, net of tax, on certain Generation Rabbi trust investments and BGE’s Rabbi trust investments are included in earnings at Exelon, Generation and BGE. Unrealized gains and losses, net of tax, for Generation’s, ComEd’s and PECO’sExelon’s available-for-sale securities are reported in OCI. Any decline in the fair value of ComEd’s and PECO’sExelon’s available-for-sale securities below the cost basis is reviewed to determine if such decline is other-than-temporary. If the decline is determined to be other-than-temporary, the cost basis of the available-for-sale securities is written down to fair value as a new cost basis and the amount of the write-down is included in earnings. See Note 15—16—Asset Retirement Obligations for information regarding marketable securities held by NDT funds and Note 23—24—Supplemental Financial Information for additional information regarding ComEd’s and PECO’s regulatory assets and liabilities.

 

Property, Plant and Equipment (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Property, plant and equipment is recorded at original cost. Original cost includes construction-related direct labor materials and material costs. ComEd, PECO and BGE also include indirect construction overhead.costs including labor and related costs of departments associated with supporting construction activities. When appropriate, original cost also includes capitalized interest for Generation and Exelon Corporate and AFUDC for regulated property at ComEd, PECO and BGE. The cost of repairs and maintenance, including planned major maintenance activities and minor replacements of property, is charged to maintenance expense as incurred. For constructed assets, Exelon capitalizes construction-related direct labor and material costs. ComEd, PECO and BGE also capitalized indirect construction costs including labor and related costs of departments associated with supporting construction activities.

 

Third parties reimburse ComEd, PECO and BGE for all or a portion of expenditures for certain capital projects. Such contributions in aid of construction costs (CIAC) are recorded as a reduction to Property, Plant and Equipment. DOE SGIG funds reimbursed to PECO and BGE arehave been accounted for as CIAC.

 

For Generation, upon retirement, the cost of property is charged to accumulated depreciation in accordance with the composite method of depreciation. Upon replacement of an asset, the costs to remove the asset, net of salvage, are capitalized to gross plant when incurred as part of the cost of the newly-installed asset and recorded to depreciation expense over the life of the new asset. Removal costs, net of salvage, incurred for property that will not be replaced is charged to operating and maintenance expense as incurred.

223


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

For ComEd, PECO and BGE, upon retirement, the cost of property, net of salvage, is charged to accumulated depreciation in accordance with the composite method of depreciation. ComEd’s and BGE’s depreciation expense includes the estimated cost of dismantling and removing plant from service upon retirement, which is consistent with each utility’s regulatory recovery method. ComEd’s and BGE’s actual incurred removal costs are applied against a related regulatory liability. PECO’s removal costs are capitalized to accumulated depreciation when incurred, and recorded to depreciation expense over the life of the new asset constructed consistent with PECO’s regulatory recovery method.

 

Generation’s oil and gas exploration and production activities consist of working interests in gas producing fields. Generation accounts for these activities under the successful efforts method of accounting. Acquisition, development and exploration costs are capitalized. Costs of drilling exploratory wells are initially capitalized and later charged to expense if reserves are not discovered or deemed not to be commercially viable. Other exploratory costs are charged to expense when incurred.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

See Note 7—Property, Plant and Equipment, Note 9—10—Jointly Owned Electric Utility Plant and Note 23—24—Supplemental Financial Information for additional information regarding property, plant and equipment.

 

Nuclear Fuel (Exelon and Generation)

 

The cost of nuclear fuel is capitalized within property, plant and equipment and charged to fuel expense using the unit-of-production method. ThePrior to May 16, 2014, the estimated disposal cost of SNF iswas established per the Standard Waste Contract with the DOE and iswas expensed through fuel expense at one mill ($0.001) per kWh of net nuclear generation. Effective May 16, 2014, the SNF disposal fee was set to zero by the DOE and Exelon and Generation are not accruing any further costs related to SNF disposal fees until a new fee structure goes into effect. On-site SNF storage costs are being reimbursed by the DOE since a DOE (or government-owned) long-term storage facility has not been completed. See Note 22—23—Commitments and Contingencies for additional information regarding the SNF disposal fee.

 

Nuclear Outage Costs (Exelon and Generation)

 

Costs associated with nuclear outages, including planned major maintenance activities, are expensed to operating and maintenance expense or capitalized to property, plant and equipment (based on the nature of the activities) in the period incurred.

 

New Site Development Costs (Exelon and Generation)

 

New site development costs represent the costs incurred in the assessment and design of new power generating facilities. Such costs are capitalized when management considers project completion to be probable, primarily based on management’s determination that the project is economically and operationally feasible, management and/or the Exelon board of directors has approved the project and has committed to a plan to develop it, and Exelon and Generation have received the required regulatory approvals or management believes the receipt of required regulatory approvals is probable. Capitalized development costs are charged to Operating and maintenance expense when project completion is no longer probable. At December 31, 2013 and 2012, there were no material capitalizedNew site development costs for projects not yet under construction included in Property, plant and equipment, net on Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.incurred prior to a project’s completion being deemed probable are expensed as incurred. Approximately $10$22 million, $4$13 million and $2$10 million of costs were expensed by Exelon and Generation for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012,2015, 2014, and 2011,2013, respectively. These costs primarilyare related to the possible development of new renewable energy projects.power generating facilities.

224


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Capitalized Software Costs (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Costs incurred during the application development stage of software projects that are internally developed or purchased for operational use are capitalized.capitalized within property, plant, and equipment. Such capitalized amounts are amortized ratably over the expected lives of the projects when they become operational, generally not to exceed five years. Certain other capitalized software costs are being amortized over longer lives based on the expected life or pursuant to prescribed regulatory requirements. The following table presents net unamortized capitalized software costs and amortization of capitalized software costs by year:

 

Net unamortized software costs

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

December 31, 2013

  $479   $129   $101   $71   $155 

December 31, 2012

   499    143    105    63    157 

Amortization of capitalized software costs

  Exelon (a)   Generation (a)   ComEd   PECO   BGE (a) 

2013

  $198    $67    $52   $33    $36 

2012

   208    81    56    30    32 

2011

   122    41    50    25    25 

(a)Exelon activity for the year ended December 31, 2012 includes the results of Constellation and BGE for March 12, 2012—December 31, 2012. Generation activity for the year ended December 31, 2012 includes the results of Constellation for March 12, 2012—December 31, 2012. BGE activity represents the activity for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011.

Net unamortized software costs

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

December 31, 2015

  $633    $180    $172    $86    $178  

December 31, 2014

   596     193     133     84     163  

Amortization of capitalized software costs

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

2015

  $208    $73    $47    $33    $46  

2014

   186     59     45     28     43  

2013

   198     67     52     33     36  

 

Depreciation, Depletion and Amortization (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Except for the amortization of nuclear fuel, depreciation is generally recorded over the estimated service lives of property, plant and equipment on a straight-line basis using the composite method. ComEd’s and BGE’s depreciation includes a provision for estimated removal costs as authorized by the respective regulators. The estimated service lives for ComEd, PECO and BGE are primarily based on the average service lives from the most recent depreciation study for each respective company. The estimated service lives of the nuclear-fuel generating facilities are based on the remaining useful lives of the stations, which assume a 20-year license renewal extension of the operating licenses (to the extent that such renewal has not yet been granted) for all of Generation’s operating nuclear generating stations except for Oyster Creek. The estimated service lives of the hydroelectric generating facilities are based on the remaining useful lives of the stations, which assume a license renewal extension of the operating licenses. The estimated service lives of the fossil fuel and other renewable generating facilities are based on the remaining useful lives of the stations, which Generation periodically evaluates based on feasibility assessments taking into account economic and capital requirement considerations.

 

See Note 7—Property, Plant and Equipment for further information regarding depreciation.

 

Depletion of oil and gas exploration and production activities is recorded using the units-of-production method over the remaining life of the estimated proved reserves at the field level for acquisition costs and over the remaining life of proved developed reserves at the field level for development costs. The estimates for oil and gas reserves are based on internal calculations.

 

Amortization of regulatory assets isand liabilities are recorded over the recovery or refund period specified in the related legislation or regulatory agreement. When the recovery or refund period is less than one year, amortization is recorded to the line item in which the deferred cost or income would have originally been recorded in the Registrants’ Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. Amortization of ComEd’s distribution formula rate regulatory asset and ComEd’s and BGE’s transmission formula rate regulatory assets is recorded to Operating revenues.

225


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

inAmortization of income tax related regulatory assets and liabilities is generally recorded to Income tax expense. With the Registrants’ Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. With exception of income tax-relatedthe regulatory assets and liabilities discussed above, when the recovery period is more than one year, the amortization is generally recorded to Depreciation and amortization in the Registrants’ Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. For income tax related regulatory assets, amortization is generally recorded to Income tax expense in the Registrants’ Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

 

See Note 3—Regulatory Matters and Note 23—24—Supplemental Financial Information for additional information regarding Generation’s nuclear fuel, Generation’s ARC and the amortization of ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s regulatory assets.

 

Asset Retirement Obligations (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The authoritative guidance for accounting for AROs requires the recognition of a liability for a legal obligation to perform an asset retirement activity even though the timing and/or method of settlement may be conditional on a future event. To estimate its decommissioning obligation related to its nuclear generating stations, Generation uses a probability-weighted, discounted cash flow model which, on a unit-by-unit basis, considers multiple outcome scenarios that include significant estimates and assumptions, and are based on decommissioning cost studies, cost escalation rates, probabilistic cash flow models and discount rates. Generation generally updates its ARO annually during the third quarter, unless circumstances warrant more frequent updates, based on its review of updated cost studies and its annual evaluation of cost escalation factors and probabilities assigned to various scenarios. Decommissioning cost studies are updated, on a rotational basis, for each of Generation’s nuclear units at least every five years.years unless circumstances warrant more frequent updates (such as a change in assumed operating life for a nuclear plant). As part of the annual cost study update process, Generation evaluates newly assumed costs or substantive changes in previously assumed costs to determine if the cost estimate impacts are sufficiently material to warrant application of the updated estimates to the AROs across the nuclear fleet outside of the normal five-year rotating cost study update cycle. The liabilities associated with Exelon’s non-nuclear AROs are adjusted on an ongoing rotational basis, at least once every five years. Changes to the recorded value of an ARO result from the passage of new laws and regulations, revisions to either the timing or amount of estimates of undiscounted cash flows, and estimates of cost escalation factors. AROs are accreted throughout each year to reflect the time value of money for these present value obligations through a charge to operatingOperating and maintenance expense in the Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income or, in the case of the majority of ComEd’s, PECO’s, and BGE’s accretion, through an increase to regulatory assets. See Note 15—16—Asset Retirement Obligations for additional information.

 

Capitalized Interest and AFUDC (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

During construction, Exelon and Generation capitalize the costs of debt funds used to finance non-regulated construction projects. Capitalization of debt funds is recorded as a charge to construction work in progress and as a non-cash credit to interest expense.

 

Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE apply the authoritative guidance for accounting for certain types of regulation to calculate AFUDC, which is the cost, during the period of construction, of debt and equity funds used to finance construction projects for regulated operations. AFUDC is recorded to construction work in progress and as a non-cash credit to AFUDC that is included in interest expense for debt-related funds and other income and deductions for equity-related funds. The rates used for capitalizing AFUDC are computed under a method prescribed by regulatory authorities.

226


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

The following table summarizes total incurred interest, capitalized interest and credits to AFUDC by year:

 

      Exelon (a)   Generation (a)   ComEd   PECO   BGE (a) 

2013

  Total incurred interest(b)  $1,423   $411   $584   $117   $129 
  Capitalized interest   54    54    —      —      —   
  Credits to AFUDC debt and equity   35    —      16    6    13 

2012

  Total incurred interest(b)  $1,003   $368   $310   $125   $149 
  Capitalized interest   67    67    —      —      —   
  Credits to AFUDC debt and equity   25    —      9    6    15 

2011

  Total incurred interest(b)  $783   $219   $349   $138   $136 
  Capitalized interest   49    49    —      —      —   
  Credits to AFUDC debt and equity   25    —      12    13    22 
      Exelon (a)   Generation (a)   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

2015

  Total incurred interest(b)  $1,170    $445    $336    $116    $113  
  Capitalized interest   79     79     —       —       —    
  Credits to AFUDC debt and equity   44     —       9     7     28  

2014

  Total incurred interest(b)  $1,144    $419    $323    $115    $118  
  Capitalized interest   63     63     —       —       —    
  Credits to AFUDC debt and equity   37     —       5     8     24  

2013

  Total incurred interest(b)  $1,423    $411    $584    $117    $129  
  Capitalized interest   54     54     —       —       —    
  Credits to AFUDC debt and equity   35     —       16     6     13  

 

(a)Exelon activity forOn April 1, 2014, Generation assumed operational control of CENG’s nuclear fleet. As a result, the year ended December 31, 2012 includes the2014 financial results include CENG’s financial position and results of Constellation and BGE for March 12, 2012—December 31, 2012. Generation activity for the year ended December 31, 2012 includes the results of Constellation for March 12, 2012—December��31, 2012. BGE activity represents the activity for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010.operations beginning April 1, 2014.
(b)Includes interest expense to affiliates.

 

Guarantees (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The Registrants recognize, at the inception of a guarantee, a liability for the fair market value of the obligations they have undertaken inby issuing the guarantee, including the ongoing obligation to perform over the term of the guarantee in the event that the specified triggering events or conditions occur.

 

The liability that is initially recognized at the inception of the guarantee is reduced as the Registrants are released from risk under the guarantee. Depending on the nature of the guarantee, the release from risk of the Registrant may be recognized only upon the expiration or settlement of the guarantee or by a systematic and rational amortization method over the term of the guarantee. See Note 22—23—Commitments and Contingencies for additional information.

 

Asset Impairments (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Long-Lived Assets.The Registrants evaluate the carrying value of their long-lived assets or asset groups, excluding goodwill, when circumstances indicate the carrying value of those assets may not be recoverable. Indicators of impairment may include a deteriorating business climate, including, but not limited to, declines in energy prices, condition of the asset, specific regulatory disallowance, or plans to dispose of a long-lived asset significantly before the end of its useful life. The Registrants determine if long-lived assets and asset groups are impaired by comparing theirthe undiscounted expected future cash flows to theirthe carrying value. When the undiscounted cash flow analysis indicates a long-lived asset or asset group is not recoverable, the amount of the impairment loss is determined by measuring the excess of the carrying amount of the long-lived asset or asset group over its fair value less costs to sell.

Cash flows for long-lived assets and asset groups are determined at the lowest level for which identifiable cash flows are largely independent of the cash flows of other assets and liabilities. CashThe cash flows from Generation plant assetsthe generating units are generally evaluated at a regional portfolio level along with cash flows generated from Generation’sthe customer supply and risk management activities, including cash flows from contracts that are recorded asrelated intangible contract assets and liabilities on the balance sheet. In certain cases, generationgenerating assets

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

may be evaluated on an individual basis where those assets are contracted on a long-term basis with a third party and operations are independent of other generation assets (typically contracted renewables).

Impairment may occur when the carrying value of the asset or asset group exceeds the future undiscounted cash flows. When the undiscounted cash flow analysis indicates a long-lived asset or

227


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

asset group is not recoverable, the amount of the impairment loss is determined by measuring the excess of the carrying amount of the long-lived asset or asset group over its fair value.

Conditions that could have an adverse impact on the expected future cash flows and the fair value of the long-lived assets and asset groups include, among other factors, a deteriorating business climate, including energy prices and market conditions, revisions to regulatory laws, or plans to dispose of a long-lived asset significantly before the end of its useful life. See Note 8—Impairment of Long-Lived Assets for additional information.

 

Goodwill. Goodwill represents the excess of the purchase price paid over the estimated fair value of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed in the acquisition of a business. Goodwill is not amortized, but is tested for impairment at least annually or on an interim basis if an event occurs or circumstances change that would more likely than not reduce the fair value of a reporting unit below its carrying value. See Note 10—11—Intangible Assets for additional information regarding Exelon’s, Generation’s and ComEd’s goodwill.

 

Equity Method Investments. Exelon and Generation regularly monitor and evaluate equity method investments to determine whether they are impaired. An impairment is recorded when the investment has experienced a decline in value that is not temporaryother-than-temporary in nature. Additionally, if the project in which Generation holds an investment recognizes an impairment loss, Exelon and Generation would record their proportionate share of that impairment loss and evaluate the investment for an other than temporaryother-than-temporary decline in value.

Debt and Equity Security Investments. Exelon and Generation regularly monitor and evaluate debt and equity investments to determine whether they are impaired. An impairment is recorded when the investment has experienced a decline in value that is other-than-temporary in nature.

 

Direct Financing Lease Investments. Direct financing lease investments represent the estimated residual values of leased coal-fired plants in Georgia and Texas.Georgia. Exelon reviews the estimated residual values of its direct financing lease investments and records an impairment charge if the review indicates an other than temporaryother-than-temporary decline in the fair value of the residual values below their carrying values. See Note 8—Impairment of Long-Lived Assets for additional information.

 

Derivative Financial Instruments (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

All derivatives are recognized on the balance sheet at their fair value unless they qualify for certain exceptions, including the normal purchases and normal sales exception. Additionally, derivatives that qualify and are designated for hedge accounting are classified as either hedges of the fair value of a recognized asset or liability or of an unrecognized firm commitment (fair value hedge) or hedges of a forecasted transaction or the variability of cash flows to be received or paid related to a recognized asset or liability (cash flow hedge). For fair value hedges, changes in fair values for both the derivative and the underlying hedged exposure are recognized in earnings each period. For cash flow hedges, the portion of the derivative gain or loss that is effective in offsetting the change in the cost or value of the underlying exposure is deferred in accumulated OCI and later reclassified into earnings when the underlying transaction occurs. Gains and losses from the ineffective portion of any hedge are recognized in earnings immediately. For derivative contracts intended to serve as economic hedges and that are not designated or do not qualify for hedge accounting or the normal purchases and normal sales exception, changes in the fair value of the derivatives are recognized in earnings each period. Amounts classified in earnings are included in revenue, purchased power and fuel, interest expense or other, net on the Consolidated Statement of Operations based on the activity the transaction is economically hedging. For energy-related derivatives entered into for proprietary trading purposes, which are subject to Exelon’s Risk Management Policy, changes in the fair value of the derivatives are recognized in earnings each period. All amounts classified in earnings related to proprietary trading are

228


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

included in revenue on the Consolidated Statement of Operations. Cash inflows and outflows related to derivative instruments are included as a component of operating, investing or financing cash flows in the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows, depending on the nature of each transaction.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

For commodity derivative contracts effective with the date of the merger with Constellation, Generation no longer utilizes the election provided for by the cash flow hedge designation and de-designated all of its existing cash flow hedges prior to the Constellation merger. Because the underlying forecasted transactions remainremained probable, the fair value of the effective portion of these cash flow hedges was frozen in accumulated OCI and will bewas reclassified to results of operations when the forecasted purchase or sale of the energy commodity occurs, or becomes probable of not occurring. None of Constellation’s designated cash flow hedges for commodity transactions prior to the merger were re-designated as cash flow hedges.occurred through March 31, 2015. The effect of this decision is that all derivatives executed to hedge economic risk forrelated to commodities are recorded at fair value with changes in fair value recognized through earnings for the combined company.

 

As part of Generation’s energy marketing business, Generation enters into contracts to buy and sell energy to meet the requirements of its customers. These contracts include short-term and long-term commitments to purchase and sell energy and energy-related products in the energy markets with the intent and ability to deliver or take delivery of the underlying physical commodity. Normal purchases and normal sales are contracts where physical delivery is probable, quantities are expected to be used or sold in the normal course of business over a reasonable period of time and will not be financially settled. Revenues and expenses on derivative contracts that qualify, and are designated, as normal purchases and normal sales are recognized when the underlying physical transaction is completed. While these contracts are considered derivative financial instruments, they are not required to be recorded at fair value, but rather are recorded on an accrual basis of accounting. See Note 12—13—Derivative Financial Instruments for additional information.

 

Retirement Benefits (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Exelon sponsors defined benefit pension plans and other postretirement benefit plans for essentially all Generation, ComEd, PECO, BGE and BSC employees. Effective March 12, 2012, Exelon became the sponsor of all of Constellation’s defined benefit pension and other postretirement benefit plans and defined contribution savings plans.

 

The measurement of the plan obligations and costs of providing benefits under these plans involve various factors, including numerous assumptions and accounting elections. The assumptions are reviewed annually and at any interim remeasurement of the plan obligations. The impact of assumption changes or experience different from that assumed on pension and other postretirement benefit obligations is recognized over time rather than immediately recognized in the income statement. Gains or losses in excess of the greater of ten percent of the projected benefit obligation or the MRV of plan assets are amortized over the expected average remaining service period of plan participants. See Note 16—17—Retirement Benefits for additional discussion of Exelon’s accounting for retirement benefits.

 

Equity Investment Earnings (Losses) of Unconsolidated Affiliates (Exelon and Generation)

 

Exelon and Generation include equity in earnings from equity method investments in qualifying facilities, power projects and joint ventures, including Generation’s 50.01% interest in CENG, in equity in earnings (losses) of unconsolidated affiliates.affiliates within their Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. Equity in earnings (losses) of unconsolidated affiliates also includes any adjustments to amortize the difference, if any, except for goodwill and land, between

229


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

their cost in an equity method investment and the underlying equity in net assets of the investee at the date of investment. See Note 5—Investment in CENG and Note 25—Related Party Transactions for additional discussion of Exelon’s and Generation’s investment in CENG.

 

Exelon and Generation continuously monitor for issues that potentially could impact future profitability of these equity method investments and which could result in the recognition of an impairment loss if such investment experiences an other than temporaryother-than-temporary decline in value.

 

New Accounting Pronouncements (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Exelon has identified the following new accounting pronouncementsstandards that have been recently adopted or issued that management believes may significantly affect the Registrants.

Presentation of Items Reclassified out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income

In February 2013, the FASB issued authoritative guidance requiring entities to present either in the notes or parenthetically on the face of the financial statements, reclassifications from each component of accumulated other comprehensive income and the affected income statement line items. Entities only need to disclose the affected income statement line item for components reclassified to net income in their entirety; otherwise, a cross-reference to the related note should be provided. This guidance was effective for the Registrants for periods beginning after December 15, 2012 and was required to be applied prospectively. As this guidance provides only disclosure requirements, the adoption of this standard did not impact the Registrants’ results of operations, cash flows or financial positions. See Note 21—Changes in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income for the new disclosures.

Disclosures About Offsetting Assets and Liabilities

In December 2011 (and amended in January 2013), the FASB issued authoritative guidance requiring entities to disclose both gross and net information about recognized derivative instruments, including bifurcated embedded derivatives, repurchase and reverse repurchase agreements, and securities borrowing or lending transactions that are offset on the balance sheet or subject to an enforceable master netting arrangement or similar agreement, irrespective of whether they are offset on the balance sheet. The guidance was effective for the Registrants for periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013 and was required to be applied retrospectively. This guidance is primarily applicable to certain derivative transactions for Exelon and Generation. As this guidance provides only disclosure requirements, the adoption of this standard did not impact the Registrants’ results of operations, cash flows or financial positions. See Note 12—Derivative Financial Instruments for the new disclosures.

Inclusion of the Fed Funds Effective Swap Rate as a Benchmark Interest Rate for Hedge Accounting Purposes

In July 2013, the FASB issued authoritative guidance permitting entities to designate the Fed Funds Effective Swap Rate as a U.S. benchmark interest rate for hedge accounting purposes. Prior to the issuance of this guidance, only interest rates on direct treasury obligations of the U.S. government and the LIBOR swap rate were considered benchmark interest rates in the U.S. This guidance was effective immediately and can be applied prospectively for qualifying new or redesignated hedging relationships entered into on or after July 17, 2013. Currently, the Registrants do not use the Fed Funds Effective Swap Rate as a benchmark interest rate, but may in the future.

230


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Balance Sheet Classification of Deferred Taxes

In November 2015, the FASB issued authoritative guidance that requires deferred tax assets and deferred tax liabilities to be classified as noncurrent in a classified statement of financial position. The guidance is effective for periods beginning after December 15, 2016, with early adoption permitted. The guidance can be applied either prospectively or retrospectively. The Registrants early adopted the standard retrospectively in the fourth quarter of 2015, resulting in the following impacts as of December 31, 2014 in the Consolidated Balance Sheets of the Registrants:

For the year ended December 31, 2014

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 
Increase (Decrease)          

Current assets—Deferred income taxes

  $(244 $(327 $—     $(69 $(6

Deferred debits and other assets—Other

   3    —      —      —      —    

Current liabilities—Deferred income taxes

   —      —      (63  —      (52

Deferred credits and other liabilities—Deferred income taxes

   (241  (327  63    (69  46  

The adoption of this guidance had no impact on the Registrants’ Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income and Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.

Simplifying the Accounting for Measurement-Period Adjustments

In September 2015, the FASB issued authoritative guidance that requires an acquirer in a business combination to recognize adjustments to provisional amounts that are identified during the measurement period in the reporting period in which the adjustment amounts are determined and to record, in the same period’s financial statements, the effect on earnings of changes in depreciation, amortization, or other income effects, if any, as a result of the change to the provisional amounts, calculated as if the accounting had been completed at the acquisition date. Under current guidance, such effects would be retrospectively recorded in prior periods. The guidance is effective for periods beginning after December 15, 2015. The guidance is required to be applied prospectively to adjustments to provisional amounts that occur after the effective date with earlier application permitted for financial statements that have not been issued. The Registrants early adopted the standard in the fourth quarter of 2015. The adoption of this guidance had no impact on the Registrants’ Consolidated Balance Sheets, Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income, Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows and disclosures.

Application of Normal Purchases Normal Sales Exception to Power Contracts in Nodal Energy Markets

In August 2015, the FASB issued authoritative guidance addressing the ability of entities to elect the normal purchase normal sales (NPNS) scope exception when the contract for the purchase or sale of electricity on a forward basis is delivered to a nodal energy market or transmitted through a nodal energy market. The NPNS scope exception allows entities to treat certain contracts that qualify as derivatives as contracts that do not require recognition at fair value. The guidance specifies that the use of locational marginal pricing by an independent system operator in such transactions does not constitute net settlement of a contract for the purchase or sale of electricity, even in scenarios in which legal title to the associated electricity is conveyed to the independent system operator during transmission. Consequently, the use of locational marginal pricing by the independent system operator does not cause that contract to fail to meet the physical delivery criterion of the NPNS scope exception. Consistent with the Registrants’ current practice, if the physical delivery criterion is met, along with all of the other criteria of the NPNS scope exception, an entity may elect to designate that contract as

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

NPNS. The guidance is effective upon issuance and should be applied prospectively. The adoption of this guidance had no impact on the Registrants’ Consolidated Balance Sheets, Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income, Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows and disclosures.

Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs

In April 2015, the FASB issued authoritative guidance that changes the presentation of debt issuance costs in financial statements. The new guidance requires entities to present such costs in the balance sheet as a direct reduction to the related debt liability rather than as a deferred cost (i.e., an asset) as required by current guidance. The new guidance does not change the recognition or measurement of debt issuance costs. The guidance is effective for the Registrants for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2015. Early adoption is permitted for financial statements that have not been previously issued. The guidance is required to be applied retrospectively to all prior periods presented. The Registrants early adopted the standard retrospectively in the fourth quarter of 2015. The adoption of this guidance resulted in a reclassification of $157 million, $70 million, $34 million, $14 million, and $16 million as of December 31, 2014, from Other long-term assets to Long-term debt, including Long-term debt to financing trusts, in the Consolidated Balance Sheets of Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE, respectively. The standard did not impact the Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income and Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows of the Registrants.

In August 2015, the FASB issued clarifying authoritative guidance for debt issuance costs incurred in connection with line-of-credit arrangements. The guidance states that an entity should defer and present debt issuance costs as an asset and subsequently amortize the deferred debt issuance costs ratably over the term of the line-of-credit arrangement. The adoption of this guidance had no impact on the Registrants’ Consolidated Balance Sheets, Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income, Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows and disclosures.

The following recently issued accounting standard isstandards are not yet required to be reflected in the combined financial statements of the Registrants.

 

PresentationRecognition and Measurement of Unrecognized Tax Benefits When Net Operating Loss Carryforwards, Similar Tax LossesFinancial Assets and Financial Liabilities

In January 2016, the FASB issued authoritative guidance which (i) requires all investments in equity securities, including other ownership interests such as partnerships, unincorporated joint ventures and limited liability companies, to be carried at fair value through net income, (ii) requires an incremental recognition and disclosure requirement related to the presentation of fair value changes of financial liabilities for which the fair value option has been elected, (iii) amends several disclosure requirements, including the methods and significant assumptions used to estimate fair value or Tax Credit Carryforwards Exista description of the changes in the methods and assumptions used to estimate fair value, and (iv) requires disclosure of the fair value of financial assets and liabilities measured at amortized cost at the amount that would be received to sell the asset or paid to transfer the liability. The standard is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017 with early adoption permitted. The guidance is required to be applied retrospectively with a cumulative effect adjustment to retained earnings for initial application of the guidance at the date of adoption (modified retrospective method). The Registrants are currently assessing the impacts this guidance may have on their Consolidated Balance Sheets, Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income, Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows and disclosures as well as the potential to early adopt the guidance.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Simplifying the Measurement of Inventory

 

In July 2013,2015, the FASB issued authoritative guidance requiring entitiesthat requires inventory to present unrecognized tax benefitsbe measured at the lower of cost or net realizable value. The new guidance defines net realizable value as the estimated selling price in the ordinary course of business, less reasonably predictable costs of completion, disposal and transportation. This definition is consistent with existing authoritative guidance. Current guidance requires inventory to be measured at the lower of cost or market where market could be replacement cost, net realizable value or net realizable value less an approximately normal profit margin. The guidance is effective for periods beginning after December 15, 2016 with early adoption permitted. The guidance is required to be applied prospectively. The Registrants do not expect that this guidance will have a significant impact on their Consolidated Balance Sheets, Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income, Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows and disclosures. The Registrants are currently assessing the potential to early adopt the guidance.

Disclosures for Investments in Certain Entities that Calculate Net Asset Value per Share

In May 2015, FASB issued authoritative guidance that removes the requirement to categorize within the fair value hierarchy all investments for which fair value is measured using the net asset value per share practical expedient. Investments measured at net asset value per share using the practical expedient will be presented as a reductionreconciling item between the fair value hierarchy disclosure and the investment line item on the statement of financial position. The guidance also removes the requirement to deferred tax assetsmake certain disclosures for losses or other tax carryforwardsall investments that wouldare eligible to be availablemeasured at fair value using the net asset value per share practical expedient. Rather, those disclosures are limited to offsetinvestments for which the uncertain tax positions atentity has elected to measure the reporting date. Currently,fair value using the Registrants present their unrecognized tax benefits as liabilities on a gross basis unless an unrecognized tax benefit is directly associated with a tax position taken in a tax year that results in the recognition of a net operating loss or other tax carryforward for that year. Thispractical expedient. The guidance is effective for the Registrants for periodsfiscal years beginning after December 15, 2013 and2015 with early adoption permitted. The guidance is required to be applied prospectively, with retroactive application permitted.retrospectively to all prior periods presented. The Registrants are currently assessing the impacts this guidance may have on their disclosures. There will be no impact to the Registrants’ Consolidated Balance Sheets, Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income and Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.

Customer’s Accounting for Fees Paid in a Cloud Computing Arrangement

In April 2015, the FASB issued authoritative guidance that clarifies the circumstances under which a cloud computing customer would account for the arrangement as a license of internal-use software. A cloud computing arrangement would include a software license if (1) the customer has a contractual right to take possession of the software at any time during the hosting period without significant penalty and (2) it is feasible for the customer to either run the software on its own hardware or contract with another party unrelated to the vendor to host the software. If the arrangement does not retroactively adoptcontain a software license, it would be accounted for as a service contract. Beginning January 1, 2016, the Registrants will apply the standard prospectively and do not expect that this guidance. Thisguidance will have a significant impact on their Consolidated Balance Sheets, Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income, Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows and disclosures.

Amendments to the Consolidation Analysis

In February 2015, the FASB issued authoritative guidance that amends the consolidation analysis for variable interest entities (VIEs) as well as voting interest entities. The new guidance primarily (1) changes the assessment of limited partnerships as VIEs, (2) amends the effect that fees paid to a decision maker or service provider have on the VIE analysis, (3) amends how variable interests held by

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

a reporting entity’s related parties and de facto agents impact its consolidation conclusion, (4) clarifies how to determine whether equity holders (as a group) have power over an entity, and (5) provides a scope exception for registered and similar unregistered money market funds. The guidance is currentlyeffective for the Registrants for the first interim period beginning on or after December 15, 2015. The guidance can be applied retrospectively to each prior reporting period presented (full retrospective method) or retrospectively with a cumulative effect adjustment to retained earnings for initial application of the guidance at the date of adoption (modified retrospective method). The Registrants are in the process of evaluating the standard and have not expectedidentified any changes to consolidation conclusions as a result of the new guidance and therefore have not elected an impactadoption method. Based on the Registrants upon adoption with the exceptionanalysis completed to date, a limited number of Exelon and Generation in which approximately $11 million of unrecognized tax benefitsadditional entities will be offset against current deferred income assets.considered variable interest entities when the guidance is adopted, and required disclosures will be included in the Variable Interest Entities footnote.

Revenue from Contracts with Customers

In May 2014, the FASB issued authoritative guidance that changes the criteria for recognizing revenue from a contract with a customer. The new standard replaces existing guidance on revenue recognition, including most industry specific guidance, with a five step model for recognizing and measuring revenue from contracts with customers. The objective of the new standard is to provide a single, comprehensive revenue recognition model for all contracts with customers to improve comparability within industries, across industries and across capital markets. The underlying principle is that an entity will recognize revenue to depict the transfer of goods or services to customers at an amount that the entity expects to be entitled to in exchange for those goods or services. The guidance also requires a number of disclosures regarding the nature, amount, timing and uncertainty of revenue and the related cash flows. The guidance can be applied retrospectively to each prior reporting period presented (full retrospective method) or retrospectively with a cumulative effect adjustment to retained earnings for initial application of the guidance at the date of initial adoption (modified retrospective method). The Registrants are currently assessing the impacts this guidance may have on their Consolidated Balance Sheets, Consolidated Statements of thisOperations and Comprehensive Income, Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows and disclosures as well as the transition method that they will use to adopt the guidance. Exelon is considering the impacts of the new guidance on our ability to recognize revenue for certain contracts where collectability is in question, our accounting for contributions in aid of construction, bundled sales contracts and contracts with pricing provisions that may require us to recognize revenue at prices other than the contract price (e.g., straight line or forward curve). In addition, the Registrants will be required to capitalize costs to acquire new contracts, whereas Exelon currently expenses those costs as incurred. In August 2015, the FASB issued an amendment to provide a one year deferral of the effective date to annual reporting periods beginning on or after December 15, 2017, as well as an option to early adopt the standard willfor annual periods beginning on or after December 15, 2016. The Registrants do not impactplan to early adopt the Registrants’ results of operations.standard.

 

2. Variable Interest Entities (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Under the applicable authoritative guidance, aA VIE is a legal entity that possesses any of the following characteristics: an insufficient amount of equity at risk to finance its activities, equity owners who do not have the power to direct the significant activities of the entity (or have voting rights that are disproportionate to their ownership interest), or equity owners who do not have the obligation to absorb expected losses or the right to receive the expected residual returns of the entity. Companies are required to consolidate a VIE if they are its primary beneficiary, which is the enterprise that has the power to direct the activities that most significantly impactaffect the entity’s economic performance.

At December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Exelon, Generation, and BGE consolidated four and five VIEs or VIE groups, respectively, for which the applicable Registrant was the primary beneficiary. As of December 31, 2013, the Registrants had one VIE for which the Registrants were the primary beneficiary, however, the VIE is immaterial and was not included in the consolidated financial statements or in the consolidated VIE table below. As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Registrants had significant interests in eight and nine other VIEs for which the Registrants do not have the power to direct the entities’ activities, respectively, and accordingly, were not the primary beneficiary.

231


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

At December 31, 2015 and 2014, Exelon, Generation, and BGE collectively consolidated seven and six VIEs or VIE groups, respectively, for which the applicable Registrant was the primary beneficiary (see Consolidated Variable Interest Entities below). As of December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Registrants had significant interests in eight and six other VIEs, respectively, for which the Registrants do not have the power to direct the entities’ activities and, accordingly, were not the primary beneficiary (see Unconsolidated Variable Interest Entities below).

Consolidated Variable Interest Entities

 

The carrying amounts and classification of the consolidated VIEs’ assets and liabilities included in the Registrants’ consolidated financial statements at December 31, 20132015 and 20122014 are as follows:

 

  December 31, 2013   December 31, 2012   December 31, 2015   December 31, 2014(a) 
  Exelon (a)   Generation   BGE   Exelon (a)(b)   Generation (b)   BGE   Exelon (b)   Generation   BGE   Exelon (b)   Generation   BGE 

Current assets

  $484   $446   $28   $550   $519   $30   $909    $881    $23    $1,275    $1,247    $21  

Noncurrent assets

   1,905    1,884    3    1,719    1,680    —      8,009     8,004     3     7,573     7,560     3  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total assets

  $2,389   $2,330   $31   $2,269   $2,199   $30   $8,918    $8,885    $26    $8,848    $8,807    $24  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Current liabilities

  $566   $481   $74   $684   $612   $71   $473    $387    $81    $611    $526    $77  

Noncurrent liabilities

   774    562    195    775    470    265    2,927     2,884     41     2,728     2,597     120  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total liabilities

  $1,340   $1,043   $269   $1,459   $1,082   $336   $3,400    $3,271    $122    $3,339    $3,123    $197  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Certain December 31, 2014 balances have been adjusted for the adoption of accounting guidance related to classification of deferred taxes and simplifying the presentation of debt costs. See Note 1—Significant Accounting Policies for additional information.
(b)Includes certain purchase accounting adjustments not pushed down to the BGE standalone entity.
(b)Includes total assets of $146 million and total liabilities of $42 million as of December 31, 2012 related to a retail supply company that is not a consolidated VIE as of December 31, 2013. See additional information below.

 

Except as specifically noted below, the assets in the table above are restricted for settlement of the VIE obligations and the liabilities in the preceding table can only be settled using VIE resources.

 

Exelon’s, Generation’s and BGE’s consolidated VIEs consist of:

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

 

BondCo’s assets are restricted and can only be used to settle the obligations of BondCo. Further, BGE is required to remit all payments it receives from customers for rate stabilization charges to BondCo. During 2013, 2012,2015, 2014, and 2011,2013, BGE remitted $83$86 million, $85 million, and $92$83 million, respectively, to BondCo.

 

BGE did not provide any additional financial support to BondCo during 2013.2015. 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.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Retail Gas GroupGroup..During 2009, Constellation formed two new entities, which now are part of Generation, and combined them with its existing retail gas activities into a retail gas entity group for the purpose of entering intoenteringinto a collateralized gas supply agreement with a third-party gas supplier. While Generation owns 100% of these entities, it has been determined that the retail gas entity group is a VIE because there is not sufficient equity to fund the group’s activities without the additional credit support that is provided in the form of a parental guarantee. Generation is the primary beneficiary of the retail gas entity group; accordingly, Generation consolidates the retail gas entity group as a VIE.

232


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

The third-party gas supply arrangement is collateralized as follows:

 

Thethe assets of the retail gas entity group must be used to settle obligations under the third-party gas supply agreement before it can make any distributions to Generation,

 

Thethe third-party gas supplier has a collateral interest in all of the assets and equity of the retail gas entity group, and

 

As of December 31, 2013 Exelon providedGeneration provides a $75 million parental guarantee to the third-party gas supplier in support of the retail gas entity group.

 

Other than credit support provided by the parental guarantee, Exelon or Generation do not have any contractual or other obligations to provide additional financial support under the collateralized third-party gas supply agreement. The third-party gas supply creditors do not have any recourse to Exelon’s or Generation’s general credit other than the parental guarantee.

 

Solar Project Entity Group. In 2011, Constellation formed a group of solar project limited liability companies to build, own, and operate solar power facilities, which are now part of Generation. Additionally, on September 30, 2011, Generation acquired all of the equity interests in Antelope Valley Solar Ranch One (Antelope Valley) from First Solar, Inc., a 230-MW242-MW solar PV project under construction in northern Los Angeles County, California. In addition, Generation owns a number of limited liability companies that build, own, and operate solar power facilities. While Generation owns 100% of these entities, it has been determined that certain of the individual solar project entities are VIEs because the entities require additional subordinated financial support in the form of a parental guarantee of debt, loans from the customers in order to obtain the necessary funds for construction of the solar facilities, or the customers absorb price variability from the entities through the fixed price power and/or REC purchase agreements. Generation is the primary beneficiary of the solar project entities that qualify as VIEs because Generation controls the design, construction, and operation of the solar power facilities. Generation provides operating and capital funding to thesethe solar VIE entities for ongoing construction, operations and maintenance of the solar power facilities.facilities and provides limited recourse related to the Antelope Valley project. In addition, these solar VIE entities have an aggregate amount of outstanding debt with third parties of $536$655 million, as of December 31, 2013,2015, for which the creditors have no recourse to Generation, however there is limited recourse to Generation with respect to remaining equity contributions necessary to complete the Antelope Valley project.Generation. For additional information on these project-specific financing arrangements refer to Note 13—14—Debt and Credit Agreements.

 

Retail Power Supply Entity.and Gas Companies. In August 2013,March 2014, Generation executed an agreement to terminate itsbegan consolidating retail power and gas VIEs for which Generation is the primary beneficiary as a result of energy supply contract with a retailcontracts that give Generation the power supply companyto direct the activities that was previously a consolidated VIE.most significantly affect the economic performance of the entities. Generation diddoes not have an equity ownership interest in the entity,these entities, but was the primary beneficiary through the energy supply contract. As a result of the termination, Generation no longer has a variable interestprovides approximately $12 million in credit support for the retail power supply company and ceasedgas companies. These entities are included in Generation’s consolidated financial statements, and the consolidation of the entity during the third quarter of 2013. Upon deconsolidation, there was no gainVIEs do not have a material impact on Generation’s financial results or loss recognized. The assets, liabilities, and non-controlling interest were removed from Exelon’s and Generation’s balance sheet and the change in non-controlling interest is also reflected on the Statement of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity and the Statement of Changes in Member’s Equity for Exelon and Generation, respectively.financial condition.

 

Wind Project Entity Group.Group. Generation owns and operates a number of wind project limited liability entities, the majority of which were acquired on December 9,during 2010 when Generation completedwith the acquisition of all of the equity

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

interests of John Deere Renewables, LLC (now known as Exelon Wind). Generation has evaluated the significant agreements and ownership structures and the risks of each of its wind projects and underlying entities, and determined that certain of the entities are VIEs because either the projects have non-controllingnoncontrolling equity interest holders that absorb variability from the wind projects, or the customers absorb price variability from the entities through the fixed price power and/or REC purchase agreements. Generation is the primary beneficiary of the windthewind project entities that

233


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

qualify as VIEs because Generation controls the design, construction, and operation of the wind powergeneration facilities. While Generation owns 100% of the majority of the wind project entities, 10nine of the projects have non-controllingnoncontrolling equity interests of 1% held by third parties, that currently range between 1% and 6%. Of these 10 projects,parties. Generation’s current economic interests in nineeight of thethese projects areis significantly greater than its stated contractual governance rights and all of these projects have reversionary interest provisions that provide the non-controllingnoncontrolling interest holder with a purchase option, certain of which are considered bargain purchase prices, which, if exercised, transfers ownership of the projects to the non-controllingnoncontrolling interest holder upon either the passage of time or the achievement of targeted financial returns. The ownership agreements with the non-controllingnoncontrolling interests state that Generation is to provide financial support to the projects in proportion to its current 99% economic interests in the projects that currently range between 94% and 99%.projects. However, no additional support to these projects beyond what was contractually required has been provided during 2013.2015. As of December 31, 2013,2015, the carrying amount of the assets and liabilities that are consolidated as a result of Generation being the primary beneficiary of the wind VIE entities primarily relaterelates to the wind generating assets, PPA intangible assets and working capital amounts.

 

Other Generating Facilities. During the second quarter of 2015, Generation formed a limited liability company to build, own, and operate a backup generator. While Generation owns 100% of the backup generator company, it was determined that the entity is a VIE because the customer absorbs price variability from the entity through the fixed price backup generator agreement. Generation provides operating and capital funding to the backup generator company. Generation also owns 90% of a biomass fueled, combined heat and power company. In the second quarter of 2015, the entity was deemed to be a VIE because the entity requires additional subordinated financial support in the form of a parental guarantee provided by Generation for up to $275 million in support of the payment obligations related to the Engineering, Procurement and Construction contract for the facility (see Note 14—Debt and Credit Agreements for additional details on Albany Green Energy, LLC). In addition to the parental guarantee, Generation provides operating and capital funding to the biomass fueled, combined heat and power company. Generation is the primary beneficiary of both entities since Generation has the power to direct the activities that most significantly affect the economic performance of the entities.

CENG. Through March 31, 2014, CENG was operated as a joint venture with EDF and was governed by a board of ten directors, five of which were appointed by Generation and five by EDF. CENG was designed to operate under joint and equal control of Generation and EDF through the Board of Directors, subject to the Chairman of the Board’s final decision making authority on certain special matters; therefore, CENG was not subject to VIE guidance. Accordingly, Generation’s 50.01% interest in CENG was accounted for as an equity method investment. On April 1, 2014, Generation, CENG, and subsidiaries of CENG executed the Nuclear Operating Services Agreement (NOSA) pursuant to which Generation now conducts all activities associated with the operations of the CENG fleet and provides corporate and administrative services to CENG and the CENG fleet for the remaining life of the CENG nuclear plants as if they were a part of the Generation nuclear fleet, subject to the CENG member rights of EDF. As a result of executing the NOSA, CENG now qualifies as a VIE due to the disproportionate relationship between Generation’s 50.01% equity ownership interest and its role in conducting the operational activities of CENG and theCENG fleet conveyed through the NOSA.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Further, since Generation is conducting the operational activities of CENG and the CENG fleet, Generation qualifies as the primary beneficiary of CENG and, therefore, is required to consolidate the financial position and results of operations of CENG. On April 1, 2014, Exelon and Generation derecognized Generation’s equity method investment in CENG and reflected all assets, liabilities, and the EDF noncontrolling interest in CENG at fair value on the consolidated balance sheets of Exelon and Generation, resulting in the recognition of a $261 million gain in their respective Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income for the year ended December 31, 2014. For additional information on this transaction refer to Note 5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC.

Generation and Exelon, where indicated, provide the following support to CENG (See Note 5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC and Note 26—Related Party Transactions for additional information regarding Generation and Exelon’s transactions with CENG):

under the NOSA, Generation conducts all activities related to the operation of the CENG nuclear generation fleet owned by CENG subsidiaries (the CENG fleet) and provides corporate and administrative services for the remaining life and decommissioning of the CENG nuclear plants as if they were a part of the Generation nuclear fleet, subject to the CENG member rights of EDF,

under the Power Services Agency Agreement (PSAA), Generation provides scheduling, asset management, and billing services to the CENG fleet for the remaining operating life of the CENG nuclear plants,

under power purchase agreements with CENG, Generation purchased or will purchase 50.01% of the available output generated by the CENG nuclear plants not subject to other contractual agreements from January 2015 through the end of the operating life of each respective plant. However, pursuant to amendments dated March 31, 2015, the energy obligations under the Ginna Nuclear Power Plant (Ginna) PPAs have been suspended during the term of the expected Reliability Support Services Agreement (RSSA). (see Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional details),

Generation provided a $400 million loan to CENG. As of December 31, 20132015, the remaining obligation is $300 million including accrued interest, which reflects the principal payment made in January 2015 (see Note 5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC for more details),

Generation executed an Indemnity Agreement pursuant to which Generation agreed to indemnify EDF against third-party claims that may arise from any future nuclear incident (as defined in the Price Anderson Act) in connection with the CENG nuclear plants or their operations. Exelon guarantees Generation’s obligations under this Indemnity Agreement. (See Note 23—Commitments and 2012,Contingencies for more details),

in connection with CENG’s severance obligations, Generation has agreed to reimburse CENG for a total of approximately $6 million of the severance benefits paid or to be paid in 2014 through 2016. As of December 31, 2015, the remaining obligation is approximately $1 million,

Generation and EDF share in the $637 million of contingent payment obligations for the payment of contingent retrospective premium adjustments for the nuclear liability insurance (See Note 23—Commitments and Contingencies for more details),

Generation provides a guarantee of approximately $7 million associated with hazardous waste management facilities and underground storage tanks. In addition, EDF executed a reimbursement agreement that provides reimbursement to Exelon for 49.99% of any amounts paid by Generation under this guarantee,

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Generation and EDF are the members-insured with Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited and have assigned the loss benefits under the insurance and the NEIL premium costs to CENG and guarantee the obligations of CENG under these insurance programs in proportion to their respective member interests (see Note 23—Commitments and Contingencies for more details), and

Exelon has executed an agreement to provide up to $245 million to support the operations of CENG as well as a $165 million guarantee of CENG’s cash pooling agreement with its subsidiaries.

For each of the consolidated VIEs, except as otherwise noted:

the assets of the VIEs are restricted and can only be used to settle obligations of the respective VIE;

Exelon, Generation and BGE did not provide any additional material financial support to the VIEs;

Exelon, Generation and BGE did not have any material contractual commitments or obligations to provide financial support to the VIEs; and

the creditors of the VIEs did not have recourse to Exelon’s, Generation’s or BGE’s general credit.

As of December 31, 2015 and 2014, ComEd and PECO did not have any material consolidated VIEs.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Assets and Liabilities of Consolidated VIEs

Included within the balances above are assets and liabilities of certain consolidated VIEs for which the assets can only be used to settle obligations of those VIEs, and liabilities that creditors, or beneficiaries, do not have recourse to the general credit of the Registrants. As of December 31, 2015 and 2014, these assets and liabilities primarily consisted of the following:

   December 31, 2015   December 31, 2014(a) 
   Exelon   Generation   BGE   Exelon   Generation   BGE 

Cash and cash equivalents

  $164    $164    $—      $392    $392    $—    

Restricted cash

   100     77     23     117     96     21  

Accounts receivable, net

            

Customer

   219     219     —       297     297     —    

Other

   43     43     —       57     57     —    

Mark-to-market derivatives assets

   140     140     —       171     171     —    

Inventory

            

Materials and supplies

   181     181     —       172     172     —    

Other current assets

   35     30     —       37     30     —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total current assets

   882     854     23     1,243     1,215     21  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Property, plant and equipment, net

   5,160     5,160     —       4,638     4,638     —    

Nuclear decommissioning trust funds

   2,036     2,036     —       2,097     2,097     —    

Goodwill

   47     47     —       47     47     —    

Mark-to-market derivatives assets

   53     53     —       44     44     —    

Other noncurrent assets

   90     85     3     90     77     3  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total noncurrent assets

   7,386     7,381     3     6,916     6,903     3  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total assets

  $8,268    $8,235    $26    $8,159    $8,118    $24  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Long-term debt due within one year

  $111    $27    $79    $87    $5    $75  

Accounts payable

   216     216     —       292     292     —    

Accrued expenses

   115     113     2     111     108     2  

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities

   5     5     —       24     24     —    

Unamortized energy contract liabilities

   12     12     —       22     22     —    

Other current liabilities

   13     13     —       25     25     —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total current liabilities

   472     386     81     561     476     77  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Long-term debt

   666     623     41     212     81     120  

Asset retirement obligations

   1,999     1,999     —       1,763     1,763     —    

Pension obligation (b)

   9     9     —       9     9     —    

Unamortized energy contract liabilities

   39     39     —       51     51     —    

Other noncurrent liabilities

   79     79     —       132     132     —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Noncurrent liabilities

   2,792     2,749     41     2,167     2,036     120  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total liabilities

  $3,264    $3,135    $122    $2,728    $2,512    $197  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Certain December 31, 2014 balances have been adjusted for the adoption of accounting guidance related to classification of deferred taxes and simplifying the presentation of debt costs. See Note 1- Significant Accounting Policies for additional information.
(b)Includes the CNEG retail gas pension obligation, which is presented as a net asset balance within the Prepaid pension asset line item on Generation’s balance sheet. See Note 17—Retirement Benefits for additional details.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Unconsolidated Variable Interest Entities

 

Exelon’s and Generation’s variable interests in unconsolidated VIEs generally include three transaction types: (1) equity investments (2)and energy purchase and sale contracts, and (3) fuel purchase commitments.contracts. For the equity investments, the carrying amount of the investments is reflected on theirExelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets in Investments in affiliates.Investments. For the energy purchase and sale contracts and the fuel purchase commitments (commercial agreements), the carrying amount of assets and liabilities in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets that relate to their involvement with the VIEs are predominately related to working capital accounts and generally represent the amounts owed by, or owed to, Exelon and Generation for the deliveries associated with the current billing cycles under the commercial agreements. Further, Exelon and Generation have not provided material debt or equity support, liquidity arrangements or performance guarantees associated with these commercial agreements.

 

As of December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014, Exelon and Generation had significant unconsolidated variable interests in eight and nine,six VIEs, respectively, VIEs for which they wereExelon or Generation, as applicable, was not the primary beneficiary; including certain equity method investments and certain commercial agreements. The changeincrease in the number of unconsolidated variable interestsVIEs is driven bydue to the completionexecution of certain obligations which cause the entities to no longer bean energy purchase and sale agreement with a new unconsolidated variable interests offset by the addition ofVIE and an equity investment in a residential solar provider. new unconsolidated VIE.

The following tables present summary information about theExelon and Generation’s significant unconsolidated VIE entities:

 

December 31, 2013

  Commercial
Agreement

VIEs
   Equity
Investment
VIEs
   Total 

Total assets(a)

  $128   $332   $460 

Total liabilities(a)

   17    123    140 

Registrants’ ownership interest(a)

   —      86    86 

Other ownership interests(a)

   111    123    234 

Registrants’ maximum exposure to loss:

      

Carrying amount of equity investments

   7    67    74 

Contract intangible asset

   9    —      9 

Debt and payment guarantees

   —      5    5 

Net assets pledged for Zion Station decommissioning(b)

   44    —      44 

December 31, 2015

  Commercial
Agreement
VIEs
   Equity
Investment
VIEs
   Total 

Total assets (a)

  $263    $164    $427  

Total liabilities (a)

   22     125     147  

Exelon’s ownership interest in VIE (a)

   —       11     11  

Other ownership interests in VIE (a)

   241     28     269  

Registrants’ maximum exposure to loss:

      

Carrying amount of equity method investments

   —       21     21  

Contract intangible asset

   9     —       9  

Debt and payment guarantees

   —       3     3  

Net assets pledged for Zion Station decommissioning (b)

   17     —       17  

 

234


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

December 31, 2012

  Commercial
Agreement
VIEs
   Equity
Investment
VIEs
   Total 

Total assets(a)

  $386   $354   $740 

Total liabilities(a)

   219    114    333 

Registrants’ ownership interest(a)

   —      97    97 

Other ownership interests(a)

   167    143    310 

Registrants’ maximum exposure to loss:

      

Letters of credit

   5    —      5 

Carrying amount of equity investments

   —      77    77 

Contract intangible asset

   8    —      8 

Debt and payment guarantees

   —      5    5 

Net assets pledged for Zion Station decommissioning(b)

   50    —      50 

December 31, 2014

  Commercial
Agreement
VIEs
   Equity
Investment
VIEs
   Total 

Total assets (a)

  $114    $91    $205  

Total liabilities (a)

   3     49     52  

Exelon’s ownership interest in VIE (a)

   —       9     9  

Other ownership interests in VIE (a)

   111     33     144  

Registrants’ maximum exposure to loss:

      

Carrying amount of equity method investments

   —       13     13  

Contract intangible asset

   9     —       9  

Debt and payment guarantees

   —       3     3  

Net assets pledged for Zion Station decommissioning (b)

   27     —       27  

 

(a)These items represent amounts on the unconsolidated VIE balance sheets, not on Exelon’s or Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. These items are included to provide information regarding the relative size of the unconsolidated VIEs. Exelon corrected an error in the December 31, 2014 balances within Commercial Agreement VIEs for an overstatement of Total assets, Total liabilities and Other ownership interests in VIE of $392 million, $234 million and $158 million, respectively. The error is not considered material to any prior period.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

(b)These items represent amounts on Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets related to the asset sale agreement with ZionSolutions, LLC. The net assets pledged for Zion Station decommissioning includes gross pledged assets of $458$206 million and $614$319 million as of December 31, 20132015 and December 31, 2012,2014, respectively; offset by payables to ZionSolutions LLC of $414$189 million and $564$292 million as of December 31, 20132015 and December 31, 2012,2014, respectively. These items are included to provide information regarding the relative size of the ZionSolutions LLC unconsolidated VIE. See Note 15—Asset Retirement Obligations for further discussion.

 

For each unconsolidated VIE, Exelon and Generation assessassessed the risk of a loss equal to their maximum exposure to be remote and, accordingly Exelon and Generation have not recognized a liability associated with any portion of the maximum exposure to loss. In addition, there are no agreements with, or commitments by, third parties that would materially affect the fair value or risk of their variable interests in these variable interest entities.

 

Energy Purchase and Sale Agreements. In March 2005, Constellation, to whichGeneration has several energy purchase and sale agreements with generating facilities. Generation has evaluated the significant agreements, ownership structures and risks of each entity, and determined that certain of the entities are VIEs because the entity absorbs risk through the sale of fixed price power and renewable energy credits. Generation has reviewed the entities and has determined that Generation is now a successor, closed a transaction in which Generation assumed from a counterparty two power sales contracts with previously existing VIEs. The VIEs previously were created bynot the counterparty to issue debt in order to monetize the value of the original contracts to purchase and sell power. Under the power sales contracts, Generation sold power to the VIEs which, in turn, sold that power to an electric distribution utility through 2013. In connection with this transaction, a third-party acquired the equityprimary beneficiary of the VIEs andbecause Generation loaneddoes not have the power to direct the activities that party a portion of the purchase price. If the electric distribution utility were to default under its obligation to buy power frommost significantly impact the VIEs the equity holder could transfer its equity interests to Generation in lieu of repaying the loan. In this event, Generation would have the right to seek recovery of its losses from the electric distribution utility. As a result, Generation has concluded that consolidation was not required. During 2013, the third-party repaid their obligations of the loan with Generation which caused the entities to no longer be unconsolidated VIEs.economic performance.

 

ZionSolutions.ZionSolutions. Generation has an asset sale agreement with EnergySolutions, Inc. and certain of its subsidiaries, including ZionSolutions, LLC (ZionSolutions), which is further discussed in Note 15—16—Asset Retirement Obligations. Under this agreement, ZionSolutions can put the assets and liabilities back to Generation when decommissioning isactivities under the asset sale agreement are complete. Generation has evaluated this agreement and determined that, through the put option, it has a variable interest in ZionSolutions but is not the primary beneficiary. As a result, Generation has concluded that consolidation is not required. Other than the asset sale agreement, Exelon orand Generation do not have any contractual or other obligations to provide additional financial support and ZionSolutions’ creditors do not have any recourse to Exelon’s or Generation’s general credit.

235


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Fuel Purchase Commitments.Generation’s customer supply operations include the physical delivery and marketing of power obtained through its generating capacity, and long-, intermediate- and short-term contracts. Generation also has contracts to purchase fuel supplies for nuclear and fossil generation. These contracts and Generation’s membership in NEIL are discussed in further detail in Note 22—Commitments and Contingencies. Generation has evaluated these contracts and its membership with NEIL and determined that it either has no variable interest in an entity or, where Generation does have a variable interest in an entity, the variable interest is not significant and it is not the primary beneficiary; therefore, consolidation is not required.

For contracts where Generation has a variable interest, the level of variability being absorbed through the contracts is not considered significant because of the small proportion of the entities’ activities encompassed by the contracts with Generation. Further, Generation has considered which interest holder has the power to direct the activities that most significantly affect the economic performance of the VIE and thus is considered the primary beneficiary and is required to consolidate the entity. The primary beneficiary must also have exposure to significant losses or the right to receive significant benefits from the VIE. In general, the most significant activity of the VIEs is the operation and maintenance of the facilities. Facilities represent power plants, sources of uranium and fossil fuels, or plants used in the uranium conversion, enrichment and fabrication process. Generation does not have control over the operation and maintenance of the facilities considered VIEs, and it does not bear operational risk of the facilities. Furthermore, Generation has no debt or equity investments in the entities and Generation does not provide any other financial support through liquidity arrangements, guarantees or other commitments other than purchase commitments described in Note 22—Commitments and Contingencies. Upon consideration of these factors, Generation does not consider itself to have significant variable interests in these entities or be the primary beneficiary of these VIEs and, accordingly, has determined that consolidation is not required.

Investment in Energy Development Projects.Projects, Distributed Energy Companies, and Energy Generating Facilities.Generation has several equity investments in energy development projects and energy generating facilities. Generation has evaluated the significant agreements, ownership structures and risks of each of its equity investments, and determined that certain of the entities are VIEs because the entity has an insufficient amount of equity at risk to finance its activities, Generation guarantees the debt of the entity, provides equity support, or provides operating services to the entity. Generation has reviewed the entities and has determined that Generation is not the primary beneficiary of the entities that qualify as VIEs because Generation does not have the power to direct the activities of the VIEs that most significantly impact the VIEs economic performance.

 

Residential Solar Provider.In July 2014, Generation hasentered into an arrangement to purchase a 90% equity investment in a residential solar provider. Generation has evaluated the significant agreements, ownership structureinterest and risks90% of the entity,tax attributes of a distributed energy company. Generation’s total equity commitment in this arrangement was $91 million and determined that the entity is a VIE because it does not have sufficient equity at risk to fund its operations. Generation has determined that its equity investment in the entity is a variable interest. However, Generation has concluded that we are not the primary beneficiary because Generation does not have the power to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance. Exelon or Generation do not have any contractual or other obligations to provide additional financial support and the residential solar provider’s creditors do not have any recourse to Exelon’s or Generation’s general credit.

ComEd, PECO and BGE

ComEd’s, PECO’s, and BGE’s retail operations frequently include the purchase of electricity and RECs through procurement contracts of varying durations. Seepaid incrementally over an approximate two year period (see Note 3—Regulatory Matters and Note 22—23—Commitments and Contingencies for additional information on these contracts. ComEd, PECO

details). This arrangement did not meet the definition of a VIE and is recorded as an equity method investment.

 

236In June 2015, 2015 ESA Investco, LLC, then a wholly owned subsidiary of Generation, entered into an arrangement to purchase a 90% equity interest and 99% of the tax attributes of another distributed energy company. Separate from the equity investment, Generation provided $27 million in cash to the other (10%) equity holder in the distributed energy company in exchange for a convertible


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

and BGE have evaluated these typespromissory note. In November 2015, Generation sold 69% of contracts and have historically determined that either there is no significant variableits equity interest in 2015 ESA Investco, LLC to a tax equity investor. Generation and the entity, or where either ComEd, PECO or BGE does havetax equity investor will contribute $250 million of equity incrementally through December 2016 in proportion to their ownership interests, which equates to approximately $172 million for the tax equity investor and $78 million for Generation (see Note 23—Commitments and Contingencies for additional details). Generation and the tax equity investor provide a significant variable interestparental guarantee of up to $275 million in proportion to their ownership interests in support of 2015 ESA Investco, LLC’s obligation to make equity contributions to the distributed energy company. The investment in the distributed energy company was evaluated and it was determined to be a VIE ComEd, PECO or BGE wouldfor which Generation is not be the primary beneficiary and, therefore, consolidation would not be required.beneficiary. Generation continues to consolidate 2015 ESA Investco, LLC under the voting interest model.

 

For contracts where ComEd, PECO or BGE isBoth distributed energy companies from the 2014 and 2015 arrangements are considered to have a significant variable interest, consideration is given to which interest holder has the power to direct the activities that most significantly affect the economic performance of the VIE. In general, the most significant activity of the VIEs is the operation and maintenance of their production or procurement processes related to electricity, RECs, AECs or natural gas. parties.

ComEd, PECO and BGE do not have control over the operation and maintenance of the entities and they do not bear operational risk related to the associated activities. Generally, the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities in ComEd’s, PECO’s, and BGE’s Consolidated Balance Sheets that relate to their involvement with VIEs as a result of commercial arrangements represent the amounts owed by the utilities for the purchases associated with the current billing cycles under the contracts. As of December 31, 2013, the total amount of accounts payable owed by the utilities under agreements with these VIEs was not material. In addition, variability from these contracts is mitigated by the fact that the utilities are able to recover costs incurred under purchase agreements through customer rates. Furthermore, ComEd, PECO and BGE do not have any debt or equity investments in these VIEs and do not provide any other financial support through liquidity arrangements, guarantees or other commitments other than purchase commitments described in Note 22—Commitments and Contingencies. Accordingly, none of ComEd, PECO or BGE considers itself to be the primary beneficiary of any VIEs as a result of commercial arrangements.

 

The financing trust of ComEd, ComEd Financing III, the financing trusts of PECO, PECO Trust III and PECO Trust IV, and the financing trust of BGE, BGE Capital Trust II are not consolidated in Exelon’s, ComEd’s, PECO’s or BGE’s financial statements. These financing trusts were created to issue mandatorily redeemable trust preferred securities. ComEd, PECO, and BGE have concluded that they do not have a significant variable interest in ComEd Financing III, PECO Trust III, PECO Trust IV or BGE Capital Trust II as each Registrant financed its equity interest in the financing trusts through the issuance of subordinated debt and, therefore, has no equity at risk. See Note 13—14—Debt and Credit Agreements for additional information.

 

3. Regulatory Matters (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The following matters below discuss the current status of material regulatory and legislative proceedings of the Registrants.

 

Illinois Regulatory Matters

 

Energy Infrastructure Modernization Act (Exelon and ComEd).

 

Background

 

Since 2011, ComEd’s electric distribution rates are established through a performance-based rate formula, pursuant to EIMA. EIMA also provides a structure for substantial capital investment by utilities over a ten-year period to modernize Illinois’ electric utility infrastructure. EIMA was scheduled to sunset, ending ComEd’s performance based rate formula and investment commitment, at December 31, 2017, unless approved to continue through 2022 by the Illinois General Assembly. On April 3, 2015, the Governor signed legislation extending the EIMA sunset from 2017 to 2019.

Participating utilities are required to file an annual update to the performance-based formula rate tariff on or before May 1, with resulting rates effective in January of the following year. This annual formula rate update is based on prior year actual costs and current year projected capital additions.additions (initial revenue requirement). The update also reconciles any differences between the revenue requirement(s)requirement in effect for the prior year and actual costs incurred for that year.year (annual reconciliation). SeeAnnual Electric Distribution Filings below for further details. Throughout each year, ComEd records regulatory assets or regulatory liabilities and corresponding increases or decreases to

237


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

corresponding increases or decreases to operating revenuesOperating revenue for any differences between the revenue requirement(s)requirement in effect and ComEd’s best estimate of the revenue requirement expected to be approved by the ICC for that year’s reconciliation. As of December 31, 2013,2015, and December 31, 2012,2014, ComEd had a net regulatory asset associated with the electric distribution formula rate of $463$189 million and $209$371 million, respectively. The regulatory asset associated with electric distribution true-up is amortized to Operating revenue in ComEd’s Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income as the associated amounts are recovered through rates.

Participating utilities are also required to file an annual update on their AMI implementation progress. On April 1, 2015, ComEd filed an annual progress report on its AMI Implementation Plan with the ICC, which allows for the installation of more than four million smart meters throughout ComEd’s service territory by 2018. To date, approximately two million smart meters have been installed in the Chicago area.

Pursuant to EIMA, ComEd annually contributes $4 million for customer education for as long as the AMI Deployment Plan remains in effect. Additionally, ComEd contributes $10 million annually through 2016 to fund customer assistance programs for low-income customers, which will not be recoverable through rates.

Annual Electric Distribution Filings

For each of the following years, the ICC approved the following total increases/(decreases) in ComEd’s electric distributions formula rate filings:

Annual Distribution Filings

  2015  2014  2013 

ComEd’s requested total revenue requirement (decrease) increase

  $(50 $269   $353  

Final ICC Order

          

Initial revenue requirement increase

  $85   $160   $160  

Annual reconciliation (decrease) increase

   (152  72    181  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total revenue requirement (decrease) increase

  $(67 $232   $341  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Allowed Return on Rate Base:

          

Initial revenue requirement

   7.05  7.06  6.94

Annual reconciliation

   7.02  7.04  6.94

Allowed ROE:

          

Initial revenue requirement

   9.14%(a)   9.25%(a)   8.72

Annual reconciliation

   9.09%(a)   9.20%(a)   8.72

Effective date of rates

   January 2016    January 2015    January 2014  

(a)Includes a reduction of 5 basis points for a reliability performance metric penalty.

 

Formula Rate TariffStructure Investigation

On November 8, 2011, ComEd filed its initial formula rate tariff and associated testimony based on 2010 costs and 2011 plant additions. The primary purpose of that proceeding was to establish the formula rate under which rates will be calculated going-forward, and the initial rates, which went into effect in late June 2012. On May 29, 2012, the ICC issued an Order (May Order) in that proceeding. The May Order reduced the annual revenue requirement by $168 million, or approximately $110 million more than the proposed reduction by ComEd. Of this incremental revenue requirement reduction, approximately $50 million reflected the ICC’s determination that certain costs should be recovered through alternative rate recovery tariffs available to ComEd or will be reflected in a subsequent annual reconciliation, thereby primarily delaying the timing of cash flows. The incremental revenue reduction also reflected a $35 million reduction for the disallowance of return on ComEd’s pension asset, a $10 million reduction for incentive compensation related adjustments, and $15 million of reductions for various adjustments for cash working capital, operating reserves, and other technical items. In the second quarter of 2012, ComEd recorded a decrease in revenue of approximately $100 million pre-tax to decrease the regulatory asset for 2011 and for the first three months of 2012 consistent with the terms of the May Order.

On June 22, 2012, the ICC granted an expedited rehearing on three of the issues decided in the May Order. On October 3, 2012, the ICC issued its final order (Rehearing Order) in that rehearing, adopting ComEd’s position on the return on its pension asset, resulting in an increase in the annual revenue requirement. For the two other issues, the ICC ruled against ComEd by reaffirming use of an average rather than year-end rate base in the annual reconciliation and amending its prior order to provide a short-term debt rate to apply to the annual reconciliation. In the fourth quarter of 2012, ComEd recorded an increase in revenue of approximately $135 million pre-tax consistent with the terms of the Rehearing Order, of which $75 million pre-tax reflects the reinstatement of the return on pension asset for 2011 and $60 million pre-tax reflects the return on pension asset for 2012. New rates reflecting the impacts of the Rehearing Order went into effect in November 2012. ComEd has filed an appeal with the Illinois Appellate Court. ComEd cannot predict the results of any such appeals.

In March 2013, the Illinois legislature passed Senate Bill 9 to clarify the intent of EIMA on the three issues decided in the Rehearing Order: an allowed return on ComEd’s pension asset; the use of year-end rather than average rate base and capital structure in the annual reconciliation; and the use of ComEd’s weighted average cost of capital interest rate rather than a short-term debt rate to apply to the annual reconciliation. On May 22, 2013, Senate Bill 9 became effective after the Illinois legislature overrode the Governor’s veto of that Bill. On June 5, 2013, the ICC approved ComEd’s updated distribution formula rate structure to reflect the impacts of Senate Bill 9.

 

In October 2013, the ICC opened an investigation (the Investigation), in response to a complaint filed by the Illinois Attorney General, to change the formula rate structure by requesting three changes: the elimination of the income tax gross-up on the weighted average cost of capital used to calculate interest on the annual reconciliation balance, the netting of associated accumulated deferred income

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

taxes against the annual reconciliation balance in calculating interest, and the use of average rather than year-end rate base for determining any ROE collar adjustment. On November 26, 2013, the ICC

238


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

issued its final order in the Investigation, rejecting two of the proposed changes but accepting the proposed change to eliminate the income tax gross-up on the weighted average cost of capital used to calculate interest on the annual reconciliation balance. The accepted change became effective in January 2014, and is estimated to reducereduced ComEd’s 2014 revenue by approximately $8 million. This change had no financial statement impact on ComEd in 2013. ComEd and intervenors requested rehearing, however all rehearing requests were denied by the ICC. ComEd and intervenors have filed appeals with the Illinois Appellate Court. ComEd cannot predictsubsequently withdrew its appeal, but the resultsIllinois Attorney General and the Citizens Utility Board continued to argue that the ICC had wrongly approved ComEd’s treatment of any such appeals.accumulated deferred income taxes (ADIT) relating to the annual reconciliation. On July 29, 2015, the Illinois Appellate Court rejected that appeal and affirmed the ICC’s decision and its acceptance of ComEd’s treatment of ADIT. The period in which to file requests for further review has expired and that decision is final.

 

Annual Reconciliation

2012 Filing. On April 30, 2012, ComEd filed its annual distribution formula rate. On December 20, 2012, the ICC, issued its final order, which increased the revenue requirement by $73 million, in conformity with the formula rate structure provided in the May 2012 and Rehearing Orders. The $73 million reflected an increaseAppeal of $80 million for the initial revenue requirement for 2012 and a decrease of $7 million for the annual reconciliation for 2011. The rate increase was set using an allowed return on capital of 7.54% (inclusive of an allowed return on common equity of 9.81%). The rates took effect in January 2013. ComEd and intervenors requested a rehearing on specific issues, which was denied by the ICC. ComEd and intervenors also filed appeals with the Illinois Appellate Court. ComEd cannot predict the results of any such appeals.Initial Formula Rate Tariff

 

On May 30, 2013, ComEd updated its revenue requirement allowed inMarch 26, 2014, the December 2012 OrderIllinois Appellate Court issued an opinion with respect to reflectComEd’s appeal of the impacts of Senate Bill 9, which resulted in a reductionICC’s order relating to ComEd’s initial formula rate tariff. The most significant financial issues under appeal related to ICC findings that were counter to the current revenue requirement in effectformula rate legislation and were clarified by subsequent legislation (Senate Bill 9). Therefore, only a subset of $14 million.the issues originally appealed remained. The rates took effect in July 2013.

2013 Filing. On April 29, 2013,Court found against ComEd filed its annualon each of the remaining issues: compensation related adjustments, billing determinants and the use of certain allocators. The Court’s opinion has no accounting impact as ComEd recorded the distribution formula rate, which was updated in August 2013,regulatory asset consistent with the ICC’s final Order. On September 14, 2014, the Illinois Supreme Court declined to request a total increasehear that appeal. ComEd elected not to the revenue requirement of $353 million of which approximately $42 million related to Senate Bill 9. On December 19, 2013, the ICC issued its final order which increased the revenue requirement by $341 million, reflecting an increase of $160 million for the initial revenue requirement for 2013 and an increase of $181 million for the annual reconciliation for 2012. The rate increase was set using an allowed return on capital of 6.94% (inclusive of an allowed return on common equity of 8.72%). The rates took effect in January 2014. ComEd requested a rehearing on specific issues, which was deniedseek review by the ICC. ComEd also filed an appeal. ComEd cannot predictUnited States Supreme Court on the results of any such appeals.

Expenditures and Capital Investment

As partFederal law issues. Accordingly, the decision of the enactment of EIMA legislation ComEd made an initial contribution of $15 million (recognized as expense in 2011) to a new Science and Technology Innovation Trust fund on July 31, 2012, and will make recurring annual contributions of $4 million, the first of which was made on December 31, 2012, which will be used for customer education for as long as the AMI Deployment Plan remains in effect. In addition, ComEd will contribute $10 million per year for five years, as long as ComEdIllinois Appellate Court is subject to EIMA, to fund customer assistance programs for low-income customers, which will not be recoverable through rates. These contributions began in 2012.

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

239


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Appeal of 2007 Illinois Electric Distribution Rate Case (ExelonGrand Prairie Gateway Transmission Line (ComEd). On December 2, 2013, ComEd filed a request to obtain the ICC’s approval to construct a 60-mile overhead 345kV transmission line that traverses Ogle, DeKalb, Kane and ComEd).The ICCDuPage Counties in Northern Illinois. On May 28, 2014, in a separate proceeding, FERC issued an order granting ComEd’s request to include 100% of the capital costs recorded to construction work in progress during construction of the line in ComEd’s 2007 electric distributiontransmission rate case (2007 Rate Case) approving a $274 million increasebase. If the project is cancelled or abandoned for reasons beyond ComEd’s control, FERC approved the ability for ComEd to recover 100% of its prudent costs incurred after May 21, 2014 and 50% of its costs incurred prior to May 21, 2014 in ComEd’s annual delivery services revenue requirement, which became effectivetransmission rate base. The costs incurred for the project prior to May 21, 2014 were immaterial. ComEd has acquired numerous easements across the project route through voluntary transactions. ComEd will seek to acquire the property rights on the remaining 28 parcels through condemnation proceedings in September 2008. In the order, the ICC authorized a 10.3% rate of return on common equity.circuit courts. ComEd and several other parties filed appealsbegan construction of the rate orderline during the second quarter of 2015 with the Illinois Appellate Court (Court). The Court issued a decision on September 30, 2010, ruling against ComEd on the treatment of post-test year accumulated depreciation and the recovery of system modernization costs via a rider (Rider SMP).

The court held the ICC abused its discretion in not reducing ComEd’s rate base to account for an additional 18 months of accumulated depreciation while including post-test year pro forma plant additions through that period. ComEd continued to bill rates as established under the ICC’s orderin-service date expected in the 2007 Rate Case until June 1, 2011 when the rates set in the 2010 electric distribution rate case (2010 Rate Case) became effective. In subsequent ICC proceedings, the ICC issued an order requiring ComEd to provide a refund of approximately $37 million to customers related to the treatment of post-test year accumulated depreciation issue. On March 26, 2012, ComEd filed a notice of appeal with the Court.

However, on September 27, 2013 the Court ruled against ComEd on the accumulated depreciation issue and affirmed that ComEd owes a refund to customers of $37 million. As of December 31, 2013, and December 31, 2012, ComEd was fully reserved for this liability. ComEd will not seek rehearing or appeal on this matter and is working with the ICC on the process and timing for a refund to customers.

Advanced Metering Program Proceeding (Exelon and ComEd)ComEd’s 2007 Rate Case filing included a system modernization rider, which permitted investments in AMI to study the costs and benefits and to develop the cost estimate of full system-wide implementation. In October 2009, the ICC approved a modified version of ComEd’s system modernization rider proposed in the 2007 Rate Case, Rider AMP (Advanced Metering Program). ComEd collected approximately $24 million under Rider AMP through December 31, 2013. Several other parties, including the Illinois Attorney General, appealed the ICC’s order on Rider AMP. In ComEd’s 2010 electric distribution rate case, the ICC approved ComEd’s transfer of other costs from recovery under Rider AMP to recovery through electric distribution rates. On March 19, 2012, the Court reversed the ICC’s approval of Rider AMP, concluding that the ICC’s October 2009 approval of the rider constituted single-issue ratemaking. ComEd filed a Petition for Leave to Appeal to the Illinois Supreme Court on April 23, 2012, which was denied in September 2012, and the matter was returned to the ICC to calculate a refund amount. ComEd believes any refund obligation associated with Rider AMP should be prospective from no earlier than the date of the Appellate Court’s order on March 19, 2012. As a result, ComEd recorded a regulatory liability of approximately $0.4 million at December 31, 2013, which represents the amounts collected from customers since March 19, 2012. ComEd cannot predict the ultimate outcome of the ICC proceeding and therefore, actual refunds may differ from the estimated accrual recorded at December 31, 2013.

2010 Illinois Electric Distribution Rate Case (Exelon and ComEd). On May 24, 2011, the ICC issued an order in ComEd’s 2010 Rate Case, which became effective on June 1, 2011. The order approved a $143 million increase to ComEd’s annual delivery services revenue requirement and a 10.5% rate of return on common equity. ComEd originally requested a $396 million increase, although it was subsequently reduced to $343 million to account for various adjustments. As expected, the ICC followed the Court’s ruling on ComEd’s 2007 Rate Case on the post-test year accumulated depreciation issue. The order allowed ComEd to establish or reestablish a net amount of approximately

240


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

$40 million of previously expensed plant balances or new regulatory assets, which is reflected as a reduction in operating and maintenance expense and income tax expense in 2011. The order also affirmed the current regulatory asset for severance costs, which was challenged by an intervener in the 2010 Rate Case. The order was appealed to the Court by several parties on a number of issues. On May 16, 2013, the Court dismissed as moot the appeals of the ICC’s order in the 2010 Rate Case as ComEd now recovers distribution costs under EIMA through a pre-established formula rate tariff.

Utility Consolidated Billing and Purchase of Receivables (Exelon and ComEd). Since the firstsecond quarter of 2011, ComEd has been required to buy certain RES receivables, primarily residential and small commercial and industrial customers, at the option of the RES, for electric supply service and then include those amounts on ComEd’s bill to customers. Receivables are purchased at a discount to compensate ComEd for uncollectible accounts. ComEd produces consolidated bills for the aforementioned retail customers reflecting charges for electric delivery service and purchased receivables. As of December 31, 2013, the balance of purchased accounts receivable was $105 million. Under the applicable tariff, ComEd recovers from RES and customers the costs for implementing and operating the program. A number of municipalities, including the City of Chicago have switched to RES electric supply. As a result, ComEd experienced a significant increase in the amount of RES receivables it purchased in 2013.2017.

 

Illinois Procurement Proceedings (Exelon, Generation and ComEd).ComEd is permitted to recover its electricity procurement costs from retail customers without mark-up. Since June 2009, as a result of the Illinois Settlement Legislation, the IPA designs, and the ICC approves, an electricity supply portfolio for ComEd and the IPA administers a competitive process under which ComEd procures its electricity supply from various suppliers, including Generation. OnAs of December 21, 2011,31, 2015, ComEd has completed the ICC approved the IPA’sICC-approved procurement plan covering the period June 2012process for a portion of its energy requirements through May 2017.2021.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

The Illinois Settlement Legislation requires ComEd is required to purchase an increasing percentage of the electricity it purchases for customer deliveries from renewable energy resources. Purchases by customers of electricity from competitive electric generation suppliers, whether as a result of the customers’ own actions or as a result of municipal aggregation, are not included in this calculation and have the effect of reducing ComEd’s purchase obligation. ComEd entered into several 20-year contracts with unaffiliated suppliers in December 2010 regarding the procurement of long-term renewable energy and associated RECs in order to meet its obligations under the state’sIllinois’ RPS. Under the Illinois Settlement Legislation, allAll associated costs are recoverable from customers.

 

As a result of reduced ComEd load forecasts, purchases under the existing long-term contracts for energyFutureGen Industrial Alliance, Inc (Exelon and the associated RECs were reduced on a pro-rata basis under the terms of those contracts for the June 2013—May 2014 period to keep the purchases under the statutory rate impact cap. The curtailment’s impact on ComEd’s financial position and cash flows was immaterial.

On December 18, 2013, the ICC approved the IPA’s 2014-2019 procurement plan. The plan provides for two separate energy procurements during 2014 to address potential fluctuations in energy demand due to customer switching between ComEd and competitive electric generation suppliers. The Commission also approved the IPA’s expansion of energy efficiency programs for both ComEd and Ameren. The ICC did not require the acquisition of additional renewable resources in 2014-2015 due to insufficient available funds to procure those resources. Further, the ICC again approved a reduction of purchases under the existing long-term contracts for energy and the associated RECs on a pro-rata basis under the terms of those contracts for the June 2014—May 2015 period to keep the purchases under the statutory rate impact cap; however the amount of the reduction will not be finalized and approved by the ICC until March 2014. The curtailment’s impact on ComEd’s financial position and

241


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

cash flows is expected to be immaterial. See Note 12—Derivative Financial Instruments for additional information regarding ComEd’s financial swap contract with Generation, which expired in May 2013, and long-term renewable energy contracts.

ComEd).During 2013, the ICC approved, and directed ComEd and Ameren (the Utilities) to enter into 20-year sourcing agreements with FutureGen Industrial Alliance, Inc (FutureGen), under which FutureGen will retrofit and repower an existing plant in Morgan County, Illinois to a 166 MW near zero emissions coal-fueled generation plant, with an assumed commercial operation date in 2017. The sourcing agreement provides that the UtilitiesComEd and Ameren will pay FutureGen’s contract prices, which are set annually pursuant to a formula rate. The contract prices are based on the difference between the costs of the facility and the revenues FutureGen receives from selling capacity and energy from the unit into the MISO or other markets, as well as any other revenue FutureGen receives from the operation of the facility. The order also directs the UtilitiesComEd and Ameren to recover (or pass along) these costs from their electric distribution customers through the Utilities’ distribution system customers,use of a tariff, regardless of whether they purchase electricity from the utilityComEd or Ameren, or from competitive electric generation suppliers.

In February 2013, ComEd filed an appeal with the Illinois Appellate Court questioning the legality of requiring ComEd to procure power for retail customers purchasing electricity from competitive electric generation suppliers.

On AugustJuly 22, 2013,2014, the UtilitiesIllinois Appellate Court issued its ruling re-affirming the ICC’s order requiring ComEd to enter into the sourcing agreement with FutureGen and allowing the use of a tariff to recover its costs. ComEd decided not to appeal the Illinois Appellate Court’s decision to the Illinois Supreme Court. However, the competitive electric generation suppliers and several large consumers petitioned for leave to appeal the Illinois Appellate Court’s decision. On November 26, 2014, the Illinois Supreme Court granted the petition. ComEd executed the sourcing agreement with FutureGen in accordance with the ICC’s order. In addition, ComEd filed a petition with the ICC order. However, in the event the order is reversed as a resultseeking approval of the appeal, ComEd’s obligations undertariff allowing for the sourcing agreement should be suspended. Dependingrecovery of its costs associated with the FutureGen contract from all of its electric distribution customers, which was approved by the ICC on the ultimate outcomeSeptember 30, 2014.

A significant portion of the appeals, the eventual market conditions and the cost of the facility,development of FutureGen was being funded by the DOE under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. In early February 2015, the DOE suspended funding for the project until further clarity could be obtained on certain significant hurdles facing the project, including the outcome of the litigation described above. Whether or not the DOE funding will be reinstated at some later date is unknown at this time.

On January 13, 2016, FutureGen informed the Illinois Supreme Court that it had ceased all development efforts on the FutureGen project and would soon be seeking to terminate the FutureGen supply agreements. Accordingly, FutureGen requested that the court dismiss the proceeding as moot. A decision from the Illinois Supreme Court dismissing the matter is expected in early 2016. In February 2016, FutureGen terminated its sourcing agreement could havewith ComEd. As a material adverse impact on Exelon’s and ComEd’s cash flows and financial positions.

See Note 22—Commitments and Contingencies for additional information on ComEd’s energy commitments.result, ComEd is under no further obligation under this agreement.

 

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Resources (Exelon and ComEd). As a result of the Illinois Settlement Legislation, electricElectric utilities in Illinois are required to include cost-effective energy efficiency resources in their plans to meet an

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

incremental annual program energy savings requirement of 0.2% of energy delivered to retail customers for the year ended June 1, 2009, which increases annually to 2.0%2% of energy delivered in the year commencing June 1, 2015 and each year thereafter. Additionally, during the ten-year period that began June 1, 2008, electric utilities must implement cost-effective demand response measures to reduce peak demand by 0.1% over the prior year for eligible retail customers. The energy efficiency and demand response goals are subject to rate impact caps each year. Utilities are allowed recovery of costs for energy efficiency and demand response programs, subject to approval by the ICC. In December 2010,January 2014, the ICC approved ComEd’s secondthird three-year Energy Efficiency and Demand Response Plan covering the period June 20112014 through May 2014.2017. The plans are designed to meet the Illinois Settlement Legislation’sIllinois’ energy efficiency and demand response goals through May 2014,2017, including reductions in delivered energy to all retail customers and in the peak demand of eligible retail customers.

 

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

 

242


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Since June 1, 2008,Illinois utilities have beenare required to procure cost-effective renewable energy resources in amounts that equal or exceed 2% of the total electricity that each electric utility supplies to its eligible retail customers. ComEd is also required to acquire amounts of renewable energy resources that will cumulatively increase this percentage to at least 10% by June 1, 2015, with an ultimate target of at least 25% by June 1, 2025. All goals are subject to rate impact criteria set forth in theby Illinois Settlement Legislation.legislation. As of December 31, 2013,2015, ComEd had purchased sufficient renewable energy resources or equivalents, such as RECs, to comply with the Illinois Settlement Legislation.legislation. ComEd currently retires all RECs upon transfer and acceptance. ComEd is permitted to recover procurement costs of RECs from retail customers without mark-up through rates. See Note 22—Commitments and Contingencies for information regarding ComEd’s future commitments for the procurement of RECs.

 

Pennsylvania Regulatory Matters

2015 Pennsylvania Electric Distribution Rate Case (Exelon and PECO). On March 27, 2015, PECO filed a petition with the PAPUC requesting an increase of $190 million to its annual service revenues for electricdelivery, which requested an ROE of 10.95%. On September 10, 2015, PECO and interested parties filed with the PAPUC a petition for joint settlement for an increase of $127 million in annual distribution service revenue. No overall ROE was specified in the settlement. On December 17, 2015, the PAPUC approved the settlement of PECO’s electric distribution rate case. The approved electric delivery rates became effective on January 1, 2016.

The settlement includes approval of the In-Program Arrearage Forgiveness (“IPAF”) Program, which provides for forgiveness of a portion of the eligible arrearage balance of its low-income Customer Assistance Program (CAP) accounts receivable that will be determined as of program inception in October 2016. The forgiveness will be granted to the extent CAP customers remain current with payments. The Settlement guarantees PECO’s recovery of two-thirds of the arrearage balance through a combination of customer payments and rate recovery, including through future rates cases if necessary. The remaining one-third of the arrearage balance will be absorbed by PECO, of which a portion has already been expensed as bad debt for CAP customer’s accounts receivable balances.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Although the actual arrearage balance is not defined until program inception, PECO believes that it can reasonably estimate certain CAP customer accounts receivable balances as of December 31, 2015 that will remain outstanding at program inception. Management determined its best estimate based on historical collectability information. As a result, a regulatory asset of $7 million, representing the previously incurred bad debt expense associated with the estimated eligible accounts receivable balances, was recorded on Exelon’s and PECO’s Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2015. This estimate will be revisited on a quarterly basis through program inception.

 

2010 Pennsylvania Electric and Natural Gas Distribution Rate Cases (Exelon and PECO). On December 16, 2010, the PAPUC approved the settlement of PECO’s electric and natural gas distribution rate cases, which were filed in March 2010, providing increases in annual service revenue of $225 million and $20 million, respectively. The electric settlement provides for recovery of PJM transmission service costs on a full and current basis through a rider. The approved electric and natural gas distribution rates became effective on January 1, 2011.

 

In addition, theThe settlements included a stipulation regarding how tax benefits related to the application of any new IRS guidance on repairs deduction methodology are to be handled from a rate-making perspective. The settlements requirerequired that the expected cash benefit from the application of any new guidance to tax years prior to 2011 be refunded to customers over a seven-year period. On August 19, 2011, the IRS issued Revenue Procedure 2011-43 providing a safe harbor method of tax accounting for electric transmission and distribution property. PECO adopted the safe harbor and elected a method change for the 2010 tax year. The expected total refund to customers for the tax cash benefit from the application of the safe harbor to costs incurred prior to 2010 iswas $171 million. On October 4, 2011, PECO filed a supplement to its electric distribution tariff to execute the refund to customers of the tax cash benefit related to the IRC Section 481(a) “catch-up” adjustment claimed on the 2010 income tax return, which is subject to adjustment based on the outcome of IRS examinations. Credits have been reflected in customer bills since January 1, 2012.

 

In September 2012, PECO filed an application with the IRS to change its method of accounting for gas distribution repairs for the 2011 tax year. The expected total refund to customers for the tax cash benefit from the application of the new method to costs incurred prior to 2011 is $54 million. This amount is subject to adjustment based on the outcome of IRS examinations. Credits have been reflected in customer bills since January 1, 2013. PECO currently anticipatesis awaiting IRS guidance that the IRS will issue guidance in early 2014 providingprovide a safe harbor method of accounting for gas transmission and distribution property.

 

The prospective tax benefits claimed as a result of the new methodology will be reflected in tax expense in the year in which they are claimed on the tax return and will bereturn. As agreed to in the 2010 distribution rate case settlements, these benefits were reflected in the determination of revenue requirements in the next2015 electric distribution rate case discussed above and will be reflected in the next natural gas distribution rate cases.case. See Note 1415—Income Taxes for additional information.

 

The 2010 electric and natural gas distribution rate case settlements did not specify the rate of return upon which the settlement rates are based, but rather provided for an increase in annual revenue. PECO has not filed a transmission rate case since rates have been unbundled.

243


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Pennsylvania Procurement Proceedings (Exelon and PECO). Through PECO’s first two PAPUC approved DSP Program, under which PECO was providing default electric service, had a 29-month term that ended May 31, 2013. On October 12, 2012, the PAPUC issued its Opinion and Order approving PECO’s second DSP Program, which was filed with the PAPUC in January 2012. The program, which has a 24-month term from June 1, 2013 through May 31, 2015, complies with electric generation procurement guidelines set forth in Act 129. Under the DSP Programs, PECO is permitted to recover its electric procurement costs from retail default service customers without mark-up through the GSA. The GSA provides for the recovery of energy, capacity, ancillary costs and administrative costs and is subject to adjustments at least quarterly for any over or under collections. In addition, PECO’s second DSP Program provides for the recovery of AEPS compliance costs through the GSA rather than a separate AEPS rider.

In the second DSP Program, PECO is procuringprocured electric supply for its default electric customers through fivePAPUC approved competitive procurements. The load for the residentialDSP I and smallDSP II expired on May 31, 2013 and medium commercial classes is served through competitively procured fixed price, full requirements contracts of two years or less. For the large commercial and industrial class load, PECO has competitively procured contracts for full requirements default electric generation with the price for energy in each contract set to be the hourly price of the spot market during the term of delivery. In December 2012 and February 2013, PECO entered into contracts with PAPUC-approved bidders, including Generation, for its residential and small and medium commercial classes that began in June 2013. In September 2013, PECO entered into contracts with PAPUC-approved bidders, including Generation, for its residential and small and medium commercial classes that began in December 2013. In January 2014, PECO entered into contracts with PAPUC-approved bidders, including Generation, for its residential and small, medium, and large commercial classes that will begin in June 2014. Charges incurred for electric supply procured through contracts with Generation are included in purchased power from affiliates on PECO’s Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income.May 31, 2015, respectively.

 

In addition, theThe second DSP Program includesincluded a number of retail market enhancements recommended by the PAPUC in its previously issued Retail Markets Intermediate Work Plan Order. PECO was also directed to allow its low-income Customer Assistance Program (CAP) customers to purchase their generation supply from electric generation suppliers beginning April 1, 2014. On May 1, 2013, PECO filed a Petition for Approval of its CAP Shopping Plan with the PAPUC, which the PAPUC granted and denied in part on January 9, 2014. PECO and other parties to the proceeding filed petitions for reconsideration of the Commission’s decision on February 10, 2014, and these petitions are currently pending before the PAPUC.

Smart Meter and Smart Grid Investments (Exelon and PECO). Pursuant to Act 129 and the follow-on Implementation Order of 2009, in April 2010, the PAPUC approved PECO’s Smart Meter Procurement and Installation Plan (SMPIP), under which PECO will install more than 1.6 million smart meters and an AMI communication network by 2020. The first phase of PECO’s SMPIP, which was completed on June 19, 2013, included the installation of an AMI communications network and the deployment of 600,000 smart meters to communicate with that network. On May 31, 2013, PECO and interested parties filed a Joint Petition for Settlement of the universal deployment plan with the PAPUC which was approved without modification on August 15, 2013. The Joint Petition for Settlement supports all material aspects of PECO’s universal deployment plan, including cost recovery, excluding certain amounts discussed below. Universal deployment is the second phase of PECO’s SMPIP, under which PECO will deploy the remainder of the 1.6 million smart meters on an accelerated basis by the end of 2014. In total, PECO currently expects to spend up to $595 million, excluding the cost of the original meters (as further described below), on its smart meter infrastructure and approximately

244


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

$120to submit a plan to allow its low-income CAP customers to purchase their generation supply from EGSs beginning in April 2014. In May 2013, PECO filed its CAP Shopping Plan with the PAPUC. By an Order entered on January 24, 2014, the PAPUC approved PECO’s plan, with modifications, to make CAP shopping available beginning April 15, 2014. On March 20, 2014, the Office of Consumer Advocate (OCA) and low-income advocacy groups filed an appeal and emergency request for a stay with the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court, claiming that the PAPUC-ordered CAP Shopping plan does not contain sufficient protections for low-income customers. On July 14, 2015, the Court issued opinions on the OCA and low-income advocacy group appeal. Specifically, the Court remanded the issue to the PAPUC with instructions that it approve a rule revision to the PECO CAP Shopping Plan that would prohibit CAP customers from entering into contracts with an EGS that would impose early cancellation/termination fees. The PAPUC has appealed the Court’s decision. PECO does not have information at this time as to what action it may be required to take following remand to the PAPUC.

On December 4, 2014, the PAPUC approved PECO’s third DSP Program. The program has a 24-month term from June 1, 2015 through May 31, 2017, and complies with electric generation procurement guidelines set forth in Act 129. Under the program, PECO is procuring electric supply through four competitive procurements for fixed price full requirements contracts of two years or less for the residential classes and small and medium commercial classes and spot market price full requirement contracts for the large commercial and industrial class load. Beginning in June 2016, the medium commercial class (101-500 kW) will move to spot market pricing. As of December 31, 2015, PECO entered into contracts with PAPUC-approved bidders, including Generation, resulting from the first two of its four scheduled procurements. Charges incurred for electric supply procured through contracts with Generation are included in purchased power from affiliates on PECO’s Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

On March 12, 2015, PECO settled the CAP Design with the Office of Consumer Advocates (OCA) and Low Income Advocates, and filed the proposed plan with the PAPUC on March 20, 2015. The program design changes the rate structure of PECO’s CAP to make the bills more affordable to customers enrolled in the assistance program. The CAP discounts continue to be recovered through PECO’s universal service fund cost. On July 8, 2015, the CAP Design was approved by the PAPUC. PECO plans to implement the program changes in October 2016.

Smart Meter and Smart Grid Investments (Exelon and PECO). In April 2010, pursuant to Act 129 and the follow-on Implementation Order of 2009, the PAPUC approved PECO’s Smart Meter Procurement and Installation Plan (SMPIP), under which PECO will install more than 1.6 million electric smart meters and an AMI communication network by 2020. PECO is currently in the second phase of the SMPIP and has deployed substantially all remaining smart meters as of December 31, 2015, for a total of 1.7 million smart meters. In total, PECO currently expects to spend up to $589 million, excluding the cost of the original meters, on its smart meter infrastructure and approximately $155 million on smart grid investments through 2014final deployment of which $200 million will behas been funded by SGIG as discussed below.SGIG. As of December 31, 2013,2015, PECO has spent $423$578 million and $116$155 million on smart meter and smart grid infrastructure, respectively, not including the DOE reimbursements received to date.

Pursuant to the ARRAreceived. Recovery of 2009, PECO and the DOE entered into a Financial Assistance Agreement to extend PECO $200 million in non-taxable SGIG funds of which $140 million relates to smart meter deployment and $60 million relates to smart grid infrastructure. As part of the agreement, the DOE has a conditional ownership interest in qualifying Federally-funded project property and equipment, which is subordinate to PECO’s existing mortgage. The SGIG funds are being used to offset the total impact to ratepayers of the smart meter deployment required by Act 129. As of December 31, 2013, PECO has received $190 million of the $200 million in reimbursements. PECO’s outstanding receivable from the DOE for reimbursable costs was $3 million as of December 31, 2013, which has been recorded in Other accounts receivable, net on Exelon’s and PECO’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.

On August 15, 2012, PECO suspended installation of smart meters for new customers based on a limited number of incidents involving overheating meters. Following its own internal investigation and additional scientific analysis and testing by independent experts completed after September 30, 2012, PECO announced its decision to resume meter deployment work on October 9, 2012. PECO has replaced the previously installed meters with an alternative vendor’s meters. PECO is moving forward with the alternative meters during universal deployment and continues to evaluate meters from several vendors and may use more than one meter vendor during universal deployment.

Following PECO’s decision, as of October 9, 2012 PECO will no longer use the original smart meters. For the meters that will no longer be used, the accounting guidance requires that any difference between the carrying value and net realizable value be recognized in the current period’s earnings, before considering potential regulatory recovery. The cost of the original meters, including installation and removal costs, owned by PECO was approximately $17 million, net of approximately $16 million of reimbursements from the DOE and approximately $2 million of depreciation. PECO requested and received approval from the DOE that the original meters continue to be allowable costs and that any agreement with the vendor will not be considered project income. In addition, PECO remains eligible for the full $200 million in SGIG funds. On August 15, 2013, PECO entered into an agreement with the original vendor, which was part of the final agreement discussed below, under which PECO transferred the original uninstalled meters to the vendor and will receive $12 million in return, of which $7 million has been received as of December 31, 2013. On January 23, 2014, PECO entered a final agreement with the vendor pursuant to which PECO will be reimbursed for amounts incurred for the original meters and related installation and removal costs, via cash payments and rebates on future purchases of licenses, goods and services primarily through 2017. PECO previously had intended to seek regulatory rate recoveryreflected in a future filing with the PAPUC of amounts not recovered from the vendor. As PECO believed such costs were probable of rate recovery based on applicable case law and past precedent on reasonably and prudently incurred costs, a regulatory asset was established at the time of the removals. As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, $5 million and $17 million, respectively, was recorded on Exelon’s and PECO’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. Pursuant to thebase rates effective January 23, 2014, vendor agreement, PECO will reclassify the regulatory asset balance as a receivable, with no gain or loss impacts on future results of operations.1, 2016.

 

Energy Efficiency Programs (Exelon and PECO). PECO’s PAPUC-approved Phase I EE&C Plan had a four-year term that began on June 1, 2009 and concluded on May 31, 2013. The Phase I plan set forth how PECOwould meet the required reduction targets established by Act 129’s EE&C provisions,provisions. On November 15, 2013, PECO filed its final compliance report with the PAPUC communicating PECO had met all Phase I reduction targets.

245


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

which included a 3% reduction in electric consumption in PECO’s service territory and a 4.5% reduction in PECO’s annual system peak demand in the 100 hours of highest demand by May 31, 2013.

The peak demand period ended on September 30, 2012 and PECO communicated its compliance with the reduction targets in a preliminary filing with the PAPUC on March 1, 2013. The final compliance report for all Phase I targets, was filed with the PAPUC on November 15, 2013.

On March 29, 2013, PECO filed a Petition with the PAPUC to change the recovery period of certain Direct Load Control (DLC) Program costs necessary to implement the Phase I Plan. The Petition sought approval to allow PECO to recover $12 million in equipment, installation and information technology costs for its Residential DLC program with the amounts collected for the Phase I Plan. As the Phase I Plan was implemented at a cost less than originally budgeted, PECO proposed to recover these expenses from its Phase I Energy Efficiency Program Charge over-collection consistent with PAPUC guidance to recover all Phase I costs through Phase I funding. The PAPUC approved PECO’s Petition on May 9, 2013. A regulatory liability was established for the DLC program costs that will be amortized as a credit to the income statement to offset the related depreciation expense during the same period.

The PAPUC issued its Phase II EE&C implementation order on August 2, 2012, that providesprovided energy consumption reduction requirements for the second phase of Act 129’s EE&C programs,program, which went into effect on June 1, 2013. The order tentatively established PECO’s three-year cumulative consumption reduction target at 1,125,852 MWh, which was reaffirmed by the PAPUC on December 5, 2012.

Pursuant to the Phase II implementation order, PECO filed its three-year EE&C Phase II planPlan with the PAPUC on November 1, 2012. The plan setsset forth how PECO willwould reduce electric consumption by at least 1,125,852 MWh in its service territory for the period June 1, 2013 through May 31, 2016, adjusted for weather and extraordinary loads. The implementation order permitspermitted PECO to apply any excess savings achieved during Phase I against its Phase II consumption reduction targets, with no reduction to its Phase II budget. In accordance with the Act 129 Phase II implementation order, at least 10% and 4.5% of the total consumption reductions musthad to be through programs directed toward PECO’s public and low income sectors, respectively. If PECO failsfailed to achieve the required reductions in consumption, it will bewould have been subject to civil penalties of up to $20 million, which would not be recoverable from ratepayers. Act 129 mandates that the total cost of the plan may not exceed 2% of the electric company’s total annual revenue as of December 31, 2006.

 

On March 15, 2013 and February 28, 2014, PECO filed a PetitionPetitions for Approval to amend its EE&C Phase II Plan to continue its DLC demand reduction program for mass market customers from June 1, 2013 tothrough May 31, 2014.2014 and May 31, 2016, respectively. PECO proposed to fund the estimated $10 million annual costs of the one-year programplan by modifying incentive levels for other Phase II programs. On May 9, 2013, the PAPUC approved PECO’s amended EE&C Phase II plan. The costs of the DLC program will be recovered through PECO’s Energy Efficiency Program ChargePlan surcharge along with all other Phase II Plan costs. The PAPUC granted PECO’s Petitions on May 5, 2013 and April 23, 2014, respectively.

 

On November 14, 2013,The PAPUC issued its Phase III EE&C implementation order on June 19, 2015, that provides energy consumption reduction requirements for the third phase of Act 129’s EE&C program with a five-year term from June 1, 2016 through May 31, 2021. The order tentatively established PECO’s five-year cumulative consumption reduction target at 2,080,553 MWh.

Pursuant to the Phase III implementation order, PECO filed its five-year EE&C Phase III Plan with the PAPUC issuedon November 30, 2015. The Plan sets forth how PECO will reduce electric consumption by at least 1,962,659 MWh, with a Tentative Ordergoal of 2,100,875 MWh in its service territory for the period June 1, 2016 through May 31, 2021. PECO expects a final decision from the PAPUC on Act 129 demand reduction programs which seeks comments on a proposed demand response program methodology for future Act 129 demand reduction programs as well as demand response potential and wholesale prices suppression studies. The comment process is scheduled to be completed inPECO’s EE&C Phase III Plan during the first quarter of 2014. Any decision reached would affect PECO’s EE&C Plan subsequent to its Phase II Plan.2016.

 

Alternative Energy Portfolio Standards (Exelon and PECO). In November 2004, Pennsylvania adopted the AEPS Act. The AEPS Act mandated that beginning in 2011, following the expiration of

246


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

PECO’s rate cap transition period, certain percentages of electric energy sold to Pennsylvania retail electric customers shall be generated from certain alternative energy resources as measured in AECs. The requirement for electric energy that must come from Tier I alternative energy resources ranges from approximately 3.5% to 8%, and the requirement for Tier II alternative energy resources ranges from 6.2% to 10%. The required compliance percentages incrementally increase each annual compliance period, which is from June 1 through May 31, until May 31, 2021. These Tier I and Tier II alternative energy resources include acceptable energy sources as set forth in Act 129 and the AEPS Act.

 

PECO has entered into five-yearcontinues to procure alternative energy credits through full requirements contracts and ten-year agreements with accepted bidders, including Generation, totaling 452,000 non-solar and 8,000its existing long-term solar Tier I AECs annually in accordance with a PAPUC approved plan. The plan allowed PECO to bank AECs procured prior to 2011 and use the banked AECscontracts to meet itsthe annual AEPS Act obligations over two compliance years ending May 2013. The PAPUC also approved the procurement of Tier II AECs and supplemental AECs as well as the sale of excess AECs through independent third-party auctions or brokers.

requirements. All AEPS administrativecompliance costs and costs of AECs incurred after December 31, 2010 are being recovered on a full and current basis from default service customers through a surcharge.

PECO’s second DSP Program eliminated the AEPS surcharge. Beginning in June 2013, AEPS compliance costs are being recovered through the GSA.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Investigation of Pennsylvania Retail Electricity Marketand Gas Markets (Exelon and PECO).On July 28, Beginning in 2011, the PAPUC issued an order outlining the next steps in its investigation into the status of competition in Pennsylvania’s retail electricelectricity market. The PAPUC found that the existing default service model presents substantial impediments to the development of a vibrant retail market in Pennsylvania and directed its Office of Competitive Markets Oversight to evaluate potential intermediate and long-term structural changes to the default service model. On March 1, 2012,Through various orders, the PAPUC issued default electric service pricing for customers in PECO’s service territory. See Pennsylvania procurement proceedings discussed above for additional details.

In early 2014, the finalextreme weather in PECO’s service territory resulted in increased electricity commodity costs causing certain shopping customers to receive unexpectedly high utility bills. In response to a significant number of customer complaints throughout Pennsylvania, on April 3, 2014, the PAPUC unanimously voted to adopt two rulemaking orders to address the issue. The first rulemaking order describingrequires electric generation suppliers to provide more detailed recommendations to be implemented prior to the expiration of the electric distribution company’s current default service plan and providing guidelines forconsumer education regarding their contract. The second rulemaking order requires electric distribution companies for developmentto enable customers to switch suppliers within three business days (known as accelerated switching). The improved customer education and accelerated switching were to be in place within 30 days and six months of their next default service plan.approval of the orders, respectively. The orders became final on June 14, 2014. On October 12, 2012,December 4, 2014, the PAPUC approved PECO’s second DSP Program, which includes several new programsimplementation plan (known as Bill on Supplier Switch), allowing PECO to continue PECO’s support ofimplement accelerated switching by the December 15, 2014 deadline.

On September 12, 2013, the PAPUC issued an Order that initiated an investigation into Pennsylvania’s natural gas retail market, competition in Pennsylvania in accordance withincluding the order issued byrole of the PAPUC onexisting default service model and opportunities for market enhancements. On December 15, 2011. Further,18, 2014, the PAPUC issued a final order on February 14, 2013, outliningFinal Order directing the Office of Competitive Market Oversight (OCMO) to continue its proposed end-state forinvestigation, confirming that natural gas distribution companies should remain with the default service which included default service pricingmodel for residentialthe time being and small commercial customers baseddirecting establishment of a working group to examine other competitive issues. The OCMO has established a working group to review operation of the natural gas retail market and to consider potential recommendations on three month full requirements contracts, full requirement contracts using hourly spot market pricing for large commercial and industrial default service customers, and the inclusion of CAP customers in the customer choice programs.competitive issues.

 

Pennsylvania Act 11 of 2012 (Exelon and PECO). OnIn February 13, 2012, Act 11 was signed into law, bywhich provided the Governor. Act 11 seeks to clarify the PAPUC’sPAPUC authority to approve alternative ratemaking mechanisms, which would allow for the implementation of a distribution system improvement charge (DSIC) in rates designed to recover capital project costs incurred to repair, improve or replace utilities’ aging electric and natural gas distribution systems in Pennsylvania. Act 11 also includesPrior to recovering costs pursuant to a provision that allows utilities to use a fully projected future test year under whichDSIC, the PAPUC may permit the inclusion of projected capital costs in rate base for assets that will be placed in service during the first year rates are in effect. On August 2, 2012, the PAPUC issued a final order establishing rules and procedures to implement the ratemaking provisions of Act 11. ThePAPUC’s implementation order requires a utility to have a Long Term Infrastructure Improvement Plan (LTIIP) approved by the Commission, which outlines how the utility is planning to increase its investment for repairing, improving or replacing aging infrastructure.

 

247On May 7, 2015, the PAPUC approved PECO’s modified natural gas LTIIP. In accordance with the approved LTIIP, PECO plans to spend $534 million through 2022 to further accelerate the replacement of existing gas mains and to relocate meters from indoors to outside in accordance with recent PAPUC rulemaking. In addition, on March 20, 2015, PECO filed a petition with the PAPUC for approval of its gas DSIC mechanism for recovery of gas LTIIP expenditures. On September 11, 2015, the PAPUC entered its Opinion and Order approving PECO’s petition for a gas DSIC.


On March 27, 2015, PECO filed a petition with the PAPUC for approval of its proposed electric DSIC and LTIIP. In accordance with the LTIIP (System 2020 plan), PECO plans to spend $275 million over the next five years to modernize and storm-harden its electric distribution system, making it more

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

aging infrastructure, approved byweather resistant and less vulnerable to damage. The DSIC will allow PECO the Commission prioropportunity to implementing a DSIC.recover the costs, subject to certain criteria, incurred to repair, improve or replace its electric distribution property between rate cases. On May 9, 2013,October 22, 2015, the PAPUC approvedentered its Opinion and Order approving PECO’s LTIIPproposed petition for its Gas Operations, which was filed on February 8, 2013.electric LTIIP and DSIC.

 

Maryland Regulatory Matters

 

20112015 Maryland Electric and Gas Distribution Rate Case (Exelon and BGE). In March 2011,On November 6, 2015, and as amended on January 5, 2016, BGE filed for electric and gas base rate increases with the MDPSC, issuedultimately requesting an increase of $121 million and $79 million, respectively, of which $103 million and $37 million,respectively, is related to recovery of smart grid initiative costs. BGE requested a comprehensive rate order setting forthROE for the details of the decision contained in its abbreviated electric and gas distribution rate order issuedcase of 10.6% and 10.5%, respectively. The new electric and gas base rates are expected to take effect in December 2010. As partJune 2016. BGE is also proposing to recover an annual increase of approximately $30 million for Baltimore City conduit lease fees through a surcharge. BGE cannot predict how much of the March 2011 comprehensive rate order, BGE was authorized to defer $19 million of costs as regulatory assets. These costs are being recovered overrequested increase the MDPSC will approve or if it will approve BGE’s request for a 5-year period that began in December 2010 and include the deferral of $16 million of storm costs incurred in February 2010. The regulatory asset for the storm costs earns a regulated rate of return.conduit fee surcharge.

 

20122014 Maryland Electric and Gas Distribution Rate Case (Exelon and BGE).On July 27, 2012,2, 2014, and as amended on September 15, 2014, BGE filed an application for increases to its electric and gas base ratesincreases with the MDPSC. MDPSC, ultimately requesting increases of $99 million and $68 million, respectively.

On February 22, 2013,October 17, 2014, BGE filed with the MDPSC a unanimous settlement agreement (the Settlement Agreement) reached with all parties to the case under which it would receive an increase of $22 million in electric base rates and an increase of $38 million in gas base rates. The Settlement Agreement establishes new depreciation rates which have the effect of decreasing annual depreciation expense by approximately $20 million, primarily for electric. On December 4, 2014, the Public Utility Law Judge issued ana proposed order in BGE’s 2012approving the Settlement Agreement without modification, which became a final order on December 12, 2014. The approved distribution rate order authorizing BGE to increase electric and natural gas distribution rate case for increases in annual distribution service revenue of $81 million and $32 million, respectively. The electric distribution rate increase was set using an allowed return on equity of 9.75% and the gas distribution rate increase was set using an allowed return on equity of 9.60%. The approved electric and natural gas distribution rates became effective for services rendered on or after February 23, 2013. As part of the rate order, the MDPSC approved both recovery of and return on merger integration costs incurred during the test year, including severance. As a result, the order affirmed the treatment of $20 million of severance-related costs that BGE had recorded as a regulatory asset in 2012, consistent with prior MDPSC decisions. Additionally, BGE established a new regulatory asset of $8 million related to non-severance merger integration costs, which includes $6 million of costs incurred during 2012. Current MDPSC treatment of these merger integration regulatory assets is to provide recovery over a five year period.December 15, 2014.

 

2013 Maryland Electric and Gas Distribution Rate Case (Exelon and BGE). On May 17, 2013, and as amended on August 23, 2013, BGE filed an application for increases of $101 million and $30 million to its electric and gas base rates, respectively,increases with the MDPSC. The requested ratesMDPSC, ultimately requesting increases of return on equity in the application were 10.50%$83 million and 10.35% for electric and gas distribution,$24 million, respectively. In addition to these requested rate increases, BGE’s application includes a request for recovery of incremental capital expenditures and operating costs associated with BGE’s proposed short-term reliability improvement plan (the “ERI initiative”) in response to a MDPSC order through a surcharge separate from base rates. On August 23, 2013, BGE filed an update to its rate request which altered the requested increase to electric base rates from $101 million to $83 million and the requested increase to gas base rates from $30 million to $24 million.

On December 13, 2013, the MDPSC issued an order in BGE’s 2013 electric and natural gas distribution rate case for increases in annual distribution service revenue of $34 million and $12 million, respectively. The electric distribution rate increase was set usingrespectively, and an allowed return on equity of 9.75% and the gas distribution rate increase was set using an allowed return on equity of 9.60%. The approved electric and natural gas distribution rates, respectively. Rates became effective for services rendered on or after December 13, 2013. The MDPSC also conditionallyauthorized BGE to recover through a surcharge mechanism costs associated with five ERI initiative programs designed to accelerate electric reliability improvements premised upon the condition that the MDPSC approve specific projects in advance of cost recovery. On March 31, 2014, after reviewing comments filed by the parties and conducting a hearing on the matter, the MDPSC approved fiveall but one project proposed for completion in 2014 as part of the eight programsERI initiative. The ERI initiative surcharge became effective June 1, 2014. On November 2, 2015, BGE filed a surcharge update including a true-up of cost estimates included in the 2015 surcharge, along with its work plan and cost estimates for 2016, to be included in the 2016 surcharge. The MDPSC subsequently approved BGE’s proposed short-term reliability improvement plan. Commencement2016 work plan and the 2016 surcharge.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

In January 2014, the residential consumer advocate in Maryland filed an appeal to the order issued by the MDPSC on December 13, 2013 in BGE’s 2013 electric and gas distribution rate cases. The residential consumer advocate filed its related legal memorandum on August 22, 2014, challenging the MDPSC’s approval of the programERI initiative surcharge. BGE submitted a response to the appeal on October 15, 2014, and recovery are dependenta hearing was held on final MDPSC approvalNovember 17, 2014. On October 26, 2015, the Circuit Court for Baltimore City issued an order affirming the MDPSC’s decision. However, on November 30, 2015, the residential consumer advocate filed an appeal of the Circuit Court’s decision with the surcharge starting no earlier than April 1, 2014.Maryland Court of Special Appeals. BGE cannot predict the outcome of this appeal. If the residential consumer advocate’s appeal is successful, BGE could recover ERI expenditures through other regulatory mechanisms.

