UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
FORM 8-K
CURRENT REPORT
Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
May 13, 2005
Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported)
Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter; State of | ||||
Commission File | Incorporation; Address of Principal Executive Offices; and | IRS Employer | ||
Number | Telephone Number | Identification Number | ||
1-16169
|
EXELON CORPORATION | 23-2990190 | ||
(a Pennsylvania corporation) | ||||
10 South Dearborn Street 37th Floor | ||||
P.O. Box 805379 | ||||
Chicago, Illinois 60680-5379 | ||||
(312) 394-7398 | ||||
333-85496
|
EXELON GENERATION COMPANY, LLC | 23-3064219 | ||
(a Pennsylvania limited liability company) | ||||
300 Exelon Way | ||||
Kennett Square, Pennsylvania 19348 | ||||
(610) 765-6900 |
Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions:
o Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)
o Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)
o Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))
o Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))
Section 8 Other Events
Item 8.01. Other Events
Exelon Corporation (Exelon) and its wholly owned subsidiary, Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Generation), are filing this current report on Form 8-K in order to recast, as required, the information contained in Exelons and Generations annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 in order to conform to the presentation of the following items in Exelons and Generations report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2005:
a) | the presentation of certain businesses as discontinued operations within Exelons and Generations Consolidated Statements of Income and Comprehensive Income, and | |||
b) | a change in the reportable segments presented by Exelon. |
Each of these items is discussed further below.
Discontinued Operations
As previously reported in a separate report on Form 8-K filed on February 1, 2005, subsidiaries of Generation completed a series of transactions on January 31, 2005 that resulted in Generations sale of its investment in Sithe Energies, Inc. (Sithe). Under the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, Exelon determined that Sithes results of operations and the gain on sale of Sithe should be presented for the first quarter of 2005, and for the comparable period in 2004, as discontinued operations.
Additionally, during 2003 and 2004 Exelon sold or wound down substantially all components of Exelon Enterprises Company, LLC (Enterprises) and AllEnergy Gas & Electric Marketing LLC (AllEnergy). Ownership of AllEnergy was transferred from Enterprises to Generation on January 1, 2004. The results of operations of qualifying components of Enterprises and AllEnergy and any gain or loss on their sale previously qualified for presentation as discontinued operations but were not presented as discontinued operations based upon a determination by Exelon that such presentation was not material to the financial statements.
Given the first quarter 2005 determination that Sithes results of operations and the gain on sale of Sithe should be presented as discontinued operations, Exelon determined that the presentation of the results of operations of the qualifying business components of Enterprises should be conformed and presented as discontinued operations.
Reportable Segment Presentation
Prior to January 1, 2005, Exelon reported financial information for three segments: Generation, Energy Delivery (consisting of the operations of Commonwealth Edison Company and PECO Energy Company) and Enterprises. Generation operates in a single business segment; as such, no separate segment information is provided for this registrant. During 2003 and 2004, Exelon sold or wound down substantially all components of Enterprises. During the first quarter of 2005, Exelon determined that it would no longer present Enterprises as a reportable segment. Accordingly, the remaining Enterprises businesses are reported within Other. There has been no change to the reportable segment presented by Generation.
Re-Presentation of Prior Years Financial Statements
In connection with the proposed merger between Exelon and Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated, Exelon has undertaken to register, under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1933, additional common shares that may be issued in connection with the merger. Accordingly, information presented in Items 6,7 and 8 of Exelons and Generations annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 has been recast in this current report on Form 8-K, for all periods presented in the annual report on Form 10-K, to conform to the above-described
changes related to the presentation of specified businesses as discontinued operations and the prior Enterprises reportable segment now being included within Other. These changes included:
| Selected Financial Data The financial information presented for both Exelon and Generation has been recast to separately present income from continuing operations and the results of discontinued operations for all periods presented. | |||
| Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation The discussions of the results of operations for both Exelon and Generation have been recast to separately discuss the components of income from continuing operations and the results of discontinued operations for all periods presented. The discussion of Exelons results of operations by segment has been recast to include Enterprises within Other for all periods presented. | |||
| Financial Statements and Supplementary Data: | |||
Primary financial statements The Consolidated Statements of Income for both Exelon and Generation for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2004 have been recast to present the above-described businesses as discontinued operations. No other changes were made to the primary financial statements. | ||||
Footnotes to the financial statements The following changes were made: |
o | A new footnote entitled Discontinued Operations, which describes the nature and composition of the businesses reported as discontinued operations for all periods presented, has been added. | |||
o | Footnote 26 (for Exelon only), entitled Segment Information, has been recast to include Enterprises within Other for all periods presented. |
In addition, information included in Exelons and Generations annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004, was recast solely to effect the re-presentation described above, and no attempt has been made to update that information to reflect other subsequent events.
Item 9.01. Financial Statements and Exhibits.
(c) Exhibits.
Exhibit No. | Description | |
Exelon Corporation: | ||
99.1
|
Selected Financial Data | |
99.2
|
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation | |
99.3
|
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data | |
Exelon Generation Company, LLC: | ||
99.4
|
Selected Financial Data | |
99.5
|
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation | |
99.6
|
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data | |
Consents: | ||
99.7
|
Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm |
* * * * *
This combined Form 8-K is being filed separately by Exelon and Generation (Registrants). Information contained herein relating to any individual registrant has been furnished by such registrant on its own behalf. No registrant makes any representation as to information relating to any other registrant.
Except for the historical information contained herein, certain of the matters discussed in this Report are forward-looking statements, within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, that are subject to risks and uncertainties. The factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements made by a registrant include those factors discussed herein, as well as the items discussed in (a) the Registrants 2004 Annual Report on Form 10-KITEM 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of OperationsBusiness Outlook and the Challenges in Managing Our Business for each of Exelon and Generation, (b) the Registrants 2004 Annual Report on Form 10-KITEM 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data: ExelonNote 20 and GenerationNote 16 and (c) other factors discussed in 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. Neither 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.
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.
EXELON CORPORATION EXELON GENERATION COMPANY, LLC |
||
/s/ J. Barry Mitchell | ||
J. Barry Mitchell Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer |
May 13, 2005
EXHIBIT INDEX
Exhibit No. | Description | |
Exelon Corporation: | ||
99.1
|
Selected Financial Data | |
99.2
|
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation | |
99.3
|
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data | |
Exelon Generation Company, LLC: | ||
99.4
|
Selected Financial Data | |
99.5
|
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation | |
99.6
|
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data | |
Consents: | ||
99.7
|
Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm |
Exhibit 99.1
SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
Exelon
Exelon and Generation have reclassified their December 31, 2004 and previous financial statements for the presentation of certain businesses as discontinued operations within Exelons and Generations Consolidated Statements of Income and a change in the reportable segments presented by Exelon. As discussed in Notes 25 and 26 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, on January 31, 2005, subsidiaries of Generation completed a series of transactions that resulted in Generations sale of its investment in Sithe. In addition, during 2004 and 2003, Exelon sold or unwound substantially all components of Enterprises and AllEnergy Gas & Electric Marketing LLC (AllEnergy), a business within Exelon Energy. As a result, the results of operations and any gain or loss on the sale of qualifying components of Enterprises have been presented as discontinued operations within Exelons Consolidated Statements of Income. As Exelon sold or wound down substantially all components of Enterprises, Exelon determined that it would no longer present Enterprises as a reportable segment. Accordingly, the remaining Enterprises businesses are reported within Other.
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 Exelons Consolidated Financial Statements and Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation filed as Exhibit 99.2 to this current report on Form 8-K.
Results for 2000 reflect the effects of the merger of Exelon Corporation, Unicom and PECO on October 20, 2000. That merger was accounted for using the purchase method of accounting with PECO as the acquiring company. Accordingly, financial results for 2000 consist of PECOs results for 2000 and Unicoms results after October 20, 2000.
For the Years Ended December 31, | |||||||||||||||||||||
in millions, except for per share data | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | ||||||||||||||||
Statement of Income data: |
|||||||||||||||||||||
Operating revenues |
$ | 14,133 | $ | 15,148 | $ | 14,060 | $ | 13,978 | $ | 7,060 | |||||||||||
Operating income |
3,499 | 2,409 | 3,280 | 3,406 | 1,562 | ||||||||||||||||
Income from continuing operations |
$ | 1,870 | $ | 892 | $ | 1,690 | $ | 1,448 | $ | 606 | |||||||||||
Loss from discontinued operations |
(29 | ) | (99 | ) | (20 | ) | (32 | ) | (44 | ) | |||||||||||
Income before cumulative effect of
changes in accounting principles |
1,841 | 793 | 1,670 | 1,416 | 562 | ||||||||||||||||
Cumulative effect of changes in accounting
principles (net of income taxes) |
23 | 112 | (230 | ) | 12 | 24 | |||||||||||||||
Net income |
$ | 1,864 | $ | 905 | $ | 1,440 | $ | 1,428 | $ | 586 | |||||||||||
Earnings per average common share (diluted): |
|||||||||||||||||||||
Income from continuing operations |
$ | 2.79 | $ | 1.36 | $ | 2.60 | $ | 2.24 | $ | 1.49 | |||||||||||
Loss from discontinued operations |
(0.04 | ) | (0.15 | ) | (0.03 | ) | (0.05 | ) | (0.11 | ) | |||||||||||
Income before cumulative effect of
changes in accounting principles |
2.75 | 1.21 | 2.57 | 2.19 | 1.38 | ||||||||||||||||
Cumulative effect of changes in accounting
principles (net of income taxes) |
0.03 | 0.17 | (0.35 | ) | 0.02 | 0.06 | |||||||||||||||
Net income |
$ | 2.78 | $ | 1.38 | $ | 2.22 | $ | 2.21 | $ | 1.44 | |||||||||||
Dividends per common share |
$ | 1.26 | $ | 0.96 | $ | 0.88 | $ | 0.91 | $ | 0.46 | |||||||||||
Average shares of common stock |
|||||||||||||||||||||
outstanding diluted |
669 | 657 | 649 | 645 | 408 | ||||||||||||||||
1
December 31, | |||||||||||||||||||||
in millions | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | ||||||||||||||||
Balance Sheet data: |
|||||||||||||||||||||
Current assets |
$ | 3,926 | $ | 4,561 | $ | 4,125 | $ | 3,735 | $ | 4,151 | |||||||||||
Property, plant and equipment, net |
21,482 | 20,630 | 17,957 | 14,665 | 15,914 | ||||||||||||||||
Noncurrent regulatory assets |
4,790 | 5,226 | 5,546 | 5,774 | 6,045 | ||||||||||||||||
Goodwill |
4,705 | 4,719 | 4,992 | 5,335 | 5,186 | ||||||||||||||||
Other deferred debits and other assets |
7,867 | 6,800 | 5,249 | 5,460 | 5,378 | ||||||||||||||||
Total assets |
$ | 42,770 | $ | 41,936 | $ | 37,869 | $ | 34,969 | $ | 36,674 | |||||||||||
Current liabilities |
$ | 4,882 | $ | 5,720 | $ | 5,874 | $ | 4,370 | $ | 4,993 | |||||||||||
Long-term debt, including long-term
debt to financing trusts (a) |
12,148 | 13,489 | 13,127 | 12,879 | 12,958 | ||||||||||||||||
Regulatory liabilities |
2,204 | 1,891 | 486 | 225 | 1,888 | ||||||||||||||||
Other deferred credits and
other liabilities |
13,984 | 12,246 | 9,968 | 8,749 | 8,959 | ||||||||||||||||
Minority interest |
42 | | 77 | 31 | 31 | ||||||||||||||||
Preferred securities of subsidiaries (a) |
87 | 87 | 595 | 613 | 630 | ||||||||||||||||
Shareholders equity |
9,423 | 8,503 | 7,742 | 8,102 | 7,215 | ||||||||||||||||
Total liabilities and
shareholders equity |
$ | 42,770 | $ | 41,936 | $ | 37,869 | $ | 34,969 | $ | 36,674 | |||||||||||
(a) | The mandatorily redeemable preferred securities of ComEd and PECO were reclassified as long-term debt to financing trusts in 2003 in accordance with FIN 46-R and FIN 46, Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities (FIN 46). |
2
Exhibit 99.2
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATION
Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation
Exelon and Generation have reclassified their December 31, 2004 and previous financial statements for the presentation of certain businesses as discontinued operations within Exelons and Generations Consolidated Statements of Income and a change in the reportable segments presented by Exelon. As discussed in Notes 25 and 26 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, on January 31, 2005, subsidiaries of Generation completed a series of transactions that resulted in Generations sale of its investment in Sithe. In addition, during 2004 and 2003, Exelon sold or unwound substantially all components of Enterprises and AllEnergy Gas & Electric Marketing LLC (AllEnergy), a business within Exelon Energy. As a result, the results of operations and any gain or loss on the sale of qualifying components of Enterprises have been presented as discontinued operations within Exelons Consolidated Statements of Income. As Exelon sold or wound down substantially all components of Enterprises, Exelon determined that it would no longer present Enterprises as a reportable segment. Accordingly, the remaining Enterprises businesses are reported within Other.
The Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates and New Accounting Pronouncement sections presented below indicate the registrant or registrants to which each policy, estimate or accounting standard is applicable.
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 within 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 areas described below require significant judgment in the application of accounting policy or in making estimates and assumptions in matters that are inherently uncertain and that may change in subsequent periods. Further discussion of the application of these accounting policies can be found in the Registrants Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
Asset Retirement Obligations (Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation)
Nuclear Decommissioning (Exelon and Generation)
Generation must make significant estimates and assumptions in accounting for its obligation to decommission its nuclear generating plants in accordance with SFAS No. 143, Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations (SFAS No. 143).
SFAS No. 143 requires that Generation estimate the fair value of its obligation for the future decommissioning of its nuclear generating plants. To estimate that fair value, Generation uses a probability-weighted, discounted cash flow model considering multiple outcome scenarios based upon significant assumptions embedded in the following:
Decommissioning Cost Studies. Generation uses decommissioning cost studies prepared by a third party to provide a marketplace assessment of costs and the timing of decommissioning activities validated by comparison to current decommissioning projects and other third-party estimates.
1
Cost Escalation Studies. Cost escalation studies are used to determine escalation factors and are based on inflation indices for labor, equipment and materials, energy and low-level radioactive waste disposal costs.
Probabilistic Cash Flow Models. Generations probabilistic cash flow models include the assignment of probabilities to various cost levels and various timing scenarios. The probability of various timing scenarios incorporate the factors of current license lives, anticipated license renewals and the timing of DOE acceptance for disposal of spent nuclear fuel.
Discount Rates. The probability-weighted estimated cash flows using these various scenarios are discounted using credit-adjusted, risk-free rates applicable to the various businesses.
Changes in the assumptions underlying the foregoing items could materially affect the decommissioning obligation recorded and could affect future updates to the decommissioning obligation to be recorded in the consolidated financial statements. For example, the 20-year average cost escalation rates used in the current ARO calculation approximate 3% to 4%. A uniform increase in these escalation rates of 25 basis points would increase the total ARO recorded by Exelon by approximately 11% or more than $400 million. Under SFAS No. 143, the nuclear decommissioning obligation is adjusted on an ongoing basis due to the passage of time and revisions to either the timing or amount of the original estimate of undiscounted cash flows. For more information regarding the adoption and ongoing application of SFAS No. 143, see Note 1 and Note 14 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
Other Asset Retirement Obligations (Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation)
The FASB has issued an exposure draft of proposed interpretations of SFAS No. 143. The exposure draft addresses the accounting for conditional asset retirement obligations. The proposed guidance is not anticipated to have any impact on Generations asset retirement obligations for nuclear decommissioning but may result in the recording of liabilities at Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation for conditional legal obligations meeting the scope of the interpretation.
Asset Impairments (Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation)
Goodwill (Exelon and ComEd)
Exelon and ComEd had approximately $4.7 billion of goodwill recorded at December 31, 2004, which relates entirely to the goodwill recorded upon the acquisition of ComEd. Exelon and ComEd perform assessments for impairment of their goodwill at least annually, or more frequently if events or circumstances indicate that goodwill might be impaired. Application of the goodwill impairment test requires managements judgments, including the identification of reporting units, assigning assets and liabilities to reporting units, assigning goodwill to reporting units, and determining the fair value of each reporting unit.
Exelon and ComEd performed their annual assessments of goodwill impairment as of November 1, 2004 and determined that goodwill was not impaired. Exelon assesses goodwill impairment at its Energy Delivery reporting unit; accordingly, a goodwill impairment charge at ComEd may not necessarily affect Exelons results of operations as the goodwill impairment test for Exelon considers the cash flows of the entire consolidated Energy Delivery business segment, which includes both ComEd and PECO.
2
In the assessments, Exelon and ComEd estimated the fair value of the Energy Delivery and ComEd reporting units using a probability-weighted, discounted cash flow model with multiple scenarios. The fair value determination is dependent on many sensitive, interrelated and uncertain variables, including changing interest rates, utility sector market performance, the capital structures of Energy Delivery and ComEd, market prices for power, post-2006 rate regulatory structures, operating and capital expenditure requirements, and other factors. Changes in assumptions regarding these variables or in the assessment of how they interrelate could produce a different impairment result, which could be material. For example, a hypothetical decrease of approximately 10% in Energy Deliverys and ComEds expected discounted cash flows would result in no impairment at Exelon, but an estimated impairment of goodwill of approximately $1.7 billion at ComEd.
Long-Lived Assets (Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation)
Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation evaluate the carrying value of their long-lived assets, excluding goodwill, when circumstances indicate the carrying value of those assets may not be recoverable. The review of long-lived assets for impairment requires significant assumptions about operating strategies and estimates of future cash flows, which require assessments of current and projected market conditions. For the generation business, forecasting future cash flows requires assumptions regarding forecasted commodity prices for the sale of power and costs of fuel. A variation in the assumptions used could lead to a different conclusion regarding the realizability of an asset and, thus, could have a significant effect on the consolidated financial statements.
Investments (Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation)
Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation had approximately $6,066 million, $91 million, $109 million and $5,365 million, respectively, of investments, including investments held in nuclear decommissioning trust funds, recorded as of December 31, 2004. Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation consider investments to be impaired when a decline in fair value below cost is judged to be other-than-temporary. If the cost of an investment exceeds its fair value, they evaluate, among other factors, general market conditions, the duration and extent to which the fair value is less than cost, as well as their intent and ability to hold the investment. The Registrants also consider specific adverse conditions related to the financial health of and business outlook for the investee.
Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Welfare Benefits (Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation)
Exelon sponsors defined benefit pension plans and postretirement welfare benefit plans applicable to essentially all ComEd, PECO, Generation and BSC employees and certain Enterprises employees. See Note 15 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding the accounting for Exelons defined benefit pension plans and postretirement welfare benefit plans.
The costs of providing benefits under these plans are dependent on historical information such as employee age, length of service and level of compensation, and the actual rate of return on plan assets. Also, Exelon utilizes assumptions about the future, including the expected rate of return on plan assets, the discount rate applied to benefit obligations, rate of compensation increases and the anticipated rate of increase in health care costs.
The selection of key actuarial assumptions utilized in the measurement of the plan obligations and costs drives the results of the analysis and the resulting charges. The long-term expected rate of return on plan assets (EROA) assumption used in calculating pension cost was 9.00% in 2004 and 2003 compared to 9.50% for 2002. The weighted average EROA assumption used in calculating other postretirement benefit costs ranged from 8.33% to 8.35% in 2004 compared to 8.40% in 2003 and 8.80% for 2002. A lower EROA is used in the calculation of other postretirement benefit costs, as the other postretirement benefit trust activity is partially taxable while the pension trust activity is non-taxable. The Moodys Aa Corporate Bond Index was used as the basis in selecting the discount rate for determining the plan obligations, using 5.75%, 6.25% and 6.75% at December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. The reduction in the discount rate is due to the decline in Moodys Aa Corporate Bond Index in 2004 and 2003.
3
The following tables illustrate the effects of changing the major actuarial assumptions discussed above:
Impact on | ||||||||||||
Projected Benefit | Impact on | Impact on | ||||||||||
Obligation at | Pension Liability at | 2005 | ||||||||||
Change in Actuarial Assumption | December 31, 2004 | December 31, 2004 | Pension Cost | |||||||||
Pension benefits |
||||||||||||
Decrease discount rate by 0.5% |
$ | 626 | $ | 535 | $ | 40 | ||||||
Decrease rate of return on plan assets by 0.5% |
| | 35 | |||||||||
Impact on | Impact on | |||||||||||
Other Postretirement | Postretirement | Impact on 2005 | ||||||||||
Benefit Obligation | Benefit Liability | Postretirement | ||||||||||
Change in Actuarial Assumption | at December 31, 2004 | at December 31, 2004 | Benefit Cost | |||||||||
Postretirement benefits |
||||||||||||
Decrease discount rate by 0.5% |
$ | 174 | $ | | $ | 17 | ||||||
Decrease rate of return on plan assets by 0.5% |
| | 5 | |||||||||
Assumed health care cost trend rates also have a significant effect on the costs reported for Exelons postretirement benefit plans. To estimate the 2004 cost, Exelon assumed a health care cost trend rate of 10%, decreasing to an ultimate trend rate of 4.5% in 2011, compared to the 2003 assumption of 8.5%, decreasing to an ultimate trend rate of 4.5% in 2008. To estimate the 2005 cost, Exelon will assume a health care cost trend rate of 9%, decreasing to an ultimate trend rate of 5% in 2010. A one-percentage point change in assumed health care cost trend rates in 2004 would have the following effects:
Effect of a one percentage point increase in assumed health care cost trend
|
||||
on total service and interest cost components |
$ | 34 | ||
on postretirement benefit obligation |
$ | 327 | ||
Effect of a one percentage point decrease in assumed health care cost trend
|
||||
on total service and interest cost components |
$ | (28 | ) | |
on postretirement benefit obligation |
$ | (276 | ) | |
The assumptions are reviewed at the beginning of each year during Exelons annual review process and at any interim remeasurement of the plan obligations. The impact of assumption changes is reflected in the recorded pension amounts as they occur, or over a period of time if allowed under applicable accounting standards. As these assumptions change from period to period, recorded pension amounts and funding requirements could also change.
In 2004, Exelon incurred approximately $294 million in costs associated with its pension and postretirement benefit plans, including curtailment and settlement costs of $24 million. Although 2005 pension and postretirement benefit costs will depend on market conditions, Exelon believes that its pension and postretirement benefit costs will decrease in 2005 due to an anticipated contribution of approximately $2 billion to the pension plans, partially offset by an increase in postretirement benefit costs due to a change in the assumed healthcare cost trend rate. Depending on the timing of the pension contribution, the estimated net decrease in 2005 pension and postretirement benefit costs could range from approximately $30 million to approximately $120 million. If the contribution is made on July 1, 2005, the estimated net decrease in 2005 pension and postretirement benefit cost would be approximately $75 million.
4
Regulatory Accounting (Exelon, ComEd and PECO)
Exelon, ComEd and PECO account for their regulated electric and gas operations in accordance with SFAS No. 71, Accounting for the Effects of Certain Types of Regulation (SFAS No. 71), which requires Exelon, ComEd and PECO to reflect the effects of rate regulation in their financial statements. Use of SFAS No. 71 is applicable to utility operations that meet the following criteria: (1) third-party regulation of rates; (2) cost-based rates; and (3) a reasonable assumption that all costs will be recoverable from customers through rates. As of December 31, 2004, Exelon, ComEd and PECO have concluded that the operations of ComEd and PECO meet the criteria. If it is concluded in a future period that a separable portion of their businesses no longer meets the criteria, Exelon, ComEd and PECO are required to eliminate the financial statement effects of regulation for that part of their business, which would include the elimination of any or all regulatory assets and liabilities that had been recorded in their Consolidated Balance Sheets. The impact of not meeting the criteria of SFAS No. 71 could be material to the financial statements as a one-time extraordinary item and through impacts on continuing operations. See Note 5 and Note 2 of Exelons and ComEds Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, respectively, for further information regarding regulatory issues.
Regulatory assets represent costs that have been deferred to future periods when it is probable that the regulator will allow for recovery through rates charged to customers. Regulatory liabilities represent revenues received from customers to fund expected costs that have not yet been incurred. As of December 31, 2004, Exelon and PECO had recorded $4.8 billion of net regulatory assets within their Consolidated Balance Sheets. At December 31, 2004, Exelon and ComEd had recorded $2.2 billion of net regulatory liabilities within their Consolidated Balance Sheets. See Note 21 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding the significant regulatory assets and liabilities of Exelon, ComEd and PECO.
For each regulatory jurisdiction where they conduct business, Exelon, ComEd and PECO continually assess whether the regulatory assets and liabilities continue to meet the criteria for probable future recovery or settlement. This assessment includes consideration of factors such as changes in applicable regulatory environments, recent rate orders to other regulated entities in the same jurisdiction, the status of any pending or potential deregulation legislation and the ability to recover costs through regulated rates.
The electric businesses of both ComEd and PECO are currently subject to rate freezes or rate caps that limit the opportunity to recover increased costs and the costs of new investment in facilities through rates during the rate freeze or rate cap period. Because the current rates include the recovery of existing regulatory assets and liabilities and rates in effect during the rate freeze or rate cap periods are expected to allow Exelon, ComEd and PECO to earn a reasonable rate of return during that period, management believes the existing regulatory assets and liabilities are probable of recovery. This determination reflects the current political and regulatory climate at the Federal level and in the states where ComEd and PECO do business but is subject to change in the future. If future recovery of costs ceases to be probable, the regulatory assets and liabilities would be recognized in current period earnings. A write-off of regulatory assets could limit the ability to pay dividends under PUHCA and state law.
Accounting for Derivative Instruments (Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation)
The Registrants enter into derivatives 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 utilizes derivatives with respect to energy transactions to manage the utilization of its available generating capability and provisions of wholesale energy to its affiliates. Generation also utilizes energy option contracts and energy financial swap arrangements to limit the market price risk associated with forward energy commodity contracts. Additionally, Generation enters into energy-related derivatives for trading purposes. All of the Registrants derivative activities are in accordance with Exelons Risk Management Policy (RMP).
5
The Registrants account for derivative financial instruments under SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivatives and Hedging Activities (SFAS No. 133). Under the provisions of SFAS No. 133, all derivatives are recognized on the balance sheet at their fair value unless they qualify for a normal purchases or normal sales exception. Derivatives recorded at fair value on the balance sheet are presented as current or noncurrent mark-to-market derivative assets or liabilities. Changes in the derivatives recorded at fair value are recognized in earnings unless specific hedge accounting criteria are met, in which case those changes are recorded in earnings as an offset to the changes in fair value of the exposure being hedged or deferred in accumulated other comprehensive income and recognized in earnings as hedged transaction occur.
Normal Purchases and Normal Sales Exception. The availability of the normal purchases and normal sales exception is based upon the assessment of the ability and intent to deliver or take delivery of the underlying item. This assessment is based primarily on internal models that forecast customer demand and electricity and gas supply. These models include assumptions regarding customer load growth rates, which are influenced by the economy, weather and the impact of customer choice, and generating unit availability, particularly nuclear generating unit capability factors. Significant changes in these assumptions could result in these contracts not qualifying for the normal purchases and normal sales exception.
Energy Contracts. Identification of an energy contract as a qualifying cash-flow hedge requires Generation to determine that the contract is in accordance with the RMP, the forecasted future transaction is probable, and the hedging relationship between the energy contract and the expected future purchase or sale of energy is expected to be highly effective at the initiation of the hedge and throughout the hedging relationship. Internal models that measure the statistical correlation between the derivative and the associated hedged item determine the effectiveness of such an energy contract designated as a hedge. Generation reassesses its cash-flow hedges on a regular basis to determine if they continue to be effective and that the forecasted future transactions are probable. When a contract does not meet the effective or probable criteria of SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivatives and Hedging Activities (SFAS No. 133) hedge accounting is discontinued and changes in the fair value of the derivative are recorded through earnings.
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. Generation uses quoted exchange prices to the extent they are available or external broker quotes in order to determine the fair value of energy contracts. When external prices are not available, Generation uses internal models to determine the fair value. These internal models include assumptions of the future prices of energy based on the specific market in which the energy is being purchased, using externally available forward market pricing curves for all periods possible under the pricing model. Generation uses the Black model, a standard industry valuation model, to determine the fair value of energy derivative contracts that are marked-to-market.
Interest-Rate Derivative Instruments. To determine the fair value of interest-rate swap agreements, the Registrants use external dealer prices or internal valuation models that utilize assumptions of available market pricing curves.
6
Depreciable Lives of Property, Plant and Equipment (Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation)
The Registrants have a significant investment in electric generation assets and electric and natural gas transmission and distribution assets. Depreciation of these assets is generally provided over their estimated service lives on a straight-line basis using the composite method. The estimation of service lives requires management judgment regarding the period of time that the assets will be in use. As circumstances warrant, depreciation estimates are reviewed to determine if any changes are needed. Changes to depreciation estimates in future periods could have a significant impact on the amount of depreciation charged to the financial statements.
In 2001, Generation extended the estimated service lives of certain nuclear-fuel generating facilities based upon Generations intent to apply for license renewals for these facilities. While Generation expects to apply for and obtain approval of license renewals for these facilities, circumstances may arise that would prevent Generation from obtaining additional license renewals. A change in depreciation estimates resulting from Generations inability to receive additional license renewals could have a significant effect on Generations results of operations.
Accounting for Contingencies (Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation)
In the preparation of their financial statements, the Registrants make judgments regarding the future outcome of contingent events and record amounts that are probable and reasonably estimated based upon available information. The amounts recorded may differ from the actual income or expense that occurs when the uncertainty is resolved. The estimates that the Registrants make in accounting for contingencies and the gains and losses that they record upon the ultimate resolution of these uncertainties have a significant effect on their financial statements. The accounting for taxation and environmental costs are further discussed below.
Taxation
The Registrants are required to make judgments regarding the potential tax effects of various financial transactions and ongoing operations to estimate their obligations to taxing authorities. These tax obligations include income, real estate, use and employment-related taxes, including taxes that are subject to ongoing appeals. Judgments include estimating reserves for potential adverse outcomes regarding tax positions that they have taken. The Registrants must also assess their ability to generate capital gains in future periods to realize tax benefits associated with capital losses previously generated or expected to be generated in future periods. Capital losses may be deducted only to the extent of capital gains realized during the year of the loss or during the three prior or five succeeding years. The Registrants do not record valuation allowances for deferred tax assets related to capital losses that the Registrants believe will be realized in future periods. Generation has recorded valuation allowances against certain deferred assets associated with capital losses due to the consolidation of Sithe. While the Registrants believe the resulting tax reserve balances as of December 31, 2004 reflect the probable expected outcome of these tax matters in accordance with SFAS No. 5, Accounting for Contingencies, and SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes, the ultimate outcome of such matters could result in favorable or unfavorable adjustments to their consolidated financial statements and such adjustments could be material.
Environmental Costs
As of December 31, 2004, Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation had accrued liabilities of $124 million, $61 million, $47 million and $16 million, respectively, for environmental investigation and remediation costs. These 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 and the timing of the remediation work. Where timing and costs of expenditures can be reliably estimated, amounts are discounted. These amounts represent $96 million, $55 million and $41 million, respectively, of the total accrued for Exelon, ComEd and PECO.
7
Where timing and amounts cannot be reliably estimated, amounts are recognized on an undiscounted basis. Such amounts represent $28 million, $6 million, $6 million and $16 million, respectively, of the total accrued liabilities for Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation. Estimates can be affected by the factors noted above as well as by changes in technology, regulations or the requirements of local governmental authorities.
Severance Accounting (Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation)
The Registrants provide severance benefits to terminated employees pursuant to pre-existing severance plans primarily based upon each individual employees years of service with the Registrants and compensation level. The Registrants accrue severance benefits that are considered probable and can be reasonably estimated in accordance with SFAS No. 112, Employers Accounting for Postemployment Benefits, an amendment of FASB Statements No. 5 and 43 (SFAS No. 112). A significant assumption in estimating severance charges is the determination of the number of positions to be eliminated. The Registrants base their estimates on their current plans and ability to determine the appropriate staffing levels to effectively operate their businesses. Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation recorded severance charges of $32 million, $10 million, $3 million and $2 million, respectively, in 2004 and severance charges of $135 million, $61 million, $16 million and $38 million, respectively, in 2003, related to personnel reductions. The Registrants may incur further severance costs if they identify additional positions to be eliminated. These costs will be recorded in the period in which the costs can be reasonably estimated.
Revenue Recognition (Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation)
Revenues related to the sale of energy are recorded when service is rendered or energy is delivered to customers. The determination of Energy Deliverys and Exelon Energy Companys energy sales to individual customers, however, is based on systematic readings of customer meters generally on a monthly basis. At the end of each month, amounts of energy delivered to customers since the date of the last meter reading are estimated, and corresponding unbilled revenue is recorded. This unbilled revenue is estimated each month based on daily customer usage measured by generation or gas throughput volume, estimated customer usage by class, estimated losses of energy during delivery to customers and applicable customer rates. Customer accounts receivable of ComEd, PECO, and Generation included estimates of $275 million, $143 million, and $64 million, respectively, for unbilled revenue as of December 31, 2004 as a result of unread meters at ComEd, PECO and Exelon Energy Company. Increases in volumes delivered to the utilities customers and favorable rate mix due to changes in usage patterns in customer classes in the period would increase unbilled revenue. 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 estimated unbilled revenue; however, total operating revenues would remain materially unchanged.
The determination of Generations energy sales, excluding Exelon Energy Company, is based on estimated amounts delivered as well as fixed quantity sales. At the end of each month, amounts of energy delivered to customers during the month are estimated and the corresponding unbilled revenue is recorded. Customer accounts receivable of Exelon and Generation as of December 31, 2004 include unbilled energy revenues of $385 million related to unbilled energy sales of Generation. Increases in volumes delivered to the wholesale customers in the period would increase unbilled revenue.
8
Accounting for Ownership Interests in Variable Interest Entities (Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation)
At December 31, 2004, Exelon, through Generation, had a 50% interest in Sithe. In accordance with FIN 46-R, Exelon and Generation consolidated Sithe within their financial statements as of March 31, 2004. The determination that Sithe qualified as a variable interest entity and that Generation was the primary beneficiary under FIN 46-R required analysis of the economic benefits accruing to all parties pursuant to their ownership interests supplemented by managements judgment. Sithes total assets and total liabilities as of December 31, 2004 were $1,356 million and $1,289 million, respectively. As required by FIN 46-R, upon the occurrence of a future triggering event, such as a change in ownership, the Registrant would reassess their investments to determine if they continue to qualify as the primary beneficiary. See Notes 3 and 25 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion of the sale of Generations interest in Sithe, which was completed on January 31, 2005. Subsequent to the sale, Sithe will no longer be consolidated within the financial statements of Exelon or Generation.
In addition to Sithe, the Registrants reviewed other entities with which they have business relationships to determine if those entities were variable interest entities that should be consolidated under FIN 46-R and concluded that those entities should not be consolidated within the financial statements.
9
Exelon
Executive Overview
Financial Results. Exelons net income was $1,864 million in 2004 as compared to $905 million in 2003 and diluted earnings per average common share were $2.78 for 2004 as compared to $1.38 for 2003, primarily as a result of increased net income at Generation, lower losses at Enterprises and several significant charges in 2003 that did not recur in 2004, partially offset by decreased net income at Energy Delivery. Key drivers included the following:
| Increased net income at Generation Generation provided net income of $673 million in 2004 compared to a net loss of $151 million in 2003. The increase in Generations net income reflects improved wholesale prices in 2004, the inclusion of a full year of AmerGens results in 2004, and impairment charges in 2003 of $945 million and $255 million (before income taxes) related to the long-lived assets of Boston Generating and Generations investment in Sithe, respectively. Generations 2004 income also includes an after-tax gain of $52 million on the sale of Boston Generating during the second quarter of 2004. See further discussion in Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation Generation. | |||
| Decreased losses at Enterprises The businesses associated with the former Enterprises segment, which are included within other, reported a net loss of $22 million in 2004 compared to a net loss of $118 million in 2003. These comparative results reflect net pre-tax gains of $41 million recorded in 2004 related to the dispositions of certain businesses and investments, as well as investment impairment charges of $54 million recorded in 2003. See further discussion under Investment Strategy below and in Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation Exelon Corporation Results of Operation Discontinued Operations. | |||
| Favorable tax effects from investments in synthetic fuel-producing facilities Exelons investments in synthetic fuel-producing facilities increased 2004 after-tax earnings by $65 million as compared to 2003. | |||
| Decreased net income at Energy Delivery Energy Delivery provided net income of $1,128 million in 2004 compared to $1,175 million in 2003. This decrease was primarily attributable to unfavorable weather conditions and charges recorded in connection with the early retirement of debt, partially offset by growth in Energy Deliverys retail customer base and reduced severance and other charges in 2004 as compared to 2003. See further discussion in Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation Energy Delivery. |
Investment Strategy. In 2004, Exelon continued to follow a disciplined approach to investing to maximize earnings and cash flows from its assets and businesses, while selling those that do not meet its strategic goals. Highlights from 2004 include the following:
| Proposed Merger with PSEG On December 20, 2004, Exelon entered into the Merger Agreement with PSEG, the holding company for an electric and gas utility company primarily located and serving customers in New Jersey, whereby PSEG will be merged with and into Exelon. Under the Merger Agreement, each share of PSEG common stock will be converted into 1.225 shares of Exelon common stock. As of December 31, 2004, PSEGs market capitalization was over $12 billion. Additionally, PSEG, on a consolidated basis, has approximately $14 billion of outstanding debt which is currently anticipated to become part of Exelons consolidated debt. |
10
The Merger Agreement contains certain termination rights for both Exelon and PSEG, and further provides that, upon termination of the Merger Agreement under specified circumstances, (i) Exelon may be required to pay PSEG a termination fee of $400 million plus PSEGs transaction expenses up to $40 million and (ii) PSEG may be required to pay Exelon a termination fee of $400 million plus Exelons transaction expenses up to $40 million. The Merger Agreement has been unanimously approved by both companies boards of directors but is contingent upon, among other things, the approval by shareholders of both companies, antitrust clearance and a number of regulatory approvals or reviews by federal and state energy authorities. On February 4, 2005, Exelon and PSEG filed for approval of the merger with the FERC, the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities (BPU) and the PUC. Exelon also filed a notice of the Merger with the ICC. | ||||
Exelon anticipates that the Merger will close within 12 months to 15 months after the environment of the Merger Agreement in December 2004, subject to shareholder and regulatory approvals which cannot be assured. | ||||
| OSC with PSEG Concurrent with the Merger Agreement, Generation entered into the OSC with PSEG Nuclear, LLC which commenced on January 17, 2005 relating to the operation of the Salem and Hope Creek nuclear generating stations. The OSC provides for Generation to provide a chief nuclear officer and other key personnel to oversee daily plant operations at the Hope Creek and Salem nuclear generating stations and to implement the Exelon operating model. PSEG Nuclear, LLC will continue as the license holder with exclusive legal authority to operate and maintain the plants, will retain responsibility for management oversight and will have full authority with respect to the marketing of its share of the output from the facilities. | |||
| Boston Generating On May 25, 2004, Generation completed the sale, transfer and assignment of ownership of its indirect wholly owned subsidiary Boston Generating, which owns directly or indirectly the companies that own Mystic 4-7, Mystic 8 and 9 and Fore River generating facilities, to a special purpose entity owned by the lenders under Boston Generatings $1.25 billion credit facility, resulting in an after-tax gain of $52 million. On September 1, 2004, Generation completed the transfer of plant operations and power marketing arrangements to the lenders special purpose entity and its contractors under Boston Generatings credit facility. | |||
| Sithe On September 29, 2004, Generation exercised its call option and entered into an agreement to acquire Reservoirs 50% interest in Sithe for $97 million and, on November 1, 2004, Generation entered into an agreement to sell its anticipated 100% interest in Sithe to Dynegy Inc. for $135 million in cash. Generation closed on the call exercise and the sale of the resulting 100% interest in Sithe on January 31, 2005. As a result, the operations of Sithe have been reported as discontinued operations. The sale did not include Sithe International, Inc. (Sithe International), which was sold to a subsidiary of Generation on October 13, 2004. | |||
| Enterprises Exelon continued its divestiture strategy for the businesses associated with the former Enterprises segment by selling or winding down substantially all components of that former segment. At December 31, 2004, the remaining assets totaled approximately $274 million in comparison to $697 million at December 31, 2003. Exelon expects to receive aggregate proceeds of $268 million and recorded in discontinued operations a net pre-tax gain of $41 million related to the dispositions of assets and investments in 2004. |
11
Financing Activities. During 2004, Exelon substantially strengthened its balance sheet and met its capital resource requirements primarily with internally generated cash. When necessary, Exelon obtains funds from external sources, including capital markets, and through bank borrowings. Highlights from 2004 include the following:
| ComEd retired $1.2 billion of its outstanding debt, including $1.0 billion prior to its maturity and $206 million at maturity, pursuant to an accelerated liability management plan. In connection with these retirements, ComEd recorded pre-tax charges totaling $130 million related to debt prepayment premiums and the write-off of previously deferred debt financing fees. | |||
| In addition to the accelerated liability management plan, payments of approximately $728 million were made for the purpose of retiring PECO and ComEd transition trust long-term debt and approximately $176 million of other net long-term debt during 2004. | |||
| Exelon replaced its $750 million 364-day unsecured revolving credit agreement with a $1 billion five-year facility and reduced its $750 million three-year facility to $500 million. | |||
| Exelons Board of Directors approved a discretionary share repurchase program under which Exelon purchased common stock, now held as treasury shares, totaling $75 million during 2004. | |||
| Exelons Board of Directors approved a policy of targeting a dividend payout ratio of 50% to 60% of ongoing earnings, and Exelon expects a dividend payout in that range for the full year of 2005. The actual dividend payout rate depends on Exelon achieving its objectives, including meeting cash flow targets and strengthening its balance sheet. On October 29, 2004, the Exelon Board of Directors approved an increased quarterly dividend of $0.40 per share, which was consistent with the dividend policy approved in 2004. The Board of Directors must approve the dividends each quarter after review of Exelons financial condition at the time, and there can be no guarantees that this targeted dividend payout ratio will be achieved. |
Regulatory Developments PJM Integration. On May 1, 2004, ComEd fully integrated its transmission facilities into PJM. PECOs and ComEds membership in PJM supports Exelons commitment to competitive wholesale electric markets and will provide Exelon the benefits of more transparent, liquid and competitive markets for the sale and purchase of electric energy and capacity. Upon joining PJM, ComEd began incurring administrative fees, which are expected to approximate $25 million annually. Exelon believes such costs will ultimately be offset by the benefits of full access to a wholesale competitive marketplace and increased revenue requirements, particularly after ComEds regulatory transition period ends in 2006; however, changes in market dynamics could affect the ultimate financial impact on Exelon.
Outlook for 2005 and Beyond. Exelons future financial results will be affected by a number of factors, including the following:
Shorter Term: Weather conditions, wholesale market prices of electricity, fuel costs, interest rates, successful implementation of operational improvement initiatives and Exelons ability to generate electricity at low costs all affect Exelons operating revenues and related costs. If weather is warmer than normal in the summer months or colder than normal in the winter months, operating revenues at Exelon generally will be favorably affected. Operating revenues will also generally be favorably affected by increases in wholesale market prices.
12
Longer Term: The proposed merger with PSEG is expected to have a significant impact on Exelons results of operations, cash flows and financial position. See further discussion above at Proposed Merger with PSEG and in ITEM 1. Business Proposed Merger with PSEG. Following is a discussion of the other non-merger-related items that will have a longer term impact on Exelon.
Restructuring in the U.S. electric industry is at a crossroads at both the Federal and state levels, with continuing debate on RTO and standard market platform issues, and in many states on the post-transition format. Some states abandoned failed transition plans (e.g., California); some states are adjusting current transition plans (e.g., Ohio); and the states of Illinois (by 2007) and Pennsylvania (by 2011) are considering options to preserve choice for large customers and rate stability for mass-market customers, while ensuring the financial returns needed for continuing investments in reliability. Exelon will continue to be an active participant in these policy debates, while continuing to focus on improving operations, controlling costs and providing a fair return to its investors.
As Exelon looks toward the end of the restructuring transition periods and related rate freezes or caps in Illinois and Pennsylvania, Exelon will also continue to work with Federal and state regulators, state and local governments, customer representatives and other interested parties to develop appropriate processes for establishing future rates in restructured electricity markets. Exelon will strive to ensure that future rate structures recognize the substantial improvements Exelon has made, and will continue to make, in its transmission and distribution systems. ComEd and PECO will also work to ensure that ComEds and PECOs rates are adequate to cover their costs of obtaining electric power and energy from their suppliers, which could include Generation, for the costs associated with procuring full-requirements power given Energy Deliverys POLR obligations. ComEd intends to make various filings during 2005 to begin the process to establish rates for the post-transition period. As in the past, by working together with all interested parties, Exelon believes it can successfully meet these objectives and obtain fair recovery of its costs for providing service to its customers; however, if Exelon is unsuccessful, its results of operations and cash flows could be negatively affected after the transition periods.
Generations financial results will be affected by a number of factors, including the market changes in Illinois and Pennsylvania discussed above. While Generation has significantly hedged its market exposure in the short-term, over the long-term, Generations results will be affected by long-term changes in the market prices of power and fuel caused by supply and demand forces and environmental regulations. Generating companies must also work with regulators to ensure that a viable capacity market exists and that new units will be constructed in a timely manner to meet the growing demand for power. On the operating side, to meet Exelons financial goals, Generations nuclear units must continue their superior performance while controlling costs despite inflationary pressures and increasing security costs.
Exelons current plans are based on moderate kilowatthour sales growth (1% to 2%) from their current levels and stable wholesale power markets. Continued cost reduction initiatives are important to offset labor and material cost escalation, especially the double digit increases in health care costs. Despite these challenges, Exelons diverse mix of generation (nuclear, coal, purchased power, natural gas, hydroelectric, wind and other renewables), linked to a stable base of over five million customers, will provide a solid platform from which it will strive to meet these challenges.
13
Results of Operations
Year Ended December 31, 2004 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2003
Significant Operating Trends Exelon
Favorable | ||||||||||||
(unfavorable) | ||||||||||||
Exelon Corporation | 2004 | 2003 | variance | |||||||||
Operating revenues |
$ | 14,133 | $ | 15,148 | $ | (1,015 | ) | |||||
Purchased power and fuel expense |
4,929 | 6,194 | 1,265 | |||||||||
Impairment of Boston Generating, LLC long-lived assets |
| 945 | 945 | |||||||||
Operating and maintenance expense |
3,700 | 3,915 | 215 | |||||||||
Depreciation and amortization expense |
1,295 | 1,115 | (180 | ) | ||||||||
Operating income |
3,499 | 2,409 | 1,090 | |||||||||
Other income and deductions |
(922 | ) | (1,123 | ) | 201 | |||||||
Income from continuing operations before income taxes and
minority interest |
2,577 | 1,286 | 1,291 | |||||||||
Income taxes |
713 | 389 | (324 | ) | ||||||||
Income from continuing operations |
1,870 | 892 | 978 | |||||||||
Loss from discontinued operations, net of income taxes |
(29 | ) | (99 | ) | 70 | |||||||
Income before cumulative effect of changes in
accounting principles |
1,841 | 793 | 1,048 | |||||||||
Net income |
1,864 | 905 | 959 | |||||||||
Diluted earnings per share |
2.78 | 1.38 | 1.40 | |||||||||
Net Income. Net income for 2004 reflects income of $32 million, net of income taxes, for the adoption of FIN 46-R, partially offset by a loss of $9 million, net of income taxes, related to the adoption of Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF) Issue No. 03-16, Accounting for Investments in Limited Liability Companies (EITF 03-16). Net income for 2003 reflects income of $112 million, net of income taxes, for the adoption of SFAS No. 143. See Note 1 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding the adoptions of FIN 46-R, EITF 03-16 and SFAS No. 143.
Operating Revenues. Operating revenues decreased primarily due to decreased revenues at Enterprises due to the sale of InfraSource in the third quarter of 2003, the sale of Boston Generating and Generations adoption of EITF No. 03-11, Reporting Realized Gains and Losses on Derivative Instruments That Are Subject to FASB Statement No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, and Not Held for Trading Purposes as Defined in EITF Issue No. 02-3, Issues Involved in Accounting for Derivative Contracts Held for Trading Purposes and Contracts Involved in Energy Trading and Risk Management Activities (EITF 03-11) in the first quarter of 2004, which changed the presentation of certain power transactions and decreased 2004 operating revenues by $980 million. The adoption of EITF 03-11 had no impact on net income. Operating revenues were favorably affected by Generations acquisition of the remaining 50% of AmerGen. Operating revenues were also favorably affected by Energy Deliverys increased volume growth and transmission revenues collected from PJM, partially offset by unfavorable weather conditions and customer choice initiatives. See further discussion of operating revenues by segment below.
14
Purchased Power and Fuel Expense. Purchased power and fuel expense decreased primarily due to Generations adoption of EITF 03-11 during 2004 which resulted in a decrease in purchased power expense and fuel expense of $980 million. In addition, purchased power decreased due to Generations acquisition of the remaining 50% of AmerGen in December 2003, which was only partially offset by an increase in fuel expense, and the sale of Boston Generating. Purchased power represented 24% of Generations total supply in 2004 compared to 37% in 2003. Purchased power also decreased due to Energy Deliverys unfavorable weather conditions and customer choice initiatives, partially offset by volume growth and transmission costs paid to PJM. See further discussion of purchased power and fuel expense by segment below.
Impairment of the Long-Lived Assets of Boston Generating. Generation recorded a $945 million charge (before income taxes) during 2003 to impair the long-lived assets of Boston Generating.
Operating and Maintenance Expense. Operating and maintenance expense decreased primarily as a result of decreased expenses at InfraSource due to its sale in the third quarter of 2003 and decreased severance and severance-related expenses, partially offset by increased expenses at Generation due to the acquisition of the remaining 50% of AmerGen. Operating and maintenance expense increased $65 million due to investments in synthetic fuel-producing facilities made in the fourth quarter of 2003 and the third quarter of 2004. See further discussion of operating and maintenance expenses by segment below.
Depreciation and Amortization Expense. The increase in depreciation and amortization expense was primarily due to additional plant placed in service at Energy Delivery and Generation, the acquisition of the remaining 50% in AmerGen in December 2003 and the recording and subsequent impairment of an asset retirement cost (ARC) at Generation in 2004. See Note 14 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information. The increase also resulted from increased amortization expense due to investments made in the fourth quarter of 2003 and the third quarter of 2004 in synthetic fuel-producing facilities and increased competitive transition charge amortization at PECO. These increases were partially offset by reduced depreciation and amortization expense at Enterprises due to the sale of InfraSource in the third quarter of 2003.
Operating Income. Exclusive of the changes in operating revenues, purchased power and fuel expense, the impairment of Boston Generatings long-lived assets, operating and maintenance expense and depreciation and amortization expense discussed above, the change in operating income was primarily the result of increased taxes other than income in 2004 as compared to 2003, primarily due to the reduction of certain real estate tax accruals at PECO and Generation during 2003.
Other Income and Deductions. Other income and deductions in 2004 reflects interest expense of $828 million, equity in losses of unconsolidated affiliates of $154 million, debt retirement charges of $130 million (before income taxes) recorded at ComEd associated with an accelerated liability management plan, and an $85 million gain (before income taxes) on the 2004 sale of Boston Generating. Other income and deductions in 2003 reflects interest expense of $873 million and impairment charges of $255 million (before income taxes) related to Generations investment in Sithe. Equity in earnings of unconsolidated affiliates decreased by $187 million due to the acquisition of the remaining 50% of AmerGen in December 2003, the deconsolidation of certain financing trusts during 2003 and investments in synthetic fuel-producing facilities made in the fourth quarter of 2003 and the third quarter of 2004.
Effective Income Tax Rate. The effective income tax rate from continuing operations was 28% for 2004 compared to 30% for 2003. The decrease in the effective rate was primarily attributable to investments in synthetic fuel-producing facilities made in the fourth quarter of 2003.
15
Discontinued Operations. 2004 and 2003 discontinued operations consist of Sithes 2004 results (beginning April 1, 2004), certain qualifying components of Enterprises, and AllEnergy. AllEnergy is a business within Exelon Energy, which is a business within Generation. A discussion of the results of Sithe and AllEnergy is included in the Generation segment results discussion below. Enterprises after-tax loss from discontinued operations of $78 million in 2003 and $13 million in 2004 decreased by $65 million primarily due to a 2004 gain on the sale of the Chicago operations of Thermal and a decrease in operating and maintenance expense of $401, partially offset by a decrease in revenues. At December 31, 2004, the remaining assets of the businesses associated with the former Enterprises segment totaled approximately $274 million in comparison to $697 million at December 31, 2003.
Results of Operations by Business Segment
Historically, Exelon had reported Enterprises as a segment. Exelon sold or unwound substantially all components of Enterprises in 2004 and 2003. As a result, Enterprises is no longer reported as a segment and is included within the other category within the results of operations by business segment below. Other consists of corporate operations, including Exelon Business Services Company, Enterprises and investments in synthetic fuel-producing facilities.
The comparison of 2004 and 2003 operating results and other statistical information set forth below include intercompany transactions, which are eliminated in Exelons consolidated financial statements.
Transfer of Exelon Energy Company from Enterprises to Generation. Effective January 1, 2004, Enterprises competitive retail sales business, Exelon Energy Company, was transferred to Generation. The 2003 information related to the Generation segment discussed below has been adjusted to reflect the transfer of Exelon Energy Company from Enterprises to the Generation segment. Exelon Energy Companys 2003 results were as follows:
Total revenues |
$ | 660 | ||
Intersegment revenues |
4 | |||
Operating revenues and purchased power from affiliates |
200 | |||
Depreciation and amortization |
1 | |||
Operating expenses |
648 | |||
Interest expense |
1 | |||
Income from continuing operations before income taxes |
6 | |||
Income taxes |
3 | |||
Income from continuing operations |
3 | |||
Loss from discontinued operations, net of income taxes |
(21 | ) | ||
Net loss |
(18 | ) | ||
Income (Loss) from Continuing Operations
Favorable | ||||||||||||
(unfavorable) | ||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | variance | ||||||||||
Energy Delivery |
$ | 1,128 | $ | 1,170 | $ | (42 | ) | |||||
Generation |
657 | (238 | ) | 895 | ||||||||
Other |
85 | (40 | ) | 125 | ||||||||
Total |
$ | 1,870 | $ | 892 | $ | 978 | ||||||
16
Income (Loss) Before Cumulative Effect of Changes in Accounting Principles by Business Segment
Favorable | ||||||||||||
(unfavorable) | ||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | variance | ||||||||||
Energy Delivery |
$ | 1,128 | $ | 1,170 | $ | (42 | ) | |||||
Generation |
641 | (259 | ) | 900 | ||||||||
Other |
72 | (118 | ) | 190 | ||||||||
Total |
$ | 1,841 | $ | 793 | $ | 1,048 | ||||||
Net Income (Loss) by Business Segment
Favorable | ||||||||||||
(unfavorable) | ||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | variance | ||||||||||
Energy Delivery |
$ | 1,128 | $ | 1,175 | $ | (47 | ) | |||||
Generation |
673 | (151 | ) | 824 | ||||||||
Other |
63 | (119 | ) | 182 | ||||||||
Total |
$ | 1,864 | $ | 905 | $ | 959 | ||||||
Results of Operations Energy Delivery
Favorable | ||||||||||||
(Unfavorable) | ||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | variance | ||||||||||
OPERATING REVENUES |
$ | 10,290 | $ | 10,202 | $ | 88 | ||||||
OPERATING EXPENSES |
||||||||||||
Purchased power and fuel expense |
4,760 | 4,597 | (163 | ) | ||||||||
Operating and maintenance |
1,444 | 1,669 | 225 | |||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
928 | 873 | (55 | ) | ||||||||
Taxes other than income |
527 | 440 | (87 | ) | ||||||||
Total operating expense |
7,659 | 7,579 | (80 | ) | ||||||||
OPERATING INCOME |
2,631 | 2,623 | 8 | |||||||||
OTHER INCOME AND DEDUCTIONS |
||||||||||||
Interest expense |
(672 | ) | (747 | ) | 75 | |||||||
Distributions on mandatorily
redeemable preferred securities |
(3 | ) | (39 | ) | 36 | |||||||
Equity in losses of unconsolidated affiliates |
(44 | ) | | (44 | ) | |||||||
Other, net |
(78 | ) | 51 | (129 | ) | |||||||
Total other income and deductions |
(797 | ) | (735 | ) | (62 | ) | ||||||
INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES AND CUMULATIVE EFFECT
OF A CHANGE IN ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLE |
1,834 | 1,888 | (54 | ) | ||||||||
INCOME TAXES |
706 | 718 | 12 | |||||||||
INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES AND CUMULATIVE EFFECT
OF A CHANGE IN ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLE |
1,128 | 1,170 | (42 | ) | ||||||||
CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF A CHANGE IN ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLE |
| 5 | (5 | ) | ||||||||
NET INCOME |
$ | 1,128 | $ | 1,175 | $ | (47 | ) | |||||
17
Net Income. Energy Deliverys net income in 2004 decreased primarily due to costs associated with ComEds accelerated retirement of long-term debt, reflected in other income and deductions other, net, offset in part by lower interest expense. Operating income, while reflecting various changes in operating revenues and expenses, was relatively unchanged between periods.
Operating Revenues. The changes in Energy Deliverys operating revenues for 2004 compared to 2003 consisted of the following:
Total | ||||||||||||
increase | ||||||||||||
Electric | Gas | (decrease) | ||||||||||
Volume |
$ | 326 | $ | 3 | $ | 329 | ||||||
PJM transmission |
149 | | 149 | |||||||||
Rate changes and mix |
(74 | ) | 111 | 37 | ||||||||
Weather |
(176 | ) | (21 | ) | (197 | ) | ||||||
Customer choice |
(182 | ) | | (182 | ) | |||||||
T&O charges |
(41 | ) | | (41 | ) | |||||||
Other |
(17 | ) | 10 | (7 | ) | |||||||
(Decrease) increase in operating revenues |
$ | (15 | ) | $ | 103 | $ | 88 | |||||
Volume. Both ComEds and PECOs electric revenues increased as a result of higher delivery volume, exclusive of the effects of weather and customer choice, due to an increased number of customers and increased usage per customer, generally across all customer classes.
PJM Transmission. Energy Deliverys transmission revenues and purchased power expense each increased by $164 million due to ComEds May 1, 2004 entry into PJM, partially offset by $15 million of lower transmission revenues and expenses at PECO.
Rate Changes and Mix. Starting in ComEds June 2003 billing cycle, the increased wholesale market price of electricity and other adjustments to the energy component decreased the collection of CTCs as compared to the respective prior year period. ComEds CTC revenues decreased by $135 million in 2004 as compared to 2003. This decrease was partially offset by increased wholesale market prices which increased energy revenues received under the ComEd PPO and by increased average rates paid by small and large commercial and industrial customers totaling $53 million. For 2004 and 2003, ComEd collected approximately $169 million and $304 million, respectively, of CTC revenues. As a result of increasing mitigation factors, changes in energy prices and the ability of certain customers to establish fixed, multi-year CTC rates beginning in 2003, ComEd anticipates that this revenue source will range from $90 million to $110 million annually in 2005 and 2006. Under the current restructuring statute, no CTCs will be collected after 2006.
Electric revenues increased $1 million at PECO as a result of a $20 million increase related to a scheduled phase-out of merger-related rate reductions, offset by a $19 million decrease reflecting a change in rate mix due to changes in monthly usage patterns in all customer classes during 2004 as compared to 2003.
Energy Deliverys gas revenues increased due to increases in rates through PUC-approved changes to the purchased gas adjustment clause that became effective March 1, 2003, June 1, 2003, December 1, 2003 and March 1, 2004. The average purchased gas cost rate per million cubic feet for 2004 was 33% higher than the rate in 2003. PECOs purchased gas cost rates were reduced effective December 1, 2004.
Weather. Energy Deliverys electric and gas revenues were negatively affected by unfavorable weather conditions. Cooling degree-days in the ComEd and PECO service territories were 12% lower and relatively unchanged, respectively, in 2004 as compared to 2003. Heating degree-days were 6% and 5% lower in both the ComEd and PECO service territories, respectively, in 2004 as compared to 2003.
18
Customer Choice. For 2004 and 2003, 28% and 25%, respectively, of energy delivered to Energy Deliverys retail customers was provided by an alternative electric supplier or under the ComEd PPO. The decrease in electric retail revenues attributable to customer choice included a decrease in revenues of $104 million from customers in Illinois electing to purchase energy from an alternative electric supplier or under the ComEd PPO and a decrease in revenues of $78 million from customers in Pennsylvania being assigned to or selecting an alternative electric supplier.
T &O Charges. Prior to FERC orders issued in November 2004, ComEd collected through and out (T&O) charges for energy flowing across ComEds transmission system. Charges collected as the transmission owner were recorded in operating revenues. In addition after ComEd joined PJM on May 1, 2004, PJM allocated T&O collections to ComEd as a load serving entity. The collections received as a load serving entity were recorded as a decrease to purchased power expense. See Note 5 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for more information on T&O charges.
Purchased Power and Fuel Expense. The changes in Energy Deliverys purchased power and fuel expense for 2004 compared to 2003 consisted of the following:
Total | ||||||||||||
increase | ||||||||||||
Electric | Gas | (decrease) | ||||||||||
Volume |
$ | 163 | $ | (2 | ) | $ | 161 | |||||
PJM transmission |
149 | | 149 | |||||||||
Prices |
11 | 111 | 122 | |||||||||
PJM administrative fees |
15 | | 15 | |||||||||
Customer choice |
(165 | ) | | (165 | ) | |||||||
Weather |
(84 | ) | (15 | ) | (99 | ) | ||||||
T&O Charges |
(22 | ) | | (22 | ) | |||||||
Other |
(13 | ) | 15 | 2 | ||||||||
Increase in purchased power and fuel expense |
$ | 54 | $ | 109 | $ | 163 | ||||||
Volume. ComEds and PECOs purchased power and fuel expense increased due to increases, exclusive of the effects of weather and customer choice, in the number of customers and average usage per customer, generally across all customer classes.
PJM Transmission. Energy Deliverys transmission revenues and purchased power expense each increased by $164 million in 2004 relative to 2003 due to ComEds May 1, 2004 entry into PJM, partially offset by $15 million of lower transmission revenues and expenses at PECO. See Operating Revenues above.
PJM Administrative Fees. ComEd fully integrated into PJM on May 1, 2004.
Prices. Energy Deliverys purchased power expense increased due to a change in the mix of average pricing related to ComEds and PECOs PPAs with Generation. Fuel expense for gas increased due to higher gas prices. See Operating Revenues above.
Customer Choice. An increase in customer switching resulted in a reduction of purchased power expense, primarily due to ComEds non-residential customers electing to purchase energy from an alternative electric supplier and PECOs residential customers selecting or being assigned to purchase energy from an alternative electric supplier.
Weather. Energy Deliverys purchased power and fuel expense decreased due to unfavorable weather conditions.
19
T &O Charges. Prior to FERC orders issued in November 2004, ComEd collected through and out (T&O) charges for energy flowing across ComEds transmission system. Charges collected as the transmission owner were recorded in operating revenues. In addition after ComEd joined PJM on May 1, 2004, PJM allocated T&O collections to ComEd as a load serving entity. The collections received as a load serving entity were recorded as a decrease to purchased power expense. See Note 5 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for more information on T&O charges.
Operating and Maintenance Expense. The changes in operating and maintenance expense for 2004 compared to 2003 consisted of the following:
Increase (decrease) | ||||
Severance and severance-related expenses |
$ | (132 | ) | |
Charge recorded at ComEd in 2003 (a) |
(41 | ) | ||
Payroll expense (b) |
(36 | ) | ||
Incremental storm costs |
(21 | ) | ||
Contractors |
(18 | ) | ||
Automated meter reading system implementation costs at PECO in 2003 |
(16 | ) | ||
Allowance for uncollectible accounts expense |
(13 | ) | ||
FERC annual fees (c) |
(11 | ) | ||
Environmental charges |
(10 | ) | ||
Corporate allocations (d) |
77 | |||
Other |
(4 | ) | ||
Decrease in operating and maintenance expense |
$ | (225 | ) | |
(a) | In 2003, ComEd reached an agreement with various Illinois retail market participants and other interested parties. | |
(b) | Energy Delivery had fewer employees in 2004 compared to 2003. | |
(c) | After joining PJM on May 1, 2004, ComEd is no longer directly charged annual fees by the FERC. PJM pays the annual FERC fees. | |
(d) | Higher corporate allocations primarily result from centralization of information technology, supply, human resources, communications, and finance functions into BSC from all of the Exelon operating companies, and changes in the corporate governance allocation calculation. Corporate governance allocations increased overall as a result of higher centralized costs distributed out of BSC, the sale of the Enterprises companies resulting in Energy Delivery comprising a greater base percentage of Exelon, and an SEC-mandated change to the methodology used to allocate Exelons corporate governance costs. |
Depreciation and Amortization Expense. The increase in depreciation and amortization expense was primarily due to increased competitive transition charge amortization of $31 million at PECO and increased depreciation of $22 million due to capital additions across Energy Delivery. In January 2005, PECOs Board of Directors approved the implementation of a new customer information and billing system as part of a broader Energy Delivery systems strategy. The approval of this new system will result in the accelerated depreciation of PECOs current system, which is expected to result in additional annual depreciation expense in 2005 and 2006 of $15 million and $8 million, respectively, relative to 2004 levels. If additional system changes are approved, additional accelerated depreciation may be required.
Taxes Other Than Income. The increase in taxes other than income reflects increases at PECO and ComEd of $63 million and $24 million, respectively. The increase at PECO was primarily attributable to a $58 million reduction of real estate tax accruals during 2003 and $12 million related to the reversal of a use tax accrual in 2003 resulting from an audit settlement, partially offset by $4 million of lower payroll taxes in 2004. The increase at ComEd was primarily attributable to a $25 million credit in 2003 for use tax payments for periods prior to the PECO / Unicom Merger and a refund of $5 million for Illinois Electricity Distribution taxes in 2003 partially offset by a refund of $8 million for Illinois Electricity Distribution taxes in 2004.
Interest Expense. The reduction in interest expense was primarily due to scheduled principal payments, debt retirements and prepayments, and refinancings at lower rates.
20
Distributions on Preferred Securities of Subsidiaries. Effective July 1, 2003, upon the adoption of FIN 46 and effective December 31, 2003, upon the adoption of FIN 46-R, ComEd and PECO deconsolidated their financing trusts (see Note 1 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements). ComEd and PECO no longer record distributions on mandatorily redeemable preferred securities, but record interest expense to affiliates related to their obligations to the financing trusts.
Equity in Losses of Unconsolidated Affiliates. During 2004, ComEd and PECO recorded $19 million and $25 million, respectively, of equity in net losses of subsidiaries as a result of ComEd and PECO deconsolidating their financing trusts.
Other, net. The change in other, net is primarily due to Exelons initiation in 2004 of an accelerated liability management plan at ComEd that resulted in the retirement of approximately $1.2 billion of long-term debt, including $1.0 billion prior to its maturity and $206 million at maturity. ComEd recorded charges of $130 million associated with the retirement of debt under the plan. The components of these charges included the following: $86 million related to prepayment premiums; $12 million related to net unamortized premiums, discounts and debt issuance costs; $24 million of losses on reacquired debt previously deferred as regulatory assets; and $12 million related to settled cash-flow interest-rate swaps previously deferred as regulatory assets partially offset by $4 million of unamortized gain on settled fair value interest-rate swaps.