 

Smart Meter and Smart Grid Investments (Exelon and BGE). In August 2010, the MDPSC approved a comprehensive smart grid initiative for BGE that includesincluded the planned installation of 2 million residential and commercial electric and gas smart meters at an expected total cost of $480 million.million of which $200 million was funded by SGIG. The MDPSC’s approval ordered BGE to defer the associated incremental costs, depreciation

248


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

and amortization, and an appropriate return, in a regulatory asset until such time as a cost-effective advancedmetering system is implemented. As of December 31, 20132015 and December 31, 2012,2014, BGE recorded a regulatory asset of $66$196 million and $31$128 million, respectively, representing incremental costs, depreciation and amortization, and a debt return on fixed assets related to its AMI program. Additionally,As part of the settlement in BGE’s 2014 electric and gas distribution rate case, the cost of the retired non-AMI meters will be amortized over 10 years.

On February 26, 2014, the MDPSC has determined thatissued an order authorizing BGE to impose a $75 upfront fee and an $11 recurring fee to customers electing to opt-out of BGE’s smart meter installation program, effective the cost recovery forlater of the non-AMI meters that BGE retiresfirst full billing cycle following July 1, 2014, or the AMI installation date in a customer’s community. The fees authorized by the order will be considered inreviewed after an initial 12 to 18 month period. On November 25, 2014, the MDPSC issued a future depreciation proceeding. The MDPSC continuesdecision approving BGE’s proposal to evaluateautomatically enroll unresponsive customers into the impacts ofopt-out program and to charge those customers opt-out fees after BGE has exhausted attempts to schedule a customer opt-out feature in BGE’s Smart Grid program. In March 2013, BGE filed a description ofmeter installation. On November 5, 2015, the overall additional costs associated with allowing customers to retain their current meter, and for radio frequency (RF)-Free and RF-Minimizing options related to the installation of their smart meters as well as a proposed cost recovery mechanism. The MDPSC held a hearing in August 2013 to considerevaluate the filings made$11 recurring monthly fee paid by BGE and other Maryland electric utilities. The ultimate resolution relatedopt-out customers. Effective with January 2016 bills, the monthly recurring fee was reduced to this feature could affect BGE’s ability to demonstrate cost-effectiveness$5.50.

As part of the advanced metering system. Overall,2015 electric and gas distribution rate case filed on November 6, 2015, BGE continuesis seeking recovery of its smart grid initiative costs. Of BGE’s requested $200 million, $140 million relates to believe the smart grid initiative. In support of its recovery of smart grid initiative costs, in future rates is probable as BGE expects to be able to demonstrateprovided evidence demonstrating that the program benefits exceed costs. Pursuantthe costs by a ratio of 2.3 to the ARRA of 2009, BGE is1.0, on a recipient of $200 million in federal funding from the DOE for its smart grid and other related initiatives, which substantially reduces the total cost of these initiatives to BGE’s ratepayers. The project to install the smart meters began in late April 2012. As of December 31, 2013, BGE had received $200 million in reimbursements from the DOE.nominal basis.

 

New Electric Generation (Exelon and BGE). On April 12, 2012, the MDPSC issued an order directing BGE and two other Maryland utilities to enter into a contract for differences (CfD) with CPV Maryland, LLC (CPV), under which CPV will construct an approximately 700 MW700MW natural gas-fired combined-cycle generation plant in Waldorf, Maryland, that CPV projected will be in commercial operation by June 1, 2015. CPV subsequently sought to extend that date. The initial term of the proposed contract is 20 years. The CfD mandates that BGE and the other utilities pay (or receive) the difference between CPV’s contract prices and the revenues CPV receives for capacity and energy from clearing the unit in the PJM capacity market. The MDPSC’s Orderorder requires the three Maryland utilities to enter into a CfD in amounts proportionate to their relative SOS load.

On April 16, 2013, the MDPSC issued an order that required BGE to execute a specific form of contract with CPV, and the parties executed the contract as of June 6, 2013. As of December 31, 2013, there is no impact on Exelon’s and BGE’s results of operations, cash flows and financial positions. Furthermore, the agreement does not become effective until the resolution of certain items, including all current litigation.

 

On April 27, 2012, a civil complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland by certain unaffiliated parties that challengeschallenged the actions taken by the MDPSC on Federal law grounds. On

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

October 24, 2013, the U.S. District Court issued a judgment order finding that the MDPSC’s Order directing BGE and the two other Maryland utilities to enter into a CfD, which assures that CPV receives a guaranteed fixed price regardless of the price set by the federally regulated wholesale market, violates the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution. On November 22, 2013, the MDPSC and CPV appealed the District Court’s ruling to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the District Court ruling in an opinion issued June 2, 2014. The MDPSC and CPV filed petitions for certiorari, seeking review of the case by the U.S. Supreme Court. On October 29, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court granted the petition to review the Fourth Circuit decision, and that appeal is now pending in the Supreme Court with oral argument scheduled for February 24, 2016.

On February 9, 2011, a civil complaint was filed by Exelon and other unaffiliated parties in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, challenging a 2011 New Jersey law, the Long Term Capacity Pilot Program Act (LCAPP). LCAPP provides eligible generators with 15-year fixed contracts for the sale of capacity in the PJM capacity market. On October 25, 2013, the U.S. District Court issued a judgment order finding that LCAPP violates the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution. CPV and New Jersey appealed the District Court’s ruling to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. On September 11, 2014, the Third Circuit affirmed the District Court’s ruling finding LCAPP unconstitutional. On November 26, 2014, CPV and New Jersey sought Supreme Court review of the Third Circuit decision. On October 29, 2015, the Supreme Court stayed the petition to review the Third Circuit case pending their review of the Fourth Circuit Maryland case described above.

 

On May 4, 2012, BGE filed a petition in the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County, Maryland, seeking judicial review of the MDPSC order under state law. That petition was subsequently transferred to the Circuit Court for Baltimore City and consolidated with similar appeals that have been filed by other interested parties. On October 1, 2013, the Circuit Court Judge issued a Memorandum Opinion and Order finding the decisions of the MDPSC were within its statutory authority under

249


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Maryland law. This decision is separate from the judgment in the federal litigation that the MDPSC Order is unconstitutional and the CfD is unenforceable under federal law. The federal judgment, if upheld, would prevent enforcement of the CfD even if the Circuit Court decision stands. On October 29, 2013, BGE and the two other Maryland utilities appealed the Circuit Court’s ruling to the Maryland Court of Special Appeals. That appeal has been stayed pending decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in the federal action described above.

 

Depending on the ultimate outcome of the pending state and federal litigation, on the eventual market conditions, and on the manner of cost recovery as of the effective date of the agreement, the CfD could have a material impact on Exelon and BGE’s results of operations, cash flows and financial positions.

 

Exelon believes that this and other states’ projects may have artificially suppressed capacity prices in PJM and may continue to do so in future auctions to the detriment of Exelon’s market driven position. In addition to this litigation, Exelon is working with other market participants to implement market rules that will appropriately limit the market suppressing effect of such state activities.

 

MDPSC Derecho Storm Order (Exelon and BGE). Following the June 2012 Derecho storm which hit the mid-Atlantic region interrupting electrical service to a significant portion of the State of Maryland, the MDPSC issued an order on February 27, 2013 requiring BGE and other Maryland utilities to file several comprehensive reports with short-term and long-term plans to improve reliability and grid resiliency that were due at various times before August 30, 2013.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

On September 3, 2013, BGE filed a comprehensive long term assessment examining potential alternatives for improving the resiliency of the electric grid and a staffing analysis reviewing historical staffing levels as well as forecasting staffing levels necessary under various storm scenarios. During the summer of 2014, an evaluation of the reports filed by BGE and other Maryland utilities was undertaken by consultants on behalf of the MDPSC and MDPSC Staff. The MDPSC Staff also proposed standards for reliability during major events and estimated times of restoration as well as undertaking an evaluation of performance-based ratemaking principles and methodologies that would more directly and transparently align reliable service with the utilities’ distribution rates and that reduce returns or otherwise penalize sub-standard performance. The MDPSC held hearings in September 2014. BGE currently cannot predict the outcome of these proceedings, which may result in increased capital expenditures and operating costs.

 

The Maryland Strategic Infrastructure Development and Enhancement Program (Exelon and BGE). In February 2013, the Maryland General Assembly passed legislation intended to accelerate gas infrastructure replacements in Maryland by establishingwas signed into law. The law established a mechanism, separate from base rate proceedings, for gas companies to promptly recover reasonable and prudent costs of eligible infrastructure replacement projects separate from base rate proceedings. On May 2, 2013, the Governor of Maryland signed the legislation into law; which took effect June 1, 2013. Under the new law, following a proceeding before the MDPSC and with the MDPSC’s approval of the eligible infrastructure replacement projects along with a corresponding surcharge, BGE could begin charging gas customers a monthly surcharge for infrastructure costs incurred after June 1, 2013. The legislation includes caps onmonthly surcharge and infrastructure replacement costs must be approved by the monthly surchargesMDPSC and are subject to residentiala cap and non-residential customers, and would require an annual true-up of the surcharge revenues against actual expenditures. Investment levels in excess of the cap would be recoverable in a subsequent gas base rate proceeding at which time all costs for the infrastructure replacement projects would be rolled into gas distribution rates. Irrespective of the cap, BGE is required to file a gas rate case every five years under this legislation.

On August 2, 2013, BGE filed its infrastructure replacement plan and associated surcharge. The MDPSC held evidentiary hearings on BGE’s proposed plan and surcharge from November 12, 2013 through November 14, 2013. On January 29, 2014, the MDPSC issued a decision conditionally approving the first five years of BGE’s plan and surcharge. On November 16, 2015, BGE must submitfiled a surcharge update to be effective January 1, 2016, including a true-up of cost estimates included in the 2015 surcharge, along with its 2016 project list detailing specific projects plannedand projected capital estimates of $113 million to be included in the 2016 surcharge calculation. The MDPSC subsequently approved BGE’s 2016 project list and the proposed surcharge for 2016, which included the 2015 surcharge true-up. As of December 31, 2015, BGE recorded a regulatory asset of less than $1 million, representing the difference between the surcharge revenues and program costs.

In 2014, the residential consumer advocate in Maryland appealed MDPSC’s decision on BGE’s infrastructure replacement plan and associated surcharge with the Baltimore City Circuit Court, who affirmed the MDPSC’s decision. On October 10, 2014, the residential consumer advocate noticed its appeal to the Maryland Court of Special Appeals from the judgment entered by the Baltimore City Circuit Court. During the third quarter of 2015, the residential consumer advocate, MDPSC for approval within 30 daysand BGE filed briefs. Oral argument in this matter was held before the Court of Special Appeals on November 3, 2015. On January 28, 2016, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals issued a decision affirming the MDPSC’s decision.

New York Regulatory Matters

Ginna Nuclear Power Plant Reliability Support Services Agreement (Exelon and Generation). Ginna Nuclear Power Plant’s (Ginna) prior period fixed-price PPA contract with Rochester Gas & Electric Company (RG&E) expired in June 2014. In light of the decision. Upon approvalexpiration of the project list byPPA and prevailing market conditions, in January 2014, Ginna advised the MDPSC, BGE will be able to implementNew York Public Service Commission (NYPSC) and the surcharge rates on gas customers’ bills. The new surcharges are expected to take effectISO-NY that, in second quarterthe absence of 2014. In addition, BGE will be subject to an annual independent audit to review plan performance and progress.a reliability need, Ginna management

250


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

would make a recommendation, subject to approval by the CENG board, that the Ginna plant be retired as soon as practicable. A formal study conducted by the ISO-NY and RG&E dated as of May 12, 2014 concluded that Ginna needs to remain in operation to maintain the reliability of the transmission grid in the Rochester region through September 2018 when planned transmission system upgrades undertaken by RG&E are expected to be completed.

In November 2014, in response to a petition filed by Ginna, the NYPSC directed Ginna and RG&E to negotiate a Reliability Support Services Agreement (RSSA). In February 2015, regulatory filings, including RSSA terms negotiated between Ginna and RG&E, to support the continued operation of Ginna for reliability purposes were made with the NYPSC and with the FERC for their approval. Although the RSSA contract is still subject to such regulatory approvals, on April 1, 2015, Ginna began delivering the power and capacity from the Ginna plant into the ISO-NY consistent with the technical provisions of the proposed RSSA contract.

In April 2015, the FERC issued an order which directed Ginna to make a compliance filing to ensure that the RSSA does not allow Ginna to receive revenues above its full cost of service and which rejected any extension of the RSSA beyond its initial term; rather the order required that any extension be subject to the rules currently being developed by the ISO-NY. The FERC order also set the RSSA for hearing and settlement procedures. In response to the FERC’s April 2015 order, in May 2015, Ginna submitted a compliance filing to the FERC containing proposed revisions to the RSSA addressing the FERC’s requirements and maintaining the April 1, 2015 proposed effective date. In July 2015, the FERC accepted Ginna’s compliance filing effective April 1, 2015. The FERC accepted Ginna’s proposal for market revenue sharing subject to a cap effective April 1, 2015, and rejected requests for rehearing by intervenors on a number of matters related to jurisdiction, the reliability need, the RSSA term, and possible price suppression.

In August 2015, Ginna reached a settlement in principle with intervenors modifying certain terms and conditions in the originally negotiated agreement. The proposed RSSA under the settlement preserves the value of the contract originally negotiated with RG&E, but shortens the term from 3.5 to 2 years, expiring March 31, 2017 and required RG&E to complete a new transmission reliability study to determine whether an interim reliability solution is required beyond March 31, 2017. That reliability study was completed in October 2015, and it identified certain RG&E projects that are needed to solve reliability problems that would be caused by an early retirement of Ginna. Under the settlement agreement, Ginna was required by December 29, 2015 to submit a bid to provide reliability services beginning April 1, 2017 until the necessary RG&E transmission upgrades are in service, which RG&E expects will be no later than October 31, 2017. Ginna submitted such a bid in December 2015. RG&E has the right until June 30, 2016 to select Ginna as an ongoing reliability solution. If such a need exists, and if Ginna is selected, Ginna and RG&E could enter into an additional RSSA commencing April 1, 2017 on the rates, terms and conditions set forth in Ginna’s bid, or as might be otherwise agreed by Ginna and RG&E.

If RG&E seeks a reliability solution with Ginna, but RG&E and Ginna do not reach an agreement on rates, terms, and conditions of a new RSSA by March 31, 2016 (or by June 30, 2016 if RG&E elects to defer the decision date), the settlement agreement requires Ginna to file an unexecuted additional RSSA with the FERC for adjudication. If Ginna is not selected for continued reliability service and does not plan to retire shortly after the expiration of the RSSA, Ginna is required to file a notice to that effect with the NYPSC no later than September 30, 2016. Under the terms of the proposed RSSA, if RG&E does not select Ginna to provide reliability service after March 31, 2017, and Ginna continues to operate after June 14, 2017, Ginna would be required to make certain refund payments related to capital expenditures to RG&E.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

The August 2015 settlement was filed at the NYPSC and at the FERC in October 2015 and remains subject to review and approval by both agencies; such reviews are not expected to be completed until the first quarter of 2016.

Until final regulatory approvals are received, Generation is recognizing revenue based on market prices for energy and capacity delivered by Ginna into the ISO-NY. Upon receiving regulatory approvals, under the RSSA contract terms, Generation would then recognize revenue based on the final approved pricing contained in the contract retroactively from the April 1, 2015 effective date. While the RSSA is expected to receive regulatory approvals and, therefore, permit Ginna to continue operating through the RSSA term, there is still a risk that, for economic reasons, including the possibility that the FERC or the NYPSC may condition the approval of the RSSA on a modification of the rates set forth in the RSSA, Ginna could be retired before 2029, which is the end of its operating license period. In the event the plant were to be retired before the current license term ends in 2029, Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations could be adversely affected by accelerated future decommissioning costs, severance costs, increased depreciation rates, and impairment charges, among other items. However, it is not expected that such impacts would be material to Exelon’s or Generation’s results of operations.

Federal Regulatory Matters

 

Transmission Formula Rate (Exelon, ComEd and BGE). ComEd’s and BGE’s transmission rates are each established based on a FERC-approved formula.

ComEd’s most recent ComEd and BGE are required to file an annual update to the FERC-approved formula on or before May 15, with the resulting rates effective on June 1 of the same year. The annual formula rate update filed in April 2013 reflects 2012is based on prior year actual costs plus forecasted 2013and current year projected capital additions. The update resulted in a revenue requirement of $488 million plus a $25 million adjustment related to the reconciliation of 2012 actual costs for a net revenue requirement of $513 million. This compares to the May 2012 updated revenue requirement of $450 million offset by a $5 million reduction related to the reconciliation of 2011 actual costs for a net revenue requirement of $445 million. The increase inalso reconciles any differences between the revenue requirement was primarily driven by increased capital investment, higher pensionin effect beginning June 1 of the prior year and post-retirement healthcareactual costs incurred for that year. ComEd and higherBGE record regulatory assets or regulatory liabilities and corresponding increases or decreases to operating and maintenance costs. The 2013 netrevenues for any differences between the revenue requirement became effective June 1, 2013,in effect and is being recovered overComEd’s and BGE’s best estimate of the period extending through Mayrevenue requirement expected to be filed with the FERC for that year’s reconciliation. As of December 31, 2014.2015, and 2014, ComEd had a regulatory asset associated with the transmission formula rate of $31 million and $21 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2015, and 2014, BGE had a net regulatory asset associated with the transmission formula rate of $12 million and $1 million, respectively. The regulatory asset associated with thetransmission true-up is being amortized to Operating revenues within their Consolidated Statements of Operations of Comprehensive Income as the associated amounts are recovered through rates.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

ComEd’s updated formula transmission rate currently provides for a weighted average debt and equity return on transmission rate base of 8.70%, a decrease from the 8.91% return previously authorized. The decrease in return was primarily due to lower interest rates on ComEd’s long-term debt outstanding. As partFor each of the FERC-approved settlement of ComEd’s 2007 transmission rate case,following years, the rate of return on common equity is 11.5% and the common equity component of the ratio used to calculate the weighted average debt and equity return for the formula transmission rate is currently capped at 55%.

BGE’s most recent annual formula rate update filed in April 2013 reflects actual 2012 expenses and investments plus forecasted 2013 capital additions. The update resulted in a revenue requirement of $158 million offset by a $1 million reduction related to the reconciliation of 2012 actual costs for a net revenue requirement of $157 million. This compares to the April 2012 updated revenue requirement of $156 million increased by $2 million related to the reconciliation of 2011 actual costs for a net revenue requirement of $158 million. The decrease in the revenue requirement was primarily driven by a lower allowed rate of return associated with a reduced equity ratio and reduced rate base, offset partially by higher depreciation and operating and maintenance costs. The 2013 net revenue requirement became effective June 1, 2013, and is being recovered over the period extending through May 31, 2014. The regulatory liability associated with the true-up is being amortized as the associated amounts are recovered through rates.

BGE’s updated formula transmission rate currently provides for a weighted average debt and equity return on transmission rate base of 8.35%, a decrease from the 8.43%following total increases/(decreases) were included in the prior year formula update. The decrease in return was primarily due to a debt issuance in 2012ComEd’s and lower interest rates on BGE’s debt outstanding. As part of the FERC-approved settlement in 2006 of BGE’s 2005 transmission rate case, the base rate of return on common equity for BGE’s electric transmission business for new transmission projects placed in service on and after January 1, 2006 is 11.3%, inclusive of a 50 basis point incentive for participating in PJM.formula rate filings:

Annual Transmission Filings

 ComEd  BGE 
 2015  2014  2013  2015  2014  2013 

Initial revenue requirement increase (a)

 $68   $36   $38   $—     $9   $2  

Annual reconciliation (decrease) increase

  18    (14  30    (3  5    (3
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total revenue requirement increase

 $86   $22   $68   $(3 $14   $(1
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Allowed return on rate base (b)

  8.61  8.62  8.7  8.46  8.53  8.35

Allowed ROE

  11.5  11.5  11.5  11.3  11.3  11.3

Effective date of rates(c)

  June 2015    June 2014    June 2013    June 2015    June 2014    June 2013  

(a)For BGE, this excludes the increase in revenue requirement associated with dedicated facilities charges. The increases for dedicated facilities were $13 million and $3 million for 2015 and 2014, respectively. There were no dedicated facilities charges in 2013 for BGE.
(b)Refers to the weighted average debt and equity return on transmission rate bases for ComEd and BGE. As part of the FERC-approved settlement of ComEd’s 2007 transmission rate case, the rate of return on common equity is 11.50% and the common equity component of the ratio used to calculate the weighted average debt and equity return for the transmission formula rate is currently capped at 55%. As part of the FERC-approved settlement of BGE’s 2005 transmission rate case, the rate of return on common equity is 11.30%, inclusive of a 50 basis point incentive for participating in PJM.
(c)The time period for any challenges to the annual transmission formula rate update filings expired with no challenges submitted.

 

FERC Transmission Complaint (Exelon and BGE). On February 27, 2013, consumer advocates and regulators from the District of Columbia, New Jersey, Delaware and Maryland, and the Delaware Electric Municipal Cooperatives (the parties), filed a complaint at FERC against BGE and the Pepco Holdings, Inc.PHI companies relating to their respective transmission formula rates. BGE’s formula rate includes a 10.8% base rate of return on common equity (ROE) and a 50 basis point incentive for most investments includedparticipating in itsPJM (and certain additional incentive basis points on certain projects). The parties sought a reduction in the base return on equity to 8.7% and changes to the formula rate process. Under FERC rules, any revenues subject to refund are limited to a fifteen month period and the earliest date from which the base ROE could be adjusted and 11.3%refunds required is the date of the complaint.

On August 21, 2014, FERC issued an order in the BGE and PHI companies’ proceeding, which established hearing and settlement judge procedures for the remainingcomplaint, and set a refund effective date of February 27, 2013.

On December 8, 2014, various state agencies in Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, and D.C. filed a second complaint against BGE regarding the base ROE of the transmission investment (the latterbusiness seeking a reduction from 10.8% to 8.8%. The filing of the second complaint created a second refund window. By order issued on February 9, 2015, FERC established a hearing on the second complaint with the complainants’ requested refund effective date of December 8, 2014. On February 20, 2015, the Chief Judge issued an order consolidating the two complaint proceedings and established an Initial Decision issuance deadline of February 29, 2016.

On November 6, 2015, BGE and the PHI companies and the complainants filed a settlement with FERC covering the issues raised in the complaints. The settlement provides for a 10% base ROE, effective March 8, 2016, which is conditioned upon creditingwill be augmented by the firstPJM incentive adder of 50 basis points, and refunds to BGE customers of $13.7 million. The settlement also provides a moratorium on any incentive ROE adders). The parties seek a reductionchange in the ROE until June 1, 2018. On December 16, 2015, the Presiding Administrative Law Judge submitted a Certification of the Uncontested Settlement to the FERC Commissioners. The settlement remains subject to FERC approval.

251


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

base return on equity to 8.7% and changes to the formula rate process. FERC docketed the matter and set April 3, 2013 as the deadline for interventions, protests and answers. Under FERC rules, the earliest date from which the base return on equity could be adjusted and refunds required is the date of the complaint. On March 19, 2013, BGE filed a motion to dismiss or sever the complaint. As of December 31, 2013, BGE cannot predict the likelihood or a reasonable estimate of the amount of a change, if any, in the allowed base return on equity, or a reasonable estimate of the refund period start date. While BGE cannot predict the outcome of this matter, if FERC orders a reduction of BGE’s base return on equity to 8.7% (while retaining the 50 basis points of any incentives that were credited to the base return on equity for certain new transmission investment), the estimated annual impact would be a reduction in revenues of approximately $10 million.

 

PJM Transmission Rate Design and Operating Agreements (Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE). PJM Transmission Rate Design specifies the rates for transmission service charged to customers within PJM.Currently, ComEd, PECO and BGE incur costs based on the existing rate design, which charges customers based on the cost of the existing transmission facilities within their load zone and the cost of new transmission facilities based on those who benefit from those facilities. In April 2007, FERC issued an order concluding that PJM’s current rate design for existing facilities is just and reasonable and should not be changed. In the same order, FERC held that the costs of new facilities 500 kV and above should be socialized across the entire PJM footprint and that the costs of new facilities less than 500 kV should be allocated to the customers of the new facilities who caused the need for those facilities. After FERC ultimately denied all requests for rehearing on all issues, severalA number of parties filed petitions inappealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit for review of the decision. On

In August 6, 2009, thatthe court issued its decision affirming the FERC’s order with regard to the costs of existing facilities, but reversingremanded to FERC the issue of the cost allocation associated with the new facilities 500 kV and remanding to FERCabove (Cost Allocation Issue) for further consideration by the FERC. On remand, FERC reaffirmed its earlier decision with regard to socialize the costs of new facilities 500 kV and above. A number of parties filed appeals of these orders. In June 2014, the court again remanded the Cost Allocation Issue to FERC. On March 30, 2012,December 18, 2014, FERC issued an order on remand affirmingsetting an evidentiary hearing and settlement proceeding regarding the cost allocation in its April 2007 order. On March 22, 2013, FERC issued an order denying rehearing of its March 30, 2012 Order and made it clear thatCost Allocation Issue. The hearing only concerns new facilities approved by the cost allocation at issue concerns only projects approvedPJM Board prior to February 1, 2013. A numberAs of entities have filed appeals ofDecember 31, 2015, settlement discussions are continuing.

Because a new cost allocation had been adopted for projects approved by the FERC orders.PJM Board on or after February 1, 2013, this latest remand only involves the cost allocation for facilities 500 kV and above approved prior to that date. ComEd and BGE anticipateanticipates that all impacts of any rate design changes effective after December 31, 2006, and June 30, 2006, respectively, should be recoverable through retail rates and, thus, the rate design changes are not expected to have a material impact on their respectiveComEd’s results of operations, cash flows or financial position. PECO anticipates that all impacts of any rate design changes should be recoverable through the transmission service charge rider approved in PECO’s 2010 electric distribution rate case settlement and, thus, the rate design changes are not expected to have a material impact on PECO’s results of operations, cash flows or financial position. To the extent that any rate design changes are retroactive to periods prior to January 1, 2011, however, there may be an impact on PECO’s results of operations.

On October 11, 2012, BGE anticipates that all impacts of any rate design changes effective after the PJM Transmission Owners filed with FERCimplementation of its standard offer service programs in Maryland should be recoverable through retail rates and, thus, the rate design changes are not expected to have a cost allocation for new transmission facilities asking that the new cost allocation methodology apply to all transmission approved by the PJM Boardmaterial impact on BGE’s results of operations, cash flows or after February 1, 2013. The proposed methodology is a hybrid methodology that would socialize 50% of the costs of new facilities at 500kV and above and double-circuit 345kV lines, and allocate the remaining 50% to direct beneficiaries. For all other facilities, the costs would be allocated to the direct beneficiaries. On March 22, 2013, FERC issued an order accepting the cost allocation with minor exceptions and requiring a compliance filing on those few issues within 120 days of the order. The compliance filing was made on July 22, 2013.financial position.

 

ComEd, PECO and BGE are committed to the construction of transmission facilities under their operating agreements with PJM to maintain system reliability. ComEd, PECO and BGE will work with

252


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

PJM to continue to evaluate the scope and timing of any required construction projects. ComEd, PECO and BGE’s estimated commitments are as follows:

 

  Total   2014   2015   2016   2017   2018   Total   2016   2017   2018   2019   2020 

ComEd

  $486    $134    $173    $177    $2   $—      $297    $204    $61    $26    $6    $—    

PECO

   133    32    29    40    24    8    67     31     24     8     4     —    

BGE

   400    42    83    95    87    93    373     140     112     62     46     13  

 

PJM Minimum Offer Price Rule (Exelon and Generation).PJM’s capacity market rules include a Minimum Offer Price Rule (MOPR) that is intended to preclude sellers from artificially suppressing the competitive price signals for generation capacity. The proceedings leading to FERC’s approval of the MOPR were extensive, and there have been numerous changes to the MOPR and litigation related to it since it was originally implemented. For example, in 2011 the parties disputed numerous elements of the MOPR including: (i) the default price that should apply to bids found subject to the MOPR, (ii) the duration of the MOPR and (iii) the application of the MOPR to self-supplying capacity and state-sponsored capacity. The FERC orders approving that MOPR have been appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. A resolution of that appeal is not expected until sometime in 2014.

In May 2012 (based on the MOPR provisions the FERC approved in 2011), PJM announced the results of its capacity auction covering the delivery year ending May 31, 2016. Several new units with state-sanctioned subsidy contracts cleared in the auction at prices below the MOPR. Potentially, these states could expand such state-sanctioned subsidy programs or other states may seek to establish similar programs. Generation believed that further revisions to that MOPR were necessary to ensure that the potential to artificially reduce capacity auction prices is appropriately limited in PJM. In early December 2012, PJM filed a new MOPR for approval at the FERC, which Exelon believed would be more effective in preventing state-sanctioned subsidy contracts from artificially reducing capacity prices. Generation was actively involved in the process through which those MOPR changes were developed and supported the changes. On May 3, 2013, the FERC issued its order. While the FERC order accepted certain aspects of the proposal that Exelon supported (such as applying the MOPR to all of PJM and not just certain zones within PJM), the FERC required PJM to retain a key element of its previous MOPR structure, the unit-specific exemption, an element that Exelon had supported removing. Several entities, including two capacity suppliers that Exelon has been working with sought rehearing of that order.

In May 2013 (based on the MOPR provisions the FERC approved earlier that month), PJM announced the results of its capacity auction covering the delivery year ending May 31, 2017. Exelon is working with PJM stakeholders on several proposed changes to the PJM tariff aimed at ensuring that capacity resources (including those with state-sanctioned subsidy contracts, excessive imported capacity resources and certain limited availability demand response resources) cannot inappropriately affect capacity auction prices in PJM.

Market-Based RatesDemand Response Resource Order (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO, and BGE). Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE are public utilitiesOn May 23, 2014, the D.C. Circuit Court issued an opinion vacating the FERC Order No. 745 (D.C. Circuit Decision). Order No. 745 established uniform compensation levels for purposes of the Federal Power Act and are required to obtain FERC’s acceptance of rate schedules for wholesale electricity sales. Currently, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE have authority to execute wholesale electricity sales at market-based rates. As is customary with market-based rate schedules, FERC has reserved the right to suspend market-based rate authority on a retroactive basis if it subsequently determines that Generation, ComEd, PECO or BGE has violated the terms and conditions of its tariff or the Federal Power Act. FERC is also authorized to order refunds in certain instances if it finds that the market-based rates are not just and reasonable under the Federal Power Act.demand response resources

253


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

As required by FERC’s regulations, as promulgatedthat participate in the day ahead and real-time wholesale energy markets. Under Order No. 697 series, Generation, ComEd, PECO745, buyers in ISO and BGE file market power analyses usingRTO markets were required to pay demand response resources the prescribed market share screensfull Locational Marginal Price when the demand response replaced a generation resource and was cost-effective. On January 25, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the D.C. Circuit Court decision and remanded the matter to demonstratethe D.C. Circuit Court. While we cannot predict exactly how the D.C. Circuit Court will handle the matter on remand, we do not expect there will be any significant change in how demand response resources have or will participate in and be paid by wholesale energy markets. Thus, we do notanticipate that Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE qualify for market-based rates inthere will be any impact to the regions where they are selling energy, capacity, and ancillary services under market-based rate tariffs. FERC accepted the 2008 filings on September 16, 2008, January 15, 2009 and September 2, 2009 and accepted the 2009 filings on July 28, 2009, October 26, 2009, February 23, 2010 and April 30, 2010, affirming Exelon’s affiliates continued right to make sales at market-based rates. These analyses must examine historic test period data and must be updated every three years on a prescribed schedule. Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE filed an updated analysis for the Northeast Region, which includes PJM, in late 2010,Registrants’ results of operations or cash flows based on 2009 historic test period data. On June 22, 2011, FERC issued an order confirming Generation’s continued authority to charge market based rates, based on Generation’s most recent updated analysis filed in 2010, stating that any market power concerns are adequately addressed by PJM’s monitoring and mitigation programs. On December 30, 2013, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE filed its updates analysis for the Northeast Region, based on 2012 historic test period data and FERC has not yet acted on the filing. Similarly, on June 29, 2012, Generation, ComEd, BGE and PECO filed their updated market power analysis for the Central Region which the FERC accepted on November 13, 2012, and on December 23, 2011, Generation filed its updated market power analysis for the Southeast Region which the FERC accepted on October 10, 2012. On December 21, 2012, Generation, ComEd, BGE and PECO filed their updated market power analysis for the SPP region, which the FERC accepted on October 8, 2013.these proceedings.

 

Reliability Pricing ModelNew England Capacity Market Results (Exelon Generation and BGE)Generation). PJM’s RPM Base Residual Auctions take place approximately 36 months aheadEach year, ISO New England, Inc. (ISO-NE) files the results of its annual capacity auction at the FERC which is required to include documentation regarding the competitiveness of the scheduled delivery year. The most recentauction. Consistent with this requirement, on February 27, 2015, ISO-NE filed the results of its ninth capacity auction for(covering the delivery year endingJune 1, 2018 through May 31, 2019 delivery period). On June 18, 2015, the FERC accepted the results of the ninth capacity auction. On July 20, 2015, a union representing utility workers sought rehearing of that decision which the FERC denied on December 30, 2015. It is not clear whether the FERC’s order will be appealed.

On February 28, 2014, ISO-NE filed the results of its eighth capacity auction (covering the June 1, 2017 occurredthrough May 31, 2018 delivery period). On June 27, 2014, the FERC issued a letter to ISO-NE noting that ISO-NE’s February 28, 2014 filing was deficient and that ISO-NE must file additional information before the FERC can process the filing. ISO-NE filed the information on July 17, 2014, and the ISO-NE’s filings became effective by operation of law pursuant to a notice issued by the secretary of FERC on September 16, 2014. Several parties sought rehearing of the secretary’s notice which was effectively denied in May 2013.October 2014 and have since appealed the matter to the D.C. Circuit Court. On April 7, 2015 the D.C. Circuit Court issued an order referring the matter to a merits panel where issues raised by parties challenging the FERC decision will be heard as well as FERC’s Motion to Dismiss the challenges. It is not clear whether the court will decide ultimately on the merits of the case or whether it will dismiss the case as FERC urges based on the fact that there is no action by the FERC to be considered. Nonetheless, while any change in the auction results is thought to be unlikely, Exelon and Generation cannot predict with certainty what further action the court may take concerning the results of that auction, but any court action could be material to Exelon’s and Generation’s expected revenues from the capacity auction.

 

License Renewals (Exelon and Generation). On June 22, 2011, Generation submitted applications tohas 40-year operating licenses from the NRC for each of its nuclear units. The operating license renewal process takes approximately four to extendfive years from the operating licensescommencement of Limerick Units 1 and 2 by 20 years. The current operating licenses for Limerick Units 1 and 2 expire in 2024 and 2029, respectively. In June 2012, the United States Courtrenewal process until completion of Appeals for the DC Circuit vacated the NRC’s temporary storage rule on the grounds that the NRC should have conducted a more comprehensive environmental review to support the rule. The temporary storage rule (also referred to as the “waste confidence decision”) recognizes that licensees can safely store spent nuclear fuel at nuclear plants for up to 60 years beyond the original and renewed licensed operating life of the plants and that licensing renewal decisions do not require discussion of the environmental impact of spent fuel stored on site. In August 2012, the NRC placed a hold on issuing new or renewed operating licenses that depend on the temporary storage rule until the court’s decision is addressed. In September 2012, the NRC directed NRC Staff to revise the temporary storage rule which is now not expected until October 3, 2014. Generation does not expect the NRC to issue license renewals until the end of 2014, at the earliest.review.

 

On May 29, 2013, Generation submitted applications to the NRC to extend the current operating licenses of Byron Units 1 and 2 and Braidwood Units 1 and 2 by 20 years. TheOn November 19, 2015, the NRC approved Generation’s request to extend the operating licenses of Byron Unit 1 and 2 by 20 years to 2044 and 2046, respectively. On January 27, 2016 the NRC approved Generation’s request to extend the operating licenses of Braidwood Unit 1 and 2 by 20 years to 2046 and 2047, respectively.

On December 09, 2014, Generation submitted an application to the NRC to extend the current operating licenses for Byronof LaSalle Units 1 and 2, which were set to expire in 20242022 and 2026,2023, respectively. The current operating licenses for Braidwood Units 1 and 2 expire in 2026 and 2027, respectively. Generation does not expect the NRC to issue license renewals for Byron and Braidwood until 2015 at the earliest.

 

On August 29, 2012 and August 30, 2012, Generation submitted hydroelectric license applications to the FERC for 46-year licenses for the Conowingo Hydroelectric Project (Conowingo) and the Muddy Run Pumped Storage Facility Project (Muddy Run), respectively.

254


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Run Pumped Storage Project (Muddy Run), respectively. On December 22, 2015, FERC issued a new 40-year license for Muddy Run. The FERC extendedlicense term expires on December 1, 2055. The financial impact associated with Muddy Run license commitments is estimated to be in the deadlinerange of an incremental $25 million to January$35 million, and includes both capital expenditures and operating expenses, primarily relating to fish passage and habitat improvement projects. At December 31, 2014 to file a water quality certification application pursuant to Section 4012015, $22 million of the Clean Water Act (CWA)direct costs associated with the MDE for Conowingo. licensing effort have been capitalized.

Generation is working with stakeholders to resolve water quality licensing issues with the MDE for Conowingo, including: (1) water quality, (2) fish passage and habitat, and (3) sediment. On January 30, 2014, ExelonGeneration filed a water quality certification application pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA with MDE for Conowingo, addressing these and other issues, although Generation cannot currently predict the conditions that ultimately may be imposed. MDE indicated that it believed it did not have sufficient information to process Generation’s application. As a result, Generation entered into an agreement with MDE to work with state agencies in Maryland, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Geological Survey, the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Chesapeake Bay Program to design, conduct and fund an additional multi-year sediment study. Generation has agreed to contribute up to $3.5 million to fund the additional study. Because states must act on applications under Section 401 of the CWA within one year and the sediment study would not be completed prior to January 31, 2015, Exelon withdrew its application for a water quality certification on December 4, 2014. FERC policy requires that an applicant resubmit its request for a water quality certification within 90 days of the date of withdrawal. Accordingly, on March 3, 2015, Generation refiled its application for a water quality certification. Exelon has agreed with MDE to withdraw and refile its application for a water quality certification as necessary pending completion of the sediment study. On August 7, 2015, US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) submitted its modified fishway prescription to FERC in the Conowingo licensing proceedings. On September 11, 2015, Exelon filed a request for an administrative hearing and proposed an alternative prescription to challenge USFWS’s preliminary prescription. Resolution of these issues relating to Conowingo may have a material effect on Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations and financial position through an increase in capital expenditures and operating costs.

 

The FERC license for Conowingo expired on September 1, 2014. Under the Federal Power Act, FERC is required to issue an annual license for a facility until the new license is issued. On August 29, 2013, Exelon filed a water quality certification application pursuant to Section 401September 10, 2014, FERC issued an annual license for Conowingo, effective as of the CWA with PA DEP for Muddy Run, addressing these and other issues that included certain commitments made by Generation. The financial impact associated with these commitments is estimated to be in the range of $20 million to $30 million, and will include both an increase in capital expenditures as well as an increase in operating expenses. Exelon anticipates that the PA DEP will issue the water quality certification pursuant to Section 401expiration of the CWA for Muddy Run in the first quarter of 2014.

Based on the latestprevious license. If FERC procedural schedule, the FERC licensing process isdoes not expected to be completedissue a new license prior to the expiration of Muddy Run’s currentan annual license, on August 31, 2014, and the expiration of Conowingo’sannual license on September 1, 2014. However,will renew automatically. On March 11, 2015, FERC issued the stations would continue to operate under annual licenses until FERC takes action on the 46-year license applications.final Environmental Impact Statement for Conowingo. The stations are currently being depreciated over their estimated useful lives, which includes the license renewal period. As of December 31, 2013, $332015, $23 million of direct costs associated with relicensinglicensing efforts have been capitalized.

 

Regulatory Assets and Liabilities (Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE prepare their consolidated financial statements in accordance with the authoritative guidance for accounting for certain types of regulation. Under this guidance, regulatory assets represent incurred costs that have been deferred because of their probable future recovery from customers through regulated rates. Regulatory liabilities represent the excess recovery of costs or accrued credits that have been deferred because it is probable such amounts will be returned to customers through future regulated rates or represent billings in advance of expenditures for approved regulatory programs.

255


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

The following tables provide information about the regulatory assets and liabilities of Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE as of December 31, 20132015 and 2012.2014.

 

December 31, 2013

 Exelon ComEd PECO BGE 
 Current Noncurrent Current Noncurrent Current Noncurrent Current Noncurrent 

December 31, 2015

  Exelon   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Regulatory assets

                

Pension and other postretirement benefits

 $221  $2,794  $—     $—     $—     $—     $—     $—      $3,156    $—      $—      $—    

Deferred income taxes

  10   1,459   2   65    —      1,317   8   77    1,616     64     1,473     79  

AMI programs

  5   159   5   35    —      58    —      66    399     140     63     196  

AMI meter events

  —      5    —      —      —      5    —      —    

Under-recovered distribution service costs

  178   285   178   285    —      —      —      —       189     189     —       —    

Debt costs

  12   56   9   53   3   3   1   8    47     46     1     8  

Fair value of BGE long-term debt

  —      219    —      —      —      —      —      —       162     —       —       —    

Fair value of BGE supply contract

  12    —      —      —      —      —      —      —    

Severance

  16   12   12    —      —      —      4   12    9     —       —       9  

Asset retirement obligations

  1   102   1   67    —      25    —      10    108     67     22     19  

MGP remediation costs

  40   212   33   178   6   33   1   1    286     255     30     1  

RTO start-up costs

  2    —      2    —      —      —      —      —    

Under-recovered uncollectible accounts

  —      48    —      48    —      —      —      —       52     52     —       —    

Under-recovered electric universal Renewable energy

  17   176   17   176    —      —      —      —    

Renewable energy

   247     247     —       —    

Energy and transmission programs

  53    —      52    —      —      —      1    —       84     43     1     40  

Deferred storm costs

  3   3    —      —      —      —      3   3    2     —       —       2  

Electric generation-related regulatory asset

  13   30    —      —      —      —      13   30    20     —       —       20  

Rate stabilization deferral

  71   154    —      —      —      —      71   154    87     —       —       87  

Energy efficiency and demand response programs

  73   148    —      —      —      —      73   148    279     —       1     278  

Merger integration costs

  2   9     —      —      2   9    6     —       —       6  

Conservation voltage reduction

   3     —       —       3  

Under-recovered revenue decoupling

   30     —       —       30  

CAP arrearage

   7     —       7     —    

Other

  31   39   18   26   8   7   4   6    35     10     19     3  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total regulatory assets

 $760  $5,910  $329  $933  $17  $1,448  $181  $524    6,824     1,113     1,617     781  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Less: current portion

   759     218     34     267  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total noncurrent regulatory assets

  $6,065    $895    $1,583    $514  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

December 31, 2013

 Exelon ComEd PECO BGE 
 Current Noncurrent Current Noncurrent Current Noncurrent Current Noncurrent 

December 31, 2015

  Exelon   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Regulatory liabilities

                

Other postretirement benefits

 $2  $43  $—     $—     $—     $—     $—     $—      $94    $—      $—      $—    

Nuclear decommissioning

  —      2,740    —      2,293    —      447    —      —       2,577     2,172     405     —    

Removal costs

  99   1,423   78   1,219    —      —      21   204    1,527     1,332     —       195  

Energy efficiency and demand response programs

  53    —      45    —      8    —      —      —       92     52     40     —    

DLC program costs

  1   10    —      —      1   10    —      —       9     —       9     —    

Energy efficiency phase II

  —      21    —      —      —      21    —      —    

Electric distribution tax repairs

  20   114    —      —      20   114    —      —       95     —       95     —    

Gas distribution tax repairs

  8   37    —      —      8   37    —      —       28     —       28     —    

Energy and transmission programs

  78    —      9    —      58    —      11    —       131     53     60     18  

Over-recovered gas and electric universal service fund costs

  8    —      —      —      8    —      —      —    

Revenue subject to refund

  38    —      38    —      —      —      —      —    

Over-recovered electric and gas revenue decoupling

  16    —      —      —      —      —      16    —    

Over-recovered revenue decoupling

   1     —       —       1  

Other

  4    —      —      —      3    —      —      —       16     5     2     8  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total regulatory liabilities

 $327  $4,388  $170  $3,512  $106  $629  $48  $204    4,570     3,614     639     222  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Less: current portion

   369     155     112     38  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total noncurrent regulatory liabilities

  $4,201    $3,459    $527    $184  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

256


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

December 31, 2012

 Exelon ComEd PECO BGE 
 Current Noncurrent Current Noncurrent Current Noncurrent Current Noncurrent 

December 31, 2014

  Exelon   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Regulatory assets

                

Pension and other postretirement benefits

 $304  $3,673  $—     $—     $—     $—     $—     $—      $3,256    $—      $—      $—    

Deferred income taxes

  14   1,382   5   62    —      1,255   9   65    1,542     64     1,400     78  

AMI programs

  3   70   3   10    —      29    —      31    296     91     77     128  

AMI meter events

  —      17    —      —      —      17    —      —    

Under-recovered distribution service costs

  18   191   18   191    —      —      —      —       371     371     —       —    

Debt costs

  14   68   11   62   3   6   1   9    57     53     4     9  

Fair value of BGE long-term debt

  —      256    —      —      —      —      —      —       190     —       —       —    

Fair value of BGE supply contracts

  77   12    —      —      —      —      —      —    

Severance

  29   28   25   12    —      —      4   16    12     —       —       12  

Asset retirement obligations

  —      90    —      65    —      25    —      —       116     74     26     16  

MGP remediation costs

  58   232   51   197   6   33   1   2    257     219     37     1  

RTO start-up costs

  3   2   3   2    —      —      —      —    

Under-recovered electric universal service fund costs

  11    —      —      —      11    —      —      —    

Financial swap with Generation

  —      —      226    —      —      —      —      —    

Under-recovered uncollectible accounts

   67     67     —       —    

Renewable energy

  18   49   18   49    —      —      —      —       207     207     —       —    

Energy and transmission programs

  43    —      14    —      1    —      28    —       48     33     —       15  

DSP Program costs

  1   3    —      —      1   3    —      —    

DSP II Program costs

  1   2    —      —      1   2    —      —    

Deferred storm costs

  3   6    —      —      —      —      3   6    3     —       —       3  

Electric generation-related regulatory asset

  16   40    —      —      —      —      16   40    30     —       —       30  

Rate stabilization deferral

  67   225    —      —      —      —      67   225    160     —       —       160  

Energy efficiency and demand response programs

  56   126    —      —      —      —      56   126    248     —       —       248  

Under-recovered electric revenue decoupling

  5    —      —      —      —      —      5    —    

Merger integration costs

   8     —       —       8  

Conservation voltage reduction

   2     —       —       2  

Under-recovered revenue decoupling

   7     —       —       7  

Other

  23   25   14   16   9   8    —      2    46     22     14     7  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total regulatory assets

 $764  $6,497  $388  $666  $32  $1,378  $190  $522    6,923     1,201     1,558     724  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Less: current portion

   847     349     29     214  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total noncurrent regulatory assets

  $6,076    $852    $1,529    $510  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

December 31, 2012

 Exelon  ComEd  PECO  BGE 
   Current  Noncurrent  Current  Noncurrent  Current  Noncurrent  Current  Noncurrent 

Regulatory liabilities

        

Nuclear decommissioning

 $—     $2,397  $—     $2,037  $—     $360  $—     $—    

Removal costs

  97   1,406   75   1,192    —      —      22   214 

Energy efficiency and demand response programs

  131    —      43    —      88    —      —      —    

Electric distribution tax repairs

  20   132    —      —      20   132    —      —    

Gas distribution tax repairs

  8   46    —      —      8   46    —      —    

Over-recovered uncollectible accounts

  6    —      6    —      —      —      —      —    

Energy and transmission programs

  54    —      6    —      48    —      —      —    

Over-recovered gas universal service fund costs

  3    —      —      —      3    —      —      —    

Over-recovered AEPS costs

  2    —      —      —      2    —      —      —    

Revenue subject to refund

  40    —      40    —      —      —      —      —    

Over-recovered gas revenue decoupling

  7    —      —      —      —      —      7    —    
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total regulatory liabilities

 $368  $3,981  $170  $3,229  $169  $538  $29  $214 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

December 31, 2014

  Exelon   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Regulatory liabilities

        

Other postretirement benefits

  $88    $—      $—      $—    

Nuclear decommissioning

   2,879     2,389     490     —    

Removal costs

   1,566     1,343     —       223  

Energy efficiency and demand response programs

   59     25     34     —    

DLC program costs

   10     —       10     —    

Electric distribution tax repairs

   102     —       102     —    

Gas distribution tax repairs

   49     —       49     —    

Energy and transmission programs

   84     19     58     7  

Revenue subject to refund

   3     3     —       —    

Over-recovered revenue decoupling

   12     —       —       12  

Other

   8     1     4     2  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total regulatory liabilities

   4,860     3,780     747     244  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Less: current portion

   310     125     90     44  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total noncurrent regulatory liabilities

  $4,550    $3,655    $657    $200  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

257Pension and other postretirement benefits. As of December 31, 2015, Exelon had regulatory assets of $3,156 million and regulatory liabilities of $94 million related to ComEd’s and BGE’s portion of deferred costs associated with Exelon’s pension plans and ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s portion of


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Pension and other postretirement benefits. As of December 31, 2013, Exelon had regulatory assets of $3,015 million and regulatory liabilities of $45 million related to ComEd’s and BGE’s portion of deferred costs associated with Exelon’s pension plans and ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s portion of deferred costs associated with Exelon’s other postretirement benefit plans. PECO’s pension regulatory recovery is based on cash contributions and is not included in the regulatory asset (liability) balances. The regulatory asset (liability) is amortized in proportion to the recognition of prior service costs (gains), transition obligations and actuarial losses (gains) attributable to Exelon’s pension and other postretirement benefit plans determined by the cost recognition provisions of the authoritative guidance for pensions and postretirement benefits. ComEd, PECO and BGE will recover these costs through base rates as allowed in their most recently approved regulated rate orders. The pension and other postretirement benefit regulatory asset balance includes a regulatory asset established at the date of the Constellation merger related to BGE’s portion of the deferred costs associated with legacy Constellation’s pension and other postretirement benefit plans. The BGE-related regulatory asset is being amortized over a period of approximately 12 years, which generally represents the expected average remaining service period of plan participants at the date of the Constellation merger. See Note 16—17—Retirement Benefits for additional detail. No return is earned on Exelon’s regulatory asset.

 

Deferred income taxes. These costs represent the difference between the method by which the regulator allows for the recovery of income taxes and how income taxes would be recorded under GAAP. Regulatory assets and liabilities associated with deferred income taxes, recorded in compliance with the authoritative guidance for accounting for certain types of regulation and income taxes, include the deferred tax effects associated principally with accelerated depreciation accounted for in accordance with the ratemaking policies of the ICC, PAPUC and MDPSC, as well as the revenue impacts thereon, and assume continued recovery of these costs in future transmission and distribution rates. For ComEd and BGE, this amount includes the impacts of a reduction in the deductibility, for Federal income tax purposes, of certain retiree health care costs pursuant to the March 2010 Health Care Reform Acts. ComEd was granted recovery of these additional income taxes on May 24, 2011 in the ICC’s 2010 Rate Case order. The recovery period for these costs is through May 31, 2014. For BGE, these additional income taxes are being amortized over a 5-year period that began in March 2011 in accordance with the MDPSC’s March 2011 rate order. For PECO, this amount includes the impacts of electric and gas distribution repairs in the deductibility pursuant to PUC’s 2010 and 2015 rate case settlement agreements. See Note 14—15—Income Taxes and Note 16—17—Retirement Benefits for additional information. ComEd, PECO and BGE are not earning a return on the regulatory asset in base rates.

 

AMI programs.For ComEd, this amount represents operating and maintenance expenses and meter costs associated with ComEd’s AMI pilot program approved in the May 24, 2011, ICC order in ComEd’s 2010 rate case. The recovery periods for operating and maintenance expenses andthe meter costs are through May 31, 2014, and January 1, 2020, respectively.2020. As of December 31, 2013,2015 and December 31, 2014, ComEd had regulatory assets of $35$137 million and $88 million, respectively, related to accelerated depreciation costs resulting from the early retirements of non-AMI meters, which will be amortized over an average ten year period pursuant to the ICC approved AMI Deployment plan. ComEd is earning a return on the meter costs.regulatory asset. For PECO, this amount represents accelerated depreciation and filing and implementation costs relating to the PAPUC-approved Smart Meter Procurement and Installation Plan as well as the return on the un-depreciated investment, taxes, and operating and maintenance expenses. The approved plan allows for recovery of filing and implementation costs incurred through December 31, 2012. In addition, the approved plan provides for recovery of program costs, which includes depreciation on new equipment placed in service, beginning in January 2011 on full and current basis, which includes interest income or expense on the under or over recovery. The approved plan also provides for recovery of accelerated depreciation on PECO’s non-AMI meter assets over a 10-year period ending December 31, 2020. Recovery of smart meter costs will be reflected in base rates effective January 1, 2016. For BGE, this amount represents smart grid pilot program costs as well as the incremental costs associated with implementing full deployment of a smart grid program. Pursuant to a MDPSC order,

258


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

pilot program costs of $11 million were deferred in a regulatory asset, and, beginning with the MDPSC’s March 2011 rate order, is earning BGE’s most current authorized rate of return. In August

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

2010, the MDPSC approved a comprehensive smart grid initiative for BGE, authorizing BGE to establish a separate regulatory asset for incremental costs incurred to implement the initiative, including the net depreciation and amortization costs associated with the meters, and an authorizedappropriate rate of return on these costs, a portion of which is not recognized under GAAP until cost recovery begins. Additionally, the MDPSC order requires that BGE prove the cost-effectiveness of the entire smart grid initiative prior to seeking recovery of the costs deferred in these regulatory assets. Therefore,As part of the commencement2015 electric and timinggas distribution rate case filed on November 6, 2015 and amended on January 5, 2016, BGE is seeking recovery of its smart grid initiative costs. Of BGE’s requested $200 million, $140 million relates to the smart grid initiative. In support of its recovery of smart grid initiative costs, BGE provided evidence demonstrating that the benefits exceed the costs by a ratio of 2.3 to 1.0, on a nominal basis. If approved by the MDPSC, the amortization of these deferred costs is currently unknown.would begin in June 2016. BGE’s AMI regulatory asset excludes costs for non-AMI meters being replaced by AMI meters, as recovery of those costs commenced with the new rates approved and implemented with the MDPSC has ordered that the cost recovery for non-AMI meters will be consideredorder in a future depreciation proceeding.

AMI Meter Events.This amount represents the remaining cost value of the original smart meters, net of accumulated depreciation, DOE reimbursementsBGE’s 2014 electric and amounts recovered from the vendor, of smart meter deployment that will no longer be used, including installation and removal costs. PECO intended to seek through regulatory rate recovery in a future filing with the PAPUC, any amounts no recovered from the vendor. PECO believed the amounts incurred for the original meters and related installation and removal costs were probable of recovery based on applicable case law and past precedent on reasonably and prudently incurred costs. As such, PECO has deferred these costs on Exelon’s and PECO’s Consolidated Balance Sheet. PECO will not earn a return on the recovery of these costs.gas distribution case.

 

Under-recovered distribution services costs. Under EIMA, which became effective in the fourth quarter of 2011, ComEd is allowed recovery ofThese amounts represent under (over) recoveries related to electric distribution services costs recoverable (refundable) through aEIMA’s performance based formula rate tariff. The legislation providesUnder (over) recoveries for anthe annual reconciliation of the revenue requirement in effect to reflect the actual costs that the ICC determinesreconciliations are prudently and reasonably incurred in a given year. The over recovery associated with the 2011 reconciliation was recovered through ratesrecoverable (refundable) over a one-year period that began in January 2013. The under recovery associated with the 2012 reconciliation will be recovered through rates over a one-year period beginning in January 2014. ComEd is earning a return on these costs. The regulatory asset also includesand costs associated withfor certain one-time events, such as large storms, which will be recoveredare recoverable over a five-year period. ComEd earns and pays a return on under and over recovered costs, respectively. As of December 31, 2013,2015, the regulatory asset was comprised of $377$142 million for the 2014 and 2015 annual reconciliationreconciliations and $86$47 million related to significant one-time events. In addition to $58events, including $36 million in deferred storm costs netand $11 million of amortization, the December 31, 2013 balance related to significant one-time events contains $28 million ofConstellation merger and integration related costs, net of amortization, incurred as a result of the merger.costs. As of December 31, 2012,2014, the regulatory asset was comprised of $125$286 million for the 2013 and 2014 annual reconciliationreconciliations and $84$85 million related to significant one-time events. In addition to $58events, including $66 million in deferred storm costs netand $19 million of amortization, the December 31, 2012 balance related to significant one-time events contains $26 million ofConstellation merger and integration related costs, net of amortization, incurred as a result of the merger.costs. See Note 4—Mergers and AcquisitionsEnergy Infrastructure Modernization Act above for additional information.further details.

 

Debt costs.Consistent with rate recovery for ratemaking purposes, ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s recoverable losses on reacquired long-term debt related to regulated operations are deferred and amortized to interest expense over the life of the new debt issued to finance the debt redemption or over the life of the original debt issuance if the debt is not refinanced. Interest-rate swap settlements are deferred and amortized over the period that the related debt is outstanding or the life of the original issuance retired. These debt costs are used in the determination of the weighted cost of capital applied to rate base in the rate-making process. ComEd and BGE are not earning a return on the recovery of these costs, while PECO is earning a return on the premium of the cost of the reacquired debt through base rates.

259


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Fair value of BGE long-term debt.These amounts represent the regulatory asset recorded at Exelon for the difference in the fair value of the long-term debt of BGE as of the Constellation merger date based on the MDPSC practice to allow BGE to recover its debt costs through rates. Exelon is amortizing the regulatory asset and the associated fair value over the life of the underlying debt.

Fair value of BGE supply contract.These amounts represent the regulatory asset recorded at Exelon representing the fair value of BGE’s supply contracts as of the close of the merger date baseddebt and is not earning a return on the MDPSC practice to allow BGE to recover its supply contracts through rates. Exelon is amortizing the regulatory asset and the associated fair value over a periodrecovery of approximately three years.these costs.

 

Severance. For ComEd, these costs represent previously incurred severance costs that ComEd was granted recovery of in the December 20, 2006, ICC rehearing rate order and the May 24, 2011, ICC order in ComEd’s 2010 rate case. The recovery periods are through June 30, 2014, and May 31, 2014, respectively. ComEd is not earning a return on these costs. For BGE, these costs represent deferred severance costs that BGE has previously been granted recovery of in rates. Costs include the portion of costs associated with a 2008 workforce reduction that relate to BGE’s gas business which were deferred in 2009 as a regulatory asset in accordance with the MDPSC’s orders in prior rate cases and are being amortized over a 5-year period that began in January 2009. Also included are costs associated with a 2010 workforce reduction that were deferred as a regulatory asset and are being amortized over a 5-year period that began in March 2011 in accordance with the MDPSC’s March 2011 rate order. Finally,Additionally, costs associated with the 2012 BGE voluntary workforce reduction were deferred in 2012 as a regulatory asset in accordance with the MDPSC’s orders in prior rate cases and are being amortized over a 5-year period that began in July 2012. BGE is earning a regulated return on the regulatory asset included in base rates.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Asset retirement obligations. These costs represent future legally required removal costs associated with existing asset retirement obligations. PECO will begin to earn a return on, and a recovery of, these costs once the removal activities have been performed. ComEd and BGE will recover these costs through future depreciation rates and will earn a return on these costs once the removal activities have been performed. See Note 15—16—Asset Retirement Obligations for additional information.

 

MGP remediation costs. RecoveryComEd is allowed recovery of these items was granted to ComEd in the July 26, 2006,costs under ICC rate order.approved rates. For PECO, these costs are recoverable through rates as affirmed in the 2010 approved natural gas distribution rate case settlement. While BGE does not have a rider for MGP clean-up costs, BGE has historically received recovery of actual clean-up costs on a site-specific basis in distribution rates. The period of recovery for both ComEd and PECO will depend on the timing of the actual expenditures. ComEd and PECO are not earning a return on the recovery of these costs. While BGE does not have a rider for MGP clean-up costs, BGE has historically received recovery of actual clean-up costs on a site-specific basis in distribution rates. For BGE, $5 million of clean-up costs incurred during the period from July 2000 through November 2005 and an additional $1 million from December 2005 through November 2010 are recoverable through rates in accordance with MDPSC orders. TheseBGE is earning a return on this regulatory asset and these costs are being amortized over 10-year periods that began in January 2006 and December 2010,respectively. BGE is earning a return on this regulatory asset.The recovery period for the 10-year period that began January 2006 was extended for an additional 24 months, in accordance with the MDPSC approved 2014 electric and natural gas distribution rate case order. See Note 22—23—Commitments and Contingencies for additional information.

RTO start-up costs. Recovery of these RTO start-up costs was approved by FERC. The recovery period is through March 31, 2015. ComEd is earning a return on these costs.

 

Under (Over)-recovered universal service fund costs.recovered uncollectible accounts. The universal service fund cost is a recovery mechanism that allows PECO to recover discounts issued to electric and gas customers

260


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

enrolled in assistance programs. As of December 31, 2013, PECO was over-recovered for both its electric and gas programs. PECO earns interest on under-recovered costs and pays interest on over-recovered costs to customers.

Financial swap with Generation. To fulfill a requirement of the Illinois Settlement Legislation, ComEd entered into a five-year financial swap contract with Generation that expired on May 31, 2013. Since the swap contract was deemed prudent by the Illinois Settlement Legislation, ensuring ComEd of full recovery in rates, the changes in fair value each period were recorded by ComEd as well as an offsetting regulatory asset or liability. ComEd did not earn (pay) a return on the regulatory asset (liability). The basis for the mark-to-market derivative asset or liability position was based onThese amounts represent the difference between ComEd’s cost to purchase energy onannual uncollectible accounts expense and revenues collected in rates through an ICC-approved rider. The difference between net uncollectible account charge-offs and revenues collected through the spot market and the contracted price. In Exelon’s consolidated financial statements, the fair valuerider each calendar year is recovered or refunded over a twelve-month period beginning in June of the intercompany swap recorded by Generation andfollowing calendar year. ComEd was eliminated.does not earn a return on these under recoveries.

 

Renewable Energy.energy. OnIn December 17, 2010, ComEd entered into several 20-year floating-to-fixed energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers for the procurement of long-term renewable energy. Delivery under the contracts began in June 2012. Since the swap contracts were deemed prudent by the Illinois Settlement Legislation, ensuring ComEd of full recovery in rates, the changes in fair value each period as well as an offsetting regulatory asset or liability are recorded by ComEd. ComEd does not earn (pay) a return on the regulatory asset (liability). The basis for the mark-to-market derivative asset or liability position is based on the difference between ComEd’s cost to purchase energy onat the spot market price and the contracted price.

 

Energy and transmission programs. Starting in 2007, ComEd’sThese amounts represent under (over) recoveries related to energy and transmission costs are recoverable (refundable) under ComEd’s ICC and/or FERC-approved rates. Under (over) recoveries are recoverable (refundable) over a one-year period or less. ComEd earns a return or interest on under-recovered costs and pays interest on over-recovered costs to customers. As of December 31, 2015, ComEd’s regulatory asset of $43 million included $5 million related to under-recovered energy costs, $31 million associated with transmission costs recoverable through its FERC-approved formula rate tariff, and $7 million of Constellation merger and integration costs to be recovered upon FERC approval. As of December 31, 2015, ComEd’s regulatory liability of $53 million included $29 million related to over-recovered energy costs and $24 million associated with revenues received for renewable energy requirements. As of December 31, 2014, ComEd’s regulatory asset of $33 million included $4 million related to under-recovered energy costs, $22 million associated with transmission costs recoverable through its FERC-approved formula rate tariff, and $7 million of

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Constellation merger and integration costs to be recovered upon FERC approval. As of December 31, 2014, ComEd’s regulatory liability of $19 million included $3 million related to over-recovered energy costs and $16 million associated with revenues received for renewable energy requirements. SeeTransmission Formula Rate above for further details.

The PECO energy costs represent the electric and gas supply related costs recoverable (refundable) under PECO’s GSA and PGC, respectively. PECO earns interest on the under-recovered energy and natural gas costs and pays interest on over-recovered energy and natural gas costs to customers. In addition, beginning in 2013, the deferred DSP I and II Program costs are presented on a net basis with PECO’s GSA under (over)-recovered energy costs. See additional discussion below. The PECO transmission costs represent the electric transmission costs recoverable (refundable) under the TSC under which PECO earns interest on under-recovered costs and pays interest on over-recovered costs to customers. As of December 31, 2013,2015, PECO had a regulatory liability that included the over-recovered electric transmission costs of $8 million, $34$35 million related to the DSP program, $22 million related to over-recovered natural gas supply costs under the PGC and $3 million related to over-recovered electric transmission costs. As of December 31, 2014, PECO had a regulatory liability that included $39 million related to the DSP program, $3 million related the over-recovered electric transmission costs and $16 million related to over-recovered natural gas supply costs under the PGC. As of December 31, 2012, PECO had a regulatory asset related to under-recovered transmission costs of $1 million and a regulatory liability that included $47 million related to over-recovered electric supply costs under the GSA and $1 million related to over-recovered natural gas supply costs under the PGC. The BGE energy costs represent the electric and gas supply related costs recoverable (refundable) from (to) customers under BGE’s market-based SOS and MBR programs, respectively. BGE does not earn or pay interest on under- or over-recovered costs to customers. As of December 31, 2013, BGE had a regulatory asset of $1 million related to under-recovered electric supply costs and a regulatory liability of $11 million related to over-recovered natural gas supply costs. As of December 31, 2012, BGE had a regulatory asset of $9 million related to under-recovered electric supply costs and a regulatory asset of $19 million related to under-recovered natural gas supply costs.

 

DSP Program costs. These amounts represent recoverable administrative costs incurred relating to filing, procurement, and information technology improvements associated with PECO’s PAPUC-

261


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

approved DSP Program for the procurement of electric supply following the expiration of PECO’s generation rate caps on December 31, 2010. The filing and implementation costs of this DSP Program are recoverable through the GSA over its 29-month term, that began January 1, 2011. The independent evaluator costs associated with conducting procurements is recoverable over a 12-month period after the PAPUC approves the results of the procurements. Costs relating to information technology improvements are recoverable over a 5-year period that began January 1, 2011. PECO earns a return on the recovery of information technology costs. Beginning in 2013, these costs are included within the energy and transmission programs line item.

DSP II Program Costs. These amounts represent recoverable administrative costs incurred relating to the filing and procurement associated with PECO’s second PAPUC-approved DSP programprograms for the procurement of electric supply. The filingfilings and procurementprocurements of thisthese DSP ProgramPrograms are recoverable through the GSA over itseach respective term. The original DSP Program had a 29-month term that began January 1, 2011. DSP II and DSP III each have a 24-month term that began June 1, 2013.2013 and June 1, 2015, respectively. The independent evaluator costs associated with conducting procurements are recoverable over a 12-month period after the PAPUC approves the results of the procurements. PECO is not earning a return on these costs. BeginningCertain costs included in 2013, thesePECO’s original DSP program related to information technology improvements were recovered over a 5-year period that began January 1, 2011. PECO earns a return on the recovery of information technology costs. These costs are included within the energy and transmission programs line item.

 

The BGE energy costs represent the electric supply, gas supply, and transmission related costs recoverable (refundable) from (to) customers under BGE’s market-based SOS program, MBR program, and FERC approved transmission rates, respectively. BGE does not earn or pay interest on under- or over-recovered costs to customers. As of December 31, 2015, BGE’s regulatory asset of $40 million included $12 million associated with transmission costs recoverable through its FERC approved formula rate and $28 million related to under-recovered electric energy costs. As of December 31, 2015, BGE’s regulatory liability of $18 million related to $5 million of over-recovered natural gas costs $14 million of over-recovered transmission costs, offset by $1 million of abandonment costs to be recovered upon FERC approval. As of December 31, 2014, BGE’s regulatory asset of $15 million included $10 million related to under-recovered electric energy costs, $4 million of Constellation merger and integration costs and $1 million of transmission costs recoverable through its FERC approved formula rate. As of December 31, 2014, BGE’s regulatory liability of $7 million related to over-recovered natural gas supply costs.

Deferred storm costs.In the MDPSC’s March 2011 rate order, BGE was authorized to defer $16 million in storm costs incurred in February 2010. These costs are being amortized over a 5-year period that began in December 2010. BGE is earningearns a return on this regulatory asset.asset and the recovery period was extended for an additional 25 months, in accordance with the MDPSC approved 2014 electric and natural gas distribution rate case order.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Electric generation-related regulatory asset.As a result of the deregulation of electric generation, BGE ceased to meet the requirements for accounting for a regulated business for the previous electric generation portion of its business. As a result, BGE wrote-off its entire individual, generation-related regulatory assets and liabilities and established a single, generation-related regulatory asset to be collected through its regulated rates, which is being amortized on a basis that approximates the pre-existing individual regulatory asset amortization schedules. The portion of this regulatory asset that does not earn a regulated rate of return were $37was $19 million as of December 31, 2013,2015, and $47$28 million as of December 31, 2012.2014. BGE will continue to amortize this amount through 2017.

 

Rate stabilization deferral.In June 2006, Senate Bill 1 was enacted in Maryland and imposed a rate stabilization measure that capped rate increases by BGE for residential electric customers at 15% from July 1, 2006, to May 31, 2007. As a result, BGE recorded a regulatory asset on its Consolidated Balance Sheets equal to the difference between the costs to purchase power and the revenues collected from customers, as well as related carrying charges based on short-term interest rates from July 1, 2006 to May 31, 2007. In addition, as required by Senate Bill 1, the MDPSC approved a plan that allowed residential electric customers the option to further defer the transition to market rates from June 1, 2007 to January 1, 2008. During 2007, BGE deferred $306 million of electricity purchased for resale expenses and certain applicable carrying charges, which are calculated using the implied interest rates of the rate stabilization bonds, as a regulatory asset related to the rate stabilization plans. During 20132015 and 2012,2014, BGE recovered $66$73 million and $67$65 million, respectively, of electricity purchased for resale expenses and carrying charges related to the rate stabilization plan regulatory asset. BGE began amortizing the regulatory asset associated with the deferral which ended in May 2007 to earnings over a period not to exceed ten years when collection from customers began in June 2007.

 

Energy efficiency and demand response programs.These For ComEd, these amounts represent costs recoverable (refundable) underover recoveries related to ComEd’s ICC approvedICC-approved Energy Efficiency and Demand Response Plan, PECO’s PAPUC-approved EE&C Plan, and the BGE Smart Energy Savers Program®.Plan. ComEd

262


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

began recovering refunds these costs or refunding over-collections of these costs on June 1, 2008over recoveries through a rider.rider over a twelve-month period. ComEd earns a return on the capital investment incurred under the program, but does not earn (pay)or pay interest on under (over) collections.or over recoveries, respectively. For PECO, this amount represents an over-collectionthese amounts represent over recoveries of program costs related to both Phase I and Phase II of its PAPUC-approved EE&C Plan. PECO does not earn (pay) interest on under (over) collections. PECO began recovering the costs of its Phase I and Phase II EE&C Plans through a surcharge in January 2010 and June 2013, respectively, based on projected spending under the programs. Phase I recovery continued over the life of the program, which expired on May 31, 2013 and excess funds collected began being refunded in June 2013. Phase II of the program began on June 1, 2013, and will continue over the life of the program, which will expire on May 31, 2016. Excess funds collected are required to be refunded beginning in June 2016. PECO earned a return on the capital investment incurred under Phase I of the program. PECO does not earn (pay) interest on under (over) collections. For BGE, these amounts represent under (over) recoveries related to BGE’s Smart Energy Savers Program®, which includes both MDPSC approvedMDPSC-approved demand response and energy efficiency programs. For the BGE Peak RewardsSM demand response program which began in January 2008, actual marketing and customer bonus costs incurred in the demand response program are being recovered over a 5-year amortization period from the date incurred pursuant to an order by the MDPSC. Fixed assets related to the demand response program are recovered over the life of the equipment. Also included in the demand response program are customer bill credits related to BGE’s Smart Energy Rewards program which began in July 2013.2013 and are being recovered through the surcharge. Actual costs incurred in the conservationenergy efficiency program are being amortized over a 5-year period with recovery beginning in 2010 pursuant to an order by the MDPSC. BGE earns a rate of return on the capital investments and deferred costs incurred under the program and earns (pays) interest on under (over) collections.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Merger integration costs.These amounts represent integration costs to achieve distribution synergies related to the Constellation merger transaction. As a result of the MDPSC’s February 2013 rate order, BGE deferred $8 million related to non-severance merger integration costs incurred during 2012 and the first quarter of 2013. Of these costs, $4 million was authorized to be amortized over a5-year period that began in March 2013. The recovery of the remaining $4 million was deferred. In the MDPSC’s December 2013 rate order, BGE was authorized to recover the remaining $4 million and an additional $4 million of non-severance merger integration costs incurred during 2013. These costs are being amortized over a 5-year period that began in December 2013. BGE is earning a return on this regulatory asset included in base rates.

 

Under (Over)-recovered electric and gas revenue decoupling.These amounts represent the electric and gas distribution costs recoverable from or refundable(refundable) to customers under BGE’s decoupling mechanism, which does not earn a rate of return. As of December 31, 2013,2015, BGE had a regulatory liabilityasset of $7$30 million related to over-recoveredunder-recovered electric revenue decoupling and $9a regulatory liability of $1 million related to over-recovered natural gas revenue decoupling. As of December 31, 2012,2014, BGE had a regulatory asset of $5$7 million related to under-recovered electric revenue decoupling and a regulatory liability of $7$12 million related to over-recovered natural gas revenue decoupling.

 

CAP arrearage. These amounts represent the guaranteed recovery of previously incurred bad debt expense associated with the estimated eligible CAP accounts receivable balances under the IPAF Program as provided by the 2015 electric distribution rate case settlement. These costs are amortized as recovery is received through a combination of customer payments and rate recovery, including through future rate cases if necessary. PECO is not earning a return on this regulatory asset.

Nuclear decommissioning.These amounts represent estimated future nuclear decommissioning costs for former ComEd and PECO plantsthe Regulatory Agreement Units that exceed (regulatory asset) or are less than (regulatory liability) the associated decommissioning trust fund assets. Exelon believes the trust fund assets, including prospective earnings thereon and any future collections from customers, will be sufficient to fund the associated future decommissioning costs at the time of decommissioning. Exelon is not accruing interest on these costs. See Note 15—16—Asset Retirement Obligations for additional information.

 

Removal costs. These amounts represent funds ComEd and BGE have received from customers through depreciation rates to cover the future non-legally required cost of removal of property, plant

263


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

and equipment which reduces rate base for ratemaking purposes. This liability is reduced as costs are incurred.

 

DLC Program Costs.program costs. The DLC program costs include equipment, installation, and information technology costs necessary to implement the DLC Program under PECO’s EE&C Phase I Plans. PECO received full cost recovery through Phase I collections and will amortize the costs as a credit to the income statement to offset the related depreciation expense during the same period through September 2025, which is the remaining useful life of the assets. PECO is not paying interest on these over-recovered costs.

 

Electric distribution tax repairs. PECO’s 2010 electric distribution rate case settlement required that the expected cash benefit from the application of Revenue Procedure 2011-43, which was issued on August 19, 2011, to prior tax years be refunded to customers over a seven-year period. Credits began being reflected in customer bills on January 1, 2012. NoPECO’s 2015 electric distribution rate case settlement requires PECO to pay interest will be paidon the unamortized balance of the tax-effected catch-up deduction beginning January 1, 2016.

Combined Notes to customers.Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Gas distribution tax repairs.PECO’s 2010 natural gas distribution rate case settlement required that the expected cash benefit from the application of new tax repairs deduction methodologies for 2010 and prior tax years be refunded to customers over a seven-year period. In September 2012, PECO filed an application with the IRS to change its method of accounting for gas distribution repairs for the 2011 tax year. Credits began being reflected in customer bills on January 1, 2013. No interest will be paid to customers.

 

Under (Over)-recovered uncollectible accounts. As a result of the February 2010 ICC order approving recovery of ComEd’s uncollectible accounts, ComEd has the ability to adjust its rates annually to reflect the increases and decreases in annual uncollectible accounts expense starting with year 2008. ComEd recorded a regulatory asset for the cumulative under-collections in 2008 and 2009. Recovery of the initial regulatory asset was completed over an approximate 14-month time frame which began in April 2010. The recovery or refund of the difference in the uncollectible accounts expense applicable to the years starting with January 1, 2010, will take place over a 12-month time frame beginning in June of the following year. ComEd is not earning a return or paying interest on these under (over)-recovered costs.

Under (Over)-recovered AEPS costs current asset (liability).The AEPS costs represent the administrative and AEC costs incurred to comply with the requirements of the AEPS Act, which are recoverable on a full and current basis. PECO earns interest on under-recovered costs and pays interest on over-recovered costs to customers. Beginning in 2013, these costs are included within the energy and transmission programs line item.

Revenue subject to refund.These amounts represent refunds of $37 million and associated interest of $1 million ComEd owes to customers primarily related to the treatment of the post-test year accumulated depreciation issue in the 2007 Rate Case. See above discussionAs of the 2007 Rate Case for further information.December 31, 2015, and December 31, 2014, ComEd owed $0 million and $3 million, respectively.

 

Purchase of Receivables Programs (Exelon, ComEd, PECO, and BGE)

 

ComEd, PECO and BGE are required, under separate legislation and regulations in Illinois, Pennsylvania and Maryland, respectively, to purchase certain receivables from retail electric and natural gas suppliers. For retail suppliers participating in the utilities’ consolidated billing, ComEd, PECO and BGE must purchase their customer accounts receivables. ComEd purchasesand BGE purchase receivables at

264


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

a discount to primarily recover uncollectible accounts expense from the suppliers. BGE’s tariff provides that receivables are to be purchased at a discount, primarily to recover uncollectible accounts expense from the suppliers. However, if the discount rate is negative, the tariff provides that the receivable is purchased at a zero discount rate. BGE is currently purchasing certain receivables at a zero discount rate. PECO is required to purchase receivables at face value and is permitted to recover uncollectible accounts expense from customers through distribution rates. Exelon, ComEd, PECO, and BGE do not record unbilled commodity receivables under their POR programs. Purchased billed receivables are classified in other accounts receivable, net on Exelon’s, ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. The following tables provide information about the purchased receivables of the Registrants as of December 31, 20132015 and 2012.2014.

 

As of December 31, 2013

  Exelon  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Purchased receivables(a)

  $263  $105  $72  $86 

Allowance for uncollectible accounts(b)

   (30  (16  (7  (7
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Purchased receivables, net

  $233  $89  $65  $79 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

As of December 31, 2012

  Exelon  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Purchased receivables(a)

  $191  $55  $65  $71 

Allowance for uncollectible accounts(b)

   (21  (9  (6  (6
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Purchased receivables, net

  $170  $46  $59  $65 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

As of December 31, 2015

  Exelon  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Purchased receivables (a)

  $229   $103   $67   $59  

Allowance for uncollectible accounts (b)

   (31  (16  (7  (8
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Purchased receivables, net

  $198   $87   $60   $51  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

As of December 31, 2014

  Exelon  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Purchased receivables (a)

  $290   $139   $76   $75  

Allowance for uncollectible accounts (b)

   (42  (21  (8  (13
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Purchased receivables, net

  $248   $118   $68   $62  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

(a)PECO’s gas POR program became effective on January 1, 2012 and includes a 1% discount on purchased receivables in order to recover the implementation costs of the program. If theThe implementation costs are notwere fully recovered when PECO files its next gas distribution rate case, PECO will propose a mechanismand the 1% discount was reset to recover the remaining implementation costs as a distribution charge to low volume transportation customers or apply future discounts on purchased receivables from natural gas suppliers serving those customers.0%, effective July 2015.
(b)For ComEd and BGE, reflects the incremental allowance for uncollectible accounts recorded, which is in addition to the purchase discount. For ComEd, the incremental uncollectible accounts expense is recovered through its Purchase of Receivables with Consolidated Billing (PORCB) tariff.

 

4. MergerMergers, Acquisitions, and AcquisitionsDispositions (Exelon and Generation)

 

Proposed Merger with Constellation (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)Pepco Holdings, Inc. (Exelon)

 

Description of Transaction

 

On March 12, 2012,April 29, 2014, Exelon completed theand Pepco Holdings, Inc. (PHI) signed an agreement and plan of merger contemplated by(as subsequently amended and restated as of July 18, 2014, the Merger Agreement among Exelon, Bolt Acquisition Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of Exelon (Merger Sub), and Constellation. As a result of that merger, Merger Sub was merged into Constellation (the Initial Merger) and Constellation became a wholly owned subsidiary of Exelon. Following the completion of the Initial Merger, Exelon and Constellation completed a series of internal corporate organizational restructuring transactions. Constellation merged with and into Exelon, with Exelon continuing as the surviving corporation (the Upstream Merger). Simultaneously with the Upstream Merger, Constellation’s interest in RF HoldCo LLC, which holds Constellation’s interest in BGE, was transferredAgreement) to Exelon Energy Delivery Company, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Exelon that also owns Exelon’s interests in ComEd and PECO. Following the Upstream Merger and the transfer of RF HoldCo LLC, Exelon contributed to Generation certain subsidiaries, including those with generation and customer supply operations that were acquired from Constellation as a result of the Initial Merger and the Upstream Merger.

265


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Regulatory Matterscombine the two companies in an all cash transaction. The resulting company will retain the Exelon name. Under the Merger Agreement, PHI’s shareholders will receive $27.25 of cash in exchange for each share of PHI common stock. Based on the outstanding shares of PHI’s common stock as of December 31, 2015, PHI shareholders would receive $6.9 billion in total cash. In addition, in connection with the Merger Agreement, Exelon entered into a subscription agreement under which it has purchased $180 million of a class of nonvoting, nonconvertible and nontransferable preferred securities of PHI. The preferred securities are included in Other non-current assets on Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheet. PHI has the right to redeem the preferred securities at its option for the purchase price paid plus accrued dividends, if any.

 

In February 2012, the MDPSC issued an Order approving theOn November 2, 2015, Exelon and Constellation merger. As partPHI each filed a new Notification and Report Form with the DOJ under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976 (HSR Act) due to the expiration of the MDPSC Order,original filing. The HSR Act waiting period expired on December 2, 2015, and the HSR Act no longer precludes completion of the merger.

To date, the PHI stockholders, the Virginia State Corporation Commission, the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities (NJBPU), the Delaware Public Service Commission (DPSC), the Maryland Public Service Commission (MDPSC) and the FERC have approved the merger of PHI and Exelon. The Federal Communications Commission has also approved the transfer of certain PHI communications licenses.

On February 11, 2015, the NJBPU approved the proposed merger and the previously filed settlement signed and filed by Exelon, agreed to providePHI, Atlantic City Electric (ACE), NJBPU staff, and the Independent Energy Coalition. The settlement provides a package of benefits to BGEACE customers the City of Baltimore and the Statestate of Maryland, resulting inNew Jersey. This package of benefits includes the establishment of customer rate credit programs, with an estimated direct investment inaggregate value of $62 million for ACE customers and energy efficiency programs that will provide savings for ACE customers of $15 million. The March 6, 2015, order by the State of Maryland of approximately $1 billion.

The following costs were recognized afterNJBPU approving the closingmerger required that the consummation of the merger and are included in Exelon’s, Generation’s and BGE’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income formust take place no later than November 1, 2015 unless otherwise extended by the year ended December 31, 2012.

Description

 Payment
Period
 BGE  Generation  Exelon  

Statement of Operations
Location

BGE rate credit of $100 per residential customer(a)

 Q2 2012 $113  $—    $113  Revenues

Customer investment fund to invest in energy efficiency and low-income energy assistance to BGE customers

 2012 to 2014  —     —     113.5  O&M Expense

Contribution for renewable energy, energy efficiency or related projects in Baltimore

 2012 to 2014  —     —     2  O&M Expense

Charitable contributions at $7 million per year for 10 years

 2012 to 2021  28   35   70  O&M Expense

State funding for offshore wind development projects

 Q2 2012  —     —     32  O&M Expense

Miscellaneous tax benefits

 Q2 2012  (2  —     (2 Taxes Other Than Income
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

Total

  $139  $35  $328.5  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

(a)Exelon made a $66 million equity contribution to BGE in the second quarter of 2012 to fund the after-tax amount of the rate credit as directed in the MDPSC order approving the merger transaction.

The direct investment estimate includes $95 millionBoard. On October 15, 2015, the NJBPU extended the November 1, 2015 date to $120 million relating to the construction of a headquarters building in Baltimore for Generation’s competitive energy businesses. On March 20, 2013, Generation signed a 20 year lease agreement that is contingent upon the developer obtaining all required approvals, permits and financing for the construction of the building. Once required approvals are received and financing conditions are met, construction will commence and the building is expected to be ready for occupancy in approximately 2 years after building construction commences.June 30, 2016.

 

On February 13, 2015, Exelon and PHI announced that they had reached a settlement agreement in the proceeding before the DPSC to review the proposed merger. The direct investment estimate also includes $600 millionsettlement, which was amended on April 7, 2015, was signed and filed by Exelon, PHI, Delmarva Power & Light Company (DPL), the DPSC Staff, the Delaware Public Advocate, the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, the Delaware Sustainable Energy Utility, the Mid-Atlantic Renewable Energy Coalition and the Clean Air Council. As part of this settlement, Exelon and PHI proposed a package of benefits to $650DPL customers and the state of Delaware including the establishment of customer rate credits of $40 million for Exelon’sDPL customers in Delaware, $2 million of funding for energy efficiency programs for DPL low income customers, and Generation’s commitment$2 million of funding for workforce development. On June 2, 2015, the DPSC issued an order accepting the settlement and approving the merger between Exelon and PHI.

On March 17, 2015, Exelon and PHI announced that they had reached settlements with multiple parties in the Maryland proceeding to develop or assist in developmentreview the proposed merger after filing a Request for Adoption of 285—300 MWs of new generation in Maryland, expected to be completed over a period of 10 years. The MDPSC Order contemplates various options for complyingSettlements with the new generation development commitments, including building or acquiring generating assets, making subsidy or compliance payments, or in circumstances in whichMDPSC. The settlements were signed and filed by Exelon, PHI, Montgomery County, Prince George’s County, the generation build is delayed, making liquidated damages payments. ExelonNational Consumer Law Center, National Housing Trust, the Maryland Affordable Housing Coalition, the Housing Association of Nonprofit Developers, and Generation expect thata consortium of recreational trail advocacy organizations led by the majority of these commitments will be satisfied by building or acquiring generating assets and, therefore, will be primarily capital in nature and recognized as incurred. If in the future Exelon determines that it is probable that it will make subsidy, compliance or liquidated damages payments related to the new generation development commitments, Exelon will record a liability at that time. As of December 31, 2013, it is reasonably possible that Exelon will be required to make subsidy orMid-Atlantic Off-Road Enthusiasts.

266


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

liquidated damages payments of approximately $40 million rather than build oneExelon and PHI also announced a settlement with The Alliance for Solar Choice. On May 15, 2015, the MDPSC approved the merger after modifying a number of the conditions in the settlements, resulting in total rate credits of $66 million, funding for energy efficiency programs of $43.2 million, a Green Sustainability Fund of $14.4 million, 20 MWs of renewable generation projects contemplated bydevelopment and increased penalties related to reliability commitments. On May 18, 2015, Exelon and PHI accepted and committed to fulfill the commitments, given thatconditions.

On June 11, 2015, the generation build is dependent uponMaryland Office of People’s Counsel (OPC), the passageSierra Club, and the Chesapeake Climate Action Network filed Petitions for Judicial Review of legislationthe MDPSC’s approval of the merger with the Circuit Court for Queen Anne’s County. On June 23, 2015, Public Citizen, Inc. filed its Petition for Judicial Review with the Circuit Court for Queen Anne’s County. On July 10, 2015, Exelon and other conditions that Exelon does not control.PHI filed a response in opposition to the Petitions for Review.

 

On July 26, 2013, Generation executed an engineering procurement21, 2015, the OPC filed a motion to stay the MDPSC order approving the merger and construction contract to expand its Perryman, Maryland site with 120MWset a schedule for discovery and presentation of new natural gas-fired generationevidence. On July 29, 2015, Public Citizen, Inc. filed a response supporting OPC’s motion to satisfy certainstay, and on July 31, 2015 the Sierra Club and the Chesapeake Climate Action Network filed a joint motion to stay. In July and August, Exelon, PHI, the MDPSC, Prince George’s County and Montgomery County filed responses opposing the motions to stay. The judge issued an order denying the motions for stay on August 12, 2015. On January 8, 2016, the Circuit Court judge affirmed the MDPSC’s order approving the merger and denied the petitions for judicial review filed by the OPC, the Sierra Club, the Chesapeake Climate Action Network (CCAN) and Public Citizen, Inc. On January 19, 2016, the OPC filed a notice of these commitmentsappeal to the Maryland Court of Special appeals, and achievementon January 21, Sierra Club and CCAN filed a notice of commercial operation is expected in 2015.appeal. In December 2013, Generation acquired the Fourmile Ridge Project in western Marylandordinary course this appeal would be resolved no earlier than third quarter 2016.

On August 27, 2015, the District of Columbia Public Service Commission (DCPSC) issued an Opinion and executed a wind turbine supply agreement for construction of a 32.5 MW project targeted for commercial operation in November 2014. This project will satisfy a portionOrder denying approval of the 125 MW Tier I land-based renewables commitment. See Note 22—Commitments and Contingencies for additional information. As of December 31, 2013, amounts reflectedmerger, concluding that the merger as presented was not in the public interest. Exelon and Generation consolidated financial statements include $24PHI filed an Application for Reconsideration with the DCPSC on September 28, 2015. On October 6, 2015, Exelon, PHI, the District of Columbia Government, the Office of Peoples Counsel, the District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority, the National Consumer Law Center, National Housing Trust and National Housing Trust—Enterprise Preservation Corporation, and the Apartment and Office Building Association of Metropolitan Washington (collectively, Settling Parties) entered into a Nonunanimous Full Settlement Agreement and Stipulation (Settlement Agreement) with respect to the merger. Exelon and PHI subsequently filed a motion of joint applicants requesting the DCPSC to reopen the approval application to allow for consideration of the Settlement Agreement and granting additional requested relief. The new package of benefits totals $78 million and includes commitments to provide relief of capital expendituresresidential customer base rate increases of $26 million, one-time direct bill credits of $14 million, low-income energy assistance of $16 million, improved reliability, a cleaner and $6greener D.C. through funding energy efficiency programs and development of renewable energy, and investment in local jobs and the local economy through workforce development of $5 million. It also guarantees charitable contributions totaling $19 million of development costs included within operating and maintenance expense associated with pursuit of these commitments for new generation in the State of Maryland.over 10 years.

 

Associated with certainOn October 28, 2015, the DCPSC agreed to reopen the approval application to allow for consideration of the regulatory approvals required forSettlement Agreement. Since then, parties supporting and opposing the Settlement filed testimony, participated in formal hearings and, on December 23, 2015, submitted final briefs to the DCPSC. The parties now await a formal decision from the DCPSC. The Merger Agreement provides that either Exelon or PHI may terminate the Merger Agreement if the merger on November 30, 2012,is not completed by October 28, 2015. Pursuant to a subsidiary of Generation sold three Maryland generating stations and associated assets, Brandon Shores and H.A. Wagner in Anne Arundel County, Maryland, and C.P. Crane in Baltimore County, Maryland,Letter Agreement related to Raven Power Holdings LLC (Raven Power), a subsidiary of Riverstone Holdings LLC. The sale agreement included a base price with purchase price adjustments based on fuel inventory, working capital, capital expenditures, and timing of the closing, resulting in net proceeds from the sale of approximately $371 million. Decisions by certain market participants to remove themselves from the bidding process, combined with the deadlines and limitations on the pool of potential buyers imposed by the merger approval orders, resulted in realized sales proceeds below Generation’s estimated fair value of the Maryland generating stations. Consequently,Settlement Agreement, Exelon and Generation recorded a pre-tax loss of $272 million in 2012PHI have agreed, among other things, that they will not exercise their rights to reflect the difference between the sales price and the carrying value of the generating stations and associated assets. In the first quarter of 2013, Exelon and Generation recorded a pre-tax gain of $8 million to reflect the final settlement of the sales price with Raven Power.

In connection with the sale of the Maryland generating stations, Exelon agreed to indemnify Raven Power for certain costs associated with the treatment of hazardous substances at off-site disposal facilities and any claims arising as a result of, or in connection with, any toxic tort, natural resource damages, loss of life or injury to persons due to releases of, or exposure to hazardous substances in connection with Raven Power’s remediation of environmental contamination or Exelon’s non-compliance with environmental laws or permits prior to the closing date of the sale.

Pursuant to the MDPSC merger approval conditions, BGE is restricted from paying any dividend on its common shares through the end of 2014, was required to maintain specified minimum capital and O&M expenditure levels in 2012 and 2013, and is not permitted to reduce employment levels due to involuntary attrition associated with the merger integration process for two years following the closing of the merger. Additionally, BGE is subject to other merger approval conditions to enhance BGE’s ring-fencing measures established by order of the MDPSC.

Subsequent to the merger, Generation discovered that, for the first two weeks following the merger, due to a software error, Generation inadvertently bid certain generating units into the PJM energy market at prices that slightly exceeded the cost-based caps to which it had agreed. This error was a violation of the commitments made in connection with merger approvals by DOJ, FERC and the MDPSC. Generation reported the error to the DOJ, FERC and the MDPSC and committed to remedyterminate

267


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

the impactsMerger Agreement before March 4, 2016, except under limited circumstances. If the DCPSC does not approve the Settlement Agreement by March 4, 2016, either Exelon or PHI may terminate the Settlement Agreement.

The settlements reached and commission orders received to date in Delaware, Maryland and New Jersey include a “most favored nation” provision which, generally speaking, requires allocation of its error. The MDPSC held a hearing to reviewmerger benefits proportionately across all the error, and accepted Generation’s proposed remediation. Subsequent close examination by Generation of its cost-based bids also revealedjurisdictions. When applying the need for some minor adjustmentsmost favored nation provision to the cost build up for certain of its PJM units. Generation has coordinated with PJMsettlement terms and other conditions established in the merger approvals received to determinedate, and as proposed in the impact on Generation’s revenues and the market from this error and these adjustments, and Generation has worked with PJM to reverse the financial impacts. In November 2012, Generation reached a settlementSettlement Agreement filed with the DOJ regarding this matter. The final resolution did not haveDCPSC, Exelon and PHI currently estimate direct benefits of $430 million or more on a material impact on Exelon’s or Generation’s resultsnet present value basis (excluding charitable contributions and renewable generation commitments) will be provided, including rate credits, funding for energy efficiency programs and other required commitments. Exelon and PHI anticipate substantially all of operations, cash flows orsuch amounts will be charged to earnings at the time of merger close and will be paid by the end of 2017. An additional $53 million will be charged to earnings at the time of the merger close for charitable contributions, which are then required to be paid over a period of 10 years. Commitments to develop renewable generation, which are expected to be primarily capital in nature, will be recognized as incurred. Upon completion of the merger, the actual nature, amount, timing and financial position.reporting treatment for these commitments may be materially different from the current projection.

 

Exelon washas been named in suits filed in the CircuitDelaware Chancery Court of Baltimore City, Maryland alleging that individual directors of ConstellationPHI breached their fiduciary duties by entering into the proposed merger transaction and Exelon aided and abetted the individual directors’ breaches. Similar suits were also filed in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. The suits soughtseek to enjoin a Constellation shareholder vote onPHI from completing the proposed merger until all material information was disclosed and soughtor seek rescission of the proposed merger. During the third quarter of 2011,merger if completed. In addition, they also seek unspecified damages and costs. Exelon was also named in a federal court suit making similar claims. In September 2014, the parties to the suits reached an agreement in principle to settle the suits through additional disclosures to Constellation shareholders. On June 26, 2012, the court approved thea proposed settlement and entered final judgment.

Accounting for the Merger Transaction

The fair value of Constellation’s non-regulated business assets acquired and liabilities assumed was determined based on significant estimates and assumptions that are judgmental in nature, including projected future cash flows (including timing); discount rates reflecting risk inherent in the future cash flows; and future market prices. There were also judgments made to determine the expected useful lives assigned to each class of assets acquired and duration of liabilities assumed.

The financial statements of BGE do not include fair value adjustments for assets or liabilities subject to rate-setting provisions for BGE. BGEwould resolve all claims, which is subject to court approval. Final court approval of the rate-setting authorityproposed settlement is not anticipated until approximately 90 days after merger close. Exelon does not believe these suits will impact the completion of FERCthe transaction, and they are not expected to have a material impact on Exelon’s results of operations.

Including 2014 and through December 31, 2015, Exelon has incurred approximately $259 million of expense associated with the proposed merger. Of the total costs incurred, $121 million is primarily related to acquisition and integration costs and $138 million are for costs incurred to finance the transaction. The financing costs include $22 million of costs associated with the private exchange offer and redemption of certain Senior Unsecured Notes (see Note 14—Debt and Credit Agreements for further information on the exchange), as well as, a net loss of $64 million related to the settlement of forward-starting interest-rate swaps. These swaps were terminated in connection with the $4.2 billion issuance of debt; refer to Note 13—Derivative Financial Instruments for more information. The financing costs exclude costs to issue equity and the MDPSC and is accounted for pursuantinitial debt offering which we recorded to the accounting guidance for regulated operations. The rate-setting and cost recovery provisions currently in place for BGE provide revenue derived from costs including a return on investment of assets and liabilities included in rate base. Except for debt, fuel supply contracts and regulatory assets not earning a return, the fair values of BGE’s tangible and intangible assets and liabilities subject to these rate-setting provisions are assumed to approximate their carrying values and, therefore, do not reflect any net adjustments related to these amounts. For BGE’s debt, fuel supply contracts and regulatory assets not earning a return, the difference between fair value and book value of BGE’s assets acquired and liabilities assumed is recorded as a regulatory asset and liability at Exelon Corporate as Exelon did not apply push-down accounting to BGE. See Note 1—Significant Accounting Policies for additional information on BGE’s push-down accounting treatment. Also see Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information on BGE’s regulatory assets.Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

The preliminary valuations performed in the first quarter of 2012 were updated in the second, third and fourth quarters of 2012, with the most significant adjustments to the preliminary valuation amounts having been made to the fair values assigned to the acquired power supply and fuel contracts, unregulated property, plant and equipment and investments in affiliates. There were no significant adjustments to the purchase price allocation in the first quarter of 2013 and the purchase price allocation was final as of March 31, 2013.

   For the year ended, 

Acquisition, Integration and Financing Costs(a)

      2015           2014     

Exelon

  $80    $179  

Generation

   25     11  

ComEd

   10     4  

PECO

   5     2  

BGE

   5     2  

268


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

The final purchase price allocation of the Merger of Exelon with Constellation and Exelon’s contribution of certain subsidiaries of Constellation to Generation was as follows:

Preliminary Purchase Price Allocation, excluding amortization

  Exelon   Generation 

Current assets

  $4,936   $3,638 

Property, plant and equipment

   9,342    4,054 

Unamortized energy contracts

   3,218    3,218 

Other intangibles, trade name and retail relationships

   457    457 

Investment in affiliates

   1,942    1,942 

Pension and OPEB regulatory asset

   740    —   

Other assets

   2,265    1,266 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total assets

   22,900    14,575 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Current liabilities

   3,408    2,804 

Unamortized energy contracts

   1,722    1,512 

Long-term debt, including current maturities

   5,632    2,972 

Non-controlling interest

   90    90 

Deferred credits and other liabilities and preferred securities

   4,683    1,933 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total liabilities, preferred securities and non-controlling interest

   15,535    9,311 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total purchase price

  $7,365   $5,264 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Intangible Assets Recorded

For the power supply and fuel contracts acquired from Constellation, the difference between the contract price and the market price at the date of the merger was recognized as either an intangible asset or liability based on whether the contracts were in or out-of-the-money. The valuation of the acquired intangible assets and liabilities was estimated by applying either the market approach or the income approach depending on the nature of the underlying contract. The market approach was utilized when prices and other relevant information generated by market transactions involving comparable transactions were available. Otherwise the income approach, which is based upon discounted projected future cash flows associated with the underlying contracts, was utilized. The measure is based upon certain unobservable inputs, which are considered Level 3 inputs, pursuant to applicable accounting guidance. Key estimates and inputs include forecasted power and fuel prices and the discount rate. The fair value amounts are amortized over the life of the contract in relation to the present value of the underlying cash flows as of the merger date. Amortization expense and income are recorded through purchased power and fuel expense or operating revenues.

Exelon and Generation present separately in their Consolidated Balance Sheets the unamortized energy contract assets and liabilities for these contracts. Generation’s amortization expense for the year ended December 31, 2013 amounted to $470 million. Generation’s amortization expense for the period March 12, 2012 to December 31, 2012 amounted to $1,101 million. In addition, Exelon Corporate has established a regulatory asset and an unamortized energy contract liability related to BGE’s power supply and fuel contracts. The power supply and fuel contracts regulatory asset amortization was $77 million for the year ended December 31, 2013 and $116 million for the period March 12, 2012 to December 31, 2012. An equally offsetting amortization of the unamortized energy contract liability has been recorded at Exelon Corporate in the Consolidated Statement of Operations.

The fair value of the Constellation trade name intangible asset was determined based on the relief from royalty method of the income approach whereby fair value is determined to be the present value of the license fees avoided by owning the assets. The measure is based upon certain unobservable

269


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

inputs, which are considered Level 3 inputs, pursuant to applicable accounting guidance. Key assumptions include the hypothetical royalty rate and the discount rate. Exelon’s and Generation’s straight line amortization expense for the fair value of the Constellation trade name intangible asset for the year ended December 31, 2013 and for the period March 12, 2012 to December 31, 2012 amounted to $26 million and $20 million, respectively. The trade name intangible asset is included in deferred debits and other assets within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.

The fair value of the retail relationships was determined based on a “multi-period excess method” of the income approach. Under this method, the intangible asset’s fair value is determined to be the estimated future cash flows that will be earned on the current customer base, taking into account expected contract renewals based on customer attrition rates and costs to retain those customers. The measure is based upon certain unobservable inputs, which are considered Level 3 inputs, pursuant to applicable accounting guidance. Key assumptions include the customer attrition rate and the discount rate. The intangible assets for the fair value of the retail relationships are amortized as amortization expense on a straight line basis over the useful life of the underlying assets. Exelon’s and Generation’s straight line amortization expense for year ended December 31, 2013 and for the period March 12, 2012 to December 31, 2012 amounted to $21 million and $15 million, respectively. The retail relationships intangible assets are included in deferred debits and other assets within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.

Exelon’s intangible assets and liabilities acquired through the merger with Constellation included in its Consolidated Balance Sheets, along with the future estimated amortization, were as follows as of December 31, 2013:

               Estimated amortization expense 

Description

 Weighted
Average
Amortization
(Years)(b)
  Gross  Accumulated
Amortization
  Net  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019
and
Beyond
 

Unamortized energy contracts, net (a)

  1.5  $1,499  $(1,378 $121  $75  $18  $(31 $(21 $11  $69 

Trade name

  10.0   243   (46  197   24   24   24   24   24   77 

Retail relationships

  12.4   214   (36  178   19   18   18   18   18   87 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total, net

  $1,956  $(1,460 $496  $118  $60  $11  $21  $53  $233 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Includes the fair value of BGE’s power and gas supply contracts of $12 million for which an offsetting Exelon Corporate regulatory asset was also recorded.
(b)Weighted average amortization period was calculated as of the date of acquisition.

Impact of Merger

It is impracticable to determine the overall financial statement impact for the Constellation subsidiaries contributed down to Generation following the Upstream Merger for the year ended December 31, 2012. Upon closing of the merger, the operations of these Constellation subsidiaries were integrated into Generation’s operations and are therefore not fully distinguishable after the merger.

The impact of BGE on Exelon’s Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income includes operating revenues of $3,065 million and $2,091 million and net income (loss) of $210 million and $(31) million during the years ended December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively.

During the year ended December 31, 2013, Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE incurred merger and integration-related costs of $142 million, $106 million, $16 million, $9 million and $6 million, respectively. Of these amounts, Exelon, ComEd and BGE deferred $17 million, $11 million and $6

270


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

million, respectively, as a regulatory asset as of December 31, 2013. Additionally, Exelon and BGE established a regulatory asset of $6 million as of December 31, 2013 for previously incurred 2012 merger and integration-related costs.

During the year ended December 31, 2012, Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE incurred merger and integration-related costs of $804 million, $340 million, $41 million, $17 million and $182 million, respectively. Of these amounts, Exelon, ComEd and BGE deferred $58 million, $36 million and $22 million, respectively, as a regulatory asset as of December 31, 2012.

The costs incurred are classified primarily within Operating and Maintenance Expense in the Registrants’ respective Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income, with the exception of the BGE customer rate credit and the credit facility fees, which are included as a reduction to operating revenues and other, net, respectively, for years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012. See Note 22—Commitments and Contingencies for additional information.

Pro-forma Impact of the Merger

The following unaudited pro forma financial information reflects the consolidated results of operations of Exelon and Generation as if the merger with Constellation had taken place on January 1, 2011. The unaudited pro forma information was calculated after applying Exelon’s and Generation’s accounting policies and adjusting Constellation’s results to reflect purchase accounting adjustments.

The unaudited pro forma financial information has been presented for illustrative purposes only and is not necessarily indicative of results of operations that would have been achieved had the merger events taken place on the dates indicated, or the future consolidated results of operations of the combined company.

   Generation   Exelon 
   Year Ended December 31,   Year Ended December 31, 

(unaudited)

      2012           2011 (a)            2012           2011 (b)      

Total Revenues

  $17,013   $19,494   $26,700   $30,712 

Net income attributable to Exelon

   1,205    324    2,092    974 

Basic Earnings Per Share

   n.a.     n.a.    $2.56   $1.15 

Diluted Earnings Per Share

   n.a.     n.a.     2.55    1.14 

 

(a)The amounts above include non-recurring costs directly related toincurred are classified primarily within Operating and maintenance expense in the mergerRegistrants’ respective Consolidated Statement of $203 million forOperations and Comprehensive Income, with the year ended December 31, 2011.exception of the financing costs, which are included within Interest expense.
(b)The amounts above include non-recurring costs directly related to the merger of $236 million for the year ended December 31, 2011.

Under certain circumstances, if the Merger Agreement is terminated, PHI may be required to pay Exelon a termination fee ranging from $259 million to $293 million plus certain expenses. If the Merger Agreement is terminated due to a failure to obtain a required regulatory approval, Exelon may be required to pay PHI a termination fee equal to $180 million through the redemption by PHI of the outstanding nonvoting preferred securities described above for no consideration other than the nominal par value of the stock, plus reimbursement of PHI’s documented out-of-pocket expenses up to a maximum of $40 million.

Merger Financing

Exelon has raised cash to fund the all-cash purchase price, acquisition and integration related costs, and merger commitments, through the issuance of $4.2 billion of debt (of which $3.3 billion remains after execution of the exchange offer, see Note 14—Debt and Credit Agreements for further information on the exchange), $1.15 billion of junior subordinated notes in the form of 23 million equity units, the issuance of $1.9 billion of common stock, cash proceeds of $1.8 billion from asset sales primarily at Generation (after-tax proceeds of approximately $1.4 billion) and the remaining balance from cash on hand and/or short-term borrowings available to Exelon. Exelon will have sufficient cash to fund the all-cash purchase price, acquisition and integration related costs, and merger commitments. See Note 14—Debt and Credit Agreements and Note 19—Shareholder’s Equity for further information on the debt and equity issuances.

 

Acquisitions (Exelon and Generation)

Acquisition of Integrys Energy Services, Inc. (Exelon and Generation)

On November 1, 2014, Generation acquired the competitive retail electric and natural gas business activities of Integrys Energy Group, Inc. through the purchase of all of the stock of its wholly owned subsidiary, Integrys Energy Services, Inc. (IES) for a purchase price of $332 million, including net working capital. Generation has elected to account for the transaction as an asset acquisition for federal income tax purposes. The generation and solar asset businesses of Integrys are excluded from the transaction. The Purchase Agreement also includes various representations, warranties, covenants, indemnification and other provisions customary for a transaction of this nature.

 

Consistent with the applicable accounting guidance, the fair value of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed was determined as of the acquisition date through the use of significant estimates and assumptions that are judgmental in nature. Some of the more significant estimates and assumptions used include: projected future cash flows (including the amount and timing); discount rates reflecting the risk inherent in the future cash flows; and future power and fuel market prices. Additionally, market prices based on the Market Price Referent (MPR) established by the CPUC for renewable energy resources were used in determining the fair value of the Antelope Valley assets acquired and liabilities assumed. There were also judgments made to determine the expected useful lives assigned to each class of assets acquired and the duration of the liabilities assumed. Generation did not record any goodwill related to any of the respective acquisitions.

271


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

The following table summarizes the acquisition-date fair value of the consideration transferred and the assets and liabilities assumed for each of the companies acquiredIntegrys acquisition by Generation during the year ended December 31, 2011:Generation:

 

   Acquisitions 
   2011 
   Wolf
Hollow
  Antelope
Valley
 

Fair value of consideration transferred

   

Cash

  $305  $75 

Plus: Gain on PPA settlement

   6   —   
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total fair value of consideration transferred

  $311  $75 
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Recognized amounts of identifiable assets acquired and liabilities assumed

   

Property, plant and equipment

  $347  $15 

Inventory

   5   —   

Intangible assets(a)

   —     190 

Payable to First Solar, Inc.(b)

   —     (135

Working capital, net

   (5  —   

Other Assets

   —     5 
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total net identifiable assets

  $347  $75 
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Bargain purchase gain

  $36  $—   
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

(a)See Note 10—Intangible Assets for additional information.
(b)Generation concluded that the remaining, yet-to-be paid $135 million in consideration was embedded in the amounts payable under the Engineering, Procurement, Construction (EPC) agreement for First Solar, Inc. to construct the solar facility. For accounting purposes, this aspect of the transaction is considered to be akin to a “seller financing” arrangement. As such, Generation recorded a liability of $135 million associated with the portion of the future payments to First Solar, Inc. under the EPC agreement to reflect Generation’s implicit amounts due First Solar, Inc. for the remainder of the value of the net assets acquired. The $135 million payable to First Solar, Inc. will be relieved as Generation makes payments for costs incurred over the project construction period. At December 31, 2012, $87 million remained payable to First Solar, Inc. During 2013, a subsidiary of Generation paid off the remaining balance of the payable to First Solar, Inc.

Total consideration transferred

  $332  

Identifiable assets acquired and liabilities assumed

    

Working capital assets

  $390  

Mark-to-market derivative assets

   184  

Unamortized energy contract assets

   115  

Customer relationships

   50  

Working capital liabilities

   (196

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities

   (57

Unamortized energy contract liabilities

   (110

Deferred tax liability

   (16
  

 

 

 

Total net identifiable assets, at fair value

  $360  
  

 

 

 

Bargain purchase gain (after-tax)

  $28  
  

 

 

 

 

Wolf Hollow, LLC.On August 24, 2011, Generation completed the acquisition of all of the equity interests of Wolf Hollow, LLC (Wolf Hollow), a combined-cycle natural gas-fired power plant in north Texas, for a purchase price of $311 million which increased Generation’s owned capacity within the ERCOT power market by 720 MWs. The acquisition supports the Exelon commitment to low-carbon generation as part of Exelon 2020.

Generation recognized an approximately $36 million non-cashafter-tax bargain purchase gain (i.e., negative goodwill).of $28 million is primarily the result of IES executing additional contract volumes between the date the acquisition agreement was signed and the closing of the transaction resulting in an increase in the fair value of the net assets acquired as of the acquisition date. The after-tax gain wasis included within Other, netGain on consolidation and acquisition of businesses in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

 

IES’s operating revenues and net loss included in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income for the period from November 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014 were $386 million and $(42) million, respectively. The pro formanet loss for the period from November 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014 includes pre-tax unrealized losses on derivative contracts of $108 million and the bargain purchase gain of $28 million. It is impracticable to determine the overall financial statement impact of this acquisition would not have been materialIES for 2015 due to Exelon’s or Generation’s resultsthe integration of operations for the yearbusiness into ongoing operations. For the years ended December 31, 2011.

Antelope Valley Solar Ranch One.On September 30, 2011,2015 and 2014, Exelon and Generation announced the completionincurred $5 million and $7 million, respectively, of its acquisitionmerger and integration related costs which are included within Operating and maintenance expense in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of all of the interests in Antelope Valley Solar Ranch One (Antelope Valley), a 230-MW solar PV project under development in northern Los Angeles County, California, from First Solar, Inc., which is developing, building, operating,Operations and maintaining the project. The firstComprehensive Income.

272


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

portion of the project began operations in December 2012, with six additional blocks coming online in 2013. Exelon has been informed by First Solar of issues relating to delays in the certification of certain components relating to the final two blocks of the project, which will delay commercial operation of these two blocks until the first half of 2014. When fully operational, Antelope Valley will be one of the largest PV solar projects in the world, with approximately 3.8 million solar panels generating enough clean, renewable electricity to power the equivalent of 75,000 average homes per year. The project has a 25-year PPA, approved by the California Public Utilities Commission, with Pacific Gas & Electric Company for the full output of the plant. The acquisition supports Exelon’s commitment to renewable energy as part of Exelon 2020.Asset Divestitures (Exelon and Generation)

 

Exelon expectsIncluding the Quail Run generating facility that was sold on January 21, 2015, Generation has sold certain generating assets with a total net book value of approximately $1.8 billion prior to invest up to $650consideration of asset impairments (See Note 8—Impairment of Long-Lived Assets for further information), for total pre-tax proceeds of approximately $1.8 billion (after-tax proceeds of approximately $1.4 billion), which resulted in cumulative pre-tax gains on sale of approximately $412 million, which are included in equity in the project through 2014. The DOE’s Loan Programs Office issued a guarantee for up to $646 million for a non-recourse loan from the Federal Financing Bank to support the financingGain (loss) on sales of the constructionassets on Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statement of the project. See Note 13—DebtOperations and Credit Agreements for additional information on the DOE loan guarantee.

The pro forma impact of this acquisition would not have been material to Exelon’s or Generation’s results of operationsComprehensive Income for the year ended December 31, 2011.2014. The proceeds are expected to be used primarily to finance a portion of the merger with PHI.

Station

Net
Generation
Capacity

Location

Operating Segment

Percent
Owned

Fore River

726 MWNorth Weymouth, MANew England100%

West Valley

185 MWSalt Lake City, UTOther100%

Keystone

714 MWShelocta, PAMid-Atlantic41.98%

Conemaugh

532 MWNew Florence, PAMid-Atlantic31.28%

Safe Harbor

278 MWConestoga, PAMid-Atlantic66.7%

Quail Run

488 MWOdessa, TXERCOT100%

At December 31, 2014, the assets and liabilities of the Quail Run generating facility were reported as Assets held for sale and within Other current liabilities on Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. The table below presents the major classes of assets and liabilities held for sale at December 31, 2014. Assets held for sale at December 31, 2015 are not material.

   December 31, 2014 

Assets

  

Property, plant and equipment, net(a)

  $143  

Inventory

   4  
  

 

 

 

Total assets held for sale

  $147  
  

 

 

 

Liabilities

  

Accrued expenses

  $1  

Asset retirement obligations

   4  
  

 

 

 

Total liabilities held for sale (b)

  $5  
  

 

 

 

(a)The total aggregate book value of property, plant and equipment is net of a $50 million pre-tax impairment loss recorded within Operating and maintenance expense on Exelon’s and Generation’s Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income for the year ended December 31, 2014. See Note 8—Impairment of Long-Lived Assets for further information.
(b)Included within Other current liabilities on Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

5. Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC (Exelon and Generation)

 

As a result of the Constellation merger, Generation owns a 50.01% interest in CENG, a nuclear generation business. Generation’s total equity in earnings (losses) on the investment in CENG is as follows:

   Year Ended
December 31,
2013
  Period March 12,
through December 31,
2012
 

Equity investment income

  $123  $73 

Amortization of basis difference in CENG

   (114  (172
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total equity in earnings (losses)—CENG

  $9  $(99
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

As of March 12, 2012, Generation had an initial basis difference of approximately $204 million between the initial carrying value of its investment in CENG and its underlying equity in CENG. This basis difference resulted from the requirement to record the investment in CENG at fair value under purchase accounting while the underlying assets and liabilities within CENG continue to be accounted for on a historical cost basis. Generation is amortizing this basis difference over the respective useful lives of the assets and liabilities of CENG or as those assets and liabilities affect the earnings of CENG.

Based on tax sharing provisions contained in the operating agreement for CENG, Generation may be eligible for distributions from its investment in CENG in excess of its 50.01% ownership interest. Through purchase accounting, Generation has recorded the fair value of expected future distributions. When these distributions are realized, Generation will record a reduction in its investment in CENG. Any distributions in excess of Generation’s investment in CENG would be recorded in earnings.

Generation hashistorically had various agreements with CENG to purchase power and to provide certain services. For further information regarding these agreements, see Note 25—26—Related Party Transactions.

273


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

On July 29, 2013, Exelon,April 1, 2014, Generation and subsidiaries of Generation and CENG entered into a Master Agreement with EDF, EDF Inc. (EDFI) (a subsidiary of EDF) and CENG. The Master Agreement contemplates that the parties will execute a series of additional agreements at a closing that will occur following the receipt of regulatory approvals and the satisfaction of other customary closing conditions. Exelon currently expects that the closing will occur early in the second quarter of 2014.

The Master Agreement requires CENG to make two pre-closing cash distributions to EDF and Generation, if CENG has cash in excess of reserves and the amount of an outstanding credit facility are available, through one of its wholly owned subsidiaries, as owners of the joint venture. Generation received the first distribution of $115 million in December 2013 and recorded it as a reduction to the Investment in CENG on Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. A second distribution will occur prior to the closing provided that CENG has sufficient available cash.

At the closing, Generation, CENG and subsidiaries of CENG will execute a Nuclear Operating Services Agreement (NOSA) pursuant to which Generation will operate the CENG nuclear generation fleet owned by CENG subsidiaries and provide corporate and administrative services for

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

the remaining life of the CENG nuclear plants as if they were a part of the Generation nuclear fleet, subject to EDFI’sEDF’s rights as a member of CENG.CENG (the Integration Transaction). CENG will reimburse Generation for its direct and allocated costs for such services. The NOSA will replaceAs part of the SSA. At the closing,arrangement, Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, LLC, a subsidiary of CENG, will also assignassigned to Generation its obligations as Operator of Nine Mile Point Unit 2 under an operating agreement with Long Island Power Authority, the Unit 2 co-owner. In addition, aton April 1, 2014, the closing the PSAA will bePower Services Agency Agreement (PSAA) was amended and extended until the permanent cessation of power generation by the CENG generation plants.

 

In addition, at closing,on April 1, 2014, Generation will makemade a $400 million loan to CENG, bearing interest at 5.25% per annum and payable out of specified available cash flows of CENG and in any event, payable upon the settlement of the Put Option Agreement discussed below, if the put option is exercised, or payable upon the maturity date of the note (which will be 20 years from the closing), whichever occurs first.April 1, 2034. Immediately following receipt of the proceeds of such loan, CENG will makemade a $400 million special distribution to EDFI. The parties willEDF. Unpaid principal and accrued interest on the loan was $300 million as of December 31, 2015.

Exelon, Generation, and subsidiaries of Generation, EDF and CENG also executeexecuted a Fourth Amended and Restated Operating Agreement for CENG on April 1, 2014, pursuant to which, among other things, CENG will commitcommitted to make preferred distributions to Generation (after repayment of the $400 million loan)loan and associated interest) quarterly out of specified available cash flows until Generation has received aggregate distributions of $400 million plus a return of 8.5% per annum from the date of the special distribution to EDFI.April 1, 2014 (Preferred Distribution Rights).

 

Generation and EDFI willEDF also enterentered into a Put Option Agreement at closingon April 1, 2014, pursuant to which EDFI will haveEDF has the option, exercisable beginning on January 1, 2016 and thereafter until June 30, 2022, to sell its 49.99% interest in CENG to Generation for a fair market value price determined by agreement of the parties, or absent agreement, a third-party arbitration process. The appraisers determining fair market value of EDF’s 49.99% interest in CENG under the Put Option Agreement are instructed to take into account all rights and obligations under the CENG Operating Agreement, including Generation’s rights with respect to any unpaid aggregate preferred distributions and the related return, and the value of Generation’s rights to other distributions. The beginning of the exercise period will be accelerated if Exelon’s affiliates cease to own a majority of CENG and exercise a related right to terminate the Nuclear Operating Services Agreement. In addition, underUnder limited circumstances, the period for exercise of the put option may be extended for 18 months. In order to exercise its option, EDF must give 60 days advance written notice to Generation stating that it is exercising its option. As of the date these financial statements were issued, EDF has not given notice to Generation that it is exercising its option.

 

Also at closing,On April 1, 2014, Generation will executealso executed an Indemnity Agreement pursuant to which Generation will indemnifyindemnified EDF and its affiliates against third-party claims that may arise from any future nuclear incident (as defined in the Price Anderson Act) in connection with the CENG nuclear plants or their operations. Exelon will guaranteeguarantees Generation’s obligations under this indemnity.

 

274In addition, on April 1, 2014, Generation, EDF, CENG and Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, LLC entered into an Employee Matters Agreement (EMA) that provides for the transfer of CENG employees to Exelon or one of its affiliates and Exelon’s assumption of the sponsorship of the employee benefit plans (including certain incentive, health and welfare, and postemployment benefit plans, among others) and their related trusts by Exelon as the plan sponsor as of July 14, 2014. The EMA also generally requires CENG to fund the obligation related to pre-transfer service of employees, including the underfunded balance of the pension and other postretirement welfare benefit plans measured as of July 14, 2014 by making periodic payments to Generation. These payments will be made on an agreed


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Currently,payment schedule or upon the occurrence of certain specified events, such as EDF’s disposition of a majority of its interest in CENG. However, in the event that EDF exercises its rights under the Put Option, all payments not made as of the put closing date shall accelerate to be paid immediately prior to such closing date.

As a condition to obtaining regulatory approval for the NOSA and related transactions from the NRC, Exelon executed a support agreement pursuant to which Exelon may be required under specified circumstances to provide up to $245 million of financial support to CENG (Exelon Support Agreement). The Exelon Support Agreement supersedes a previous support agreement under which Generation had agreed to provide up to $205 million of financial support for CENG. In addition, Exelon executed a Guarantee pursuant to which Exelon may be required under specified circumstances to provide up to $165 million in additional financial support for CENG. A previous support agreement executed by an affiliate of EDF remains in effect under which the EDF affiliate may be required to provide up to approximately $145 million of financial support for CENG under specified circumstances. The agreements were executed on April 1, 2014 when the NRC licenses were transferred to Generation. No liability has been recognized by Exelon for the guarantees.

Prior to April 1, 2014, Exelon and Generation accountaccounted for their investment in CENG under the equity method of accounting. From January 1, 2014, through March 31, 2014, Generation recorded $19 million of equity in losses of unconsolidated affiliates related to its investment in CENG and recorded $17 million of revenues from CENG. For the twelve months ended December 31, 2013, Generation recorded $9 million of equity in losses of unconsolidated affiliates related to its investment in CENG and $56 million of revenues from CENG. The book value of Generation’s investment in CENG prior to the consolidation was $1.9 billion, and the book value of the AOCI related to CENG prior to consolidation was $116 million, net of taxes of $77 million.

As a result of the consolidation of CENG on April 1, 2014, there are several additional transactions included in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Financial Statements between CENG and Exelon’s affiliates that are considered related party transactions to Generation. As further described in Note 26—Related Party Transactions, EDF and Generation had a PPA with CENG under which they purchased 15% and 85%, respectively, of the nuclear output owned by CENG that was not sold to third parties under pre-existing PPAs through December 31, 2014. Beginning January 1, 2015 and continuing through the life of the respective plants, EDF and Generation purchase 49.99% and 50.01%, respectively, of the nuclear output owned by CENG not subject to other contractual agreements. Beginning April 1, 2014, CENG’s sales to Generation have been eliminated in consolidation. For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, Generation had sales to EDF of $488 million and $137 million, respectively. See discussion above and Note 2—Variable Interest Entities for additional information regarding other transactions between CENG and EDF included within Exelon and Generation’s consolidated financial statements and for additional information about the Registrants VIE’s.

Accounting for the Consolidation of CENG

The transfer of the nuclear operating licenses and corresponding operational control to Exelon and Generation will resultthe execution of the NOSA on April 1, 2014, resulted in Exelon and Generation being required to consolidate the financial position and resultsderecognition of operations of CENG. When that accounting change occurs, Exelon and Generation will derecognize theirthe equity method investment in CENG and will recordthe recording of all assets, liabilities and the non-controllingEDF’s noncontrolling interest in CENG at fair value on Exelon and Generation’s balance sheets. Any difference between the former carrying value and newly recorded fair value at that date will be recognized as a gain or loss upon consolidation, which could be material to Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. As a result of the consolidation, Exelon and Generation recorded a net gain of $261 million within their respective Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. This gain consists of approximately $136 million related to the step up to fair value basis of

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Generation’s ownership interest in CENG, and approximately $132 million related to the settlement of pre-existing transactions between CENG and Generation. The net gain on the consolidation of CENG of $261 million is net of a $7 million payment to EDF.

The fair value of CENG’s assets and liabilities recorded in consolidation was determined based on significant estimates and assumptions that are judgmental in nature, including projected future cash flows (including timing); discount rates reflecting risk inherent in the future cash flows; and future market prices. There were also judgments made to determine the expected useful lives assigned to each class of assets acquired and duration of liabilities assumed.

The valuations necessary to assess the fair values of certain assets and liabilities were considered preliminary as a result of the short time period between the execution of the NOSA and the end of the second quarter of 2014. The estimates of the fair value of assets and liabilities could be modified for up to one year from April 1, 2014, as more information was obtained about the fair value of assets and liabilities. The principal items that have been revised include the asset retirement obligation liabilities and related asset retirement costs. These items have been updated with inputs from a third party engineering firm with corresponding adjustments recorded in 2014 and the first quarter of 2015. See Note 16—Asset Retirement Obligations for discussion of the impacts of adjustments recorded during 2014 and 2015 related to updated estimates of the CENG asset retirement obligation liabilities. In the period of such revisions, these and any other material changes to the fair value assessments have resulted in adjustments to the amounts recorded upon consolidation. In addition, the asset or liability adjustments impacting depreciation and/or accretion expense recorded after the consolidation date have impacted Generation’s post-consolidation results of operations.

Generation recorded the assets and liabilities of CENG at fair value as of April 1, 2014. The following assets and liabilities of CENG were recorded within Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets as of the date of integration, adjusted for the modifications discussed above:

Fair Values

  Exelon and
Generation
 

Current assets

  $499  

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund

   1,955  

Property, plant and equipment

   3,073  

Nuclear fuel

   482  

Other assets

   10  
  

 

 

 

Total assets

   6,019  
  

 

 

 

Current liabilities

   237  

Asset retirement obligation

   1,816  

Pension and other employee benefit obligations

   281  

Unamortized energy contract liabilities

   171  

Other liabilities

   114  
  

 

 

 

Total liabilities

   2,619  
  

 

 

 

Total net assets

  $3,400  
  

 

 

 

Generation also recorded the fair value of the noncontrolling interest on its Consolidated Balance Sheets of approximately $1.5 billion, net of the fair value of $152 million for certain specified additional distribution rights under the Operating Agreement. In addition, the noncontrolling interest was further reduced by the $400 million special cash distribution to EDF.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Due to the Preferred Distribution Rights that Generation has on CENG’s available cash, the earnings attributable to the noncontrolling interest on the Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income as well as the corresponding adjustment to Noncontrolling interest on the Consolidated Balance Sheets will not be in proportion to Generation’s and EDF’s equity ownership interests. Rather, the attribution will consider Generation’s Preferred Distribution Rights and allocate net income based on each owner’s rights to CENG’s net assets. For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, Generation reduced by $18 million and $13 million, respectively, the amount of Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests on Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. As a result of the consolidation, Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income includes CENG’s incremental operating revenues of $509 million and $218 million and CENG’s net income (loss), prior to any intercompany eliminations and any adjustments for noncontrolling interest, of $(11) million and $407 million during the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively.

Exelon and Generation incurred integration-related costs of $2 million and $26 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The costs incurred are classified primarily within Operating and maintenance expense in Exelon’s and Generation’s respective Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

 

6. Accounts Receivable (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Accounts receivable at December 31, 20132015 and 20122014 included estimated unbilled revenues, representing an estimate for the unbilled amount of energy or services provided to customers, and is net of an allowance for uncollectible accounts as follows:

 

2013

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Unbilled customer revenues

   $1,151   $584(a)  $201   $161   $205 

Allowance for uncollectible accounts(b)

   (272  (57  (62  (107)(c)    (46

2015

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Unbilled customer revenues

  $1,203   $732(a)  $218   $105   $148  

Allowance for uncollectible accounts (b)

   (284  (77  (75  (83)(c)   (49

 

2012

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Unbilled customer revenues

   $1,094   $535(a)  $213   $164   $182 

Allowance for uncollectible accounts(b)

   (293  (84  (70  (99)(c)    (40

2014

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Unbilled customer revenues

  $1,381   $823(a)  $204   $140   $214  

Allowance for uncollectible accounts (b)

   (311  (60  (84  (100)(c)   (67)(d) 

 

(a)Represents unbilled portion of retail receivables estimated under Exelon’s unbilled critical accounting policy.
(b)Includes the allowance for uncollectible accounts on customer and other accounts receivable.
(c)Includes anExcludes the non-current allowance for uncollectible accounts of $8 million and $7 million at both December 31, 20132015 and 2012, respectively,2014, related to PECO’s current installment plan receivables described below.
(d)At December 31, 2014, as explained in Note 1—Significant Accounting Policies, BGE estimated the allowance for uncollectible accounts on customer receivables by applying loss rates to the outstanding receivable balance by risk segment. The change in estimate resulted in a $19 million pre-tax charge to BGE’s provision for uncollectible accounts expense for the year ended December 31, 2014, which is included in Operating and maintenance expense on BGE’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

 

PECO Installment Plan Receivables (Exelon and PECO).PECO enters into payment agreements with certain delinquent customers, primarily residential, seeking to restore their service, as required by the PAPUC. Customers with past due balances that meet certain income criteria are provided the option to enter into an installment payment plan, some of which have terms greater than one year, to repay past due balances in addition to paying for their ongoing service on a current basis. The receivable balance for these payment agreement receivables is recorded in accounts receivable for the current portion and other deferred debits and other assets for the noncurrent portion. The net receivable balance for installment plans with terms greater than one year was $19$15 million and $18 million as of at both

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

December 31, 20132015 and 2012, respectively.2014. The allowance for uncollectible accounts reserve methodology and assessment of the credit quality of the installment plan receivables are consistent with the customer accounts receivable methodology discussed in Note 1—Significant Accounting Policies. The allowance for uncollectible accounts balance associated with these receivables at December 31, 2013 of $18 million consists of $1 million, $4 million2015 and $13 million for low risk, medium risk and high risk segments, respectively. The allowance for uncollectible accounts balance at December 31, 20122014 of $15 million consists of $1 million, $3 million and $11 million for low risk, medium risk and high risk segments, respectively. The balance of the payment agreement is billed to the customer in equal monthly installments over the term of the agreement. Installment receivables outstanding as of December 31, 20132015 and 20122014 include balances not yet presented on the customer bill, accounts currently billed and an immaterial amount of past due receivables. Whena customer defaults on its payment agreement, the terms of which are defined by plan type, the entire balance of the agreement becomes due and the balance is reclassified to current customer accounts receivable and reserved for in accordance with the methodology discussed in Note 1—Significant Accounting Policies.

275


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Accounts Receivable Agreement (Exelon and PECO).PECO was party to an agreement with a financial institution under which it transferred an undivided interest, adjusted daily, in its accounts receivable designated under the agreement in exchange for proceeds of $210 million, which was classified as a short-term note payable on Exelon’s and PECO’s Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2012. The agreement terminated on August 30, 2013 and PECO paid down the outstanding principal of $210 million. The financial institution no longer has an undivided interest in the accounts receivable designated under the agreement. As of December 31, 2012, the financial institution’s undivided interest in Exelon’s and PECO’s gross accounts receivable was equivalent to $289 million, which represented the financial institution’s interest in PECO’s eligible receivables as calculated under the terms of the agreement. The agreement required PECO to maintain eligible receivables at least equivalent to the financial institution’s undivided interest.

 

7. Property, Plant and Equipment (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Exelon

 

The following table presents a summary of property, plant and equipment by asset category as of December 31, 20132015 and 2012:2014:

 

  Average Service Life
(years)
  2013   2012   Average
Service Life
(years)
  2015   2014 

Asset Category

            

Electric—transmission and distribution

  5 - 90  $28,123   $26,576   5-90  $32,546    $30,157  

Electric—generation

  1 - 52   20,420    19,004   1-56   25,615     22,911  

Gas—transportation and distribution

  5 - 90   3,296    3,108   5-90   3,864     3,505  

Common—electric and gas

  5 - 50   1,101    1,029   5-50   1,149     1,169  

Nuclear fuel(a)

  1 - 8   5,196    4,815   1-8   6,384     5,947  

Construction work in progress

  N/A   1,890    1,926   N/A   3,075     2,167  

Other property, plant and equipment(b)

  1 - 51   1,017    912   5-50   1,181     1,056  
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

Total property, plant and equipment

     61,043    57,370      73,814     66,912  

Less: accumulated depreciation(c)

     13,713    12,184      16,375     14,742  
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

Property, plant and equipment, net

    $47,330   $45,186     $57,439    $52,170  
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Includes nuclear fuel that is in the fabrication and installation phase of $947$1,266 million and $894$1,003 million at December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014, respectively.
(b)Includes Generation’s buildings under capital lease with a net carrying value of $23$13 million and $20$15 million at December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014, respectively. The original cost basis of the buildings was $59$52 million, and total accumulated amortization was $36$39 million and $33$37 million, as of December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014, respectively. Also includes ComEd’s buildings under capital lease with a net carrying value of $8 million and $0 million at December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014, of $7 million and $8 million, respectively. The original cost basis of the buildings was $8 million and total accumulated amortization was $0$1 million and $0$0.3 million as of December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014, respectively. Includes land held for future use and non utility property at ComEd, PECO, and BGE.BGE of $57 million, $21 million, and $32 million, respectively. These balances also include capitalized acquisition, development and exploration costs of $266 million and $242 million related to oil and gas production activities at Generation.Generation at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. Includes the original cost and progress payments associated with Generation’s turbine equipment held for future use with a carrying value of $146 million and $83 million at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
(c)Includes accumulated amortization of nuclear fuel in the reactor core at Generation of $2,371$2,861 million and $2,078$2,673 million as of December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014, respectively.

276


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

The following table presents the annual depreciation provisions as a percentage of average service life for each asset category.

 

Average Service Life Percentage by Asset Category

  2013 2012 2011   2015   2014   2013 

Electric—transmission and distribution

   2.91  2.76  2.59   2.83   2.93   2.91

Electric—generation

   3.35  3.15  3.12   3.47   3.50   3.35

Gas

   2.06  2.03  1.73   2.17   2.13   2.06

Common—electric and gas

   7.53  7.61  8.05   7.79   7.32   7.53

 

Generation

 

The following table presents a summary of property, plant and equipment by asset category as of December 31, 20132015 and 2012:2014:

 

  Average Service Life
(years)
  2013   2012   Average Service Life
(years)
  2015   2014 

Asset Category

            

Electric—generation

  1 - 52  $20,420   $19,004   1-56  $25,615    $22,911  

Nuclear fuel(a)

  1 - 8   5,196    4,815   1-8   6,384     5,947  

Construction work in progress

  N/A   1,129    1,352   N/A   2,017     1,404  

Other property, plant and equipment(b)

  1 - 51   400    374   5-31   466     378  
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

Total property, plant and equipment

     27,145    25,545      34,482     30,640  

Less: accumulated depreciation(c)

     7,034    6,014      8,639     7,612  
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

Property, plant and equipment, net

    $20,111   $19,531     $25,843    $23,028  
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Includes nuclear fuel that is in the fabrication and installation phase of $947$1,266 million and $894$1,003 million at December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014, respectively.
(b)Includes buildings under capital lease with a net carrying value of $23$13 million and $20$15 million at December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014, respectively. The original cost basis of the buildings was $59$52 million, and total accumulated amortization was $36$39 million and $33$37 million, as of December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014, respectively. These balances also include capitalized acquisition, development and exploration costs of $266 million and $242 million related to oil and gas production activities.activities at Generation at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. Includes the original cost and progress payments associated with Generation’s turbine equipment held for future use with a carrying value of $146 million and $83 million at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
(c)Includes accumulated amortization of nuclear fuel in the reactor core of $2,371$2,861 million and $2,078$2,673 million as of December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014, respectively.

 

The annual depreciation provisions as a percentage of average service life for electric generation assets were 3.35%3.47%, 3.15%3.50% and 3.12%3.35% for the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011,2013, respectively.

 

License Renewals. Generation’s depreciation provisions are based on the estimated useful lives of its generating stations, which assume the renewal of the licenses for all nuclear generating stations (except for Oyster Creek) and the hydroelectric generating stations. As a result, the receipt of license renewals has no material impact on the Consolidated Statements of Operations.Operations and Comprehensive Income. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information regarding license renewals.

Plant Retirements

Schuylkill Station and Riverside Station. On October 31, 2012, Generation notified PJM of its intention to permanently retire Schuylkill Generating Station Unit 1 by February 1, 2013, and Riverside Generating Station Unit 6 by June 1, 2014. Schuylkill Unit 1 is a 166 MW peaking oil unit located in

277


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, which was placed in service in 1958. Riverside Unit 6 is a 115 MW peaking gas/kerosene unit that was placed in service in 1970, located in Baltimore, Maryland. On December 1, 2013, Generation notified PJM of its intention to permanently retire Riverside Generating Station Unit 4 by June 1, 2016. Riverside Unit 4 is a 74 MW intermediate gas unit that was placed in service in 1951 also located in Baltimore, Maryland. The units are being retired because they are no longer economic to operate due to their age, relatively high capital and operating costs and declining revenue expectations. On November 30, 2012, PJM notified Generation that it did not identify any transmission system reliability issues associated with the proposed Schuylkill Unit 1 retirement date, and as a result, Schuylkill Unit 1 was retired on January 1, 2013. On January 7, 2013 and December 23, 2013, PJM notified Generation that it did not identify any transmission system reliability issues associated with the retirements of Riverside Units 6 and 4, respectively. The early retirements will not have a material impact on Generation or Exelon’s results of operations, cash flows or financial position.

Eddystone Station and Cromby Station.In December 2009, Exelon announced its intention to permanently retire three coal-fired generating units and one oil/gas-fired generating unit, effective May 31, 2011, in response to the economic outlook related to the continued operation of these four units. However, PJM determined that transmission reliability upgrades would be necessary to alleviate reliability impacts and that those upgrades would be completed in a manner that will permit Generation’s retirement of two of the units on that date and two of the units subsequent to May 31, 2011. On May 31, 2011, Cromby Generating Station (Cromby) Unit 1 and Eddystone Generating Station (Eddystone) Unit 1 were retired. On May 27, 2011, the FERC approved a settlement providing for a reliability-must-run rate schedule, which defined compensation to be paid to Generation for continuing to operate Cromby Unit 2 and Eddystone Unit 2. The monthly fixed-cost recovery during the reliability-must-run period for Eddystone Unit 2 was approximately $6 million, and covered operating costs, plus a return on net assets, of the two units during the reliability-must-run period. In addition, Generation was reimbursed for variable costs, including fuel, emissions costs, chemicals, auxiliary power and for project investment costs during the reliability-must-run period. Eddystone Unit 2 and Cromby Unit 2 operated under the reliability-must-run agreement from June 1, 2011 until their respective retirement dates, Cromby Unit 2 on December 31, 2011 and Eddystone Unit 2 on May 31, 2012.

During the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012, and 2011, Generation incurred $1 million, $11 million, and $2 million of shut down costs reflected within Operating and maintenance expense in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. Expense for the write down of inventory was not material for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011.

278


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

ComEd

 

The following table presents a summary of property, plant and equipment by asset category as of December 31, 20132015 and 2012:2014:

 

  Average Service Life
(years)
  2013   2012   Average Service Life
(years)
  2015   2014 

Asset Category

            

Electric—transmission and distribution

  5 - 75  $17,334   $16,480   5-80  $20,576    $18,884  

Construction work in progress

  N/A   456    294   N/A   572     276  

Other property, plant and equipment(a)

  50   60    50 

Other property, plant and equipment (a), (b)

  38-50   64     65  
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

Total property, plant and equipment

     17,850    16,824      21,212     19,225  

Less: accumulated depreciation

     3,184    2,998      3,710     3,432  
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

Property, plant and equipment, net

    $14,666   $13,826     $17,502    $15,793  
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Includes buildings under capital lease with a net carrying value of $8 million and $0 million at December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014 of $7 million and $8 million, respectively. The original cost basis of the buildings was $8 million and total accumulated amortization was $0$1 million and $0$0.3 million as of December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014, respectively.
(b)Includes land held for future use and non-utility property.

 

The annual depreciation provisions as a percentage of average service life for electric transmission and distribution assets were 2.97%3.03%, 2.79%3.05% and 2.67%2.97% for the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011,2013, respectively.

 

PECO

 

The following table presents a summary of property, plant and equipment by asset category as of December 31, 20132015 and 2012:2014:

 

  Average Service Life
(years)
  2013   2012   Average Service Life
(years)
  2015   2014 
Asset Category                 

Electric—transmission and distribution

  5 - 65  $6,669   $6,355   5-65  $7,230    $6,886  

Gas—transportation and distribution

  5 - 70   1,932    1,859   5-70   2,206     2,039  

Common—electric and gas

  5 - 50   600    568   5-50   631     618  

Construction work in progress

  N/A   101    76   N/A   154     154  

Other property, plant and equipment(a)

  50   17    17   50   21     21  
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

Total property, plant and equipment

     9,319    8,875      10,242     9,718  

Less: accumulated depreciation

     2,935    2,797      3,101     2,917  
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

Property, plant and equipment, net

    $6,384   $6,078     $7,141    $6,801  
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Represents land held for future use and non utilitynon-utility property.

 

The following table presents the annual depreciation provisions as a percentage of average service life for each asset category.

 

Average Service Life Percentage by Asset Category

  2013 2012 2011   2015   2014   2013 

Electric—transmission and distribution

   2.73  2.51  2.33   2.39   2.55   2.73

Gas

   1.79  1.77  1.73   1.87   1.84   1.79

Common—electric and gas

   6.65  7.54  8.05   5.16   5.16   6.65

279


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

BGE

 

The following table presents a summary of property, plant and equipment by asset category as of December 31, 20132015 and 2012:2014:

 

  Average Service Life
(years)
  2013   2012   Average Service Life
(years)
  2015   2014 

Asset Category

            

Electric—transmission and distribution

  5 - 90  $6,100   $5,767   5-90  $6,663    $6,339  

Gas—distribution

  5 -90   1,660    1,548   5-90   1,951     1,761  

Common—electric and gas

  5 - 40   578    554   5-40   655     623  

Construction work in progress

  N/A   196    193   N/A   312     317  

Other property, plant and equipment(a)

  20   32    31   20   32     32  
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

Total property, plant and equipment

     8,566    8,093      9,613     9,072  

Less: accumulated depreciation

     2,702    2,595      3,016     2,868  
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

Property, plant and equipment, net

    $5,864   $5,498     $6,597    $6,204  
    

 

   

 

     

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Represents land held for future use and non utilitynon-utility property.

 

Average Service Life Percentage by Asset Category

  2013 2012 2011   2015   2014   2013 

Electric—transmission and distribution

   2.91  2.92  2.89   2.62   2.96   2.91

Gas

   2.36  2.33  2.41   2.50   2.47   2.36

Common—electric and gas

   8.45  7.68  8.40   10.35   9.49   8.45

 

See Note 1—Significant Accounting PolicesPolicies for further information regarding property, plant and equipment policies and accounting for capitalized software costs for Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE. See Note 13—14—Debt and Credit Agreements for further information regarding Exelon’s, ComEd’s, and PECO’s property, plant and equipment subject to mortgage liens.

 

8. Impairment of Long-Lived Assets (Exelon and Generation)

 

Long-Lived Assets (Exelon and Generation)

 

Generation evaluates long-lived assets for recoverability whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount may not be recoverable. In the thirdsecond quarter of each year, Generation updates the long-term fundamental energy prices, which includes a thorough evaluation of key assumptions including gas prices, load growth, environmental policy, plant retirements and renewable growth.

In 2015, the year over year change in fundamentals did not indicate any impairments. In 2014, the year over year change in fundamentals suggested that the carrying value of certain merchant wind assets may be impaired. Generation concluded that the estimated undiscounted future cash flows and fair value of twelve wind projects, primarily located in West Texas, were less than their respective carrying values at May 31, 2014. As a result, long-lived assets held and used with a carrying amount of approximately $151 million were written down to their fair value of $65 million and a pre-tax impairment charge of $86 million was recorded within Operating and maintenance expense in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

In 2013, lower projected wind production and a decline in power prices suggested that the carrying value of certain wind projects with market price exposure for either all or a portion of the life of the

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

asset may be impaired. Generation concluded that the estimated undiscounted future cash flows and fair value of eleven wind projects, primarily located in West Texas and Minnesota, were less than their respective carrying values at September 30, 2013. The fair value analysis was primarily based on the income approach using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3) including revenue and generation forecasts, projected capital and maintenance expenditures and discount rates. As a result, long-lived assets held and used with a carrying amount of approximately $75 million were written down to their fair value of $32 million and a pre-tax impairment charge of $43 million, net of the impairment amount attributable to noncontrolling interests for certain of the projects, was recorded during the third quarter in operatingwithin Operating and maintenance expense in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations. OfOperations and Comprehensive Income.

During 2015 and 2014, significant declines in oil and gas prices suggested that the $43carrying value of certain Upstream assets may be impaired. Generation concluded that the estimated undiscounted future cash flows and fair value of various Upstream properties, primarily located in Oklahoma and Texas, were less than their respective carrying values at December 31, 2015 and 2014. As a result, pre-tax impairment charges of $5 million $4and $124 million were recorded for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively, within Operating and maintenance expense within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. After reflecting the impairment charges, Generation has $187 million of Upstream assets remaining on its Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2015. Further declines in commodity prices could potentially result in future impairments of the Upstream assets.

The fair value analysis used in the above impairments was primarily based on the income approach using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3) including revenue, generation and production forecasts, projected capital and maintenance expenditures and discount rates. Changes in the assumptions described above could potentially result in future impairments of Exelon’s long-lived assets, which could be material.

In 2014, certain non-nuclear generating assets were identified as assets held for sale on Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. When long-lived assets are held for sale, an impairment loss is recognized to the extent that the asset’s carrying value exceeds its estimated fair value less costs to sell. Long-lived assets with a carrying amount of approximately $1 billion were written down to their fair value of $556 million and a pre-tax impairment charge of $450 million was attributable to non-controlling interestsrecorded within Operating and maintenance expense on Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. See Note 4—Mergers, Acquisitions, and Dispositions for certain of the wind projects.

280


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)further information on asset sales.

 

Nuclear Uprate Program (Exelon and Generation)

 

Generation is engaged in individual projects as part of a planned power uprate program across its nuclear fleet. When economically viable, the projects take advantage of new production and measurement technologies, new materials and application of expertise gained from a half-century of nuclear power operations. Based on ongoing reviews, the nuclear uprate implementation plan was adjusted during 2013 to cancel certain projects. The Measurement Uncertainty Recapture (MUR) uprate projects at the Dresden and Quad Cities nuclear stations were cancelled as a result of the cost of additional plant modifications identified during final design work which, when combined with then current market conditions, made the projects not economically viable. Additionally, the market conditions prompted Generation to cancel the previously deferred extended power uprate projects at the LaSalle and Limerick nuclear stations. During 2013, Exelon and Generation recorded a pre-tax charge to operatingOperating and maintenance expense and interestInterest expense within their Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income of approximately $111 million and $8 million, respectively, to accrue remaining costs and reverse the previously capitalized costs.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Like-Kind Exchange Transaction (Exelon)

 

Prior to the PECO/Unicom Merger in October 2000, UII, LLC (formerly Unicom Investments, Inc.) (UII), a wholly owned subsidiary of Exelon, entered into a like-kind exchange transaction pursuant to which approximately $1.6 billion was invested in coal-fired generating station leases located in Georgia and Texas with two separate entities unrelated to Exelon. The generating stations were leased back to such entities as part of the transaction. See Note 14—15—Income Taxes for further information. For financial accounting purposes, the investments are accounted for as direct financing lease investments. UII holds the leasehold interests in the generating stations in several separate bankruptcy remote, special purpose companies it directly or indirectly wholly owns. The lease agreements provide the lessees with fixed purchase options at the end of the lease terms. If the lessees do not exercise the fixed purchase options, Exelon has the ability to operate the stations and keep or market the power itself or require the lessees to return the leasehold interests or to arrange for a third-party to bid on a service contract for a period following the lease term. If Exelon chooses the service contract option, the leasehold interests will be returned to Exelon at the end of the term of the service contract. In any event, Exelon will be subject to residual value risk if the lessees do not exercise the fixed purchase options. This risk is partially mitigated by the fair value of the scheduled payments under the service contract. However, such payments are not guaranteed. Further, the term of the service contract is less than the expected remaining useful life of the plants and, therefore, Exelon’s exposure to residual value risk will not be mitigated by payments under the service contract in this remaining period. In the fourth quarter of 2000, under the terms of the lease agreements, UII received a prepayment of $1.2 billion for all rent, which reduced the investment in the leases. There are no minimum scheduled lease payments to be received over the remaining term of the leases.

On February 26, 2014, UII and the City Public Service Board of San Antonio, Texas (CPS) finalized an agreement to terminate the leases on the generating station located in Texas, as described above, prior to its expiration dates. As a result of the lease termination, UII received a net early termination amount of $335 million from CPS and wrote down the net investment in the CPS long-term lease of $336 million in Investments in Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets in 2014; resulting in a pre-tax loss of $1 million being reflected in Operating and maintenance expense in the Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income in 2014.

 

Pursuant to the applicable accounting guidance, Exelon is required to review the estimated residual values of its direct financing lease investments at least annually and record an impairment charge if the review indicates an other than temporary decline in the fair value of the residual values below their carrying values. Exelon estimates the fair value of the residual values of its direct financing lease investments under the income approach, which uses a discounted cash flow analysis, which takes into consideration significant unobservable inputs (Level 3) including the expected revenues to be generated and costs to be incurred to operate the plants over their remaining useful lives subsequent to the lease end dates. Significant assumptions used in estimating the fair value include fundamental energy and capacity prices, fixed and variable costs, capital expenditure requirements, discount rates, tax rates, and the estimated remaining useful lives of the plants. The estimated fair values also reflect the cash flows associated with the service contract option discussed above given that a market participant would take into consideration all of the terms and conditions contained in the lease agreements.

 

281Based on the annual reviews performed in the second quarters of 2015 and 2014, the estimated residual value of Exelon’s direct financing leases for the Georgia generating stations experienced other than temporary declines given increases in estimated long-term operating and maintenance costs in the 2015 annual review and reduced long-term energy and capacity price expectations in the 2014 annual review. As a result, Exelon recorded $24 million pre-tax impairment charges in both 2015 and


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Based on the review performed in the second quarter of 2013, the estimated residual value of one of Exelon’s direct financing leases experienced an other than temporary decline given reduced long-term energy2014 for these stations. These impairment charges were recorded within Investments and capacity price expectations. As a result, Exelon recorded a $14 million pre-tax impairment charge in the second quarter of 2013, which was recorded in investments and operatingOperating and maintenance expense in theExelon’s Consolidated Balance SheetSheets and the Consolidated StatementStatements of Operations and Comprehensive Income, respectively. Changes in the assumptions described above could potentially result in future impairments of Exelon’s direct financing lease investments, which could be material. Through December 31, 2013,2015, no events have occurred that would require Exelon to review the estimated residual values of its direct financing lease investments subsequent to the review performed in the second quarter of 2013.

As of December 31, 2012, Exelon concluded that the estimated fair values of the residual values at the end of the lease terms exceeded the residual values established at the lease dates.2015.

 

At December 31, 20132015 and December 31, 2012,2014, the components of the net investment in long-term leases were as follows:

 

  December 31, 2013   December 31, 2012   December 31, 2015   December 31, 2014 

Estimated residual value of leased assets

  $1,465   $1,492   $639    $685  

Less: unearned income

   767    807    287     324  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Net investment in long-term leases

  $698   $685   $352    $361  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

9. Implications of Potential Early Plant Retirements (Exelon and Generation)

Exelon and Generation continue to evaluate the current and expected economic value of each of Generation’s nuclear plants. Factors that will continue to affect the economic value of Generation’s nuclear plants include, but are not limited to: market power prices, results of capacity auctions, potential legislative solutions in New York and Illinois such as the proposed Low Carbon Portfolio Standard (LCPS) legislation, the impact of final rules from the EPA requiring reduction of carbon and other emissions and the efforts of the states to implement those final rules, and the outcome of the Ginna RSSA hearing and settlement procedures and the resulting contractual terms and conditions. On September 10, 2015, after considering the results of the recent PJM capacity auctions, Exelon and Generation decided to defer decisions about the future operations of its Quad Cities and Byron nuclear plants and will offer both plants in the 2019/2020 auction in May 2016. As a result of clearing the other PJM capacity auction in September 2015 for the 2017/2018 transitional capacity auction, Exelon and Generation will continue to operate its Quad Cities nuclear power plant through at least May 2018. The Byron plant is already obligated to operate through May 2019. On October 29, 2015, Exelon and Generation announced the deferral of any decision about the future operations of its Clinton nuclear plant and plans to bid the plant into the MISO capacity auction for the 2016-2017 planning year in April 2016. This decision was driven by MISO’s acknowledgment of the need for market design changes to ensure long-term power system reliability in southern Illinois, the desire to provide Illinois policy makers with additional time to consider needed reforms as well as the potential long-term impact of EPA’s Clean Power Plan. Exelon and Generation previously committed to cease operation of the Oyster Creek nuclear plant by the end of 2019. Exelon and Generation have not made any decisions regarding potential nuclear plant closures at other sites at this time.

As a result of a decision to early retire one or more other nuclear plants, certain changes in accounting treatment would be triggered and Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations and cash flows could be materially affected by a number of items including, among other items: accelerated depreciation expense, impairment charges related to inventory that cannot be used at other nuclear units and cancellation of in-flight capital projects, accelerated amortization of plant specific nuclear fuel costs, employee-related costs (i.e. severance, relocation, retention, etc.), accelerated asset retirement obligation expense related to future decommissioning activities, and additional funding of nuclear decommissioning trust funds. In addition, any early plant retirement would also result in reduced

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

operating costs, lower fuel expense, and lower capital expenditures in the periods beyond shutdown. While there are a number of Generation’s nuclear plants that are at risk of early retirement, the following table provides the balance sheet amounts as of December 31, 2015 for significant assets and liabilities associated with the three nuclear plants currently considered by management to be at the greatest risk of early retirement due to their current economic valuations and other factors:

(in millions)

  Quad Cities  Clinton  Ginna  Total 

Asset Balances

     

Materials and supplies inventory

  $50   $57   $29   $136  

Nuclear fuel inventory, net

   218    107    60    385  

Completed plant, net

   1,030    579    127    1,736  

Construction work in progress

   11    9    11    31  

Liability Balances

     

Asset retirement obligation

   (698  (401  (644  (1,743

NRC License Renewal Term

   2032    2046(a)   2029   

(a)Assumes Clinton seeks and receives a 20-year operating license renewal extension.

In the event a decision is made to retire early one or more nuclear plants, the precise timing of the retirement date, and resulting financial statement impact, is uncertain and would be influenced by a number of factors such as the results of any transmission system reliability study assessments, the nature of any co-owner requirements and stipulations, and decommissioning trust fund requirements, among other factors. However, the earliest retirement date for any plant would usually be the first year in which the unit does not have capacity obligations and just prior to its next scheduled nuclear refueling outage date in that year.

10. Jointly Owned Electric Utility Plant (Exelon, Generation, PECO and BGE)

 

Exelon, Generation, PECO and BGE’s undivided ownership interests in jointly owned electric plants and transmission facilities at December 31, 20132015 and 20122014 were as follows:

 

  Nuclear generation  Fossil fuel generation  Transmission  Other 
  Quad Cities  Peach
Bottom
  Salem (a)  Keystone (b)  Conemaugh (b)  Wyman  PA (c)  DE/NJ (d)  Other (e) 

Operator

  Generation    Generation    
 
PSEG
Nuclear
  
  
  GenOn    GenOn    FP&L    
 
First
Energy
  
  
  PSEG   

Ownership interest

  75.00%  50.00%  42.59%  41.98%  31.28%  5.89%  Various    42.55%  44.24

Exelon’s share at December 31,
2013:

         

Plant (f)

 $941  $883  $501  $725  $399  $3  $14  $64  $2 

Accumulated depreciation(f)

  226   326   134   268   220   3   7   34   1 

Construction work
in progress

  27   174   24   6   121   —     —     —     —   

Exelon’s share at December 31,
2012:

         

Plant (f)

 $874  $796  $494  $624  $322  $3  $13  $65  $1 

Accumulated depreciation (f)

  187   302   119   153   158   3   7   33   —   

Construction work
in progress

  44   115   11   10   57   —     1   —     —   
   Nuclear Generation  Fossil Fuel
Generation
  Transmission  Other 
   Quad Cities  Peach
Bottom
  Salem (a)  Nine Mile
Point Unit 2 (f)
  Wyman  PA(b)   DE/NJ (c)  Other (d) 

Operator

  Generation    Generation    

 

PSEG

Nuclear

  

  

  Generation    FP&L    

 

First

Energy

  

  

   PSEG   

Ownership interest

  75.00  50.00  42.59  82.00  5.89  Various     42.55  44.24

Exelon’s share at December 31, 2015:

         

Plant(e)

 $1,035   $1,345   $566   $756   $3   $15    $65   $1  

Accumulated depreciation(e)

  309    368    167    42    3    7     35    1  

Construction work in progress

  11    18    40    56    —      —       —      —    

Exelon’s share at December 31, 2014:

         

Plant(e)

 $995   $1,095   $531   $676   $3   $14    $64   $2  

Accumulated depreciation (e)

  266    343    150    14    3    7     34    1  

Construction work in progress

  15    133    29    48    —      —       —      —    

 

(a)Generation also owns a proportionate share in the fossil fuel combustion turbine at Salem, which is fully depreciated. The gross book value was $3 million at December 31, 20132015 and 2012.
(b)Generation’s ownership interest in Keystone and Conemaugh has increased as a result of Exelon’s merger with Constellation in 2012. See Note 4—Merger and Acquisitions for additional information.
(c)PECO and BGE own a 22% and 7% share, respectively, in 127 miles of 500 kV lines located in Pennsylvania; PECO and BGE also own a 20.7% and 10.56% share, respectively, of a 500 kV substation immediately outside of the Conemaugh fossil generating station which supplies power to the 500 kV lines including, but not limited to, the lines noted above.2014.

282


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

(d)(b)PECO and BGE own a 22% and 7% share, respectively, in 127 miles of 500kV lines located in Pennsylvania; PECO and BGE also own a 20.7% and 10.56% share, respectively, of a 500kV substation immediately outside of the Conemaugh fossil generating station which supplies power to the 500kV lines including, but not limited to, the lines noted above.
(c)PECO owns a 42.55% share in 131 miles of 500 kV500kV lines located in Delaware and New Jersey as well as a 42.55% share in a 500kV substation immediately outside of the Salem nuclear generating station in New Jersey which supplies power to the 500kV lines including, but not limited to, the lines noted above.
(e)(d)Generation has a 44.24% ownership interest in assets located at Merrill Creek Reservoir located in New Jersey.
(f)(e)Excludes asset retirement costs.
(f)On April 1, 2014, Generation assumed operational control of CENG’s nuclear fleet, and as of that date, CENG’s operations are consolidated into Generation’s financial statements. As of December 31, 2013, Generation’s ownership interest in CENG, including Nine Mile Point, was treated as an equity method investment, and thus did not represent an undivided Interest. See Note 5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC for additional information.

 

Exelon’s, Generation’s, PECO’s and BGE’s undivided ownership interests are financed with their funds and all operations are accounted for as if such participating interests were wholly ownedwholly-owned facilities. Exelon’s, Generation’s, PECO’s and BGE’s share of direct expenses of the jointly owned plants are included in Purchased power and fuel and operatingOperating and maintenance expenses on Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income and in operatingOperating and maintenance expenses on PECO’s and BGE’s Consolidated Statements of Operations.Operations and Comprehensive Income.

 

10.11. Intangible Assets (Exelon, Generation, ComEd and PECO)

 

Goodwill

 

Exelon’s, Generation’s and ComEd’s gross amount of goodwill, accumulated impairment losses and carrying amount of goodwill for the years ended December 31, 20132015 and 20122014 were as follows:

 

   Gross
Amount (a)
   Accumulated
Impairment
Losses
   Carrying
Amount
 

Balance, January 1, 2012

  $4,608   $1,983   $2,625 

Impairment losses

   —      —      —   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2013

  $4,608   $1,983   $2,625 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 
  ComEd  Generation  Exelon 
  Gross
Amount (a)
  Accumulated
Impairment
Losses
  Carrying
Amount
  Gross
Amount
  Carrying
Amount
  Gross
Amount
  Accumulated
Impairment
Losses
  Carrying
Amount
 

Balance, January 1, 2014

 $4,608   $1,983   $2,625   $—     $—     $4,608   $1,983   $2,625  

Goodwill from business combination

  —      —      —      47    47    47    —      47  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2014

  4,608    1,983    2,625    47    47    4,655    1,983    2,672  

Impairment losses

  —      —      —      —      —      —      —      —    
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2015

 $4,608   $1,983   $2,625   $47   $47   $4,655   $1,983   $2,672  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

(a)Reflects goodwill recorded in 2000 from the PECO/Unicom (predecessor parent company of ComEd) merger net of amortization, resolution of tax matters and other non-impairment-related changes as allowed under previous authoritative guidance.

 

Goodwill is not amortized, but is subject to an assessment for impairment at least annually, or more frequently if events occur or circumstances change that would more likely than not reduce the fair value of the ComEd reporting unit below its carrying amount. Under the authoritative guidance for goodwill, a reporting unit is an operating segment or one level below an operating segment (known as a component) and is the level at which goodwill is tested for impairment. A component of an operating segment is a reporting unit if the component constitutes a business for which discrete financial

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

information is available and isits operating results are regularly reviewed by segment management. ComEd has a single operating segment for its combined business. There is no level below this operating segment for which discrete financial information isoperating results are regularly reviewed by segment management. Therefore, ComEd’s operating segment is considered its only reporting unit.

 

Entities assessing goodwill for impairment have the option of first performing a qualitative assessment before calculating the fair value of the reporting unit (i.e., step one of the two-step fair value based impairment test). If an entity determines, on the basis of qualitative factors, that the fair value of the reporting unit is more likely than not less than the carrying amount, the two-step fair value based impairment test is required. Otherwise, no further testing is required.

 

If an entity bypasses the qualitative assessment or performs the qualitative assessment, but determines that it is more likely than not that its fair value is less than its carrying amount, a quantitative two-step, fair value based test is performed. The first step compares the fair value of the reporting unit to its carrying amount, including goodwill. If the carrying amount of the reporting unit

283


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

exceeds its fair value, the second step is performed. The second step requires an allocation of fair value to the individual assets and liabilities using purchase price allocation in order to determine the implied fair value of goodwill. If the implied fair value of goodwill is less than the carrying amount, an impairment loss is recorded as a reduction to goodwill and a charge to operating expense. Any goodwill impairment charge at ComEd will affect Exelon’s consolidated results of operations.

 

ComEd’s valuation approach is based on a market participant view, pursuant to authoritative guidance for fair value measurement, and utilizes a weighted combination of a discounted cash flow analysis and a market multiples analysis. The discounted cash flow analysis relies on a single scenario reflecting “base case” or “best estimate” projected cash flows for ComEd’s business and includes an estimate of ComEd’s terminal value based on these expected cash flows using the generally accepted Gordon Dividend Growth formula, which derives a valuation using an assumed perpetual annuity based on the entity’s residual cash flows. The discount rate is based on the generally accepted Capital Asset Pricing Model and represents the weighted average cost of capital of comparable companies. The market multiples analysis utilizes multiples of business enterprise value to earnings, before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) of comparable companies in estimating fair value. Significant assumptions used in estimating the fair value include discount and growth rates, utility sector market performance and transactions, projected operating and capital cash flows from ComEd’s business and the fair value of debt. Management performs a reconciliation of the sum of the estimated fair value of all Exelon reporting units to Exelon’s enterprise value based on its trading price to corroborate the results of the discounted cash flow analysis and the market multiple analysis.

 

20132015 and 2014 Goodwill Impairment Assessments.Assessment.Management concluded the remeasurement of the like-kind exchange position and the chargePursuant to ComEd’s earnings in the first quarter of 2013 triggered an interim goodwill impairment assessment and, as a result,authoritative guidance, ComEd testedis required to test its goodwill for impairment as of January 31, 2013. The first step of the interimannually and more frequently if an event occurs or circumstances change that suggest an impairment assessment comparing the estimated fair value ofis more likely than not. ComEd toperforms its carrying value, including goodwill, indicated no impairment of goodwill; therefore, the second step was not required.

ComEd performed a quantitative assessment as of November 1, 2013, forof each year. For its 20132015 and 2014 annual goodwill impairment assessment. The first step of the annual impairment assessment comparing the estimatedassessments, ComEd qualitatively determined that its fair value of ComEd towas not more likely than not less than its carrying value, including goodwill, indicated no impairmentvalue. Therefore, ComEd did not perform quantitative assessments. As part of goodwill; therefore, the second step was not required.

In both the interim and annualits qualitative assessments, the discounted cash flow analysis reflected Exelon’s indemnity to hold ComEd harmless from any unfavorable impactsevaluated, among other things, management’s best estimate of the after-tax interest amounts related to the like-kind exchange position on ComEd’s equity. While neither the interim nor the annual assessments indicated an impairment of ComEd’s goodwill, certain assumptions used to estimate the fair value of ComEd are highly sensitive to changes. Adverse regulatory actions, such as early termination of EIMA, or changes in significant assumptions, including discount and growth rates, utility sector market performance and transactions, projected operating and capital cash flows fromfor ComEd’s business, as well as, changes in certain market conditions, including the discount rate and regulated utility peer company EBITDA multiples, while also considering the fair value of debt could potentially result in a future impairment of ComEd’s goodwill, which could be material. Based on the results of the annual goodwill testpassing margin from its last quantitative assessment performed as of November 1, 2013, the estimated fair value of ComEd would have needed to decrease by more than 10% for ComEd to fail the first step of the impairment test.

2013.Prior Goodwill Impairment Assessments.Management concluded that the May 2012 ICC final Order in ComEd’s 2011 formula rate proceeding triggered an interim goodwill impairment assessment and, as a result, ComEd tested its goodwill for impairment as of May 31, 2012. The first step of the

284


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

interim impairment assessment comparing the estimated fair value of ComEd to its carrying value, including goodwill, indicated no impairment of goodwill; therefore, the second step was not required. ComEd performed a qualitative assessment as of November 1, 2012, for its 2012 annual goodwill impairment assessment and determined that its fair value was not more likely than not less than its carrying value. Therefore, ComEd did not perform a quantitative assessment. As part of its qualitative assessment, ComEd evaluated, among other things, management’s best estimate of projected operating and capital cash flows for ComEd’s business (including the impacts of the May 2012 Order) as well as changes in certain other market conditions, such as the discount rate and EBITDA multiples.

Other Intangible Assets

For discussion surrounding Exelon’s and Generation’s unamortized energy contracts, trade name and retail relationships recorded in conjunction with the Merger, refer to Note 4—Merger and Acquisitions.

 

Exelon’s, Generation’s and ComEd’s other intangible assets and liabilities, included in unamortizedUnamortized energy contract assets and liabilities and Other deferred debits and other assets in their Consolidated Balance Sheets, consisted of the following as of December 31, 2013:2015:

 

  Weighted
Average
Amortization
Years (e)
           Estimated amortization expense 
   Gross  Accumulated
Amortization
  Net  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018 

Generation(f)

         

Exelon Wind acquisition(a)

  18.0  $224  $(41 $183  $14  $14  $14  $14  $14 

Antelope Valley acquisition (b)

  25.0   190   (4  186   8   8   8   8   8 

ComEd

         

Chicago settlement—1999 agreement (c)

  21.8   100   (76  24   3   3   3   4   4 

Chicago settlement—2003 agreement (d)

  17.9   62   (38  24   4   4   4   3   3 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total intangible assets

  $576  $(159 $417  $29  $29  $29  $29  $29 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
  Weighted
Average
Amortization
Years(k)
  Gross  Accumulated
Amortization
  Net  Estimated amortization expense 
      2016  2017  2018  2019  2020 

Exelon

         

Software License Agreement(a)

  10.0   $95   $(6 $89   $10   $10   $10   $10   $10  

Generation

         

Unamortized Energy Contracts(b)

         

Exelon Wind(c)

  18.0    224    (69  155    14    14    14    14    10  

Antelope Valley (d)

  25.0    190    (20  170    8    8    8    8    8  

Constellation(e)

  1.5    1,499    (1,473  26    (33  (21  11    8    10  

CENG(f)

  1.7    (97  48    (49  (11  (15  (18  (15  (8

Integrys(g)

  2.4    5    2    7    5    1    1    —      —    

Customer Relationships (h)

         

Constellation(e)

  12.4    214    (76  138    18    18    18    17    17  

Integrys(g)

  10.0    50    (6  44    5    5    5    5    5  

Trade Names

         

Constellation(e)

  10.0    243    (103  140    23    23    23    23    23  

ComEd

         

Chicago settlement—1999 agreement(i)

  21.8    100    (83  17    3    3    3    4    4  

Chicago settlement—2003 agreement(j)

  17.9    62    (44  18    4    4    4    3    3  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total intangible assets

  $2,585   $(1,830 $755   $46   $50   $79   $77   $82  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

(a)On May 31, 2015, Exelon entered into a long-term software license agreement. Exelon is required to make payments starting August 2015 through May 2024. The intangible asset recognized as a result of these payments is being amortized on a straight-line basis over the contract term.
(b)Includes unamortized energy contract assets and liabilities on Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. Excludes $44 million of other miscellaneous unamortized energy contracts that have been acquired at various points in time. The estimated amortization for these miscellaneous unamortized energy contracts is $3 million, $0 million, $2 million, $3 million and $4 million for 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2020, respectively.
(c)In December 2010, Generation acquired all of the equity interests of John Deere Renewables, LLC (later named Exelon Wind), adding 735 MWs735MWs of installed, operating wind capacity located in eight states.
(b)(d)Refer to Note 4—Merger and Acquisitions for additional information regardingIn September 2011, Generation acquired all of the interest in Antelope Valley.Valley Solar Ranch One, a 242 MW solar project under development in northern Los Angeles County, CA from First Solar, Inc.
(c)(e)On March 12, 2012, Constellation merged into Exelon with Exelon continuing as the surviving corporation pursuant to the transactions contemplated by the Agreement and Plan of Merger. Since the merger transaction, Generation includes the former Constellation generation and customer supply operations.
(f)See Note 5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC for additional information.
(g)See Note 4—Mergers, Acquisitions, and Dispositions for additional information.
(h)Excludes $12 million of other miscellaneous customer relationships that have been acquired. The estimated amortization for these miscellaneous customer relationships is $1 million in each of the years from 2016 to 2020.
(i)

In March 1999, ComEd entered into a settlement agreement with the City of Chicago associated with ComEd’s franchise agreement. Under the terms of the settlement, ComEd agreed to make payments to the City of Chicago each year from

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

1999 to 2002. The intangible asset recognized as a result of these payments is being amortized ratably over the remaining term of the franchise agreement, which ends in 2020.

(d)(j)In February 2003, ComEd entered into separate agreements with the City of Chicago and with Midwest Generation, LLC (Midwest Generation). Under the terms of the settlement agreement with the City of Chicago, ComEd agreed to pay the City of Chicago a total of $60 million over a ten-year period, beginning in 2003. The intangible asset recognized as a result of the settlement agreement is being amortized ratably over the remaining term of the City of Chicago franchise agreement, which ends in 2020. As required by the settlement, ComEd also made a payment of $2 million to a third-party on the City of Chicago’s behalf. Under the terms of the agreement with Midwest Generation, ComEd received payments of $32 million from Midwest Generation to relieve Midwest Generation’s obligation under the 1999 fossil sale agreement with ComEd to build the generation facility in the City of Chicago. The payments received by ComEd, which have been recorded in Other deferred credits and other liabilities, and other long-term liabilities on Exelon’s and ComEd’s Consolidated Balance Sheets are being recognized ratably (approximately $2 million annually) as an offset to amortization expense over the remaining term of the franchise agreement.
(e)(k)Weighted-average amortization period was calculated at the date of a) acquisition for acquired assets or b) settlement agreement.

The following table summarizes the amortization expense related to intangible assets and liabilities for each of the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013:

For the Year Ended December 31,

  Exelon (a)   Generation (a)   ComEd 

2015

  $76    $69    $7  

2014

   179     179     7  

2013

   478     550     7  

(f)(a)Excludes $67 millionAt Exelon, amortization of other miscellaneous unamortized energy contracts that have been acquired at various pointstotaling $22 million, $135 million and $430 million for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively, was recorded in time.Operating revenues or Purchase power and fuel expense within Exelon’s Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income. At Generation, amortization of unamortized energy contracts totaling $22 million, $135 million and $507 million for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively, was recorded in Operating revenues or Purchase power and fuel expense within Generation’s Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income

Acquired Intangible Assets

 

285Accounting guidance for business combinations requires the acquirer to separately recognize identifiable intangible assets in the application of purchase accounting.


Unamortized Energy Contracts.Unamortized energy contract assets and liabilities represent the remaining unamortized fair value of non-derivative energy contracts that Generation has acquired. The valuation of unamortized energy contracts was estimated by applying either the market approach or the income approach depending on the nature of the underlying contract. The market approach was utilized when prices and other relevant information generated by market transactions involving comparable transactions were available. Otherwise, the income approach, which is based upon discounted projected future cash flows associated with the underlying contracts, was utilized. The fair value is based upon certain unobservable inputs, which are considered Level 3 inputs, pursuant to applicable accounting guidance. Key estimates and inputs include forecasted power and fuel prices and the discount rate. The Exelon Wind unamortized energy contracts are amortized on a straight line basis over the period in which the associated contract revenues are recognized as a decrease in Operating revenue within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income. In the case of Antelope Valley, Constellation, CENG and Integrys, the fair value amounts are amortized over the life of the contract in relation to the present value of the underlying cash flows as of the acquisition dates through either Operating revenues or Purchase power and fuel expense within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Customer Relationships.The following table summarizes the amortization expense related tocustomer relationship intangible assets for eachwas determined based on a “multi-period excess method” of the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011:

For the Year Ended December 31,

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd 

2013

  $27   $20   $7 

2012

   20    13    7 

2011

   19    12    7 

Acquired Intangible Assets

Accounting guidance for business combinations requires thatincome approach. Under this method, the acquirer must recognize separately identifiable intangible assets inasset’s fair value is determined to be the application of purchase accounting. The valuation of the acquired intangible assets discussed below were estimated by applying the income approach, which is based upon discounted projected future cash flows associated withthat will be earned on the respective PPAs. Key assumptions used in the valuation of these intangible assets include forecasted power pricescurrent customer base, taking into account expected contract renewals based on customer attrition rates and discount rates. Those measures arecosts to retain those customers. The fair value is based upon certain unobservable inputs, which are considered Level 3 inputs, pursuant to applicable accounting guidance. Key assumptions include the customer attrition rate and the discount rate. The intangible assets areaccounting guidance requires that customer-based intangibles be amortized as a decreaseover the period expected to be benefited using the pattern of economic benefit. The amortization of the customer relationships is recorded in operating revenueDepreciation and amortization expense within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income over the term of the underlying PPAs.Income.

 

Exelon Wind.Trade Name.The outputConstellation trade name intangible was determined based on the relief from royalty method of income approach whereby fair value is determined to be the acquired wind turbines has been sold under PPA contracts. The excess of the contract price of the PPAs over market prices was recognized as intangible assets at the acquisition date. Generation determined that the estimated acquisition-date fairpresent value of the license fees avoided by owning the assets. The fair value is based upon certain unobservable inputs, which are considered Level 3 inputs, pursuant to applicable accounting guidance. Key assumptions include the hypothetical royalty rate and the discount rate. The Constellation trade name intangible assets was approximately $224 million, which is recorded in unamortized energy contract assets within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. The intangible assets are amortized on a straight-line basis over thea period in which the associated contract revenues are recognized.

Antelope Valley. Upon completionof 10 years. The amortization of the development project, all of the output will be sold under a PPA with Pacific Gas & Electric Company. The excess of the contract price of the PPA over forecasted MPR-based market prices was recognized as an intangible asset at the acquisition date. Generation determined that the estimated acquisition-date fair value of the intangible asset was approximately $190 million, whichtrade name is recorded in unamortized energy contract assetsDepreciation and amortization expense within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. The fair value is amortized over the lifeStatements of the contract in relation to the present value of the underlying cash flows as of the acquisition date.Operations and Comprehensive Income.

 

Renewable Energy Credits and Alternative Energy Credits (Exelon, Generation, ComEd and PECO).

 

Exelon’s, Generation’s, ComEd’s and PECO’s other intangible assets, included in otherOther current assets and otherOther deferred debits and other assets on the Consolidated Balance Sheets, include RECs (Exelon, Generation and ComEd) and AECs (Exelon and PECO). Purchased RECs are recorded at cost on the date they are purchased. The cost of RECs purchased on a stand-alone basis is based on the transaction price, while the cost of RECs acquired through PPAs represents the difference between the total contract price and the market price of energy at contract inception. Revenue for RECs that are part of a bundled power sale is recognized when the power is produced and delivered to the customer. As of December 31, 2013,2015, and 2012,2014, PECO had current AECs of $19$2 million and $17$13 million, respectively. PECO had no noncurrent AECs as of December 31, 2015 and 2014. As of December 31, 2015, and 2014, Generation had current RECs of $251 million and $191 million, respectively, and noncurrent AECs of $5$56 million and $9$44 million of noncurrent REC’s, respectively. As of December 31, 2013,2015 and 2012, Generation had current RECs of $158 million and $61 million, respectively, and noncurrent RECs of $0 million and $45 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2013, and 2012,2014, ComEd had current RECs of $3$5 million and $4 million, respectively. ComEd had no noncurrent RECs as of December 31, 2015 and 2014. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters and Note 22—23—Commitments and Contingencies for additional information on RECs and AECs.

286


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

11.12. Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Fair Value of Financial Liabilities Recorded at the Carrying Amount

 

The following tables present the carrying amounts and fair values of the Registrants’ short-term liabilities, long-term debt, SNF obligation, and trust preferred securities (long-term debt to financing trusts or junior subordinated debentures), and preferred securities as of December 31, 2013,2015 and 2012:2014:

 

Exelon

 

  December 31, 2013   December 31, 2012   December 31, 2015   December 31, 2014 
  Carrying
Amount
   Fair Value   Carrying
Amount
   Fair
Value
   Carrying
Amount
   Fair Value   Carrying
Amount
   Fair
Value
 
  Level 1   Level 2   Level 3     Level 1   Level 2   Level 3   Total   

Short-term liabilities

  $344   $3   $341   $—     $214   $214   $536    $3    $533    $—      $536    $463    $463  

Long-term debt (including amounts due within one year)(a)

   19,132    —      18,672    1,079    18,745    20,520    25,145     931     23,644     1,349     25,924     21,014     22,936  

Long-term debt to financing trusts(b)

   648    —      —      631    648    664    641     —       —       673     673     641     648  

SNF obligation

   1,021    —      790    —      1,020    763    1,021     —       818     —       818     1,021     833  

Preferred securities of subsidiary

   —      —      —      —      87    82 

 

Generation

 

  December 31, 2013   December 31, 2012   December 31, 2015   December 31, 2014 
  Carrying
Amount
   Fair Value   Carrying
Amount
   Fair
Value
   Carrying
Amount
   Fair Value   Carrying
Amount
   Fair
Value
 
  Level 1   Level 2   Level 3     Level 1   Level 2   Level 3   Total   

Short-term liabilities

  $22   $—     $22   $—     $—     $—     $29    $—      $29    $—      $29    $36    $36  

Long-term debt (including amounts due within one year)(a)

   7,729    —      6,586    1,062    7,483    7,849    8,959     —       7,767     1,349     9,116     8,196     8,822  

SNF obligation

   1,021    —      790    —      1,020    763    1,021     —       818     —       818     1,021     833  

 

ComEd

 

  December 31, 2013   December 31, 2012   December 31, 2015   December 31, 2014 
  Carrying
Amount
   Fair Value   Carrying
Amount
   Fair
Value
   Carrying
Amount
   Fair Value   Carrying
Amount
   Fair
Value
 
  Level 1   Level 2   Level 3     Level 1   Level 2   Level 3   Total   

Short-term liabilities

  $184   $—     $184   $—     $—     $—     $294    $—      $294    $—      $294    $304    $304  

Long-term debt (including amounts due within one year)(a)

   5,675    —      6,238    17    5,567    6,548    6,509     —       7,069     —       7,069     5,925     6,788  

Long-term debt to financing trust

   206    —      —      202    206    212 

Long-term debt to financing trusts(b)

   205     —       —       213     213     205     213  

 

PECO

 

   December 31, 2013   December 31, 2012 
   Carrying
Amount
   Fair Value   Carrying
Amount
   Fair
Value
 
     Level 1   Level 2   Level 3     

Short-term liabilities

  $—     $—     $—     $—     $210   $210 

Long-term debt (including amounts due within one year)

   2,197    —      2,358    —      1,947    2,264 

Long-term debt to financing trusts

   184    —      —      180    184    188 

Preferred securities

   —      —      —      —      87    82 
    December 31, 2015   December 31, 2014 
    Carrying
Amount
   Fair Value   Carrying
Amount
   Fair
Value
 
     Level 1   Level 2   Level 3   Total     

Long-term debt (including amounts due within one year)(a)

  $2,580    $—      $2,786    $—      $2,786    $2,232    $2,537  

Long-term debt to financing trusts

   184     —       —       195     195     184     199  

287


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

BGE

 

  December 31, 2013   December 31, 2012   December 31, 2015   December 31, 2014 
  Carrying
Amount
   Fair Value   Carrying
Amount
   Fair
Value
   Carrying
Amount
   Fair Value   Carrying
Amount
   Fair
Value
 
  Level 1   Level 2   Level 3     Level 1   Level 2   Level 3   Total   

Short-term liabilities

  $138   $3   $135   $—     $—     $—     $213    $3    $210    $—      $213    $123    $123  

Long-term debt (including amounts due within one year)(a)

   2,011    —      2,148    —      2,178    2,468    1,858     —       2,044     —       2,044     1,932     2,178  

Long-term debt to financing trusts(b)

   258    —      —      249    258    263    252     —       —       264     264     252     236  

(a)Includes unamortized debt issuance costs of $180 million, $70 million, $38 million, $15 million and $9 million for Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE, respectively, at December 31, 2015 and $150 million, $70 million, $33 million, $14 million and $10 million at December 31, 2014.
(b)Includes unamortized debt issuance costs of $7 million, $1 million and $6 million for Exelon, ComEd and BGE, respectively, at both December 31, 2015 and 2014.

 

Short-Term Liabilities. The short-term liabilities included in the tables above are comprised of dividends payable (included in other current liabilities) (Level 1), short-term borrowings (Level 2), short-term notes payable related to PECO’s accounts receivable agreement and third party financing (Level 2), and dividends payable (Level 1)3). The Registrants’ carrying amounts of the short-term liabilities are representative of fair value because of the short-term nature of these instruments. See Note 13—Debt and Credit Agreements for additional information on PECO’s accounts receivable agreement.

 

Long-Term Debt. The fair value amounts of Exelon’s taxable debt securities (Level 2) are determined by a valuation model that is based on a conventional discounted cash flow methodology and utilizes assumptions of current market pricing curves. In order to incorporate the credit risk of the Registrants into the discount rates, Exelon obtains pricing (i.e., U.S. Treasury rate plus credit spread) based on trades of existing Exelon debt securities as well as debt securities of other issuers in the electric utility sector with similar credit ratings in both the primary and secondary market, across the Registrants’ debt maturity spectrum. The credit spreads of various tenors obtained from this information are added to the appropriate benchmark U.S. Treasury rates in order to determine the current market yields for the various tenors. The yields are then converted into discount rates of various tenors that are used for discounting the respective cash flows of the same tenor for each bond or note. The fair value of Exelon’s equity units (Level 1) are valued based on publicly traded securities issued by Exelon.

 

The fair value of Generation’s non-government-backed fixed rate project financingnonrecourse debt (Level 3) is based on market and quoted prices for its own and other project financingnonrecourse debt with similar risk profiles. Given the low trading volume in the project financingnonrecourse debt market, the price quotes used to determine fair value will reflect certain qualitative factors, such as market conditions, investor demand, new developments that might significantly impact the project cash flows or off-taker credit, and other circumstances related to the project (e.g., political and regulatory environment). The fair value of Generation’s government-backgovernment-backed fixed rate project financing debt (Level 3) is largely based on a discounted cash flow methodology that is similar to the taxable debt securities methodology described above. Due to the lack of market trading data on similar debt, the discount rates are derived based on the original loan interest rate spread to the applicable Treasury rate as well as a current market curve derived from government-backed securities. Variable rate project financing debt resets on a quarterly basis and the carrying value approximates fair value.

The Registrantsvalue (Level 2). Generation also havehas tax-exempt debt (Level 3)2). Due to low trading volume in this market, qualitative factors, such as market conditions, investor demand, and circumstances related to the issuer (i.e.(e.g., conduit issuer political and regulatory environment), may be incorporated into the credit spreads that are used to obtain the fair value as described above.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

SNF Obligation. The carrying amount of Generation’s SNF obligation (Level 2) is derived from a contract with the DOE to provide for disposal of SNF from Generation’s nuclear generating stations. When determining the fair value of the obligation, the future carrying amount of the SNF obligation

288


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

estimated to be settled in 2025 is calculated by compounding the current book value of the SNF obligation at the 13-week Treasury rate. The compounded obligation amount is discounted back to present value using Generation’s discount rate, which is calculatediscalculated using the same methodology as described above for the taxable debt securities, and an estimated maturity date of 2025.

 

Long-Term Debt to Financing Trusts. Exelon’s long-term debt to financing trusts is valued based on publicly traded securities issued by the financing trusts. Due to low trading volume of these securities, qualitative factors, such as market conditions, investor demand, and circumstances related to each issue, this debt is classified as Level 3.

 

Preferred Securities. The fair value of these securities is determined based on the last closing price prior to quarter end, less accrued interest. The securities are registered with the SEC and are public. PECO redeemed all outstanding series of preferred securities on May 1, 2013. See Note 20—Earnings Per Share and Equity for additional information.

Recurring Fair Value Measurements

 

Exelon records the fair value of assets and liabilities in accordance with the hierarchy established by the authoritative guidance for fair value measurements. The hierarchy prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value into three levels as follows:

 

Level 1—quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the Registrants have the ability to accessliquidate as of the reporting date. Financial assets and liabilities utilizing Level 1 inputs include active exchange-traded equity securities and funds, certain exchange-based derivatives, and money market funds.

 

Level 2—inputs other than quoted prices included within Level 1 that are directly observable for the asset or liability or indirectly observable through corroboration with observable market data. Financial assets and liabilities utilizing Level 2 inputs include fixed income securities, derivatives, commingled and mutual investment funds priced at NAV per fund share and fair value hedges.

 

Level 3—unobservable inputs, such as internally developed pricing models or third-party valuations for the asset or liability due to little or no market activity for the asset or liability. Financial assets

Transfers in and liabilities utilizingout of levels are recognized as of the end of the reporting period when the transfer occurred. Given derivatives categorized within Level 1 are valued using exchange-based quoted prices within observable periods, transfers between Level 2 and Level 1 were not material. Transfers into Level 2 from Level 3 inputs include infrequently traded securitiesgenerally occur when the contract tenure becomes more observable. Transfers into Level 3 from Level 2 generally occur due to changes in market liquidity or assumptions for certain commodity contracts. There were no transfers between Level 1 and derivatives,Level 2 during the year ended December 31, 2015 for cash equivalents, nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments, pledged assets for Zion Station decommissioning, Rabbi trust investments, and investments priced using an alternative pricing mechanism or third party valuation.deferred compensation obligations.

289


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Generation and Exelon

 

The following tables present assets and liabilities measured and recorded at fair value on Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets on a recurring basis and their level within the fair value hierarchy as of December 31, 20132015 and December 31, 2012:2014:

 

As of December 31, 2013

  Level 1   Level 2   Level 3   Total 

Assets

        

Cash equivalents (a)

  $1,230   $—     $—     $1,230 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments

        

Cash equivalents

   459    —       —       459 

Equity

        

Individually held

   1,776    —      —      1,776 

Exchange traded funds

   115    —      —      115 

Commingled funds

   —      2,271    —      2,271 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Equity funds subtotal

   1,891    2,271    —      4,162 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income

        

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

   882    —      —      882 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and political subdivisions of the states

   —      294    —      294 

Debt securities issued by foreign governments

   —      87    —      87 

Corporate debt securities

   —      1,753    31    1,784 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —      10    —      10 

Commercial mortgage-backed securities (non-agency)

   —      40    —      40 

Residential mortgage-backed securities (non-agency)

   —      7    —      7 

Mutual funds

   —      18    —      18 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income subtotal

   882    2,209    31    3,122 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Middle market lending

   —      —      314    314 

Private Equity

   —      —      5    5 

Other debt obligations

   —      14    —      14 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments subtotal (b)

   3,232    4,494    350    8,076 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Pledged assets for Zion decommissioning

        

Cash equivalents

   —      26    —      26 

Equity

        

Individually held

   16    —      —      16 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Equity funds subtotal

   16    —      —      16 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income

        

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

   45    4    —      49 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and political subdivisions of the states

   —      20    —      20 

Corporate debt securities

   —      227    —      227 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income subtotal

   45    251    —      296 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Middle market lending

   —      —      112    112 

Other debt obligations

   —      1    —      1 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Pledged assets for Zion decommissioning subtotal (c)

   61    278    112    451 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 
  Generation  Exelon 

As of December 31, 2015

 Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 

Assets

        

Cash equivalents(a)

 $104   $—     $—     $104   $5,766   $—     $—     $5,766  

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments

        

Cash equivalents(b)

  219    92    —      311    219    92    —      311  

Equities

  3,008    1,894    —      4,902    3,008    1,894    —      4,902  

Fixed income

        

Corporate debt

  —      1,824    242    2,066    —      1,824    242    2,066  

U.S. Treasury and agencies

  1,323    15    —      1,338    1,323    15    —      1,338  

Foreign governments

  —      61    —      61    —      61    —      61  

State and municipal debt

  —      326    —      326    —      326    —      326  

Other(c)

  —      537    —      537    —      537    —      537  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Fixed income subtotal

  1,323    2,763    242    4,328    1,323    2,763    242    4,328  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Middle market lending

  —      —      428    428    —      —      428    428  

Private equity

  —      —      125    125    —      —      125    125  

Real estate

  —      —      35    35    —      —      35    35  

Other

  —      216    —      216    —      216    —      216  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments subtotal(d)

  4,550    4,965    830    10,345    4,550    4,965    830    10,345  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Pledged assets for Zion Station decommissioning

        

Cash equivalents

  —      17    —      17    —      17    —      17  

Equities

  1    5    —      6    1    5    —      6  

Fixed income

        

U.S. Treasury and agencies

  6    2    —      8    6    2    —      8  

Corporate debt

  —      46    —      46    —      46    —      46  

Other

  —      1    —      1    —      1    —      1  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Fixed income subtotal

  6    49    —      55    6    49    —      55  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Middle market lending

  —      —      127    127    —      —      127    127  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Pledged assets for Zion Station decommissioning subtotal(e)

  7    71    127    205    7    71   ��127    205  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Rabbi trust investments in mutual funds(f)

  17    —      —      17    48    —      —      48  

Commodity derivative assets

        

Economic hedges

  1,922    3,467    1,707    7,096    1,922    3,467    1,707    7,096  

Proprietary trading

  36    64    30    130    36    64    30    130  

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral(g)

  (1,964  (2,629  (564  (5,157  (1,964  (2,629  (564  (5,157
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity derivative assets subtotal

  (6  902    1,173    2,069    (6  902    1,173    2,069  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate and foreign currency derivative assets

        

Derivatives designated as hedging instruments

  —      —      —      —      —      25    —      25  

Economic hedges

  —      20    —      20    —      20    —      20  

Proprietary trading

  10    5    —      15    10    5    —      15  

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral

  (3  (3  —      (6  (3  (3  —      (6
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate and foreign currency derivative assets subtotal

  7    22    —      29    7    47    —      54  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other investments

  —      —      33    33    —      —      33    33  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total assets

  4,679    5,960    2,163    12,802    10,372    5,985    2,163    18,520  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Liabilities

        

Commodity derivative liabilities

        

Economic hedges

  (2,382  (3,348  (850  (6,580  (2,382  (3,348  (1,097  (6,827

Proprietary trading

  (33  (57  (37  (127  (33  (57  (37  (127

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral(g)

  2,440    3,186    765    6,391    2,440    3,186    765    6,391  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity derivative liabilities subtotal

  25    (219  (122  (316  25    (219  (369  (563
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate and foreign currency derivative liabilities

     —         —    

Derivatives designated as hedging instruments

  —      (16  —      (16  —      (16  —      (16

Economic hedges

  —      (3  —      (3  —      (3  —      (3

Proprietary trading

  (12  —      —      (12  (12  —      —      (12

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral

  12    3    —      15    12    3    —      15  

Interest rate and foreign currency derivative liabilities subtotal

  —      (16  —      (16  —      (16  —      (16
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Deferred compensation obligation

  —      (30  —      (30  —      (99  —      (99
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total liabilities

  25    (265  (122  (362  25    (334  (369  (678
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total net assets

 $4,704   $5,695   $2,041   $12,440   $10,397   $5,651   $1,794   $17,842  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

290


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

As of December 31, 2013

  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 

Rabbi trust investments

     

Cash equivalents

   2   —     —     2 

Mutual funds (d)(e)

   54   —     —     54 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Rabbi trust investments subtotal

   56   —     —     56 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market derivative assets

     

Economic hedges

   493   2,582   885   3,960 

Proprietary trading

   324   1,315   122   1,761 

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral (f)

   (863  (3,131  (430  (4,424
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market assets subtotal

   (46  766   577   1,297 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative assets

   30   39   —     69 

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral

   (30  (2  —     (32
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative assets subtotal

   —     37   —     37 

Other Investments

   —     —     15   15 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total assets

   4,533   5,575   1,054   11,162 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Liabilities

     

Commodity mark-to-market derivative liabilities

     

Economic hedges

   (540  (1,890  (590  (3,020

Proprietary trading

   (328  (1,256  (119  (1,703

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral (f)

   869   3,007   404   4,280 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market liabilities subtotal (h)

   1   (139  (305  (443
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative liabilities

   (31  (17  —     (48

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral

   31   1   —     32 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative liabilities subtotal

   —     (16  —     (16
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Deferred compensation obligation

   —     (114  —     (114
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total liabilities

   1   (269  (305  (573
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total net assets

  $4,534  $5,306  $749  $10,589 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
  Generation  Exelon 

As of December 31, 2014

 Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 

Assets

        

Cash equivalents(a)

 $405   $—     $—     $405   $1,119   $—     $—     $1,119  

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments

        

Cash equivalents(b)

  208    37    —      245    208    37    —      245  

Equities

  3,035    2,207    —      5,242    3,035    2,207    —      5,242  

Fixed income

        

Corporate debt

  —      2,023    239    2,262    —      2,023    239    2,262  

U.S. Treasury and agencies

  996    —      —      996    996    —      —      996  

Foreign governments

  —      95    —      95    —      95    —      95  

State and municipal debt

  —      438    —      438    —      438    —      438  

Other

  —      511    —      511    —      511    —      511  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Fixed income subtotal

  996    3,067    239    4,302    996    3,067    239    4,302  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Middle market lending

  —      —      366    366    —      —      366    366  

Private equity

  —      —      83    83    —      —      83    83  

Real estate

  —      —      3    3    —      —      3    3  

Other(c)

  —      301    —      301    —      301    —      301  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments subtotal(d)

  4,239    5,612    691    10,542    4,239    5,612    691    10,542  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Pledged assets for Zion Station decommissioning

        

Cash equivalents

  —      15    —      15    —      15    —      15  

Equities

  6    1    —      7    6    1    —      7  

Fixed income

        

U.S. Treasury and agencies

  5    3    —      8    5    3    —      8  

Corporate debt

  —      89    —      89    —      89    —      89  

State and municipal debt

  —      10    —      10    —      10    —      10  

Other

  —      3    —      3    —      3    —      3  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Fixed income subtotal

  5    105    —      110    5    105    —      110  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Middle market lending

  —      —      184    184    —      —      184    184  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Pledged assets for Zion Station decommissioning subtotal(e)

  11    121    184    316    11    121    184    316  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Rabbi trust investments(f)

        

Cash equivalents

  —      —      —      —      1    —      —      1  

Mutual funds

  16    —      —      16    46    —      —      46  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Rabbi trust investments subtotal

  16    —      —      16    47    —      —      47  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity derivative assets

     —         —    

Economic hedges

  1,667    3,465    1,681    6,813    1,667    3,465    1,681    6,813  

Proprietary trading

  201    284    27    512    201    284    27    512  

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral(g)

  (1,982  (2,757  (557  (5,296  (1,982  (2,757  (557  (5,296
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity derivative assets subtotal

  (114  992    1,151    2,029    (114  992    1,151    2,029  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate and foreign currency derivative assets

     —         —    

Derivatives designated as hedging instruments

  —      8    —      8    —      31    —      31  

Economic hedges

  —      12    —      12    —      13    —      13  

Proprietary trading

  18    9    —      27    18    9    —      27  

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral

  (17  (12  —      (29  (17  (31  —      (48
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate and foreign currency derivative assets subtotal

  1    17    —      18    1    22    —      23  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other investments

  —      —      3    3    2    —      3    5  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total assets

  4,558    6,742    2,029    13,329    5,305    6,747    2,029    14,081  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Liabilities

        

Commodity derivative liabilities

        

Economic hedges

  (2,241  (3,458  (788  (6,487  (2,241  (3,458  (995  (6,694

Proprietary trading

  (195  (295  (42  (532  (195  (295  (42  (532

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral(g)

  2,416    3,557    729    6,702    2,416    3,557    729    6,702  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity derivative liabilities subtotal

  (20  (196  (101  (317  (20  (196  (308  (524
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate and foreign currency derivative liabilities

     —         —    

Derivatives designated as hedging instruments

  —      (12  —      (12  —      (41  —      (41

Economic hedges

  —      (2  —      (2  —      (103  —      (103

Proprietary trading

  (14  (9  —      (23  (14  (9  —      (23

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral

  25    10    —      35    25    29    —      54  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate and foreign currency derivative liabilities subtotal

  11    (13  —      (2  11    (124  —      (113
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Deferred compensation obligation

  —      (31  —      (31  —      (107  —      (107
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total liabilities

  (9  (240  (101  (350  (9  (427  (308  (744
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total net assets

 $4,549   $6,502   $1,928   $12,979   $5,296   $6,320   $1,721   $13,337  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

291


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

As of December 31, 2012

  Level 1   Level 2   Level 3   Total 

Assets

        

Cash equivalents (a)

  $995   $—     $—     $995 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments

        

Cash equivalents

   245    —      —      245 

Equity

        

Individually held

   1,480    —      —      1,480 

Commingled funds

   —      1,933    —      1,933 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Equity funds subtotal

   1,480    1,933    —      3,413 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income

        

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

   1,057    —      —      1,057 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and political subdivisions of the states

   —      321    —      321 

Debt securities issued by foreign governments

   —      93    —      93 

Corporate debt securities

   —      1,788    —      1,788 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —      24    —      24 

Commercial mortgage-backed securities (non-agency)

   —      45    —      45 

Residential mortgage-backed securities (non-agency)

   —      11    —      11 

Mutual funds

   —      23    —      23 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income subtotal

   1,057    2,305    —      3,362 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Middle market lending

   —      —      183    183 

Other debt obligations

   —      15    —      15 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments subtotal (b)

   2,782    4,253    183    7,218 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Pledged assets for Zion decommissioning

        

Cash equivalents

   —      23    —      23 

Equity

        

Individually held

   14    —      —      14 

Commingled funds

   —      9    —      9 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Equity funds subtotal

   14    9    —      23 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income

        

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

   118    12    —      130 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and political subdivisions of the states

   —      37    —      37 

Corporate debt securities

   —      249    —      249 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —      49    —      49 

Commercial mortgage-backed securities (non-agency)

   —      6    —      6 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income subtotal

   118    353    —      471 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Middle market lending

   —      —      89    89 

Other debt obligations

   —      1    —      1 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Pledged assets for Zion decommissioning subtotal (c)

   132    386    89    607 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Rabbi trust investments

        

Cash equivalents

   2    —      —      2 

Mutual funds (d)(e)

   69    —      —      69 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Rabbi trust investments subtotal

   71    —      —      71 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

292


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

As of December 31, 2012

  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 

Commodity mark-to-market derivative assets

     

Economic hedges

   861   3,173   641   4,675 

Proprietary trading

   1,042   2,078   73   3,193 

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral (f)

   (1,823  (4,175  (58  (6,056
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market assets subtotal (g)

   80   1,076   656   1,812 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative assets

   —     114   —     114 

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral

   —     (51  —     (51
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative assets subtotal

   —     63   —     63 

Other Investments

   2   —     17   19 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total assets

   4,062   5,778   945   10,785 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Liabilities

     

Commodity mark-to-market derivative liabilities

     

Economic hedges

   (1,041  (2,289  (236  (3,566

Proprietary trading

   (1,084  (1,959  (78  (3,121

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral (f)

   2,042   4,020   25   6,087 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market liabilities (g)(h)

   (83  (228  (289  (600
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate mark-to-market liabilities

   —     (84  —     (84

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral

   —     51   —     51 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative liabilities subtotal

   —     (33  —     (33

Deferred compensation obligation

   —     (102  —     (102
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total liabilities

   (83  (363  (289  (735
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total net assets

  $3,979  $5,415  $656  $10,050 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

(a)Excludes certain cash equivalents considered to be held-to-maturity and not reported at fair value.
(b)Excludes net assets (liabilities) of $(5)Includes $52 million and $30$43 million of cash received from outstanding repurchase agreements at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively, and is offset by an obligation to repay upon settlement of the agreement as discussed in (d) below.
(c)Includes derivative instruments of $(8) million and $(10) million, which have a total notional amount of $1,236 million and $794 million at December 31, 20132015 and 2014, respectively. The notional principal amounts for these instruments provide one measure of the transaction volume outstanding as of the fiscal years ended and do not represent the amount of the company’s exposure to credit or market loss.
(d)Excludes net liabilities of $(3) million and $(5) million at December 31, 2012,2015 and 2014, respectively. These items consist of receivables related to pending securities sales, interest and dividend receivables, repurchase agreement obligations, and payables related to pending securities purchases. The repurchase agreements are generally short-term in nature with durations generally of 30 days or less.
(e)Excludes net assets of $1 million and $3 million at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. These items consist of receivables related to pending securities sales, interest and dividend receivables, and payables related to pending securities purchases.
(c)(f)Excludes net assets of $7 million at both December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively. These items consist of receivables related to pending securities sales, interest and dividend receivables, and payables related to pending securities purchases.
(d)The mutual funds held by the Rabbi trusts include $53 million related to deferred compensation and $1 million related to Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan at December 31, 2013, and $53 million related to deferred compensation and $16 million related to Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan at December 31, 2012.
(e)Excludes $32$36 million and $28$35 million of the cash surrender value of life insurance investmentsinvestment at December 31, 20132015 and 2014, respectively, at Exelon Consolidated. Excludes $13 million and $11 million of cash surrender value of life insurance investment at December 31, 2012, respectively.2015 and 2014, respectively, at Generation.
(f)(g)Includes collateral postings (received) from counterparties. Collateral (received) from counterparties, net of collateral paid toposted to/(received from) counterparties totaled $6$476 million, $(124)$557 million and $(26)$201 million allocated to Level 1, Level 2 and Level 3 mark-to-market derivatives, respectively, as of December 31, 2013.2015. Collateral (received) from counterparties, net of collateral paid toposted to/(received from) counterparties totaled $219$434 million, $(155)$800 million and $(33)$172 million allocated to Level 1, Level 2 and Level 3 mark-to-market derivatives, respectively, as of December 31, 2012.2014.

ComEd, PECO and BGE

The following tables present assets and liabilities measured and recorded at fair value on the utility Registrants’ Consolidated Balance Sheets on a recurring basis and their level within the fair value hierarchy as of December 31, 2015 and 2014:

  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

As of December 31, 2015

 Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 

Assets

            

Cash equivalents

 $29   $—     $—     $29   $271   $—     $—     $271   $25   $—     $—     $25  

Rabbi trust investments in mutual funds(a)

  —      —      —      —      8    —      —      8    4    —      —      4  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total assets

  29    —      —      29    279    —      —      279    29    —      —      29  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Liabilities

        

Deferred compensation obligation

  —      (8  —      (8  —      (12  —      (12  —      (4  —      (4

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities(b)

  —      —      (247  (247  —      —      —      —      —      —      —      —    
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total liabilities

  —      (8  (247  (255  —      (12  —      (12  —      (4  —      (4
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total net assets (liabilities)

 $29   $(8 $(247 $(226 $279   $(12 $—     $267   $29   $(4 $—     $25  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

As of December 31, 2014

 Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 

Assets

            

Cash equivalents

 $25   $—     $—     $25   $12   $—     $—     $12   $103   $—     $—     $103  

Rabbi trust investments in mutual funds(a)

  —      —      —      —      9    —      —      9    5    —      —      5  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total assets

  25    —      —      25    21    —      —      21    108    —      —      108  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Liabilities

        

Deferred compensation obligation

  —      (8  —      (8  —      (15  —      (15  —      (5  —      (5

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities (b)

  —      —      (207  (207  —      —      —      —      —      —      —      —    
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total liabilities

  —      (8  (207  (215  —      (15  —      (15  —      (5  —      (5
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total net assets (liabilities)

 $25   $(8 $(207 $(190 $21   $(15 $—     $6   $108   $(5 $—     $103  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

(a)At PECO, excludes $12 million and $14 million of the cash surrender value of life insurance investments at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
(g)The Level 3 balance does not include current assets for Generation and current liabilities for ComEd of $226 million at December 31, 2012 related to the fair value of Generation’s financial swap contract with ComEd.
(h)(b)The Level 3 balance includes the current and noncurrent liability of $17$23 million and $176$224 million, respectively, at December 31, 2013, respectively,2015, and $18$20 million and $49$187 million, respectively, at December 31, 2012, respectively,2014, related to floating-to-fixed energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers.

293


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

The following tables presenttable presents the fair value reconciliation of Level 3 assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis during the yearsyear ended December 31, 20132015 and 2012:2014:

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2013

 Nuclear
Decommissioning
Trust Fund
Investment
  Pledged Assets
for Zion Station
Decommissioning
  Mark-to-Market
Derivatives
  Other
Investments
  Total 

Balance as of January 1, 2013

 $183  $89  $367  $17  $656 

Total realized / unrealized gains (losses)

     

Included in net income

  2   —      (44)(a)   —      (42

Included in other comprehensive income

  —      —      —      2   2 

Included in regulatory assets

  8   —      (126)(b)   —      (118

Change in collateral

  —      —      7   —      7 

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements

     

Purchases

  203   62   28   4   297 

Sales

  (28  (39  (11  (8  (86

Settlements

  (18  —     —     —     (18

Transfers into Level 3

  —      —      86 (c)   1   87 

Transfers out of Level 3

  —      —      (35  (1  (36
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2013

 $350  $112  $272  $15  $749 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

The amount of total gains included in income attributed to the change in unrealized gains related to assets and liabilities held as of December 31, 2013

 $1  $��     $167  $
 

  
 
 
 $168 

(a)Includes a reduction for the reclassification of $211 million of realized gains due to settlement of derivative contracts recorded in results of operations for the year ended December 31, 2013.
(b)Excludes decreases in fair value of $11 million of and realized losses reclassified due to settlements of $215 million associated with Generation’s financial swap contract with ComEd for the year ended December 31, 2013. All items eliminate upon consolidation in Exelon’s Consolidated Financial Statements.
(c)Includes an increase of transfers into Level 3 arising from reductions in market liquidity, which resulted in less observable contract tenures in various locations.
  Generation  ComEd     Exelon 

For The Year Ended
December 31, 2015

 Nuclear
Decommissioning
Trust Fund
Investments
  Pledged
Assets for
Zion Station
Decommissioning
  Mark-to-
Market
Derivatives
  Other
Investments
  Total
Generation
  Mark-to-
Market

Derivatives (b)
  Eliminated in
Consolidation
  Total 

Balance as of January 1, 2015

 $691   $184   $1,050   $3   $1,928   $(207 $—     $1,721  

Total realized / unrealized gains (losses)

        

Included in net income

  4    —      22(a)   1    27    —      —      27  

Included in noncurrent payables to affiliates

  23    —      —      —      23    —      (23  —    

Included in payable for Zion Station decommissioning

  —      (2  —      —      (2  —      —      (2

Included in regulatory assets/liabilities

  —      —      —      —      —      (40  23    (17

Change in collateral

  —      —      29    —      29    —      —      29  

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements

        

Purchases

  226    20    144    30    420    —      —      420  

Sales

  (8  (75  (25  —      (108  —      —      (108

Settlements

  (106  —      —      —      (106  —      —      (106

Transfers into Level 3

  4    —      80    —      84    —      —      84  

Transfers out of Level 3

  (4  —      (249  (1  (254  —      —      (254
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2015

 $830   $127   $1,051   $33   $2,041   $(247 $—     $1,794  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

The amount of total gains included in income attributed to the change in unrealized gains (losses) related to assets and liabilities as of December 31, 2015

 $4   $—     $856   $—     $860   $—     $—     $860  

294


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2012

 Nuclear
Decommissioning
Trust Fund
Investments
 Pledged Assets  for
Zion
Decommissioning
 Mark-to-Market
Derivatives(b)
 Other
Investments
 Total 

Balance as of January 1, 2012

 $13  $37  $17  $—    $67 
 Generation ComEd   Exelon 

For The Year Ended
December 31, 2014

 Nuclear
Decommissioning
Trust Fund
Investments
 Pledged Assets
for Zion Station
Decommissioning
 Mark-to-
Market

Derivatives (d)
 Other
Investments
 Total
Generation
 Mark-to-
Market

Derivatives (b)
 Eliminated in
Consolidation
 Total 

Balance as of January 1, 2014

 $350   $112   $465   $15   $942   $(193 $—     $749  

Total realized / unrealized gains (losses)

            

Included in income

  —      —      59(a)   —      59 

Included in regulatory liabilities

  1   —      39   —      40 

Included in net income

  6    —      526(a)   —      532    —      —      532  

Included in other comprehensive income

  —      —      —      —      —      —      —      —    

Included in noncurrent payables to affiliates

  14    —      —      —      14    —      (14  —    

Included in payable for Zion Station decommissioning

  —      2    —      —      2    —      —      2  

Included in regulatory assets/liabilities

  —      —      —      —      —      (14  14    —    

Change in collateral

  —      —      (32  —      (32  —      —      198    —      198    —      —      198  

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements

            

Purchases

  169   63   334(c)   17   583   400    120    76(c)   2    598    —      —      598  

Sales

  —      (11  —      —      (11  (15  (50  (7  (8  (80  —      —      (80

Settlements

  (64  —      —      —      (64  —      —      (64

Transfers into Level 3

  —      —      39   —      39   —      —      (7  —      (7  —      —      (7

Transfers out of Level 3

  —      —      (89  —      (89  —      —      (201  (6  (207  —      —      (207
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2012

 $183  $89  $367  $17  $656 

Balance as of December 31, 2014

 $691   $184   $1,050   $3   $1,928   $(207 $—     $1,721  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

The amount of total gains included in income attributed to the change in unrealized gains related to assets and liabilities as of December 31, 2012

 $—     $—     $214  $—    $214 

The amount of total gains included in income attributed to the change in unrealized gains (losses) related to assets and liabilities held as of December 31, 2014

 $4   $—     $640   $—     $644   $—     $—     $644  

 

(a)Includes a reduction for the reclassification of $155$834 million and $114 million of realized gains due to the settlement of derivative contracts for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
(b)Includes $55 million of decreases in fair value and an increase for realized losses due to settlements of $(15) million recorded in results of operationspurchased power expense associated with floating-to-fixed energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers for the year ended December 31, 2012.
(b)Excludes $982015. Includes $13 million of increasesdecreases in fair value and $566 million ofa reduction for realized lossesgains due to settlements of $1 million for the year ended December 31, 2012 of Generation’s financial swap contract with ComEd, which eliminates upon consolidation in Exelon’s Consolidated Financial Statements. This position was de-designated as a cash flow hedge prior to the merger date.2014.
(c)Includes $310$34 million of fair value from contracts and $14 million of other investments acquired as a result of the merger.Integrys acquisition.

 

The following tables present the income statement classification of the total realized and unrealized gains (losses) included in income for Level 3 assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis during the years ended December 31, 20132015 and 2012:2014:

 

   Operating
Revenue
  Purchased
Power and
Fuel
   Other,
net(a)
 

Total gains (losses) included in income for the year ended December 31, 2013

  $(152 $108   $2 

Change in the unrealized gains relating to assets and liabilities held for the year ended December 31, 2013

  $40  $127   $1 
   Generation   Exelon 
   Operating
Revenues
   Purchased
Power and
Fuel
  Other,
net(a)
   Operating
Revenues
   Purchased
Power and
Fuel
  Other,
net(a)
 

Total gains (losses) included in net income for the year ended December 31, 2015

  $67    $(45 $4  �� $67    $(45 $4  

Change in the unrealized gains (losses) relating to assets and liabilities held for the year ended December 31, 2015

  $858    $(2 $4    $858    $(2 $4  

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

   Operating
Revenue
   Purchased
Power and
Fuel
  Other,
net
 

Total gains included in income for the year ended December 31, 2012

  $54   $5  $—   

Change in the unrealized gains (losses) relating to assets and liabilities held for the year ended December 31, 2012

  $230   $(16 $—   
   Generation   Exelon 
   Operating
Revenues
   Purchased
Power and
Fuel
  Other,
net(a)
   Operating
Revenues
   Purchased
Power and
Fuel
  Other,
net(a)
 

Total gains (losses) included in net income for the year ended December 31, 2014

  $614    $(88 $6    $614    $(88 $6  

Change in the unrealized gains (losses) relating to assets and liabilities held for the year ended December 31, 2014

  $663    $(23 $4    $663    $(23 $4  

 

(a)Other, net activity consists of realized and unrealized gains (losses) included in income for the NDT funds held by Generation.

295


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Generation

The following tables present assets and liabilities measured and recorded at fair value on Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets on a recurring basis and their level within the fair value hierarchy as of December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012:

As of December 31, 2013

  Level 1   Level 2   Level 3   Total 

Assets

        

Cash equivalents

  $1,006   $—      $—      $1,006 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments

        

Cash equivalents

   459    —       —       459 

Equity

        

Individually held

   1,776    —       —       1,776 

Exchange traded funds

   115    —       —       115 

Commingled funds

   —       2,271    —       2,271 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Equity funds subtotal

   1,891    2,271    —       4,162 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income

        

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

   882    —       —       882 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and political subdivisions of the states

   —       294    —       294 

Debt securities issued by foreign governments

   —       87    —       87 

Corporate debt securities

   —       1,753    31    1,784 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —       10    —       10 

Commercial mortgage-backed securities (non-agency)

   —       40    —       40 

Residential mortgage-backed securities (non-agency)

   —       7    —       7 

Mutual funds

   —       18    —       18 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income subtotal

   882    2,209    31    3,122 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Middle market lending

   —       —       314    314 

Private Equity

   —       —       5    5 

Other debt obligations

   —       14    —       14 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments subtotal (b)

   3,232    4,494    350    8,076 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Pledged assets for Zion Station decommissioning

        

Cash equivalents

   —       26    —       26 

Equity

        

Individually held

   16    —       —       16 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Equity funds subtotal

   16    —       —       16 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income

        

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

   45    4    —       49 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and political subdivisions of the states

   —       20    —       20 

Corporate debt securities

   —       227    —       227 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

296


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

As of December 31, 2013

  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 

Fixed income subtotal

   45   251   —      296 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Middle market lending

   —      —      112   112 

Other debt obligations

   —      1   —      1 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Pledged assets for Zion Station decommissioning subtotal (c)

   61   278   112   451 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Rabbi trust investments

     

Mutual funds (d)

   13   —      —      13 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Rabbi trust investments subtotal

   13   —      —      13 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market derivative assets

     

Economic hedges

   493   2,582   885   3,960 

Proprietary trading

   324   1,315   122   1,761 

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral (e)

   (863  (3,131  (430  (4,424
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market assets subtotal

   (46  766   577   1,297 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest Rate mark-to-market derivative assets

   30   32   —      62 

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral

   (30  (2  —      (32
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest Rate mark-to-market derivative assets subtotal

   —      30   —      30 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other investments

   —      —      15   15 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total assets

   4,266   5,568   1,054   10,888 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Liabilities

     

Commodity mark-to-market derivative liabilities

     

Economic hedges

   (540  (1,890  (397  (2,827

Proprietary trading

   (328  (1,256  (119  (1,703

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral (e)

   869   3,007   404   4,280 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market liabilities subtotal

   1   (139  (112  (250
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative liabilities

   (31  (13  —      (44

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral

   31   1   —      32 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative liabilities subtotal

   —      (12  —      (12
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Deferred compensation obligation

   —      (29  —      (29
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total liabilities

   1   (180  (112  (291
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total net assets

  $4,267  $5,388  $942  $10,597 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

297


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

As of December 31, 2012

 Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 

Assets

    

Cash equivalents (a)

 $487  $—     $—     $487 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments

    

Cash equivalents

  245   —      —      245 

Equity

    

Individually held

  1,480   —      —      1,480 

Commingled funds

  —      1,933   —      1,933 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Equity funds subtotal

  1,480   1,933   —      3,413 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Fixed income

    

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

  1,057   —      —      1,057 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and political subdivisions of the states

  —      321   —      321 

Debt securities issued by foreign governments

  —      93   —      93 

Corporate debt securities

  —      1,788   —      1,788 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

  —      24   —      24 

Commercial mortgage-backed securities (non-agency)

  —      45   —      45 

Residential mortgage-backed securities (non-agency)

  —      11   —      11 

Mutual funds

  —      23   —      23 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Fixed income subtotal

  1,057   2,305   —      3,362 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Middle market lending

  —      —      183   183 

Other debt obligations

  —      15   —      15 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments subtotal (b)

  2,782   4,253   183   7,218 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Pledged assets for Zion Station decommissioning

    

Cash equivalents

  —      23   —      23 

Equity

    

Individually held

  14   —      —      14 

Commingled funds

  —      9   —      9 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Equity funds subtotal

  14   9   —      23 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Fixed income

    

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

  118   12   —      130 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and political subdivisions of the states

  —      37   —      37 

Corporate debt securities

  —      249   —      249 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

  —      49   —      49 

Commercial mortgage-backed securities (non-agency)

  —      6   —      6 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Fixed income subtotal

  118   353   —      471 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Middle market lending

  —      —      89   89 

Other debt obligations

  —      1   —      1 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Pledged assets for Zion Station decommissioning subtotal (c)

  132   386   89   607 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Rabbi trust investments

    

Cash equivalents

  1   —      —      1 

Mutual funds (d)

  13   —      —      13 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

298


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

As of December 31, 2012

 Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 

Rabbi trust investments subtotal

  14   —      —      14 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market derivative assets

    

Economic hedges

  861   3,173   867   4,901 

Proprietary trading

  1,042   2,078   73   3,193 

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral (f)

  (1,823  (4,175  (58  (6,056
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market assets subtotal

  80   1,076   882   2,038 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative assets

  —      101   —      101 

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral

  —      (51  —      (51
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative assets subtotal

  —      50   —      50 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other investments

  2   —      17   19 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total assets

  3,497   5,765   1,171   10,433 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Liabilities

    

Commodity mark-to-market derivative liabilities

    

Economic hedges

  (1,041  (2,289  (169  (3,499

Proprietary trading

  (1,084  (1,959  (78  (3,121

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral (f)

  2,042   4,020   25   6,087 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Commodity mark-to-market liabilities subtotal

  (83  (228  (222  (533
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative liabilities

  —      (84  —      (84

Effect of netting and allocation of collateral

  —      51   —      51 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest rate mark-to-market derivative liabilities subtotal

  —      (33  —      (33)  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Deferred compensation obligation

  —      (28  —      (28
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total liabilities

  (83  (289  (222  (594
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total net assets

 $3,414  $5,476  $949  $9,839 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Excludes certain cash equivalents considered to be held-to-maturity and not reported at fair value.
(b)Excludes net assets (liabilities) of $(5) million and $30 million at December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively. These items consist of receivables related to pending securities sales, interest and dividend receivables, and payables related to pending securities purchases.
(c)Excludes net assets of $7 million at both December 31, 2013 December 31, 2012, respectively. These items consist of receivables related to pending securities sales, interest and dividend receivables, and payables related to pending securities purchases.
(d)Excludes $10 million and $8 million of the cash surrender value of life insurance investments at December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively.
(e)Includes collateral postings (received) from counterparties. Collateral (received) from counterparties, net of collateral paid to counterparties, totaled $6 million, $(124) million and $(26) million allocated to Level 1, Level 2 and Level 3 mark-to-market derivatives, respectively, as of December 31, 2013. Collateral (received) from counterparties, net of collateral paid to counterparties, totaled $219 million, $(155) million and $(33) million allocated to Level 1, Level 2 and Level 3 mark-to-market derivatives, respectively, as of December 31, 2012.
(f)The Level 3 balance includes current assets for Generation of $226 million at December 31, 2012 related to the fair value of Generation’s financial swap contract with ComEd, which eliminates upon consolidation in Exelon’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

299


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

The following tables present the fair value reconciliation of Level 3 assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis during the years ended December 31, 2013, and 2012:

For the Year Ended December 31, 2013

 Nuclear
Decommissioning
Trust Fund
Investments
  Pledged Assets for
Zion Station
Decommissioning
  Mark-to-Market
Derivatives
  Other
Investments
  Total 

Balance as of January 1, 2013

 $183  $89  $660  $17  $949 

Total unrealized / realized gains (losses)

     

Included in income

  2   —     (51)(a)(b)    —     (49

Included in other comprehensive income

  —     —     (219)(b)    2   (217

Included in noncurrent payables to affiliates

  8   —     —     —     8 

Change in collateral

  —     —     7   —     7 

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements

     

Purchases

  203   62   28   4   297 

Sales

  (28  (39  (11  (8  (86

Settlements

  (18  —     —     —     (18

Transfers into Level 3

  —     —     86(c)    1   87 

Transfers out of Level 3

  —     —     (35  (1  (36
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2013

 $350  $112  $465  $15  $942 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

The amount of total losses included in income attributed to the change in unrealized gains related to assets and liabilities held as of December 31, 2013

 $1  $—    $156  $—    $157 

(a)Includes a reduction for the reclassification of $207 million of realized gains due to the settlement of derivative contracts recorded in results of operations for the year ended December 31, 2013.
(b)Includes $11 million of increases in fair value and realized losses due to settlements of $215 million associated with Generation’s financial swap contract with ComEd for the year ended December 31, 2013. All items eliminate upon consolidation in Exelon’s Consolidated Financial Statements.
(c)Includes an increase of transfers into Level 3 arising from reductions in market liquidity, which resulted in less observable contract tenures in various locations.

300


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

For the Year Ended December 31, 2012

 Nuclear
Decommissioning
Trust Fund
Investments
  Pledged Assets for
Zion Station
Decommissioning
  Mark-to-Market
Derivatives
  Other
Investments
  Total 

Balance as of January 1, 2012

 $13  $37  $817  $—    $867 

Total realized / unrealized gains (losses)

     

Included in income

  —     —     66(a)   —     66 

Included in other comprehensive income

  —     —     (475)(b)   —     (475

Included in noncurrent payables to affiliates

  1   —     —     —     1 

Changes in collateral

  —     —     (32  —     (32

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements

     

Purchases

  169   63   334(c)   17   583 

Sales

  —     (11  —     —     (11

Transfers into Level 3

  —     —     39   —     39 

Transfers out of Level 3

  —     —     (89  —     (89
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2012

 $183  $89  $660   17  $949 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

The amount of total gains included in income attributed to the change in unrealized gains related to assets and liabilities as of December 31, 2012

 $—    $—    $165  

$

—  

 

 $165 

(a)Includes a reduction for the reclassification of $99 million of realized gains due to the settlement of derivative contracts recorded in results of operations for the year ended December 31, 2012.
(b)Includes $98 million of increases in fair value and $566 million of realized losses reclassified from OCI due to settlements associated with Generation’s financial swap contract with ComEd for the year ended December 31, 2012. This position was de-designated as a cash flow hedge prior to the merger date. All prospective changes in fair value and reclassifications of realized amounts are being recorded to income offset by the amortization of the frozen mark in OCI. All items eliminate upon consolidation in Exelon’s Consolidated Financial Statements.
(c)Includes $310 million of fair value from contracts and $14 million of other investments acquired as a result of the merger.

The following tables present the income statement classification of the total realized and unrealized gains (losses) included in income for Level 3 assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis during the years ended December 31, 2013, and 2012:

  Operating
Revenue
  Purchased
Power and
Fuel
  Other -
net(a)
 

Total gains (losses) included in income for the year ended December 31, 2013

 $(158 $107  $2 

Change in the unrealized gains relating to assets and liabilities held for the year ended December 31, 2013

 $30  $126  $1 
  Operating
Revenue
  Purchased
Power and
Fuel
  Other -
net (a)
 

Total gains included in income for the year ended December 31, 2012

 $61  $5  $—   

Change in the unrealized gains (losses) relating to assets and liabilities held for the year ended December 31, 2012

 $181  $(16 $—   

301


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

(a)Other, net activity consists of realized and unrealized gains (losses) included in income for the NDT funds held by Generation.

ComEd

The following tables present assets and liabilities measured and recorded at fair value on ComEd’s Consolidated Balance Sheets on a recurring basis and their level within the fair value hierarchy as of December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012:

As of December 31, 2013

  Level 1   Level 2  Level 3  Total 

Assets

      

Rabbi trust investments

      

Mutual funds

   5    —     —     5 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Rabbi trust investments subtotal

   5    —     —     5 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total assets

   5    —     —     5 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Liabilities

      

Deferred compensation obligation

   —      (8  —     (8

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities(b)

   —      —     (193  (193
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total liabilities

   —      (8  (193  (201
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total net assets (liabilities)

  $5   $(8 $(193 $(196
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

As of December 31, 2012

  Level 1   Level 2  Level 3  Total 

Assets

      

Cash equivalents

  $111   $ —    $—    $111 

Rabbi trust investments

      

Mutual funds

   8    —     —     8 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Rabbi trust investments subtotal

   8    —     —     8 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total assets

   119    —     —     119 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Liabilities

      

Deferred compensation obligation

   —      (8  —     (8

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities(a)(b)

   —      —     (293  (293
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total liabilities

   —      (8  (293  (301
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total net assets (liabilities)

  $119   $(8 $(293 $(182
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

(a)The Level 3 balance includes the current liability of $226 million at December 31, 2012, related to the fair value of ComEd’s financial swap contract with Generation which eliminates upon consolidation in Exelon’s Consolidated Financial Statements.
(b)The Level 3 balance includes the current and noncurrent liability of $17 million and $176 million at December 31, 2013, respectively, and $18 million and $49 million at December 31, 2012, respectively, related to floating-to-fixed energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers.

The following tables present the fair value reconciliation of Level 3 assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis during the year ended and December 31, 2013, and 2012:

For the Year Ended December 31, 2013

  Mark-to-Market
Derivatives
 

Balance as of January 1, 2013

  $(293

Total realized / unrealized gains included in regulatory assets(a)(b)

   100 
  

 

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2013

  $(193
  

 

 

 

(a)Includes $11 million of decreases in fair value and realized gains due to settlements of $215 million associated with ComEd’s financial swap contract with Generation for the year ended December 31, 2013. All items eliminate upon consolidation in Exelon’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

302


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

(b)Includes $133 million of increases in the fair value and realized losses due to settlements of $7 million recorded in purchased power expense associated with floating-to-fixed energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers for the year ended December 31, 2013.

Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2012

  Mark-to-Market
Derivatives
 

Balance as of January 1, 2012

  $(800

Total realized / unrealized gains included in regulatory assets(a)(b)

   507 
  

 

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2012

  $(293
  

 

 

 

(a)Includes $98 million of increases in fair value and $566 million of realized gains due to settlements associated with ComEd’s financial swap contract with Generation for the year ended December 31, 2012. All items eliminate upon consolidation in Exelon’s Consolidated Financial Statements.
(b)Includes $34 million of decreases in the fair value and realized losses due to settlements of $5 million recorded in purchased power expense associated with floating-to-fixed energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers for the year ended December 31, 2012.

PECO

The following tables present assets and liabilities measured and recorded at fair value on PECO’s Consolidated Balance Sheets on a recurring basis and their level within the fair value hierarchy as of December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012:

As of December 31, 2013

  Level 1   Level 2  Level 3   Total 

Assets

       

Cash equivalents

  $175   $—    $—     $175 

Rabbi trust investments

       

Mutual funds(a)

   9    —     —      9 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Rabbi trust investments subtotal

   9    —     —      9 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total assets

   184    —     —      184 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Liabilities

       

Deferred compensation obligation

   —      (17  —      (17
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total liabilities

   —      (17  —      (17
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total net assets (liabilities)

  $184   $(17 $—     $167 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

As of December 31, 2012

  Level 1   Level 2  Level 3   Total 

Assets

       

Cash equivalents

  $346   $—    $—     $346 

Rabbi trust investments

       

Mutual funds(a)

   9    —     —      9 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Rabbi trust investments subtotal

   9    —     —      9 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total assets

   355    —     —      355 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Liabilities

       

Deferred compensation obligation

   —      (18  —      (18
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total liabilities

   —      (18  —      (18
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total net assets (liabilities)

  $355   $(18 $—     $337 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

303


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

(a)Excludes $14 million and $13 million of the cash surrender value of life insurance investments at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

PECO had no Level 3 assets or liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis during the year ended December 31, 2013 and 2012.

BGE

The following tables present assets and liabilities measured and recorded at fair value on BGE’s Consolidated Balance Sheets on a recurring basis and their level within the fair value hierarchy as of December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012:

As of December 31, 2013

  Level 1   Level 2  Level 3   Total 

Assets

       

Cash equivalents

  $31   $—    $—     $31 

Rabbi trust investments

       

Mutual funds

   6    —     —      6 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Rabbi trust investments subtotal

   6    —     —      6 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total assets

   37    —     —      37 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Liabilities

       

Deferred compensation obligation

   —      (6  —      (6
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total liabilities

   —      (6  —      (6
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total net assets (liabilities)

  $37   $(6 $—     $31 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

As of December 31, 2012

  Level 1   Level 2  Level 3   Total 

Assets

       

Cash equivalents

  $33   $—    $—     $33 

Rabbi trust investments

       

Mutual funds

   5    —     —      5 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Rabbit trust investments subtotal

   5    —     —      5 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total assets

   38    —     —      38 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Liabilities

       

Deferred compensation obligation

   —      (5  —      (5
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total liabilities

   —      (5  —      (5
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total net assets (liabilities)

  $38   $(5 $—     $33 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

BGE had no Level 3 assets or liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis during the year ended December 31, 2013.

 

Valuation Techniques Used to Determine Fair Value

 

The following describes the valuation techniques used to measure the fair value of the assets and liabilities shown in the tables above.

304


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Cash Equivalents (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE).The Registrants’ cash equivalents include investments with maturities of three months or less when purchased. The cash equivalents shown in the fair value tables are comprised of investments in mutual and money market funds. The fair values of the shares of these funds are based on observable market prices and, therefore, have been categorized in Level 1 in the fair value hierarchy.

 

Nuclear Decommissioning Trust Fund Investments and Pledged Assets for Zion Station Decommissioning (Exelon and Generation).The trust fund investments have been established to satisfy Generation’s and CENG’s nuclear decommissioning obligations as required by the NRC. The NDT funds hold debt and equity securities directly and indirectly through commingled funds.funds and mutual funds, which are included in Equities, Fixed Income and Other. Generation’s and CENG’s NDT fund investments policies outline investment policies place limitations onguidelines for the typestrusts and investment grade ratings of the securities that may be held by the trusts. These policies limit the trust funds’ exposures to investments in highly illiquid markets and other alternative investments. Investments with maturities of three months or less when purchased, including certain short-term fixed income securities are considered cash equivalents and included in the recurring fair value measurements hierarchy as Level 1 or Level 2.

 

With respect to individually held equity securities, the trustees obtain prices from pricing services, whose prices are obtained from direct feeds from market exchanges, which Generation is able to independently corroborate. The fair values of equity securities held directly by the trust funds are based on quoted prices in active markets and are categorized in Level 1. Equity securities held individually are primarily traded on the New York Stock Exchange and NASDAQ-Global Select Market, which contain only actively traded securities due to the volume trading requirements imposed by these exchanges.

 

For fixed income securities, multiple prices from pricing services are obtained whenever possible, which enables cross-provider validations in addition to checks for unusual daily movements. A primary price source is identified based on asset type, class or issue for each security. TheWith respect to individually held fixed income securities, the trustees monitor prices supplied by pricing services and may use a supplemental price source or change the primary price source of a given security if the portfolio managers challenge an assigned price and the trustees determine that another price source is considered to be preferable. Generation has obtained an understanding of how these prices are

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

derived, including the nature and observability of the inputs used in deriving such prices. Additionally, Generation selectively corroborates the fair values of securities by comparison to other market-based price sources. U.S. Treasury securities are categorized as Level 1 because they trade in a highly liquid and transparent market. The fair values of fixed income securities, excluding U.S. Treasury securities, are based on evaluated prices that reflect observable market information, such as actual trade information or similar securities, adjusted for observable differences and are categorized in Level 2. The fair values of private placement fixed income securities, which are included in Corporate debt, are determined using a third party valuation that contains certain significant unobservable inputs and are categorized in Level 3.