21
Energy Delivery Operating Statistics and Revenue Detail
Energy Deliverys electric sales statistics and revenue detail were as follows:
Retail Deliveries (in GWhs) (a) | 2004 | 2003 | Variance | % Change | ||||||||||||
Full
service (b) |
||||||||||||||||
Residential |
36,812 | 37,564 | (752 | ) | (2.0 | %) | ||||||||||
Small commercial & industrial |
26,914 | 28,165 | (1,251 | ) | (4.4 | %) | ||||||||||
Large commercial & industrial |
20,969 | 20,660 | 309 | 1.5 | % | |||||||||||
Public authorities & electric railroads |
5,135 | 6,022 | (887 | ) | (14.7 | %) | ||||||||||
Total full service |
89,830 | 92,411 | (2,581 | ) | (2.8 | %) | ||||||||||
Delivery
only (c) |
||||||||||||||||
Residential |
2,158 | 900 | 1,258 | 139.8 | % | |||||||||||
Small commercial & industrial |
8,794 | 7,461 | 1,333 | 17.9 | % | |||||||||||
Large commercial & industrial |
13,182 | 10,689 | 2,493 | 23.3 | % | |||||||||||
Public authorities & electric railroads |
1,410 | 1,402 | 8 | 0.6 | % | |||||||||||
25,544 | 20,452 | 5,092 | 24.9 | % | ||||||||||||
PPO (ComEd only) |
||||||||||||||||
Small commercial & industrial |
3,594 | 3,318 | 276 | 8.3 | % | |||||||||||
Large commercial & industrial |
4,223 | 4,348 | (125 | ) | (2.9 | %) | ||||||||||
Public authorities & electric railroads |
1,670 | 1,925 | (255 | ) | (13.2 | %) | ||||||||||
9,487 | 9,591 | (104 | ) | (1.1 | %) | |||||||||||
Total delivery only and PPO |
35,031 | 30,043 | 4,988 | 16.6 | % | |||||||||||
Total retail deliveries |
124,861 | 122,454 | 2,407 | 2.0 | % | |||||||||||
(a) | One gigawatthour is the equivalent of one million kilowatthours (kWh). |
|
(b) | Full service reflects deliveries to customers taking electric service under tariffed rates. | |
(c) | Delivery only service reflects customers electing to receive electric generation service from an alternative electric supplier, which rates include a distribution charge and a CTC. |
22
Electric Revenues | 2004 | 2003 | Variance | % Change | ||||||||||||
Full
service (a) |
||||||||||||||||
Residential |
$ | 3,612 | $ | 3,715 | $ | (103 | ) | (2.8 | %) | |||||||
Small commercial & industrial |
2,360 | 2,421 | (61 | ) | (2.5 | %) | ||||||||||
Large commercial & industrial |
1,403 | 1,394 | 9 | 0.6 | % | |||||||||||
Public authorities & electric railroads |
341 | 396 | (55 | ) | (13.9 | %) | ||||||||||
Total full service |
7,716 | 7,926 | (210 | ) | (2.6 | %) | ||||||||||
Delivery
only (b) |
||||||||||||||||
Residential |
164 | 65 | 99 | 152.3 | % | |||||||||||
Small commercial & industrial |
220 | 214 | 6 | 2.8 | % | |||||||||||
Large commercial & industrial |
190 | 196 | (6 | ) | (3.1 | %) | ||||||||||
Public authorities & electric railroads |
28 | 33 | (5 | ) | (15.2 | %) | ||||||||||
602 | 508 | 94 | 18.5 | % | ||||||||||||
PPO
(ComEd only) (c) |
||||||||||||||||
Small commercial & industrial |
246 | 225 | 21 | 9.3 | % | |||||||||||
Large commercial & industrial |
240 | 240 | | | ||||||||||||
Public authorities & electric railroads |
92 | 103 | (11 | ) | (10.7 | %) | ||||||||||
578 | 568 | 10 | 1.8 | % | ||||||||||||
Total delivery only and PPO |
1,180 | 1,076 | 104 | 9.7 | % | |||||||||||
Total electric retail revenues |
8,896 | 9,002 | (106 | ) | (1.2 | %) | ||||||||||
Wholesale and miscellaneous revenues (d) |
646 | 555 | 91 | 16.4 | % | |||||||||||
Total electric revenues |
$ | 9,542 | $ | 9,557 | $ | (15 | ) | (0.2 | %) | |||||||
(a) | Full service revenue reflects deliveries to customers taking electric service under tariffed rates, which include the cost of energy and the delivery cost of the transmission and the distribution of the energy. PECOs tariffed rates also include a CTC. See Note 5 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion of CTC. | |
(b) | Delivery only revenue reflects revenue under tariffed rates from customers electing to receive electric generation service from an alternative electric supplier, which rates include a distribution charge and a CTC. Prior to ComEds full integration into PJM on May 1, 2004, ComEds transmission charges received from alternative electric suppliers are included in wholesale and miscellaneous revenue. | |
(c) | Revenues from customers choosing ComEds PPO include an energy charge at market rates, transmission and distribution charges, and a CTC. | |
(d) | Wholesale and miscellaneous revenues include transmission revenues (including revenues from PJM), sales to municipalities and other wholesale energy sales. |
Energy Deliverys gas sales statistics and revenue detail were as follows:
Deliveries to customers in million cubic feet (mmcf) | 2004 | 2003 | Variance | % Change | ||||||||||||
Retail sales |
59,949 | 61,858 | (1,909 | ) | (3.1 | %) | ||||||||||
Transportation |
27,148 | 26,404 | 744 | 2.8 | % | |||||||||||
Total |
87,097 | 88,262 | (1,165 | ) | (1.3 | %) | ||||||||||
Revenues | 2004 | 2003 | Variance | % Change | ||||||||||||
Retail sales |
$ | 702 | $ | 609 | $ | 93 | 15.3 | % | ||||||||
Transportation |
18 | 18 | | | ||||||||||||
Resales and other |
28 | 18 | 10 | 55.6 | % | |||||||||||
Total |
$ | 748 | $ | 645 | $ | 103 | 16.0 | % | ||||||||
23
Results of Operations Generation
As previously described, effective January 1, 2004, Exelon contributed its interest in Exelon Energy Company to Generation. For comparative discussion and analysis, Exelon Energy Companys results of operations have been included within the Generation segment results of operations as if this transfer had occurred on January 1, 2003.
Favorable | ||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | (Unfavorable) | ||||||||||
OPERATING REVENUES |
$ | 7,703 | $ | 8,586 | $ | (883 | ) | |||||
OPERATING EXPENSES |
||||||||||||
Purchased power |
2,307 | 3,620 | 1,313 | |||||||||
Fuel |
1,704 | 1,930 | 226 | |||||||||
Operating and maintenance |
2,201 | 1,874 | (327 | ) | ||||||||
Impairment of Boston Generating, LLC long-lived assets |
| 945 | 945 | |||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
286 | 200 | (86 | ) | ||||||||
Taxes other than income |
166 | 120 | (46 | ) | ||||||||
Total operating expense |
6,664 | 8,689 | 2,025 | |||||||||
OPERATING INCOME (LOSS) |
1,039 | (103 | ) | 1,142 | ||||||||
OTHER INCOME AND DEDUCTIONS |
||||||||||||
Interest expense |
(103 | ) | (88 | ) | (15 | ) | ||||||
Equity in earnings (losses) of unconsolidated affiliates |
(14 | ) | 49 | (63 | ) | |||||||
Other, net |
130 | (268 | ) | 398 | ||||||||
Total other income and deductions |
13 | (307 | ) | 320 | ||||||||
INCOME (LOSS) FROM CONTINUING OPERATIONS BEFORE
INCOME TAXES AND MINORITY INTEREST |
1,052 | (410 | ) | 1,462 | ||||||||
INCOME TAXES |
401 | (176 | ) | (577 | ) | |||||||
INCOME FROM CONTINUING OPERATIONS BEFORE
MINORITY INTEREST |
651 | (234 | ) | 885 | ||||||||
MINORITY INTEREST |
6 | (4 | ) | 10 | ||||||||
INCOME FROM CONTINUING OPERATIONS |
657 | (238 | ) | 895 | ||||||||
LOSS FROM DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS (net of income taxes) |
(16 | ) | (21 | ) | 5 | |||||||
INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF
CHANGES IN ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES |
641 | (259 | ) | 900 | ||||||||
CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF CHANGES IN ACCOUNTING
PRINCIPLES (net of income taxes) |
32 | 108 | (76 | ) | ||||||||
NET INCOME (LOSS) |
$ | 673 | $ | (151 | ) | $ | 824 | |||||
Net Income (Loss). Generations net income in 2004 increased from 2003 due to a number of factors. The increase in Generations 2004 net income was driven primarily by charges incurred in 2003 for the impairment of the long-lived assets of Boston Generating of $945 million (before income taxes) and the impairment and other transaction-related charges of $280 million (before income taxes) related to Generations investment in Sithe. Also, 2004 results were favorably affected by the acquisition of the remaining 50% of AmerGen and an increase in revenue, net of purchased power and fuel expense,
24
primarily due to the decrease in average realized costs resulting from the increased success in the hedging program of fuel costs in 2004.
Cumulative effect of changes in accounting principles recorded in 2004 included a benefit of $32 million, net of income taxes, related to the adoption of FIN 46-R and in 2003 included income of $108 million, net of income taxes related to the of adoption of SFAS No. 143. See Note 1 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion of these effects.
Operating Revenues. Operating revenues decreased in 2004 as compared to 2003, primarily as a result of the adoption of EITF 03-11. The adoption of EITF 03-11 resulted in a decrease in revenues of $980 million in 2004 as compared with the prior year. Generations sales in 2004 and 2003 were as follows:
Revenues (in millions) | 2004 | 2003 | Variance | % Change | ||||||||||||
Electric sales to affiliates |
$ | 3,749 | $ | 3,831 | $ | (82 | ) | (2.1 | %) | |||||||
Wholesale and retail electric sales |
3,227 | 4,107 | (880 | ) | (21.4 | %) | ||||||||||
Total energy sales revenues |
6,976 | 7,938 | (962 | ) | (12.1 | %) | ||||||||||
Retail gas sales |
448 | 414 | 34 | 8.2 | % | |||||||||||
Trading portfolio |
| 1 | (1 | ) | (100.0 | %) | ||||||||||
Other revenue (a) |
279 | 233 | 46 | 19.7 | % | |||||||||||
Total revenues |
$ | 7,703 | $ | 8,586 | $ | (883 | ) | (10.3 | %) | |||||||
Sales (in GWhs) | 2004 | 2003 | Variance | % Change | ||||||||||||
Electric sales to affiliates |
110,465 | 112,688 | (2,223 | ) | (2.0 | %) | ||||||||||
Wholesale and retail electric sales |
92,134 | 112,816 | (20,682 | ) | (18.3 | %) | ||||||||||
Total sales |
202,599 | 225,504 | (22,905 | ) | (10.2 | %) | ||||||||||
(a) | Includes sales related to tolling agreements and fossil fuel sales. |
Trading volumes of 24,001 GWhs and 32,584 GWhs for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively, are not included in the table above. The decrease in trading volume is a result of reduced volumetric and VAR trading limits in 2004, which are set by the Exelon Risk Management Committee and approved by the Board of Directors.
Electric Sales to Affiliates. Sales to Energy Delivery declined $82 million in 2004 as compared to the prior year. The lower sales to Energy Delivery were primarily driven by cooler than normal summer weather and lower average transfer prices in 2004 compared to the prior year.
Wholesale and Retail Electric Sales. The changes in Generations wholesale and retail electric sales for the year ended December 31, 2004 compared to the same period in 2003, consisted of the following:
Generation | Increase (decrease) | |||
Effects of EITF 03-11 adoption (a) |
$ | (966 | ) | |
Sale of Boston Generating |
(370 | ) | ||
Addition of AmerGen operations |
189 | |||
Other operations |
267 | |||
Decrease in wholesale and retail electric sales |
$ | (880 | ) | |
(a) | Does not include $14 million of EITF 03-11 reclassifications related to fuel sales that are included in other revenues. |
The adoption of EITF 03-11 on January 1, 2004 resulted in the netting of certain revenues and the associated purchased power and fuel expense in 2004. The sale of Boston Generating in May 2004 resulted in less revenues from this entity in 2004 compared to the prior year. The acquisition of AmerGen resulted in increased market and retail electric sales of approximately $189 million in 2004.
25
The remaining increase in wholesale and retail electric sales was primarily due to higher volumes sold to the market at overall higher prices. The increase in market prices was primarily driven by higher coal prices in the Midwest region and higher oil and gas prices in the Mid-Atlantic region.
Retail Gas Sales. Retail gas sales increased $34 million as a result of higher natural gas prices in 2004.
Other revenues. Other revenues include increased sales from tolling agreements, offset by a decrease in fossil fuel revenues.
Purchased Power and Fuel Expense. Generations supply of sales in 2004 and 2003, excluding the trading portfolio, was as follows:
Supply of Sales (in GWhs) | 2004 | 2003 | % Change | |||||||||
Nuclear generation (a) |
136,621 | 117,502 | 16.3 | % | ||||||||
Purchases non-trading portfolio ( b) |
48,968 | 83,692 | (41.5 | %) | ||||||||
Fossil and hydroelectric generation (c, d) |
17,010 | 24,310 | (30.0 | %) | ||||||||
Total supply |
202,599 | 225,504 | (10.2 | %) | ||||||||
(a) | Excludes AmerGen for 2003. AmerGen generated 20,135 GWhs during the year ended December 31, 2004. | |
(b) | Sales in 2004 do not include 25,464 GWhs that were netted with purchased power GWhs as a result of the reclassification of certain hedging activities in accordance with EITF 03-11. Includes PPAs with AmerGen, which represented 12,667 GWhs in 2003. | |
(c) | Fossil and hydroelectric supply mix changed as a result of decreased fossil fuel generation due to the sale of Boston Generating in May 2004. | |
(d) | Excludes Sithe and Generations investment in TEG and TEP. |
The changes in Generations purchased power and fuel expense for the year ended December 31, 2004 compared to the same period in 2003, consisted of the following:
Generation | Increase (decrease) | |||
Effects of the adoption of EITF 03-11 |
$ | (980 | ) | |
Addition of AmerGen operations |
(344 | ) | ||
Sale of Boston Generating |
(290 | ) | ||
Midwest Generation |
(122 | ) | ||
Price |
(13 | ) | ||
Mark-to-market adjustments on hedging activity |
(14 | ) | ||
Volume |
267 | |||
Other |
(43 | ) | ||
Decrease in purchased power and fuel expense |
$ | (1,539 | ) | |
Adoption of EITF 03-11. The adoption of EITF 03-11 resulted in a decrease in purchased power and fuel expense of $980 million.
Addition of AmerGen Operations. As a result of Generations acquisition of the remaining 50% interest in AmerGen in December 2003, purchased power decreased $379 million. In prior periods, Generation reported energy purchased from AmerGen as purchased power expense. The decrease in purchased power was partially offset by an increase of $35 million related to AmerGens nuclear fuel expense.
Sale of Boston Generating. The decrease in fuel and purchased power expense for Boston Generating is due primarily to the sale of the business in May 2004.
26
Midwest Generation. The volume of purchased power acquired from Midwest Generation declined in 2004 as a result of Generation exercising its option to reduce the capacity purchased from Midwest Generation, as announced in 2003.
Price. The decrease reflects the forward hedging of fuel at lower costs than 2003 realized costs.
Hedging Activity. Mark-to-market losses on hedging activities at Generation were $2 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 compared to losses of $16 million for 2003. Hedging activities in 2004 relating to Boston Generating operations accounted for a gain of $4 million and hedging activities relating to other Generation operations in 2004 accounted for losses of $6 million.
Volume. Generation experienced increases in purchased power and fuel expense due to increased market and retail electric sales throughout its various sales regions.
Other. Other decreases in purchased power and fuel expense were primarily due to lower transmission expense resulting from reduced inter-region transmission charges, primarily associated with ComEds integration into PJM.
Generations average margins per megawatt hour (MWh) sold for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 were as follows:
($/MWh) | 2004 | 2003 | % Change | |||||||||
Average electric revenue |
||||||||||||
Electric sales to affiliates |
$ | 33.94 | $ | 34.00 | (0.2 | %) | ||||||
Wholesale and retail electric sales |
35.03 | 36.40 | (3.8 | %) | ||||||||
Total excluding the trading portfolio |
34.43 | 35.20 | (2.2 | %) | ||||||||
Average electric supply cost excluding the
trading portfolio (a) |
$ | 17.60 | $ | 24.61 | (28.5 | %) | ||||||
Average margin excluding the trading portfolio |
$ | 16.83 | $ | 10.59 | 58.9 | % | ||||||
(a) | Average electric supply cost includes purchased power, and fuel costs associated with electric sales and PPAs with AmerGen in 2003. Average electric supply cost does not include purchased power and fuel cost associated with retail gas sales. |
Impairment of the Long-Lived Assets of Boston Generating. In connection with the decision to transition out of the ownership of Boston Generating during the third quarter of 2003, Generation recorded a long-lived asset impairment charge of $945 million ($573 million net of income taxes). See Note 2 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion of the sale of Generations ownership interest in Boston Generating.
Operating and Maintenance Expense. The changes in operating and maintenance expense for 2004 compared to 2003 consisted of the following:
Generation | Increase (decrease) | |||
Addition of AmerGen operations |
$ | 331 | ||
Decommissioning-related costs (a) |
50 | |||
Refueling outage costs (b) |
50 | |||
Pension, payroll and benefit costs, primarily associated with The Exelon Way |
(84 | ) | ||
DOE Settlement (c) |
(52 | ) | ||
Sale of Boston Generating |
(12 | ) | ||
Other |
44 | |||
Increase in operating and maintenance expense |
$ | 327 | ||
(a) | Includes $40 million due to AmerGen asset retirement obligation accretion not included in 2003. | |
(b) | Includes refueling outage cost of $43 million at AmerGen not included in 2003. | |
(c) | See Note 14 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion of the spent nuclear fuel storage settlement agreement with the DOE. |
27
The increase in operating and maintenance expense is primarily due to the inclusion of AmerGen in Generations consolidated results for 2004. Decommissioning-related costs increased primarily due to the inclusion of AmerGen in 2004 compared to the prior year. Accretion expense includes accretion of the asset retirement obligation and adjustments to offset the earnings impacts of certain decommissioning related activities revenues earned from ComEd and PECO, income taxes and depreciation of the ARC asset to zero. The increase in operating and maintenance expense was partially offset by reductions in payroll-related costs due to the implementation of the programs associated with The Exelon Way, the sale of Boston Generating in May 2004 and the settlement with the DOE to reimburse Generation for costs associated with storage of spent nuclear fuel.
Nuclear fleet operating data and purchased power costs data for the year ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 were as follows:
Generation | 2004 | 2003 | ||||||
Nuclear fleet capacity factor (a) |
93.5 | % | 93.4 | % | ||||
Nuclear fleet production cost per MWh (a) |
$ | 12.43 | $ | 12.53 | ||||
Average purchased power cost for wholesale operations per MWh (b) |
$ | 47.11 | $ | 43.25 | ||||
(a) | Includes AmerGen and excludes Salem, which is operated PSEG Nuclear. |
|
(b) | Includes PPAs with AmerGen in 2003. |
The higher nuclear capacity factor and lower nuclear production costs are primarily due to ten fewer unplanned outages which offset the impact of one additional planned refuel outage. The lower production cost in 2004 as compared to 2003 is primarily due to the lower fuel costs and the impact of the spent fuel storage cost settlement agreement with the DOE which offset the added cost for one additional planned refuel outage and costs associated with the Dresden generator repairs during outages in the fourth quarter of 2004.
In 2004 as compared to 2003, the Quad Cities Units intermittently operated at pre-Extended Power Uprate (EPU) generation levels due to performance issues with their steam dryers. Generation plans additional expenditures to ensure safe and reliable operations at the EPU output levels by mid-2005.
Depreciation and Amortization. The increase in depreciation and amortization expense in 2004 as compared to 2003 was primarily due to the immediate expensing of an ARC, totaling $49 million, recorded in 2004 for which no useful life remains. The ARC was originally recorded in accordance with SFAS No. 143, which requires the establishment of an asset to offset the impact of an increased asset retirement obligation (ARO). See Note 14 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for more information on the 2004 update to the ARO and ARC. The remaining increase is due to capital additions and the consolidation of AmerGen. These increase were partially offset by a decrease in depreciation expense related to the Boston Generating facilities, which were sold in May 2004.
Effective Income Tax Rate. The effective income tax rate from continuing operations was 38% for 2004 compared to 43% for 2003. The decrease in the effective rate was primarily attributable to income taxes associated with nuclear decommissioning trust activity, income tax deductions related to non-taxable employee benefits and the dilution of the permanent income tax benefits due to the increase in pre-tax income in 2004.
Discontinued Operations. In 2004, the loss from discontinued operations included Sithes results from April 1, 2004 through the end of the year and the results from AllEnergy, a former subsidiary of Exelon Energy. Generation had accounted for the investment in Sithe as an unconsolidated equity method investment prior to its consolidation on March 31, 2004 pursuant to FIN 46-R. The loss from discontinued operations in 2003 included the results of AllEnergy. Sithes net impact to Generation was a loss of $19 million in 2004, while AllEnergy produced $3 million of net income in 2004. In 2003, AllEnergy had a net loss of $21 million. See Note 26 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information.
28
Results of Operations Exelon Corporation
Year Ended December 31, 2003 Compared To Year Ended December 31, 2002
Significant Operating Trends Exelon
Favorable | ||||||||||||
(unfavorable) | ||||||||||||
Exelon Corporation | 2003 | 2002 | variance | |||||||||
Operating revenues |
$ | 15,148 | $ | 14,060 | $ | 1,088 | ||||||
Purchased power and fuel expense |
6,194 | 5,090 | (1,104 | ) | ||||||||
Impairment of Boston Generating, LLC long-lived assets |
945 | | (945 | ) | ||||||||
Operating and maintenance expense |
3,915 | 3,655 | (260 | ) | ||||||||
Operating income |
2,409 | 3,280 | (871 | ) | ||||||||
Other income and deductions |
(1,123 | ) | (587 | ) | (536 | ) | ||||||
Income from continuing operations before income taxes and
minority interest |
1,286 | 2,693 | (1,407 | ) | ||||||||
Income taxes |
389 | 1,000 | 611 | |||||||||
Income from continuing operations |
892 | 1,690 | (798 | ) | ||||||||
Loss from discontinued operations, net of income taxes |
(99 | ) | (20 | ) | (79 | ) | ||||||
Income before cumulative effect of changes in
accounting principles |
793 | 1,670 | (877 | ) | ||||||||
Net income |
905 | 1,440 | (535 | ) | ||||||||
Diluted earnings per share |
1.38 | 2.22 | (0.84 | ) | ||||||||
Net Income. Net income for 2003 reflects income of $112 million, net of income taxes, for the adoption of SFAS No. 143, while net income for 2002 reflects a $230 million charge, net of income taxes, as a result of the adoption of SFAS No. 142. See Note 1 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding the adoptions of SFAS No. 143 and SFAS No. 142.
Operating Revenues. Operating revenues increased in 2003 primarily due to increased market sales at Generation due to generating assets acquired in 2002 and higher wholesale market prices in 2003. Total market sales at Generation, excluding the trading portfolio, increased from 88,985 GWhs in 2002 to 112,816 GWhs in 2003, and the average revenue per MWh on Generations market sales, excluding the trading portfolio, increased from $32.36 in 2002 to $35.20 in 2003. This increase in operating revenues was partially offset by a decrease in Energy Deliverys revenues of $255 million primarily due to unfavorable weather impacts and an increase in customers selecting an alternative electric supplier or ComEds PPO. Revenues also decreased by over $215 million primarily due to the sale of InfraSource during the third quarter of 2003. See further discussion of operating revenues by segment below.
Purchased Power and Fuel Expense. Purchased power and fuel expense increased in 2003 primarily due to generating assets acquired in 2002 and higher market prices for purchased power in 2003. The average cost per MWh supplied by Generation, excluding the trading portfolio, increased from $22.51 in 2002 to $25.48 in 2003 due to increased fossil generation and increased purchased power at higher market prices. Fossil and hydroelectric generation represented 11% of Generations total supply in 2003 compared to 6% in 2002. See further discussion of purchased power and fuel expense by segment below.
Impairment of the Long-Lived Assets of Boston Generating. Generation recorded a $945 million charge (before income taxes) during 2003 to impair the long-lived assets of Boston Generating.
Operating and Maintenance Expense. Operating and maintenance expense increased in 2003 primarily due to a change in the accounting methodology for nuclear decommissioning, severance and severance-related costs associated with The Exelon Way, and increased costs at Generation associated with generating assets acquired in 2002. Partially offsetting these increases was an overall reduction in operating and maintenance expenses at InfraSource, due to its sale during the third quarter of 2003. See further discussion of operating and maintenance expenses by segment below.
29
Operating Income. The decrease in operating income, exclusive of the changes in operating revenues, purchased power and fuel expense, Boston Generating long-lived asset impairment charge and operating and maintenance expense discussed above, was primarily due to a decrease of $215 million in depreciation and amortization expense primarily due to the adoption of SFAS No. 143 and lower depreciation and amortization expense in the Energy Delivery segment. In addition, taxes other than income also decreased by $135 million primarily due to a reduction in reserves for real estate taxes within the Energy Delivery and Generation segments.
Other Income and Deductions. Other income and deductions changed primarily due to impairment and other transaction-related charges of $280 million recorded in 2003 related to Generations investment in Sithe. Interest expense decreased 9% from $955 million in 2002 to $873 million in 2003 primarily due to less outstanding debt and refinancing of existing debt at lower interest rates at Energy Delivery partially offset by increased interest expense at Generation due to debt related to 2002 acquisitions and reduced capitalized interest in 2003. In 2002, Enterprises recorded a gain on the sale of its investment in AT&T Wireless of $198 million (before income taxes).
Effective Income Tax Rate. The effective income tax rate from continuing operations was 30% for 2003 compared to 37% for 2002. The decrease in the effective rate was primarily attributable to a decrease in state income taxes, net of Federal income tax benefit.
Discontinued Operations. Certain qualifying components of Enterprises and AllEnergy for 2003 and 2002 have been classified as discontinued operations within the Consolidated Statements of Income. A discussion of the results of AllEnergy is included in the Generation segment discussion below. Enterprises after-tax loss from discontinued operations increased $48 million from $30 million in 2002 to $78 million in 2003, primarily due to a reduction in revenues, only partially offset by a decrease in operating and maintenance expenses. Operating and maintenance expense in 2003 included impairment charges of $14 million (before income taxes) related to the classification of the assets and liabilities of Exelon Services as held for sale and goodwill impairment charges of $24 million (before income taxes) related to the remaining goodwill within the Exelon Services reporting unit.
30
Results of Operations by Business Segment
Historically, Exelon had presented Enterprises as a segment. Exelon sold or unwound substantially all components of Enterprises in 2004 and 2003. As a result, Enterprises is no longer reported as a segment and is included within the other category within the results of operations by business segment below. Other consists of corporate operations, including Exelon Business Services Company, Enterprises and investments in synthetic fuel-producing facilities.
The comparisons of 2003 and 2002 operating results and other statistical information set forth below reflect intercompany transactions, which are eliminated in the consolidated financial statements.
Transfer of Exelon Energy Company from Enterprises to Generation. Effective January 1, 2004, Enterprises competitive retail sales business, Exelon Energy Company, became part of Generation. The information for 2003 and 2002 related to the Generation segment discussed below has been adjusted to reflect the transfer of Exelon Energy Company to the Generation segment. Exelon Energy Companys 2003 and 2002 results were as follows:
2003 | 2002 | |||||||
Total revenues |
$ | 660 | $ | 494 | ||||
Intersegment revenues |
4 | 8 | ||||||
Operating revenues and purchased power from affiliates |
200 | 235 | ||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
1 | 15 | ||||||
Operating expenses |
648 | 517 | ||||||
Interest expense |
1 | 3 | ||||||
Income (loss) from continuing operations before income taxes |
6 | (24 | ) | |||||
Income taxes |
3 | 8 | ||||||
Income (loss) from continuing operations |
3 | (32 | ) | |||||
(Loss) Income from discontinued operations, net of income taxes |
(21 | ) | 10 | |||||
Cumulative effect of changes in accounting principles |
| (11 | ) | |||||
Net loss |
(18 | ) | (33 | ) | ||||
Income from Continuing Operations
Favorable | ||||||||||||
(unfavorable) | ||||||||||||
2003 | 2002 | variance | ||||||||||
Energy Delivery |
$ | 1,170 | $ | 1,268 | $ | (98 | ) | |||||
Generation |
(238 | ) | 355 | (593 | ) | |||||||
Other |
(40 | ) | 67 | (107 | ) | |||||||
Total |
$ | 892 | $ | 1,690 | $ | (798 | ) | |||||
Income (Loss) Before Cumulative Effect of Changes in Accounting Principles by Business Segment
Favorable | ||||||||||||
(unfavorable) | ||||||||||||
2003 | 2002 | variance | ||||||||||
Energy Delivery |
$ | 1,170 | $ | 1,268 | $ | (98 | ) | |||||
Generation |
(259 | ) | 365 | (624 | ) | |||||||
Other |
(118 | ) | 37 | (155 | ) | |||||||
Total |
$ | 793 | $ | 1,670 | $ | (877 | ) | |||||
31
Net Income (Loss) by Business Segment
Favorable | ||||||||||||
(unfavorable) | ||||||||||||
2003 | 2002 | variance | ||||||||||
Energy Delivery |
$ | 1,175 | $ | 1,268 | $ | (93 | ) | |||||
Generation |
(151 | ) | 367 | (518 | ) | |||||||
Other |
(119 | ) | (195 | ) | 76 | |||||||
Total |
$ | 905 | $ | 1,440 | $ | (535 | ) | |||||
Results of Operations Energy Delivery
Favorable | ||||||||||||
(unfavorable) | ||||||||||||
2003 | 2002 | variance | ||||||||||
OPERATING REVENUES |
$ | 10,202 | $ | 10,457 | $ | (255 | ) | |||||
OPERATING EXPENSES |
||||||||||||
Purchased power and fuel expense |
4,597 | 4,602 | 5 | |||||||||
Operating and maintenance |
1,669 | 1,486 | (183 | ) | ||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
873 | 978 | 105 | |||||||||
Taxes other than income |
440 | 531 | 91 | |||||||||
Total operating expense |
7,579 | 7,597 | 18 | |||||||||
OPERATING INCOME |
2,623 | 2,860 | (237 | ) | ||||||||
OTHER INCOME AND DEDUCTIONS |
||||||||||||
Interest expense |
(747 | ) | (854 | ) | 107 | |||||||
Distributions on mandatorily
redeemable preferred securities |
(39 | ) | (45 | ) | 6 | |||||||
Equity in income of unconsolidated affiliates |
| 1 | (1 | ) | ||||||||
Other, net |
51 | 71 | (20 | ) | ||||||||
Total other income and deductions |
(735 | ) | (827 | ) | 92 | |||||||
INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES AND CUMULATIVE EFFECT
OF A CHANGE IN ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLE |
1,888 | 2,033 | (145 | ) | ||||||||
INCOME TAXES |
718 | 765 | 47 | |||||||||
INCOME BEFORE CUMULATIVE EFFECT
OF A CHANGE IN ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLE |
1,170 | 1,268 | (98 | ) | ||||||||
CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF A CHANGE IN ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLE |
5 | | 5 | |||||||||
NET INCOME |
$ | 1,175 | $ | 1,268 | $ | (93 | ) | |||||
Net Income. Energy Deliverys net income in 2003 decreased primarily due to increased operating and maintenance expense resulting from severance and curtailment charges associated with The Exelon Way, a charge at ComEd associated with a regulatory settlement, lower revenues, net of purchased power primarily attributable to weather and higher purchased power prices, partially offset by reductions in depreciation and amortization expense, taxes other than income, and interest expense.
32
Operating Revenues. The changes in Energy Deliverys operating revenues for 2003 compared to 2002 consisted of the following:
Total | ||||||||||||
increase | ||||||||||||
Energy Delivery | Electric | Gas | (decrease) | |||||||||
Customer choice |
$ | (167 | ) | $ | | $ | (167 | ) | ||||
Weather |
(229 | ) | 71 | (158 | ) | |||||||
Resales and other |
| (22 | ) | (22 | ) | |||||||
Rate changes and mix |
(58 | ) | 51 | (7 | ) | |||||||
Volume |
118 | (3 | ) | 115 | ||||||||
Other effects |
(15 | ) | (1 | ) | (16 | ) | ||||||
(Decrease) increase in operating revenues |
$ | (351 | ) | $ | 96 | $ | (255 | ) | ||||
Customer Choice. For 2003 and 2002, 25% and 21%, respectively, of energy delivered to Energy Deliverys retail customers was provided by an alternative electric supplier or under the ComEd PPO. The decrease in electric retail revenues attributable to customer choice included a decrease in revenues of $155 million from customers in Illinois electing to purchase energy from an alternative electric supplier and a decrease in revenues of $12 million from customers in Pennsylvania selecting or being assigned to an alternative electric generation supplier.
Weather. Energy Deliverys electric revenues were affected by cooler summer weather in 2003, partially offset by colder winter weather in the first quarter of 2003. Cooling degree-days in the ComEd and PECO service territories were 36% lower and 21% lower, respectively, in 2003 as compared to 2002. Heating degree-days in the ComEd and PECO service territories were 5% higher and 16% higher, respectively, in 2003 as compared to 2002.
Energy Deliverys gas revenues were affected by colder winter weather in the first quarter of 2003.
Resales and Other. Energy Deliverys gas revenues decreased as a result of a decrease in off-system sales, exchanges and capacity releases.
Rate Changes and Mix. Energy Deliverys electric revenues decreased $33 million at ComEd primarily due to decreased average energy rates under ComEds PPO as a result of lower wholesale market prices. Electric revenues decreased $25 million at PECO as a result of rate mix due to changes in monthly usage patterns in all customer classes during 2003 as compared to 2002.
Energy Deliverys gas revenues increased due to increases in rates through the purchased gas adjustment clause that became effective March 1, 2003, June 1, 2003 and December 1, 2003. The average purchased gas cost rate per million cubic feet for 2003 was 11% higher than the rate in 2002. PECOs purchased gas cost rates are subject to periodic adjustments by the PUC and are designed to recover from or refund to customers the difference between the actual cost of purchased gas and the amount included in rates.
Volume. Energy Deliverys electric revenues increased as a result of higher delivery volume, exclusive of the effects of weather and customer choice, due to an increased number of customers and increased usage per customer, primarily in the large and small commercial and industrial customer classes.
Other. The decrease was attributable to a reduction in wholesale revenues. This reduction reflects a $12 million reimbursement from Generation in 2002.
33
Purchased Power and Fuel Expense. The changes in Energy Deliverys purchased power and fuel expense for 2003 compared to 2002 consisted of the following:
Total | ||||||||||||
increase | ||||||||||||
Energy Delivery | Electric | Gas | (decrease) | |||||||||
Customer choice |
$ | (143 | ) | $ | | $ | (143 | ) | ||||
Weather |
(119 | ) | 49 | (70 | ) | |||||||
Resales and other |
| (28 | ) | (28 | ) | |||||||
Prices |
74 | 39 | 113 | |||||||||
Volume |
73 | 6 | 79 | |||||||||
Decommissioning |
62 | | 62 | |||||||||
Other |
(23 | ) | 5 | (18 | ) | |||||||
(Decrease) increase in purchased power
and fuel expense |
$ | (76 | ) | $ | 71 | $ | (5 | ) | ||||
Customer Choice. An increase in customer switching resulted in a reduction of purchased power expense, primarily due to ComEds non-residential customers electing to purchase energy from an alternative electric supplier or ComEds PPO and PECOs non-residential customers electing or being assigned to purchase energy from alternative energy suppliers.
Weather. Energy Deliverys purchased power and fuel expense decreased due to the impacts of cooler summer weather in 2003, partially offset by colder winter weather in the first quarter of 2003.
Resales and other. Energy Deliverys fuel expense decreased as a result of reduced resale transactions.
Prices. Energy Deliverys purchased power increased for electric due to an increase in the weighted average on-peak/off-peak cost of electricity at ComEd, and fuel expense for gas increased due to PECOs higher gas prices.
Volume. Energy Deliverys purchased power and fuel expense increased due to increases, exclusive of the effect of weather, in the number of customers and average usage per customer, primarily large and small commercial and industrial customers at ComEd and PECO.
Decommissioning. ComEd changed its presentation for accounting for decommissioning collections upon the adoption of SFAS No. 143 (see Note 14 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements). Decommissioning collections, which are remitted to Generation, were previously recorded as amortization expense and are recorded as purchased power expense in 2003.
Other. Energy Deliverys purchased power decreased due to additional energy billed in 2002 under the purchase power agreement (PPA) with Generation discussed in other operating revenues above.
34
Operating and Maintenance Expense. The changes in operating and maintenance expense for 2003 compared to 2002 consisted of the following:
Increase | ||||
Energy Delivery | (decrease) | |||
Severance, pension and postretirement benefit costs associated with The Exelon Way |
$ | 167 | ||
Charge recorded at ComEd in 2003 associated with a regulatory settlement (a) |
41 | |||
Increased storm costs |
36 | |||
Increased employee fringe benefits primarily due to increased health care costs |
23 | |||
Decreased payroll expense due to fewer employees |
(93 | ) | ||
Decreased costs associated with the initial implementation of automated meter reading services
at PECO in 2002 |
(13 | ) | ||
Other |
22 | |||
Increase in operating and maintenance expense |
$ | 183 | ||
(a) | For more information regarding the settlement, see Note 5 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. |
Depreciation and Amortization Expense. The reduction in depreciation and amortization expense was primarily due to a change in the accounting for nuclear decommissioning at ComEd, lower amortization of ComEds recoverable transition costs of $58 million and a $48 million reduction due to changes in ComEds depreciation rates in 2002, partially offset by increased depreciation of $30 million due to capital additions across Energy Delivery and increased competitive transition charge amortization of $28 million at PECO.
Taxes Other Than Income. The reduction in taxes other than income was primarily due to a reduction of real estate tax accruals recorded by PECO of $58 million during the third quarter of 2003 and a favorable settlement of coal use tax at ComEd of $25 million. See Note 20 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding the reduction of real estate tax accruals recorded by PECO.
Interest Expense. The reduction in interest expense was primarily due to refinancing existing debt at lower rates and the pay down of transitional trust notes.
35
Energy Delivery Operating Statistics and Revenue Detail
Energy Deliverys electric sales statistics and revenue detail were as follows:
Retail Deliveries (in GWhs) (a) | 2003 | 2002 | Variance | % Change | ||||||||||||
Full
service (b) |
||||||||||||||||
Residential |
37,564 | 37,839 | (275 | ) | (0.7 | %) | ||||||||||
Small commercial & industrial |
28,165 | 29,971 | (1,806 | ) | (6.0 | %) | ||||||||||
Large commercial & industrial |
20,660 | 22,652 | (1,992 | ) | (8.8 | %) | ||||||||||
Public authorities & electric railroads |
6,022 | 7,332 | (1,310 | ) | (17.9 | %) | ||||||||||
Total full service |
92,411 | 97,794 | (5,383 | ) | (5.5 | %) | ||||||||||
Delivery
only (c) |
||||||||||||||||
Residential |
900 | 1,971 | (1,071 | ) | (54.3 | %) | ||||||||||
Small commercial & industrial |
7,461 | 5,634 | 1,827 | 32.4 | % | |||||||||||
Large commercial & industrial |
10,689 | 7,652 | 3,037 | 39.7 | % | |||||||||||
Public authorities & electric railroads |
1,402 | 913 | 489 | 53.6 | % | |||||||||||
20,452 | 16,170 | 4,282 | 26.5 | % | ||||||||||||
PPO (ComEd only) |
||||||||||||||||
Small commercial & industrial |
3,318 | 3,152 | 166 | 5.3 | % | |||||||||||
Large commercial & industrial |
4,348 | 5,131 | (783 | ) | (15.3 | %) | ||||||||||
Public authorities & electric railroads |
1,925 | 1,346 | 579 | 43.0 | % | |||||||||||
9,591 | 9,629 | (38 | ) | (0.4 | %) | |||||||||||
Total delivery only and PPO deliveries |
30,043 | 25,799 | 4,244 | 16.5 | % | |||||||||||
Total retail deliveries |
122,454 | 123,593 | (1,139 | ) | (0.9 | %) | ||||||||||
(a) | One gigawatthour is the equivalent of one million kilowatthours (kWh). |
|
(b) | Full service reflects deliveries to customers taking electric service under tariffed rates. | |
(c) | Delivery only reflects service from customers electing to receive electric generation service from an alternative electric supplier, which rates include a distribution charge and a CTC. |
36
Electric Revenues | 2003 | 2002 | Variance | % Change | ||||||||||||
Full service (a) |
||||||||||||||||
Residential |
$ | 3,715 | $ | 3,719 | $ | (4 | ) | (0.1 | %) | |||||||
Small commercial & industrial |
2,421 | 2,601 | (180 | ) | (6.9 | %) | ||||||||||
Large commercial & industrial |
1,394 | 1,496 | (102 | ) | (6.8 | %) | ||||||||||
Public authorities & electric railroads |
396 | 456 | (60 | ) | (13.2 | %) | ||||||||||
Total full service |
7,926 | 8,272 | (346 | ) | (4.2 | %) | ||||||||||
Delivery only (b) |
||||||||||||||||
Residential |
65 | 145 | (80 | ) | (55.2 | %) | ||||||||||
Small commercial & industrial |
214 | 159 | 55 | 34.6 | % | |||||||||||
Large commercial & industrial |
196 | 170 | 26 | 15.3 | % | |||||||||||
Public authorities & electric railroads |
33 | 28 | 5 | 17.9 | % | |||||||||||
508 | 502 | 6 | 1.2 | % | ||||||||||||
PPO (ComEd only) (c) |
||||||||||||||||
Small commercial & industrial |
225 | 204 | 21 | 10.3 | % | |||||||||||
Large commercial & industrial |
240 | 278 | (38 | ) | (13.7 | %) | ||||||||||
Public authorities & electric railroads |
103 | 71 | 32 | 45.1 | % | |||||||||||
568 | 553 | 15 | 2.7 | % | ||||||||||||
Total delivery only and PPO |
1,076 | 1,055 | 21 | 2.0 | % | |||||||||||
Total electric retail revenues |
9,002 | 9,327 | (325 | ) | (3.5 | %) | ||||||||||
Wholesale and miscellaneous revenues (d) |
555 | 581 | (26 | ) | (4.5 | %) | ||||||||||
Total electric revenues |
$ | 9,557 | $ | 9,908 | $ | (351 | ) | (3.5 | %) | |||||||
(a) | Full service revenue reflects deliveries to customers taking electric service under tariffed rates, which include the cost of energy and the delivery cost of the transmission and the distribution of the energy. PECOs tariffed rates also include a CTC. See Note 5 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion of CTC. | |
(b) | Delivery only revenue reflects revenue under tariffed rates from customers electing to receive electric generation service from an alternative electric supplier, which rates include a distribution charge and a CTC. | |
(c) | Revenues from customers choosing ComEds PPO include an energy charge at market rates, transmission and distribution charges, and a CTC. Prior to ComEds full integration into PJM on May 1, 2004, ComEds transmission charges received from alternative electric suppliers were included in wholesale and miscellaneous revenues. | |
(d) | Wholesale and miscellaneous revenues include transmission revenues, sales to municipalities and other wholesale energy sales. |
Energy Deliverys gas sales statistics and revenue detail were as follows:
Deliveries to customers in million cubic feet (mmcf) | 2003 | 2002 | Variance | % Change | ||||||||||||
Retail sales |
61,858 | 54,782 | 7,076 | 12.9 | % | |||||||||||
Transportation |
26,404 | 30,763 | (4,359 | ) | (14.2 | %) | ||||||||||
Total |
88,262 | 85,545 | 2,717 | 3.2 | % | |||||||||||
Revenues | 2003 | 2002 | Variance | % Change | ||||||||||||
Retail sales |
$ | 609 | $ | 490 | $ | 119 | 24.3 | % | ||||||||
Transportation |
18 | 19 | (1 | ) | (5.3 | %) | ||||||||||
Resales and other |
18 | 40 | (22 | ) | (55.0 | %) | ||||||||||
Total |
$ | 645 | $ | 549 | $ | 96 | 17.5 | % | ||||||||
37
Results of Operations - Generation
As previously described, effective January 1, 2004, Exelon contributed its interest in Exelon Energy Company to Generation. For comparative discussion and analysis, Exelon Energy Companys results of operations have been included within the Generation segment results of operations as if this transfer had occurred on January 1, 2002.
Favorable | ||||||||||||
(unfavorable) | ||||||||||||
2003 | 2002 | variance | ||||||||||
OPERATING REVENUES |
$ | 8,586 | $ | 7,117 | $ | 1,469 | ||||||
OPERATING EXPENSES |
||||||||||||
Purchased power |
3,620 | 3,298 | (322 | ) | ||||||||
Fuel |
1,930 | 1,201 | (729 | ) | ||||||||
Operating and maintenance |
1,874 | 1,674 | (200 | ) | ||||||||
Impairment of Boston Generating, LLC long-lived assets |
945 | | (945 | ) | ||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
200 | 291 | 91 | |||||||||
Taxes other than income |
120 | 166 | 46 | |||||||||
Total operating expense |
8,689 | 6,630 | (2,059 | ) | ||||||||
OPERATING INCOME (LOSS) |
(103 | ) | 487 | (590 | ) | |||||||
OTHER INCOME AND DEDUCTIONS |
||||||||||||
Interest expense |
(88 | ) | (78 | ) | (10 | ) | ||||||
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated affiliates |
49 | 87 | (38 | ) | ||||||||
Other, net |
(268 | ) | 87 | (355 | ) | |||||||
Total other income and deductions |
(307 | ) | 96 | (403 | ) | |||||||
INCOME (LOSS) FROM CONTINUING OPERATIONS BEFORE
INCOME TAXES AND MINORITY INTEREST |
(410 | ) | 583 | (993 | ) | |||||||
INCOME TAXES |
(176 | ) | 225 | 401 | ||||||||
INCOME (LOSS) FROM CONTINUING OPERATIONS BEFORE
MINORITY INTEREST |
(234 | ) | 358 | (592 | ) | |||||||
MINORITY INTEREST |
(4 | ) | (3 | ) | (1 | ) | ||||||
INCOME (LOSS) FROM CONTINUING OPERATIONS |
(238 | ) | 355 | (593 | ) | |||||||
(LOSS) INCOME FROM DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS
(net of income taxes) |
(21 | ) | 10 | (31 | ) | |||||||
INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF
CHANGES IN ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES |
(259 | ) | 365 | (624 | ) | |||||||
CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF CHANGES IN ACCOUNTING
PRINCIPLES (net of income taxes) |
108 | 2 | 106 | |||||||||
NET INCOME (LOSS) |
$ | (151 | ) | $ | 367 | $ | (518 | ) | ||||
Net Income (Loss). The decrease in Generations net income in 2003 as compared to 2002 was primarily due to an impairment charge of $945 million before income taxes recorded in 2003 related to the long-lived assets of Boston Generating, impairment and other transaction-related charges of $280 million before income taxes recorded in 2003 related to Generations investment in Sithe, and increased operating and maintenance expenses, partially offset by an increase in operating revenues net of purchased power and fuel expense. Generation also experienced an increase in its effective tax rate.
38
Cumulative effect of changes in accounting principles recorded in 2003 and 2002 included income of $108 million, net of income taxes, recorded in 2003 related to the of adoption of SFAS No. 143 and income of $2 million, net of income taxes, recorded in 2002 related to the adoption of SFAS No. 142. See Note 1 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion of these effects.
Operating Revenues. Operating revenues increased in 2003 as compared to 2002. Generations sales in 2003 and 2002 were as follows:
Revenues (in millions) | 2003 | 2002 | Variance | % Change | ||||||||||||
Electric sales to affiliates |
$ | 3,831 | $ | 3,978 | $ | (147 | ) | (3.7 | %) | |||||||
Wholesale and retail electric sales |
4,107 | 2,736 | 1,371 | 50.1 | % | |||||||||||
Total energy sales revenues |
7,938 | 6,714 | 1,224 | 18.2 | % | |||||||||||
Retail gas sales |
414 | 248 | 166 | 66.9 | % | |||||||||||
Trading portfolio |
1 | (29 | ) | 30 | (103.4 | %) | ||||||||||
Other revenues (a) |
233 | 184 | 49 | 26.6 | % | |||||||||||
Total revenues |
$ | 8,586 | $ | 7,117 | $ | 1,469 | 20.6 | % | ||||||||
Sales (in GWhs) | 2003 | 2002 | Variance | % Change | ||||||||||||
Electric sales to affiliates |
112,688 | 118,473 | (5,785 | ) | (4.9 | %) | ||||||||||
Wholesale and retail electric sales |
112,816 | 88,985 | 23,831 | 26.8 | % | |||||||||||
Total sales |
225,504 | 207,458 | 18,046 | 8.7 | % | |||||||||||
(a) | Includes sales related to tolling agreements and fossil fuel sales. |
Trading volumes of 32,584 GWhs and 69,933 GWhs for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002, respectively, are not included in the table above. The decrease in trading volume is a result of reduced volumetric and VAR trading limits in 2003, which are set by the Exelon Risk Management Committee and approved by the Board of Directors.
Electric Sales to Affiliates. Sales to affiliates decreased primarily due to lower volume sales to ComEd, partially offset by slightly higher realized prices. Sales to PECO were lower, primarily due to lower realized prices, partially offset by slightly higher volumes.
Wholesale and Retail Electric Sales. Sales volume in the wholesale spot and bilateral markets increased primarily due to the acquisition of Exelon New England in November 2002 and the commencement of commercial operations in 2003 of the Boston Generating facilities, Mystic 8 and 9 and Fore River. In addition, average market prices were $5/MWh higher than 2002.
Retail Gas Sales. Retail gas sales at Exelon Energy increased $166 million due to higher natural gas prices in 2003. In addition, customer growth in the gas and electric markets increased revenues by $69 million and $40 million, respectively.
Trading Revenues. Trading activity increased revenues by $1 million in 2003 compared to a reduction in revenues of $29 million in 2002 due to an increase in gas prices in April 2002, which negatively affected Generations trading positions.
Other. Revenues also increased in 2003 as compared to 2002, as a result of a $76 million increase in sales of excess fossil fuel. The increased excess fossil fuel is a result of generating plants in the Texas and New England regions operating at less than projected levels. Also, revenues increased by $62 million due to higher decommissioning revenues received from ComEd in 2003 compared to 2002.
39
Purchased Power and Fuel Expense. Generations supply of sales in 2003 and 2002, excluding the trading portfolio, was as follows:
Supply of Sales (in GWhs) | 2003 | 2002 | % Change | |||||||||
Nuclear generation (a) |
117,502 | 115,854 | 1.4 | % | ||||||||
Purchases non-trading portfolio (b) |
83,692 | 78,628 | 6.4 | % | ||||||||
Fossil and hydroelectric generation |
24,310 | 12,976 | 87.3 | % | ||||||||
Total supply |
225,504 | 207,458 | 8.7 | % | ||||||||
(a) | Excluding AmerGen. | |
(b) | Including purchase power agreements with AmerGen. |
Generations supply mix changed as a result of increased nuclear generation due to a lower number of refueling and unplanned outages during 2003 as compared to 2002, increased fossil generation due to the Exelon New England plants acquired in November 2002, including plants under construction which became operational in the second and third quarters of 2003 and account for an increase of 8,426 GWhs. Additionally, the change included additional purchased power of 3,320 GWhs from Exelon New England, a new PPA with AmerGen which increased purchased power by 3,049 GWhs in the second quarter of 2003 and 11,989 GWhs of other miscellaneous power purchases, which more than offset a 14,208 GWhs reduction in purchased power from Midwest Generation.
The changes in Generations purchased power and fuel expense for 2003 compared to 2002 consisted of the following:
Generation | Increase | |||
Exelon New England |
$ | 429 | ||
Prices |
350 | |||
Volume |
46 | |||
Hedging activity |
22 | |||
Other |
204 | |||
Increase in purchased power and fuel expense |
$ | 1,051 | ||
Exelon New England. Generation acquired Exelon New England in November 2002 and Mystic Units 8 and 9 began commercial operations during the second quarter of 2003, while Fore River began commercial operations during the third quarter of 2003.
Prices. The increase reflects higher market prices in 2003.
Volume. Purchased power increased in 2003 due to an increase in purchased power from AmerGen under a June 2003 PPA to purchase 100% of the output of Oyster Creek. Prior to the June 2003 PPA, Generation did not purchase power from Oyster Creek. Fuel expense increased due to increases in fossil fuel generation required to meet the increased market demand for energy and the acquisition of generating plants in Texas in April 2002.
Hedging Activity. Mark-to-market losses on hedging activities were $16 million in 2003 compared to a gain of $6 million in 2002.
Other. Other increases in purchased power and fuel were primarily due to $171 million of higher purchased power and fuel expense at Exelon Energy, additional nuclear fuel amortization of $16 million in 2003 resulting from under-performing fuel, which was completely replaced in May 2003 at the Quad Cities Unit 1 and $10 million due to the write-down of coal inventory in 2003 as a result of a fuel burn analysis.
40
Generations average margins per MWh sold for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002 were as follows:
($/MWh) | 2003 | 2002 | % Change | |||||||||
Average
electric revenue |
||||||||||||
Electric sales to affiliates |
$ | 34.00 | $ | 33.58 | 1.3 | % | ||||||
Wholesale
and retail electric sales |
36.40 | 30.75 | 18.4 | % | ||||||||
Total excluding the trading portfolio |
35.20 | 32.36 | 8.8 | % | ||||||||
Average electric supply cost excluding the trading portfolio (a) |
24.61 | 21.69 | 13.5 | % | ||||||||
Average margin excluding the trading portfolio |
10.59 | 10.67 | (0.8 | %) | ||||||||
(a) | Average electric supply cost includes purchased power, fuel costs and PPAs with AmerGen in 2003. |
Operating and Maintenance Expense. The changes in operating and maintenance expense for 2003 compared to 2002 consisted of the following:
Increase | ||||
Generation | (decrease) | |||
2003 asset impairment charge related to long-lived assets of Boston Generating |
$ | 945 | ||
Adoption of
SFAS No. 143 (a) |
118 | |||
Increased costs due to generating asset acquisitions in 2002 |
78 | |||
Severance, pension and postretirement benefit costs associated with The Exelon Way |
60 | |||
Increased employee fringe benefits primarily due to increased health care costs |
54 | |||
Decreased
refueling outage costs (b) |
(49 | ) | ||
2002 executive severance |
(19 | ) | ||
Other |
(42 | ) | ||
Increase in operating and maintenance expense |
$ | 1,145 | ||
(a) | Due to a reclassification of decommissioning-related expenses upon the adoption of SFAS No. 143. | |
(b) | Includes cost savings of $19 million related to one of Generations co-owned facilities. Refueling outage days, not including Generations co-owned facilities, decreased from 202 in 2002 to 157 in 2003. |
The increase in operating and maintenance expense is primarily due to the decision to transition out of the ownership of Boston Generating during the third quarter of 2003. Generation recorded a long-lived asset impairment charge of $945 million ($573 million net of income taxes) in the third quarter of 2003. The remaining increase is due to payroll-related costs due to implementation of the programs associated with The Exelon Way, costs incurred due to generating asset acquisitions made in 2002, partially offset by lower refueling outage costs.
Nuclear fleet operating data and purchased power costs data for the year ended December 31, 2003 and 2002 were as follows:
Generation | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||
Nuclear fleet capacity factor (a) |
93.4 | % | 92.7 | % | ||||
Nuclear fleet production cost per MWh (a) |
$ | 12.53 | $ | 13.00 | ||||
Average purchased power cost for wholesale operations per MWh (b) |
$ | 43.25 | $ | 41.94 | ||||
(a) | Including AmerGen and excluding Salem, which is operated by PSEG Nuclear. | |
(b) | Including PPAs with AmerGen. |
The higher nuclear capacity factor and decreased production costs are primarily due to 56 fewer planned refueling outage days in 2003 as compared to 2002, resulting in a $36 million decrease in refueling outage costs, including a $6 million decrease related to AmerGen. The years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002 included 30 and 26 unplanned outages, respectively, resulting in a $2 million increase in non-refueling outage costs in 2003 as compared to 2002.
41
Depreciation and Amortization. The decrease in depreciation and amortization expense in 2003 as compared to 2002 was primarily attributable to a $130 million reduction in decommissioning expense net of ARC depreciation, as these costs are included in operating and maintenance expense after the adoption of SFAS No. 143, and a $12 million decrease due to life extensions of assets acquired in 2002. The decrease was partially offset by $65 million of additional depreciation expense on capital additions placed in service in 2002, of which $18 million of expense is related to plant acquisitions made after the third quarter of 2002.
Effective Income Tax Rate. The effective income tax rate from continuing operations was 43% for 2003 compared to 39% for 2002.
Discontinued Operations. The loss from discontinued operations increased by over $30 million from 2002 to 2003 primarily due to decreased margins and unfavorable impacts of mark-to-market accounting at AllEnergy.
42
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Exelons businesses are capital intensive and require considerable capital resources. These capital resources are primarily provided by internally generated cash flows from Energy Deliverys and Generations operations. When necessary, Exelon obtains funds from external sources in the capital markets and through bank borrowings. Exelons access to external financing at reasonable terms depends on Exelon and its subsidiaries credit ratings and general business conditions, as well as that of the utility industry in general. If these conditions deteriorate to the extent that Exelon no longer has access to the capital markets at reasonable terms, Exelon has access to revolving credit facilities with aggregate bank commitments of $1.5 billion that it currently utilizes to support its commercial paper programs. See the Credit Issues section of Liquidity and Capital Resources for further discussion. Exelon primarily uses its capital resources, including cash, to fund capital requirements, including construction expenditures, retire debt, pay common stock dividends, fund its pension obligations and invest in new and existing ventures. Exelons construction expenditures utilize a significant amount of cash on projects that have a long-term return on investment. Additionally, Energy Delivery operates in a rate-regulated environment in which recovery of current cash expenditures takes place over an extended period of time. As a result of these factors, Exelon has historically operated with a working capital deficit. However, Exelon expects operating cash flows to be sufficient to meet operating and capital expenditure requirements. Future acquisitions that Exelon may undertake, such as the proposed merger with PSEG, may require external debt financing or the issuance of Exelon common stock.
Cash Flows from Operating Activities
Energy Deliverys cash flows from operating activities primarily result from sales of electricity and gas to a stable and diverse base of retail customers at fixed prices and are weighted toward the third quarter of each fiscal year. Energy Deliverys future cash flows will be affected by the impact of the economy, weather, customer choice and future regulatory proceedings on its revenues and its ability to achieve operating cost reductions. Generations cash flows from operating activities primarily result from the sale of electric energy to wholesale customers, including Energy Delivery. Generations future cash flows from operating activities will be affected by future demand for and market prices of energy and its ability to continue to produce and supply power at competitive costs.
43
Cash flows from operations have been, and are expected to continue to provide, a reliable, steady source of cash flow, sufficient to meet operating and capital expenditures requirements for the foreseeable future. Operating cash flows after 2006 could be negatively affected by changes in the rate regulatory environments of ComEd and PECO, although any effects are not expected to hinder the ability to fund their business requirements. See Business Outlook and the Challenges in Managing the Business for further information regarding the regulatory transition periods. Additionally, Exelon, through its ComEd subsidiary, has taken certain tax positions, which have been disclosed to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), to defer the tax gain on the 1999 sale of its fossil generating assets. See Note 13 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding these tax positions.
The following table provides a summary of the major items impacting cash flows from operations:
2004 | 2003 | Variance | ||||||||||
Net income |
$ | 1,864 | $ | 905 | $ | 959 | ||||||
Non-cash operating activities (a) |
2,274 | 2,989 | (715 | ) | ||||||||
Changes in working capital and other noncurrent assets and
liabilities (b) |
530 | (366 | ) | 896 | ||||||||
Pension and post-retirement healthcare benefit payments |
(270 | ) | (144 | ) | (126 | ) | ||||||
Net cash flow from operations |
$ | 4,398 | $ | 3,384 | $ | 1,014 | ||||||
(a) | Represents depreciation, amortization and accretion, deferred income taxes, cumulative effect of changes in accounting principle, impairment of investments and long-lived assets and other non-cash charges. | |
(b) | Changes in working capital and other noncurrent assets and liabilities exclude the changes in commercial paper and the current portion of long-term debt. |
Cash flows provided by operations in 2004 and 2003 were $4,398 million and $3,384 million, respectively. Changes in Exelons cash flows provided by operations were generally consistent with changes in its results of operations, as adjusted by changes in working capital in the normal course of business. The $1,014 million increase in cash flows provided by operations from 2003 to 2004 was due primarily to an increase in operating income of $1,156 million during 2004 over 2003 and changes in working capital and other asset and liability accounts, including income taxes. The timing of the working capital and other noncurrent asset and liability account changes resulted in an increase to cash flows provided by operations of approximately $896 million in 2004 over 2003, approximately $564 million of which is the result of the timing of Federal income tax activity. The operating cash flows resulting from Federal income tax activity were primarily the result of the following:
| Exelon reduced its Federal income tax obligation by approximately $315 million and $140 million in 2004 and 2003, respectively, for tax-deductible pension plan contributions of approximately $900 million to be contributed prior to September 15, 2005 and $400 million contributed prior to September 15, 2004, respectively. | |||
| Exelon realized Federal income tax credits from its investments in synthetic fuel producing facilities, which reduced its 2004 and 2003 Federal income taxes payable by approximately $216 million and $23 million, respectively. | |||
| Exelon recorded approximately $631 million and $1,057 million of special depreciation allowances in 2004 and 2003, respectively, that resulted in the reduction of Federal income taxes payable of approximately $220 million and $370 million, respectively. Approximately $150 million of the 2003 special depreciation allowance was recorded as a Federal income tax receivable at December 31, 2003 and filed and collected as a corporate application for quick refund in March 2004. This activity resulted in a $300 million year over year increase in cash flows from 2003 to 2004. | |||
| In November 2003, Exelon recorded a Federal income tax receivable of approximately $120 million for capital losses generated in 2003 related to its investment in Sithe, which were carried back to prior periods. The transaction was presented as a use of cash in Exelons |
44
December 31, 2003 statement of cash flows.
The combination of the income tax activities described above and other income tax activities reduced the amount of cash paid for income taxes from approximately $730 million in 2003 to approximately $200 million in 2004, a decrease of $530 million.
Additionally, the following non-recurring operating cash flows occurred during 2004:
| In December 2004, TXU and Generation terminated a tolling agreement and entered into a new agreement. Upon termination of the original agreement, Generation received a cash payment of $172 million. The resulting gain was deferred and will be recognized as income over the contractual term of the new agreement. See Note 2 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding the transaction with TXU. | |||
| Net cash received for collateral for 2004 was $73 million, compared to $68 million paid in 2003. The year over year increase in cash flows of $141 million was primarily due to the reduction of cash collateral requirements for certain trading counterparties as a result of Generation negotiating the acceptance of letters of credit during 2004 to satisfy current and future collateral obligations. | |||
| During 2004, Exelon paid $86 million for prepayment premiums on the retirement of ComEd debt. See Cash Flows from Financing Activities for further information regarding debt retirements pursuant to the accelerated liability management plan. |
Exelon management does not expect the changes in working capital associated with income taxes and other non-recurring events, as described above, that contributed to the increase in cash flows provided by operations in 2004 to recur.
Pension and other non-pension postretirement payments. Discretionary tax-deductible pension plan payments were $439 million in 2004 compared to $367 million in 2003. Exelon also contributed $11 million during 2004 to the pension plans needed to satisfy minimum funding requirements of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act. Additionally, $132 million and $135 million were contributed to the postretirement welfare benefit plans for 2004 and 2003, respectively. See Note 15 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding pension and postretirement benefits.
Exelon expects to contribute approximately $2 billion to its pension plans in 2005, which will be funded primarily through the issuance of debt in 2005. These contributions exclude benefit payments expected to be made directly from corporate assets. Of the $2 billion expected to be contributed to the pension plans during 2005, $13 million is estimated to be needed to satisfy Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) minimum funding requirements.
Cash Flows from Investing Activities
Cash flows used in investing activities for 2004 and 2003 were $1,765 million and $2,109 million, respectively. In addition to the recurring investing activities presented on the face of the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows, significant investing activities by business segment during 2004 and 2003 are as follows:
45
Exelon
| Exelon received cash proceeds of $76 million, net of $2 million held in escrow at December 31, 2004, from the sale of its investments in affordable housing in 2004. | |||
| Exelon contributed $56 million to investments in synthetic fuel-producing facilities in 2004. | |||
| Cash proceeds of $227 million, net of transaction costs and contingency payments on prior year dispositions, were received during 2004 from the sales of Exelon Thermal Holdings, Inc., substantially all of the operating businesses of Services, and Enterprises investments in PECO TelCove and other equity method and cost basis investments of Enterprises. | |||
| Early settlement on an acquisition note receivable from the 2003 disposition of InfraSource resulted in cash proceeds of $30 million during 2004. | |||
| In September 2003, Exelon sold the electric construction and services, underground and telecom businesses of InfraSource for cash of $175 million, net of transaction costs and cash transferred to the buyer upon sale. |
Generation
| Exelon Generation received cash proceeds of $42 million from the January 2004 sale of three gas turbines that were classified as assets held for sale at December 31, 2003. | |||
| On March 31, 2004, Exelon consolidated the assets and liabilities of Sithe under the provisions of FIN 46-R, which resulted in an increase in cash of $19 million. See Note 1 and Note 3 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding the FIN 46-R consolidation of Sithe. | |||
| Sithe collected a $20 million note receivable during 2004 related to the sale of certain businesses of Sithe during the fourth quarter of 2003 and the first quarter of 2004. | |||
| On November 25, 2003, Generation, Reservoir, and Sithe completed a series of transactions resulting in Generation and Reservoir each indirectly owning a 50% interest in Sithe. Net cash proceeds from the series of transactions were $44 million. In addition, a note was received from EXRES SHC, Inc. for $92 million. See Note 3 and Note 25 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding this transaction and Generations sale of Sithe. | |||
| In December 2003, Generation purchased the 50% interest in AmerGen held by British Energy for $240 million, net of cash acquired of $36 million. The acquisition was funded with cash provided by operations. |
Investing activities in 2004 and 2003 exclude the non-cash issuance of $22 million and $238 million of notes payable, respectively, for Exelons investments in synthetic fuel-producing facilities. Exelon expects these investments to provide more than $200 million of net cash benefits from 2005 through 2008, with peak net cash of approximately $100 million in 2008.
Capital expenditures by business segment for 2004 and projected amounts for 2005 are as follows:
2004 | 2005 | |||||||
Energy Delivery |
$ | 946 | $ | 1,023 | ||||
Generation |
960 | 1,073 | ||||||
Corporate and other |
15 | 56 | ||||||
Total capital expenditures |
$ | 1,921 | $ | 2,152 | ||||
Excluding acquisitions, capital requirements during 2005 are expected to be met through internally generated cash or external borrowings. Exelons proposed capital expenditures and other investments are subject to periodic review and revision to reflect changes in economic conditions and other factors.
46
Energy Delivery. Energy Deliverys projected capital expenditures for 2005 reflect continuing efforts to improve the reliability of its transmission and distribution systems and capital additions to support new business and customer growth. Exelon anticipates that Energy Deliverys capital expenditures will be funded by internally generated funds, borrowings or capital contributions from Exelon.
Generation. Exelon projects that Generations capital expenditures for 2005 will be higher than they were in 2004. The majority of these expenditures will be for additions and upgrades to existing facilities, nuclear fuel and increases in capacity at existing plants. Generation is planning on eleven nuclear refueling outages in 2005, compared to ten during 2004; however, the projected total non-fuel capital expenditures for the nuclear plants are expected to decrease in 2005 from 2004 by $40 million. Exelon anticipates that Generations capital expenditures will be funded by internally generated funds, borrowings or capital contributions from Exelon.
Cash Flows from Financing Activities
Cash flows used in financing activities for 2004 were $2,627 million compared to $1,240 million for the same period in 2003. The increase in cash used in financing activities was primarily attributable to an increase in the net retirement of long-term debt and preferred securities during 2004 of $2,221 million. Exelon retired $1.2 billion of long-term debt, including $1.0 billion prior to its maturity and $206 million at maturity, during 2004 in accordance with an accelerated liability management plan and retired $728 million of long-term debt due to financing affiliates. During 2003, Exelon issued debt (net of retirements during the period) and preferred stock of approximately $96 million. See Note 12 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding debt issuances and retirements during 2004. During 2004, Exelon issued $164 million of commercial paper, net of payments, and received cash proceeds of $33 million from the settlement of interest-rate swaps. During 2003, Exelon repaid $355 million of commercial paper and paid $43 million to settle interest-rate swaps. Additionally, Exelon repurchased common shares totaling $82 million during 2004 and received proceeds from employee stock plans of $240 million and $181 million during 2004 and 2003, respectively.
In 2004, Generation paid $27 million of a note payable to Sithe, compared to $446 million paid in 2003. At December 31, 2004, Generation had repaid $473 million of the note payable, resulting in a remaining balance of $63 million, which was paid upon the completion of a series of transactions that resulted in Generations sale of its investment in Sithe on January 31, 2005. See Note 25 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding the sale of Sithe.
The 2004 cash dividend payments on common stock increased $211 million over 2003, reflecting a 10% increase in the first quarter of 2004 and an 11% increase in the third quarter of 2004. See further discussion of Exelons dividend policy within the Dividends section of ITEM 5 of this Form 10-K.
From time to time and as market conditions warrant, Exelon may engage in long-term debt retirements via tender offers, open market repurchases or other viable options to strengthen its balance sheet. In the third quarter of 2004, Exelon initiated an accelerated liability management plan. Through December 31, 2004, ComEd had retired approximately $1.2 billion of debt under the plan, including $1.0 billion prior to its maturity and $206 million at maturity.