 

Equity, balanced and fixed income commingled funds and fixed income mutual funds are maintained by investment companies and hold certain investments in accordance with a stated set of fund objectives. The fair values of fixed income commingled and mutual funds held within the trust funds, which generally hold short-termobjectives such as holding short term fixed income securities and are not subject to restrictions regarding the purchase or sale of shares, are derived from observable prices. The objectives of the remaining equity commingled funds in which Exelon and Generation invest primarily seek to tracktracking the performance of certain equity indices by purchasing equity securities to replicate the capitalization and characteristics of the indices. CommingledThe values of some of these funds are publicly quoted. For mutual funds which are publicly quoted, the funds are valued based on quoted prices in active markets and have been categorized as Level 1. For commingled funds and mutual funds, which are categorized in Level 2 becausenot publicly quoted, the fund administrators value the funds using NAV as a practical expedient for fair value, of the funds are based on NAVs per fund share (the unit of account),which is primarily derived from the quoted prices in active markets on the underlying equity securities.

These investments typically can be redeemed monthly with 30 or less days of notice and without further restrictions, and, as a result are categorized as Level 2.

 

305


Combined NotesDerivative instruments consisting primarily of interest rate swaps to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

(Dollars in millions, except per sharemanage risk are recorded at fair value. Derivative instruments are valued based on external price data unless otherwise noted)of comparable securities and have been categorized as Level 2.

 

Middle market lending are investments in loans or managed funds which invest inlend to private companies. Generation elected the fair value option for its investments in certain limited partnerships that invest in middle market lending managed funds. The fair value of these loans is determined using a combination of valuation models including cost models, market models, and income models. Investments in middle market lending are categorized as Level 3 because the fair value of these securities is based largely on inputs that are unobservable and utilize complex valuation models. Investments in middle market lending typically cannot be redeemed until maturity of the term loan.

 

Private equity and real estate investments include those in limited partnerships that invest in operating companies and real estate holding companies that are not publicly traded on a stock exchange, such as,leveraged buyouts, growth capital, venture capital, distressed investments, investments in natural resources, and direct investments in pools of real estate properties. The fair value of private equity and real estate investments is determined using NAV or its equivalent as a practical expedient. These investments typically cannot be redeemed and are generally liquidated over a period of 8 to 10 years from the initial investment date. Private equity and real estate valuations are reported by the fund manager and are based on the valuation of the underlying investments, which include inputs such as cost, operating results, discounted future cash flows, market based comparable data, and independent appraisals from sources with professional qualifications. Since these valuation inputs are not highly observable, private equity and real estate investments have been categorized as Level 3.

As of December 31, 2015, Generation has outstanding commitments to invest in middle market lending, corporate debt securities, private equity investments, and real estate investments of approximately $266 million. These commitments will be funded by Generation’s existing nuclear decommissioning trust funds.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Concentrations of Credit Risk. Generation evaluated its NDT portfolios for the existence of significant concentrations of credit risk as of December 31, 2015. Types of concentrations that were evaluated include, but are not limited to, investment concentrations in a single entity, type of industry, foreign country, and individual fund. As of December 31, 2015, there were no significant concentrations (generally defined as greater than 10 percent) of risk in Generation’s NDT assets.

See Note 16—Asset Retirement Obligations for further discussion on the NDT fund investments.

Rabbi Trust Investments (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE).The Rabbi trusts were established to hold assets related to deferred compensation plans existing for certain active and retired members of Exelon’s executive management and directors. The investments in the Rabbi trusts assets are included in investments in the Registrants’ Consolidated Balance Sheets and consist primarily of mutual funds. Thesefunds and life insurance policies. The mutual funds are maintained by investment companies and hold certain investments in accordance with a stated set of fund objectives, which are consistent with Exelon’s overall investment strategy. Mutual funds are publicly quoted and have been categorized as Level 1 given the clear observability of the prices. The life insurance policies are valued using the cash surrender value of the policies, which is provided by a third party. The cash surrender value inputs are not observable.

 

Mark-to-Market Derivatives (Exelon, Generation, and ComEd). Derivative contracts are traded in both exchange-based and non-exchange-based markets. Exchange-based derivatives that are valued using unadjusted quoted prices in active markets are categorized in Level 1 in the fair value hierarchy. Certain derivatives’ pricing is verified using indicative price quotations available through brokers or over-the-counter, on-line exchanges and are categorized in Level 2. These price quotations reflect the average of the bid-ask, mid-point prices and are obtained from sources that the Registrants believe provide the most liquid market for the commodity. The price quotations are reviewed and corroborated to ensure the prices are observable and representative of an orderly transaction between market participants. This includes consideration of actual transaction volumes, market delivery points, bid-ask spreads and contract duration. The remainder of derivative contracts are valued using the Black model, an industry standard option valuation model. The Black model takes into account inputs such as contract terms, including maturity, and market parameters, including assumptions of the future prices of energy, interest rates, volatility, credit worthiness and credit spread. For derivatives that trade in liquid markets, such as generic forwards, swaps and options, model inputs are generally observable. Suchobservable.Such instruments are categorized in Level 2. The Registrants’ derivatives are predominately at liquid trading points. For derivatives that trade in less liquid markets with limited pricing information model inputs generally would include both observable and unobservable inputs. These valuations may include an estimated basis adjustment from an illiquid trading point to a liquid trading point for which active price quotations are available. Such instruments are categorized in Level 3.

Transfers in and out of levels are recognized as of the end of the reporting period the transfer occurred. Given derivatives categorized within Level 1 are valued using exchange-based quoted prices within observable periods, transfers between Level 2 and Level 1 were not material. Transfers into Level 2 from Level 3 generally occur when the contract tenure becomes more observable. Transfers into Level 3 from Level 2 generally occur due to changes in market liquidity or assumptions for certain commodity contracts.

 

Exelon may utilize fixed-to-floating interest rate swaps, which are typically designated as fair value hedges, as a means to achieve its targeted level of variable-rate debt as a percent of total debt. In addition, the Registrants may utilize interest rate derivatives to lock in interest rate levels in anticipation of future financings. These interest rate derivatives are typically designated as cash flow hedges. Exelon determines the current fair value by calculating the net present value of expected payments and receipts under the swap agreement, based on and discounted by the market’s expectation of

306


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

future interest rates. Additional inputs to the net present value calculation may include the contract terms, counterparty credit risk and other market parameters. As these inputs are based on observable data and valuations of similar instruments, the interest rate swaps are categorized in Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy. See Note 12—13—Derivative Financial Instruments for further discussion on mark-to-market derivatives.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Deferred Compensation Obligations (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE).The Registrants’ deferred compensation plans allow participants to defer certain cash compensation into a notional investment account. The Registrants include such plans in other current and noncurrent liabilities in their Consolidated Balance Sheets. The value of the Registrants’ deferred compensation obligations is based on the market value of theofthe participants’ notional investment accounts. The underlying notional investments are comprised primarily of equities, mutual funds, commingled funds, and fixed income securities which are based on directly and indirectly observable market prices. However, sinceSince the deferred compensation obligations themselves are not exchanged in an active market, they are categorized as Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy.

 

Additional Information Regarding Level 3 Fair Value Measurements (Exelon, Generation, ComEd)

 

Mark-to-Market Derivatives (Exelon, Generation, ComEd). For valuations that include both observable and unobservable inputs, if the unobservable input is determined to be significant to the overall inputs, the entire valuation is categorized in Level 3. This includes derivatives valued using indicative price quotations whose contract tenure extends into unobservable periods. In instances where observable data is unavailable, consideration is given to the assumptions that market participants would use in valuing the asset or liability. This includes assumptions about market risks such as liquidity, volatility and contract duration. Such instruments are categorized in Level 3 as the model inputs generally are not observable. Exelon’s RMC approves risk management policies and objectives for risk assessment, control and valuation, counterparty credit approval, and the monitoring and reporting of risk exposures. The RMC is chaired by the chief riskexecutive officer and includes the chief risk officer, chief strategy officer, chief executive officer of Exelon Utilities, chief commercial officer, chief financial officer corporate controller, general counsel, treasurer, vice presidentand chief executive officer of strategy, vice president of audit services and officers representing Exelon’s business units.Constellation. The RMC reports to the Finance and Risk Committee of the Exelon boardBoard of directorsDirectors on the scope of the risk management activities and is responsible for approving all valuation procedures at Exelon.activities. Forward price curves for the power market utilized by the front office to manage the portfolio, are reviewed and verified by the middle office, and used for financial reporting by the back office. The Registrants consider credit and nonperformance risk in the valuation of derivative contracts categorized in Level 2 and 3, including both historical and current market data in its assessment of credit and nonperformance risk by counterparty. Due to master netting agreements and collateral posting requirements, the impacts of credit and nonperformance risk were not material to the financial statements.

 

Disclosed below is detail surrounding the Registrants’ significant Level 3 valuations. The calculated fair value includes marketability discounts for margining provisions and notional size.other attributes. Generation’s Level 3 balance generally consists of forward sales and purchases of power and natural gas, coal purchases and certain transmission congestion contracts, and project financing debt.contracts. Generation utilizes various inputs and factors including market data and assumptions that market participants would use in pricing assets or liabilities as well as assumptions about the risks inherent in the inputs to the valuation technique. The inputs and factors include forward commodity prices, commodity price volatility, contractual volumes, delivery location, interest rates, credit quality of counterparties and credit enhancements.

307


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

For commodity derivatives, the primary input to the valuation models is the forward commodity price curve for each instrument. Forward commodity price curves are derived by risk management for liquid locations and by the traders and portfolio managers for illiquid locations. All locations are reviewed and verified by risk management considering published exchange transaction prices, executed bilateral transactions, broker quotes, and other observable or public data sources. The relevant forward commodity curve used to value each of the derivatives depends on a number of factors, including commodity type, delivery location, and delivery period. Price volatility varies by

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

commodity and location. When appropriate, Generation discounts future cash flows using risk free interest rates with adjustments to reflect the credit quality of each counterparty for assets and Generation’s own credit quality for liabilities. The level of observability of a forward commodity price isvaries generally due to the delivery location and delivery period. Certain delivery locations including PJM West Hub (for power) and Henry Hub (for natural gas) are highlymore liquid and prices are observable for up to three years in the future. The observability period of volatility is generally shorter than the underlying power curve used in option valuations. The forward curve for a less liquid location is estimated by using the forward curve from the liquid location and applying a spread to represent the cost to transport the commodity to the delivery location. This spread does not typically represent a majority of the instrument’s market price. As a result, the change in fair value is closely tied to liquid market movements and not a change in the applied spread. The change in fair value associated with a change in the spread is generally immaterial. An average spread calculated across all Level 3 power and gas delivery locations is approximately $3.92$2.91 and $0.12$0.27 for power and natural gas, respectively. Many of the commodity derivatives are short term in nature and thus a majority of the fair value may be based on observable inputs even though the contract as a whole must be classified as Level 3. See ITEM 7A.—QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK for information regarding the maturity by year of the Registrant’s mark-to-market derivative assets and liabilities.

 

On December 17, 2010, ComEd entered into several 20-year floating to fixed energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers for the procurement of long-term renewable energy and associated RECs. See Note 12—13—Derivative Financial Instruments for more information. The fair value of these swaps has been designated as a Level 3 valuation due to the long tenure of the positions and internal modeling assumptions. The modeling assumptions include using natural gas heat rates to project long term forward power curves adjusted by a renewable factor that incorporates time of day and seasonality factors to reflect accurate renewable energy pricing. In addition, marketability reserves are applied to the positions based on the tenor and supplier risk.

The table below discloses the significant inputs to the forward curve used to value these positions.

 

Type of trade

 Fair Value at
December 31, 2015
  Valuation
Technique
 Unobservable
Input
 Range 

Mark-to-market derivatives—Economic hedges (Generation)(a)(c)

 $857   Discounted

Cash Flow

 Forward power

price

  $11 - $88(d) 
   Forward gas
price
  $1.18 - $8.95(d) 
  Option Model Volatility
percentage
  5% - 152%  

Mark-to-market derivatives—Proprietary trading (Generation) (a)(c)

 $(7 Discounted

Cash Flow

 Forward power
price
  $13 - $78(d) 

Mark-to-market derivatives (ComEd)

 $(247 Discounted

Cash Flow

 Forward heat
rate
(b)
  9x - 10x  
   Marketability
reserve
  3.5% - 7%  
   Renewable
factor
  87% - 128%  

308

(a)The valuation techniques, unobservable inputs and ranges are the same for the asset and liability positions.
(b)Quoted forward natural gas rates are utilized to project the forward power curve for the delivery of energy at specified future dates. The natural gas curve is extrapolated beyond its observable period to the end of the contract’s delivery.


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

The table below discloses the significant inputs to the forward curve used to value these positions.

(c)The fair values do not include cash collateral posted on level three positions of $201 million as of December 31, 2015.
(d)Unlike the previous year, the New England region was not a significant driver for the upper end of the ranges for power and gas as of December 31, 2015.

 

Type of trade

 Fair Value at
December 31, 2013 (c)
 Valuation
Technique
 Unobservable
Input
 Range  Fair Value at
December 31, 2014
 Valuation
Technique
 Unobservable
Input
 Range 

Mark-to-market derivatives—Economic Hedges (Generation) (a)

 $488  Discounted
Cash Flow
 Forward power
price
  $8 - $176(d) 

Mark-to-market derivatives—Economic hedges (Generation)(a)(c)

 $893   Discounted

Cash Flow

 Forward power
price
  $15 - $120(d) 
   Forward gas
price

Volatility

  $2.98 - $16.63(d)    Forward gas
price
  $1.52 - $14.02(d) 
  Option Model percentage  15% - 142%    Option Model Volatility
percentage
  8% - 257%  

Mark-to-market derivatives—Proprietary trading (Generation) (a)

 $3  Discounted
Cash Flow
 Forward power
price

Volatility

  $10 - $176(d) 
  Option Model percentage  14% - 19%  

Mark-to-market derivatives— Proprietary trading (Generation)(a)(c)

 $(15 Discounted

Cash Flow

 Forward power
price
  $15 - $117(d) 

Mark-to-market derivatives (ComEd)

 $(193 Discounted
Cash Flow
 Forward heat
rate
(b)
  8 - 9  $(207 Discounted

Cash Flow

 Forward heat
rate
(b)
  8x - 9x  
   Marketability
reserve
  3.5% - 8%     Marketability
reserve
  3.5% - 8%  
   Renewable
factor
  84% -128%     Renewable
factor
  86% - 126%  

 

a)(a)The valuation techniques, unobservable inputs and ranges are the same for the asset and liability positions.
b)(b)Quoted forward natural gas rates are utilized to project the forward power curve for the delivery of energy at specified future dates. The natural gas curve is extrapolated beyond its observable period to the end of the contract’s delivery.
c)(c)The fair values do not include cash collateral heldposted on Level 3level three positions of $26$172 million as of December 31, 2013.2014
d)(d)The upper ends of the ranges are driven by the winter power and gas prices in the New England region. Without the New England region, the upper ends of the ranges for power and gas would be approximately $100$97 and $5.70, respectively.

Type of trade

 Fair Value at
December 31, 2012 (d)
  Valuation
Technique
 Unobservable
Input
 

Range

Mark-to-market derivatives—Economic Hedges (Generation)(a)

 $473  Discounted
Cash Flow
 Forward power
price
 $14 - $79
   Forward gas
price

Volatility

 $3.26 - $6.27
  Option Model percentage 28% - 132%

Mark-to-market derivatives—Proprietary trading (Generation)(a)

 $(6 Discounted
Cash Flow
 Forward power
price

Volatility

 $15 - $106
  Option Model percentage 16% - 48%

Mark-to-market derivatives—Transactions with affiliates (Generation and ComEd)(b)

 $226  Discounted
Cash Flow
 Marketability
reserve
 8% - 9%

Mark-to-market derivatives (ComEd)

 $(67 Discounted
Cash Flow
 Forward heat
rate
(c)
 8% - 9.5%
   Marketability
reserve
 3.5% - 8.3%
   Renewable
factor
 81% - 123%

309


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

a)The valuation techniques, unobservable inputs$8.14, respectively and ranges are the samewould be approximately $76 for the asset and liability positions.
b)Includes current assets for Generation and current liabilities for ComEd of $226 million, related to the fair value of the five-year financial swap contract between Generation and ComEd that ended in May 2013, which eliminates in consolidation.
c)Quoted forward natural gas rates are utilized to project the forward power curve for the delivery of energy at specified future dates. The natural gas curve is extrapolated beyond its observable period to the end of the contract’s delivery.
d)The fair values do not include cash collateral held on Level 3 positions of $33 million as of December 31, 2012.proprietary trading.

 

The inputs listed above would have a direct impact on the fair values of the above instruments if they were adjusted. The significant unobservable inputs used in the fair value measurement of Generation’s commodity derivatives are forward commodity prices and for options is price volatility. Increases (decreases) in the forward commodity price in isolation would result in significantly higher (lower) fair values for long positions (contracts that give Generation the obligation or option to purchase a commodity), with offsetting impacts to short positions (contracts that give Generation the obligation or right to sell a commodity). Increases (decreases) in volatility would increase (decrease) the value for the holder of the option (writer of the option). Generally, a change in the estimate of forward commodity prices is unrelated to a change in the estimate of volatility of prices. An increase to the reserves listed above would decrease the fair value of the positions. An increase to the heat rate or renewable factors would increase the fair value accordingly. Generally, interrelationships exist between market prices of natural gas and power. As such, an increase in natural gas pricing would potentially have a similar impact on forward power markets.

 

Nuclear Decommissioning Trust Fund Investments and Pledged Assets for Zion Station Decommissioning (Exelon and Generation). For middle market lending, certain corporate debt securities, real estate and private equity investments the fair value is determined using a combination of valuation models including cost models, market models and income models. The valuation estimates are based on valuations of comparable companies, discounting the forecasted cash flows of the portfolio company, estimating the liquidation or collateral value of the portfolio company or its assets, considering offers from third parties to buy the portfolio company, its historical and projected

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

financial results, as well as other factors that may impact value. Significant judgment is required in the application of discounts or premiums applied to the prices of comparable companies for factors such as size, marketability, credit risk and relative performance.

 

Because Generation relies on third-party fund managers to develop the quantitative unobservable inputs without adjustment for the valuations of its’its Level 3 investments, quantitative information about significant unobservable inputs used in valuing these investments is not reasonably available to Generation. This includes information regarding the sensitivity of the fair values to changes in the unobservable inputs. Generation gains an understanding of the fund managers’ inputs and assumptions used in preparing the valuations. Generation performed procedures to assess the reasonableness of the valuations. For a sample of its’its Level 3 investments, Generation reviewed independent valuations and reviewed the assumptions in the detailed pricing models used by the fund managers.

 

As of December 31, 2013, Generation has outstanding commitments to invest in middle market lending, corporate debt securities, and private equity investments of approximately $448 million. These commitments will be funded by Generation’s existing nuclear decommissioning trust funds.

12.13. Derivative Financial Instruments (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The Registrants are exposeduse derivative instruments to certain risksmanage commodity price risk, foreign currency exchange rate risk, and interest rate risk related to ongoing business operations. The primary risks managed by using derivative instruments are commodity price risk and interest rate risk.

310


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Commodity Price Risk (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

To the extent the amount of energy Exelon generatesGeneration produces differs from the amount of energy it has contracted to sell, the RegistrantsExelon and Generation are exposed to market fluctuations in the prices of electricity, fossil fuels and other commodities. TheEach of the Registrants employ established policies and procedures to manage their risks associated with market fluctuations in commodity prices by entering into physical and financial derivative contracts, including swaps, futures, forwards, options and short-term and long-term commitments to purchase and sell energy and energy-related products. The Registrants believe these instruments, which are classified as either economic hedges or non-derivatives, mitigate exposure to fluctuations in commodity prices.

 

Derivative accounting guidance requires that derivative instruments be recognized as either assets or liabilities at fair value, with changes in fair value of the derivative recognized in earnings each period. Other accounting treatments are available through special election and designation, provided they meet specific, restrictive criteria both at the time of designation and on an ongoing basis. These alternative permissible accounting treatments include normal purchase normal sale (NPNS), cash flow hedge, and fair value hedge. For commodity transactions, effective with the date of merger with Constellation, Generation no longer utilizes the special election provided for by the cash flow hedge designation and de-designated all of its existing cash flow hedges prior to the Constellation merger. Because the underlying forecasted transactions remain at least reasonably possible,remained probable, the fair value of the effective portion of these cash flow hedges was frozen in accumulatedAccumulated OCI and was reclassified to results of operations when the forecasted purchase or sale of the energy commodity occurs, or becomes probable of not occurring. None of Constellation’s designated cash flow hedges for commodity transactions prior to the merger were re-designated as cash flow hedges.occurred. The effect of this decision is that all derivative economic hedges forrelated to commodities are recorded at fair value through earnings for the combined company, referred to as economic hedges in the following tables. The Registrants have applied the NPNS scope exception to certain derivative contracts for the forward sale of generation, power procurement agreements, and natural gas supply agreements. Non-derivative contracts for access to additional generation and certain sales to load-serving entities are accounted for primarily under the accrual method of accounting, which is further discussed in Note 22—23—Commitments and Contingencies. Additionally, Generation is exposed to certain market risks through its proprietary trading activities. The proprietary trading activities are a complement to Generation’s energy marketing portfolio, but represent a small portion of Generation’s overall energy marketing activities.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Economic Hedging.The Registrants are exposed to commodity price risk primarily relating to changes in the market price of electricity, fossil fuels, and other commodities associated with price movements resulting from changes in supply and demand, fuel costs, market liquidity, weather conditions, governmental regulatory and environmental policies, and other factors. Within Exelon, Generation has the most exposure to commodity price risk. As such, Generation uses a variety of derivative and non-derivative instruments to manage the commodity price risk of its electric generation facilities, including power and gas sales, fuel and energy purchases, natural gas transportation and pipeline capacity agreements and other energy-related products marketed and purchased. In order to manage these risks, Generation may enter into fixed-price derivative or non-derivative contracts to hedge the variability in future cash flows from forecasted sales of energy and gas and purchases of fuel and energy. The objectives for entering into such hedges include fixing the price for a portion of anticipated future electricity sales at a level that provides an acceptable return on electric generation operations, fixing the price of a portion of anticipated fuel purchases for the operation of power plants, and fixing thefixingthe price for a portion of anticipated energy purchases to supply load-serving customers. The portion of forecasted transactions hedged may vary based upon management’s policies and hedging objectives, the market, weather conditions, operational and other factors. Generation is also exposed to

311


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

differences between the locational settlement prices of certain economic hedges and the hedged generating units. This price difference is actively managed through other instruments which include derivative congestion products, whose changes in fair value are recognized in earnings each period, and auction revenue rights, which are accounted for on an accrual basis.

 

In general, increases and decreases in forward market prices have a positive and negative impact, respectively, on Generation’s owned and contracted generation positions that have not been hedged. Generation hedges commodity price risk on a ratable basis over three-year periods. As of December 31, 2013,2015, the percentageproportion of expected generation hedged for the major reportable segments was 92%-95%90%-93%, 62%-65%60%-63% and 30%-33%28%-31% for 2014, 2015,2016, 2017, and 2016,2018, respectively. The percentage of expected generation hedged is the amount of equivalent sales divided by the expected generation. Expected generation representsis the amountvolume of energy estimated to be generated or purchased throughthat best represents our commodity position in energy markets from owned or contracted capacity.for capacity based upon a simulated dispatch model that makes assumptions regarding future market conditions, which are calibrated to market quotes for power, fuel, load following products, and options. Equivalent sales represent all hedging products, which include economic hedges and certain non-derivative contracts, including Generation’s sales to ComEd, PECO and BGE to serve their retail load.

In order to fulfill a requirement of the Illinois Settlement Legislation, Generation and ComEd entered into a five-year financial swap contract that expired May 31, 2013. The financial swap was designed to hedge spot market purchases, which, along with ComEd’s remaining energy procurement contracts, met its load service requirements. The terms of the financial swap contract required Generation to pay the around-the-clock market price for a portion of ComEd’s electricity supply requirement, while ComEd paid a fixed price.

As the contract expired May 31, 2013, all realized impacts have been included in Generation’s and ComEd’s results of operations. In Exelon’s consolidated financial statements, all financial statement effects of the financial swap recorded by Generation and ComEd are eliminated.

In addition, the physical contracts that Generation has entered into with ComEd and that ComEd has entered into with Generation and other suppliers as part of the ComEd power procurement process, which are further discussed in Note 3—Regulatory Matters, qualify and are accounted for under the NPNS exception. Based on the Illinois Settlement Legislation and ICC-approved procurement methodologies permitting ComEd to recover its electricity procurement costs from retail customers with no mark-up, ComEd’s price risk related to power procurement is limited.

 

On December 17, 2010, ComEd entered into several 20-year floating-to-fixed energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers for the procurement of long-term renewable energy and associated RECs. Delivery under the contracts began in June 2012. Pursuant to the ICC’s Order on December 19, 2012, ComEd’s commitments under the existing long-term contracts for energy and associated RECs were reduced for the June 2013 through May 2014 procurement period. In addition, the ICC’s December 18, 2013 Order approved the reduction of ComEd’s commitments under those contracts for the June 2014 through May 2015 procurement period, and the amount of the reductions was approved in the first quarter of 2013.March 2014. These contracts are designed to lock in a portion of the long-term commodity price risk resulting from the renewable energy resource procurement requirements in the Illinois Settlement Legislation. ComEd has not elected hedge accounting for these derivative financial instruments. ComEd records the fair value of the swap contracts on its balance sheet. Because ComEd receives full cost recovery for energy procurement and related costs from retail customers, the change in fair value each period is recorded by ComEd as a regulatory asset or liability. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

PECO has contracts to procure electric supply that were executed through the competitive procurement process outlined in its PAPUC-approved DSP Programs, which are further discussed in Note 3—Regulatory Matters. Based on Pennsylvania legislation and the DSP Programs permitting

312


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

PECO to recover its electric supply procurement costs from retail customers with no mark-up, PECO’s price risk related to electric supply procurement is limited. PECO locked in fixed prices for a significant portion of its commodity price risk through full requirements contracts and block contracts. PECO has certain full requirements contracts and block contracts that are considered derivatives and qualify for the NPNS scope exception under current derivative authoritative guidance.

 

PECO’s natural gas procurement policy is designed to achieve a reasonable balance of long-term and short-term gas purchases under different pricing approaches in order to achieve system supply reliability at the least cost. PECO’s reliability strategy is two-fold. First, PECO must assure that there is sufficient transportation capacity to satisfy delivery requirements. Second, PECO must ensure that a firm source of supply exists to utilize the capacity resources. All of PECO’s natural gas supply and asset management agreements that are derivatives either qualify for the NPNS scope exception and have been designated as such, or have no mark-to-market balances because the derivatives are index priced. Additionally, in accordance with the 20132015 PAPUC PGC settlement and to reduce the exposure of PECO and its customers to natural gas price volatility, PECO has continued its program to purchase natural gas for both winter and summer supplies using a layered approach of locking-in prices ahead of each season with long-term gas purchase agreements (those with primary terms of at least twelve months). Under the terms of the 20132015 PGC settlement, PECO is required to lock in (i.e., economically hedge) the price of a minimum volume of its long-term gas commodity purchases. PECO’s gas-hedging program is designed to cover about 30% of planned natural gas purchases in support of projected firm sales. The hedging program for natural gas procurement has no direct impact on PECO’s financial position or results of operations as natural gas costs are fully recovered from customers under the PGC.

 

BGE has contracts to procure SOS electric supply that are executed through a competitive procurement process approved by the MDPSC. The SOS rates charged recover BGE’s wholesale power supply costs and include an administrative fee. The administrative fee includes an incremental cost component and a shareholder return component for commercial and industrial rate classes. BGE’s price risk related to electric supply procurement is limited. BGE locks in fixed prices for all of its SOS requirements through full requirements contracts. Certain of BGE’s full requirements contracts, which are considered derivatives, qualify for the NPNS scope exception under current derivative authoritative guidance. Other BGE full requirements contracts are not derivatives.

 

BGE provides natural gas to its customers under a MBR mechanism approved by the MDPSC. Under this mechanism, BGE’s actual cost of gas is compared to a market index (a measure of the market price of gas in a given period). The difference between BGE’s actual cost and the market index is shared equally between shareholders and customers. BGE must also secure fixed price contracts for at least 10%, but not more than 20%, of forecasted system supply requirements for flowing (i.e., non-storage) gas for the November through March period. These fixed-price contracts are not subject to sharing under the MBR mechanism. BGE also ensures it has sufficient pipeline transportation capacity to meet customer requirements. All of BGE’s natural gas supply and asset management agreements qualify for the NPNS scope exception and result in physical delivery.

 

Proprietary Trading.Generation also enters into certain energy-related derivatives for proprietary trading purposes. Proprietary trading includes all contracts entered into with the intent of benefiting from shifts or changes in market prices as opposed to those entered into with the intent of hedging or managing risk. Proprietary trading activities are subject to limits established by Exelon’s RMC. The proprietary trading activities, which included settled physical sales volumes of 8,762 GWh, 12,958 GWh and 5,742 Gwh for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, are a complement to

313


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

proprietary trading activities, which included settled physical sales volumes of 7,310 GWh, 10,571 GWh and 8,762 GWh for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, are a complement to Generation’s energy marketing portfolio but represent a small portion of Generation’s revenue from energy marketing activities. ComEd, PECO and BGE do not enter into derivatives for proprietary trading purposes.

 

Interest Rate and Foreign Exchange Risk (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The Registrants use a combination of fixed-rate and variable-rate debt to manage interest rate exposure. The Registrants may also utilize fixed-to-floating interest rate swaps, which are typically designated as fair value hedges, as a means to manage their interest rate exposure. In addition, the Registrants may utilize interest rate derivatives to lock in rate levels in anticipation of future financings, which are typically designated as cash flow hedges. These strategies are employed to manage interest rate risks. At December 31, 2013,2015, Exelon had $1,425$800 million of notional amounts of fixed-to-floating hedges outstanding and $190Exelon and Generation had $738 million of notional amounts of floating-to-fixed hedges outstanding. Assuming the fair value and cash flow interest rate hedges are 100% effective, a hypothetical 50 bps increase in the interest rates associated with unhedged variable-rate debt (excluding Commercial Paper) and fixed-to-floating swaps would result in an approximate $5approximately $6 million decrease in Exelon Consolidated pre-tax income for the year ended December 31, 2013.2015. To manage foreign exchange rate exposure associated with international energy purchases in currencies other than U.S. dollars, Generation utilizes foreign currency derivatives, which are typically designated as economic hedges. Below is a summary of the interest rate and foreign currency hedgesexchange hedge balances as of December 31, 2013.2015:

 

 Generation Other Exelon  Generation Other Exelon 

Description

 Derivatives
Designated as
Hedging
Instruments
 Economic
Hedges
 Proprietary
Trading (a)
 Collateral
and  Netting
(b)
 Subtotal Derivatives
Designated as
Hedging
Instruments
 Total  Derivatives
Designated
as Hedging
Instruments
 Economic
Hedges
 Proprietary
Trading  (a)
 Collateral
and
Netting (b)
 Subtotal Derivatives
Designated
as Hedging
Instruments
 Economic
Hedges
 Collateral
and
Netting (b)
 Subtotal Total 

Mark-to-market derivative assets (Current Assets)

 $—    $3  $15  $(19 $(1 $—    $(1

Mark-to-market derivative assets (Noncurrent Assets)

  26   3   15   (13  31   7   38 

Mark-to-market derivative assets (current assets)

 $—     $10   $10   $(5 $15   $—     $—     $—     $—     $15  

Mark-to-market derivative assets (noncurrent assets)

  —      10    5    (1  14    25    —      —      25    39  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total mark-to-market derivative assets

 $26  $6  $30  $(32 $30  $7  $37   —      20    15    (6  29    25    —      —      25    54  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities (Current Liabilities)

 $(1 $(1 $(18 $19  $(1 $—    $(1

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities (Noncurrent Liabilities)

  (10  (1  (13  13   (11  (4  (15

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities (current liabilities)

  (8  (2  (9  11    (8  —      —      —      —      (8

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities (noncurrent liabilities)

  (8  (1  (3  4    (8  —      —      —      —      (8
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total mark-to-market derivative liabilities

 $(11 $(2 $(31 $32  $(12 $(4 $(16  (16  (3  (12  15    (16  —      —      —      —      (16
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total mark-to-market derivative net assets (liabilities)

 $15  $4  $(1 $—    $18  $3  $21  $(16 $17   $3   $9   $13   $25   $—     $—     $25   $38  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Generation enters into interest rate derivative contracts to economically hedge risk associated with the interest rate component of commodity positions. The characterization of the interest rate derivative contracts between the proprietary trading activity in the above table is driven by the corresponding characterization of the underlying commodity position that gives rise to the interest rate exposure. Generation does not utilize proprietary trading interest rate derivatives with the objective of benefiting from shifts or changes in market interest rates.
(b)RepresentsExelon and Generation net all available amounts allowed under the netting of fair value balancesderivative accounting guidance on the balance sheet. These amounts include unrealized derivative transactions with the same counterparty under legally enforceable master netting agreements and any associated cash collateral. In some cases Exelon and Generation may have other offsetting exposures subject to a master netting or similar agreement, such as accrued interest, transactions that do not qualify as derivatives, letters of credit and other forms of non-cash collateral. These are not reflected in the table above.

314


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

The following table provides a summary of the interest rate and foreign exchange hedge balances recorded by the Registrants as of December 31, 2012:2014:

 

 Generation Other Exelon  Generation Other Exelon 

Description

 Derivatives
Designated as
Hedging
Instruments
 Economic
Hedges
 Proprietary
Trading (a)
 Collateral
and  Netting
(b)
 Subtotal Derivatives
Designated as
Hedging
Instruments
 Total  Derivatives
Designated
as Hedging
Instruments
 Economic
Hedges
 Proprietary
Trading (a)
 Collateral
and
Netting (b)
 Subtotal Derivatives
Designated
as Hedging
Instruments
 Economic
Hedges
 Collateral
and
Netting (b)
 Subtotal Total 

Mark-to-market derivative assets (Current Assets)

 $—    $3  $20  $(19 $4  $—    $4 

Mark-to-market derivative assets (Noncurrent Assets)

  38   8   32   (32  46   13   59 

Mark-to-market derivative assets (current assets)

 $7   $7   $20   $(22 $12   $3   $—     $—     $3   $15  

Mark-to-market derivative assets (noncurrent assets)

  1    5    7    (7  6    20    1    (19 $2   $8  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total mark-to-market derivative assets

 $38  $11  $52  $(51 $50  $13  $63   8    12    27    (29  18    23    1    (19  5    23  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities (Current Liabilities)

 $(1 $(1 $(19 $19  $(2 $—    $(2

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities (Noncurrent Liabilities)

  (31  —     (32  32   (31  —     (31

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities (current liabilities)

  (8  (2  (14  25    1    —      —      —      —      1  

Mark-to-market derivative liabilities (noncurrent liabilities)

  (4  —      (9  10    (3  (29  (101  19    (111  (114
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total mark-to-market derivative liabilities

  (32  (1  (51  51   (33  —     (33  (12  (2  (23  35    (2  (29  (101  19    (111  (113
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total mark-to-market derivative net assets (liabilities)

 $6  $10  $1  $—    $17  $13  $30  $(4 $10   $4   $6   $16   $(6 $(100 $—     $(106 $(90
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Generation enters into interest rate derivative contracts to economically hedge risk associated with the interest rate component of commodity positions. The characterization of the interest rate derivative contracts between the proprietary trading activity in the above table is driven by the corresponding characterization of the underlying commodity position that gives rise to the interest rate exposure. Generation does not utilize proprietary trading interest rate derivatives with the objective of benefiting from shifts or changes in market interest rates.
(b)RepresentsExelon and Generation net all available amounts allowed under the netting of fair value balancesderivative accounting guidance on the balance sheet. These amounts include unrealized derivative transactions with the same counterparty under legally enforceable master netting agreements and any associated cash collateral. In some cases Exelon and Generation may have other offsetting exposures subject to a master netting or similar agreement, such as accrued interest, transactions that do not qualify as derivatives, letters of credit and other forms of non-cash collateral. These are not reflected in the table above.

 

Fair Value Hedges. For derivative instruments that are designated and qualify as fair value hedges, the gain or loss on the derivative as well as the offsetting loss or gain on the hedged item attributable to the hedged risk are recognized in current earnings. Exelon includes the gain or loss on the hedged items and the offsetting loss or gain on the related interest rate swaps in interest expense as follows:

 

   Twelve Months Ended December 31,    Year Ended December 31, 
 

Income Statement Location

  2013 2012 2011   2013   2012 2011  

Income Statement Location

   2015   2014   2013    2015     2014       2013   
   Gain (Loss) on Swaps   Gain (Loss) on Borrowings    Gain (Loss) on Swaps Gain (Loss) on Borrowings 

Generation

 

Interest expense  (a)

  $(15 $(6 $—      $—     $(6 $—    Interest expense (a)  $(1 $(16 $(15 $—     $2    $(6

Exelon

 

Interest expense

  $(24 $(9 $1   $11   $(3 $(1 Interest expense  $2   $3   $(24 $(9 $15    $(3

 

(a)For the years ended December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014, the loss on Generation swaps included $16$(1) million and $12$(17) million realized in earnings, respectively, with $2 million and an immaterial amount and $4 million excluded from hedge effectiveness testing, respectively.

During the third and fourth quarters of 2013, Exelon entered into $625 million of notional amounts of fixed-to-floating fair value hedges related to interest rate swaps, which expire in 2020. At December 31, 2013, Exelon and Generation had total outstanding fixed-to-floating fair value hedges related to interest rate swaps of $1,275 million and $550 million, with unrealized gains of $26 million and $23 million, respectively. At December 31, 2012, Exelon and Generation had outstanding fixed-to-floating fair value hedges related to interest rate swaps of $650 million and $550 million that expire in 2015, with unrealized gains of $49 million and $38 million, respectively. During the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, the impact on the results of operations as a result of ineffectiveness from fair value hedges was a $2 million gain and immaterial, respectively.

315


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

At December 31, 2015, Exelon had total outstanding fixed-to-floating fair value hedges related to interest rate swaps of $800 million, with a derivative asset of $25 million. At December 31, 2014, Exelon and Generation had outstanding fixed-to-floating fair value hedges related to interest rate swaps of $1,450 million and $550 million, with a derivative asset of $29 million and $7 million, respectively. During the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, the impact on the results of operations, as a result of the ineffectiveness from fair value hedges, was a $17 million gain and $18 million gain, respectively.

Cash Flow Hedges. In anticipation of the Continental Wind, LLC non-recourse project financing that was completed on September 30, 2013,During 2014, Exelon entered into forward-starting interest rate swaps that were designated as cash flow hedges to hedge the change in benchmark interest rates. Upon settlement$400 million of the swaps, a $26 million effective gain in OCI was deferred and will be amortized into interest expense over the life of the debt. See Note 13—Debt and Credit Agreements for additional information on the project financing.

In connection with the DOE guaranteed loan for the Antelope Valley acquisition, as discussed in Note 13—Debt and Credit Agreements, Generation entered into a floating-to-fixed forward starting interest rate swap with a notional amount of $485 million and a mandatory early termination date of April 5, 2014. The swap hedges approximately 75% of Generation’s future interest rate exposure associated with the financing and was designated as a cash flow hedge. As such, the effective portion of the hedge is recorded in other comprehensive income within Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets, with any ineffectiveness recorded in Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. Net gains (or losses) from settlement of the hedges, to the extent effective, are amortized as an adjustment to the interest expense over the term of the DOE guaranteed loan.

Every time Generation draws down on the loan, an offsetting hedge (fixed-to-floating) is executed and a portion of the cash flow hedge with a notional amount equal to the offsetting hedge, is de-designated and the related gains or losses going forward are reflected in earnings, which are largely offset by the losses or gains in the offsetting hedge.

Antelope Valley received its first loan advance on April 5, 2012, and a series of additional advances subsequently. Generation has entered into a series of fixed-to-floating interest rate swaps with an aggregated notional amount of $350 million, approximately 75% of the loan advance amount to offset portions of the original interest rate hedge, which are not designated as cash flow hedges. The remaining cash flow hedge has a notional amount of $135 million. At December 31, 2013, Generation’s mark-to-market non-current derivative liability relating to the interest rate swaps in connection with the loan agreement to fund Antelope Valley was $10 million.

During the third quarter of 2011, a subsidiary of Constellation entered into floating-to-fixed interest rate swaps to manage a portion of the interest rate exposure forassociated with the anticipated long-term borrowings to finance Sacramento PV Energy.refinancing of existing debt. The swaps have a total notional amount of $28 million as of December 31, 2013 and expire in 2027. After the closing of the merger with Constellation, the swaps were re-designatedare designated as cash flow hedges. At December 31, 2013,In January 2015, in connection with Generation’s $750 million issuance of five-year Senior Unsecured Notes, Exelon terminated these swaps. As the subsidiary hadoriginal forecasted transactions were a $1series of future interest payments over a ten year period, a portion of the anticipated interest payments are probable not to occur. As a result, $26 million derivative liability relatedof anticipated payments were reclassified from Accumulated OCI to these swaps.Other, net in Exelon’s Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

 

During the third quarter of 2012,2014, ExGen Texas Power, LLC, a subsidiary of Exelon Generation, entered into a floating-to-fixed interest rate swap to manage a portion of theits interest rate exposure of anticipatedin connection with the long-term borrowings to finance Constellation Solar Horizons.borrowing. See Note 14—Debt and Credit Agreements for additional information regarding the financing. The swap hasswaps have a notional amount of $27$500 million as of December 31, 2013,2015 and expiresexpire in 2030. This2019. The swap iswas designated as a cash flow hedge.hedge in the fourth quarter of 2014. At December 31, 2013,2015, the subsidiary had a $2$12 million derivative assetliability related to the swap.

 

During the first quarter of 2014, ExGen Renewables I, LLC, a subsidiary of Generation, entered into floating-to-fixed interest rate swaps to manage a portion of its interest rate exposure in connection with the long-term borrowings. See Note 14—Debt and Credit Agreements for additional information regarding the financing. The swaps have a notional amount of $189 million as of December 31, 2015 and expire in 2020. The swaps are designated as cash flow hedges. At December 31, 2015, the subsidiary had a $2 million derivative liability related to the swaps.

During the years ended December 31, 2013,2015 and 2012,2014, the impact on the results of operations as a result of ineffectiveness from cash flow hedges wasin continuing designated hedge relationships were immaterial.

 

Economic Hedges.During the third quarter of 2011, Sacramento PV Energy, a subsidiary of Generation, entered into floating-to-fixed interest rate swaps to manage a portion of its interest rate exposure in connectionwith the long-term borrowings. See Note 14—Debt and Credit Agreements for additional information regarding the financing. The swaps have a total notional amount of $25 million as of December 31, 2015 and expire in 2027. After the closing of the Constellation merger, the swaps were re-designated as cash flow hedges. During the first quarter of 2015, the swaps were de-designated as the forecasted transaction was no longer probable of occurring. All future changes in fair value are reflected in Interest expense. At December 31, 2013,2015, the subsidiary had a $2 million derivative liability related to these swaps, which included an immaterial amount that was amortized to Interest expense after de-designation.

During the third quarter of 2012, Constellation Solar Horizons, a subsidiary of Generation, had $144 million in notional amounts ofentered into a floating-to-fixed interest rate derivative contractsswap to economically hedge risk associatedmanage a portion of its interest rate exposure in connection with the interest ratelong-term borrowings. See Note 14—Debt and Credit Agreements for additional information

316


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

regarding the financing. The swap has a notional amount of $24 million as of December 31, 2015, and expires in 2030. This swap was designated as a cash flow hedge. During the first quarter of 2015, the swaps were de-designated as the forecasted transaction was no longer probable of occurring. All future changes in fair value are reflected in Interest expense. At December 31, 2015, the derivative asset related to the swap was immaterial.

During the second quarter 2015, upon the issuance of debt, Exelon terminated $2,400 million of floating-to-fixed forward starting interest rate swaps. As a result of the termination of the swaps, Exelon realized a $64 million loss during the second quarter of 2015.

At December 31, 2015, Generation had immaterial notional amounts of interest rate derivative contracts to economically hedge risk associated with the interest rate component of commodity positions and $195$30 million in notional amounts of foreign currency exchange rate swaps that are marked-to-market to manage the exposure associated with international purchases of commodities in currencies other than U.S. dollars.

At December 31, 2013, Exelon and Generation had $150 million in notional amounts of fixed-to-floating interest rate swaps that are marked-to-market, with unrealized gains of $2 million. These swaps, which were acquired as part of the merger with Constellation, expire in 2014. During the year ended December 31, 2013, and the period from March 12 to December 31, 2012, the impact on the results of operations was immaterial.

 

Fair Value Measurement and Accounting for the Offsetting of Amounts Related to Certain Contracts (Exelon Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Fair value accounting guidance and disclosures about offsetting assets and liabilities requires the fair value of derivative instruments to be shown in the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements on a gross basis, even when the derivative instruments are subject to legally enforceable master netting agreements and qualify for net presentation in the Consolidated Balance Sheet. A master netting agreement is an agreement between two counterparties that may have derivative and non-derivative contracts with each other providing for the net settlement of all referencing contracts via one payment stream, which takes place either as the contracts deliver, when collateral is requested or in the event of default. Generation’s use of cash collateral is generally unrestricted unless Generation is downgraded below investment grade (i.e. to BB+ or Ba1). In the table below, Generation’s energy-relatedenergy related economic hedges and proprietary trading derivatives are shown gross and thegross. The impact of the netting of fair value balances with the same counterparty that are subject to legally enforceable master netting agreements, as well as netting of cash collateral including initial margin on exchange positions, is aggregated in the collateral and netting column. As of December 31, 20132015 and 2012, $102014, $3 million and $8 million of cash collateral posted, and $3 million of cash collateral received, respectively, was not offset against derivative positions because such collateral was not associated with any energy-related derivatives, were associated with accrual positions, or as of the balance sheet date there were no positions to offset. Excluded from the tables below are economic hedges that qualify for the NPNS scope exception and other non-derivative contracts that are accounted for under the accrual method of accounting.

 

ComEd’s use of cash collateral is generally unrestricted unless ComEd is downgraded below investment grade (i.e. to BB+ or Ba1).

 

Cash collateral held by PECO and BGE must be deposited in a non affiliate major U.S. commercial bank or foreign bank with a U.S. branch office that meet certain qualifications.

317


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

The following table provides a summary of the derivative fair value balances recorded by the Registrants as of December 31, 2013:2015:

 

  Generation ComEd Exelon  Generation ComEd Exelon 

Derivatives

  Economic
Hedges
 Proprietary
Trading
 Collateral
and
Netting (a)
 Subtotal (b) Economic
Hedges (c)
 Total
Derivatives
  Economic
Hedges
 Proprietary
Trading
 Collateral
and
Netting(a)
 Subtotal (b) Economic
Hedges(c)
 Total
Derivatives
 

Mark-to-market
derivative assets (current assets)

  $2,616  $1,476  $(3,364 $728  $—    $728  $5,236   $108   $(3,994 $1,350   $—     $1,350  

Mark-to-market
derivative assets (noncurrent assets)

   1,344   285   (1,060  569   —     569   1,860    22    (1,163  719    —      719  
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total mark-to-market
derivative assets

  $3,960  $1,761  $(4,424 $1,297  $—    $1,297   7,096    130    (5,157  2,069    —      2,069  
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Mark-to-market
derivative liabilities (current liabilities)

  $(2,023 $(1,410 $3,292  $(141 $(17 $(158  (4,907  (94  4,827    (174  (23  (197

Mark-to-market
derivative liabilities (noncurrent liabilities)

   (804  (293  988   (109  (176  (285  (1,673  (33  1,564    (142  (224  (366
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total mark-to-market
derivative liabilities

  $(2,827 $(1,703 $4,280  $(250 $(193 $(443  (6,580  (127  6,391    (316  (247  (563
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total mark-to-market
derivative net assets (liabilities)

  $1,133  $58  $(144 $1,047  $(193 $854  $516   $3   $1,234   $1,753   $(247 $1,506  
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Exelon and Generation net all available amounts allowed under the derivative accounting guidance on the balance sheet. These amounts include unrealized derivative transactions with the same counterparty under legally enforceable master netting agreements and cash collateral. In some cases Exelon and Generation may have other offsetting exposures, subject to a master netting or similar agreement, such as trade receivables and payables, transactions that do not qualify as derivatives, letters of credit and other forms of non-cash collateral. These are not reflected in the table above.
(b)Current and noncurrent assets are shown net of collateral of $84$352 million and $72$180 million, respectively, and current and noncurrent liabilities are shown net of collateral of $(12)$480 million and $0$222 million, respectively. The total cash collateral posted, net of cash collateral received and offset against mark-to-market assets and liabilities was $144$1,234 million at December 31, 2013.2015.
(c)Includes current and noncurrent liabilities relating to floating-to-fixed energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers.

318


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

The following table provides a summary of the derivative fair value balances recorded by the Registrants as of December 31, 2012:2014:

 

 Generation ComEd Exelon  Generation ComEd Exelon 

Derivatives

 Economic
Hedges(a)
 Proprietary
Trading
 Collateral
and
Netting (b)
 Subtotal (c) Economic
Hedges (a)(d)
 Intercompany
Eliminations (a)
 Total
Derivatives
  Economic
Hedges
 Proprietary
Trading
 Collateral
and
Netting (a)
 Subtotal (b) Economic
Hedges (c)
 Total
Derivatives
 

Mark-to-market
derivative assets (current assets)

 $2,883  $2,469  $(4,418 $934  $—    $—    $934  $4,992   $456   $(4,184 $1,264   $—     $1,264  

Mark-to-market
derivative assets with affiliate (current assets)

  226   —     —     226   —     (226  —   

Mark-to-market
derivative assets (noncurrent assets)

  1,792   724   (1,638  878   —     —     878   1,821    56    (1,112  765    —      765  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total mark-to-market
derivative assets

 $4,901  $3,193  $(6,056 $2,038  $—    $(226 $1,812   6,813    512    (5,296  2,029    —      2,029  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Mark-to-market
derivative liabilities (current liabilities)

 $(2,419 $(2,432 $4,519  $(332 $(18 $—    $(350  (4,947  (468  5,200    (215  (20  (235

Mark-to-market
derivative liability with affiliate (current liabilities)

  —     —     —     —     (226  226   —   

Mark-to-market
derivative liabilities (noncurrent liabilities)

  (1,080  (689  1,568   (201  (49  —     (250  (1,540  (64  1,502    (102  (187  (289
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total mark-to-market
derivative liabilities

 $(3,499 $(3,121 $6,087  $(533 $(293 $226  $(600  (6,487  (532  6,702    (317  (207  (524)��
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total mark-to-market
derivative net assets (liabilities)

 $1,402  $72  $31  $1,505  $(293 $—    $1,212  $326   $(20 $1,406   $1,712   $(207 $1,505  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Includes current and noncurrent assets for Generation and current and noncurrent liabilities for ComEd of $226 million related to the fair value of the five-year financial swap contract between Generation and ComEd, as described above. For Generation, excludes $28 million of noncurrent liability relating to an interest rate swap in connection with a loan agreement to fund Antelope Valley as discussed above.
(b)Exelon and Generation net all available amounts allowed under the derivative accounting guidance on the balance sheet. These amounts include unrealized derivative transactions with the same counterparty under legally enforceable master netting agreements and cash collateral. In some cases Exelon and Generation may have other offsetting exposures, subject to a master netting or similar agreement, such as trade receivables and payables, transactions that do not qualify as derivatives, and letters of credit.credit and other forms of non-cash collateral. These are not reflected in the table above.
(c)(b)Current and noncurrent assets are shown net of collateral of $113$416 million and $201$171 million, respectively, and current and noncurrent liabilities are shown net of collateral of $ (214)$599 million and $ (131)$220 million, respectively. The total cash collateral received,posted, net of cash collateral postedreceived and offset against mark-to-market assets and liabilities was $ (31)$1,406 million at December 31, 2012.2014.
(d)(c)Includes current and noncurrent liabilities relating to floating-to-fixed energy swap contracts with unaffiliated suppliers.

 

Cash Flow Hedges (Exelon, Generation and ComEd). As discussed previously, effective prior to the Constellation merger, with Constellation, Generation de-designated all of its cash flow hedges relating to commodity price risk. Because the underlying forecasted transactions remain at least reasonably possible,probable, the fair value of the effective portion of these cash flow hedges was frozen in accumulatedAccumulated OCI and is reclassified to results of operations when the forecasted purchase or sale of the energy commodity occurs, or becomes probable of not occurring. Generation began recording prospective changes in the fair value of these instruments through current earnings from the date of de-designation. As of December 31, 2015, no unrealized balance remains in accumulated OCI to be reclassified by Generation.

319


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

changes in the fair value of these instruments through current earnings from the date of de-designation. Approximately $195 million of these net pre-tax unrealized gains within accumulated OCI are expected to be reclassified from accumulated OCI during the next twelve months by Generation. Generation expects the settlement of the majority of its cash flow hedges will occur during 2013 through 2014.

Exelon discontinues hedge accounting when it determines that the derivative is no longer effective in offsetting changes in the cash flows of a hedged item or when it is no longer probable that the forecasted transaction will occur. For the year ended 2012, the amount reclassified into earnings as a result of the discontinuance of cash flow hedges was immaterial.

The tables below provide the activity of accumulatedAccumulated OCI related to cash flow hedges for the years ended December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014, containing information about the changes in the fair value of cash flow hedges and the reclassification from accumulatedAccumulated OCI into results of operations. The amounts reclassified from accumulatedAccumulated OCI, when combined with the impacts of the actual physical power sales,hedged transactions, result in the ultimate recognition of net revenues or expenses at the contractedcontractual price.

 

  Income Statement
Location
   Total Cash Flow Hedge OCI  Activity,
Net of Income Tax
  Income Statement
Location
 Total Cash Flow Hedge OCI  Activity,
Net of Income Tax
 
  Generation Exelon   Generation Exelon 
  Energy-Related
Hedges
 Total Cash Flow
Hedges
   Total Cash Flow
Hedges
 Total Cash Flow
Hedges
 

Accumulated OCI derivative gain at January 1, 2012

    $925(a)(d)  $488 

Effective portion of changes in fair value

  

   432(b)   330(e) 

Reclassifications from accumulated OCI to net income

   Operating Revenues     (828)(c)   (453

Ineffective portion recognized in income

   Operating Revenues     3   3 
    

 

  

 

 

Accumulated OCI derivative gain at December 31, 2012

     532(a)(d)   368 

Accumulated OCI derivative gain at January 1, 2014

  $114   $120  

Effective portion of changes in fair value

Effective portion of changes in fair value

  

   —     29(e)    (15  (31

Reclassifications from accumulated OCI to net income

   Operating Revenues     (413)(c)   (277 Operating revenues  (117)(a)   (117)(a) 
    

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Accumulated OCI derivative gain at December 31, 2013

    $119(d)  $120 

Accumulated OCI derivative gain at December 31, 2014

   (18  (28

Effective portion of changes in fair value

   (8  (12

Reclassifications from accumulated OCI to net income

 Other, net  —      16(b) 

Reclassifications from accumulated OCI to net income

 Interest expense  7(c)   7(c) 

Reclassifications from accumulated OCI to net income

 Operating revenues  (2  (2
    

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Accumulated OCI derivative gain at December 31, 2015

  $(21 $(19
  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Includes $133 million and $420 million of gains,Amount is net of taxes, related to the fair valueincome tax expense of the five-year financial swap contract with ComEd for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011 .
(b)Includes $88$78 million of gains, net of taxes, related to the effective portion of changes in fair value of the five-year financial swap contract with ComEd for the year ended December 31, 2012. As of the merger date, cash flow hedges were discontinued, as such, this amount represents changes in fair value prior to the merger date.2014.
(c)(b)Includes $133 million and $375 million of losses,Amount is net of taxes, reclassified from accumulated OCI to recognize gains in netrelated income related to settlementstax benefit of the five-year financial swap contract with ComEd for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.
(d)Excludes $5$10 million of losses and $20 million of losses, net of taxes, related to interest rate swaps and treasury rate locks for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.
(e)Includes $15 million and $9 million of losses, net of taxes, related to the effective portion of changes in fair value of interest rate swaps and treasury rate locks at Generation for the year ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.2015.
(c)Amount is net of related income tax expense of $4 million for the year ended December 31, 2015.

 

During the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012,2015, 2014, and 20112013, Generation’s former energy-related cash flow hedge activity impact to pre-tax earnings based on the reclassification adjustment from accumulatedAccumulated OCI to earnings was a $683$2 million, $1,368$195 million and $968$683 million pre-tax gain, respectively. In addition, the effect of Exelon’s former energy-related cash flow hedge activity impact on pre-tax earnings based on the reclassification adjustment from Accumulated OCI to earnings was a $2 million, $195 million and $464 million pre-tax gain for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Given that the cash flow hedges had primarily consisted of forward power sales and

320


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

power swaps and did not include power and gas options or sales, the ineffectiveness of Generation’s cash flow hedges was primarily the result of differences between the locational settlement prices of the cash flow hedges and the hedged generating units. Changes in cash flow hedge ineffectiveness were losses of $5 million and a gain of $10 million for the years ended 2012 and 2011, respectively.

Exelon’s former energy-related cash flow hedge activity impact to pre-tax earnings based on the reclassification adjustment from accumulated OCI to earnings was a $464 million, $747 million and $512 million pre-tax gain for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Changes in cash flow hedge ineffectiveness, primarily due to changes in market prices, were losses of $5 million and gains of $10 million for the years ended 2012 and 2011, respectively. Neitherneither Exelon nor Generation will incur changes in cash flow hedge ineffectiveness in future periods relating to energy-related hedge positions as all energy-related cash flow hedge positions were de-designated prior to the merger date.

 

Economic Hedges (Exelon and Generation). These instruments represent hedges that economically mitigate exposure to fluctuations in commodity prices and include financial options, futures, swaps, physical forward sales and purchases, but for which the fair value or cash flow hedge elections were not made. Additionally, Generation enters into interest rate derivative contracts and foreign exchange currency swaps (“treasury”) to manage the exposure related to the interest rate component of commodity positions and international purchases of commodities in currencies other

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

than U.S. Dollars. Exelon entered into floating-to-fixed forward starting interest rate swaps to manage interest rate risks associated with anticipated future debt issuance related to the proposed PHI merger. For the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011,2013, the following net pre-tax mark-to-market gains (losses) of certain purchase and sale contracts were reported in operatingOperating revenues or purchasedPurchased power and fuel expense, or Interest expense at Exelon and Generation in the Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income and are included in “Net fair value changes related to derivatives” in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows. In the tables below, “Change in fair value” represents the change in fair value of the derivative contracts held at the reporting date. The “Reclassification to realized at settlement” represents the recognized change in fair value that was reclassified to realized due to settlement of the derivative during the period.

 

   Generation  Intercompany
Eliminations
  Exelon 

Year Ended December 31, 2013

  Operating
Revenues
  Purchased
Power
and Fuel
   Total  Operating
Revenues (a)
  Total 

Change in fair value

  $285  $180   $465   $(6 $459 

Reclassification to realized at settlement

   (65  104    39   13   52 
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net mark-to-market gains

  $220  $284   $504  $7  $511 
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
   Generation  Intercompany
Eliminations
  Exelon 

Year Ended December 31, 2012

  Operating
Revenues
  Purchased
Power
and Fuel
   Total  Operating
Revenues (a)
  Total 

Change in fair value

  $(362 $215   $(147 $(94 $(241

Reclassification to realized at settlement

   429   238    667   101   768 
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net mark-to-market gains

  $67  $453   $520  $7  $527 
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

  Generation  Intercompany
Eliminations
  Exelon
Corporate
  Exelon 

Year Ended December 31, 2015

 Operating
Revenues
  Purchased
Power
and Fuel
  Interest
Expense
  Total  Operating
Revenues(a)
  Interest
Expense
  Total 

Change in fair value of commodity positions

 $759   $(355 $—     $404   $—     $—     $404  

Reclassification to realized at settlement of commodity positions

  (563  409    —      (154  —      —      (154
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net commodity mark-to-market gains (losses)

  196    54    —      250    —      —      250  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Change in fair value of treasury positions

  13    —      —      13    —      36    49  

Reclassification to realized at settlement of treasury positions

  (6  —      —      (6  —      64    58  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net treasury mark-to market gains (losses)

  7    —      —      7    —      100    107  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net mark-to market gains (losses)

 $203   $54   $—     $257   $—     $100   $357  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

321
  Generation  Intercompany
Eliminations
  Exelon
Corporate
  Exelon 

Year Ended December 31, 2014

 Operating
Revenues
  Purchased
Power
and Fuel
  Interest
Expense
  Total  Operating
Revenues(a)
  Interest
Expense
  Total 

Change in fair value of commodity positions

 $(413 $(194 $—     $(607 $—     $—     $(607

Reclassification to realized at settlement of commodity positions

  231    (223  —      8    —      —      8  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net commodity mark-to-market gains (losses)

  (182  (417  —      (599  —      —      (599
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Change in fair value of treasury positions

  10    —      (2  8    —      (100  (92

Reclassification to realized at settlement of treasury positions

  (2  —      —      (2  —      —      (2
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net treasury mark-to market gains (losses)

  8    —      (2  6    —      (100  (94
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net mark-to market gains (losses)

 $(174 $(417 $(2 $(593 $—     $(100 $(693
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

   Exelon and Generation      

Year Ended December 31, 2011 (As Reported)

  Operating
Revenues
  Purchased
Power

and Fuel
  Total      

Change in fair value

  $87  $131  $218    

Reclassification to realized at settlement

   (296  (219  (515   
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

    

Net mark-to-market (losses) (b)

  $(209 $(88 $(297   
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

    
   Exelon and Generation      

Year Ended December 31, 2011 (Pro Forma)

  Operating
Revenues
  Purchased
Power

and Fuel
  Total      

Change in fair value

  $258   $(40 $218    

Reclassification to realized at settlement

   (516  1   (515   
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

    

Net mark-to-market (losses) (b)

  $(258 $(39 $(297   
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

    
  Generation  Intercompany
Eliminations
  Exelon
Corporate
  Exelon 

Year Ended December 31, 2013

 Operating
Revenues
  Purchased
Power
and Fuel
  Interest
Expense
  Total  Operating
Revenues(a)
  Interest
Expense
  Total 

Change in fair value of commodity positions

 $286   $180   $—     $466   $(6 $—     $460  

Reclassification to realized at settlement of commodity positions

  (64  104    —      40    13    —      53  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net commodity mark-to-market gains (losses)

  222    284    —      506    7    —      513  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Change in fair value of treasury positions

  (1  —      (4  (5  —      —      (5

Reclassification to realized at settlement of treasury positions

  (1  —      —      (1  —      —      (1
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net treasury mark-to market gains (losses)

  (2  —      (4  (6  —      —      (6
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net mark-to market gains (losses)

 $220   $284   $(4 $500   $7   $—     $507  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

(a)Prior to the Constellation merger, the five-year financial swap contract between Generation and ComEd was de-designated. As a result, all prospective changes in fair value arewere recorded to operating revenues and eliminated in consolidation.
(b)Exelon and Generation have historically presented mark-to-market gains and losses within purchased power expense for all non-trading, energy-related derivatives that were not accounted for as cash flow hedges. In 2011, Exelon and Generation classified the mark-to-market gains and losses for contracts, where the underlying hedged transaction was an expected sale to hedge power, to operating revenues.

 

Proprietary Trading Activities (Exelon and Generation). For the years ended December 31, 2013,2015, 2014, and 2012,2013 Exelon and Generation recognized the following net unrealized mark-to-market gains (losses), net realized mark-to-market gains (losses) and total net mark-to-market gains (losses) (before income taxes) relating to mark-to-market activity on commodity derivative instruments entered into for proprietary trading purposes.purposes and interest rate derivative contracts to hedge risk associated with the interest rate component of underlying commodity positions. Gains and losses associated with proprietary trading are reported as operating revenue in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income and are included in “Net fair value changes related to derivatives” in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows. In the tables below, “Change in fair value” represents the change in fair value of the derivative contracts held at the reporting date. The “Reclassification to realized at settlement” represents the recognized change in fair value that was reclassified to realized due to settlement of the derivative during the period.

 

   Location on Income
Statement
   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 
    2013  2012  2011 

Change in fair value

   Operating Revenue    $(21 $(12 $23 

Reclassification to realized at settlement

   Operating Revenue     (18  108   (26
    

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net mark-to-market gains (losses)

   Operating Revenue    $(39 $96  $(3
    

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
   Location on  Income
Statement
   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 
    2015  2014  2013 

Change in fair value of commodity positions

   Operating Revenues    $8   $(1 $(22

Reclassification to realized at settlement of commodity positions

   Operating Revenues     (14  (29  (15
    

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net commodity mark-to-market gains (losses)

   Operating Revenues     (6  (30  (37
    

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Change in fair value of treasury positions

   Operating Revenues     8    1    1  

Reclassification to realized at settlement of treasury positions

   Operating Revenues     (10  3    (3
    

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net treasury mark-to market gains (losses)

   Operating Revenues     (2  4    (2
    

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net mark-to market gains (losses)

   Operating Revenues    $(8 $(26 $(39
    

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

Credit Risk (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The Registrants would be exposed to credit-related losses in the event of non-performance by counterparties that enter into derivative instruments. The credit exposure of derivative contracts, before collateral, is represented by the fair value of contracts at the reporting date. For energy-related derivative instruments, Generation enters into enabling agreements that allow for payment netting with its

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

counterparties, which reduces Generation’s exposure to counterparty risk by providing for the offset of amounts payable to the counterparty against amounts receivable from the counterparty. Typically,

322


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

each enabling agreement is for a specific commodity and so, with respect to each individual counterparty, netting is limited to transactions involving that specific commodity product, except where master netting agreements exist with a counterparty that allow for cross product netting. In addition to payment netting language in the enabling agreement, Generation’s credit department establishes credit limits, margining thresholds and collateral requirements for each counterparty, which are defined in the derivative contracts. Counterparty credit limits are based on an internal credit review process that considers a variety of factors, including the results of a scoring model, leverage, liquidity, profitability, credit ratings by credit rating agencies, and risk management capabilities. To the extent that a counterparty’s margining thresholds are exceeded, the counterparty is required to post collateral with Generation as specified in each enabling agreement. Generation’s credit department monitors current and forward credit exposure to counterparties and their affiliates, both on an individual and an aggregate basis.

 

The following tables provide information on Generation’s credit exposure for all derivative instruments, NPNS, and applicable payables and receivables, net of collateral and instruments that are subject to master netting agreements, as of December 31, 2013.2015. The tables further delineate that exposure by credit rating of the counterparties and provide guidance on the concentration of credit risk to individual counterparties. The figures in the tables below do not includeexclude credit risk exposure from uraniumindividual retail counterparties, Nuclear fuel procurement contracts orand exposure through RTOs, ISOs, NYMEX, ICE and Nodal commodity exchanges, further discussed in ITEM 7A—7A.—QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK. Additionally, the figures in the tables below do not includeexclude exposures with affiliates, including net receivables with ComEd, PECO and BGE of $38$15 million, $38$36 million and $27$31 million, respectively.

 

Rating as of December 31, 2013

 Total
Exposure
Before Credit
Collateral
 Credit
Collateral (a)
 Net
Exposure
 Number of
Counterparties

Greater  than 10%
of Net Exposure
 Net Exposure  of
Counterparties

Greater than 10%
of Net Exposure
 

Rating as of December 31, 2015

 Total
Exposure
Before Credit
Collateral
 Credit
Collateral (a)
 Net
Exposure
 Number of
Counterparties
Greater than 10%
of Net Exposure
 Net Exposure of
Counterparties
Greater than 10%
of Net Exposure
 

Investment grade

 $1,621  $172  $1,449  $1  $491  $1,397   $50   $1,347    1   $432  

Non-investment grade

  27   9   18   —     —     67    25    42    —      —    

No external ratings

         

Internally rated—investment grade

  416   1   415   1   226   521    —      521    —      —    

Internally rated—non-investment grade

  30   2   28   —     —     77    7    70    —      —    
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total

 $2,094  $184  $1,910  $2  $717  $2,062   $82   $1,980    1   $432  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

Net Credit Exposure by Type of Counterparty

  December 31, 2013   December 31, 2015 

Financial Institutions

  $256 

Financial institutions

  $187  

Investor-owned utilities, marketers, power producers

   684    886  

Energy cooperatives and municipalities

   907    872  

Other

   63    35  
  

 

   

 

 

Total

  $1,910   $1,980  
  

 

   

 

 

 

(a)As of December 31, 2013,2015, credit collateral held from counterparties where Generation had credit exposure included $155$13 million of cash and $29$69 million of letters of credit .credit.

 

ComEd’s power procurement contracts provide suppliers with a certain amount of unsecured credit. The credit position is based on forward market prices compared to the benchmark prices. The benchmark prices are the forward prices of energy projected through the contract term and are set at

323


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

benchmark prices are the forward prices of energy projected through the contract term and are set at the point of supplier bid submittals. If the forward market price of energy exceeds the benchmark price, the suppliers are required to post collateral for the secured credit portion after adjusting for any unpaid deliveries and unsecured credit allowed under the contract. The unsecured credit used by the suppliers represents ComEd’s net credit exposure. As of December 31, 2013,2015, ComEd’s net credit exposure to suppliers was immaterial.

 

ComEd is permitted to recover its costs of procuring energy through the Illinois Settlement Legislation. ComEd’s counterparty credit risk is mitigated by its ability to recover realized energy costs through customer rates. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.

 

PECO’s supplier master agreements that govern the terms of its electric supply procurement contracts, which define a supplier’s performance assurance requirements, allow a supplier to meet its credit requirements with a certain amount of unsecured credit. The amount of unsecured credit is determined based on the supplier’s lowest credit rating from the major credit rating agencies and the supplier’s tangible net worth. The credit position is based on the initial market price, which is the forward price of energy on the day a transaction is executed, compared to the current forward price curve for energy. To the extent that the forward price curve for energy exceeds the initial market price, the supplier is required to post collateral to the extent the credit exposure is greater than the supplier’s unsecured credit limit. The unsecured credit used by the suppliers represents PECO’s net credit exposure. As of December 31, 2013,2015, PECO had no net credit exposure withto suppliers.

 

PECO is permitted to recover its costs of procuring electric supply through its PAPUC-approved DSP Program. PECO’s counterparty credit risk is mitigated by its ability to recover realized energy costs through customer rates. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.

 

PECO’s natural gas procurement plan is reviewed and approved annually on a prospective basis by the PAPUC. PECO’s counterparty credit risk under its natural gas supply and asset management agreements is mitigated by its ability to recover its natural gas costs through the PGC, which allows PECO to adjust rates quarterly to reflect realized natural gas prices. PECO does not obtain collateral from suppliers under its natural gas supply and asset management agreements. As of December 31, 2013, PECO had2015, PECO’s credit exposure of $9 million under its natural gas supply and asset management agreements with investment grade suppliers.suppliers was immaterial.

 

BGE is permitted to recover its costs of procuring energy through the MDPSC-approved procurement tariffs. BGE’s counterparty credit risk is mitigated by its ability to recover realized energy costs through customer rates. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.

 

BGE’s full requirement wholesale electric power agreements that govern the terms of its electric supply procurement contracts, which define a supplier’s performance assurance requirements, allow a supplier, or its guarantor, to meet its credit requirements with a certain amount of unsecured credit. The amount of unsecured credit is determined based on the supplier’s lowest credit rating from the major credit rating agencies and the supplier’s tangible net worth, subject to an unsecured credit cap. The credit position is based on the initial market price, which is the forward price of energy on the day a transaction is executed, compared to the current forward price curve for energy. To the extent that the forward price curve for energy exceeds the initial market price, the supplier is required to post collateral to the extent the credit exposure is greater than the supplier’s unsecured credit limit. The unsecured credit used by the suppliers represents BGE’s net credit exposure. The seller’s credit exposure is calculated each business day. As of December 31, 2013,2015, BGE had no net credit exposure to suppliers.

324


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

BGE’s regulated gas business is exposed to market-price risk. This market-price risk is mitigated by BGE’s recovery of its costs to procure natural gas through a gas cost adjustment clause approved by the MDPSC. BGE does make off-system sales after BGE has satisfied its customers’ demands, which are not covered by the gas cost adjustment clause. At December 31, 2013,2015, BGE had credit exposure of $14$4 million related to off-system sales which is mitigated by parental guarantees, letters of credit, or right to offset clauses within other contracts with those third-party suppliers.

 

Collateral and Contingent-Related Features (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

As part of the normal course of business, Generation routinely enters into physical or financially settled contracts for the purchase and sale of electric capacity, energy, fuels, emissions allowances and other energy-related products. Certain of Generation’s derivative instruments contain provisions that require Generation to post collateral. Generation also enters into commodity transactions on exchanges (i.e. NYMEX, ICE). The exchanges act as the counterparty to each trade. Transactions on the exchanges must adhere to comprehensive collateral and margining requirements. This collateral may be posted in the form of cash or credit support with thresholds contingent upon Generation’s credit rating from each of the major credit rating agencies. The collateral and credit support requirements vary by contract and by counterparty. These credit-risk-related contingent features stipulate that if Generation were to be downgraded or lose its investment grade credit rating (based on its senior unsecured debt rating), it would be required to provide additional collateral. This incremental collateral requirement allows for the offsetting of derivative instruments that are assets with the same counterparty, where the contractual right of offset exists under applicable master netting agreements. In the absence of expressly agreed-to provisions that specify the collateral that must be provided, collateral requested will be a function of the facts and circumstances of the situation at the time of the demand. In this case, Generation believes an amount of several months of future payments (i.e. capacity payments) rather than a calculation of fair value is the best estimate for the contingent collateral obligation, which has been factored into the disclosure below.

 

The aggregate fair value of all derivative instruments with credit-risk-related contingent features in a liability position that are not fully collateralized (excluding transactions on the exchanges that are fully collateralized) is detailed in the table below:

 

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

Credit-Risk Related Contingent Feature

 2013 2012       2015         2014     

Gross Fair Value of Derivative Contracts Containing this Feature (a)

 $(1,056 $(1,849  $(932 $(1,433

Offsetting Fair Value of In-the-Money Contracts Under Master Netting Arrangements (b)

 $846  $1,426    684    1,140  
 

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Net Fair Value of Derivative Contracts Containing This Feature (c)

 $(210 $(423  $(248 $(293
 

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Amount represents the gross fair value of out-of-the-money derivative contracts containing credit-risk-related contingent features ignoring the effects of master netting agreements.
(b)Amount represents the offsetting fair value of in-the-money derivative contracts under legally enforceable master netting agreements with the same counterparty, which reduces the amount of any liability for which a Registrant could potentially be required to post collateral.
(c)Amount represents the net fair value of out-of-the-money derivative contracts containing credit-risk related contingent features after considering the mitigating effects of offsetting positions under master netting arrangements and reflects the actual net liability upon which any potential contingent collateral obligations would be based.

Generation had cash collateral posted of $72 million, letters of credit posted of $364 million, cash collateral held of $206 million and letters of credit held of $34 million as of December 31, 2013 for counterparties with derivative positions. Generation had cash collateral posted of $527 million and

325


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Generation had cash collateral posted of $1,267 million and letters of credit posted of $563$497 million, and cash collateral held of $499$21 million and letters of credit held of $45$78 million as of December 31, 2015 for external counterparties with derivative positions. Generation had cash collateral posted of $1,497 million and letters of credit posted of $672 million and cash collateral held of $77 million and letters of credit held of $24 million at December 31, 20122014 for external counterparties with derivative positions. In the event of a credit downgrade below investment grade (i.e. to BB+ by S&P or Ba1)Ba1 by Moody’s), Generation could bewould have been required to post additional collateral of $2.0 billion and $2.4 billion as of December 31, 20132015 and December 31, 2012.2014, respectively. These amounts represent the potential additional collateral required after giving consideration to offsetting derivative and non-derivative positions under master netting agreements.

 

Generation’s and Exelon’s interest rate swaps contain provisions that, in the event of a merger, if Generation’s debt ratings were to materially weaken, it would be in violation of these provisions, resulting in the ability of the counterparty to terminate the agreement prior to maturity. Collateralization would not be required under any circumstance. Termination of the agreement could result in a settlement payment by Exelon or the counterparty on any interest rate swap in a net liability position. The settlement amount would be equal to the fair value of the swap on the termination date. As of December 31, 2013,2015, Generation’s and Exelon’s swaps were in an asset position, with a fair value of $18$13 million and $21$38 million, respectively.

 

See Note 24—25—Segment Information for additionalfurther information regarding the letters of credit supporting the cash collateral.

 

Generation entered into supply forward contracts with certain utilities, including PECO and BGE, with one-sided collateral postings only from Generation. If market prices fall below the benchmark price levels in these contracts, the utilities are not required to post collateral. However, when market prices rise above the benchmark price levels, counterparty suppliers, including Generation, are required to post collateral once certain unsecured credit limits are exceeded. Under the terms of ComEd’s standard block energy contracts, collateral postings are one-sided from suppliers, including Generation, should exposures between market prices and benchmark prices exceed established unsecured credit limits outlined in the contracts. As of December 31, 2013,2015, ComEd held neither cash nor letters of credit for the purpose ofno collateral from suppliers in association with energy procurement contracts. Under the terms of ComEd’s annual renewable energy contracts, collateral postings are required to cover a fixed value for RECs only. In addition, under the terms of ComEd’s long-term renewable energy contracts, collateral postings are required from suppliers for both RECs and energy. The REC portion is a fixed value and the energy portion is one-sided from suppliers should the forward market prices exceed contract prices. As of December 31, 2013,2015, ComEd held approximately $19 million in the form of cash and letters of credit as margin for both the annual and long-term REC obligations. See Note 1—Significant Accounting Policies3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.

 

PECO’s natural gas procurement contracts contain provisions that could require PECO to post collateral. This collateral may be posted in the form of cash or credit support with thresholds contingent upon PECO’s credit rating from the major credit rating agencies. The collateral and credit support requirements vary by contract and by counterparty. As of December 31, 2013,2015, PECO was not required to post collateral for any of these agreements. If PECO lost its investment grade credit rating as of December 31, 2013,2015, PECO could have been required to post approximately $42$25 million of collateral to its counterparties.

 

PECO’s supplier master agreements that govern the terms of its DSP Program contracts do not contain provisions that would require PECO to post collateral.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

BGE’s full requirements wholesale power agreements that govern the terms of its electric supply procurement contracts do not contain provisions that would require BGE to post collateral.

326


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

BGE’s natural gas procurement contracts contain provisions that could require BGE to post collateral. This collateral may be posted in the form of cash or credit support with thresholds contingent upon BGE’s credit rating from the major credit rating agencies. The collateral and credit support requirements vary by contract and by counterparty. As of December 31, 2013,2015, BGE was not required to post collateral for any of these agreements. If BGE lost its investment grade credit rating as of December 31, 2013,2015, BGE could have been required to post approximately $85$35 million of collateral to its counterparties.

 

13.14. Debt and Credit Agreements (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Short-Term Borrowings

 

Exelon, ComEd and BGE meet their short-term liquidity requirements primarily through the issuance of commercial paper. Generation and PECO meet their short-term liquidity requirements primarily through the issuance of commercial paper and borrowings from the intercompany money pool.

 

Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE had the following amounts of commercial paper borrowings at December 31, 20132015 and 2012:2014:

 

  Maximum
Program Size at
December 31,
   Outstanding
Commercial
Paper at
December 31,
   Average Interest Rate on
Commercial Paper Borrowings for
the Year Ended December 31,
   Maximum
Program Size at
December 31,
   Outstanding
Commercial
Paper at
December 31,
   Average Interest Rate on
Commercial  Paper Borrowings for
the Year Ended December 31,
 

Commercial Paper Issuer

  2013 (a)   2012 (a)   2013   2012   2013 2012   2015 (a)(b)   2014 (a)(b)   2015   2014   2015 2014 

Exelon Corporate

  $500   $500   $—     $—      0.27  0.47  $500    $500    $—      $—       n.a.    n.a.  

Generation

   5,600    5,600    —      —      0.32  0.45   5,450     5,600     —       —       0.49  0.32

ComEd

   1,000    1,000    184    —      0.40  0.50   1,000     1,000     294     304     0.53  0.33

PECO

   600    600    —      —      n.a.   n.a.    600     600     —       —       n.a.    n.a.  

BGE

   600    600    135    —      0.31  0.43   600     600     210     120     0.48  0.29
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

      

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

    

Total

  $8,300   $8,300   $319   $—        $8,150    $8,300    $504    $424     
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

      

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

    

 

(a)EqualsReflects aggregate bank commitments under the revolving and bilateral credit agreements (with the exception of a $75$275 million and $200 million bilateral agreement)agreements for Generation as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively) that backstop the commercial paper program. See discussion below and Credit AgreementsFacilities table below for items affecting effective program size.
(b)Excludes additional credit facilities for Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE with aggregate commitments of $50 million, $34 million, $34 million and $5 million, respectively, arranged with minority and community banks located primarily within ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s service territories. The agreements for these facilities expired on October 16, 2015 and were renewed at the same amount through October 14, 2016. These facilities are solely utilized to issue letters of credit. As of December 31, 2015, letters of credit issued under these facilities totaled $7 million, $14 million, $21 million and $2 million for Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE, respectively.

 

In order to maintain their respective commercial paper programs in the amounts indicated above, each Registrant must have revolving credit facilities in place, at least equal to the amount of its commercial paper program. While the amount of its outstanding commercial paper does not reduce available capacity under a Registrant’s credit agreement,facility, a Registrant does not issue commercial paper in an aggregate amount exceeding the then available capacity under its credit agreement.facility.

327


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

At December 31, 2013,2015, the Registrants had the following aggregate bank commitments, credit facility borrowings and available capacity under their respective credit agreements:facilities:

 

                    
              Available Capacity at
December 31, 2013
           Available Capacity at
December 31, 2015
 

Borrower

  Aggregate Bank
Commitment (a)
   Facility Draws   Outstanding
Letters of Credit
   Actual   To Support
Additional
Commercial
Paper(b)
   Aggregate Bank
Commitment(a)
   Facility Draws   Outstanding
Letters of Credit (c)
   Actual   To Support
Additional
Commercial
Paper(b)
 

Exelon Corporate

  $500   $—      $2   $498   $498   $500    $—      $26    $474    $474  

Generation

   5,675    —      1,413    4,262    4,187    5,725     —       1,449     4,276     4,174  

ComEd

   1,000    —      —      1,000    816    1,000     —       2     998     704  

PECO

   600    —      1    599    599    600     —       1     599     599  

BGE

   600    —      —      600    465    600     —       —       600     390  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total

  $8,375   $—     $1,416   $6,959   $6,565   $8,425    $—      $1,478    $6,947    $6,341  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Excludes additional credit facility agreementsfacilities for Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE with aggregate commitments of $50 million, $34 million, $34 million and $5 million, respectively, arranged with minority and community banks located primarily within ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s service territories. The agreements for these facilities expired on October 16, 2015 and were renewed at the same amount through October 14, 2016. These facilities expire on October 17, 2014 and are solely for issuingutilized to issue letters of credit. As of December 31, 2013,2015, letters of credit issued under these agreementsfacilities totaled $20$7 million, $18$14 million, $21 million and $1$2 million for Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE, respectively.
(b)Excludes $75$275 million bilateral credit facilityfacilities that doesdo not back Generation’s commercial paper program.
(c)Excludes nonrecourse debt letters of credit, see discussion below on Continental Wind.

 

For the year endedAs of December 31, 2013,2015, there were no borrowings under the Registrants’ credit facilities.

 

The following tables present the short-term borrowings activity for Exelon, Generation, ComEd, and BGE during 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011.2013. PECO did not have any short-term borrowings outstanding during 2013, 20122015, 2014 or 2011.2013.

 

Exelon

 

   2013  2012  2011 

Average borrowings

  $254  $199  $218 

Maximum borrowings outstanding

   682   505   600 

Average interest rates, computed on a daily basis

   0.37  0.48  0.50

Average interest rates, at December 31

   0.35  n.a.    0.44

Generation

    
   2013  2012  2011 

Average borrowings

  $42  $4  $51 

Maximum borrowings outstanding

   291   165   304 

Average interest rates, computed on a daily basis

   0.32  0.45  0.48 

Average interest rates, at December 31

   n.a.    n.a.    n.a.  

328


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

ComEd

    
  2013 2012 2011   2015 2014 2013 

Average borrowings

  $203  $110  $36   $499   $571   $254  

Maximum borrowings outstanding

   446   366   407    739    1,164    682  

Average interest rates, computed on a daily basis

   0.40  0.50  0.71   0.53  0.32  0.37

Average interest rates, at December 31

   0.37  n.a.    n.a.     0.88  0.53  0.35

BGE

    
  2013 2012 2011 

Average borrowings

  $35  $6  $26 

Maximum borrowings outstanding

   135   76   190 

Average interest rates, computed on a daily basis

   0.31  0.43  0.38

Average interest rates, computed at December 31

   0.31  n.a.    n.a.  

 

Credit AgreementsGeneration

 

On January 23, 2013, Generation entered into a two year $75 million bilateral letter of credit facility with a bank. The credit agreement expires in January 2015. This facility will solely be utilized by Generation to issue letters of credit.
   2015  2014  2013 

Average borrowings

  $1   $93   $42  

Maximum borrowings outstanding

   50    552    291  

Average interest rates, computed on a daily basis

   0.49  0.32  0.32

Average interest rates, at December 31

   n.a.    n.a.    n.a.  

On March 14, 2013, ComEd extended its unsecured revolving credit facility with aggregate bank commitments of $1.0 billion. Under this facility, ComEd may issue letters of credit in the aggregate amount of up to $500 million. The credit agreement expires on March 28, 2018, and ComEd may request another one-year extension of that term. The credit facility also allows ComEd to request increases in the aggregate commitments of up to an additional $500 million. Any such extension or increases are subject to the approval of the lenders party to the credit agreement in their sole discretion. Costs incurred to extend the facility for ComEd were not material.

On August 10, 2013, Exelon Corporate, Generation, PECO and BGE amended and extended their respective unsecured syndicated revolving credit facilities, with aggregate bank commitments of $500 million, $5.3 billion, $600 million and $600 million, respectively. The new covenants are substantially consistent with existing covenants. Costs incurred to amend and extend the facilities for Exelon Corporate, Generation, PECO and BGE were not material.

Effective August 10, 2013, Exelon and ComEd entered into amendments to each of their respective revolving credit facilities (the Amendments). The Amendments relate to the IRS’s challenge to the position taken by Exelon on its 1999 federal income tax return with respect to the sale of ComEd’s fossil generating assets in a like-kind exchange tax position. The Amendments are intended to exclude the non-cash impact of the like-kind exchange tax position from the calculation of the interest coverage ratio under each of Exelon and ComEd’s respective credit facilities. See Note 12—Income Taxes for additional information.

On January 27, 2014 ComEd began the process of extending its unsecured syndicated revolving credit facility, with aggregate bank commitments of $1.0 billion. The transaction is expected to close and become effective in March 2014, with a maturity of five years from the close of the transaction. No changes are expected to be made to the facility other than extension of the term for an additional one year period. Generally, it is expected that costs incurred to extend the facility will be amortized over the newly extended life of the facility.

329


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

ComEd

   2015  2014  2013 

Average borrowings

  $461   $415   $203  

Maximum borrowings outstanding

   684    597    446  

Average interest rates, computed on a daily basis

   0.53  0.33  0.40

Average interest rates, at December 31

   0.89  0.50  0.37

BGE

   2015  2014  2013 

Average borrowings

  $37   $64   $35  

Maximum borrowings outstanding

   210    180    135  

Average interest rates, computed on a daily basis

   0.48  0.29  0.31

Average interest rates, computed at December 31

   0.87  0.61  0.31

Credit Agreements

On October 23, 2015, the credit agreement for CENG’s $100 million bilateral credit facility was amended and extended for an additional two years. This facility has been utilized by CENG to fund working capital and capital projects. This facility does not back Generation’s commercial paper program.

On January 5, 2016, Generation entered into a credit agreement establishing a $150 million bilateral credit facility, scheduled to mature in January of 2019. This facility does not back Generation’s commercial paper program.

Borrowings under Exelon Corporate’s, Generation’s, ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s revolving credit agreementsfacilities bear interest at a rate based upon either the prime rate or a LIBOR-based rate, plus an adder based upon the particular registrant’s credit rating. Exelon Corporate, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE have adders of 27.5, 27.5, 27.5,7.5, 0.0 and 7.50.0 basis points for prime based borrowings and 127.5, 127.5, 127.5,107.5, 90.0 and 100.0 and 107.5 basis points for LIBOR-based borrowings. The maximum adders for prime rate borrowings and LIBOR-based rate borrowings are 65 basis points and 165 basis points, respectively. The credit agreements also require the borrower to pay a facility fee based upon the aggregate commitments under the agreement.commitments. The fee varies depending upon the respective credit ratings of the borrower.

 

An event of default under any of the Registrants’ credit facilitiesagreements would not constitute an event of default under any of the other Registrants’ credit facilities,agreements, except that a bankruptcy or other event of default in the payment of principal, premium or indebtedness in principal amount in excess of $100 million in the aggregate by Generation under its credit facilityagreement would constitute an event of default under the Exelon CorporateCorporation credit facility.agreement.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

On October 18, 2013, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE refinanced their respective minority and community bank credit facility agreements(Dollars in the amounts of $50 million, $34 million, $34 million and $5 million, respectively. These facilities, which expire in October 2014, are solely utilized to issue letters of credit.millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)

 

Each credit facilityagreement requires the affected borrower to maintain a minimum cash from operations to interest expense ratio for the twelve-month period ended on the last day of any quarter. The ratios exclude revenues and interest expenses attributable to securitization debt, certain changes in working capital, distributions on preferred securities of subsidiaries and, in the case of Exelon and Generation, interest on the debt of its project subsidiaries. The following table summarizes the minimum thresholds reflected in the credit agreements for the year ended December 31, 2013:2015:

 

   Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE

Credit facilityagreement threshold

  2.50 to 1  3.00 to 1  2.00 to 1  2.00 to 1  2.00 to 12.00 to 1

 

At December 31, 2013,2015, the interest coverage ratios at the Registrants were as follows:

 

   Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Interest coverage ratio

   7.67     11.45    5.20    8.29    7.85  

   Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Interest coverage ratio

   9.77     12.31     7.25     8.94     10.66  

Accounts Receivable Agreement

PECO was party to an agreement with a financial institution under which it transferred an undivided interest, adjusted daily, in its accounts receivable designated under the agreement in exchange for proceeds of $210 million, which was classified as a short-term note payable on Exelon’s and PECO’s Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2012. The agreement terminated on August 30, 2013 and PECO paid down the outstanding principal of $210 million. The financial institution no longer has an undivided interest in the accounts receivable designated under the agreement. As of December 31, 2012, the financial institution’s undivided interest in Exelon’s and PECO’s gross accounts receivable was equivalent to $289 million, which represented the financial institution’s interest in PECO’s eligible receivables as calculated under the terms of the agreement. The agreement required PECO to maintain eligible receivables at least equivalent to the financial institution’s undivided interest.

330


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Willis Tower Capital Lease

In the second quarter of 2013, ComEd entered into a 20-year capital lease for distribution substation space at Willis Tower in Chicago, Illinois. Exelon and ComEd recorded $8 million on their Consolidated Balance Sheets within property plant and equipment and long-term debt at the inception of the lease. ComEd will make lease payments of less than $1 million annually in 2013-2017 and approximately $7 million in aggregate thereafter.

 

Long-Term Debt

 

The following tables present the outstanding long-term debt at Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE as of December 31, 20132015 and 2012:2014:

 

Exelon

 

    Maturity
Date
   December 31,     Maturity
Date
   December 31, 
  Rates   2013 2012   Rates   2015 2014 

Long-term debt

            

First Mortgage Bonds (a)(b):

      

Fixed rates

   1.20%  —  7.63%    2013-2043    $7,746  $7,397 

Rate stabilization bonds

   5.72%  —  5.82  2017    $120   $195  

First mortgage bonds(a)

   1.20%  —  6.45  2016-2045     9,019    8,079  

Senior unsecured notes

   1.55%  —  7.60  2017-2045     9,803    7,071  

Unsecured bonds

   2.80%  —  6.35%    2013-2036     1,750   1,850    2.80%  —  6.35  2016-2036     1,750    1,750  

Rate stabilization bonds

   5.68%  —  5.82%    2016-2017    265   332 

Senior unsecured notes

   2.00%  —  7.60%    2014-2042     7,571   8,021 

Pollution control notes:

      

Fixed rates

   4.10%    2014    20   20 

Non-recourse debt:

      

Pollution control notes

   2.50%  —  2.70  2025-2036     435    —    

Nuclear fuel procurement contracts

   3.15%  —  3.35  2018-2020     127    70  

Notes payable and other(b)(c)

   1.43%  —  7.83  2016-2053     314    174  

Junior subordinated notes

   6.50  2024     1,150    1,150  

Contract payment - junior subordinated notes

   2.50  2017     64    108  

Long-term software licensing agreement

   3.95  2024     111    —    

Nonrecourse debt:

      

Fixed rates

   2.33%  —  5.50%    2031-2037     1,077   238    2.29%  —  6.00  2031-2037     1,162    1,166  

Variable rates

   1.96%  —  2.77%    2013-2053     150   262    2.42%  —  5.00  2017-2030     1,058    1,101  

Notes payable and other(c)

   4.50%  —  7.83%    2014-2053     181   177 
     

 

  

 

      

 

  

 

 

Total long-term debt

      18,760   18,297       25,113    20,864  

Unamortized debt discount and premium, net

      (19  (17      (63  (37

Unamortized debt issuance costs(d)

      (180  (150

Fair value adjustment

      384   448       275    333  

Fair value hedge carrying value adjustment, net

      7   17       —      4  

Long-term debt due within one year

      (1,509  (1,047      (1,500  (1,802
     

 

  

 

      

 

  

 

 

Long-term debt

     $17,623  $17,698      $23,645   $19,212  
     

 

  

 

      

 

  

 

 

Long-term debt to financing trusts (d)

      

Long-term debt to financing trusts(e)

      

Subordinated debentures to ComEd Financing III

   6.35  2033   $206  $206    6.35  2033    $206   $206  

Subordinated debentures to PECO Trust III

   7.38  2028    81   81    7.38  2028     81    81  

Subordinated debentures to PECO Trust IV

   5.75  2033    103   103    5.75  2033     103    103  

Subordinated debentures to BGE Trust

   6.20  2043    258   258    6.20  2043     258    258  
     

 

  

 

      

 

  

 

 

Total long-term debt to financing trusts

     $648  $648       648    648  

Unamortized debt issuance costs(d)

      (7  (7
     

 

  

 

      

 

  

 

 

Long-term debt to financing trusts

     $641   $641  
     

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Substantially all of ComEd’s assets other than expressly excepted property and substantially all of PECO’s assets are subject to the liens of their respective mortgage indentures.
(b)Includes First Mortgage Bonds issued undercapital lease obligations of $29 million and $32 million at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. Lease payments of $4 million, $4 million, $4 million, $5 million, $4 million, and $8 million will be made in 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 and thereafter, respectively.
(c)Includes financing related to Albany Green Energy, LLC (AGE), which is a consolidated variable interest entity (see Note 2—Variable Interest Entities for additional information). The agreement is scheduled to expire on November 17, 2017, at a variable rate equal to LIBOR plus 1.25%. As of December 31, 2015, $100 million was outstanding.
(d)Certain December 31, 2014 balances have been adjusted for the ComEd and PECO mortgage indentures securing pollution control bonds and notes.adoption of accounting guidance related to simplifying the presentation of debt costs. See Note 1—Significant Accounting Policies for additional information.

331


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

(c)Includes capital lease obligations of $41 million and $30 million at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. Lease payments of $4 million, $4 million, $4 million, $5 million, $5 million and $19 million will be made in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and thereafter, respectively.
(d)(e)Amounts owed to these financing trusts are recorded as Long-term debt to financing trusts within Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

Generation

 

      Maturity
Date
   December 31,     Maturity
Date
   December 31, 
  Rates   2013 2012   Rates   2015 2014 

Long-term debt

             

Senior unsecured notes

   2.00%  —  7.60    2014-2042    $6,271  $6,721    2.00%  —  7.60  2017-2042    $5,971   $5,771  

Social Security Administration

   2.93%     2015    1   —   

Pollution control notes:

       

Fixed rates

   4.10%     2014    20   20 

Non-recourse debt:

       

Pollution control notes

   2.50%  —  2.70  2025-2036     435    —    

Nuclear fuel procurement contracts

   3.15%  —  3.35  2018-2020     127    70  

Notes payable and other(a)(b)

   1.43%  —  7.83  2016-2035     166    26  

Nonrecourse debt:

      

Fixed rates

   2.33%  —  5.50%     2031-2037     1,077   238    2.29%  —  6.00  2031-2037     1,162    1,166  

Variable rates

   1.96%  —  2.77%     2014-2030     150   262    2.42%  —  5.00  2017-2030     1,058    1,101  

Notes payable and other(a)

   4.50%  —  7.83%     2014-2022     33   30 
      

 

  

 

      

 

  

 

 

Total long-term debt

       7,552   7,271       8,919    8,134  

Fair value adjustment

       166   199       127    146  

Unamortized debt discount and premium, net

       11   13       (17  (14

Unamortized debt issuance costs(c)

      (70  (70

Long-term debt due within one year

       (561  (28      (90  (614
      

 

  

 

      

 

  

 

 

Long-term debt

      $7,168  $7,455      $8,869   $7,582  
      

 

  

 

      

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Includes Generation’s capital lease obligations of $33$21 million and $30$24 million at December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014, respectively. Generation will make lease payments of $4 million, $4 million, $4 million, $5 million $5and $4 million and $11 million in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and thereafter,2019, 2020, respectively. The capital lease matures in 2020.

During January 2014, Generation redeemed its $20 million 4.10% pollution control revenue bonds due July 1, 2014 and its $500 million 5.35% senior unsecured notes at maturity.

(b)Includes financing related to Albany Green Energy, LLC (AGE), which is a consolidated variable interest entity (see Note 2 - Variable Interest Entities for additional information). The agreement is scheduled to expire on November 17, 2017, at a variable rate equal to LIBOR plus 1.25%. As of December 31, 2015, $100 million was outstanding.
(c)Certain December 31, 2014 balances have been adjusted for the adoption of accounting guidance related to simplifying the presentation of debt costs. See Note 1 - Significant Accounting Policies for additional information.

 

ComEd

 

   Maturity
Date
   December 31,     Maturity
Date
   December 31, 
 Rates   2013 2012   Rates   2015 2014 

Long-term debt

           

First Mortgage Bonds (a)(b):

     

Fixed rates

  1.63%  —  7.63  2013-2043    $5,546  $5,447 

Notes payable and other (c)

  6.95%  —  7.49  2014-2053     148   140 

First mortgage bonds(a)

   1.95%  —  6.45  2016-2045    $6,419   $5,829  

Notes payable and other (b)

   6.95%  —  7.49  2016-2053     148    148  
    

 

  

 

      

 

  

 

 

Total long-term debt

     5,694   5,587       6,567    5,977  

Unamortized debt discount and premium, net

     (19  (20      (20  (19

Unamortized debt issuance costs(c)

      (38  (33

Long-term debt due within one year

     (617  (252      (665  (260
    

 

  

 

      

 

  

 

 

Long-term debt

    $5,058  $5,315      $5,844   $5,665  
    

 

  

 

      

 

  

 

 

Long-term debt to financing trust (d)

           

Subordinated debentures to ComEd Financing III

  6.35  2042   $206  $206    6.35  2033    $206   $206  
    

 

  

 

      

 

  

 

 

Total long-term debt to financing trusts

      206    206  

Unamortized debt issuance costs(c)

      (1  (1
     

 

  

 

 

Long-term debt to financing trusts

     $205   $205  
     

 

  

 

 

332


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

 

(a)Substantially all of ComEd’s assets other than expressly excepted property are subject to the lien of its mortgage indenture.
(b)Includes First Mortgage Bonds issued under the ComEd mortgage indenture securing pollution control bonds and notes.
(c)Includes ComEd’s capital lease obligations of $8 million at both December 31, 2013.2015 and 2014, respectively. Lease payments of less than $1 million will be made from 20142016 through expiration at 2053.
(c)Certain December 31, 2014 balances have been adjusted for the adoption of accounting guidance related to simplifying the presentation of debt costs. See Note 1—Significant Accounting Policies for additional information.
(d)Amount owed to this financing trust is recorded as Long-term debt to financing trust within ComEd’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

On January 10, 2014, ComEd issued $300 million aggregate principal amount of its First Mortgage 2.150% Bonds, Series 115, due January 15, 2019, and $350 million aggregate principal amount of its First Mortgage 4.700% Bonds, Series 116, due January 15, 2044. The proceeds of the Bonds were used by ComEd to refinance the $17 million outstanding principal amount of its First Mortgage 5.850% Bonds, Pollution Control Series 1994C, due January 15, 2014, and the $600 million outstanding principal amount of its First Mortgage 1.625% Bonds, Series 110, due January 15, 2014, and to fund other general corporate purposes in 2014.

PECO

 

   Maturity
Date
   December 31,     Maturity
Date
   December 31, 
 Rates   2013 2012   Rates   2015 2014 

Long-term debt

           

First Mortgage Bonds (a)(b):

     

Fixed rates

  1.20%  —  5.95  2013-2043    $2,200  $1,950 

First mortgage bonds(a)

   1.20%  —  5.95  2016-2044    $2,600   $2,250  
    

 

  

 

      

 

  

 

 

Total long-term debt

     2,200   1,950       2,600    2,250  

Unamortized debt discount and premium, net

     (3  (3      (5  (4

Unamortized debt issuance costs(b)

      (15  (14

Long-term debt due within one year

     (250  (300      (300  —    
    

 

  

 

      

 

  

 

 

Long-term debt

    $1,947  $1,647      $2,280   $2,232  
    

 

  

 

      

 

  

 

 

Long-term debt to financing trusts (c)

           

Subordinated debentures to PECO Trust III

  7.38  2028   $81  $81    7.38  2028    $81   $81  

Subordinated debentures to PECO Trust IV

  5.75  2033    103   103    5.75  2033     103    103  
    

 

  

 

      

 

  

 

 

Long-term debt to financing trusts

    $184  $184      $184   $184  
    

 

  

 

      

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Substantially all of PECO’s assets are subject to the lien of its mortgage indenture.
(b)Includes First Mortgage Bonds issued underCertain December 31, 2014 balances have been adjusted for the PECO mortgage indenture securing pollution control bonds and notes.adoption of accounting guidance related to simplifying the presentation of debt costs. See Note 1—Significant Accounting Policies for additional information.
(c)Amounts owed to this financing trust are recorded as Long-term debt to financing trusts within PECO’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

BGE

 

     Maturity
Date
   December 31, 
  Rates    2013  2012 

Long-term debt

     

Unsecured bonds

  2.80%  —  6.35  2013-2036    $1,750  $1,850 

Rate stabilization bonds

  5.68%        5.82  2016-2017    265  $332 
    

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total long-term debt

     2,015   2,182 

Unamortized debt discount and premium, net

     (4  (4

Long-term debt due within one year

     (70  (467
    

 

 

  

 

 

 

Long-term debt

    $1,941  $1,711 
    

 

 

  

 

 

 

Long-term debt to financing trusts (a)

     

Subordinated debentures to BGE Capital Trust II

  6.20  2043   $258  $258 
    

 

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Amount owed to this financing trust is recorded as debt to financing trust within BGE’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.
      Maturity
Date
   December 31, 
   Rates    2015  2014 

Long-term debt

      

Rate stabilization bonds

   5.72%  —  5.82  2017    $120   $195  

Senior unsecured notes

   2.80%  —  6.35  2016-2036     1,750    1,750  
     

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total long-term debt

      1,870    1,945  

Unamortized debt discount and premium, net

      (3  (3

Unamortized debt issuance costs(a)

      (9  (10

Long-term debt due within one year

      (378  (75
     

 

 

  

 

 

 

Long-term debt

     $1,480   $1,857  
     

 

 

  

 

 

 

Long-term debt to financing trusts(b)

      

Subordinated debentures to BGE Capital Trust II

   6.20  2043    $258   $258  
     

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total long-term debt to financing trusts

      258    258  

Unamortized debt issuance costs(a)

      (6  (6
     

 

 

  

 

 

 

Long-term debt to financing trusts

     $252   $252  
     

 

 

  

 

 

 

333


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

(a)Certain December 31, 2014 balances have been adjusted for the adoption of accounting guidance related to simplifying the presentation of debt costs. See Note 1—Significant Accounting Policies for additional information.
(b)Amount owed to this financing trust is recorded as Long-term debt to financing trust within BGE’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.

Long-term debt maturities at Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE in the periods 20142016 through 20182020 and thereafter are as follows:

 

Year

  Exelon Generation   ComEd PECO BGE   Exelon Generation   ComEd PECO BGE 

2014

  $1,428   $561    $617  $250  $—   

2015

   1,615   555    260   —     —   

2016

   1,346   81    665   300   300   $1,487   $90    $665   $300   $378  

2017

   1,396   706    425   —     265    1,841    805     425    —      42  

2018

   1,345   5    840   500   —      1,393    53     840    500    —    

2019

   973    673     300    —      —    

2020

   3,311    1,911     500    —      —    

Thereafter

   12,278(a)   5,644     3,093(b)   1,334(c)   1,708(d)    16,756(a)   5,387     4,043(b)   1,984(c)   1,708(d) 
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total

  $19,408  $7,552   $5,900  $2,384  $2,273   $25,761   $8,919    $6,773   $2,784   $2,128  
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Includes $648 million due to ComEd, PECO and BGE financing trusts.
(b)Includes $206 million due to ComEd financing trust.
(c)Includes $184 million due to PECO financing trusts.
(d)Includes $258 million due to BGE financing trust.

 

Non-RecoursePHI Merger Financing

In May 2014, concurrently and in connection with entering into the agreement to acquire PHI, Exelon entered into a credit facility to which the lenders committed to provide Exelon a 364-day senior unsecured bridge credit facility of $7.2 billion to support the contemplated transaction and provide flexibility for timing of permanent financing. In June 2015, the remaining $3.2 billion bridge credit facility was terminated as a result of Exelon’s issuance of $4.2 billion of long-term debt to fund a portion of the purchase price and related costs and expenses for the pending PHI merger and for general corporate purposes.

In connection with the $4.2 billion issuance of Senior Unsecured Notes in 2015, the tranches due in 2025, 2035, and 2045 had to be redeemed at the principal amount plus a 1% premium of principal on December 31, 2015, if the PHI merger was not consummated or terminated prior to such date (“Special Mandatory Redemption”). Exelon also had the option to redeem those notes earlier at a 1% premium of principal, if Exelon determined that the merger would not be completed before December 31, 2015.

On October 29, 2015, Exelon commenced a private exchange offer (Exchange Offer) to certain eligible holders whereby, for those that took part, the outstanding Senior Unsecured Notes in the 2025, 2035 and 2045 tranches were exchanged for new Senior Unsecured Notes. The new Senior Unsecured Notes have substantially the same terms as the outstanding Senior Unsecured Notes, except the outside date with regard to the special redemption provisions is June 30, 2016, (or the date the PHI merger is terminated if earlier), rather than December 31, 2015, and under certain circumstances, can be further extended to August 31, 2016.

On December 2, 2015, Exelon exchanged $1.9 billion of the Senior Unsecured Notes and paid a consent fee of approximately $5 million, which has been deferred on Exelon’s Consolidated Balance

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Sheet and $4 million of third-party debt issuance costs, which were charged to earnings within Other, net on Exelon’s Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income. On December 2, 2015, Exelon also redeemed $0.9 billion of Senior Unsecured Notes not exchanged in the Exchange Offer resulting in the payment of $9 million of redemption premium and the acceleration of the unamortized original issuance discount and deferred financing costs associated with the redeemed debt of $9 million, which were charged to earnings within Other, net on Exelon’s Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

Junior Subordinated Notes

In June 2014, Exelon issued $1.15 billion of junior subordinated notes in the form of 23 million equity units at a stated amount of $50.00 per unit. Net proceeds from the issuance were $1.11 billion, net of a $35 million underwriter fee. The net proceeds are expected to be used to finance a portion of the merger and related costs and expenses for the pending PHI merger and for general corporate purposes. Each equity unit represents an undivided beneficial ownership interest in Exelon’s 2.50% junior subordinated notes due in 2024 and a forward equity purchase contract which settles in 2017. The junior subordinated notes are expected to be remarketed in 2017.

At the time of issuance, Exelon determined that the forward equity purchase contract had no value and therefore the entire $1.15 billion of junior subordinated notes were allocated to debt and recorded within Long-term debt on Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheet. Additionally, at the time of issuance, the present value of the contract payments of $131 million (“Contract Payment Obligation”) were recorded to Long-term debt, representing the obligation to make contract payments, with an offsetting reduction to Common stock. The obligation for the contract payments is accreted to interest expense over the 3 year period ending in 2017 in Exelon’s Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income. During 2015, contract payments of $44 million related to the Contract Payment Obligation were included within Retirements of long-term debt in Exelon’s Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows. During 2014, the Contract Payment Obligation was considered a non-cash financing transaction that was excluded from Exelon’s Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows. Until settlement of the equity purchase contract, earnings per share dilution resulting from the equity unit issuance will be determined under the treasury stock method.

Nonrecourse Debt

 

Exelon and Generation have issued nonrecourse debt financing, in which approximately $2.4 billion of generating assets and $0.2 billion of Upstream gas properties have been pledged as collateral at December 31, 2015. Borrowings under these agreements are secured by the assets and equity of each respective project. The following are descriptionslenders do not have recourse against Exelon or Generation in the event of activitya default.

Denver Airport.    In June 2011, Generation entered into a 20-year, $7 million solar loan agreement to finance a solar construction project in Denver, Colorado. The agreement is scheduled to mature on June 30, 2031. The agreement bears interest at a fixed rate of 5.50% annually with respect tointerest payable annually. As of December 31, 2015, $7 million was outstanding.

CEU Upstream.    In July 2011, Generation entered into a 5-year asset-based lending agreement associated with certain indebtedness of Exelon’s project subsidiariesUpstream gas properties that it owns. The borrowing base committed under the facility is outstanding$85 million as of December 31, 2013.2015. The indebtedness described belowcommitment level can be decreased if the assets no longer support the current borrowing base, which would result in repayment of a portion or all of the outstanding balance. The commitment can be increased up to $500 million if the assets support a

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

higher borrowing base and Generation is specificable to certain generating facilities pledged as collateralobtain additional commitments from lenders. Calculations of the borrowing base are impacted by projected production and commodity prices. The facility was amended and extended through January 2019. The agreement bears interest at a variable rate equal to LIBOR plus 2.50% and is payable monthly. As of December 31, 2015, $68 million was outstanding under the facility.

Sacramento PV Energy.    In July 2011, a subsidiary of Generation entered into a 19-year, $41 million nonrecourse note to finance a 30MW solar facility in Sacramento, California. The note is scheduled to mature on December 31, 2030. The note bears interest at a variable rate equal to LIBOR plus 2.25% and is payable quarterly. As of December 31, 2015, $33 million was outstanding. The subsidiary also executed interest rate swaps with a net bookan initial notional value of approximately $1.9 billion$30 million at an interest rate of 3.57% in order to convert the variable interest payments to fixed payments on 75% of the $41 million facility amount, as required by the debt covenants. See Note 13—Derivative Financial Instruments for additional information regarding interest rate swaps.

Holyoke Solar Cooperative.    In October 2011, Generation entered into a 20-year, $11 million solar loan agreement related to a solar construction project in Holyoke, Massachusetts. The agreement is scheduled to mature on December 2031. The agreement bears interest at a fixed rate of 5.25% annually with interest payable monthly. As of December 31, 2013,2015, $10 million was outstanding.

Antelope Valley Solar Ranch One.    In December 2011, the DOE Loan Programs Office issued a guarantee for up to $646 million for a nonrecourse loan from the Federal Financing Bank to support the financing of the construction of the Antelope Valley facility. The project became fully operational in the first half of 2014. The loan will mature on January 5, 2037. Interest rates on the loan were fixed upon each advance at a spread of 37.5 basis points above U.S. Treasuries of comparable maturity. The advances were completed as of December 31, 2015 and all associated project financing liabilities are non-recoursethe outstanding loan balance will bear interest at an average blended interest rate of 2.82%. As of December 31, 2015, $574 million was outstanding. In addition, Generation has issued letters of credit to Exelon and Generation.support its equity investment in the project. As of December 31, 2015, Generation had $69 million in letters of credit outstanding related to the project.

Constellation Solar Horizons.    In September 2012, a subsidiary of Generation entered into an 18-year $38 million nonrecourse note to recover capital used to build a 16MW solar facility in Emmitsburg, Maryland. The note is scheduled to mature on September 7, 2030. The note bears interest at a variable rate equal to LIBOR plus 2.25% with interest payable quarterly. As of December 31, 2015, $32 million was outstanding. The subsidiary also executed interest rate swaps for an initial notional amount of $29 million at an interest rate of 2.03% in order to convert the variable interest payments to fixed payments on 75% of the $38 million facility amount, as required by the debt covenants. See Note 13—Derivative Financial Instruments for additional information regarding interest rate swaps.

 

Continental Wind.    OnIn September 30, 2013, Continental Wind, LLC (Continental Wind), an indirect subsidiary of Exelon and Generation, completed the issuance and sale of $613 million aggregate principal amount of Continental Wind’s 6.00% senior secured notes due February 28, 2033.notes. Continental Wind owns and operates a portfolio of wind farms in Idaho, Kansas, Michigan, Oregon, New Mexico and Texas with a total net capacity of 667 MW.667MW. The net proceeds were distributed to Generation for its general business purposes. In connectionThe notes are scheduled to mature on February 28, 2033. The notes bear interest at a fixed rate of 6.00% with this non-recourse project financing, Exelon terminated existing interest rate swaps with a total notional amountpayable semi-annually. As of $350December 31, 2015, $572 million during the third quarter of 2013, and realized a total gain of $26 million upon termination. The gain on the interest rate swaps was recorded within OCI and will reduce the effective interest rate over the life of the debt for Exelon. See Note 12—Derivative Financial Instruments for additional information on the interest rate swaps.outstanding.

 

In addition, Continental Wind entered into a $131 million letter of credit facility and $10 million working capital revolver facility. Continental Wind has issued letters of credit to satisfy certain of its credit support and security obligations. As of December 31, 2013,2015, the Continental Wind letter of credit facility had $93$99 million in letters of credit outstanding related to the project.

ExGen Renewables Energy I LLC.    On February 6, 2014, ExGen Renewables I, LLC (EGR), an indirect subsidiary of Exelon and Generation, completed the issuance and sale of $300 million aggregate principal amount of EGR’s LIBOR plus 425 bps non-recourse senior secured loan, due February 6, 2021. EGR indirectly owns Continental Wind LLC (Continental).

Antelope Valley Project Development Debt Agreement.    The DOE Loan Programs Office issued a guarantee for up to $646 million for a non-recourse loan from the Federal Financing Bank to support the financing of the construction of the Antelope Valley facility. The project is expected to be

334


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

completed in the first halfExGen Renewables I.    In February 2014, ExGen Renewables I, LLC (EGR), an indirect subsidiary of 2014.Exelon and Generation, borrowed $300 million aggregate principal amount pursuant to a nonrecourse senior secured loan. The proceeds were distributed to Generation for its general business purposes. The loan willis scheduled to mature on January 5, 2037. Interest rates on theFebruary 6, 2021. The loan are fixed upon each advance at a spread of 37.5 basis points above U.S. Treasuries of comparable maturity.

In addition, Generation has issued letters of credit to support its equity investment in the project. As of December 31, 2013, Generation had $334 million in letters of credit outstanding related to the project The letters of credit balance is expected to decline over time as scheduled equity contributions for the project are made.

In connection with this agreement, Generation entered into a floating-for-fixed interest rate swap with a notional amount of $485 million to mitigate interest-rate risk associated with the financing. As Generation received additional loan advances, it subsequently entered into a series of fixed-to-floating interest rate swaps to offset portions of the original interest rate hedge. See Note 12—Derivative Financial Instruments for additional information regarding interest rate swaps associated with Antelope Valley.

Sacramento PV Energy.    In July, 2011, a subsidiary of Generation entered into a $41 million non-recourse project financing for a 30MW solar facility in Sacramento, California. As of December 31, 2013, $37 million was outstanding. Borrowings under the facility bearbears interest at a variable rate equal to LIBOR plus 4.25%, subject to a 1% LIBOR floor with interest payable quarterly, and are secured by equity interests and assets of the subsidiary.quarterly. EGR indirectly owns Continental Wind. As of December 31, 2013,2015, $258 million was outstanding. In addition to the subsidiary hadfinancing, EGR entered into interest rate swaps with an initial notional amount of $240 million at an interest rate of 2.03% to manage a notional value of $29 million in order to convert the variable interest payments to fixed payments on 75%portion of the $41 million facility.interest rate exposure in connection with the financing. See Note 12—13—Derivative Financial Instruments for additional information regarding interest rate swaps.

 

Constellation Solar Horizons Financing.ExGen Texas Power.    In September 2012, a2014, ExGen Texas Power, LLC (EGTP), an indirect subsidiary of Exelon and Generation, entered into an 18-year $38issued $675 million non-recourseaggregate principal amount of a nonrecourse senior secured term loan. The net proceeds were distributed to Generation for general business purposes. The loan is scheduled to mature on September 18, 2021. The term loan bears interest at a variable rate equal to LIBOR plus 4.75%, subject to a 1% LIBOR floor with interest note to recover capital used to build a 16 MW solar facility in Emmitsburg, Maryland. Interest is payable quarterly, and the note is secured by the equity interests and assets of the subsidiary.quarterly. As of December 31, 2013, $362015, $666 million was outstanding. The subsidiary also executedAs part of the agreement, a revolving credit facility was established for the amount of $20 million available through, and scheduled to mature on September 18, 2019. In addition to the financing, EGTP entered into interest rate swaps for awith an initial notional amount of $29approximately $505 million in orderat an interest rate of 2.34% to convert the variable interest payments to fixed payments on 75%hedge a portion of the $38 million facility amount.interest rate exposure in connection with this financing, as required by the debt covenants. See Note 12—13—Derivative Financial Instruments for additional information regarding interest rate swaps.