47
Credit Issues
Exelon Credit Facility
Exelon meets its short-term liquidity requirements primarily through the issuance of commercial paper by Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation. At December 31, 2004, Exelon, along with ComEd, PECO and Generation, participated with a group of banks in a $1 billion unsecured revolving facility maturing on July 16, 2009 and a $500 million unsecured revolving credit facility maturing on October 31, 2006. Both revolving credit agreements are used principally to support the commercial paper programs at Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation and to issue letters of credit.
At December 31, 2004, Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation had the following sublimits and available capacity under the credit agreements and the indicated amounts of outstanding commercial paper:
Bank | Available | Outstanding | ||||||||||
Borrower | Sublimit (a) | Capacity (b) | Commercial Paper | |||||||||
Exelon |
$ | 700 | $ | 685 | $ | 490 | ||||||
ComEd |
100 | 74 | | |||||||||
PECO |
100 | 100 | | |||||||||
Generation |
600 | 444 | | |||||||||
(a) | Sublimits under the credit agreements can change upon written notification to the bank group. | |
(b) | Available capacity represents the bank sublimit net of outstanding letters of credit. The amount of commercial paper outstanding does not reduce the available capacity under the credit facilities. |
Interest rates on advances under the credit facilities are based on either prime or the London Interbank Offering Rate (LIBOR) plus an adder based on the credit rating of the borrower as well as the total outstanding amounts under the agreement at the time of borrowing. The maximum LIBOR adder is 170 basis points.
The average interest rates on commercial paper in 2004 for Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation were approximately 1.51%, 2.11%, 1.08% and 1.14%, respectively.
The credit agreements require Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation 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, revenues from Sithe and interest on the debt of its project subsidiaries. The following table summarizes the minimum thresholds reflected in the credit agreements for the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2004:
Exelon | ComEd | PECO | Generation | |||||||||||||
Credit agreement threshold |
2.65 to 1 | 2.25 to 1 | 2.25 to 1 | 3.25 to 1 | ||||||||||||
At December 31, 2004, Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation were in compliance with the foregoing thresholds.
At December 31, 2004, Exelons capital structure consisted of 56% of long-term debt, including long-term debt to financing trusts, 41% common equity, 2% notes payable and less than 1% preferred securities of subsidiaries. Total debt included $5.3 billion owed to unconsolidated affiliates of ComEd and PECO that qualify as special purpose entities under FIN 46-R. These special purpose entities were created for the sole purpose of issuing debt obligations to securitize intangible transition property and CTCs of Energy Delivery or mandatorily redeemable preferred securities. See Note 1 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding FIN 46-R.
48
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. Participation in the money pool is subject to authorization by the corporate treasurer. ComEd and its subsidiary, Commonwealth Edison Company of Indiana, Inc. (ComEd of Indiana), PECO, Generation and BSC may participate in the money pool as lenders and borrowers, and Exelon and UII, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Exelon, may participate as lenders. Funding of, and borrowings from, the money pool are predicated on whether the contributions and borrowings result in economic benefits. Interest on borrowings is based on short-term market rates of interest or, if from an external source, specific borrowing rates. Maximum amounts contributed to and borrowed from the money pool by participant during 2004 are described in the following table in addition to the net contribution or borrowing as of December 31, 2004:
Maximum | Maximum | December 31, 2004 | ||||||||||
Contributed | Borrowed | Contributed (Borrowed) | ||||||||||
ComEd |
$ | 487 | $ | 43 | $ | 308 | ||||||
ComEd of Indiana (a) |
21 | | | |||||||||
PECO |
162 | 70 | 34 | |||||||||
Generation |
53 | 546 | (283 | ) | ||||||||
BSC |
| 197 | (59 | ) | ||||||||
UII, LLC |
160 | | | |||||||||
(a) | The activity at ComEd of Indiana was eliminated in the consolidation of ComEd. |
Security Ratings
Exelons, ComEds, PECOs and Generations access to the capital markets, including the commercial paper market, and its financing costs in those markets depend on the securities ratings of the entity that is accessing the capital markets. On December 20, 2004, Standard and Poors Rating Services placed the ratings of Exelon and its subsidiaries on credit watch with negative implications in response to the announced Merger between Exelon and PSEG. None of Exelons borrowings is subject to default or prepayment as a result of a downgrading of securities although such a downgrading could increase fees and interest charges under Exelons credit facilities.
49
The following table shows the Registrants securities ratings at December 31, 2004:
Moodys Investors | Standard & Poors | Fitch Investors | ||||||
Securities | Service | Corporation | Service, Inc. | |||||
Exelon
|
Senior unsecured debt | Baa2 | BBB+ | BBB+ | ||||
Commercial paper | P2 | A2 | F2 | |||||
ComEd
|
Senior secured debt | A3 | A- | A- | ||||
Commercial paper | P2 | A2 | F2 | |||||
Transition bonds (a) | Aaa | AAA | AAA | |||||
PECO
|
Senior secured debt | A2 | A- | A | ||||
Commercial paper | P1 | A2 | F1 | |||||
Transition bonds (b) | Aaa | AAA | AAA | |||||
Generation
|
Senior unsecured debt | Baa1 | A- | BBB+ | ||||
Commercial paper | P2 | A2 | F2 | |||||
(a) | Issued by ComEd Transitional Funding Trust, an unconsolidated affiliate of ComEd. | |
(b) | Issued by PETT, an unconsolidated affiliate of PECO. |
A security rating is not a recommendation to buy, sell or hold securities and may be subject to revision or withdrawal at any time by the assigning rating agency.
As part of the normal course of business, Exelon routinely enters into physical or financially settled contracts for the purchase and sale of capacity, energy, fuels and emissions allowances. These contracts either contain express provisions or otherwise permit its counterparties and Exelon to demand adequate assurance of future performance when there are reasonable grounds for doing so. In accordance with the contracts and applicable contracts law, if Exelon or 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 its 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, the obligation to supply the collateral requested will be a function of the facts and circumstances of Exelon or Generations situation at the time of the demand. If Exelon can reasonably claim that it is willing and financially able to perform its obligations, it may be possible to successfully argue that no collateral should be posted or that only an amount equal to two or three months of future payments should be sufficient.
See the PUHCA Restrictions section below for discussion of investment grade ratings under PUHCA.
Shelf Registration
As of December 31, 2004, Exelon, ComEd and PECO had current shelf registration statements for the sale of $2.0 billion, $555 million and $550 million, respectively, of securities that were effective with the SEC. The ability of Exelon, ComEd or PECO to sell securities off its 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, the current financial condition of the company, its securities ratings and market conditions.
PUHCA Restrictions
On April 1, 2004, Exelon obtained an order from the SEC under the Public Utilities Holding Company Act of 1935 (PUHCA) authorizing, through April 15, 2007, financing transactions, including the issuance of common stock, preferred securities, equity-linked securities, long-term debt and short-term debt in an aggregate amount not to exceed $8.0 billion above the amount outstanding for Exelon Corporate and Generation at December 31, 2003.
50
No securities have been issued under the above-described limit. Exelon is also authorized to issue guarantees, letters of credit, or otherwise provide credit support with respect to the obligations of its subsidiaries and non-affiliated third parties in the normal course of business of up to $6.0 billion outstanding at any one time. At December 31, 2004, Exelon had provided $2.0 billion of guarantees and letters of credit under the SEC order. See Contractual Obligations and Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements in this section for further discussion of guarantees. The SEC order requires Exelon to maintain a ratio of common equity to total capitalization (including securitization debt) of not less than 30%. At December 31, 2004, Exelons common equity ratio was 42%. Exelon expects that it will maintain a common equity ratio of at least 30%.
Exelon is also limited by the April 1, 2004 order to an aggregate investment of $4.0 billion in exempt wholesale generators (EWGs) and foreign utility companies (FUCOs). At December 31, 2004, Exelon had invested $2.2 billion in EWGs, leaving $1.8 billion of investment authority under the order. In that order, the SEC reserved jurisdiction over an additional $3.0 billion in investments in EWGs.
The loss of investment grade ratings for any outstanding security of ComEd, PECO or Generation would suspend the financing authority of the issuer to issue certain other securities and guarantees. The loss of investment grade ratings for any outstanding security of Exelon would suspend financing authority for ComEd, PECO, Generation and Exelon to issue certain other securities and guarantees. Exceptions include long-term debt issuances by ComEd and PECO (authorization for such security issuances are granted by the ICC and the PUC, respectively), common stock and the issuance of securities for the purpose of funding money pool operations. For purposes of investment grade ratings, a security will be deemed to be rated investment grade if it is rated investment grade by at least one nationally recognized statistical rating organization.
In cases where the financing authority of Exelon or a subsidiary is suspended in the circumstances as described above, Exelon would nevertheless be able to seek specific further authority from the SEC for it or its subsidiaries to continue to issue securities upon receipt of further SEC authorization.
Under applicable law, Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation can pay dividends only from retained, undistributed or current earnings. A significant loss recorded at ComEd, PECO or Generation may limit the dividends that these companies can distribute to Exelon. At December 31, 2004, Exelon had retained earnings of $3.4 billion, including ComEds retained earnings of $1,102 million (all of which had been appropriated for future dividend payments), PECOs retained earnings of $607 million and Generations undistributed earnings of $761 million.
51
Contractual Obligations and Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
The following table summarizes Exelons future estimated cash payments under existing contractual obligations, including payments due by period.
Payment due within | Due 2010 | |||||||||||||||||||
Total | 2005 | 2006-2007 | 2008-2009 | and beyond | ||||||||||||||||
Long-term debt |
$ | 7,774 | $ | 424 | $ | 712 | $ | 1,023 | $ | 5,615 | ||||||||||
Long-term debt to financing trusts |
5,342 | 486 | 1,840 | 1,665 | 1,351 | |||||||||||||||
Interest payments on long-term debt (a) (b) |
4,031 | 429 | 790 | 644 | 2,168 | |||||||||||||||
Interest payments on long-term debt to
financing trusts (a) |
1,938 | 329 | 515 | 285 | 809 | |||||||||||||||
Commercial paper |
490 | 490 | | | | |||||||||||||||
Capital leases |
50 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 38 | |||||||||||||||
Operating leases |
909 | 73 | 134 | 114 | 588 | |||||||||||||||
Power purchase obligations |
9,497 | 2,024 | 1,973 | 1,288 | 4,212 | |||||||||||||||
Fuel purchase agreements |
3,639 | 639 | 985 | 616 | 1,399 | |||||||||||||||
Other purchase obligations (c) |
463 | 241 | 134 | 57 | 31 | |||||||||||||||
Chicago agreement (d) |
48 | 6 | 12 | 12 | 18 | |||||||||||||||
Regulatory commitments |
20 | 10 | 10 | | | |||||||||||||||
Spent nuclear fuel obligation |
878 | | | | 878 | |||||||||||||||
Obligation to minority shareholders |
49 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 36 | |||||||||||||||
Pension ERISA minimum funding
requirement |
13 | 13 | | | | |||||||||||||||
Decommissioning (e) |
3,981 | | | | 3,981 | |||||||||||||||
Total contractual obligations |
$ | 39,122 | $ | 5,170 | $ | 7,115 | $ | 5,713 | $ | 21,124 | ||||||||||
(a) | Interest payments are estimated based on final maturity dates of debt securities outstanding at December 31, 2004 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, 2004. In 2004, Exelons Board of Directors approved contributions of approximately $2 billion in 2005 to Exelons defined benefit pension plans. The contributions will be funded in part by additional debt anticipated to be issued in 2005. Estimated future payments associated with the anticipated debt issuance have not been included in the table above. | |
(b) | Includes Sithe-related interest payments of $71 million, $132 million, $115 million and $849 million for payments due in 2005, 2006-2007, 2008-2009 and 2010 and beyond, respectively. See Note 25 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding the sale of Generations investment in Sithe. | |
(c) | Commitments for services and materials, minimum spend requirements related to the sale of InfraSource (see Note 2 of Exelons Consolidated Financial Statements) and amounts committed for information technology services. | |
(d) | On February 20, 2003, ComEd entered into separate agreements with Chicago and with Midwest Generation (Midwest Agreement). Under the terms of the agreement with Chicago, ComEd will pay Chicago $60 million over ten years to be relieved of a requirement, originally transferred to Midwest Generation upon the sale of ComEds fossil stations in 1999, to build a 500-MW generation facility. | |
(e) | Represents the present value of Generations obligation to decommission nuclear plants. |
For additional information about:
52
| regulatory commitments, see Note 5 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. | |||
| commercial paper, see Note 11 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. | |||
| long-term debt, see Note 12 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. | |||
| capital lease obligations, see Note 12 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. | |||
| the spent nuclear fuel and decommissioning obligations, see Note 14 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. | |||
| the contribution required to Exelons pension plans to satisfy ERISA minimum funding requirements, see Note 15 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. | |||
| operating leases, energy commitments, fuel purchase agreements and other purchase obligations, see Note 20 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. | |||
| the obligation to minority shareholders, see Note 20 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. |
Mystic Development LLC (Mystic) a former affiliate of Exelon New England has a long-term agreement through January 2020 with Distrigas of Massachusetts Corporation (Distrigas) for gas supply, primarily for the Boston Generating units. Under the agreement, gas purchase prices from Distrigas are indexed to the New England gas markets. Exelon New England has guaranteed Mystics financial obligations to Distrigas under the long-term supply agreement. Exelon New Englands guarantee to Distrigas remained in effect following the transfer of ownership interest in Boston Generating in May 2004. Under FIN 45, Guarantors Accounting and Disclosure Requirements for Guarantees, Including Indirect Guarantees of Indebtedness to Others (FIN 45), approximately $16 million was included as a liability within the Consolidated Balance Sheet of Exelon as of December 31, 2004 related to this guarantee. The terms of the guarantee do not limit the potential future payments that Exelon New England could be required to make under the guarantee.
Exelon paid down $27 million of the Exelon New England note during 2004 to fund Sithes acquisition of the 40% of Sithe/Independence Power Partners, L.P. that it did not own. Sithe is now the owner of 100% of the Independence generating plant.
Generation has an obligation to decommission its nuclear power plants. 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. Based on estimates of decommissioning costs for each of the nuclear facilities in which Generation has an ownership interest, the ICC permits ComEd, and the PUC permits PECO, to collect from their customers and deposit in nuclear decommissioning trust funds maintained by Generation amounts which, together with earnings thereon, will be used to decommission such nuclear facilities. Generation also maintains nuclear decommissioning trust funds for each of the AmerGen units. Upon adoption of SFAS No. 143, Generation was required to re-measure its decommissioning liabilities at fair value and recorded an asset retirement obligation of $2.4 billion on January 1, 2003. Increases in the asset retirement obligation to decommission nuclear generating facilities resulting from the passage of time are recorded as operating and maintenance expense. Increases in the asset retirement obligation resulting from a remeasurement are recorded with a corresponding ARC, which is a component of property, plant and equipment. At December 31, 2004, the asset retirement obligation recorded within Generations Consolidated Balance Sheet was approximately $4.0 billion. Decommissioning expenditures are expected to occur primarily after the plants are retired. Based on current licenses and anticipated renewals, decommissioning expenditures for plants in operation are currently estimated to begin in 2029. To fund future decommissioning costs, Generation held $5.3 billion of investments in trust funds, including net unrealized gains and losses, at December 31, 2004. See Note 14 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion of Generations decommissioning obligation.
See Note 20 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for discussion of Exelons commercial commitments as of December 31, 2004.
53
IRS Refund Claims
ComEd and PECO have entered into several agreements with a tax consultant related to the filing of refund claims with the IRS. ComEd and PECO previously made refundable prepayments to the tax consultant of $11 million and $5 million, respectively. The fees for these agreements are contingent upon a successful outcome of the claims and are based upon a percentage of the refunds to be recovered from the IRS, if any. The ultimate net cash outflow from ComEd and PECO related to all the agreements will either be positive or neutral depending upon the outcome of the refund claims with the IRS. These potential tax benefits and associated fees could be material to the financial position, results of operations and cash flows of ComEd and PECO. A portion of ComEds tax benefits, including any associated interest for periods prior to the PECO / Unicom Merger, would be recorded as a reduction of goodwill pursuant to a reallocation of the PECO / Unicom Merger purchase price. See below for discussion of the final approval of ComEds income tax refund claim. PECO cannot predict the timing of the final resolution of its refund claims.
During 2004, the IRS granted preliminary approval for one of ComEds refund claims. As such, ComEd believes that it is probable that a fee will ultimately be paid to the tax consultant. Therefore, ComEd recorded an expense of $5 million (pre-tax), which resulted in a decrease to the prepayment from $11 million to $6 million. The charge represents an estimate of the fee to the tax consultant which may be adjusted upward or downward depending on the IRS final calculation of the tax and interest benefit. As of December 31, 2004, ComEd had not reflected the tax benefit associated with the refund claim pending final approval of the IRS; however, as described above, the net income statement impact for ComEd is anticipated to be neutral or positive.
In the first quarter of 2005, ComEd received final approval for the income tax refund described above; however the calculation of the claim, including interest has not been finalized. As a portion of the refund will be recorded against goodwill under the provisions of EITF Issue No. 93-7, Uncertainties Related to Income Taxes in a Purchase Business Combination, the net result is not anticipated to have a material impact on Exelons results of operations.
Variable Interest Entities
Sithe. As of December 31, 2004, Generation was a 50% owner of Sithe. In accordance with FIN 46-R, Generation consolidated Sithe within its financial statements as of March 31, 2004. The determination that Sithe qualified as a variable interest entity and that Generation was the primary beneficiary under FIN 46-R required analysis of the economic benefits accruing to all parties pursuant to their ownership interests supplemented by managements judgment. See Note 3 and Note 25 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion of Generations ownership in Sithe and the ultimate sale of Generations entire interest in Sithe, which was completed on January 31, 2005.
Financing Trusts of ComEd and PECO. During June 2003, PECO issued $103 million of subordinated debentures to PECO Trust IV in connection with the issuance by PECO Trust IV of $100 million of preferred securities. Effective July 1, 2003, PECO Trust IV was deconsolidated from the financial statements of PECO in conjunction with FIN 46. The $103 million of subordinated debentures issued by PECO to PECO Trust IV was recorded as long-term debt to financing trusts within the Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Effective December 31, 2003, ComEd Financing II, ComEd Financing III, ComEd Funding, LLC, ComEd Transitional Funding Trust, PECO Trust III and PETT were deconsolidated from the financial statements of Exelon in conjunction with the adoption of FIN 46-R. Amounts of $5.3 billion owed by ComEd and PECO to these financing trusts were recorded as long-term debt to ComEd Transitional Funding Trust and PETT and long-term debt to financing trusts within the Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2004. See Other Subsidiaries of ComEd and PECO with Publicly Held Securities in Part I, ITEM 1 for further discussion of the nature, purpose and history of Exelons involvement with these financing trusts.
54
PECO Accounts Receivable Agreement
PECO is party to an agreement with a financial institution under which it can sell or finance with limited recourse an undivided interest, adjusted daily, in up to $225 million of designated accounts receivable until November 2005. PECO entered into this agreement to diversify its funding sources at favorable floating interest rates. At December 31, 2004, PECO had sold a $225 million interest in accounts receivable, consisting of a $179 million interest in accounts receivable, which PECO accounted for as a sale under SFAS No. 140, Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishment of Liabilities a Replacement of FASB Statement No. 125, and a $46 million interest in special agreement accounts receivable, which PECO accounted for as a long-term note payable and reflected on the consolidated balance sheet as long-term debt due within one year. At December 31, 2003, PECO had sold a $225 million interest in accounts receivable, consisting of a $176 million interest in accounts receivable which PECO accounted for as a sale under SFAS No. 140 and a $49 million interest in special-agreement accounts receivable which was accounted for as a long-term note payable. PECO must continue to service these receivables and must maintain the level of the accounts receivable at $225 million. If PECO fails to maintain that level, the cash that would otherwise be received by PECO under this program must be held in escrow until the level is met. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, PECO met this requirement and was not required to make any cash deposit.
Nuclear Insurance Coverage
Generation carries property damage, decontamination and premature decommissioning insurance for each station loss resulting from damage to Generations nuclear plants, subject to certain exceptions. Additionally, Generation carries business interruption insurance in the event of a major accidental outage at a nuclear station. Finally, Generation participates in the American Nuclear Insurers Master Worker Program, which provides coverage for worker tort claims filed for bodily injury caused by a nuclear energy accident. See Note 20 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion of nuclear insurance. For its types of insured losses, 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 and Generations financial condition and their results of operations and cash flows.
55
Business Outlook and the Challenges in Managing the Business
Substantially all of Exelons businesses are in the electric generation, transmission and distribution industry in the United States. That industry is in the midst of a fundamental and, at this point, uncertain transition from a fully regulated industry offering bundled service to an industry with unbundled services, some of which are regulated and others of which are priced in competitive markets. Exelons Energy Delivery business remains highly regulated while Exelons Generation business operates in a competitive environment. All of Exelons businesses are capital intensive.
The challenges affecting Exelons businesses are discussed below. There are several factors, such as weather, economic activity and regulatory actions that affect its businesses in different ways. Also, there are several factors that affect its business as a whole, such as environmental compliance and the ability to access capital on a cost-effective basis. Further discussion of its liquidity and capital resources and related challenges is included in the Liquidity and Capital Resources section.
Energy Delivery
The Energy Delivery business is comprised of two utility transmission and distribution companies, ComEd and PECO, which provide electricity and, in the case of PECO, natural gas to customers in Illinois and Pennsylvania, respectively. Energy Delivery focuses on providing safe and reliable services to customers. Energy Delivery continues to make improvements to its delivery systems to minimize the frequency and duration of service interruptions, while working more efficiently to lower costs. Exelon believes that Energy Delivery will continue to provide a significant and steady source of earnings and cash flows over the next several years.
Both Illinois and Pennsylvania have adopted restructuring legislation designed to foster competition in the retail sale of electricity. As a result of these restructuring initiatives, both ComEd and PECO are subject to rate freezes or caps through mandated restructuring transition periods. During these periods, the results of operations of ComEd and PECO will depend on their ability to deliver energy in a cost-efficient manner and to offset infrastructure investments and inflation with cost savings. ComEd and PECO each have long-term, full-requirements supply contracts with Generation, helping to mitigate the risk of changing energy supply costs during their respective transition periods. Energy Delivery is also managing operating and maintenance costs, while maintaining a strong focus on both reliability and safety in operating its business.
Exelon cannot currently predict the frameworks that will be used by the Illinois and Pennsylvania state regulators to establish rates after the transition periods. Exelon also cannot predict the outcome of any new laws that may impact its business. Nevertheless, Exelon expects that ComEd and PECO will continue to be obligated to deliver electric power and energy to customers in their respective service territories and will also retain significant POLR obligations, whereby each utility is required to provide electric power and energy service to customers in its service area. ComEd and PECO therefore must continue to ensure that adequate supplies of electricity and gas are available at reasonable costs.
More detailed explanations for each of these and other challenges in managing the Energy Delivery business are as follows:
Exelon must comply with numerous regulatory requirements in managing the Energy Delivery business, which affect their costs and responsiveness to changing events and opportunities.
The Energy Delivery business is subject to regulation at the state and Federal levels. State commissions regulate the rates, terms and conditions of service; various business practices and transactions; financings; and transactions between the utilities and affiliates. The FERC regulates the utilities transmission rates, certain other aspects of their businesses and, for PECO, gas pipelines. The regulations adopted by these state and Federal agencies affect the manner in which Energy Delivery does business, its ability to undertake specified actions, the costs of its operations, and the level of rates Energy Delivery may charge to recover such costs.
56
Energy Delivery must manage its costs due to the rate and equity return limitations imposed on its revenues.
Rate freezes or caps in effect at ComEd and PECO currently limit their ability to recover increased expenses and the costs of investments in new transmission and distribution facilities. As a result, Energy Deliverys future results of operations will depend on the ability of ComEd and PECO to deliver electricity and, in the case of PECO, natural gas in a cost-efficient manner.
Rate limitations. ComEd is subject to a legislatively mandated rate freeze on bundled retail rates that will remain in effect until January 1, 2007. Pursuant to a PECO / Unicom Merger-related settlement agreement with the PUC, PECO is subject to agreed-upon electric service rate reductions of $200 million, in aggregate, for the period January 1, 2002 through December 31, 2005, including $40 million in each of 2004 and 2005, and caps (subject to limited exceptions for significant increases in Federal or state income taxes or other significant changes in law or regulation that do not allow PECO to earn a fair rate of return) on its transmission and distribution rates through December 31, 2006, and on its generation rates through December 31, 2010.
Equity return limitation. ComEd is subject to a legislatively mandated cap on its return on common equity through the end of 2006. The cap is based on a two-year average of the U.S. Treasury long-term rates (20 years and above) plus 8.5% and is compared to a two-year average return on ComEds common equity. The legislation requires customer refunds equal to one-half of any earnings above the cap. ComEd is allowed to include regulatory asset amortization in the calculation of earnings. Under Illinois statute, any impairment of goodwill has no impact on the determination of the cap on ComEds allowed equity return during the transition period. ComEd has not triggered the earnings sharing provision in 2004 or previous years and does not expect to trigger that provision in 2005 or 2006.
Energy Deliverys long-term purchase power agreements provide a hedge to its customers demand.
To effectively manage its obligation to provide power to meet its customers demand, Energy Delivery has established full-requirements, power supply agreements with Generation which reduce exposure to the volatility of customer demand and market prices through 2006 for ComEd and through 2010 for PECO. Market prices relative to Energy Deliverys regulated rates still influence whether retail customers purchase energy from Energy Delivery or from an alternative electric supplier.
Effective management of capital projects is important to Energy Deliverys business.
Energy Deliverys business is capital intensive and requires significant investments in energy transmission and distribution facilities and in other internal infrastructure projects.
Energy Delivery expects to continue to make significant capital expenditures to improve the reliability of its transmission and distribution systems and for capital additions to support new business and customer growth. It is anticipated that Energy Deliverys capital expenditures will exceed depreciation on its plant assets. Energy Deliverys base rate freeze and caps will generally preclude rate recovery on any of these incremental investments prior to January 1, 2007.
57
Energy Deliverys business may be significantly affected by the end of the Illinois and Pennsylvania regulatory transition periods.
Illinois. Illinois electric utilities are allowed to collect competitive transition charges (CTCs) from customers who choose an alternative electric supplier or choose ComEds power purchase option (PPO). CTCs were intended to assist electric utilities, such as ComEd, in recovering stranded costs that might not otherwise be recoverable in a fully competitive market. The CTC charge represents the difference between the market value of delivered energy (the sum of generation service at market-based prices and the regulated price of energy delivery) and recoveries under historical bundled rates, reduced by a mitigation factor. The CTCs are updated annually. Over time, to facilitate the transition to a competitive market, the mitigation factor increases, thereby reducing the CTC.
In 2004 and 2003, ComEd collected $169 million and $304 million, respectively, of CTC revenue. As a result of increasing mitigation factors, changes in energy prices and the ability of certain customers to establish fixed, multi-year CTC rates beginning in 2003, it is anticipated that this revenue source will decline to approximately $90 million to $110 million in each of the years 2005 and 2006. Under the current restructuring statute, no CTCs will be collected after 2006.
Through 2006, ComEd will continue to have an obligation to offer bundled service to all customers (except certain large customers with demand of three MWs or more) at frozen price levels, under which a majority of ComEds residential and small commercial customers are expected to continue to receive service. ComEds current bundled service is generally provided under an all-inclusive rate that does not separately break out charges for energy generation service and energy delivery service, but charges a single set of prices. After the transition ends in 2006, ComEds bundled rates may be reset through a regulatory approval process, which may include traditional or innovative pricing, including performance-based incentives to ComEd.
In order to address post-transition uncertainty, ComEd is continually working with the ICC, consumer advocates and business community leadership to facilitate the development of a competitive electricity market while providing system reliability and safety. ComEd is promoting constructs that will move it towards transparent and liquid markets to allow for power procurement that will be deemed prudent, provide consumers assurance of equitable pricing and ensure cost recoverability. At the same time, ComEd is attempting to establish a regulatory framework for the post-2006 timeframe. Currently, it is difficult to predict the framework for, or the outcome of, a potential regulatory proceeding to establish rates after 2006.
In 2004, the ICC initiated and conducted a workshop process to consider issues related to retail electric service in the post-transition period (i.e., post-2006). Issues addressed included utility wholesale supply procurement methodology, rates, competition and utility service obligations. All interested parties were invited to participate. The end result was a report to the Illinois General Assembly which was generally supportive of continuing under the existing regulatory framework and of utilities procuring supply through a full-requirements, vertical tranche, descending clock auction process with full recovery of the supply costs from retail customers. In 2005, utilities including ComEd, are expected to begin to seek regulatory approval of structures that implement the methodologies supported by the report or such other proposals as they may choose to make. ComEd intends to make various filings during 2005 to begin the process to establish rates for the post-transition period. ComEd currently expects that these filings will include a proposal consistent with the auction process described above. All such methodologies and proposals will be subject to regulatory approval. ComEd cannot predict which particular proposal or proposals will be approved.
Pennsylvania. In Pennsylvania, the Pennsylvania Electricity Generation Customer Choice and Competition Act (Competition Act) provides for the imposition and collection of non-bypassable CTCs on customers bills as a mechanism for utilities to recover their allowed stranded costs. CTCs are assessed to and collected from virtually all retail customers who access PECOs transmission and distribution systems. These CTCs are assessed regardless of whether the customer purchases electricity from PECO or an alternative electric supplier. The Competition Act provides, however, that PECOs right to collect CTCs is contingent on the continued operation, at reasonable availability levels, of the assets for which the stranded costs were awarded, except where continued operation is no longer cost efficient because of the transition to a competitive market.
58
PECO has been authorized by the PUC to recover stranded costs of $5.3 billion over a twelve-year period ending December 31, 2010, with a return on the unamortized balance of 10.75%. At December 31, 2004, approximately $3.9 billion had yet to be recovered. Recovery of transition charges for stranded costs and PECOs allowed return on its recovery of stranded costs are included in revenues. Amortization of PECOs stranded cost recovery, which is a regulatory asset, is included in depreciation and amortization expense. PECOs results will be adversely affected over the remaining transition period ending December 31, 2010 by the steadily increasing amortization of stranded costs. The following table (amounts in millions) indicates the estimated revenues and amortization expense associated with CTC collection and stranded cost recovery through 2010.
Estimated | Estimated Stranded | |||||||
Year | CTC Revenues | Cost Amortization | ||||||
2005 |
$ | 808 | $ | 404 | ||||
2006 |
903 | 550 | ||||||
2007 |
910 | 619 | ||||||
2008 |
917 | 697 | ||||||
2009 |
924 | 783 | ||||||
2010 |
932 | 880 | ||||||
By the end of 2010, PECO will have fully recovered all of the stranded costs authorized by the PUC. As a result, PECO expects that both its revenues and expenses will decrease in 2011.
PECOs transmission and distribution rates are capped through 2006, while PECOs generation rates are capped through 2010. The end of these transition periods involves uncertainties, including the nature of PECOs POLR obligations and the source and pricing of generation services to be provided by PECO. PECO will continue to work with Federal and state regulators, state and local governments, customer representatives and other interested parties to develop appropriate processes for establishing future rates in restructured electricity markets. PECO will strive to ensure that future rate structures recognize the substantial improvements PECO has made, and will continue to make, in its transmission and distribution systems. PECO will also work to ensure that its rates are adequate to cover its costs of obtaining electric power and energy from its suppliers, which could include Generation, for the costs associated with procuring full requirements power given PECOs POLR obligations. As in the past, by working together with all interested parties, PECO believes it can successfully meet these objectives and obtain fair recovery of its costs for providing service to its customers; however, if PECO is unsuccessful, its results of operations and cash flows could be negatively affected after the transition periods.
Energy Deliverys ability to successfully manage the end of the transition period may affect its capital structure.
Exelon and ComEd had approximately $4.7 billion of goodwill recorded at December 31, 2004. This goodwill was recognized and recorded in connection with the PECO / Unicom Merger. Under GAAP, the goodwill will remain at its recorded amount unless it is determined to be impaired, which is based upon an annual analysis prescribed by SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets (SFAS No. 142) that compares the implied fair value of the goodwill to its carrying value. If an impairment occurs, the amount of the impaired goodwill will be written off and expensed, reducing equity. Under Illinois law, any impairment of goodwill has no impact on the determination of ComEds rate cap through the transition period.
59
Goodwill was not impaired at Exelon or ComEd during 2004. Exelons goodwill impairment test considers the cash flows of the entire Energy Delivery business segment, including both ComEd and PECO, and not just of ComEd; accordingly, a goodwill impairment charge at ComEd may not affect Exelons results of operations.
However, based on certain anticipated reductions to cash flows (primarily reductions in CTCs) subsequent to ComEds regulatory transition period, there is a reasonable possibility that goodwill will be impaired at ComEd, and possibly at Exelon, in 2005 or later periods. The actual timing and amounts of any goodwill impairments in future years will depend on many sensitive, interrelated and uncertain variables, including changing interest rates, utility sector market performance, ComEds capital structure, market prices for power, post-2006 rate regulatory structures, operating and capital expenditure requirements and other factors, some not yet known.
See Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates for further discussion on goodwill impairments.
Energy Delivery is and will continue to be involved in regulatory proceedings as a part of the process of establishing the terms and rates for its services.
These regulatory proceedings typically involve multiple parties, including governmental bodies, 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 also involve various contested issues of law and fact and have a bearing upon the recovery of Energy Deliverys costs through regulated rates. During the course of the proceedings, Energy Delivery looks for opportunities to resolve contested issues in a manner that grants some certainty to all parties to the proceedings as to rates and energy costs.
Energy Deliverys business is affected by the restructuring of the energy industry.
The electric utility industry in the United States is in transition. As a result of both legislative initiatives as well as competitive pressures, the industry has been moving from a fully regulated industry, consisting primarily of vertically integrated companies that combine generation, transmission and distribution, to a partially restructured industry, consisting of competitive wholesale generation markets and continued regulation of transmission and distribution. Due to a number of factors, these developments have been somewhat uneven across the states. Both Illinois and Pennsylvania have adopted restructuring legislation designed to foster competition in the retail sale of electricity, but a large number of other states have not changed their regulatory structures.
Regional Transmission Organizations and Standard Market Platform. The FERC required jurisdictional utilities to provide open access to their transmission systems as early as the late 1980s. Subsequently, the FERC encouraged the voluntary development of RTOs and the elimination of trade barriers between regions. RTOs provide transmission service. Transmission owners remain responsible for maintaining and operating their transmission facilities, under the direction of RTOs, and recover their revenue requirements through the RTOs. ComEd and PECO are members of PJM, a FERC-approved RTO operating in the Mid-Atlantic and Midwest regions. RTOs direct the dispatch of generation units as a means of centrally managing congestion on transmission systems without curtailing service. RTOs also manage transparent and competitive short-term energy markets.
The FERCs efforts to promote RTOs throughout the states has generated substantial opposition by some state regulators and other governmental bodies. In addition, efforts to develop an RTO have been abandoned in certain regions. Notwithstanding these difficulties, MISO has been certified as a RTO by the FERC. MISO is attempting to develop central generation dispatch and transmission operations across the Midwestern United States, contiguous to PJMs footprint. The FERC has ordered the elimination of rate barriers and protocol differences between MISO and PJM. Energy Delivery supports the development of RTOs and implementation of standard market protocols for these regions, and others, but cannot predict their success or whether they will lead to the development of the envisioned large, successful wholesale markets.
60
The development of large competitive wholesale electricity markets would facilitate an auction to meet ComEds and PECOs POLR load obligations with reliable wholesale electricity supply when their long-term supply contracts with Generation expire. In the meantime, Energy Deliverys transmission facilities are being operated by PJM successfully with little impact on ComEds or PECOs transmission rates and revenues.
Proposed Federal Energy Legislation. Attempts have been made to adopt comprehensive Federal energy legislation that, among other things, would repeal PUHCA, create incentives for the construction of transmission infrastructure, encourage but not mandate standardized competitive markets and expand the authority of the FERC to include overseeing the reliability of the bulk power system. Exelon cannot predict whether comprehensive energy legislation will be adopted and, if adopted, the final form of that legislation. Exelon would expect that comprehensive energy legislation would, if adopted, significantly affect the electric utility industry and its businesses. Such legislation did not pass Congress during 2004 but is expected to be reintroduced in Congress in early 2005.
Energy Delivery must maintain the availability and reliability of its delivery systems to meet customer expectations.
Increases in both customers and the demand for energy require expansion and reinforcement of Energy Deliverys delivery systems to increase capacity and maintain reliability. Failures of the equipment or facilities used in its delivery systems could potentially interrupt energy delivery services and related revenues and increase repair expenses and capital expenditures. Such failures of Energy Deliverys systems or those of other utilities, including prolonged or repeated failures, could affect customer satisfaction, the level of regulatory oversight and Energy Deliverys maintenance and capital expenditures, and expose Energy Delivery to claims by customers and others.
Regulated utilities that are required to provide service to all customers and others within their service territory have generally been afforded liability protections against claims by customers relating to failure of service. Under Illinois law, ComEd can be required to pay damages to its customers in the event of extended outages affecting large numbers of its customers.
Energy Delivery has lost and may continue to lose energy customers and related revenues to other generation suppliers, although Energy Delivery continues to provide delivery services.
Energy Deliverys retail electric customers may purchase their generation supply from alternative electric suppliers, although Energy Delivery remains obligated to provide transmission and distribution service to customers in its service territories regardless of their generation supplier. As of December 31, 2004, no alternative electric supplier had approval from the ICC, and no electric utilities had chosen to enter the ComEd residential market for the supply of electricity. ComEd and PECO are each generally obligated to provide generation and delivery service to customers in their service territories at fixed rates or, in some instances, market-derived rates. In addition, customers who take service from an alternative electric supplier may later return to ComEd or PECO. The number of customers taking service from alternative electric suppliers depends in part on the prices being offered by those suppliers relative to the fixed prices that ComEd and PECO are authorized to charge by their state regulatory commissions. To the extent that customers leave traditional bundled tariffs and select a different electric supplier, Energy Deliverys revenues are likely to decline, and revenues and gross margins could vary from period to period.
Energy Deliverys post-transition period and provider of last resort obligations add uncertainty to planning its electricity supply needs and its ability to manage the related costs of that supply.
61
In 2004, the ICC initiated and conducted a workshop process to consider issues related to retail electric service in the post-transition period (i.e., post-2006). Issues addressed included utility wholesale supply procurement methodology, rates, competition and utility service obligations. All interested parties were invited to participate. The end result was a report to the Illinois General Assembly which was generally supportive of continuing under the existing regulatory framework and of utilities procuring supply through a full-requirements, vertical tranche, descending clock auction process with full recovery of the supply costs from retail customers. In 2005, utilities, including ComEd, are expected to begin to seek regulatory approval of structures that implement the methodologies supported by the report or such other proposals as they may choose to make. ComEd intends to make various filings during 2005 to begin the process to establish rates for the post-transition period. These filings will include a proposal consistent with the auction process described above. All such methodologies and proposals will be subject to regulatory approval. ComEd cannot predict which particular proposals will be approved.
Because ComEd and PECO customers can switch, that is, within limits they can choose an alternative electric supplier and then return to either ComEd or PECO and then go back to an alternative electric supplier, and so on, planning for Energy Delivery has a higher level of uncertainty than that traditionally experienced due to weather and the economy. Energy Delivery has no obligation to purchase power reserves to cover the load served by others. Energy Delivery manages its POLR obligation through full-requirements contracts with Generation, under which Generation supplies the power requirements of ComEd and PECO. Also, Energy Delivery has sought through the regulatory process, as permitted by law, to retain the POLR obligation to customers who do not have competitive supply options and limit the POLR obligation for those customers that do have competitive supply options. In 2003, ComEd received ICC approval to phase out over several years its obligation to provide fixed-price energy under bundled rates to approximately 370 of its largest energy customers, which have demands of at least three MWs and represent an aggregate of approximately 2,500 MWs of load. To date, ComEd has not requested to phase out its obligation to provide fixed-price energy under bundled rates for other customers but continues to evaluate its options, particularly with respect to customers having energy demands of one to three MWs.
A mandatory renewable portfolio standard (RPS) could affect the cost of electricity purchased and sold by Energy Delivery.
Renewable and alternative fuel sources such as wind, solar, biomass and geothermal are anticipated to have an increasingly important role in creating fuel diversity in the generation of electricity. Federal or state legislation mandating a RPS could result in significant changes in Energy Deliverys business, including fuel cost and capital expenditures. Energy Delivery continues to monitor discussions related to RPSs at the Federal and state levels.
For additional information, see Environmental Regulation Renewable and Alternative Energy Portfolio Standards in ITEM 1 of this Form 10-K.
Weather affects electricity and gas usage and, consequently, Energy Deliverys results of operations.
62
Temperatures above normal levels in the summer tend to increase summer cooling electricity demand and revenues, and temperatures below moderate levels in the winter tend to increase winter heating electricity and gas demand and revenues. As a corollary, moderate temperatures adversely affect the usage of energy and resulting revenues. Because of seasonal pricing differentials, coupled with higher consumption levels, Energy Delivery typically reports higher revenues in the third quarter of the fiscal year. However, extreme summer conditions or storms may stress Energy Deliverys transmission and distribution systems, resulting in increased maintenance costs and limiting its ability to meet peak customer demand. These extreme conditions may have detrimental effects on Energy Deliverys operations.
Economic conditions and activity in Energy Deliverys service territories directly affect the demand for electricity and gas.
Higher levels of development and business activity generally increase the number of Energy Deliverys customers and their average use of energy. Periods of recessionary economic conditions may adversely affect Energy Deliverys results of operations. Retail electric and gas sales growth on an annual basis is expected to be between 1% and 2% in the service territories of ComEd and PECO.
Generation
Generation is focused on efficiently providing reliable power through a generation portfolio with fuel and dispatch diversity. Generations directive is to continue to increase fleet output and to improve fleet efficiency while sustaining operational safety. Generations Power Team manages the output of Generations assets and energy sales to optimize value and reduce the volatility of Generations earnings and cash flows. Exelon believes that Generation will provide a steady source of earnings through its low-cost operations and will take advantage of higher wholesale prices when they can be realized. More detailed explanations for each of these and other challenges in managing the Generation business are as follows:
Generation must effectively manage its power portfolio to meet its contractual commitments and to handle changes in the wholesale power markets.
The majority of Generations portfolio is used to provide power under long-term purchase power agreements with ComEd and PECO. To the extent portions of the portfolio are not needed for that purpose, Generations output is sold on the wholesale market. To the extent that its portfolio is not sufficient to meet the requirements of ComEd and PECO, Generation must purchase power in the wholesale power markets. Generations financial results are dependent upon its ability to cost-effectively meet the load requirements of ComEd and PECO, to manage its power portfolio and to effectively handle the changes in the wholesale power markets.
Generation must effectively plan for the elimination of significant purchase power arrangements post 2006.
Generation sells a significant portion of its output to ComEd and PECO under long-term purchase power agreements. As a result of the continuing transition from a regulated environment, the agreement with ComEd, which expires at the end of 2006, is unlikely to be replaced with a similar arrangement. If the agreement is not replaced, Generation may need to sell more power at market-based prices. Illinois has considered both regulated and competitive models for the post-transition periods, including an auction-based model and new contractual arrangements with third parties, which may have shorter durations and lower volume sales. A regulated model may not adequately compensate Generation for its investment in its generating facilities. Increased market sales and new contractual arrangements under a competitive model may adversely affect Generations credit risk due to an increase in the number of customers and the loss of a highly predictable revenue source.
63
The scope and scale of Generations nuclear generating resources provide a cost advantage in meeting contractual commitments and enable Generation to sell power in the wholesale markets.
Generations resources include interests in 11 nuclear generation stations, consisting of 19 units. Generations nuclear fleet generated 136,621 GWhs, or more than half of Generations total output, for the year ended December 31, 2004. 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. Generations nuclear plants benefit from stable fuel costs, minimal environmental impact from operations and a safe operating history.
Generations financial performance may be affected by liabilities arising from its ownership and operation of nuclear facilities.
The ownership and operation of nuclear facilities involve risks as further described below.
Nuclear capacity factors. Capacity factors, particularly nuclear capacity factors, significantly affect Generations results of operations. Nuclear plant operations involve substantial fixed operating costs but produce electricity at low variable costs due to low fuel costs. Consequently, to be successful, Generation must consistently operate its nuclear generating facilities at high capacity factors. Lower capacity factors increase Generations operating costs by requiring Generation to generate additional energy from its fossil or hydroelectric facilities or purchase additional energy in the spot or forward markets in order to satisfy Generations obligations to ComEd and PECO and other committed third-party sales. These sources generally have a higher operating cost than Generation incurs to generate energy from its nuclear stations.
Refueling outages. Outages at nuclear stations to replenish fuel require the station to be turned off. Refueling outages are planned to occur once every 18 to 24 months and currently average approximately 25 days in duration. Generation has significantly decreased the length of refueling outages in recent years; however, 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. Each 25-day outage, depending on the capacity of the station, will decrease the total nuclear annual capacity factor between 0.3% and 0.5%. The number of refueling outages, including the AmerGen plants and the co-owned Salem plant operated by PSEG, will increase from ten in 2004 to eleven in 2005; however, the projected total non-fuel capital expenditures for the nuclear plants will decrease in 2005 from 2004 by approximately $40 million. Maintenance expenditures are expected to increase by approximately $15 million in 2005 compared to 2004 as a result of the increased number of planned nuclear outages.
Nuclear fuel quality. The quality of nuclear fuel utilized by Generation can affect the efficiency and costs of Generations operations. Certain of Generations nuclear units have been identified as having a limited number of fuel performance issues. Remediation actions, including those required to address performance issues, could result in increased costs due to accelerated fuel amortization and/or increased outage costs. It is difficult to predict the total cost of these remediation procedures.
Spent nuclear fuel storage. Generation incurs costs on an annual basis for the storage of spent nuclear fuel. Under the terms of the settlement reached with the DOE in 2004, Generation will be reimbursed for costs of spent fuel storage. The approval of a national repository for the storage of spent nuclear fuel, such as the one proposed for Yucca Mountain, Nevada, and the timing of such facility opening, will significantly affect the costs associated with storage of spent nuclear fuel, and the ultimate amounts received from the DOE under the settlement. Also, the availability of a repository for spent nuclear fuel may affect the ability to fully decommission the nuclear units.
64
License Renewals. Generations nuclear facilities are currently operating under 40-year Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) licenses. Generation has applied for and received 20-year renewals for the licenses that will be expiring in the next ten years, excluding licenses for the AmerGen facilities. Generation has received 20-year renewals of the operating licenses for the Peach Bottom 2 and 3, Dresden 2 and 3 and Quad Cities 1 and 2 Units. In December 2004, the NRC issued an order that will permit Oyster Creek to operate beyond its license expiration in April 2009 if the NRC has not completed reviewing the application for renewal. The application for Oyster Creeks license renewal is anticipated to be filed by August 2005 in order to comply with this agreement. Generation intends to evaluate opportunities, as permitted by the NRC, to apply for license renewals for some or all of the remaining licenses. If the renewals are granted, Generation cannot assure that economics will support the continued operation of the facilities for all or any portion of the renewed license. If the NRC does not renew the operating licenses for Generations nuclear stations, Generations results of operations could be adversely affected by increased depreciation rates and accelerated future decommissioning payments.
Management believes the current status of Yucca Mountain will not impact Generations ability to renew the licenses for its nuclear plants. However, should a national policy for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel not be developed, the unavailability of a repository for spent nuclear fuel could become a consideration by the NRC during future nuclear license renewal proceedings, including applications for new licenses, and may affect Generations ability to fully decommission its nuclear units.
Regulatory risk. The NRC may modify, suspend or revoke licenses, shut down a nuclear facility and impose civil penalties for failure to comply with the Atomic Energy Act, related regulations or the terms of the licenses for nuclear facilities. A change in the Atomic Energy Act or the applicable regulations or licenses may require a substantial increase in capital expenditures or may result in increased operating or decommissioning costs and significantly affect Generations results of operations or financial position. Events at nuclear plants owned by others, as well as those owned by Generation, may cause the NRC to initiate such actions.
Operational risk. Operations at any of Generations nuclear generation plants could degrade to the point where Generation has to shut down the plant or operate at less than full capacity. If this were to happen, identifying and correcting the causes may require significant time and expense. Generation may choose to close a plant rather than incur the expense of restarting it or returning the plant to full capacity. In either event, Generation may lose revenue and incur increased fuel and purchased power expense to meet supply commitments. For plants operated but not wholly owned by Generation, Generation may also incur liability to the co-owners.
On January 28, 2004, the NRC issued a letter requesting PSEG to conduct a review of its Salem facility, of which Generation owns 42.59%, to assess the workplace environment for raising and addressing safety issues. PSEG responded to the letter on February 28, 2004, and had independent assessments of the work environment at the facility performed. Assessment results were provided to the NRC in May 2004. The assessments concluded that Salem was safe for continued operation, but also identified issues that needed to be addressed. At an NRC public meeting on June 16, 2004, PSEG outlined its action plans to address these issues, which focus on safety conscious work environment, the corrective action program and work management. A letter documenting these plans and commitments was sent to the NRC on June 25, 2004. On July 30, 2004, the NRC provided a letter to PSEG indicating that it had completed its review. The letter indicated that the NRC has not identified any safety violations and that it appears that the PSEG action plan will address the key findings of both the NRC and PSEG assessments. On August 30, 2004, the NRC provided PSEG with its mid-cycle performance reviews of Salem, which detailed the NRCs plan for enhanced oversight related to the work environment. The letter indicated the NRC plans to continue with this heightened oversight until PSEG has concluded that substantial, sustainable progress has been made, and the NRC has completed a review that confirms PSEGs conclusions. Under the NRC oversight program, among other things, PSEG provided the NRC with a report of its progress at a public meeting in December 2004, and began publishing quarterly metrics to demonstrate performance in the fourth quarter of 2004. The next public meeting is scheduled for spring 2005.
65
The spent fuel pool at each Salem Unit has an installed leakage collection system. This normal leakage path was found to be obstructed, causing concern about the extent of leakage contact with the fuel handling buildings concrete structure. PSEG is developing a solution to maintain the design function of the leakage collection system and is investigating the extent of any structural degradation caused by the leakage. The investigation should take approximately one year. If any significant degradation is identified, the repair costs to the owners of the facility could be material. The NRC issued Information Notice 2004-05 in March 2004 concerning this emerging industry issue and Generation cannot predict what further actions the NRC may take on this matter.
Nuclear accident risk. Although the safety record of nuclear reactors, including Generations, generally has been very good, accidents and other unforeseen problems have occurred both in the United States and elsewhere. The consequences of an accident can be severe and include loss of life and property damage. Any resulting liability from a nuclear accident may exceed Generations resources, including insurance coverages, and significantly affect Generations results of operations or financial position.
Nuclear insurance. The Price-Anderson Act limits the liability of nuclear reactor owners for claims that could arise from a single incident. The limit as of December 31, 2004 is $10.76 billion and is subject to change to account for the effects of inflation and changes in the number of licensed reactors. As required by the Price-Anderson Act, Generation carries the maximum available amount of nuclear liability insurance (currently $300 million for each operating site). Claims exceeding that amount are covered through mandatory participation in a financial protection pool. Although the Price-Anderson Act has expired, only facilities applying for NRC licenses subsequent to its expiration are affected. Existing commercial generating facilities, such as those owned and operated by Generation, remain subject to the provisions of the Price-Anderson Act.
Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited (NEIL), a mutual insurance company to which Generation belongs, provides property and business interruption insurance for Generations nuclear operations. In recent years, NEIL has made distributions to its members. Generations distribution for 2004 was $40 million, which was recorded as a reduction to operating and maintenance expenses in its Consolidated Statement of Income. Generation cannot predict the level of future distributions or if they will continue at all.
Decommissioning. Generation has an obligation to decommission its nuclear power plants. Based on estimates of decommissioning costs for each of the nuclear facilities in which Generation has an ownership interest, other than AmerGen facilities, the ICC permits ComEd and the PUC permits PECO to collect funds from their customers, which are deposited in nuclear decommissioning trust funds maintained by Generation. These funds, together with earnings thereon, will be used to decommission such nuclear facilities. The ICC permitted ComEd to recover $73 million per year from retail customers for decommissioning for the years 2001 through 2004 and, depending upon the portion of the output of certain generating stations taken by ComEd, up to $73 million annually in 2005 and 2006. Because ComEd is not expected to take all of the output of these stations, actual collections are expected to be less than $73 million annually in 2005 and 2006. Subsequent to 2006, there will be no further recoveries of decommissioning costs from ComEds customers. PECO is currently recovering $33 million annually for nuclear decommissioning. Generation expects that these collections will continue through the operating license life of each of the former PECO units, with adjustments every five years to reflect changes in cost estimates and decommissioning trust fund performance. Decommissioning expenditures are expected to occur primarily after the plants are retired. Based on current licenses and anticipated renewals, decommissioning expenditures for plants in operation are currently estimated to begin in 2029. To fund future decommissioning costs, Generation held $5.3 billion of investments in trust funds, including net unrealized gains and losses, at December 31, 2004.
66
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 Generations four retired units) addressing Generations ability to meet the NRC-estimated funding levels (NRC Funding Levels) with scheduled contributions to and earnings on the decommissioning trust funds. As of December 31, 2004, Generations 23 units met the NRCs Funding Levels. Generation will submit its next biennial report to the NRC in March 2005.
In 2003, the General Accounting Office (GAO) published a study on the NRCs need for more effective analyses to ensure the adequate accumulation of funds to decommission nuclear power plants in the United States. As it has in the past, the GAO concluded that accumulated and future proposed funding was inadequate to achieve NRC Funding Levels at a number of U.S. nuclear plants, including a number of Generations plants. Generation has reviewed the GAOs report and believes that, in reaching its conclusions, the GAO did not consider all aspects of Generations decommissioning strategy, such as fund growth during the decommissioning period. The inclusion of estimated earnings growth on Generations nuclear trust funds during the decommissioning period virtually eliminates any funding shortfalls identified in the GAO report.
Generation currently believes that the amounts in nuclear decommissioning trust funds and future collections from ratepayers, together with earnings thereon, will provide adequate funding to decommission its nuclear facilities in accordance with regulatory requirements. Forecasting investment earnings and costs to decommission nuclear generating stations requires significant judgment, and actual results may differ significantly from current estimates. Ultimately, when decommissioning activities are initiated, if the investments held by Generations nuclear decommissioning trusts are not sufficient to fund the decommissioning of Generations nuclear plants, Generation may be required to identify other means of funding its decommissioning obligations.
Generation relies on the availability of electric transmission facilities that it does not own or control to deliver its wholesale electric power to the purchasers of the power.
Generation depends on transmission facilities owned and operated by other companies, including ComEd and PECO, to deliver the power that it sells at wholesale. If transmission at these facilities is disrupted or transmission capacity is inadequate, Generation may not be able to sell and deliver its wholesale power. While Generation was not significantly affected by the failure in the transmission grid that served a large portion of the Northeastern United States and Canada during the August 2003 blackout, the North American transmission grid is highly interconnected and, in extraordinary circumstances, disruptions at a point within the grid can cause a systemic response that results in an extensive power outage. If a regions power transmission infrastructure is inadequate, Generations recovery of wholesale costs and profits may be limited. In addition, if restrictive transmission price regulation is imposed, the transmission companies may not have sufficient incentive to invest in expansion of transmission infrastructure.
The FERC has issued electric transmission initiatives that require electric transmission services to be offered unbundled from commodity sales. Although these initiatives are designed to encourage wholesale market transactions for electricity, access to transmission systems may in fact not be available if transmission capacity is insufficient because of physical constraints or because it is contractually unavailable. Generation also cannot predict whether transmission facilities will be expanded in specific markets to accommodate competitive access to those markets.
Generation is directly affected by price fluctuations and other risks of the wholesale power market.
Generation fulfills its energy commitments from the output of the generating facilities that it owns as well as through buying electricity in both the wholesale bilateral and spot markets. The excess or deficiency of energy owned or controlled by Generation compared to its obligations exposes Generation to the risks of rising and falling prices in those markets, and Generations cash flows may vary accordingly.
67
Generations cash flows from generation that is not used to meet its commitments to ComEd and PECO are largely dependent on wholesale prices of electricity and Generations ability to successfully market energy, capacity and ancillary services. In the event that lower wholesale prices of electricity reduce Generations current or forecasted cash flows, the carrying value of Generations generating units may be determined to be impaired and Generation would be required to incur an impairment loss.
The wholesale spot market price of electricity for each hour is generally determined by the cost of supplying the next unit of electricity to the market during that hour. Many times, the next unit of electricity supplied would be supplied from generating stations fueled by fossil fuels, primarily natural gas. Consequently, the open-market wholesale price of electricity may reflect the cost of natural gas plus the cost to convert natural gas to electricity. Therefore, changes in the supply and cost of natural gas generally affect the open market wholesale price of electricity.
Credit Risk. In the bilateral markets, Generation is exposed to the risk that counterparties that owe Generation money or energy will not perform their obligations for operational or financial reasons. In the event the counterparties to these arrangements fail to perform, Generation might be forced to purchase or sell power 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 the risks of whatever default mechanisms exist in that market, some of which attempt to spread the risk across all participants, which may or may not be an effective way of lessening the severity of the risk and the amounts at stake. Generation is also a party to agreements with entities in the energy sector that have experienced rating downgrades or other financial difficulties.
In order to evaluate the viability of Generations counterparties, Generation has implemented credit risk management procedures designed to mitigate the risks associated with these transactions. These policies include counterparty credit limits and, in some cases, require deposits or letters of credit to be posted by certain counterparties. Generations counterparty credit limits are based on a scoring model that considers a variety of factors, including leverage, liquidity, profitability, credit ratings and risk management capabilities. Generation has entered into payment netting agreements or enabling agreements that allow for netting of payables and receivables with the majority of its large counterparties. The credit department monitors current and forward credit exposure to counterparties and their affiliates, both on an individual and an aggregate basis.
The integration of the retail businesses of Exelon Energy subjects Generation to credit risk resulting from a new customer base.
Immature Markets. Certain wholesale spot markets are new and evolving markets that vary from region to region and are still developing practices and procedures. While the FERC has proposed initiatives to standardize wholesale spot markets, Generation cannot predict whether that effort will be successful, what form any of these markets will eventually take or what roles Generation will play in them. Problems in or the failure of any of these markets, as was experienced in California in 2000, could adversely affect Generations business.
Hedging. The Power Team buys and sells energy and other products in the wholesale markets and enters into financial contracts to manage risk and hedge various positions in Generations power generation portfolio. This activity, along with the effects of any specialized accounting for trading contracts, may cause volatility in Generations future results of operations.
Weather. Generations operations are affected by weather, which affects demand for electricity as well as operating conditions. Generation plans its business based upon normal weather assumptions. To the extent that weather is warmer in the summer or colder in the winter than assumed, Generation may require greater resources to meet its contractual requirements to ComEd and PECO. Extreme weather conditions or storms may affect the availability of generation capacity and transmission, limiting Generations ability to source or send power to where it is sold.
68
These conditions, which may not have been fully anticipated, may have an adverse effect by causing Generation to seek additional capacity at a time when wholesale markets are tight or to seek to sell excess capacity at a time when those markets are weak. Generation 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.
Excess capacity. Energy prices are also affected by the amount of supply available in a region. In the markets where Generation sells power, there has been a significant increase in the number of new power plants commencing commercial operations in recent years. An excess supply situation can lead to conditions with reduced wholesale market prices.
Generations business is also affected by the restructuring of the energy industry.
Regional Transmission Organizations and Standard Market Platform. Generation is dependent on wholesale energy markets and open transmission access and rights by which Generation delivers power to its wholesale customers, including ComEd and PECO. Generation uses the wholesale regional energy markets to sell power that Generation does not need to satisfy its long-term contractual obligations, to meet long-term obligations not provided by its own resources and to take advantage of price opportunities.
Wholesale markets have only been implemented in certain areas of the country and each market has unique features which may create trading barriers among the markets. The FERC has proposed initiatives, including RTOs, to encourage the development of large regional, uniform markets and to eliminate trade barriers. The FERCs effort to promote RTOs throughout the states has generated substantial opposition by some state regulators and other governmental bodies. In addition, efforts to develop a RTO have been abandoned in certain regions. Generation supports the development of RTOs and implementation of standard market protocols for these regions, and others, but cannot predict their success or whether they will lead to the development of the envisioned large, successful wholesale markets.
Approximately 79% of Generations generating resources, which include directly owned assets and capacity obtained through long-term contracts, are located in the region encompassed by PJM, following PJMs expansion to the Midwest markets in 2004. The PJM market has been the most successful and liquid regional market. Generations future results of operations may be affected by the successful expansion of that market to the Midwest and the implementation of any market changes mandated by the FERC.
Provider of Last Resort. As discussed above, ComEd and PECO each have POLR obligations that they have effectively transferred to Generation through full-requirements contracts. Because the choice of electricity generation supplier lies with the customer, planning to meet these obligations has a higher level of uncertainty than that traditionally experienced due to weather and the economy. It is difficult for Generation to plan the energy demand of ComEd and PECO customers. The uncertainty regarding the amount of ComEd and PECO load for which Generation must prepare increases Generations costs and may limit its sales opportunities. A significant under-estimation of the electric-load requirements of ComEd and PECO could result in Generation not having enough power to cover its supply obligation, in which case Generation would be required to buy power from third parties or in the spot markets at prevailing market prices. Those prices may not be as favorable or as manageable as Generations long-term supply expenses and thus could increase Generations total costs.
As the demand for energy rises in the future, it may be necessary to increase capacity through the construction of new generating facilities. Both Illinois and Pennsylvania statutes contemplate that future generation will be built at the risk of market participants. Any construction of new generating facilities by Generation would be subject to market concentration tests administered by the FERC.
69
Effective management of capital projects is important to Generations business.
Generations business is capital intensive and requires significant investments in energy generation and in other internal infrastructure projects. The inability of Generation to effectively manage its capital projects could adversely affect Generations results of operations.
The interaction between the energy delivery and generation businesses provides Exelon a partial hedge of wholesale energy market prices.
The price of power purchased and sold in the open wholesale energy markets can vary significantly in response to market conditions. The amounts of power that Generation provides to ComEd and PECO vary from month to month; however, delivery requirements are generally highest in the summer when wholesale power prices are also generally highest. Therefore, energy committed by Generation to serve ComEd and PECO customers is not exposed to the price uncertainty of the open wholesale energy market. Generally, between 60% and 70% of Generations supply serves ComEd and PECO customers. Consequently, Generation has limited its earnings exposure from the volatility of the wholesale energy market to the energy generated in excess of the ComEd and PECO requirements, as well as any other contracted longer term obligations.
As its business continues to evolve, Generation is exploring other long-term contracts or arrangements, which arrangements could limit its earnings opportunity if market prices are significantly different than its expectations.
Generations financial performance depends on its ability to respond to competition in the energy industry.
As a result of industry restructuring, numerous generation companies created by the disaggregation of vertically integrated utilities have become active in the wholesale power generation business. In addition, independent power producers (IPP) have become prevalent in the wholesale power industry. In recent years, IPPs and the generation companies of disaggregated utilities have installed new generating capacity at a pace greater than the growth of electricity demand. These new generating facilities may be more efficient than Generations facilities. The introduction of new technologies could increase competition, which could lower prices and have an adverse effect on Generations results of operations or financial condition. Generations financial performance depends on its ability to respond to competition in the energy industry.
70
Power Teams risk management policies cannot fully eliminate the risk associated with its power trading activities.
Power Teams power trading (including fuel procurement and power marketing) activities expose Generation to risks of commodity price movements. Generation attempts to manage its exposure through enforcement of established risk limits and risk management procedures. These risk limits and risk management procedures may not always be followed or may not work as planned and cannot eliminate the risks associated with these activities. Even when its policies and procedures are followed, and decisions are made based on projections and estimates of future performance, results of operations may be diminished if the judgments and assumptions underlying those decisions prove to be wrong or inaccurate. 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 power trading and risk management decisions may have on its business, operating results or financial position.
General Business
The Registrants may make acquisitions that do not achieve the intended financial results.
The Registrants may continue to pursue investments that fit their strategic objectives and improve their financial performance. On December 20, 2004, Exelon announced the execution of the Merger Agreement with PSEG. Exelon and PSEG entered into the Merger Agreement with the expectation that the Merger would result in various benefits, including, among other things, cost savings and operating efficiencies. Achieving the anticipated benefits of the Merger is subject to a number of uncertainties, including whether the businesses of Exelon and PSEG are integrated in an efficient and effective manner, as well as general competitive factors in the market place. Failure to achieve these anticipated benefits could result in increased costs, decreases in the amount of expected revenues generated by the combined company and diversion of managements time and energy and could have an adverse effect on the combined companys business, financial condition, operating results and prospects.
Before the Merger may be completed, various approvals or consents must be obtained from FERC, the SEC, the NRC and various utility regulatory, antitrust and other authorities in the United States and in foreign jurisdictions. The governmental authorities from which these approvals are required may impose conditions on completion of the Merger or require changes to the terms of the Merger. These conditions or changes could have the effect of delaying completion of the Merger or imposing additional costs on or limiting the revenues of the combined company and or the individual registrants following the Merger, any of which might have a material adverse effect on the combined company or the individual registrants following completion of the Merger.
Additionally, the Merger Agreement contains certain termination rights for both Exelon and PSEG, and further provides that, upon termination of the Merger Agreement under specified circumstances, (1) Exelon may be required to pay PSEG a termination fee of $400 million plus PSEGs transaction expenses up to $40 million and (2) PSEG may be required to pay Exelon a termination fee of $400 million plus Exelons transaction expenses up to $40 million.
Among the factors considered by the board of directors of Exelon in connection with its approvals of the Merger Agreement were the benefits as well as the risks that could result from the Merger. Exelon cannot give any assurance that these benefits will be realized within the time periods contemplated or even that they will be realized at all.
71
The Registrants results of operations may be affected by the divestiture of businesses and facilities.
The Registrants may decide to divest businesses or facilities that do not fit with their strategic objectives or improve their financial performance, such as the sale of Generations interest in Sithe and the divestiture or wind down of the remaining businesses of Enterprises. The Registrants may be unable to successfully divest or wind down these businesses and facilities for a number of reasons, including an inability to locate appropriate buyers or to negotiate acceptable terms for transactions. In addition, the amount that the Registrants may realize from a divestiture of a business or a facility is subject to fluctuating market conditions that may contribute to pricing and other terms that may be materially different than expected and could result in losses on sales. The Registrants also face risks in managing these businesses prior to their divestitures due to potential turnover of key employees and operating the businesses through their transition. The Registrants may also incur costs related to the wind down of businesses that will not be sold or unfavorable post-close purchase price adjustments related to divestitures.
Results of operations are affected by increasing costs.
Inflation affects the Registrants through increased operating costs and increased capital costs for plant and equipment. As a result of the rate freezes and caps under which the Energy Delivery business operates and price pressures due to competition, Energy Delivery may not be able to pass the costs of inflation through to its customers. In addition, the Registrants face rising medical benefit costs, which are increasing at a rate that greatly exceeds the rate of general inflation. If the Registrants are unable to successfully manage their medical benefit costs, their results of operations could be negatively affected.
Market performance affects decommissioning trust funds and benefit plan asset values.
The performance of the capital markets affects the values of the assets that are held in trust to satisfy future obligations under pension and postretirement benefit plans and to decommission Generations nuclear plants. The Registrants have significant obligations in these areas and hold significant assets in these trusts. A decline in the market value of those assets, as was experienced from 2000 to 2002, may increase the funding requirements of these obligations.
Regulations imposed by the SEC under PUHCA affect business operations.
Exelon is subject to regulation by the SEC under PUHCA as a result of its ownership of ComEd and PECO. That regulation affects Exelons ability to:
72
| diversify, by generally restricting investments to traditional electric and gas utility businesses and related businesses; | |||
| invest in or operate SEC-approved, non-utility companies beyond authorized financial and operating thresholds; | |||
| issue securities, by requiring the prior approval of the SEC or, for ComEd and PECO, requiring the approval of state regulatory commissions; | |||
| engage in transactions among affiliates without the SECs prior approval and, then, only at cost, since the PUHCA regulates business between affiliates in a utility holding company system; | |||
| make dividend payments in specified situations; | |||
| make intercompany loans in specified companies; | |||
| restructure capitalization to the extent the equity ratio falls below 30%; and | |||
| operate with a complex corporate structure. |
The Registrants may incur substantial costs to fulfill their obligations related to environmental matters.
The businesses in which the Registrants operate are subject to extensive environmental regulation by local, state and Federal authorities. These laws and regulations affect the manner in which they conduct their operations and make capital expenditures. These regulations affect how the Registrants handle air and water emissions and solid waste disposal and are an important aspect of their operations. In addition, the Registrants are subject to liability under these laws for the costs of remediating environmental contamination of property now or formerly owned by the Registrants and of property contaminated by hazardous substances they generate. They believe that they have a responsible environmental management and compliance program; however, they have incurred and expect to incur significant costs related to environmental compliance, site remediation and clean-up. Remediation activities associated with manufactured gas plant operations conducted by predecessor companies will be one component of such costs. Also, they 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.
As of December 31, 2004, Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation had reserves for environmental investigation and remediation costs of $124 million, $61 million, $47 million and $16 million, respectively, exclusive of decommissioning liabilities. The Registrants have accrued and will continue to accrue amounts that are believed prudent to cover these environmental liabilities, but the Registrants cannot predict with any certainty whether these amounts will be sufficient to cover their environmental liabilities. The Registrants cannot predict whether they will incur other significant liabilities for any additional investigation and remediation costs at additional sites not currently identified by them, environmental agencies or others, or whether such costs will be recoverable from third parties.
In July 2004, the EPA issued the final Phase II rule implementing Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act. This rule establishes national requirements for reducing the adverse environmental impacts from the entrainment and impingement of aquatic organisms at existing power plants. The rule identifies particular standards of performance with respect to entrainment and impingement and requires each facility to monitor and validate this performance in future years. All of Exelons power generation facilities with cooling water systems are subject to the regulations. Facilities without closed-cycle recirculating systems are potentially most affected. Those facilities are Clinton, Cromby, Dresden, Eddystone, Fairless Hills, Handley, Mountain Creek, New Boston, Oyster Creek, Peach Bottom, Quad Cities, and Salem. Exelon is currently evaluating compliance options at its affected plants. At this time, Exelon cannot estimate the effect that compliance with the Phase II rule requirements will have on the operation of Generations generating facilities and its future results of operations, financial condition and cash flows. There are many factors to be considered and evaluated to determine the extent to which there will be financial and operational impacts. The considerations and evaluations include, but are not limited to obtaining clarifying interpretations of the requirements from state regulators, resolving outstanding litigation proceedings concerning the requirements, completing studies to establish biological baselines for each facility, and performing environmental and economic cost benefit evaluation of the potential compliance alternatives in accordance with the requirements.
73
In June 2001, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (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. An application for renewal of that permit, including a demonstration of compliance with the requirements of the recently published Federal Water Pollution Control Act Section 316(b) regulations, must be submitted to NJDEP by February 2, 2006 unless the NJDEP grants additional time to collect information to comply with the new regulations. NJDEP advised PSEG in a letter dated July 12, 2004 that it strongly recommends reducing cooling water intake flow commensurate with closed-cycle cooling as a compliance option for Salem. PSEG has not made a determination regarding how it will demonstrate compliance with the Section 316(b) regulations. If application of the Section 316(b) regulations requires the retrofitting of Salems cooling water intake structure to reduce cooling water intake flow commensurate with closed-cycle cooling, the retrofit and any resulting cost of interim replacement power could result in material costs of compliance to the owners of the facility.
For additional information regarding environmental matters, see Environmental Regulation in ITEM 1 of this Form 10-K.
The Registrants must actively manage the security of their people and facilities.
As a result of the events of September 11, 2001, the electric industry has developed additional security guidelines. The electric industry, through the North American Electric Reliability Council, developed physical security guidelines, which were accepted by the United States Department of Energy and which may become mandatory through regulation or legislation. The gas industry, through the American Gas Association, developed physical security guidelines that were accepted by the United States Department of Transportation.
Generation has also initiated security measures, including implementation of measures mandated by the NRC for the nuclear facilities, to safeguard its employees and critical operations and is actively participating in industry initiatives to identify methods to maintain the reliability of its energy production and delivery systems. These security measures have resulted in and are expected to continue to result in increased costs. On a continuing basis, Generation evaluates enhanced security measures at certain critical locations, enhanced response and recovery plans and assesses long-term design changes and redundancy measures. Additionally, the energy industry is working 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 countrys energy systems. These measures will involve additional expense to develop and implement.
Changes in the availability and cost of insurance mean that the Registrants have greater exposure to economic loss due to property damage and liability.
The Registrants carry property damage and liability insurance for their properties and operations. As a result of significant changes in the insurance marketplace, due in part to terrorist acts, the available coverage and limits may be less than the amount of insurance obtained in the past, the costs of obtaining such insurance may be higher and the recovery for losses due to terrorist acts may be limited. The Registrants are self-insured for deductibles and to the extent that any losses may exceed the amount of insurance maintained. A claim that exceeds the amounts available under their property damage and liability insurance, together with the deductible, would negatively affect their results of operations.
74
Taxation has a significant impact on results of operations.
Tax reserves and the recoverability of deferred tax assets. The Registrants are required to make judgments regarding the potential tax effects of various financial transactions and their ongoing operations to estimate their obligations to taxing authorities. These tax obligations include income, real estate, use and employment-related taxes and ongoing appeals related to these tax matters. These judgments include reserves for potential adverse outcomes regarding tax positions that have been taken. The Registrants must also assess their ability to generate capital gains in future periods to realize tax benefits associated with capital losses previously generated or expected to be generated in future periods. Capital losses may be deducted only to the extent of capital gains realized during the year of the loss or during the three prior or five succeeding years. The Registrants do not record valuation allowances for deferred tax assets related to capital losses that the Registrants believe will be realized in future periods. Generation has recorded valuation allowances against certain deferred assets associated with capital losses due to the consolidation of Sithe.
Increases in state income taxes. Due to the revenue needs of the states in which the Registrants operate, various state income tax and fee increases have been proposed or are being contemplated. The Registrants cannot predict whether legislation or regulation will be introduced, the form of any legislation or regulation, whether any such legislation or regulation will be passed by the state legislatures or regulatory bodies, or, if enacted, whether any such legislation or regulation would be effective retroactively or prospectively. If enacted, these changes could increase state income tax expense and could have a negative impact on the Registrants results of operations and cash flows.
Investments in synthetic fuel-producing facilities. Exelon has purchased interests in three synthetic fuel-producing facilities, which increased Exelons net income by $70 million in 2004. Tax credits generated by the production of synthetic fuel are subject to a phase-out provision that gradually reduces tax credits as the annual average wellhead price per barrel of domestic crude oil increases into an inflation-adjusted phase-out range. If domestic crude oil prices remain high in 2005, the tax credits and net income generated by the investments may be reduced substantially. In addition, Exelon has recorded an intangible asset related to its investments in these facilities with a net carrying value of $208 million at December 31, 2004 that could become impaired if domestic crude oil prices continue to increase in the future.
Exelon and its subsidiaries have guaranteed the performance of third parties that may result in substantial cost in the event of non-performance.
Exelon and its subsidiaries have issued certain guarantees of the performance of others, which obligate Exelon to perform in the event that the third parties do not perform. In the event of non-performance by the third parties to these guarantees, Exelon and its subsidiaries could incur substantial cost to fulfill their obligations under these guarantees. Such performance could have a material impact on the financial statements of Exelon and its subsidiaries. See Note 20 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding guarantees.
New Accounting Pronouncements
See Note 1 of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding new accounting pronouncements.
75
Exhibit 99.3
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
Exelon
Managements 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. Exelons 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 accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
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.
Exelons management conducted an assessment of the effectiveness of Exelons internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004. In making this assessment, management used the criteria in Internal ControlIntegrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on this assessment, Exelons management concluded that, as of December 31, 2004, Exelons internal control over financial reporting was effective.
February 22, 2005
Managements assessment of the effectiveness of Exelons internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004 has been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report which appears on page 2 of Exelons Current Report on Form 8-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.
1
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
To the Shareholders and Board of Directors of Exelon Corporation:
We have completed an integrated audit of Exelon Corporations 2004 consolidated financial statements and of its internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004 and audits of its 2003 and 2002 consolidated financial statements in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Our opinions, based on our audits, are presented below.
Consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements listed in the index appearing under Item 9.01 of this Current Report on Form 8-K present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Exelon Corporation and its subsidiaries at December 31, 2004 and 2003, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2004 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In addition, in our opinion, the financial statement schedule (not presented herein) listed in the index appearing under Item 15(a)(1)(ii) of Exelon Corporations 2004 Annual Report on Form 10-K presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein when read in conjunction with the related consolidated financial statements. These financial statements and the financial statement schedule are the responsibility of the Companys management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and the financial statement schedule based on our audits. We conducted our audits of these statements in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit of financial statements includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
As discussed in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements, Exelon Corporation changed its method of accounting for goodwill as of January 1, 2002; its method of accounting for asset retirement obligations as of January 1, 2003; and its method of accounting for variable interest entities in 2003 and 2004.
Internal control over financial reporting
Also, in our opinion, managements assessment, included in Managements Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting appearing under Item 9.01 of this Current Report on Form 8-K, that the Company maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004 based on criteria established in Internal Control Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO), is fairly stated, in all material respects, based on those criteria. Furthermore, in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004, based on criteria established in Internal Control Integrated Framework issued by the COSO. The Companys management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting. Our responsibility is to express opinions on
2
managements assessment and on the effectiveness of the Companys internal control over financial reporting based on our audit. We conducted our audit of internal control over financial reporting in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. An audit of internal control over financial reporting includes obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, evaluating managements assessment, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control, and performing such other procedures as we consider necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinions.
A companys 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 companys 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 companys 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.
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Chicago, Illinois
February 22, 2005, except as to the change in reportable segments and the effects of the
reclassification for discontinued operations discussed in notes 22 and 26, respectively, as to
which the date is May 11, 2005
3
Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies
Consolidated Statements of Income
For the Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
(in millions, except per share data) | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | |||||||||
Operating revenues |
$ | 14,133 | $ | 15,148 | $ | 14,060 | ||||||
Operating expenses |
||||||||||||
Purchased power |
2,709 | 3,459 | 3,262 | |||||||||
Purchased power from AmerGen Energy Company, LLC |
| 382 | 273 | |||||||||
Fuel |
2,220 | 2,353 | 1,555 | |||||||||
Impairment of Boston Generating, LLC long-lived assets |
| 945 | | |||||||||
Operating and maintenance |
3,700 | 3,915 | 3,655 | |||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
1,295 | 1,115 | 1,330 | |||||||||
Taxes other than income |
710 | 570 | 705 | |||||||||
Total operating expenses |
10,634 | 12,739 | 10,780 | |||||||||
Operating income |
3,499 | 2,409 | 3,280 | |||||||||
Other income and deductions |
||||||||||||
Interest expense |
(471 | ) | (861 | ) | (953 | ) | ||||||
Interest expense to affiliates |
(357 | ) | (12 | ) | (2 | ) | ||||||
Distributions on preferred securities of subsidiaries |
(3 | ) | (39 | ) | (45 | ) | ||||||
Equity in earnings (losses) of unconsolidated affiliates |
(154 | ) | 33 | 86 | ||||||||
Other, net |
63 | (244 | ) | 327 | ||||||||
Total other income and deductions |
(922 | ) | (1,123 | ) | (587 | ) | ||||||
Income from continuing operations before income taxes and
minority interest |
2,577 | 1,286 | 2,693 | |||||||||
Income taxes |
713 | 389 | 1,000 | |||||||||
Income from continuing operations before minority interest |
1,864 | 897 | 1,693 | |||||||||
Minority interest |
6 | (5 | ) | (3 | ) | |||||||
Income from continuing operations |
1,870 | 892 | 1,690 | |||||||||
Discontinued operations |
||||||||||||
Loss from discontinued operations (net of taxes of $(40) and $(49)
in 2004 and 2003, respectively) |
(61 | ) | (86 | ) | (16 | ) | ||||||
Gain (loss) on disposal of discontinued operations (net of taxes
of $19, $(9) and $(2) in 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively) |
32 | (13 | ) | (4 | ) | |||||||
Loss from discontinued operations |
(29 | ) | (99 | ) | (20 | ) | ||||||
Income before cumulative effect of changes in accounting principles |
1,841 | 793 | 1,670 | |||||||||
Cumulative effect of changes in accounting principles
(net of income taxes of $17, $69 and $(90) in 2004, 2003 and 2002,
respectively) |
23 | 112 | (230 | ) | ||||||||
Net income |
$ | 1,864 | $ | 905 | $ | 1,440 | ||||||
Average shares of common stock outstanding |
||||||||||||
Basic |
661 | 651 | 645 | |||||||||
Diluted |
669 | 657 | 649 | |||||||||
Earnings per average common share - basic: |
||||||||||||
Income from continuing operations |
$ | 2.83 | $ | 1.37 | $ | 2.62 | ||||||
Loss from discontinued operations |
(0.04 | ) | (0.15 | ) | (0.03 | ) | ||||||
Income before cumulative
effect of changes in accounting principles |
2.79 | 1.22 | 2.59 | |||||||||
Cumulative effect of changes in accounting principles |
0.03 | 0.17 | (0.36 | ) | ||||||||
Net income |
$ | 2.82 | $ | 1.39 | $ | 2.23 | ||||||
Earnings per average common share diluted: |
||||||||||||
Income from continuing operations |
$ | 2.79 | $ | 1.36 | $ | 2.60 | ||||||
Loss from discontinued operations |
(0.04 | ) | (0.15 | ) | (0.03 | ) | ||||||
Income before cumulative
effect of changes in accounting principles |
2.75 | 1.21 | 2.57 | |||||||||
Cumulative effect of changes in accounting principles |
0.03 | 0.17 | (0.35 | ) | ||||||||
Net income |
$ | 2.78 | $ | 1.38 | $ | 2.22 | ||||||
Dividends per common share |
$ | 1.26 | $ | 0.96 | $ | 0.88 | ||||||
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
4
Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
For the Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
(in millions) | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | |||||||||
Cash flows from operating activities |
||||||||||||
Net income |
$ | 1,864 | $ | 905 | $ | 1,440 | ||||||
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash flows provided by operating activities: |
||||||||||||
Depreciation, amortization and accretion, including nuclear fuel |
1,933 | 1,681 | 1,701 | |||||||||
Other decommissioning-related activities |
169 | 37 | | |||||||||
Cumulative effect of changes in accounting principles (net of income taxes) |
(23 | ) | (112 | ) | 230 | |||||||
Impairment of investments |
10 | 309 | 41 | |||||||||
Impairment of goodwill and other long-lived assets |
1 | 990 | | |||||||||
Deferred income taxes and amortization of investment tax credits |
202 | (36 | ) | 278 | ||||||||
Provision for uncollectible accounts |
87 | 94 | 129 | |||||||||
Equity in (earnings) losses of unconsolidated affiliates |
153 | (33 | ) | (80 | ) | |||||||
(Gains) losses on sales of investments and wholly owned subsidiaries |
(162 | ) | 25 | (199 | ) | |||||||
Net realized (gains) losses on nuclear decommissioning trust funds |
(72 | ) | 16 | 32 | ||||||||
Other non-cash operating activities |
(24 | ) | 18 | 101 | ||||||||
Changes in assets and liabilities
|
||||||||||||
Accounts receivables |
(123 | ) | 102 | (357 | ) | |||||||
Inventories |
(60 | ) | (54 | ) | (37 | ) | ||||||
Other current assets |
79 | (68 | ) | 45 | ||||||||
Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other current liabilities |
173 | (74 | ) | 43 | ||||||||
Income taxes |
293 | (271 | ) | 288 | ||||||||
Net realized and unrealized mark-to-market and hedging transactions |
49 | (10 | ) | 18 | ||||||||
Pension and non-pension postretirement benefits obligations |
(270 | ) | (144 | ) | (165 | ) | ||||||
Other noncurrent assets and liabilities |
119 | 9 | 134 | |||||||||
Net cash flows provided by operating activities |
4,398 | 3,384 | 3,642 | |||||||||
Cash flows from investing activities |
||||||||||||
Capital expenditures |
(1,921 | ) | (1,954 | ) | (2,150 | ) | ||||||
Proceeds from liquidated damages |
| 92 | | |||||||||
Proceeds from nuclear decommissioning trust fund sales |
2,320 | 2,341 | 1,612 | |||||||||
Investment in nuclear decommissioning trust funds |
(2,587 | ) | (2,564 | ) | (1,824 | ) | ||||||
Collection of other notes receivable |
59 | 35 | (35 | ) | ||||||||
Proceeds from sales of investments and wholly owned subsidiaries |
329 | 263 | 287 | |||||||||
Proceeds from sales of long-lived assets |
52 | 10 | ||||||||||
Acquisitions of businesses, net of cash acquired |
| (272 | ) | (445 | ) | |||||||
Investments in synthetic fuel-producing facilities |
(56 | ) | | | ||||||||
Change in restricted cash |
26 | (92 | ) | (24 | ) | |||||||
Net cash increase from consolidation of Sithe Energies, Inc. |
19 | | | |||||||||
Other investing activities |
(6 | ) | 32 | 17 | ||||||||
Net cash flows used in investing activities |
(1,765 | ) | (2,109 | ) | (2,562 | ) | ||||||
Cash flows from financing activities |
||||||||||||
Issuance of long-term debt |
232 | 3,015 | 1,223 | |||||||||
Retirement of long-term debt |
(1,629 | ) | (2,922 | ) | (2,134 | ) | ||||||
Issuance of long-term debt to financing affiliates |
| 103 | | |||||||||
Retirement of long-term debt to financing affiliates |
(728 | ) | | | ||||||||
Change in short-term debt |
164 | (355 | ) | 321 | ||||||||
Issuance of mandatorily redeemable preferred securities |
| 200 | | |||||||||
Retirement of mandatorily redeemable preferred securities |
| (250 | ) | (18 | ) | |||||||
Payment on acquisition note payable to Sithe Energies, Inc. |
(27 | ) | (446 | ) | | |||||||
Retirement of preferred stock |
| (50 | ) | | ||||||||
Dividends paid on common stock |
(831 | ) | (620 | ) | (563 | ) | ||||||
Proceeds from employee stock plans |
240 | 181 | 75 | |||||||||
Purchase of treasury stock |
(82 | ) | | | ||||||||
Contribution from minority interest of consolidated subsidiary |
| | 43 | |||||||||
Other financing activities |
34 | (96 | ) | (43 | ) | |||||||
Net cash flows used in financing activities |
(2,627 | ) | (1,240 | ) | (1,096 | ) | ||||||
Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents |
6 | 35 | (16 | ) | ||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period |
493 | 469 | 485 | |||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents, including cash held for sale |
499 | 504 | 469 | |||||||||
Cash classified as held for sale on the consolidated balance sheet |
| 11 | | |||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period |
$ | 499 | $ | 493 | $ | 469 | ||||||
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
5
Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies
Consolidated Balance Sheets
December 31, | ||||||||
(in millions) | 2004 | 2003 | ||||||
Assets |
||||||||
Current assets |
||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents |
$ | 499 | $ | 493 | ||||
Restricted cash and investments |
60 | 97 | ||||||
Accounts receivable, net |
||||||||
Customer |
1,649 | 1,567 | ||||||
Other |
409 | 676 | ||||||
Mark-to-market derivative assets |
403 | 337 | ||||||
Inventories, at average cost |
||||||||
Fossil fuel |
230 | 212 | ||||||
Materials and supplies |
312 | 310 | ||||||
Notes receivable from affiliate |
| 92 | ||||||
Deferred income taxes |
68 | 122 | ||||||
Assets held for sale |
| 242 | ||||||
Other |
296 | 413 | ||||||
Total current assets |
3,926 | 4,561 | ||||||
Property, plant and equipment, net |
21,482 | 20,630 | ||||||
Deferred debits and other assets |
||||||||
Regulatory assets |
4,790 | 5,226 | ||||||
Nuclear decommissioning trust funds |
5,262 | 4,721 | ||||||
Investments |
804 | 955 | ||||||
Goodwill |
4,705 | 4,719 | ||||||
Mark-to-market derivative assets |
383 | 133 | ||||||
Other |
1,418 | 991 | ||||||
Total deferred debits and other assets |
17,362 | 16,745 | ||||||
Total assets |
$ | 42,770 | $ | 41,936 | ||||
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
6
Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies
Consolidated Balance Sheets
December 31, | ||||||||
(in millions) | 2004 | 2003 | ||||||
Liabilities and shareholders equity |
||||||||
Current liabilities |
||||||||
Commercial paper |
$ | 490 | $ | 326 | ||||
Note payable to Sithe Energies, Inc. |
| 90 | ||||||
Long-term debt due within one year |
427 | 1,385 | ||||||
Long-term debt to ComEd Transitional Funding Trust and
PECO Energy Transitional Trust due within one year |
486 | 470 | ||||||
Accounts payable |
1,255 | 1,238 | ||||||
Mark-to-market derivative liabilities |
598 | 584 | ||||||
Accrued expenses |
1,143 | 1,260 | ||||||
Liabilities held for sale |
| 61 | ||||||
Other |
483 | 306 | ||||||
Total current liabilities |
4,882 | 5,720 | ||||||
Long-term debt |
7,292 | 7,889 | ||||||
Long-term debt due to ComEd Transitional Funding Trust
and PECO Energy Transitional Trust |
4,311 | 5,055 | ||||||
Long-term debt to other financing trusts |
545 | 545 | ||||||
Deferred credits and other liabilities |
||||||||
Deferred income taxes |
4,488 | 4,320 | ||||||
Unamortized investment tax credits |
275 | 288 | ||||||
Asset retirement obligations |
3,981 | 2,997 | ||||||
Pension obligations |
1,993 | 1,668 | ||||||
Non-pension postretirement benefits obligations |
1,065 | 1,053 | ||||||
Spent nuclear fuel obligation |
878 | 867 | ||||||
Regulatory liabilities |
2,204 | 1,891 | ||||||
Mark-to-market derivative liabilities |
323 | 141 | ||||||
Other |
981 | 912 | ||||||
Total deferred credits and other liabilities |
16,188 | 14,137 | ||||||
Total liabilities |
33,218 | 33,346 | ||||||
Commitments and contingencies |
||||||||
Minority interest of consolidated subsidiaries |
42 | | ||||||
Preferred securities of subsidiaries |
87 | 87 | ||||||
Shareholders equity |
||||||||
Common stock (No par value, 1,200 shares authorized, 666.7 and 656.4 shares
outstanding at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively) |
7,598 | 7,292 | ||||||
Treasury stock, at cost (2.5 shares held at December 31, 2004) |
(82 | ) | | |||||
Retained earnings |
3,353 | 2,320 | ||||||
Accumulated other comprehensive loss |
(1,446 | ) | (1,109 | ) | ||||
Total shareholders equity |
9,423 | 8,503 | ||||||
Total liabilities and shareholders equity |
$ | 42,770 | $ | 41,936 | ||||
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
7
Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies
Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders Equity
Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other | Total | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(Dollars in millions, | Issued | Common | Treasury | Deferred | Retained | Comprehensive | Shareholders | |||||||||||||||||||||
shares in thousands) | Shares | Stock | Stock | Compensation | Earnings | Loss | Equity | |||||||||||||||||||||
Balance, December 31, 2001 |
642,014 | $ | 6,961 | $ | | $ | (2 | ) | $ | 1,169 | $ | (26 | ) | $ | 8,102 | |||||||||||||
Net income |
| | | | 1,440 | | 1,440 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Long-term incentive
plan activity |
4,098 | 87 | | | | | 87 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Employee stock purchase
plan issuances |
514 | 11 | | | | | 11 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Amortization of deferred
compensation |
| | | 1 | | | 1 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Common stock dividends declared |
| | | | (567 | ) | | (567 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||
Other comprehensive loss, net of
income taxes of $(850) |
| | | | | (1,332 | ) | (1,332 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||
Balance, December 31, 2002 |
646,626 | 7,059 | | (1 | ) | 2,042 | (1,358 | ) | 7,742 | |||||||||||||||||||
Net income |
| | | | 905 | | 905 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Long-term incentive
plan activity |
9,322 | 222 | | | | | 222 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Employee stock purchase
plan issuances |
418 | 11 | | | | | 11 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Amortization of deferred
compensation |
| | | 1 | | | 1 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Common stock dividends declared |
| | | | (625 | ) | | (625 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||
Redemption premium on
PECO preferred stock |
| | | | (2 | ) | | (2 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||
Other comprehensive income, net of
income taxes of $217 |
| | | | | 249 | 249 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Balance, December 31, 2003 |
656,366 | 7,292 | | | 2,320 | (1,109 | ) | 8,503 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Net income |
| | | | 1,864 | | 1,864 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Long-term incentive
plan activity |
10,013 | 296 | | | | | 296 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Employee stock purchase
plan issuances |
309 | 10 | | | | | 10 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Common stock purchases |
| | (82 | ) | | | | (82 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||
Common stock dividends declared |
| | | | (831 | ) | | (831 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||
Adjustments to accumulated other
comprehensive loss due to the
consolidation of Sithe |
| | | | | (6 | ) | (6 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||
Other comprehensive loss,
net of income taxes of $(190) |
| | | | | (331 | ) | (331 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||
Balance, December 31, 2004 |
666,688 | $ | 7,598 | $ | (82 | ) | $ | | $ | 3,353 | $ | (1,446 | ) | $ | 9,423 | |||||||||||||
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
8
Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies
Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income
For the Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
(in millions) | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | |||||||||
Net income |
$ | 1,864 | $ | 905 | $ | 1,440 | ||||||
Other comprehensive income (loss) |
||||||||||||
Minimum pension liability, net of income taxes of $(228), $16 and $(597), respectively |
(392 | ) | 26 | (1,007 | ) | |||||||
SFAS No. 143 transition adjustment, net of income taxes of $167 |
| 168 | | |||||||||
Change in net unrealized gain (loss) on cash-flow hedges, net of income taxes of $6, $5
and $(129), respectively |
8 | 9 | (193 | ) | ||||||||
Foreign currency translation adjustment, net of income taxes of $1, $0 and $0, respectively |
1 | 3 | | |||||||||
Unrealized gain (loss) on marketable securities, net of
income taxes of $31, $29, and $(124), respectively |
52 | 43 | (132 | ) | ||||||||
Total other comprehensive income (loss) |
(331 | ) | 249 | (1,332 | ) | |||||||
Total comprehensive income |
$ | 1,533 | $ | 1,154 | $ | 108 | ||||||
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
9
Exelon Corporation and Subsidiary Companies
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in millions, except per share data unless otherwise noted)
1. Significant Accounting Policies
Description of Business
Exelon Corporation (Exelon) is a utility services holding company engaged, through its subsidiaries, in the energy delivery and generation businesses discussed below (see Note 22 - Segment Information). The energy delivery businesses (Energy Delivery) include the purchase and retail sale of electricity and distribution and transmission services by Commonwealth Edison Company (ComEd) in northern Illinois and by PECO Energy Company (PECO) in southeastern Pennsylvania and the purchase and retail sale of natural gas and related distribution services by PECO in the Pennsylvania counties surrounding the City of Philadelphia. The generation business consists principally of the electric generating facilities and wholesale energy marketing operations of Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Generation), the competitive retail sales business of Exelon Energy Company (Exelon Energy), Generations investment in Sithe Energies, Inc. (Sithe) and certain other generation projects. Historically, Exelons other businesses, consisting of the infrastructure and electrical contracting services of Exelon Enterprises Company, LLC (Enterprises), had been reported as a segment. Exelon sold or unwound substantially all components of that segment in 2004 and 2003. As a result, Enterprises is no longer reported as a segment and is included within the other category of Note 22 Segment Information. Effective January 1, 2004, Exelon Energy Company, which had previously been reported as part of Enterprises, became part of Generation. See Note 2 Acquisitions and Dispositions for information regarding the disposition of businesses within Enterprises and Note 25 Subsequent Events for information regarding the sale of Sithe.
Basis of Presentation
Exelons consolidated financial statements include the accounts of entities in which it has a controlling financial interest, other than certain financing trusts of ComEd and PECO described below, and its proportionate interests in jointly owned electric utility plants, after the elimination of intercompany transactions. A controlling financial interest is evidenced by either a voting interest greater than 50% or a risk and rewards model that identifies Exelon or one of its subsidiaries as the primary beneficiary of the variable interest entity. Investments and joint ventures in which Exelon does not have a controlling financial interest and certain financing trusts of ComEd and PECO are accounted for under the equity or cost methods of accounting.
Exelon owns 100% of all significant consolidated subsidiaries, either directly or indirectly, except for ComEd, of which Exelon owns more than 99%, Southeast Chicago Energy Project, LLC (SCEP), of which Exelon owns 71%, and Sithe, of which Exelon owned 50% at December 31, 2004. Exelon has reflected the third-party interests in the above majority-owned investments as minority interests in its consolidated financial statements. As a result of the adoption of Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 150, Accounting for Certain Financial Instruments with Characteristics of Both Liabilities and Equity (SFAS No. 150), on July 1, 2003, Exelon reclassified the minority interest associated with SCEP to a long-term liability. The total minority interest related to SCEP was $49 million and $51 million as of December 31, 2004 and 2003.
In accordance with FASB Interpretation No. (FIN) 46 (revised December 2003), Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities (FIN 46-R), Sithe was consolidated in Exelons financial statements as of March 31, 2004. Certain trusts and limited partnerships that are financing subsidiaries of ComEd and PECO have issued debt or mandatorily redeemable preferred securities. Due to the adoption of FIN 46-R, these subsidiaries are no longer consolidated within the financial statements of Exelon as of December 31, 2003, or as of July 1, 2003 for PECO Energy Capital Trust IV (PECO Trust IV). See Variable Interest Entities below for further discussion of the adoption of FIN 46-R and the resulting consolidation of Sithe and the deconsolidation of these financing subsidiaries.
10
The share and per-share amounts included in Exelons Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements have been adjusted for all periods presented to reflect a 2-for-1 stock split of Exelons common stock with a distribution date of May 5, 2004. See Note 18 Common Stock for additional information regarding the stock split.
Reclassifications
Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified for comparative purposes. The reclassifications did not affect net income or shareholders equity.
Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (GAAP) requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. Areas in which significant estimates have been made include, but are not limited to, the accounting for nuclear decommissioning costs and asset retirement obligations, inventory reserves, allowance for doubtful accounts, goodwill and asset impairments, pension and other postretirement benefits, derivative instruments, fixed asset depreciation, environmental costs, taxes, severance and unbilled energy revenues.
Accounting for the Effects of Regulation
Exelon accounts for its operations in accordance with accounting policies prescribed by the regulatory authorities having jurisdiction, principally the Illinois Commerce Commission (ICC) and the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC) under state public utility laws, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) under various Federal laws, and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) under the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935 (PUHCA), and Energy Delivery applies SFAS No. 71, Accounting for the Effects of Certain Types of Regulation, (SFAS No. 71) when appropriate. SFAS No. 71 requires Energy Delivery to record in its financial statements the effects of rate regulation for utility operations that meet the following criteria: (1) third-party regulation of rates; (2) cost-based rates; and (3) a reasonable assumption that all costs will be recoverable from customers through rates. Exelon believes that it is probable that currently recorded regulatory assets and liabilities will be recovered in future rates. If a separable portion of Energy Deliverys business were no longer to meet the provisions of SFAS No. 71, Exelon would be required to eliminate from its financial statements the effects of regulation for that portion.
Variable Interest Entities
FIN 46-R addressed the requirements for consolidating certain variable interest entities. FIN 46 was effective for Exelons variable interest entities created after January 31, 2003. FIN 46-R was effective December 31, 2003 for Exelons other variable interest entities that were considered to be special-purpose entities and as of March 31, 2004 for all other variable interest entities.
Exelon consolidated Sithe, 50% owned through a wholly owned subsidiary of Generation, as of March 31, 2004 pursuant to the provisions of FIN 46-R and recorded income of $32 million (net of income taxes) as a result of the reversal of guarantees of Sithes commitments previously recorded by Generation. This income was reported as a cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle in the first quarter of 2004. As of March 31, 2004, Generation was a 50% owner of Sithe, and Exelon had accounted for Sithe as an unconsolidated equity method investment prior to March 31, 2004. Sithes results subsequent to April 1, 2004 are presented as a discontinued operation within Exelons Consolidated Statements of Income. Sithe owns and operates power-generating facilities and was sold by Generation on January 31, 2005. See Note 3 Sithe for additional information on the consolidation of Sithe and Note 25 Subsequent Events for additional information on the sale of Sithe in 2005.
11
PECO Trust IV, a financing subsidiary of PECO created in May 2003, was deconsolidated from the financial statements of Exelon pursuant to the provisions of FIN 46 as of July 1, 2003. Pursuant to the provisions of FIN 46-R, as of December 31, 2003, the financing trusts of ComEd, namely ComEd Financing II (formed in November 1996), ComEd Financing III (formed in September 2002), ComEd Funding LLC (formed in July 1998) and ComEd Transitional Funding Trust (formed in October 1998), and the other financing trusts of PECO, namely PECO Energy Capital Trust III (PECO Trust III) (formed in April 1998) and PECO Energy Transition Trust (PETT) (formed in June 1998), were deconsolidated from Exelons financial statements. Amounts owed to these financing trusts at December 31, 2004 and 2003 of $5,342 million and $6,070 million, respectively, were recorded as debt to financing trusts within the Consolidated Balance Sheets.
This change in presentation related to the financing trusts had no effect on Exelons net income. In accordance with FIN 46-R, prior periods were not restated. The maximum exposure to loss as a result of ComEd and PECOs involvement with the financing trusts is $62 million and $87 million, respectively, at December 31, 2004.
Revenues
Operating Revenues. Operating revenues are recorded as service is rendered or energy is delivered to customers. At the end of each month, Exelon accrues an estimate for the unbilled amount of energy delivered or services provided to customers (see Note 6 Accounts Receivable).
Option Contracts, Swaps, and Commodity Derivatives. Premiums received and paid on option contracts and swap arrangements considered normal derivatives pursuant to SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivatives and Hedging Activities (SFAS No. 133) are amortized to revenue and expensed over the lives of the contracts. Certain option contracts and swap arrangements are considered derivative instruments and are recorded at fair value with subsequent changes in fair value recognized as revenues and expenses, unless hedge accounting is applied. Commodity derivatives used for trading purposes are accounted for using the mark-to-market method with unrealized gains and losses recognized in operating revenues.
Trading Activities. Exelon accounts for its trading activities under the provisions of Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF) Issue No. 02-3, Accounting for Contracts Involved in Energy Trading and Risk Management Activities (EITF 02-3), which requires revenues and energy costs related to energy trading contracts to be presented on a net basis in the income statement.
Physically Settled Derivative Contracts. Exelon accounts for realized gains and losses on physically settled derivative contracts not held for trading purposes in accordance with EITF Issue No. 03-11, Reporting Realized Gains and Losses on Derivative Instruments That Are Subject to FASB Statement No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, and Not Held for Trading Purposes as Defined in EITF Issue No. 02-3, Issues Involved in Accounting for Derivative Contracts Held for Trading Purposes and Contracts Involved in Energy Trading and Risk Management Activities (EITF 03-11).
EITF 03-11 was ratified by the FASB in August 2003. The EITF concluded that determining whether realized gains and losses on physically settled derivative contracts not held for trading purposes should be reported in the income statement on a gross or net basis is a matter of judgment that depends on the relevant facts and circumstances. Exelon adopted EITF 03-11 as of January 1, 2004 and presented $966 million of purchased power and $14 million of fuel expense net within revenues during 2004. Prior periods were not reclassified. The adoption of EITF 03-11 had no effect on Exelons net income. Had EITF 03-11 been retroactively applied to 2003, operating revenues, purchased power and fuel expense would have been affected as follows:
2003 | As Reported | EITF 03-11 Impact | Pro Forma | |||||||||
Operating revenues |
$ | 15,148 | $ | (996 | ) | $ | 14,152 | |||||
Purchased power |
3,841 | (943 | ) | 2,898 | ||||||||
Fuel expense |
2,353 | (53 | ) | 2,300 | ||||||||
12
Exelon is unable to determine the impact on operating revenues, purchased power and fuel expense, had EITF 03-11 been applied retroactively to 2002 results of operations, due to system constraints.
Stock-Based Compensation
Exelon accounts for its stock-based compensation plans under the intrinsic method prescribed by Accounting Principles Board No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees (APB No. 25) and related interpretations and follows the disclosure requirements of SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation (SFAS No. 123), and SFAS No. 148, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation Transition and Disclosure an amendment of FASB Statement No. 123. Accordingly, compensation expense related to stock options recognized within the Consolidated Statements of Income was insignificant in 2004, 2003 and 2002. Expense recognized related to other stock-based compensation plans is further described in Note 18 Common Stock. The tables below show the effect on Exelons net income and earnings per share for 2004, 2003 and 2002 had Exelon elected to account for all of its stock-based compensation plans using the fair-value method under SFAS No. 123:
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
Net income as reported |
$ | 1,864 | $ | 905 | $ | 1,440 | ||||||
Add: Stock-based compensation expense included
in reported net income, net of income taxes |
39 | 19 | 12 | |||||||||
Deduct: Total stock-based compensation expense
determined under fair-value method for all
awards, net of income taxes (a) |
(60 | ) | (39 | ) | (45 | ) | ||||||
Pro forma net income |
$ | 1,843 | $ | 885 | $ | 1,407 | ||||||
Earnings per share: |
||||||||||||
Basic as reported |
$ | 2.82 | $ | 1.39 | $ | 2.23 | ||||||
Basic pro forma |
$ | 2.79 | $ | 1.36 | $ | 2.18 | ||||||
Diluted as reported |
$ | 2.78 | $ | 1.38 | $ | 2.22 | ||||||
Diluted pro forma |
$ | 2.75 | $ | 1.35 | $ | 2.17 | ||||||
(a) | The fair value of options granted was estimated using a Black-Scholes option pricing model. |
Income Taxes
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 previously utilized for income tax purposes have been deferred on the Consolidated Balance Sheets and are recognized in book income over the life of the related property.
Pursuant to the Internal Revenue Code, Exelon files a consolidated Federal income tax return that includes its subsidiaries in which it owns at least 80% of the outstanding stock. Income taxes are allocated to each of Exelons subsidiaries included in the filing of the consolidated Federal income tax return based on the separate return method. Exelon records its income tax valuation allowance by assessing which deferred tax assets are more likely than not to be realized in the future (see Note 13 Income Taxes).
Losses on Reacquired Debt
Recoverable losses on reacquired debt related to regulated operations are deferred and amortized to interest expense over the life of new debt issued to finance the debt redemption consistent with rate recovery for rate-making purposes. Losses on other reacquired debt are recognized in Exelons Consolidated Statements of Income as incurred (see Note 21 Supplemental Financial Information).
Comprehensive Income
Comprehensive income includes all changes in equity during a period except those resulting from investments by and distributions to shareholders. Other comprehensive income primarily relates to unrealized gains or losses on securities held in nuclear decommissioning trust funds and unrealized gains and losses on cash-flow hedge instruments. Comprehensive income is reflected in the Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders Equity and the Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income.
13
Cash and Cash Equivalents
Exelon considers all temporary cash investments purchased with an original maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents.
Restricted Cash and Investments
As of December 31, 2004, restricted cash and investments primarily represented restricted cash related to Sithes Independence Plant partnership distribution fund. As of December 31, 2003, restricted cash and investments primarily represented liquidated damages receipts at Generation and proceeds from a ComEd pollution control bond offering in December 2003 which were applied to pay pollution control bonds upon their maturity in January 2004.
Restricted cash and investments not available for general operations or to satisfy current liabilities are classified as noncurrent assets. As of December 31, 2004, $93 million of restricted cash and investments were classified within deferred debits and other assets, which included $83 million of debt service reserves, major overhaul reserves of $7 million and lease service reserves of $3 million. As of December 31, 2003, there were no restricted cash and investments classified as noncurrent assets.
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
The allowance for doubtful accounts reflects Exelons best estimate of probable losses in the accounts receivable balances. The allowance is based on known troubled accounts, historical experience and other currently available evidence. Customer accounts are generally considered delinquent if the amount billed is not received by the time the next bill is issued, typically monthly. Customer accounts are written off based upon approved regulatory or legislative requirements.
Inventories
Inventory is recorded at the lower of cost or market, and provisions are made for excess and obsolete inventory.
Fossil Fuel. Fossil fuel inventory includes the weighted average costs of stored natural gas, coal and oil. The costs of natural gas, coal and oil are generally included in inventory when purchased and charged to fuel expense when used. Fossil fuel also includes propane at cost. PECO has several long-term storage contracts for natural gas as well as a liquefied natural gas storage facility.
Materials and Supplies. Materials and supplies inventory generally includes the average costs of transmission, distribution and generating plant materials. Materials are generally charged to inventory when purchased and then expensed or capitalized to plant, as appropriate, when installed.
Emission Allowances
Emission allowances are included in inventories and deferred debits or other assets and are carried at the lower of weighted average cost or market and charged to fuel expense as they are used in operations. Exelons emission allowance balances as of December 31, 2004 and 2003 were $106 million and $105 million, respectively.
Marketable Securities
Marketable securities are classified as available-for-sale securities and are reported at fair value pursuant to SFAS No. 115, Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities (SFAS No. 115). Unrealized gains and losses, net of tax, on nuclear decommissioning trust funds transferred to Generation from PECO and ComEd are considered in the determination of the regulatory assets and liabilities on Exelons Consolidated Balance Sheets. See Note 21 Supplemental Financial Information for additional information regarding Exelons regulatory assets and liabilities. Unrealized gains and losses on nuclear decommissioning trust funds for the AmerGen units are reported in other comprehensive income.
14
Prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 143, Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations (SFAS No. 143) on January 1, 2003, unrealized gains and losses on marketable securities held in nuclear decommissioning trust funds were reported in accumulated depreciation for operating units transferred to Generation from PECO and as other comprehensive income for operating and retired units transferred to Generation from ComEd. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, Exelon had no held-to-maturity securities.
Purchased Gas Adjustment Clause
PECOs natural gas rates are subject to a fuel adjustment clause designed to recover or refund the difference between the actual cost of purchased gas and the amount included in rates. Differences between the amounts billed to customers and the actual costs recoverable are deferred and recovered or refunded in future periods by means of prospective quarterly adjustments to rates. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, deferred energy costs of $71 million and $81 million, respectively, were recorded in other current assets on Exelons Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Leases
Exelon accounts for leases in accordance with SFAS No. 13 Accounting for Leases and determines whether its long-term power purchase and sales contracts are leases pursuant to EITF Issue No. 01-8, Determining Whether an Arrangement is a Lease (EITF 01-8) which applies to arrangements initiated or modified after October 1, 2003. At the inception of the lease, or subsequent modification, Exelon determines whether the lease is an operating or capital lease based upon its terms and characteristics. Several of Exelons long-term power purchase agreements which have been determined to be operating leases have significant contingent rental payments which are dependent on the future operating characteristics of the associated plants such as plant availability. Exelon recognizes contingent rental expense when it becomes probable of payment.
Property, Plant and Equipment
Property, plant and equipment is recorded at cost. The cost of maintenance, repairs and minor replacements of property is charged to maintenance expense as incurred.
For Energy Delivery, upon retirement, the cost of regulated property, net of salvage, is charged to accumulated depreciation and removal costs reduce the related regulated liability in accordance with the composite method of depreciation. For unregulated property, the cost and accumulated depreciation of property, plant and equipment retired or otherwise disposed of are removed from the related accounts and included in the determination of any gain or loss on disposition.
For Generation, upon retirement, the cost of property, including net salvage cost, is charged to accumulated depreciation.
See Note 7 Property, Plant and Equipment and Note 21 Supplemental Financial Information for additional information regarding property, plant and equipment.
Nuclear Fuel
The cost of nuclear fuel is capitalized and charged to fuel expense using the unit-of-production method. The estimated cost of disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) is established per the Standard Waste Contract with the Department of Energy (DOE) and is expensed at one mill ($.001) per kilowatthour of net nuclear generation. On-site SNF storage costs are capitalized or expensed, as incurred, based upon the nature of the work performed.
Nuclear Outage Costs
Costs associated with nuclear outages are recorded in the period incurred.
15
Capitalized Software Costs
Costs incurred during the application development stage of software projects that are developed or obtained for internal use are capitalized. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, net unamortized capitalized software costs totaled $311 million and $356 million, respectively. Such capitalized amounts are amortized ratably over the expected lives of the projects when they become operational, generally not to exceed ten years. Certain capitalized software costs are being amortized over fifteen years pursuant to regulatory approval. During 2004, 2003 and 2002, Exelon amortized capitalized software costs of $80 million, $69 million and $64 million, respectively.
Depreciation and Amortization
Depreciation is provided over the estimated service lives of property, plant and equipment on a straight-line basis using the composite method. Annual depreciation provisions for financial reporting purposes, expressed as a percentage of average service life for each asset category, are presented in the table below. See Note 7 Property, Plant and Equipment for information regarding a change in Energy Deliverys depreciation rates.
Asset Category | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | |||||||||
Electric transmission and distribution |
2.82 | % | 2.81 | % | 3.11 | % | ||||||
Electric generation |
3.34 | % | 2.90 | % | 3.58 | % | ||||||
Gas |
2.52 | % | 2.38 | % | 2.13 | % | ||||||
Common gas and electric |
4.60 | % | 7.53 | % | 6.40 | % | ||||||
Other property and equipment |
6.77 | % | 8.20 | % | 7.88 | % | ||||||
Amortization of regulatory assets is provided over the recovery period specified in the related legislation or regulatory agreement. See Note 21 Supplemental Financial Information for further information regarding Exelons regulatory assets.
Nuclear Generating Station Decommissioning
Exelon accounts for the costs of decommissioning its nuclear generating stations in accordance with SFAS No. 143. See Note 14 Nuclear Decommissioning and Spent Fuel Storage for information regarding the adoption and application of SFAS No. 143 and Cumulative Effect of Changes in Accounting Principles below for pro forma net income and earnings per common share for the year ended December 31, 2002, adjusted as if SFAS No. 143 had been applied during that period.
Capitalized Interest and Allowance for Funds Used During Construction
Exelon uses SFAS No. 34, Capitalizing Interest Costs to calculate the costs during construction of debt funds used to finance its non-regulated construction projects. Exelon recorded capitalized interest of $11 million, $15 million and $20 million in 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.
Allowance for funds used during construction (AFUDC) is the cost, during the period of construction, of debt and equity funds used to finance construction projects for regulated operations. AFUDC is recorded as a charge 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 (see Note 21 Supplemental Financial Information). Exelon recorded credits to AFUDC of $5 million, $16 million and $19 million in 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.
Guarantees
Beginning February 1, 2003, pursuant to FIN 45, Guarantors Accounting and Disclosure Requirements for Guarantees, Including Indirect Guarantees of Indebtedness to Others (FIN 45), Exelon recognizes, at the inception of a guarantee, a liability for the fair market value of the obligations it has undertaken in issuing the guarantee, including its ongoing obligation to perform over the term of the guarantee in the event that the specified triggering events or conditions occur.
16
The liability that is initially recognized at the inception of the guarantee is reduced as Exelon is released from risk under the guarantee. Depending on the nature of the guarantee, Exelons release from risk 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. The recognition and subsequent adjustment of the liability is highly dependent upon the nature of the associated guarantee.
Asset Impairments
Long-Lived Assets. Exelon evaluates the carrying value of long-lived assets to be held and used for impairment whenever indications of impairment exist in accordance with the requirements of SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets (SFAS No. 144). The carrying value of long-lived assets is considered impaired when the projected undiscounted cash flows are less than the carrying value. In that event, a loss would be recognized based on the amount by which the carrying value exceeds the fair value. Fair value is determined primarily by available market valuations or, if applicable, discounted cash flows. See Note 2 Acquisitions and Dispositions for a description of the impairment charge recorded in 2003 related to the long-lived assets of Boston Generating, LLC (Boston Generating).
Upon meeting certain criteria defined in SFAS No. 144, the assets and associated liabilities that compose a disposal group are classified as held for sale and the carrying value of these assets is adjusted downward, if necessary, to the estimated sales price, less cost to sell. See Note 2 Acquisitions and Dispositions for a description of assets and liabilities classified as held for sale as of December 31, 2003 and impairments recorded related to those assets.
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. As of January 1, 2002, Exelon adopted SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets (SFAS No. 142) and recorded a loss of $230 million as a cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle upon its adoption. Pursuant to SFAS No. 142, 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 reduce the fair value of a reporting unit below its carrying value. See Note 9 Intangible Assets for information regarding the adoption of SFAS No. 142 and goodwill impairment studies that have been performed.
Investments. Investments are considered to be impaired when a decline in fair value is judged to be other-than-temporary. If the cost of an investment exceeds its fair value, Exelon evaluates, among other factors, general market conditions, the duration and extent to which the fair value is less than cost, as well as Exelons intent and ability to hold the investment. Exelon also considers specific adverse conditions related to the financial health of and business outlook for the investee. Once a decline in fair value is determined to be other-than-temporary, an impairment charge is recorded and a new cost basis is established. See Note 3 Sithe for a description of the impairments recorded in 2003 related to Generations investment in Sithe and Note 16 Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities for a description of the other-than-temporary impairments in the nuclear decommissioning trust funds determined in 2004.
Derivative Financial Instruments
Exelon enters into derivatives to manage its 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 utilizes derivatives with respect to energy transactions to manage the utilization of its available generating capability and the supply of wholesale energy to its affiliates. Generation also utilizes energy option contracts and energy financial swap arrangements to limit the market price risk associated with forward energy commodity contracts. Additionally, Generation enters into energy-related derivatives for trading purposes. Exelons derivative activities are in accordance with Exelons Risk Management Policy (RMP).
Exelon accounts for derivative financial instruments under SFAS No. 133. Under the provisions of SFAS No. 133, all derivatives are recognized on the balance sheet at their fair value unless they qualify for a normal purchases or normal sales exception. Derivatives on the balance sheet are presented as current or noncurrent mark-to-market derivative assets or liabilities.
17
Changes in the fair value of derivatives are recognized in earnings unless specific hedge accounting criteria are met, in which case those changes are recorded in earnings as an offset to the changes in fair value of the exposure being hedged or deferred in accumulated other comprehensive income and recognized in earnings as hedged transactions occur. Amounts recorded in earnings are included in revenue, purchased power or other, net on the consolidated statements of income.
Revenues and expenses on contracts that qualify as normal purchases or normal sales are recognized when the underlying physical transaction is completed. Normal purchases and 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 price is not tied to an unrelated underlying derivative. As part of Generations 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 these contracts are considered derivative financial instruments under SFAS No. 133, the majority of these transactions have been designated as normal purchases or normal sales and are thus not required to be recorded at fair value, but on an accrual basis of accounting.
A derivative financial instrument can be designated as a hedge of the fair value of a recognized asset or liability or of an unrecognized firm commitment (fair-value hedge), or a hedge 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). Changes in the fair value of a derivative that is highly effective as, and is designated and qualifies as, a fair-value hedge, are recognized in earnings as offsets to the changes in fair value of the exposure being hedged. Changes in the fair value of a derivative that is highly effective as, and is designated as and qualifies as, a cash-flow hedge are deferred in accumulated other comprehensive income and are recognized in earnings as the hedged transactions occur. Any ineffectiveness is recognized in earnings immediately. On an ongoing basis, the Company assesses the hedge effectiveness of all derivatives that are designated as hedges for accounting purposes in order to determine that each derivative continues to be highly effective in offsetting changes in fair values or cash flows of hedged items. If it is determined that the derivative is not highly effective as a hedge, hedge accounting will be discontinued prospectively.
Generation enters into contracts to buy and sell energy for trading purposes subject to limits. These contracts are recognized on the balance sheet at fair value and changes in the fair value of these derivative financial instruments are recognized in earnings.
Severance Benefits
Exelon accounts for its ongoing severance plans in accordance with SFAS No. 112, Employers Accounting for Postemployment Benefits, an amendment of FASB Statements No. 5 and 43 (SFAS No. 112) and SFAS No. 88, Employers Accounting for Settlements and Curtailments of Defined Benefit Pension Plans and for Termination Benefits and accrues amounts associated with severance benefits that are considered probable and that can be reasonably estimated. See Note 10 Severance Accounting for further discussion of Exelons accounting for severance benefits.
Retirement Benefits
Exelons defined benefit pension plans and postretirement welfare benefit plans are accounted for in accordance with SFAS No. 87, Employers Accounting for Pensions (SFAS No. 87), SFAS No. 106, Employers Accounting for Postretirement Benefits Other than Pensions (SFAS No. 106) and FASB Staff Position (FSP) FAS 106-2, Accounting and Disclosure Requirements Related to the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 (FSP FAS 106-2), and are disclosed in accordance with SFAS No. 132, Employers Disclosures about Pensions and Other Postretirement Benefits an Amendment of FASB Statements No. 87, 88, and 106 (revised 2003) (SFAS No. 132). See Note 15 Retirement Benefits for further discussion of Exelons accounting for retirement benefits in accordance with SFAS No. 87 and SFAS No. 106 and disclosures pursuant to SFAS No. 132.
18
FSP FAS 106-2. Through its postretirement benefit plans, Exelon provides retirees with prescription drug coverage. The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 (Prescription Drug Act) was enacted on December 8, 2003. The Prescription Drug Act 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 Exelons postretirement benefit plans is at least actuarially equivalent to the Medicare prescription drug benefit. In response to the enactment of the Prescription Drug Act, in May 2004, the FASB issued FSP FAS 106-2, which provided transition guidance for accounting for the effects of the Prescription Drug Act and superseded FSP FAS 106-1, which had been issued in January 2004. FSP FAS 106-1 permitted a plan sponsor of a postretirement health care plan that provides a prescription drug benefit to make a one-time election to defer the accounting for the effects of the Prescription Drug Act. Exelon made the one-time election allowed by FSP FAS 106-1 during the first quarter of 2004.
During the second quarter of 2004, Exelon early adopted the provisions of FSP FAS 106-2, resulting in a remeasurement of its postretirement benefit plans assets and accumulated postretirement benefit obligations (APBO) as of December 31, 2003. Upon adoption, the effect of the subsidy on benefits attributable to past service was accounted for as an actuarial experience gain, resulting in a decrease of the APBO of approximately $186 million. The annualized reduction in the net periodic postretirement benefit cost is estimated to be approximately $33 million compared to the annual cost calculated without considering the effects of the Prescription Drug Act. The effect of the subsidy on the components of net periodic postretirement benefit cost for 2004 included in the consolidated financial statements and Note 15 Retirement Benefits was as follows:
2004 | ||||
Amortization of the actuarial experience gain |
$ | 15 | ||
Reduction in current period service cost |
6 | |||
Reduction in interest cost on the APBO |
12 | |||
Previously reported historical financial information for the three months ended March 31, 2004 has been adjusted in Note 24 Quarterly Data (Unaudited).
Treasury Stock
Treasury shares are recorded at cost. Any shares of common stock repurchased are held as treasury shares unless cancelled or reissued.
Foreign Currency Translation
The financial statements of Exelons foreign subsidiaries were prepared in their respective local currencies and translated into U.S. dollars based on the current exchange rates at the end of the periods for the Consolidated Balance Sheets and on weighted-average rates for the periods for the Consolidated Statements of Income. Foreign currency translation adjustments, net of deferred income tax benefits, are reflected as a component of other comprehensive income on the Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income and, accordingly, have no effect on net income.
New Accounting Pronouncements
EITF 03-1. In March 2004, the EITF reached a consensus on and the FASB ratified EITF Issue No. 03-1, The Meaning of Other-Than-Temporary Impairment and Its Application to Certain Investments (EITF 03-1). EITF 03-1 provides guidance for evaluating whether an investment is other-than-temporarily impaired. Exelon adopted the disclosure requirements of EITF 03-1 for investments accounted for under SFAS No. 115 for the year ended December 31, 2003. On September 30, 2004, the FASB issued FSP EITF 03-1-1, Effective Date of Paragraphs 10-20 of EITF Issue No. 03-1, The Meaning of Other-Than-Temporary Impairment and its Application to Certain Investments, which delayed the effective date of the application guidance on impairment of securities included within EITF 03-1. The EITF and the FASB are reconsidering the conclusions reached within EITF 03-1.
19
SFAS No. 151. In November 2004, the FASB issued FASB Statement No. 151, Inventory Costs an amendment of ARB No. 43, Chapter 4 (SFAS No. 151), which is the result of its efforts to converge U.S. accounting standards for inventories with International Accounting Standards. SFAS No. 151 requires abnormal amounts of idle facility expense, freight, handling costs and wasted material or spoilage to be recognized as current-period charges. It also requires that allocation of fixed production overheads to the costs of conversion be based on the normal capacity of the production facilities. SFAS No. 151 will be effective for inventory costs incurred during fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2005. Exelon is assessing the impact SFAS No. 151 will have on its consolidated financial statements.
SFAS No. 123-R. In December 2004, the FASB issued FASB Statement No. 123 (revised 2004), Share-Based Payment (SFAS No. 123-R). SFAS No. 123-R replaces SFAS No. 123 and supersedes APB No. 25. SFAS No. 123-R requires that the compensation cost relating to share-based payment transactions be recognized in the financial statements. That cost will be measured based on the fair value of the equity or liability instruments issued. Exelon will no longer be permitted to follow the intrinsic value accounting method of APB No. 25, which resulted in no expense being recorded for stock option grants for which the strike price was equal to the fair value of the underlying stock on the date of grant. Exelon has not elected to early adopt SFAS No. 123-R. As a result, SFAS No. 123-R will be effective for Exelon in the third quarter of 2005 and will apply to all of Exelons outstanding unvested share-based payment awards as of July 1, 2005 and all prospective awards. Exelon is assessing the impact SFAS No. 123-R will have on its consolidated financial statements and which of three transition methods allowed by SFAS No. 123-R will be elected.
SFAS No. 153. In December 2004, the FASB issued FASB Statement No. 153, Exchanges of Nonmonetary Assets, an amendment of APB Opinion No. 29, Accounting for Nonmonetary Transactions (SFAS No. 153). Previously, APB Opinion No. 29 had required that the accounting for an exchange of a productive asset for a similar productive asset or an equivalent interest in the same or similar productive asset should be based on the recorded amount of the asset relinquished. The amendments made by SFAS No. 153 are based on the principle that exchanges of nonmonetary assets should be measured based on the fair value of the assets exchanged. Further, the amendments eliminate the narrow exception for nonmonetary exchanges of similar productive assets and replace it with a broader exception for exchanges of nonmonetary assets that do not have commercial substance. SFAS No. 153 will be effective for Exelon in the third quarter of 2005 and earlier application is permitted for nonmonetary asset exchanges occurring after the issuance of SFAS No. 153. The provisions of SFAS No. 153 are applied prospectively. Exelon is assessing the impact SFAS No. 153 will have on its consolidated financial statements.
FSP FAS 109-1 and FSP FAS 109-2. In December 2004, the FASB issued FSP FAS 109-1, Application of FASB Statement No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes, to the Tax Deduction on Qualified Production Activities Provided by the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 (FSP FAS 109-1) and FSP FAS 109-2, Accounting and Disclosure Guidance for the Foreign Earnings Repatriation Provisions within the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 (FSP FAS 109-2). FSP FAS 109-1 and FSP FAS 109-2 were effective upon issuance. The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 (Act), signed into law on October 22, 2004, provided, generally, for a tax deduction for domestic manufacturing activities of up to nine percent (when fully phased-in) of the lesser of qualified production activities income, as defined in the Act, or taxable income. FSP FAS 109-1 clarified that the tax deduction for domestic manufacturing activities under the Act should be accounted for as a special deduction in accordance with SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes (SFAS No. 109). The Act also provided a special limited-time dividends received deduction on the repatriation of certain foreign earnings to a U.S. taxpayer, provided certain criteria are met. FSP FAS 109-2 provides a registrant more time to evaluate the Acts impact on the registrants plan for reinvestment or repatriation of certain foreign earnings for purposes of applying SFAS No. 109. Exelon is assessing the impact, if any, that the Act and these standards may have on its consolidated financial statements in future periods.
20
Cumulative Effect of Changes in Accounting Principles
EITF 03-16. In March 2004, the EITF reached a consensus on and the FASB ratified EITF Issue No. 03-16, Accounting for Investments in Limited Liability Companies (EITF 03-16). The EITF concluded that if investors in a limited liability company have specific ownership accounts, they should follow the guidance prescribed in Statement of Position 78-9, Accounting for Investments in Real Estate Ventures, and EITF Topic No. D-46, Accounting for Limited Partnership Investments. Otherwise, investors should follow the significant influence model prescribed in Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 18, The Equity Method of Accounting for Investments in Common Stock. EITF 03-16 was effective for Exelon and its subsidiaries during the third quarter of 2004. Exelon recorded a charge of $9 million (net of an income tax benefit of $5 million) as a cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle in connection with its adoption of EITF 03-16 as of July 1, 2004. This charge related to certain investments in limited liability partnerships held by Enterprises.
FIN 46-R. See discussion of the adoption of FIN 46-R within the Variable Interest Entities discussion above.
SFAS No. 143. SFAS No. 143 provides accounting guidance for retirement obligations (whether statutory, contractual or as a result of principles of promissory estoppel) associated with tangible long-lived assets. Exelon adopted SFAS No. 143 as of January 1, 2003 and recorded income of $112 million (net of income taxes) as a cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle in connection with its adoption of this standard in the first quarter of 2003. The components of the cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle, net of income taxes, were as follows:
Generation (net of income taxes of $52) |
$ | 80 | ||
Generations investments in AmerGen and Sithe (net of income taxes of $18) |
28 | |||
ComEd (net of income taxes of $0) |
5 | |||
Enterprises (net of income taxes of $(1)) |
(1 | ) | ||
Total |
$ | 112 | ||
21
The following tables set forth Exelons net income and basic and diluted earnings per common share for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, adjusted as if SFAS No. 143, FIN 46-R and EITF 03-16 had been applied during those periods. SFAS No. 143, FIN 46-R and EITF 03-16 had adoption dates of January 1, 2003, March 31, 2004 and July 1, 2004, respectively.
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
Reported income before cumulative effect of changes in
accounting principles |
$ | 1,841 | $ | 793 | $ | 1,670 | ||||||
Pro forma earnings effects (net of income taxes): |
||||||||||||
EITF 03-16 |
(1 | ) | | (6 | ) | |||||||
FIN 46-R |
| 32 | | |||||||||
SFAS No. 143 |
| | 27 | |||||||||
Pro forma income before cumulative effect of changes in
accounting principles |
$ | 1,840 | $ | 825 | $ | 1,691 | ||||||
Reported net income |
$ | 1,864 | $ | 905 | $ | 1,440 | ||||||
Pro forma earnings effects (net of income taxes): |
||||||||||||
EITF 03-16 |
(1 | ) | | (6 | ) | |||||||
FIN 46-R |
| 32 | | |||||||||
SFAS No. 143 |
| | 27 | |||||||||
Reported cumulative effects of changes in accounting principles: |
||||||||||||
EITF 03-16 |
9 | | | |||||||||
FIN 46-R |
(32 | ) | | | ||||||||
SFAS No. 143 |
| (112 | ) | | ||||||||
SFAS No. 142 |
| | 230 | |||||||||
Pro forma net income |
$ | 1,840 | $ | 825 | $ | 1,691 | ||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
Basic earnings per common share: |
||||||||||||
Reported income before cumulative effect of changes in
accounting principles |
$ | 2.79 | $ | 1.22 | $ | 2.59 | ||||||
Pro forma income before cumulative effect of changes in
accounting principles |
$ | 2.79 | $ | 1.27 | $ | 2.62 | ||||||
Reported net income |
$ | 2.82 | $ | 1.39 | $ | 2.23 | ||||||
Pro forma net income |
$ | 2.79 | $ | 1.27 | $ | 2.62 | ||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
Diluted earnings per common share: |
||||||||||||
Reported income before cumulative effect of changes in
accounting principles |
$ | 2.75 | $ | 1.21 | $ | 2.57 | ||||||
Pro forma income before cumulative effect of changes in
accounting principles |
$ | 2.75 | $ | 1.26 | $ | 2.60 | ||||||
Reported net income |
$ | 2.78 | $ | 1.38 | $ | 2.22 | ||||||
Pro forma net income |
$ | 2.75 | $ | 1.26 | $ | 2.60 | ||||||
2. Acquisitions and Dispositions
On December 20, 2004, Exelon entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (Merger Agreement) with Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated (PSEG), a holding company for an electric and gas utility company primarily located and serving customers in New Jersey, whereby PSEG will be merged with and into Exelon (Merger). Under the Merger Agreement, each share of PSEG common stock will be converted into 1.225 shares of Exelon common stock. As of December 31, 2004,
22
PSEGs market capitalization was over $12 billion. Additionally, PSEG, on a consolidated basis, has approximately $14 billion of outstanding debt which will become part of Exelons consolidated debt.
The Merger Agreement contains certain termination rights for both Exelon and PSEG, and further provides that, upon termination of the Merger Agreement under specified circumstances, (i) Exelon may be required to pay PSEG a termination fee of $400 million plus PSEGs transaction expenses up to $40 million and (ii) PSEG may be required to pay Exelon a termination fee of $400 million plus Exelons transaction expenses up to $40 million. The Merger Agreement has been unanimously approved by both companies boards of directors but is contingent upon, among other things, the approval by shareholders of both companies, antitrust clearance and a number of regulatory approvals or reviews by Federal and state energy authorities. The parties have made certain of the regulatory filings to obtain necessary regulatory approvals. It is anticipated that this approval process will be completed and the Merger will close within 12 months to 15 months after the announcement of the Merger Agreement in December 2004.
The Merger will be accounted for as a purchase under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Under the purchase method of accounting, the assets and liabilities of PSEG will be recorded, as of the completion of the Merger, at their respective fair values and added to those of Exelon. The reported financial condition and results of operations of Exelon after completion of the Merger will reflect PSEGs balances and results after completion of the Merger, but will not be restated retroactively to reflect the historical financial position or results of operations of PSEG.
Exelon has capitalized external costs associated with the Merger since the execution of the Merger Agreement on December 20, 2004. Total capitalized costs as of December 31, 2004 were $10 million. External costs of $7 million incurred prior to the execution of the Merger Agreement were expensed.
Acquisition and Disposition of Generation Entities
Sale of Ownership Interest in Boston Generating, LLC. On May 25, 2004, Generation completed the sale, transfer and assignment of ownership of its indirect wholly owned subsidiary Boston Generating, which owns the companies that own Mystic 4-7, Mystic 8 and 9 and Fore River generating facilities, to a special purpose entity owned by the lenders under Boston Generatings $1.25 billion credit facility (Boston Generating Credit Facility).
The sale was pursuant to a settlement agreement reached with Boston Generatings lenders on February 23, 2004. The FERC approved the sale of Boston Generating on May 25, 2004. Responsibility for plant operations and power marketing activities were transferred to the lenders special purpose entity on September 1, 2004.
In connection with the settlement reached on February 23, 2004, Exelon, Generation, the lenders and Raytheon Company (Raytheon), the guarantor of the obligations of the turnkey contractor under the projects engineering, procurement and construction agreements, entered into a global settlement of all disputes relating to the construction of the Mystic 8 and 9 and Fore River generating facilities.
In connection with the decision to transition out of Boston Generating and the generating units, Exelon recorded during the third quarter of 2003 an impairment charge of long-lived assets pursuant to SFAS No. 144 of $945 million ($573 million net of income taxes) in operating expenses within its Consolidated Statements of Income.
Boston Generating was reported in the Generation segment of Exelons consolidated financial statements prior to its sale. At the date of the sale, Boston Generating had approximately $1.2 billion in assets, primarily consisting of property, plant and equipment, and approximately $1.3 billion of liabilities of which approximately $1.0 billion was debt outstanding under the Boston Generating Credit Facility. As of the date of transfer, these amounts were eliminated from Exelons Consolidated Balance Sheets. As a result of Boston Generatings liabilities being greater than its assets at the time of the sale, transfer and assignment of ownership, Exelon recorded a gain of $85 million ($52 million net of income taxes) in other income and deductions within the Consolidated Statements of Income in the second quarter of 2004. In connection with the sale, Exelon recorded a liability associated with an existing guarantee by its subsidiary Exelon New England Holdings, LLC (Exelon New England) of fuel purchase obligations of Boston Generating.
23
Due to the existence of this guarantee and in accordance with SFAS No. 144 and EITF Issue No. 03-13, Applying the Conditions in Paragraph 42 of FASB Statement No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, in Determining Whether to Report Discontinued Operations (EITF 03-13), Generation determined that it had retained risk and continuing involvement associated with the operations of Boston Generating and, as a result, the results of Boston Generating have not been classified as a discontinued operation within Exelons Consolidated Statements of Income. See Note 20 Commitments and Contingencies for further information regarding the guarantee.
Exelons Consolidated Statements of Income include the following results related to Boston Generating:
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
Operating revenues |
$ | 248 | $ | 618 | $ | 39 | ||||||
Operating loss (a) |
(49 | ) | (954 | ) | (2 | ) | ||||||
Income (loss) (b) |
21 | (583 | ) | (3 | ) | |||||||
(a) | The operating loss in 2003 included an impairment loss of $945 million ($573 million net of income taxes) related to Boston Generatings long-lived assets. | |
(b) | Net income for 2004 included an after-tax gain of $52 million related to the sale of Boston Generating in the second quarter of 2004. |
See Note 4 Selected Pro Forma and Consolidating Financial Information for the effect of the sale of Boston Generating as if the transaction had occurred on January 1, 2003 and was excluded from Exelons results from that date.