Secured Solar Credit Lending Agreement.    In December 2013, a Generation subsidiary, Constellation Solar, LLC, paid off the remaining balance of the three-year senior secured credit facility that is designed to support the growth of solar operations in the amount of $94 million and terminated the facility. The facility was scheduled to mature in June of 2014.

Other Solar Project Financings.    Generation has the following amounts outstanding under solar project loan agreements:

$7 million fully amortizing by June 30, 2031 related to a solar project at the Denver International Airport, and

$10 million fully amortizing by December 31, 2031 related to a solar project in Holyoke, Massachusetts.

Upstream Gas Property Asset-Based Lending Agreement

Generation has a five year asset-based lending agreement associated with certain upstream gas properties that it owns. The borrowing base committed under the facility is $110 million and can increase to a total of $500 million if the assets support a higher borrowing base and Generation is able

335


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

to obtain additional commitments from lenders. The facility was amended and extended through January 2019. Borrowings under this facility are secured by the upstream gas properties, and the lenders do not have recourse against Exelon or Generation in the event of a default. As of December 31, 2013, $77 million was outstanding under the facility with interest payable quarterly. The facility includes a provision that requires the Generation entities owning the upstream gas properties subject to the agreement to maintain a current ratio of one-to-one. As of December 31, 2013, Generation was in compliance with this provision.

 

14.15. Income Taxes (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Income tax expense (benefit) from continuing operations is comprised of the following components:

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2013

  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2015

  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

Included in operations:

            

Federal

            

Current

  $744  $250  $160  $126 ��$9   $407   $546   $(80 $64   $25  

Deferred

   140   360   (27  23   100    566    16    310    69    126  

Investment tax credit amortization

   (15  (11  (2  (1  (1   (22  (19  (2  —      (1

State

            

Current

   181   50   50   16   —      (86  (90  7    (10  —    

Deferred

   (6  (34  (29  (2  26    208    49    45    20    39  
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total

  $1,044  $615  $152  $162  $134   $1,073   $502   $280   $143   $189  
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2012

  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2014

  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

Included in operations:

            

Federal

            

Current

  $37  $104  $(40 $88  $(97  $121   $360   $(171 $28   $24  

Deferred

   701   326   237   25   101    576    (35  395    87    90  

Investment tax credit amortization

   (11  (6  (2  (2  (1   (20  (16  (2  —      (1

State

            

Current

   (25  (12  6   4   —      42    35    7    (2  —    

Deferred

   (75  88   38   12   4    (53  (137  39    1    27  
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total

  $627  $500  $239  $127  $7   $666   $207   $268   $114   $140  
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2011

  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

Included in operations:

      

Federal

      

Current

  $1  $431  $(329 $(71 $(71

Deferred

   1,200   435   544   223   130 

Investment tax credit amortization

   (12  (7  (3  (2  (1

State

      

Current

   (3  74   (123  (37  —   

Deferred

   271   123   161   33   17 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total

  $1,457  $1,056  $250  $146  $75 
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

336


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

For the Year Ended December 31, 2013

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Included in operations:

      

Federal

      

Current

  $744   $250   $160   $126   $9  

Deferred

   140    360    (27  23    100  

Investment tax credit amortization

   (15  (11  (2  (1  (1

State

      

Current

   181    50    50    16    —    

Deferred

   (6  (34  (29  (2  26  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total

  $1,044   $615   $152   $162   $134  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

The effective income tax rate from continuing operations varies from the U.S. Federal statutory rate principally due to the following:

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2013

 Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2015

  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

U.S. Federal statutory rate

  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%   35.0  35.0  35.0  35.0  35.0

Increase (decrease) due to:

           

State income taxes, net of Federal income tax benefit

  4.7   1.6   3.4   1.6   4.9    3.7    1.0    4.9    1.0    5.3  

Qualified nuclear decommissioning trust fund income

  3.7   6.1   —     —     —   

Tax exempt income

  (0.2  (0.3  —     —     —   

Qualified nuclear decommissioning trust fund loss

   (0.4  (0.8  —      —      —    

Domestic production activities deduction

   (0.7  (1.3  —      —      —    

Health care reform legislation

  0.1   —     0.7   —     0.2    —      —      —      —      0.1  

Amortization of investment tax credit, net deferred taxes

  (1.9  (3.0  (0.6  (0.1  —   

Amortization of investment tax credit, including deferred taxes on basis difference

   (0.9  (1.5  (0.3  (0.1  (0.1

Plant basis differences

   (1.5  —      (0.1  (8.7  (0.7

Production tax credits and other credits

  (2.1  (3.4  (0.1  —     —      (1.9  (3.4  —      —      —    

Plant basis differences

  (1.6  —     (0.8  (7.1  (0.2

Non-controlling interest

   0.3    0.5    —      —      —    

Statute of limitations expiration

   (1.4  (2.4  —      —      —    

Other

  (0.1  0.7   0.3   (0.3  (0.9   —      —      0.2    0.2    —    
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Effective income tax rate

  37.6%  36.7%  37.9%  29.1%  39.0%   32.2  27.1  39.7  27.4  39.6
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2012

 Exelon (a) Generation (a) ComEd PECO BGE (b) 

U.S. Federal statutory rate

  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%

Increase (decrease) due to:

     

State income taxes, net of Federal income tax benefit

  (3.6  4.7   4.6   2.0   24.3 

Qualified nuclear decommissioning trust fund income

  5.4   9.1   —     —     —   

Tax exempt income

  (0.2  (0.4  —     —     —   

Health care reform legislation

  0.1   —     0.4   —     11.6 

Amortization of investment tax credit, net deferred taxes

  (1.1  (1.3  (0.4  (0.3  (8.6

Production tax credits and other credits

  (2.2  (3.7  —     —     —   

Plant basis differences

  (2.4  —     (0.3  (11.5  (9.0

Merger expenses(c)

  2.4   —     —     —     24.2 

Fines and Penalties

  2.6   4.4   —     —     —   

Other

  (1.1  (0.5  (0.6  (0.2  (13.9
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Effective income tax rate

  34.9%  47.3%  38.7%  25.0%  63.6%
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2011

 Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE (b) 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2014

  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

U.S. Federal statutory rate

  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%   35.0  35.0  35.0  35.0  35.0

Increase (decrease) due to:

           

State income taxes, net of Federal income tax benefit

  4.4   4.5   3.6   (0.5  5.2    1.3    (1.9  4.5    (0.1  5.0  

Qualified nuclear decommissioning trust fund income

  0.5   0.7   —     —     —      2.4    4.8    —      —      —    

Domestic production activities deduction

  (0.3  (0.4  —     —     —      (2.0  (4.1  —      —      —    

Tax exempt income

  (0.2  (0.2  —     —     —   

Health care reform legislation

  (0.2  —     (1.0  —     (0.5   0.1    —      0.2    —      0.2  

Amortization of investment tax credit

  (0.3  (0.3  (0.4  (0.3  (0.5

Production tax credits

  (0.9  (1.2  —     —     —   

Amortization of investment tax credit, including deferred taxes on basis difference

   (1.1  (2.0  (0.3  (0.1  (0.3

Plant basis differences

  (1.0  —     (0.3  (6.9  (2.0   (1.9  —      (0.1  (10.4  0.2  

Production tax credits and other credits

   (2.4  (4.8  —      —      —    

Non-controlling interest

   (1.8  (3.7   

Statute of limitations expiration

   (2.6  (5.3  —      —      —    

Other

  (0.2  (0.7  0.6   —     (1.7   (0.2  (1.1  0.3    0.1    (0.2
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Effective income tax rate

  36.8%  37.4%  37.5%  27.3%  35.5%   26.8  16.9  39.6  24.5  39.9
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

337


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

(a)Exelon activity for the twelve months ended December 31, 2012 includes the results of Constellation and BGE for March 12, 2012—December 31, 2012. Generation activity for the twelve months ended December 31, 2012 includes the results of Constellation for March 12, 2012—December 31, 2012.
(b)BGE activity represents the activity for the twelve months ended December 31, 2012 and 2011.
(c)Prior to the close of the merger, the Registrants recorded the applicable taxes on merger transaction costs assuming the merger would not be completed. Upon closing of the merger, the Registrants reversed such taxes for those merger transaction costs that were determined to be non tax-deductible upon successful completion of a merger.

For the Year Ended December 31, 2013

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

U.S. Federal statutory rate

   35.0  35.0  35.0  35.0  35.0

Increase (decrease) due to:

      

State income taxes, net of Federal income tax benefit

   4.8    1.8    3.4    1.6    4.9  

Qualified nuclear decommissioning trust fund income

   3.7    6.1    —      —      —    

Domestic production activities deduction

   —      —      —      —      —    

Health care reform legislation

   0.1    —      0.7    —      0.2  

Amortization of investment tax credit, including deferred taxes on basis difference

   (1.9  (3.0  (0.6  (0.1  —    

Plant basis differences

   (1.6  —      (0.8  (7.1  (0.2

Production tax credits and other credits

   (2.1  (3.4  (0.1  —      —    

Statute of limitations expiration

   (0.1  (0.2  —      —      —    

Other

   (0.3  0.4    0.3    (0.3  (0.9
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Effective income tax rate

   37.6  36.7  37.9  29.1  39.0
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

The tax effects of temporary differences and carryforwards, which give rise to significant portions of the deferred tax assets (liabilities), as of December 31, 20132015 and 20122014 are presented below:

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2013

  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2015

  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

Plant basis differences

  $(11,612 $(3,879 $(3,523 $(2,573 $(1,538  $(13,393 $(4,269 $(4,424 $(2,901 $(1,821

Accrual based contracts

   (214  (214  —     —     —      (136  (136  —      —      —    

Derivatives and other financial instruments

   (509  (505  (4  —     —      (203  (181  (4  —      —    

Deferred pension and post-retirement obligation

   1,489    (362  (522  —     (74

Deferred pension and postretirement obligation

   1,801    (371  (505  (9  (47

Nuclear decommissioning activities

   (647  (646  —     —     —      (592  (592  —      —      —    

Deferred debt refinancing costs

   173    79   (21  (3  (5   133    48    (15  (1  (4

Regulatory

   (1,611  —     (241  42   (253

Regulatory assets and liabilities

   (1,706  —      (219  16    (264

Tax loss carryforward

   252   76   47   11   52    103    56    —      —      33  

Tax credit carryforward

   534   534   —     —     —      327    374    —      —      —    

Investment in CENG

   (541  (541  —     —     —      (595  (595  —      —      —    

Other, net

   804   67   154   122   26    1,112    425    270    105    27  
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Deferred income tax liabilities (net)

  $(11,882 $(5,391 $(4,110 $(2,401 $(1,792  $(13,149 $(5,241 $(4,897 $(2,790 $(2,076

Unamortized investment tax credits

   (490  (454  (22  (3  (6   (622  (598  (17  (2  (5
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total deferred income tax liabilities (net) and unamortized investment tax credits

  $(12,372 $(5,845 $(4,132 $(2,404 $(1,798  $(13,771 $(5,839 $(4,914 $(2,792 $(2,081
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2012

  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

Plant basis differences

  $(10,689 $(3,545 $(3,537 $(2,437 $(1,553

Accrual based contracts

   (389  (389  —     —     —   

Derivatives and other financial instruments

   (392  (479  (4  —     —   

Deferred pension and post-retirement obligation

   2,356    (439  (598  (11  (12

Nuclear decommissioning activities

   (604  (604  —     —     —   

Deferred debt refinancing costs

   (537  163   (25  (4  (4

Regulatory

   (1,857  —      (116  50    (253

Tax loss carryforward

   421   226   32   14   105 

Tax credit carryforward

   226   226   —     —     —   

Investment in CENG

   (405  (419  —     —     —   

Other, net

   701    9   83    100    67  
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Deferred income tax liabilities (net)

  $(11,169 $(5,251 $(4,165 $(2,288 $(1,650

Unamortized investment tax credits

   (251  (216  (24  (3  (6
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total deferred income tax liabilities (net) and unamortized investment tax credits

  $(11,420 $(5,467 $(4,189 $(2,291 $(1,656
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

338


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2014

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Plant basis differences

  $(12,143 $(3,834 $(3,945 $(2,749 $(1,660

Accrual based contracts

   (178  (178  —      —      —    

Derivatives and other financial instruments

   (46  (79  (4  —      —    

Deferred pension and postretirement obligation

   1,914    (390  (543  2    (53

Nuclear decommissioning activities

   (726  (726  —      —      —    

Deferred debt refinancing costs

   112    57    (18  (2  (4

Regulatory assets and liabilities

   (1,824  —      (286  27    (258

Tax loss carryforward

   111    48    —      11    39  

Tax credit carryforward

   97    143    —      —      —    

Investment in CENG

   (563  (563  —      —      —    

Other, net

   1,029    346    255    111    30  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Deferred income tax liabilities (net)

  $(12,217 $(5,176 $(4,541 $(2,600 $(1,906

Unamortized investment tax credits

   (555  (528  (20  (2  (5
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total deferred income tax liabilities (net) and unamortized investment tax credits

  $(12,772 $(5,704 $(4,561 $(2,602 $(1,911
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

The following table provides the Registrants’ carryforwards and any corresponding valuation allowances as of December 31, 2013.2015.

 

  Exelon Generation ComEd   PECO BGE   Exelon Generation ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Federal

               

Federal net operating loss

  $377(a)  $36  $139   $—    $31 

Deferred taxes on Federal net operating loss

   132    13    49     —      11  

Federal general business credits carryforward

   556(b)   556   —      —     —      416(a)   415    —       —       —    

State

               

State net operating losses and other credit carryforwards

   3,061(c)   1,498(d)   —      167(e)   768(f)    2,086(b)   1,259(b)   —       —       618(c) 

Deferred taxes on state tax attributes (net)

   161   82   —      11   41    117    66    —       —       34  

Valuation allowance on state tax attributes

   13   11   —      —     1    13    11    —       —       1  

 

(a)Exelon’s federal net operating loss will expire beginning in 2031
(b)Exelon’s federal general business credit carryforwards will expire beginning in 20322032.
(c)(b)Exelon’s state net operating losses and other carryforwards, which are presented on a post-apportioned basis, will expire beginning in 2014
(d)Generation’s state net operating losses and other carryforwards, which are presented on a post-apportioned basis, will expire beginning in 20142016.
(e)PECO’s state net operating losses will expire beginning in 2031
(f)(c)BGE’s state net operating losses will expire beginning in 20262026.

 

Tabular reconciliation of unrecognized tax benefits

 

The following table provides a reconciliation of the Registrants’ unrecognized tax benefits as of December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011:2013:

 

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Unrecognized tax benefits at January 1, 2013

 $1,024  $876  $67  $44  $—   

Increases based on tax positions related to 2013

  19   19   —     —     —   

Change to positions that only affect timing

  649   36   257   —     —   

Increases based on tax positions prior to 2013

  493   493   —     —     —   

Decreases based on tax positions prior to 2013

  (6  (5  —     —     —   

Decreases from expiration of statute of limitations

  (4  (4  —     —     —   
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 2013

 $2,175  $1,415  $324  $44  $—   
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Unrecognized tax benefits at January 1, 2012

 $807  $683  $70  $48  $11 

Merger Balance Transfer

  195   183   —     —     —   

Increases based on tax positions related to 2012

  34   3   —     —     —   

Change to positions that only affect timing

  (88  (69  (3  (4  (11

Increases based on tax positions prior to 2012

  91   91   —     —     —   

Decreases based on tax positions prior to 2012

  (6  (6  —     —     —   

Decreases related to settlements with taxing authorities

  (2  (2  —     —     —   

Decreases from expiration of statute of limitations

  (7  (7  —     —     —   
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 2012

 $1,024  $876  $67  $44  $—   
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
   Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Unrecognized tax benefits at January 1, 2015

  $1,829   $1,357   $149   $44   $—    

Increases based on tax positions related to 2015

   108    —      —      —      106  

Change to positions that only affect timing

   (705  (659  (7  (44  —    

Increases based on tax positions prior to 2015

   79    65    —      —      14  

Decreases based on tax positions prior to 2015

   (116  (112  —      —      —    

Decrease from settlements with taxing authorities

   (31  (31  —      —      —    

Decreases from expiration of statute of limitations

   (86  (86  —      —      —    
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 2015

  $1,078   $534   $142   $—     $120  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

339


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Unrecognized tax benefits at January 1, 2011

 $787  $664  $72  $44  $73 

Increases based on tax positions related to 2011

  5   1   —     4   —   

Change to positions that only affect timing

  21   24   (2  —     (62

Decreases based on tax positions prior to 2011

  (3  (3  —     —     —   

Decrease from expiration of statute of limitations

  (3  (3  —     —     —   
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 2011

 $807  $683  $70  $48  $11 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
   Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO   BGE 

Unrecognized tax benefits at January 1, 2014

  $2,175   $1,415   $324   $44    $—    

Increases based on tax positions related to 2014

   15    15    —      —       —    

Change to positions that only affect timing

   (255  33    (175  —       —    

Increases based on tax positions prior to 2014

   18    18    —      —       —    

Decreases based on tax positions prior to 2014

   (1  (2  —      —       —    

Decrease from settlements with taxing authorities

   (35  (34  —      —       —    

Decreases from expiration of statute of limitations

   (88  (88  —      —       —    
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 2014

  $1,829   $1,357   $149   $44    $—    
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

   Exelon  Generation  ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Unrecognized tax benefits at January 1, 2013

  $1,024   $876   $67    $44    $—    

Increases based on tax positions related to 2013

   19    19    —       —       —    

Change to positions that only affect timing

   649    36    257     —       —    

Increases based on tax positions prior to 2013

   493    493    —       —       —    

Decreases based on tax positions prior to 2013

   (6  (5  —       —       —    

Decreases from expiration of statute of limitations

   (4  (4  —       —       —    
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 2013

  $2,175   $1,415   $324    $44    $—    
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

Included in Exelon’s unrecognized tax benefits balance at December 31, 20132015 and 20122014 are approximately $1,387$540 million and $730$1,129 million, respectively, of tax positions for which the ultimate tax benefit is highly certain, but for which there is uncertainty about the timing of such benefits. The disallowance of such positions would not materially affect the annual effective tax rate but would accelerate the payment of cash to, or defer the receipt of the cash tax benefit from, the taxing authority to an earlier or later period respectively.

Unrecognized tax benefits that if recognized would affect the effective tax rate

Exelon and Generation have $788 million and $768 million, respectively, of unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 2013 that, if recognized, would decrease the effective tax rate. Exelon and Generation had $294 million and $263 million, respectively, of unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 2012 that, if recognized, would decrease the effective tax rate.

Reasonably possible that total amount of unrecognized tax benefits could significantly increase or decrease within 12 months after the reporting date

 

Nuclear Decommissioning Liabilities (Exelon and Generation)

 

AmerGen filed income tax refund claims taking the position that nuclear decommissioning liabilities assumed as part of its acquisition of nuclear power plants are taken into account in determining the tax basis in the assets it acquired. The additional basis results primarily in reduced capital gains or increased capital losses on the sale of assets in nonqualified decommissioning funds and increased tax depreciation and amortization deductions. The IRS disagrees with this position and has disallowed theAmerGen’s claims. In November 2008, Generation received a final determination from the Appeals division of the IRS (IRS Appeals) disallowing AmerGen’s refund claims.early 2009, Generation filed a complaint in the United States Court of Federal Claims on February 20, 2009 to contest this determination. During the first and second quarters of 2013, AmerGen and the DOJ completed and filed cross motions for summary judgment. On September 17, 2013, the Court granted the government’s motion denying AmerGen’s claims for refund. In the first quarter of 2014, Exelon is expecting tofiled an appeal thisof the decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. On March 11, 2015, the Federal Circuit during 2014.affirmed the lower court’s decision to deny AmerGen’s claims for refund. Exelon will not be pursuing further appeals with respect to this issue and, as a result, reduced Generation and PECO’s unrecognized tax benefits by a total of $661 million and $43 million, respectively, in the first quarter of 2015. This change in unrecognized tax benefits had no impact on Exelon, Generation, or PECO’s effective tax rate.

 

DueUnrecognized tax benefits that if recognized would affect the effective tax rate

Exelon and Generation have $538 million and $509 million, respectively, of unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 2015 that, if recognized, would decrease the effective tax rate. BGE has

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

$120 million of unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 2015 that, if recognized, may be included in future base rates and that portion would have no impact to the possibilityeffective tax rate. Exelon and Generation had $701 million and $672 million, respectively, of final resolution through an appellate decision,unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 2014 that, if recognized, would decrease the effective tax rate. In 2015, the unrecognized tax benefits decreased at Exelon and Generation continuesdue to believe that it is reasonablysettlements with state tax authorities and the expiration of statues of limitations for certain state jurisdictions.

Reasonably possible that the total amount of unrecognized tax benefits willcould significantly increase or decrease inwithin 12 months after the next twelve months.reporting date

 

Like-Kind Exchange

As of December 31, 2015, Exelon and ComEd have approximately $397 million and $142 million of unrecognized tax benefits that could significantly decrease within the 12 months after the reporting date as a result of a decision in the like-kind exchange litigation described below. Exelon and ComEd have unrecognized tax benefits that, if recognized, would decrease Exelon’s effective tax rate by $69 million and increase ComEd’s effective tax rate by $11 million.

Settlement of Income Tax Audits and Litigation

 

As of December 31, 2013,2015, Exelon, Generation, and Generation hadBGE have approximately $256$174 million, $54 million, and $120 million of other federal andunrecognized state unrecognized tax benefits that could significantly increase or decrease within the 12 months

340


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

after the reporting date as a result of completing federal and state audits, potential settlements, and expected statute of limitation expirationsexpirations. Of the above unrecognized tax benefits, Exelon and Generation have $54 million that, if recognized, would decrease the effective tax rate. In January 2014, certain of theseThe unrecognized tax benefits were effectively settledbenefit related to BGE, if recognized, may be included in future base rates and thus will result in reducedthat portion would have no impact to the effective tax expense of $33 million at Generation in the first quarter of 2014.

See Other Tax Matters—Like Kind Exchange section below for information regarding the amount of unrecognized tax benefits associated with this matter that could change significantly within the next 12 months.rate.

 

Total amounts of interest and penalties recognized

 

The following table represents the net interest receivable (payable), including interest related to uncertain tax positions reflected in the Registrants’ Consolidated Balance Sheets. Prior to the merger legacy Constellation recorded interest related to uncertain tax positions as a tax and not interest.

 

Net interest receivable (payable) as of

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO   BGE 

December 31, 2013

  $(349 $(37 $(174 $3   $—   

December 31, 2012

   31   (20  107   2    —   

Net interest receivable (payable) as of

  Exelon  Generation   ComEd  PECO   BGE 

December 31, 2015

  $(288 $80    $(210 $3    $(1

December 31, 2014

   (310  40     (203  3     (1

 

The following table sets forth the net interest expense, including interest related to uncertain tax positions, recognized in interest expense (income) in other income and deductions in the Registrants’ Consolidated Statements of Operations.Operations and Comprehensive Income. The Registrants have not accrued any material penalties with respect to uncertain tax positions. Prior to the merger legacy Constellation recorded interest related to uncertain tax positions as a tax and not interest.

 

Net interest expense (income) for the years ended

  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE   Exelon Generation ComEd   PECO BGE 

December 31, 2015

  $(13 $(31 $7    $—     $—    

December 31, 2014

   (36  (50  6     —      1  

December 31, 2013

  $391  $17  $281  $(1 $—      391    17    281     (1  —    

December 31, 2012

   (1  11   (20  (1  9 

December 31, 2011

   (56  (40  (14  (1  (3

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Description of tax years that remain open to assessment by major jurisdiction

 

Taxpayer

  Open Years 

Exelon (and predecessors) and subsidiaries consolidated Federal income tax returns

   1999-2012

Constellation and subsidiaries consolidated Federal income tax returns

2009-March 20121999, 2001-2014  

Exelon and subsidiaries Illinois unitary income tax returns

   2007-20122007-2014  

Constellation combined New York corporate income tax returns

   2008-20122010-March 2012  

Various separate company Pennsylvania corporate net income tax returns

   2008-20122010-2014  

BGE Maryland Corporatecorporate net income tax returns

   2004-2007, 2009-20122011-2014  

Various other (Non-BGE)Exelon Maryland Corporatecorporate net income tax returns

   2009-20122012-2014

Various Constellation (Non-BGE) Maryland corporate net income tax returns

2011-2014  

 

Other Tax Matters

 

Like-Kind Exchange

 

Exelon, through its ComEd subsidiary, took a position on its 1999 income tax return to defer approximately $2.8$1.2 billion of tax gain on the sale of ComEd’s fossil generating assets. The gain was deferred by reinvesting a portion of the proceeds from the sale in qualifying replacement property under the like-kind exchange provisions of the IRC. The like-kind exchange replacement property purchased by

341


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Exelon included interests in three municipal-owned electric generation facilities which were properly leased back to the municipalities. The IRS disagreed with this position and asserted that the entire gain of approximately $2.8$1.2 billion was taxable in 1999.

 

Exelon has been unable to reach agreement with the IRS regarding the dispute over the like kindlike-kind exchange position. The IRS has asserted that the ExelonExelon’s purchase and leaseback transaction is substantially similar to a leasing transaction, known as a SILO, which the IRS does not respect as the acquisition of an ownership interest in property. A SILO is a “listed transaction” that the IRS has identified as a potentially abusive tax shelter under guidance issued in 2005. Accordingly, the IRS has asserted that the sale of the fossil plants followed by the purchase and leaseback of the municipal owned generation facilities does not qualify as a like-kind exchange and the gain on the sale is fully subject to tax. The IRS has also asserted a penalty of approximately $87$90 million for a substantial understatement of tax.

 

Exelon disagrees with the IRS and continues to believe that its like-kind exchange transaction is not the same as or substantially similar to a SILO. Although Exelon has been and remains willing to settle the disagreement on terms commensurate with the hazards of litigation, Exelon does not believe a settlement is possible. Because Exelon believed, as of December 31, 2012, that it was more-likely-than-not that Exelon would prevail in litigation, Exelon and ComEd had no liability for unrecognized tax benefits with respect to the like-kind exchange position.

 

On January 9, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the U.S. Court of Federal Claims and reached a decision for the government in Consolidated Edison v. United States. The Court disallowed Consolidated Edison’s deductions stemming from its participation in a LILO transaction that the IRS also has characterized as a tax shelter.

 

In accordance with applicable accounting standards, Exelon is required to assess whether it is more-likely-than-not that it will prevail in litigation. Exelon continues to believe that its transaction is not a SILO and that it has a strong case on the merits. However, in light of the Consolidated Edison decision and Exelon’s current determination that settlement is unlikely, Exelon has concluded that

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

subsequent to December 31, 2012, it is no longer more-likely-than-not that its position will be sustained. As a result, in the first quarter of 2013, Exelon recorded a non-cash charge to earnings of approximately $265 million, which represents the amount of interest expense (after-tax) and incremental state income tax expense for periods through March 31, 2013 that would be payable in the event that Exelon is unsuccessful in litigation. Of this amount, approximately $170$172 million was recorded at ComEd. Exelon intends to hold ComEd harmless from any unfavorable impacts of the after-tax interest amounts on ComEd’s equity. As such, ComEd recorded on its consolidated balance sheet as of March 31, 2013, a $172 million receivable and non-cash equity contributions from Exelon. Exelon and ComEd will continue to accrue interest on the unpaid tax liabilities related to the uncertain tax position, and the charges arising from future interest accruals are not expected to be material to the annual operating earnings of Exelon or ComEd. In addition, ComEd will continue to record non-cash equity contributions from Exelon in the amount of the net after-tax interest charges attributable to ComEd in connection with the like-kind exchange position. Exelon continues to believe that it is unlikely that the $87 million penaltyIRS’s assertion of penalties will ultimately be sustained and therefore no liability for the penalty has been recorded.

 

On September 30, 2013, the Internal Revenue ServiceIRS issued a notice of deficiency to Exelon for the like-kind exchange position. Exelon filed a petition on December 13, 2013 to initiate litigation in the United States Tax Court.Court and the trial took place in August of 2015. Exelon was not required to remit any part of the asserted tax or penalty in order to litigate the issue. TheWhile the Tax Court could reach its decision as early as 2016, the litigation could take three to five years including appeals, if an appeal is necessary. Decisions in the Tax Court are not controlled by the Federal Circuit’s decision in Consolidated Edison.

In the first quarter of 2014, Exelon entered into an agreement to terminate its investment in one of the three municipal-owned electric generation properties in exchange for a net early termination amount of $335 million. In connection with the termination, Exelon deposited $65 million with the IRS, including $35 million by ComEd. The deposit can be redesignated to any tax year, if necessary, and may be used to satisfy any amounts owed as a result of the litigation.

 

342


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

As of December 31, 2013, inIn the event of a fully successful IRS challenge to Exelon’s like-kind exchange position, the potential tax and after-tax interest, net of the deposit discussed above and exclusive of penalties, that could become currently payable as of December 31, 2015 may be as much as $840$760 million, of which approximately $305$280 million would be attributable to ComEd after consideration of Exelon’s agreement to hold ComEd harmless,harmless. Interest will continue to accrue until such time as payment is made. An appeal of an adverse decision in the Tax Court would necessitate either the posting of a bond or the payment of the tax and interest for the balance at Exelon. Litigationtax years before the court. A final appellate decision could take several years such that the estimated cash impacts would likely change by a material amount.years.

 

Accounting for Generation Repairs (Exelon and Generation)

 

On April 30, 2013, the IRS issued Revenue Procedure 2013-24 providing guidance for determining the appropriate tax treatment of costs incurred to repair electric generation assets. Generation expects to changechanged its method of accounting for deducting repairs in accordance with this guidance beginning with itsin the 2014 tax year. Generation has estimated thatThe adoption of the new method will resultresulted in Generation recording a cash tax detriment of approximately $100 - $120 million.million in 2014.

 

Accounting for Electric TransmissionLong-Term State Tax Apportionment (Exelon and Distribution Property Repairs (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)Generation)

 

On August 19, 2011, the IRS issued Revenue Procedure 2011-43 providing a safe harbor method ofThe long-term state tax accounting for repair costs associated with electric transmission and distribution property. ComEd and PECO adopted the safe harborapportionment was revised in the Revenue Procedure for the 2011 and 2010fourth quarter of 2015 pursuant to Exelon’s long-term state tax years, respectively. For the year ended December 31, 2011, the adoption of the safe harbor resulted in a $35 million reduction to income tax expense at PECO, while Generation incurred additional income tax expenseapportionment policy, resulting in the amountrecording of $28 million due to a decrease in its domestic production activities deduction, which are reflected in the effective incomedeferred state tax rate reconciliation above in the plant basis differences and domestic production activities deduction lines, respectively. For Exelon, the adoption had a minimal effect on consolidated earnings. In addition, the adoption of the safe harbor resulted in a cash tax benefit at Exelon, ComEd and PECO in the amount of approximately $300 million, $250 million, $95 million respectively, partially offset by a cash tax detriment at Generation in the amount of $28 million related to a decreased domestic production activities deduction.

BGE adopted the safe harbor for the short period 2012 pre-merger tax year. For the year ended December 31, 2012, the adoption of the safe harbor resulted in a cash tax benefit at BGE in the amount of $27 million.

See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for discussion of the regulatory treatment prescribed in the 2010 electric distribution rate case settlement for PECO’s cash tax benefit resulting from the application of the method change to years prior to 2010.

Accounting for Gas Distribution Property Repairs (Exelon, PECO and BGE).

In September 2012, PECO filed an application with the IRS to change its method of accounting for gas distribution repairs for the 2011 tax year. The change to the newly adopted method for the 2011 tax year and 2012 resulted in a tax benefit of $26 million at Exelon, of which $29 million in tax benefit is recorded at PECO, partially offset by an expense recorded at Generation to reflect a reduction in its domestic production activities deduction. BGE changed its method of accounting for gas distribution repairs for the 2008 tax year. The IRS is expected to issue industry guidance in the near future. Exelon, PECO and BGE will then determine the financial statement impacts of the gas distribution repair costs accounting method changes after guidance is issued.

343


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Accountingexpense for Final Tangible Property Regulations (Exelon,Exelon and Generation ComEd, PECO, and BGE)

On September 19, 2013, the Treasury Department and the IRS published final regulations regarding the tax treatment of costs incurred to acquire, produce, or improve tangible property. The Registrants have assessed the financial impact of this guidance and do not expect it to have a material impact. Any changes in method of accounting required to conform to the final regulations will be made for the Registrant’s 2014 taxable year.

2011 Illinois State Tax Rate Legislation (Exelon, Generation and ComEd)

The Taxpayer Accountability and Budget Stabilization Act, (SB 2505), enacted into law in Illinois on January 13, 2011, increases the corporate tax rate in Illinois from 7.3% to 9.5% for tax years 2011—2014, provides for a reduction in the rate from 9.5% to 7.75% for tax years 2015—2024 and further reduces the rate from 7.75% to 7.3% for tax years 2025 and thereafter. Pursuant to the rate change, Exelon re-evaluated its deferred state income taxes during the first quarter of 2011. Illinois’ corporate income tax rate changes resulted in a charge to state deferred taxes$41 million (net of Federal taxes) during the first quarter of 2011 of $7 million, $11 million and $4 million for Exelon, Generation and ComEd, respectively. Exelon’s and ComEd’s charge is net of a regulatory asset of $15 million.

In 2011, the income tax rate change increased Exelon’s Illinois income tax provision (net of Federal taxes) by approximately $7 million, of which $12 million and $5 million of additional tax relates to Exelon Corporate and Generation, respectively, and a $10 million benefit for ComEd. The 2011 tax benefit at ComEd reflects the impact of a 2011 tax net operating loss generated primarily by the bonus depreciation deduction allowed under the Tax Relief Act of 2010 and the electric transmission and distribution property repairs deduction discussed below.

Long-Term State Tax Apportionment (Exelon and Generation)

Exelon and Generation periodically review events that may significantly impact how income is apportioned among the states and, therefore, the calculation of Exelon’s and Generation’s deferred state income taxes. In 2011 as a result of the 2011 Illinois State Tax Rate Legislation discussed above, Exelon and Generation re-evaluated their long-term state tax apportionment for Illinois and all other states where they have state income tax obligations, resulting in recording a deferred state tax expense during the first quarter of 2011 of $22 million and $11 million (net of Federal taxes) for, respectively. In 2014, in accordance with the policy, Exelon and Generation respectively. The long-term state tax apportionment also was revised in the fourth quarter of 2011 pursuant to long-term state tax apportionment policy, resulting in recording an additional deferred state tax expense of $1 million andrecorded a deferred state tax benefit of $8$28 million (net of Federal taxes) for Exelon and Generation, respectively.

As a result of the merger with Constellation, Exelon and Generation re-evaluated their long-term state tax apportionment in the first quarter of 2012. The total effect of revising the long-term state tax apportionment resulted in the recording of a deferred state tax asset of $72 million (net of Federal taxes) for Exelon. Of this, a benefit in the amount of $116 million and $14 million (net of Federal taxes) was recorded for Exelon and Generation, respectively, for the three months ended March 31, 2012. Further, Exelon and Generation recorded deferred state tax liabilities of $44 million and $14$40 million (net of Federal taxes), respectively, as part of purchase accounting duringrespectively. The amounts recorded for 2013 in accordance with the three months ended March 31, 2012. The long-term state tax apportionment also was updated in the fourth quarter of 2012, resulting in the recording of a deferred state tax benefit of $3 million (net of Federal taxes) for Exelon, and a deferred state tax expense of $7 million (net of Federal taxes) for Generation. There was no change to the long-term state tax apportionment for BGE, ComEd and PECO.

344


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

The long-term state tax apportionment was revised in the fourth quarter of 2013 pursuant to its long-term state tax apportionment policy resulting in the recording of amounts that are immaterial for Exelon and Generation, respectively.were immaterial.

 

Allocation of Tax Benefits (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE are all party to an agreement with Exelon and other subsidiaries of Exelon that provides for the allocation of consolidated tax liabilities and benefits (Tax Sharing Agreement). The Tax Sharing Agreement provides that each party is allocated an amount of tax similar to that which would be owed had the party been separately subject to tax. In addition, any net benefit attributable to Exelon is reallocated to the other Registrants. That allocation is treated as a contribution to the capital of the party receiving the benefit. During 2015, Generation, PECO, and BGE recorded an allocation of Federal tax benefits from Exelon under the Tax Sharing Agreement of $57 million, $16 million, and $7 million respectively. ComEd did not record an allocation of Federal tax benefits from Exelon under the Tax Sharing Agreement as a result of a tax net operating loss.

During 2014, Generation and PECO recorded an allocation of Federal tax benefits from Exelon under the Tax Sharing Agreement of $55 million and $25 million, respectively. ComEd and BGE did not record an allocation of Federal tax benefits from Exelon under the Tax Sharing Agreement as a result of tax net operating losses.

During 2013, Generation and PECO recorded an allocation of Federal tax benefits from Exelon under the Tax Sharing Agreement of $26 million and $27 million, respectively. During 2013, ComEd and BGE did not record an allocation of Federal tax benefits from Exelon under the Tax Sharing Agreement as a result of ComEd’s and BGE’s 2013 tax net operating loss generated primarily by the bonus depreciation deduction allowed under the Tax Relief Act of 2010. During 2012, Generation and PECO recorded an allocation of Federal tax benefits from Exelon under the Tax Sharing Agreement of $48 million and $9 million, respectively. During 2012, ComEd and BGE did not record an allocation of Federal tax benefits from Exelon under the Tax Sharing Agreement as a result of ComEd’s and BGE’s 2012 tax net operating loss generated primarily by the bonus depreciation deduction allowed under the Tax Relief Act of 2010.

 

ComEd received a non-cash contribution to equity from Exelon in 2012 of $11, related to tax benefits associated with capital projects constructed by ComEd on behalf of Exelon and Generation.

15.16. Asset Retirement Obligations (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Nuclear Decommissioning Asset Retirement Obligations

 

Generation has a legal obligation to decommission its nuclear power plants following the expiration of their operating licenses. To estimate its decommissioning obligation related to its nuclear generating stations for financial accounting and reporting purposes, Generation uses a probability-weighted, discounted cash flow model which, on a unit-by-unit basis, considers multiple outcome scenarios that include significant estimates and assumptions, and are based on decommissioning cost studies, cost escalation rates, probabilistic cash flow models and discount rates. Generation generally updates its ARO annually during the third quarter, unless circumstances warrant more frequent updates, based on its review of updated cost studies and its annual evaluation of cost escalation factors and probabilities assigned to various scenarios.

345


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

The following table provides a rollforward of the nuclear decommissioning ARO reflected on Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets, from January 1, 20122014 to December 31, 2013:2015:

 

  Exelon and
Generation
   Exelon and
Generation
 

Nuclear decommissioning ARO at January 1, 2012

  $3,680 

Nuclear decommissioning ARO at January 1, 2014

  $4,855  

Consolidation of CENG(a)

   1,760  

Accretion expense

   231    334  

Net increase due to changes in, and timing of, estimated future cash flows

   833    19  

Costs incurred to decommission retired plants

   (3   (7
  

 

   

 

 

Nuclear decommissioning ARO at December 31, 2012 (a)

   4,741 

Nuclear decommissioning ARO at December 31, 2014 (b)

   6,961  

Accretion expense

   259    387  

Net decrease due to changes in, and timing of, estimated future cash flows

   (140

Net increase due to changes in, and timing of, estimated future cash flows

   901  

Costs incurred to decommission retired plants

   (5   (3
  

 

   

 

 

Nuclear decommissioning ARO at December 31, 2013 (a)

  $4,855 

Nuclear decommissioning ARO at December 31, 2015(b)

  $8,246  
  

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Represents the fair value of the CENG ARO liability as of April 1, 2014, the date of consolidation. See Note 5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC for additional information.
(b)Includes $9$7 million and $10$8 million as the current portion of the ARO at December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014, respectively, which is included in Other current liabilities on Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

During 2013,2015, Generation’s total nuclear ARO increased by approximately $114 million. $1.3 billion, reflecting impacts of ARO updates completed during 2015 to reflect changes in amounts and timing of estimated decommissioning cash flows and impacts of year-to-date accretion of the ARO liability due to the passage of time.

The increase is largelyin the ARO during 2015 was primarily driven by an increase of approximately $630 million for costs expected to be incurred for required site security during the decommissioning periods in which SNF remains on-site and until major reactor components and buildings have been dismantled and removed. This projected increase is based on emerging industry experience at nuclear sites in the estimatedplanning or early stage of decommissioning indicating greater than originally expected numbers of security personnel required to be on site during these decommissioning periods. Generation will continue to monitor emerging security cost trends, including potential strategies to limit such costs to decommissionby, for example, optimizing the Limericktransfer of SNF when DOE starts taking possession of SNF or increasing the use of dry SNF storage, and Three Mile Island nuclear units resulting fromwill adjust the completion of updated decommissioning costs studies received during 2013 andARO liability accordingly. The 2015 increase in the ARO includes an increase of approximately $285 million for the impacts of a change implemented in the 2015 annual assessment of Generation’s SNF storage and disposal cost estimation methodology to better align the projected timing of SNF transfers to the DOE with assumed plant shutdown dates as well as higher assumed probabilities of early retirements of certain economically challenged nuclear plants (See Note 9—Implications of Potential Early Plant Retirements for additional information) and further accretion of the obligation. These increases in the ARO were partially offset by decreases to the ARO due to changesreductions in long-termestimated cost escalation rates, primarily for labor and energy costs, as well as changes incosts.

The financial statement impact related to the timing of the future nominal cash flows coupled with the fact that cash flows affected by this change in timing are re-measured and discounted at current credit adjusted risk free rates (CARFRs), which have increased from the prior year. The decreaseincrease in the ARO due to the changes in, and timing of, estimated cash flows were entirely offset by decreasesprimarily resulted in a corresponding increase in Property, plant and equipment withinon Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. Approximately $8 million of the 2015 adjustment resulted in a credit to income, which is included in Operating and maintenance expense within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

During 2012,2014, Generation’s ARO increased by $1,061 million.approximately $2.1 billion. The increase is largely driven by the recording of an ARO on Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets at fair value, including subsequent purchase accounting adjustments, upon consolidation of CENG (see Note 5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC ). The change in the ARO was largelyalso driven by four factors: i) changes in the timingan increase for accretion of the future nominal cash flows resulting from an assumed five year deferral to 2025 of the acceptance date of spent nuclear fuel by the DOE coupled with the fact that; ii) cash flows affected by this change in timing are re-measuredobligation and discounted at current CARFRs, which had dramatically decreased given the lower interest rate environment; iii) an increase in the estimated costs to decommission the Quad Cities, DresdenByron, Braidwood, and ClintonLaSalle nuclear units resulting from the completion of updated decommissioning costs studies received during 2012; and iv) accretion2014 as part of the obligation.annual assessment. These increases in the ARO were partially offset by decreases in the ARO due to a reduction in estimated escalation rates, primarily for labor and energy costs. The increase in the ARO due to the changes in, and timing of, estimated cash flows resulted in $10was offset within Property, plant and equipment on Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets, aside from an approximate $16 million of expense,credit to income, which is included in Operating and maintenance expense within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

 

Nuclear Decommissioning Trust Fund Investments

 

NDT funds have been established for each generating station unit to satisfy Generation’s nuclear decommissioning obligations. Generally, NDT funds established for a particular unit may not be used to fund the decommissioning obligations of any other unit.

 

The NDT funds associated with the former ComEd, former PECO and former AmerGenGeneration’s nuclear units have been funded with amounts collected from ComEd customers, PECO customers and the previous owners of the former AmerGen plants, respectively. Based on an ICC order, ComEd ceased collecting amounts from its customers to pay for decommissioning costs.and their respective utility customers. PECO is authorized to collect funds, in

346


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

revenues, for decommissioning the former PECO nuclear plants through regulated rates, and these collections are scheduled through the operating lives of the former PECO plants. The amounts collected from PECO customers are remitted to Generation and deposited into the NDT funds for the unit for which funds are collected. Every five years, PECO files a rate adjustment with the PAPUC that reflects PECO’s calculations of the estimated amount needed to decommission each of the former PECO units based on updated fund balances and estimated decommissioning costs. The rate adjustment is used to determine the amount collectible from PECO customers. The most recent rate adjustment occurred on January 1, 2013, and the effective rates currently yield annual collections of approximately $24 million. The next five-year adjustment is expected to be reflected in rates charged to PECO customers effective January 1, 2018. With respect toAside from the former AmerGenPECO units, Generation does not currently collect any amounts, nor is there any mechanism by which Generation can seek to collect additional amounts, from utility customers. Apart from the contributions made to the NDT funds from amounts previously collected from ComEd and currently collected from PECO customers, Generation has not made contributions to the NDT funds.

 

Any shortfall of funds necessary for decommissioning, determined for each generating station unit, is ultimately required to be funded by Generation, with the exception of a shortfall for the current decommissioning activities at Zion Station, where certain decommissioning activities have been transferred to a third-party (see Zion Station Decommissioning below). and the CENG units, where any shortfall is required to be funded by both Generation and EDF. Generation, through PECO, has recourse to collect additional amounts from PECO customers related to a shortfall of NDT funds for the former PECO units, subject to certain limitations and thresholds, as prescribed by an order from the PAPUC. Generally, PECO, and likewise Generation will not be allowed to collect amounts associated with the first $50 million of any shortfall of trust funds compared to decommissioning costs, as well as 5% of any additional shortfalls, on an aggregate basis for all former PECO units, compared to decommissioning obligations, as well as 5% of any additional shortfalls.units. The initial $50 million and up to 5% of any additional shortfalls would be borne by Generation. No recourse exists to collect additional amounts from ComEdutility customers for the former ComEd units or from the previous ownersany of the former AmerGenGeneration’s other nuclear units. With respect to

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

the former ComEd and PECO units, any funds remaining in the NDTs after all decommissioning has been completed are required to be refunded to ComEd’s or PECO’s customers, subject to certain limitations that allow sharing of excess funds with Generation related to the former PECO units. With respect to the former AmerGenGeneration’s other nuclear units, Generation retains any funds remaining after decommissioning. However, in connection with CENG’s acquisition of the Nine Mile Point and Ginna plants and settlements with certain regulatory agencies, CENG is subject to certain conditions pertaining to nuclear decommissioning trust funds that, if met, could possibly result in obligations to make payments to certain third parties (clawbacks). For Nine Mile Point and Ginna, the clawback provisions are triggered only in the event that the required decommissioning activities are discontinued or not started or completed in a timely manner. In the event that the clawback provisions are triggered for Nine Mile Point, then, depending upon the triggering event, an amount equal to 50% of the total amount withdrawn from the funds after decommissioning.

During 2012, the NDT fixed income portfolio completed its transition from solely core fixed income investments to a blendfor non-decommissioning activities or 50% of Treasury Inflation Protected Securities (TIPS), investment-grade corporate credit and middle market lending. There was no changeany excess funds in the equity investment strategy. At December 31, 2013, approximately 48%trust funds above the amounts required for decommissioning (including spent fuel management and decommissioning) is to be paid to the Nine Mile Point sellers. In the event that the clawback provisions are triggered for Ginna, then an amount equal to any estimated cost savings realized by not completing any of the funds were invested in equity securitiesrequired decommissioning activities is to be paid to the Ginna sellers. Generation expects to comply with applicable regulations and 52% were invested in fixed income securities. At December 31, 2012, approximately 47% of the funds were invested in equity securitiestimely commence and 53% were invested in fixed income securities.complete all required decommissioning activities.

 

At December 31, 2013,2015, and 2012,2014, Exelon and Generation had NDT fund investments totaling $8,071$10,342 million and $7,248$10,537 million, respectively. For additional information related to the NDT fund investments, refer to Note 12—Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities.

 

The following table provides unrealized gains (losses) on NDT funds for 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011:2013:

 

   Exelon and Generation 
   For the Years Ended December 31, 
   2013   2012   2011 

Net unrealized gains (losses) on decommissioning trust
funds—Regulatory Agreement Units
(a)

  $406   $386   $(74

Net unrealized gains (losses) on decommissioning trust
funds—Non-Regulatory Agreement Units
(b)(c)

   146    105    (4

347


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

   Exelon and Generation 
   For the Years Ended December 31, 
       2015          2014           2013     

Net unrealized gains (losses) on decommissioning trust funds—Regulatory Agreement Units (a)

  $(282 $180    $406  

Net unrealized gains (losses) on decommissioning trust funds—
Non-Regulatory Agreement Units
(b)(c)

   (197  134     146  

 

(a)Net unrealized gains (losses) related to Generation’s NDT funds associated with Regulatory Agreement Units are included in Regulatory liabilities on Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets and Noncurrent payables to affiliates on Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.
(b)Excludes $7 million, $73$29 million and $48$7 million of net unrealized gains related to the Zion Station pledged assets in 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011,2013, respectively. Net unrealized gains related to Zion Station pledged assets are included in the Payable for Zion Station decommissioning on Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.
(c)Net unrealized gains (losses) related to Generation’s NDT funds with Non-Regulatory Agreement Units are included within Other, net in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

 

Interest and dividends on NDT fund investments are recognized when earned and are included in Other, net in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. Interest and dividends earned on the NDT fund investments for the Regulatory Agreement Units are eliminated within Other, net in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

 

Accounting Implications of the Regulatory Agreements with ComEd and PECO. Based on the regulatory agreement with the ICC that dictates Generation’s obligations related to the shortfall or

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

excess of NDT funds necessary for decommissioning the former ComEd units on a unit-by-unit basis, as long as funds held in the NDT funds are expected to exceed the total estimated decommissioning obligation, decommissioning-related activities, including realized and unrealized gains and losses on the NDT funds and accretion of the decommissioning obligation, are generally offset within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. The offset of decommissioning-related activities within the Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income results in an equal adjustment to the noncurrent payables to affiliates at Generation and an adjustment to the regulatory liabilities at Exelon. Likewise, ComEd has recorded an equal noncurrent affiliate receivable from Generation and corresponding regulatory liability. Should the expected value of the NDT fund for any former ComEd unit fall below the amount of the expected decommissioning obligation for that unit, the accounting to offset decommissioning-related activities in the Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income for that unit would be discontinued, the decommissioning-related activities would be recognized in the Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income and the adverse impact to Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations and financial position could be material. As of December 31, 2013,2015, the NDT funds of each of the former ComEd units, except for Zion (see Zion Station Decommissioning below), are expected to exceed the related decommissioning obligation for each of the units. For the purposes of making this determination, the decommissioning obligation referred to is different, as described below, from the calculation used in the NRC minimum funding obligation filings based on NRC guidelines.

 

Based on the regulatory agreement supported by the PAPUC that dictates Generation’s rights and obligations related to the shortfall or excess of trust funds necessary for decommissioning the seven former PECO nuclear units, regardless of whether the funds held in the NDT funds are expected to exceed or fall short of the total estimated decommissioning obligation, decommissioning-related activities are generally offset within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. The offset of decommissioning-related activities within the Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income results in an equal adjustment to the noncurrent payables to affiliates at Generation and an adjustment to the regulatory liabilities at Exelon. Likewise, PECO has recorded an equal noncurrent affiliate receivable from Generation and a corresponding regulatory liability. Any changes to the PECO regulatory agreements could impact Exelon’s and Generation’s ability to offset decommissioning-related activities within the Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income, and the impact to Exelon’s and Generation’s results of operations and financial position could be material.

348


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

The decommissioning-related activities related to the Clinton, Oyster Creek and Three Mile Island nuclear plants (the former AmerGen units) and the portions of the Peach Bottom nuclear plants that are not subject to regulatory agreements with respect to the NDT fundsNon-Regulatory Agreement Units are reflected in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income, as there are no regulatory agreements associated with these units.Income.

 

Refer to Note 3—Regulatory Matters and Note 25—26—Related Party Transactions for information regarding regulatory liabilities at ComEd and PECO and intercompany balances between Generation, ComEd and PECO reflecting the obligation to refund to customers any decommissioning-related assets in excess of the related decommissioning obligations.

 

Zion Station Decommissioning

 

On September 1, 2010, Generation completed an Asset Sale Agreement (ASA) with EnergySolutions Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiaries, EnergySolutions, LLC (EnergySolutions) and ZionSolutions under which ZionSolutions has assumed responsibility for decommissioning Zion

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Station, which is located in Zion, Illinois and ceased operation in 1998. Specifically, Generation transferred to ZionSolutions substantially all of the assets (other than land) associated with Zion Station, including assets held in related NDT funds. In consideration for Generation’s transfer of those assets, ZionSolutions assumed decommissioning and other liabilities, excluding the obligation to dispose of SNF and decommission the SNF dry storage facility, associated with Zion Station. Pursuant to the ASA, ZionSolutions will periodically request reimbursement from the Zion Station-related NDT funds for costs incurred related to theits decommissioning efforts at Zion Station. During 2013, EnergySolutions entered a definitive acquisition agreement and was acquired by another Company. Generation reviewed the acquisition as it relates to the ASA to decommission Zion Station. Based on that review, Generation determined that the acquisition will not adversely impact decommissioning activities under the ASA.

 

On July 14, 2011, three people filed a purported class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois naming ZionSolutions and Bank of New York Mellon as defendants and seeking, among other things, an accounting for use of NDT funds, an injunction against the use of NDT funds, the appointment of a trustee for the NDT funds, and the return of NDT funds to customers of ComEd to the extent legally entitled thereto. On July 20, 2012, ZionSolutions and Bank of New York Mellon filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint for failing to state a claim. On July 29, 2013, United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois dismissed the amended complaint. On August 26, 2013, the plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal with the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. On January 31, 2014, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit dismissed the appeal.

ZionSolutions is subject to certain restrictions on its ability to request reimbursements from the Zion Station NDT funds as defined within the ASA. Therefore, the transfer of the Zion Station assets did not qualify for asset sale accounting treatment and, as a result, the related NDT funds were reclassified to pledgedPledged assets for Zion Station decommissioning within Generation’s and Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets and will continue to be measured in the same manner as prior to the completion of the transaction. Additionally, the transferred ARO for decommissioning was replaced with a payable to ZionSolutionsPayable for Zion Station decommissioning in Generation’s and Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. Changes in the value of the Zion Station NDT assets, net of applicable taxes, will be recorded as a change in the payablePayable to ZionSolutions. At no point will the payable to ZionSolutions exceed the project budget of the costs remaining to decommission Zion Station. Generation has retained its obligation tofor the SNF following ZionSolutionsSNF. Following ZionSolutions’ completion of its contractual obligations and transfer of the NRC license to transferGeneration, Generation will store the SNF at Zion Station until it is transferred to the DOE for ultimate disposal, and towill complete all remaining decommissioning activities associated with the SNF

349


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

dry storage facility. Generation has a liability of approximately $82$84 million, which is included within the nuclear decommissioning ARO at December 31, 2013.2015. Generation also has retained NDT assets to fund its obligation to maintain and transfer the SNF at Zion Station until transfer to the DOE and to complete all remaining decommissioning activities for the SNF storage facility. Any shortage of funds necessary to maintain the SNF and decommission the SNF storage facility is ultimately required to be funded by Generation. Any Zion Station NDT funds remaining after the completion of all decommissioning activities will be returned to ComEd customers in accordance with the applicable orders. The following table provides the pledged assets and payablepayables to ZionSolutions, and withdrawals by ZionSolutions at December 31, 20132015 and 2012:2014:

 

   Exelon and Generation 
         2013               2012       

Carrying value of Zion Station pledged assets

  $458   $614 

Payable to Zion Solutions(a)

   414    564 

Current portion of payable to Zion Solutions(b)

   109    132 

Withdrawals by Zion Solutions to pay decommissioning costs(c)

   498    335 
   Exelon and Generation 
       2015           2014     

Carrying value of Zion Station pledged assets

  $206    $319  

Payable to Zion Solutions (a)

   189     292  

Current portion of payable to Zion Solutions (b)

   99     137  

Cumulative withdrawals by Zion Solutions to pay decommissioning costs (c)

   786     666  

 

(a)Excludes a liability recorded within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets related to the tax obligation on the unrealized activity associated with the Zion Station NDT Funds. The NDT Funds will be utilized to satisfy the tax obligations as gains and losses are realized.
(b)Included in Other current liabilities within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.
(c)Cumulative withdrawals since September 1, 2010.Includes project expenses to decommission Zion Station and estimated tax payments on Zion Station NDT fund earnings.

 

ZionSolutions leased the land associated with Zion Station from Generation pursuant to a Lease Agreement. Under the Lease Agreement, ZionSolutions has committed to complete the required

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

decommissioning work according to an established schedule and will constructconstructed a dry cask storage facility on the land forand has loaded the SNF currently held infrom the SNF pools onto the dry cask storage facility at Zion Station. Rent payable under the Lease Agreement is $1.00 per year, although the Lease Agreement requires ZionSolutions to pay property taxes associated with Zion Station and penalty rents may accrue if there are unexcused delays in the progress of decommissioning work at Zion Station or the construction of the dry cask SNF storage facility. To reduce the risk of default by EnergySolutions or ZionSolutions, EnergySolutions provided a $200 million letter of credit to be used to fund decommissioning costs in the event the NDT assets are insufficient. EnergySolutions hasand its parent company have also provided a performance guarantee and EnergySolutions has entered into other agreements that will provide rights and remedies for Generation and the NRC in the case of other specified events of default, including a special purpose easement for disposal capacity at the EnergySolutions site in Clive, Utah, for all LLRW volume of Zion Station.

 

NRC Minimum Funding Requirements.

NRC regulations require that licensees of nuclear generating facilities demonstrate reasonable assurance that funds will be available in specified minimum amounts to decommission the facility at the end of its life. The estimated decommissioning obligations as calculated using the NRC methodology differ from the ARO recorded on Generation’s and Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets primarily due to differences in the type of costs included in the estimates, the basis for estimating such costs, and assumptions regarding the decommissioning alternatives to be used, potential license renewals, decommissioning cost escalation, and the growth rate in the NDT funds. Under NRC regulations, if the minimum funding requirements calculated under the NRC methodology are less than the future value of the NDT funds, also calculated under the NRC methodology, then the NRC requires either further funding or other financial guarantees.

 

Key assumptions used in the minimum funding calculation using the NRC methodology at December 31, 20132015 include: (1) consideration of costs only for the removal of radiological contamination at each unit; (2) the option on a unit-by-unit basis to use generic, non-site specific cost estimates; (3) consideration of only one decommissioning scenario for each unit; (4) the plants cease

350


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

operation at the end of their current license lives (with no assumed license renewals for those units that have not already received renewals and with an assumed end-of-operations date of 2019 for Oyster Creek); (5) the assumption of current nominal dollar cost estimates that are neither escalated through the anticipated period of decommissioning, nor discounted using the CARFR; and (6) assumed annual after-tax returns on the NDT funds of 2% (3% for the former PECO units, as specified by the PAPUC).

 

In contrast, the key criteria and assumptions used by Generation to determine the ARO and to forecast the target growth in the NDT funds at December 31, 20132015 include: (1) the use of site specific cost estimates that are updated at least once every five years; (2) the inclusion in the ARO estimate of all legally unavoidable costs required to decommission the unit (e.g., radiological decommissioning and full site restoration for certain units, on-site spent fuel maintenance and storage subsequent to ceasing operations and until DOE acceptance, and disposal of certain low-level radioactive waste); (3) the consideration of multiple scenarios where decommissioning activities are completed under three possible scenarios ranging from 10 to 70 years after the cessation of plant operations; (4) the assumption plants cease operating at the end of an extended license life (assuming 20-year license renewal extensions, except Oyster Creek with an assumed end-of-operations date of 2019); (5) the measurement of the obligation at the present value of the future estimated costs and an annual average accretion of the ARO of approximately 5% through a period of approximately 30 years after the end of the extended lives of the units; and (6) an estimated targeted annual pre-tax return on the NDT funds of 5.9%6.1% to 6.7%6.3% (as compared to a historical 5-year annual average pre-tax return of approximately 11.7%7%).

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Generation is required to provide to the NRC a biennial report by unit (annually for units that have been retired or are within five years of the current approved license life), based on values as of December 31, addressing Generation’s ability to meet the NRC minimum funding levels. Depending on the value of the trust funds, Generation may be required to take steps, such as providing financial guarantees through letters of credit or parent company guarantees or makemaking additional contributions to the trusts, which could be significant, to ensure that the trusts are adequately funded and that NRC minimum funding requirements are met. As a result, Exelon’s and Generation’s cash flows and financial position may be significantly adversely affected.

 

On April 1, 2013,March 31, 2014, Generation submitted its NRC-requiredNRC required annual decommissioning funding report as of December 31, 2013 for reactors that have been shut down except for Zion Station which is included on a separate report to the NRC submitted by EnergySolutions (see Zion Station Decommissioning above). This submittal also included the required updated financial tests for the Limerick Unit 1 parent guarantee that had been established in 2013. There was no change to the amount of the parent guarantee, or the funding status of these reactors. Adequate decommissioning funding assurance was in place for all reactors owned by Generation. During 2014, the operating license for Limerick Unit 1 was extended by 20 years. As a result of this extension, and the subsequent funding assurance calculation performed by the NRC, it was found that the parent company guarantee was no longer required and thus the parent guarantee for Limerick Unit 1 has been cancelled effective March 13, 2015. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information regarding the operating license extension for Limerick Unit 1.

Generation filed its biennial decommissioning funding status report with the NRC on March 31, 2015. This report reflects the status of decommissioning funding assurance as of December 31, 2012. As2014. Due to increased cost estimates received in the second half of 2014, Braidwood Unit 1, Braidwood Unit 2, and Byron Unit 2 did not meet the NRC’s minimum funding assurance criteria as of December 31, 2012, Generation provided adequate2014. NRC guidance provides licensees with two years or by the time of submitting the next biennial report (on or before March 31, 2017) to resolve funding assurance shortfalls. During this period, Generation will monitor funding assurance and new developments, including the impact of a 20-year license renewal for allBraidwood and Byron, to assess the status of itsfunding assurance and to take steps, if necessary, to address any funding shortfall on these funds on or before March 31, 2017. On February 4, 2016, Generation submitted an updated decommissioning funding status report with the NRC for Braidwood Units 1 and 2, and Byron Unit 2. This report reflected the recently approved license renewals for these units, including Limerick Unit 1, whereand showed that they have adequate decommissioning funding assurance, and that the shortfall identified in the March 31, 2015 report has now been resolved. The increased security costs discussed above will be taken into consideration, as appropriate and in accordance with the regulatory requirements, in Generation’s future decommissioning funding status reports submitted to the NRC. Generation has in place a $115 million parent guaranteedoes not expect the increased costs to cover thechange Generation’s NRC minimum funding assurance requirements. On October 2, 2013, the NRC issued summary findings from the NRC Staff’s review of the 2013 decommissioning funding status reports for all 104 operating reactors, including the Generation operating units. Based on that review, the NRC Staff determined that Generation provided decommissioning funding assurance under the NRC regulations for all of its operating units, including Limerick Unit 1.

On January 31, 2013, Generation received a letter from the NRC indicating that the NRC has identified potential “apparent violations” of its regulations because of alleged inaccuracies in the Decommissioning Funding Status reports for 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2009. The NRC asserted that Generation’s status reports deliberately reflected cost estimates for decommissioning its nuclear plants that were less than what the NRC says are the minimum amounts required by NRC regulations. Generation met with the NRC on April 30, 2013 for a pre-decisional enforcement conference to provide additional information to explain why Generation believes that it complied with the regulatory requirements and did not deliberately or otherwise provide incomplete or inaccurate information in its decommissioning funding status reports. While Generation does not believe that any sanction is appropriate, the ultimate outcome of this proceeding including the amount of a potential fine or sanction, if any, is uncertain. The January 31, 2013 letter from the NRC does not take issue with

351


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Generation’s current funding status, and as reflected in Generation’s April 1, 2013 decommissioning funding status report referenced above, Generation continues to provide adequate funding assurance for each of its units. In the normal course of NRC review, Generation has received a series of data requests that are unrelated to the potential apparent violations and the pre-decisional enforcement conference. Generation continues to cooperate with the NRC and provide the requested information. Generation does not have a definite date on which it will receive a response from the NRC.

In addition, on June 24, 2013, Exelon received a subpoena from the SEC requesting that Exelon provide the SEC with certain documents generally relating to Exelon and Generation’s reporting and funding of the future decommissioning of Exelon’s nuclear power plants. Exelon and Generation are cooperating with the SEC and providing the requested documents.status.

 

As the future values of trust funds change due to market conditions, the NRC minimum funding status of Generation’s units will change. In addition, if changes occur to the regulatory agreement with the PAPUC that currently allows amounts to be collected from PECO customers for decommissioning the former PECO nuclear plants,units, the NRC minimum funding status of those plants could change at subsequent NRC filing dates.

 

Non-Nuclear Asset Retirement Obligations (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Generation has AROs for plant closure costs associated with its fossil and renewable generating facilities, including asbestos abatement, removal of certain storage tanks, restoring leased land to the

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

condition it was in prior to construction of renewable generating stations and other decommissioning-related activities. ComEd, PECO and BGE have AROs primarily associated with the abatement and disposal of equipment and buildings contaminated with asbestos and PCBs. See Note 1—Significant Accounting Policies for additional information on the Registrants’ accounting policy for AROs.

 

The following table provides a rollforward of the non-nuclear AROs reflected on the Registrants’ Consolidated Balance Sheets from January 1, 20122014 to December 31, 2013:2015:

 

   Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Non-nuclear AROs at January 1, 2012

  $209  $92  $89  $28  $1 

Net increase due to changes in, and timing of, estimated future cash flows(a)

   27   18   8   1   7 

Development projects

   47   47   —     —     —   

Accretion expense(b)

   13   8   4   1   —   

Merger with Constellation(c)

   58   50   —     —     —   

Payments

   (11  (8  (2  (1  —   
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Non-nuclear AROs at December 31, 2012

   343   207   99   29   8 

Net increase due to changes in, and timing of, estimated future cash flows(a)

   1   (11  —     —     12 

Development projects

   2   2   —     —     —   

Accretion expense(b)

   18   13   4   1   —   

Payments

   (13  (10  (2  —     (1
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Non-nuclear AROs at December 31, 2013(d)

  $351  $201  $101  $30  $19 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
   Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Non-nuclear AROs at January 1, 2014

  $351   $201   $101   $30   $19  

Net increase (decrease) due to changes in, and timing of, estimated future cash flows (a)

   (1  (2  2    —      (1

Development projects(b)

   11    11    —      —      —    

Accretion expense (c)

   15    11    3    1    —    

Liabilities held for sale(d)

   (4  (4  —      —      —    

Sale of generating assets(e)

   (20  (20  —      —      —    

Payments

   (6  (3  (2  (1  —    
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Non-nuclear AROs at December 31, 2014(f)

   346    194    104    30    18  

Net increase (decrease) due to changes in, and timing of, estimated future cash flows (a)

   (10  (12  6    (4  —    

Development projects(b)

   10    10    —      —      —    

Accretion expense (c)

   16    10    5    1    —    

Sale of generating assets(e)

   (2  (2  —      —      —    

Payments

   (5  (3  (2  —      —    
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Non-nuclear AROs at December 31, 2015(f)

  $355   $197   $113   $27   $18  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

(a)During the year ended December 31, 2013,2015, Generation recorded an increasea decrease of $(2) million in operatingOperating and maintenance expense of $13 million.expense. ComEd, PECO, and PECOBGE did not record any adjustments in operatingOperating and maintenance expense for the year ended December 31, 2013.2015. During the year ended December 31, 2012,2014, Generation recorded a reductiondecrease of $(2) million and ComEd recorded an increase of $1 million in operatingOperating and maintenance expense of $8 million. ComEd,expense. PECO and BGE did not record any reductionsadjustments in operatingOperating and maintenance expense for the year ended December 31, 2012.2014.

352


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

(b)Relates to new AROs recorded due to the construction of solar, wind and other non-nuclear generating sites.
(c)For ComEd, PECO, and BGE, the majority of the accretion is recorded as an increase to a regulatory asset due to the associated regulatory treatment.
(c)(d)Exelon’s ARO includes $8 million of BGE costs incurred priorRepresents AROs related to the closing of Exelon’s merger with Constellation. Refer togenerating stations classified as held for sale. See Note 4—MergerMergers, Acquisitions, and AcquisitionsDispositions for additionalfurther information.
(d)(e)IncludesReflects a reduction to the ARO resulting primarily from the sales of Schuylkill generating station in 2015 and Keystone and Conemaugh generating stations in 2014. See Note 4—Mergers, Acquisitions, and Dispositions for further information.
(f)Excludes $5 million, $2 million, $1$0 million and $0$1 million as the current portion of the ARO at December 31, 20132015 for Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE, respectively, whichrespectively. Excludes $1 million, $1 million, $1 million and $1 million as the current portion of the ARO at December 31, 2014 for Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE, respectively. This is included in otherOther current liabilities on Exelon’s and each of the Registrants’ respective utilities’ Consolidated Balance Sheets.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

16.17. Retirement Benefits (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

As of December 31, 2013,2015, Exelon sponsored defined benefit pension plans and other postretirement benefit plans for essentially all Generation, ComEd, PECO, BGE and BSC employees. In connection with the acquisition of Constellation in March 2012, Exelon assumed Constellation’s benefit plans and its related assets. The table below shows the pension and other postretirement benefit plans in which employees of each operating company participated at December 31, 2013.2015.

 

   Operating Company (d) 

Name of Plan:

  Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE   BSC 

Qualified Pension Plans:

          

Exelon Corporation Retirement Program (a)

XXXXX

Exelon Corporation Cash Balance Pension Plan (a)

XXXXX

Exelon Corporation Pension Plan for Bargaining Unit Employees (a)

XXX

Exelon New England Union Employees Pension Plan (a)

X

Exelon Employee Pension Plan for Clinton, TMI and Oyster Creek (a)

   X     X     X       X  

Exelon Corporation Cash Balance Pension Plan of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. (b)

   X     X     X    X

Exelon Corporation Pension Plan for Bargaining Unit Employees

 X     X  X

Exelon New England Union Employees Pension Plan

X

Exelon Employee Pension Plan for Clinton, TMI and Oyster Creek

XXX

Pension Plan of Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, Inc.LLC (c)

   X         X     X  

Nine Mile Point Pension Plan (c)

XX

Constellation Mystic Power, LLC Union Employees Pension Plan Including Plan A and Plan B (b)

   X          

Non-Qualified Pension Plans:

          

Exelon Corporation Supplemental Pension Benefit Plan and 2000 Excess Benefit Plan (a)

   X     X     X       X  

Exelon Corporation Supplemental Management Retirement Plan (a)

   X     X     X    X   X  

Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Senior Executive Supplemental Plan (b)

   X         X     X  

Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Supplemental Pension Plan (b)

   X         X     X  

Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Benefits Restoration Plan (b)

XXXX

Constellation Nuclear Plan, LLC Executive Retirement Plan (c)

XX

Constellation Energy Nuclear Plan, LLC Benefits Restoration Plan (c)

XX

Baltimore Gas & Electric Company Executive Benefit Plan (b)

   X         X     X  

Baltimore Gas & Electric Company ExecutiveManager Benefit Plan (b)

X   X     X  

Baltimore Gas & Electric Company Manager Benefit Plan

X     X     X  

Other Postretirement Benefit Plans:

          

PECO Energy Company Retiree Medical Plan

XXX

Exelon Corporation Health Care Program

XXX

Exelon Corporation Employees’ Life Insurance Plan (a)

   X     X     X    X   X  

Exelon Corporation Health Care Program (a)

XXXXX

Exelon Corporation Employees’ Life Insurance Plan (a)

XXXXX

Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Retiree Medical Plan (b)

XXXXX

Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Retiree Dental Plan (b)

   X         X     X  

Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Employee Life Insurance Plan and Family Life Insurance Plan (b)

XXXXX

Constellation Mystic Power, LLC Post-Employment Medical Account Savings Plan (b)

X

Exelon New England Union Post-Employment Medical Savings Account Plan (a)

X

Retiree DentalMedical Plan of Constellation Energy Nuclear Group LLC (c)

   X         X     X  

Retiree Dental Plan of Constellation Energy Nuclear Group Inc. Employee Life Insurance Plan and Family Life Insurance PlanLLC (c)

   X         X     X  

Constellation Mystic Power,Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, LLC Post-Employment Medical Account SavingsCare and Prescription Drug Plan for Retired Employees (c)

   X          

Exelon New England Union Post-Employment Medical Savings Account Plan

 X  

(a)These plans are collectively referred to as the Legacy Exelon plans.
(b)These plans are collectively referred to as the Legacy Constellation Energy Group (CEG) Plans.
(c)These plans are collectively referred to as the Legacy CENG plans.
(d)Employees generally remain in their legacy benefit plans when transferring between operating companies.

353


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Exelon’s traditional and cash balance pension plans are intended to be tax-qualified defined benefit plans. Substantially all non-union employees and electing union employees hired on or after January 1, 2001 participate in cash balance pension plans. Effective January 1, 2009, substantially all newly-hired union-represented employees participate in cash balance pension plans. Exelon has elected that the trusts underlying these plans be treated under the IRC as qualified trusts. If certain conditions are met, Exelon can deduct payments made to the qualified trusts, subject to certain IRC limitations.

 

Benefit Obligations, Plan Assets and Funded Status

 

Exelon recognizes the overfunded or underfunded status of defined benefit pension and other postretirement benefitOPEB plans as an asset or liability on its balance sheet, with offsetting entries to Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (AOCI)OCI and regulatory assets (liabilities), in accordance with the applicable authoritative guidance. The measurement date for the plans is December 31.

 

During the first quarter of 2013,2015, Exelon received an updated valuation of its legacy pension and other postretirement benefit obligations to reflect actual census data as of January 1, 2013.2015. This valuation resulted in an increase to the pension obligation of $8$45 million and a decreasean increase to the other postretirement benefit obligation of $39$57 million. Additionally, accumulatedAccumulated other comprehensive loss decreased(AOCL) increased by approximately $75$27 million (after tax) and, regulatory assets increased by approximately $93 million. During the second quarter of 2013, Exelon received the updated valuation for the legacy Constellation pension and other postretirement obligations to reflect actual census data as of January 1, 2013. This valuation resulted in an increase to the pension obligation of $23$48 million, and a decrease to the other postretirement benefit obligation of $12 million. Additionally, accumulated other comprehensive loss increasedregulatory liabilities decreased by approximately $2 million (after tax) and regulatory assets increased by approximately $14$11 million.

 

The following table provides a rollforward of the changes in the benefit obligations and plan assets for the most recent two years for all plans combined:

 

   Pension Benefits  Other
Postretirement Benefits
 
   2013  2012      2013          2012     

Change in benefit obligation:

     

Net benefit obligation at beginning of year

  $16,800  $13,538  $4,820  $4,062 

Service cost

   317   280   162   156 

Interest cost

   650   698   194   205 

Plan participants’ contributions

   —     —     34   34 

Actuarial loss (gain)

   (1,363  1,520   (551  313 

Plan amendments

   1   —     15   (103

Acquisitions/divestitures

   —     1,880   —     362 

Curtailments

   —     (10  —     (8

Settlements(a)

   (69  (169  —     —   

Contractual termination benefits

   —     15   —     6 

Gross benefits paid

   (877  (952  (223  (219

Federal subsidy on benefits paid

   —     —     —     12 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net benefit obligation at end of year

  $15,459  $16,800  $4,451  $4,820 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

   Pension Benefits  Other
Postretirement Benefits
 
       2015          2014          2015          2014     

Change in benefit obligation:

     

Net benefit obligation at beginning of year

  $18,256   $15,459   $4,197   $4,451  

Service cost

   326    293    119    117  

Interest cost

   710    749    167    186  

Plan participants’ contributions

   —      —      42    42  

Actuarial (gain) loss

   (582  2,095    (341  502  

Plan amendments

   —      —      (23  (1,012

Acquisitions/divestitures  (a)

   —      594    —      142  

Curtailments

   —      (8  —      —    

Settlements

   (34  (30  —      —    

Gross benefits paid

   (923  (896  (223  (231
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net benefit obligation at end of year

  $17,753   $18,256   $3,938   $4,197  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

354
   Pension Benefits  Other
Postretirement Benefits
 
       2015          2014          2015          2014     

Change in plan assets:

     

Fair value of net plan assets at beginning of year

  $14,874   $13,571   $2,430   $2,238  

Actual return on plan assets

   (32  1,443    4    90  

Employer contributions

   462    332    40    291  

Plan participants’ contributions

   —      —      42    42  

Gross benefits paid

   (923  (896  (223  (231

Acquisitions/divestitures  (a)

   —      454    —      —    

Settlements

   (34  (30  —      —    
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Fair value of net plan assets at end of year

  $14,347   $14,874   $2,293   $2,430  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

   Pension Benefits  Other
Postretirement Benefits
 
   2013  2012      2013          2012     

Change in plan assets:

     

Fair value of net plan assets at beginning of year

  $13,357  $11,302  $2,135  $1,797 

Actual return on plan assets

   821   1,484   209   197 

Employer contributions

   339   149   83   325 

Plan participants’ contributions

   —     —     34   34 

Benefits paid(b)

   (877  (952  (223  (218

Acquisitions/divestitures

   —     1,543   —     —   

Settlements(a)

   (69  (169  —     —   
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Fair value of net plan assets at end of year

  $13,571  $13,357  $2,238  $2,135 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

(a)Represents cash settlements only.
(b)Exelon’s other postretirement benefits paidOn April 1, 2014, Generation assumed operational control of CENG’s nuclear fleet. As a result, Exelon became a sponsor of CENG’s pension and OPEB plans effective July 14, 2014. See Note 5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC for the year ended December 31, 2012 are net of $1.3 million of reinsurance proceeds received from the Department of Health and Human Services as part of the Early Retiree Reinsurance Program pursuant to the Affordable Care Act of 2010. In 2013, the Program was no longer accepting applications for reimbursement.further information.

 

Exelon presents its benefit obligations and plan assets net on its balance sheet within the following line items:

 

  Pension Benefits   Other
Postretirement Benefits
   Pension Benefits   Other
Postretirement Benefits
 
  2013   2012       2013           2012           2015           2014           2015           2014     

Other current liabilities

  $12   $15   $23   $23   $21    $16    $27    $25  

Pension obligations

   1,876    3,428    —      —      3,385     3,366     —       —    

Non-pension postretirement benefit obligations

   —      —      2,190    2,662    —       —       1,618     1,742  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Unfunded status (net benefit obligation less net plan assets)

  $1,888   $3,443   $2,213   $2,685   $3,406    $3,382    $1,645    $1,767  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

The funded status of the pension and other postretirement benefit obligations refers to the difference between plan assets and estimated obligations of the plan. The funded status changes over time due to several factors, including contribution levels, assumed discount rates and actual returns on plan assets.

 

The following tables provide the projected benefit obligations (PBO), accumulated benefit obligation (ABO), and fair value of plan assets for all pension plans with a PBO or ABO in excess of plan assets.

 

  PBO in
excess of plan assets
   PBO in
excess of plan assets
 
        2013               2012             2015           2014     

Projected benefit obligation

  $15,452   $16,800   $17,753    $18,256  

Fair value of net plan assets

   13,564    13,357    14,347     14,874  

 

   ABO in
excess of plan assets
 
         2013               2012       

Projected benefit obligation

  $15,452   $16,796 

Accumulated benefit obligation

   14,552    15,657 

Fair value of net plan assets

   13,564    13,353 

   ABO in
excess of plan assets
 
       2015           2014     

Projected benefit obligation

  $17,753    $18,256  

Accumulated benefit obligation

   16,792     17,191  

Fair value of net plan assets

   14,347     14,874  

 

355On a PBO basis, the plans were funded at 81% at December 31, 2015 compared to 81% at December 31, 2014. On an ABO basis, the plans were funded at 85% at December 31, 2015 compared to 87% at December 31, 2014. The ABO differs from the PBO in that the ABO includes no assumption about future compensation levels.


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

On a PBO basis, the plans were funded at 88% at December 31, 2013 compared to 80% at December 31, 2012. On an ABO basis, the plans were funded at 93% at December 31, 2013 compared to 85% at December 31, 2012. The ABO differs from the PBO in that the ABO includes no assumption about future compensation levels.

Components of Net Periodic Benefit Costs

 

The following table presentsmajority of the components of Exelon’s net periodic benefit costs for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011. The table reflects an increase in 2012 and a reduction in 2011 of net periodic postretirement benefit costs of approximately $(17) million and $28 million, respectively, related to a Federal subsidy provided under the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 (Medicare Modernization Act), discussed further below.

The 20132015 pension benefit cost for allExelon-sponsored plans is calculated using an expected long-term rate of return on plan assets of 7.50%7.00% and a discount rate of 3.92%. Certain plans were remeasured during the year using a discount rate of 4.21%3.94%. The 2013majority of the 2015 other postretirement benefit cost is calculated using an expected long-term rate of return on plan assets of 6.45%6.46% for funded plans and a discount rate of 4.00% for all plans. Certain plans were remeasured during the year using a discount rate of 4.66%3.92%. Certain other postretirement benefit plans are not funded. A portion of the net periodic benefit cost isfor all pension and OPEB plans are capitalized within each of the Registrant’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.

   Pension Benefits  Other
Postretirement Benefits
 
   2013  2012  2011  2013  2012  2011 

Components of net periodic benefit cost:

       

Service cost

  $317  $280  $212  $162  $156  $142 

Interest cost

   650   698   649   194   205   207 

Expected return on assets

   (1,015  (988  (939  (132  (115  (111

Amortization of:

       

Transition obligation

   —     —     —     —     11   9 

Prior service cost (credit)

   14   15   14   (19  (17  (38

Actuarial loss

   562   450   331   83   81   66 

Curtailment benefits

   —     —     —     —     (7  —   

Settlement charges

   9   31   —     —     —     —   

Contractual termination benefits(a)

   —     14   —     —     6   —   
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net periodic benefit cost

  $537  $500  $267  $288  $320  $275 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

(a)ComEd and BGE established regulatory assets of $1 million and $4 million, respectively, for their portion of the contractual termination benefit charge in 2012.

Through Exelon’s postretirement benefit plans, the Registrants provide retirees with prescription drug coverage. The Medicare Modernization Act, enacted on December 8, 2003, introduced a prescription drug benefit under Medicare as well as a Federal subsidy to sponsors of retiree health care benefit plans that provide a benefit that is at least actuarially equivalent to the Medicare prescription drug benefit. Management believes the prescription drug benefit provided under Exelon’s postretirement benefit plans meets the requirements for the subsidy. In December 2011, the Company decided that beginning in 2013, it will no longer elect to take the direct Part D subsidy. Beginning in 2013, eligible employees are offered an Employee Group Waiver Plan, a Medicare Part D Plan, with a supplemental “wrap” that closely matches the current prescription drug plan design. See theHealth

356


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Care Reform Legislation section below for further discussion regarding the income tax treatment of Federal subsidies of prescription drug benefits.

The effect of the subsidy onfollowing table presents the components of Exelon’s net periodic postretirement benefit costcosts, prior to any capitalization, for the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011 included in the consolidated financial statements was as follows:2013.

 

   2013   2012  2011 

Amortization of the actuarial experience loss

  $—     $(17 $3 

Reduction in current period service cost

   —      —     9 

Reduction in interest cost on the APBO

   —      —     16 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total effect of subsidy on net periodic postretirement benefit cost

  $—     $(17 $28 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 
   Pension Benefits  Other
Postretirement Benefits
 
   2015  2014  2013  2015  2014  2013 

Components of net periodic benefit cost:

       

Service cost

  $326   $293   $317   $119   $117   $162  

Interest cost

   710    749    650    167    186    194  

Expected return on assets

   (1,026  (994  (1,015  (151  (154  (132

Amortization of:

       

Prior service cost (credit)

   13    14    14    (174  (122  (19

Actuarial loss

   571    420    562    80    50    83  

Settlement charges

   2    2    9    —      —      —    
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net periodic benefit cost

  $596   $484   $537   $41   $77   $288  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

Components of AOCI and Regulatory Assets

 

Under the authoritative guidance for regulatory accounting, a portion of current year actuarial gains and losses and prior service costs (credits) is capitalized within Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets to reflect the expected regulatory recovery of these amounts, which would otherwise be recorded to AOCI. The following tables provide the components of AOCI and regulatory assets (liabilities) for the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 20112013 for all plans combined.

 

  Pension Benefits Other
Postretirement Benefits
   Pension Benefits Other
Postretirement Benefits
 
  2013 2012 2011 2013 2012 2011   2015 2014 2013 2015 2014 2013 

Changes in plan assets and benefit obligations recognized in AOCI and regulatory assets (liabilities):

              

Current year actuarial (gain) loss

  $(1,169 $1,693  $744  $(628 $304  $74 

Amortization of actuarial gain (loss)

   (562  (450  (331  (83  (81  (66

Current year actuarial loss (gain)

  $476   $1,639   $(1,169 $(194 $561   $(628

Amortization of actuarial loss

   (571  (420  (562  (80  (50  (83

Current year prior service (credit) cost

   —     1   —     15   (109  —      —      —      —      (23  (1,012  15  

Amortization of prior service (cost) credit

   (14  (15  (14  19   17   38    (13  (14  (14  174    122    19  

Current year transition (asset) obligation

   —     —     —     —     1   —   

Amortization of transition asset (obligation)

   —     —     —     —     (11  (9

Curtailments

   —     (10  —     —     (1  —   

Settlements

   (8  (31  —     —     —     —      (2  (2  (8  —      —      —    
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total recognized in AOCI and regulatory assets (liabilities) (a)

  $(1,753 $1,188  $399  $(677 $120  $37   $(110 $1,203   $(1,753 $(123 $(379 $(677
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)

Of the $110 million gain related to pension benefits, $64 million and $46 million were recognized in AOCI and regulatory assets, respectively, during 2015. Of the $123 million gain related to other postretirement benefits, $63 million and $60 million were recognized in AOCI and regulatory assets (liabilities), respectively, during 2015. Of the $1,203 million loss related to pension benefits, $788 million and $415 million were recognized in AOCI and regulatory assets, respectively, during 2014. Of the $379 million gain related to other postretirement benefits, $162 million and $217 million were recognized

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

in AOCI and regulatory assets (liabilities), respectively, during 2014. Of the $1,753 million gain related to pension benefits, $1,071 million and $682 million were recognized in AOCI and regulatory assets, respectively, during 2013. Of the $677 million gain related to other postretirement benefits, $352 million and $325 million were recognized in AOCI and regulatory assets, (liabilities), respectively, during 2013. Of the $1,188 million loss related to pension benefits, $283 million and $904 million were recognized in AOCI and regulatory assets, respectively, during 2012. Of the $120 million loss related to other postretirement benefits, $39 million and $81 million were recognized in AOCI and regulatory assets, respectively, during 2012. Of the $399 million loss related to pension benefits, $181 million and $218 million were recognized in AOCI and regulatory assets, respectively, during 2011. Of the $37 million loss related to other postretirement benefits, $13 million and $24 million were recognized in AOCI and regulatory assets, respectively, during 2011.

357


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

The following table provides the components of Exelon’s gross accumulated other comprehensive loss and regulatory assets (liabilities) that have not been recognized as components of periodic benefit cost at December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014, respectively, for all plans combined:

 

  Pension Benefits   Other
Postretirement Benefits
   Pension Benefits   Other
Postretirement Benefits
 
  2013   2012       2013         2012           2015           2014           2015         2014     

Prior service cost (credit)

  $62   $76   $(73 $(107  $36    $49    $(812 $(963

Actuarial loss

   6,192    7,931    474   1,185    7,310     7,407     711    985  
  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total (a)

  $6,254   $8,007   $401  $1,078   $7,346    $7,456    $(101 $22  
  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

 

(a)Of the $6,254$7,346 million related to pension benefits, $3,523$4,246 million and $2,731$3,100 million are included in AOCI and regulatory assets, respectively, at December 31, 2013.2015. Of the $401$(101) million related to other postretirement benefits, $161$(63) million and $240$(38) million are included in AOCI and regulatory assets (liabilities), respectively, at December 31, 2013.2015. Of the $8,007$7,456 million related to pension benefits, $4,594$4,310 million and $3,413$3,146 million are included in AOCI and regulatory assets, respectively, at December 31, 2012. Of the $1,0782014. The $22 million related to other postretirement benefits $514 million and $564 million areis included in AOCI and regulatory assets respectively,(liabilities) at December 31, 2012.2014.

 

The following table provides the components of Exelon’s AOCI and regulatory assetsassets(liabilities) at December 31, 20132015 (included in the table above) that are expected to be amortized as components of periodic benefit cost in 2014.2016. These estimates are subject to the completion of an actuarial valuation of Exelon’s pension and other postretirement benefit obligations, which will reflect actual census data as of January 1, 20142016 and actual claims activity as of December 31, 2013.2015. The valuation is expected to be completed in the first quarter of 20142016 for legacy Exelon plans and in the second quartermajority of 2014 for legacy Constellationthe benefit plans.

 

  Pension Benefits   Other
Postretirement Benefits
   Pension Benefits   Other
Postretirement Benefits
 

Prior service cost (credit)

  $14   $(16  $13    $(175

Actuarial loss

   427    32    501     50  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total (a)

  $441   $16   $514    $(125
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Of the $441$514 million related to pension benefits at December 31, 2013, $2322015, $290 million and $209$224 million are expected to be amortized from AOCI and regulatory assets in 2013,2016, respectively. Of the $16$(125) million related to other postretirement benefits at December 31, 2013, $72015, $(64) million and $9$(61) million are expected to be amortized from AOCI and regulatory assets (liabilities) in 2013,2016, respectively.

 

Assumptions

 

The measurement of the plan obligations and costs of providing benefits under Exelon’s defined benefit and other postretirement plans involves various factors, including the development of valuation assumptions and accounting policy elections. When developing the required assumptions, Exelon considers historical information as well as future expectations. The measurement of benefit obligations and costs is impacted by several assumptions including the discount rate applied to benefit obligations, the long-term expected rate of return on plan assets,EROA, Exelon’s expected level of contributions to the plans, the long-term expected investment rate credited to employees participating in cash balance plans and the anticipated rate of increase of health care costs. Additionally, assumptions related to plan participants include the incidence of mortality, the expected remaining service period, the level of compensation and rate of compensation increases, employee age and length of service, among other factors.

358


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Expected Rate of Return. In selecting the expected rate of return on plan assets,EROA, Exelon considers historical economic indicators (including inflation and GDP growth) that impact asset returns, as well as expectations regarding future long-term capital market performance, weighted by Exelon’s target asset class allocations.

 

Mortality.For the December 31, 2014 actuarial valuation, Exelon changed its assumption of mortality to reflect more recent expectations of future improvements in life expectancy. The change was supported through completion of an experience study and supplemental analyses performed by its actuaries. The change in assumption resulted in increases of $361 million and $117 million in the pension and other postretirement benefits obligations as of December 31, 2014, respectively. There were no changes to the mortality assumption in 2015.

The following assumptions were used to determine the benefit obligations for all of the plans at December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011.2013. Assumptions used to determine year-end benefit obligations are the assumptions used to estimate the subsequent year’s net periodic benefit costs.

 

 Pension Benefits Other Postretirement Benefits  Pension Benefits Other Postretirement Benefits 
       2013             2012             2011             2013             2012             2011        2015 2014 2013 2015 2014 2013 

Discount rate

  4.80  3.92  4.74  4.90  4.00  4.80  4.29  3.94  4.80  4.29  3.92  4.90

Rate of compensation increase

      (a)       (b)   3.75      (a)       (b)   3.75      (a)       (a)       (b)       (a)       (a)       (b) 

Mortality table

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2014
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2013
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2012
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2014
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2013
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2012
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
RP-2000
table
projected to
2012 with
improvement
scale AA, with
Scale BB-2D
improvements
(adjusted)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
RP-2000
table
projected to
2012 with
improvement
scale AA, with
Scale BB-2D
improvements
(adjusted)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
RP-2000
table with
Scale AA
improvements
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
RP-2000
table
projected to
2012 with
improvement
scale AA, with
Scale BB-2D
improvements
(adjusted)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
RP-2000
table
projected to
2012 with
improvement
scale AA, with
Scale BB-2D
improvements
(adjusted)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
RP-2000
table with
Scale AA
improvements
  
  
  
  

Health care cost trend on covered charges

  N/A    N/A    N/A   

 
 
 

 
 
 
 

 

6.00%
decreasing
to

ultimate
trend of
5.00% in
2017

  
  
  

  
  
  
  

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
6.50%
decreasing
to
ultimate
trend of
5.00% in
2017
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
6.50%
decreasing
to
ultimate
trend of
5.00% in
2017
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  N/A    N/A��   N/A    
 
 
 
 
5.50%
decreasing to
ultimate trend
of 5.00% in
2017
  
  
  
  
  
 

 
 
 
 
 

 

6.00%
decreasing to
ultimate trend
of 5.00% in
2017

  
  
  
  
  

  
 
 
 
 
6.00%
decreasing to
ultimate trend
of 5.00% in
2017
  
  
  
  
  

 

(a)3.25% for 2014-2018through 2019 and 3.75% thereafter.
(b)3.25% for 2013-2017through 2018 and 3.75% thereafter.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

The following assumptions were used to determine the net periodic benefit costs for all the plans for the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011:2013:

 

  Pension Benefits  Other Postretirement Benefits 
        2013              2012              2011              2013              2012              2011       

Discount rate

  3.92%(a)   4.74%(b)   5.26  4.00%(a)   4.80%(b)   5.30

Expected return on plan assets

  7.50%(c)   7.50%(c)   8.00%(c)   6.45%(c)   6.68%(c)   7.08%(c) 

Rate of compensation increase

      (d)   3.75  3.75      (d)   3.75  3.75

Mortality table

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2013
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2012
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2011
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2013
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2012
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
IRS
required
mortality
table for
2011
funding
valuation
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

Health care cost trend on covered charges

  N/A    N/A    N/A   

 
 
 

 
 
 
 

 

6.50%
decreasing
to

ultimate
trend of
5.00% in
2017

  
  
  

  
  
  
  

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
6.50%
decreasing
to
ultimate
trend of
5.00% in
2017
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
7.00%
decreasing
to
ultimate
trend of
5.00% in
2015
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

359


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

  Pension Benefits  Other Postretirement Benefits 
  2015  2014  2013  2015  2014  2013 

Discount rate

  3.94%(a)   4.80%(b)   3.92%(c)   3.92%(a)   4.90%(b)   4.00%(c) 

Expected return on plan assets

  7.00%(d)   7.00%(d)   7.50%(d)   6.50%(d)   6.59%(d)   6.45%(d) 

Rate of compensation increase

      (e)       (f)       (g)       (e)       (f)       (g) 

Mortality table

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
RP-2000
table
projected to
2012 with
improvement
scale AA, with
Scale BB-2D
improvements
(adjusted)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
RP-2000
table with
Scale AA
improvements
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
RP-2000
table with
Scale AA
improvements
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
RP-2000
table
projected to
2012 with
improvement
scale AA, with
Scale BB-2D
improvements
(adjusted)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
RP-2000
table with
Scale AA
improvements
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
RP-2000
table with
Scale AA
improvements
  
  
  
  

Health care cost trend on covered charges

  N/A    N/A    N/A   

 
 
 
 
 

 

6.00%
decreasing to
ultimate trend
of 5.00% in
2017

  
  
  
  
  

  
 
 
 
 
6.00%
decreasing to
ultimate trend
of 5.00% in
2017
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
6.50%
decreasing to
ultimate trend
of 5.00% in
2017
  
  
  
  
  

 

(a)The discount rates above represent the initial discount rates used to establish the majority of Exelon’s pension and other postretirement benefits costs for the year ended December 31, 2015. Discount rates for CENG’s legacy pension and OPEB plans ranged from 3.68%-4.14% and 4.32%-4.43%, respectively.
(b)The discount rates above represent the initial discount rates used to establish the majority of Exelon’s pension and other postretirement benefits costs for the year ended December 31, 2014. Certain of the other postretirement benefit plans were remeasured as of April 30, 2014 using an expected long-term rate of return on plan assets of 6.59% and a discount rate of 4.30%. Costs of the year ended December 31, 2014 reflect the impact of this remeasurement. On April 1, 2014, Generation assumed operational control of CENG’s nuclear fleet. As a result, Exelon became the sponsor of CENG’s legacy pension and OPEB plans effective July 14, 2014; discount rates for those plans, impacting 2014 costs, ranged from 3.60%-4.30% and 4.09%-4.55%, respectively. See Note 5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC for further information.
(c)The discount rates above represent the initial discounts rates used to establish Exelon’s pension and other postretirement benefits costs for the year ended December 31, 2013. Certain of the benefit plans were remeasured during the year using discount rates of 4.21% and 4.66% for pension and other postretirement benefits, respectively. Costs for the year ended December 31, 2013 reflect the impact of these remeasurements.
(b)The discount rates above represent the initial discounts rates used to establish Exelon’s pension and other postretirement benefits costs for 2012. Certain of the benefit plans were remeasured during the year due to the Constellation merger, plan settlement and curtailment events, and plan changes using discount rates of 3.71% and 3.72% for pension and other postretirement benefits, respectively. Costs for the year ended December 31, 2012 reflect the impact of these remeasurements.
(c)(d)Not applicable to pension and other postretirement benefit plans that do not have plan assets.
(d)(e)3.25% for 2013-2017through 2019 and 3.75% thereafter.
(f)3.25% through 2018 and 3.75% thereafter.
(g)3.25% through 2017 and 3.75% thereafter.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Assumed health care cost trend rates have a significant effect on the costs reported forimpact the other postretirement benefit plans.plan costs reported for Exelon’s participant populations with plan designs that do not have a cap on cost growth. A one percentage point change in assumed health care cost trend rates would have the following effects:

 

Effect of a one percentage point increase in assumed health care cost trend:

  

on 2013 total service and interest cost components

  $90 

on postretirement benefit obligation at December 31, 2013

   858 

Effect of a one percentage point decrease in assumed health care cost trend:

  

on 2013 total service and interest cost components

   (62

on postretirement benefit obligation at December 31, 2013

   (607

Effect of a one percentage point increase in assumed health care cost trend:

  

on 2015 total service and interest cost components

  $12  

on postretirement benefit obligation at December 31, 2015

   100  

Effect of a one percentage point decrease in assumed health care cost trend:

  

on 2015 total service and interest cost components

   (9

on postretirement benefit obligation at December 31, 2015

   (89

 

Health Care Reform Legislation

 

In March 2010, the Health Care Reform Acts were signed into law, which contain a number of provisions that impact retiree health care plans provided by employers. One such provision reduces the deductibility, for Federal income tax purposes, of retiree health care costs to the extent an employer’s postretirement health care plan receives Federal subsidies that provide retiree prescription drug benefits at least equivalent to those offered by Medicare. Although this change did not take effect immediately, the Registrants were required to recognize the full accounting impact in their financial statements in the period in which the legislation was enacted. As a result, in the first quarter of 2010, Exelon recorded total after-tax charges of approximately $65 million to income tax expense to reverse deferred tax assets previously established. Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE recorded charges of $24 million, $11 million, $9 million and $3 million, respectively. Additionally, as a result of this deductibility change for employers, and other Health Care Reform provisions that impact the federal prescription drug subsidy options provided to employers, Exelon has made a change in the manner in which it will receive prescription drug subsidies beginning in 2013.

Additionally, the Health Care Reform Acts also includeincluding a provision that imposes an excise tax on certain high-cost plans beginning in 2018, whereby premiums paid over a prescribed threshold will be taxed at a 40% rate. Additional legislation was passed in December 2015 that made some changes to the law, including moving the implementation date of the excise tax from 2018 to 2020. Although the excise tax does not go into effect until 2018,2020, accounting guidance requires Exelon to incorporate the estimated impact of the excise tax in its annual actuarial valuation. The application of the legislation is still unclear and Exelon continues to monitor the Department of Labor and IRS for additional guidance. Certain key assumptions are required to estimate the impact of the excise tax on Exelon’s other postretirement benefit obligation, including projected inflation rates (based on the CPI) and whether pre- and post-65 retiree populations can be aggregated in determining the premium values of health care benefits.. Exelon reflected its best estimate of the expected impact in its annual actuarial valuation.

360


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Contributions

 

The following table provides contributions made by Generation, ComEd, PECO, BGE and BSC to the pension and other postretirement benefit plans:

 

  Pension Benefits   Other Postretirement Benefits   Pension Benefits   Other Postretirement Benefits 
  2013   2012   2011(c)   2013 (a)   2012 (a)   2011 (a)     2015 (a)       2014 (a)       2013       2015       2014       2013   

Generation

  $119   $48   $954   $30   $135   $121   $231    $173    $119    $14    $124    $30  

ComEd

   118    25    873    4    119    108    143     122     118     7     125     4  

PECO

   11    13    110    20    33    28    40     11     11     —       5     20  

BGE(b)

   —      —      —      24    12    —      1     —       —       16     17     24  

BSC(b)

   91    63    157    5    24    20    47     26     91     3     20     5  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Exelon

  $339   $149   $2,094   $83   $323   $277   $462    $332    $339    $40    $291    $83  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)The Registrants present the cashExelon’s and Generation’s pension contributions above net of Federal subsidy payments received on each of their respective Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows. Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO, and BGE received Federal subsidy payments of $10 million, $5 million, $4 million, $1include $36 million and $2$43 million respectively,related to the legacy CENG plans that was funded by CENG as provided in 2012,an Employee Matters Agreement (EMA) between Exelon and $11 million, $5 million, $4 million, $1 millionCENG for the years ended December 31, 2015 and $3 million, respectively, in 2011. Effective January 1, 2013, Exelon is no longer receiving this subsidy.2014, respectively.
(b)BGE’s pension benefit contributions for 2012 and 2011 exclude $0Includes $5 million, $9 million, and $54$72 million respectively, of pension contributions madefunded by BGE prior toExelon Corporate, for the closing of Exelon’s merger with Constellation on March 12, 2012. BGE’s other postretirement benefit payments for 2012years ended December 31, 2015, 2014, and 2011 exclude $4 million and $13 million, respectively, of other postretirement benefit payments made by BGE prior to the closing of Exelon’s merger with Constellation on March 12, 2012. These pre-merger contributions are not included in Exelon’s financial statements but are reflected in BGE’s financial statements.
(c)The increase in 2011 pension contributions was related to Exelon’s $2.1 billion contribution to its pension plans as a result of accelerated cash benefits associated with the Tax Relief Act of 2010.2013, respectively.

 

Exelon plans to contribute $264 million to its qualified pension plans in 2014, of which Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE will contribute $118 million, $119 million, $11 million and $0 million, respectively. Unlike the qualified pension plans, Exelon’s non-qualified pension plans are not funded. Exelon plans to make non-qualified pension plan benefit payments of $12 million in 2014, of which Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE will make payments of $5 million, $1 million, $0 million and $1 million, respectively. Management considers various factors when making pension funding decisions, including actuarially determined minimum contribution requirements under ERISA, contributions required to avoid benefit restrictions and at-risk status as defined by the Pension Protection Act of 2006 (the Act), management of the pension obligation and regulatory implications. The Act requires the attainment of

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

certain funding levels to avoid benefit restrictions (such as an inability to pay lump sums or to accrue benefits prospectively), and at-risk status (which triggers higher minimum contribution requirements and participant notification). Additionally, for Exelon’s largest qualified pension plan, the projected contributions reflectcontribution reflects a funding strategy of contributing the greater of $250 million which approximates service cost, oruntil the qualified plans are fully funded on an ABO basis, and the minimum amounts under ERISA to avoid benefit restrictions and at-risk status. This level funding strategy helps minimize volatility of future period required pension contributions. On July 6, 2012, President Obama signed into law the Moving Ahead for Progress in the Twenty-first Century Act, which contains a pension funding provision that results in lower minimum pension contributions in the near term while increasing the premiums

Exelon plans to contribute $250 million to its qualified pension plans payin 2016, of which Generation, ComEd, PECO, and BGE will contribute $134 million, $30 million, $28 million, and $31 million, respectively. Exelon’s and Generation’s expected qualified pension plan contributions above include $25 million related to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. Certain provisionslegacy CENG plans that will be funded by CENG as provided in an EMA between Exelon and CENG.

Unlike the qualified pension plans, Exelon’s non-qualified pension plans are not funded. Exelon plans to make non-qualified pension plan benefit payments of the law were applied$21 million in 2012 while others were applied in 2013. The estimated impacts2016, of the law are reflected in the projected pension contributions.which Generation, ComEd, PECO, and BGE will make payments of $9 million, $2 million, $1 million and $1 million, respectively.

 

Unlike the qualified pension plans, other postretirement plans are not subject to statutory minimum contribution requirements. Exelon’s management has historically considered several factors in determining the level of contributions to its other postretirement benefit plans, including levels of benefit claims paid and regulatory implications (amounts deemed prudent to meet regulatory expectations and

361


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

best assure continued rate recovery). In 2014,2016, Exelon anticipates funding its other postretirement benefit plans based on the funding considerations discussed above, with the exception of those plans which remain unfunded. Exelon expects to make other postretirement benefit plan contributions, including benefit payments related to unfunded plans, of approximately $430$35 million in 2014,2016, of which Generation, ComEd, PECO, and BGE expect to contribute $168$13 million, $197$3 million, $19$1 million, and $17$18 million, respectively.

 

Estimated Future Benefit Payments

 

Estimated future benefit payments to participants in all of the pension plans and postretirement benefit plans at December 31, 20132015 were:

 

   Pension
Benefits
   Other
Postretirement
Benefits
 

2014

  $929   $204 

2015

   851    210 

2016

   873    219 

2017

   902    228 

2018

   1,015    238 

2019 through 2023

   5,257    1,383 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total estimated future benefit payments through 2023

  $9,827   $2,482 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 
   Pension
Benefits
   Other
Postretirement
Benefits
 

2016

  $1,153    $217  

2017

   997     223  

2018

   1,009     228  

2019

   1,036     235  

2020

   1,071     244  

2021 through 2025

   5,923     1,341  
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total estimated future benefit payments through 2025

  $11,189    $2,488  
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

Allocation to Exelon Subsidiaries

 

Generation, ComEd, PECO, and BGE account for their participation in Exelon’s pension and other postretirement benefit plans by applying multiemployermulti-employer accounting. Employee-related assets and

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

liabilities, including both pension and postretirement liabilities, for the legacy Exelon plans were allocated by Exelon to its subsidiaries based on the number of active employees as of January 1, 2001 as part of Exelon’s corporate restructuring. The obligation for Generation, ComEd and PECO reflects the initial allocation and the cumulative costs incurred and contributions made since January 1, 2001. Historically, Exelon allocateshas allocated the components of pension and other postretirement costs to the subsidiaries in the legacy Exelon plans based upon several factors, including the measures of active employee participation in each participating unit. The obligation for Generation, ComEdPension and PECO reflects the initial allocation and the cumulative costs incurred and contributions made since January 1, 2001. Pension andother postretirement benefit contributions arewere allocated to legacy Exelon subsidiaries in proportion to active service costs recognized and total costs recognized, respectively. Beginning in 2015, Exelon began allocating costs related to its legacy Exelon pension and other postretirement benefit plans to its subsidiaries based on both active and retired employee participation and contributions are allocated based on accounting cost. The impact of this allocation methodology change is not material to any Registrant. For legacy CEG and legacy CENG plans, components of pension and other postretirement benefit costs and contributions arehave been, and will continue to be, allocated to the subsidiaries based on employee participation (both active and retired).

 

The amounts below were included in capital expenditures and operatingOperating and maintenance expense for the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011,2013, respectively, for Generation’s, ComEd’s, PECO’s, BSC’s and BGE’s allocated portion of the pension and other postretirement benefit plan costs. These amounts include the recognized contractual termination benefit charges, curtailment gains, and settlement charges:

 

For the Year Ended December 31,

  Generation   ComEd   PECO   BSC (a)   BGE (b)(c)   Exelon 

2013

  $347   $309   $43   $71   $55   $825 

2012

   341    282    50    99    60    820 

2011

   249    213    32    48    51    542 

362


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

For the Year Ended December 31,

  Generation   ComEd   PECO   BSC (a)   BGE   Exelon 

2015

  $269    $206    $39    $57    $66     637  

2014

   250     162     36     46     67     561  

2013

   347     309     43     71     55     825  

 

(a)These amounts primarily represent amounts billed to Exelon’s subsidiaries through intercompany allocations. These amounts are not included in the Generation, ComEd, PECO or BGE amounts above. As of December 31, 2012, ComEd and BGE each reported a regulatory asset of $1 million related to their BSC-billed portion of the second quarter 2012 contractual termination benefit charge.
(b)The amounts included in capital and operating and maintenance expense for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011 include $12 million and $51 million, respectively, in costs incurred prior to the closing of Exelon’s merger with Constellation on March 12, 2012. These amounts are not included in Exelon’s capital expenditures and operating and maintenance expense for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011.
(c)BGE’s pension and other postretirement benefit costs for the year ended December 31, 2012 include a $3 million contractual termination benefit charge, which was recorded as a regulatory asset as of December 31, 2012.

 

Plan Assets

 

Investment Strategy. On a regular basis, Exelon evaluates its investment strategy to ensure that plan assets will be sufficient to pay plan benefits when due. As part of this ongoing evaluation, Exelon may make changes to its targeted asset allocation and investment strategy.

 

Exelon has developed and implemented a liability hedging investment strategy for its qualified pension plans that has reduced the volatility of its pension assets relative to its pension liabilities. Exelon is likely to continue to gradually increase the liability hedging portfolio as the funded status of its plans improves. The overall objective is to achieve attractive risk-adjusted returns that will balance the liquidity requirements of the plans’ liabilities while striving to minimize the risk of significant losses. Trust assets for Exelon’s other postretirement plans are managed in a diversified investment strategy that prioritizes maximizing liquidity and returns while minimizing asset volatility.

 

Exelon used an EROA of 7.00% and 6.59%6.71% to estimate its 20142016 pension and other postretirement benefit costs, respectively.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Exelon’s pension and other postretirement benefit plan target asset allocations andat December 31, 20132015 and 20122014 asset allocations were as follows:

 

Pension Plans

 

    Percentage of Plan Assets
at December 31,
     Percentage of Plan Assets
at December 31,
 

Asset Category

  Target Allocation 2013 2012   Target Allocation 2015 2014 

Equity securities

   31  35  35   32  35  33

Fixed income securities

   38  37   40    37  34    37  

Alternative investments(a)

   31  28   25    31  31    30  
   

 

  

 

    

 

  

 

 

Total

    100  100    100  100
   

 

  

 

    

 

  

 

 

 

Other Postretirement Benefit Plans

 

      Percentage of Plan Assets
at December 31,
 

Asset Category

  Target Allocation  2013  2012 

Equity securities

   41  45  46

Fixed income securities

   39  37   40 

Alternative investments(a)

   20  18   14 
   

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total

    100  100
   

 

 

  

 

 

 

363


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

      Percentage of Plan Assets
at December 31,
 

Asset Category

  Target Allocation  2015  2014 

Equity securities

   39  43  42

Fixed income securities

   26  27    34  

Alternative investments (a)

   35  30    24  
   

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total

    100  100
   

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

(a)Alternative investments include private equity, hedge funds, real estate, and real estate.private credit.

 

Concentrations of Credit Risk. Exelon evaluated its pension and other postretirement benefit plans’ asset portfolios for the existence of significant concentrations of credit risk as of December 31, 2013.2015. Types of concentrations that were evaluated include, but are not limited to, investment concentrations in a single entity, type of industry, foreign country, and individual fund. As of December 31, 2013,2015, there were no significant concentrations (defined as greater than 10 percent10% of plan assets) of risk in Exelon’s pension and other postretirement benefit plan assets.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Fair Value Measurements

 

The following table presents Exelon’s pension and other postretirement benefit plan assets measured and recorded at fair value on Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets on a recurring basis and their level within the fair value hierarchy at December 31, 20132015 and 2012:2014:

 

At December 31, 2013(a)  Level 1   Level 2  Level 3   Total 

Pension plan assets

       

Equity securities:

       

Individually held

   3,090    —     2    3,092 

Commingled funds

   —       1,167   —       1,167 

Mutual funds

   270    —      —       270 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Equity securities subtotal

   3,360    1,167   2    4,529 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income securities:

       

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

   908    9   —       917 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and by political subdivisions of the states

   —       88   —       88 

Foreign debt securities

   —       205   —       205 

Corporate debt securities

   —       2,927   41    2,968 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —       90   —       90 

Non-Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —       26   —       26 

Commingled funds

   —       558   —       558 

Mutual funds

   5    315   —       320 

Derivative instruments(b):

       

Assets

   —       7   —       7 

Liabilities

   —       (134  —       (134
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income securities subtotal

   913    4,091   41    5,045 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Private equity

   —       —      806    806 

Hedge funds

   —       1,266   1,039    2,305 

Real estate:

       

Individually held

   264    —      —       264 

Commingled funds

   —       2   —       2 

Real estate funds

   —       —      582    582 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Real estate subtotal

   264    2   582    848 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Pension plan assets subtotal

   4,537    6,526   2,470    13,533 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

At December 31, 2015 (a) Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 

Pension plan assets

    

Cash equivalents

 $210   $—     $—     $210  

Equities(b)

  3,571    1,462    2    5,035  

Fixed income:

    

U.S. Treasury and agencies

  1,001    79    —      1,080  

State and municipal debt

  —      61    —      61  

Corporate debt

  —      2,901    165    3,066  

Other (b)

  —      395    203    598  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Fixed income subtotal

  1,001    3,436    368    4,805  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Private equity

  —      —      924    924  

Hedge funds

  —      1,129    795    1,924  

Real estate

  —      —      725    725  

Private credit

  —      —      699    699  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Pension plan assets subtotal

  4,782    6,027    3,513    14,322  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

364
At December 31, 2015 (a) Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 

Other postretirement benefit plan assets

    

Cash equivalents

  15    —      —      15  

Equities

  510    482    —      992  

Fixed income:

    

U.S. Treasury and agencies

  11    53    —      64  

State and municipal debt

  —      131    —      131  

Corporate debt

  —      44    —      44  

Other

  155    205    —      360  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Fixed income subtotal

  166    433    —      599  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Hedge funds

  —      312    139    451  

Real estate

  —      —      131    131  

Private credit

  —      —      103    103  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other postretirement benefit plan assets subtotal

  691    1,227    373    2,291  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total pension and other postretirement benefit plan assets (c)

 $5,473   $7,254   $3,886   $16,613  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

At December 31, 2013(a)  Level 1   Level 2   Level 3   Total 

Other postretirement benefit plan assets

        

Cash equivalents

   51    —       —       51 

Equity securities:

        

Individually held

   286    —       —       286 

Commingled funds

   —       515    —       515 

Mutual funds

   164    —       —       164 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Equity securities subtotal

   450    515    —       965 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income securities:

        

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

   17    1    —       18 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and by political subdivisions of the states

   —       149    —       149 

Foreign debt securities

   —       2    —       2 

Corporate debt securities

   —       50    —       50 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —       45    —       45 

Non-Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —       7    —       7 

Commingled funds

   —       218    —       218 

Mutual funds

   305    —       —       305 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income securities subtotal

   322    472    —       794 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Private equity

   —       —       2    2 

Hedge funds

   —       295    4    299 

Real estate:

        

Individually held

   8    —       —       8 

Real estate funds

   —       5    109    114 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Real estate subtotal

   8    5    109    122 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Other postretirement benefit plan assets subtotal

   831    1,287    115    2,233 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total pension and other postretirement benefit plan
assets(c)

  $5,368   $7,813   $2,585   $15,766 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

At December 31, 2014 (a) Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 

Pension plan assets

    

Cash equivalents

 $1   $—     $—     $1  

Equities (b)

  3,261    1,449    2    4,712  

Fixed income:

    

U.S. Treasury and agencies

  1,051    88    —      1,139  

State and municipal debt

  —      80    —      80  

Corporate debt

  —      3,125    120    3,245  

Other (b)

  —      930    152    1,082  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Fixed income subtotal

  1,051    4,223    272    5,546  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Private equity

  —      —      900    900  

Hedge funds

  —      1,355    785    2,140  

Real estate

  243    —      685    928  

Private credit

  —      —      607    607  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Pension plan assets subtotal

  4,556    7,027    3,251    14,834  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

365


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

At December 31, 2012(a)  Level 1   Level 2  Level 3   Total 

Pension plan assets

       

Cash equivalents

  $1   $—     $—      $1 

Equity securities:

       

Individually held

   2,562    —      —       2,562 

Commingled funds

   —       1,111   —       1,111 

Mutual funds

   323    —      —       323 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Equity securities subtotal

   2,885    1,111   —       3,996 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income securities:

       

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

   1,037    —      —       1,037 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and by political subdivisions of the states

   —       108   —       108 

Foreign debt securities

   —       252   —       252 

Corporate debt securities

   —       3,330   —       3,330 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —       117   —       117 

Non-Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —       28   —       28 

Commingled funds

   —       274   —       274 

Mutual funds

   4    291   —       295 

Derivative instruments(b):

       

Assets

   —       9   —       9 

Liabilities

   —       (21  —       (21
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income securities subtotal

   1,041    4,388   —       5,429 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Private equity

   —       —      754    754 

Hedge funds

   —       1,080   1,235    2,315 

Real estate:

       

Individually held

   280    —      —       280 

Commingled funds

   —       75   —       75 

Real estate funds

   —       —      426    426 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Real estate subtotal

   280    75   426    781 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Pension plan assets subtotal

   4,207    6,654   2,415    13,276 
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

366


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

At December 31, 2012(a)  Level 1   Level 2   Level 3   Total 

Other postretirement benefit plan assets

        

Cash equivalents

   44    —       —       44 

Equity securities:

        

Individually held

   198    —       —       198 

Commingled funds

   —       530    —       530 

Mutual funds

   230    —       —       230 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Equity securities subtotal

   428    530    —       958 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income securities:

        

Debt securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government corporations and agencies

   18    —       —       18 

Debt securities issued by states of the United States and by political subdivisions of the states

   —       125    —       125 

Foreign debt securities

   —       3    —       3 

Corporate debt securities

   —       50    —       50 

Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —       52    —       52 

Non-Federal agency mortgage-backed securities

   —       6    —       6 

Commingled funds

   —       271    —       271 

Mutual funds

   295    2    —       297 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Fixed income securities subtotal

   313    509    —       822 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Private equity

   —       —       1    1 

Hedge funds

   —       188    12    200 

Real estate:

        

Individually held

   7    —       —       7 

Commingled funds

   —       2    —       2 

Real estate funds

   —       6    95    101 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Real estate subtotal

   7    8    95    110 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Other postretirement benefit plan assets subtotal

   792    1,235    108    2,135 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total pension and other postretirement benefit plan assets (c)

  $4,999   $7,889   $2,523   $15,411 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 
At December 31, 2014 (a) Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 

Other postretirement benefit plan assets

    

Cash equivalents

  11    —      —      11  

Equities

  480    525    —      1,005  

Fixed income:

    

U.S. Treasury and agencies

  15    59    —      74  

State and municipal debt

  —      197    —      197  

Corporate debt

  —      42    —      42  

Other

  253    272    —      525  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Fixed income subtotal

  268    570    —      838  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Hedge funds

  —      339    —      339  

Real estate

  8    —      116    124  

Private credit

  —      —      110    110  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other postretirement benefit plan assets subtotal

  767    1,434    226    2,427  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total pension and other postretirement benefit plan assets (c)

 $5,323   $8,461   $3,477   $17,261  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

(a)See Note 11—12—Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities for a description of levels within the fair value hierarchy.
(b)DerivativeIncludes derivative instruments of $5 million and $(3) million, which have a total notional amount of $2,651$1,774 million and $2,498$1,491 million at December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014, respectively. The notional principal amounts for these instruments provide one measure of the transaction volume outstanding as of the fiscal years ended and do not represent the amount of the company’s exposure to credit or market loss.
(c)Excludes net assets of $43$27 million and $81$42 million at December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014, respectively, which are required to reconcile to the fair value of net plan assets. These items consist primarily of receivables related to pending securities sales, interest and dividends receivable, and payables related to pending securities purchases.