Sithe. See Note 3 Sithe for information regarding Generations investment in Sithe and Note 25 Subsequent Events for information regarding Generations sale of Sithe on January 31, 2005.
Acquisition of Sithe International. On October 13, 2004, Generation acquired a 100% interest in Sithe International in exchange for cancellation of a $92 million note. Sithe International, through its subsidiaries, has a 49.5% interest in Termoeléctrica del Golfo (TEG) and Termoeléctrica Peñoles (TEP), two generating facilities in Mexico that began commercial operation in the second quarter of 2004. Effective January 26, 2005, Sithe Internationals name was changed to Tamuin International, Inc.
AmerGen Energy Company, LLC. On December 22, 2003, Generation purchased British Energy plcs (British Energy) 50% interest in AmerGen Energy Company, LLC (AmerGen). The resolution of purchase price contingencies related to the valuation of long-lived assets was finalized during the fourth quarter of 2004, reflecting the final purchase price of $267 million after working capital adjustments.
Prior to the purchase, Generation was a 50% owner of AmerGen and had accounted for the investment as an unconsolidated equity method investment. From January 1, 2003 through the date of closing, Generation recorded $47 million ($28 million, net of tax) of equity in earnings of unconsolidated affiliates related to its investment in AmerGen and recorded $382 million of purchased power from AmerGen. The book value of Generations investment in AmerGen prior to the purchase was $316 million.
The transaction was accounted for as a step acquisition. As such, upon consolidation, Generation was required to allocate its $316 million book value to 50% of AmerGens equity book value. The difference between Generations investment in AmerGen and 50% of AmerGens equity book value of approximately $227 million was primarily due to Generation not recognizing a significant portion of the cumulative effect of the change in accounting principle at AmerGen related to the adoption of SFAS No. 143. Generation reduced AmerGens equity book value through the reduction of the book value of AmerGens long-lived assets.
Exelon recorded the acquired assets and liabilities of AmerGen (remaining 50%) at fair value as of the date of purchase. The following assets and liabilities, after final purchase accounting adjustments, reflecting the equity basis and fair value adjustments discussed above, of AmerGen were recorded within Exelons Consolidated Balance Sheets as of the date of purchase:
24
Current assets (including $36 million of cash acquired) |
$ | 116 | ||
Property, plant and equipment, including nuclear fuel |
111 | |||
Nuclear decommissioning trust funds |
1,108 | |||
Deferred debits and other assets |
30 | |||
Current liabilities |
(140 | ) | ||
Asset retirement obligation |
(496 | ) | ||
Deferred credits and other liabilities |
(106 | ) | ||
Long-term debt |
(40 | ) | ||
Total equity |
$ | 583 | ||
The assets and liabilities of AmerGen were included in Exelons Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2004 and 2003, and AmerGens results of operations were included in Exelons Consolidated Statement of Income for the year ended December 31, 2004.
In connection with the purchase of Unit No. 1 of the Three Mile Island (TMI) facility by AmerGen in 2000, AmerGen entered into an agreement with the seller whereby the seller would receive additional consideration based upon future power purchase prices through 2009. Under the terms of the agreement, approximately $7 million had been accrued at December 31, 2004, which will be payable to the former owner of the TMI facility in the first quarter of 2005. This payment represents contingent consideration for the original acquisition and has accordingly been reflected as an increase to the long-lived assets associated with the TMI facility, and will be depreciated over the remaining useful life of the facility.
Acquisition of Generating Plants from TXU. On April 25, 2002, Generation acquired two natural-gas generation plants with a total of 2,334 MWs of capacity from TXU Corp. (TXU) for an aggregate purchase price of $443 million. Substantially the entire purchase price was allocated to property, plant and equipment. The transaction included a tolling agreement that provided for TXU to purchase power from the plants during the months of May through September from 2002 through 2006. In December 2004, TXU and Generation terminated the original tolling agreement and entered into a new agreement whereby TXU agreed to purchase 1,900 MWs of capacity and related energy/ancillary services from Generation through 2006. Upon termination of the original agreement, Generation received a cash payment of $172 million. The resulting gain was deferred and will be recognized as income over the contractual term of the new agreement.
25
Disposition of Enterprises Entities
Exelon Thermal Holdings, Inc. On June 30, 2004, Enterprises sold the Chicago businesses of Exelon Thermal Holdings, Inc. (Thermal) for net cash proceeds of $134 million and expected proceeds of $2 million from a working capital settlement, resulting in a pre-tax gain of $45 million included in discontinued operations. Prior to closing, Enterprises repaid $37 million of related debt, resulting in prepayment penalties of $9 million.
On September 29, 2004, Enterprises sold ETT Nevada, Inc., the holding company for its investment in Northwind Aladdin, LLC, for a net cash outflow of $1 million, resulting in a pre-tax loss of $3 million included in discontinued operations.
On October 28, 2004, Northwind Windsor, of which Enterprises owned a 50% interest, sold substantially all of its assets, providing Enterprises with cash proceeds of $8 million, resulting in a pre-tax gain of $2 million included in discontinued operations.
See Assets and Liabilities Held for Sale below for discussion of the classification of the Thermal assets and liabilities as held for sale as of December 31, 2003.
Exelon Services, Inc. During 2004, Enterprises disposed of or wound down all of the operating businesses of Exelon Services, Inc. (Exelon Services), including Exelon Solutions, the mechanical services businesses and the Integrated Technology Group. Total expected proceeds and the net pre-tax gain on sale recorded during 2004 related to these dispositions were $61 million and $9 million, respectively. Pre-tax impairment charges of $5 million and $14 million related to Exelon Services tangible assets were recorded in 2004 and 2003, respectively. Exelon Services also recorded a pre-tax charge of $24 million in 2003 to impair its remaining goodwill. As of December 31, 2004, Exelon Services had remaining assets and liabilities of $74 million and $22 million, respectively, which primarily consisted of tax assets, affiliate receivables and payables, and sales proceeds to be collected. See Assets and Liabilities Held for Sale below for information regarding the classification of the assets and liabilities of Exelon Services as held for sale as of December 31, 2003.
PECO TelCove. On June 30, 2004, Enterprises sold its investment in PECO TelCove, a communications joint venture, along with certain telecommunications assets, for proceeds of $49 million. A pre-tax gain of $9 million was recorded in other income and deductions on Exelons Consolidated Statements of Income. An impairment charge of $5 million (before income taxes) related to the telecommunications assets had been recorded in the fourth quarter of 2003.
InfraSource. On September 24, 2003, Enterprises sold the electric construction and services, underground and telecom businesses of InfraSource. Cash proceeds to Enterprises from the sale were approximately $175 million, net of transaction costs and cash transferred to the buyer upon sale, plus a $30 million subordinated note receivable maturing in 2011. At the time of closing, the present value of the note receivable was approximately $12 million. The note was collected in full during the second quarter of 2004, resulting in pre-tax income of $18 million. In connection with the transaction, Enterprises entered into an agreement that may result in certain payments to InfraSource if the amount of services Exelon purchases from InfraSource during the period from closing through 2006 is below specified thresholds. Due to Exelons ongoing involvement with InfraSource through this agreement and in accordance with SFAS No. 144 and EITF 03-13, the results of InfraSource have not been classified as a discontinued operation within Exelons Consolidated Statements of Income.
In connection with the agreement to sell InfraSource, Enterprises recorded an impairment charge during the second quarter of 2003 of approximately $48 million (before income taxes and minority interest) pursuant to SFAS No. 142 related to the goodwill recorded within the InfraSource reporting unit. Management of Enterprises primarily considered the negotiated sales price and the estimated book value of InfraSource at the time of the closing of the sale in determining the amount of the goodwill impairment charge. In connection with the closing of the sale in the third quarter of 2003, Enterprises recorded a pre-tax gain of $44 million, primarily due to the book value of InfraSource at the date of closing being lower than estimated in the second quarter of 2003. The net impact of the goodwill impairment in the second quarter and the gain recorded in the third quarter was a pre-tax loss and minority interest of $4 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. The net impact was recorded as an operating and maintenance expense within the Consolidated Statements of Income.
26
Sale of Investments. On December 1, 2004, Enterprises sold its limited partnership interest in EnerTech Capital Partners II, L.P. and its limited liability company interests in Kinetic Ventures I, LLC and Kinetic Ventures II, LLC for $8 million in cash and the assumption by the buyers of approximately $10 million in unfunded capital commitments. Prior to the sale, in 2004, these investments were written down to their expected sales price, resulting in pre-tax impairment charges totaling $18 million. As such, there was no net gain or loss recorded associated with the sale.
Sale of Investment in AT&T Wireless. On April 1, 2002, Enterprises sold its 49% interest in AT&T Wireless PCS of Philadelphia, LLC to a subsidiary of AT&T Wireless Services for $285 million in cash. Exelon recorded a pre-tax gain of $198 million ($116 million net of income taxes) on the $84 million investment in other income and deductions on its Consolidated Statements of Income.
The results of Thermal and Exelon Services have been included in discontinued operations within Exelons Consolidated Statements of Income. See Note 26 Discontinued Operations for additional information.
Investments in Synthetic Fuel-Producing Facilities
Synthetic fuel-producing facilities chemically change coal, including waste and marginal coal, into a fuel used at power plants. Section 29 of the Internal Revenue Code provides that tax credits are available for the production of this synthetic fuel.
In November 2003, Exelon purchased interests in two synthetic fuel-producing facilities. The purchase price for these facilities included a combination of cash, notes payable and contingent consideration dependent upon the production level of the facilities. The notes payable recorded for the purchase of the facilities were $238 million. Exelons right to acquire a fixed amount of tax credits generated by the facilities was recorded as an intangible asset which is amortized as the tax credits are earned.
In July 2004, Exelon purchased an interest in a limited partnership that indirectly owns four synthetic fuel-producing facilities. Exelons purchase price for these facilities included a combination of a note payable and contingent consideration dependent upon the production levels of the facilities. The note payable recorded for the purchase of the facilities was $22 million. Exelons right to acquire a fixed amount of tax credits generated by the facilities was recorded as an intangible asset which is amortized as these tax credits are earned.
Private letter rulings have been received that affirm that the process used by the facilities will produce a solid synthetic fuel that qualifies for tax credits under Section 29 of the Internal Revenue Code.
Tax credits generated by the production of synthetic fuel are subject to a phase-out provision that gradually reduces tax credits as the annual average wellhead price per barrel of domestic crude oil increases into an inflation-adjusted phase-out range. For 2003, the tax credit would have begun to phase out when the annual average wellhead price per barrel of domestic crude oil exceeded $50.14 and would have been completely phased out when the annual average wellhead price per barrel of domestic crude oil reached $62.94. The 2004 and 2005 phase-out range will be calculated using inflation rates published in 2005 and 2006, respectively, by the Internal Revenue Service.
If domestic crude oil prices remain high in 2005, the tax credits and net income generated by the investments may be reduced substantially. The intangible asset recorded by Exelon related to its investments in these facilities could become impaired if domestic crude oil prices continue to increase in the future. See Note 9 Intangible Assets for additional information regarding the intangible assets.
Exelons investments in synthetic fuel-producing facilities increased net income by $70 million and $5 million in 2004 and 2003, respectively. The increase in net income is reflected in the Consolidated Statements of Income as a benefit within income taxes, partially offset by charges to operating and maintenance expense, depreciation and amortization expense, interest expense and equity in losses of unconsolidated affiliates. See Note 13 Income Taxes for information regarding the effect of these investments on Exelons effective income tax rate.
27
Investments in Affordable Housing
On October 15, 2004 and November 12, 2004, Exelon sold investments in affordable housing for total proceeds of $78 million and recognized a net gain on sale of $4 million before income taxes. Of the total proceeds, $2 million is being held in escrow pending possible purchase price adjustments.
Assets and Liabilities Held for Sale
There were no assets or liabilities classified as held for sale as of December 31, 2004. The major classes of assets and liabilities classified as held for sale within Exelons Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2003 consisted of the following :
December 31, 2003 | Generation | Enterprises | Total | |||||||||
Cash |
$ | | $ | 11 | $ | 11 | ||||||
Accounts receivable, net |
| 59 | 59 | |||||||||
Other current assets |
| 24 | 24 | |||||||||
Property, plant and equipment, net |
| 86 | 86 | |||||||||
Other long-term assets |
36 | 26 | 62 | |||||||||
Total assets classified as held for sale |
$ | 36 | $ | 206 | $ | 242 | ||||||
December 31, 2003 | Generation | Enterprises | Total | |||||||||
Accounts payable, accrued expenses
and other current liabilities |
$ | | $ | 44 | $ | 44 | ||||||
Debt |
| 1 | 1 | |||||||||
Asset retirement obligation |
| 3 | 3 | |||||||||
Other long-term liabilities |
| 13 | 13 | |||||||||
Total liabilities classified as held for sale |
$ | | $ | 61 | $ | 61 | ||||||
Generation. Generation classified three gas turbines with a book value of $36 million as held for sale as of December 31, 2003. The turbines were sold during the first quarter of 2004 for proceeds of $42 million, resulting in a gain of $6 million. In anticipation of their sale in 2004, these turbines had been classified as other long-term assets as they had not been placed into service.
Enterprises. As of December 31, 2003, the assets and liabilities of certain entities of Thermal and Exelon Services were classified as held for sale. The assets and liabilities of Thermal classified as held for sale were $120 million and $18 million, respectively, at December 31, 2003. The assets and liabilities of Exelon Services classified as held for sale were $86 million and $43 million, respectively, at December 31, 2003. Enterprises recognized impairment charges totaling $14 million (before income taxes) under SFAS No. 144 related to the assets of Exelon Services that were classified as held for sale during the year ended December 31, 2003. These assets and liabilities are reported within the other category of Note 22 Segment Information. See Disposition of Enterprises Entities above for information regarding the disposition of these businesses in 2004.
3. Sithe
Sithe is primarily engaged in the ownership and operation of electric wholesale generating facilities in North America. At December 31, 2004, Sithe operated nine power units with total average net capacity of 1,323 MWs. Described below is a series of transactions in 2004 and 2003 involving Generations investment in Sithe that ultimately resulted in the sale of Generations ownership interest in Sithe to a third party on January 31, 2005. See Note 25 Subsequent Events for a further discussion of the sale transaction.
Exercise of Call Option and Subsequent Agreement to Sell. On November 25, 2003, Generation, Reservoir Capital Group (Reservoir) and Sithe completed a series of transactions resulting in Generation and Reservoir each indirectly owning a 50% interest in Sithe (Generation owned 49.9% prior to November 25, 2003). See below for further details regarding these 2003 transactions.
Both Generations and Reservoirs 50% interests in Sithe were subject to put and call options.
28
On September 29, 2004, Generation exercised its call option and entered into an agreement to acquire Reservoirs 50% interest in Sithe for $97 million. On November 1, 2004, Generation entered into an agreement to sell Sithe to Dynegy Inc. (Dynegy) for $135 million in cash. On January 31, 2005, Generation completed the closing of the call exercise and the sale of the resulting 100% interest in Sithe. The sale did not include Sithe International, Inc., which was sold to a subsidiary of Generation in a separate transaction described below.
Acquisition of Sithe International, Inc. Sithe International, through its subsidiaries, has 49.5% interests in two Mexican business trusts that own the TEG and TEP power stations, two 230 MW petcoke-fired generating facilities in Tamuín, Mexico that commenced commercial operations in the second quarter of 2004. On October 13, 2004, Sithe transferred all of the shares of Sithe International, Inc. and its subsidiaries to a subsidiary of Generation in exchange for cancellation of a $92 million note, which is eliminated as part of the consolidation of Sithe. Effective January 26, 2005, Sithe Internationals name was changed to Tamuin International Inc.
2003 Transactions. On November 25, 2003, Generation, Reservoir and Sithe completed a series of transactions resulting in Generation and Reservoir each indirectly owning a 50% interest in Sithe. Immediately prior to these transactions, Sithe was owned 49.9% by Generation, 35.2% by Apollo Energy, LLC (Apollo), and 14.9% by subsidiaries of Marubeni Corporation (Marubeni).
On November 25, 2003, entities controlled by Reservoir purchased certain Sithe entities holding six U.S. generating facilities, each a qualifying facility under the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act, in exchange for $37 million ($21 million in cash and a $16 million two-year note); and entities controlled by Marubeni purchased all of Sithes entities and facilities outside of North America (other than Sithe Energies Australia (SEA) of which it purchased a 49.9% interest on November 24, 2003 and the remaining 50.1% interest on May 27, 2004 for separate consideration) for $178 million.
Following the sales of the above entities, Generation transferred its wholly owned subsidiary that held the Sithe investment to a newly formed holding company, EXRES SHC, Inc. The subsidiary holding the Sithe investment acquired the remaining Sithe interests from Apollo and Marubeni for $612 million using proceeds from a $580 million bridge financing and available cash. Generation sold a 50% interest in the newly formed holding company for $76 million to an entity controlled by Reservoir on November 25, 2003. On November 26, 2003, Sithe distributed $580 million of available cash to its parent, which then utilized the distributed funds to repay the bridge financing.
Guarantees. In connection with the 2003 transactions, Generation recorded obligations related to $39 million of guarantees in accordance with FIN 45. These guarantees were issued to protect Reservoir from credit exposure of certain counter-parties through 2015 and other indemnities. In determining the value of the FIN 45 guarantees, Generation utilized probabilistic models to assess the possibilities of future payments under the guarantees. These guarantees were reversed upon the consolidation of Sithe in accordance with FIN 45 as this liability was associated with guarantees for the performance of a consolidated entity. The consolidation of Sithe in accordance with FIN 46-R resulted in Exelon recording income of $32 million (net of income taxes), which included the reversal of the aforementioned guarantees, as a cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle during the first quarter of 2004.
Accounting Prior to the Consolidation of Sithe on March 31, 2004. Generation had accounted for the investment in Sithe as an unconsolidated equity method investment prior to its consolidation on March 31, 2004 pursuant to FIN 46-R. See Note 1 Significant Accounting Policies for further discussion. In 2003, Generation recorded impairment charges of $255 million (before income taxes) in other income and deductions within the Consolidated Statements of Income associated with a decline in the fair value of the Sithe investment, which was considered to be other-than-temporary. Generations management considered various factors in the decision to impair this investment, including managements negotiations to sell its interest in Sithe. The discussions surrounding the sale indicated that the fair value of the Sithe investment was below its book value and, as such, impairment charges were required.
The book value of Generations investment in Sithe immediately prior to its consolidation on March 31, 2004 was $49 million. For the year ended December 31, 2004, Exelon recorded $2 million of equity method losses from Sithe prior to its consolidation. For the year ended December 31, 2003 and 2002, Exelon recorded $2 million and $23 million of equity method income, respectively, related to its investment in Sithe.
29
Consolidation of Sithe as of March 31, 2004. As a result of the 2003 transactions referred to above, the consolidation of Sithe at March 31, 2004 was accounted for as a step acquisition pursuant to purchase accounting policies. Under the provisions of FIN 46-R, the operating results of Sithe were included in Exelons results of operations beginning April 1, 2004. As discussed in Note 26 Discontinued Operations, the results of operations of Sithe subsequent to March 31, 2004 have been reported as discontinued operations.
The condensed consolidating financial information included in Note 4 Selected Pro Forma and Consolidating Financial Information (Unaudited) presents the financial position of Exelon and Sithe, as well as consolidating entries related primarily to acquisition notes payables and receivables between Exelon and Sithe.
Intangible Assets. Sithe had entered into a tolling arrangement (Tolling Agreement) with Dynegy Power Marketing and its affiliates with respect to Sithes Independence Station. The Tolling Agreement commenced on July 1, 2001 and runs through 2014. Additionally, Sithe has entered into an energy purchase agreement (Energy Purchase Agreement) with a counterparty relating to the Independence Station, which continues through 2014. As a result of the acquisition accounting described above, values were assigned to the Tolling Agreement and the Energy Purchase Agreement of approximately $73 million and $384 million, respectively, which have been recorded as intangible assets on Exelons Consolidated Balance Sheets in deferred debits and other assets. These amounts were determined based on fair value techniques utilizing the contract terms and various other estimates including forward power prices, discount rates and option pricing models.
The intangible assets representing the Tolling Agreement and the Energy Purchase Agreement are being amortized on a straight-line basis over the lives of the associated agreements. See Note 9 Intangible Assets for further information regarding Exelons intangible assets.
Long-Term Debt and Letters of Credit. Substantially all of Sithes property, plant and equipment and project agreements secure Sithes outstanding long-term debt, which consists primarily of project debt. During 2003, Sithe entered into an agreement with Exelon and Generation under which Exelon obtained letters of credit to support contractual obligations of Sithe and its subsidiaries. As of December 31, 2004, Exelon had obtained $61 million of letters of credit in support of Sithes obligations not including a $50 million letter of credit that is not guaranteed by Exelon. With the exception of the issuance of letters of credit to support contractual obligations, the creditors of Sithe have no recourse against the general credit of Exelon or Generation.
4. Selected Pro Forma and Consolidating Financial Information (Unaudited)
The following unaudited pro forma financial information gives effect to the acquisition on December 22, 2003 of the remaining 50% interest in AmerGen by Generation and the sale of Boston Generating by Generation on May 25, 2004, in each case, as if the transaction had occurred on January 1, 2003.
Sale of | ||||||||||||||||
Exelon | Boston | Eliminating | Pro Forma | |||||||||||||
2004 | As Reported | Generating | Entries | Exelon | ||||||||||||
Total operating revenues |
$ | 14,133 | $ | 248 | $ | | $ | 13,885 | ||||||||
Operating income (loss) |
3,499 | (49 | ) | | 3,548 | |||||||||||
Income from continuing operations |
1,870 | 21 | | 1,849 | ||||||||||||
Acquisition | Sale of | |||||||||||||||||||
Exelon | of 50% of | Boston | Eliminating | Pro Forma | ||||||||||||||||
2003 | As Reported | AmerGen | Generating | Entries(a) | Exelon | |||||||||||||||
Total operating revenues |
$ | 15,148 | $ | 623 | $ | 618 | $ | (382 | ) | $ | 14,771 | |||||||||
Operating income (loss) |
2,409 | 99 | (954 | ) | | 3,462 | ||||||||||||||
Income from continuing operations |
892 | 89 | (583 | ) | (47 | ) | 1,517 | |||||||||||||
(a) | Represents the elimination of intercompany revenues at AmerGen and equity in earnings from AmerGen in 2003. |
30
The above unaudited pro-forma financial information should not be relied upon as being indicative of the historical results that would have been obtained if the transactions had actually occurred in prior periods nor of the results that might be obtained in the future.
Condensed Consolidating Balance Sheet at December 31, 2004
The following condensed consolidating financial information presents the financial position of Exelon and Sithe, as well as eliminating entries, related primarily to acquisition notes payable and receivables between Generation and Sithe.
Exelon | ||||||||||||||||
Pro Forma | Eliminating | (As | ||||||||||||||
December 31, 2004 | Exelon | Sithe | Entries | Reported) | ||||||||||||
Assets |
||||||||||||||||
Current assets |
$ | 3,951 | $ | 336 | $ | (361 | ) | $ | 3,926 | |||||||
Property, plant and equipment, net |
21,212 | 270 | | 21,482 | ||||||||||||
Other noncurrent assets |
16,643 | 750 | (31 | ) | 17,362 | |||||||||||
Total assets |
$ | 41,806 | $ | 1,356 | $ | (392 | ) | $ | 42,770 | |||||||
Liabilities and shareholders equity |
||||||||||||||||
Current liabilities |
$ | 4,920 | $ | 323 | $ | (361 | ) | $ | 4,882 | |||||||
Long-term debt |
11,363 | 785 | | 12,148 | ||||||||||||
Other long-term liabilities (a) |
16,013 | 181 | 36 | 16,230 | ||||||||||||
Shareholders equity (b) |
9,510 | 67 | (67 | ) | 9,510 | |||||||||||
Total liabilities and shareholders equity |
$ | 41,806 | $ | 1,356 | $ | (392 | ) | $ | 42,770 | |||||||
(a) | Includes minority interest in consolidated subsidiaries. | |
(b) | Includes preferred securities of subsidiaries. |
5. Regulatory Issues
Energy Delivery
PJM Integration. On June 2, 2003, ComEd began receiving electric transmission reservation services from PJM Interconnection, LLC (PJM) and transferred control of ComEds Open Access Same Time Information System to PJM. On April 27, 2004, the FERC issued its order approving ComEds application to complete its integration into PJM, subject to certain stipulations, including a provision to hold certain utilities in Michigan and Wisconsin harmless from the associated impacts for ComEd to join PJM. ComEd agreed to these stipulations and fully integrated its transmission facilities into PJM on May 1, 2004. In the fourth quarter of 2004, ComEd entered into settlement agreements with all such Michigan and Wisconsin utilities requiring a total payment of approximately $4 million by ComEd. FERC has approved these agreements and payment is expected to be made in the first quarter of 2005.
Through and Out Rates. In November 2004, the FERC issued two orders authorizing ComEd and PECO to recover from various entities revenue representing amounts ComEd and PECO will lose as a result of the elimination of through and out (T&O) charges, for energy flowing across ComEds and PECOs transmission systems, that were terminated pursuant to the FERC orders effective December 1, 2004. The collection of this revenue will be over a transitional period of December 1, 2004 through March 31, 2006. Several parties have sought rehearing of the FERC orders and there likely will be appeals filed in the matter after the rehearing order is issued. During 2004 prior to the termination of T&O charges, ComEd and PECO collected net T&O charges of approximately $50 million and $3 million, respectively. As a result of this proceeding, ComEd may see reduced net collections, and PECO may be come a net payer of these charges. The ultimate outcome of this proceeding is uncertain and may have a material adverse effect on ComEds and PECOs financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
31
Delivery Service Rates. On March 3, 2003, ComEd entered into, and the ICC subsequently entered orders to implement, an agreement (Agreement) with various Illinois retail market participants and other interested parties that settled, among other things, delivery service rates and the market value index proceeding and facilitates competitive service declarations for large-load customers and an extension of ComEds PPA with Generation. The effect of the Agreement is to lower competitive transition charge (CTC) collections that ComEd receives from customers who take electricity from an alternative electric supplier or under the purchase power option (PPO) through 2006. The Agreement also allows customers to lock in current CTCs for multiple years. In 2004 and 2003, ComEd collected $169 million and $304 million in CTC revenues, respectively.
In 2003, ComEd recorded a charge to earnings associated with the required funding of specified programs and initiatives associated with the Agreement of $51 million (before income taxes) on a present value basis. This amount was partially offset by the reversal of a $12 million (before income taxes) reserve established in the third quarter of 2002 for a potential capital disallowance in ComEds delivery services rate proceeding and a credit of $10 million (before income taxes) related to the capitalization of employee incentive payments provided for in the delivery services order. The charge of $51 million and the credit of $10 million were recorded in operating and maintenance expense and the reversal of the $12 million reserve was recorded in other, net within Exelons Consolidated Statements of Income. The net charge for these items was $29 million (before income taxes). In accordance with the Agreement, ComEd made payments of $10 million and $23 million during 2004 and 2003, respectively.
Customer Choice. All ComEds retail customers are eligible to choose an alternative electric supplier and most non-residential customers may also buy electricity from ComEd at market-based prices under the PPO. No alternative electric supplier has approval from the ICC, and no electric utilities have chosen, to serve ComEds residential customers. As of December 31, 2004, approximately 22,100 non-residential customers, or 35% of ComEds annual retail kilowatthour sales, had elected either the PPO or an alternative electric supplier. Customers who receive energy from an alternative supplier continue to pay a delivery charge.
All PECO customers may choose to purchase energy from an alternative electric supplier. As of December 31, 2004, approximately 101,500 customers, representing approximately 8% of PECOs annual kilowatthour sales, had elected to purchase their electric energy from an alternative electric supplier. Customers who receive energy from an alternative electric supplier continue to pay delivery charges and CTCs.
Competitive Service Declarations. On November 14, 2002, the ICC allowed ComEd, by operation of law, to revise its provider of last resort obligation to be the back-up energy supplier at market-based rates for certain customers with energy demands of at least three MWs. About 370 of ComEds largest energy customers are affected, representing an aggregate supply obligation or load of approximately 2,500 MWs. These customers will not have a right to take bundled service after June 2006 or to return to bundled rates if they choose an alternative supplier prior to June 2006.
On March 28, 2003, the ICC approved changes to ComEds real-time pricing tariff for non-residential customers, including those with energy demands of at least three MWs, who choose hourly energy supply for their electric power and energy. The ICC orders were affirmed on appeal.
Exelon cannot predict the long-term impact of customer choice and customer service declarations on its results of operations.
Rate Reductions and Return on Common Equity Threshold. The Illinois restructuring legislation, as amended, required a 15% residential base rate reduction effective August 1, 1998 and an additional 5% residential base rate reduction effective October 1, 2001. In addition, a base rate freeze,
32
reflecting the residential base rate reduction, is in effect through January 1, 2007. A utility may request a rate increase during the rate freeze period only when necessary to ensure the utilitys financial viability. Under the Illinois legislation, if the two-year average of the earned return on common equity of a utility through December 31, 2006 exceeds an established threshold, one-half of the excess earnings must be refunded to customers. The threshold rate of return on common equity is based on a two-year average of the Monthly Treasury Bond Long-Term Average Rates (20 years and above) plus 8.5% in the years 2000 through 2006. Earnings for purposes of ComEds threshold include ComEds net income calculated in accordance with GAAP and reflect the amortization of regulatory assets. Under Illinois statute, any impairment of goodwill would have no impact on the determination of the cap on ComEds allowed equity return during the transition period. As a result of the Illinois legislation, at December 31, 2004, ComEd had a regulatory asset related to recoverable transition costs with an unamortized balance of $87 million that it expects to fully recover and amortize by the end of 2006. Consistent with the provisions of the Illinois legislation, regulatory assets may be recovered in amounts that provide ComEd an earned return on common equity within the Illinois legislation earnings threshold. ComEd has not triggered the earnings sharing provision through 2004.
Rate limitations. Pursuant to a settlement agreement related to the merger of Exelon, Unicom Corporation and PECO on October 20, 2000 (PECO / Unicom Merger) with the PUC, PECO is subject to agreed-upon electric service rate reductions of $200 million, in aggregate, for the period January 1, 2002 through December 31, 2005, including $40 million in each of 2004 and 2005. As required by the 1998 electric restructuring settlement and as modified by the PECO / Unicom Merger-related settlement agreement, PECO is subject to rate caps (subject to limited exceptions for significant increases in Federal or state income taxes or other significant changes in law or regulation that do not allow PECO to earn a fair rate of return) on its transmission and distribution rates through December 31, 2006, and on its energy rates through December 31, 2010.
Nuclear Decommissioning Costs. In connection with the transfer of ComEds nuclear generating stations to Generation, the ICC permitted ComEd to recover $73 million per year from retail customers for decommissioning for the years 2001 through 2004 and, depending upon the portion of the output from those stations taken by ComEd, up to $73 million annually in 2005 and 2006. Because ComEd is not expected to take all of the output of these stations, actual collections are expected to be less than $73 million annually in 2005 and 2006. Subsequent to 2006, there will be no further recoveries of decommissioning costs from customers. Any surplus funds after a nuclear station is decommissioned must be refunded to ComEds customers. The amounts collected by ComEd from retail customers are remitted to Generation. See Note 14 Nuclear Decommissioning and Spent Fuel Storage.
Effective January 1, 2004, the PUC approved an adjustment to PECOs nuclear decommissioning cost adjustment clause permitting PECO to recover an additional $3.6 million annually, or $33 million compared to $29 million previously. The amounts recovered by PECO are remitted to Generation upon collection.
Open Access Transmission Tariff. On November 10, 2003, the FERC issued an order allowing ComEd to put into effect, subject to refund and rehearing, new transmission rates designed to reflect nearly $500 million of infrastructure investments made since 1998; however, because of the Illinois retail rate freeze and the method for calculating CTCs, the increase is not expected to significantly increase operating revenues until December 31, 2006. During the third quarter of 2004, a settlement agreement was reached which was approved by the FERC during the fourth quarter of 2004, which established new rates that became effective May 1, 2004.
33
Generation
Service Life Extension. Upon the December 2003 acquisition of the remaining 50% interest in AmerGen, Generation changed its accounting estimates related to the depreciation of certain AmerGen generating facilities to conform with Generations depreciation policies. The estimated service lives were extended by 20 years for the three AmerGen stations. These changes were based on engineering and economic feasibility analyses performed by Generation. The service life extensions are subject to approval by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) of renewals of the existing NRC operating licenses. Generation has not applied for license renewals at the AmerGen facilities, but has announced its plan to file a renewal request in 2005 for the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (Oyster Creek), and is planning on filing for license renewals for TMI Unit 1 and the Clinton Nuclear Power Station (Clinton) on a timeline consistent and integrated with the other planned license renewal filings for the Generation nuclear fleet.
License Renewals. In December 2004, the NRC issued an order that will permit Oyster Creek to operate beyond its license expiration in April 2009 if the NRC has not completed reviewing the application for renewal. The application for Oyster Creeks license renewal is anticipated to be filed by August 2005 in order to comply with this agreement. On October 28, 2004, the NRC approved 20-year renewals of the operating licenses for Generations Dresden and Quad Cities generating stations. The licenses for Dresden Unit 2, Dresden Unit 3 and Quad Cities Units 1 and 2 were renewed to 2029, 2031 and 2032, respectively. On May 7, 2003, the operating licenses for Peach Bottom Unit 2 and Peach Bottom Unit 3 were renewed to 2033 and 2034, respectively. Depreciation provisions are based on the estimated useful lives of the stations, which assumes the renewal of these licenses for all nuclear generating stations. As a result, these license renewals had no impact on the Consolidated Statements of Income.
6. Accounts Receivable
Customer accounts receivable at December 31, 2004 and 2003 included unbilled revenues related to unread meters for Energy Delivery and Exelon Energy Company customers of $482 million and $452 million, respectively. Also included in customer accounts receivable was $385 million and $366 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively, related to Generations unbilled revenues for amounts of energy delivered to customers in the month of December. The allowance for uncollectible accounts at December 31, 2004 and 2003 was $93 million and $110 million, respectively.
PECO is party to an agreement with a financial institution under which it can sell or finance with limited recourse an undivided interest, adjusted daily, in up to $225 million of designated accounts receivable until November 2005. At December 31, 2004, PECO had sold a $225 million interest in accounts receivable, consisting of a $179 million interest in accounts receivable which PECO accounted for as a sale under SFAS No. 140, Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishment of Liabilities - a Replacement of FASB Statement No. 125, (SFAS No. 140) and a $46 million interest in special-agreement accounts receivable which was accounted for as a long-term note payable and reflected on the consolidated balance sheet as long-term debt due within one year. At December 31, 2003, PECO had sold a $225 million interest in accounts receivable, consisting of a $176 million interest in accounts receivable which PECO accounted for as a sale under SFAS No. 140 and a $49 million interest in special-agreement accounts receivable which was accounted for as a long-term note payable (see Note 12 - Long-Term Debt). PECO retains the servicing responsibility for these receivables. The agreement requires PECO to maintain the $225 million interest, which, if not met, requires cash, which would otherwise be received by PECO under this program, to be held in escrow until the requirement is met. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, PECO met this requirement and was not required to make any cash deposits.
34
7. Property, Plant, and Equipment
A summary of property, plant and equipment by asset category as of December 31, 2004 and 2003 is as follows:
Asset Category | 2004 | 2003 | ||||||
Electric transmission and distribution |
$ | 13,479 | $ | 12,644 | ||||
Electric generation |
7,125 | 7,968 | ||||||
Gas transmission and distribution |
1,436 | 1,381 | ||||||
Common |
501 | 492 | ||||||
Nuclear fuel |
2,926 | 2,568 | ||||||
Construction work in progress |
593 | 862 | ||||||
Asset retirement cost |
1,024 | 203 | ||||||
Other property, plant and equipment (a) |
1,627 | 1,549 | ||||||
Total property, plant and equipment |
28,711 | 27,667 | ||||||
Less accumulated depreciation (including accumulated
amortization of nuclear fuel of $1,976 and $1,596 as of
December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively) |
7,229 | 7,037 | ||||||
Property, plant and equipment, net |
$ | 21,482 | $ | 20,630 | ||||
(a) | Includes buildings under capital lease with a net carrying value of $43 million and $46 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. The original cost basis of the buildings was $53 million and total accumulated amortization was $10 million and $7 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. |
Energy Deliverys depreciation expense, which is included in cost of service for rate purposes, includes the estimated cost of dismantling and removing plant from service upon retirement. Beginning in 2003, in accordance with new interpretations of regulatory accounting practice, collections for future removal costs are recorded as a regulatory liability. For more information, see Note 21 Supplemental Financial Information.
Effective July 1, 2002, ComEd decreased its depreciation rates based on a new depreciation study reflecting its significant construction program in recent years, changes in and development of new technologies, and changes in estimated plant service lives since the last depreciation study. The annualized reduction in depreciation expense was $96 million.
35
8. Jointly Owned Electric Utility Plant
Exelons undivided ownership interests in jointly owned electric plant at December 31, 2004 and 2003 were as follows:
Nuclear generation | Fossil fuel generation | Transmission/ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Quad Cities | Peach Bottom | Salem (a) | Keystone | Conemaugh | Wyman | Other | ||||||||||||||||||||||
PSEG | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Operator | Generation | Generation | Nuclear | Reliant | Reliant | FP&L | (b, c) | |||||||||||||||||||||
Ownership interest |
75.00 | % | 50.00 | % | 42.59 | % | 20.99 | % | 20.72 | % | 5.89 | % | (b, c) | |||||||||||||||
Exelons share at
December 31, 2004: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Plant |
$ | 287 | $ | 438 | $ | 127 | $ | 167 | $ | 212 | $ | 2 | $ | 61 | ||||||||||||||
Accumulated depreciation |
54 | 231 | 33 | 102 | 133 | | 27 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Construction work
in progress |
39 | 16 | 81 | 5 | 1 | | | |||||||||||||||||||||
Exelons share at
December 31, 2003: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Plant |
$ | 191 | $ | 453 | $ | 106 | $ | 168 | $ | 210 | $ | 2 | $ | 61 | ||||||||||||||
Accumulated depreciation |
18 | 239 | 24 | 106 | 138 | | 26 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Construction work
in progress |
40 | 1 | 48 | 2 | 1 | | | |||||||||||||||||||||
(a) | Generation also owns a proportionate share in the fossil fuel combustion turbine, which is fully depreciated. The gross book value was $3 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003. | |
(b) | PECO has a 22.00% ownership of 127 miles of 500,000 voltage lines located in Pennsylvania and a 42.55% ownership of 151 miles of 500,000 voltage lines located in Delaware and New Jersey. | |
(c) | Generation has a 44.24% ownership interest in Merrill Creek Reservoir located in New Jersey with a book value of $1 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003. |
Exelons undivided ownership interests are financed with Exelon funds and all operations are accounted for as if such participating interests were wholly owned facilities. Exelons share of direct expenses of the jointly owned plants is included in the corresponding operating expenses on the Consolidated Statements of Income.
9. Intangible Assets
Goodwill
Adoption of SFAS No. 142. Effective January 1, 2002, Exelon adopted SFAS No. 142. Pursuant to SFAS No. 142, goodwill is no longer amortized; however, in addition to an initial assessment, goodwill is subject to an assessment for impairment at least annually, or more frequently, if events or circumstances indicate that goodwill might be impaired. The impairment assessment is performed using a two-step, fair-value based test. 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 compares the carrying amount of the goodwill to the estimated fair value of the goodwill. If the fair value of goodwill is less than the carrying amount, an impairment loss is reported as a reduction to goodwill and a charge to operating expense.
As of December 31, 2001, Exelons Consolidated Balance Sheets reflected approximately $5.3 billion in goodwill net of accumulated amortization, including $4.9 billion of goodwill, net of accumulated amortization, related to the PECO / Unicom Merger recorded on ComEds Consolidated Balance Sheets, with the remainder related to Enterprises. The first step of the transitional impairment analysis indicated that Energy Deliverys goodwill was not impaired but that an impairment did exist with respect to goodwill recorded in Enterprises reporting units. The second step of the analysis, which compared the fair value of each of Enterprises reporting units goodwill to the carrying value at
36
December 31, 2001, indicated a total goodwill impairment of $357 million ($243 million, net of income taxes and minority interest). The fair value of Enterprises reporting units was determined using discounted cash flow models reflecting the expected range of future cash flow outcomes related to each of Enterprises reporting units over the life of the investment. These cash flows were discounted to 2002 using a risk-adjusted discount rate.
The components of the net transitional impairment loss recognized in the first quarter of 2002 as a cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle were as follows:
Enterprises goodwill impairment (net of income taxes of ($95)) |
$ | (243 | ) | |
Exelon Energys goodwill impairment (net of income taxes of ($8)) |
(11 | ) | ||
Minority interest (net of income taxes of $4) |
11 | |||
Elimination of AmerGen negative goodwill (net of income taxes of $9) |
13 | |||
Total cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle |
$ | (230 | ) | |
Accounting Methodology Under SFAS No. 142. The changes in the carrying amount of goodwill by reportable segment (see Note 22 Segment Information) for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2004 were as follows:
Energy | ||||||||||||
Delivery | Other(a) | Total | ||||||||||
Balances as of January 1, 2003 |
$ | 4,916 | $ | 76 | $ | 4,992 | ||||||
Impairment losses
|
| (72 | ) | (72 | ) | |||||||
Adoption of SFAS No. 143: (b) |
||||||||||||
Reduction of asset retirement obligation |
(210 | ) | | (210 | ) | |||||||
Cumulative effect of change in accounting principle |
5 | | 5 | |||||||||
Resolution of certain tax matters |
8 | | 8 | |||||||||
Other |
| (4 | ) | (4 | ) | |||||||
Balances as of January 1, 2004 |
4,719 | | 4,719 | |||||||||
Resolution of certain tax matters |
(9 | ) | | (9 | ) | |||||||
PECO / Unicom Merger severance adjustments |
(5 | ) | | (5 | ) | |||||||
Balances as of December 31, 2004 |
$ | 4,705 | $ | | $ | 4,705 | ||||||
(a) | Represents the goodwill associated with Enterprises. | |
(b) | See Note 14 Nuclear Decommissioning and Spent Fuel Storage. |
2004 Annual Goodwill Impairment Assessment. The annual goodwill impairment assessment was performed as of November 1, 2004. The first step of the annual impairment analysis, comparing the fair value of a reporting unit to its carrying value, including goodwill, indicated no impairment of goodwill. In its assessment to estimate the fair value of the Energy Delivery reporting unit, Exelon used a probability-weighted, discounted cash flow model with multiple scenarios. The determination of the fair value is dependent on many sensitive, interrelated and uncertain variables including changing interest rates, utility sector market performance, capital structure, market prices for power, post-2006 rate regulatory structures, operating and capital expenditure requirements and other factors.
Changes from the assumptions used in the impairment review could possibly result in a future impairment loss of Energy Deliverys goodwill, which could be material. Illinois legislation provides that reductions to ComEds common equity resulting from goodwill impairments will have no impact on the determination of the rate cap on ComEds allowed equity return during the electricity industry restructuring transition period through 2006. See Note 5 Regulatory Issues for further discussion of ComEds earnings provisions.
2003 Goodwill Impairment Assessments. The 2003 annual goodwill impairment assessment was performed as of November 1, 2003, and Exelon determined that goodwill was not impaired at Energy Delivery but that the remaining goodwill at Exelon Services was fully impaired. Exelon recorded a pre-tax charge of $24 million within operating and maintenance expenses during 2003 to fully impair the goodwill that had been recorded within Exelon Services.
37
In connection with the sale of InfraSource in 2003, Exelon recorded a goodwill impairment charge of approximately $48 million pre-tax to fully impair the goodwill recorded within InfraSource. Management of Exelon primarily considered the negotiated sales price of InfraSource in determining the amount of the goodwill impairment charge.
Other Intangible Assets
Other Intangible Assets. Exelons other intangible assets, included in deferred debits and other assets consisted of the following:
December 31, 2004 | December 31, 2003 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Accumulated | Accumulated | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross | Amortization | Net | Gross | Amortization | Net | |||||||||||||||||||
Amortized intangible assets: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Energy purchase agreement (a) |
$ | 384 | $ | (27 | ) | $ | 357 | $ | | $ | | $ | | |||||||||||
Tolling agreement (a) |
73 | (5 | ) | 68 | | | | |||||||||||||||||
Synthetic fuel investments (b) |
264 | (56 | ) | 208 | 241 | (4 | ) | 237 | ||||||||||||||||
Other |
6 | (6 | ) | | 6 | | 6 | |||||||||||||||||
Total amortized intangible assets |
727 | (94 | ) | 633 | 247 | (4 | ) | 243 | ||||||||||||||||
Other intangible assets: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Intangible pension asset |
171 | | 171 | 186 | | 186 | ||||||||||||||||||
Total |
$ | 898 | $ | (94 | ) | $ | 804 | $ | 433 | $ | (4 | ) | $ | 429 | ||||||||||
(a) | See Note 3 Sithe and Note 25 Subsequent Events for a description of Sithes intangible assets that are reflected in Exelons balance sheet at December 31, 2004 and a description of the sale of Sithe that was completed on January 31, 2005. | |
(b) | See Note 2 Acquisitions and Dispositions for a description of Exelons right to acquire tax credits through investments in synthetic fuel-producing facilities. |
Amortization expense related to amortized intangible assets was $90 million in 2004, of which $6 million was reflected as a reduction in revenues and $32 million was attributable to the energy purchase agreement and the tolling agreement. The $32 million relates to Generations consolidation of Sithe and is reflected in discontinued operations. Amortization expense was not significant in 2003.
In 2004, Generation entered into an agreement to sell its ownership interest in Sithe, which was completed on January 31, 2005 and will result in the elimination of the intangible assets related to Sithes energy purchase agreement and tolling agreement from the Consolidated Balance Sheets in future periods. See Note 25 Subsequent Events for further information regarding this sale. Amortization expense related to intangible assets is expected to be in the range of $100 million to $120 million annually from 2005 through 2007 and approximately $50 million in 2008 and 2009. This estimate includes amortization related to Sithes intangible assets of $43 million annually through 2009, which will not be incurred as a result of the sale of Sithe. The remaining amortization expense relates to Exelons investments in synthetic fuel-producing facilities.
10. Severance Accounting
Exelon provides severance and health and welfare benefits to terminated employees pursuant to pre-existing severance plans primarily based upon each individual employees years of service with Exelon and compensation level.
During the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, Exelon identified approximately 260 and 1,580 positions, respectively, for elimination. As of December 31, 2004, approximately 380 of the identified positions had not been eliminated. Exelon recorded charges for salary continuance severance of $32 million and $135 million (before income taxes) during 2004 and 2003, respectively, which represented salary continuance costs that were probable and could be reasonably estimated as of the end of the year. During 2004 and 2003, Exelon recorded charges of $16 million and $48 million (before income taxes), respectively, associated with special health and welfare severance benefits.
38
Additionally, Exelon incurred curtailment and settlement costs in 2004 and 2003 associated with its pension and postretirement benefit plans of $24 million and $80 million (before income taxes), respectively, as a result of personnel reductions. In total, Exelon recorded charges of $56 million and $258 million (before income taxes) in 2004 and 2003, respectively. See Note 15 Retirement Benefits for a description of the curtailment charges related to the pension and postretirement benefit plans.
Exelon based its estimate of the number of positions to be eliminated on managements current plans and its ability to determine the appropriate staffing levels to effectively operate the businesses. Exelon may incur further severance costs if additional positions are identified for elimination. These costs will be recorded in the period in which the costs can be reasonably estimated.
The following table details, by segment, Exelons total salary continuance severance costs, recorded as an operating and maintenance expense, for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002:
Energy | ||||||||||||||||
Salary continuance severance charges | Delivery | Generation | Other | Consolidated | ||||||||||||
Expenses recorded - 2004 (a) |
$ | 13 | $ | 2 | $ | 17 | $ | 32 | ||||||||
Expenses recorded 2003 (a) |
77 | 38 | 20 | 135 | ||||||||||||
Expenses recorded 2002 (b) |
| 2 | 6 | 8 | ||||||||||||
(a) | Severance expense in 2004 and 2003 reflects severance costs associated with The Exelon Way, revised estimates to reflect specific individuals instead of positions previously identified under The Exelon Way and other severance costs incurred in the normal course of business. | |
(b) | Severance expense in 2002 generally represents severance activity associated with the PECO / Unicom Merger and in the normal course of business. |
The following table provides a roll forward of Exelons salary continuance severance obligation from January 1, 2003 through December 31, 2004.
Salary continuance severance obligation | ||||
Balance as of January 1, 2003 |
$ | 39 | ||
Severance charges recorded |
135 | |||
Cash payments |
(39 | ) | ||
Other adjustments |
4 | |||
Balance as of January 1, 2004 |
139 | |||
Severance charges recorded |
32 | |||
Cash payments |
(87 | ) | ||
Other adjustments |
(15 | ) | ||
Balance as of December 31, 2004 |
$ | 69 | ||
39
11. Short-Term Debt
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
Average borrowings |
$ | 149 | $ | 144 | $ | 337 | ||||||
Maximum borrowings outstanding |
622 | 1,288 | 783 | |||||||||
Average interest rates, computed on a daily basis |
1.37 | % | 1.25 | % | 1.9 | % | ||||||
Average interest rates, at December 31 |
2.43 | % | 1.08 | % | 1.88 | % | ||||||
At December 31, 2003, Exelon, along with ComEd, PECO and Generation, participated with a group of banks in a $750 million 364-day unsecured revolving credit agreement and a $750 million three-year unsecured revolving credit agreement. On July 16, 2004, the $750 million 364-day facility was replaced with a $1 billion unsecured revolving facility maturing on July 16, 2009, and the $750 million three-year facility was reduced to $500 million maturing on October 31, 2006. Both revolving credit agreements are used principally to support the commercial paper programs at Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation and to issue letters of credit.
At December 31, 2004, Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation had the following sublimits and available capacity under the credit agreements and the indicated amounts of outstanding commercial paper:
Bank | Available | Outstanding | ||||||||||
Borrower | Sublimit | (a) | Capacity | (b) | Commercial Paper | |||||||
Exelon |
$ | 700 | $ | 685 | $ | 490 | ||||||
ComEd |
100 | 74 | | |||||||||
PECO |
100 | 100 | | |||||||||
Generation |
600 | 444 | | |||||||||
(a) | Sublimits under the credit agreements can change upon written notification to the bank group. | |
(b) | Available capacity represents the bank sublimit net of outstanding letters of credit. The amount of commercial paper outstanding does not reduce the available capacity under the credit facilities. |
Interest rates on advances under the credit facilities are based on either prime or the London Interbank Offering Rate (LIBOR) plus an adder based on the credit rating of the borrower as well as the total outstanding amounts under the agreement at the time of borrowing. The maximum LIBOR adder is 170 basis points.
The credit agreements require Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation 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, revenues from Sithe and interest on the debt of its project subsidiaries. The following table summarizes the minimum thresholds reflected in the credit agreements for the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2004:
Exelon | ComEd | PECO | Generation | |||||||||||||
Credit agreement threshold |
2.65 to 1 | 2.25 to 1 | 2.25 to 1 | 3.25 to 1 | ||||||||||||
At December 31, 2004, Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation were in compliance with the foregoing thresholds.
40
12. Long-Term Debt
December 31, | ||||||||||||||||
Maturity | ||||||||||||||||
Rates | Date | 2004 | 2003 | |||||||||||||
Long-term debt |
||||||||||||||||
First Mortgage Bonds (a) (b): |
||||||||||||||||
Fixed rates |
3.50%-9.875 | % | 2005-2033 | $ | 3,510 | $ | 4,312 | |||||||||
Floating rates |
1.70%-1.95 | % | 2012-2020 | 406 | 406 | |||||||||||
Notes payable and other (c) |
5.35%-9.20 | % | 2005-2020 | 2,411 | 2,943 | |||||||||||
Boston Generating Credit Facility (d) |
| | | 1,037 | ||||||||||||
Pollution control notes: |
||||||||||||||||
Fixed rates |
| | | 157 | ||||||||||||
Floating rates |
1.71%-2.04 | % | 2016-2034 | 520 | 363 | |||||||||||
Notes payable accounts receivable agreement |
2.50 | % | 2005 | 46 | 49 | |||||||||||
Sinking fund debentures |
3.875%-4.75 | % | 2005-2011 | 12 | 17 | |||||||||||
Sithe long-term debt (e) |
||||||||||||||||
Non-recourse project debt |
||||||||||||||||
Independence |
8.50%-9.00 | % | 2007-2013 | 499 | | |||||||||||
Batavia |
18.00 | % | 2007 | 1 | | |||||||||||
Subordinated debt |
7.00 | % | 2034 | 419 | | |||||||||||
Total long-term debt (f) |
7,824 | 9,284 | ||||||||||||||
Unamortized debt discount and premium, net |
(114 | ) | (43 | ) | ||||||||||||
Fair-value hedge carrying value adjustment, net |
9 | 33 | ||||||||||||||
Long-term debt due within one year |
(427 | ) | (1,385 | ) | ||||||||||||
Long-term debt |
$ | 7,292 | $ | 7,889 | ||||||||||||
Long-term debt due to ComEd Transitional Funding Trust and
PECO Energy Transition Trust (g, h)
|
||||||||||||||||
Payable to
ComEd Transitional Funding Trust |
5.44%-5.74 | % | 2005-2008 | $ | 1,341 | $ | 1,676 | |||||||||
Payable to PETT |
2.98%-7.65 | % | 2005-2010 | 3,456 | 3,849 | |||||||||||
Long-term debt due to ComEd Transitional Funding Trust and
PECO Energy Transition Trust |
4,797 | 5,525 | ||||||||||||||
Long-term debt due to ComEd Transitional Funding Trust and
PECO Energy Transition Trust due within one year |
(486 | ) | (470 | ) | ||||||||||||
Total long-term debt due to ComEd Transitional Funding Trust and
PECO Energy Transition Trust |
$ | 4,311 | $ | 5,055 | ||||||||||||
Long-term debt to other financing trusts ( g, h) |
||||||||||||||||
Subordinated debentures to ComEd Financing II |
8.50 | % | 2027 | 155 | 155 | |||||||||||
Subordinated debentures to ComEd Financing III |
6.35 | % | 2033 | 206 | 206 | |||||||||||
Subordinated debentures to PECO Trust III |
7.38 | % | 2028 | 81 | 81 | |||||||||||
Subordinated debentures to PECO Trust IV |
5.75 | % | 2033 | 103 | 103 | |||||||||||
Total long-term debt to other financing trusts |
$ | 545 | $ | 545 | ||||||||||||
(a) | Utility plant of ComEd and PECO is subject to the liens of their respective mortgage indentures. | |
(b) | Includes first mortgage bonds issued under the ComEd and PECO mortgage indentures securing pollution control bonds and notes. | |
(c) | Includes capital lease obligations of $50 million at December 31, 2004 and December 31, 2003. Lease payments of $3 million, $3 million, $2 million, $2 million and $40 million will be made in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, and thereafter, respectively. | |
(d) | Approximately $1.0 billion of debt was outstanding under the non-recourse Boston Generating Credit Facility at December 31, 2003, all of which was reflected in the Consolidated Balance Sheet of Exelon as a current liability due to certain events of default under the Boston Generating Credit Facility. The outstanding debt under the Boston Generating Credit Facility was eliminated from the financial statements of Exelon upon the sale of Generations ownership interest in Boston Generating in May 2004. See Note 2 Acquisitions and Dispositions for additional information regarding the sale. |
41
(e) | In addition to the stated interest rate, an additional 1.97% and 0.99% of interest on the carrying amount of the secured bonds payable is being credited due to debt premiums and 1.63% of interest on the carrying amount of the subordinated debt is being incurred due to the debt discount recorded at the time of the purchase. There is $100 million of unamortized debt discount associated with Sithe long-term debt. These amounts represent obligations of Sithe and will be removed from Exelons Consolidated Balance Sheet following Generations sale of Sithe, which was completed on January 31, 2005. See Note 25 Subsequent Events for additional information. | |
(f) | Long-term debt maturities in the periods 2005 through 2009 and thereafter are as follows: |
2005 |
$ | 427 | ||
2006 |
446 | |||
2007 |
271 | |||
2008 |
942 | |||
2009 |
85 | |||
Thereafter |
5,653 | |||
Total |
$ | 7,824 | ||
Included in the table above are maturities of Sithes debt of $34, $38, $40, $44, $57 and $706 in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 and thereafter, respectively. In connection with Generations sale of Sithe on January 31, 2005, Generation is no longer obligated to fulfill these debt maturities, and the related obligations will be removed from the Consolidated Balance Sheets. See Note 25 Subsequent Events for a further discussion of Generations the sale of Sithe. | ||
(g) | Effective July 1, 2003, PECO Trust IV, a financing subsidiary created in May 2003, was deconsolidated from the financial statements in conjunction with the adoption of FIN 46. Effective December 31, 2003, ComEd Financing II, ComEd Financing III, ComEd Transitional Funding Trust, PECO Trust III, and PETT were deconsolidated from the financial statements in conjunction with the adoption of FIN 46-R. Amounts owed to these financing trusts are recorded as debt to financing trusts within the Consolidated Balance Sheets. | |
(h) | Long-term debt to financing trusts maturities in the periods 2005 through 2009 and thereafter are as follows: |
2005 |
$ | 486 | ||
2006 |
860 | |||
2007 |
980 | |||
2008 |
965 | |||
2009 |
700 | |||
Thereafter |
1,351 | |||
Total |
$ | 5,342 | ||
Issuances of Long-Term Debt. The following long-term debt was issued during 2004:
Interest | ||||||||||||||
Company | Type | Rate | Maturity | Amount | ||||||||||
PECO | First Mortgage Bonds |
5.90 | % | May 1, 2034 | $ | 75 | ||||||||
Generation | Pollution Control Revenue Bonds (a) |
Variable | April 1, 2021 | 51 | ||||||||||
Generation | Pollution Control Revenue Bonds (a) |
Variable | October 1, 2030 | 92 | ||||||||||
Generation | Pollution Control Revenue Bonds (a) |
Variable | October 1, 2034 | 14 | ||||||||||
Exelon | Note (b) |
6.00 | % | January 15, 2008 | 22 | |||||||||
Total issuances | $ | 254 | ||||||||||||
(a) | The proceeds from the issuances were used to redeem pollution control revenue bonds of PECO. | |
(b) | Represents a non-cash issuance for investments in synthetic fuel-producing facilities. See Note 2 Acquisitions and Dispositions for additional information regarding these investments. |
42
Debt Retirements and Redemptions. The following debt was retired, through tender, open market purchases, optional redemption or payment at maturity, during 2004:
Interest | ||||||||||||||
Company | Type | Rate | Maturity | Amount | ||||||||||
ComEd | Medium Term Notes |
9.200 | % | October 15, 2004 | $ | 56 | ||||||||
ComEd | Notes |
6.400 | % | October 15, 2005 | 128 | |||||||||
ComEd | Notes |
6.950 | % | July 15, 2018 | 85 | |||||||||
ComEd | Notes |
7.375 | % | January 15, 2004 | 150 | |||||||||
ComEd | Notes |
7.625 | % | January 15, 2007 | 5 | |||||||||
ComEd | Pollution Control Revenue Bonds |
5.300 | % | January 15, 2004 | 26 | |||||||||
ComEd | Pollution Control Revenue Bonds |
5.700 | % | January 15, 2009 | 4 | |||||||||
ComEd | Pollution Control Revenue Bonds |
5.850 | % | January 15, 2014 | 3 | |||||||||
ComEd | Sinking Fund Debentures |
3.125 | % | October 1, 2004 | 2 | |||||||||
ComEd | Sinking Fund Debentures |
3.875 | % | January 1, 2008 | 1 | |||||||||
ComEd | Sinking Fund Debentures |
4.625 | % | January 1, 2009 | 1 | |||||||||
ComEd | Sinking Fund Debentures |
4.750 | % | December 1, 2011 | 1 | |||||||||
ComEd | First Mortgage Bonds |
3.700 | % | February 1, 2008 | 55 | |||||||||
ComEd | First Mortgage Bonds |
4.700 | % | April 15, 2015 | 135 | |||||||||
ComEd | First Mortgage Bonds |
4.740 | % | August 15, 2010 | 38 | |||||||||
ComEd | First Mortgage Bonds |
5.875 | % | February 1, 2033 | 96 | |||||||||
ComEd | First Mortgage Bonds |
6.150 | % | March 15, 2012 | 150 | |||||||||
ComEd | First Mortgage Bonds |
7.000 | % | July 1, 2005 | 62 | |||||||||
ComEd | First Mortgage Bonds |
7.500 | % | July 1, 2013 | 20 | |||||||||
ComEd | First Mortgage Bonds |
7.625 | % | April 15, 2013 | 94 | |||||||||
ComEd | First Mortgage Bonds |
8.000 | % | May 15, 2008 | 20 | |||||||||
ComEd | First Mortgage Bonds |
8.250 | % | October 1, 2006 | 5 | |||||||||
ComEd | First Mortgage Bonds |
8.375 | % | October 15, 2006 | 94 | |||||||||
PECO | Pollution Control Revenue Bonds (a) |
5.200 | % | April 1, 2021 | 51 | |||||||||
PECO | Pollution Control Revenue Bonds (a) |
5.200 | % | October 1, 2030 | 92 | |||||||||
PECO | Pollution Control Revenue Bonds (a) |
5.300 | % | October 1, 2034 | 14 | |||||||||
PECO | First Mortgage Bonds |
6.375 | % | August 15, 2005 | 75 | |||||||||
Enterprises | Note |
7.680 | % | June 30, 2023 | 11 | |||||||||
Enterprises | Note |
9.090 | % | January, 31, 2020 | 26 | |||||||||
Generation | Note AmerGen |
6.330 | % | August 8, 2009 | 10 | |||||||||
Generation | Note AmerGen |
6.200 | % | December 20, 2004 | 16 | |||||||||
Generation | Note Sithe |
8.500 | % | June 30, 2007 | 32 | |||||||||
Exelon | Notes |
7.980% to 8.875% | 2009 and 2010 | 63 | ||||||||||
Other | 8 | |||||||||||||
Total retirements | $ | 1,629 | ||||||||||||
(a) | The bonds were redeemed with the proceeds from the issuance of pollution control revenue bonds by Generation. |
During 2004, ComEd made payments of $335 million related to its obligation to the ComEd Transitional Funding Trust, and PECO made payments of $393 million related to its obligation to PETT.
During 2004, ComEd retired $1.2 billion of long-term debt, including $1.0 billion prior to its maturity and $206 million at maturity, pursuant to Exelons accelerated liability management plan. ComEd funded the retirements through cash from operations, a return of contributions to the intercompany money pool and collections on an intercompany note receivable from UII, LLC (formerly Unicom Investments, Inc.) Exelon recorded charges of $130 million (before income taxes) in 2004 associated with the retirement of debt under the plan. The charges were included within other, net within Exelons Consolidated Statements of Income. The components of the charges included the following: $86 million for prepayment premiums; $12 million for net unamortized premiums, discounts and debt issuance costs; $24 million of losses on reacquired debt previously deferred as regulatory assets; and $12 million for settled cash-flow interest-rate swaps previously deferred as regulatory assets partially offset by $4 million of unamortized gain on settled fair value interest-rate swaps.
43
See Note 2 Acquisitions and Dispositions for information regarding debt classified as held for sale as of December 31, 2003.
See Note 16 Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities for additional information regarding interest-rate swaps of ComEd, PECO and Generation.
See Note 17 Preferred Securities for additional information regarding preferred stock.
13. Income Taxes
Income tax expense (benefit) is comprised of the following components:
For the Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
Federal |
||||||||||||
Current |
$ | 401 | $ | 275 | $ | 624 | ||||||
Deferred |
243 | 63 | 250 | |||||||||
Investment tax credit amortization |
(13 | ) | (13 | ) | (15 | ) | ||||||
State |
||||||||||||
Current |
89 | 92 | 96 | |||||||||
Deferred |
(28 | ) | (86 | ) | 43 | |||||||
Total income tax expense |
$ | 692 | $ | 331 | $ | 998 | ||||||
Included in cumulative effect of changes in accounting principles: |
||||||||||||
Deferred |
||||||||||||
Federal |
$ | 12 | $ | 58 | $ | (87 | ) | |||||
State |
5 | 11 | (3 | ) | ||||||||
Total income tax expense (benefit) |
$ | 17 | $ | 69 | $ | (90 | ) | |||||
Income tax expense is included in the financial statements as follows:
For the Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
Continuing operations |
$ | 713 | $ | 389 | $ | 1,000 | ||||||
Discontinued operations |
(21 | ) | (58 | ) | (2 | ) | ||||||
Cumulative effect of change in accounting principle |
17 | 69 | (90 | ) | ||||||||
Total income tax expense |
$ | 709 | $ | 400 | $ | 908 | ||||||
44
The effective income tax rate related to continuing operations and discontinued operations varies from the U.S. Federal statutory rate principally due to the following:
For the Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
U.S. Federal statutory rate |
35.0 | % | 35.0 | % | 35.0 | % | ||||||
Increase (decrease) due to: |
||||||||||||
State income taxes, net of Federal income tax benefit |
1.6 | 0.4 | 3.2 | |||||||||
Synthetic fuel-producing facilities credit (a) |
(8.6 | ) | (2.0 | ) | | |||||||
Low income housing credit |
(0.4 | ) | (1.2 | ) | (0.5 | ) | ||||||
Amortization of investment tax credit |
(0.4 | ) | (0.9 | ) | (0.4 | ) | ||||||
Tax exempt income |
(0.4 | ) | (0.7 | ) | (0.2 | ) | ||||||
Qualified nuclear decommissioning trust fund income |
(0.3 | ) | 0.8 | | ||||||||
Nontaxable employee benefits |
(0.3 | ) | | | ||||||||
Other |
1.3 | (2.1 | ) | 0.3 | ||||||||
Effective income tax rate |
27.5 | % | 29.3 | % | 37.4 | % | ||||||
(a) | Change between 2003 and 2004 reflects investments in synthetic fuel-producing facilities made in the fourth quarter of 2003 and the third quarter of 2004. See Note 2 Acquisitions and Dispositions for additional information regarding investments in synthetic fuel-producing facilities. |
The tax effects of temporary differences giving rise to significant portions of Exelons deferred tax assets and liabilities as of December 31, 2004 and 2003 are presented below:
2004 | 2003 | |||||||
Deferred tax liabilities: |
||||||||
Plant basis difference |
$ | 4,177 | $ | 3,932 | ||||
Stranded cost recovery |
1,632 | 1,784 | ||||||
Deferred debt refinancing costs |
56 | 69 | ||||||
Total deferred tax liabilities |
5,865 | 5,785 | ||||||
Deferred tax assets: |
||||||||
Deferred pension and postretirement obligations |
(985 | ) | (901 | ) | ||||
Excess of
tax value over book value of impaired assets (a) |
(44 | ) | (200 | ) | ||||
Decommissioning and decontamination obligations |
(145 | ) | (97 | ) | ||||
Unrealized loss on derivative financial instruments |
(57 | ) | (70 | ) | ||||
Goodwill |
(6 | ) | (29 | ) | ||||
Other, net |
(208 | ) | (290 | ) | ||||
Total deferred tax assets |
(1,445 | ) | (1,587 | ) | ||||
Deferred income tax liabilities (net) on the Consolidated Balance Sheets |
$ | 4,420 | $ | 4,198 | ||||
(a) | Includes impairments related to Exelons investments in Sithe and Boston Generating and write-downs of certain Enterprises investments. |
In accordance with regulatory treatment of certain temporary differences, Exelon has recorded a net regulatory asset associated with deferred income taxes, pursuant to SFAS No. 71 and SFAS No. 109, of $751 million and $701 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. See Note 21 Supplemental Financial Information for further discussion of Exelons regulatory asset associated with deferred income taxes.
ComEd and PECO have certain tax returns that are under review at the audit or appeals level of the IRS, and certain state authorities. Except for the tax positions discussed below, these reviews by governmental taxing authorities are not expected to have an adverse impact on the financial condition or result of operations of Exelon.
Exelon, through its ComEd subsidiary, has taken certain tax positions, which have been disclosed to the IRS, to defer the tax gain on the 1999 sale of its fossil generating assets. As of December 31, 2004, deferred tax liabilities related to the fossil plant sale are reflected in Exelons Consolidated Balance Sheets with the majority allocated to ComEd and the remainder to Generation.
45
The 1999 income tax liability deferred as a result of these transactions was approximately $1.1 billion. Exelons ability to continue to defer a portion of this liability depends on whether its treatment of a portion of the sales proceeds as having been received in connection with an involuntary conversion is proper pursuant to IRS regulations and interpretations. Exelons ability to continue to defer the remainder of this liability may depend in part on whether its tax characterization of a lease transaction it entered into in connection with the sale is proper pursuant to IRS regulations and interpretations. The IRS is likely to argue that the lease transaction is of a type it has recently announced its intention to challenge, and Exelon understands that somewhat similar transactions entered into by other companies have been the subject of review and challenge by the IRS. Changes in IRS interpretations of existing primary tax authority or challenges to ComEds positions could have the impact of accelerating future income tax payments and increasing interest expense related to the deferred tax gain that becomes current. Any required payments could be significant to the cash flows of Exelon. Exelons management believes Exelons reserve for interest, which has been established in the event that such positions are not sustained, has been appropriately recorded in accordance with SFAS No. 5, Accounting for Contingencies (SFAS No. 5); however, the ultimate outcome of such matters could result in unfavorable or favorable adjustments to the results of operations, and such adjustments could be material. Federal tax returns covering the period of the 1999 sale are currently under Internal Revenue Service (IRS) audit. Final resolution of this matter is not anticipated for several years.
It is presently unclear the extent to which any IRS challenge to such deferral would be successful. If the deferral was successfully challenged by the IRS, it could have a material adverse impact on Exelons operating results.
As of December 31, 2004 and 2003, Exelon had recorded valuation allowances of $9 million and $22 million, respectively, with respect to deferred taxes associated with separate company state taxes. As of December 31, 2004, Exelon had net capital loss carryforwards for income tax purposes of approximately $183 million, which expire beginning in 2008.
14. Nuclear Decommissioning and Spent Fuel Storage
Nuclear Decommissioning
Overview
Exelon has a legal obligation to decommission its nuclear power plants following the expiration of their operating licenses. This obligation is reflected as an asset retirement obligation (ARO), which is classified as a noncurrent liability. Based on the actual or anticipated extended license lives of the nuclear plants, decommissioning expenditures for Exelons nuclear power plants currently operating are expected to occur primarily during the period 2029 through 2056. Exelon owns three nuclear units that are retired and currently incur certain costs associated with decommissioning. The cost of nuclear decommissioning will be funded by investments held in trust funds that have been established for each nuclear station. Exelon had nuclear decommissioning trust funds totalling $5,262 million and $4,721 million as of December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. See Note 16 Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities for more information regarding Exelons nuclear decommissioning trust funds.
Cost Recovery and Decommissioning Responsibilities
Former ComEd plants. Exelon currently recovers in revenues funds for decommissioning the former ComEd nuclear plants through regulated rates collected by ComEd. The amounts recovered from customers are remitted to Generation and deposited into the trust accounts to fund the future decommissioning costs. Under a December 2000 Illinois Commerce Commission Order issued to ComEd, amended February 2001 (ICC Order), ComEd is permitted to collect up to $73 million annually through 2006 from ratepayers to decommission the former ComEd nuclear plants. The amount of decommissioning revenue collections for 2005 and 2006 are anticipated to be less than than $73 million. Under the current ICC Order, ComEd will not collect amounts for decommissioning subsequent to 2006.
46
Based on the provisions of the ICC Order and NRC regulations, Exelon is financially responsible for the decommissioning obligations related to these plants. If trust assets plus future collections permitted by the ICC Order are exceeded by the ultimate ARO, Exelon is responsible for any shortfall in funding; however, if amounts remain in the trust funds for these units following the completion of the decommissioning activities, those amounts will be returned to the ComEd ratepayers. At the end of each financial reporting period, Exelon assesses the amounts currently recorded in trust assets plus future collections less amounts recorded in the ARO. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, Exelon recorded a regulatory liability for the amount of decommissioning-related assets in excess of the ARO.
Former PECO plants. Exelon currently recovers costs for decommissioning the former PECO nuclear plants through regulated rates collected by PECO. The amounts recovered from customers are remitted to Generation and deposited into the trust accounts to fund the future decommissioning costs. Under orders from the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC), PECO is permitted to collect from ratepayers up to $33 million annually for the full funding of the expected costs to decommission the former PECO nuclear plants. Based on the provisions of the PUC order, the PECO ratepayers are financially responsible for the majority of any shortfalls in the costs to decommission these nuclear units; however, the PECO ratepayers will receive any excess amounts from the trust funds at the completion of decommissioning. Exelon is responsible for 1) the first $50 million of the decommissioning costs above a certain threshold established under the PUC order and 2) five percent of the decommissioning costs above that first $50 million of costs that exceed the established threshold. Exelon expects total decommissioning costs to exceed this threshold and expects to be held responsible for the entire $50 million over the remaining life of the assets. At the end of each financial reporting period, Exelon assesses the amounts currently recorded in trust assets plus future collections less amounts recorded in the ARO. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, Exelon recorded a regulatory liability for the amount of decommissioning-related assets in excess of the ARO.
AmerGen plants. Exelon does not recover costs for decommissioning the AmerGen nuclear plants from customers. As such, Exelon is financially responsible for the decommissioning of these plants and bears all risks and benefits related to the funding levels associated with these plants decommissioning trust funds.
Adoption of SFAS No. 143
Exelon adopted SFAS No. 143 on January 1, 2003, which promulgates the accounting for AROs. In accordance with SFAS No. 143, a probability-weighted, discounted cash flow model with multiple scenarios was used to determine the fair value of the decommissioning obligation. SFAS No. 143 states that the estimated fair value of the decommissioning obligation represents the amount a third party would receive for assuming an entitys entire obligation. The present value of future estimated cash flows required to decommission the nuclear stations was calculated using credit-adjusted, risk-free rates applicable to the various businesses in order to determine the fair value of the decommissioning obligation at the time of adoption of SFAS No. 143.
Former ComEd plants. The transition provisions of SFAS No. 143 required Exelon to apply the fair value remeasurement back to the historical periods in which AROs were originally incurred, resulting in a remeasurement of these obligations at the date the assets were acquired by Exelon. Since the nuclear plants previously owned by ComEd were acquired by Exelon on October 20, 2000 (and subsequently transferred to Generation as a result of the Exelon corporate restructuring on January 1, 2001), Exelons historical accounting for its ARO associated with those plants was revised as if SFAS No. 143 had been in effect at the merger date. The calculation of the SFAS No. 143 ARO yielded decommissioning obligations lower than the value of the corresponding trust assets at January 1, 2003. Since the trust fund assets exceeded the fair value of the ARO, a regulatory liability of $948 million was recorded at January 1, 2003. As a result of increases in the trust funds due to market conditions, the regulatory liability has increased to $1,433 million at December 31, 2004.
47
In accordance with the provisions of SFAS No. 143 and regulatory accounting guidance, Exelon recorded a SFAS No. 143 transition adjustment to accumulated other comprehensive income to reclassify $168 million, net of tax, of accumulated net unrealized losses in the nuclear decommissioning trust funds to the regulatory liability associated with the former ComEd plants.
Former PECO plants. In the case of the former PECO plants, the SFAS No. 143 ARO calculation yielded decommissioning obligations greater than the corresponding trust assets at January 1, 2003. As such, a regulatory asset of $20 million was recorded. As a result of increases in the trust funds due to market conditions and contributions collected from PECO customers, the trust fund assets exceeded the ARO at December 31, 2004 and Exelon has a regulatory liability to the PECO ratepayers of $46 million. At December 31, 2003, Exelon had a regulatory liability to the PECO ratepayers of $12 million related to nuclear decommissioning.
Upon adoption, and in accordance with the provisions of SFAS No. 143, Exelon capitalized an asset retirement cost (ARC) asset within property, plant and equipment of $172 million related to the establishment of the ARO for the former PECO plants. The ARC is being amortized over the remaining useful lives of the former PECO plants.
Exelon believes that all of the decommissioning assets, anticipated earnings thereon and future revenues from decommissioning collections will be used to decommission the former ComEd and PECO nuclear plants. As such, Exelon expects the regulatory liabilities to be reduced to zero at the conclusion of the decommissioning activities.
AmerGen plants. At the time of the adoption of SFAS No. 143 on January 1, 2003, Exelon had a 50% ownership of AmerGen. Exelon recorded income of $29 million (after income taxes) as the cumulative effect of changes in accounting principles.
Impact of Current Regulatory Orders on the Application of SFAS No. 143
Increases in the ARO due to the passage of time are recorded in operating and maintenance expense as accretion expense. Increases in the ARO resulting from revisions to the estimated future cash flows are generally recorded with a corresponding adjustment to the basis of plant value, by recording an ARC asset. The ARC is depreciated on a straight-line basis over the remaining life of the unit to which it relates. Changes in the nuclear decommissioning trust funds are discussed in Note 16 Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities.
Former ComEd plants. As of December 31, 2004, the trust assets associated with the former ComEd plants exceeded the ARO for those plants. Until such time, if ever, that the ARO exceeds the decommissioning-related assets, Exelons net income should not reflect the impacts of any income or expenses associated with decommissioning the former ComEd nuclear units. As such, decommissioning revenues collected, nuclear decommissioning trust fund investment income, accretion expense and depreciation of the ARC are not reflected in net income as they are offset by the adjustment to the regulatory liability to ComEds ratepayers to the extent the decommissioning-related assets exceed the ARO.
Former PECO plants. As of December 31, 2004, the trust assets associated with the former PECO plants exceeded the ARO for those plants. The regulatory order associated with the former PECO units ensures that Exelon will not be financially responsible for the decommissioning of these units, with the exception of certain amounts described above. As such, Exelons net income should not reflect the impacts of any income or expenses associated with decommissioning the former PECO nuclear units, except for the accretion expense associated with its decommissioning cost responsibility above the decommissioning cost thresholds established by the PUC, as previously discussed. The net effect of decommissioning revenues collected, nuclear decommissioning trust fund investment income, accretion expense and depreciation of the ARC is adjusted so that the amounts net to an insignificant amount in Exelons Consolidated Statements of Income. This adjustment is reflected as a change in the regulatory liability to PECOs ratepayers.
AmerGen plants. Beginning in 2004, decommissioning activity related to the AmerGen units is reflected in Exelons Consolidated Statements of Income. The AmerGen units are not subject to any cost recovery regulation and, as such, Exelon will be required to fund any shortfall of trust assets below the decommissioning obligations.
48
Similarly, Exelon will not be required to refund any excess trust funds to customers if the obligation is less than the available trust funds. As such, the impacts of nuclear decommissioning trust fund investment income, accretion expense and depreciation of the ARC are all included in Exelons Consolidated Statements of Income. Prior to December 2003 and Exelons acquisition of British Energys 50% interest in AmerGen, the impact to Exelon for accounting for the decommissioning of the AmerGen plants was recorded within Exelons equity in earnings of AmerGen. In addition, Exelons proportionate share of unrealized gains and losses on AmerGens decommissioning trust funds were reflected in Exelons other comprehensive income.
2004 Update of ARO
Generation updates its ARO on a periodic basis. During 2004, Generation recorded a $780 million net increase to the ARO resulting from revisions to estimated future nuclear decommissioning cash flows. This update also resulted in an adjustment to the basis of property, plant and equipment of $780 million by recording a corresponding net increase to the ARC. This increase to the ARO was primarily a result of updated decommissioning cost studies and changes in cost escalation factors used to estimate future undiscounted costs, both of which are provided by independent third-party appraisers. Cost estimates are updated every three to five years in accordance with NRC regulations and industry practice. The net increase in the ARO for the former ComEd units, the former PECO units and the AmerGen units resulting from revisions to estimated cash flows during 2004 was $563 million, $142 million and $75 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2004, the ARO balances for the former ComEd, the former PECO and the AmerGen units totaled approximately $2.3 billion, $1.0 billion and $0.6 billion, respectively.
The following table provides a roll forward reconciliation of the ARO reflected on Exelons Consolidated Balance Sheets from January 1, 2003 to December 31, 2004:
Asset retirement obligation at January 1, 2003 |
$ | 2,366 | ||
Consolidation of AmerGen |
487 | |||
Accretion expense |
161 | |||
Payments to decommission retired plants |
(14 | ) | ||
Reclassification of Thermal ARO as held for sale (a) |
(3 | ) | ||
Asset retirement obligation at December 31, 2003 |
2,997 | |||
Net increase resulting from updates to future estimated cash flows |
780 | |||
Accretion expense |
210 | |||
Additional liabilities incurred (b) |
6 | |||
Payments to decommission retired plants |
(12 | ) | ||
Asset retirement obligation at December 31, 2004 |
$ | 3,981 | ||
(a) | The ARO of Thermal was subsequently relieved upon its sale in the second quarter of 2004. |
|
(b) | Additional liabilities incurred are primarily due to the consolidation of Sithe. |
Accounting Prior to the Adoption of SFAS No. 143
Prior to January 1, 2003, Exelon accounted for the current periods cost of decommissioning related to generating plants previously owned by PECO in accordance with common regulatory accounting practices by recording a charge to depreciation expense and a corresponding liability in accumulated depreciation concurrently with recognizing decommissioning collections. Financial activity of the decommissioning trust (e.g., investment income and realized and unrealized gains and losses on trust investments) was reflected in nuclear decommissioning trust funds in Exelons Consolidated Balance Sheets with a corresponding offset recorded to accumulated depreciation.
Regulatory accounting practices for the nuclear generating stations previously owned by ComEd were discontinued as a result of an ICC Order capping ComEds ultimate recovery of decommissioning costs. The difference between the decommissioning cost estimate and the decommissioning liability recorded in accumulated depreciation for the former ComEd operating stations was previously amortized to
49
depreciation expense on a straight-line basis over the remaining lives of the stations. The decommissioning cost estimate (adjusted annually to reflect inflation) for the former ComEd retired units recorded in deferred credits and other liability was previously accreted to depreciation expense. Financial activity of the decommissioning trust funds related to Generations nuclear generating stations no longer accounted for under common regulatory practices was reflected in nuclear decommissioning trust funds in Exelons Consolidated Balance Sheets with a corresponding gain or expense recorded in Exelons Consolidated Income Statements or in other comprehensive income.
Spent Nuclear Fuel
Under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (NWPA), the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is responsible for the development of a repository for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel (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 its nuclear generating stations. In accordance with the NWPA and the Standard Contracts, Generation pays the DOE one mill ($.001) per kilowatt-hour of net nuclear generation for the cost of nuclear fuel long-term 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. The DOEs current estimate for opening a SNF facility is 2012. This extended delay in SNF acceptance by the DOE has led to Generations adoption of dry cask storage at its Dresden, Quad Cities, Oyster Creek and Peach Bottom stations and its consideration of dry cask storage at other stations.
The Standard Contracts with the DOE also required the payment to the DOE a one-time fee applicable to nuclear generation through April 6, 1983. PECOs fee has been paid. Pursuant to the Standard Contracts, ComEd elected to pay the one-time fee of $277 million, with interest to the date of payment, just prior to the first delivery of SNF to the DOE. As of December 31, 2004, the unfunded liability for the one-time fee with interest was $878 million. Interest accrues at the 13-week Treasury Rate, which was 1.987% at December 31, 2004. The liabilities for spent nuclear fuel disposal costs, including the one-time fee, were transferred to Generation as part of the corporate restructuring. The one-time fee obligation for the AmerGen units remains with the prior owner. The Clinton Unit has no outstanding obligation.
In July 1998, ComEd filed a complaint against the United States Government (Government) in the United States Court of Federal Claims (Court) seeking to recover damages caused by the DOEs failure to honor its contractual obligation to begin disposing of SNF in January 1998. In August 2001, the Court granted ComEds motion for partial summary judgment for liability on ComEds breach of contract claim. In November 2001, the Government filed two partial summary judgment motions relating to certain damage issues in the case as well as two motions to dismiss claims other than ComEds breach of contract claim. On June 10, 2003, the Court granted the Governments motion to dismiss claims other than the breach of contract claims. Also on June 10, 2003, the Court denied the Governments summary judgment motions and set the case for trial on damages for November 2004.
In July 2000, PECO entered into an agreement (Amendment) with the DOE relating to PECOs Peach Bottom nuclear generating unit to address the DOEs failure to begin removal of SNF in January 1998 as required by the Standard Contracts. Under the Amendment, the DOE agreed to provide PECO with credits against PECOs future contributions to the Nuclear Waste Fund to compensate PECO for SNF storage costs incurred as a result of the DOEs breach of the contract. The Amendment also provided that, upon PECOs request, the DOE will take title to the SNF and the interim storage facility at Peach Bottom provided certain conditions are met. Generation assumed this contract in the 2001 corporate restructuring.
In November 2000, eight utilities with nuclear power plants filed a Joint Petition for Review against the DOE with the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit seeking to invalidate that portion of the Amendment providing for credits to PECO against nuclear waste fund payments on the ground that such provision is a violation of the NWPA. PECO intervened as a defendant in that case, and Generation assumed the claim in the 2001 corporate restructuring. On September 24, 2002, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit ruled that the fee adjustment provision of the Amendment violates the NWPA and therefore is null and void.
50
The Court did not hold that the Amendment as a whole is invalid. Article XVI(I) of the Amendment provides that if any portion of the Amendment is found to be void, the DOE and Generation agree to negotiate in good faith and attempt to reach an enforceable agreement consistent with the spirit and purpose of the Amendment. That provision further provided that should a major term be declared void, and the DOE and Generation cannot reach a subsequent agreement, the entire Amendment would be rendered null and void, the original Peach Bottom Standard Contracts would remain in effect and the parties would return to pre-Amendment status. Under the Amendment, Generation has received approximately $40 million in credits against contributions to the nuclear waste fund.
On August 14, 2003, Generation received a letter from the DOE demanding repayment of $40 million of previously received credits from the Nuclear Waste Fund. The letter also demanded $1.5 million of interest that was accrued as of that date, and Generation continued to accrue interest expense each subsequent month. Generation reserved its 50% ownership share of these amounts. Because Generation expenses the dry storage casks and capitalizes the permanent components of its spent fuel storage facilities, these reserves increased Generations operating and maintenance expense approximately $11 million and its capital base approximately $9 million during 2003.
On July 21, 2004, Exelon and the U.S. Department of Justice, in close consultation with the DOE, reached a settlement under which the government will reimburse Exelon for costs associated with storage of spent fuel at Generations nuclear stations pending DOEs fulfillment of its obligations. Under the agreement, Generation immediately received $80 million in gross reimbursements for storage costs already incurred ($53 million net after considering amounts due from Generation to co-owners of certain nuclear stations), with additional amounts to be reimbursed annually for future costs. In all cases, reimbursements will be made only after costs are incurred and only for costs resulting from DOE delays in accepting the fuel. As of December 31, 2004, the amount of spent fuel storage costs for which reimbursement will be requested in mid-2005 from the DOE under the settlement agreement is $33 million net, which is recorded within accounts receivable, other. This amount is comprised of $14 million, which has been recorded as a reduction to operating and maintenance expense, and $12 million, which has been recorded as a reduction to capital expenditures. The remaining $7 million represents amounts owed to the co-owners of the Peach Bottom and Quad Cities generating facilities.
15. Retirement Benefits
Exelon sponsors defined benefit pension plans and postretirement welfare benefit plans for essentially all ComEd, PECO, Generation (except for AmerGen) and Exelon Business Services Company (BSC) employees and certain employees of Enterprises. Substantially all non-union employees and electing union employees hired on or after January 1, 2001 participate in Exelon-sponsored cash balance pension plans. Substantially all non-union employees hired prior to January 1, 2001 were offered a choice to remain in Exelons traditional pension plan or transfer to a cash balance pension plan for management employees. Employees of AmerGen participate in separate defined benefit pension plans and postretirement welfare benefit plans sponsored by AmerGen. AmerGen is currently offering its employees a choice to remain in their traditional benefit formula or convert to a cash balance formula.
The costs of providing benefits under these plans are dependent on historical information, such as employee age, length of service and level of compensation, and the actual rate of return on plan assets, in addition to assumptions about the future, including the expected rate of return on plan assets, the discount rate applied to benefit obligations, rate of compensation increase and the anticipated rate of increase in health care costs. The impact of changes in these factors on pension and other postretirement welfare benefit obligations is generally recognized over the expected remaining service life of the employees rather than immediately recognized in the income statement. Exelon uses a December 31 measurement date for the majority of its plans.
Exelons traditional and cash balance pension plans are intended to be tax-qualified defined benefit plans, and Exelon has submitted applications to the IRS for rulings on the tax-qualification of the form of each plan.
51
By letters dated April 21, 2004, the IRS notified Exelon that the rulings on its applications for the traditional and management cash balance plans were delayed pending advice from the IRSs National Office, pursuant to a previously announced moratorium on rulings with respect to plans involved in so called cash balance conversions. On June 1, 2004, the IRS issued a favorable ruling on the union cash balance plan.
Various methods used by other employers to accrue and calculate benefits under cash balance plans have been challenged in recent lawsuits. The design of Exelons cash balance plans differs in certain material respects from the cash balance plans involved in the cases decided to date, and the courts have not reached uniform decisions on certain issues. In addition, the U.S. Treasury Department recently withdrew proposed regulations intended to clarify the application of certain rules to cash balance plans, and proposed other regulations that could adversely affect the qualified status of Exelons cash balance plans. As a result, considerable uncertainty remains regarding the application of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), the Internal Revenue Code and Federal employment laws to Exelons cash balance plans. Exelon does not know how the current uncertainty will be resolved and cannot determine at this time what impact, if any, future developments in this area will have on its pension plans or the funding of its pension obligations.
Funding is based upon actuarially determined contributions that take into account the amount deductible for income tax purposes and the minimum contribution required under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended.
Effective January 1, 2005, Exelon changed the benefit provisions of its postretirement welfare benefit plans. The changes triggered a remeasurement of the plan assets and obligations as of August 1, 2004. The plan change resulted in a reduction in the accumulated postretirement benefit obligation of $106 million and a reduction of other postretirement benefit costs in 2004 of $6 million.
During 2003, Exelon announced an amendment related to the benefit provisions of its postretirement welfare benefit plans. The amendment was effective August 1, 2003 and reduced the benefits attributable to prior service through increased retiree cost-sharing for medical coverage.
Due to an overall reduction in active employees during 2003, certain defined benefit pension plans and postretirement welfare benefit plans were subject to curtailment accounting that resulted in a remeasurement of the plan obligations. The threshold basis for curtailment remeasurement was a reduction in future service greater than 5%. The net benefit obligations of the pension plans and the postretirement welfare benefit plans increased by $48 million and $27 million, respectively, in 2003 due to the curtailment.
For certain of Exelons defined benefit pension plans, the benefit payments in 2004 exceeded the service and interest cost recognized. As a result, the plans were subject to settlement accounting that resulted in a reduction in the net benefit obligation of $19 million and an increase in 2004 pension cost of $17 million.
On December 22, 2003, Generation purchased British Energys 50% interest in AmerGen, and as a result, the obligations associated with AmerGens pension and postretirement welfare plans are reflected in the disclosures below as an acquisition.
52
The following tables provide a roll forward of the changes in the benefit obligations and plan assets for the most recent two years:
Pension Benefits | Other Postretirement Benefits | |||||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2004 | 2003 | |||||||||||||
Change in benefit obligation: |
||||||||||||||||
Net benefit obligation at beginning of year |
$ | 8,758 | $ | 7,854 | $ | 3,019 | $ | 2,555 | ||||||||
Service cost |
128 | 109 | 78 | 68 | ||||||||||||
Interest cost |
545 | 519 | 163 | 167 | ||||||||||||
Plan participants contributions |
| | 17 | 15 | ||||||||||||
Plan amendments |
| | (106 | ) | (337 | ) | ||||||||||
Actuarial loss (gain) |
964 | 711 | (10 | ) | 559 | |||||||||||
AmerGen acquisition |
| 67 | | 80 | ||||||||||||
Curtailments/settlements |
(19 | ) | 48 | | 27 | |||||||||||
Special accounting costs |
| | 16 | 48 | ||||||||||||
Gross benefits paid |
(601 | ) | (550 | ) | (189 | ) | (163 | ) | ||||||||
Net benefit obligation at end of year |
$ | 9,775 | $ | 8,758 | $ | 2,988 | $ | 3,019 | ||||||||
Change in plan assets: |
||||||||||||||||
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year |
$ | 6,442 | $ | 5,395 | $ | 1,171 | $ | 958 | ||||||||
Actual return on plan assets |
723 | 1,189 | 115 | 227 | ||||||||||||
Employer contributions |
450 | 367 | 132 | 134 | ||||||||||||
Plan participants contributions |
| | 17 | 15 | ||||||||||||
AmerGen acquisition |
| 41 | | | ||||||||||||
Gross benefits paid |
(601 | ) | (550 | ) | (189 | ) | (163 | ) | ||||||||
Fair value of plan assets at end of year |
$ | 7,014 | $ | 6,442 | $ | 1,246 | $ | 1,171 | ||||||||
The following table provides a reconciliation of benefit obligations, plan assets and funded status of the plans:
Pension Benefits | Other Postretirement Benefits | |||||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2004 | 2003 | |||||||||||||
Fair value of plan assets at end of year |
$ | 7,014 | $ | 6,442 | $ | 1,246 | $ | 1,171 | ||||||||
Benefit obligations at end of year |
9,775 | 8,758 | 2,988 | 3,019 | ||||||||||||
Funding status (plan assets less
plan obligations) |
(2,761 | ) | (2,316 | ) | (1,742 | ) | (1,848 | ) | ||||||||
Amounts not recognized: |
||||||||||||||||
Miscellaneous adjustment |
| 14 | | | ||||||||||||
Unrecognized net actuarial loss |
2,954 | 2,203 | 1,046 | 1,129 | ||||||||||||
Unrecognized prior service cost (benefit) |
170 | 185 | (445 | ) | (420 | ) | ||||||||||
Unrecognized net transition obligation (asset) |
(4 | ) | (8 | ) | 76 | 86 | ||||||||||
Net amount recognized |
$ | 359 | $ | 78 | $ | (1,065 | ) | $ | (1,053 | ) | ||||||
The following table provides a reconciliation of the amounts recognized in the Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2004 and 2003:
Pension Benefits | Other Postretirement Benefits | |||||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2004 | 2003 | |||||||||||||
Prepaid benefit cost |
$ | 407 | $ | 175 | $ | | $ | | ||||||||
Accrued benefit cost |
(48 | ) | (97 | ) | (1,065 | ) | (1,053 | ) | ||||||||
Additional minimum liability |
(2,352 | ) | (1,746 | ) | | | ||||||||||
Intangible asset |
171 | 186 | | | ||||||||||||
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
2,181 | 1,560 | | | ||||||||||||
Net amount recognized |
$ | 359 | $ | 78 | $ | (1,065 | ) | $ | (1,053 | ) | ||||||
53
The accumulated benefit obligation (ABO) for all defined benefit pension plans was $9,006 million and $8,104 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. The acquisition of AmerGen and assumption of its pension liabilities in December 2003 resulted in a $55 million increase in Exelons ABO. The following table provides the projected benefit obligation, accumulated benefit obligation, and fair value of plan assets for pension plans with an ABO in excess of plan assets. The table below is also representative of all pension plans with a projected benefit obligation in excess of plan assets.
December 31, | ||||||||
2004 | 2003 | |||||||
Projected benefit obligation |
$ | 9,775 | $ | 8,758 | ||||
Accumulated benefit obligation |
9,006 | 8,104 | ||||||
Fair value of plan assets |
7,014 | 6,442 | ||||||
The following table provides the components of the net periodic benefit costs for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002. The table reflects an annualized reduction in 2004 net periodic postretirement benefit cost of $33 million related to a Federal subsidy provided under the Prescription Drug Act. This subsidy has been accounted for under FSP FAS 106-2, as described in Note 1 Significant Accounting Policies. A portion of the net periodic benefit cost is capitalized within the Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Pension Benefits | Other Postretirement Benefits | |||||||||||||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||
Service cost |
$ | 128 | $ | 109 | $ | 95 | $ | 78 | $ | 68 | $ | 57 | ||||||||||||
Interest cost |
545 | 519 | 525 | 163 | 167 | 160 | ||||||||||||||||||
Expected return on assets |
(611 | ) | (584 | ) | (628 | ) | (90 | ) | (75 | ) | (93 | ) | ||||||||||||
Amortization of: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Transition obligation (asset) |
(4 | ) | (4 | ) | (4 | ) | 10 | 10 | 10 | |||||||||||||||
Prior service cost |
15 | 16 | 16 | (81 | ) | (54 | ) | (37 | ) | |||||||||||||||
Actuarial (gain) loss |
73 | 23 | | 44 | 47 | 6 | ||||||||||||||||||
Curtailment/settlement charges |
22 | 59 | | 2 | 21 | | ||||||||||||||||||
Net periodic benefit cost |
$ | 168 | $ | 138 | $ | 4 | $ | 126 | $ | 184 | $ | 103 | ||||||||||||
Special accounting costs |
$ | | $ | | $ | 4 | $ | 16 | $ | 48 | $ | | ||||||||||||
Other additional information: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Increase (decrease) in other
comprehensive
income (net of tax) |
$ | (392 | ) | $ | 26 | $ | (1,007 | ) | $ | | $ | | $ | | ||||||||||
Exelons costs of providing pension and postretirement benefit plans are dependent upon a number of factors, such as the rates of return on pension plan assets, discount rate, and the rate of increase in health care costs. The market value of plan assets was affected by sharp declines in the equity market from 2000 through 2002. As a result, at December 31, 2002, Exelon was required to recognize an additional minimum liability and an intangible asset as prescribed by SFAS No. 87. The liability was recorded as a reduction to shareholders equity. The amount of the reduction to shareholders equity (net of income taxes) in 2002 was $1.0 billion. The recording of this reduction did not affect net income or cash flows in 2002 or compliance with debt covenants. In 2003, the additional minimum liability was reduced by $69 million and shareholders equity increased by $26 million (net of income taxes) as a result of accounting associated with Exelons pension plans. In 2004, the additional minimum pension liability was increased by $606 million and shareholders equity decreased by $392 million (net of income taxes) as a result of accounting associated with Exelons pension plans.
Special accounting costs of $16 million and $48 million in 2004 and 2003, respectively, represent special health and welfare severance benefits offered to terminated employees. These costs were recorded pursuant to SFAS No. 112. See Note 10 Severance Accounting for additional information.
54
Special accounting costs of $4 million in 2002 represented accelerated separation and enhancement benefits provided to PECO employees expected to be terminated as a result of the PECO / Unicom Merger.
Prior service cost is amortized on a straight-line basis over the average remaining service period of employees expected to receive benefits under the plans.
The following weighted average assumptions were used to determine the benefit obligations at December 31 2004, 2003 and 2002:
Pension Benefits | Other Postretirement Benefits | |||||||||||||||||||||||
2004(a) | 2003 | 2002 | 2004(a) | 2003 | 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||
Discount rate |
5.75 | % | 6.25 | % | 6.75 | % | 5.75 | % | 6.25 | % | 6.75 | % | ||||||||||||
Rate of compensation
increase |
4.00 | % | 4.00 | % | 4.00 | % | 4.00 | % | 4.00 | % | 4.00 | % | ||||||||||||
Health care cost trend on
covered charges |
N/A | N/A | N/A | 9.00 | % | 10.00 | % | 8.50 | % | |||||||||||||||
decreasing | decreasing | decreasing | ||||||||||||||||||||||
to ultimate | to ultimate | to ultimate | ||||||||||||||||||||||
trend of 5.0% | trend of 4.5% | trend of 4.5% | ||||||||||||||||||||||
in 2010 | in 2011 | in 2008 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
(a) | Assumptions used to determine year-end 2004 benefit obligations will be the assumptions used to estimate the expected costs of benefits in 2005. |
The following weighted average assumptions were used to determine the net periodic benefit costs for years ended December 31 2004, 2003 and 2002:
Pension Benefits | Other Postretirement Benefits | |||||||||||||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||
Discount rate |
6.25 | % | 6.60-6.75 | % | 7.35 | % | 6.25 | % | 6.60-6.75 | % | 7.35 | % | ||||||||||||
Expected return on plan assets |
9.00 | % | 9.00 | % | 9.50 | % | 8.33-8.35 | % | 8.40 | % | 8.80 | % | ||||||||||||
Rate of compensation increase |
4.00 | % | 4.00 | % | 4.00 | % | 4.00 | % | 4.00 | % | 4.00 | % | ||||||||||||
Health care cost trend on
covered charges |
N/A | N/A | N/A | 10.00 | % | 8.50 | % | 10.00 | % | |||||||||||||||
decreasing | decreasing | decreasing | ||||||||||||||||||||||
to ultimate | to ultimate | to ultimate | ||||||||||||||||||||||
trend of 4.5% | trend of 4.5% | trend of 4.5% | ||||||||||||||||||||||
in 2011 | in 2008 | in 2008 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
In managing its pension and postretirement plan assets, Exelon utilizes a diversified, strategic asset allocation to efficiently and prudently generate investment returns that will meet the objectives of the investment trusts that hold the plan assets. Asset / Liability studies that incorporate specific plan objectives as well as assumptions regarding long-term capital market returns and volatilities generate the specific asset allocations for the trusts. In general, Exelons investment strategy reflects the belief that over the long term, equities are expected to outperform fixed-income investments. The long-term nature of the trusts make them well suited to bear the risk of added volatility associated with equity securities, and, accordingly, the asset allocations of the trusts usually reflect a higher allocation to equities as compared to fixed-income securities. Non-U.S. equity securities are used to diversify some of the volatility of the U.S. equity market while providing comparable long-term returns. Alternative asset classes, such as private equity and real estate, may be utilized for additional diversification and return potential when appropriate. Exelons investment guidelines do limit exposure to investments in more volatile sectors.
Exelon generally maintains 60% of its plan assets in equity securities and 40% of its plan assets in fixed-income securities. On a quarterly basis, Exelon reviews the actual asset allocations and follows a rebalancing procedure in order to remain within an allowable range of these targeted percentages.
In selecting the expected rate of return on plan assets, Exelon considers historical returns for the types of investments that its plans hold. Historical returns and volatilities are modeled to determine asset allocations that best meet the objectives of the asset / liability studies. These asset allocations, when viewed over a long-term historical view of the capital markets, yield an expected return on assets in excess of 9%.
55
Exelons pension plan weighted average asset allocations at December 31, 2004 and 2003 and target allocation for 2004 were as follows:
Percentage of Plan Assets | ||||||||||||
Target Allocation | at December 31, | |||||||||||
Asset Category | at December 31, 2004 | 2004 | 2003 | |||||||||
Equity securities |
60 | % | 63 | % | 64 | % | ||||||
Debt securities |
35-40 | 33 | 32 | |||||||||
Real estate |
0-5 | 4 | 4 | |||||||||
Total |
100 | % | 100 | % | ||||||||
Exelons other postretirement benefit plan weighted average asset allocations at December 31, 2004 and 2003 and target allocation for 2004 were as follows:
Percentage of Plan Assets | ||||||||||||
Target Allocation | at December 31, | |||||||||||
Asset Category | at December 31, 2004 | 2004 | 2003 | |||||||||
Equity securities |
60-65 | % | 64 | % | 67 | % | ||||||
Debt securities |
35-40 | 34 | 33 | |||||||||
Real estate |
| 2 | | |||||||||
Total |
100 | % | 100 | % | ||||||||
Exelons pension plans and postretirement welfare benefit plans do not directly hold shares of Exelon common stock.
Assumed health care cost trend rates have a significant effect on the costs reported for the health care plans. A one percentage point change in assumed health care cost trend rates would have the following effects:
Effect of a one percentage point increase in assumed health care cost trend |
||||
on total service and interest cost components |
$ | 34 | ||
on postretirement benefit obligation |
$ | 327 | ||
Effect of a one percentage point decrease in assumed health care cost trend |
||||
on total service and interest cost components |
$ | (28 | ) | |
on postretirement benefit obligation |
$ | (276 | ) | |
In the fourth quarter of 2004, Exelons Board of Directors approved a proposal to make contributions of approximately $2 billion in 2005 to the Exelon defined benefit pension plans, reducing the under funded status of these plans. These contributions exclude benefit payments expected to be made directly from corporate assets. Of the $2 billion expected to be contributed to the pension plans during 2005, $13 million is estimated to be needed to satisfy ERISA minimum funding requirements.
56
Estimated future benefit payments to participants in Exelons pension plans and postretirement welfare benefit plans as of December 31, 2004 were:
Pension Benefits | Other Postretirement Benefits (a) | |||||||
2005 |
$ | 531 | $ | 163 | ||||
2006 |
530 | 170 | ||||||
2007 |
536 | 181 | ||||||
2008 |
537 | 190 | ||||||
2009 |
544 | 197 | ||||||
2010 through 2014 |
2,911 | 1,088 | ||||||
Total estimated future benefits payments |
$ | 5,589 | $ | 1,989 | ||||
(a) | Estimated future benefit payments do not reflect an anticipated Federal subsidy provided through the Prescription Drug Act. The Federal subsidies to be received by Exelon in the years 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 and from 2010 through 2014 are estimated to be $8 million, $8 million, $9 million, $10 million and $63 million, respectively. A subsidy is not anticipated for 2005. |
Exelon sponsors savings plans for the majority of its employees. The plans allow employees to contribute a portion of their pre-tax income in accordance with specified guidelines. Exelon matches a percentage of the employee contribution up to certain limits. The cost of Exelons matching contribution to the savings plans totaled $57 million, $55 million, and $63 million in 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.
16. Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities
Non-Derivative Financial Assets and Liabilities
Fair Value. As of December 31, 2004 and 2003, Exelons carrying amounts of cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, accounts payable and accrued liabilities are representative of fair value because of the short-term nature of these instruments. Fair values for long-term debt and preferred securities of subsidiaries are determined by an external valuation model which is based on conventional discounted cash flow methodology and utilizes assumptions of current market pricing curves.
The carrying amounts and fair values of Exelons financial liabilities as of December 31, 2004 and 2003 were as follows:
2004 | 2003 | |||||||||||||||
Carrying | Carrying | |||||||||||||||
Amount | Fair Value | Amount | Fair Value | |||||||||||||
Long-term debt (including
amounts due within one year) |
$ | 7,719 | $ | 8,372 | $ | 9,274 | $ | 9,922 | ||||||||
Long-term debt to ComEd
Transitional Funding Trust and
PETT (including amounts due within
one year) |
4,797 | 5,182 | 5,525 | 6,006 | ||||||||||||
Long-term debt to other financing trusts |
545 | 573 | 545 | 567 | ||||||||||||
Preferred securities of subsidiaries |
87 | 69 | 87 | 71 | ||||||||||||
Credit Risk. Financial instruments that potentially subject Exelon to concentrations of credit risk consist principally of cash equivalents and customer accounts receivable. Exelon places its cash equivalents with high-credit quality financial institutions. Generally, such investments are in excess of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation limits. Concentrations of credit risk with respect to customer accounts receivable are limited due to Exelons large number of customers and, in the case of the Energy Delivery business, their dispersion across many industries.
57
Derivative Instruments
Fair Value. The fair values of Exelons interest-rate swaps and power purchase and sale contracts are determined using quoted exchange prices, external dealer prices or internal valuation models which utilize assumptions of future energy prices and available market pricing curves.
Interest-Rate Swaps. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, Exelon had $0.4 billion and $1.3 billion, respectively, of notional amounts of interest-rate swaps outstanding with net deferred gains (losses) of $11 million and $(44) million, respectively, as follows:
Fair | Fair | |||||||||||||||||||
Notional | Value | Value | ||||||||||||||||||
Amount | Exelon Pays | Counterparty Pays | 12/31/04 | 12/31/03 | ||||||||||||||||
Fair-Value Hedges |
||||||||||||||||||||
ComEd |
$ | 240 | 3 Month LIBOR |
6.15 | % | $ | 9 | $ | | |||||||||||
plus 1.12% 1.60% | ||||||||||||||||||||
ComEd |
485 | 3 Month LIBOR |
6.40% - 8.25 | % | | 33 | ||||||||||||||
plus 1.68% 3.09% | ||||||||||||||||||||
Cash-Flow Hedges |
||||||||||||||||||||
Exelon |
200 | 4.59% 4.65 | % | 3 Month LIBOR | 2 | | ||||||||||||||
Generation |
861 | (a) | 5.71% 5.74 | % | 3 Month LIBOR | | (77 | ) | ||||||||||||
Net Deferred Gains (Losses) |
$ | 11 | $ | (44 | ) | |||||||||||||||
(a) | Generation was released from its obligation due to sale of Boston Generating assets. |
During 2004, Exelon settled interest-rate swaps in aggregate notional amounts of $800 million, and recorded net pre-tax gains of $27 million. Of the $27 million net gain, $26 million was the result of settlement by ComEd of interest-rate swaps designated as fair-value hedges and is being amortized as a reduction to interest expense over the remaining life of the related debt. The remaining $1 million was the result of settlement by Exelon and PECO of interest-rate swaps designated as cash-flow hedges and is being amortized over the lives of the related debt.
During 2003, Exelon settled interest-rate swaps in aggregate notional amounts of $860 million and recorded net pre-tax gains of $1 million. The $1 million gain was the result of settlement by PECO and Generation of interest-rate swaps designated as cash-flow hedges and is being amortized over the lives of the related debt. Additionally, during 2003, Exelon settled interest-rate swaps in aggregate notional amounts of $1,070 million and recorded net pre-tax losses of $45 million which were recorded as regulatory assets. The pre-tax losses on settlements of interest-rate swaps are being amortized over the life of the related debt to interest expense.
Exelon recorded income of $0.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2004, representing the ineffective portions of changes in the fair value of cash-flow hedge positions. This amount was associated with the settlement of interest-rate swaps in December 2004 and was included in other, net on Exelons consolidated statements of income. Exelon did not have any amount excluded from the measure of effectiveness for the year ended December 31, 2004.
During 2004 and 2003, no amounts were reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income into earnings as a result of forecasted financing transactions no longer being probable.
Energy-Related Derivatives. Exelon utilizes derivatives to manage the utilization of its available generating capacity and the provision of wholesale energy to its affiliates. Exelon also utilizes energy option contracts and energy financial swap arrangements to limit the market price risk associated with forward energy commodity contracts. Additionally, Exelon enters into certain energy-related derivatives for trading or speculative purposes. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, Exelon had $145 million and $213 million, respectively, of energy derivatives recorded as net liabilities at fair value on the Consolidated Balance Sheets, which includes the energy derivatives at Generation discussed below.
For the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002, Generation recognized net unrealized gains of $42 million, net unrealized losses of $16 million and net unrealized gains of $6 million, respectively, relating to mark-to-market activity of certain non-trading power purchase and sale contracts pursuant to SFAS No. 133.
58
Mark-to-market activity on non-trading power purchase and sale contracts are reported in fuel and purchased power. For the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, Generation recognized net unrealized gains of $3 million and net unrealized losses of $3 million and $9 million, respectively, relating to mark-to-market activity on derivative instruments entered into for trading purposes. Gains and losses associated with financial trading are reported as revenue in the Consolidated Statements of Income.
Exelon Energy has entered into a limited number of energy commodity derivative contracts in connection with its service of gas customers. Prior to January 1, 2004, contracts were maintained by Exelon Energy. While the majority of these contracts qualify as normal purchases and sales or as cash-flow hedges under SFAS No. 133, $15 million was recorded as an increase to fuel expense in 2003 primarily as a result of the reversal of the 2002 mark-to-market adjustments. At December 31, 2004, Exelon Energys contracts are included in Generations mark-to-market activity. At December 31, 2003, Exelon had net assets of $3 million on the Consolidated Balance Sheets related to Exelon Energys mark-to-market contracts. Exelon Energys counterparties in these contracts were all investment grade.
As of December 31, 2004, $194 million of deferred net losses on derivative instruments in accumulated other comprehensive income are expected to be reclassified to earnings during the next twelve months. Amounts in accumulated other comprehensive income related to changes in interest-rate cash-flow hedges are reclassified into earnings when the interest payment occurs or when ineffectiveness has been determined. Amounts in accumulated other comprehensive income related to changes in energy commodity cash-flow hedges are reclassified into earnings when the forecasted purchase or sale of the energy commodity occurs. The majority of Exelons cash-flow hedges are expected to settle within the next three years.
Credit Risk Associated with Derivative Instruments. Exelon would be exposed to credit-related losses in the event of non-performance by counterparties that issue derivative instruments. The credit exposure of derivatives contracts is represented by the fair value of contracts at the reporting date. For energy-related derivative instruments, Generation has entered into payment netting agreements or enabling agreements that allow for payment netting with the majority of its large counterparties, which reduce Generations exposure to counterparty risk by providing for the offset of amounts payable to the counterparty against amounts receivable from the counterparty. The notional amount of derivatives does not represent amounts that are exchanged by the parties and, thus, is not a measure of Exelons exposure. The amounts exchanged are calculated on the basis of the notional or contract amounts, as well as on the other terms of the derivatives, which relate to interest rates and the volatility of these rates.
Nuclear Decommissioning Trust Fund Investments
Investments as of December 31, 2004 and 2003. Exelon classifies investments in trust accounts for decommissioning nuclear plants as available-for-sale and estimates their fair value based on quoted market prices for the securities held in trust funds. These investments are held to fund Exelons decommissioning obligation for its nuclear plants. Decommissioning expenditures are expected to occur primarily after the plants are retired. Based on current licenses and anticipated renewals, decommissioning expenditures for plants in operation are currently estimated to begin in 2029. See Note 14 Nuclear Decommissioning and Spent Fuel Storage for further information regarding the decommissioning of Generations nuclear plants.
59
The following tables show the fair values, gross unrealized gains and losses and amortized cost bases of the securities held in these trust accounts as of December 31, 2004 and 2003.
December 31, 2004 | ||||||||||||||||
Gross | Gross | |||||||||||||||
Amortized | Unrealized | Unrealized | Estimated | |||||||||||||
Cost | Gains | Losses | Fair Value | |||||||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents |
$ | 184 | $ | | $ | | $ | 184 | ||||||||
Equity securities |
2,194 | 538 | (37 | ) | 2,695 | |||||||||||
Debt securities
|
||||||||||||||||
Federal government obligations |
1,447 | 51 | (4 | ) | 1,494 | |||||||||||
Other debt securities |
855 | 37 | (3 | ) | 889 | |||||||||||
Total debt securities |
2,302 | 88 | (7 | ) | 2,383 | |||||||||||
Total available-for-sale securities |
$ | 4,680 | $ | 626 | $ | (44 | ) | $ | 5,262 | |||||||
December 31, 2003 | ||||||||||||||||
Gross | Gross | |||||||||||||||
Amortized | Unrealized | Unrealized | Estimated | |||||||||||||
Cost | Gains | Losses | Fair Value | |||||||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents |
$ | 84 | $ | | $ | | $ | 84 | ||||||||
Equity securities |
2,402 | 300 | (294 | ) | 2,408 | |||||||||||
Debt securities
|
||||||||||||||||
Federal government obligations |
1,574 | 65 | (4 | ) | 1,635 | |||||||||||
Other debt securities |
567 | 29 | (2 | ) | 594 | |||||||||||
Total debt securities |
2,141 | 94 | (6 | ) | 2,229 | |||||||||||
Total available-for-sale securities |
$ | 4,627 | $ | 394 | $ | (300 | ) | $ | 4,721 | |||||||
The fixed-income available-for-sale securities held at December 31, 2004 have an average maturity range of six to thirteen years. The cost of these securities was determined on the basis of specific identification.
Impairment Evaluation in 2004. At December 31, 2004, Exelon had gross unrealized gains of $626 million and gross unrealized losses of $44 million related to the nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments. At December 31, 2003, Exelon had gross unrealized gains of $394 million and gross unrealized losses of $300 million related to the nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments. With the exception of the portion of these amounts primarily related to AmerGen, as a result of ComEds and PECOs regulatory arrangements for decommissioning costs, approximately $469 million of these net unrealized gains were recorded as an increase to regulatory liabilities.
Exelon evaluates decommissioning trust fund investments for other-than-temporary impairments by analyzing the historical performance, cost basis and market value of securities in unrealized loss positions in comparison to related market indices. During 2004, Exelon concluded that certain trust fund investments were other-than-temporarily impaired based on various factors assessed in the aggregate, including the duration and severity of the impairment, the anticipated recovery of the securities and considerations of Exelons ability and intent to hold the investments until the recovery of their cost basis. This determination resulted in an $8 million impairment charge recorded in other income and deductions associated with the trust funds for the decommissioning of the AmerGen plants. Also, Exelon realized $260 million of the previously unrealized losses associated with the trust investments for the decommissioning of the former ComEd and PECO plants. As both realized and unrealized losses are included as a reduction in the fair value of the investments and in the fair value of the regulatory liability, realization of these losses associated with the former ComEd and PECO plants had no net income impact on Exelons results of operations or financial position.
60
Unrealized Gains and Losses. Net unrealized gains of $582 million were included in regulatory assets, regulatory liabilities or accumulated other comprehensive income in Exelons Consolidated Balance Sheet at December 31, 2004. Net unrealized gains of $94 million were included in accumulated depreciation, regulatory assets and accumulated other comprehensive income in Exelons Consolidated Balance Sheet at December 31, 2003.
The following table provides information regarding Exelons available-for-sale securities held in nuclear decommissioning trust funds in an unrealized loss position that were not considered other-than-temporarily impaired. The following tables show the investments gross unrealized losses and fair value, aggregated by investment category and length of time that individual securities have been in a continuous unrealized loss position, at December 31, 2004 and 2003.
December 31, 2004 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Less than 12 months | 12 months or more | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross | Gross | Gross | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Unrealized | Fair | Unrealized | Fair | Unrealized | Fair | |||||||||||||||||||
Losses | Value | Losses | Value | Losses | Value | |||||||||||||||||||
Equity securities |
$ | 16 | $ | 197 | $ | 21 | $ | 278 | $ | 37 | $ | 475 | ||||||||||||
Debt securities |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Government obligations |
2 | 207 | 2 | 68 | 4 | 275 | ||||||||||||||||||
Other debt securities |
2 | 182 | 1 | 22 | 3 | 204 | ||||||||||||||||||
Total debt securities |
4 | 389 | 3 | 90 | 7 | 479 | ||||||||||||||||||
Total temporarily impaired
securities |
$ | 20 | $ | 586 | $ | 24 | $ | 368 | $ | 44 | $ | 954 | ||||||||||||
December 31, 2003 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Less than 12 months | 12 months or more | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross | Gross | Gross | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Unrealized | Fair | Unrealized | Fair | Unrealized | Fair | |||||||||||||||||||
Losses | Value | Losses | Value | Losses | Value | |||||||||||||||||||
Equity securities |
$ | 33 | $ | 231 | $ | 261 | $ | 775 | $ | 294 | $ | 1,006 | ||||||||||||
Debt securities |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Government obligations |
4 | 232 | | 11 | 4 | 243 | ||||||||||||||||||
Other debt securities |
2 | 117 | | 2 | 2 | 119 | ||||||||||||||||||
Total debt securities |
6 | 349 | | 13 | 6 | 362 | ||||||||||||||||||
Total temporarily impaired
securities |
$ | 39 | $ | 580 | $ | 261 | $ | 788 | $ | 300 | $ | 1,368 | ||||||||||||
Exelon evaluates the historical performance, cost basis and market value of securities in unrealized loss positions in comparison to related market indices to assess whether or not the securities are other-than-temporarily impaired. Exelon concluded that the trending of the related market indices, the historical performance of these securities over a long-term time horizon and the level of insignificance of the unrealized loss as a percentage of the cost of the individual securities indicates that the securities are not other-than-temporarily impaired.
Sale of Nuclear Decommissioning Trust Fund Investments. Proceeds from the sale of decommissioning trust fund investments and gross realized gains and losses on those sales for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 were as follows:
61
For the Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
Proceeds from sales |
$ | 2,320 | $ | 2,341 | $ | 1,612 | ||||||
Gross realized gains |
115 | 219 | 56 | |||||||||
Gross realized losses |
(43 | ) | (235 | ) | (86 | ) | ||||||
Net realized gains of $72 million and net realized losses of $16 million and $32 million were recognized in other income and deductions in Exelons Consolidated Statements of Income for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. Additionally, net realized gains $2 million were recognized in accumulated depreciation and regulatory assets in Exelons Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2002. Prior to January 1, 2003, realized gains and losses related to the former PECO units were included in accumulated depreciation. See Note 14 Nuclear Decommissioning and Spent Fuel for further information regarding the nuclear decommissioning trusts.
17. Preferred Securities
At December 31, 2004 and 2003, Exelon was authorized to issue up to 100,000,000 shares of preferred stock, none of which was outstanding.
Preferred and Preference Stock of Subsidiaries
At December 31, 2004 and 2003, cumulative preferred stock of PECO, no par value, consisted of 15,000,000 shares authorized and the outstanding amounts set forth below:
Current | December 31, | |||||||||||||||||||
Redemption | 2004 | 2003 | 2004 | 2003 | ||||||||||||||||
Price (a) | Shares Outstanding | Dollar Amount | ||||||||||||||||||
Series (without mandatory
redemption) |
||||||||||||||||||||
$4.68 (Series D) |
$ | 104.00 | 150,000 | 150,000 | $ | 15 | $ | 15 | ||||||||||||
$4.40 (Series C) |
112.50 | 274,720 | 274,720 | 27 | 27 | |||||||||||||||
$4.30 (Series B) |
102.00 | 150,000 | 150,000 | 15 | 15 | |||||||||||||||
$3.80 (Series A) |
106.00 | 300,000 | 300,000 | 30 | 30 | |||||||||||||||
Total preferred stock |
874,720 | 874,720 | $ | 87 | $ | 87 | ||||||||||||||
(a) | Redeemable, at the option of PECO, at the indicated dollar amounts per share, plus accrued dividends. |
At December 31, 2004 and 2003, ComEd prior preferred stock and ComEd preference stock consisted of 850,000 shares and 6,810,451 shares authorized, respectively, none of which was outstanding.
18. Common Stock
At December 31, 2004 and 2003, common stock without par value consisted of 1,200,000,000 shares authorized and 664,187,996 and 656,365,044 shares outstanding, respectively.
Stock Split
On January 27, 2004, the Board of Directors of Exelon approved a 2-for-1 stock split of Exelons common stock. The distribution date was May 5, 2004. The share and per-share amounts have been adjusted for all periods presented to reflect the stock split.
62
Share Repurchases
Share Repurchase Program. In April 2004, Exelons Board of Directors approved a discretionary share repurchase program that allows Exelon to repurchase shares of its common stock on a periodic basis in the open market. The share repurchase program is intended to mitigate, in part, the dilutive effect of shares issued under Exelons employee stock option plan and Exelons Employee Stock Purchase Plan (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 Exelons 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 share repurchase program has no specified limit on the number of shares that may be repurchased and no specified termination date. Any shares repurchased are held as treasury shares unless cancelled or reissued at the discretion of Exelons management. Treasury shares are recorded at cost. During 2004, 2.3 million shares of common stock were purchased under the share repurchase program for $75 million.
Other Share Repurchases. In November 2004, Exelon repurchased 0.2 million shares of common stock from a retired executive for $7 million. These shares are held as treasury shares and recorded at cost.
Stock-Based Compensation Plans
Exelon maintains Long-Term Incentive Plans (LTIPs) for certain full-time salaried employees. The types of long-term incentive awards that have been granted under the LTIPs are non-qualified options to purchase shares of Exelons common stock and common stock awards. At December 31, 2004, there were options for approximately 14,770,078 shares remaining for issuance under the LTIPs.
The exercise price of the stock options is equal to the fair market value of the underlying stock on the date of option grant. Options granted under the LTIPs become exercisable upon attainment of a target share value and/or specified vesting date. All options expire 10 years from the date of grant. The vesting period of options outstanding as of December 31, 2004 generally ranged from 3 years to 4 years.
Information with respect to the LTIPs at December 31, 2004 and changes for the three years then ended, is as follows:
Weighted | Weighted | Weighted | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Average | Average | Average | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Exercise | Exercise | Exercise | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Price | Price | Price | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Shares | (per share) | Shares | (per share) | Shares | (per share) | |||||||||||||||||||
2004 | 2004 | 2003 | 2003 | 2002 | 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||
Balance at January 1 |
28,307,386 | $ | 24.51 | 31,773,980 | $ | 22.90 | 28,079,992 | $ | 21.98 | |||||||||||||||
Options granted/assumed |
6,994,288 | 32.57 | 6,346,400 | 24.85 | 7,877,264 | 23.56 | ||||||||||||||||||
Options exercised |
(9,373,662 | ) | 24.20 | (9,017,390 | ) | 19.03 | (3,642,678 | ) | 16.69 | |||||||||||||||
Options canceled |
(722,727 | ) | 27.34 | (795,604 | ) | 25.09 | (540,598 | ) | 26.81 | |||||||||||||||
Balance at December 31 |
25,205,285 | $ | 26.78 | 28,307,386 | $ | 24.51 | 31,773,980 | $ | 22.90 | |||||||||||||||
Exercisable at
December 31 |
13,097,192 | $ | 24.88 | 18,032,696 | $ | 24.33 | 20,982,368 | $ | 21.98 | |||||||||||||||
Weighted average fair value
of options granted during year |
$ | 9.58 | $ | 5.52 | $ | 6.81 | ||||||||||||||||||
63
The fair value of each option is estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model with the following weighted average assumptions used for grants in 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively:
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
Dividend yield |
3.3 | % | 3.3 | % | 3.3 | % | ||||||
Expected volatility |
19.7 | % | 30.5 | % | 36.8 | % | ||||||
Risk-free interest rate |
3.25 | % | 3.0 | % | 4.6 | % | ||||||
Expected life (years) |
5.0 | 5.0 | 5.0 | |||||||||
At December 31, 2004, the options outstanding, based on ranges of exercise prices, were as follows:
Options Outstanding | Options Exercisable | |||||||||||||||||||
Weighted | ||||||||||||||||||||
Average | ||||||||||||||||||||
Remaining | Weighted | Weighted | ||||||||||||||||||
Contractual | Average | Average | ||||||||||||||||||
Range of | Number | Life | Exercise | Number | Exercise | |||||||||||||||
Exercise Prices | Outstanding | (years) | Price | Exercisable | Price | |||||||||||||||
$6.97-$10.46 |
49,050 | 3.0 | $ | 9.84 | 49,050 | $ | 9.84 | |||||||||||||
$10.47-$13.95 |
383,064 | 1.9 | 12.46 | 383,064 | 12.46 | |||||||||||||||
$13.96-$17.44 |
114,628 | 2.3 | 15.07 | 114,628 | 15.07 | |||||||||||||||
$17.45-$20.93 |
3,472,093 | 4.4 | 19.28 | 3,472,093 | 19.28 | |||||||||||||||
$20.94-$24.42 |
4,022,670 | 6.5 | 23.43 | 2,373,736 | 23.41 | |||||||||||||||
$24.43-$27.91 |
5,204,363 | 7.7 | 24.86 | 1,293,402 | 24.91 | |||||||||||||||
$27.92-$31.40 |
4,545,548 | 5.7 | 29.74 | 4,531,898 | 29.74 | |||||||||||||||
$31.41-$34.90 |
7,413,869 | 8.6 | 32.66 | 879,321 | 33.37 | |||||||||||||||
Total |
25,205,285 | 6.8 | $ | 26.78 | 13,097,192 | $ | 24.88 | |||||||||||||
Exelon common share awards of 1,813,874, 901,958 and 1,180,148 shares were granted under Exelons LTIPs and board compensation plans during 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. Compensation costs related to these awards are accrued and expensed over the vesting period, typically up to 5 years from the grant date. Exelon recognized stock-based compensation expense of $65 million, $31 million and $20 million during 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. At December 31, 2004, Exelon had a liability of $81 million related to outstanding awards not yet settled through cash payments or share issuances.
In June 2001, the Board of Directors of Exelon approved the ESPP. The purpose of the ESPP is to provide employees of Exelon and its subsidiary companies the right to purchase shares of Exelons common stock at below-market prices. A total of 5,357,745 shares of Exelons common stock have been reserved for issuance under the ESPP. Employees purchases are limited to no more than 155 shares per quarter and no more than $25,000 in fair market value in any plan year. Employees purchased 309,492, 418,652, and 514,910 shares of Exelon common stock under the ESPP in 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.
Fund Transfer Restrictions
Under applicable law, Exelon is precluded from borrowing or receiving any extension of credit or indemnity from its subsidiaries and can lend to, but not borrow from, Exelons intercompany money pool. Additionally, under applicable Federal law, Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation can pay dividends only from retained, undistributed or current earnings. 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. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, Exelon had retained earnings of $3.4 billion and $2.3 billion, respectively, which included ComEd retained earnings of $1,102 million and $883 million (all which has been appropriated for future dividends at December 31, 2004), PECO retained earnings of $607 million and $546 million, and Generation undistributed earnings of $761 million and $602 million, respectively. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, Exelons common equity to total capitalization ratio was 41% and 35%, respectively.
64
Undistributed Losses of Equity Method Investments
Exelon had undistributed losses of equity method investments of $106 million and $55 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively.
19. Earnings Per Share
Diluted earnings per share are calculated by dividing net income by the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding, including shares to be issued upon exercise of stock options outstanding under Exelons stock option plans considered to be common stock equivalents. The following table sets forth the computation of basic and diluted earnings per share and shows the effect of these stock options on the weighted average number of shares outstanding used in calculating diluted earnings per share:
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
Income from continuing operations |
$ | 1,870 | $ | 892 | $ | 1,690 | ||||||
Loss from discontinued operations |
(29 | ) | (99 | ) | (20 | ) | ||||||
Income before cumulative
effect of changes in accounting principles |
1,841 | 793 | 1,670 | |||||||||
Cumulative effect of changes in accounting
principles |
23 | 112 | (230 | ) | ||||||||
Net income |
$ | 1,864 | $ | 905 | $ | 1,440 | ||||||
Average common shares outstanding basic |
661 | 651 | 645 | |||||||||
Assumed exercise of stock options |
8 | 6 | 4 | |||||||||
Average common shares outstanding diluted |
669 | 657 | 649 | |||||||||
Earnings per average common share Basic: |
||||||||||||
Income from continuing operations |
$ | 2.83 | $ | 1.37 | $ | 2.62 | ||||||
Loss from discontinued operations |
(0.04 | ) | (0.15 | ) | (0.03 | ) | ||||||
Income before cumulative
effect of changes in accounting principles |
2.79 | 1.22 | 2.59 | |||||||||
Cumulative effect of changes in accounting principles |
0.03 | 0.17 | (0.36 | ) | ||||||||
Net income |
$ | 2.82 | $ | 1.39 | $ | 2.23 | ||||||
Earnings per average common share Diluted: |
||||||||||||
Income from continuing operations |
$ | 2.79 | $ | 1.36 | $ | 2.60 | ||||||
Loss from discontinued operations |
(0.04 | ) | (0.15 | ) | (0.03 | ) | ||||||
Income before cumulative
effect of changes in accounting principles |
2.75 | 1.21 | 2.57 | |||||||||
Cumulative effect of changes in accounting principles |
0.03 | 0.17 | (0.35 | ) | ||||||||
Net income |
$ | 2.78 | $ | 1.38 | $ | 2.22 | ||||||
The number of stock options not included in the calculation of diluted common shares outstanding due to their antidilutive effect was approximately nine million and ten million for 2003 and 2002, respectively. There were no stock options excluded for 2004.
65
20. Commitments and Contingencies
Nuclear Insurance
The Price-Anderson Act limits the liability of nuclear reactor owners for claims that could arise from a single incident. As of December 31, 2004, the limit is $10.76 billion and is subject to change to account for the effects of inflation and changes in the number of licensed reactors. Through its subsidiaries, Exelon carries the maximum available commercial insurance of $300 million for each operating site and the remaining $10.46 billion is provided through mandatory participation in a financial protection pool. Under the Price-Anderson Act, all nuclear reactor licensees can be assessed a maximum charge per reactor per incident. The maximum assessment for all nuclear operators per reactor per incident (including a 5% surcharge) is $100.6 million, payable at no more than $10 million per reactor per incident per year. This assessment is subject to inflation and state premium taxes.
In addition, the U.S. Congress could impose revenue-raising measures on the nuclear industry to pay claims. The Price-Anderson Act expired on August 1, 2002 and was subsequently extended to the end of 2003 by the U.S. Congress. Only facilities applying for NRC licenses subsequent to the expiration of the Price-Anderson Act are affected. Existing commercial generating facilities, such as those owned by Generation, remain subject to the provisions of the Price-Anderson Act and are unaffected by its expiration. However, new licenses are not covered under the Price-Anderson Act and any new plant initiatives would need to address this exposure.
Generation is a member of an industry mutual insurance company, Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited (NEIL), which provides property damage, decontamination and premature decommissioning insurance for each station for losses resulting from damage to its nuclear plants. 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. 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 $168 million for losses incurred at any plant insured by the insurance companies. 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 insureds, 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 a result of government indemnity. Generally, a certified act of terrorism is defined in the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act to be any act, certified by the U.S. government, to be an act of terrorism committed on behalf of a foreign person or interest.
Additionally, NEIL provides replacement power cost insurance in the event of a major accidental outage at a nuclear station. The premium for this coverage is subject to assessment for adverse loss experience. Generations maximum share of any assessment is $48 million per year. 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 also not apply in cases of certified acts of terrorism under the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act as described above.
In addition, Generation participates in the American Nuclear Insurers Master Worker Program, which provides coverage for worker tort claims filed for bodily injury caused by a nuclear energy accident. This program was modified, effective January 1, 1998, to provide coverage to all workers whose nuclear-related employment began on or after the commencement date of reactor operations. Generation will not be liable for a retrospective assessment under this new policy; however, in the event losses incurred under the small number of policies in the old program exceed accumulated reserves, a maximum retroactive assessment of up to $50 million could apply.
66
For its insured losses, Exelon 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 Exelons financial condition, results of operations and liquidity.
Energy Commitments
Generations wholesale operations include the physical delivery and marketing of power
obtained through its generation capacity, and
long-, intermediate- and short-term contracts.
Generation maintains a net positive supply of energy and capacity, through ownership of generation
assets and power purchase and lease agreements, to protect it from the potential operational
failure of one of its owned or contracted power generating units. Generation has also contracted
for access to additional generation through bilateral long-term purchase power agreements (PPAs).
These agreements are firm commitments related to power generation of specific generation plants
and/or are dispatchable in nature. Generation enters into power purchase agreements 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. Generation primarily uses financial contracts in its wholesale marketing activities for
hedging purposes. Generation also uses financial contracts to manage the risk surrounding trading
for profit 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 wholesale market participants who primarily focus on the resale of energy products for delivery. Generation provides delivery of its energy to these customers through access to its transmission assets or rights for firm transmission.
At December 31, 2004, Generation had long-term commitments, relating to the purchase from and sale to unaffiliated utilities and others of energy, capacity and transmission rights as indicated in the following tables:
Net Capacity | Power Only | Power Only | Transmission Rights | |||||||||||||
Purchases (a) | Sales | Purchases | Purchases (b) | |||||||||||||
2005 |
$ | 578 | $ | 2,551 | $ | 1,446 | $ | 31 | ||||||||
2006 |
581 | 961 | 605 | 3 | ||||||||||||
2007 |
533 | 167 | 254 | | ||||||||||||
2008 |
462 | 9 | 195 | | ||||||||||||
2009 |
437 | 9 | 194 | | ||||||||||||
Thereafter |
3,664 | 343 | 548 | | ||||||||||||
Total (c) |
$ | 6,255 | $ | 4,040 | $ | 3,242 | $ | 34 | ||||||||
(a) | Net capacity purchases include tolling agreements that are accounted for as operating leases. Amounts presented in the commitments represent Generations expected payments under these arrangements at December 31, 2004. Expected payments include certain capacity charges which are contingent on plant availability. | |
(b) | Transmission rights purchases include estimated commitments in 2005 and 2006 for additional transmission rights that will be required to fulfill firm sales contracts. | |
(c) | Included in the totals are $395 million of power only sales commitments related to Sithe, which were not retained by Generation following the sale of Sithe. See Note 3 Sithe and Note 25 Subsequent Events for further discussion of these transactions. |
Generation has a PPA with ComEd under which Generation has agreed to supply all of ComEds load requirements through 2006. Prices for this energy vary depending upon the time of day and month of delivery. Subsequent to 2006, ComEd expects to procure all of its supply from market sources, which could include Generation. Additionally, Generation has entered into a PPA with PECO under which PECO obtains substantially all of its electric supply from Generation through 2010. Prices for this energy vary depending upon month of delivery. Subsequent to 2010, PECO expects to procure all of its supply from market sources, which could include Generation.