367


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

The following table presents the reconciliation of Level 3 assets and liabilities measured at fair value for pension and other postretirement benefit plans for the years ended December 31, 20132015 and 2012:2014:

 

   Hedge
funds
  Private
equity
  Real
estate
  Debt
securities
   Preferred
stock
   Total 

Pension Assets

         

Balance as of January 1, 2013

  $1,235  $754  $426  $—      $—      $2,415 

Actual return on plan assets:

         

Relating to assets still held at the reporting date

   143   86   63   —       —       292 

Relating to assets sold during the period

   3   —      (4  —       —       (1

Purchases, sales and settlements:

         

Purchases

   360   123   226   41    2    752 

Sales

   (76  —      (91  —       —       (167

Settlements (a)

   (3  (157  (38  —       —       (198

Transfers into (out of) Level 3 (b)

   (623  —      —      —       —       (623
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2013

  $1,039  $806  $582  $41   $2   $2,470 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Other Postretirement Benefits

         

Balance as of January 1, 2013

  $12  $1  $95  $—      $—      $108 

Actual return on plan assets:

         

Relating to assets still held at the reporting date

   1   —      11   —       —       12 

Relating to assets sold during the period

   —      —      —      —       —       —    

Purchases, sales and settlements:

         

Purchases

   —      1   3   —       —       4 

Sales

   (1  —      —      —       —       (1

Settlements (a)

   (4  —      —      —       —       (4

Transfers into (out of) Level 3 (b)

   (4  —      —      —       —       (4
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2013

  $4  $2  $109  $—     $—     $115 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

   Hedge
funds
  Private
equity
  Real
estate
  Fixed
income
  Equities   Private
Credit
  Total 

Pension Assets

         

Balance as of January 1, 2015

  $785   $900   $685   $272   $2    $607   $3,251  

Actual return on plan assets:

         

Relating to assets still held at the reporting date

   (39  60    76    (14  —       (19  64  

Relating to assets sold during the period

   4    —      9    —      —       —      13  

Purchases, sales and settlements:

         

Purchases

   104    186    116    125    —       200    731  

Sales

   (57  —      (54  (7  —       (5  (123

Settlements (a)

   (2  (222  (107  (8  —       (84  (423
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2015

  $795   $924   $725   $368   $2    $699   $3,513  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other Postretirement Benefits

         

Balance as of January 1, 2015

  $—     $—     $116   $—     $—      $110   $226  

Actual return on plan assets:

         

Relating to assets still held at the reporting date

   1    —      15    —      —       (7  9  

Purchases, sales and settlements:

         

Purchases

   138    —      62    —      —       —      200  

Settlements (a)

   —      —      (62  —      —       —      (62
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2015

  $139   $—     $131   $—     $—      $103   $373  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

368
   Hedge
funds
  Private
equity
  Real
estate
  Fixed
income
  Equities   Private
credit
  Total 

Pension Assets

         

Balance as of January 1, 2014

  $706   $806   $544   $41   $2    $371   $2,470  

Actual return on plan assets:

         

Relating to assets still held at the reporting date

   59    112    81    7    —       20    279  

Relating to assets sold during the period

   2    —      —      —      —       1    3  

Purchases, sales and settlements:

         

Purchases

   74    169    112    227    —       265    847  

Sales

   (25  —      (19  (3  —       (13  (60

Settlements (a)

   (1  (203  (60  —      —       (37  (301

Transfers into (out of) Level 3 (b)(c)

   (30  16    27    —      —       —      13  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2014

  $785   $900   $685   $272   $2    $607   $3,251  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other Postretirement Benefits

         

Balance as of January 1, 2014

  $—     $2   $109   $—     $—      $4   $115  

Actual return on plan assets:

         

Relating to assets still held at the reporting date

   —      —      13    —      —       1    14  

Purchases, sales and settlements:

         

Purchases

   —      1    1    —      —       109    111  

Sales

   —      (2  (7  —      —       (4  (13

Settlements (a)

   —      (1  —      —      —       —      (1
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2014

  $—     $—     $116   $—     $—      $110   $226  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

��

   Hedge
funds
  Private
equity
  Real
estate
  Debt
securities
   Preferred
stock
   Total 

Pension Assets

         

Balance as of January 1, 2012

  $1,525  $672  $229  $—      $—      $2,426 

Actual return on plan assets:

         

Relating to assets still held at the reporting date

   138   55   24   —       —       217 

Purchases, sales and settlements:

         

Purchases

   447   108   134   —       —       689 

Sales

   (6  —      —      —       —       (6

Settlements (a)

   (4  (128  (28  —       —       (160

Transfers into (out of) Level 3 (c)(d)(e)

   (865  47   67   —       —       (751
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2012

  $1,235  $754  $426  $—      $—      $2,415 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Other Postretirement Benefits

         

Balance as of January 1, 2012

  $157  $1  $7  $—      $—      $165 

Actual return on plan assets:

         

Relating to assets still held at the reporting date

   11   —      3   —       —       14 

Purchases, sales and settlements:

         

Purchases

   32   —      91   —       —       123 

Sales

   —      —      —      —       —       —    

Settlements (a)

   —      —      (1  —       —       (1

Transfers into (out of) Level 3 (c)(d)(e)

   (188  —      (5  —       —       (193
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Balance as of December 31, 2012

  $12  $1  $95  $—      $—      $108 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

(a)Represents cash settlements only.
(b)In connection with the Employee Matters Agreement between EDF and Exelon, Exelon assumed the pension plan assets of Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, LLC and Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC resulting in transfers into Level 3 of $56 million.
(c)As of December 31, 2012,January 1, 2015 and January 1, 2014, hedge fund investments that contained redemption restrictions limiting Exelon’s ability to redeem the investments within a reasonable period of time were classified as Level 3 investments. As of December 31, 2013,2014, restrictions for certain investments no longer applied, therefore allowing redemption within a reasonable period of time from the measurement date at NAV. As such, these hedge fund investments are reflected as transfers out of Level 3 to Level 2 of $627$43 million in 2013.2014.
(c)In connection with the acquisition of Constellation in March 2012, Exelon assumed Constellation’s pension plan assets resulting in transfers into Level 3 of $141 million.
(d)In 2012, Exelon refined its policy over the criteria that hedge fund investments must meet in order to be categorized within Level 2 and Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy. Therefore, certain hedge fund investments that were categorized within Level 3 in prior periods have been re-categorized as Level 2 investments as of December 31, 2012. The re-categorization of these hedge fund investments is reflected as transfers out of Level 3 of $1.1 billion.
(e)In 2012, the liquidity terms of a certain real estate investment changed to allow redemption within a reasonable period of time from the redemption date which led to a transfer out of Level 3 to Level 2 of $5 million.

There were no transfers between Level 1 and Level 2 during the twelve months ended December 31, 2015 for the pension and other postretirement benefit plan assets.

 

Valuation Techniques Used to Determine Fair Value

 

Cash equivalents. Investments with maturities of three months or less when purchased, including certain short—termshort-term fixed income securities and money market funds, are considered cash equivalents. The fair values are based on observable market prices and, therefore, are included in the recurring fair value measurements hierarchy as Level 1.

 

EquityEquities. Equities consist of individually held equity securities,. equity mutual funds and equity commingled funds in domestic and foreign markets. With respect to individually held equity securities, including investments in U.S. and international securities, the trustees obtain prices from pricing services, whose prices are obtained from direct feeds from market exchanges, which Exelon is able to independently corroborate. Equity

369


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

securities held individually, including real estate investment trusts, rights and warrants, are primarily traded on exchanges that contain only actively traded securities due to the volume trading requirements imposed by these exchanges. Equity securities are valued based on quoted prices in active markets and are categorized as Level 1. Certain private placement equity securities are categorized as Level 3 because they are not publicly traded and are priced using significant unobservable inputs.

 

Equity commingled funds and mutual funds are maintained by investment companies that hold certain investments in accordance with a stated set of fund objectives, which are consistent with Exelon’sthe plans’ overall investment strategy. The values of some of these funds are publicly quoted. For mutual funds which are publicly quoted, the funds are valued based on quoted prices in active markets and have been categorized as Level 1. For equity commingled funds and mutual funds which are not publicly quoted, the fund administrators value the funds using the net asset valueNAV per fund share, derived from the quoted prices in active markets of the underlying securities. These funds have been categorized as Level 2.

 

Fixed income. For fixed income securities, which consist primarily of corporate debt securities, foreign government securities, municipal bonds, asset and mortgage-backed securities, commingled funds, mutual funds and derivative instruments, the trustees obtain multiple prices from pricing vendors whenever possible, which enables cross-provider validations in addition to checks for unusual daily movements. A primary price source is identified based on asset type, class or issue for each security. TheWith respect to individually held fixed income securities, the trustees monitor prices supplied by pricing services and may use a supplemental price source or change the primary price source of a given security if the portfolio managers challenge an assigned price and the trustees determine that another price source is considered to be preferable. Exelon has obtained an understanding of how these prices are derived, including the nature and observability of the inputs used in deriving such prices. Additionally, Exelon selectively corroborates the fair values of securities by comparison to other

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

market-based price sources. Investments in U.S. Treasury securities have been categorized as Level 1 because they trade in highly-liquid and transparent markets. Certain private placement fixed income securities have been categorized as Level 3 because they are priced using certain significant unobservable inputs and are typically illiquid. The fair values ofremaining fixed income securities, excluding U.S. Treasury securities and privately placedincluding certain other fixed income securities,investments, are based on evaluated prices that reflect observable market information, such as actual trade information of similar securities, adjusted for observable differences and are categorized as Level 2.2

 

Derivative instruments consistingOther fixed income investments primarily consist of interest rate swaps to manage risk are recorded at fair value. Derivative instruments are valued based on external price data of comparable securities and have been categorized as Level 2.

Fixedfixed income commingled funds and mutual funds, including short-term investment funds,which are maintained by investment companies and hold certain investments in accordance with a stated set of fund objectives, which are consistent with Exelon’s overall investment strategy. The values of some of these funds are publicly quoted. For mutual funds which are publicly quoted, the funds are valued based on quoted prices in active markets and have been categorized as Level 1. For fixed income commingled funds and mutual funds which are not publicly quoted, the fund administrators value the funds using the net asset valueNAV per fund share, derived from the quoted prices in active markets of the underlying securities. These funds have been categorized as Level 2. Certain fixed income commingled funds are valued using the NAV per fund share, which is based on the valuation of the underlying investments and include significant unobservable inputs. These funds have been categorized as Level 3.

Derivative instruments consisting primarily of interest rate swaps to manage risk are recorded at fair value. Derivative instruments are valued based on external price data of comparable securities and have been categorized as Level 2.

 

Private equity. Private equity investments include those in limited partnerships that invest in operating companies that are not publicly traded on a stock exchange such as leveraged buyouts, growth capital, venture capital, distressed investments and investments in natural resources. Private

370


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

equity valuations are reported by the fund manager and are based on the valuation of the underlying investments, which include inputs such as cost, operating results, discounted future cash flows and market based comparable data. Since these valuation inputs are not highly observable, private equity investments have been categorized as Level 3.

 

Hedge funds. Hedge fund investments include those seeking to maximize absolute returns using a broad range of strategies to enhance returns and provide additional diversification. The fair value of hedge funds is determined using NAV or ownership interest of the investments. Exelon has the ability to redeem these investments at NAV or its equivalent subject to certain restrictions which may include a lock-up period or a gate. For Exelon’s investments that have terms that allow redemption within a reasonable period of time from the measurementthemeasurement date, the hedge fund investments are categorized as Level 2. For investments that have restrictions that may limit Exelon’s ability to redeem the investments at the measurement date or within a reasonable period of time, the hedge fund investments are categorized as Level 3.

 

Real estate. Real estate investment trusts valued daily based on quoted prices in active markets are categorized as Level 1. Real estate commingled funds are maintained by investment companies and hold certain investments in accordance with a stated set of fund objectives, which are consistent with Exelon’s overall investment strategy. Since these funds are not publicly quoted, the fund administrators value the funds using the net asset value per fund share, derived from the quoted prices in active markets of the underlying securities. These funds have been categorized as Level 2. Other real estate funds are funds with a direct investment in a poolpools of real estate properties. These funds are valued by investment managers on a periodic basis using pricing models that use independent appraisals from sources with professional qualifications. Since these valuation inputs are not highly observable, these real estate funds have been categorized as Level 3.

Private credit.Private credit investments primarily consist of limited partnerships that invest in private debt strategies. These investments are generally less liquid assets with an underlying term of 3

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

to 5 years and are intended to be held to maturity. The fair value of these investments is determined by the fund manager or administrator and include unobservable inputs such as cost, operating results, and discounted cash flows. Since the valuation inputs are not highly observable, private credit investments have been categorized as Level 3.

 

Defined Contribution Savings Plan (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The Registrants participate in various 401(k) defined contribution savings plans that are sponsored by Exelon. The plans are qualified under applicable sections of the IRC and allow employees to contribute a portion of their pre-tax and after-tax income in accordance with specified guidelines. All Registrants match a percentage of the employee contributions up to certain limits. The following table presents matching contributions to the savings plan for the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011:2013:

 

For the Year Ended December 31,

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE (a)   BSC (b)   Exelon (a)   Generation (a)   ComEd   PECO   BGE   BSC (b) 

2015

  $148    $80    $32    $11    $14    $11  

2014

   103     51     26     8     8     10  

2013

  $85   $40   $22   $8   $8   $7    85     40     22     8     8     7  

2012

   67    30    19    7    7    5 

2011

   78    40    22    9    7    7 

 

(a)BGE’s matching contributionsIncludes $9 million and $5 million related to CENG for the yearsyear ended December 31, 20122015, and 2011 include $1 million and $7 million of costs, respectively, incurred prior to the closing of Exelon’s merger with Constellation on March 12, 2012. These costs are not included in Exelon’s matching contributions for the years endedperiod from April 1, 2014 to December 31, 2012 and 2011.2014, respectively.
(b)These amounts primarily represent amounts billed to Exelon’s subsidiaries through intercompany allocations. These costs are not included in the Generation, ComEd, PECO, or BGE amounts above.

 

17. Severance18. Contingently Redeemable Noncontrolling Interest (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)Generation)

 

The Registrants haveIn November 2015, 2015 ESA Investco, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Generation, entered into an ongoing severance plan under which,arrangement to sell a portion of its equity to a tax equity investor. Pursuant to the operating agreement, in general,certain situations the longer an employee worked prior to terminationequity contributions made by the greaternoncontrolling interest holder could be contingently redeemable. These situations are outside of the amountcontrol of severance benefits. The Registrants record a liability and expense or regulatory asset for severance once terminations are probable of occurrence

371


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Generation and the related severance benefits can be reasonably estimated. For severance benefits that are incremental to its ongoing severance plan (“one-time termination benefits”), the Registrants measure the obligation and record the expense at fair value at the communication date if there are no future service requirements, or, if future service is required to receive the termination benefit, ratably over the required service period.

Merger-Related Severance

Upon closing the merger with Constellation, Exelon recordednoncontrolling interest holder resulting in a severance accrual for the anticipated employee position reductions as a resultportion of the post-merger integration. The majority of these positions are corporatenoncontrolling interest being considered contingently redeemable and Generation support positions. Since then, Exelon has identified specific employees to be severed pursuant tothus presented in mezzanine equity in the merger-related staffing and selection process as well as employees that were previously identified for severance but have since accepted another position within Exelon and are no longer receiving a severance benefit. Exelon adjusts its accrual each quarter to reflect its best estimate of remaining severance costs. In addition, certain employees identified during the staffing and selection process also receive pension and other postretirement benefits that are deemed contractual termination benefits, which the Registrants recorded during the second quarter of 2012.consolidated balance sheet.

 

The amount of severance expense associated withfollowing table summarizes the post-merger integration recognizedchanges in the contingently redeemable noncontrolling interest for the year ended December 31, 2013 for Exelon and Generation was $6 million and $6 million, respectively. For Generation, $5 million represents amounts billed by BSC through intercompany allocations. There was no severance expense associated with post-merger integration recognized for the year ended December 31, 2013 for ComEd, PECO and BGE. Estimated costs to be incurred after December 31, 2013 are not material.2015:

 

For the year ended December 31, 2012, the Registrants recorded the following severance benefit costs associated with the identified job reductions within operating and maintenance expense in their Consolidated Statements of Operations, except for those costs that were capitalized as regulatory assets related to ComEd and BGE:
   Year Ended December 31,
2015
 

Beginning Balance

  $—    

Cash received from noncontrolling interest

   32  

Release of contingency

   (4
  

 

 

 

Ending Balance

  $28  
  

 

 

 

Year Ended December 31, 2012

Severance Benefits(a)

  Exelon (b)   Generation   ComEd (b)   PECO   BGE (b) 

Severance charges

  $124   $80   $14   $7   $17 

Stock compensation

   7    4    1    —       1 

Other charges

   7    4    1    —       1 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total severance benefits

  $138   $88   $16   $7   $19 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)The amounts above include $46 million at Generation, $14 million at ComEd, $7 million at PECO, and $7 million at BGE, for amounts billed by BSC through intercompany allocations for the year ended December 31, 2012.
(b)Exelon, ComEd and BGE established regulatory assets of $35 million, $16 million and $19 million, respectively, for severance benefits costs for the year ended December 31, 2012. The majority of these costs are expected to be recovered over a five-year period.

372


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Amounts included in the table below represent the severance liability recorded by Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE for employees of those Registrants and exclude amounts billed through intercompany allocations:

Severance liability

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO   BGE 

Balance at December 31, 2011

  $—    $—    $—    $—     $—   

Severance charges(a)

   124   38   2   —      11 

Stock compensation

   7   2   —     —      —   

Other charges(b)

   7   2   —     —      1 

Payments

   (27  (9  (1  —      (1
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Balance at December 31, 2012

  $111  $33  $1  $—     $11 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Severance charges

   5   1   —     —      —   

Stock compensation

   1   —     —     —      —   

Payments

   (64  (24  (1  —      (5
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Balance at December 31, 2013

  $53  $10  $—    $—     $6 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Includes salary continuance and health and welfare severance benefits. Amounts primarily represent benefits provided for under Exelon’s ongoing severance plan. One-time termination benefits were not material for the years ended December 31, 2012 and December 31, 2013.
(b)Primarily includes life insurance, employer payroll taxes, educational assistance, and outplacement services.

Cash payments under the plan began in the second quarter of 2012. Substantially all cash payments under the plan are expected to be made by the end of 2016.

Ongoing Severance Plans

The Registrants provide severance and health and welfare benefits under Exelon’s ongoing severance benefit plans to terminated employees in the normal course of business, which were not directly related to the merger with Constellation. These benefits are accrued for when the benefits are considered probable and can be reasonably estimated.

For the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012, and 2011, the Registrants recorded the following severance costs associated with these ongoing severance benefits within operating and maintenance expense in their Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income:

Severance Benefits(a)

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Severance charges—2013

  $18   $16   $2   $—     $—   

Severance charges—2012

   19    14    2    1    3 

Severance charges—2011

   5    5    —      —      4 

(a)The amounts above for Generation include $2 million, $0 million, and $1 million for amounts billed by BSC through intercompany allocations for the years ended December 31, 2013, December 31, 2012, and December 31, 2011, respectively. Amounts billed by BSC to ComEd, PECO and BGE were not material.

The severance liability balances associated with these ongoing severance benefits as of December 31, 2013 and 2012 are not material.

373


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

18. Preferred and Preference Securities19. Shareholder’s Equity (Exelon, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

The following table presents common stock authorized and outstanding as of December 31, 2015 and 2014:

           December 31, 
           2015   2014 
   Par Value   Shares
Authorized
   Shares Outstanding 

Common Stock

        

Exelon

   no par value     2,000,000,000     919,924,742     859,833,343  

ComEd

   $12.50     250,000,000     127,016,973     127,016,947  

PECO

   no par value     500,000,000     170,478,507     170,478,507  

BGE

   no par value     175,000,000     1,000     1,000  

ComEd had 73,434 and 73,533 warrants outstanding to purchase ComEd common stock at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The warrants entitle the holders to convert such warrants into common stock of ComEd at a conversion rate of one share of common stock for three warrants. At December 31, 20132015 and 2012, Exelon was authorized to issue up to 100,000,0002014, 24,478 and 24,511 shares of preferred securities, nonecommon stock, respectively, were reserved for the conversion of which were outstanding.warrants.

 

Equity Securities Offering

In June 2014, Exelon marketed an equity offering of 57.5 million shares of its common stock at a public offering price of $35 per share. In connection with such offering, Exelon entered into forward sale agreements with two counterparties. In July 2015, Exelon settled the forward sale agreement by the issuance of 57.5 million shares of Exelon common stock. Exelon received net cash proceeds of $1.87 billion, which was calculated based on a forward price of $32.48 per share as specified in the forward sale agreements. Use of net proceeds will be to fund the pending merger with PHI and related costs and expenses, and for general corporate purposes. The forward sale agreements are classified as equity transactions. As a result, no amounts were recorded in the consolidated financial statements until the July 2015 settlement of the forward sale agreements. However, prior to the July 2015 settlement, incremental shares, if any, were included within the calculation of diluted EPS using the treasury stock method.

Concurrent with the forward equity transaction, Exelon also issued $1.15 billion of junior subordinated notes in the form of 23 million equity units. See Note 14—Debt and Credit Agreements for further information on the equity units.

Share Repurchases

Share Repurchase Programs. There currently is no Exelon Board of Director authority to repurchase shares. Any previous shares repurchased are held as treasury shares, at cost, unless cancelled or reissued at the discretion of Exelon’s management. Under the previous share repurchase programs, 35 million shares of common stock are held as treasury stock with a cost of $2.3 billion at December 31, 2015. During 2015, 2014 and 2013, Exelon had no common stock repurchases.

Preferred and Preference SecuritiesShare Repurchase Programs. There currently is no Exelon Board of Subsidiaries

At December 31, 2013 and 2012, ComEd prior preferred securities and ComEd cumulative preference securities consistedDirector authority to repurchase shares. Any previous shares repurchased are held as treasury shares, at cost, unless cancelled or reissued at the discretion of 850,000 shares and 6,810,451 shares authorized, respectively, none of which were outstanding.

At December 31, 2012, PECO cumulative preferred securities, no par value, consisted of 15,000,000 shares authorized andExelon’s management. Under the outstanding amounts set forth below. Shares of preferred securities have full voting rights, including the right to cumulate votes in the election of directors. On May 1, 2013, PECO redeemed all of its outstanding preferred securities. PECO had $87previous share repurchase programs, 35 million of cumulative preferred securities that were redeemable at its option at any time for the redemption price established when each series was issued. The redemption premium is treated as a reduction to Net income to arrive at Net income attributable to common shareholders utilized in the calculation of the earnings per share for Exelon.

       December 31, 
     Redemption
Price (a)
   2013   2012   2013   2012 
         Shares Outstanding       Dollar Amount   

Series (without mandatory redemption)

          

$4.68 (Series D)

  $104.00    —       150,000   $—     $15 

$4.40 (Series C)

   112.50    —       274,720    —       27 

$4.30 (Series B)

   102.00    —       150,000    —       15 

$3.80 (Series A)

   106.00    —       300,000    —       30 
    

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total preferred securities

     —       874,720   $—     $87 
    

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Redeemable, at the option of PECO, at the indicated dollar amounts per share, plus accrued dividends.

At December 31, 2013 and 2012, BGE cumulative preference stock, $100 par value, consisted of 6,500,000 shares authorized and the outstanding amounts set forth below. Shares of BGE preference stock have no voting power except for the following:

The preference stock has one vote per share on any charter amendment which would create or authorize any shares of stock ranking prior to or on a parity with the preference stock as to either dividends or distribution of assets, or which would substantially adversely affect the contract rights, as expressly set forth in BGE’s charter, of the preference stock, each of which requires the affirmative vote of two-thirds of all the shares of preference stock outstanding; and

Whenever BGE fails to pay full dividends on the preference stock and such failure continues for one year, the preference stock shall have one vote per share on all matters, until and unless such dividends shall have been paid in full. Upon liquidation, the holders of the preference stock of each series outstanding are entitled to receive the par amount of their shares and an amount equal to the unpaid accrued dividends.

374


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

       December 31, 
   Redemption
Price (a)
   2013   2012   2013   2012 
     Shares Outstanding       Dollar Amount     

Series (without mandatory redemption)

          

7.125%, 1993 Series

  $100.00    400,000    400,000   $40   $40 

6.97%, 1993 Series

   100.00    500,000    500,000    50    50 

6.70%, 1993 Series

   100.34    400,000    400,000    40    40 

6.99%, 1995 Series

   100.70    600,000    600,000    60    60 
    

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total preference stock

     1,900,000    1,900,000   $190   $190 
    

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Redeemable, at the option of BGE, at the indicated dollar amounts per share, plus accrued and unpaid dividends.

19. Common Stock (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

The following table presents common stock authorized and outstanding as of December 31, 2013 and 2012:

           December 31, 
           2013   2012 
   Par Value   Shares Authorized   Shares Outstanding 

Common Stock

        

Exelon

   no par value     2,000,000,000    857,290,484    854,781,389 

ComEd

   $12.50    250,000,000    127,016,896    127,016,761 

PECO

   no par value     500,000,000    170,478,507    170,478,507 

BGE

   no par value     175,000,000    1,000    1,000 

ComEd had 73,709 and 74,182 warrants outstanding to purchase ComEd common stock at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. The warrants entitle the holders to convert such warrants into common stock of ComEd at a conversion rate of one share of common stock for three warrants. At December 31, 2013 and 2012, 24,570 and 24,727 shares of common stock respectively, were reserved for the conversionare held as treasury stock with a cost of warrants.

Share Repurchases$2.3 billion at December 31, 2015. During 2015, 2014 and 2013, Exelon had no common stock repurchases.

 

Share Repurchase Programs. In April 2004, Exelon’sThere currently is no Exelon Board of Directors approved a discretionary share repurchase program that allowed ExelonDirector authority to repurchase shares of its common stock on a periodic basis in the open market. The share repurchase program was intended to mitigate, in part, the dilutive effect of shares issued under Exelon’s employee stock option plan and Exelon’s ESPP. The aggregate value of the shares of common stock repurchased pursuant to the program cannot exceed the economic benefit received after January 1, 2004 due to stock option exercises and share purchases pursuant to Exelon’s ESPP. The economic benefit consists of the direct cash proceeds from purchases of stock and the tax benefits associated with exercises of stock options. The 2004 share repurchase program had no specified limit on the number of shares that could be repurchased and no specified termination date. In 2008, Exelon management decided to defer indefinitely any share repurchases.shares. Any previous shares repurchased are held as treasury shares, at cost, unless cancelled or reissued at the discretion of Exelon’s management. Under the previous share repurchase programs, 35 million shares of common stock are held as treasury stock with a cost of $2.3 billion at December 31, 2013.2015. During 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011,2013, Exelon had no common stock repurchases.

Preferred and Preference Securities of Subsidiaries

 

375At December 31, 2015 and 2014, Exelon was authorized to issue up to 100,000,000 shares of preferred securities, none of which were outstanding.


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

At December 31, 2015 and 2014, ComEd prior preferred securities and ComEd cumulative preference securities consisted of 850,000 shares and 6,810,451 shares authorized, respectively, none of which were outstanding.

At December 31, 2015 and 2014, BGE cumulative preference stock, $100 par value, consisted of 6,500,000 shares authorized of which 1,900,000 are outstanding as set forth in the table below. Shares of BGE preference stock have no voting power except for the following:

The preference stock has one vote per share on any charter amendment that i) with regards to either dividends or distribution of assets, would create or authorize any shares of stock ranking prior to or on a parity with the preference stock or ii) substantially adversely affect the contract rights, as expressly set forth in BGE’s charter, of the preference stock. Each such amendment would require the affirmative vote of two-thirds of all the shares of preference stock outstanding; and

Whenever BGE fails to pay full dividends on the preference stock and such failure continues for one year, the preference stock shall have one vote per share on all matters, until and unless such dividends shall have been paid in full. Upon liquidation, the holders of the preference stock of each series outstanding are entitled to receive the par amount of their shares and an amount equal to the unpaid accrued dividends.

       December 31, 
   Redemption
Price(a)
   2015   2014   2015   2014 
     Shares Outstanding   Dollar
Amount
 

Series (without mandatory redemption)

          

7.125%, 1993 Series

  $100.00     400,000     400,000    $40    $40  

6.97%, 1993 Series

   100.00     500,000     500,000     50     50  

6.70%, 1993 Series

   100.00     400,000     400,000     40     40  

6.99%, 1995 Series

   100.00     600,000     600,000     60     60  
    

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total preference stock

     1,900,000     1,900,000    $190    $190  
    

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Redeemable, at the option of BGE, at the indicated dollar amounts per share, plus accrued and unpaid dividends.

20. Stock-Based Compensation Plans (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Stock-Based Compensation Plans

 

Exelon grants stock-based awards through its LTIP, which primarily includes stock options, restricted stock units and performance share awards. At December 31, 2013,2015, there were approximately 16 million shares authorized for issuance under the LTIP. For the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011,2013, exercised and distributed stock-based awards were primarily issued from authorized but unissued common stock shares.

 

The Compensation Committee of Exelon’s Board of Directors changed the mix of awards granted under the LTIP in 2013 by eliminating stock options in favor of the use of full value shares, consisting of 67% performance shares and 33% restricted stock.stock units. The performance share awards granted in 2013 will cliff vest at the end of a three-year performance period. The performance share awards granted in 2012 and earlier had a one-year performance period and vested ratably over three years. To address the reduction in annual award opportunity resulting from the transition to a three-year cliff vesting performance period, the Compensation Committee also approved a one-time grant of performance share transition awards in 2013, which will vest one-third after one year, with the remaining balance vesting over a two-year performance period.

The following table presents the stock-based compensation expense included in Exelon’s Consolidated Statements of Operations for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011:

   Year Ended
December 31,
 

Components of Stock-Based Compensation Expense

  2013  2012  2011 

Performance share awards

  $48  $46  $26 

Restricted stock units

   61   50   31 

Stock options

   3   15   8 

Other stock-based awards

   6   4   4 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total stock-based compensation expense included in operating and maintenance expense

   118   115   69 

Income tax benefit

   (44  (44  (27
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total after-tax stock-based compensation expense

  $74  $71  $42 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

The following table presents stock-based compensation expense (pre-tax) for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011:

   Year Ended
December 31,
 

Subsidiaries

  2013   2012 (a)   2011 (d) 

Generation

  $48   $42   $31 

ComEd

   9    11    5 

PECO

   5    5    5 

BGE

   6    5    6 

BSC (b)

   50    52    28 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total(c)

  $118   $115   $69 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)BGE’s stock-based compensation expense (pre-tax) for December 31, 2012 excludes $2 million of cost incurred in 2012 prior to the closing of Exelon’s merger with Constellation on March 12, 2012. This amount is not included in Exelon’s stock-based compensation expense for the year ended December 31, 2012 shown in the tables titled Components of Stock-Based Compensation Expense and Subsidiaries above.

376


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

performance share transition awards in 2013, which vested one-third after one year, with the remaining balance vesting over a two-year performance period. These one-time 2013 performance share transition awards will be settled 50% in common stock and 50% in cash, except for awards granted to executive vice presidents and higher officers that may be settled 100% in cash if certain Exelon stock ownership requirements are satisfied. In addition to this change, in 2013 ComEd and in 2014 PECO and BGE transitioned from Exelon stock-based awards to cash award programs with payouts based on the performance of each respective utility. The following tables do not include expense related to these plans as they are not considered stock-based compensation plans under the applicable accounting guidance.

The following table presents the stock-based compensation expense included in Exelon’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013:

   Year Ended
December 31,
 

Components of Stock-Based Compensation Expense

  2015  2014  2013 

Performance share awards

  $41   $59   $48  

Restricted stock units

   71    61    61  

Stock options

   1    2    3  

Other stock-based awards

   6    5    6  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total stock-based compensation expense included in operating and maintenance expense

   119    127    118  

Income tax benefit

   (46  (47  (44
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total after-tax stock-based compensation expense

  $73   $80   $74  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

The following table presents stock-based compensation expense (pre-tax) for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013:

   Year Ended
December 31,
 

Subsidiaries

  2015   2014   2013 

Generation

  $64    $52    $48  

ComEd

   6     7     9  

PECO

   3     3     5  

BGE

   3     5     6  

BSC (a)

   43     60     50  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total

  $119    $127    $118  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

(b)(a)These amounts primarily represent amounts billed to Exelon’s subsidiaries through intercompany allocations. These amounts are not included in the Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE amounts above.
(c)The stock-based compensation expense (pre-tax) for December 31, 2013 reflects the impact of changes to the retirement eligibility requirements for employees participating in the LTIP. In addition, the stock-based compensation expense at ComEd does not reflect the impact of the ComEd Key Manager Long-Term Performance Program in 2013 for certain employees, which is not considered stock-based compensation expense under the applicable authoritative guidance. In 2012, these employees participated in the Exelon Restricted Stock Award Program.
(d)The total stock-based compensation expense (pre-tax) for December 31, 2011 of $69 million does not include the $6 million expense for BGE as those costs were incurred prior to the closing of Exelon’s merger with Constellation on March 12, 2012.

 

There were no significant stock-based compensation costs capitalized during the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011.2013.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Exelon receives a tax deduction based on the intrinsic value of the award on the exercise date for stock options and the distribution date for performance share awards and restricted stock units. For each award, throughout the requisite service period, Exelon recognizes the tax benefit related to compensation costs. The tax deductions in excess of the benefits recorded throughout the requisite service period are recorded to common stock and are included in other financing activities within Exelon’s Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows. The following table presents information regarding Exelon’s tax benefits for the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011:2013:

 

  Year Ended
December 31,
   Year Ended
December 31,
 
  2013   2012   2011   2015   2014   2013 

Realized tax benefit when exercised/distributed:

            

Stock options

  $—      $3   $2 

Restricted stock units

   11    11    8   $30    $17    $11  

Performance share awards

   11    7    7    18     11     11  

Stock deferral plan

   1    —      1    —       —       1  

Excess tax benefits included in other financing activities of Exelon’s

      

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows:

      

Stock options

  $—      $2   $1 

 

Stock Options

 

Non-qualified stock options to purchase shares of Exelon’s common stock arewere granted under the LTIP. TheLTIP through 2012. Due to changes in the LTIP, there were no stock options granted in 2013, 2014 or 2015. For all stock options granted through 2012, the exercise price of the stock options is equal to the fair market value of the underlying stock on the date of option grant. The vesting period of stock options is generally four years. All stock options expire ten years from the date of grant.

There were no stock options granted in 2013. The Compensation Committee eliminated stock option grants by changing the mix of long-term incentives for senior vice presidents (SVPs) and higher officers from 75% performance shares and 25% stock options to 67% performance shares and 33% restricted stock units.

 

The value of stock options at the date of grant is expensed over the requisite service period using the straight-line method. The requisite service period for stock options is generally four years. However, certain stock options become fully vested upon the employee reaching retirement-eligibility. The value of the stock options granted to retirement-eligible employees is either recognized immediately upon the date of grant or through the date at which the employee reaches retirement eligibility.

377


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Historically, Exelon has granted most of its stock options in the first quarter of each year. Stock options granted during the remaining quarters of 2012 and 2011 were not significant.

 

The fair value of each option is estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes-Merton option-pricing model. The following table presents the weighted average assumptions used in the pricing model for grants and the resulting weighted average grant date fair value of stock options granted for the yearsyear ended 2012 and 2011:2012:

 

   Year Ended
December 31,
 
   2012  2011 

Dividend yield

   5.28  4.84

Expected volatility

   23.20  24.40

Risk-free interest rate

   1.30  2.65

Expected life (years)

   6.25   6.25 

Weighted average grant date fair value (per share)

  $4.18  $6.22 
Year ended
December 31, 2012

Dividend yield

5.28

Expected volatility

23.20

Risk-free interest rate

1.30

Expected life (years)

6.25

Weighted average grant date fair value (per share)

4.18

 

The assumptions above relate to Exelon stock options granted during the periods presentedin 2012 and therefore do not include stock options that were converted in connection with the merger with Constellation during the year ended 2012.

 

The dividend yield is based on several factors, including Exelon’s most recent dividend payment at the grant date and the average stock price over the previous year. Expected volatility is based on implied volatilities of traded stock options in Exelon’s common stock and historical volatility over the estimated expected life of the stock options. The risk-free interest rate for a security with a term equal

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

to the expected life is based on a yield curve constructed from U.S. Treasury strips at the time of grant. For each year presented, the expected life represents the period of time the stock options are expected to be outstanding and is based on the simplified method. Exelon believes that the simplified method is appropriate due to several factors that result in historical exercise data not being sufficient to determine a reasonable estimate of expected term. Exelon uses historical data to estimate employee forfeitures, which are compared to actual forfeitures on a quarterly basis and adjusted as necessary.

 

The following table presents information with respect to stock option activity for the year ended December 31, 2013:2015:

 

   Shares  Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price
(per
share)
   Weighted
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Life

(years)
   Aggregate
Intrinsic
Value
 

Balance of shares outstanding at December 31, 2012

   21,903,781  $45.91     

Options reinstated

   751,122   38.60     

Options exercised

 �� (670,957  28.02     

Options forfeited

   (54,743  39.36     

Options expired

   (893,758  49.08     
  

 

 

      

Balance of shares outstanding at December 31, 2013

   21,035,445  $46.07    4.72   $10 
  

 

 

      

Exercisable at December 31, 2013 (a)

   20,188,327  $46.31    4.58   $10 
  

 

 

      
   Shares  Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price
(per
share)
   Weighted
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Life
(years)
   Aggregate
Intrinsic
Value
 

Balance of shares outstanding at December 31, 2014

   18,830,967   $46.85      

Options exercised

   (7,133  21.25      

Options forfeited

   (5,250  39.81      

Options expired

   (3,245,827  47.75      
  

 

 

      

Balance of shares outstanding at December 31, 2015

   15,572,757   $46.68     3.85    $9  
  

 

 

      

Exercisable at December 31, 2015(a)

   15,490,507   $46.72     3.84    $9  
  

 

 

      

 

(a)Includes stock options issued to retirement eligible employees.

378


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

The following table summarizes additional information regarding stock options exercised for the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011:2013:

 

  Year Ended
December 31,
   Year Ended
December 31,
 
  2013   2012   2011   2015   2014   2013 

Intrinsic value (a)

  $4   $19   $5   $—      $3    $4  

Cash received for exercise price

   19    47    13    —       7     19  

 

(a)The difference between the market value on the date of exercise and the option exercise price.

 

The following table summarizes Exelon’s nonvested stock option activity for the year ended December 31, 2013:2015:

 

  Shares Weighted Average
Exercise Price
(per share)
   Shares Weighted Average
Exercise Price
(per share)
 

Nonvested at December 31, 2012 (a)

   1,960,665  $40.56 

Nonvested at December 31, 2014(a)

   432,035   $39.91  

Vested

   (1,058,804  40.89    (344,535  39.93  

Forfeited

   (54,743  39.36    (5,250  39.81  
  

 

    

 

  

Nonvested at December 31, 2013 (a)

   847,118  $40.22 

Nonvested at December 31, 2015(a)

   82,250   $39.81  
  

 

    

 

  

 

(a)Excludes 1,348,913279,000 and 2,647,536746,140 of stock options issued to retirement-eligible employees as of December 31, 20132015 and December 31, 2012,2014, respectively, as they are fully vested.

 

At December 31, 2013, $22015, $0.1 million of total unrecognized compensation costs related to nonvested stock options are expected to be recognized over the remaining weighted-average period of 1.6 years.less than a year.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Restricted Stock Units

 

Restricted stock units are granted under the LTIP with the majority being settled in a specific number of shares of common stock after the service condition has been met. The corresponding cost of services is measured based on the grant date fair value of the restricted stock unit issued.

 

The value of the restricted stock units is expensed over the requisite service period using the straight-line method. The requisite service period for restricted stock units is generally three to five years. However, certain restricted stock unit awards become fully vested upon the employee reaching retirement-eligibility. The value of the restricted stock units granted to retirement-eligible employees is either recognized immediately upon the date of grant or through the date at which the employee reaches retirement eligibility. Exelon uses historical data to estimate employee forfeitures, which are compared to actual forfeitures on a quarterly basis and adjusted as necessary.

 

The following table summarizes Exelon’s nonvested restricted stock unit activity for the year ended December 31, 2013:2015:

 

   Shares  Weighted Average
Grant Date Fair
Value (per share)
 

Nonvested at December 31, 2012 (a)

   2,029,161  $42.12 

Granted

   2,828,187   31.06 

Vested

   (842,439  42.90 

Forfeited

   (108,199  36.37 

Undistributed vested awards (b)

   (520,013  32.62 
  

 

 

  

Nonvested at December 31, 2013 (a)

   3,386,697  $34.10 
  

 

 

  

379


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

   Shares  Weighted Average
Grant Date Fair
Value (per share)
 

Nonvested at December 31, 2014(a)

   3,758,218   $31.27  

Granted

   2,132,856    36.55  

Vested

   (1,597,255  32.88  

Forfeited

   (76,232  33.06  

Undistributed vested awards (b)

   (654,333  35.35  
  

 

 

  

Nonvested at December 31, 2015(a)

   3,563,254   $32.92  
  

 

 

  

 

(a)Excludes 931,6281,097,630 and 686,121975,116 of restricted stock units issued to retirement-eligible employees as of December 31, 20132015 and December 31, 2012,2014, respectively, as they are fully vested.
(b)Represents restricted stock units that vested but were not distributed to retirement-eligible employees during 2013.2015.

 

The weighted average grant date fair value (per share) of restricted stock units granted for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 2012was $36.55, $28.71 and 2011 was $31.06, $39.94 and $43.33, respectively. At December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014, Exelon had obligations related to outstanding restricted stock units not yet settled of $77$97 million and $58$85 million, respectively, which are included in common stock in Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. For the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011,2013, Exelon settled restricted stock units with fair value totaling $28$75 million, $25$43 million and $19$28 million, respectively. At December 31, 2013, $642015, $56 million of total unrecognized compensation costs related to nonvested restricted stock units are expected to be recognized over the remaining weighted-average period of 2.52 years.

 

Performance Share Awards

 

Performance share awards are granted under the LTIP. The 20132015 and 20122014 performance share awards are being settled 50% in common stock and 50% in cash at the end of the three-year performance period except for awards granted to executive vice presidents and higher officers that may be settled 100% in cash if certain ownership requirements are satisfied. The performance shares granted prior to 2012 generally vest and settle over a three-year period with the holders receiving shares of common stock and/or cash annually during the vesting period.

The one-time 2013 performance share transition awards, which provide an opportunity to earn an award contingent on company performance, will be settled 50% in common stock and 50% in cash, except for awards granted to executive vice presidents and higher officers that may be settled 100% in cash if certain ownership requirements are satisfied. One-third of the award vests and is payable after a one-year performance period while the remaining two-thirds vests and is payable after a two-year performance period.

The payout of the 2013 performance share awards and one-time performance share transition awards are based on the Company’s performance against specific operational and financial goals set annually during the respective performance periods. As a result, the 2013 performance share awards have been divided into equal tranches for the purpose of expense recognition as though the respective award were multiple awards; with each tranche representing a corresponding fiscal year. The one-time performance share transition awards have also been divided into multiple tranches for the purpose of expense recognition. One tranche reflects the one-third of the awards that vests and are payable after a one-year period. The two-thirds of the one-time performance share transition awards that are subject to a two-year performance period have also been divided into equal tranches; with each tranche representing a corresponding fiscal year. The grant date for each tranche of the 2013 performance share and one-time performance share transition awards is the date in which the performance goals for that fiscal year are approved and communicated, which typically occurs at the corresponding January Compensation Committee meeting.

The 2013 performance share awards and one-time performance share transition awards are recorded at fair value at the grant dates for each tranche, with the estimated grant date fair value based on the expected payout of the award, which may range from 50% to 150% of the payout target. The 2013 performance share awards also include a total shareholder return modifier (TSR) that may increase or decrease the award up to 25% and an individual performance modifier (IPM) that can

380


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

decrease the award by up to 50% or increase the award by up to 10% for SVPs and higher officers or up to 20% for vice presidents. The one-time performance share transition award is not affected by either TSR or the IPM.

The common stock portion of the performance share and one-time 2013 performance share transition awards is considered an equity award beingand is valued based on Exelon’s stock price on the grant date. The cash portion of the awards is considered a liability award which is remeasured each reporting period based on Exelon’s current stock price. As the value of the common stock and cash portions of the awards are based on Exelon’s stock price during the performance period, coupled with changes in the total shareholder return modifier and expected payout of the award, the compensation costs are subject to volatility until payout is established.

 

The 2012 performance share awards are recorded at fair value at the date of grant with the estimated grant date fair value based on the expected payout of the award, which may range from 75% to 125% of the payout target. The common stock portion is considered an equity award with the 75% payout floor being valued based on Exelon’s stock price on the grant date. The cash portion of the award is considered a liability award with the 75% payout floor being remeasured each reporting period based on Exelon’s current stock price. The expected payout in excess of the 75% floor for the equity and liability portions are remeasured each reporting period based on Exelon’s current stock price and changes in the expected payout of the award; therefore these portions of the award are subject to volatility until the payout is established.

For nonretirement-eligible employees, stock-based compensation costs are recognized over the vesting period of three years using the graded-vesting method. For performance share and one-time performance share transition awards granted to retirement-eligible employees, the value of the performance shares inis recognized ratably over the vesting period, which is the year of grant.

 

The following table summarizes Exelon’s nonvested performance share awards activity for the year ended December 31, 2013:2015:

 

  Shares Weighted Average
Grant Date Fair
Value (per share)
   Shares Weighted Average
Grant Date Fair
Value (per share)
 

Nonvested at December 31, 2012 (a)

   1,312,734  $40.08 

Nonvested at December 31, 2014(a)

   2,696,097   $30.62  

Granted

   2,629,171   31.55    1,556,273    35.88  

Change in performance

   (118,398  35.88  

Vested

   (612,624  40.13    (704,141  32.80  

Forfeited

   (24,451  32.17    (52,167  32.25  

Undistributed vested awards (b)

   (1,290,640  34.28    (820,505  33.95  
  

 

    

 

  

Nonvested at December 31, 2013 (a)

   2,014,190  $32.74 

Nonvested at December 31, 2015(a)

   2,557,159   $31.88  
  

 

    

 

  

 

(a)Excludes 1,411,8241,817,883 and 204,6431,535,791 of performance share awards issued to retirement-eligible employees as of December 31, 20132015 and December 31, 2012,2014, respectively, as they are fully vested.
(b)Represents performance share awards that vested but were not distributed to retirement-eligible employees during 2013.2015.

 

The weighted average grant date fair value (per share) of performance share awards granted during the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 2012was $35.88, $28.75, and 2011 was $31.55, $39.71, and $43.52, respectively. During the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011,2013, Exelon settled performance shares with a fair value totaling $26$46 million, $23$27 million and $22$26 million, respectively, of which $12$29 million, $3$13 million and $10$12 million was paid in cash, respectively. As of December 31, 2013, $342015, $27 million of total unrecognized compensation costs related to nonvested performance shares are expected to be recognized over the remaining weighted-average period of 1.71.4 years.

381


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

The following table presents the balance sheet classification of obligations related to outstanding performance share awards not yet settled:

 

  December 31,   December 31, 
  2013   2012   2015   2014 

Current liabilities (a)

  $13   $7   $28    $28  

Deferred credits and other liabilities (b)

   24    11    32     36  

Common stock

   32    35    35     33  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total

  $69   $53   $95    $97  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Represents the current liability related to performance share awards expected to be settled in cash.
(b)Represents the long-term liability related to performance share awards expected to be settled in cash.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

20.21. Earnings Per Share and Equity (Exelon)

Earnings per Share

 

Diluted earnings per share is calculated by dividing netNet income attributable to common shareholders by the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding, including shares to be issued upon exercise of stock options, performance share awards and restricted stock outstanding under Exelon’s LTIPs considered to be common stock equivalents. The following table sets forth the components of basic and diluted earnings per share and shows the effect of thesethe stock options, performance share awards and restricted stock on the weighted average number of shares outstanding used in calculating diluted earnings per share:

 

  Year Ended December 31,   Year Ended December 31, 
  2013   2012   2011   2015   2014   2013 

Net income attributable to common shareholders

  $1,719   $1,160   $2,495   $2,269    $1,623    $1,719  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Weighted average common shares outstanding—basic

   856    816    663    890     860     856  

Assumed exercise and/or distributions of stock-based awards

   4    3    2    3     4     4  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Weighted average common shares outstanding—diluted

   860    819    665    893     864     860  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

The number of stock options not included in the calculation of diluted common shares outstanding due to their antidilutive effect was approximately 16 million in 2015, 17 million in 2014, and 20 million in 2013, 142013. The number of equity units related to the PHI merger not included in the calculation of diluted common shares outstanding due to their antidilutive effect was 3 million for the year ended December 2015 and less than 1 million for the year ended December 31, 2014. Additionally, there were no forward units related to the PHI merger not included in 2012the calculation of diluted common shares outstanding due to their antidilutive effect for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 9 million in 2011.2014. Refer to Note 19—Shareholder’s Equity for further information regarding the equity units and equity forward units.

 

Under share repurchase programs, 35 million shares of common stock are held as treasury stock with a cost of $2.3 billion as of December 31, 2013.2015. In 2008, Exelon management decided to defer indefinitely any share repurchases.

Preferred Securities Redemption (Exelon and PECO)

On May 1, 2013, PECO redeemed all of its outstanding preferred securities. PECO had $87 million of cumulative preferred securities that were redeemable at its option at any time for the redemption price established when each series of securities were issued. The redemption premium of $6 million is treated as a reduction to Net income to arrive at Net income attributable to common shareholders utilized in the calculation of earnings per share for Exelon for the year ending December 31, 2013. As a result of the redemption, PECO is now indirectly, wholly-owned by Exelon.

382


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

21.22. Changes in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Exelon, Generation, and PECO)

 

The following table presentstables present changes in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) (AOCI) by component for the yearyears ended December 31, 2013:2015 and 2014:

 

  Gains and
(Losses) on
Cash Flow
Hedges
 Unrealized
Gains and
(Losses) on
Marketable
Securities
   Pension and
Non-Pension
Postretirement
Benefit Plan
items
 Foreign
Currency
Items
 AOCI of
Equity
Investments
   Total 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2015

 Gains and
(Losses) on
Cash Flow
Hedges
 Unrealized
Gains and
(Losses) on
Marketable
Securities
 Pension and
Non-Pension
Postretirement
Benefit Plan
Items
 Foreign
Currency
Items
 AOCI of
Equity
Investments
 Total 

Exelon(a)

               

Beginning balance

  $368  $—      $(3,137 $—    $2   $(2,767 $(28 $3   $(2,640 $(19 $—     $(2,684
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

OCI before reclassifications

   29   2    669   (10  101    791   (12  —      (100  (21  (3  (136

Amounts reclassified from AOCI(b)

   (277  —      208   —     5    (64  21    —      175    —      —      196  
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net current-period OCI

   (248  2    877   (10  106    727   9    —      75    (21  (3  60  
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Ending balance

  $120  $2   $(2,260 $(10 $108   $(2,040 $(19 $3   $(2,565 $(40 $(3 $(2,624
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Generation(a)

               

Beginning balance

  $512  $—     $—    $—    $1   $513  $(18 $1   $—     $(19 $—     $(36
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

OCI before reclassifications

   15   2    —     (10  102    109   (8  —      —      (21  (3  (32

Amounts reclassified from AOCI(b)

   (413  —      —     —     5    (408  5    —      —      —      —      5  
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net current-period OCI

   (398  2    —     (10  107    (299  (3  —      —      (21  (3  (27
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Ending balance

  $114  $2   $—    $(10 $108   $214  $(21 $1   $—     $(40 $(3 $(63
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

PECO(a)

               

Beginning balance

  $—    $1   $—    $—    $—     $1  $—     $1   $—     $—     $—     $1  
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

OCI before reclassifications

   —     —      —     —     —      —     —      —      —      —      —      —    

Amounts reclassified from AOCI(b)

   —    

 
—      —     —     —      —     —      —      —      —      —      —    
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net current-period OCI

   —     —      —     —     —      —     —      —      —      —      —      —    
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Ending balance

  $—    $1   $—    $—    $—     $1  $—     $1   $—     $—     $—     $1  
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

For the Year Ended December 31, 2014

 Gains and
(Losses) on
Cash Flow
Hedges
  Unrealized
Gains and
(Losses) on
Marketable
Securities
 ��Pension and
Non-Pension
Postretirement
Benefit Plan
items
  Foreign
Currency
Items
  AOCI of
Equity
Investments
  Total 

Exelon (a)

      

Beginning balance

 $120   $2   $(2,260 $(10 $108   $(2,040
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

OCI before reclassifications

  (31  (1  (498  (9  11    (528

Amounts reclassified from AOCI(b)

  (117  2    118    —      (119  (116
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net current-period OCI

  (148  1    (380  (9  (108  (644
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Ending balance

 $(28 $3   $(2,640 $(19 $—     $(2,684
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Generation (a)

      

Beginning balance

 $114   $2   $—     $(10 $108    214  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

OCI before reclassifications

  (15  (1  —      (9  11    (14

Amounts reclassified from AOCI(b)

  (117  —      —      —      (119  (236
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net current-period OCI

  (132  (1  —      (9  (108  (250
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Ending balance

 $(18 $1   $—     $(19 $—     $(36
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

PECO (a)

      

Beginning balance

 $—     $1   $—     $—     $—     $1  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

OCI before reclassifications

  —      —      —      —      —      —    

Amounts reclassified from AOCI(b)

  —      —      —      —      —      —    
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net current-period OCI

  —      —      —      —      —      —    
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Ending balance

 $—     $1   $—     $—     $—     $1  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

(a)All amounts are net of tax. Amounts in parenthesis represent a decrease in accumulated other comprehensive income.
(b)See next tabletables for details about these reclassifications.

383


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

ComEd, PECO, and BGE did not have any reclassifications out of AOCI to Net Incomeincome during the yearyears ended December 31, 2013.2015 and 2014. The following table presentstables present amounts reclassified out of AOCI to Net Incomeincome for Exelon and Generation during the yearyears ended December 31, 2013:2015 and 2014:

 

Details about AOCI components

  Items reclassified out of AOCI (a)  

Affected line item in the statement
where Net Income is presented

    Exelon  Generation   

Gains and (losses) on cash flow hedges

    

Energy related hedges

  $464  $683  Operating revenues

Other cash flow hedges

   (3  —    Interest expense
  

 

 

  

 

 

  
   461   683  Total before tax
   (184  (270 Tax expense
  

 

 

  

 

 

  
  $277  $413  Net of tax
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

Amortization of pension and other
postretirement benefit plan items

Prior service costs

  $(2 $—      (b)

Actuarial losses

   (339  —      (b)

Deferred compensation unit plan

   (1  —      (c)
  

 

 

  

 

 

  
   (342  —    Total before tax
   134   —    Tax benefit
  

 

 

  

 

 

  
  $(208 $—    Net of tax
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

Equity investments

    

Capital activity

  $(8 $(8 Equity in losses of unconsolidated affiliates
  

 

 

  

 

 

  
   (8  (8 Total before tax
   3   3  Tax benefit
  

 

 

  

 

 

  
  $(5 $(5 Net of tax
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

Total Reclassifications

  $64  $408  Net of Tax
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

For the Year Ended December 31, 2015

Details about AOCI components

 Items reclassified out of AOCI (a)  Affected line item in the Statements
of  Operations and Comprehensive Income
       Exelon          Generation       

Gains and (losses) on cash flow hedges

   

Terminated interest rate swaps

 $(26 $—     Other, net

Energy related hedges

  2    2   Operating revenues

Other cash flow hedges

  (11  (11 Interest expense
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

Total before tax

  (35  (9 

Tax benefit

  14    4   
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

Net of tax

 $(21 $(5 Comprehensive income
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

Amortization of pension and other postretirement benefit plan items

   

Prior service costs (b)

 $74   $—     

Actuarial losses (b)

  (361  —     
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

Total before tax

  (287  —     

Tax benefit

  112    —     
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

Net of tax

 $(175 $—     
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

Total Reclassifications

 $(196 $(5 Comprehensive income
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

For the Year Ended December 31, 2014

Details about AOCI components

 Items reclassified out of AOCI (a)  Affected line item in the Statements
of Operations and Comprehensive Income
  Exelon  Generation   

Gains and (losses) on cash flow hedges

   

Energy related hedges

 $195   $195   Operating revenues
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

Total before tax

  195    195   

Tax expense

  (78  (78 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

Net of tax

 $117   $117   Comprehensive income
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

Gains and (losses) on available for sale securities

   

Other available securities for sale

 $(2 $—     Other Income and Deductions
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

Total before tax

  (2  —     
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

Net of tax

 $(2 $—     Comprehensive income
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

Amortization of pension and other postretirement benefit plan items

   

Prior service costs (b)

 $46   $—     

Actuarial losses (b)

  (239  —     
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

Total before tax

  (193  —     

Tax benefit

  75    —     
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

Net of tax

 $(118 $—     Comprehensive income
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

Equity investments

   

Sale of equity method investment

 $5   $5   Equity in losses of unconsolidated affiliates

Reversal of CENG equity method AOCI

  193    193   Gain on Consolidation of CENG
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

Total before tax

  198    198   

Tax expense

  (79  (79 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

Net of tax

 $119   $119   
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

Total Reclassifications

 $116   $236   Comprehensive income
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

(a)Amounts in parenthesis represent a decrease in net income.
(b)This accumulated other comprehensive income component is included in the computation of net periodic pension and OPEB cost (see note 16Note 17—Retirement Benefits for additional details).
(c)Amortization of the deferred compensation unit plan is allocated to capital and operating and maintenance expense.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

The following table presents income tax expense (benefit) allocated to each component of other comprehensive income (loss) during the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014:

   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 
   2015  2014  2013 

Exelon

    

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit plans:

    

Prior service benefit reclassified to periodic benefit cost

  $30   $19   $—    

Actuarial loss reclassified to periodic cost

   (140  (93  (133

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit plan valuation adjustment

   62    317    (430

Change in unrealized (gain) loss on cash flow hedges

   (6  96    166  

Change in unrealized (gain) loss on equity investments

   1    73    (71
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total

  $(53 $412   $(468
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Generation

    

Change in unrealized loss on cash flow hedges

  $2   $84   $262  

Change in unrealized (gain) loss on equity investments

   1    73    (72
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total

  $3   $157   $190  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

22.23. Commitments and Contingencies (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

Commitments

Constellation Merger Commitments

In February 2012, the MDPSC issued an Order approving the Exelon and Constellation merger. As part of the MDPSC Order, Exelon agreed to provide a package of benefits to BGE customers, the City of Baltimore and the State of Maryland, resulting in an estimated direct investment in the State of Maryland of approximately $1 billion. The direct investment estimate includes $95 million to $120 million relating to the construction of a headquarters building in Baltimore for Generation’s competitive energy businesses.

The direct investment commitment also includes $500 million to $600 million relating to Exelon and Generation’s development or assistance in the development of 275—300 MWs of new generation in Maryland, which is expected to be completed within a period of 10 years. Exelon and Generation have incurred $393 million towards satisfying the commitment for new generation development in the state of Maryland, with approximately 220 MW of the new generation commencing with commercial operations to date. The MDPSC order contemplates various options for complying with the new generation development commitments, including building or acquiring generating assets, making subsidy or compliance payments, or in circumstances in which the generation build is delayed or certain specified provisions are elected, making liquidated damages payments. Exelon and Generation expect that the majority of these commitments will be satisfied by building or acquiring generating assets and, therefore, will be primarily capital in nature and recognized as incurred. However, during the third quarter of 2014, the conditions associated with one of the generation development commitments changed such that Exelon and Generation now believe that the most likely outcome will involve making subsidy payments and/or liquidated damages payments rather than constructing the specified generating plant. As a result, Exelon and Generation recorded a pre-tax $44 million loss contingency related to this generation development commitment which is included in Operating and maintenance expense in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Comprehensive Income for the year ended December 31, 2014. While this $44 million loss contingency represents Generation’s best estimate of the future obligation, it is reasonably possible that Exelon and Generation could ultimately be required to make cumulative subsidy payments of up to a maximum of approximately $105 million over a 20-year period dependent on actual generating output from a successfully constructed generating plant.

Equity Investment Commitments

As part of Generation’s recent investments in technology development, Generation enters into equity purchase agreements that include commitments to invest additional equity through incremental payments to fund the anticipated needs of the planned operations of the associated companies. The commitment includes approximately $20 million of in-kind services and 100% of 2015 ESA Investco, LLC’s equity commitment since 2015 ESA Investco, LLC is consolidated by Generation (see Note 2—Variable Interest Entities for additional details). As of December 31, 2015, Generation’s estimated commitment relating to its equity purchase agreements, including in-kind services contributions, is anticipated to be as follows:

   Total 

2016(a)

  $299  

2017

   21  

2018

   7  

2019

   —    
  

 

 

 

Total

  $327  
  

 

 

 

(a)The noncontrolling interest holder of 2015 ESA Investco, LLC will contribute up to $172 million in support of a portion of this equity commitment.

Commercial Commitments

Exelon’s commercial commitments as of December 31, 2015, representing commitments potentially triggered by future events, were as follows:

       Expiration within 
   Total   2016   2017   2018   2019   2020   2021
and beyond
 

Letters of credit (non-debt) (a)

  $1,583    $1,565    $5    $—      $—      $13    $—    

Surety bonds (b)

   809     733     49     3     2     16     6  

Financing trust guarantees (c)

   628     —       —       —       —       —       628  

Energy marketing contract guarantees (d)

   3,126     3,126     —       —       —       —       —    

Nuclear insurance premiums (e)

   3,060     —       —       —       —       —       3,060  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total commercial commitments

  $9,206    $5,424    $54    $3    $2    $29    $3,694  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Letters of credit (non-debt)—Exelon and certain of its subsidiaries maintain non-debt letters of credit to provide credit support for certain transactions as requested by third parties.
(b)Surety bonds—Guarantees issued related to contract and commercial agreements, excluding bid bonds.
(c)Includes $200 million of Trust Preferred Securities of ComEd Financing III, $178 million of Trust Preferred Securities of PECO Trust III and IV and $250 million of Trust Preferred Securities of BGE Capital Trust II.
(d)

Energy marketing contract guarantees—Guarantees issued to ensure performance under energy commodity contracts. Amount includes approximately $3.1 billion of guarantees issued by Exelon and Generation on behalf of its Constellation businesses to allow it the flexibility needed to conduct business with counterparties without having to post other forms of

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

collateral. The majority of these guarantees contain evergreen provisions that require the guarantee to remain in effect until cancelled. Exelon’s estimated net exposure for obligations under commercial transactions covered by these guarantees is approximately $0.5 billion at December 31, 2015, which represents the total amount Exelon could be required to fund based on December 31, 2015 market prices.

(e)Nuclear insurance premiums—Represents the maximum amount that Generation would be required to pay for retrospective premiums in the event of nuclear disaster at any domestic site under the Secondary Financial Protection pool as required under the Price-Anderson Act as well as the current aggregate annual retrospective premium obligation that could be imposed by NEIL. See the Nuclear Insurance section within this note for additional details on Generation’s nuclear insurance premiums.

Generation’s commercial commitments as of December 31, 2015, representing commitments potentially triggered by future events, were as follows:

       Expiration within 
   Total   2016   2017   2018   2019   2020   2021
and beyond
 

Letters of credit (non-debt) (a)

  $1,503    $1,485    $5    $—      $—      $13    $—    

Surety bonds

   737     692     45     —       —       —       —    

Energy marketing contract guarantees (b)

   1,532     1,532     —       —       —       —       —    

Nuclear insurance premiums (c)

   3,060     —       —       —       —       —       3,060  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total commercial commitments

  $6,832    $3,709    $50    $—      $—      $13    $3,060  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Letters of credit (non-debt)—Non-debt letters of credit maintained to provide credit support for certain transactions as requested by third parties.
(b)Energy marketing contract guarantees—Guarantees issued to ensure performance under energy commodity contracts. Amount includes approximately $1.5 billion of guarantees issued by Generation on behalf of its Constellation businesses to allow it the flexibility needed to conduct business with counterparties without having to post other forms of collateral. The majority of these guarantees contain evergreen provisions that require the guarantee to remain in effect until cancelled. Generation’s estimated net exposure for obligations under commercial transactions covered by these guarantees is approximately $0.3 billion at December 31, 2015, which represents the total amount Generation could be required to fund based on December 31, 2015 market prices.
(c)Nuclear insurance premiums—Represents the maximum amount that Generation would be required to pay for retrospective premiums in the event of nuclear disaster at any domestic site, including CENG sites, under the Secondary Financial Protection pool as required under the Price-Anderson Act as well as the current aggregate annual retrospective premium obligation that could be imposed by NEIL. See the Nuclear Insurance section within this note for additional details on Generation’s nuclear insurance premiums.

ComEd’s commercial commitments as of December 31, 2015, representing commitments potentially triggered by future events, were as follows:

       Expiration within 
   Total   2016   2017   2018   2019   2020   2021
and beyond
 

Letters of credit (non-debt) (a)

  $16    $16    $—      $—      $—      $—      $—    

Surety bonds (b)

   8     6     —       2     —       —       —    

Financing trust guarantees (c)

   200     —       —       —       —       —       200  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total commercial commitments

  $224    $22    $—      $2    $—      $—      $200  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Letters of credit (non-debt)—ComEd maintains non-debt letters of credit to provide credit support for certain transactions as requested by third parties.
(b)Surety bonds—Guarantees issued related to contract and commercial agreements, excluding bid bonds.
(c)Performance guarantees—Reflects full and unconditional guarantee of Trust Preferred Securities of ComEd Financing III which is a 100% owned finance subsidiary of ComEd.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

PECO’s commercial commitments as of December 31, 2015, representing commitments potentially triggered by future events, were as follows:

       Expiration within 
   Total   2016   2017   2018   2019   2020   2021
and beyond
 

Letters of credit (non-debt) (a)

  $22    $22    $—      $—      $—      $—      $—    

Surety bonds (b)

   9     9     —       —       —       —       —    

Financing trust guarantees (c)

   178     —       —       —       —       —       178  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total commercial commitments

  $209    $31    $—      $—      $—      $—      $178  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Letters of credit (non-debt)—PECO maintains non-debt letters of credit to provide credit support for certain transactions as requested by third parties.
(b)Surety bonds—Guarantees issued related to contract and commercial agreements, excluding bid bonds.
(c)Performance guarantees—Reflects full and unconditional guarantee of Trust Preferred Securities of PECO Trust III and IV, which are 100% owned finance subsidiaries of PECO.

BGE’s commercial commitments as of December 31, 2015, representing commitments potentially triggered by future events, were as follows:

       Expiration within 
   Total   2016   2017   2018   2019   2020   2021
and beyond
 

Letters of credit (non-debt) (a)

  $2    $2    $—      $—      $—      $—      $—    

Surety bonds (b)

   10     10     —       —       —       —       —    

Financing trust guarantees (c)

   250     —       —       —       —       —       250  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total commercial commitments

  $262    $12    $—      $—      $—      $—      $250  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Letters of credit (non-debt)—BGE maintains non-debt letters of credit to provide credit support for certain transactions as requested by third parties.
(b)Surety bonds—Guarantees issued related to contract and commercial agreements, excluding bid bonds.
(c)Performance guarantee—Reflects full and unconditional guarantee of Trust Preferred Securities of BGE Capital Trust which is an unconsolidated VIE of BGE.

Leases

Minimum future operating lease payments, including lease payments for contracted generation, vehicles, real estate, computers, rail cars, operating equipment and office equipment, as of December 31, 2015 were:

   Exelon (a)   Generation  (a)(b)   ComEd (c)   PECO (c)   BGE (c)(d) 

2016

  $133    $86    $14    $3    $12  

2017

   109     69     9     3     10  

2018

   86     57     5     2     9  

2019

   74     45     5     2     8  

2020

   70     44     3     2     7  

Remaining years

   702     655     1     —       19  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total minimum future lease payments

  $1,174    $956    $37    $12    $65  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Excludes Generation’s contingent operating lease payments associated with contracted generation agreements.
(b)

The Generation column above includes minimum future lease payments associated with a 20-year lease agreement for the Baltimore headquarters that became effective during the second quarter of 2015. Generation’s total commitments under the

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

lease agreement are $4 million, $10 million, $11 million, $13 million, $14 million, and $271 million related to years 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 and thereafter, respectively.

(c)Amounts related to certain real estate leases and railroad licenses effectively have indefinite payment periods. As a result, ComEd, PECO and BGE have excluded these payments from the remaining years, as such amounts would not be meaningful. ComEd’s, PECO’s, and BGE’s annual obligation for these arrangements, included in each of the years 2016—2020, was $2 million, $3 million, and $1 million respectively.
(d)Includes all future lease payments on a 99 year real estate lease that expires in 2106.

The following table presents the Registrants’ rental expense under operating leases for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013:

For the Year Ended December 31,

  Exelon   Generation (a)   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

2015

  $922    $851    $12    $9    $32  

2014

   865     806     15     14     12  

2013

   806     744     15     21     11  

(a)Includes contingent operating lease payments associated with contracted generation agreements that are not included in the minimum future operating lease payments table above. Payments made under Generation’s contracted generation lease agreements totaled $798 million, $755 million and $694 million during 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Excludes contract amortization associated with purchase accounting and contract acquisitions.

For information regarding capital lease obligations, see Note 14—Debt and Credit Agreements.

 

Nuclear Insurance

 

Generation is subject to liability, property damage and other risks associated with major incidents at any of its nuclear stations, including the CENG nuclear stations. Generation has reducedmitigated its financial exposure to these risks through insurance and other industry risk-sharing provisions.

 

The Price-Anderson Act was enacted to ensure the availability of funds for public liability claims arising from an incident at any of the U.S. licensed nuclear facilities and also to limit the liability of nuclear reactor owners for such claims from any single incident. As of December 31, 2013,2015, the current liability limit per incident was $13.6is $13.5 billion and is subject to change to account for the effects of inflation and changes in the number of licensed reactors. An inflation adjustment must be made at least once

384


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

every 5 years and the last inflation adjustment was made effective September 10, 2013. In accordance with the Price-Anderson Act, Generation maintains financial protection at levels equal to the amount of liability insurance available from private sources through the purchase of private nuclear energy liability insurance for public liability claims that could arise in the event of an incident. As of January 1, 2013,December 31, 2015, the amount of nuclear energy liability insurance purchased is $375 million for each operating site. Additionally, the Price-Anderson Act requires a second layer of protection through the mandatory participation in a retrospective rating plan for power reactors (currently 104103 reactors) resulting in an additional $13.2$13.1 billion in funds available for public liability claims. Participation in this secondary financial protection pool requires the operator of each reactor to fund its proportionate share of costs for any single incident that exceeds the primary layer of financial protection. Under the Price-Anderson Act, the maximum assessment in the event of an incident for each nuclear operator, per reactor, per incident (including a 5% surcharge), is $127.3 million, payable at no more than $19 million per reactor per incident per year. Exelon’s maximum liability per incident is approximately $2.4 billion.$2.7 billion, including CENG’s related liability.

 

In addition, the U.S. Congress could impose revenue-raising measures on the nuclear industry to pay public liability claims exceeding the $13.6$13.5 billion limit for a single incident.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

As part of the execution of the NOSA on April 1, 2014, Generation executed an Indemnity Agreement pursuant to which Generation agreed to indemnify EDF and its affiliates against third-party claims that may arise from any future nuclear incident (as defined in the Price-Anderson Act) in connection with the CENG nuclear plants or their operations. Exelon guarantees Generation’s obligations under this indemnity. See Note 5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC for additional information on Generation’s operations relating to CENG.

 

Generation is required each year to report to the NRC the current levels and sources of property insurance that demonstrates Generation possesses sufficient financial resources to stabilize and decontaminate a reactor and reactor station site in the event of an accident. The property insurance maintained for each facility is currently provided through insurance policies purchased from NEIL, an industry mutual insurance company of which Generation is a member.

 

NEIL may declare distributions to its members as a result of favorable operating experience. In recent years NEIL has made distributions to its members, but Generation cannot predict the level of future distributions or if they will continue at all. NEIL declared a distribution for 2013, of which Generation’s portion of the distribution declared by NEIL is estimated to be $20.7 million for 2015, and was $18.3 million for 2014 and $18.5 million.million for 2013. The distribution wasdistributions were recorded as a reduction to Operating and maintenance expense within Exelon and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. No distributions were declared in 2011 or 2012. Premiums paid to NEIL by its members are subject to assessment for adverse loss experience (the retrospective premium obligation). NEIL has never exercised this assessment since its formation in 1973, and while Generation cannot predict the level of future assessments, or if they will be imposed at all, as of December 31, 2013,2015, the current maximum aggregate annual retrospective premium obligation for Generation is approximately $287$365 million. NEIL requires its members to maintain an investment grade credit rating or to ensure collectability of their annual retrospective premium obligation by providing a financial guarantee, letter of credit, deposit premium, or some other means of assurance.

 

NEIL provides “all risk” property damage, decontamination and premature decommissioning insurance for each station for losses resulting from damage to its nuclear plants, either due to accidents or acts of terrorism. As of December 31, 2013, Generation’s current limit for this coverage is $2.1 billion. For property limits in excess of the first $1.25 billion of that limit, Generation participates in an $850 million single limit blanket policy shared by all the Generation operating nuclear sites and the Salem and Hope Creek nuclear sites. This blanket limit is not subject to automatic reinstatement in the event of a loss. In the event of an accident, insurance proceeds must first be used for reactor stabilization and site decontamination. If the decision is made to decommission the facility, a portion of the insurance proceeds will be allocated to a fund, which Generation is required by the NRC to maintain, to provide for decommissioning the facility. In the event of an insured loss, Generation is unable to predict the timing of the availability of insurance proceeds to Generation and the amount of such proceeds that would be available. Under the terms of the various insurance agreements, Generation could be assessed up to $229 million per year for losses incurred at any plant insured by the insurance company (the retrospective premium obligation). In the event that one or more acts of terrorism cause accidental property damage within a twelve-month period from the first accidental

385


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

property damage under one or more policies for all insured plants, the maximum recovery for all losses by all insureds will be an aggregate of $3.2 billion plus such additional amounts as the insurer may recover for all such losses from reinsurance, indemnity and any other source, applicable to such losses. The $3.2 billion maximum recovery limit is not applicable, however, in the event of a “certified act of terrorism” as defined in the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002, as amended by the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007. The Terrorism Risk Insurance Act expires on December 31, 2014.

Additionally, NEIL provides replacement power cost insurance in the event of a major accidental outage at an insured nuclear station. The premium for this coverage is subject to assessment for adverse loss experience. Generation’s maximum share of any assessment is $58 million per year (the retrospective premium obligation). Recovery under this insurance for terrorist acts is subject to the $3.2 billion aggregate limit and secondary to the property insurance described above. This limit would not apply in cases of certified acts of terrorism under the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002, as amended by the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007, as described above.

NEIL requires its members to maintain an investment grade credit rating or to ensure collectability of their annual retrospective premium obligation by providing a financial guarantee, letter of credit, deposit premium, or some other means of assurance.

 

For its insured losses, Generation is self-insured to the extent that losses are within the policy deductible or exceed the amount of insurance maintained. Uninsured losses and other expenses, to the extent not recoverable from insurers or the nuclear industry, could also be borne by Generation. Any such losses could have a material adverse effect on Exelon’s and Generation’s financial condition, results of operations and liquidity.

 

Spent Nuclear Fuel Obligation

Under the NWPA, the DOE is responsible for the development of a geologic repository for and the disposal of SNF and high-level radioactive waste. As required by the NWPA, Generation is a party to contracts with the DOE (Standard Contracts) to provide for disposal of SNF from Generation’s nuclear generating stations. In accordance with the NWPA and the Standard Contracts, Generation pays the DOE one mill ($0.001) per kWh of net nuclear generation for the cost of SNF disposal. This fee may be adjusted prospectively in order to ensure full cost recovery. The NWPA and the Standard Contracts required the DOE to begin taking possession of SNF generated by nuclear generating units by no later than January 31, 1998. The DOE, however, failed to meet that deadline and its performance will be delayed significantly. On November 19, 2013, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ordered the DOE to submit to Congress a proposal to reduce the current SNF disposal fee to zero, unless and until there is a viable disposal program. On January 3, 2014, the DOE filed a petition for rehearing. On the same date, as ordered by the court, the DOE submitted a proposal to Congress to reduce the current SNF disposal fee to zero, subject to any further judicial decision. The DOE’s submitted proposal becomes effective after the 90-days of continuous session of the Congress unless there is Congressional action contrary to the DOE proposal. However, if the court grants the petition for rehearing, the proposal to eliminate the fee (and the review period) will be held in suspense until after the court rules. Until such time as a new fee structure is in effect, Generation must continue to pay the current SNF disposal fees.

The 2010 Federal budget (which became effective October 1, 2009) eliminated almost all funding for the creation of the Yucca Mountain repository while the Obama administration devised a new strategy for long-term SNF management. A Blue Ribbon Commission (BRC) on America’s Nuclear

386


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Future, appointed by the U.S. Energy Secretary, released a report on January 26, 2012, detailing comprehensive recommendations for creating a safe, long-term solution for managing and disposing of the nation’s spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste.

In early 2013, the DOE issued an updated “Strategy for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste” in response to the BRC recommendations. This strategy included a consolidated interim storage facility that is planned to be operational in 2025.

Generation uses the 2025 date as the assumed date for when the DOE will begin accepting SNF for purposes of determining nuclear decommissioning asset retirement obligations. The extended delay in SNF acceptance by the DOE has led to Generation’s adoption of dry cask storage at its Dresden, Clinton, Limerick, Oyster Creek, Peach Bottom, Byron, Braidwood, LaSalle and Quad Cities stations.

In August 2004, Generation and the DOJ, in close consultation with the DOE, reached a settlement under which the government agreed to reimburse Generation, subject to certain damage limitations based on the extent of the government’s breach, for costs associated with storage of SNF at Generation’s nuclear stations pending the DOE’s fulfillment of its obligations. Generation submits annual reimbursement requests to the DOE for costs associated with the storage of SNF. In all cases, reimbursement requests are made only after costs are incurred and only for costs resulting from DOE delays in accepting the SNF.

Under the settlement agreement, Generation has received cash reimbursements for costs incurred through April 30, 2013, totaling approximately $712 million ($601 million after considering amounts due to co-owners of certain nuclear stations and to the former owner of Oyster Creek). As of December 31, 2013, the amount of SNF storage costs for which reimbursement will be requested from the DOE under the settlement agreement is $71 million, which is recorded within Accounts receivable, other. Of this amount, $18 million represents amounts owed to the co-owners of the Peach Bottom and Quad Cities generating facilities.

CENG entered into settlement agreements with the DOE during 2011 and 2012 to recover damages caused by the DOE’s failure to comply with legal and contractual obligations to dispose of spent nuclear fuel related to the Ginna, Calvert Cliffs and Nine Mile Point nuclear power plants. At December 31, 2012, Generation had approximately $22 million recorded as a receivable from CENG with respect to costs incurred by Constellation prior to the formation of the CENG joint venture for the Nine Mile Point and Calvert Cliffs nuclear power plants. CENG received the funds for the Nine Mile Point and Calvert Cliffs settlement from the DOE in January 2013 and February 2013, respectively, and remitted the $22 million to Generation.

The Standard Contracts with the DOE also required the payment to the DOE of a one-time fee applicable to nuclear generation through April 6, 1983. The fee related to the former PECO units has been paid. Pursuant to the Standard Contracts, ComEd previously elected to defer payment of the one-time fee of $277 million for its units (which are now part of Generation), with interest to the date of payment, until just prior to the first delivery of SNF to the DOE. As of December 31, 2013, the unfunded SNF liability for the one-time fee with interest was $1,021 million. Interest accrues at the 13-week Treasury Rate. The 13-week Treasury Rate in effect, for calculation of the interest accrual at December 31, 2013, was 0.051%. The liabilities for SNF disposal costs, including the one-time fee, were transferred to Generation as part of Exelon’s 2001 corporate restructuring. The outstanding one-time fee obligations for the Oyster Creek and TMI units remain with the former owners. Clinton has no outstanding obligation. See Note 11—Fair Value of Assets and Liabilities for additional information.

387


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

EnergyCommercial Commitments

 

Generation’s customer facing activities include the physical delivery and marketing of power obtained through its generation capacity, and long-, intermediate- and short-term contracts. Generation maintains an effective supply strategy through ownership of generation assets and power purchase and lease agreements. Generation has also contracted for access to additional generation through bilateral long-term PPAs. These agreements are firm commitments related to power generation of specific generation plants and/or are dispatchable in nature. Several of Generation’s long-term PPAs, which have been determined to be operating leases, have significant contingent rental payments that are dependent on the future operating characteristics of the associated plants, such as plant availability. Generation recognizes contingent rental expense when it becomes probable of payment. Generation enters into PPAs with the objective of obtaining low-cost energy supply sources to meet its physical delivery obligations to its customers. Generation has also purchased firm transmission rights to ensure that it has reliable transmission capacity to physically move its power supplies to meet customer delivery needs. The primary intent and business objective for the use of its capital assets and contracts is to provide Generation with physical power supply to enable it to deliver energy to meet customer needs. In addition to physical contracts, Generation uses financial contracts for economic hedging purposes and, to a lesser extent, as part of proprietary trading activities.

Generation has entered into bilateral long-term contractual obligations for sales of energy to load-serving entities, including electric utilities, municipalities, electric cooperatives and retail load aggregators. Generation also enters into contractual obligations to deliver energy to market participants who primarily focus on the resale of energy products for delivery. Generation provides for delivery of its energy to these customers through firm transmission.

As part of reaching a comprehensive agreement with EDF in October 2010, the existing power purchase agreements with CENG were modified to be unit-contingent through the end of their original term in 2014. Under these agreements, CENG has the ability to fix the energy price on a forward basis by entering into monthly energy hedge transactions for a portion of the future sale, while any unhedged portions will be provided at market prices by default. Additionally, beginning in 2015 and continuing to the end of the life of the respective plants, Generation agreed to purchase 50.01% of the nuclear plant output owned by CENG at market prices. Generation discloses in the table below commitments to purchase from CENG at fixed prices. All commitments to purchase at market prices, which include all purchases subsequent to December 31, 2014, are excluded from the table. Generation continues to own a 50.01% membership interest in CENG that is accounted for as an equity method investment. See Note 5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC and Note 25—Related Party Transactions for more details on this arrangement.

At December 31, 2013, Generation’s short- and long-term commitments, relating to the purchases from unaffiliated utilities and others of energy, capacity and transmission rights, are as indicated in the following tables:

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

2014

  $412   $117   $25   $824   $1,378 

2015

   367    110    13    —      490 

2016

   284    76    2    —      362 

2017

   223    25    2    —      250 

2018

   112    3    2    —      117 

Thereafter

   414    3    32    —      449 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total

  $1,812   $334   $76   $824   $3,046 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

388


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

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

ComEd purchases its expected energy requirements through an ICC approved competitive bidding process administered by the IPA and spot market purchases. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for further information.

Since 2009, PECO has entered into contracts through a competitive procurement process in order to meet a portion of its default service customers’ electric supply requirements for 2011 through 2016. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for further information regarding the DSP Programs.

ComEd is subject to requirements established by the Illinois Settlement Legislation and the Energy Infrastructure Modernization Act related to the use of alternative energy resources. PECO is subject to requirements related to the use of alternative energy resources established by the AEPS Act. BGE is subject to requirements established by the Public Utilities Article in Maryland related to the use of alternative energy resources; however, the wholesale suppliers that supply power to BGE through SOS procurement auctions have the obligation, by contract with BGE, to meet the RPS requirement. BGE has entered into contracts with curtailment services providers in accordance with the March 2009 MDPSC order. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information relating to electric generation procurement, alternative energy resources and energy efficiency programs.

ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s electric supply procurement, curtailment services, REC and AEC purchaseExelon’s commercial commitments as of December 31, 2013 are2015, representing commitments potentially triggered by future events, were as follows:

 

   Total   Expiration within 
     2014   2015   2016   2017   2018   2019
and beyond
 

ComEd

              

Electric supply procurement(a)

  $736   $323   $136   $137   $140   $—     $—   

Renewable energy and RECs(b)

   1,589    72    74    76    77    83    1,207 

PECO

              

Electric supply procurement(c)

   681    590    91    —      —      —      —   

AECs(d)

   14    2    2    2    2    2    4 

BGE

              

Electric supply procurement(e)

   1,256    783    400    73    —      —      —   

Curtailment services(f)

   132    45    40    34    13    —      —   
       Expiration within 
   Total   2016   2017   2018   2019   2020   2021
and beyond
 

Letters of credit (non-debt) (a)

  $1,583    $1,565    $5    $—      $—      $13    $—    

Surety bonds (b)

   809     733     49     3     2     16     6  

Financing trust guarantees (c)

   628     —       —       —       —       —       628  

Energy marketing contract guarantees (d)

   3,126     3,126     —       —       —       —       —    

Nuclear insurance premiums (e)

   3,060     —       —       —       —       —       3,060  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total commercial commitments

  $9,206    $5,424    $54    $3    $2    $29    $3,694  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

(a)ComEd entered into various contractsLetters of credit (non-debt)—Exelon and certain of its subsidiaries maintain non-debt letters of credit to provide credit support for the procurement of electricity that started to expire in 2012, and will continue to expire through 2017. ComEd is permitted to recover its electric supply procurement costs from retail customers with no mark-up. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.certain transactions as requested by third parties.
(b)Surety bonds—Guarantees issued related to contract and commercial agreements, excluding bid bonds.
(c)Includes $200 million of Trust Preferred Securities of ComEd entered into 20-year contracts for renewableFinancing III, $178 million of Trust Preferred Securities of PECO Trust III and IV and $250 million of Trust Preferred Securities of BGE Capital Trust II.
(d)

Energy marketing contract guarantees—Guarantees issued to ensure performance under energy commodity contracts. Amount includes approximately $3.1 billion of guarantees issued by Exelon and RECs beginning in June 2012. ComEd is permittedGeneration on behalf of its Constellation businesses to recover its renewable energy and REC costs from retail customersallow it the flexibility needed to conduct business with no mark-up. The annual commitments represent the maximum settlements with suppliers for renewable energy and RECs under the existing contract terms. Pursuantcounterparties without having to the ICC’s Order on December 19, 2012, ComEd’s commitments under the existing long-term contracts were reduced for the June 2013 through May 2014 procurement period. The ICC’s December 18, 2013 order approved the reductionpost other forms of ComEd’s commitments under the long-term contracts for the June 2014 through May 2015 procurement period, however the amount of the reduction will not be finalized and approved by the ICC until March 2014. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.

389


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

(c)PECO entered into various contracts

collateral. The majority of these guarantees contain evergreen provisions that require the guarantee to remain in effect until cancelled. Exelon’s estimated net exposure for obligations under commercial transactions covered by these guarantees is approximately $0.5 billion at December 31, 2015, which represents the procurement of electric supplytotal amount Exelon could be required to serve its default service customers that expire between 2014 and 2015. PECO is permitted to recover its electric supply procurement costs from default service customers with no mark-up in accordance with its PAPUC-approved DSP Programs. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.

(d)PECO is subject to requirements related to the use of alternative energy resources established by the AEPS Act. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.fund based on December 31, 2015 market prices.

(e)BGE entered into various contractsNuclear insurance premiums—Represents the maximum amount that Generation would be required to pay for retrospective premiums in the procurementevent of electricity beginning 2013 through 2016. The cost of powernuclear disaster at any domestic site under these contracts is recoverablethe Secondary Financial Protection pool as required under MDPSC approved fuel clauses.the Price-Anderson Act as well as the current aggregate annual retrospective premium obligation that could be imposed by NEIL. See Note 3—Regulatory Mattersthe Nuclear Insurance section within this note for additional information.
(f)BGE has entered into various contracts with curtailment services providers related to transactions in PJM’s capacity market. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.details on Generation’s nuclear insurance premiums.

 

Fuel Purchase Obligations

In addition to the energyGeneration’s commercial commitments described above, Generation has commitments to purchase fuel supplies for nuclear and fossil generation. PECO and BGE have commitments to purchase natural gas, related transportation, storage capacity and services to serve customers in their gas distribution service territory. Asas of December 31, 2013, these net2015, representing commitments potentially triggered by future events, were as follows:

 

   Total   Expiration within 
     2014   2015   2016   2017   2018   2019
and beyond
 

Generation

  $8,490   $1,212   $1,256   $1,040   $1,044   $763   $3,175 

PECO

   507    179    112    98    37    15    66 

BGE

   609    129    59    57    57    51    256 
       Expiration within 
   Total   2016   2017   2018   2019   2020   2021
and beyond
 

Letters of credit (non-debt) (a)

  $1,503    $1,485    $5    $—      $—      $13    $—    

Surety bonds

   737     692     45     —       —       —       —    

Energy marketing contract guarantees (b)

   1,532     1,532     —       —       —       —       —    

Nuclear insurance premiums (c)

   3,060     —       —       —       —       —       3,060  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total commercial commitments

  $6,832    $3,709    $50    $—      $—      $13    $3,060  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Letters of credit (non-debt)—Non-debt letters of credit maintained to provide credit support for certain transactions as requested by third parties.
(b)Energy marketing contract guarantees—Guarantees issued to ensure performance under energy commodity contracts. Amount includes approximately $1.5 billion of guarantees issued by Generation on behalf of its Constellation businesses to allow it the flexibility needed to conduct business with counterparties without having to post other forms of collateral. The majority of these guarantees contain evergreen provisions that require the guarantee to remain in effect until cancelled. Generation’s estimated net exposure for obligations under commercial transactions covered by these guarantees is approximately $0.3 billion at December 31, 2015, which represents the total amount Generation could be required to fund based on December 31, 2015 market prices.
(c)Nuclear insurance premiums—Represents the maximum amount that Generation would be required to pay for retrospective premiums in the event of nuclear disaster at any domestic site, including CENG sites, under the Secondary Financial Protection pool as required under the Price-Anderson Act as well as the current aggregate annual retrospective premium obligation that could be imposed by NEIL. See the Nuclear Insurance section within this note for additional details on Generation’s nuclear insurance premiums.

 

Other Purchase Obligations

The Registrants’ other purchase obligationsComEd’s commercial commitments as of December 31, 2013, which primarily represent2015, representing commitments for services, materials and information technology, arepotentially triggered by future events, were as follows:

 

   Total   Expiration within 
     2014   2015   2016   2017   2018   2019
and beyond
 

Exelon

  $262   $61   $34   $32   $31   $26   $78 

Generation

   504    170    131    45    42    30    86 

ComEd(a)

   122    88    5    5    5    5    14 

PECO(a)

   40    30    1    1    1    1    6 

BGE(a)

   53    44    2    5    2    —      —   
       Expiration within 
   Total   2016   2017   2018   2019   2020   2021
and beyond
 

Letters of credit (non-debt) (a)

  $16    $16    $—      $—      $—      $—      $—    

Surety bonds (b)

   8     6     —       2     —       —       —    

Financing trust guarantees (c)

   200     —       —       —       —       —       200  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total commercial commitments

  $224    $22    $—      $2    $—      $—      $200  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

(a)Purchase obligations include commitmentsLetters of credit (non-debt)—ComEd maintains non-debt letters of credit to provide credit support for certain transactions as requested by third parties.
(b)Surety bonds—Guarantees issued related to smart meter installation. See Note 3- Regulatory Matters for additional information.contract and commercial agreements, excluding bid bonds.
(c)Performance guarantees—Reflects full and unconditional guarantee of Trust Preferred Securities of ComEd Financing III which is a 100% owned finance subsidiary of ComEd.

390


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

PECO’s commercial commitments as of December 31, 2015, representing commitments potentially triggered by future events, were as follows:

       Expiration within 
   Total   2016   2017   2018   2019   2020   2021
and beyond
 

Letters of credit (non-debt) (a)

  $22    $22    $—      $—      $—      $—      $—    

Surety bonds (b)

   9     9     —       —       —       —       —    

Financing trust guarantees (c)

   178     —       —       —       —       —       178  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total commercial commitments

  $209    $31    $—      $—      $—      $—      $178  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Letters of credit (non-debt)—PECO maintains non-debt letters of credit to provide credit support for certain transactions as requested by third parties.
(b)Surety bonds—Guarantees issued related to contract and commercial agreements, excluding bid bonds.
(c)Performance guarantees—Reflects full and unconditional guarantee of Trust Preferred Securities of PECO Trust III and IV, which are 100% owned finance subsidiaries of PECO.

BGE’s commercial commitments as of December 31, 2015, representing commitments potentially triggered by future events, were as follows:

       Expiration within 
   Total   2016   2017   2018   2019   2020   2021
and beyond
 

Letters of credit (non-debt) (a)

  $2    $2    $—      $—      $—      $—      $—    

Surety bonds (b)

   10     10     —       —       —       —       —    

Financing trust guarantees (c)

   250     —       —       —       —       —       250  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total commercial commitments

  $262    $12    $—      $—      $—      $—      $250  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Letters of credit (non-debt)—BGE maintains non-debt letters of credit to provide credit support for certain transactions as requested by third parties.
(b)Surety bonds—Guarantees issued related to contract and commercial agreements, excluding bid bonds.
(c)Performance guarantee—Reflects full and unconditional guarantee of Trust Preferred Securities of BGE Capital Trust which is an unconsolidated VIE of BGE.

Leases

Minimum future operating lease payments, including lease payments for contracted generation, vehicles, real estate, computers, rail cars, operating equipment and office equipment, as of December 31, 2015 were:

   Exelon (a)   Generation  (a)(b)   ComEd (c)   PECO (c)   BGE (c)(d) 

2016

  $133    $86    $14    $3    $12  

2017

   109     69     9     3     10  

2018

   86     57     5     2     9  

2019

   74     45     5     2     8  

2020

   70     44     3     2     7  

Remaining years

   702     655     1     —       19  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total minimum future lease payments

  $1,174    $956    $37    $12    $65  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Excludes Generation’s contingent operating lease payments associated with contracted generation agreements.
(b)

The Generation column above includes minimum future lease payments associated with a 20-year lease agreement for the Baltimore headquarters that became effective during the second quarter of 2015. Generation’s total commitments under the

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

lease agreement are $4 million, $10 million, $11 million, $13 million, $14 million, and $271 million related to years 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 and thereafter, respectively.

(c)Amounts related to certain real estate leases and railroad licenses effectively have indefinite payment periods. As a result, ComEd, PECO and BGE have excluded these payments from the remaining years, as such amounts would not be meaningful. ComEd’s, PECO’s, and BGE’s annual obligation for these arrangements, included in each of the years 2016—2020, was $2 million, $3 million, and $1 million respectively.
(d)Includes all future lease payments on a 99 year real estate lease that expires in 2106.

The following table presents the Registrants’ rental expense under operating leases for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013:

For the Year Ended December 31,

  Exelon   Generation (a)   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

2015

  $922    $851    $12    $9    $32  

2014

   865     806     15     14     12  

2013

   806     744     15     21     11  

(a)Includes contingent operating lease payments associated with contracted generation agreements that are not included in the minimum future operating lease payments table above. Payments made under Generation’s contracted generation lease agreements totaled $798 million, $755 million and $694 million during 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Excludes contract amortization associated with purchase accounting and contract acquisitions.

For information regarding capital lease obligations, see Note 14—Debt and Credit Agreements.

Nuclear Insurance

Generation is subject to liability, property damage and other risks associated with major incidents at any of its nuclear stations, including the CENG nuclear stations. Generation has mitigated its financial exposure to these risks through insurance and other industry risk-sharing provisions.

The Price-Anderson Act was enacted to ensure the availability of funds for public liability claims arising from an incident at any of the U.S. licensed nuclear facilities and also to limit the liability of nuclear reactor owners for such claims from any single incident. As of December 31, 2015, the current liability limit per incidentis $13.5 billion and is subject to change to account for the effects of inflation and changes in the number of licensed reactors. An inflation adjustment must be made at least once every 5 years and the last inflation adjustment was made effective September 10, 2013. In accordance with the Price-Anderson Act, Generation maintains financial protection at levels equal to the amount of liability insurance available from private sources through the purchase of private nuclear energy liability insurance for public liability claims that could arise in the event of an incident. As of December 31, 2015, the amount of nuclear energy liability insurance purchased is $375 million for each operating site. Additionally, the Price-Anderson Act requires a second layer of protection through the mandatory participation in a retrospective rating plan for power reactors (currently 103 reactors) resulting in an additional $13.1 billion in funds available for public liability claims. Participation in this secondary financial protection pool requires the operator of each reactor to fund its proportionate share of costs for any single incident that exceeds the primary layer of financial protection. Under the Price-Anderson Act, the maximum assessment in the event of an incident for each nuclear operator, per reactor, per incident (including a 5% surcharge), is $127.3 million, payable at no more than $19 million per reactor per incident per year. Exelon’s maximum liability per incident is approximately $2.7 billion, including CENG’s related liability.

In addition, the U.S. Congress could impose revenue-raising measures on the nuclear industry to pay public liability claims exceeding the $13.5 billion limit for a single incident.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

As part of the execution of the NOSA on April 1, 2014, Generation executed an Indemnity Agreement pursuant to which Generation agreed to indemnify EDF and its affiliates against third-party claims that may arise from any future nuclear incident (as defined in the Price-Anderson Act) in connection with the CENG nuclear plants or their operations. Exelon guarantees Generation’s obligations under this indemnity. See Note 5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC for additional information on Generation’s operations relating to CENG.

Generation is required each year to report to the NRC the current levels and sources of property insurance that demonstrates Generation possesses sufficient financial resources to stabilize and decontaminate a reactor and reactor station site in the event of an accident. The property insurance maintained for each facility is currently provided through insurance policies purchased from NEIL, an industry mutual insurance company of which Generation is a member.

NEIL may declare distributions to its members as a result of favorable operating experience. In recent years NEIL has made distributions to its members, but Generation cannot predict the level of future distributions or if they will continue at all. Generation’s portion of the distribution declared by NEIL is estimated to be $20.7 million for 2015, and was $18.3 million for 2014 and $18.5 million for 2013. The distributions were recorded as a reduction to Operating and maintenance expense within Exelon and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. Premiums paid to NEIL by its members are subject to assessment for adverse loss experience (the retrospective premium obligation). NEIL has never exercised this assessment since its formation in 1973, and while Generation cannot predict the level of future assessments, or if they will be imposed at all, as of December 31, 2015, the current maximum aggregate annual retrospective premium obligation for Generation is approximately $365 million. NEIL requires its members to maintain an investment grade credit rating or to ensure collectability of their annual retrospective premium obligation by providing a financial guarantee, letter of credit, deposit premium, or some other means of assurance.

NEIL provides “all risk” property damage, decontamination and premature decommissioning insurance for each station for losses resulting from damage to its nuclear plants, either due to accidents or acts of terrorism. If the decision is made to decommission the facility, a portion of the insurance proceeds will be allocated to a fund, which Generation is required by the NRC to maintain, to provide for decommissioning the facility. In the event of an insured loss, Generation is unable to predict the timing of the availability of insurance proceeds to Generation and the amount of such proceeds that would be available. In the event that one or more acts of terrorism cause accidental property damage within a twelve-month period from the first accidental property damage under one or more policies for all insured plants, the maximum recovery for all losses by all insureds will be an aggregate of $3.2 billion plus such additional amounts as the insurer may recover for all such losses from reinsurance, indemnity and any other source, applicable to such losses.

For its insured losses, Generation is self-insured to the extent that losses are within the policy deductible or exceed the amount of insurance maintained. Uninsured losses and other expenses, to the extent not recoverable from insurers or the nuclear industry, could also be borne by Generation. Any such losses could have a material adverse effect on Exelon’s and Generation’s financial condition, results of operations and liquidity.

Commercial Commitments

 

Exelon’s commercial commitments as of December 31, 2013,2015, representing commitments potentially triggered by future events, were as follows:

 

   Total   Expiration within 
     2014   2015   2016   2017   2018   2019
and beyond
 

Letters of credit (non-debt) (a)

  $1,520   $1,217   $298   $—     $5   $—     $—   

Surety bonds (b)

   339    301    2    6    4    1    25 

Performance guarantees(c)

   1,107    350    —      —      —      —      757 

Energy marketing contract guarantees(d)

   3,161    3,161    —      —      —      —      —   

Lease guarantees (e)

   44    —      —      —      —      —      44 

Nuclear insurance premiums(f)

   3,529    —      —      —      —      —      3,529 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total commercial commitments

  $9,700   $5,029   $300   $6   $9   $1   $4,355 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 
       Expiration within 
   Total   2016   2017   2018   2019   2020   2021
and beyond
 

Letters of credit (non-debt) (a)

  $1,583    $1,565    $5    $—      $—      $13    $—    

Surety bonds (b)

   809     733     49     3     2     16     6  

Financing trust guarantees (c)

   628     —       —       —       —       —       628  

Energy marketing contract guarantees (d)

   3,126     3,126     —       —       —       —       —    

Nuclear insurance premiums (e)

   3,060     —       —       —       —       —       3,060  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total commercial commitments

  $9,206    $5,424    $54    $3    $2    $29    $3,694  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

(a)Letters of credit (non-debt)—Exelon and certain of its subsidiaries maintain non-debt letters of credit to provide credit support for certain transactions as requested by third parties.
(b)Surety bonds—Guarantees issued related to contract and commercial agreements, excluding bid bonds.
(c)Performance guarantees—Guarantees issued to ensure performance under specific contracts, including $211 million issued on behalf of CENG nuclear generating facilities for credit support,Includes $200 million of Trust Preferred Securities of ComEd Financing III, $178 million of Trust Preferred Securities of PECO Trust III and IV and $250 million of Trust Preferred Securities of BGE Capital Trust II.
(d)

Energy marketing contract guarantees—Guarantees issued to ensure performance under energy commodity contracts. Amount includes approximately $3$3.1 billion of guarantees previously issued by ConstellationExelon and Generation on behalf of its Generation and NewEnergy businessConstellation businesses to allow it the flexibility needed to conduct business with counterparties without having to post other forms of

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

collateral. The majority of these guarantees contain evergreen provisions that require the guarantee to remain in effect until cancelled. Exelon’s estimated net exposure for obligations under commercial transactions covered by these guarantees is approximately $463 million$0.5 billion at December 31, 2013,2015, which represents the total amount Exelon could be required to fund based on December 31, 20132015 market prices.

(e)Lease guarantees—Guarantees issued to ensure payments on building leases.
(f)Nuclear insurance premiums—Represents the maximum amount that Generation would be required to pay for retrospective premiums in the event of nuclear disaster at any domestic site under the Secondary Financial Protection pool as required under the Price-Anderson Act as well as the current aggregate annual retrospective premium obligation that could be imposed by NEIL. See the Nuclear Insurance section within this note for additional details on Generation’s nuclear insurance premiums.

 

Generation’s commercial commitments as of December 31, 2013,2015, representing commitments potentially triggered by future events, were as follows:

 

  Total   Expiration within       Expiration within 
  2014   2015   2016   2017   2018   2019
and beyond
   Total   2016   2017   2018   2019   2020   2021
and beyond
 

Letters of credit (non-debt) (a)

  $1,477   $1,174   $298   $—     $5   $—     $—     $1,503    $1,485    $5    $—      $—      $13    $—    

Performance guarantees(b)

   357    343    —      —      —      —      14 

Surety bonds

   737     692     45     —       —       —       —    

Energy marketing contract guarantees (c)(b)

   832    832    —      —      —      —      —      1,532     1,532     —       —       —       —       —    

Nuclear insurance premiums(d)(c)

   3,529    —      —      —      —      —      3,529    3,060     —       —       —       —       —       3,060  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total commercial commitments

  $6,195   $2,349   $298   $—     $5   $—     $3,543   $6,832    $3,709    $50    $—      $—      $13    $3,060  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Letters of credit (non-debt)—Non-debt letters of credit maintained to provide credit support for certain transactions as requested by third parties.
(b)Performance guarantees—Guarantees issued to ensure performance under specific contracts including $211 million issued on behalf of CENG nuclear generating facilities for credit support.

391


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

(c)Energy marketing contract guarantees—Guarantees issued to ensure performance under energy commodity contracts. Amount includes approximately $749 million$1.5 billion of guarantees previously issued by ConstellationGeneration on behalf of its Generation and NewEnergy businessConstellation businesses to allow it the flexibility needed to conduct business with counterparties without having to post other forms of collateral. The majority of these guarantees contain evergreen provisions that require the guarantee to remain in effect until cancelled. Generation’s estimated net exposure for obligations under commercial transactions covered by these guarantees is approximately $0.2$0.3 billion at December 31, 2013,2015, which represents the total amount Generation could be required to fund based on December 31, 20132015 market prices.
(d)(c)Nuclear insurance premiums—Represents the maximum amount that Generation would be required to pay for retrospective premiums in the event of nuclear disaster at any domestic site, including CENG sites, under the Secondary Financial Protection pool as required under the Price-Anderson Act as well as the current aggregate annual retrospective premium obligation that could be imposed by NEIL. See the Nuclear Insurance section within this note for additional details on Generation’s nuclear insurance premiums.

 

ComEd’s commercial commitments as of December 31, 2013,2015, representing commitments potentially triggered by future events, were as follows:

 

  Total   Expiration within       Expiration within 
  2014   2015   2016   2017   2018   2019
and beyond
   Total   2016   2017   2018   2019   2020   2021
and beyond
 

Letters of credit (non-debt) (a)

  $19   $19   $—     $—     $—     $—     $—     $16    $16    $—      $—      $—      $—      $—    

Surety bonds (b)

   9    9    —      —      —      —      —      8     6     —       2     —       —       —    

Performance guarantees(c)

   200    —      —      —      —      —      200 

Financing trust guarantees (c)

   200     —       —       —       —       —       200  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total commercial commitments

  $228   $28   $—     $—     $—     $—     $200   $224    $22    $—      $2    $—      $—      $200  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Letters of credit (non-debt)—ComEd maintains non-debt letters of credit to provide credit support for certain transactions as requested by third parties.
(b)Surety bonds—Guarantees issued related to contract and commercial agreements, excluding bid bonds.
(c)Performance guarantees—Reflects full and unconditional guarantee of Trust Preferred Securities of ComEd Financing III which is a 100% owned finance subsidiary of ComEd.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

PECO’s commercial commitments as of December 31, 2013,2015, representing commitments potentially triggered by future events, were as follows:

 

  Total   Expiration within       Expiration within 
  2014   2015   2016   2017   2018   2019
and beyond
   Total   2016   2017   2018   2019   2020   2021
and beyond
 

Letters of credit (non-debt) (a)

  $22   $22   $—     $—     $—     $—     $—     $22    $22    $—      $—      $—      $—      $—    

Surety bonds (b)

   3    3    —      —      —      —      —      9     9     —       —       —       —       —    

Performance guarantees (c)

   178    —      —      —      —      —      178 

Financing trust guarantees (c)

   178     —       —       —       —       —       178  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total commercial commitments

  $203   $25   $—     $—     $—     $—     $178   $209    $31    $—      $—      $—      $—      $178  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Letters of credit (non-debt)—PECO maintains non-debt letters of credit to provide credit support for certain transactions as requested by third parties.
(b)Surety bonds—Guarantees issued related to contract and commercial agreements, excluding bid bonds.
(c)Performance guarantees—Reflects full and unconditional guarantee of Trust Preferred Securities of PECO Trust III and IV, which are 100% owned finance subsidiaries of PECO.

392


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

BGE’s commercial commitments as of December 31, 2013,2015, representing commitments potentially triggered by future events, were as follows:

 

  Total   Expiration within       Expiration within 
  2014   2015   2016   2017   2018   2019
and beyond
   Total   2016   2017   2018   2019   2020   2021
and beyond
 

Letters of credit (non-debt) (a)

  $1   $1   $—     $—     $—     $—     $—     $2    $2    $—      $—      $—      $—      $—    

Surety bonds(b)

   9    9    —      —      —      —      —      10     10     —       —       —       —       —    

Performance guarantees(c)

   250    —      —      —      —      —      250 

Financing trust guarantees (c)

   250     —       —       —       —       —       250  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total commercial commitments

  $260   $10   $—     $—     $—     $—     $250   $262    $12    $—      $—      $—      $—      $250  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Letters of credit (non-debt)—BGE maintains non-debt letters of credit to provide credit support for certain transactions as requested by third parties.
(b)Surety bond—bonds—Guarantees issued related to contract and commercial agreements, excluding bid bonds.
(c)Performance guarantee—Reflects full and unconditional guarantee of Trust Preferred Securities of BGE Capital Trust which is an unconsolidated VIE of BGE.

 

Construction CommitmentsLeases

 

Generation has committed to the constructionMinimum future operating lease payments, including lease payments for contracted generation, vehicles, real estate, computers, rail cars, operating equipment and office equipment, as of the Antelope Valley solar PV facility in Los Angeles County, California. The first portion of the project began operations in December 2012, with six additional blocks coming online in 2013 and an expectation of full commercial operation in the first half of 2014. Generation’s estimated remaining commitment for the project is $110 million.31, 2015 were:

 

On July 3, 2013, Generation executed a Turbine Supply Agreement to expand its Beebe wind project in Michigan. The estimated remaining commitment under the contract is $50 million and achievement of commercial operations is expected in 2014.

   Exelon (a)   Generation  (a)(b)   ComEd (c)   PECO (c)   BGE (c)(d) 

2016

  $133    $86    $14    $3    $12  

2017

   109     69     9     3     10  

2018

   86     57     5     2     9  

2019

   74     45     5     2     8  

2020

   70     44     3     2     7  

Remaining years

   702     655     1     —       19  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total minimum future lease payments

  $1,174    $956    $37    $12    $65  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

On July 26, 2013, Generation executed an engineering procurement and construction contract to expand its Perryman, Maryland generation site with 120 MW of new natural gas-fired generation to satisfy certain merger commitments. The estimated remaining commitment under the contract is $80 million and achievement of commercial operation is expected in 2015. See 4—Merger and Acquisitions for additional information on commitments to develop or assist in development of new generation in Maryland resulting from the merger.
(a)Excludes Generation’s contingent operating lease payments associated with contracted generation agreements.
(b)

The Generation column above includes minimum future lease payments associated with a 20-year lease agreement for the Baltimore headquarters that became effective during the second quarter of 2015. Generation’s total commitments under the

On December 27, 2013, Generated executed a Turbine Supply Agreement for construction of the 32.5MW Fourmile Wind project in western Maryland. The estimated remaining commitment under the contract is $26 million and achievement of commercial operations is expected in 2014. See 4—Merger and Acquisitions for additional information on commitments to develop or assist in development of new generation in Maryland resulting from the merger.

Refer to Note 3—Regulatory Matters for information on investment programs associated with regulatory mandates, such as ComEd’s Infrastructure Investment Plan under EIMA, PECO’s Smart Meter Procurement and Installation Plan, and BGE’s comprehensive smart grid initiative.

Constellation Merger Commitments

Exelon’s commercial and construction commitments shown above do not include the merger commitments made to the State of Maryland in conjunction with the Constellation merger. See Note 4—Merger and Acquisitions for additional information on the mergers commitments.

393


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Leases

Minimum future operating lease payments, including lease payments for vehicles, real estate, computers, rail cars, operating equipment and office equipment, as of December 31, 2013 were:

   Exelon  Generation  ComEd (b)   PECO (b)   BGE (b)(c) 

2014

  $103  $49  $13   $13   $12 

2015

   91   50   11    3    11 

2016

   89   49   11    3    9 

2017

   82    48    7     3     8  

2018

   63   40   2    3    7 

Remaining years

   398   336   3    —      14 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total minimum future lease payments

  $826(a)  $572(a)  $47   $25   $61 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Excludes Generation’s PPAs

lease agreement are $4 million, $10 million, $11 million, $13 million, $14 million, and other capacity contracts that are accounted for as contingent operating lease payments.$271 million related to years 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 and thereafter, respectively.

(b)(c)Amounts related to certain real estate leases and railroad licenses effectively have indefinite payment periods. As a result, ComEd, PECO and BGE have excluded these payments from the remaining years, as such amounts would not be meaningful. ComEd’s, PECO’s, and BGE’s annual obligation for these arrangements, included in each of the years 2014—2018,2016—2020, was $1$2 million, $3 million, and $1 million respectively.
(c)(d)Includes all future lease payments on a 99 year real estate lease that expires in 2105.2106.

 

The following table presents the Registrants’ rental expense under operating leases for the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011:2013:

 

For the Year Ended December 31,

  Exelon   Generation (a)   ComEd   PECO   BGE   Exelon   Generation (a)   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

2015

  $922    $851    $12    $9    $32  

2014

   865     806     15     14     12  

2013

  $806   $744   $15   $21   $11    806     744     15     21     11  

2012

   930    872    18    27    12 

2011

   711    659    18    28    15 

 

(a)Includes Generation’s PPAs and other capacity contracts that are accounted for as operating leases and are reflected as net capacity purchases in the energy commitments table above. These agreements are considered contingent operating lease payments andassociated with contracted generation agreements that are not included in the minimum future operating lease payments table above. Payments made under Generation’s PPAscontracted generation lease agreements totaled $798 million, $755 million and other capacity contracts totaled $694 million $801 millionduring 2015, 2014 and $630 million during 2013, 2012respectively. Excludes contract amortization associated with purchase accounting and 2011, respectively.contract acquisitions.

 

For information regarding capital lease obligations, see Note 13—14—Debt and Credit Agreements.

 

Indemnifications Related to Sale of Sithe (Exelon and Generation)Nuclear Insurance

 

On January 31, 2005, subsidiaries of Generation completed a series of transactions that resulted in Generation’s saleis subject to liability, property damage and other risks associated with major incidents at any of its investment in Sithe. Specifically, subsidiaries ofnuclear stations, including the CENG nuclear stations. Generation consummated the acquisition of Reservoir Capital Group’s 50% interest in Sithehas mitigated its financial exposure to these risks through insurance and subsequently sold 100% of Sithe to Dynegy Inc. (Dynegy).other industry risk-sharing provisions.

 

The estimated maximum possible exposurePrice-Anderson Act was enacted to Exelon relatedensure the availability of funds for public liability claims arising from an incident at any of the U.S. licensed nuclear facilities and also to limit the liability of nuclear reactor owners for such claims from any single incident. As of December 31, 2015, the current liability limit per incidentis $13.5 billion and is subject to change to account for the effects of inflation and changes in the number of licensed reactors. An inflation adjustment must be made at least once every 5 years and the last inflation adjustment was made effective September 10, 2013. In accordance with the Price-Anderson Act, Generation maintains financial protection at levels equal to the guarantees provided as partamount of liability insurance available from private sources through the sales transaction to Dynegy was approximately $200 million atpurchase of private nuclear energy liability insurance for public liability claims that could arise in the event of an incident. As of December 31, 2013. Generation believes2015, the amount of nuclear energy liability insurance purchased is $375 million for each operating site. Additionally, the Price-Anderson Act requires a second layer of protection through the mandatory participation in a retrospective rating plan for power reactors (currently 103 reactors) resulting in an additional $13.1 billion in funds available for public liability claims. Participation in this secondary financial protection pool requires the operator of each reactor to fund its proportionate share of costs for any single incident that it is remote that it will be required to make any additional payments underexceeds the guarantee, and currently has no recorded liabilities associated with this guarantee. Generation expects thatprimary layer of financial protection. Under the exposure covered by this guarantee will expire in 2014. The guarantee is included abovePrice-Anderson Act, the maximum assessment in the Commercial Commitments table under performance guarantees.

event of an incident for each nuclear operator, per reactor, per incident (including a 5% surcharge), is $127.3 million, payable at no more than $19 million per reactor per incident per year. Exelon’s maximum liability per incident is approximately $2.7 billion, including CENG’s related liability.