67
Other Purchase Obligations
In addition to Generations energy commitments as described above, Exelon has commitments to purchase fuel supplies for nuclear generation and various other purchase commitments related to the normal day-to-day operations of its business. As of December 31, 2004, these commitments were as follows:
Expiration within | ||||||||||||||||||||
2010 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Total | 2005 | 2006-2007 | 2008-2009 | and beyond | ||||||||||||||||
Fuel purchase agreements (a) |
$ | 3,639 | $ | 639 | $ | 985 | $ | 616 | $ | 1,399 | ||||||||||
Other purchase commitments (b) |
463 | 241 | 134 | 57 | 31 | |||||||||||||||
(a) | Fuel purchase agreements Commitments to purchase fuel supplies for nuclear and fossil generation. | |
(b) | Other purchase commitments Commitments for services and materials, minimum spend requirements related to the sale of InfraSource (see Note 2 Acquisitions and Dispositions) and amounts committed for information technology services. |
Commercial Commitments
Exelons commercial commitments as of December 31, 2004, representing commitments potentially triggered by future events, were as follows:
Expiration within | ||||||||||||||||||||
2010 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Total | 2005 | 2006-2007 | 2008-2009 | and beyond | ||||||||||||||||
Letters of credit (non-debt) (a) |
$ | 240 | $ | 239 | $ | 1 | $ | | $ | | ||||||||||
Letters of credit (long-term debt)
interest coverage (b) |
15 | 15 | | | | |||||||||||||||
Surety bonds (c) |
458 | 84 | 4 | | 370 | |||||||||||||||
Performance guarantees (d) |
201 | | | | 201 | |||||||||||||||
Energy marketing contract
guarantees (e) |
261 | 156 | 65 | | 40 | |||||||||||||||
Nuclear insurance guarantees (f) |
1,710 | | | 1,710 | ||||||||||||||||
Lease guarantees (g) |
10 | | 1 | | 9 | |||||||||||||||
Midwest Generation Capacity Reservation
Agreement guarantee (h) |
29 | 4 | 7 | 8 | 10 | |||||||||||||||
Exelon New England guarantees (i) |
17 | | | | 17 | |||||||||||||||
Total commercial commitments |
$ | 2,941 | $ | 498 | $ | 78 | $ | 8 | $ | 2,357 | ||||||||||
(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. As of December 31, 2004, Exelon had $240 million of outstanding letters of credit (non-debt) issued under its $1.5 billion credit agreements. Guarantees of $67 million have been issued to provide support for certain letters of credit as required by third parties. Includes letters of credit of $95 million that will be eliminated upon the sale of Sithe to Dynegy. See Note 25 Subsequent Events for further information regarding the sale of Sithe. | |
(b) | Letters of credit (long-term debt) interest coverage Reflects the interest coverage portion of letters of credit supporting floating-rate pollution control bonds. The principal amount of the floating-rate pollution control bonds of $520 million is reflected in long-term debt in Exelons Consolidated Balance Sheet. | |
(c) | Surety bonds Guarantees issued related to contract and commercial surety bonds, excluding bid bonds. | |
(d) | Performance guarantees Guarantees issued to ensure execution under specific contracts. | |
(e) | Energy marketing contract guarantees Guarantees issued to ensure performance under energy commodity contracts. Includes guarantees of $30 million that will be eliminated upon the sale of Sithe to Dynegy. See Note 25 Subsequent Events for further information regarding the sale of Sithe. | |
(f) | Nuclear insurance guarantees Guarantees of nuclear insurance required under the Price-Anderson Act. $1.0 billion of this total exposure is exempt from the $6.0 billion PUHCA guarantee limit by SEC rule. | |
(g) | Lease guarantees Guarantees issued to ensure payments on building leases. |
|
(h) | Midwest Generation Capacity Reservation Agreement guarantee In connection with ComEds agreement with the City of Chicago (Chicago) entered into on February 20, 2003, Midwest Generation assumed from Chicago a Capacity Reservation Agreement that Chicago had entered into with Calumet Energy Team, LLC. ComEd has agreed to reimburse Chicago for any nonperformance by Midwest Generation under the Capacity Reservation Agreement. Under FIN 45, $3 million is included as a liability on Exelons Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2004. | |
(i) | Exelon New England guarantees Mystic Development LLC (Mystic), a former affiliate of Exelon New England, has a long-term agreement through January 2020 with Distrigas of Massachusetts Corporation (Distrigas) for gas supply, primarily for the Boston Generating units. Under the agreement, gas purchase prices from Distrigas are indexed to the New England gas markets. |
68
Exelon New England has guaranteed Mystics financial obligations to Distrigas under the long-term supply agreement. Exelon New Englands guarantee to Distrigas remained in effect following the transfer of ownership interest in Boston Generating in May 2004. Under FIN 45, approximately $16 million is included as a liability within the Consolidated Balance Sheet of Exelon as of December 31, 2004 related to this guarantee. The terms of the guarantee do not limit the potential future payments that Exelon New England could be required to make under the guarantee. Other guarantees associated with Exelon New England total less than $1 million. |
Environmental Issues
General. Exelons 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, Exelon, through its subsidiaries, is generally liable for the costs of remediating environmental contamination of property now or formerly owned by Exelon and of property contaminated by hazardous substances generated by Exelon. Exelons subsidiaries 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. Exelon has identified 69 sites where former manufactured gas plant (MGP) activities have or may have resulted in actual site contamination. Of these 69 sites, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency has approved the clean up of four sites and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection has approved the cleanup of nine sites, and of the remaining sites, 56 are currently under some degree of active study and/or remediation. In addition, Exelons subsidiaries 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.
As of December 31, 2004 and 2003, Exelon had accrued $124 million and $129 million, respectively, for environmental investigation and remediation costs, including $96 million and $105 million, respectively, for MGP investigation and remediation that currently can be reasonably estimated. Included in the environmental investigation and remediation cost obligations as of December 31, 2004 and 2003 are $96 million and $105 million, respectively, that have been recorded on a discounted basis (reflecting discount rates of 4.3% in 2004 and from 5.0% in 2003). Such estimates before the effects of discounting were $109 million and $138 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively (reflecting inflation rates of 2.3% in 2004 and 2.5% in 2003). Exelon cannot reasonably estimate whether it will incur other significant liabilities for additional investigation and remediation costs at these or additional sites identified by Exelon, environmental agencies or others, or whether such costs will be recoverable from third parties, including ratepayers. However, PECO is currently recovering through regulated gas rates costs associated with the remediation of the MGP sites.
As of December 31, 2004, Exelon anticipates that payments related to the discounted environmental investigation and remediation costs, disclosed below on an undiscounted basis, will be:
2005 |
$ | 16 | ||
2006 |
21 | |||
2007 |
17 | |||
2008 |
14 | |||
2009 |
7 | |||
Remaining years |
34 | |||
Total payments |
$ | 109 | ||
In December 2003, PECO updated its accounting estimate related to the reserve for environmental remediation. Based on an update of an independently prepared environmental remediation study on 27 MGP sites, PECO increased the environmental reserve by $18 million, with an offsetting increase to the MGP regulatory asset. See Note 21 Supplemental Financial Information for further discussion of the MGP regulatory asset.
69
Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act. In July 2004, the EPA issued the final Phase II rule implementing Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act. This rule establishes national requirements for reducing the adverse environmental impacts from the entrainment and impingement of aquatic organisms at existing power plants. The rule identifies particular standards of performance with respect to entrainment and impingement and requires each facility to monitor and validate this performance in future years. The requirements will be implemented through state-level National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit programs. All of Generations power generation facilities with cooling water systems are subject to the regulations. Facilities without closed-cycle recirculating systems are potentially most affected. Those facilities are Clinton, Cromby, Dresden, Eddystone, Fairless Hills, Handley, Mountain Creek, New Boston, Oyster Creek, Peach Bottom, Quad Cities and Salem. Generation is currently evaluating compliance options at its affected plants. At this time, Generation cannot estimate the effect that compliance with the Phase II rule requirements will have on the operation of its generating facilities and its future results of operations, financial condition and cash flows. There are many factors to be considered and evaluated to determine how Generation will comply with the Phase II rule requirements and the extent to which such compliance may result in financial and operational impacts. The considerations and evaluations include, but are not limited to obtaining clarifying interpretations of the requirements from state regulators, resolving outstanding litigation proceedings concerning the requirements, completing studies to establish biological baselines for each facility and performing environmental and economic cost benefit evaluation of the potential compliance alternatives in accordance with the requirements.
Cotter Corporation. The 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 incurred by Cotter as a result of any liability arising in connection with the West Lake Landfill. In connection with Exelons 2001 corporate restructuring, this responsibility to indemnify Cotter was transferred to Generation. Cotter is alleged to have disposed of approximately 39,000 tons of soils mixed with 8,700 tons of leached barium sulfate at the site. Cotter, along with three other companies identified by the EPA as potentially responsible parties (PRPs), has submitted a draft feasibility study addressing options for remediation of the site. The PRPs are also engaged in discussions with the State of Missouri and the EPA. The estimated costs of the anticipated remediation strategy for the site range up to $22 million. Once a remedy is selected, it is expected that the PRPs will agree on an allocation of responsibility for the costs. Generation has accrued what it believes to be an adequate amount to cover its anticipated share of the liability.
Leases
Minimum future operating lease payments, including lease payments for vehicles, real estate, computers, rail cars and office equipment, as of December 31, 2004 were:
2005 |
$ | 73 | ||
2006 |
71 | |||
2007 |
63 | |||
2008 |
59 | |||
2009 |
55 | |||
Remaining years |
588 | |||
Total minimum future lease payments (a) |
$ | 909 | ||
(a) | Generations tolling agreements are accounted for as operating leases and are reflected as net capacity purchases in the energy commitments table above. |
Rental expense under operating leases totaled $64 million, $57 million and $85 million in 2004, 2003, and 2002, respectively.
70
For information regarding Exelons capital lease obligations, see Note 12 Long Term Debt.
Litigation
Retail Rate Law. In 1996, three developers of non-utility generating facilities filed litigation against various Illinois officials claiming that the enforcement against those facilities of an amendment to Illinois law removing the entitlement of those facilities to state-subsidized payments for electricity sold to ComEd after March 15, 1996 violated their rights under Federal and state constitutions. The developers also filed suit against ComEd for a declaratory judgment that their rights under their contracts with ComEd were not affected by the amendment and for breach of contract. On November 25, 2002, the court granted the developers motions for summary judgment. The judge also entered a permanent injunction enjoining ComEd from refusing to pay the retail rate on the grounds of the amendment and Illinois from denying ComEd a tax credit on account of such purchases. On March 9, 2004, the Illinois Appellate Court reversed the trial court. The Appellate Court held that the 1996 law does apply to the developers facilities and, therefore, they are not entitled to subsidized payments. The Court expressly ruled that the breach of contract claims against ComEd are dismissed with prejudice. Two of the developers sought review of the Appellate Courts decision by the Illinois Supreme Court. On May 26, 2004, the Supreme Court declined to hear the earlier-filed of the two appeals. On October 6, 2004, the Supreme Court declined to hear the final appeal. The time for further appeals has now passed. Related claims remain pending in the trial court.
Real Estate Tax Appeals. PECO and Generation each have been challenging real estate taxes assessed on nuclear plants. PECO is involved in litigation in which it is contesting taxes assessed in 1997 under the Pennsylvania Public Utility Realty Tax Act of March 4, 1971, as amended (PURTA), and has appealed local real estate assessments for 1998 and 1999 on the Limerick Generating Station (Montgomery County, PA) (Limerick) and Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station (York County, PA) (Peach Bottom) plants. Generation is involved in real estate tax appeals for 2000 through 2004, also regarding the valuation of its Limerick and Peach Bottom plants, Quad Cities Station (Rock Island County, IL), Three Mile Island Nuclear Station (Dauphin County, PA) and Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (Forked River, NJ).
During 2003, upon completion of updated nuclear plant appraisal studies, Exelon recorded reductions of $74 million to reserves recorded for exposures associated with the real estate taxes. Exelon believes its reserve balances for exposures associated with the real estate taxes as of December 31, 2004 reflect the probable expected outcome of the litigation and appeals proceedings in accordance with SFAS No. 5, Accounting for Contingencies. The ultimate outcome of such matters, however, could result in unfavorable or favorable adjustments to the consolidated financial statements of Exelon and such adjustments could be material.
General. Exelon is involved in various other litigation matters that are being defended and handled in the ordinary course of business. Exelon maintains accruals for such costs that are probable of being incurred and subject to reasonable estimation. The ultimate outcomes of such matters, as well as the matters discussed above, are uncertain and may have a material adverse effect on Exelons financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
71
Capital Commitments
SCEP. Generation has a 71% interest in SCEP, which owns a peaking facility in Chicago. SCEP is obligated to make total equity distributions of $49 million through 2022 to the party, which is not affiliated with Exelon, that owns the remaining 29% interest. This amount reflects a return of that partys investment in SCEP. Generation has the right to purchase, generally at a premium, and the other party has the right to require Generation to purchase, generally at a discount, the 29% interest in SCEP. Additionally, Generation may be required to purchase the remaining 29% interest upon the occurrence of certain events, including Generations failure to maintain an investment grade rating. As a result of the adoption of SFAS No. 150 on July 1, 2003, Exelon reclassified the minority interest associated with SCEP to a long-term liability. The total long-term liability related to SCEP was $49 million and $51 million as of December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively.
Sithe Call Option. On September 29, 2004, Generation exercised its call option and entered into an agreement to acquire Reservoirs 50% interest in Sithe for $97 million. The closing of the call required state and Federal regulatory approvals, which were received in January 2005, and the transaction was completed on January 31, 2005. See Note 3 Sithe and Note 25 Subsequent Events for additional information.
Credit Contingencies
Dynegy. As previously disclosed, Generation is counterparty to Dynegy in various energy transactions and had financial and credit risk associated with Dynegy through Generations investment in Sithe at December 31, 2004. On January 31, 2005, Generation sold its investment in Sithe and, accordingly, is no longer subject to potential financial risk associated with Dynegys performance under the financial swap arrangement that Dynegy had with Sithe. See Note 25 Subsequent Events for further discussion of Generations sale of Sithe.
Income Taxes
Refund Claims. ComEd and PECO have entered into several agreements with a tax consultant related to the filing of refund claims with the IRS. ComEd and PECO previously made refundable prepayments to the tax consultants of $11 million and $5 million, respectively. The fees for these agreements are contingent upon a successful outcome of the claims and are based upon a percentage of the refunds recovered from the IRS, if any. The ultimate net cash outflows to ComEd and PECO related to these agreements will either be positive or neutral depending upon the outcome of the refund claim with the IRS. These potential tax benefits and associated fees could be material to the financial position, results of operations and cash flows of ComEd and PECO. A portion of ComEds tax benefits, including any associated interest for periods prior to the PECO / Unicom Merger, would be recorded as a reduction of goodwill pursuant to a reallocation of the PECO / Unicom Merger purchase price. Exelon cannot predict the timing of the final resolution of these refund claims.
In 2004, the IRS granted preliminary approval for one of ComEds refund claims. As such, ComEd believes that it is probable that a fee will ultimately be paid to the tax consultant. Therefore, ComEd recorded an expense of $5 million (pre-tax), which resulted in a decrease to the prepayment from $11 million to $6 million. The charge represents an estimate of the fee to the tax consultant which may be adjusted upward or downward depending on the IRS final calculation of the tax and interest benefit. As of December 31, 2004, ComEd had not reflected the tax benefit associated with the refund claim pending final approval of the IRS; however, as described above, the net income statement impact for ComEd is anticipated to be neutral or positive.
See Note 25 Subsequent Events for information regarding the final approval of ComEds refund claim.
Other. Exelon, through its ComEd subsidiary, has taken certain tax positions, which have been disclosed to the IRS to defer the tax gain on the 1999 sale of its fossil generating assets. See Note 13 Income Taxes for further information.
72
21. Supplemental Financial Information
Supplemental Income Statement Information
The following tables provide additional information about Exelons Consolidated Statements of Income for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002.
For the Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
Depreciation, amortization and accretion |
||||||||||||
Property, plant and equipment(a) |
$ | 835 | $ | 736 | $ | 729 | ||||||
Regulatory assets |
418 | 386 | 472 | |||||||||
Nuclear fuel(b) |
380 | 395 | 374 | |||||||||
Asset retirement obligation accretion (c) |
210 | 160 | 126 | |||||||||
Amortization of intangible assets(d) |
90 | 4 | | |||||||||
Total depreciation, amortization and accretion |
1,933 | 1,681 | 1,701 | |||||||||
Total depreciation, amortization and accretion
from discontinued operations |
(41 | ) | (10 | ) | (10 | ) | ||||||
Total depreciation, amortization, and accretion from
continuing operations |
$ | 1,892 | $ | 1,671 | $ | 1,691 | ||||||
(a) | Includes amortization of capitalized software costs. |
|
(b) | Included in fuel expense in the Consolidated Statements of Income. | |
(c) | Prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 143 on January 1, 2003, these amounts were recorded in depreciation expense. Upon adoption of SFAS No. 143, these amounts were recorded in operating and maintenance expense in Exelons Consolidated Statements of Income. See Note 14 Nuclear Decommissioning and Spent Fuel Storage for further discussion of the adoption of SFAS No. 143. | |
(d) | $6 million was reflected as a reduction in revenues and $32 million related to the amortization of Sithe assets and is reflected in discontinued operations in the Consolidated Statements of Income. See Note 3 Sithe and Note 25 Subsequent Events for a description of Sithes intangible assets that are reflected in Exelons Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2004 and a description of the sale of Sithe that was completed on January 31, 2005. |
For the Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
Income (loss) in equity method investments |
||||||||||||
Financing trusts of ComEd and PECO (a) |
$ | (44 | ) | $ | | $ | | |||||
AmerGen (b) |
| 47 | 64 | |||||||||
Sithe (c) |
(11 | ) | 2 | 23 | ||||||||
Synfuel |
(84 | ) | | | ||||||||
Affordable housing projects (d) |
(9 | ) | (10 | ) | (10 | ) | ||||||
Communications joint ventures and other investments |
(5 | ) | (6 | ) | 3 | |||||||
Total income (loss) in equity method investments |
(153 | ) | 33 | 80 | ||||||||
Total income (loss) in equity method investments from
discontinued operations |
(1 | ) | | 6 | ||||||||
Total income (loss) in equity method investments from
continuing operations |
$ | (154 | ) | $ | 33 | $ | 86 | |||||
(a) | Financing trusts were deconsolidated as of December 31, 2003. | |
(b) | Prior to the acquisition of British Energys 50% interest in December 2003. | |
(c) | Includes losses incurred prior to Sithes consolidation as of March 31, 2004 and losses from Sithes investments in TEG and TEP prior to their sale in October 2004. See Note 3 Sithe for additional information. | |
(d) | Prior to the sale of investments on October 15, 2004 and November 12, 2004. |
73
For the Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
Taxes other than income |
||||||||||||
Utility (a) |
$ | 439 | $ | 440 | $ | 439 | ||||||
Real estate |
151 | 65 | (b) | 149 | ||||||||
Payroll |
100 | 92 | 98 | |||||||||
Other |
29 | (16 | )(c) | 23 | ||||||||
Total taxes other than income |
719 | 581 | 709 | |||||||||
Total taxes and other income from discontinued operations |
(9 | ) | (11 | ) | (4 | ) | ||||||
Total taxes other than income from continuing operations |
$ | 710 | $ | 570 | $ | 705 | ||||||
(a) | Municipal and state utility taxes are also recorded in revenues on Exelons Consolidated Statements of Income. | |
(b) | Includes the reduction of $74 million of property tax accruals during 2003 as described in Note 20 Commitments and Contingencies. | |
(c) | Includes a credit of $25 million in 2003 due to a favorable settlement of coal use tax issues at ComEd related to periods prior to the PECO / Unicom Merger. |
For the Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
Other, net |
||||||||||||
Investment income |
$ | 14 | $ | 21 | $ | 33 | ||||||
Net loss on early extinguishment of debt |
(130 | ) | | | ||||||||
Gain (loss) on disposition of assets, net (a) |
167 | (3 | ) | 201 | ||||||||
Decommissioning-related activities |
||||||||||||
Decommissioning trust fund income (b) |
194 | 79 | 77 | |||||||||
Decommissioning trust fund income AmerGen (b) |
43 | | | |||||||||
Other-than-temporary impairment of
decommissioning trust funds (c) |
(268 | ) | | | ||||||||
Regulatory offset to non-operating decommissioning-
related activities (d) |
66 | (79 | ) | | ||||||||
Interest associated with Federal income taxes |
| (14 | ) | | ||||||||
Impairment of investment in Sithe |
| (255 | ) | | ||||||||
Impairment of investments and other assets |
(19 | ) | (38 | ) | (47 | ) | ||||||
Net direct financing lease income |
21 | 20 | 18 | |||||||||
Gain on settlement of note receivable |
18 | | | |||||||||
AFUDC |
4 | 9 | 19 | (e) | ||||||||
Reserve for potential plant disallowance |
| 12 | (12 | ) | ||||||||
Other |
30 | (13 | ) | 15 | ||||||||
Total other, net |
$ | 140 | $ | (261 | ) | $ | 304 | |||||
Total other, net from discontinued operations |
(77 | ) (f) | 17 | 23 | ||||||||
Total other, net from continuing operations |
$ | 63 | $ | (244 | ) | $ | 327 | |||||
(a) | See Note 2 Acquisitions and Dispositions for further discussion. |
|
(b) | Includes investment income and realized gains (losses). | |
(c) | Includes other-than-temporary impairments totaling $255 million, $5 million and $8 million on nuclear decommissioning trust funds for the former ComEd units, the former PECO units and the AmerGen units, respectively. | |
(d) | Includes the elimination of non-operating decommissioning-related activity for those units that are subject to regulatory accounting, including the elimination of decommissioning trust fund income and other-than-temporary impairments for certain nuclear units. See Note 14 Nuclear Decommissioning and Spent Fuel Storage and Note 16 Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities for more information regarding the regulatory accounting applied for certain nuclear units. | |
(e) | In 2002, the debt portion of AFUDC of $8 million was recorded as a non-cash credit to other, net. Subsequent to 2002, the debt portion of AFUDC was recorded as a non-cash credit to interest expense. | |
(f) | Consists primarily of gain on sale of Exelon Thermal Holdings, Inc. (Thermal) ($46 million), gain on sale of Exelon Services, Inc. (Services) ($9 million) and gain on settlement of note receivable ($18 million). |
74
Supplemental Cash Flow Information
The following table provides additional information about Exelons Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002.
For the Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
Cash paid during the year |
||||||||||||
Interest (net of amount capitalized) |
$ | 888 | $ | 801 | $ | 905 | ||||||
Income taxes (net of refunds) |
205 | 728 | 614 | |||||||||
Non-cash investing and financing activities |
||||||||||||
Increase in asset retirement cost |
829 | | | |||||||||
Disposition of Boston Generating (a) |
102 | | | |||||||||
Note cancelled in conjunction with the acquisition of
Sithe International from Sithe |
92 | | | |||||||||
Consolidation of Sithe pursuant to FIN 46-R |
85 | | | |||||||||
Purchase accounting estimate adjustments |
36 | 59 | | |||||||||
Non-cash issuance of common stock |
26 | 16 | 3 | |||||||||
Issuance of note payable to acquire synthetic fuel interests |
22 | 238 | | |||||||||
Resolution of certain tax matters and PECO / Unicom
Merger severance adjustment |
14 | | 14 | |||||||||
Capital lease obligations |
1 | | 52 | |||||||||
Note received in connection with
the sale of Sithe to Reservoir |
| 92 | | |||||||||
Note issued to Sithe in the
Exelon New England acquisition |
| 2 | 534 | |||||||||
Contribution of land from minority interest of
consolidated subsidiary |
| | 12 | |||||||||
(a) | See Note 2 Acquisitions and Dispositions for additional information regarding the disposition of Boston Generating. |
Supplemental Balance Sheet Information
The following tables provide additional information about assets recorded within Exelons Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2004 and 2003.
December 31, 2004 | Energy Delivery | Generation | Exelon | |||||||||
Investments |
||||||||||||
Equity method investments: |
||||||||||||
Direct financing leases |
$ | | $ | | $ | 486 | ||||||
Financing trusts (a) |
139 | | 139 | |||||||||
TEG and TEP (b) |
| 79 | 79 | |||||||||
Energy services and other ventures |
2 | 10 | 14 | |||||||||
Total equity method investments |
141 | 89 | 718 | |||||||||
Other investments: |
||||||||||||
Employee benefit trusts and investments |
59 | 14 | 85 | |||||||||
Energy services and other ventures |
| | 1 | |||||||||
Total other investments |
59 | 14 | 86 | |||||||||
Total investments |
$ | 200 | $ | 103 | $ | 804 | ||||||
(a) | Includes investments in financing trusts which were not consolidated within the financial statements of Exelon at December 31, 2004 pursuant to the provisions of FIN 46-R. See Note 1- Significant Accounting Policies for further discussion of the effects of FIN 46-R. |
75
(b) | Generation acquired 49.5% interests in two facilities in Mexico on October 13, 2004. See Note 3 Sithe for further information on this transaction. |
December 31, 2003 | Energy Delivery | Generation | Exelon | |||||||||
Investments |
||||||||||||
Equity method investments: |
||||||||||||
Direct financing leases |
$ | | $ | | $ | 465 | ||||||
Financing trusts (a) |
196 | | 196 | |||||||||
Affordable housing projects |
| | 77 | |||||||||
Investment in EXRES, SHC Inc. (b) |
| 47 | 47 | |||||||||
Energy services and other ventures |
2 | 11 | 44 | |||||||||
Communications ventures |
1 | | 29 | |||||||||
Total equity method investments |
199 | 58 | 858 | |||||||||
Other investments: |
||||||||||||
Employee benefit trusts and investments |
53 | 7 | 72 | |||||||||
Energy services and other ventures |
| | 25 | |||||||||
Total other investments |
53 | 7 | 97 | |||||||||
Total investments |
$ | 252 | $ | 65 | $ | 955 | ||||||
(a) | Includes investments in financing trusts which were not consolidated within the financial statements of Exelon at December 31, 2004 pursuant to the provisions of FIN 46-R. See Note 1- Significant Accounting Policies for further discussion of the effects of FIN 46-R. | |
(b) | On November 25, 2003, Generation, Reservoir and Sithe completed a series of transactions that restructured the ownership of Sithe, with Generation continuing to own a 50% interest in Sithe through EXRES SHC, Inc. See Note 3 Sithe and Note 25 Subsequent Events for further information on these transactions and the sale of Sithe in 2005. |
Like-Kind Exchange Transaction. Prior to the PECO / Unicom Merger, UII, LLC (formerly Unicom Investments, Inc.) (UII), a wholly owned subsidiary of Exelon, entered into a like-kind exchange transaction pursuant to which approximately $1.6 billion was invested in passive generating station leases with two separate entities unrelated to Exelon. The generating stations were leased back to such entities as part of the transaction. For financial accounting purposes, the investments are accounted for as direct financing lease investments. UII holds the leasehold interests in the generating stations in several separate bankruptcy remote, special purpose companies it directly or indirectly wholly owns. Under the terms of the lease agreements, UII received a prepayment of $1.2 billion in the fourth quarter of 2000, which reduced the investment in the lease. The remaining payments are payable at the end of the thirty-year lease and there are no minimum scheduled lease payments to be received over the next five years. The components of the net investment in the direct financing leases were as follows:
December 31, | ||||||||
2004 | 2003 | |||||||
Total minimum lease payments |
$ | 1,492 | $ | 1,492 | ||||
Less: unearned income |
1,006 | 1,027 | ||||||
Net investment in direct financing leases |
$ | 486 | $ | 465 | ||||
76
December 31, | ||||||||
2004 | 2003 | |||||||
Other deferred debits and other assets |
||||||||
Intangible assets (a) |
$ | 804 | $ | 429 | ||||
Long-term prepaid state income taxes (b) |
201 | 208 | ||||||
Long-term emission allowances |
82 | 81 | ||||||
Chicago agreement (c) |
59 | 63 | ||||||
Chicago arbitration settlement (d) |
55 | 59 | ||||||
Other |
217 | 151 | ||||||
Total |
$ | 1,418 | $ | 991 | ||||
(a) | See Note 9 Intangible Assets for further information. | |
(b) | Long-term prepaid state income taxes relate to ComEds overpayment of state income taxes. The overpayment will be applied towards future state income tax payments. | |
(c) | On February 20, 2003, ComEd entered into separate agreements with Chicago and with Midwest Generation. Under the terms of the agreement with Chicago, ComEd will pay Chicago and other parties a total of $63 million over ten years and be relieved of a requirement, originally transferred to Midwest Generation upon the sale of ComEds fossil stations in 1999, to build a 500-MW generation facility. These payments were deferred and are amortized ratably over the life of the franchise agreement with Chicago through 2020. | |
(d) | On March 22, 1999, ComEd reached a settlement agreement with Chicago to end the arbitration proceeding between ComEd and Chicago regarding the January 1, 1992 franchise agreement and a supplement agreement. As part of the settlement agreement, ComEd paid $25 million each year from 1999 to 2002 to help ensure an adequate and reliable electric supply for Chicago. These payments were deferred and are amortized ratably over the life of the franchise agreement with Chicago through 2020. |
The following tables provide information about the regulatory assets and liabilities of ComEd and PECO as of December 31, 2004 and 2003.
December 31, | ||||||||
ComEd | 2004 | 2003 | ||||||
Regulatory assets (liabilities) |
||||||||
Nuclear decommissioning |
$ | (1,433 | ) | $ | (1,183 | ) | ||
Removal costs |
(1,011 | ) | (973 | ) | ||||
Reacquired debt costs and interest-rate swap settlements |
118 | 172 | ||||||
Recoverable transition costs |
87 | 131 | ||||||
Deferred income taxes |
4 | (61 | ) | |||||
Other |
31 | 23 | ||||||
Total |
$ | (2,204 | ) | $ | (1,891 | ) | ||
December 31, | ||||||||
PECO | 2004 | 2003 | ||||||
Regulatory assets (liabilities) |
||||||||
Competitive transition charges |
$ | 3,936 | $ | 4,303 | ||||
Deferred income taxes |
747 | 762 | ||||||
Non-pension postretirement benefits |
52 | 58 | ||||||
Reacquired debt costs |
42 | 49 | ||||||
MGP regulatory asset |
32 | 34 | ||||||
DOE facility decommissioning |
19 | 26 | ||||||
Nuclear decommissioning |
(46 | ) | (12 | ) | ||||
Other |
8 | 6 | ||||||
Long-term regulatory assets |
4,790 | 5,226 | ||||||
Deferred energy costs (current asset) |
71 | 81 | ||||||
Total |
$ | 4,861 | $ | 5,307 | ||||
Nuclear decommissioning. These amounts represent future nuclear decommissioning costs 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 ratepayers, will equal the associated future decommissioning costs at the time of decommissioning. See Note 14 Nuclear Decommissioning and Spent Fuel Storage.
77
Removal costs. These amounts represent funds received from ratepayers to cover the future removal of property, plant and equipment. See Note 7 Property, Plant and Equipment for further information.
Reacquired debt costs and interest-rate swap settlements. The reacquired debt costs represent premiums paid for the early extinguishment and refinancing of long-term debt, which is amortized over the life of the new debt issued to finance the debt redemption. Interest-rate swap settlements are deferred and amortized over the period that the related debt is outstanding.
Recoverable transition costs. These charges, related to amounts that would have been unrecoverable but for the recovery mechanism, such as the CTC allowed under the Illinois restructuring act, are amortized based on the expected return on equity of ComEd in any given year. ComEd expects to fully recover and amortize these charges by the end of 2006, but may increase or decrease its annual amortization to maintain its earnings within the earnings cap provisions established by Illinois legislation. See Note 5 Regulatory Issues for discussion of recoverable transition cost amortization.
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 by unregulated entities. Regulatory assets and liabilities associated with deferred income taxes, recorded in compliance with SFAS No. 71 and SFAS No. 109, include the deferred tax effects associated principally with liberalized depreciation accounted for in accordance with the rate-making policies of the ICC and PUC, as well as the revenue impacts thereon, and assume continued recovery of these costs in future rates. See Note 13 Income Taxes.
Competitive transition charges. These charges represent PECOs stranded costs that the PUC determined would be recoverable through regulated rates. These costs are related to the deregulation of the generation portion of the electric utility business in Pennsylvania. The CTC includes intangible transition property sold to PETT, an unconsolidated subsidiary of PECO, in connection with the securitization of PECOs stranded cost recovery. These charges are being amortized through December 31, 2010 with a return on the unamortized balance of 10.75%.
Non-pension postretirement benefits. These costs are the result of transitioning to SFAS No. 106 in 1993, which are recoverable in rates through 2012.
MGP regulatory asset. These costs represent estimated MGP-related environmental remediation costs at PECO which are recoverable through regulated gas rates.
DOE facility decommissioning. These costs represent PECOs share of recoverable decommissioning and decontamination costs of the DOE nuclear fuel enrichment facilities established by the National Energy Policy Act of 1992.
Deferred energy costs (current asset). These costs represent fuel costs recoverable under the purchase gas adjustment clause.
Recovery of regulatory assets. The regulatory assets related to deferred income taxes and non-pension post retirement benefits did not require a cash outlay of investor supplied funds; consequently, these costs are not earning a rate of return. Recovery of the regulatory assets for loss on reacquired debt, recoverable transition costs, MGP remediation costs and deferred energy costs is provided for through regulated revenue sources. Therefore, these costs are earning a rate of return.
The following tables provide additional information about liabilities recorded within Exelons Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2004 and 2003.
78
December 31, | ||||||||
2004 | 2003 | |||||||
Accrued expenses |
||||||||
Compensation-related accruals (a) |
$ | 346 | $ | 329 | ||||
Taxes accrued |
312 | 336 | ||||||
Interest accrued |
252 | 247 | ||||||
Severance accrued |
69 | 139 | ||||||
Other accrued expenses |
164 | 209 | ||||||
Total |
$ | 1,143 | $ | 1,260 | ||||
(a) | Primarily includes accrued payroll, bonuses and other incentives, vacation and benefits. |
The following tables provide additional information about accumulated other comprehensive income recorded within Exelons Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2004 and 2003.
December 31, | ||||||||
2004 | 2003 | |||||||
Accumulated other comprehensive loss |
||||||||
Minimum pension liability |
$ | (1,372 | ) | $ | (980 | ) | ||
Net unrealized loss on cash-flow hedges |
(138 | ) | (140 | ) | ||||
Unrealized gain on marketable securities |
61 | 10 | ||||||
Foreign currency translation adjustment |
3 | 1 | ||||||
Total accumulated other comprehensive loss |
$ | (1,446 | ) | $ | (1,109 | ) | ||
22. Segment Information
Exelon operates in two business segments: Energy Delivery (ComEd and PECO) and Generation. Exelon evaluates the performance of its business segments based on net income. Exelon has sold or unwound substantially all components of the businesses associated with the Enterprises segment. As a result, Enterprises is no longer reported as a segment. Enterprises is included within the other category in the table for all periods presented. Other consists of corporate operations, including Exelon Business Services Company, Enterprises and investments in synthetic fuel-producing facilities.
Energy Deliverys business consists of the purchase and regulated sale of electricity and distribution and transmission services by ComEd in northern Illinois, including the City of Chicago, and by PECO in southeastern Pennsylvania, including the City of Philadelphia, and the purchase and regulated sale of natural gas and distribution services by PECO in the Pennsylvania counties surrounding the City of Philadelphia. Generation consists principally of the electric generating facilities and wholesale energy marketing operations of Generation, the competitive retail sales business of Exelon Energy Company, Generations interest in Sithe and certain other generation projects.
See Note 2 Acquisitions and Dispositions for information regarding dispositions within the Generation segment and Enterprises in 2004 and 2003 and Note 3 Sithe and Note 25 Subsequent Events regarding the sale of Sithe in 2005. Also, see Note 26 Discontinued Operations for information regarding Exelons and Generations discontinued operations.
Effective January 1, 2004, Enterprises competitive retail sales business, Exelon Energy Company, was transferred to Generation. Segment information for 2003 and 2002 included in the table below has been adjusted to reflect Exelon Energy Company as part of the Generation segment.
79
An analysis and reconciliation of Exelons business segment information to the respective information in the consolidated financial statements are as follows:
Energy | Intersegment | |||||||||||||||||||
Delivery | Generation(a) | Other | Eliminations | Consolidated | ||||||||||||||||
Total revenues: |
||||||||||||||||||||
2004 |
$ | 10,290 | $ | 7,703 | $ | 670 | $ | (4,530 | ) | $ | 14,133 | |||||||||
2003 |
10,202 | 8,586 | 792 | (4,432 | ) | 15,148 | ||||||||||||||
2002 |
10,457 | 7,117 | 979 | (4,493 | ) | 14,060 | ||||||||||||||
Intersegment revenues: |
||||||||||||||||||||
2004 |
$ | 27 | $ | 3,841 | $ | 669 | $ | (4,537 | ) | $ | | |||||||||
2003 |
76 | 3,920 | 479 | (4,475 | ) | | ||||||||||||||
2002 |
76 | 4,000 | 430 | (4,506 | ) | | ||||||||||||||
Depreciation and
amortization: |
||||||||||||||||||||
2004 |
$ | 928 | $ | 286 | $ | 81 | $ | | $ | 1,295 | ||||||||||
2003 |
873 | 200 | 42 | | 1,115 | |||||||||||||||
2002 |
978 | 291 | 61 | | 1,330 | |||||||||||||||
Operating expenses: |
||||||||||||||||||||
2004 |
$ | 7,659 | $ | 6,664 | $ | 842 | $ | (4,531 | ) | $ | 10,634 | |||||||||
2003 |
7,579 | 8,689 | 904 | (4,433 | ) | 12,739 | ||||||||||||||
2002 |
7,597 | 6,630 | 1,046 | (4,493 | ) | 10,780 | ||||||||||||||
Interest expense: |
||||||||||||||||||||
2004 |
$ | 672 | $ | 103 | $ | 61 | $ | (8 | ) | $ | 828 | |||||||||
2003 |
747 | 88 | 47 | (9 | ) | 873 | ||||||||||||||
2002 |
854 | 78 | 74 | (51 | ) | 955 | ||||||||||||||
Income taxes: |
||||||||||||||||||||
2004 |
$ | 706 | $ | 401 | $ | (394 | ) | $ | | $ | 713 | |||||||||
2003 |
718 | (176 | ) | (153 | ) | | 389 | |||||||||||||
2002 |
765 | 225 | 10 | | 1,000 | |||||||||||||||
Income from continuing
operations |
||||||||||||||||||||
2004 |
$ | 1,128 | $ | 657 | $ | 85 | $ | | $ | 1,870 | ||||||||||
2003 |
1,170 | (238 | ) | (40 | ) | | 892 | |||||||||||||
2002 |
1,268 | 355 | 67 | | 1,690 | |||||||||||||||
Income (loss) from
discontinued operations |
||||||||||||||||||||
2004 |
$ | | $ | (16 | ) | $ | (13 | ) | $ | | $ | (29 | ) | |||||||
2003 |
| (21 | ) | (78 | ) | | (99 | ) | ||||||||||||
2002 |
| 10 | (30 | ) | | (20 | ) | |||||||||||||
Cumulative effect of
changes in accounting
principles: |
||||||||||||||||||||
2004 |
$ | | $ | 32 | $ | (9 | ) | $ | | $ | 23 | |||||||||
2003 |
5 | 108 | (1 | ) | | 112 | ||||||||||||||
2002 |
| 2 | (232 | ) | | (230 | ) | |||||||||||||
Net income (loss): |
||||||||||||||||||||
2004 |
$ | 1,128 | $ | 673 | $ | 63 | $ | | $ | 1,864 | ||||||||||
2003 |
1,175 | (151 | ) | (119 | ) | | 905 | |||||||||||||
2002 |
1,268 | 367 | (195 | ) | | 1,440 | ||||||||||||||
Capital expenditures: |
||||||||||||||||||||
2004 |
$ | 946 | $ | 960 | $ | 15 | $ | | $ | 1,921 | ||||||||||
2003 |
962 | 953 | 39 | | 1,954 | |||||||||||||||
2002 |
1,041 | 991 | 118 | | 2,150 | |||||||||||||||
Total assets: |
||||||||||||||||||||
2004 |
$ | 27,574 | $ | 16,438 | $ | (1,242 | ) | $ | | $ | 42,770 | |||||||||
2003 |
28,369 | 14,765 | (1,198 | ) | | 41,936 | ||||||||||||||
2002 |
27,036 | 11,059 | (226 | ) | | 37,869 | ||||||||||||||
80
(a) | Effective January 1, 2004, Enterprises competitive retail sales business, Exelon Energy Company, was transferred to Generation. Segment information for 2003 and 2002 included in the table above has been adjusted to reflect Exelon Energy Company as part of the Generation segment. |
23. Related Party Transactions
Exelons financial statements reflect related-party transactions with unconsolidated affiliates as reflected in the tables below. Exelon accounted for its investment in AmerGen as an equity investment prior to the acquisition of the remaining 50% interest in December 2003 and its investment in Sithe as an equity method investment prior to its consolidation as of March 31, 2004.
For the Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
Operating revenues from PETT |
$ | 10 | $ | | $ | | ||||||
Operating revenues from ComEd Transitional Funding Trust |
3 | | | |||||||||
Purchased power from AmerGen (a) |
| 382 | 273 | |||||||||
Interest income from AmerGen (b) |
| 1 | 2 | |||||||||
Interest expense to financing affiliates (c)
|
||||||||||||
ComEd Transitional Funding Trust |
85 | | | |||||||||
ComEd Financing II |
13 | | | |||||||||
ComEd Financing III |
13 | | | |||||||||
PETT |
235 | | | |||||||||
PECO Trust III |
6 | | | |||||||||
PECO Trust IV |
6 | 3 | | |||||||||
Interest expense to Sithe (d) |
| 9 | 2 | |||||||||
Services provided to AmerGen (e) |
| 111 | 70 | |||||||||
Services provided to Sithe (f) |
| | 1 | |||||||||
Services provided by Sithe (g) |
| | 13 | |||||||||
Equity in earnings (losses) from unconsolidated affiliates
|
||||||||||||
ComEd Funding LLC |
(20 | ) | | | ||||||||
ComEd Financing III |
1 | | | |||||||||
PETT |
(25 | ) | | | ||||||||
81
December 31, | ||||||||
2004 | 2003 | |||||||
Receivables from affiliates (current) |
||||||||
ComEd Transitional Funding Trust |
$ | 9 | $ | 9 | ||||
Investment in subsidiaries |
||||||||
ComEd Funding LLC |
36 | 56 | ||||||
ComEd Financing II |
10 | 11 | ||||||
ComEd Financing III |
6 | 6 | ||||||
PETT |
77 | 104 | ||||||
PECO Energy Capital Corp |
4 | 16 | ||||||
PECO Trust IV |
6 | 3 | ||||||
Receivables from affiliates (noncurrent) |
||||||||
ComEd Transitional Funding Trust |
10 | 9 | ||||||
PECO Trust IV |
| 1 | ||||||
Payables to affiliates (current) |
||||||||
ComEd Financing II |
6 | 6 | ||||||
ComEd Financing III |
4 | 4 | ||||||
PECO Energy Capital Corp |
| 1 | ||||||
PECO Trust III |
1 | 10 | ||||||
Long-term debt to financing trusts (including due within one year) |
||||||||
ComEd Transitional Funding Trust |
1,341 | 1,676 | ||||||
ComEd Financing II |
155 | 155 | ||||||
ComEd Financing III |
206 | 206 | ||||||
PETT |
3,456 | 3,849 | ||||||
PECO Trust III |
81 | 81 | ||||||
PECO Trust IV |
103 | 103 | ||||||
December 31, | ||||||||
2004 | 2003 | |||||||
Note receivable from Sithe (h) |
$ | | $ | 3 | ||||
Note payable to Sithe (d) |
| 90 | ||||||
Note receivable from EXRES SHC, Inc. (i) |
| 92 | ||||||
(a) | Prior to Generations purchase of British Energys 50% interest in AmerGen in December 2003, AmerGen was an unconsolidated affiliate of Exelon and Generation and was considered to be a related party of Exelon and Generation. Generation entered into PPAs dated June 26, 2003, December 18, 2001 and November 22, 1999 with AmerGen. Generation agreed to purchase 100% of the energy generated by Oyster Creek through April 9, 2009. Generation agreed to purchase from AmerGen all the energy from Unit No. 1 at Three Mile Island Nuclear Station from January 1, 2002 through December 31, 2014. Generation agreed to purchase all of the residual energy from Clinton not sold to Illinois Power through December 31, 2002. Currently, the residual output is approximately 31% of the total output of Clinton. See Note 2 Acquisitions and Dispositions for a description of Generations purchase of British Energys interest in AmerGen in December 2003. | |
(b) | In February 2002, Generation entered into an agreement to loan AmerGen up to $75 million at an interest rate equal to the 1-month London Interbank Offering Rate plus 2.25%. In July 2002, the limit of the loan agreement was increased to $100 million and the maturity date was extended to July 1, 2003. The principal balance of the loan was repaid in full in 2003. | |
(c) | In conjunction with the adoption of FIN 46, PECO Trust IV was deconsolidated from Exelons financial statements as of July 1, 2003. Additionally, in conjunction with the adoption of FIN 46-R, effective December 31, 2003, the financing trusts of ComEd, namely ComEd Financing II, ComEd Financing III, ComEd Funding LLC and ComEd Transitional Funding Trust, and the other financing trusts of PECO, namely PECO Trust III and PETT, were deconsolidated from Exelons financial statements. As a result, $5.3 billion and $6.1 billion of debt was recorded as a debt to financing trusts within the Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. Prior periods were not restated. | |
(d) | Under the terms of the agreement to acquire Exelon New England dated November 1, 2002, Generation issued a $534 million note to be paid in full on June 18, 2003 to Sithe. In June 2003, the principal of the note was increased $2 million, and the payment terms of the note were changed. During 2003, Generation paid $446 million on this note. In the first quarter of 2004, Generation paid $27 million prior to consolidation of Sithe in accordance with the provisions of FIN 46-R. The balance of the note, which bore interest at the rate of LIBOR plus 0.875%, was paid upon the completion of a series of transactions that resulted in Generations sale of its investment in Sithe on January 31, 2005. See Note 25 Subsequent Events regarding the sale of Generations investment in Sithe. |
82
(e) | Under a service agreement dated March 1, 1999, Generation provides AmerGen with certain operation and support services to the nuclear facilities owned by AmerGen. Generation is compensated for these services at cost. | |
(f) | Under a service agreement dated December 18, 2000, Generation provides certain engineering and environmental services for fossil facilities owned by Sithe and for certain developmental projects. Generation is compensated for these services at cost. | |
(g) | Under a service agreement dated December 18, 2000, Sithe provides Generation certain fuel and project development services. Sithe is compensated for these services at cost. Under a service agreement dated November 1, 2002, Sithe provides Generation certain transition services related to the transition of the Exelon New England asset acquisition, which occurred in November 2002. | |
(h) | In December 2003, Sithe received letter of credit proceeds of $3 million, which Generation was billed on behalf of Sithe. | |
(i) | In connection with a series of transactions in November 2003 that restructured the ownership of Sithe (see Note 3 Sithe for additional information), Exelon received a $92 million note receivable from EXRES SHC, Inc, which holds the common stock of Sithe. Exelon owns 50% of EXRES SHC, Inc. and consolidated its investment pursuant to FIN 46-R effective March 31, 2004. Prior to the consolidation of EXRES SHC, Inc. in connection with FIN 46-R, EXRES SHC, Inc. was an unconsolidated affiliate of Exelon and was considered to be a related party to Exelon. This note was cancelled in connection with the purchase of Sithe International. See Note 3 Sithe for additional information. |
24. Quarterly Data (Unaudited)
The data shown below include all reclassifications which Exelon considers necessary for a fair presentation of such amounts:
Income (Loss) Before the | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Operating | Cumulative Effect of Changes | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Operating Revenues | Income (Loss) | in Accounting Principles | Net Income (Loss) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2004 (a) | 2003 (b) | 2004 | 2003 | 2004 | 2003 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Quarter ended: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
March 31(c) |
$ | 3,635 | $ | 3,855 | $ | 771 | $ | 810 | $ | 380 | $ | 249 | $ | 412 | $ | 361 | ||||||||||||||||
June 30 (d) |
3,438 | 3,536 | 853 | 830 | 521 | 372 | 521 | 372 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
September 30 |
3,748 | 4,288 | 1,198 | 20 | 577 | (102 | ) | 568 | (102 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
December 31 (e) |
3,312 | 3,469 | 677 | 749 | 363 | 274 | 363 | 274 |
(a) | Operating income has been adjusted to reflect a reclassification from operating and maintenance expense to other, net of $30 million and $28 million, for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and June 30, 2004, respectively, for comparison purposes related to decommissioning accounting presentation. These reclassifications had no impact on net income as reported. | |
(b) | Operating income has been adjusted to reflect a reclassification from operating and maintenance expense to other, net of $31 million, $22 million, $23 million and $3 million for the three months ended March 31, 2003, June 30, 2003, September 30, 2003 and December 31, 2003 respectively, for comparison purposes related to decommissioning accounting presentation. These reclassifications had no impact on net income as reported. | |
(c) | Operating income, income before the cumulative effect of changes in accounting principles and net income for the three months ended March 31, 2004 have been adjusted to reflect a reduction in net periodic postretirement benefit cost of $6 million due to the adoption of FSP FAS 106-2. See Note 1 Significant Accounting Policies for additional information. | |
(d) | During the second quarter of 2004, Enterprises sold its Chicago business of Thermal and recorded a gain of $45 million (before income taxes). The results of Thermal have been classified as discontinued operations within the Consolidated Statements of Income. | |
(e) | During the fourth quarter of 2003, Enterprises recorded impairment charges of $14 million (before income taxes) related to the classification of the assets and liabilities of Exelon Services as held for sale. The results of Exelon Services have been classified as discontinued operations within the Consolidated Statements of Income. |
83
Earnings (Loss) per Basic | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Average Basic | Share Before the Cumulative | Net Income | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Shares Outstanding | Effect of Changes | (Loss) per | ||||||||||||||||||||||
(in millions) | in Accounting Principles | Basic Share | ||||||||||||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2004 | 2003 | 2004 | 2003 | |||||||||||||||||||
Quarter ended: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
March 31(a) |
659 | 648 | $ | 0.58 | $ | 0.39 | $ | 0.63 | $ | 0.57 | ||||||||||||||
June 30 |
661 | 650 | 0.79 | 0.57 | 0.79 | 0.57 | ||||||||||||||||||
September 30 |
661 | 652 | 0.87 | (0.16 | ) | 0.86 | (0.16 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
December 31 |
664 | 655 | 0.55 | 0.42 | 0.55 | 0.42 | ||||||||||||||||||
(a) | Earnings per basic share before the cumulative effect of changes in accounting principles and net income per basic share for the three months ended March 31, 2004 have been increased by $0.01 to reflect a reduction in net periodic postretirement benefit cost due to the adoption of FSP FAS 106-2. See Note 1 Significant Accounting Policies for additional information. |
Earnings (Loss) per Diluted | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Average Diluted | Share Before the Cumulative | Net Income | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Shares Outstanding | Effect of Changes | (Loss) per | ||||||||||||||||||||||
(in millions) | in Accounting Principles | Diluted Share | ||||||||||||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2004 | 2003 | 2004 | 2003 | |||||||||||||||||||
Quarter ended: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
March 31(a) |
665 | 652 | $ | 0.56 | $ | 0.38 | $ | 0.62 | $ | 0.55 | ||||||||||||||
June 30 |
667 | 655 | 0.78 | 0.57 | 0.78 | 0.57 | ||||||||||||||||||
September 30 |
669 | 652 | 0.86 | (0.16 | ) | 0.85 | (0.16 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
December 31 |
672 | 661 | 0.54 | 0.41 | 0.54 | 0.41 | ||||||||||||||||||
(a) | Earnings per diluted share before the cumulative effect of changes in accounting principles and net income per diluted share for the three months ended March 31, 2004 have been increased by $0.01 to reflect a reduction in net periodic postretirement benefit cost due to the adoption of FSP FAS 106-2. See Note 1 Significant Accounting Policies for additional information. |
The following table presents the New York Stock Exchange Composite Common Stock Prices and dividends by quarter on a per share basis:
2004 | 2003 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fourth | Third | Second | First | Fourth | Third | Second | First | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Quarter | Quarter | Quarter | Quarter | Quarter | Quarter | Quarter | Quarter | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
High price |
$ | 44.90 | $ | 37.90 | $ | 34.89 | $ | 34.43 | $ | 33.31 | $ | 31.98 | $ | 30.46 | $ | 27.60 | ||||||||||||||||
Low price |
36.73 | 32.69 | 30.92 | 32.18 | 30.48 | 27.09 | 24.83 | 23.04 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Close |
44.07 | 36.69 | 33.29 | 34.43 | 33.18 | 31.75 | 29.91 | 25.21 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dividends |
0.400 | 0.305 | 0.275 | 0.275 | 0.250 | 0.250 | 0.230 | 0.230 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
25. Subsequent Events
ComEd
In the first quarter 2005, ComEd received final approval of the income tax refund described in Note 20 Commitments and Contingencies; however the calculation of the claim, including interest has not been finalized. As a portion of the refund will be recorded against goodwill under the provisions of EITF Issue No. 93-7, Uncertainties Related to Income Taxes in a Purchase Business Combination, the net result is not anticipated to have a material impact on Exelons results of operations.
Generation
On January 31, 2005, subsidiaries of Generation completed a series of transactions that resulted in Generations sale of its investment in Sithe. Specifically, subsidiaries of Generation closed on the acquisition of Reservoirs 50% interest in Sithe and the sale of 100% of Sithe to Dynegy. Prior to closing on the sale to Dynegy, subsidiaries of Generation received from Sithe approximately $65 million in cash distributions. As a result of the sale, Exelon will deconsolidate from its balance sheet approximately $820 million of debt and will be released from approximately $125 million of credit support associated with the Independence project.
84
Additionally, Exelon issued certain guarantees to Dynegy that will be taken into account in the final determination of the gain or loss on the sale. See further information regarding Generations investment in Sithe at Note 3 Sithe.
26. Discontinued Operations
As discussed in Note 25 Subsequent Events, on January 31, 2005, subsidiaries of Generation completed a series of transactions that resulted in Generations sale of its investment in Sithe. In addition, during 2004 and 2003, Exelon sold or unwound substantially all components of Enterprises and AllEnergy Gas & Electric Marketing LLC (AllEnergy), a business within Exelon Energy. Significant operating entities of Enterprises that have been reported in discontinued operations include Exelon Thermal Holdings, Inc., Exelon Services, Inc., and F&M Holdings Company LLC. As a result, the results of operations and any gain or loss on the sale of qualifying components of Enterprises have been presented as discontinued operations for 2004, 2003 and 2002 within Exelons Consolidated Statements of Income. The following tables summarize the results of operations of these entities:
2004 | Sithe (a) | Enterprises | AllEnergy | Total | ||||||||||||
Total operating revenues |
$ | 227 | $ | 154 | $ | 8 | $ | 389 | ||||||||
Operating income (loss) |
(7 | ) | (57 | ) | (2 | ) | (66 | ) | ||||||||
Income (loss) before income taxes and minority interest |
(58 | ) | (5 | ) | (2 | ) | (65 | ) | ||||||||
(a) | Includes Sithes results of operations from April 1, 2004 through December 31, 2004. See Note 25 Subsequent Events for further information regarding the sale of Sithe. |
2003 | Enterprises (a) | AllEnergy | Total | |||||||||
Total operating revenues |
$ | 533 | $ | 174 | $ | 707 | ||||||
Operating income (loss) |
(97 | ) | (35 | ) | (132 | ) | ||||||
Income (loss) before income taxes and minority interest |
(123 | ) | (35 | ) | (158 | ) | ||||||
2002 | Enterprises (a) | AllEnergy | Total | |||||||||
Total operating revenues |
$ | 703 | $ | 203 | $ | 906 | ||||||
Operating income (loss) |
(1 | ) | 20 | 19 | ||||||||
Income (loss) before income taxes and minority interest |
(39 | ) | 18 | (21 | ) | |||||||
As discussed in Note 2 Acquisitions and Dispositions, Exelon sold the electric construction and services, underground and telecom businesses of InfraSource in 2003 and sold its indirect wholly owned subsidiary Boston Generating in 2004. Because Exelon maintains significant continuing involvement with these entities, they have not been classified as discontinued operations within Exelons Consolidated Statements of Income.
85
Exhibit 99.4
Selected Financial Data
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 Generations Consolidated Financial Statements and Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations filed as exhibit 99.5 to this current report on Form 8-K.
The consolidated financial statements of Generation as of December 31, 2000 and for the year then ended present the financial position, results of operations and net cash flows of the generation-related business of Exelon prior to its corporate restructuring on January 1, 2001. The results of operations for Exelon Energy Company are not included in periods prior to 2004.
For the Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||
(in millions) | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | |||||||||||||||
Statement of Income data: |
||||||||||||||||||||
Operating revenues |
$ | 7,703 | $ | 8,135 | $ | 6,858 | $ | 6,826 | $ | 3,274 | ||||||||||
Operating income (loss) |
1,039 | (115 | ) | 509 | 872 | 441 | ||||||||||||||
Income (loss) from continuing operations |
$ | 1,052 | $ | (416 | ) | $ | 607 | $ | 839 | $ | 420 | |||||||||
Loss from discontinued operations |
(16 | ) | | | | | ||||||||||||||
Income (loss) before cumulative effect
of changes in accounting principles |
641 | (241 | ) | 387 | 512 | 260 | ||||||||||||||
Cumulative effect of changes in
accounting principles (net of income taxes) |
32 | 108 | 13 | 12 | | |||||||||||||||
Net income (loss) |
$ | 673 | $ | (133 | ) | $ | 400 | $ | 524 | $ | 260 | |||||||||
December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||
(in millions) | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | |||||||||||||||
Balance Sheet data: |
||||||||||||||||||||
Current assets |
$ | 2,321 | $ | 2,438 | $ | 1,805 | $ | 1,435 | $ | 1,793 | ||||||||||
Property, plant and equipment, net |
7,536 | 7,106 | 4,698 | 2,003 | 1,727 | |||||||||||||||
Deferred debits and other assets |
6,581 | 5,105 | 4,402 | 4,700 | 4,742 | |||||||||||||||
Total assets |
$ | 16,438 | $ | 14,649 | $ | 10,905 | $ | 8,138 | $ | 8,262 | ||||||||||
Current liabilities |
$ | 2,416 | $ | 3,553 | $ | 2,594 | $ | 1,097 | $ | 2,176 | ||||||||||
Long-term debt |
2,583 | 1,649 | 2,132 | 1,021 | 205 | |||||||||||||||
Deferred credits and other liabilities |
8,356 | 6,488 | 3,226 | 3,212 | 3,271 | |||||||||||||||
Minority interest |
44 | 3 | 54 | | | |||||||||||||||
Members equity |
3,039 | 2,956 | 2,899 | 2,808 | 2,610 | |||||||||||||||
Total liabilities and members equity |
$ | 16,438 | $ | 14,649 | $ | 10,905 | $ | 8,138 | $ | 8,262 | ||||||||||
Exhibit 99.5
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL
CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATION
Generation
Executive Overview
As of December 31, 2004, Generation consisted of its owned and contracted for electric generating facilities and energy marketing operations, a 50% interest in Sithe, 49.5% interests in two power stations in Mexico, and the competitive retail sales business of Exelon Energy Company. On January 31, 2005, Generation purchased the remaining 50% interest of Sithe and immediately sold its entire interest in Sithe.
Effective January 1, 2004, Enterprises competitive retail sales business, Exelon Energy Company, became part of Generation. Generations results of operations have not been adjusted to reflect Exelon Energy Company as a part of Generation for 2003 or 2002. Exelon Energy Companys results for the years ended December 31, 2003, and 2002 were as follows:
Year ended | Year ended | |||||||
December 31, 2003 | December 31, 2002 | |||||||
Total revenues |
$ | 660 | $ | 494 | ||||
Intersegment revenues |
4 | 8 | ||||||
Income (loss) from continuing operations
before income taxes and minority interest |
6 | (24 | ) | |||||
Discontinued operations |
(21 | ) | 10 | |||||
Income taxes (benefit) |
3 | 8 | ||||||
Net income (loss) |
(18 | ) | (33 | ) | ||||
Generation is one of the largest competitive electric generation companies in the United States, as measured by owned and controlled MWs. Generation combines its large generation fleet with an experienced wholesale and retail power marketing operation. Generation owns generation assets in the Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, Midwest and Texas regions with a net capacity of 25,756 MWs, including 16,751 MWs of nuclear capacity, and controls another 8,701 MWs of capacity in the Midwest, Southeast and South Central regions through long-term contracts.
In addition to its owned generating facilities, Generation, through its investment in Sithe International, owns 49.5% interests in two Mexican business trusts that own the Termoeléctrica del Golfo (TEG) and Termoeléctrica Peñoles (TEP) power stations, two 230 MW petcoke-fired generating facilities in Tamuín, Mexico.
Generations wholesale marketing unit, Power Team, a major wholesale marketer of energy, uses Generations energy generation portfolio, transmission rights and expertise to ensure delivery of energy to Generations wholesale customers under long-term and short-term contracts, including the energy, or load, requirements of ComEd and PECO. Power Team markets any remaining energy in the wholesale bilateral and spot markets.
2004 has been a year of operating accomplishments and execution of Generations overall investment strategy. Generation has focused on living up to its commitments while pursuing greater productivity, quality and innovation. 2004 highlights included the following:
Financial Results. Generations net income was $673 million in 2004, compared to a $133 million net loss in 2003. The improvement in Generations financial results is primarily attributable to the acquisition of the remaining 50% interest of AmerGen, the sale of Boston
1
Generating, reductions in costs associated with The Exelon Way and an increase in revenue net of purchased power and fuel (revenue net fuel) of over $650 million in 2004 compared to 2003. Also, Generation incurred a $945 million impairment charge related to the long-lived assets of Boston Generating in 2003. The increase in revenue net fuel is attributable to a reduction in realized purchased power and fuel costs due to Generations hedging program and the inclusion of AmerGen and Exelon Energy in the 2004 results from operations. The increase in net income was partially offset by an increase in operating and maintenance expense associated with the consolidation of AmerGen and Exelon Energy in 2004. Also included in Generations financial results in 2004 is $32 million of net income resulting from the cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle for the adoption of FIN 46-R. Net losses of $16 million from Sithe and AllEnergy, a subsidiary of Exelon Energy, are included in Generations net income classified as discontinued operations. In 2003, Generation also recorded $108 million of net income resulting from the cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle upon the adoption of a new accounting standard that has a significant impact on how Generation accounts for its nuclear decommissioning obligations.
Investment and Divestiture Activities. On May 25, 2004, Generation completed the sale, transfer and assignment of ownership of its indirect wholly owned subsidiary Boston Generating, which owns directly or indirectly the companies that own Mystic 4-7, Mystic 8 and 9 and Fore River generating facilities, to a special purpose entity owned by the lenders under Boston Generatings $1.25 billion credit facility. The resulting gain of $85 million ($52 million after-tax) was recorded within Generations results of operations during the second quarter of 2004. On September 1, 2004, Generation completed the transfer of plant operations and power marketing arrangements to the lenders special purpose entity and its contractors under Boston Generatings credit facility. In 2003, Generation recorded a pre-tax impairment charge of $945 million related to the long-lived assets of Boston Generating.
On September 29, 2004, Generation exercised its call option and entered into an agreement to acquire Reservoirs 50% interest in Sithe for $97 million, and on November 1, 2004, Generation entered into an agreement to sell its anticipated 100% interest in Sithe to Dynegy, Inc. for $135 million in cash. On January 31, 2005, Generation closed on these two transactions and exited its investment in Sithe. The sale did not include Sithe International, which was sold to a subsidiary of Generation on October 13, 2004. Generation acquired Sithe International in exchange for its $92 million note receivable from Sithe in a non-cash transaction. Effective January 26, 2005, Sithe Internationals name was changed to Tamuin International Inc.
Financing Activities. Generation met its capital resource commitments primarily through internally generated cash. When necessary, Generation obtains funds from external sources, including the capital markets, the intercompany money pool and through bank borrowings. During 2004, Generation issued $157 million of pollution control bonds, decreased borrowings in the intercompany money pool by $133 million, net of $29 million of borrowings assumed as a result of the transfer of Exelon Energy, and distributed $505 million of dividends to Exelon. On December 31, 2004, Generation had $283 million in outstanding money pool loans to fund operations.
Operational Achievements. Generation focused on the core fundamentals of providing efficient generation to its customers. Generations nuclear fleet achieved a 93.5% capacity factor in 2004 compared to 93.4% in 2003 while reducing the production costs of nuclear generation to 1.24 cents per kilowatt-hour. Generations nuclear fleets production costs continue to be in the top quartile of the nuclear industry. Other operational achievements include improved commercial availability and improved safety metrics at Generations fossil fuel plants in 2004.
2
Outlook for 2005 and Beyond. On December 20, 2004, Exelon entered into a merger agreement with PSEG, a holding company for an electric and gas utility company primarily located and serving customers in New Jersey. The transaction, which has been unanimously approved by the Boards of Directors of both companies, is expected to close in the first quarter of 2006. However, the transaction is contingent upon, among other things, the approval by shareholders of PSEG of the merger and shareholders of Exelon of the shares to be issued in the merger, antitrust clearance and a number of regulatory approvals and reviews. Exelon and Generation are in the process of evaluating the impacts of the merger.
In the near term, Generations financial results can be affected by a number of factors, including wholesale market prices, weather conditions, the continued successful implementation of operational improvement initiatives and Generations ability to generate electricity at low costs. Generation believes that Power Teams hedging program reduces the short-term exposure to the variability in market prices.
Generations results will be affected by long-term changes in the market prices of power and fuel caused by supply/demand changes, the continued restructuring of the U.S. electric industry at both the Federal and state levels and various environmental regulations. Generating companies must also work with regulators to ensure that a viable capacity market exists to ensure that new units will be constructed in a timely manner to meet the growing demand for power. Generation will continue to be an active participant in these policy debates, while continuing to focus on improving operations and controlling costs and providing a fair return to its investors. To meet Exelons financial goals, Generations nuclear units must continue their superior performance while keeping costs under control despite inflationary pressures and increasing security costs caused by external events.
3
Results of Operations
Year Ended December 31, 2004 Compared To Year Ended
December 31, 2003
Favorable | |||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | (Unfavorable) | |||||||||||
OPERATING
REVENUES |
$ | 7,703 | $ | 8,135 | $ | (432 | ) | ||||||
OPERATING EXPENSES |
|||||||||||||
Purchased power |
2,307 | 3,587 | 1,280 | ||||||||||
Fuel |
1,704 | 1,533 | (171 | ) | |||||||||
Operating and maintenance |
2,201 | 1,866 | (335 | ) | |||||||||
Impairment of Boston Generating, LLC long-lived assets |
| 945 | 945 | ||||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
286 | 199 | (87 | ) | |||||||||
Taxes other than income |
166 | 120 | (46 | ) | |||||||||
Total operating expense |
6,664 | 8,250 | 1,586 | ||||||||||
OPERATING INCOME (LOSS) |
1,039 | (115 | ) | 1,154 | |||||||||
OTHER INCOME AND DEDUCTIONS |
|||||||||||||
Interest expense |
(103 | ) | (88 | ) | (15 | ) | |||||||
Equity in earnings (losses) of unconsolidated affiliates |
(14 | ) | 49 | (63 | ) | ||||||||
Other, net |
130 | (262 | ) | 392 | |||||||||
Total other income and deductions |
13 | (301 | ) | 314 | |||||||||
INCOME (LOSS) FROM CONTINUING OPERATIONS BEFORE
INCOME TAXES AND MINORITY INTEREST |
1,052 | (416 | ) | 1,468 | |||||||||
INCOME TAXES |
401 | (179 | ) | (580 | ) | ||||||||
INCOME (LOSS) FROM CONTINUING OPERATIONS
BEFORE MINORITY INTEREST |
651 | (237 | ) | 888 | |||||||||
MINORITY INTEREST |
6 | (4 | ) | 10 | |||||||||
INCOME FROM CONTINUING OPERATIONS |
657 | (241 | ) | 898 | |||||||||
DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS (NOTE 21) |
|||||||||||||
Loss from discontinued operations |
(45 | ) | | (45 | ) | ||||||||
Income taxes |
(29 | ) | | (29 | ) | ||||||||
Loss from discontinued operations
|
(16 | ) | | (16 | ) | ||||||||
INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF
CHANGES IN ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES |
641 | (241 | ) | 882 | |||||||||
CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF CHANGES IN ACCOUNTING
PRINCIPLES (net of income taxes) |
32 | 108 | (76 | ) | |||||||||
NET INCOME (LOSS) |
$ | 673 | $ | (133 | ) | $ | 806 | ||||||
4
Operating Revenues
Operating revenues decreased in 2004 as compared to 2003, primarily as a result of the adoption of EITF 03-11. The adoption of EITF 03-11 resulted in a net decrease in revenues of $980 million in 2004 as compared with the prior year. Generations sales in 2004 and 2003 were as follows:
Revenue (in millions) | 2004 | 2003 | Variance | % Change | |||||||||||||||||||||
Electric sales to affiliates (a) |
$ | 3,749 | $ | 4,036 | $ | (287 | ) | (7.1 | %) | ||||||||||||||||
Wholesale and retail electric sales(b) |
3,227 | 3,861 | (634 | ) | (16.4 | %) | |||||||||||||||||||
Total energy sales revenue |
6,976 | 7,897 | (921 | ) | (11.7 | %) | |||||||||||||||||||
Retail gas sales |
448 | | 448 | 100.0 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
Trading portfolio |
| 1 | (1 | ) | (100.0 | %) | |||||||||||||||||||
Other revenue (c) |
279 | 237 | 42 | 17.7 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
Total revenue |
$ | 7,703 | $ | 8,135 | $ | (432 | ) | (5.3 | %) | ||||||||||||||||
Sales (in GWhs) | 2004 | 2003 | Variance | % Change | |||||||||||||||||||||
Sales to affiliates (a) |
110,465 | 117,405 | (6,940 | ) | (5.9 | %) | |||||||||||||||||||
Wholesale and retail electric sales(b) |
92,134 | 107,267 | (15,133 | ) | (14.1 | %) | |||||||||||||||||||
Total sales |
202,599 | 224,672 | (22,073 | ) | (9.8 | %) | |||||||||||||||||||
(a) | Includes sales to Exelon Energy Company during 2003. As of January 1, 2004, Exelon Energy Company became part of Generation and is presented as retail electric sales. | |
(b) | Includes retail electric sales of Exelon Energy Company in 2004. | |
(c) | Includes sales related to tolling agreements and fossil fuel sales. | |
Trading volumes of 24,001 GWhs and 32,584 GWhs for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively, are not included in the table above. The decrease in trading volume is a result of reduced volumetric and VAR trading limits in 2004, which are set by the Exelon Risk Management Committee and approved by the Board of Directors.