 

394In addition, the U.S. Congress could impose revenue-raising measures on the nuclear industry to pay public liability claims exceeding the $13.5 billion limit for a single incident.


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Indemnifications RelatedAs part of the execution of the NOSA on April 1, 2014, Generation executed an Indemnity Agreement pursuant to Sale of TEGwhich Generation agreed to indemnify EDF and TEP (Exelon and Generation)

On February 9, 2007, Tamuin International Inc. (TII), a wholly owned subsidiary of Generation, sold its 49.5% ownership interestsaffiliates against third-party claims that may arise from any future nuclear incident (as defined in TEG and TEP to a subsidiary of AES Corporation for $95 millionthe Price-Anderson Act) in cash plus certain purchase price adjustments. In connection with the transaction, CENG nuclear plants or their operations. Exelon guarantees Generation’s obligations under this indemnity. See Note 5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC for additional information on Generation’s operations relating to CENG.

Generation entered into a guarantee agreement under which Generation guarantees the timely payment of TII’s obligationsis required each year to report to the subsidiaryNRC the current levels and sources of AES Corporation pursuantproperty insurance that demonstrates Generation possesses sufficient financial resources to the terms of the purchasestabilize and sale agreement relating to the sale of TII’s ownership interests. Generation was required to performdecontaminate a reactor and reactor station site in the event that TII did not pay any obligation coveredof an accident. The property insurance maintained for each facility is currently provided through insurance policies purchased from NEIL, an industry mutual insurance company of which Generation is a member.

NEIL may declare distributions to its members as a result of favorable operating experience. In recent years NEIL has made distributions to its members, but Generation cannot predict the level of future distributions or if they will continue at all. Generation’s portion of the distribution declared by the guarantee thatNEIL is estimated to be $20.7 million for 2015, and was not otherwise$18.3 million for 2014 and $18.5 million for 2013. The distributions were recorded as a reduction to Operating and maintenance expense within Exelon and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. Premiums paid to NEIL by its members are subject to a dispute resolution process. Portionsassessment for adverse loss experience (the retrospective premium obligation). NEIL has never exercised this assessment since its formation in 1973, and while Generation cannot predict the level of the exposures covered by this guarantee expired in 2008, and the remaining guarantee expired in the third quarter of 2013. Generation was not required to make payments under the guarantee, and therefore, has no further obligation related to this guaranteefuture assessments, or if they will be imposed at all, as of December 31, 2013.2015, the current maximum aggregate annual retrospective premium obligation for Generation is approximately $365 million. NEIL requires its members to maintain an investment grade credit rating or to ensure collectability of their annual retrospective premium obligation by providing a financial guarantee, letter of credit, deposit premium, or some other means of assurance.

 

NEIL provides “all risk” property damage, decontamination and premature decommissioning insurance for each station for losses resulting from damage to its nuclear plants, either due to accidents or acts of terrorism. If the decision is made to decommission the facility, a portion of the insurance proceeds will be allocated to a fund, which Generation is required by the NRC to maintain, to provide for decommissioning the facility. In the event of an insured loss, Generation is unable to predict the timing of the availability of insurance proceeds to Generation and the amount of such proceeds that would be available. In the event that one or more acts of terrorism cause accidental property damage within a twelve-month period from the first accidental property damage under one or more policies for all insured plants, the maximum recovery for all losses by all insureds will be an aggregate of $3.2 billion plus such additional amounts as the insurer may recover for all such losses from reinsurance, indemnity and any other source, applicable to such losses.

For its insured losses, Generation is self-insured to the extent that losses are within the policy deductible or exceed the amount of insurance maintained. Uninsured losses and other expenses, to the extent not recoverable from insurers or the nuclear industry, could also be borne by Generation. Any such losses could have a material adverse effect on Exelon’s and Generation’s financial condition, results of operations and liquidity.

Spent Nuclear Fuel Obligation

Under the NWPA, the DOE is responsible for the development of a geologic repository for and the disposal of SNF and high-level radioactive waste. As required by the NWPA, Generation is a party to

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

contracts with the DOE (Standard Contracts) to provide for disposal of SNF from Generation’s nuclear generating stations. In accordance with the NWPA and the Standard Contracts, Generation historically had paid the DOE one mill ($0.001) per kWh of net nuclear generation for the cost of SNF disposal. On November 19, 2013, the D.C. Circuit Court ordered the DOE to submit to Congress a proposal to reduce the current SNF disposal fee to zero, unless and until there is a viable disposal program. On May 9, 2014, the DOE notified Generation that the SNF disposal fee remained in effect through May 15, 2014, after which time the fee was set to zero. As a result, for the year ended December 31, 2015, Generation did not incur any expense in SNF disposal fees. For the year ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, Generation incurred expense of $49 million and $136 million, respectively, in SNF disposal fees recorded in Purchased power and fuel expense within Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income, including Exelon’s share of Salem and net of co-owner reimbursements (not including such fees incurred by CENG). Until such time as a new fee structure is in effect, Exelon and Generation will not accrue any further costs related to SNF disposal fees. This fee may be adjusted prospectively in order to ensure full cost recovery. The NWPA and the Standard Contracts required the DOE to begin taking possession of SNF generated by nuclear generating units by no later than January 31, 1998. The DOE, however, failed to meet that deadline and its performance has been, and is expected to be, delayed significantly.

The 2010 Federal budget (which became effective October 1, 2009) eliminated almost all funding for the creation of the Yucca Mountain repository while the Obama administration devised a new strategy for long-term SNF management. A Blue Ribbon Commission (BRC) on America’s Nuclear Future, appointed by the U.S. Energy Secretary, released a report on January 26, 2012, detailing comprehensive recommendations for creating a safe, long-term solution for managing and disposing of the nation’s spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste.

In early 2013, the DOE issued an updated “Strategy for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste” in response to the BRC recommendations. This strategy included a consolidated interim storage facility that is planned to be operational in 2025.

Generation uses the 2025 date as the assumed date for when the DOE will begin accepting SNF for purposes of determining nuclear decommissioning asset retirement obligations.

In August 2004, Generation and the DOJ, in close consultation with the DOE, reached a settlement under which the government agreed to reimburse Generation, subject to certain damage limitations based on the extent of the government’s breach, for costs associated with storage of SNF at Generation’s nuclear stations pending the DOE’s fulfillment of its obligations. Settlement agreements pertaining to Calvert Cliffs and Ginna were executed during 2011, and Nine Mile Point during 2012, (the “DOE Settlement Agreements”), as amended in 2014 for Calvert Cliffs and Nine Mile Point, under which the government has agreed to reimburse the costs associated with SNF storage expended or to be expended through 2016 as a result of the DOE delays. The DOE Settlement Agreement is expected to be amended for Ginna in a similar manner as needed. Generation, including CENG, submits annual reimbursement requests to the DOE for costs associated with the storage of SNF. In all cases, reimbursement requests are made only after costs are incurred and only for costs resulting from DOE delays in accepting the SNF.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Under the settlement agreement, Generation has received cumulative cash reimbursements for costs incurred as follows:

   Total   Net(a) 

Cumulative cash reimbursements(b)

  $945    $804  

(a)Total after considering amounts due to co-owners of certain nuclear stations and to the former owner of Oyster Creek.
(b)Includes $53 million and $49 million, respectively, for amounts received since April 1, 2014, for costs incurred under the CENG DOE Settlement Agreements prior to the consolidation of CENG.

As of December 31, 2015, and 2014, the amount of SNF storage costs for which reimbursement has been or will be requested from the DOE under the DOE settlement agreements is as follows:

   December 31, 2015  December 31, 2014 

DOE receivable—current(a)

  $76   $82  

DOE receivable—noncurrent(b)

   14    7  

Amounts owed to co-owners(a)(c)

   (5  (5

(a)Recorded in Accounts receivable, other.
(b)Recorded in Deferred debits and other assets, other
(c)Non-CENG amounts owed to co-owners are recorded in Accounts receivable, other. CENG amounts owed to co-owners are recorded in Accounts payable. Represents amounts owed to the co-owners of Peach Bottom, Quad Cities, and Nine Mile Point Unit 2 generating facilities.

The Standard Contracts with the DOE also required the payment to the DOE of a one-time fee applicable to nuclear generation through April 6, 1983. The fee related to the former PECO units has been paid. Pursuant to the Standard Contracts, ComEd previously elected to defer payment of the one-time fee of $277 million for its units (which are now part of Generation), with interest to the date of payment, until just prior to the first delivery of SNF to the DOE. As of December 31, 2015, the unfunded SNF liability for the one-time fee with interest was $1,021 million. Interest accrues at the 13-week Treasury Rate. The 13-week Treasury Rate in effect, for calculation of the interest accrual at December 31, 2015, was 0.112%. The liabilities for SNF disposal costs, including the one-time fee, were transferred to Generation as part of Exelon’s 2001 corporate restructuring. The outstanding one-time fee obligations for the Nine Mile Point, Ginna, Oyster Creek and TMI units remain with the former owners. The Clinton and Calvert Cliffs units have no outstanding obligation. See Note 12—Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities for additional information.

Environmental Matters

 

General. The Registrants’ operations have in the past, and may in the future, require substantial expenditures in order to comply with environmental laws. Additionally, under Federal and state environmental laws, the Registrants are generally liable for the costs of remediating environmental contamination of property currentlynow or formerly owned by them and of property contaminated by hazardous substances generated by them. The Registrants own or lease a number of real estate parcels, including parcels on which their operations or the operations of others may have resulted in contamination by substances that are considered hazardous under environmental laws. In addition, the Registrants are currently involved in a number of proceedings relating to sites where hazardous substances have been deposited and may be subject to additional proceedings in the future.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

ComEd, PECO and BGE have identified sites where former MGP activities have or may have resulted in actual site contamination. For manyalmost all of these sites, ComEd, PECO or BGE is one of severalthere are additional PRPs that may be responsibleshare responsibility for the ultimate remediation of each location.

 

ComEd has identified 42 sites, 1617 of which have been remediated and approved for cleanup by the Illinois EPA or the U.S. EPA and 2625 that are currently under some degree of active study and/or remediation. ComEd expects the majority of the remediation at these sites to continue through at least 2016.2020.

 

PECO has identified 26 sites, 16 of which have been approved for cleanup by theremediated in accordance with applicable PA DEP andregulatory requirements. The remaining 10 thatsites are currently under some degree of active study and/or remediation. PECO expects the majority of the remediation at these sites to continue through at least 2020.2021.

 

BGE has identified 13 former gas manufacturing or purification sites that it currently owns or owned at one time through a predecessor’s acquisition. Two gas manufacturing sites require some level of remediation and ongoing monitoring under the direction of the MDE. The required costs at these two sites are not considered material. OneAn investigation of an additional gas purification site is inwas completed during the initial stagesfirst quarter of investigation2015 at the direction of the MDE. For more information, see the discussion of the Riverside site below.

 

ComEd, pursuant to an ICC order, and PECO, pursuant to settlements of natural gas distribution rate cases with the PAPUC, are currently recovering environmental remediation costs of former MGP facility sites through customer rates. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information regarding the associated regulatory assets. BGE is authorized to recover, and is currently recovering, environmental costs for the remediation of the former MGP facility sites from customers; however, while BGE does not have a rider for MGP clean-up costs, BGE has historically received recovery of actual clean-up costs in distribution rates. ComEd, PECO and BGE have recorded regulatory assets for the recovery of these

costs.

 

395As of December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Registrants had accrued the following undiscounted amounts for environmental liabilities in Other current liabilities and Other deferred credits and other liabilities within their respective Consolidated Balance Sheets:


December 31, 2015

  Total environmental
investigation
and  remediation reserve
   Portion of total related to  MGP
investigation and remediation (a)
 

Exelon

  $369    $301  

Generation

   63     —    

ComEd

   266     264  

PECO

   37     35  

BGE(a)

   3     2  

December 31, 2014

  Total environmental
investigation
and remediation reserve
   Portion of total related to  MGP
investigation and remediation
 

Exelon

  $347    $277  

Generation

   63     —    

ComEd

   238     235  

PECO

   45     42  

BGE

   1     —    

(a)For BGE, includes reserve for Riverside, a gas purification site. See discussion below for additional information.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

costs. During the third quarter of 2013, ComEd and PECO completed an annual study of their future estimated MGP remediation requirements. The results of these studies indicated that additional remediation would be required at certain sites; accordingly, ComEd and PECO increased their reserves and regulatory assets by less than $1 million and $6 million, respectively. BGE assessed its currently and formerly owned gas manufacturing and purification sites quarterly in 2013 and determined that a loss was not probable at ten of its sites as of December 31, 2013. As discussed above, the remediation costs at two of BGE’s MGP sites are not considered material. Furthermore, an estimate of a range of possible loss, if any, related to BGE’s gas purification site under investigation cannot be determined as of December 31, 2013 given that the site is in the early stages of investigation and the extent of contamination is currently unknown. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information regarding the associated regulatory assets.

 

The historical nature of the MGP sites and the fact that many of the sites have been buried and built over, impacts the ability to determine a precise estimate of the ultimate costs prior to initial sampling and determination of the exact scope and method of remedial action.activity. Management determines its best estimate of remediation costs based on probabilistic modeling and deterministic estimates using all available information at the time of each study, including probabilistic and deterministic modeling for ComEd and PECO, and the remediation standards currently required by the U.S. EPA.applicable state environmental agency. Prior to completion of any significant clean up, each site remediation plan is approved by the appropriate state environmental agency.

 

AsDuring the third quarter of December 31, 20132015, ComEd and 2012,PECO completed an annual study of their future estimated MGP remediation requirements. For ComEd, the Registrants have accruedresults of the following undiscounted amounts forstudy resulted in a $50 million increase to ComEd’s environmental liabilities and related regulatory assets. The increase at ComEd was primarily driven by refined assumptions and scopes based on further experience and analysis, including one site where a new option is being considered for a facility under which contamination exists and certain sites where another PRP leads the remediation efforts and ComEd shares responsibility. For PECO, the results of the study resulted in other currenta $1 million decrease to PECO’s environmental liabilities and other deferred credits and other liabilities within their respective Consolidated Balance Sheets:related regulatory assets.

December 31, 2013

  Total environmental
investigation
and remediation reserve
   Portion of total related to MGP
investigation and remediation
 

Exelon

  $338   $273 

Generation

   56    —   

ComEd

   234    229 

PECO

   47    44 

BGE

   1    —   

December 31, 2012

  Total environmental
investigation
and remediation reserve
   Portion of total related to MGP
investigation and remediation
 

Exelon

  $351   $298 

Generation

   42    —   

ComEd

   261    254 

PECO

   47    44 

BGE

   1    —   

 

The Registrants cannot reasonably estimate whether they will incur other significant liabilities for additional investigation and remediation costs at these or additional sites identified by the Registrants, environmental agencies or others, or whether such costs will be recoverable from third parties, including customers.

 

Water Quality

Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act. Section 316(b) requires that the cooling water intake structures at electric power plants reflect the best technology available to minimize adverse environmental impacts, and is implemented through state-level NPDES permit programs. All of

396


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Generation’s and CENG’s power generation facilities with cooling water systems are subject to the regulations. Facilities without closed-cycle recirculating systems (e.g., cooling towers) are potentially most affected by changes to the existing regulations. For Generation, those facilities are Clinton, Dresden, Eddystone, Fairless Hills, Gould Street, Handley, Mountain Creek, Mystic 7, Oyster Creek, Peach Bottom, Quad Cities, Riverside, Salem and Schuylkill. For CENG, those facilities are Calvert Cliffs, Nine Mile Point Unit 1 and R.E. Ginna.

On March 28, 2011, the U.S. EPA issued the proposed regulation under Section 316(b). The proposal does not require closed-cycle cooling (e.g., cooling towers) as the best technology available to address impingement and entrainment. The proposal provides the state permitting agency with discretion to determine the best technology available to limit entrainment (drawing aquatic life into the plants cooling system) mortality, including application of a cost-benefit test and the consideration of a number of site-specific factors. After consideration of these factors, the state permitting agency may require closed cycle cooling, an alternate technology, or determine that the current technology is the best available. The proposed rule also imposes limits on impingement (trapping aquatic life on screens) mortality, which likely will be accomplished by the installation of screens or another technology at the intake. Exelon filed comments on the proposed regulation on August 18, 2011, stating its support for a number of its provisions (e.g., cooling towers not required as best technology available, and the use of site-specific and cost benefit analysis) while also noting a number of technical provisions that require revision to take into account existing unit operations and practices within the industry.

In June 2012, the U.S. EPA published two Notices of Data Availability (NODA) seeking public comment on alternate compliance technologies for impingement and the use of a public opinion survey to calculate the so-called “non-use” benefits of the rule. Exelon filed comments for each NODA, supporting the additional flexibility afforded by the impingement NODA, and opposing the NODA relating to calculation of non-use benefits due to its inaccurate and unreliable methodologies that would artificially inflate the benefits of proposed technologies that would otherwise not be cost-effective. On June 27, 2013, the U.S. EPA agreed to amend the court approved Settlement Agreement to extend the deadline to issue a final rule until November 4, 2013 and on October 30, 2013 the U.S. EPA invoked theforce majeure provision of the Settlement Agreement to extend the final rule deadline until January 14, 2014 due to the early October 2013 federal government shutdown. The U.S. EPA and the plaintiffs have again agreed to extend the date for issuance of the final rule until April 17, 2014. Until the rule is finalized, the state permitting agencies will continue to apply their best professional judgment to address impingement and entrainment.

Salem and Other Power Generation Facilities. In June 2001, the NJDEP issued a renewed NPDES permit for Salem, allowing for the continued operation of Salem with its existing cooling water system. NJDEP advised PSEG, in July 2004 that it strongly recommended reducing cooling water intake flow commensurate with closed-cycle cooling as a compliance option for Salem. PSEG submitted an application for a renewal of the permit on February 1, 2006. In the permit renewal application, PSEG analyzed closed-cycle cooling and other options and demonstrated that the continuation of the Estuary Enhancement Program, an extensive environmental restoration program at Salem, is the best technology to meet the Section 316(b) requirements. PSEG continues to operate Salem under the approved June 2001 NPDES permit while the NPDES permit renewal application is being reviewed. If the final permit or Section 316(b) regulations ultimately requires the retrofitting of Salem’s cooling water intake structure to reduce cooling water intake flow commensurate with closed-cycle cooling, Exelon’s and Generation’s share of the total cost of the retrofit and any resulting interim replacement power would likely be in excess of $430 million, based on a 2006 estimate, and would result in increased depreciation expense related to the retrofit investment.

397


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

It is unknown at this time whether the NJDEP permit programs will require closed-cycle cooling at Salem. In addition, the economic viability of Generation’s other power generation facilities, as well as CENG’s, without closed-cycle cooling water systems will be called into question by any requirement to construct cooling towers. Should the final rule not require the installation of cooling towers, and retain the flexibility afforded the state permitting agencies in applying a cost benefit test and to consider site-specific factors, the impact of the rule would be minimized even though the costs of compliance could be material to Generation and CENG.

Given the uncertainties associated with the requirements that will be contained in the final rule, Generation cannot predict the eventual outcome or estimate the effect that compliance with any resulting Section 316(b) or interim state requirements will have on the operation of its and CENG’s generating facilities and its future results of operations, cash flows and financial position.

 

Groundwater Contamination. In October 2007, a subsidiary of Constellation entered into a consent decree with the MDE relating to groundwater contamination at a third-party facility that was licensed to accept fly ash, a byproduct generated by coal-fired plants. The consent decree required the payment of a $1 million penalty, remediation of groundwater contamination resulting from the ash placement operations at the site, replacement of drinking water supplies in the vicinity of the site, and monitoring of groundwater conditions. Prior to the Merger, Constellation recorded in its Consolidated Balance Sheets total liabilities of approximately $30 million to comply with the consent decree with an additional $3 million recognized through purchase accounting. During third quarter of 2013, Generation increased its reserve by $2 million based on an update of future estimated remediation costs. The remaining liability asAs of December 31, 2013, is approximately $14 million. In addition, a private party asserted claims relating to2015 and 2014, Generation’s remaining groundwater contamination. Generation has reached an agreement in principle to resolve these claims. The amount of the settlement is not material to the financial condition of Generation.

Alleged Conemaugh Clean Streams Act Violation. The PA DEP has alleged that GenOn Northeast Management Company (GenOn), the operator of Conemaugh Generating Station, violated the Pennsylvania Clean Streams Law. GenOn reached agreement with PA DEP on a proposed Consent Decree thatcontamination reserve was approved by the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania on December 4, 2012. Under the Consent Decree, GenOn is obligated to pay a civil penalty of $0.5$12 million of which Generation’s responsibility was approximately $0.2 million. Generation made the final payment in January 2014 and is complying with the Consent Decree.$13 million respectively.

 

Air Quality

Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR). On July 11, 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit Court) vacated the CAIR, which had been promulgated by the U.S. EPA to reduce power plant emissions of SO2 and NOx. The D.C. Circuit Court later remanded the CAIR to the U.S. EPA, without invalidating the entire rulemaking, so that the U.S. EPA could correct CAIR in accordance with the D.C. Circuit Court’s July 11, 2008 opinion. On July 7, 2011, the U.S. EPA published the final rule, known as the CSAPR. The CSAPR requires 28 states in the eastern half of the United States to significantly improve air quality by reducing power plant emissions that cross state lines and contribute to ground-level ozone and fine particle pollution in other states.

Numerous entities challenged the CSAPR in the D.C. Circuit Court, and some requested a stay of the rule pending the Court’s consideration of the matter on the merits. On December 30, 2011, the Court granted a stay of the CSAPR, and directed the U.S. EPA to continue the administration of CAIR in the interim. On August 21, 2012, a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court held that the U.S. EPA

398


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

has exceeded its authority in certain material aspects of the CSAPR and vacated the rule and remanded it to the U.S. EPA for further rulemaking consistent with its decision. The Court also ordered that CAIR remain in effect pending finalization of CSAPR on remand. The Court’s order was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, where oral argument was held on December 10, 2013. A decision is expected sometime during 2014.

Under the CSAPR, generation units were to receive allowances based on historic heat input and intrastate, and limited interstate, trading of allowances was permitted. The CSAPR restricted entirely the use of pre-2012 allowances. Existing SO2 allowances under the ARP would remain available for use under ARP. As of December 31, 2013, Generation had $56 million of emission allowances carried at the lower of weighted average cost or market.

EPA Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS). The MATS rule became final on April 16, 2012. The MATS rule reduces emissions of toxic air pollutants, and finalized the new source performance standards for fossil fuel-fired electric utility steam generating units (EGUs). The MATS rule requires coal-fired EGUs to achieve high removal rates of mercury, acid gases and other metals from air emissions. To achieve these standards, coal units with no pollution control equipment installed (uncontrolled coal units) will have to make capital investments and incur higher operating expenses. It is expected that smaller, older, uncontrolled coal units will retire rather than make these investments. Coal units with existing controls that do not meet the required standards may need to upgrade existing controls or add new controls to comply. In addition, the new standards will require oil units to achieve high removal rates of metals. Owners of oil units not currently meeting the proposed emission standards may choose to convert the units to light oils or natural gas, install control technologies or retire the units. The MATS rule requires generating stations to meet the new standards three years after the rule takes effect, April 16, 2015, with specific guidelines for an additional one or two years in limited cases. Numerous entities have challenged MATS in the D.C. Circuit Court, and Exelon was granted permission by the Court to intervene in support of the rule. A decision by the Court is expected sometime during 2014. The outcome of the appeal, and its impact on power plant operators’ investment and retirement decisions, is uncertain.

Exelon, along with the other co-owners of Conemaugh Generating Station are moving forward with plans to improve the existing scrubbers and install Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) controls to meet the mercury removal requirements of MATS.

In addition, as of December 31, 2013, Exelon had a $698 million net investment in coal-fired plants in Georgia and Texas subject to long-term leases extending through 2028-2032. While Exelon currently estimates the value of these plants at the end of the lease term will be in excess of the recorded residual lease values, after the impairment recorded in the second quarter of 2013, final applications of the CSAPR and MATS regulations could negatively impact the end-of-lease term values of these assets, which could result in a future impairment loss that could be material.

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The U.S. EPA previously announced that it would complete a review of all NAAQS by 2014. Oral argument in the litigation (State of Miss. v. EPA) of the final 2008 ozone standard occurred in the D.C. Circuit Court in November 2012 and a final Court decision was issued on July 23, 2013 with the 2008 primary ozone standard upheld, but the secondary standard remanded to EPA for reconsideration. Concurrent with litigation of the 2008 ozone standard, the U.S. EPA continues its regular, periodic review of the ozone NAAQS and is expected to propose revisions in the fall of 2014, with preliminary indications that the U.S. EPA will likely propose a tightened standard. It is unclear at this point in time whether the U.S. EPA will be able to respond to the Court remand of the secondary 2008 ozone standard on a timeframe that would be any quicker than

399


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

that of the U.S. EPA’s current, periodic review schedule. In December 2012, the U.S. EPA issued its final revisions to the Agency’s particulate matter (PM) NAAQS. In its final rule, the U.S. EPA lowered the annual PM2.5 standard, but declined to issue a new secondary NAAQS to improve urban visibility. The U.S. EPA indicated in its final rule that by 2020 it expects most areas of the country will be in attainment of the new PM2.5 NAAQS based on currently expected regulations, such as the MATS regulation. It is unclear if the vacatur of the CSAPR, one of the regulations that the U.S. EPA is relying on to assist with future PM reduction, would alter the U.S. EPA’s view since either CAIR or a finalized CSAPR regulation would be in effect leading up to 2020. In March 2013, a number of industry coalitions filed a joint lawsuit challenging the new PM2.5 standard. Also during early 2013, the D.C. Circuit remanded several rules for implementation of earlier PM2.5 NAAQS to the U.S. EPA for revision of certain aspects of the rules, with a requirement that the U.S. EPA re-promulgate regulations in conformance with the correct subparts of the Clean Air Act.

In addition to these NAAQS, the U.S. EPA also finalized nonattainment designations for certain areas in the United States for the 2010 one-hour SO2 standard on August 5, 2013, and indicated that additional nonattainment areas will be designated in a future rulemaking. U.S. EPA will require states to submit state implementation plans (SIPs) for nonattainment areas by April 2015. With regard to Texas and Maryland, no nonattainment areas were identified in U.S. EPA’s final designation rule. With regard to Illinois and Pennsylvania, several counties, or portions of counties, in each state were identified as nonattainment. The U.S. EPA will follow the approach outlined in a February 2013 U.S. EPA strategy document that establishes a process and timeline for the Agency to address additional designations in states’ counties under a future rulemaking. Nonattainment county compliance with the one-hour SO2 standard is required by October 2018. While significant SO2 reductions will occur as a result of MATS compliance in 2015, Exelon is unable to predict the requirements of pending states’ SIPs to further reduce SO2 emissions in support of attainment of the one hour SO2 standard.

 

Notices and Finding of Violations and Midwest Generation Bankruptcy. In December 1999, ComEd sold several generating stations to Midwest Generation, LLC (Midwest Generation), a subsidiary of Edison Mission Energy (EME). Under the terms of the sale agreement, Midwest Generation and EME assumed responsibility for environmental liabilities associated with the ownership, occupancy, use and operation of the stations, including responsibility for compliance by the stations with environmental laws before their purchase by Midwest Generation. Midwest Generation and EME additionally agreed to indemnify and hold ComEd and its affiliates harmless from claims, fines, penalties, liabilities and expenses arising from third-partythird party claims against ComEd resulting from or arising out of the environmental liabilities assumed by Midwest Generation and EME under the terms of the agreement governing the sale. In connection with Exelon’s 2001 corporate restructuring, Generation assumed ComEd’s rights and obligations with respect to its former generation business, including its rights and obligations under the sale agreement with Midwest Generation and EME.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Under a supplemental agreement reached in 2003, Midwest Generation agreed to reimburse ComEd and Generation for 50% of the specific asbestos claims pending as of February 2003 and related expenses less recovery of insurance costs and agreed to a sharing arrangement for liabilities and expenses associated with future asbestos-related claims as specified in the agreement.

 

On December 17, 2012 (Petition Date), EME and certain of its subsidiaries, including Midwest Generation, filed for protection under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code.

 

In 2012, the Bankruptcy Court approved the rejection of an agency agreement related to a coal rail car lease under which Midwest Generation had agreed to reimburse ComEd for all obligations.obligations incurred under the coal rail car lease. The rejection left Generation as the party responsible to makefor making all remaining payments under the lease. Inlease and performing all other obligations thereunder. A settlement was reached in January 2013, Generation made2015, to resolve the final $10 million payment due under the lease agreement which had been accrued at December 31, 2012.

400


Combined Notesclaims related to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

During the second quarter of 2013, Exelon filed proofs of claim of $21 million with the Bankruptcy Court for amounts owed by EME and Midwest Generation for the coal rail car lease ComEd utility paymentsfor approximately $14 million and certain legal costs. Further, Exelon filed anrecorded a gain upon receipt of the funds, within Operating and maintenance expense in Exelon’s and Generation’s Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income. No further action is expected related to the rail car lease.

On March 11, 2014, the Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Illinois entered its Order Confirming Debtors’ Joint Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization. On April 1, 2014 (Effective Date), NRG Energy purchased EME’s portfolio of generation, including Midwest Generation and the Joint Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization (Plan) became effective. As part of the Plan, the sale agreement, including the environmental claim with an unspecified amount that listedindemnity, and the indemnifications thatasbestos cost-sharing agreement were rejected.

Generation increased its reserve for asbestos-related bodily injury claims pertaining to Midwest Generations’ share of liability as a result of the rejection of the asbestos cost sharing agreement in place pre-Petition Datethe bankruptcy proceedings. Exelon and other factorsGeneration may be entitled to damages associated with the remediation. Asrejection of December 31, 2013,the agreement and a claim has been filed by Exelon hasfor such damages. These amounts are considered to be contingent gains and would not recorded a receivable for the filed proofs of claim because recovery of any amount cannot be assured at this point in the bankruptcy. Exelon will not record claim recoveries unless andrecognized until they are realized.

 

Certain environmental laws and regulations subject current and prior owners of properties or generators of hazardous substances at such properties to liability for remediation costs of environmental contamination. As a prior owner of the generating stations, ComEd (and Generation, through its agreement in Exelon’s 2001 corporate restructuring to assume ComEd’s rights and obligations associated with its former generation business) could face liability (along with any other potentially responsible parties) for environmental conditions at the stations requiring remediation, with the determination of the allocation among the parties subject to many uncertain factors, including the impact of Midwest Generation’s bankruptcy. On January 17, 2014, Midwest Generation filed a plan supplement to its bankruptcy filing that included a request to reject the sale agreement, including the environmental indemnity. ComEd and Generation have reviewed available public information as to potential environmental exposures regarding the Midwest Generation station sites. Midwest Generation publicly disclosed in its quarter ending September 30, 2013 Form 10-Q that (i) it has accrued a probable amount of approximately $8 million for estimated environmental investigation and remediation costs under CERCLA, or similar laws, for the investigation and remediation of contaminated property at four Midwest Generation plant sites, (ii) it has identified stations for which a reasonable estimate for investigation and/ or remediation cannot be made and (iii) it and the Illinois EPA entered into Compliance Commitment Agreements outlining specified environmental remediation measures and groundwater monitoring activities to be undertaken at its Crawford, Powerton, Joliet, Will County and Waukegan generating stations. At this time, however, ComEd and Generation do not have sufficient information to reasonably assess the potential likelihood or magnitude of any remediation requirements that may be asserted. For these reasons,factors. ComEd and Generation are unable to predict whether and to what extent they may ultimately be held responsible for remediation and other costs relating to the generating stations and as a result no liability has been recorded as of December 31, 2013.2015. Any liability imposed on ComEd or Generation for environmental matters relating to the generating stations could have a material adverse impact on their future results of operations and cash flows.

 

Under a supplemental agreement reached in 2003, Midwest Generation agreed to reimburse ComEd and Generation for 50% of the specific asbestos claims pending as of February 2003 and related expenses less recovery of insurance costs and agreed to a sharing arrangement for liabilities and expenses associated with future asbestos-related claims as specified in the agreement. In addition to the sale agreement, Midwest Generation also requested to reject this supplemental agreement in the January 17, 2014 plan supplement to its bankruptcy filing. Exelon and Generation had previously expected Midwest Generation or its successor would remain responsible for asbestos personal injury claims filed post-Petition Date, and as a result had not recorded a liability for such amounts. Exelon and Generation now believe that the rejection of the 1999 sale and supplemental agreements is probable, and as a result, Generation has increased its reserve for asbestos-related bodily injury claims at December 31, 2013 by $25 million. The increase in the reserve was estimated using actuarial assumptions and analyses available to Generation. Generation’s exposure could differ to the extent new information is received or made available. Midwest Generation publicly disclosed in its quarter ending September 30, 2013 Form 10-Q that they had $53 million recorded related to asbestos bodily injury claims under the contractual indemnity with ComEd. If the agreements are rejected, Exelon and

401


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Generation may be entitled to damages associated with the agreement terminations. These amounts are considered to be contingent gains and would not be recognized until realized.

On October 18, 2013, NRG Energy entered into an agreement to buy EME’s portfolio of generation subject to regulatory approvals. Exelon continues to monitor all aspects of the bankruptcy; the proposed purchase by NRG has not impacted any accounting conclusions as of December 31, 2013.

In May 2010, the United States and State of Illinois initiated a lawsuit against Midwest Generation, ComEd and EME alleging Clean Air Act violations relating to the modification and/or operation of six (coal) electric generation plants in Northern Illinois, which ComEd sold to Midwest Generation/EME in 1999. The government parties sought injunctive relief and civil penalties against all defendants, although not all of the claims specifically pertained to ComEd. On March 16, 2011, the District Court granted ComEd’s motion to dismiss the May 2010 complaint in its entirety as it relates to ComEd. On January 3, 2012, upon leave of the District Court, the government parties appealed the dismissal of ComEd to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. On July 8, 2013, the Circuit Court affirmed the District Court’s dismissal of the complaint against ComEd. On September 19, 2013, the Circuit Court denied the petition for a rehearing filed by the governmental parties. The government parties did not seek United States Supreme Court review of the Seventh Circuit’s decision. The deadline for seeking such review was in December 2013. In light of the Circuit Court decision resolving this matter in favor of ComEd, no reserve has been established.

Solid and Hazardous Waste

 

Cotter Corporation.The U.S. EPA has advised Cotter Corporation (Cotter), a former ComEd subsidiary, that it is potentially liable in connection with radiological contamination at a site known as the West Lake Landfill in Missouri. On February 18, 2000, ComEd sold Cotter to an unaffiliated third-party. As part of the sale, ComEd agreed to indemnify Cotter for any liability arising in connection with the West Lake Landfill. In connection with Exelon’s 2001 corporate restructuring, this responsibility to indemnify Cotter was transferred to Generation. On May 29, 2008, the U.S. EPA issued a Record of Decision approving the remediation option submitted by Cotter and the two other PRPs that required

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

additional landfill cover. The current estimated cost of the anticipated landfill cover remediation for the site is approximately $42 million, which will be allocated among all PRPs. Generation has accrued what it believes to be an adequate amount to cover its anticipated share of such liability. By letter dated January 11, 2010, the U.S. EPA requested that the PRPs perform a supplemental feasibility study for a remediation alternative that would involve complete excavation of the radiological contamination. On September 30, 2011, the PRPs submitted the final supplemental feasibility study to the U.S. EPA for review. InSince, June 2012, the U.S. EPA has requested that the PRPs perform a series of additional analysisanalyses and groundwater and soil sampling as part of the supplemental feasibility study, that could take up to one year to complete, and subsequently requested additional analysis sampling and modelingare now scheduled to be conducted into 2014. In light of these additional requests, it is unknown whencompleted in mid-2016 to enable the U.S EPA willto propose a remedy for public comment.comment by the end of 2016. Thereafter the U.S. EPA will select a final remedy and enter into a Consent Decree with the PRPs to effectuate the remedy. A complete excavation remedy would be significantly more expensive than the previously selected additional cover remedy; however, Generation believes the likelihood that the U.S. EPA would require a complete excavation remedy is remote. The U.S. EPA is also reviewing a partial excavation remedy; however, until the current sampling is concluded there is no basis to determine the likelihood and estimate of a partial excavation remedy. The current estimated cost of the landfill cover remediation for the site is approximately $60 million, which will be allocated among all PRPs. Recent investigation has identified a number of other parties who may be PRPs and could be liable to contribute to the final remedy. Further investigation is underway. Generation has accrued what it believes to be an adequate amount to cover its anticipated share of such liability.

During December 2015, the U.S. EPA took two actions related to the West Lake Landfill designed to abate what it termed as imminent and dangerous conditions at the landfill. The first involved installation of a non-combustible interim surface cover to protect against surface fires in areas where radiological materials are believed to have been disposed. Generation has accrued what it believes to be an adequate amount to cover its anticipated liability for this interim action. The second action involved EPA’s public statement that it will require the PRPs to construct a barrier wall in an adjacent landfill to prevent a subsurface fire from spreading to those areas of the West Lake Landfill where radiological materials are believed to have been disposed. At this time, EPA has not provided sufficient details related to the basis for and the requirements and design of a barrier wall to enable Generation to determine the likelihood such a remedy will ultimately be implemented, assess the degree to which Generation may have liability as a potentially responsible party, or develop a reasonable estimate of the potential incremental costs. It is reasonably possible, however, that resolution of this matter could have a material, unfavorable impact on Generation’s and Exelon’s future results of operations and cash flows. Finally, one of the other PRPs, the landfill owner and operator of the adjacent landfill, has indicated that it will be making a contribution claim against Cotter for costs that it has incurred to prevent the subsurface fire from spreading to those areas of the West Lake Landfill where radiological materials are believed to have been disposed. At this time, Generation and Exelon do not possess sufficient information to assess this claim and are therefore unable to determine the impact on their future results of operations and cash flows.

On February 2, 2015, the U.S. Senate passed a bill to transfer remediation authority over the West Lake landfill from the U.S. EPA to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, under the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP). Such legislation would become final upon passage in the U.S. House of Representatives and the signature of the President, and be subject to annual funding appropriations in the U.S. Budget. Remediation under FUSRAP would not alter the liability of the PRPs, but could delay the determination of a final remedy and its implementation.

 

On August 8, 2011, Cotter was notified by the DOJ that Cotter is considered a PRP with respect to the government’s clean-up costs for contamination attributable to low level radioactive residues at a former storage and reprocessing facility named Latty Avenue near St. Louis, Missouri. The Latty Avenue site is included in ComEd’s indemnification responsibilities discussed above as part of the sale

402


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Avenue site is included in ComEd’s indemnification responsibilities discussed above as part of the sale of Cotter. The radioactive residues had been generated initially in connection with the processing of uranium ores as part of the U.S. government’s Manhattan Project. Cotter purchased the residues in 1969 for initial processing at the Latty Avenue facility for the subsequent extraction of uranium and metals. In 1976, the NRC found that the Latty Avenue site had radiation levels exceeding NRC criteria for decontamination of land areas. Latty Avenue was investigated and remediated by the United States Army Corps of Engineers pursuant to funding under the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program. The DOJ has not yet formally advised the PRPs of the amount that it is seeking, but it is believed to be approximately $90 million. The DOJ and the PRPs agreed to toll the statute of limitations until August 20142016 so that settlement discussions could proceed. Based on Exelon’sGeneration’s preliminary review, it appears probable that ExelonGeneration has liability to Cotter under the indemnification agreement and has established an appropriate accrual for this liability.

 

OnCommencing in February 28, 2012, and April 12, 2012, two37 lawsuits werehave been filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri against 15 and 14Missouri. Among the defendants respectively, includingwere Exelon, Generation and ComEd, (the “Exelon defendants”)all of which were subsequently dismissed from the case, and Cotter.Cotter, which remains a defendant. The suits allege that individuals living in the North St. Louis area developed some form of cancer due to the defendants’Cotter’s negligent or reckless conduct in processing, transporting, storing, handling and/or disposing of radioactive materials. Plaintiffs have asserted claims for negligence, strict liability, emotional distress, medical monitoring, and violations of the Price-Anderson Act. The complaints do not contain specific damage claims. On May 30, 2012, the plaintiffs filed voluntary motions to dismiss the Exelon defendants from both lawsuits which were subsequently granted. Since May 30, 2012, several related lawsuits have been filed in the same court on behalf of various plaintiffs against Cotter and other defendants, but not Exelon. The allegations in these related lawsuits mirror the initially filed lawsuits. In the event of a finding of liability, it is reasonably possible that Exelon would be considered liable due to its indemnification responsibilities of Cotter described above. On March 27, 2013,The court has dismissed the U.S. District Court dismissed all state common law actions brought underlawsuits filed by 30 of the initial two lawsuits;plaintiffs. Pre-trial motions and also found thatdiscovery are proceeding in the plaintiffs had not properly brought the actions under the Price-Anderson Act. On July 8, 2013, the plaintiffsremaining cases and a proposed pre-trial scheduling order has been filed amended complaints under the Price-Anderson Act. Cotter moved to dismiss the amended complaints and has motions currently pending beforewith the court. At this stage of the litigation, ExelonGeneration and ComEd cannot estimate a range of loss, if any.

 

68th Street Dump.In 1999, the U.S. EPA proposed to add the 68th Street Dump in Baltimore, Maryland to the Superfund National Priorities List, and notified BGE and 19 others that they are PRPs at the site. In March 2004, BGE and other PRPs formed the 68th Street Coalition and entered into consent order negotiations with the U.S. EPA to investigate clean-up options for the site under the Superfund Alternative Sites Program. In May 2006, a settlement among the U.S. EPA and 19 of the PRPs, including BGE, with respect to investigation of the site became effective. The settlement requires the PRPs, over the course of several years, to identify contamination at the site and recommend clean-up options. The PRPs submitted their investigation of the range of clean-up options in the first quarter of 2011. Although the investigation and options provided to the U.S. EPA are still subject to U.S. EPA review and selection of a remedy, the range of estimated clean-up costs to be allocated among all of the PRPs is in the range of $50 million to $64 million. On September 30, 2013, U.S. EPA issued the Record of Decision identifying its preferred remedial alternative for the site. The estimated cost for the alternative chosen by U.S. EPA is consistent with the PRPsPRPs’ estimated range of costs noted above. Based on Exelon’sGeneration’s preliminary review, it appears probable that ExelonGeneration has liability and has established an appropriate accrual for its share of the estimated clean-up costs. BGE is indemnified by aA wholly owned subsidiary of Generation has agreed to indemnify BGE for most of the costs related to this settlement and clean-up of the site.

403


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Rossville Ash Site. The Rossville Ash Site is a 32-acre property located in Rosedale, Baltimore County, Maryland, which was used for the placement of fly ash from 1983-2007. The property is owned by Constellation Power Source Generation, LLC(CPSG).LLC (CPSG), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Generation. In 2008, CPSG investigated and remediated the property by entering it into the Maryland Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP) to address any historic environmental concerns and ready the site for appropriate future redevelopment. The site was accepted into the program in 2010 and is currently

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

going through the process to remediate the site and receive closure from MDE. Exelon currently estimates the cost to close the site to be approximately $6$9 million, which has been fully reserved as of December 31, 2013.2015.

 

Sauer Dump. On May 30, 2012, BGE was notified by the U.S. EPA that it is considered a PRP at the Sauer Dump Superfund site in Dundalk, Maryland. The U.S. EPA offered BGE and three other PRPs the opportunity to conduct an environmental investigation and present cleanup recommendations at the site. In addition, the U.S. EPA is seeking recovery from the PRPs of $1.7 million for past cleanup and investigation costs at the site. On March 11, 2013, BGE and three other PRP’sPRPs signed an Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent with the U.S. EPA which requires the PRP’sPRPs to conduct a Remedial Investigationremedial investigation and Feasibility Studyfeasibility study at the site to determine what, if any, are the appropriate and recommended cleanup activities for the site. The ultimate outcome of this proceeding is uncertain. Since the U.S. EPA has not selected a cleanup remedy and the allocation of the cleanup costs among the PRPs has not been determined, an estimate of the range of BGE’s reasonably possible loss, if any, cannot be determined.

 

Climate Change Regulation.Riverside Exelon is subject to climate change regulation or legislation. In 2013, the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE), at the Federal, regionalrequest of U.S. EPA, conducted a site inspection and state levels. In 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that GHG emissions are pollutants subject to regulation under the new motor vehicle provisionslimited environmental sampling of certain portions of the Clean Air Act. Consequently, on December 7, 2009, the U.S. EPA issued an endangerment finding under Section 202170 acre Riverside property owned by BGE. The site consists of the Clean Air Act regarding GHGs from new motor vehiclesseveral different parcels with different current and on April 1, 2010 issued final regulations limiting GHG emissions from carshistorical uses. The sampling included soil and light trucks effective on January 2, 2011. While such regulations do not specifically address stationary sources, such as a generating plant, it is the U.S. EPA’s position that the regulation of GHGs under the mobile source provisions of the Clean Air Act has triggered the permitting requirements under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Title V operating permit sections of the Clean Air Actgroundwater samples for new and modified stationary sources effective January 2, 2011. Therefore, on May 13, 2010, the U.S. EPA issued final regulations (the Tailoring Rule) relating to these provisions of the Clean Air Act for major stationary sources of GHG emissions that apply to new sources that emit greater than 100,000 tons per year, on a CO2 equivalent basis, and to modifications to existing sources that result in emissions increases greater than 75,000 tons per year on a CO2 equivalent basis. These thresholds became effective January 2, 2011, apply for six years and will be reviewed by the U.S. EPA for future applicability thereafter. On July 2, 2012 the U.S. EPA declined to lower GHG permit thresholds in its final “Step 3” Tailoring Rule update. The U.S. EPA will review permit thresholds again in a 2015 rulemaking process. On June 26, 2012, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, in aper curium decision, dismissed industry and state petitions challenging the U.S. EPA’s “Tailpipe Rule” for cars and light duty trucks, the endangerment finding for GHG’s from stationary sources, and the Tailoring Rule. On October 15, 2013 the U.S. Supreme Court granted industry petitions to review one aspect of the PSD permitting regulations. Under the PSD regulations, new and modified major stationary sources could be required to install best available control technology, to be determined on a case by case basis. Generation could be significantly affected by the regulations if it were to build new plants or modify existing plants.

On June 25, 2013, President Obama announced “The President’s Climate Action Plan,” a summary of executive branch actions intended to: reduce carbon emissions; prepare the United States

404


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

for the impacts of climate change; and lead international efforts to combat global climate change and prepare for its impacts. Concurrent with the announcement of the Administration’s plan, the President also issued a Memorandum for the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency that focused on power generation sector carbon reductions under the Section 111 New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) section of the federal Clean Air Act. The memorandum directs the U.S. EPA Administrator to issue two sets of proposed rulemakings with regard to power plant carbon emissions under Section 111 of the Clean Air Act.

The first rulemaking, under Section 111(b) of the Clean Air Act is to focus on establishing carbon regulations for new fossil-fuel power plants. This rulemaking was proposed on September 20, 2013 and is to be finalized “in a timely fashion.” In the proposed rule U.S.EPA sets separate standards for fossil-fuel fired utility boilers and natural gas fired stationary combustion turbines.

The second rulemaking, under Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act is to focus on modified, reconstructed and existing fossil power plants. The rulemaking is to be proposed no later than June 1, 2014, be finalized no later than June 1, 2015, and require that states submit to U.S. EPA their implementation plans no later than June 30, 2016. In developing this rulemaking, U.S. EPA is directed to consider a number of factors, including options to reduce costs, options to ensurepotential environmental contaminants. The sampling confirmed the continued useexistence of a range of energy sources and technologies, options that arecontaminants consistent with reliablethe known historical uses of the various portions of the site. In March 2014, the MDE requested that BGE conduct an investigation of three specific areas of the site, and affordable power,a site-wide investigation of soils, sediment, groundwater, and optionssurface water to complement the MDE sampling. The field investigation was completed in January 2015, and a final report was provided to MDE onJune 2, 2015. On November 3, 2015, MDE provided BGE with its comments and recommendations on the report which require BGE to conduct further investigation and sampling at the site to better delineate the nature and extent of historic contamination, including off-site sediment and soil sampling.MDE did not request any interim remediation at this time. Upon completion of the investigation the MDE will determine if the site requires further action and/or remediation. Based upon the investigation to date, BGE has established what it believes is an appropriate reserve. As the investigation and potential remediation proceed, it is possible that allow for the use of market-based instruments, performance standards and other regulatory flexibilities.additional reserves could be established, in amounts that could be material to BGE.

 

To the extent that the final Section 111(d) rule results in emission reductions from fossil fuel fired plants, and thereby imposes some form of direct or indirect price of carbon in competitive electricity markets, Exelon’s overall low-carbon generation portfolio results could benefit.

Litigation and Regulatory Matters

 

Asbestos Personal Injury Claims (Exelon, Generation, PECO and BGE).

 

Exelon and Generation. Generation maintains a reserve for claims associated with asbestos-related personal injury actions in certain facilities that are currently owned by Generation or were previously owned by ComEd and PECO. The reserve is recorded on an undiscounted basis and excludes the estimated legal costs associated with handling these matters, which could be material.

 

At December 31, 20132015 and 2012,2014, Generation had reserved approximately $90$95 million and $63$100 million, respectively, in total for asbestos-related bodily injury claims. As of December 31, 2013,2015, approximately $19$21 million of this amount related to 224228 open claims presented to Generation, while the remaining $71$74 million of the reserve is for estimated future asbestos-related bodily injury claims anticipated to arise through 2050, based on actuarial assumptions and analyses, which are updated on an annual basis. On a quarterly basis, Generation monitors actual experience against the number of forecasted claims to be received and expected claim payments and evaluates whether an adjustment to the reserve is necessary.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

On November 22, 2013, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania held that the Pennsylvania Workers Compensation Act does not apply to an employee’s disability or death resulting from occupational disease, such as diseases related to asbestos exposure, which manifests more than 300 weeks after the employee’s last employment-based exposure, and that therefore the exclusivity provision of the Act does not apply to preclude such employee from suing his or her employer in court. The Supreme

405


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

Court’s ruling reverses previous rulings by the Pennsylvania Superior Court precluding current and former employees from suing their employers in court, despite the fact that the same employee was not eligible for workers compensation benefits for diseases that manifest more than 300 weeks after the employee’s last employment-based exposure to asbestos. Currently,Since the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s ruling in November 2013, Exelon, Generation, and PECO are unable to predict whether and to what extent they may experiencehave experienced an increase in asbestos-related personal injury claims brought by former PECO employees, all of which have been reserved against on a claim by claim basis. Those additional claims are taken into account in projecting estimated future asbestos-related bodily injury claims.

On November 4, 2015, the future asIllinois Supreme Court found that the provisions of the Illinois’ Workers’ Compensation Act and the Workers’ Occupational Diseases Act barred an employee from bringing a direct civil action against an employer for latent diseases, including asbestos-related diseases that fall outside the 25-year limit of the statute of repose. The Illinois Supreme Court’s ruling reversed previous rulings by the Illinois Court of Appeals, which initially ruled that the Illinois Worker’s Compensation law should not apply in cases where the diagnosis of an asbestos related disease occurred after the 25-year maximum time period for filing a Worker’s Compensation claim. As a result of this ruling; as such noruling, Exelon, Generation, and ComEd have not recorded an increase to the asbestos-related bodily injury liability has been recorded as of December 31, 2013. Increased2015.

There is a reasonable possibility that Exelon may have additional exposure to estimated future asbestos-related bodily injury claims activity resulting from this rulingin excess of the amount accrued and the increases could have a material adverse impacteffect on Exelon,Exelon’s, Generation’s and PECO’s future results of operations and cash flows.

 

BGE.Since 1993, BGE and certain Constellation (now Generation) subsidiaries have been involved in several actions concerning asbestos. The actions are based upon the theory of “premises liability,” alleging that BGE and Generation knew of and exposed individuals to an asbestos hazard. In addition to BGE and Generation, numerous other parties are defendants in these cases.

 

Approximately 486454 individuals who were never employees of BGE or certain Constellation subsidiaries have pending claims each seeking several million dollars in compensatory and punitive damages. Cross-claims and third-party claims brought by other defendants may also be filed against BGE and certain Constellation subsidiaries in these actions. To date, most asbestos claims which have been resolved have been dismissed or resolved without any payment by BGE or certain Constellation subsidiaries and a small minority of these cases has been resolved for amounts that were not material to BGE or Generation’s financial results.

 

Discovery begins in these cases after they are placed on the trial docket. At present, only two of the pending cases are set for trial. Given the limited discovery in these cases, BGE and Generation do not know the specific facts that are necessary to provide an estimate of the reasonably possible loss relating to these claims; as such, no accrual has been made and a range of loss is not estimable. The specific facts not known include:

 

the identity of the facilities at which the plaintiffs allegedly worked as contractors;

 

the names of the plaintiffs’ employers;

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

the dates on which and the places where the exposure allegedly occurred; and

 

the facts and circumstances relating to the alleged exposure.

 

Insurance and hold harmless agreements from contractors who employed the plaintiffs may cover a portion of any awards in the actions.

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Investigation (Exelon and Generation).

On January 30, 2012, FERC published a notice on its website regarding a non-public investigation of certain of Constellation’s power trading activities in and around the ISO-NY from September 2007 through December 2008. Prior to the merger, Constellation announced on March 9, 2012, that it had resolved the FERC investigation. Under the settlement, Constellation agreed to pay, and has paid, a $135 million civil penalty and $110 million in disgorgement.

During the year ended December 31, 2012, Generation recorded expense of $195 million in operating and maintenance expense with the remaining $50 million recorded as a Constellation pre-acquisition contingency. See Note 4—Merger and Acquisitions for additional information on the merger.

406


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Continuous Power Interruption (ComEd)

 

Section 16-125 of the Illinois Public Utilities Act provides that in the event an electric utility, such as ComEd, experiences a continuous power interruption of four hours or more that affects (in ComEd’s case) more than 30,000 customers, the utility may be liable for actual damages suffered by customers as a result of the interruption and may be responsible for reimbursement of local governmental emergency and contingency expenses incurred in connection with the interruption. Recovery of consequential damages is barred. The affected utility may seek from the ICC a waiver of these liabilities when the utility can show that the cause of the interruption was unpreventable damage due to weather events or conditions, customer tampering, or certain other causes enumerated in the law.

On August 18, 2011, ComEd sought from the ICC a determination that ComEd is not liable for damage compensation to customers in connection with the July 11, 2011 storm system that produced multiple power interruptions that in the aggregate affected more than 900,000 customers in ComEd’s service territory, as well as for five other storm systems that affected ComEd’s customers during June As of December 31, 2015 and July 2011 (Summer 2011 Storm Docket). In addition, on September 29, 2011, ComEd sought from the ICC a determination that it was not liable for damage compensation related to the February 1, 2011 blizzard (February 2011 Blizzard Docket).

On June 5, 2013, the ICC approved a complete waiver of liability for five of the six summer storms and the February 2011 blizzard. However, the ICC held that for the July 11, 2011 storm, 34,559 interruptions were preventable and therefore no waiver should apply. As required by the ICC’s Order, ComEd notified relevant customers that they may be entitled to seek reimbursement of incurred costs in accordance with a claims procedure established under ICC rules and regulations. In addition, the ICC found that2014, ComEd did not systematically fail in its duty to provide adequate, reliable and safe service. As a result, the ICC rejected the Illinois Attorney General’s requesthave any material liabilities recorded for the ICC to open an investigation into ComEd’s infrastructure andthese storm hardening investments.

Following the ICC’s June 26, 2013 denial of ComEd’s request for rehearing, on June 27, 2013 ComEd filed an appeal of both the summer and winter storm dockets with the Illinois Appellate Court regarding the ICC’s interpretation of Section 16-125 of the Illinois Public Utilities Act. ComEd cannot predict the outcome of appeals.

As a result of the ICC’s June 5, 2013 ruling, ComEd established a liability, which was not material, for potential reimbursements for actual damages incurred by the 34,559 customers covered by the ICC’s June 5, 2013 Order. The liability recorded represents the low end of a range of potential losses given that no amount within the range represents a better estimate. ComEd’s ultimate liability will be based on actual claims eligible for reimbursement as well as the outcome of the appeal. Although reimbursements for actual damages will differ from the estimated accrual recorded, at this time ComEd does not expect the difference to be material to ComEd’s results of operations or cash flows.

ComEd has not recorded an accrual for reimbursement of local governmental emergency and contingency expenses as a range of loss, if any, cannot be reasonably estimated at this time, but may be material to ComEd’s results of operations and cash flows.events.

 

Telephone Consumer Protection Act Lawsuit (ComEd)

 

On November 19, 2013, a class action complaint was filed in Cook Countythe Northern District of Illinois on behalf of a single individual and a presumptive class that would include all customers that ComEd enrolled in ComEd’s service territory who

407


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

were enrolled by the Company in ComEd’sits Outage Alert text message program. The complaint allegesalleged that ComEd violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”)(TCPA) by sending approximately 1.2 million text messages to customers without first obtaining their consent to receive such messages. The complaint seekssought certification of a class along with statutory damages, attorneys’ fees, and an order prohibiting ComEd from sending additional text messages. Such statutory damages could range from $500 to $1,500 per text. However, ComEd is preparing a motion to dismiss this class action complaint and will vigorously contest the allegations of this suit. The ultimate outcome of this proceeding is uncertain, and an amount, if any, which might be asserted, cannot be reasonably estimated at this time, but may be material to ComEd’s results of operations and cash flows. As a result, ComEd has not established a reserve for this complaint as of December 31, 2013.

Securities Class Action (Exelon)

Three federal securities class action lawsuits were filed in the United States District Courts for the Southern District of New York and the District of Maryland between September 2008 and November 2008 against Constellation. The cases were filed on behalf of a proposedplaintiff agreed in principle to settle the suit for $5 million, with payments to the class of persons who acquired publicly traded securities, including the Series A Junior Subordinated Debentures (Debentures), of Constellation between January 30, 2008 and September 16, 2008, and who acquired Debenturescommencing in an offering completed in June 2008. The securities class actions generally allege that Constellation, a number of its former officers or directors, and the underwriters violated the securities laws by issuing a false and misleading registration statement and prospectus in connection with Constellation’s June 27, 2008 offering of the Debentures. The securities class actions also allege that Constellation issued false or misleading statements or was aware of material undisclosed information which contradicted public statements, including in connection with its announcements of financial results for 2007, the fourth quarter of 2007, the first quarter of 2008 and the second quarter of 2008 and the filing of its first quarter 2008 Form 10-Q. The securities class actions sought, among other things, certification of the cases as class actions, compensatory damages, reasonable costs and expenses, including counsel fees, and rescission damages.

The Southern District of New York granted the defendants’ motion to transfer the two securities class actions filed in Maryland to the District of Maryland, and the actions have since been transferred for coordination with the securities class action filed there. On May 9, 2013, the federal court in Maryland preliminarily approved the settlement of Constellation’s 2008 Securities Class Action for a payment of $4 million, which will be paid by Constellation’s insurer. Notice of the settlement was provided to class members in June 2013 and the court approved the final settlement on November 4, 2013. This settlement will resolve all of Constellation’s litigation arising from the 2008 Securities Class Action lawsuit.2015.

 

Fund Transfer Restrictions (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Under applicable law, Exelon may borrow or receive an extension of credit from its subsidiaries. Under the terms of Exelon’s intercompany money pool agreement, Exelon can lend to, but not borrow from the money pool.

 

The Federal Power Act declares it to be unlawful for any officer or director of any public utility “to participate in the making or paying of any dividends of such public utility from any funds properly included in capital account.” What constitutes “funds properly included in capital account” is undefined in the Federal Power Act or the related regulations; however, FERC has consistently interpreted the provision to allow dividends to be paid as long as: (1) the source of the dividends is clearly disclosed;

408


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

(2) the dividend is not excessive; and (3) there is no self-dealing on the part of corporate officials. While these restrictions may limit the absolute amount of dividends that a particular subsidiary may pay, Exelon does not believe these limitations are materially limiting because, under these limitations, the subsidiaries are allowed to pay dividends sufficient to meet Exelon’s actual cash needs.

 

Under Illinois law, ComEd may not pay any dividend on its stock unless, among other things, “[its] earnings and earned surplus are sufficient to declare and pay same after provision is made for

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

reasonable and proper reserves,” or unless it has specific authorization from the ICC. ComEd has also agreed in connection with financings arranged through ComEd Financing III that it will not declare dividends on any shares of its capital stock in the event that: (1) it exercises its right to extend the interest payment periods on the subordinated debt securities issued to ComEd Financing III; (2) it defaults on its guarantee of the payment of distributions on the preferred trust securities of ComEd Financing III; or (3) an event of default occurs under the Indenture under which the subordinated debt securities are issued.

 

PECO’s Articles of Incorporation prohibit payment of any dividend on, or other distribution to the holders of, common stock if, after giving effect thereto, the capital of PECO represented by its common stock together with its retained earnings is, in the aggregate, less than the involuntary liquidating value of its then outstanding preferred securities. On May 1, 2013, PECO redeemed all outstanding preferred securities. As a result, the above ratio calculation is no longer applicable. Additionally, PECO may not declare dividends on any shares of its capital stock in the event that: (1) it exercises its right to extend the interest payment periods on the subordinated debentures, which were issued to PEC L.P. or PECO Trust IV; (2) it defaults on its guarantee of the payment of distributions on the Series D Preferred Securities of PEC L.P. or the preferred trust securities of PECO Trust IV; or (3) an event of default occurs under the Indenture under which the subordinated debentures are issued.

 

BGE pays dividends on its common stock after its board of directors declares them. However, BGE is subject to certain dividend restrictions established by the MDPSC. First, BGE iswas prohibited from paying a dividend on its common shares through the end of 2014. Second, BGE is prohibited from paying a dividend on its common shares if (a) after the dividend payment, BGE’s equity ratio would be below 48% as calculated pursuant to the MDPSC’s ratemaking precedents or (b) BGE’s senior unsecured credit rating is rated by two of the three major credit rating agencies below investment grade. Finally, BGE must notify the MDPSC that it intends to declare a dividend on its common shares at least 30 days before such a dividend is paid. There are no other limitations on BGE paying common stock dividends unless: (1) BGE elects to defer interest payments on the 6.20% Deferrable Interest Subordinated Debentures due 2043, and any deferred interest remains unpaid; or (2) any dividends (and any redemption payments) due on BGE’s preference stock have not been paid.

 

Baltimore City Franchise Taxes (BGE)

 

The City of Baltimore claims that BGE has maintained electric facilities in the City’s public right-of-ways for over one hundred years without the proper franchise rights from the City. BGE is currently reviewinghas reviewed the merits of this claim.City’s claim and believes that it lacks merit. BGE has not recorded an accrual for payment of franchise fees for past periods as a range of loss, if any, cannot be reasonably estimated at this time. Franchise fees assessed in future periods may be material to BGE’s results of operations and cash flows.

409


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

General (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE).

 

The Registrants are involved in various other litigation matters that are being defended and handled in the ordinary course of business. The assessment of whether a loss is probable or a reasonable possibility, and whether the loss or a range of loss is estimable, often involves a series of complex judgments about future events. The Registrants maintain accruals for such losses that are probable of being incurred and subject to reasonable estimation. Management is sometimes unable to estimate an amount or range of reasonably possible loss, particularly where (1) the damages sought are indeterminate, (2) the proceedings are in the early stages, or (3) the matters involve novel or

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

unsettled legal theories. In such cases, there is considerable uncertainty regarding the timing or ultimate resolution of such matters, including a possible eventual loss.

 

Income Taxes(Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

See Note 14—15—Income Taxes for information regarding the Registrants’ income tax refund claims and certain tax positions, including the 1999 sale of fossil generating assets.

 

23.24. Supplemental Financial Information (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Supplemental Statement of Operations Information

 

The following tables provide additional information about the Registrants’ Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income for the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011.2013.

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2013

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

For the year ended December 31, 2015

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Taxes other than income

                    

Utility(a)

  $449   $79   $241   $129   $82   $474    $105    $236    $133    $85  

Property

   302    205    24    14    112    407     250     27     11     119  

Payroll

   159    89    27    13    15    201     118     28     14     16  

Other

   185    16    7    2    4    118     16     5     2     4  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total taxes other than income

  $1,095   $389   $299   $158   $213   $1,200    $489     296    $160    $224  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2012

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO  BGE 

Taxes other than income

         

Utility(a)

  $463   $82   $239   $141  $75 

Property

   227    189    22    13   111 

Payroll

   131    78    26    12   18 

Other

   198    20    8    (4  4 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total taxes other than income

  $1,019   $369   $295   $162  $208 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 

For the year ended December 31, 2014

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Taxes other than income

          

Utility (a)

  $456    $89    $238    $128    $86  

Property

   396     240     25     15     114  

Payroll

   200     118     28     14     18  

Other

   102     18     2     2     3  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total taxes other than income

  $1,154    $465    $293    $159    $221  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

410


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

For the Year Ended December 31, 2011

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

For the year ended December 31, 2013

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Taxes other than income

                    

Utility(a)

  $443   $27   $243   $173   $79   $449    $79    $241    $129    $82  

Property

   177    146    22    9    107    302     205     24     14     112  

Payroll

   123    71    25    13    17    159     89     27     13     15  

Other

   42    20    6    10    4    185     16     7     2     4  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total taxes other than income

  $785   $264   $296   $205   $207   $1,095    $389    $299    $158    $213  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Generation’s utility tax represents gross receipts tax related to its retail operations and ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s utility taxes represent municipal and state utility taxes and gross receipts taxes related to their operating revenues, respectively.revenues. The offsetting collection of utility taxes from customers is recorded in revenues on the Registrants’ Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

For the Year Ended December 31, 2013

 Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Other, Net

     

Decommissioning-related activities:

     

Net realized income on decommissioning trust funds (a)

     

Regulatory agreement units

 $256  $256  $—    $—    $—   

Non-regulatory agreement units

  77   77   —     —     —   

Net unrealized gains on decommissioning trust funds—

     

Regulatory agreement units

  406   406   —     —     —   

Non-regulatory agreement units

  146   146   —     —     —   

Net unrealized gains on pledged assets—

     

Zion Station decommissioning

  7   7   —     —     —   

Regulatory offset to decommissioning trust fund-related activities (b)

  (546  (546  —     —     —   
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total decommissioning-related activities

  346   346   —     —     —   
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Investment income

  8   (1  —     (1  9(c) 

Long-term lease income

  28   —     —     —     —   

Interest income related to uncertain income tax positions

  24   4   —     —     —   

AFUDC—Equity

  22   —     11   4   7 

Other

  45   19   15   3   1 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other, net

 $473  $368  $26  $6  $17 
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2012

 Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Other, Net

     

Decommissioning-related activities:

     

Net realized income on decommissioning trust funds (a)

     

Regulatory agreement units

 $189  $189  $—    $—    $—   

Non-regulatory agreement Units

  102   102   —     —     —   

Net unrealized gains on decommissioning trust funds—

     

Regulatory agreement units

  386   386   —     —     —   

Non-regulatory agreement units

  105   105   —     —     —   

Net unrealized gains on pledged assets—

     

Zion Station decommissioning

  73   73   —     —     —   

Regulatory offset to decommissioning trust fund-related activities (b)

  (530  (530  —     —     —   
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total decommissioning-related activities

  325   325   —     —     —   
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

411


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2012

 Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

Investment income

  20   3   1   2   11(c) 

For the year ended December 31, 2015

 Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

Other, Net

     

Decommissioning-related activities:

     

Net realized income on decommissioning trust funds(a)

     

Regulatory agreement units

 $232   $232   $—     $—     $—    

Non-regulatory agreement units

  156    156    —      —      —    

Net unrealized losses on decommissioning trust funds—

     

Regulatory agreement units

  (282  (282  —      —      —    

Non-regulatory agreement units

  (197  (197  —      —      —    

Net unrealized gains on pledged assets—

     

Zion Station decommissioning

  7    7    —      —      —    

Regulatory offset to decommissioning trust fund-related activities(b)

  21    21    —      —      —    
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total decommissioning-related activities

  (63  (63  —      —      —    
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Investment income (loss)

  8    3    —      (2  4(c) 

Long-term lease income

  29   —     —     —     —     15    —      —      —      —    

Interest income related to uncertain income tax positions

  15   2   20   —     —     1    1    —      —      —    

AFUDC—Equity

  17   —     6   4   10   24    —      5    5    14  

Credit facility termination fees

  (85  (85  —     —     —   

Terminated interest rate swaps(d)

  (26  —      —      —      —    

PHI merger related debt exchange(e)

  (22  —      —      —      —    

Other

  25   (6  12   2   2   17    (1  16    2    —    
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other, net

 $346  $239  $39  $8  $23  $(46 $(60 $21   $5   $18  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2011

 Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

For the year ended December 31, 2014

 Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

Other, Net

          

Decommissioning-related activities:

          

Net realized income on decommissioning trust funds (a)

          

Regulatory agreement units

 $177  $177  $—    $—    $—    $216   $216   $—     $—     $—    

Non-regulatory agreement units

  45   45   —     —     —     159    159    —      —      —    

Net unrealized losses on decommissioning trust funds—

     

Net unrealized gains on decommissioning trust funds—

     

Regulatory agreement units

  (74  (74  —     —     —     180    180    —      —      —    

Non-regulatory agreement units

  (4  (4  —     —     —     134    134    —      —      —    

Net unrealized gains on pledged assets—

          

Zion Station decommissioning

  48   48   —     —     —     29    29    —      —      —    

Regulatory offset to decommissioning trust fund-related activities (b)

  (130  (130  —     —     —     (358  (358  —      
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total decommissioning-related activities

  62   62   —     —     —     360    360    —      —      —    
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Investment income

  10   1   1   3   13(c)   1    1    —      (1  7(c) 

Long-term lease income

  28   —     —     —     —     24    —      —      —      —    

Interest income related to uncertain income tax positions

  53   31   14   1   —     40    54    —      —      —    

AFUDC—Equity

  17   —     8   9   15   21    —      3    6    12  

Bargain purchase gain related to Wolf Hollow acquisition

  36   36   —     —     —   

Other

  (3  (8  6   1   (2  9    (9  14    2    (1
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other, net

 $203  $122  $29  $14  $26  $455   $406   $17   $7   $18  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

For the year ended December 31, 2013

 Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Other, Net

     

Decommissioning-related activities:

     

Net realized income on decommissioning trust funds(a)

     

Regulatory agreement units

 $256   $256   $—     $—     $—    

Non-regulatory agreement units

  77    77    —      —      —    

Net unrealized gains on decommissioning trust funds—

     

Regulatory agreement units

  406    406    —      —      —    

Non-regulatory agreement units

  146    146    —      —      —    

Net unrealized gains on pledged assets—

     

Zion Station decommissioning

  7    7    —      —      —    

Regulatory offset to decommissioning trust fund-related activities(b)

  (546  (546  —       —    
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total decommissioning-related activities

  346    346    —      —      —    
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Investment income

  8    (1  —      (1  9(c) 

Long-term lease income

  28    —      —      —      —    

Interest income related to uncertain income tax positions

  24    4    —      —      —    

AFUDC—Equity

  22    —      11    4    7  

Other

  32    6    15    3    1  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other, net

 $460   $355   $26   $6   $17  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

(a)Includes investment income and realized gains and losses on sales of investments ofwithin the nuclear decommissioning trust funds.
(b)Includes the elimination of NDT fund activity for the Regulatory Agreement Units, including the elimination of net income taxes related to all NDT fund activity for those units. See Note 15—16—Asset Retirement Obligations for additional information regarding the accounting for nuclear decommissioning.
(c)Relates to the cash return on BGE’s rate stabilization deferral. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information regarding the rate stabilization deferral.
(d)In January 2015, in connection with Generation’s $750 million issuance of five-year Senior Unsecured Notes, Exelon terminated certain floating-to-fixed interest rate swaps. As the original forecasted transactions were a series of future interest payments over a ten year period, a portion of the anticipated interest payments are probable not to occur. As a result, $26 million of anticipated payments were reclassified from Accumulated OCI to Other, net in Exelon’s Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income.
(e)See Note 14—Debt and Credit Agreements and 4—Mergers, Acquisitions, and Dispositions for additional information on the PHI merger related debt exchange.

412


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Supplemental Cash Flow Information

 

The following tables provide additional information regarding the Registrants’ Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011.2013.

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2013

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

For the year ended December 31, 2015

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Depreciation, amortization, accretion and depletion

                    

Property, plant and equipment

  $1,893   $813   $545   $219   $264   $2,227    $1,007    $635    $240    $289  

Regulatory assets

   212    —      119    9    84    170     —       72     20     77  

Amortization of intangible assets, net

   48    43    5    —      —      54     47     —       —       —    

Amortization of energy contract assets and liabilities (a)

   430    507    —      —      —      22     22     —       —       —    

Nuclear fuel (a)(b)

   921    921    —      —      —      1,116     1,116     —       —       —    

ARO accretion (b)(c)

   275    275    —      —      —      398     397     —       —       —    
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total depreciation, amortization, accretion and depletion

  $3,779   $2,559   $669   $228   $348   $3,987    $2,589    $707    $260    $366  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2012

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

For the year ended December 31, 2014

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Depreciation, amortization, accretion and depletion

                    

Property, plant and equipment

  $1,712   $733   $525   $207   $245   $2,080    $922    $588    $227    $288  

Regulatory assets

   129    —      80    10    53    191     —       99     9     83  

Amortization of intangible assets, net

   40    35    5    —      —      44     44     —       —       —    

Amortization of energy contract assets and liabilities (a)

   1,110    1,110    —      —      —      135     135     —       —       —    

Nuclear fuel (a)(b)

   848    848    —      —      —      1,073     1,073     —       —       —    

ARO accretion (b)(c)

   240    240    —      —      —      345     345     —       —       —    
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total depreciation, amortization, accretion and depletion

  $4,079   $2,966   $610   $217   $298   $3,868    $2,519    $687    $236    $371  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2011

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Depreciation, amortization and accretion

          

Property, plant and equipment

  $1,284   $570   $502   $191   $224 

Regulatory assets

   63    —      52    11    50 

Nuclear fuel (a)

   755    755    —      —      —   

ARO accretion (b)

   214    214    —      —      —   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total depreciation, amortization and accretion

  $2,316   $1,539   $554   $202   $274 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

For the year ended December 31, 2013

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Depreciation, amortization, accretion and depletion

          

Property, plant and equipment

  $1,893    $813    $545    $219    $264  

Regulatory assets

   212     —       119     9     84  

Amortization of intangible assets, net

   48     43     5     —       —    

Amortization of energy contract assets and liabilities (a)

   430     507     —       —       —    

Nuclear fuel (b)

   921     921     —       —       —    

ARO accretion (c)

   275     275     —       —       —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total depreciation, amortization and accretion

  $3,779    $2,559    $669    $228    $348  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

(a)Included in Operating revenues or Purchased power and fuel expense, or operating revenues on the Registrants’ Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.
(b)Included in operatingPurchased power and fuel expense on the Registrants’ Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.
(c)Included in Operating and maintenance expense on the Registrants’ Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

413


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

For the Year Ended December 31, 2013

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Cash paid (refunded) during the year:

      

Interest (net of amount capitalized)

  $866  $291  $283  $95  $130 

Income taxes (net of refunds)

   112   (18  33   70   42 

Other non-cash operating activities:

      

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit costs

  $825  $345  $308  $43  $56 

Earnings from equity method investments

   (10  (10  —     —     —   

Provision for uncollectible accounts

   101   10   (15  61   44 

Provision for excess and obsolete inventory

   9   9   —     —     —   

Stock-based compensation costs

   120   —     —     —     —   

Other decommissioning-related activity (a)

   (169  (169  —     —     —   

Energy-related options (b)

   104   104   ��     —     —   

Amortization of regulatory asset related to debt costs

   12   —     9   3   —   

Amortization of rate stabilization deferral

   66   —     —     —     66 

Amortization of debt fair value adjustment

   (34  (34  —     —     —   

Discrete impacts from EIMA (c)

   (271  —     (271  —     —   

Amortization of debt costs

   18   10   1   2   2 

Impairment of investments in direct financing leases (e)

   14   —     —     —     —   

Impairment charges (f)

   149   149   —     —     —   

Other

   (58  —     (4  (1  (15
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other non-cash operating activities

  $876  $414  $28  $108  $153 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Changes in other assets and liabilities:

      

Under/over-recovered energy and transmission costs

  $12  $—    $(35 $9  $38  

Other regulatory assets and liabilities

   (64  —     (43  (16  (71

Other current assets

   (165  (151  (2  13   (8

Other noncurrent assets and liabilities

   322    15   268(g)   (12  (23
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total changes in other assets and liabilities

  $105  $(136 $188  $(6 $(64
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

   Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO   BGE 

Non-cash investing and financing activities:

       

Change in ARC

  $(128 $(128 $—    $—     $4 

Change in capital expenditures not paid

   (38  (107)(h)   (8  13    (48

Consolidated VIE dividend to non-controlling interest

   63   63   —     —      —   

Indemnification of like-kind exchange position (i)

   —     —     176   —      —   

For the year ended December 31, 2015

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Cash paid (refunded) during the year:

      

Interest (net of amount capitalized)

  $930   $348   $308   $94   $120  

Income taxes (net of refunds)

   342    476    (265  64    73  

Other non-cash operating activities:

      

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit costs

  $637   $269   $206   $39   $65  

Loss from equity method investments

   7    8    —      —      —    

Provision for uncollectible accounts

   120    22    53    30    15  

Provision for excess and obsolete inventory

   10    9    1    —      —    

Stock-based compensation costs

   97    —      —      —      —    

Other decommissioning-related activity (a)

   (82  (82  —      —      —    

Energy-related options (b)

   21    21    —      —      —    

Amortization of regulatory asset related to debt costs

   7    —      5    2    —    

Amortization of rate stabilization deferral

   73    —      —      —      73  

Amortization of debt fair value adjustment

   (17  (17  —      —      —    

Amortization of debt costs

   58    15    4    2    2  

Discrete impacts from EIMA (c)

   144    —      144    —      —    

Lower of cost or market inventory adjustment

   23    23    —      —      —    

Other

   11    —      3    (3  (18
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other non-cash operating activities

  $1,109   $268   $416   $70   $137  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Non-cash investing and financing activities:

      

Change in PPE related to ARO update

  $885   $885   $—     $—     $—    

Change in capital expenditures not paid

   96    82    34    (13  (9

Non-cash financing of capital projects

   77    77    —      —      —    

Nuclear fuel procurement(d)

   57    57    —      —      —    

Indemnification of like-kind exchange position(e)

   —      —      7    —      —    

Long-term software licensing agreement(f)

   95    —      —      —      —    

 

(a)Includes the elimination of NDT fund activity for the Regulatory Agreement Units, including the elimination of operating revenues, ARO accretion, ARC amortization, investment income and income taxes related to all NDT fund activity for these units. See Note 15—16—Asset Retirement Obligations for additional information regarding the accounting for nuclear decommissioning.
(b)Includes option premiums reclassified to realized at the settlement of the underlying contracts and recorded to results of operations.
(c)Reflects the change in distribution rates pursuant to EIMA, which allows for the recovery of costs by a utility through a pre-established performance-based formula rate tariff. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for more information.
(d)Relates to integration coststhe nuclear fuel procurement contract for the purchase of fixed quantities of converted uranium, which was delivered to achieve distribution synergies relatedGeneration in 2015. Generation is required to make payments starting September 28, 2018, with the merger transaction. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for more information.final payment being due no later than September 30, 2020.
(e)Relates to an other than temporary decline in the estimated residual value of one of Exelon’s direct financing leases. See Note 8—Impairment15—Income Taxes for discussion of Long-Lived Assets for more information.the like-kind exchange tax position.
(f)Relates to the cancellationa long-term software license agreement entered into on May 30, 2015. Exelon is required to make payments starting August of uprate projects and write down2015 through May of certain wind projects at Generation.2024. See Note 8— Impairment of Long-Lived Assets14—Debt and Credit Agreements for moreadditional information.

414


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

(g)Relates primarily to interest payable related to like-kind exchange tax position. See Note 14—Income Taxes for discussion of the like-kind exchange tax position.
(h)Includes $55 million of changes in capital expenditures not paid between December 31, 2013 and 2012 related to Antelope Valley.
(i)See Note 14—Income Taxes for discussion of the like-kind exchange tax position.

For the Year Ended December 31, 2012

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Cash paid (refunded) during the year:

      

Interest (net of amount capitalized)

  $761  $286  $288  $113  $136 

Income taxes (net of refunds)

   (171  175   (42  (64  (112

Other non-cash operating activities:

      

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit costs

  $820  $341  $282  $50  $57 

Loss in equity method investments

   91   91   —     —     —   

Provision for uncollectible accounts

   164   22   42   60   44 

Provision for excess and obsolete inventory

   6   6   1   —     —   

Stock-based compensation costs

   94   —     —     —     —   

Other decommissioning-related activity (a)

   (145  (145  —     —     —   

Energy-related options (b)

   160   160   —     —     —   

Amortization of regulatory asset related to debt costs

   18   —     13   3   2 

Amortization of rate stabilization deferral

   57   —     —     —     67 

Amortization of debt fair value adjustment

   (34  (34  —     —     —   

Merger-related commitments (d)

   141   32   —     —     27 

Severance costs

   99   34   —     —     —   

Discrete impacts from EIMA (c)

   (96  —     (96  —     —   

Amortization of debt costs

   19   11   5   3   2 

Other

   (11  19   5   9   (6
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other non-cash operating activities

  $1,383  $537  $252  $125  $193 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Changes in other assets and liabilities:

      

Under/over-recovered energy and transmission costs

  $71  $—    $28  $20  $26 

Other regulatory assets and liabilities

   (404  —     (68  18   (112

Other current assets

   213   (30  (7  (12  (7

Other noncurrent assets and liabilities

   (248  (98  (95  (10  8 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total changes in other assets and liabilities

  $(368 $(128 $(142 $16  $(85
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

For the year ended December 31, 2014

  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

Cash paid (refunded) during the year:

      

Interest (net of amount capitalized)

  $940   $322   $292   $94   $111  

Income taxes (net of refunds)

   314    227    (6  85    (21

Other non-cash operating activities:

      

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit costs

  $560   $249   $162   $36   $64  

Loss from equity method investments

   22    20    —      —      —    

Provision for uncollectible accounts

   156    14    26    52    64  

Provision for excess and obsolete inventory

   5    5    —      —      —    

Stock-based compensation costs

   91    —      —      —      —    

Other decommissioning-related activity(a)

   (132  (132  —      —      —    

Energy-related options(b)

   122    122    —      —      —    

Amortization of regulatory asset related to debt costs

   11    —      8    3    —    

Amortization of rate stabilization deferral

   65    —      —      —      65  

Amortization of debt fair value adjustment

   (23  (23  —      —      —    

Merger-related commitments

   44    44    —      —      —    

Amortization of debt costs

   53    12    4    2    2  

Discrete impacts from EIMA(c)

   53    —      53    —      —    

Lower of cost or market inventory adjustment

   29    29    —      —      —    

Other

   (2  6    2    (1  (15
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total other non-cash operating activities

  $1,054   $346   $255   $92   $180  
  Exelon   Generation ComEd   PECO   BGE   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Non-cash investing and financing activities:

               

Change in ARC

  $781   $781  $2   $—     $—   

Change in PPE related to ARO update

  $72   $72   $—     $—     $—    

Change in capital expenditures not paid

   160    103(e)  15    26    (4   220    (61)(d)   78    —      25  

Merger with Constellation, common stock issued

   7,365    5,264   —      —      —   

Fair value of net assets recorded upon CENG consolidation(e)

   3,400    3,400    —      —      —    

Issuance of equity units(f)

   131    —      —      —      —    

Nuclear fuel procurement(g)

   70    70    —      —      —    

Indemnification of like-kind exchange position(h)

   —      —      5    —      —    

 

(a)Includes the elimination of NDT fund activity for the Regulatory Agreement Units, including the elimination of operating revenues, ARO accretion, ARC amortization, investment income and income taxes related to all NDT fund activity for these units. See Note 15—16—Asset Retirement Obligations for additional information regarding the accounting for nuclear decommissioning.
(b)Includes option premiums reclassified to realized at the settlement of the underlying contracts and recorded to results of operations.
(c)Reflects the change in distribution rates pursuant to EIMA, which allows for the recovery of costs by a utility through a pre-established performance-based formula rate tariff. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for more information.
(d)Includes $170 million of changes in capital expenditures not paid between December 31, 2014 and 2013 related to Antelope Valley.
(e)See Note 5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC for additional information.
(f)Relates to the present value of the contract payments for the equity units issued by Exelon. See Note 20—Stock-Based Compensation Plans for additional information.
(g)Relates to the nuclear fuel procurement contracts for the purchase of fixed quantities of uranium, which was delivered to Generation in 2014. Generation is required to make payments starting June 30, 2016, with the final payment being due no later than June 30, 2018.
(h)See Note 15—Income Taxes for discussion of the like-kind exchange tax position.

415


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

(d)Relates to the integration costs to achieve distribution synergies related to the merger transaction. See Note 4—Mergers and Acquisitions for more information on merger-related commitments.
(e)Includes $127 million of changes in capital expenditures not paid between December 31, 2012 and 2011 related to Antelope Valley.

For the Year Ended December 31, 2011

  Exelon  Generation  ComEd  PECO  BGE 

Cash paid (refunded) during the year:

      

Interest (net of amount capitalized)

  $649  $158  $296  $128  $122 

Income taxes (net of refunds)

   (457  347   (676  (65  (54

Other non-cash operating activities:

      

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit costs

  $542  $249  $213  $32  $51 

Provision for uncollectible accounts

   121  ��—     57   64   44 

Stock-based compensation costs

   67   —     —     —     —   

Other decommissioning-related activity (a)

   16   16   —     —     —   

Energy-related options (b)

   137   137   —     —     —   

Amortization of regulatory asset related to debt costs

   21   —     18   3   2 

Amortization of rate stabilization deferral

   —     —     —     —     57 

Deferral of storm costs

   —     —     —     —     (16

Uncollectible accounts recovery, net

   14   —     14   —     —   

Discrete impacts from 2010 Rate Case Order (c)

   (32  —     (32  —     —   

Bargain purchase gain related to Wolf Hollow Acquisition

   (36  (36  —     —     —   

Discrete impacts from EIMA (d)

   (82  —     (82  —     —   

Other

   2   55   (4  1   (9
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total other non-cash operating activities

  $770  $421  $184  $100  $129 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Changes in other assets and liabilities:

      

Under/over-recovered energy and transmission costs

  $(45 $—    $(49 $4  $(52

Other regulatory assets and liabilities

   —     —     44   26   10 

Other current assets

   (101  (23  (14  (12  (88

Other noncurrent assets and liabilities

   122   (34  64   (4  (31
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total changes in other assets and liabilities

  $(24 $(57 $45  $14  $(161
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

For the year ended December 31, 2013

  Exelon Generation ComEd PECO BGE 

Cash paid (refunded) during the year:

      

Interest (net of amount capitalized)

  $866   $291   $283   $95   $130  

Income taxes (net of refunds)

   112    (18  33    70    42  

Other non-cash operating activities:

      

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit costs

  $825   $345   $308   $43   $56  

Gain from equity method investments

   (10  (10  —      —      —    

Provision for uncollectible accounts

   101    10    (15  61    44  

Provision for excess and obsolete inventory

   9    9    —      —      —    

Stock-based compensation costs

   120    —      —      —      —    

Other decommissioning-related activity(a)

   (169  (169  —      —      —    

Energy-related options(b)

   104    104    —      —      —    

Amortization of regulatory asset related to debt costs

   12    —      9    3    —    

Amortization of rate stabilization deferral

   66    —      —      —      66  

Amortization of debt fair value adjustment

   (34  (34  —      —      —    

Discrete impacts from EIMA(c)

   (271  —      (271  —      —    

Amortization of debt costs

   18    10    1    2    2  

Other

   (53  5    (4  (1  (15
  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total other non-cash operating activities

  $718   $270   $28   $108   $153  
  Exelon   Generation ComEd   PECO BGE   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Non-cash investing and financing activities:

              

Change in ARC

  $186   $186  $—     $—    $—   

Change in PPE related to ARO update

  $(128 $(128 $—     $—     $4  

Change in capital expenditures not paid

   96    125(e)   7    (35  (7   (38  (107)(d)   (8  13    (48

Consolidated VIE dividend to noncontrolling interest

   63    63    —      —      —    

Indemnification of like-kind exchange position(e)

   —      —      176    —      —    

 

(a)Includes the elimination of NDT fund activity for the Regulatory Agreement Units, including the elimination of operating revenues, ARO accretion, ARC amortization, investment income and income taxes related to all NDT fund activity for these units. See Note 15—16—Asset Retirement Obligations for additional information regarding the accounting for nuclear decommissioning.
(b)Includes option premiums reclassified to realized at the settlement of the underlying contracts and recorded to results of operations.
(c)In May 2011, asReflects the change in distribution rates pursuant to EIMA, which allows for the recovery of costs by a result of the 2010 Rate Case order, ComEd recorded one-time benefits to reestablish previously expensed plant balances and to recover previously incurred costs related to Exelon’s 2009 restructuring plan.utility through pre-established performance-based formula rate tariff. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for more information.Matters.
(d)Includes the establishment of a regulatory asset, pursuant to EIMA, for the 2011 annual reconciliation in ComEd’s distribution formula rate tariff and the deferral of costs associated with significant 2011 storms, partially offset by an accrual to fund a new Science and Technology Innovation Trust. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for more information.
(e)Includes $120$55 million of changes in capital expenditures not paid between December 31, 20112013 and 20102012 related to Antelope Valley.

416


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

(e)See Note 15—Income Taxes for discussion of the like-kind exchanged tax position.

 

DOE Smart Grid Investment Grant (Exelon, PECO and BGE). For the year ended December 31, 2014, PECO has included in the capital expenditures line item under investing activities of the cash flow statement capital expenditures of $2 million and reimbursements of $5 million related to PECO’s DOE SGIG programs. For the year ended December 31, 2015, PECO had no capital expenditures or reimbursements, as the DOE SGIG program was completed during 2014. For the year ended December 31, 2013, Exelon, PECO and BGE have included in the capital expenditures line item under investing activities of the cash flow statement capital expenditures of $74 million, $27 million and $47 million, respectively, and reimbursements of $95 million, $37 million and $58 million, respectively, related to PECO’s and BGE’s DOE SGIG programs. For the year ended December 31, 2012, Exelon, PECO and BGE have included in the capital expenditures line item under investing activities of the cash flow statement capital expenditures of $103 million, $56 million and $47 million, respectively, and reimbursements of $113 million, $66 million and $47 million, respectively, related to PECO’s and BGE’s DOE SGIG programs. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information regarding the DOE SGIG.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

Supplemental Balance Sheet Information

 

The following tables provide additional information about assets and liabilities of the Registrants at December 31, 20132015 and 2012.2014.

 

December 31, 2013

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Investments

          

Equity method investments:

          

Financing trusts (a)

  $22   $—     $6   $8   $8 

Keystone Fuels, LLC

   32    32    —      —      —   

Conemaugh Fuels, LLC

   21    21    —      —      —   

CENG

   1,925    1,925    —      —      —   

Safe Harbor

   285    285    —      —      —   

Malacha

   8    8    —      —      —   

Other investments

   31     31     —      —      —   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total equity method investments

   2,324     2,302     6    8    8 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Other investments:

          

Net investment in direct financing leases

   698     0    —      —      —   

Employee benefit trusts and investments (b)

   90    23    5    23    5 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total investments

  $3,112   $2,325   $11   $31   $13 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

December 31, 2015

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Investments

          

Equity method investments:

          

Financing trusts (a)

  $22    $—      $6    $8    $8  

Bloom

   63     63     —       —       —    

Net Power

   23     23     —       —       —    

Other equity method investments

   4     3     —       —       —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total equity method investments

   112     89     6     8     8  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Other investments:

          

Net investment in leases(b)

   358     6     —       —       —    

Employee benefit trusts and investments (c)

   85     31     —       20     4  

Other cost method investments

   55     55     —       —       —    

Other available for sale investments

   29     29     —       —       —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total investments

  $639    $210    $6    $28    $12  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2012

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Investments

          

Equity method investments:

          

Financing trusts (a)

  $22   $—     $6   $8   $8 

Keystone Fuels, LLC

   38    38    —      —      —   

Conemaugh Fuels, LLC

   26    26    —      —      —   

CENG

   1,849    1,849    —      —      —   

Safe Harbor

   293    293    —      —      —   

Malacha

   8    8    —      —      —   

Other investments

   34    33    —      —      —   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total equity method investments

   2,270    2,247    6    8    8 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Other investments:

          

Net investment in direct financing leases

   685    —      —      —      —   

Employee benefit trusts and investments (b)

   100    22    8    22    5 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total investments

  $3,055   $2,269   $14   $30   $13 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

December 31, 2014

  Exelon   Generation   ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Investments

          

Equity method investments:

          

Financing trusts (a)

  $22    $—      $6    $8    $8  

Bloom

   13     13     —       —       —    

Net Power

   9     9     —       —       —    

Sunnyside

   5     5     —       —       —    

Other equity method investments

   1     1     —       —       —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total equity method investments

   50     28     6     8     8  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Other investments:

          

Net investment in leases(b)

   367     7     —       —       —    

Employee benefit trusts and investments (c)

   85     27     —       23     4  

Other cost method investments

   37     37     —       —       —    

Other available for sale investments

   5     5     —       —       —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total investments

  $544    $104    $6    $31    $12  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

417
(a)Includes investments in affiliated financing trusts, which were not consolidated within the financial statements of Exelon and are shown as investments on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. See Note 1—Significant Accounting Policies for additional information.
(b)Represents direct financing lease investments. See Note 8—Impairment of Long-Lived Assets for additional information.
(c)The Registrants’ investments in these marketable securities are recorded at fair market value.


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

(a)Includes investments in financing trusts, which were not consolidated within the financial statements of Exelon and are shown as investments in affiliates on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. See Note 1—Significant Accounting Policies for additional information.
(b)The Registrants’ investments in these marketable securities are recorded at fair market value.

The following tables provide additional information about liabilities of the Registrants at December 31, 20132015 and 2012.2014.

 

December 31, 2013

  Exelon Generation ComEd   PECO   BGE 

December 31, 2015

  Exelon Generation ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Accrued expenses

Accrued expenses

  

             

Compensation-related accruals (a)

  $683  $337  $135   $47   $55   $1,014   $547   $183    $66    $57  

Taxes accrued

   315   212   62    24    16    293    186    63     4     23  

Interest accrued

   234   72   95    32    29    915    77    443     35     27  

Severance accrued

   66   31   3    1    4    21    11    3     —       1  

Other accrued expenses

   335(b)   324(b)   12    2    7    133    114    14     4     2  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total accrued expenses

  $1,633  $976  $307   $106   $111   $2,376   $935   $706    $109    $110  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 

December 31, 2012

  Exelon Generation ComEd   PECO   BGE 

December 31, 2014

  Exelon Generation ComEd   PECO   BGE 

Accrued expenses

                

Compensation-related accruals (a)

  $708  $371  $125   $45   $38   $832   $447   $153    $50    $58  

Taxes accrued

   353   247   61    3    22    305    248    59     3     42  

Interest accrued

   232   60   96    32    37    240    66    102     33     29  

Severance accrued

   91   42   4    1    5    49    33    2     1     2  

Other accrued expenses

   412(b)   396(b)   9    1    —      113(b)   92(b)   15     4     —    
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total accrued expenses

  $1,796  $1,116  $295   $82   $102   $1,539   $886   $331    $91    $131  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Primarily includes accrued payroll, bonuses and other incentives, vacation and benefits.
(b)Includes $228 million and $327$19 million for amounts accrued related to Antelope Valley as of December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively.2014.

 

24.25. Segment Information (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Operating segments for each of the Registrants are determined based on information used by the chief operating decision maker(s) (CODM) in deciding how to evaluate performance and allocate resources at each of the Registrants.

 

Exelon has nine reportable segments, which include ComEd, PECO, BGE and Generation’s six power marketing reportable segments, consisting of the Mid-Atlantic, Midwest, New England, New York, ERCOT and all other power regions not considered individually significant referred to collectively as “Other Power Regions”; including, which includes activities in the South, West and Canada. Generation’s expanded number of reportable segments is the result of the acquisition of Constellation on March 12, 2012. ComEd, PECO and BGE each represent a single reportable segment;segment, and as such, no separate segment information is provided for these Registrants. Exelon, evaluatesComEd, PECO and BGE’s CODMs evaluate the performance of and allocate resources to ComEd, PECO and BGE based on net income.

The CODMs for ComEd, PECO, and BGE evaluate performance and allocate resources for their respective companies based on net income and return on equity for ComEd, PECO, and BGE each as single integrated businesses.

418


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

The foundation ofbasis for Generation’s six reportable segments is based on the geographic locationintegrated management of its assets,electricity business that is located in different geographic regions, and is largely representative of the footprints of an ISO / ISO/RTO and/or NERC region.regions, which utilize multiple supply sources to provide electricity through various distribution channels (wholesale and retail). Generation’s hedging strategies and risk metrics are also aligned to these same geographic regions. Descriptions of each of Generation’s six reportable segments are as follows:

 

  

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

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

  

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

 

  

New England represents the operations within ISO-NE covering the states of Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Vermont.

 

  

New York represents operations within ISO-NY, which covers the state of New York in its entirety.

 

  

ERCOT represents operations within Electric Reliability Council of Texas, covering most of the state of Texas.

 

  

Other Power Regions not considered individually significant::

 

  

South represents operations in the FRCC, MISO’s Southern Region, and the remaining portions of the SERC not included within MISO or PJM, which includes all or most of Florida, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, North Carolina, South Carolina and parts of Missouri, Kentucky and Texas. Generation’s South region also includes operations in the SPP, covering Kansas, Oklahoma, most of Nebraska and parts of New Mexico, Texas, Louisiana, Missouri, Mississippi and Arkansas.

 

  

West represents operations in the WECC, which includes California ISO, and covers the states of California, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, Idaho, Colorado, and parts of New Mexico, Wyoming and South Dakota.

 

  

Canada represents operations across the entire country of Canada and includes the AESO, OIESO and the Canadian portion of MISO.

 

The CODMs for Exelon and Generation evaluate the performance of Generation’s power marketing activities and allocate resources based on revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense.expense (RNF). Generation believes that revenue net of purchased power and fuel expenseRNF is a useful measurement of operational performance. Revenue net of purchased power and fuel expenseRNF is not a presentation defined under GAAP and may not be comparable to other companies’ presentations or deemed more useful than the GAAP information provided elsewhere in this report. Generation’s operating revenues include all sales to third parties and affiliated sales to ComEd, PECO, and BGE. Purchased power costs include all costs associated with the procurement and supply of electricity including capacity, energy and ancillary services. Fuel expense includes the fuel costs for Generation’s ownowned generation and fuel costs associated with tolling agreements. The results of Generation’s other business activities including retailare not regularly reviewed by the CODM and wholesale gas, upstreamare therefore not classified as operating segments or included in the regional reportable segment amounts. These activities include natural gas, proprietary trading, energy efficiency and demand response, heating, cooling, and cogeneration facilities, and home improvements, sales of electric and gas appliances, servicing of heating, air conditioning, plumbing, electrical, and indoor quality systems, and investments in energy-related proprietary technologyas well as other miscellaneous business activities that are not allocatedsignificant to regions.Generation’s overall operating revenues or results of operations. Further, Generation’s compensation underunrealized mark-to-market gains and losses on economic hedging activities and its amortization of certain intangible assets and liabilities relating to commodity contracts recorded at fair value from mergers and acquisitions are also not included in the reliability-must-run rate schedule,regional reportable segment amounts. Exelon and Generation do not use a measure of total assets in making decisions regarding allocating resources to or assessing the performance of these reportable segments.

419


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

results of operations from the Brandon Shores, Wagner, and C.P. Crane Maryland generating stations, and other miscellaneous revenues, mark-to-market impact of economic hedging activities, and amortization of certain intangible assets relating to commodity contracts recorded at fair value as a result of the merger are also not allocated to a region.

 

An analysis and reconciliation of the Registrants’ reportable segment information to the respective information in the consolidated financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014, and 20112013 is as follows:

 

  Generation (a)  ComEd  PECO  BGE (b)  Other (c)  Intersegment
Eliminations
  Exelon 

Operating revenues (d):

       

2013

 $15,630  $4,464  $3,100  $3,065  $1,241  $(2,612 $24,888 

2012

  14,437   5,443   3,186   2,091   1,396   (3,064  23,489 

2011

  10,447   6,056   3,720   —     830   (1,990  19,063 

Intersegment revenues (e):

       

2013

 $1,367  $3  $1  $13  $1,237  $(2,607 $14 

2012

  1,660   2   3   9   1,381   (3,049  6 

2011

  1,161   2   5   —     831   (1,990  9 

Depreciation and amortization

  

      

2013

 $856  $669  $228  $348  $52  $—    $2,153 

2012

  768   610   217   238   48   —     1,881 

2011

  570   554   202   —     21   —     1,347 

Operating expenses (d):

  

      

2013

 $13,976  $3,510  $2,434  $2,616  $1,324  $(2,618 $21,242 

2012

  13,226   4,557   2,563   2,053   1,662   (3,043  21,018 

2011

  7,571   5,074   3,065   —     863   (1,990  14,583 

Equity in earnings (losses) of
unconsolidated affiliates

   

    

2013

 $10  $—    $—    $—    $—    $—    $10 

2012

  (91  —     —     —     —     —     (91

2011

  (1  —     —     —     —     —     (1

Interest expense, net:

       

2013

 $357  $579  $115  $122  $183  $—    $1,356 

2012

  301   307   123   111   86   —     928 

2011

  170   345   134   —     77   —     726 

Income (loss) before income
taxes:

   

     

2013

 $1,675  $401  $557  $344  $(191 $(13 $2,773 

2012

  1,058   618   508   (54  (325  (7  1,798 

2011

  2,827   666   535   —     (59  (13  3,956 

Income taxes:

       

2013

 $615  $152  $162  $134  $(20 $1  $1,044 

2012

  500   239   127   (23  (215  (1  627 

2011

  1,056   250   146   —     9   (4  1,457 

Net income (loss):

       

2013

 $1,060  $249  $395  $210  $(171 $(14 $1,729 

2012

  558   379   381   (31  (110  (6  1,171 

2011

  1,771   416   389   —     (68  (9  2,499 

Capital expenditures:

       

2013

 $2,752  $1,433  $537  $587  $86  $—    $5,395 

2012

  3,554   1,246   422   500   67   —     5,789 

2011

  2,491   1,028   481   —     42   —     4,042 

Total assets:

       

2013

 $41,232  $24,118  $9,617  $7,861  $8,317  $(11,221 $79,924 

2012

  40,681   22,905   9,353   7,506   10,432   (12,316  78,561 
  Generation (a)  ComEd  PECO  BGE  Other (b)  Intersegment
Eliminations
  Exelon 

Operating revenues (c):

       

2015

       

Competitive businesses electric revenues

 $15,944   $—     $—     $—     $—     $(744 $15,200  

Competitive businesses natural gas revenues

  2,433    —      —      —      —      —      2,433  

Competitive businesses other revenues

  758    —      —      —      —      (1  757  

Rate-regulated electric revenues

  —      4,905    2,486    2,490    —      (5  9,876  

Rate-regulated natural gas revenues

  —      —      546    645    —      (15  1,176  

Shared service and other revenues

  —      —      —      —      1,372    (1,367  5  

2014

       

Competitive businesses electric revenues

 $14,533   $—     $—     $—     $—     $(760 $13,773  

Competitive businesses natural gas revenues

  2,705    —      —      —      —      (1  2,704  

Competitive businesses other revenues

  155    —      —      —      —      (1  154  

Rate-regulated electric revenues

  —      4,564    2,448    2,460    —      (5  9,467  

Rate-regulated natural gas revenues

  —      —      646    705    —      (26  1,325  

Shared service and other revenues

  —      —      —      —      1,285    (1,279  6  

2013

       

Competitive businesses electric revenues

 $13,862   $—     $—     $—     $—     $(1,366 $12,496  

Competitive businesses natural gas revenues

  1,721    —      —      —      —      —      1,721  

Competitive businesses other revenues

  47    —      —      —      —      (1  46  

Rate-regulated electric revenues

  —      4,464    2,500    2,405    —      (4  9,365  

Rate-regulated natural gas revenues

  —      —      600    660    —      (14  1,246  

Shared service and other revenues

  —      —      —      —      1,241    (1,227  14  

Intersegment revenues (d):

       

2015

 $745   $4   $2   $14   $1,367   $(2,127 $5  

2014

  762    4    2    25    1,280    (2,067  6  

2013

  1,367    3    1    13    1,237    (2,607  14  

Depreciation and amortization

       

2015

 $1,054   $707   $260   $366   $63   $—     $2,450  

2014

  967    687    236    371    53    —      2,314  

2013

  856    669    228    348    52    —      2,153  

Operating expenses(c):

       

2015

 $16,872   $3,889   $2,404   $2,578   $1,444   $(2,131 $25,056  

2014

  16,923    3,586    2,522    2,726    1,353    (2,071  25,039  

2013

  13,976    3,510    2,434    2,616    1,324    (2,618  21,242  

Equity in earnings (losses) of unconsolidated affiliates

       

2015

 $(8 $—     $—     $—     $1   $—     $(7

2014

  (20  —      —      —      —      —      (20

2013

  10    —      —      —      —      —      10  

Interest expense, net:

       

2015

 $365   $332   $114   $99   $123   $—     $1,033  

2014

  356    321    113    106    169    —      1,065  

2013

  357    579    115    122    183    —      1,356  

Income (loss) before income taxes:

       

2015

 $1,850   $706   $521   $477   $(219 $(5 $3,330  

2014

  1,226    676    466    351    (227  (6  2,486  

2013

  1,675    401    557    344    (191  (13  2,773  

Income taxes:

       

2015

 $502   $280   $143   $189   $(41 $—     $1,073  

2014

  207    268    114    140    (63  —      666  

2013

  615    152    162    134    (20  1    1,044  

Net income (loss):

       

2015

 $1,340   $426   $378   $288   $(177 $(5 $2,250  

2014

  1,019    408    352    211    (164  (6  1,820  

2013

  1,060    249    395    210    (171  (14  1,729  

Capital expenditures:

       

2015

 $3,841   $2,398   $601   $719   $65   $—      7,624  

2014

  3,012    1,689    661    620    95    —      6,077  

2013

  2,752    1,433    537    587    86    —      5,395  

Total assets:

       

2015

 $46,529   $26,532   $10,367   $8,295   $15,389   $(11,728 $95,384  

2014

  44,951    25,358    9,860    8,056    9,711    (11,520  86,416  

420


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

 

(a)Generation includes the six power marketing reportable segments shown below: Mid-Atlantic, Midwest, New England, New York, ERCOT and Other Power Regions. Intersegment revenues for Generation forFor the year ended December 31, 20132015, intersegment revenues for Generation include revenue from sales to PECO of $224 million and sales to BGE of $502 million in the Mid-Atlantic region, and sales to ComEd of $18 million in the Midwest region, which eliminate upon consolidation. For the year ended December 31, 2014, intersegment revenues for Generation include revenue from sales to PECO of $198 million and sales to BGE of $387 million in the Mid-Atlantic region, and sales to ComEd of $176 million in the Midwest region, which eliminate upon consolidation. For the year ended December 31, 2013, intersegment revenues for Generation include revenue from sales to PECO of $405 million and sales to BGE of $455 million in the Mid-Atlantic region, and sales to ComEd of $506 million in the Midwest region, net of $7 million related to the unrealized mark-to-market losses related to the ComEd swap, which eliminate upon consolidation. For the year ended December 31, 2012 include revenue from sales to PECO of $543 and sales to BGE of $322 million in the Mid-Atlantic region, and sales to ComEd of $795 in the Midwest region, net of $7 million related to the unrealized mark-to-market losses related to the ComEd swap, which eliminate upon consolidation. For the year ended 2011 intersegment revenues for Generation include revenue from sales to PECO of $508 million in the Mid-Atlantic region, and sales to ComEd of $653 million in the Midwest region.
(b)Amounts represent activity recorded at BGE from March 12, 2012, the closing date of the merger, through December 31, 2013.
(c)Other primarily includes Exelon’s corporate operations, shared service entities and other financing and investment activities.
(d)(c)For the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011,2013, utility taxes of $79$105 million, $82$89 million and $27$79 million, respectively, are included in revenues and expenses for Generation. For the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011,2013, utility taxes of $241$236 million, $239$238 million and $243$241 million, respectively, are included in revenues and expenses for ComEd. For the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 2011,2013, utility taxes of $129$133 million, $141$128 million and $173$129 million, respectively, are included in revenues and expenses for PECO. For the yearyears ended December 31, 20132015, 2014 and for the period of March 12, 2012 through December 31, 2012,2013, utility taxes of $82$85 million, $86 million and $59$82 million are included in revenues and expenses for BGE, respectively.
(e)(d)Intersegment revenues exclude sales to unconsolidated affiliates. The intersegment profit associated with Generation’s sale of certain products and services by and between Exelon’s segments is not eliminated in consolidation due to the recognition of intersegment profit in accordance with regulatory accounting guidance. For Exelon, these amounts are included in operating revenues in the Consolidated Statements of Operations.Operations and Comprehensive Income.

 

Generation total revenues:

 

 2013 2012 2011  2015 2014 2013 
 Revenues
from
external
customers (a)
 Interseg
ment
revenues
 Total
Revenues
 Revenues
from
external
customers (a)
 Interseg
ment
revenues
 Total
Revenues
 Revenues
from
external
customers (a)
 Interseg
ment
revenues
 Total
Revenues
  Revenues
from
external
customers (b)
 Intersegment
revenues
 Total
revenues
 Revenues
from
external
customers (b)(d)
 Intersegment
revenues (d)
 Total
revenues
 Revenues
from
external
customers (b)(d)
 Intersegment
revenues(d)
 Total
revenues
 

Mid-Atlantic(a)

 $5,182  $22  $5,204  $5,082  $(44 $5,038  $4,052  $—    $4,052  $5,974   $(74 $5,900   $5,414   $(155 $5,259   $5,261   $(57 $5,204  

Midwest

  4,280   (10  4,270   4,824   24   4,848   5,445   —     5,445   4,712    (2  4,710    4,488    (13  4,475    4,298    (28  4,270  

New England

  1,245   (8  1,237   1,048   45   1,093   11   —     11   2,217    (5  2,212    1,468    (46  1,422    1,279    (42  1,237  

New York

  735   (21  714   582   (25  557   —     —     —     996    (11  985    846    (3  843    717    (3  714  

ERCOT

  1,222   (6  1,216   1,365   2   1,367   575   —     575   863    (6  857    938    (3  935    1,223    (7  1,216  

Other Regions (b)

  946   22   968   755   78   833   201   —     201 

Other Power Regions

  1,182    (80  1,102    1,379    (70  1,309    1,084    (116  968  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total Revenues for Reportable Segments

 $13,610  $(1 $13,609  $13,656  $80  $13,736  $10,284  $—    $10,284  $15,944   $(178 $15,766   $14,533   $(290 $14,243   $13,862   $(253 $13,609  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other (c)

  2,020   1   2,021   781   (80  701   163   —     163   3,191    178    3,369    2,860    290    3,150    1,768    253    2,021  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total Generation Consolidated Operating Revenues

 $15,630  $—    $15,630  $14,437  $—    $14,437  $10,447  $—    $10,447  $19,135   $—     $19,135   $17,393   $—     $17,393   $15,630   $—     $15,630  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)On April 1, 2014, Generation assumed operational control of CENG’s nuclear fleet. As a result, beginning on April 1, 2014, CENG’s revenues are included on a fully consolidated basis.
(b)Includes all wholesale and retail electric sales to third parties and affiliated sales to ComEd, PECO and BGE.
(b)Other regions include the South, West and Canada, which are not considered individually significant.
(c)Other represents activities not allocated to a region. See text above for a description of included activities. Also includes a $7 million increase to revenues, a $289 million decrease to revenues, and a $767 million decrease to revenues for the amortization of intangible assets related to commodity contracts recorded at fair value for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014, and 2013, respectively, unrealized mark-to-market gains of $767$203 million, losses of $174 million, and $1,505gains of $220 million for the years ended December 31, 20132015, 2014, and 2012,2013, respectively, and elimination of intersegment revenues.
(d)

Exelon corrected an error in the December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013 balances within Intersegment revenues and Revenues from external customers for an overstatement of Intersegment revenues for Reportable Segments of $284 million and

421


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

$252 million for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively, an understatement of Revenues from external customers for Reportable Segments of $284 million and $252 million for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively, an understatement of Intersegment revenues for Other of $284 million and $252 million for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively, and an overstatement of Revenues from external customers for Other of $284 million and $252 million for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. The error is not considered material to any prior period, and there is no net impact to Total Revenues.

Generation total revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense:

 

 2013 2012 2011  2015 2014 2013 
 RNF from
external
customers (a)
 Interseg
ment
RNF
 Total
RNF
 RNF from
external
customers (a)
 Interseg
ment
RNF
 Total
RNF
 RNF from
external
customers (a)
 Interseg
ment
RNF
 Total
RNF
  RNF from
external
customers (b)
 Intersegment
RNF
 Total
RNF
 RNF from
external
customers (b)(d)
 Intersegment
RNF (d)
 Total
RNF
 RNF from
external
customers (b)(d)
 Intersegment
RNF (d)
 Total
RNF
 

Mid-Atlantic(a)

 $3,273  $(3 $3,270  $3,477  $(44 $3,433  $3,350  $—    $3,350  $3,556   $15   $3,571   $3,544   $(113 $3,431   $3,287   $(17 $3,270  

Midwest

  2,585   1   2,586   2,974   24   2,998   3,547   —     3,547   2,912    (20  2,892    2,607    (8  2,599    2,606    (20  2,586  

New England

  217   (32  185   151   45   196   9   —     9   519    (58  461    450    (99  351    299    (114  185  

New York

  14   (18  (4  101   (25  76   —      —     —     584    50    634    439    44    483    (55  51    (4

ERCOT

  604   (168  436   403   2   405   84   —     84   425    (132  293    573    (256  317    627    (191  436  

Other Regions (b)

  334   (133  201   53   78   131   (14  —     (14

Other Power Regions

  440    (190  250    517    (190  327    397    (196  201  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total Revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense for Reportable Segments

 $7,027  $(353 $6,674  $7,159  $80  $7,239  $6,976  $—    $6,976  $8,436   $(335 $8,101   $8,130   $(622 $7,508   $7,161   $(487 $6,674  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other(c)

  406   353   759   217   (80  137   (118  —     (118  678    335    1,013    (662  622    (40  272    487    759  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total Generation Revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense

 $7,433  $—    $7,433  $7,376  $—    $7,376  $6,858  $—    $6,858  $9,114   $—     $9,114   $7,468   $—     $7,468   $7,433   $—     $7,433  
 

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

(a)On April 1, 2014, Generation assumed operational control of CENG’s nuclear fleet. As a result, beginning on April 1, 2014, CENG’s revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense are included on a fully consolidated basis.
(b)Includes purchases and sales from third parties and affiliated sales to ComEd, PECO and BGE.
(b)Other regions include the South, West and Canada, which are not considered individually significant.
(c)Other represents activities not allocated to a region. See text above for a description of included activities. Also includes a $8 million increase in RNF, a $124 million decrease in RNF, and a $488 million decrease in RNF for the amortization of intangible assets related to commodity contracts recorded at fair value for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014, and 2013, respectively, unrealized mark-to-market gains of $488$257 million, losses of $591 million, and $1,098gains of $504 million for the years ended December 31, 20132015, 2014, and 2012,2013, respectively, and the elimination of intersegment revenues.revenue net of purchased power and fuel expense.
(d)Exelon corrected an error in the December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013 balances within Intersegment RNF and RNF from external customers for an understatement of $8 million and an overstatement of $134 million of Intersegment RNF for Reportable Segments for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively, an understatement of RNF from external customers for Reportable Segments of $11 million and $134 million for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively, an overstatement of $8 million and an understatement $134 million of Intersegment RNF for Other for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively, and an overstatement of RNF from external customers for Other of $11 million and $134 million for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. This also included an understatement of total RNF for Reportable Segments and an overstatement of total RNF for Other of $19 million for the year ended December 31, 2014. The error is not considered material to any prior period, and there is no net impact to Generation Total RNF for 2013 or 2014.

422


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

25.26. Related Party Transactions (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE)

 

Exelon

 

The financial statements of Exelon include related party transactions as presented in the tables below:

 

  For the Years Ended
December 31,
   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 
  2013   2012 2011   2015 2014 2013 

Operating revenues from affiliates:

         

PECO(a)

  $10   $6  $9   $1   $1   $10  

CENG(b)

   56    42   —      —      17    56  

BGE(a)

   4    —     —      4    5    4  

Other

   4    —      —    
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total operating revenues from affiliates

  $70   $48  $9   $9   $23   $70  
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Purchase power and fuel from affiliates:

         

CENG(c)

  $992   $793  $—     $—     $282   $992  

Keystone Fuels, LLC

   144    119   68 

Conemaugh Fuels, LLC

   98    101   69 

Safe Harbor Water Power Corp

   22    23   —   

Keystone Fuels, LLC(d)

   —      138    144  

Conemaugh Fuels, LLC(d)

   —      99    98  

Safe Harbor Water Power Corp(d)

   —      12    22  
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total purchase power and fuel from affiliates

  $1,256   $1,036  $137   $—     $531   $1,256  
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Interest expense to affiliates, net:

         

ComEd Financing III

  $13   $13  $13   $13   $13   $13  

PECO Trust III

   6    6   6    6    6    6  

PECO Trust IV

   6    6   6    6    6    6  

BGE Capital Trust II(f)

   16    12   —   

BGE Capital Trust II

   16    16    16  
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total interest expense to affiliates, net

  $41   $37  $25   $41   $41   $41  
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Earnings (losses) in equity method investments:

         

CENG(e)

  $9   $(99 $—     $—     $(19 $9  

Qualifying facilities and domestic power projects

   1    8   (1   (8  (1  1  

Other

  $1   $—     $—    
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total earnings (losses) in equity method investments

  $10   $(91 $(1  $(7 $(20 $10  
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

423


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

  December 31,   December 31, 
  2013   2012   2015   2014 

Investments in affiliates:

    

ComEd Financing III

  $6   $6 

PECO Energy Capital Corporation

   4    4 

PECO Trust IV

   4    4 

BGE Capital Trust II

   8    8 
  

 

   

 

 

Total investments in affiliates

  $22   $22 
  

 

   

 

 

Receivables from affiliates (current):

    

CENG(b)

  $3   $16 

Payables to affiliates (current):

        

CENG(c)

  $85   $83 

ComEd Financing III

   4    4   $4    $4  

PECO Trust III

   1    1    1     1  

BGE Capital Trust II

   4    4    3     3  

Keystone Fuels, LLC

   12    11 

Conemaugh Fuels, LLC

   9    9 

Other

   1    —   
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total payables to affiliates (current)

  $116   $112   $8    $8  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Long-term debt due to financing trusts:

        

ComEd Financing III

  $206   $206   $205    $205  

PECO Trust III

   81    81    81     81  

PECO Trust IV

   103    103    103     103  

BGE Capital Trust II

   258    258    252     252  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total long-term debt due to financing trusts

  $648   $648   $641    $641  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)The intersegment profit associated with the sale of certain products and services by and between Exelon’s segments is not eliminated in consolidation due to the recognition of intersegment profit in accordance with regulatory accounting guidance. For Exelon, these amounts are included in operating revenues in the Consolidated Statement of Operations. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.
(b)Exelon has a shared services agreement (SSA) with CENG, which expiresBeginning in 2017. Pursuant to an agreement between Exelon and EDF, the pricing in the SSA for services reflect actual costs determined on the same basis that BSC charges its affiliates for similar services subject to an annual cap for most SSA services provided. In addition to the SSA,2012, Generation hasentered into a power services agency agreement (PSAA) with the CENG plants, which expires on December 31, 2014.as of April 1, 2014, was amended and extended until the permanent cessation of power generation by the CENG generation plants. The PSAA is a five-yearan agreement under which Generation provides scheduling, asset management and billing services to the CENG plants for a specified monthly fee. The charges for services reflect the cost of the services. AtOn April 1, 2014, Generation and CENG entered into a Nuclear Operating Services Agreement (NOSA) pursuant to which Generation will operate the closing, as described underCENG nuclear generation fleet owned by CENG subsidiaries and provide corporate and administrative services for the Master Agreement, the PSAA will be amended and extended until the complete and permanent cessation of operationremaining life of the CENG generation plants.nuclear plants as if they were part of the Generation nuclear fleet. For further information regarding the Investment in CENG, see Note 5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC.
(c)CENG owns 100% of four nuclear units in Maryland and New York and 82% of Nine Mile Point Unit 2 in New York. Beginning in 2012, Generation hashad a PPA under which it is purchasingpurchased 85% of the nuclear plant output owned by CENG that iswas not sold to third parties under pre-existing firm and unit-contingent PPAs through 2014. Beginning on January 1, 2015 and continuing to the end of the life of the respective plants, Generation will purchase on a unit-contingent basis 50.01% of the nuclear plant output owned by CENG and a subsidiary of EDF will purchase on a unit-contingent basis 49.99% of the nuclear plant output owned by CENG (EDF PPA). This agreement will continue not sold to be effective and is not affected by the Master Agreement, except that if the put option under the Master Agreement is exercised, then the EDF PPA would transferthird parties. Beginning April 1, 2014, sales to Generation upon completion of the Put Option Agreement transaction.are eliminated in consolidation. For further information regarding the Investment in CENG, see Note 5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC.
(d)Exelon Foundation isDuring 2014, Generation closed the sale of Safe Harbor Water Power Corporation, Keystone Fuels, LLC, and Conemaugh Fuels LLC. Generation recorded purchase power and fuel costs from affiliates related to these generating assets during the time these assets were still partially owned by Generation. See Note 4—Mergers, Acquisitions, and Dispositions for more information.
(e)Prior to April 1, 2014, Generation’s total gain (loss) in equity method investments includes equity investment income (loss) and amortization of the basis difference established as a nonconsolidated not-for-profit Illinois corporation. The Exelon Foundationresult of purchase accounting applied upon Constellation merger in 2012. CENG was establishedfully consolidated on April 1, 2014. For further information regarding the Investment in 2007 to serve educational and environmental philanthropic purposes and does not serve a direct business or political purpose of Exelon.CENG, see Note 5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC.

424


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

(e)Generation’s total gain (loss) in equity method investments includes equity investment income (loss) and amortization of basis difference. For further information regarding the Investment in CENG see Note 5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC.
(f)The BGE Capital Trust II portion of Exelon’s interest expense to affiliates, net, for December 31, 2012 excludes $4 million of expense incurred in 2012 prior to the closing of Exelon’s merger with Constellation on March 12, 2012.

 

Transactions involving Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE are further described in the tables below.

 

Generation

 

The financial statements of Generation include related party transactions as presented in the tables below:

 

  For the Years Ended
December 31,
   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 
  2013   2012 2011   2015 2014 2013 

Operating revenues from affiliates:

         

ComEd(a)

  $506   $795  $653   $18   $176   $506  

PECO(b)

   405    543   508    224    198    405  

BGE(c)

   455    322   —      502    387    455  

CENG(d)

   56    42   —      —      17    56  

BSC

   1    —     —      1    1    1  

Other

   4    —      —    
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total operating revenues from affiliates

  $1,423   $1,702  $1,161   $749   $779   $1,423  
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Purchase power and fuel from affiliates:

         

PECO

  $—     $—    $1 

ComEd

   1    —     —     $—     $1   $1  

BGE

   13    8   —      14    25    13  

CENG(e)

   992    793   —      —      282    992  

Keystone Fuels, LLC(i)

   144    119   68    —      138    144  

Conemaugh Fuels, LLC(i)

   98    101   69    —      99    98  

Safe Harbor Water Power Corporation(i)

   22    23   —      —      12    22  
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total purchase power and fuel from affiliates

  $1,270   $1,044  $138   $14   $557   $1,270  
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Operating and maintenance from affiliates:

         

ComEd(f)

  $2   $2  $2   $4   $3   $2  

PECO(f)

   1    3   5    2    2    1  

BSC(g)

   571    625   314    614    618    571  
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total operating and maintenance from affiliates

  $574   $630  $321   $620   $623   $574  
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Interest expense to affiliates, net:

         

Exelon Corporate(j)

  $59   $75  $—     $43   $53   $59  

Earnings (losses) in equity method investments

         

CENG(h)

   9    (99  —     $—     $(19 $9  

Qualifying facilities and domestic power projects

   1    8   (1   (8  (1  1  
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total earnings (losses) in equity method investments

  $10   $(91 $(1  $(8 $(20 $10  
  

 

   

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Capitalized costs

    

BSC (g)

  $76   $91   $93  

Cash distribution paid to member

  $625   $1,626  $172   $2,474   $645   $625  

Contribution from member

  $26   $48  $30   $47   $53   $26  

425


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

  December 31,   December 31, 
  2013   2012   2015   2014 

Mark-to-market derivative assets with affiliates (current):

    

Receivables from affiliates (current):

    

ComEd(i)(a)

  $—     $226   $15    $43  
  

 

   

 

 

Receivables from affiliates (current):

    

CENG(d)

  $3   $—   

ComEd(a)(j)

   38    54 

PECO(b)

   38    56    36     29  

BGE(c)

   27    31    31     40  

Other

   2    —      1     1  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total receivables from affiliates (current)

  $108   $141   $83    $113  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Receivable from affiliate (noncurrent)

    

Intercompany money pool (current):

    

Exelon Corporate

  $1,252    $—    

Long-term debt due to affiliates (current):

    

Exelon Corporate(l)

  $—      $556  

Payables to affiliates (current):

    

Exelon Corporate(j)

  $—     $1   $16    $12  

Payables to affiliates (current):

    

CENG(e)

  $85   $83 

Exelon Corporate(k)

   7    33 

BSC(g)

   66    77    78     83  

Keystone Fuels, LLC

   12    11 

Conemaugh Fuels, LLC

   9    9 

ComEd

   9     12  

Other

   2    —      1     —    
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total payables to affiliates (current)

  $181   $213   $104    $107  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Long-term debt due to affiliates (noncurrent):

    

Exelon Corporate(l)

  $933    $943  

Payables to affiliates (noncurrent):

        

ComEd(l)

  $2,293   $2,037 

PECO(l)

   447    360 

BSC(g)

  $—      $1  

ComEd(k)

   2,172     2,389  

PECO(k)

   405     490  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total payables to affiliates (noncurrent)

  $2,740   $2,397   $2,577    $2,880  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)Generation has an ICC-approved RFP contract with ComEd to provide a portion of ComEd’s electricity supply requirements. Generation also sells RECs to ComEd. In addition, Generation had revenue from ComEd associated with the settled portion of the financial swap contract established as part of the Illinois Settlement. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.
(b)Generation provides electric supply to PECO under contracts executed through PECO’s competitive procurement process. In addition, Generation has five-year and ten-year agreements with PECO to sell non-solar and solar AECs, respectively. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.
(c)Generation provides a portion of BGE’s energy requirements under its MDPSC-approved market-based SOS and gas commodity programs. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.
(d)Exelon has a shared services agreement with CENG, which expiresBeginning in 2017. Pursuant to an agreement between Exelon and EDF, the pricing in the SSA for services reflect actual costs determined on the same basis that BSC charges its affiliates for similar services subject to an annual cap for most SSA services provided. In addition to the SSA,2012, Generation hasentered into a power services agency agreement (PSAA) with the CENG plants, which expires on December 31, 2014.as of April 1, 2014, was amended and extended until the permanent cessation of power generation by the CENG generation plants. The PSAA is a five-yearan agreement under which Generation provides scheduling, asset management and billing services to the CENG plants for a specified monthly fee. The charges for services reflect the cost of the services. AtOn April 1, 2014, Generation and CENG entered into a Nuclear Operating Services Agreement (NOSA) pursuant to which Generation will operate the closing, as described underCENG nuclear generation fleet owned by CENG subsidiaries and provide corporate and administrative services for the Master Agreement, the PSAA will be amended and extended until the complete and permanent cessation of operationremaining life of the CENG generation plants.nuclear plants as if they were part of the Generation nuclear fleet. For further information regarding the Investment in CENG, see Note 5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC.
(e)

CENG owns 100% of four nuclear units in Maryland and New York and 82% of Nine Mile Point Unit 2 in New York. Beginning in 2012, Generation hashad a PPA under which it is purchasingpurchased 85% of the nuclear plant output owned by CENG that iswas not sold to third parties under pre-existing firm and unit-contingent PPAs through 2014. Beginning on January 1, 2015 and continuing to the end of the life of the respective plants, Generation will purchase on a unit-contingent basis 50.01% of the nuclear plant output owned by CENG and a subsidiary of EDF will purchase on a unit-contingent basis 49.99% of the nuclear plant output

owned by CENG (EDF PPA) not sold to third parties. Beginning April 1, 2014, sales to Generation are eliminated in consolidation. For further information regarding the Investment in CENG, see Note 5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC.

426


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

owned by CENG. This agreement will continue to be effective and is not affected by the Master Agreement, except that if the put option under the Master Agreement is exercised, then the EDF PPA would transfer to Generation upon completion of the Put Option Agreement transaction. For further information regarding the Investment in CENG see Note 5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC.

(f)Generation requires electricity for its own use at its generating stations. Generation purchases electricity and distribution and transmission services from PECO and only distribution and transmission services from ComEd for the delivery of electricity to its generating stations.
(g)Generation receives a variety of corporate support services from BSC, including legal, human resources, financial, information technology and supply management services. All services are provided at cost, including applicable overhead. A portion of such services is capitalized.
(h)Prior to April 1, 2014, Generation’s total gain (loss) in equity method investments includes equity income (loss) and amortization of the basis difference.difference established as a result of purchase accounting applied upon Constellation merger in 2012. CENG was fully consolidated on April 1, 2014. For further information regarding the Investment in CENG, see Note 5—Investment in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC.
(i)RepresentsDuring 2014, Generation closed the fair valuesale of Generation’s five-year financial swap contract with ComEd, which ended in 2013.Safe Harbor Water Power Corporation, Keystone Fuels, LLC, and Conemaugh Fuels LLC. Generation recorded purchase power and fuel costs from affiliates related to these generating assets during the time these assets were still partially owned by Generation. See Note 4—Mergers, Acquisitions, and Dispositions for more information.
(j)Generation had a $53 million receivable from ComEd at December 31, 2012 associated with the completed portion of the financial swap contract entered into as part of the Illinois Settlement. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters and Note 12—Derivative Financial Instruments for additional information.
(k)As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, theThe balance consists of interest owed to Exelon Corporation related to the senior unsecured notes. In addition, the balance at December 31, 2012, includesnotes, as well as, expense related to certain invoices Exelon Corporation processed on behalf of Generation.
(l)(k)Generation has long-term payables to ComEd and PECO as a result of the nuclear decommissioning contractual construct whereby, to the extent NDT funds are greater than the underlying ARO at the end of decommissioning, such amounts are due back to ComEd and PECO, as applicable, for payment to their respective customers. See Note 15—16—Asset Retirement Obligations.
(l)In connection with the debt obligations assumed by Exelon as part of the Constellation merger, Exelon and subsidiaries of Generation (former Constellation subsidiaries) assumed intercompany loan agreements that mirror the terms and amounts of the third-party debt obligations of Exelon, resulting in intercompany notes payable included in Long-term Debt to affiliate on Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets and intercompany notes receivable at Exelon Corporate, which are eliminated in consolidation on Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

ComEd

 

The financial statements of ComEd include related party transactions as presented in the tables below:

 

  For the Years Ended
December 31,
   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 
  2013   2012   2011   2015   2014   2013 

Operating revenues from affiliates

            

Generation

  $3   $2   $2   $4    $4    $3  

Purchased power from affiliate

            

Generation(a)

  $512   $789   $653   $18    $176    $512  

Operating and maintenance from affiliate

            

BSC(b)

  $157   $163   $158   $195    $166    $157  

Interest expense to affiliates, net:

            

Exelon Corporate

  $—     $—     $2 

ComEd Financing III

   13    13    13   $13    $13    $13  
  

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total interest expense to affiliates, net

  $13   $13   $15 
  

 

   

 

   

 

 

Capitalized costs

            

BSC(b)

  $69   $92   $85   $103    $77    $69  

Cash dividends paid to parent

  $220   $105   $300   $299    $307    $220  

Contribution from parent

  $—     $11   $11   $202    $273    $—    

427


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

  December 31,   December 31, 
  2013   2012   2015   2014 

Prepaid voluntary employee beneficiary association trust(c)

  $13   $10   $11    $13  

Investment in affiliate

    

ComEd Financing III

  $6   $6 

Receivable from affiliates (current):

        

Voluntary employee beneficiary association trust

  $3   $—     $2    $2  

BGE

   —      3 

Generation

   9     12  

Exelon Corporate (e)

   188     —    
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total receivable from affiliates (current)

  $3   $3   $199    $14  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Receivable from affiliates (noncurrent):

        

Generation(d)

  $2,293   $2,037   $2,172    $2,389  

Exelon Corporate(g)

   176    2 

Exelon Corporate (e)

   —       182  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total receivable from affiliates (noncurrent)

  $2,469   $2,039   $2,172    $2,571  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Payables to affiliates (current):

        

Generation(a)(e)

  $38   $54 

Generation(a)

  $15    $43  

BSC(b)

   30    35    39     32  

ComEd Financing III

   4    4    4     4  

PECO

   2     2  

Exelon Corporate

   9    2    2     3  

Other

   2    2 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total payables to affiliates (current)

  $83   $97   $62    $84  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Mark-to-market derivative liability with affiliate (current)

    

Generation(f)

  $—     $226 

Mark-to-market derivative liability with affiliate (noncurrent)

    

Long-term debt to ComEd financing trust

        

ComEd Financing III

  $206   $206   $205    $205  

 

(a)ComEd procures a portion of its electricity supply requirements from Generation under an ICC-approved RFP contract. ComEd also purchases RECs from Generation. In addition, purchased power expense includes the settled portion of the financial swap contract with Generation, established as part of the Illinois Settlement Legislation.which expired in 2013. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters and Note 12—13—Derivative Financial Instruments for additional information.
(b)ComEd receives a variety of corporate support services from BSC, including legal, human resources, financial, information technology and supply management services. All services are provided at cost, including applicable overhead. A portion of such services is capitalized.
(c)The voluntary employee benefit association trusts covering active employees are included in corporate operations and are funded by the operating segments.Registrants. A prepayment to the active welfare plans has accumulated due to actuarially determined contribution rates, which are the basis for ComEd’s contributions to the plans, being higher than actual claim expense incurred by the plans over time. The prepayment is included in other current assets.
(d)ComEd has a long-term receivable from Generation as a result of the nuclear decommissioning contractual construct for generating facilities previously owned by ComEd. To the extent the assets associated with decommissioning are greater than the applicable ARO at the end of decommissioning, such amounts are due back to ComEd for payment to ComEd’s customers.
(e)ComEd had a $53 million payable to Generation at December 31, 2012, associated with the completed portion of the financial swap contract entered into as part of the Illinois Settlement Legislation. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters and Note 12—Derivative Financial Information for additional information.
(f)To fulfill a requirement of the Illinois Settlement Legislation, ComEd entered into a five-year financial swap with Generation, which ended in 2013.
(g)In 2013, representsRepresents indemnification from Exelon Corporate related to the like-kind exchange transaction.

428


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

PECO

 

The financial statements of PECO include related party transactions as presented in the tables below:

 

  For the Years Ended
December 31,
   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 
  2013   2012   2011   2015   2014   2013 

Operating revenues from affiliates:

            

Generation(a)

  $1   $3   $5   $2    $2    $1  

Purchased power from affiliate

            

Generation(b)

  $392   $533   $495   $220    $194    $392  

Operating and maintenance from affiliates:

            

BSC(c)

  $98   $107   $92   $107    $96    $98  

Generation

   3    4    4    3     3     3  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total operating and maintenance from affiliates

  $101   $111   $96   $110    $99    $101  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Interest expense to affiliates, net:

            

PECO Trust III

  $6   $6   $6   $6    $6    $6  

PECO Trust IV

   6    6    6    6     6     6  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total interest expense to affiliates, net

  $12   $12   $12   $12    $12    $12  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Capitalized costs

            

BSC(c)

  $46   $54   $60   $40    $39    $46  

Cash dividends paid to parent

  $332   $343   $348   $279    $320    $332  

Contribution from parent

  $27   $9   $18   $16    $24    $27  

 

  December 31,   December 31, 
  2013   2012   2015   2014 

Prepaid voluntary employee beneficiary association trust(d)

  $3   $2   $2    $3  

Investments in affiliates:

    

PECO Energy Capital Corporation

  $4   $4 

PECO Trust IV

   4    4 

Receivable from affiliate (current):

    

ComEd

  $2    $2  

BGE

   —       1  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total investments in affiliates

  $8   $8 

Total receivable from affiliates (current)

  $2    $3  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Receivable from affiliate (noncurrent):

        

BGE

  $3   $2 

Receivable from affiliate (noncurrent):

    

Generation(e)

  $405    $490  

Payables to affiliates (current):

    

Generation(e)(b)

  $447   $360   $36    $29  

Payables to affiliates (current):

    

Generation(b)

  $38   $56 

BSC(c)

   17    18    17     20  

Exelon Corporate

   2    1    1     2  

PECO Trust III

   1    1    1     1  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total payables to affiliates (current)

  $58   $76   $55    $52  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Long-term debt to financing trusts:

        

PECO Trust III

  $81   $81   $81    $81  

PECO Trust IV

   103    103    103     103  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total long-term debt to financing trusts

  $184   $184   $184    $184  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

(a)PECO provides energy to Generation for Generation’s own use.

429


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

(b)PECO purchases electric supply from Generation under contracts executed through its competitive procurement process. In addition, PECO has five-year and ten-year agreements with Generation to purchase non-solar and solar AECs, respectively. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information on AECs.
(c)PECO receives a variety of corporate support services from BSC, including legal, human resources, financial, information technology and supply management services. All services are provided at cost, including applicable overhead. A portion of such services is capitalized.
(d)The voluntary employee beneficiary association trusts covering active employees are included in corporate operations and are funded by the operating segments.Registrants. A prepayment to the active welfare plans has accumulated due to actuarially determined contribution rates, which are the basis for PECO’s contributions to the plans, being higher than actual claim expense incurred by the plans over time.
(e)PECO has a long-term receivable from Generation as a result of the nuclear decommissioning contractual construct, whereby, to the extent the assets associated with decommissioning are greater than the applicable ARO at the end of decommissioning, such amounts are due back to PECO for payment to PECO’s customers.

 

BGE

 

The financial statements of BGE include related party transactions as presented in the tables below:

 

  For the Years Ended
December 31,
   For the Years Ended
December 31,
 
  2013   2012   2011   2015   2014   2013 

Operating revenues from affiliates:

            

Generation(a)

  $13   $10   $8   $14    $25    $13  

Purchased power from affiliate

            

Generation(b)

  $452   $396   $348   $498    $382    $452  

Operating and maintenance from affiliates:

            

BSC(c)

  $83   $106   $150   $118    $103    $83  

Interest expense to affiliates, net:

            

BGE Capital Trust II

  $16   $16   $16   $16    $16    $16  

Capitalized costs

            

BSC(c)

  $15   $21   $29   $28    $19    $15  

Cash dividends paid to parent

  $—     $—     $(85  $158    $—      $—    

Contribution from parent

  $—     $66   $—     $7    $—      $—    

 

  December 31,   December 31, 
  2013   2012   2015   2014 

Prepaid voluntary employee beneficiary association trust(d)

  $1   $—     $—      $1  

Investments in affiliates:

    

BGE Capital Trust II

  $8   $8 

Payables to affiliates (current):

        

Generation(b)

  $27   $31   $31    $40  

BSC(c)

   20    12    17     17  

Exelon(d)

   1    17 

ComEd

   —      3 

Exelon Corporate

   1     5  

PECO

   3    2    —       1  

BGE Capital Trust II

   4    4    3     3  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total payables to affiliates (current)

  $55   $69   $52    $66  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Long-term debt to BGE financing trust

        

BGE Capital Trust II

  $258   $258   $252    $252  

 

(a)BGE provides energy to Generation for Generation’s own use.

430


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

(b)BGE procures a portion of its electricity and gas supply requirements from Generation under its MDPSC-approved market-based SOS and gas commodity programs. See Note 3—Regulatory Matters for additional information.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

(c)BGE receives a variety of corporate support services from BSC, including legal, human resources, financial, information technology and supply management services. All services are provided at cost, including applicable overhead. A portion of such services is capitalized.
(d)BGE receives a variety ofThe voluntary employee benefit association trusts covering active employees are included in corporate support services from Exelon Corporate, including payrolloperations and benefits services.are funded by the Registrants. A prepayment to the active welfare plans has accumulated due to actuarially determined contribution rates, which are the basis for BGE’s contributions to the plans, being higher than actual claim expense incurred by the plans over time. The prepayment is included in other current assets.

 

26.27. Quarterly Data (Unaudited) (Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and PECO)BGE)

 

Exelon

 

The data shown below, which may not equal the total for the year due to the effects of rounding and dilution, includes all adjustments that Exelon considers necessary for a fair presentation of such amounts:

 

  Operating Revenues   Operating Income   Net (Loss) Income
on Common
Stock
   Operating Revenues   Operating Income Net Income
on Common
Stock
 
      2013           2012           2013           2012           2013         2012           2015           2014       2015 2014 2015   2014 

Quarter ended:

                     

March 31

  $6,082   $4,690   $508   $359   $(4 $200   $8,830    $7,237    $1,366(a)  $168(b)  $693    $90  

June 30

   6,141    5,966    1,005    714    490   286    6,514     6,024     1,134(a)   842(b)   638     522  

September 30

   6,502    6,579    1,254    603    738   296    7,401     6,912     1,200(a)   1,738(b)   629     993  

December 31

   6,163    6,254    889    704    495   378    6,702     7,255     707    348    309     18(c) 

 

   Average Basic Shares
Outstanding

(in millions)
   Net (Loss) Income
per Basic Share
 
   2013   2012       2013          2012     

Quarter ended:

       

March 31

   855    705   $(0.01) $0.28 

June 30

   856    853    0.57   0.34 

September 30

   857    854    0.86   0.35 

December 31

   856    854    0.60   0.44 
   Average Diluted Shares
Outstanding

(in millions)
   Net (Loss) Income
per Diluted Share
 
   2013   2012   2013  2012 

Quarter ended:

       

March 31

   855    707   $(0.01) $0.28 

June 30

   860    856    0.57   0.33 

September 30

   860    857    0.86   0.35 

December 31

   860    857    0.59   0.44 

(a)In the first, second, and third quarter of 2015, Exelon reclassified $(1) million, $7 million, and $2 million, respectively, to Operating income for presentation purposes in Exelon’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. The reclassifications did not affect Exelon’s Net (Loss) Income on Common Stock.
(b)In the first, second, and third quarter of 2014, Exelon reclassified $5 million, $13 million, and $339 million, respectively, to Operating income for presentation purposes in Exelon’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. The reclassifications did not affect Exelon’s Net (Loss) Income on Common Stock.
(c)Includes charges to earnings related to the impairments of certain generating assets which were held for sale and certain Upstream exploration assets. See Note 8—Impairment of Long-Lived Assets of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

 

   Average Basic Shares
Outstanding
(in millions)
   Net Income
per Basic Share
 
       2015           2014       2015   2014 

Quarter ended:

    

March 31

   862     858    $0.80    $0.10  

June 30

   863     860     0.74     0.61  

September 30

   913     861     0.69     1.15  

December 31

   921     861     0.34     0.02  

431

   Average Diluted Shares
Outstanding
(in millions)
   Net Income
per Diluted Share
 
       2015           2014           2015           2014     

Quarter ended:

        

March 31

   867     861    $0.80    $0.10  

June 30

   866     864     0.74     0.60  

September 30

   915     863     0.69     1.15  

December 31

   924     868     0.33     0.02  


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

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

 

  2013   2012 
  Fourth   Third   Second   First   Fourth   Third   Second   First   2015   2014 
  Quarter   Quarter   Quarter   Quarter   Quarter   Quarter   Quarter   Quarter   Fourth
Quarter
   Third
Quarter
   Second
Quarter
   First
Quarter
   Fourth
Quarter
   Third
Quarter
   Second
Quarter
   First
Quarter
 

High price

  $30.59   $32.42   $37.80   $34.56   $37.50   $39.82   $39.37   $43.70   $31.37    $34.44    $34.98    $38.25    $38.93    $36.26    $37.73    $33.94  

Low price

   26.64    29.42    29.84    29.10    28.40    34.54    36.27    38.31    25.09     28.41     31.28     31.71     33.07     30.66     33.11     26.45  

Close

   27.39    29.64    30.88    34.48    29.74    35.58    37.62    39.21    27.77     29.70     31.42     33.61     37.08     34.09     36.48     33.56  

Dividends

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

 

Generation

 

The data shown below includes all adjustments that Generation considers necessary for a fair presentation of such amounts:

 

  Operating Revenues   Operating (Loss) Income   Net (Loss) Income
on Membership
Interest
   Operating Revenues   Operating (Loss) Income Net (Loss) Income
on Membership
Interest
 
    2013       2012         2013         2012       2013 2012       2015           2014           2015 (a)          2014         2015           2014     

Quarter ended:

                    

March 31

  $3,533   $2,743   $(64 $272   $(18 $168   $5,840 ��  $4,390    $719(a)  $(384)(b)  $443    $(185

June 30

   4,070    3,765    603   384    330   166    4,232     3,789     703(a)   441(b)   398     340  

September 30

   4,255    4,031    721   174    490   91    4,768     4,412     622(a)   1,225(b)   377     771  

December 31

   3,772    3,898    405   290    269   137    4,294     4,802     230    (105  154     (91

(a)In the first, second, and third quarter of 2015, Generation reclassified $(1) million, $7 million, and $1 million, respectively, to Operating (loss) income for presentation purposes in Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. The reclassifications did not affect Generation’s Net (Loss) Income on Membership Interest.
(b)In the first, second, and third quarter of 2014, Generation reclassified $5 million, $12 million, and $338 million, respectively, to Operating (loss) income for presentation purposes in Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. The reclassifications did not affect Generation’s Net (Loss) Income on Membership Interest.

 

ComEd

 

The data shown below includes all adjustments that ComEd considers necessary for a fair presentation of such amounts:

 

  Operating Revenues   Operating Income   Net (Loss) Income   Operating Revenues   Operating Income Net Income 
      2013           2012         2013       2012     2013 2012       2015           2014           2015           2014     2015   2014 

Quarter ended:

                      

March 31

  $1,160   $1,388   $209   $226   $(81 $87   $1,185    $1,134    $230    $238   $90    $98  

June 30

   1,080    1,281    232    142    96   42    1,148     1,128     243     258(a)   99     111  

September 30

   1,156    1,484    278    218    126   90    1,376     1,222     327     287(a)   149     126  

December 31

   1,068    1,290    236    300    109   160    1,196     1,079     217     196    87     73  

(a)In both the second and third quarter of 2014, ComEd reclassified $1 million to Operating income for presentation purposes in ComEd’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. The reclassifications did not affect ComEd’s Net (Loss) Income.

Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

 

PECO

 

The data shown below includes all adjustments that PECO considers necessary for a fair presentation of such amounts:

 

   Operating Revenues   Operating Income   Net Income
on Common
Stock
 
     2013       2012     2013   2012   2013   2012 

Quarter ended:

            

March 31

  $895   $875   $203   $177   $121   $96 

June 30

   672    715    138    151    72    79 

September 30

   728    806    155    178    92    122 

December 31

   805    790    168    117    102    79 

432


Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued)

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

   Operating Revenues   Operating Income   Net Income
on Common
Stock
 
       2015           2014           2015           2014       2015   2014 

Quarter ended:

            

March 31

  $985    $993    $223    $149    $139    $89  

June 30

   661     656     124     134     70     84  

September 30

   740     693     154     133     90     81  

December 31

   645     750     128     156     79     98  

 

BGE

 

The data shown below includes all adjustments that BGE considers necessary for a fair presentation of such amounts:

 

  Operating Revenues   Operating
Income (Loss)
 Net Income (Loss)
attributable to
Common Shareholders
   Operating Revenues   Operating
Income
   Net Income
attributable to
Common Shareholders
 
    2013       2012     2013   2012 2013   2012       2015           2014       2015   2014       2015           2014     

Quarter ended:

                       

March 31

  $880   $697   $163   $(11 $77   $(33  $1,036    $1,054    $204    $169    $106    $85  

June 30

   653    616    69    52   22    13    628     653     99     55     44     16  

September 30

   737    720    114    30   50    (4   725     697     110     102     51     46  

December 31

   794    703    101    61   47    15    746     761     144     113     74     52  

27. Subsequent Events (Exelon and PECO)

On February 5, 2014, a winter storm which brought a mix of snow, ice and freezing rain to the region interrupted electric service delivery to nearly 715,000 customers in PECO’s service territory. Restoration efforts are continuing and will include significant costs associated with employee overtime, support from other utilities and incremental equipment, contracted tree trimming crews and supplies. PECO estimates that restoration efforts will have a material impact to Exelon’s and PECO’s results of operations and cash flows for the first quarter of 2014.

433


ITEM 9.CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

 

Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE

 

None.

 

ITEM 9A.CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

 

Exelon,Generation,ComEd,PECO andBGE—Disclosure Controls and Procedures

 

During the fourth quarter of 2013,2015, each registrant’s management, including its principal executive officer and principal financial officer, evaluated the effectiveness of that registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures related to the recording, processing, summarizing and reporting of information in that registrant’s periodic reports that it files with the SEC. These disclosure controls and procedures have been designed by each registrant to ensure that (a) information relating to that registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, that is required to be included in filings under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, is accumulated and made known to that registrant’s management, including its principal executive officer and principal financial officer, by other employees of that registrant and its subsidiaries as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure, and (b) this information is recorded, processed, summarized, evaluated and reported, as applicable, within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms. Due to the inherent limitations of control systems, not all misstatements may be detected. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty and that breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. Additionally, controls could be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons or by collusion of two or more people.

 

Accordingly, as of December 31, 2013,2015, the principal executive officer and principal financial officer of each registrant concluded that such registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective to accomplish their objectives.

 

Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE—Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

 

Each registrant continually strives to improve its disclosure controls and procedures to enhance the quality of its financial reporting and to maintain dynamic systems that change as conditions warrant. However, there have been no changes in internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the fourth quarter of 20132015 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, any of Exelon’s, Generation’s, ComEd’s, PECO’s and BGE’s internal control over financial reporting.

During 2015 management included an assessment of internal controls over financial reporting of Integrys, a business acquired on November 1, 2014, that was excluded from management’s prior year evaluation consistent with guidance issued by the Securities and Exchange Commission that an assessment of internal controls of a recently acquired business may be omitted. The total revenues related to the Integrys business are 7.45% and 11.46%, respectively, and total assets related to Integrys are approximately 0.53% and 1.08%, respectively, of Exelon’s and Generation’s related consolidated financial statement amounts as of and for the year ended December 31, 2015.

 

Exelon, Generation, ComEd, PECO and BGE—Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

 

Management is required to assess and report on the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013.2015. As a result of that assessment, management determined

that there were no material weaknesses as of December 31, 20132015 and, therefore, concluded that each registrant’s internal control over financial reporting was effective. Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting is included in ITEM 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA.

 

434


ITEM 9B.OTHER INFORMATION

 

Exelon,Generation,ComEd,PECO andComEd

Anne R. Pramaggiore, President and Chief Operating Officer of ComEd, Michael J. Pacilio, President, Exelon Nuclear and Chief Nuclear Officer, Generation, and Sunil Garg, President, Exelon Power and Senior Vice President, Generation, each entered into a Change in Control Employment Agreement effective as of February 10, 2011. The terms of these change in control employment agreements are substantially the same as the change in control employment agreements entered into by other senior executives and previously disclosed, except that the agreements with Ms. Pramaggiore and Messrs. Pacilio and Garg do not include excise tax gross-up provisions, consistent with a policy adopted by the compensation committee in April 2009. The form of Change in Control Employment Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit 10-44.

PECO andBGEBGE

 

None.

435


PART III

 

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, and PECO Energy Company meet the conditions set forth in General Instruction I(1)(a) and (b) of Form 10-K for a reduced disclosure format. Accordingly, all items in this section relating to Generation, BGE, and PECO are not presented.

 

ITEM 10.DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

 

Executive Officers

 

The information required by ITEM 10 relating to executive officers is set forth above in ITEM 1. BUSINESS—Executive Officers of the Registrants at February 13, 2014.10, 2016.

 

Directors, Director Nomination Process, and Audit Committee

 

The information required under ITEM 10 concerning directors and nominees for election as directors at the annual meeting of shareholders (Item 401 of Regulation S-K), the director nomination process (Item 407(c)(3)), the audit committee (Item 407(d)(4) and (d)(5)) and the beneficial reporting compliance (Sec. 16(a)) is incorporated herein by reference to information to be contained in Exelon’s definitive 20142016 proxy statement (2014(2016 Exelon Proxy Statement) and the ComEd information statementsstatement (2016 ComEd Information Statement) to be filed with the SEC before April 30, 201429, 2016 pursuant to Regulation 14A or 14C, as applicable, under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

 

Code of Ethics

 

Exelon’s Code of Business Conduct is the code of ethics that applies to Exelon’s and ComEd’s Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Corporate Controller, and other finance organization employees. The Code of Business Conduct is filed as Exhibit 14 to this report and is available on Exelon’s website atwww.exeloncorp.com. The Code of Business Conduct will be made available, without charge, in print to any shareholder who requests such document from Bruce G. Wilson, Senior Vice President, Deputy General Counsel, and Corporate Secretary, Exelon Corporation, P.O. Box 805398, Chicago, Illinois 60680-5398.

 

If any substantive amendments to the Code of Business Conduct are made or any waivers are granted, including any implicit waiver, from a provision of the Code of Business Conduct, to its Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer or Corporate Controller, Exelon will disclose the nature of such amendment or waiver on Exelon’s website,www.exeloncorp.com, or in a report on Form 8-K.

436


ITEM 11.ITEM 11.EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

 

The information required by this item will be set forth underExecutive Compensation Data andReport of the Compensation Committee in the 20142016 Exelon Proxy Statement or the ComEd 2014 information statements2016 Information Statement and incorporated herein by reference.

437


ITEM 12.ITEM 12.SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

 

The additional information required by this item will be set forth underOwnership of Exelon Stock in the 20142016 Exelon Proxy Statement or the ComEd 2014 information statements2016 Information Statement and incorporated herein by reference.

 

Securities Authorized for Issuance under Exelon Equity Compensation Plans

 

[A]  [B]   [C]   [D]   [B]   [C]   [D] 

Plan Category

  Number of securities to
be issued upon

exercise of outstanding
Options, warrants and
rights (Note 1)
   Weighted-average
price of outstanding
Options, warrants
and rights (note 2)
   Number of securities
remaining available
for future issuance
under equity
compensation plans
(excluding securities
reflected in
column [B] (Note 3)
   Number of securities to
be issued upon
exercise of outstanding
Options, warrants and
rights (Note 1)
   Weighted-average
price of outstanding
Options, warrants
and rights (Note 2)
   Number of securities
remaining available
for future issuance
under equity
compensation plans
(excluding securities
reflected in
column [B]) (Note 3)
 

Equity compensation plans approved by security holders

   29,447,000    $37.12     36,556,000     29,694,000    $35.67     30,102,000  

 

(1)Balance includes stock options, unvested performance shares, and unvested restricted shares that were granted under the Exelon LTIP or predecessor company plans and shares awarded under those plans and deferred into the stock deferral plan, as well as deferred stock units granted to directors as part of their compensation. For performance shares and performance share transition awards granted in 2013, 2014 and 2015, the total includes the maximum number of shares that could be granted, if performance, total shareholder return modifier, and individual performance multipliers were all at maximum, a total of 4,599,0009,016,000 shares. At target, the number of securities to be issued for such awards is 2,586,000.4,508,000. The deferred stock units granted to directors includes 286,600338,000 shares to be issued upon the conversion of deferred stock units awarded to members of the Exelon board of directors, and 94,200102,000 shares to be issued upon the conversion of stock units held by members of the Exelon board of directors that were earned under a legacy Constellation Energy Group plan. Conversion of stock units to shares will occur after the director terminates service to the Exelon board or the board of any of its subsidiary companies. See Note 1920—Common Stock of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information about the material features of the plans.
(2)Includes outstanding restricted stock units and performance shares that can be exercised for no consideration. Without such instruments, the weighted-average price of outstanding options, warrants and rights shown in column [C] would be $46.07.$46.68.
(3)Includes 24,441,00022,289,000 shares available for issuance from the company’s employee stock purchase plan.

 

No ComEd securities are authorized for issuance under equity compensation plans.

438


ITEM 13.ITEM 13.CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE

 

The additional information required by this item will be set forth underRelated Persons Transactions andDirector Independence in the 20142016 Exelon Proxy Statement or the ComEd 2014 information statements2016 Information Statement and incorporated herein by reference.

439


ITEM 14.ITEM 14.PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES

 

The information required by this item will be set forth underThe Ratification of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as Exelon’s Independent Accountant for 20142016 in the 2016 Proxy Statement and the 2016 ComEd Information Statement and incorporated herein by reference.

440


PART IV

 

ITEM 15.EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES

 

(a)The following documents are filed as a part of this report:

 

     Exelon

 

1.  

Financial Statements:

  

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm dated February 13, 201410, 2016 of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

  

Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 20112013

  

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 20112013

  

Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 20132015 and 20122014

  

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 20112013

  

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

2.  

Financial Statement Schedules:

  

Schedule I—Condensed Financial Information of Parent (Exelon Corporate) at December 31, 20132015 and 20122014 and for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 20112013

  

Schedule II—Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

  

Schedules not included are omitted because of the absence of conditions under which they are required or because the required information is provided in the consolidated financial statements, including the notes thereto.

441


Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

 

Schedule I – Condensed Financial Information of Parent (Exelon Corporate)

 

Condensed Statements of Operations and Other Comprehensive Income

 

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

(In millions)

  2013 2012 2011   2015 2014 2013 

Operating expenses

        

Operating and maintenance

  $9  $201  $56   $—     $9   $9  

Operating and maintenance from affiliates

   34   72   44    43    38    34  

Other

   12   6   4    4    3    12  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total operating expenses

   55   279   104    47    50    55  

Operating loss

   (55  (279  (104   (47)   (50)   (55) 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other income and (deductions)

        

Interest expense, net

   (116  (153  (75   (168  (237  (116

Equity in earnings of investments

   1,903   1,278   2,662    2,461    1,779    1,903  

Interest income from affiliates, net

   36   75   1    43    53    36  

Other, net

   (78  7   8    (43  (2  (78
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total other income

   1,745   1,207   2,596    2,293    1,593    1,745  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Income before income taxes

   1,690   928   2,492    2,246    1,543    1,690  

Income taxes

   (29  (232  (3   (23)   (80)   (29) 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net income

  $1,719  $1,160  $2,495   $2,269   $1,623   $1,719  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other comprehensive income (loss)

        

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit plans:

        

Prior service cost (benefit) reclassified to periodic costs, net of taxes of $0, $1 and $(4), respectively

   —     1   (5

Actuarial loss reclassified to periodic cost, net of taxes of $133, $110 and $93, respectively

   208    168   136 

Transition obligation reclassified to periodic cost, net of taxes of $0, $2 and $2, respectively

   —     2   4 

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit plan valuation adjustment, net of taxes of $430, $(237) and $(171), respectively

   669    (371  (250

Unrealized gain (loss) on cash flow hedges, net of taxes of $(166), $(68) and $39, respectively

   (248  (120  88 

Unrealized gain on marketable securities, net of taxes of $0, $(1) and $0, respectively

   2   2   —   

Unrealized gain (loss) on equity investments, net of taxes of $71, $1 and $0, respectively

   106   1   —   

Unrealized gain (loss) on foreign currency translation, net of taxes of $0, $0 and $0, respectively

   (10  —     —   

Prior service cost (benefit) reclassified to periodic costs

  $(46 $(30 $—    

Actuarial loss reclassified to periodic cost

   220    147    208  

Transition obligation reclassified to periodic cost

   —      —      —    

Pension and non-pension postretirement benefit plan valuation
adjustment

   (99  (497  669  

Unrealized loss on cash flow hedges

   9    (148  (248

Unrealized gain on marketable securities

   —      1    2  

Unrealized gain on equity investments

   (3  8    106  

Unrealized loss on foreign currency translation

   (21  (9  (10

Reversal of CENG equity method AOCI

   —      (116  —    
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Other comprehensive income (loss)

   727   (317  (27   60    (644)   727  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Comprehensive income

  $2,446  $843  $2,468   $2,329   $979   $2,446  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

See Notes to Financial Statements

442


Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

 

Schedule I – Condensed Financial Information of Parent (Exelon Corporate)

 

Condensed Statements of Cash Flows

 

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

(In millions)

  2013 2012 2011   2015 2014 2013 

Net cash flows provided by operating activities

  $1,053  $2,131  $766   $3,071   $806   $1,053  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Cash flows from investing activities

        

Return on investment of direct financing lease termination

   —      335    —    

Changes in Exelon intercompany money pool

   (60  —      —       (1,217  (83  (60

Note receivable from affiliates

   484    —     —      550    —      484  

Capital expenditures

   —     (30  (28   —      1    —    

Return on capital from equity method investee

   —     —     (1

Cash and restricted cash acquired from Constellation

   —     679   —   

Change in restricted cash

   38   (38  —      —      —      38  

Investment in affiliates

   (38  (67  (65   (212  (70  (38

Other investing activities

   15    —     —      (55  (126  15  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net cash flows provided by (used in) investing activities

   439    544   (94   (934)   57    439  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Cash flows from financing activities

        

Cash receipts from intercompany money pool

   —      (703  20 

Changes in short-term debt

   10    (161  161 

Changes in short-term borrowings

   —      —      10  

Issuance of long-term debt

   4,200    1,150    —    

Retirement of long-term debt

   (450  (77  —      (2,263  (23  (450

Issuance of common stock

   1,868    —      —    

Dividends paid on common stock

   (1,249  (1,716  (1,393   (1,105  (1,065  (1,249

Proceeds from employee stock plans

   47   73   38    32    35    47  

Other financing activities

   (6  30   (1   (58  (84  (6
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net cash flows used in financing activities

   (1,648  (2,554  (1,175

Net cash flows provided by (used in) financing activities

   2,674    13    (1,648) 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents

   (156  121   (503   4,811    876    (156) 

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

   159   38   541    879    3    159  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

  $3  $159  $38   $5,690   $879   $3  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

See Notes to Financial Statements

443


Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

 

Schedule I – Condensed Financial Information of Parent (Exelon Corporate)

 

Condensed Balance Sheets

 

  December 31,   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2013   2012   2015   2014 
ASSETS        

Current assets

        

Cash and cash equivalents

  $3   $159   $5,690    $879  

Restricted cash and investments

   —      38 

Accounts receivable, net

        

Other accounts receivable

   72    25    272     209  

Accounts receivable from affiliates

   22    87    20     24  

Deferred income taxes

   27    —   

Notes receivable from affiliates

   179    119    1,478     818  

Regulatory assets

   233     381    241     254  

Other

   1     2    5     22  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total current assets

   537    811    7,706     2,206  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Property, plant and equipment, net

   57    59    53     54  

Deferred debits and other assets

        

Regulatory assets

   3,005    3,932    3,072     3,186  

Investments in affiliates

   26,390    25,576    26,119     26,670  

Deferred income taxes

   1,890    2,437    2,036     2,147  

Non-pension postretirement benefit asset

   108     —    

Notes receivable from affiliates

   1,522    2,007    933     943  

Other

   17    42    404     149  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total deferred debits and other assets

   32,824    33,994    32,672     33,095  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total assets

  $33,418   $34,864   $40,431    $35,355  
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

See Notes to Financial Statements

444


Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

 

Schedule I – Condensed Financial Information of Parent (Exelon Corporate)

 

Condensed Balance Sheets

 

  December 31,   December 31, 

(In millions)

  2013 2012   2015 2014 
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY      

Current liabilities

      

Short-term borrowings

  $188   $—    

Long-term debt due within one year

  $10  $—      60    1,409  

Accounts payable

   43   101    5    2  

Unamortized energy contract liabilities

   12   77 

Accrued expenses

   106   110    440    25  

Deferred income taxes

   26   55 

Regulatory liabilities

   2    —       63    51  

Pension obligations

   52    45  

Other

   54    60    1    30  
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total current liabilities

   253   403    809    1,562  
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Long-term debt

   3,033   3,576    6,017    2,818  

Long-term debt to affiliate

   176   —      —      182  

Deferred credits and other liabilities

      

Regulatory liabilities

   43   —      31    37  

Pension obligations

   6,444   8,252    7,520    7,638  

Non-pension postretirement benefit obligations

   393   1,071    —      16  

Unamortized energy contract liabilities

   —     12 

Deferred income taxes

   70   —      134    93  

Other

   271   116    122    398  
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total deferred credits and other liabilities

   7,221   9,451    7,807    8,182  
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total liabilities

   10,683   13,430    14,633    12,744  
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Commitments and contingencies

      

Shareholders’ equity

      

Common stock (No par value, 2,000 shares authorized, 857 and 855 shares outstanding at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively)

   16,741   16,632 

Treasury stock, at cost (35 shares held at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively)

   (2,327  (2,327

Common stock (No par value, 2000 shares authorized, 920 shares and 860 shares outstanding at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively)

   18,678    16,709  

Treasury stock, at cost (35 shares at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively)

   (2,327  (2,327

Retained earnings

   10,358   9,893    12,068    10,910  

Accumulated other comprehensive loss, net

   (2,040  (2,767   (2,624  (2,684
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total shareholders’ equity

   22,732   21,431    25,795    22,608  
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

BGE preference stock not subject to mandatory redemption

   3   3    3    3  
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

  $33,418  $34,864   $40,431   $35,355  
  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

 

 

See Notes to Financial Statements

445


Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

 

Schedule I – Condensed Financial Information of Parent (Exelon Corporate)

 

Notes to Financial Statements

 

1. Basis of Presentation

 

Exelon Corporate is a holding company that conducts substantially all of its business operations through its subsidiaries. These condensed financial statements and related footnotes have been prepared in accordance with Rule 12-04, Schedule I of Regulation S-X. These statements should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and notes thereto of Exelon Corporation.

 

Exelon Corporate owns 100% of all of its significant subsidiaries, either directly or indirectly, except for Commonwealth Edison Company (ComEd), of which Exelon Corporate owns more than 99%, and BGE, of which Exelon owns 100% of the common stock but none of BGE’s preferred stock. Exelon owned none of PECO’s preference securities, which PECO redeemed in 2013.

 

2. Merger with ConstellationMergers

 

On March 12, 2012,April 29, 2014, Exelon Corporation completedand Pepco Holdings, Inc. (PHI) signed an agreement and plan of merger (as subsequently amended and restated as of July 18, 2014, the merger contemplated byMerger Agreement) to combine the two companies in an all cash transaction. The resulting company will retain the Exelon name. See Note 4—Mergers, Acquisitions, and Dispositions of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on the Merger Agreement among Exelon, Bolt Acquisition Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of Exelon (Merger Sub), and Constellation. As a result of that merger, Merger Sub was merged into Constellation (the Initial Merger) and Constellation became a wholly owned subsidiary of Exelon. Following the completion of the Initial Merger, Exelon and Constellation completed a series of internal corporate organizational restructuring transactions. Constellation merged with and into Exelon, with Exelon continuing as the surviving corporation (the Upstream Merger). Simultaneously with the Upstream Merger, Constellation’s interest in RF HoldCo LLC, which holds Constellation’s interest in BGE, was transferred to Exelon Energy Delivery Company, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Exelon that also owns Exelon’s interests in ComEd and PECO. Following the Upstream Merger and the transfer of RF HoldCo LLC, Exelon contributed to Generation certain subsidiaries, including the customer supply and generation businesses that were acquired from Constellation as a result of the Initial Merger and the Upstream Merger.PHI.

 

For BGE’s debt, fuel supply contracts and regulatory assets not earning a return, the difference between fair value and book value of BGE’s assets acquired and liabilities assumed is recorded as a regulatory asset at Exelon Corporate as Exelon did not apply push-down accounting to BGE.BGE as part of the 2012 Constellation Merger. See Note 4—Merger and Acquisitions3—Regulatory Matters of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on the merger with Constellation. Also see Note 1—Significant Accounting Policiesfair value of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on BGE’s push-down accounting treatment.BGE long-term debt regulatory asset.

 

3. Debt and Credit Agreements

 

Short-Term Borrowings

 

Exelon Corporate meets its short-term liquidity requirements primarily through the issuance of commercial paper. Exelon Corporate had no commercial paper borrowings at both December 31, 20132015 and December 31, 2012.2014.

 

Credit Agreements

 

On August 10, 2013,May 30, 2014, Exelon Corporate amended and extended its unsecured syndicated revolving credit facility with aggregate bank commitments of $500 million through August 10, 2018.May 2019. As of December 31, 2013,2015, Exelon CorporateCorporation had available capacity under those commitments of $498$474 million. See Note 13—14—Debt and Credit Agreements of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding Exelon Corporate’sCorporation’s credit agreement.

446


Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

 

Schedule I – Condensed Financial Information of Parent (Exelon Corporate)

 

Notes to Financial Statements

 

Long-Term Debt

 

The following tables present the outstanding long-term debt for Exelon Corporate as of December 31, 20132015 and December 31, 2012:2014:

 

      Maturity
Date
   December 31,      Maturity
Date
   December 31, 
  Rates   2013 2012   

Rates

  2015 2014 

Long-term debt

              

Senior unsecured notes

   4.55% – 7.60%     2015-2035    $2,658  $3,108 

Junior subordinated notes

  6.5%   2024    $1,150   $1,150  

Contract payment—junior subordinated notes

  2.5%   2017     64    108  

Senior unsecured notes(a)

  1.6% – 7.6%   2017-2045     4,639    2,658  
      

 

  

 

 

Total long-term debt

       5,853    3,916  

Unamortized debt discount and premium, net

       2   2        (4  1  

Fair value adjustment

       383   455 

Fair value hedge carrying value adjustment, net

       —     11 

Unamortized debt issuance costs

       (47  (23

Fair value adjustment of consolidated subsidiary

       275    333  

Long-term debt due within one year

       (10  —          (60  (1,409
      

 

  

 

       

 

  

 

 

Long-term debt

      $3,033  $3,576       $6,017   $2,818  
      

 

  

 

       

 

  

 

 

(a)Senior unsecured notes include mirror debt that is held on both Generation and Exelon Corporation’s balance sheets.

 

Exelon Corporate will not have any long-term debt maturities in 2014. The debt maturities for Exelon Corporate for the periods 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 and thereafter are as follows:

 

2015

  $1,350 

2016

   —     $45  

2017

   —      569  

2018

   —      —    

2019

   —    

2020

   1,450  

Remaining years

   1,308    3,789  
  

 

   

 

 

Total long-term debt

  $2,658   $5,853  
  

 

   

 

 

 

4. Commitments and Contingencies

 

See Note 22—23—Commitments and Contingencies of the Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for Exelon Corporate’s commitments and contingencies related to environmental matters and fund transfer restrictions.

447


Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

 

Schedule I – Condensed Financial Information of Parent (Exelon Corporate)

 

Notes to Financial Statements

 

5. Related Party Transactions

 

The financial statements of Exelon Corporate include related party transactions as presented in the tables below:

 

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

(In millions)

  2013 2012 2011   2015 2014 2013 

Operating and maintenance from affiliates:

        

Business Services Company, LLC(a)

  $34   $72  $44 

Interest income from affiliates, net

  $36   $75  $1 

BSC (a)

  $43   $38   $34  

Interest income from affiliates, net:

    

Generation

  $43   $53   $36  

Equity in earnings of investments:

        

Exelon Energy Delivery Company, LLC(b)

  $834   $713  $801   $1,079   $958   $834  

Exelon Ventures Company, LLC(c)

   1,076    564   1,769    —      926    1,076  

UII, LLC

   (2  25   18    20    (6  (2

Exelon Transmission Company, LLC

   (5  (3  (3   (8  (7  (5

Exelon Consolidations(d)

   —      (21  77 

Exelon Enterprise

   (1  (1  —    

Generation

   1,371    (91  —    
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total equity in earnings of investments

  $1,903   $1,278  $2,662   $2,461   $1,779   $1,903  
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Cash contributions received from affiliates

  $1,175   $2,074  $820   $3,209   $1,370   $1,175  

Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

 

   December 31, 

(in millions)

  2013   2012 

Accounts receivable from affiliates (current):

    

Business Services Company, LLC(a)

  $3   $33 

Generation

   7    33 

ComEd

   9    2 

PECO

   2    2 

BGE

   1    17 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total accounts receivable from affiliates (current)

  $22   $87 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Notes receivable from affiliates (current):

    

Business Services Company, LLC(a)

  $179   $119 

Investments in affiliates:

    

Business Services Company, LLC(a)

  $201   $181 

Exelon Energy Delivery Company, LLC(b)

   12,956    12,466 

Exelon Ventures Company, LLC(c)

   12,750    12,444 

UII, LLC

   470    472 

Exelon Transmission Company, LLC

   3    4 

VEBA

   10    9 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total investments in affiliates

  $26,390   $25,576 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Notes receivable from affiliates (non-current):

    

Generation

  $1,522   $2,007 

Long-term debt to affiliates (non-current):

    

ComEd

  $176   $—   

Schedule I – Condensed Financial Information of Parent (Exelon Corporate)

Notes to Financial Statements

   December 31, 

(in millions)

  2015  2014 

Accounts receivable from affiliates (current):

   

BSC(a)

  $—     $2  

Generation

   16    12  

ComEd

   2    3  

PECO

   1    2  

BGE

   1    5  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total accounts receivable from affiliates (current)

  $20   $24  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Notes receivable from affiliates (current):

   

BSC(a)

  $226   $262  

Generation(d)

   1,252    556  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total receivable from affiliates (current):

  $1,478   $818  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Investments in affiliates:

   

BSC (a)

  $191   $193  

Exelon Energy Delivery Company, LLC (b)

   14,163    13,590  

UII, LLC

   102    130  

Exelon Transmission Company, LLC

   3    1  

Voluntary Employee Beneficiary Association trust

   7    9  

Exelon Enterprises

   22    23  

Generation

   11,637    12,720  

Other

   (6  4  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total investments in affiliates

  $26,119   $26,670  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Notes receivable from affiliates (non-current):

   

Generation(d)

  $933   $943  

Notes payable to affiliates (current):

   

ComEd

  $188   $—    

Long-term debt to affiliates (non-current):

   

ComEd

  $—     $182  

 

(a)Exelon Corporate receives a variety of corporate support services from BSC, including legal, human resources, financial, information technology and supply management services. All services are provided at cost, including applicable overhead.
(b)Exelon Energy Delivery Company, LLC consists of ComEd, PECO and BGE.
(c)Exelon Ventures Company, LLC primarily consistsconsisted of Generation.Generation and was fully dissolved as of December 31, 2014. Exelon Enterprises, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, and Exelon Consolidations are now directly owned Exelon Corporate investments as of December 31, 2014.
(d)EquityIn connection with the debt obligations assumed by Exelon as part of the Constellation merger, Exelon and subsidiaries of Generation (former Constellation subsidiaries) assumed intercompany loan agreements that mirror the terms and amounts of the third-party debt obligations of Exelon, resulting in earnings of investments forintercompany notes payable included in Long-Term Debt to affiliate on Generation’s Consolidated Balance Sheets and intercompany notes receivable at Exelon Consolidations represents the intercompany income component that offsets the corresponding intercompany expense at Generation for upgrades in transmission assets owned by ComEd,Corporate, which are reflected as assets at Exelon Corporate.eliminated in consolidation on Exelon’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.

448


Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

 

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

 

Column A

  Column B   Column C Column D Column E   Column B   Column C Column D Column E 
      Additions and adjustments           Additions and adjustments     

Description

  Balance at
Beginning
of Period
   Charged to
Costs and
Expenses
   Charged
to Other
Accounts
 Deductions Balance at
End

of Period
   Balance at
Beginning
of Period
   Charged to
Costs and
Expenses
   Charged
to Other
Accounts
 Deductions Balance at
End
of Period
 
  (in millions)   (in millions) 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2013

        

For the year ended December 31, 2015

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts (a)

  $293   $121   $37(c)  $179(d)  $272   $311    $113    $27(b)  $167(c)  $284  

Deferred tax valuation allowance

   36    1     24   13    50     —       (27  10    13  

Reserve for obsolete materials

   53    17    —     12   58    95     10     2    2    105  

For The Year Ended December 31, 2012

        

For the year ended December 31, 2014

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts (a)

  $199   $144   $136(b)(c)  $186(d)  $293   $272    $175    $69(b)  $205(c)  $311  

Deferred tax valuation allowance

   10    18    18(b)   10   36    13     —       37    —      50  

Reserve for obsolete materials

   60    2    2(b)   11   53    58     5     34    2    95  

For The Year Ended December 31, 2011

        

For the year ended December 31, 2013

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts(a)

  $211   $121   $32(c)  $165(d)  $199   $293    $121    $37(b)  $179(c)  $272  

Deferred tax valuation allowance

   9    1    —     —     10    36     1     —      24    13  

Reserve for obsolete materials

   56    6    —     2   60    53     17     —      12    58  

 

(a)Excludes the non-current allowance for uncollectible accounts related to PECO’s installment plan receivables of $9$8 million, $8 million, and $9 million for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012,2015, 2014, and 2011,2013, respectively.
(b)Primarily represents the addition of Constellation’s and BGE’s results as of March 12, 2012, the date of the merger.
(c)Includes charges for late payments and non-service receivables.
(d)(c)Write-off of individual accounts receivable.

449


Exelon Generation Company, LLC and Subsidiary Companies

 

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

 

Generation

 

1.

  

Financial Statements:

  

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm dated February 13, 201410, 2016 of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

  

Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 20112013

  

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 20112013

  

Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 20132015 and 20122014

  

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Member’s Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 20112013

  

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

2.

  

Financial Statement Schedules:

  

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

  

Schedules not included are omitted because of the absence of conditions under which they are required or because the required information is provided in the consolidated financial statements, including the notes thereto

450


Exelon Generation Company, LLC and Subsidiary Companies

 

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

 

Column A

  Column B   Column C  Column D   Column E 
       Additions and adjustments        

Description

  Balance at
Beginning
of Period
   Charged to
Costs and
Expenses
  Charged
to Other
Accounts
  Deductions   Balance at
End

of Period
 
   (in millions) 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2013

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $84   $(16 $—    $11   $57 

Deferred tax valuation allowance

   35    1   —     25    11 

Reserve for obsolete materials

   50    16   —     11    55 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2012

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $29   $—    $66(a)  $11   $84 

Deferred tax valuation allowance

   —      17   18(a)   —      35 

Reserve for obsolete materials

   59    —     2(a)   11    50 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2011

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $32   $—    $—    $3   $29 

Reserve for obsolete materials

   55    4   —     —      59 

(a)Represents the addition of Constellation’s results as of March 12, 2012, the date of the merger.

Column A

  Column B   Column C  Column D  Column E 
       Additions and adjustments       

Description

  Balance at
Beginning
of Period
   Charged to
Costs and
Expenses
  Charged
to Other
Accounts
  Deductions  Balance at
End
of Period
 
   (in millions) 

For the year ended December 31, 2015

       

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $60    $22   $—     $5   $77  

Deferred tax valuation allowance

   48     —      (27  10    11  

Reserve for obsolete materials

   93     9    —      —      102  

For the year ended December 31, 2014

       

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $57    $14   $8   $19   $60  

Deferred tax valuation allowance

   11     —      37    —      48  

Reserve for obsolete materials

   55     5    32    (1  93  

For the year ended December 31, 2013

       

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $84    $(16 $—     $11   $57  

Deferred tax valuation allowance

   35     1    —      25    11  

Reserve for obsolete materials

   50     16    —      11    55  

451


Commonwealth Edison Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

 

ComEd

1.

  

Financial Statements:

  

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm dated February 13, 201410, 2016 of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

  

Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 20112013

  

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 20112013

  

Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 20132015 and 20122014

  

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 20112013

  

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

2.

  

Financial Statement Schedules:

  

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

  

Schedules not included are omitted because of the absence of conditions under which they are required or because the required information is provided in the consolidated financial statements, including the notes thereto

452


Commonwealth Edison Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

 

Column A

  Column B   Column C Column D Column E   Column B   Column C Column D Column E 
      Additions and adjustments           Additions and adjustments     

Description

  Balance at
Beginning
of Period
   Charged to
Costs and
Expenses
   Charged
to Other
Accounts
 Deductions Balance at
End

of Period
   Balance at
Beginning
of Period
   Charged to
Costs and
Expenses
   Charged
to Other
Accounts
 Deductions Balance at
End
of Period
 
  (in millions)   (in millions) 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2013

        

For the year ended December 31, 2015

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $70   $33   $29(a)  $70(b)  $62   $84    $39    $18(a)  $66(b)  $75  

Reserve for obsolete materials

   2    1    —     1   2    2     1     2    2    3  

For The Year Ended December 31, 2012

        

For the year ended December 31, 2014

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $78   $42   $26(a)  $76(b)  $70   $62    $45    $33(a)  $56(b)  $84  

Reserve for obsolete materials

   1    1    —     —     2    2     —       2    2    2  

For The Year Ended December 31, 2011

        

For the year ended December 31, 2013

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $80   $57   $15(a)  $74(b)  $78   $70    $33    $29(a)  $70(b)  $62  

Reserve for obsolete materials

   1    2    —     2   1    2     1     —      1    2  

 

(a)Primarily charges for late payments and non-service receivables.
(b)Write-off of individual accounts receivable.

453


PECO Energy Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

 

PECO

1.

  

Financial Statements:

  

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm dated February 13, 201410, 2016 of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

  

Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 20112013

  

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 20112013

  

Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 20132015 and 20122014

  

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 20112013

  

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

2.

  

Financial Statement Schedules:

  

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

  

Schedules not included are omitted because of the absence of conditions under which they are required or because the required information is provided in the consolidated financial statements, including the notes thereto

454


PECO Energy Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

 

Column A

  Column B   Column C  Column D  Column E 
       Additions and adjustments       

Description

  Balance at
Beginning
of Period
   Charged to
Costs and
Expenses
   Charged
to Other
Accounts
  Deductions  Balance at
End

of Period
 
   (in millions) 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2013

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts(a)

  $99   $61   $7(b)  $60(c)  $107 

Reserve for obsolete materials

   1    —       —     —     1 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2012

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts(a)

  $92   $60   $8(b)  $61(c)  $99 

Reserve for obsolete materials

   1    —       —     —     1 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2011

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts(a)

  $99   $64   $17(b)  $88(c)  $92 

Reserve for obsolete materials

   1    —       —     —     1 

Column A

  Column B   Column C  Column D  Column E 
       Additions and adjustments       

Description

  Balance at
Beginning
of Period
   Charged to
Costs and
Expenses
   Charged
to Other
Accounts
  Deductions  Balance at
End
of Period
 
   (in millions) 

For the year ended December 31, 2015

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts (a)

  $100    $37    $9(b)  $63(c)  $83  

Reserve for obsolete materials

   1     —       —      —      1  

For the year ended December 31, 2014

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts (a)

  $107    $52    $11(b)  $70(c)  $100  

Reserve for obsolete materials

   1     —       —      —      1  

For the year ended December 31, 2013

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts (a)

  $99    $61    $7(b)  $60(c)  $107  

Reserve for obsolete materials

   1     —       —      —      1  

 

(a)Excludes the non-current allowance for uncollectible accounts related to PECO’s installment plan receivables of $9$8 million, $8 million, and $9 million for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012,2015, 2014, and 2011,2013, respectively.
(b)Primarily charges for late payments.
(c)Write-off of individual accounts receivable.

455


Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

 

BGE

1.

  

Financial Statements:

  

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm dated February 13, 201410, 2016 of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

  

Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 20112013

  

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 20112013

  

Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 20132015 and 20122014

  

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 20122015, 2014 and 20112013

  

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

2.

  

Financial Statement Schedules:

  

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

  

Schedules not included are omitted because of the absence of conditions under which they are required or because the required information is provided in the consolidated financial statements, including the notes thereto

456


Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Subsidiary Companies

 

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

 

Column A

  Column B   Column C Column D Column E   Column B   Column C Column D Column E 
      Additions and adjustments           Additions and adjustments     

Description

  Balance at
Beginning
of Period
   Charged to
Costs and
Expenses
   Charged
to Other
Accounts
 Deductions Balance at
End

of Period
   Balance at
Beginning
of Period
   Charged to
Costs and
Expenses
   Charged
to Other
Accounts
 Deductions Balance at
End
of Period
 
  (in millions)   (in millions) 

For The Year Ended December 31, 2013

        

For the year ended December 31, 2015

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $40   $43   $1(b)  $38(a)  $46   $67    $15    $—  (b)  $33(a)  $49  

Deferred tax valuation allowance

   1    —       —     —     1    1     —       —      —      1  

Reserve for obsolete materials

   1     —      —     —     1    —       —       —      —      —    

For The Year Ended December 31, 2012

        

For the year ended December 31, 2014

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $38   $45   $—    $43(a)  $40   $46    $64    $17(b)  $60(a)  $67  

Deferred tax valuation allowance

   —      1    —     —     1    1     —       —      —      1  

Reserve for obsolete materials

   —      1    —     —     1    1     —       —      1    —    

For The Year Ended December 31, 2011

        

For the year ended December 31, 2013

        

Allowance for uncollectible accounts

  $36   $39   $—    $37(a)  $38   $40    $43    $1   $38(a)  $46  

Deferred tax valuation allowance

   1     —       —      —      1  

Reserve for obsolete materials

   1     —       —      —      1  

 

(a)Write-off of individual accounts receivable.
(b)Primarily charges for late payments.

457


Exhibits required by Item 601 of Regulation S-K:

 

Certain of the following exhibits are incorporated herein by reference under Rule 12b-32 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Certain other instruments which would otherwise be required to be listed below have not been so listed because such instruments do not authorize securities in an amount which exceeds 10% of the total assets of the applicable registrant and its subsidiaries on a consolidated basis and the relevant registrant agrees to furnish a copy of any such instrument to the Commission upon request.

 

Exhibit No.

  

Description

2-1  Agreement and Plan of Merger dated as of April 28, 2011 by and among Exelon Corporation, Bolt Acquisition Corporation and Constellation Energy Group, Inc. (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated April 28, 2011, Exhibit No. 2-1).
2-2  Distribution and Assignment Agreement, dated as of March 12, 2012, by and among Exelon Corporation, Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and RF HoldCo LLC (FileNo. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated March 14, 2012, Exhibit No. 2-3).
2-3  Contribution and Assignment Agreement, dated as of March 12, 2012, by and among Exelon Corporation, Exelon Energy Delivery Company, LLC and RF HoldCo LLC (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated March 14, 2012, Exhibit No. 2-4).
2-4  Contribution Agreement, dated as of March 12, 2012, by and among Exelon Corporation, Exelon Ventures Company, LLC and Exelon Generation Company, LLC (FileNo. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated March 14, 2012, Exhibit No. 2-5).
2-5  Purchase Agreement dated as of August 8, 2012 by and between Constellation Power Source Generation, Inc. and Raven Power Holdings, LLC. (File No. 333-85496,Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2012, Exhibit 2-1).
2-6  Master Agreement, dated as of October 26, 2010, by and between Electricite de France, S.A. and Constellation Energy Group, Inc. (Designated as Exhibit No. 2.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 1, 2010, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File No. 1-12869.)1-12869).
2-7  Put Termination Agreement dated as of November 3, 2010, by and among EDF Inc. (formerly known as EDF Development, Inc.), E.D.F. International S.A., Constellation Nuclear, LLC, and Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC. (Designated as Exhibit No. 2.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 8, 2010, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File No. 1-12869.)1-12869).
2-8  Contribution Agreement, dated as of February 4, 2010, by and among Constellation Energy Group, Inc., Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and RF HoldCo LLC. (Designated as Exhibit No. 99.2 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2010, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)1-1910).
2-9  Purchase Agreement, dated as of February 4, 2010, by and between RF HoldCo LLC and GSS Holdings (Baltimore Gas and Electric Company Utility), Inc. (Designated as Exhibit No. 99.3 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2010, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.1-1910).
2-10-1Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of April 29, 2014, by and among Exelon Corporation, Pepco Holdings, Inc. and Purple Acquisition Corp. (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated April 30, 2014, Exhibit 2.1).
2-10-2Amended and Restated Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of July 18, 2014, among Pepco Holdings, Inc., Exelon Corporation and Purple Acquisition Corp. (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated July 21, 2014, Exhibit 2.1).

Exhibit No.

Description

2-10-3Subscription Agreement for Series A Non-Voting Non-Convertible Preferred Stock, dated as of April 29, 2014, by and between Pepco Holdings, Inc. and Exelon Corporation (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated April 30, 2014, Exhibit 2.2).
3-1  Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of Exelon Corporation, as amended May 8, 2007 (File No. 001-16169, Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2008, Exhibit 3-1-2).
3-2  Exelon Corporation Amended and Restated Bylaws, effective as of March 12, 2012 (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated March 14, 2012, Exhibit 3-1).
3-3  Certificate of Formation of Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Registration Statement No. 333-85496, Form S-4, Exhibit 3-1).

458


Exhibit No.

Description

3-4  First Amended and Restated Operating Agreement of Exelon Generation Company, LLC executed as of January 1, 2001 (File No. 333-85496, 2003 Form 10-K, Exhibit 3-8).
3-5  Restated Articles of Incorporation of Commonwealth Edison Company Effective February 20, 1985, including Statements of Resolution Establishing Series, relating to the establishment of three new series of Commonwealth Edison Company preference stock known as the “$9.00 Cumulative Preference Stock,” the “$6.875 Cumulative Preference Stock” and the “$2.425 Cumulative Preference Stock” (File No. 1-1839, 1994 Form 10-K, Exhibit 3-2).
3-6  Commonwealth Edison Company Amended and Restated By-Laws, Effective January 23, 2006 As Further Amended January 28, 2008 and July 27, 2009. (File No. 001-1839, Form 8-K dated July 27, 2009, Exhibit 3.1).
3-7  Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of PECO Energy Company (FileNo. 1-01401, 2000 Form 10-K, Exhibit 3-3).
3-8  PECO Energy Company Amended Bylaws (File 000-16844, Form 8-K dated May 6, 2009, Exhibit 99.1).
3-9  Articles of Amendment to the Charter of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company as of February 2, 2010. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2010, filed by Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, File No. 1-1910.)1-1910).
3-10  Articles of Restatement to the Charter of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, restated as of August 16, 1996. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3 to the Quarterly Report onForm 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 1996, filed by Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, File No. 1-1910.)1-1910).
3-11  Bylaws of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, as amended and restated as of May 10, 2012. (File No. 1-16169, 2013 Form 10-K, Exhibit 3-11).
3-12  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, filed by Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)1-1910).
4-1  First and Refunding Mortgage dated May 1, 1923 between The Counties Gas and Electric Company (predecessor to PECO Energy Company) and Fidelity Trust Company, Trustee (U.S. Bank National Association, as current successor trustee), (Registration No. 2-2281, Exhibit B-1).
4-1-14-1-2Reserved.

Exhibit No.

Description

4-1-3  Supplemental Indentures to PECO Energy Company’s First and Refunding Mortgage:
  

Dated as of

  

File Reference

  

Exhibit No.

  May 1, 1927  2-2881  B-1(c)
  March 1, 1937  2-2881  B-1(g)
  December 1, 1941  2-4863  B-1(h)
  November 1, 1944  2-5472  B-1(i)
  December 1, 1946  2-6821  7-1(j)
  September 1, 1957  2-13562  2(b)-17
  May 1, 1958  2-14020  2(b)-18
  March 1, 1968  2-34051  2(b)-24
  March 1, 1981  2-72802  4-46
  March 1, 1981  2-72802  4-47

459


  

Dated as of

File Reference

Exhibit No.

December 1, 1984

  1-01401, 1984 Form 10-K  4-2(b)
  

March 1, 1993

  1-01401, 1992 Form 10-K  4(e)-86
  

May 1, 1993

  1-01401, March 31, 1993 Form 10-Q  4(e)-88
  

May 1, 1993

  1-01401, March 31, 1993 Form 10-Q  4(e)-89
  

April 15, 2004

  0-6844, September 30, 2004 Form 10-Q  4-1-1
  

September 15, 2006

  000-16844, Form 8-K dated September 25, 2006  4.1
  

March 1, 2007

  000-16844, Form 8-K dated March 19, 2007  4.1
  

March 15, 2009

  000-16844, Form 8-K dated March 26, 2009  4.1
  

September 1, 2012

  000-16844, Form 8-K dated September 17, 2012  4.1
  

September 15, 2013

  000-16844, Form 8-K dated September 23, 2013  4.1
  

September 15, 2013

  000-16844, Form 8-K dated September 23, 2013  4.1
September 1, 2014000-16169, Form 8-K dated September 15, 20144.1
September 15, 2015000-16844, Form 8-K dated October 5, 20154.1
4-2  Exelon Corporation Direct Stock Purchase Plan (Registration StatementNo. 333-183751,333-206474, Form S-3, Prospectus).
4-3  Mortgage of Commonwealth Edison Company to Illinois Merchants Trust Company, Trustee (BNY Mellon Trust Company of Illinois, as current successor Trustee), dated July 1, 1923, as supplemented and amended by Supplemental Indenture thereto dated August 1, 1944. (Registration No. 2-60201, Form S-7, Exhibit 2-1).

Exhibit No.

Description

4-3-1  Supplemental Indentures to Commonwealth Edison Company Mortgage.
  

Dated as of

  

File Reference

  

Exhibit No.

  

August 1, 1946

  

2-60201, Form S-7

  

2-1

  

April 1, 1953

  

2-60201, Form S-7

  

2-1

  

March 31, 1967

  

2-60201, Form S-7

  

2-1

  

April 1,19671, 1967

  

2-60201, Form S-7

  

2-1

  

February 28, 1969

  

2-60201, Form S-7

  

2-1

  

May 29, 1970

  

2-60201, Form S-7

  

2-1

  

June 1, 1971

  

2-60201, Form S-7

  

2-1

  

April 1, 1972

  

2-60201, Form S-7

  

2-1

  

May 31, 1972

  

2-60201, Form S-7

  

2-1

  

June 15, 1973

  

2-60201, Form S-7

  

2-1

  

May 31, 1974

  

2-60201, Form S-7

  

2-1

  

June 13, 1975

  

2-60201, Form S-7

  

2-1

May 28, 1976

2-60201, Form S-7

2-1

June 3, 1977

2-60201, Form S-7

2-1

May 17, 1978

2-99665, Form S-3

4-3

August 31, 1978

2-99665, Form S-3

4-3

June 18, 1979

2-99665, Form S-3

4-3

June 20, 1980

2-99665, Form S-3

4-3

April 16, 1981

2-99665, Form S-3

4-3

April 30, 1982

2-99665, Form S-3

4-3

April 15, 1983

2-99665, Form S-3

4-3

April 13, 1984

2-99665, Form S-3

4-3

April 15, 1985

2-99665, Form S-3

4-3

April 15, 1986

33-6879, Form S-3

4-9

January 13, 2003

001-01839, Form 8-K dated

January 22, 2003

4-4
February 22, 2006001-01839, Form 8-K dated March 6, 20064.1
August 1, 2006001-01839, Form 8-K dated August 28, 20064.1
September 15, 2006001-01839, Form 8-K dated October 2, 20064.1
March 1, 2007001-01839, Form 8-K dated March 23, 20074.1
August 30, 2007001-01839, Form 8-K dated September 10, 20074.1
December 20, 2007001-01839, Form 8-K dated January 16, 20084.1

460


  

Dated as of

  

File Reference

  

Exhibit No.

May 28, 1976

2-60201, Form S-72-1
  

June 3, 1977

2-60201, Form S-72-1

May 17, 1978

2-99665, Form S-34-3

August 31, 1978

2-99665, Form S-34-3

June 18, 1979

2-99665, Form S-34-3

June 20, 1980

2-99665, Form S-34-3

April 16, 1981

2-99665, Form S-34-3

April 30, 1982

2-99665, Form S-34-3

April 15, 1983

2-99665, Form S-34-3

April 13, 1984

2-99665, Form S-34-3

April 15, 1985

2-99665, Form S-34-3

April 15, 1986

33-6879, Form S-34-9

January 15, 1994

1-1839, 1993 Form 10-K4-15

January 13, 2003

1-1839, Form 8-K dated

January 22, 2003

4-4

March 14, 2003

1-1839, Form 8-K dated

April 7, 2003

4-4

February 22, 2006

1-1839, Form 8-K dated March 6, 20064.1

August 1, 2006

1-1839, Form 8-K dated August 28, 20064.1

September 15, 2006

1-1839, Form 8-K dated October 2, 20064.1

March 1, 2007

1-1839, Form 8-K dated March 23, 20074.1

August 30, 2007

1-1839, Form 8-K dated September 10, 20074.1

December 20, 2007

1-1839, Form 8-K dated January 16, 2008  4.1

March 10, 2008

1-1839,001-01839, Form 8-K dated March 27, 2008  4.1
  

July 12, 2010

  001-01839, Form 8-K dated August 2, 2010  4.1
  

January 4, 2011

001-01839, Form 8-K dated January 18, 20114.1

August 22, 2011

  001-01839, Form 8-K dated September 7, 2011  4.1
  

September 17, 2012

  001-01839, Form 8-K dated October 1, 2012  4.1
  

August 1, 2013

  001-01839, Form 8-K dated August 19, 2013  4.1
  

January 2, 2014

  001-01839, Form 8-K dated January 10, 2014  4.1

461


October 28, 2014001-01839, Form 8-K dated November 10, 20144.1
February 18, 2015001-01839, Form 8-K dated March 2, 20154.1
November 4, 2015001-01839, Form 8-K dated November 19, 20154.1

Exhibit No.

  

Description

4-3-2  Instrument of Resignation, Appointment and Acceptance dated as of February 20, 2002, under the provisions of the Mortgage of Commonwealth Edison Company dated July 1, 1923, and Indentures Supplemental thereto, regarding corporate trustee (FileNo. 1-1839, 2001 Form 10-K, Exhibit 4-4-2).
4-3-3  Instrument dated as of January 31, 1996, under the provisions of the Mortgage of Commonwealth Edison Company dated July 1, 1923 and Indentures Supplemental thereto, regarding individual trustee (File No. 1-1839, 1995 Form 10-K, Exhibit 4-29).
4-4  Indenture dated as of September 1, 1987 between Commonwealth Edison Company and Citibank, N.A. (U.S. Bank National Association, as current successor trustee), Trustee relating to Notes (Registration No. 33-20619, Form S-3, Exhibit 4-13).
4-5  Indenture dated December 19, 2003 between Exelon Generation Company, LLC and U.S. Bank National Association (File No. 333-85496, 2003 Form 10-K, Exhibit 4-6).
4-6  Indenture to Subordinated Debt Securities dated as of June 24, 2003 between PECO Energy Company, as Issuer, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee (FileNo. 0-16844, June 30, 2003 Form 10-Q, Exhibit 4.1).
4-7  Form of 4.25% Senior Note due 2022 issued by Exelon Generation Company, LLC. (File 333-85496, Form 8-K dated June 18, 2012, Exhibit 4.1).
4-8  Form of 5.60% Senior Note due 2042 issued by Exelon Generation Company, LLC. (File 333-85496, Form 8-K dated June 18, 2012, Exhibit 4.2).
4-9  Form of 2.80% Senior Note due 2022 issued by Baltimore Gas and Electric Company. (File 1-1910, Form 8-K dated August 17, 2012, Exhibit 4.1).
4-10  Form of 3.35% Senior Note due 2023 Baltimore Gas and Electric Company. (File 1-1910, Form 8-K dated June 17, 2013, Exhibit 4.1).
4-11  Form of 6.000% Senior Secured Notes due 2033 issued by Exelon Generation Company, LLC (File No. 333-85496, Form 8-K dated September 30, 2013, Exhibit No. 4.2).

Exhibit No.

Description

4-12  Preferred Securities Guarantee Agreement between PECO Energy Company, as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, dated as of June 24, 2003 (File No. 0-16844, June 30, 2003 Form 10-Q, Exhibit 4.2).
4-13  PECO Energy Capital Trust IV Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust among PECO Energy Company, as Sponsor, U.S. Bank Trust National Association, as Delaware Trustee and Property Trustee, and J. Barry Mitchell, George R. Shicora and Charles S. Walls as Administrative Trustees dated as of June 24, 2003 (FileNo. 0-16844, June 30, 2003 Form 10-Q, Exhibit 4.3).
4-14  Indenture dated May 1, 2001 between Exelon Corporation and The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, National Association, as trustee (File No. 1-16169, June 30, 2005 Form 10-Q, Exhibit 4-10).
4-15  Form of $800,000,000 4.90% senior notes due 2015 dated June 9, 2005 issued by Exelon Corporation (File No. 1-16169, Form 8-K dated June 9, 2005, Exhibit 99.2).
4-16Form of $500,000,000 5.625% senior notes due 2035 dated June 9, 2005 issued by Exelon Corporation (File No. 1-16169, Form 8-K dated June 9, 2005, Exhibit 99.3).
4-174-16  Indenture dated as of September 28, 2007 from Exelon Generation Company, LLC to U.S. Bank National Association, as trustee (File 333-85496, Form 8-K dated September 28, 2007, Exhibit 4.1).
4-184-17  Form of 5.20% Exelon Generation Company, LLC Senior Note due 2019 (File333-85496, Form 8-K dated September 23, 2009, Exhibit 4.1).

462


Exhibit No.

4-18
  

Description

4-19Form of 6.25% Exelon Generation Company, LLC Senior Note due 2039 (File333-85496, Form 8-K dated September 23, 2009, Exhibit 4.2).
4-204-19  Form of 4.00% Exelon Generation Company, LLC Senior Note due 2020 (FileNo. 333-85496, Form 8-K dated September 30, 2010, Exhibit 4.1).
4-214-20  Form of 5.75% Exelon Generation Company, LLC Senior Note due 2041 (FileNo. 333-85496, Form 8-K dated September 30, 2010, Exhibit 4.2).
4-224-21  Indenture between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and the Bank of New York, Trustee dated as of March 24, 1999. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(a) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated March 29, 1999, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File No. 333-75217.)
4-234-22  First Supplemental Indenture between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and the Bank of New York, Trustee dated as of January 24, 2003. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(b) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated January 24, 2003, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File No. 333-102723.)333-102723).
4-244-23  Indenture dated as of July 24, 2006 between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(a) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 filed July 24, 2006, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File No. 333-135991.)333-135991).
4-254-24  First Supplemental Indenture between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee, dated as of June 27, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit 4(a) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 30, 2008, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File No. 1-12869.)1-12869).
4-264-25  Indenture dated June 19, 2008 between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(a) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2008, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)1-1910).
4-274-26  Indenture, dated as of September 30, 2013, among Continental Wind, LLC, the guarantors party thereto and Wilmington Trust, National Association, as trustee (File No. 333-85496, Form 8-K dated September 30, 2013, Exhibit No. 4.1).

4-28

Exhibit No.

  

Description

4-27Indenture dated July 1, 1985, between Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and The Bank of New York (Successor to Mercantile-Safe Deposit and Trust Company), Trustee. (Designated as Exhibit 4(a) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3, FileNo. 2-98443); as supplemented by Supplemental Indentures dated as of October 1, 1987 (Designated as Exhibit 4(a) to the Current Report on Form 8-K, dated November 13, 1987, File No. 1-1910) and as of January 26, 1993 (Designated as Exhibit 4(b) to the Current Report on Form 8-K, dated January 29, 1993, filed by Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, File No. 1-1910.)1-1910).
4-294-28  Indenture and Security Agreement dated as of July 9, 2009, between Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee (including form of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company Officer’s Certificate and form of Senior Secured Bond) (Designated as Exhibit Nos. 4(u) and 4(u)(1) to Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated July 9, 2009, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 333-157637 and 333-157637-01.)333-157637-01).
4-304-29  Indenture dated as of July 24, 2006 between Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee. (Designated as Exhibit 4(b) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 filed July 24, 2006, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File No. 333-135991.)333-135991).

463


Exhibit No.

Description

4-314-30  Supplemental Indenture No. 1, dated as of October 1, 2009, to the Indenture and Security Agreement dated as of July 9, 2009, between Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(c) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and1-1910.)1-1910).
4-324-31  Baltimore Gas and Electric Company Deed of Easement and Right-of-Way Grant dated as of July 9, 2009 (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(u)(2) to Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated July 9, 2009, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 333-157637 and 333-157637-01.)333-157637-01).
4-334-32  Indenture dated as of June 29, 2007, by and between RSB BondCo LLC and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as Trustee and Securities Intermediary. (Designated as Exhibit 4.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 5, 2007, filed by Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, File No. 1-1910.)1-1910).
4-344-33  Series Supplement to Indenture dated as of June 29, 2007 by and between RSB BondCo LLC and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as Trustee and Securities Intermediary (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(b) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, filed by Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, File No. 1 1910.)1910).
4-354-34  Replacement Capital Covenant dated June 27, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(b) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 30, 2008, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File No. 1-12869.)1-12869).
4-364-35  Amendment to Replacement Capital Covenant, dated as of March 12, 2012, amending the Replacement Capital Covenant, dated as of June 27, 2008 (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated March 14, 2012, Exhibit No. 99.4).
4-374-36  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)4 (b) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 14, 2010, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File No. 1-12869.)1-12869).

4-38

Exhibit No.

  

Description

4-37Officers’ Certificate, November 16, 2011, establishing the 3.50% Notes due November 15, 2021 of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, with the form of Notes attached thereto. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(b) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 16, 2011, filed by Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, FileNo. 1-1910.)1-1910).
4-38-1Indenture, dated as of June 17, 2014, between Exelon Corporation and The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A., as Trustee. (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated June 23, 2014, Exhibit 4.1).
4-38-2First Supplemental Indenture, dated as of June 17, 2014, between Exelon Corporation and The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A., as Trustee.(File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated June 23, 2014, Exhibit 4.2).
4-38-3Form of 2.50% Notes due 2024 (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated June 23, 2014, Exhibit 4.1).
4-38-4Purchase Contract and Pledge Agreement, between Exelon Corporation and The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A., as Purchase Contract Agent, Collateral Agent, Custodial Agent and Securities Intermediary. (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated June 23, 2014, Exhibit 4.4).
4-38-5Form of Remarketing Agreement (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated June 23, 2014, Exhibit 4.5).
4-38-6Form of Corporate Unit (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated June 23, 2014, Exhibit 4.6).
4-38-7Form of Treasury Unit (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated June 23, 2014, Exhibit 4.7).
4-39-1Indenture, dated as of June 11, 2015, among Exelon Corporation and The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, National Association, as trustee (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Exelon Corporation’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on June 11, 2015).
4-39-2First Supplemental Indenture, dated as of June 11, 2015, among Exelon Corporation and The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, National Association, as trustee (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to Exelon Corporation’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on June 11, 2015).
4-39-3Second Supplemental Indenture, dated as of December 2, 2015, among Exelon Corporation and The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, National Association, as trustee (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Exelon Corporation’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on December 2, 2015).
4-39-4Registration Rights Agreement, dated as of December 2, 2015, among Exelon Corporation, Barclays Capital Inc. and Goldman, Sachs & Co. (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 1.1 to Exelon Corporation’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on December 2, 2015).
10-1Facility Credit Agreement, dated as of February 6, 2014, among ExGen Renewables I Holding, LLC and Barclays Bank PLC (File No. 333-85496, Form 8-K dated February 12, 2014, Exhibit 10.1).
10-1-1Credit Agreement, dated as of September 18, 2014, among ExGen Texas Power, LLC, ExGen Texas Power Holdings, LLC, Wolf Hollow I Power, LLC, Colorado Bend I Power, LLC, Laporte Power, LLC, Handley Power, LLC and Mountain Creek Power, LLC, the lenders party thereto from time to time, Bank of America, N.A., as administrative agent and collateral agent, and Wilmington Trust, National Association, as depositary agent. (File No. 1-16169, Form 8-K dated September 18, 2014, Exhibit 10.1).
10-2  Exelon Corporation Non-Employee Directors’ Deferred Stock Unit Plan (As Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2011). * (File No. 001-16169, 2010 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10.1).

10-2

Exhibit No.

  Exelon Corporation Retirement Program (As Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2013).

Description

10-3  Form of Exelon Corporation Unfunded Deferred Compensation Plan for Directors (as amended and restated Effective January 1, 2011)March 12, 2012). * (File No. 001-16169, 2010 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10.3)
10-4  Exelon Corporation Long-Term Incentive Plan As Amended and Restated Effective January 28, 2002* (File No. 1-16169, Exelon Proxy Statement dated March 13, 2002, Appendix B).Reserved.
10-5-110-5  Form of Restricted Stock Award Agreement under the Exelon Corporation Long-Term Incentive Plan* (File No. 1-16169, 2001 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10-6-1).

464


Exhibit No.

Description

10-5-210-6  Forms of Transferable Stock Option Award Agreement under the Exelon Corporation Long-Term Incentive Plan* (File No. 1-16169, 2001 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10-6-2).
10-5-310-7  Forms of Stock Option Award Agreement under the Exelon Corporation Long-Term Incentive Plan* (File No. 1-16169, 2001 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10-6-3).
10-6Exelon Corporation Employee Savings Plan (As Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2013).
10-7Exelon Corporation Cash Balance Pension Plan (As Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2013).
10-8  Unicom Corporation Deferred Compensation Unit Plan, as amended *(File Nos. 1-11375 and 1-1839, 1995 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10-12).
10-9  Amendment Number One to the Unicom Corporation Deferred Compensation Unit Plan, as amended January 1, 2008 * (File No. 001-16169, 2008 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10.16).
10-10  Unicom Corporation Retirement Plan for Directors, as amended *(Registration Statement No. 333-49780, Form S-8, Exhibit 4-12).
10-11  Commonwealth Edison Company Retirement Plan for Directors, as amended *(Registration Statement No. 333-49780, Form S-8, Exhibit 4-13).
10-12  Exelon Corporation Supplemental Management Retirement Plan (As Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2009) * (File No. 001-16169, 2008 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10.19).
10-13  PECO Energy Company Supplemental Pension Benefit Plan (As Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2009) (File No. 000-16844, 2008 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10.20).
10-14  Exelon Corporation Annual Incentive Plan for Senior Executives (As Amended Effective January 1, 2004 (As Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2009)2014 * (File No. 001-16169, 2009 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10.21)1-16169, Exelon Proxy Statement dated April 1, 2014, Appendix A).
10-15  Form of change in control employment agreement for senior executives effective January 1, 2009 * (File No. 001-16169. 2008 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10.23).
10-16  Form of change in control employment agreement (amended and restated as of January 1, 2009) * (File No. 001-16169, 2008 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10.24).
10-17  Exelon Corporation Employee Stock Purchase Plan, as amended and restated effective July 1, 2013. (File No. 1-16169, Schedule 14A dated March 14, 2013 Appendix A).
10-18  Exelon Corporation 2006 Long-Term Incentive Plan (Registration StatementNo. 333-122704, Form S-4, Joint Proxy Statement-Prospectus pursuant to Rule 424(b)(3) filed June 3, 2005, Annex H).
10-19  Form of Stock Option Grant Instrument under the Exelon Corporation 2006 Long-Term Incentive Plan (File No. 1-16169, Form 8-K filed January 27, 2006, Exhibit 99.2).
10-20  Exelon Corporation Employee Stock Purchase Plan for Unincorporated Subsidiaries (Registration Statement No. 333-122704, Form S-4, Joint Proxy Statement-Prospectus pursuant to Rule 424(b)(3) filed June 3, 2005, Annex I).
10-21  Exelon Corporation Senior Management Severance Plan (As Amended and Restated Effective April 1, 2013).* (File No. 001-16169, 2013 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10.21).
10-21-1Exelon Corporation Senior Management Severance Plan (As Amended and Restated Effective November 1, 2015)

Exhibit No.

Description

10-22  Form of Separation Agreement under Exelon Corporation Senior Management Severance Plan (As Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2009) * (FileNo, No. 001-16169, 2008 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10.30).
10-23  Facility Credit Agreement, dated as of November 4, 2010, among Exelon Generation Company, LLC and UBS AG, Stamford Branch (File No. 333-85496, Form 8-K dated February 22, 2011, Exhibit No. 10-1).

465


Exhibit No.

Description

10-24  Exelon Corporation Executive Death Benefits Plan dated as of January 1, 2003 * (File No. 1-16169, 2006 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10-52).
10-25  First Amendment to Exelon Corporation Executive Death Benefits Plan, Effective January 1, 2006 * (File No. 1-16169, 2006 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10-53).
10-26  Amendment Number One to the Exelon Corporation 2006 Long-Term Incentive Plan, Effective December 4, 2006 (File No. 1-16169, 2006 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10-54).
10-27  Amendment Number Two to the Exelon Corporation 2006 Long-Term Incentive Plan (As Amended and Restated Effective January 28, 2002), Effective December 4, 2006 (File No. 1-16169, 2006 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10-55).
10-28  Exelon Corporation Deferred Compensation Plan (As Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2005) (File No. 1-16169, 2006 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10-56).
10-29  Exelon Corporation Stock Deferral Plan (As Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2005) (File No. 1-16169, 2006 Form 10-K, Exhibit 10-57).
10-30  Commonwealth Edison Company Long-Term Incentive Plan, Effective January 1, 2007 (File No. 1-16169, March 31, 2007 Form 10-Q, Exhibit 10-1).
10-31  Amendment Number One to the Exelon Corporation Stock Deferral Plan (As Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2005) (File No. 1-16169, June 30, 2007 Form 10-Q, Exhibit 10-3).
10-32  Restricted stock unit award agreement (File 1-16169, Form 8-K dated August 31, 2007, Exhibit 99.1).
10-33  

Reserved.

10-34  Form of Exelon Corporation 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan, (File No. 1-16169, Schedule 14A dated Marchas amended effective December 18, 2010, Appendix A).2014.
10-34-1Form of Exelon Corporation Long-Term Incentive Program, as amended and restated as of January 1, 2014.
10-34-2Form of Exelon Corporation Long-Term Incentive Program, as amended and restated as of January 1, 2015.
10-34-3Amendment Number Two to the Exelon Corporation 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (As Amended and Restated Effective January 21, 2014), Effective October 26, 2015.
10-35  Form of Change in Control Employment Agreement Effective February 10, 2011. * (File 1-16169, 2011Form 10-K,Exhibit 10-44).
10-36  Credit Agreement for $500,000,000 dated as of March 23, 2011 between Exelon Corporation and Various Financial Institutions (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated March 23, 2011, Exhibit No. 10-2).
10-37  Credit Agreement for $5,300,000,000 dated as of March 23, 2011 between Exelon Generation Company, LLC and Various Financial Institutions (File No. 333-85496, Form 8-K dated March 23, 2011, Exhibit No. 10-3).
10-38  Credit Agreement for $600,000,000 dated as of March 23, 2011 between PECO Energy Company and Various Financial Institutions (File No. 000-16844, Form 8-K dated March 23, 2011, Exhibit No. 10-4).

Exhibit No.

Description

10-39  Credit Agreement dated as of March 28, 2012 among Commonwealth Edison Company, Various Financial Institutions, as Lenders, and JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., as Administrative Agent (File No. 001-01839, Form 8-K dated March 28, 2012, Exhibit No. 99-1).
10-40  Amendment No. 3 to Credit Agreement dated as of March 23, 2011 among Exelon Corporation, as Borrower, the various financial institutions named therein, as Lenders, and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as Administrative Agent (File No. 001-16169,Form 8-K dated August 10, 2013, Exhibit No. 99-1).
10-41  Amendment No. 1 to Credit Agreement dated as of March 28, 2012 among Commonwealth Edison Company, as Borrower, the various financial institutions named therein, as Lenders and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as Administrative Agent (File No. 001-1839, Form 8-K dated August 10, 2013, Exhibit No. 99-2).

466


Exhibit No.

Description

10-42  Amendment No. 1 to Credit Agreement, dated as of December 21, 2011, to the Credit Agreement dated as of March 23, 2011, among Exelon Generation Company, LLC, the lenders party thereto and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as Administrative Agent (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated March 14, 2012, Exhibit No. 4-6).
10-43  Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plan, as amended and restated. * (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(b) to the Constellation Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)1-1910).
10-44  Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan for Non-Employee Directors, as amended and restated. * (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(c) to the Constellation Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)1-1910).
10-45  Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Benefits Restoration Plan, amended and restated effective June 1, 2010. * (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(b) to the Constellation Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)1-1910).
10-46  Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Supplemental Pension Plan, as amended and restated. * (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(e) to the Constellation Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)1-1910).
10-47  Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Senior Executive Supplemental Plan, as amended and restated. * (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(f) to the Constellation Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)1-1910).
10-48  Executive Annual Incentive Plan of Constellation Energy Group, Inc., as amended and restated. * (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(d) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2008, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
1-1910).
10-49  Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Executive Supplemental Benefits Plan, as amended and restated. * (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(a) to the Constellation Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2008, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)1-1910).
10-50  Constellation Energy Group, Inc. 1995 Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended and restated. * (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(b) to the Constellation Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)1-1910).

Exhibit No.

Description

10-51  Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Executive Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended and restated. * (Designated as Exhibit 10(b) to the Constellation Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2011, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)1-1910).
10-52  Constellation Energy Group, Inc. 2002 Senior Management Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended and restated. * (Designated as Exhibit 10(a) to the Constellation Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2011, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)1-1910).
10-53  Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Management Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended and restated. * (Designated as Exhibit 10(d) to the Constellation Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)1-1910).

467


Exhibit No.

Description

10-54  Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Amended and Restated 2007 Long-Term Incentive Plan. * (Designated as Exhibit No. 10.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 4, 2010, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File No. 1-12869.)1-12869).
10-55  Form of Grant Agreement for Stock Units with Sales Restriction. * (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(x) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)1-1910).
10-56  Rate Stabilization Property Servicing Agreement dated as of June 29, 2007 by and between RSB BondCo LLC and Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, as servicer (Designated as Exhibit 10.2 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 5, 2007, filed by Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, File No. 1-1910.)1-1910).
10-57  Administration Agreement dated as of June 29, 2007 by and between RSB BondCo LLC and Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, as administrator (Designated as Exhibit 10.3 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 5, 2007, filed by Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, File No. 1-1910.)1-1910).
10-58  Second Amended and Restated Operating Agreement, dated as of November 6, 2009, by and among Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC, Constellation Nuclear, LLC, CE Nuclear, LLC, EDF Development Inc., and for certain limited purposes, E.D.F. International S.A. and Constellation Energy Group, Inc. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 12, 2009, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File No. 1-12869.)1-12869).
10-59  Amendment No. 1 to the Second Amended and Restated Operating Agreement of Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC, by and among Constellation Nuclear, LLC, CE Nuclear, LLC, EDF Inc. (formerly known as EDF Development, Inc.), and E.D.F. International S.A. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(s) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
1-1910).
10-60  Amendment No. 2 to the Second Amended and Restated Operating Agreement of Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC, by and among Constellation Nuclear, LLC, CE Nuclear, LLC, EDF Inc. (formerly known as EDF Development, Inc.), and E.D.F. International S.A. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(t) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)1-1910).
10-61  Amendment No. 3 to the Second Amended and Restated Operating Agreement of Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC, by and among Constellation Nuclear, LLC, CE Nuclear, LLC, EDF Inc. (formerly known as EDF Development, Inc.), and E.D.F. International S.A. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 3, 2010, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File No. 1-12869.)1-12869).

Exhibit No.

Description

10-62  Termination Agreement dated as of November 3, 2010, by and among EDF Inc. (formerly known as EDF Development, Inc.), E.D.F. International S.A., and Constellation Energy Group, Inc. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10.2 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 3, 2010, filed by Constellation Energy Group, Inc., File No. 1-12869.)1-12869).
10-63  Settlement Agreement between EDF Inc., Exelon Corporation, Exelon Energy Delivery Company, LLC, Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Baltimore Gas and Electric Company dated January 16, 2012. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated January 19, 2012, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)1-1910).
10-6410-64-10-70  Pension Plan of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. (Amended and Restated Effective January 31, 2012)*

468


Exhibit No.

Description

Reserved.
10-6510-71-1  First Amendment to the Pension Plan of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. (Amended and Restated Effective January 31, 2012)*Commitment Letter for $7.221 Billion Senior Unsecured Bridge Facility, dated April 29, 2014 (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated April 30, 2014, Exhibit No. 10.1).
10-6610-71-2  Second Amendment to364-Day Bridge Term Loan Agreement, dated as of May 30, 2014, among Exelon Corporation, as Borrower, the Pension Plan of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. (Amendedvarious financial institutions named therein, as Lenders, and Restated Effective January 31, 2012)*Barclays Bank PLC, as Administrative Agent (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated April 30, 2014, Exhibit No. 10.1).
10-6710-71-3  Third Amendment No. 4 to Credit Agreement, dated May 30, 2014, among Exelon Corporation, as Borrower, the Pension Plan of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. (Amendedfinancial institutions signatory therein, as Lenders and Restated Effective January 31, 2012)*JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as Administrative Agent. (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated June 4, 2014, Exhibit 10.2).
10-6810-71-4  Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Employee Savings Plan (AmendedAmendment No. 4 to Credit Agreement, dated May 30, 2014, among Exelon Generation Company, LLC, as Borrower, the financial institutions signatory therein, as Lenders and Restated Effective January 31, 2012)*JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as Administrative Agent. (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated June 4, 2014, Exhibit 10.3).
10-6910-71-5  First Amendment No. 3 to Credit Agreement, dated May 30, 2014, among PECO Energy Company, as Borrower, the Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Employee Savings Plan (Amendedfinancial institutions signatory therein, as Lenders and Restated Effective January 31, 2012)*JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as Administrative Agent. (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated June 4, 2014, Exhibit 10.4).
10-7010-71-6  Second Amendment No. 2 to Credit Agreement, dated as of May 30, 2014, among Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, as Borrower, the Constellation Energy Group,financial institutions signatory therein, as Lenders and The Royal Bank of Scotland plc, as Administrative Agent. (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated June 4, 2014, Exhibit 10.6).
10-72-1Confirmation of Base Issuer Forward Transaction, dated June 11, 2014, between Exelon Corporation and Barclays Capital, Inc. Employee Savings Plan (Amended, acting as Agent for Barclays Bank PLC (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated June 17, 2014, Exhibit 10.1).
10-72-2Confirmation of Base Issuer Forward Transaction, dated June 11, 2014, between Exelon Corporation and Restated Effective January 31, 2012)*Goldman Sachs & Co. (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated June 17, 2014, Exhibit 10.2).
10-72-3Confirmation of Additional Issuer Forward Transaction, dated June 13, 2014, between Exelon Corporation and Barclays Capital, Inc., acting as Agent for Barclays Bank PLC (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated June 17, 2014, Exhibit 10.3).
10-72-4Confirmation of Additional Issuer Forward Transaction, dated June 13, 2014, between Exelon Corporation and Goldman Sachs & Co. (File No. 001-16169, Form 8-K dated June 17, 2014, Exhibit 10.4).
12-1  Exelon Corporation Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges.
12-2  

Exelon Generation Company, LLC Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges.

12-3  

Commonwealth Edison Company Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges.

Exhibit No.

Description

12-4  

PECO Energy Company Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges.

12-5  Baltimore Gas and Electric Company Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges and Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges and Preference Stock Dividends.
14  Exelon Code of Conduct, as amended March 12, 2012 (File No. 1-16169, Form 8-K dated March 14, 2012, Exhibit No. 14-1).
  Subsidiaries
21-1  

Exelon Corporation

21-2  Exelon Generation Company, LLC
21-3  Commonwealth Edison Company
21-4  PECO Energy Company
21-5  Baltimore Gas and Electric Company
  Consent of Independent Registered Public Accountants
23-1  Exelon Corporation
23-2  Exelon Generation Company, LLC
23-3  Commonwealth Edison Company
23-4  PECO Energy Company
23-5  Baltimore Gas and Electric Company
  

Power of Attorney (Exelon Corporation)

24-1  

Anthony K. Anderson

24-2  

Ann C. Berzin

24-3  

John A. Canning, Jr.

24-4  

Christopher M. Crane

24-5  

Yves C. de Balmann

24-6  

Nicholas DeBenedictis

24-7  Paul L. Joskow
24-8

NelsonLinda P. Jojo

24-9Robert J. Lawless
24-10Richard W. Mies
24-11John W. Rogers, Jr.
24-12Mayo A. Diaz

Shattuck III
24-13Stephen D. Steinour
Power of Attorney (Commonwealth Edison Company)
24-14James W. Compton
24-15Christopher M. Crane
24-16A. Steven Crown
24-17Nicholas DeBenedictis
24-18Peter V. Fazio, Jr.
24-19Michael Moskow
24-20Denis P. O’Brien

469


Exhibit No.

  

Description

24-8

Sue L. Gin

24-9

Paul L. Joskow

24-10

Robert J. Lawless

24-11

Richard W. Mies

24-12

William C. Richardson

24-13John W. Rogers, Jr.
24-14

Mayo A. Shattuck III

24-15

Stephen D. Steinour

Power of Attorney (Commonwealth Edison Company)

24-16

James W. Compton

24-17

Christopher M. Crane

24-18

A. Steven Crown

24-19

Nicholas DeBenedictis

24-20

Peter V. Fazio, Jr.

24-21  

Sue L. Gin

Anne R. Pramaggiore
24-22  

Michael Moskow

24-23

Denis O’Brien

24-24

Anne R. Pramaggiore

24-25

Jesse H. Ruiz

Reserved.
  Power of Attorney (PECO Energy Company)
24-2624-23  

Craig L. Adams

24-2724-24  

Christopher M. Crane

24-2824-25  M. Walter D’Alessio
24-2924-26  Nicholas DeBenedictis
24-3024-27  

Nelson A. Diaz

24-3124-28  Rosemarie B. Greco
24-3224-29  Charisse R. Lillie
24-3324-30  Denis P. O’Brien
24-3424-31  Ronald Rubin
  Power of Attorney (Baltimore Gas and Electric Company)
24-3524-32  Ann C. Berzin
24-3624-33  Christopher M. Crane
24-3724-34  Michael E. Cryor
24-3824-35  James R. Curtiss
24-3924-36  Kenneth W. DeFontes,Calvin G. Butler, Jr.
24-4024-37  Joseph Haskins, Jr.
24-4124-38  

Carla D. Hayden

24-4224-39  

Denis P. O’Brien

470


Exhibit No.

24-40
  

Description

Michael D. Sullivan
  Certifications Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 as to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013 filed by the following officers for the following registrants:
31-1  Filed by Christopher M. Crane for Exelon Corporation
31-2  Filed by Jonathan W. Thayer for Exelon Corporation
31-3  Filed by Kenneth W. Cornew for Exelon Generation Company, LLC
31-4  Filed by Bryan P. Wright for Exelon Generation Company, LLC
31-5  Filed by Anne R. Pramaggiore for Commonwealth Edison Company
31-6  Filed by Joseph R. Trpik, Jr. for Commonwealth Edison Company
31-7  Filed by Craig L. Adams for PECO Energy Company
31-8  Filed by Phillip S. Barnett for PECO Energy Company
31-9  Filed by Kenneth W. DeFontesCalvin G. Butler, Jr. for Baltimore Gas and Electric Company
31-10  Filed by Carim V. Khouzami forDavid M. Vahos Baltimore Gas and Electric Company
  Certifications Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 United States Code as to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013 filed by the following officers for the following registrants:
32-1  Filed by Christopher M. Crane for Exelon Corporation
32-2  

Filed by Jonathan W. Thayer for Exelon Corporation

32-3  

Filed by Kenneth W. Cornew for Exelon Generation Company, LLC

Exhibit No.

Description

32-4  

Filed by Bryan P. Wright for Exelon Generation Company, LLC

32-5  

Filed by Anne R. Pramaggiore for Commonwealth Edison Company

32-6  

Filed by Joseph R. Trpik, Jr. for Commonwealth Edison Company

32-7  

Filed by Craig L. Adams for PECO Energy Company

32-8  

Filed by Phillip S. Barnett for PECO Energy Company

32-9  

Filed by Kenneth W. DeFontesCalvin G. Butler, Jr. for Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

32-10  

Filed by Carim V. Khouzami forDavid M. Vahos Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

101.INS  

XBRL Instance

101.SCH  

XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema

101.CAL  

XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation

101.DEF  

XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition

101.LAB  

XBRL Taxonomy Extension Labels

101.PRE  

XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation

 

*Compensatory plan or arrangements in which directors or officers of the applicable registrant participate and which are not available to all employees.

471


SIGNATURES

 

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, in the City of Chicago and State of Illinois on the 13th10th day of February, 2014.2016.

 

EXELONCORPORATIONEXELON CORPORATION
By: 

/S/    CHRISTOPHER M. CRANE        

Name: Christopher M. Crane
Title: President and Chief Executive Officer

 

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities indicated on the 13th10th day of February, 2014.2016.

 

Signature

  

Title

/S/    CHRISTOPHER M. CRANE        

Christopher M. Crane

  

President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal
(Principal Executive Officer) and Director

/S/    JONATHANOHNATHAN W. THAYER        

Jonathan W. Thayer

  

Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)

/S/    DUANE M. DESPARTE        

Duane M. DesParte

  

Senior Vice President and Corporate Controller (Principal Accounting Officer)

 

This annual report has also been signed below by Darryl M. Bradford, Attorney-in-Fact, on behalf of the following Directors on the date indicated:

 

Anthony K. Anderson

Ann C. Berzin

John A. Canning, Jr.

Yves C. de Balmann

Nicholas DeBenedictis

Nelson A. Diaz

SuePaul L. GinJoskow

  

Paul L. JoskowLinda P. Jojo

Robert J. Lawless

Richard W. Mies

William C. Richardson

John W. Rogers, Jr.

Mayo A. Shattuck III

Stephen D. Steinour

 

By:  

/S/    DARRYL M. BRADFORD        

 February 13, 201410, 2016
Name:  Darryl M. Bradford 

472


SIGNATURES

 

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, in the City of Chicago and State of Illinois on the 13th10th day of February, 2014.2016.

 

EXELONGENERATIONEXELON GENERATION COMPANY, LLC
By: 

/S/    KENNETH W. CORNEW        

Name: Kenneth W. Cornew
Title: President and Chief Executive Officer

 

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities indicated on the 13th10th day of February, 2014.2016.

 

Signature

  

Title

/S/    KENNETH W. CORNEW        

Kenneth W. Cornew

  

President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)

/S/    BRYAN P. WRIGHT        

Bryan P. Wright

  

Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)

/S/    ROBERT M. AIKEN        

Robert M. Aiken

  

Vice President and Controller (Principal Accounting Officer)

473


SIGNATURES

 

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, in the City of Chicago and State of Illinois on the 13th10th day of February, 2014.2016.

 

COMMONWEALTHEDISONCOMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY

By:

 

/s/    ANNE R. PRAMAGGIORE        

Name: Anne R. Pramaggiore
Title: President and Chief Executive Officer

 

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities indicated on the 13th10th day of February, 2014.2016.

 

Signature

  

Title

/s/    ANNE R. PRAMAGGIORE        

Anne R. Pramaggiore

  

President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) and Director

/s/    JOSEPH R. TRPIK, JR.        

Joseph R. Trpik, Jr.

  

Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer)

/s/    GERALD J. KOZEL        

Gerald J. Kozel

  

Vice President and Controller (Principal Accounting Officer)

/s/    CHRISTOPHER M. CRANE        

Christopher M. Crane

  

Chairman and Director

/s/    DENIS P. O’BRIEN        

Denis P. O’Brien

Vice Chairman and Director

 

This annual report has also been signed below by Anne R. Pramaggiore, Attorney-in-Fact, on behalf of the following Directors on the date indicated:

 

James W. Compton

A. Steven Crown

Nicholas DeBenedictis

Peter V. Fazio, Jr.

  

Sue L. Gin

Michael Moskow

Jesse H. RuizDenis P. O’Brien

 

By:  

/s/    ANNE R. PRAMAGGIORE        

 February 13, 201410, 2016
Name:  Anne R. Pramaggiore 

474


SIGNATURES

 

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, in the City of Chicago and State of Illinois on the 13th10th day of February, 2014.2016.

 

PECOENERGYPECO ENERGY COMPANY

By:

 

/s/    CRAIG L. ADAMS        

Name: Craig L. Adams
Title: President and Chief Executive Officer and President

 

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities indicated on the 13th10th day of February, 2014.2016.

 

Signature

  

Title

/s/    CRAIG L. ADAMS        

Craig L. Adams

  

President and Chief Executive Officer and President (Principal Executive Officer) and Director

/s/    PHILLIP S. BARNETT        

Phillip S. Barnett

  

Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer)

/s/    SCOTT A. BAILEY        

Scott A. Bailey

  

Vice President and Controller (Principal Accounting Officer)

/s/    CHRISTOPHER M. CRANE        

Christopher M. Crane

  

Chairman and Director

/s/    DENIS P. O’BRIEN        

Denis P. O’Brien

Vice Chairman and Director

 

This annual report has also been signed below by Craig L. Adams, Attorney-in-Fact, on behalf of the following Directors on the date indicated:

 

M. Walter D’Alessio  

Rosemarie B. Greco

Nelson A. Diaz

Charisse R. Lillie

Nicholas DeBenedictis  

Denis P. O’Brien

Nelson A. DiazRonald Rubin
Rosemarie B. Greco

 

By:

  

/s/    CRAIG L. ADAMS        

  February 13, 201410, 2016
Name:  Craig L. Adams  

475


SIGNATURES

 

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, in the City of Chicago and State of Illinois on the 13th10th day of February, 2014.2016.

 

BALTIMORE GASANDGAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY

By:

 

/s/    KCENNETHALVIN W. DG. BEFONTESUTLER, JR.        

Name: Kenneth W. DeFontesCalvin G. Butler, Jr.
Title: Chief Executive Officer and President

 

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities indicated on the 13th10th day of February, 2014.2016.

 

Signature

  

Title

/s/    KCENNETHALVIN W. DG. BEFONTESUTLER, JR.        

Kenneth W. DeFontesCalvin G. Butler, Jr.

  

Chief Executive Officer and President (Principal Executive Officer) and Director

/s/    CARIM V. KHOUZAMI        

Carim V. Khouzami

Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer)

/s/    DAVID M. VAHOS        

David M. Vahos

Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer)

/s/    MATTHEW N. BAUER        

Matthew N. Bauer

  

Vice President and Controller (Principal Accounting Officer)

/s/    CHRISTOPHER M. CRANE        

Christopher M. Crane

  

Chairman and Director

/s/    DENIS P. O’BRIEN        

Denis P. O’Brien

Vice Chairman and Director

 

This annual report has also been signed below by Kenneth W. DeFontes,Calvin G. Butler, Jr., Attorney-in-Fact, on behalf of the following Directors on the date indicated:

 

Ann C. Berzin  

Joseph Haskins, Jr.

Michael E. Cryor  

Carla D. Hayden

James R. Curtiss  Denis O’Brien
Michael D. Sullivan

 

By:

  

/s/    KCENNETHALVIN W. DG. BEFONTESUTLER, JR.        

  February 13, 201410, 2016
Name:  Kenneth W. DeFontes,Calvin G. Butler, Jr.  

 

476480