Electric Sales to Affiliates. Revenue from sales to affiliates decreased primarily as a result of the transfer of Exelon Energy Company to Generation effective January 1, 2004. Sales to Exelon Energy Company are no longer reported as affiliate revenue by Generation. Revenue from sales to Exelon Energy Company for the year ended December 31, 2003 was $209 million.
Sales to Energy Delivery declined $76 million in 2004 as compared to the prior year, which further contributed to the decrease in sales to affiliates. The lower sales to Energy Delivery were primarily driven by cooler than normal summer weather and lower average transfer prices in 2004 as compared to the prior year.
Wholesale and Retail Electric Sales. The changes in Generations wholesale and retail electric sales for the year ended December 31, 2004 compared to the same period in 2003, consisted of the following:
Variance | ||||||
Effects of EITF 03-11 adoption(a) |
$ | (966 | ) | |||
Sale of Boston Generating |
(370 | ) | ||||
Addition of Exelon Energy Company and AmerGen operations |
424 | |||||
Other operations |
278 | |||||
Decrease in wholesale and retail electric sales | $ | (634 | ) | |||
(a) Does not include $14 million of EITF 03-11 reclassifications related to fuel sales that are included in other revenues. |
5
As previously described, the adoption of EITF 03-11 on January 1, 2004 resulted in the netting of certain revenues and the associated purchased power and fuel expense in 2004. The sale of Boston Generating in May 2004 resulted in less revenue from this entity in 2004 compared to the prior year. The acquisition of Exelon Energy and AmerGen resulted in increased market and retail electric sales of approximately $424 million compared to the prior year.
The remaining increase in wholesale and retail electric sales was primarily due to higher volumes sold to the market at overall higher prices. The increase in market prices was primarily driven by higher coal prices in the Midwest region and higher oil and gas prices in the Mid-Atlantic region.
Retail Gas Sales. Retail gas sales increased $448 million as a result of the transfer of Exelon Energy Company to Generation as of January 1, 2004.
Other. The remaining increase in other revenue includes increased sales from tolling agreements offset by a decrease in fossil fuel revenue.
Purchased Power and Fuel Expense
Generations supply of sales in 2004 and 2003, excluding the trading portfolio, was as follows:
Supply of Sales (in GWhs) | 2004 | 2003 | % Change | |||||||||
Nuclear generation (a) |
136,621 | 117,502 | 16.3 | % | ||||||||
Purchases non-trading portfolio (b) |
48,968 | 82,860 | (40.9 | %) | ||||||||
Fossil and hydroelectric generation (c, d) |
17,010 | 24,310 | (30.0 | %) | ||||||||
Total supply |
202,599 | 224,672 | (9.8 | %) | ||||||||
(a) | Excludes AmerGen for 2003. AmerGen generated 20,135 GWhs during the year ended December 31, 2004. | |
(b) | Sales in 2004 do not include 25,464 GWhs that were netted with purchased power GWhs as a result of the reclassification of certain hedging activities in accordance with EITF 03-11. Includes PPAs with AmerGen, which represented 12,667 GWhs in 2003. | |
(c) | Fossil and hydroelectric supply mix changed as a result of decreased fossil fuel generation due to the sale of Boston Generating in May 2004. | |
(d) | Excludes Sithe and Generations investment in TEG and TEP. |
The changes in Generations purchased power and fuel expense for the year ended December 31, 2004 compared to the same period in 2003 consisted of the following:
Variance | ||||
Effects of the adoption of EITF 03-11 |
$ | (980 | ) | |
Sale of Boston Generating |
(290 | ) | ||
Midwest Generation |
(122 | ) | ||
Mark-to-market adjustments on hedging activity |
(14 | ) | ||
Price |
(13 | ) | ||
Volume |
267 | |||
Addition of AmerGen and Exelon Energy Company |
124 | |||
Other |
(81 | ) | ||
Decrease in
purchased power and fuel expense |
$ | (1,109 | ) | |
Adoption of EITF 03-11. The adoption of EITF 03-11 resulted in a decrease in purchased power and fuel expense of $980 million.
6
Sale of Boston Generating. The decrease in fuel and purchased power expense for Boston Generating is due primarily to the sale of the business in May 2004.
Midwest Generation. The volume of purchased power acquired from Midwest Generation declined in 2004 as a result of Generation exercising its option to reduce the capacity purchased from Midwest Generation, as announced in 2003.
Hedging Activity. Mark-to-market losses on hedging activities at Generation were $2 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 compared to losses of $16 million for 2003. Hedging activities in 2004 relating to Boston Generating operations accounted for a gain of $4 million and hedging activities relating to other Generation operations in 2004 accounted for a loss of $6 million.
Price. The decrease reflects the forward hedging of fuel at lower costs than 2003 realized costs.
Volume. Generation experienced increases in purchased power and fuel expense due to increased market and retail electric sales throughout its various sales regions.
Addition of AmerGen and Exelon Energy Company. Due to the transfer of Exelon Energy Company to Generation effective January 1, 2004, fuel expense increased $468 million as fuel purchases made by Exelon Energy Company did not previously affect Generations results. As a result of Generations acquisition of the remaining 50% interest in AmerGen in December 2003, purchased power decreased $379 million in 2004. In prior periods, Generation reported energy purchased from AmerGen as purchased power expense. The decrease in purchase power from the acquisition of the remaining 50% of AmerGen was partially offset by an increase of $35 million in AmerGens nuclear fuel expense.
Other. Other decreases in purchased power and fuel expense were primarily due to lower transmission expense resulting from reduced inter-region transmission charges, primarily associated with ComEds integration into PJM.
Generations average margins per MWh sold for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 were as follows:
($/MWh) | 2004 | 2003 | % Change | |||||||||
Average electric revenue |
||||||||||||
Electric sales to affiliates (a) |
$ | 33.94 | $ | 34.38 | (1.3 | %) | ||||||
Wholesale and retail electric sales (b) |
35.03 | 35.99 | (2.7 | %) | ||||||||
Total excluding the trading portfolio |
34.43 | 35.15 | (2.0 | %) | ||||||||
Average electric supply cost
excluding the trading portfolio (c) |
$ | 17.60 | $ | 22.79 | (22.8 | %) | ||||||
Average margin excluding the trading portfolio |
$ | 16.83 | $ | 12.36 | 36.2 | % | ||||||
(a) | Includes sales to Exelon Energy Company during 2003. As of January 1, 2004, Exelon Energy Company became part of Generation and is presented as retail sales. | |
(b) | Includes retail electric sales of Exelon Energy Company in 2004. | |
(c) | Average electric supply cost includes purchased power and fuel costs associated with electric sales and PPAs with AmerGen in 2003. Average electric supply cost does not include purchased power and fuel cost associated with retail gas sales. |
Operating and Maintenance
The changes in operating and maintenance expense for the year ended December 31, 2004 compared to the same period in 2003 consisted of the following:
7
Variance | ||||
Addition of AmerGen and Exelon Energy Company |
$ | 345 | ||
Refueling outage costs (a) |
50 | |||
Decommissioning-related costs (b) |
50 | |||
Pension, payroll and benefit costs, primarily associated with The Exelon Way |
(84 | ) | ||
DOE Settlement (c) |
(52 | ) | ||
Sale of Boston Generating |
(12 | ) | ||
Other |
38 | |||
Increase in operating and maintenance expense |
$ | 335 | ||
(a) | Includes refueling outage expense of $43 million at AmerGen not included in 2003. | |
(b) | Includes $40 million due to AmerGen asset retirement obligation accretion not included in 2003. | |
(c) | See Note 13 of Generations Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussions of the spent nuclear fuel storage settlement agreement with the DOE. |
The increase in operating and maintenance expense is primarily due to the inclusion of AmerGen and Exelon Energy Company in Generations consolidated results for 2004. Decommissioning- related costs increased primarily due to the inclusion of AmerGen in 2004 compared to the prior year. Accretion expense includes accretion of the asset retirement obligation and adjustments to offset the earnings impacts of certain decommissioning-related activities, including revenues earned from ComEd and PECO, income taxes and depreciation of the asset retirement cost asset (ARC) to zero. The increase in operating and maintenance expense was partially offset with reductions in payroll-related costs due to the implementation of the programs associated with The Exelon Way, the sale of Boston Generating in May 2004 and the settlement with the DOE to reimburse Generation for costs associated with storage of spent nuclear fuel.
Nuclear fleet operating data and purchased power costs data for the year ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 were as follows:
2004 | 2003 | |||||||
Nuclear fleet capacity factor (a) |
93.5 | % | 93.4 | % | ||||
Nuclear fleet production cost per MWh (a) |
$ | 12.43 | $ | 12.53 | ||||
Average purchased power cost for wholesale operations per MWh (b) |
$ | 47.11 | $ | 43.29 | ||||
(a) | Includes AmerGen and excludes Salem, which is operated by PSEG Nuclear. | |
(b) | Includes PPAs with AmerGen in 2003. |
The higher nuclear capacity factor is primarily due to ten fewer unplanned outages which offset the impact of one additional planned refuel outage. The lower production cost in 2004 as compared to 2003 is primarily due to lower fuel costs and the impact of the spent fuel storage cost settlement agreement with the DOE which offset the added cost for one additional planned refuel outage and costs associated with the Dresden generator repairs during outages in the fourth quarter of 2004.
In 2004 as compared to 2003, the Quad Cities Units intermittently operated at pre-Extended Power Uprate (EPU) generation levels due to performance issues with their steam dryers. Generation plans additional expenditures to ensure safe and reliable operations at the EPU output levels by mid-2005.
Impairment of the Long-Lived Assets of Boston Generating
In connection with the decision to transition out of the ownership of Boston Generating during the third quarter of 2003, Generation recorded a long-lived asset impairment charge of $945 million ($573 million net of income taxes). See Note 2 of Generations Notes to
8
Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion of the sale of Generations ownership interest in Boston Generating.
Depreciation and Amortization
The increase in depreciation and amortization expense in 2004 as compared to 2003 was primarily due to the immediate expensing of an asset retirement cost (ARC), totaling $49 million, recorded in 2004 for which no useful life remains. The ARC was originally recorded in accordance with SFAS No. 143, which requires the establishment of an asset to offset the impact of an increased asset retirement obligation (ARO). See Note 13 of Generations Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for more information on the 2004 update to the ARO and ARC. The remaining increase was due to capital additions and the consolidation of AmerGen and Exelon Energy. These increases were partially offset by a decrease in depreciation expense related to the Boston Generating facilities, which were sold in May 2004.
Taxes Other Than Income
Taxes other than income increased in 2004 compared to 2003 due primarily to $26 million of additional payroll and property taxes incurred from the consolidation of AmerGen and Exelon Energy. The remaining increase primarily resulted from a $15 million reduction to reserves recorded in 2003 for exposures associated with property taxes.
Interest Expense
The increase in interest expense in 2004 as compared to 2003 was primarily related to additional expense incurred from the purchase of British Energys interest in AmerGen and the issuance of $500 million of Senior Notes in December 2003. The increase was partially offset by a reduction in interest expense of $12 million related to the Boston Generating project debt being deconsolidated in May 2004.
Equity in Earnings of Unconsolidated Affiliates
The decrease in equity in earnings of unconsolidated affiliates in 2004 as compared to 2003 was due to a $47 million decrease resulting from Generations consolidation of AmerGen in 2004 following the purchase of British Energys 50% interest in AmerGen in December 2003 and the consolidation of Sithe in 2004. Equity in earnings of unconsolidated affiliates in 2004 represents equity earnings from TEG and TEP following the transfer of ownership in Sithe International in the fourth quarter of 2004, and prior to the transfer, relates to earnings recorded at Sithe for Sithes 49.5% interests in TEG and TEP.
Other, Net
The components of other, net for 2004 as compared to 2003 are as follows:
9
Other, Net | 2004 | 2003 | Variance | |||||||||
Gain on sale of Boston Generating (a) |
$ | 85 | $ | | $ | 85 | ||||||
Decommissioning-related activities: |
||||||||||||
Decommissioning trust fund income (b) |
194 | 79 | 115 | |||||||||
Decommissioning trust fund income AmerGen (b) |
43 | | 43 | |||||||||
Other-than-temporary impairment of decommissioning
trust funds (c) |
(268 | ) | | (268 | ) | |||||||
Contractual offset to decommissioning-related activities (d) |
66 | (79 | ) | 145 | ||||||||
Gain on sale of assets |
6 | | 6 | |||||||||
Impairment of investment in Sithe |
| (255 | ) | 255 | ||||||||
Other |
4 | (7 | ) | 11 | ||||||||
Total |
$ | 130 | $ | (262 | ) | $ | 392 | |||||
(a) | See Note 2 of Generations Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion of Generations sale of Boston Generating. | |
(b) | Includes investment income and realized gains/(losses). | |
(c) | Includes other-than-temporary impairments totaling $255 million, $5 million and $8 million on nuclear decommissioning trust funds for the former ComEd, former PECO and AmerGen units respectively. | |
(d) | Includes the elimination of non-operating decommissioning-related activity for those units that are subject to contractual accounting, including the elimination of decommissioning trust fund income and other-than-temporary impairments for certain nuclear units. See Notes 13 and 15 of Generations Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for more information regarding the contractual accounting applied for certain nuclear units. |
The increase in other, net in 2004 as compared to 2003 was primarily due to the $85 million gain ($52 million, net of taxes) on the sale of Boston Generating recorded in 2004, a $255 million impairment charge in 2003 related to Generations equity investment in Sithe Energies, Inc. and a $25 million loss resulting from the purchase and subsequent sale of 50% of the assets of Sithe to Reservoir (see Note 3 of Generations Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements) in 2003. The remaining increase was primarily due to a $35 million increase in decommissioning trust fund investment income primarily related to AmerGen.
Effective Income Tax Rate
The effective income tax rate was 38% for 2004 compared to 43% for 2003. The decrease in the effective rate was primarily attributable to income taxes associated with nuclear decommissioning trust fund activity, income tax deductions related to non-taxable employee benefits and the dilution of the permanent income tax benefits due to the increase in pre-tax income in 2004.
Discontinued Operations
The loss from discontinued operations includes the results of operations of Sithe from April 1, 2004 through the end of the year and the results from AllEnergy, a former subsidiary of Exelon Energy. Sithes net impact to Generation was a loss of $19 million in 2004, while AllEnergy produced $3 million of net income in 2004. (See Note 21 of Generations Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements)
Cumulative Effect of Changes in Accounting Principles
On March 31, 2004, Generation adopted FIN 46-R, resulting in a benefit of $32 million (net of income taxes of $22 million).
On January 1, 2003, Generation adopted SFAS No. 143 resulting in a benefit of $108 million (net of income taxes of $70 million).
10
Results of
Operations
Year Ended December 31, 2003 Compared To Year Ended December 31, 2002
Favorable | ||||||||||||
2003 | 2002 | (Unfavorable) | ||||||||||
OPERATING REVENUES |
$ | 8,135 | $ | 6,858 | $ | 1,277 | ||||||
OPERATING EXPENSES |
||||||||||||
Purchased power |
3,587 | 3,294 | (293 | ) | ||||||||
Fuel |
1,533 | 959 | (574 | ) | ||||||||
Operating and maintenance |
1,866 | 1,656 | (210 | ) | ||||||||
Impairment of Boston Generating, LLC long-lived assets |
945 | | (945 | ) | ||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
199 | 276 | 77 | |||||||||
Taxes other than income |
120 | 164 | 44 | |||||||||
Total operating expense |
8,250 | 6,349 | (1,901 | ) | ||||||||
OPERATING INCOME (LOSS) |
(115 | ) | 509 | (624 | ) | |||||||
OTHER INCOME AND DEDUCTIONS |
||||||||||||
Interest expense |
(88 | ) | (75 | ) | (13 | ) | ||||||
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated affiliates |
49 | 87 | (38 | ) | ||||||||
Other, net |
(262 | ) | 86 | (348 | ) | |||||||
Total other income and deductions |
(301 | ) | 98 | (399 | ) | |||||||
INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE INCOME TAXES, MINORITY
INTEREST, AND CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF
CHANGES IN ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES |
(416 | ) | 607 | (1,023 | ) | |||||||
INCOME TAXES |
(179 | ) | 217 | 396 | ||||||||
INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE MINORITY INTEREST AND
CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF CHANGES IN
ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES |
(237 | ) | 390 | (627 | ) | |||||||
MINORITY INTEREST |
(4 | ) | (3 | ) | (1 | ) | ||||||
INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF
CHANGES IN ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES |
(241 | ) | 387 | (628 | ) | |||||||
CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF CHANGES IN ACCOUNTING
PRINCIPLES (net of income taxes) |
108 | 13 | 95 | |||||||||
NET INCOME (LOSS) |
$ | (133 | ) | $ | 400 | $ | (533 | ) | ||||
11
Operating Revenues
Operating revenues increased in 2003 as compared to 2002. Generations sales in 2003 and 2002 were as follows:
Revenue (in millions) | 2003 | 2002 | Variance | %Change | ||||||||||||
Electric sales to affiliates (a) |
$ | 4,036 | $ | 4,213 | $ | (177 | ) | (4.2 | %) | |||||||
Wholesale and retail electric sales |
3,861 | 2,490 | 1,371 | 55.1 | % | |||||||||||
Total energy sales revenue |
7,897 | 6,703 | 1,194 | 17.8 | % | |||||||||||
Trading portfolio |
1 | (29 | ) | 30 | (103.4 | %) | ||||||||||
Other revenue |
237 | 184 | 53 | 28.8 | % | |||||||||||
Total revenue |
$ | 8,135 | $ | 6,858 | $ | 1,277 | 18.6 | % | ||||||||
Sales (in GWhs) | 2003 | 2002 | Variance | % Change | ||||||||||||
Electric sales to affiliates (a) |
117,405 | 123,975 | (6,570 | ) | (5.3 | %) | ||||||||||
Wholesale and retail electric sales |
107,267 | 83,565 | 23,702 | 28.4 | % | |||||||||||
Total sales |
224,672 | 207,540 | 17,132 | 8.3 | % | |||||||||||
(a) | Includes sales to Exelon Energy Company. |
Trading volumes of 32,584 GWhs and 69,933 GWhs for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002, respectively, are not included in the table above. The decrease in trading volume is a result of reduced volumetric and VAR trading limits in 2003, which are set by the Exelon Risk Management Committee and approved by the Board of Directors.
Electric sales to affiliates. Sales to affiliates decreased primarily due to lower volume sales to ComEd, offset by slightly higher realized prices. Revenues from PECO were lower, primarily due to lower realized prices, partially offset by slightly higher volumes. Sales to Exelon Energy Company decreased primarily due to the discontinuance of Exelon Energy Company operations in the PJM region.
Wholesale and Retail Electric Sales. Sales volume in the wholesale spot and bilateral markets increased primarily due to the acquisition of Exelon New England in November 2002 and the commencement of commercial operations in 2003 of the Boston Generating facilities, Mystic 8 and 9 and Fore River. In addition, average market prices in 2003 were $5/MWh higher than in 2002.
Trading Revenues. Trading margin increased, reflecting a $1 million gain for the year ended December 31, 2003 as compared to a $29 million loss in the same period in 2002. The increase was primarily related to an increase in gas prices in April 2002, which negatively affected Generations trading positions.
Other Revenue. Revenues also increased in 2003 as compared to 2002, as a result of a $76 million increase in sales of excess fossil fuel. The excess fossil fuel is a result of generating plants in Texas and New England operating at less than projected levels.
Purchased Power and Fuel
Generations supply of sales in 2003 and 2002, excluding the trading portfolio, was as follows:
Supply of Sales (in GWhs) | 2003 | 2002 | % Change | |||||||||
Nuclear generation (a) |
117,502 | 115,854 | 1.4 | % | ||||||||
Purchases non-trading portfolio (b) |
82,860 | 78,710 | 5.3 | % | ||||||||
Fossil and hydroelectric generation |
24,310 | 12,976 | 87.3 | % | ||||||||
Total supply |
224,672 | 207,540 | 8.3 | % | ||||||||
(a) | Excluding AmerGen. | |
(b) | Including purchase power agreements with AmerGen. |
12
Generations supply mix changed as a result of increased nuclear generation due to a lower number of refueling and unplanned outages during 2003 as compared to 2002, increased fossil generation due to the Exelon New England plants acquired in November 2002, including plants under construction which became operational in the second and third quarters of 2003 which accounted for an increase of 8,426 GWhs. Additionally, the change included additional purchased power of 3,320 GWhs from Exelon New England, a new PPA with AmerGen which increased purchased power by 3,049 GWhs in the second quarter of 2003 and 11,989 GWhs of other miscellaneous power purchases, which more than offset a 14,208 GWhs reduction in purchased power from Midwest Generation.
Purchased Power and Fuel Expense. The changes in Generations purchased power and fuel expense for the year ended December 31, 2003 compared to the same period in 2002 consisted of the following:
Variance | ||||
Exelon New England |
$ | 429 | ||
Prices |
350 | |||
Volume |
46 | |||
Hedging activity |
22 | |||
Other |
20 | |||
Increase in purchased power and fuel expense |
$ | 867 | ||
Exelon New England. Generation acquired Exelon New England in November 2002 and Mystic Units 8 and 9 began commercial operations during the second quarter of 2003, while Fore River began commercial operations during the third quarter of 2003.
Prices. The increase reflects higher market prices in 2003.
Volume. Purchased power increased in 2003 due to an increase in purchased power from AmerGen under a June 2003 PPA to purchase 100% of the output of Oyster Creek. Prior to the June 2003 PPA, Generation did not purchase power from Oyster Creek. Fuel expense increased due to increases in fossil fuel generation required to meet the increased market demand for energy and the acquisition of generating plants in Texas in April 2002.
Hedging Activity. Mark-to-market losses on hedging activities were $16 million in 2003 compared to a gain of $6 million in 2002.
Other. Other increases in purchased power and fuel were primarily due to additional nuclear fuel amortization of $16 million in 2003 resulting from under-performing fuel which was completely replaced in May 2003 at the Quad Cities Unit 1 and $10 million due to the write-down of coal inventory in 2003 as a result of a fuel burn analysis.
13
Generations average margins per MWh sold for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002 were as follows:
($/MWh) | 2003 | 2002 | % Change | |||||||||
Average
electric revenue |
||||||||||||
Wholesale sales to affiliates (a) |
$ | 34.38 | $ | 33.98 | 1.2 | % | ||||||
Wholesale
electric and retail sales |
35.99 | 29.80 | 20.8 | % | ||||||||
Total excluding the trading portfolio |
35.15 | 32.30 | 8.8 | % | ||||||||
Average electric supply cost excluding the trading portfolio (b) |
22.79 | 20.49 | 11.2 | % | ||||||||
Average margin excluding the trading portfolio |
12.36 | 11.81 | 4.7 | % | ||||||||
(a) | Includes sales to Exelon Energy Company. | |
(b) | Average electric supply cost includes purchased power and fuel costs. |
Operating and Maintenance
The changes in operating and maintenance expense in 2003 as compared to 2002 consisted of the following:
Variance | ||||
Adoption of
SFAS No. 143 (a) |
$ | 118 | ||
Increased costs due to generating asset acquisitions in 2002 |
78 | |||
Severance, pension and postretirement benefit costs associated with The Exelon Way |
60 | |||
Increased employee fringe benefits primarily due to increased health care costs |
54 | |||
Decreased
refueling outage costs (b) |
(49 | ) | ||
2002 executive severance |
(19 | ) | ||
Other |
(32 | ) | ||
Increase in operating and maintenance expense |
$ | 210 | ||
(a) | Due to a reclassification of decommissioning-related expenses upon the adoption of SFAS No. 143. | |
(b) | Includes cost savings of $19 million related to one of Generations co-owned facilities. Refueling outage days, not including Generations co-owned facilities, decreased from 202 in 2002 to 157 in 2003. |
The increase in operating and maintenance expense is primarily due to the decision to transition out of the ownership of Boston Generating during the third quarter of 2003, Generation recorded a long-lived asset impairment charge of $945 million ($573 million net of income taxes) in the third quarter of 2003. The remaining increase is due to payroll-related costs due to implementation of the programs associated with The Exelon Way, costs incurred due to generating asset acquisitions made in 2002, offset by lower refueling outage cost.
Nuclear fleet operating data and purchased power cost data for 2003 as compared to 2002 was as follows:
2003 | 2002 | |||||||
Nuclear fleet capacity factor (a) |
93.4 | % | 92.7 | % | ||||
Nuclear fleet production cost per MWh (a) |
$ | 12.53 | $ | 13.00 | ||||
Average purchased power cost for wholesale operations
per MWh(b) |
$ | 43.29 | $ | 41.85 | ||||
(a) | Including AmerGen and excluding Salem, which is operated by PSEG Nuclear. |
|
(b) | Including PPAs with AmerGen. |
14
The higher nuclear capacity factor and decreased production costs were primarily due to 56 fewer planned refueling outage days, resulting in a $36 million decrease in outage costs, including a $6 million decrease related to AmerGen, in 2003 as compared to 2002. The years ended 2003 and 2002 included 30 and 26 unplanned outages, respectively, resulting in a $2 million increase in non-refueling outage costs in 2003 as compared to 2002.
Impairment of the Long-Lived Assets of Boston Generating
In connection with the decision to transition out of the ownership of Boston Generating during the third quarter of 2003, Generation recorded a long-lived asset impairment charge of $945 million ($573 million net of income taxes). See Note 2 of Generations Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion of the sale of Generations ownership interest in Boston Generating.
Depreciation and Amortization
The decrease in depreciation and amortization expense in 2003 as compared to 2002 was primarily attributable to a $130 million reduction in decommissioning expense net of ARC depreciation, as these costs are included in operating and maintenance expense after the adoption of SFAS No. 143, and a $12 million decrease due to life extensions of assets acquired in 2002. The decrease was partially offset by $65 million of additional depreciation expense on capital additions placed in service in 2002, of which $18 million of expense is related to plant acquisitions made after the third quarter of 2002.
Taxes Other Than Income
Taxes other than income decreased in 2003 compared to 2002 due primarily to a $20 million decrease in property taxes, a $13 million decrease in the Pennsylvania capital stock tax and the Texas franchise tax, and a $6 million decrease in payroll taxes.
Interest Expense
The increase in interest expense in 2003 as compared to 2002 is due to $18 million of higher interest related to the Boston Generating project debt outstanding in 2003 as well as the outstanding Sithe note. The increase was partially offset by a $14 million decrease resulting from interest expense no longer being recorded to offset decommissioning interest income in 2003. This offset is currently included as accretion expense in operating and maintenance expense.
Equity in Earnings of Unconsolidated Affiliates
The decrease in equity in earnings of unconsolidated affiliates in 2003 as compared to 2002 was due to a decrease of $21 million in the equity in earnings of Sithe, which was primarily the result of the sale of Sithe New Englands assets to Generation in November 2002. A decrease of $17 million in the equity in earnings of AmerGen also contributed to the overall decrease, which was primarily due to lower PPA revenues at AmerGen and increases in severance costs during 2003.
15
Other, Net
The decrease in other, net in 2003 as compared to 2002 was primarily a result of impairment charges related to Generations equity investment in Sithe due to an other-than-temporary decline in value of $255 million and a $25 million loss resulting from the purchase and subsequent sale of 50% of the assets of Sithe to Reservoir. See Note 3 of Generations Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
Effective Income Tax Rate
The effective income tax rate was 43.0% for 2003 compared to 35.7% for 2002. This increase was primarily attributable to the impairment charges recorded in 2003 related to the long-lived assets of Boston Generating and Generations investment in Sithe, which resulted in a pre-tax loss. Other adjustments that affected income taxes include a decrease in tax-exempt interest in 2003 and an increase in nuclear decommissioning investment income for 2003.
Cumulative Effect of Changes in Accounting Principles
On January 1, 2003, Generation adopted SFAS No. 143 resulting in a benefit of $108 million (net of income taxes of $70 million).
On January 1, 2002, Generation adopted SFAS No. 142 resulting in a benefit of $13 million (net of income taxes of $9 million).
16
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Generations business is capital intensive and requires considerable capital resources. Generations capital resources are primarily provided by internally generated cash flows from operations and, to the extent necessary, external financing, including the issuance of commercial paper, participation in the intercompany money pool or capital contributions from Exelon. Generations 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 the extent that Generation no longer has access to external financing sources at reasonable terms, Generation has access to a revolving credit facility, which Generation currently utilizes to support its commercial paper program. See the Credit Issues section of Liquidity and Capital Resources for further discussion. Capital resources, including cash, are used primarily to fund Generations capital requirements, including construction expenditures, investments in new and existing ventures, repayments of maturing debt, the payment of distributions to Exelon and contributions to Exelons pension plans. Any future acquisitions could require external financing or borrowings or capital contributions from Exelon.
Cash Flows from Operating Activities
Generations cash flows from operating activities primarily result from the sale of electric energy to wholesale customers, including Generations affiliated companies, as well as settlements arising from Generations trading activities. Generations future cash flow from operating activities will depend upon future demand and market prices for energy and the ability to continue to produce and supply power at competitive costs. Cash flows from operations have been and are expected to continue to provide a reliable, steady source of cash flow, sufficient to meet operating and capital expenditures requirements for the foreseeable future. See Business Outlook and Challenges in Managing the Business.
Cash flows provided by operations for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 were $1,947 million and $1,453 million, respectively. Changes in Generations cash flows from operations are generally consistent with changes in its results of operations, as further adjusted by changes in working capital in the normal course of business and non-cash charges.
In addition to the items mentioned in Results of Operation, Generations operating cash flows in 2004 were affected by the following items:
17
| Receivables from Energy Delivery under the PPAs increased $28 million for 2004, compared to a decrease of $177 million in 2003. The decrease in 2003 was primarily due to the payment of certain trade receivables from ComEd. | |||
| Net cash received for collateral for 2004 was $73 million, compared to $68 million paid in 2003. The year over year increase in cash flows of $141 million was primarily due to the reduction of cash collateral requirements for certain counterparties as a result of Generation negotiating the acceptance of letters of credit during 2004 to satisfy current and future collateral obligations. | |||
| At December 31, 2004 and 2003, Generation had income tax receivables of $87 million and $290 million, respectively. In 2003, Generation established an income tax receivable primarily associated with special depreciation allowances, which was received in 2004, resulting in the primary change in cash in 2004 as compared to 2003 associated with income taxes. | |||
| In December 2004, TXU and Generation terminated a tolling agreement and entered into a new agreement. Upon termination of the original agreement, Generation received a cash payment of $172 million. The resulting gain was deferred and will be recognized as income over the contractual term of the new agreement. See Note 2 of Generations Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding the transaction with TXU. | |||
| Discretionary contributions to Exelons defined benefit pension plans were $180 million in 2004 compared to $145 million in 2003. Generations minimum funding requirement to satisfy ERISA for 2004 was $11 million. See Note 14 of Generations Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding pension and postretirement benefits. |
Generation participates in Exelons defined benefit pension plans. Exelons plans currently meet the minimum funding requirements of ERISA; however, Exelon expects to make a discretionary pension plan contribution up to approximately $2 billion in 2005, of which $853 million is expected to be funded by Generation. Of the $853 million expected to be contributed to the pension plan during 2005, $13 million is estimated to be needed to satisfy ERISA minimum funding requirements for the pension plan obligations.
Cash Flows from Investing Activities
Cash flows used in investing activities were $1,103 million in 2004, compared to $1,301 million in 2003. Capital expenditures, including investment in nuclear fuel, were $960 million and $861 million in 2004 and 2003, respectively, and primarily represent additions to nuclear fuel and additions and upgrades to existing facilities. Capital expenditures for 2003 are stated net of proceeds from liquidated damages of $92 million received from Raytheon as a result of Raytheon not meeting the expected completion date and certain contractual performance criteria in connection with Raytheons construction of the Boston Generating facilities.
In addition to the recurring investing activities presented on the face of the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows, significant investing activities during 2004 and 2003 were as follows:
| Generation received cash proceeds of $42 million from the January 2004 sale of three gas turbines that were classified as assets held for sale at December 31, 2003. | |||
| Generation received $24 million as a result of the transfer of Exelon Energy Company to Generation, effective January 1, 2004, and the consolidation of Sithe in accordance with FIN 46-R on March 31, 2004. See Notes 2 and 3 of Generations Notes to Consolidated Financial |
18
Statements for additional information on the transfer of Exelon Energy and the consolidation of Sithe, respectively. | ||||
| Sithe collected a $20 million note receivable during 2004 related to the sale of certain businesses of Sithe during the fourth quarter of 2003 and the first quarter of 2004. | |||
| On November 25, 2003, Generation, Reservoir and Sithe completed a series of transactions resulting in Generation and Reservoir each indirectly owning a 50% interest in Sithe. Net cash proceeds from the series of transactions were $44 million. In addition, a note was received from EXRES SHC, Inc. for $92 million. See Notes 3 and 20 of Generations Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding this transaction and Generations sale of Sithe. | |||
| In December 2003, Generation purchased the 50% interest in AmerGen held by British Energy plc for $240 million, net of cash acquired of $36 million. The acquisition was funded with cash provided by operations. |
Capital expenditures for 2005 are projected to be $1,073 million. Generation anticipates that nuclear refueling outages, including co-owned facilities, will increase from ten in 2004 to eleven in 2005. Generations capital expenditures are expected to be funded by internally generated funds.
Cash Flows from Financing Activities
Cash flows used in financing activities were $739 million in 2004 compared to $52 million in 2003. The increase in cash flows used in financing activities was primarily a result of a $500 million issuance of unsecured notes in 2003, a net repayment of intercompany borrowings of $162 million during 2004, compared to a $87 million net increase in intercompany borrowings in 2003 and a $316 million increase in dividend distributions to Exelon during 2004 as compared to 2003. In 2004, Generation paid $27 million of a note payable to Sithe, compared to $446 million paid in 2003. At December 31, 2004, Generation had repaid $473 million of the note payable, resulting in a remaining balance of $63 million, which was paid upon the completion of a series of transactions that resulted in Generations exit from its investment in Sithe on January 31, 2005. See Note 20 of Generations Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding the sale of Sithe. In October 2004, Generation issued $157 million of pollution control notes, the proceeds of which were distributed to Exelon.
From time to time and as market conditions warrant, Generation may engage in long-term debt retirements via tender offers, open market repurchases or other viable options to strengthen its balance sheet.
Credit Issues
Exelon Credit Facility. A description of Exelons credit agreements, and Generations participation therein, is set forth above under Credit Issues Exelon Credit Facility in Exelon Corporation Liquidity and Capital Resources.
Capital Structure. At December 31, 2004, Generations capital structure consisted of 51% members equity, 5% notes payable and 44% long-term debt. Long-term debt includes $1.2 billion of senior unsecured notes and $819 million related to Sithe Energies, Inc. debt, representing 14% of capitalization.
19
Generation Revolving Credit Facilities. On September 29, 2003, Generation closed on an $850 million revolving credit facility that replaced a $550 million revolving credit facility that had originally closed on June 13, 2003. Generation used the facility to make the first payment to Sithe relating to the $536 million note that was used to purchase Exelon New England. This note was restructured in June 2003 to provide for a payment of $210 million of the principal on June 16, 2003, payment of $236 million of the principal on the earlier of December 1, 2003 or upon a change of control of Generation and payment of the remaining principal on the earlier of December 1, 2005, upon reaching certain Sithe liquidity requirements, or upon a change of control of Generation. Generation paid $27 million on the note to Sithe in 2004. Generation terminated the $850 million revolving credit facility on December 22, 2003.
Intercompany Money Pool. A description of the intercompany money pool, and Generations participation therein, is set forth above under Credit Issues Intercompany Money Pool in Exelon Corporation Liquidity and Capital Resources. For the year ended December 31, 2004, Generation paid $3 million in interest to the money pool and earned less than $1 million in interest from its contributions to the intercompany money pool.
Security Ratings. A description of Generations security ratings is set forth above under Credit Issues Security Ratings in Exelon Corporation Liquidity and Capital Resources.
Fund Transfer Restrictions. Under applicable law, Generation can only pay dividends from undistributed or current earnings. Generation is precluded from lending or extending credit or indemnity to Exelon. At December 31, 2004, Generation had undistributed earnings of $761 million.
Contractual Obligations and Off-Balance Sheet Obligations
The following table summarizes Generations future estimated cash payments under existing contractual obligations, including payments due by period.
Payment Due within | Due 2010 | |||||||||||||||||||
(in millions) | Total | 2005 | 2006-2007 | 2008-2009 | and beyond | |||||||||||||||
Long-term debt |
$ | 2,688 | $ | 44 | $ | 98 | $ | 120 | $ | 2,426 | ||||||||||
Intercompany money pool |
283 | 283 | | | | |||||||||||||||
Interest obligations related to
long-term debt (a, b) |
1,955 | 159 | 306 | 286 | 1,204 | |||||||||||||||
Capital leases |
50 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 38 | |||||||||||||||
Operating leases |
723 | 45 | 87 | 80 | 511 | |||||||||||||||
Purchase power obligations |
9,497 | 2,024 | 1,973 | 1,288 | 4,212 | |||||||||||||||
Fuel purchase agreements |
3,639 | 639 | 985 | 616 | 1,399 | |||||||||||||||
Other purchase commitments (c) |
230 | 66 | 75 | 57 | 32 | |||||||||||||||
Obligation to minority shareholders |
49 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 36 | |||||||||||||||
Pension ERISA minimum
funding requirement |
13 | 13 | | | | |||||||||||||||
Spent nuclear fuel obligations |
878 | | | | 878 | |||||||||||||||
Total contractual obligations |
$ | 20,005 | $ | 3,279 | $ | 3,534 | $ | 2,456 | $ | 10,736 | ||||||||||
(a) | Interest payments are estimated based on final maturity dates of debt securities outstanding at December 31, 2004 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, 2004. | |
(b) | Includes Sithe-related interest payments of $71 million, $132 million, $115 million and $849 million for payments due in 2005, 2006-2007, 2008-2009, and 2010 and beyond, respectively. See Note 20 and Note 21 of Generations Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion of the sale of Generations investment in Sithe. | |
(c) | Commitments for services and materials. |
20
See ITEM 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data Generations Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information about:
| Long-term debt, see Note 11. | |||
| Capital lease obligations, see Note 11. | |||
| Spent nuclear fuel obligation, see Note 13. | |||
| Pension ERISA minimum funding requirement, see Note 14. | |||
| Operating leases, see Note 16. | |||
| Purchase power obligations, see Note 16. | |||
| Obligation to minority shareholders, see Note 16. | |||
| Intercompany money pool, see Note 18. |
Mystic Development LLC (Mystic) a former affiliate of Exelon New England has a long-term agreement through January 2020 with Distrigas of Massachusetts Corporation (Distrigas) for gas supply, primarily for the Boston Generating units. Under the agreement, gas purchase prices from Distrigas are indexed to the New England gas markets. Exelon New England has guaranteed Mystics financial obligations to Distrigas under the long-term supply agreement. Exelon New Englands guarantee to Distrigas remained in effect following the transfer of ownership interest in Boston Generating in May 2004. Under FIN 45, approximately $16 million is included as a liability within the Consolidated Balance Sheet of Generation as of December 31, 2004 related to this guarantee. The terms of the guarantee do not limit the potential future payments that Exelon New England could be required to make under the guarantee.
Generation has an obligation to decommission its nuclear power plants. Upon adoption of SFAS No. 143, Generation was required to re-measure its decommissioning liabilities at fair value and recorded an asset retirement obligation of $2.4 billion on January 1, 2003. Increases in the asset retirement obligation resulting from the passage of time, are recorded as operating and maintenance expense. Increases in the asset retirement obligation resulting from a remeasurement are recorded with a corresponding asset retirement cost, which is a component of property, plant and equipment. At December 31, 2004, the asset retirement obligation recorded within Generations Consolidated Balance Sheet was $4.0 billion. Decommissioning expenditures are expected to occur primarily after the plants are retired. Based on current licenses and anticipated renewals, decommissioning expenditures for plants in operation are currently estimated to begin in 2029. To fund future decommissioning costs, Generation held $5.3 billion of investments in trust funds, including net unrealized gains and losses, at December 31, 2004. See ITEM 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data Generations Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion of Generations decommissioning obligation.
See Note 16 of Generations Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for discussion of Generations commercial commitments as of December 31, 2004.
Variable Interest Entities. As of December 31, 2004, Generation was a 50% owner of Sithe. In accordance with FIN 46-R, Generation consolidated Sithe, within the financial statements as of March 31, 2004. The determination that Sithe qualified as a variable interest entity and that Generation was the primary beneficiary under FIN 46-R required analysis of the economic benefits accruing to all parties pursuant to their ownership interests supplemented by managements judgment. See Notes 3 and 20 of Generations Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding the consolidation and sale of Sithe.
21
Other
Generations cash-flow hedges are affected by commodity prices. These hedge contracts primarily represent forward sales of Generations excess capacity that it expects to deliver. The majority of these contracts are expected to settle within the next three years. These contracts have specified credit limits pursuant to standardized contract terms and require that cash collateral be posted when the limits are exceeded. When power prices increase relative to Generations forward sales prices, it can be subject to collateral calls if Generation exceeds its credit limits; however, when power prices return to previous levels or when Generation delivers the power under its forward contracts, the collateral would be returned to Generation with no impact on its results of operations. Generation will satisfy its margin call obligations with the use of working capital or drawing on its available letters of credit. Generation believes that it has sufficient capability to fund any collateral requirements that could be reasonably expected to occur.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
See Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates above for a discussion of Generations critical accounting policies and estimates.
Business Outlook and the Challenges in Managing the Business
The U.S. electric generation, transmission and distribution industry is in the midst of a fundamental and, at this point, uncertain transition from a fully regulated industry offering bundled service to an industry with unbundled services, some of which are regulated and others of which are priced in competitive markets. Generation operates in a highly competitive environment that is capital intensive.
A description of the business outlook and challenges in managing Generations business is set forth above under Business Outlook and the Challenges in Managing the Business Generation and General Business in Exelon Corporation Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation.
Further discussion of Generations liquidity position and capital resources and related challenges is included in the Liquidity and Capital Resources section.
New Accounting Pronouncements
See Note 1 of Generations Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding new accounting pronouncements.
QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET
RISK Generation
Generation is exposed to market risks associated with commodity price, credit, interest rates and equity prices. These risks are described above under Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk Exelon.
22
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
To the Member and Board of Directors of Exelon Generation Company, LLC:
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements listed in the index appearing under Item 9.01 of this Current Report on Form 8-K present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Exelon Generation Company, LLC and its subsidiaries (Generation) at December 31, 2004 and 2003, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2004 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In addition, in our opinion, the financial statement schedule (not presented herein) listed in the index appearing under Item 15(a)(4)(ii) of Generations 2004 Annual Report on Form 10-K presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein when read in conjunction with the related consolidated financial statements. These financial statements and the financial statement schedule are the responsibility of the Companys management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and the financial statement schedule based on our audits. We conducted our audits of these statements in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit of financial statements includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
As discussed in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements, Exelon Generation Company, LLC changed its method of accounting for asset retirement obligations as of January 1, 2003 and its method of accounting for variable interest entities in 2004.
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Chicago, Illinois
February 22, 2005, except as to the effects of the reclassification for discontinued operations
discussed in note 21, as to which the date is May 11, 2005
Exelon Generation Company, LLC and Subsidiary Companies
Consolidated Statements of Income
For the Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
(in millions) | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | |||||||||
Operating revenues |
||||||||||||
Operating revenues |
$ | 3,862 | $ | 4,010 | $ | 2,631 | ||||||
Operating revenues from affiliates |
3,841 | 4,125 | 4,227 | |||||||||
Total operating revenues |
7,703 | 8,135 | 6,858 | |||||||||
Operating expenses |
||||||||||||
Purchased power |
2,297 | 3,158 | 2,980 | |||||||||
Purchased power from affiliates |
10 | 429 | 314 | |||||||||
Fuel |
1,704 | 1,533 | 959 | |||||||||
Impairment of Boston Generating, LLC long-lived assets |
| 945 | | |||||||||
Operating and maintenance |
1,962 | 1,717 | 1,504 | |||||||||
Operating and maintenance from affiliates |
239 | 149 | 152 | |||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
286 | 199 | 276 | |||||||||
Taxes other than income |
166 | 120 | 164 | |||||||||
Total operating expense |
6,664 | 8,250 | 6,349 | |||||||||
Operating income (loss) |
1,039 | (115 | ) | 509 | ||||||||
Other income and deductions |
||||||||||||
Interest expense |
(100 | ) | (75 | ) | (68 | ) | ||||||
Interest expense to affiliates |
(3 | ) | (13 | ) | (7 | ) | ||||||
Equity in earnings (losses) of unconsolidated affiliates |
(14 | ) | 49 | 87 | ||||||||
Interest income from affiliates |
| 1 | 6 | |||||||||
Other, net |
130 | (263 | ) | 80 | ||||||||
Total other income and deductions |
13 | (301 | ) | 98 | ||||||||
Income (loss) from continuing operations
before income taxes and minority interests |
1,052 | (416 | ) | 607 | ||||||||
Income taxes |
401 | (179 | ) | 217 | ||||||||
Income (loss) from continuing operations
before minority interest |
651 | (237 | ) | 390 | ||||||||
Minority interest |
6 | (4 | ) | (3 | ) | |||||||
Income (loss) from continuing operations |
657 | (241 | ) | 387 | ||||||||
Discontinued operations (Note 21) |
||||||||||||
Loss from discontinued operations |
(45 | ) | | | ||||||||
Income taxes |
(29 | ) | | | ||||||||
Loss from
discontinued operations |
(16 | ) | | | ||||||||
Income (loss) before cumulative effect of changes
in accounting principle |
641 | (241 | ) | 387 | ||||||||
Cumulative effect of changes in accounting
principle (net of income taxes of $22, $70 and $9,
respectively) |
32 | 108 | 13 | |||||||||
Net income (loss) |
$ | 673 | $ | (133 | ) | $ | 400 | |||||
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
2
Exelon Generation Company, LLC and Subsidiary Companies
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
For the Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
(in millions) | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | |||||||||
Cash flows from operating activities |
||||||||||||
Net income (loss) |
$ | 673 | $ | (133 | ) | $ | 400 | |||||
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net
cash flows provided by operating activities: |
||||||||||||
Depreciation, amortization and accretion, including nuclear fuel |
923 | 754 | 650 | |||||||||
Cumulative effect of changes in accounting principles (net of income taxes) |
(32 | ) | (108 | ) | (13 | ) | ||||||
Impairment of investment in Sithe Energies, Inc. |
| 255 | | |||||||||
Impairment of long-lived assets |
| 952 | | |||||||||
Deferred income taxes and amortization of investment tax credits |
124 | 60 | 132 | |||||||||
Provision for uncollectible accounts |
2 | (2 | ) | 26 | ||||||||
(Gain) loss on sale of investments |
(91 | ) | 25 | | ||||||||
Other decommissioning-related activities |
169 | 37 | | |||||||||
Equity in (earnings) losses of unconsolidated affiliates |
14 | (49 | ) | (87 | ) | |||||||
Net realized (gains) losses on nuclear decommissioning trust funds |
(72 | ) | 16 | 32 | ||||||||
Other non-cash operating activities |
(47 | ) | (10 | ) | 57 | |||||||
Changes in assets and liabilities: |
||||||||||||
Accounts receivable |
(67 | ) | (23 | ) | (159 | ) | ||||||
Receivables and payables to affiliates, net |
11 | 195 | (72 | ) | ||||||||
Inventories |
(35 | ) | (29 | ) | (33 | ) | ||||||
Other current assets |
64 | (35 | ) | (71 | ) | |||||||
Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other current liabilities |
76 | 16 | 124 | |||||||||
Income taxes |
228 | (361 | ) | 129 | ||||||||
Net realized and unrealized mark-to-market and hedging transactions |
37 | (9 | ) | 26 | ||||||||
Pension and non-pension postretirement benefits obligations |
(92 | ) | (50 | ) | (60 | ) | ||||||
Other noncurrent assets and liabilities |
62 | (48 | ) | 69 | ||||||||
Net cash flows provided by operating activities |
1,947 | 1,453 | 1,150 | |||||||||
Cash flows from investing activities |
||||||||||||
Capital expenditures |
(960 | ) | (953 | ) | (990 | ) | ||||||
Proceeds from liquidated damages |
| 92 | | |||||||||
Proceeds from nuclear decommissioning trust fund sales |
2,320 | 2,341 | 1,612 | |||||||||
Investment in nuclear decommissioning trust funds |
(2,587 | ) | (2,564 | ) | (1,824 | ) | ||||||
Acquisition of businesses, net of cash acquired |
| (272 | ) | (445 | ) | |||||||
Proceeds from sales of investments |
24 | 82 | | |||||||||
Net cash increase from consolidation of Sithe Energies, Inc. and
Exelon Energy Company |
24 | | | |||||||||
Change in restricted cash |
36 | (63 | ) | (12 | ) | |||||||
Other investing activities |
40 | 36 | (27 | ) | ||||||||
Net cash flows used in investing activities |
(1,103 | ) | (1,301 | ) | (1,686 | ) | ||||||
Cash flows from financing activities |
||||||||||||
Issuance of long-term debt |
157 | 1,066 | 30 | |||||||||
Retirement of long-term debt |
(62 | ) | (570 | ) | (5 | ) | ||||||
Change in note payable, affiliate |
(162 | ) | 87 | 329 | ||||||||
Payment on acquisition note payable to Sithe Energies, Inc. |
(27 | ) | (446 | ) | | |||||||
Distribution to member |
(662 | ) | (189 | ) | (27 | ) | ||||||
Contribution from member |
17 | | | |||||||||
Contribution from minority interest of consolidated subsidiary |
| | 43 | |||||||||
Net cash flows (used in) provided by financing activities |
(739 | ) | (52 | ) | 370 | |||||||
Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents |
105 | 100 | (166 | ) | ||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period |
158 | 58 | 224 | |||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period |
$ | 263 | $ | 158 | $ | 58 | ||||||
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
3
Exelon Generation Company, LLC and Subsidiary Companies
Consolidated Balance Sheets
December 31, | ||||||||
(in millions) | 2004 | 2003 | ||||||
Assets |
||||||||
Current assets |
||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents |
$ | 263 | $ | 158 | ||||
Restricted cash and investments |
26 | 75 | ||||||
Accounts receivable, net |
||||||||
Customer |
525 | 389 | ||||||
Other |
209 | 402 | ||||||
Mark-to-market derivative assets |
403 | 322 | ||||||
Receivables from affiliates |
332 | 421 | ||||||
Inventories, at average cost |
||||||||
Fossil fuel |
112 | 98 | ||||||
Materials and supplies |
255 | 259 | ||||||
Assets held for sale |
| 36 | ||||||
Deferred income taxes |
48 | 40 | ||||||
Prepayments and other current assets |
148 | 238 | ||||||
Total current assets |
2,321 | 2,438 | ||||||
Property, plant and equipment, net |
7,536 | 7,106 | ||||||
Deferred debits and other assets |
||||||||
Nuclear decommissioning trust funds |
5,262 | 4,721 | ||||||
Investments |
103 | 65 | ||||||
Receivable from affiliate |
11 | 22 | ||||||
Prepaid pension asset |
199 | 79 | ||||||
Mark-to-market derivative asset |
373 | 100 | ||||||
Other |
633 | 118 | ||||||
Total deferred debits and other assets |
6,581 | 5,105 | ||||||
Total assets |
$ | 16,438 | $ | 14,649 | ||||
Liabilities and Members equity |
||||||||
Current liabilities |
||||||||
Long-term debt due within one year |
$ | 47 | $ | 1,068 | ||||
Accounts payable |
856 | 848 | ||||||
Mark-to-market derivative liabilities |
598 | 581 | ||||||
Payables to affiliates |
42 | 1 | ||||||
Notes payable to affiliates |
283 | 506 | ||||||
Accrued expenses |
367 | 423 | ||||||
Other |
223 | 126 | ||||||
Total current liabilities |
2,416 | 3,553 | ||||||
Long-term debt |
2,583 | 1,649 | ||||||
Deferred credits and other liabilities |
||||||||
Asset retirement obligation |
3,980 | 2,996 | ||||||
Pension obligation |
21 | 21 | ||||||
Non-pension postretirement benefits obligation |
584 | 555 | ||||||
Spent nuclear fuel obligation |
878 | 867 | ||||||
Deferred income taxes |
506 | 195 | ||||||
Unamortized investment tax credits |
210 | 218 | ||||||
Payables to affiliates |
1,479 | 1,195 | ||||||
Mark-to-market derivative liabilities |
323 | 133 | ||||||
Other |
375 | 308 | ||||||
Total deferred credits and other liabilities |
8,356 | 6,488 | ||||||
Total liabilities |
13,355 | 11,690 | ||||||
Commitments and contingencies |
||||||||
Minority interest of consolidated subsidiary |
44 | 3 | ||||||
Members equity |
||||||||
Membership interest |
2,361 | 2,490 | ||||||
Undistributed earnings |
761 | 602 | ||||||
Accumulated other comprehensive loss |
(83 | ) | (136 | ) | ||||
Total Members equity |
3,039 | 2,956 | ||||||
Total liabilities and Members equity |
$ | 16,438 | $ | 14,649 | ||||
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
4
Exelon Generation Company, LLC and Subsidiary Companies
Consolidated Statements of Changes in Membership Interest
Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||
Other | Total | |||||||||||||||
Membership | Undistributed | Comprehensive | Members | |||||||||||||
(in millions) | Interest | Earnings | Income (Loss) | Equity | ||||||||||||
Balance, December 31, 2001 |
$ | 2,315 | $ | 524 | $ | (31 | ) | $ | 2,808 | |||||||
Net income |
| 400 | | 400 | ||||||||||||
Distribution to member |
(30 | ) | | | (30 | ) | ||||||||||
Allocation of tax benefit from Member |
11 | | | 11 | ||||||||||||
Other comprehensive loss,
net of income taxes of $(223) |
| | (290 | ) | (290 | ) | ||||||||||
Balance, December 31, 2002 |
2,296 | 924 | (321 | ) | 2,899 | |||||||||||
Net loss |
| (133 | ) | | (133 | ) | ||||||||||
Non-cash distribution to Member |
(17 | ) | | | (17 | ) | ||||||||||
Distribution to Member |
| (189 | ) | | (189 | ) | ||||||||||
Cumulative effect of FAS 143 adoption |
210 | | | 210 | ||||||||||||
Contribution from Member |
1 | | | 1 | ||||||||||||
Other comprehensive income,
net of income taxes of $179 |
| | 185 | 185 | ||||||||||||
Balance, December 31, 2003 |
2,490 | 602 | (136 | ) | 2,956 | |||||||||||
Net income |
| 673 | | 673 | ||||||||||||
Non-cash distribution to Member |
| (9 | ) | | (9 | ) | ||||||||||
Distribution to Member |
(157 | ) | (505 | ) | | (662 | ) | |||||||||
Transfer of Exelon Energy |
(4 | ) | | 2 | (2 | ) | ||||||||||
Consolidation of Sithe in accordance with
FIN 46-R |
| | (6 | ) | (6 | ) | ||||||||||
Contribution from Member |
6 | | | 6 | ||||||||||||
Allocation of tax benefit from Member |
26 | | | 26 | ||||||||||||
Other comprehensive income,
net of income taxes of $30 |
| | 57 | 57 | ||||||||||||
Balance, December 31, 2004 |
$ | 2,361 | $ | 761 | $ | (83 | ) | $ | 3,039 | |||||||
Exelon Generation Company, LLC and Subsidiary Companies
Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income
For the Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
(in millions) | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | |||||||||
Net income (loss) |
$ | 673 | $ | (133 | ) | $ | 400 | |||||
Other comprehensive income (loss) |
||||||||||||
SFAS No. 143 transition adjustment, net of income taxes of $167 |
| 168 | | |||||||||
Change in net unrealized gain (loss) on cash-flow hedges, net of income taxes
of $8, $(15) and $(104), respectively |
7 | (21 | ) | (164 | ) | |||||||
Foreign currency translation, net of income taxes
of $0, $0 and $0, respectively |
1 | | | |||||||||
Unrealized gain (loss) on marketable securities, net of income taxes
of $31, $27 and $(118), respectively |
49 | 38 | (126 | ) | ||||||||
Total other comprehensive income (loss) |
57 | 185 | (290 | ) | ||||||||
Total comprehensive income |
$ | 730 | $ | 52 | $ | 110 | ||||||
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
5
Exelon Generation Company, LLC and Subsidiary Companies
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in millions, unless otherwise noted)
1. Significant Accounting Policies
Description of Business
Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Generation) is a limited liability company engaged principally in the production and wholesale marketing and sale of electricity in various regions of the United States. Generation is wholly owned by Exelon Corporation (Exelon). Generation has numerous wholly owned subsidiaries. These subsidiaries were primarily established to hold certain nuclear, hydroelectric, intermediate and peaking-unit facilities, as well as the 50% interest in Sithe Energies, Inc. (Sithe), and 49.5% interests in Termoeléctrica del Golfo (TEG) and Termoeléctrica Peñoles (TEP), two 230 MW projects in Mexico that commenced commercial operations in the second quarter of 2004. The interests in TEG and TEP were acquired from Sithe in the fourth quarter of 2004. In addition, Generation also has a finance company subsidiary, Generation Finance Company, LLC, which provides certain financing for Generations other subsidiaries. Effective January 1, 2004, Exelon Enterprises Company, LLCs (Enterprises) competitive retail sales business, Exelon Energy Company, became part of Generation. See Note 2 Acquisitions and Dispositions for information regarding the disposition of businesses within the Enterprises segment and Note 20 Subsequent Events and Note 21 Discontinued Operations for information regarding the sale of Sithe.
Basis of Presentation
The consolidated financial statements of Generation include the accounts of its majority-owned subsidiaries after the elimination of intercompany transactions. Investments and joint ventures in which a 20% to 50% interest is owned and a significant influence is exerted are accounted for under the equity method of accounting. The proportionate interests in jointly owned electric plants are consolidated. Investments in which less than a 20% interest is owned are primarily accounted for under the cost method of accounting.
Generation owns 100% of all significant consolidated subsidiaries, either directly or indirectly, except for Southeast Chicago Energy Project, LLC (SCEP) and Sithe, of which Generation owns 71% and 50%, respectively. See Note 3 Sithe and Note 20 Subsequent Events for information regarding transactions that resulted in the ultimate sale of Generations investment in Sithe on January 31, 2005. Generation has reflected the third-party interests in the above majority-owned investments as minority interests in its Consolidated Financial Statements. As a result of the adoption of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 150, Accounting for Certain Financial Instruments with Characteristics of Both Liabilities and Equity (SFAS No. 150) on July 1, 2003, Generation reclassified the minority interest associated with SCEP to a long-term liability. The total minority interest related to SCEP was $49 million and $51 million as of December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. Prior periods were not restated.
In accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Interpretation No. (FIN) 46 (revised December 2003), Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities (FIN 46-R), Sithe, a 50% owned subsidiary of Generation, was consolidated in Generations financial statements as of March 31, 2004. See below for further discussion of the adoption of FIN 46-R and the resulting consolidation of Sithe.
6
Reclassifications
Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified for comparative purposes. The reclassifications did not affect net income or members equity.
Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (GAAP) requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. Areas in which significant estimates have been made include, but are not limited to, the accounting for derivatives, nuclear decommissioning costs and asset retirement obligations, inventory reserves, allowance for doubtful accounts, fixed asset depreciation, asset impairments, severance, pension and other postretirement benefits, taxes, unbilled energy revenues and environmental costs.
Variable Interest Entities
FIN 46-R addressed the requirements for consolidating certain variable interest entities. FIN 46 was effective for Exelons variable interest entities created after January 31, 2003. FIN 46-R was effective December 31, 2003 for Exelons other variable interest entities that were considered to be special-purpose entities and as of March 31, 2004 for all other variable interest entities.
Generation consolidated Sithe, a 50% owned subsidiary, as of March 31, 2004 pursuant to the provisions of FIN 46-R and recorded income of $32 million (net of income taxes) as a result of this consolidation, which included the reversal of guarantees of Sithes commitments previously recorded by Generation. This income was reported as a cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle in the first quarter of 2004. As of March 31, 2004, Generation was a 50% owner of Sithe and had accounted for Sithe as an unconsolidated equity method investment prior to March 31, 2004. Sithes results subsequent to April 1, 2004 are presented as a discontinued operation within Generations Consolidated Statements of Income. Sithe owns and operates power-generating facilities. See Note 3 Sithe, Note 20 Subsequent Events and Note 21 Discontinued Operations for additional information on the consolidation of Sithe, and the subsequent sale of Generations investment in Sithe on January 31, 2005.
Revenues
Operating Revenues. Operating revenues are recorded as energy is delivered to customers. At the end of each month, Generation accrues an estimate for the unbilled amount of energy delivered to its customers. See Note 5 Accounts Receivable for further discussion.
Option Contracts, Swaps, and Commodity Derivatives. Premiums received and paid on option contracts and swap arrangements considered normal derivatives pursuant to SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivatives and Hedging Activities (SFAS No. 133) are amortized to revenue and expensed over the lives of the contracts. Certain option contracts and swap arrangements are considered derivative instruments and are recorded at fair value with subsequent changes in fair value recognized as revenues and expenses unless hedge accounting is applied. Commodity derivatives used for trading purposes are accounted for using the mark-to-market method with the unrealized gains and losses recognized in current period income.
Trading Activities. Generation accounts for its trading activities under the provisions of Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF) Issue No. 02-3, Accounting for Contracts Involved in Energy Trading and Risk Management Activities (EITF 02-3), which requires revenues and energy costs related to energy trading contracts to be presented on a net basis in the income statement.
7
Physically Settled Derivative Contracts. Generation accounts for realized gains and losses on physically settled derivative contracts not held for trading purposes in accordance with EITF Issue No. 03-11, Reporting Realized Gains and Losses on Derivative Instruments That Are Subject to FASB Statement No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, and Not Held for Trading Purposes as Defined in EITF Issue No. 02-3, Issues Involved in Accounting for Derivative Contracts Held for Trading Purposes and Contracts Involved in Energy Trading and Risk Management Activities (EITF 03-11).
EITF 03-11 was ratified by the FASB in August 2003. The EITF concluded that determining whether realized gains and losses on physically settled derivative contracts not held for trading purposes should be reported in the income statement on a gross or net basis is a matter of judgment that depends on the relevant facts and circumstances. Generation adopted EITF 03-11 as of January 1, 2004 and presented $966 million of purchased power and $14 million of fuel expense net within revenues during 2004. Prior periods were not reclassified. The adoption of EITF 03-11 had no effect on Exelons net income. Had EITF 03-11 been retroactively applied to 2003, operating revenues, purchased power and fuel expense would have been affected as follows:
2003 | As Reported | EITF 03-11 Impact | Pro Forma | |||||||||
Operating revenue |
$ | 8,135 | $ | (996 | ) | $ | 7,139 | |||||
Purchased power |
3,587 | (943 | ) | 2,644 | ||||||||
Fuel expense |
1,533 | (53 | ) | 1,480 | ||||||||
Generation is unable to determine the impact on operating revenues, purchased power and fuel expense, had EITF 03-11 been applied retroactively to 2002 results of operations, due to system constraints.
Stock-Based Compensation
Generation participates in Exelons stock-based compensation plans. Exelon accounts for its stock-based compensation plans under the intrinsic method prescribed by Accounting Principles Board No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees and related interpretations and follows the disclosure requirements of SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation (SFAS No. 123), and SFAS No. 148, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation Transition and Disclosure an amendment of FASB Statement No. 123. Accordingly, no compensation expense for stock options has been recognized within the Consolidated Statements of Income. The table below shows the effect on Generations net income for 2004, 2003 and 2002 had Exelon elected to account for its stock-based compensation plans using the fair-value method under SFAS No. 123:
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
Net income (loss) as reported |
$ | 673 | $ | (133 | ) | $ | 400 | |||||
Deduct: Total stock-based compensation expense
determined under fair-value method for all
awards, net of income taxes (a) |
12 | 11 | 15 | |||||||||
Pro forma net income (loss) |
$ | 661 | $ | (144 | ) | $ | 385 | |||||
(a) | The fair value of options granted was estimated using a Black-Scholes option pricing model. |
Income Taxes
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 previously utilized for income tax purposes have been
8
deferred on the Consolidated Balance Sheets and are recognized in book income over the life of the related property.
Exelon and its subsidiaries, including Generation, file a consolidated return for Federal and certain state income tax returns. Income taxes of the Exelon consolidated group are allocated to Generation based on the separate return method. Generation estimates its income tax valuation allowance by assessing which deferred tax assets are more likely than not to be realized in the future. See Note 12 Income Taxes for further discussion.
Generation is a party to an agreement (Tax Sharing Agreement) with Exelon and other subsidiaries of Exelon that provides for the allocation of consolidated tax liabilities. The Tax Sharing Agreement generally 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. Any net benefit attributable to the parent is reallocated to other members. That allocation is treated as a contribution to the capital of the party receiving the benefit.
Comprehensive Income
Comprehensive income includes all changes in equity during a period except those resulting from investments by and distributions to the member. Other comprehensive income primarily relates to unrealized gains or losses on securities held in nuclear decommissioning trust funds and unrealized gains and losses on cash-flow hedge instruments. Comprehensive income is reflected in the Consolidated Statements of Changes in Membership Interest and the Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
Generation considers all temporary cash investments purchased with an original maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents.
Restricted Cash and Investments
As of December 31, 2004, restricted cash and investments primarily represented restricted cash related to Sithes Independence Plant partnership distribution fund. As of December 31, 2003, the balance related to liquidated damages receipts, which were restricted as to use for the construction of the Exelon New England facilities.
Restricted cash and investments not available for general operations or to satisfy current liabilities are classified as noncurrent assets. As of December 31, 2004, $93 million of Sithes restricted cash and investments were classified within deferred debits and other assets, which includes $83 million of debt service reserves, major overhaul reserves of $7 million and lease service reserves of $3 million. As of December 31, 2003, there were no restricted cash and investments classified as noncurrent assets.
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
The allowance for doubtful accounts reflects Generations best estimate of probable losses in the accounts receivable balances. The allowance is based on known uncollateralized troubled accounts, historical experience and other currently available evidence.
Inventories
Inventory is recorded at the lower of cost or market, and provisions are made for excess and obsolete inventory when appropriate.
Fossil Fuel. Fossil fuel inventory includes the weighted average costs of stored natural gas, coal and oil. The costs of natural gas, coal and oil are generally included in inventory when purchased and charged to fuel expense when used.
Materials and Supplies. Materials and supplies inventory generally includes the average costs of generating plant materials. Materials are generally charged to inventory when purchased and then expensed or capitalized to plant, as appropriate, when installed.
9
Emission Allowances
Emission allowances are included in inventories and other assets and are carried at the lower of weighted average cost or market and charged to fuel expense as they are used in operations. Generations emission allowance balances as of December 31, 2004 and 2003 were $106 million and $105 million, respectively.
Marketable Securities
Marketable securities are classified as available-for-sale securities and reported at fair value pursuant to SFAS No. 115, Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities (SFAS No. 115). Unrealized gains and losses, net of tax, on nuclear decommissioning trust funds transferred to Generation from PECO Energy Company (PECO) and Commonwealth Edison Company (ComEd) are reflected in the payables to affiliates on Generations Consolidated Balance Sheets. Unrealized gains and losses on nuclear decommissioning trust funds for the AmerGen Energy Company, LLC (AmerGen) units are reported in other comprehensive income. Prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 143, Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations (SFAS No. 143) on January 1, 2003, unrealized gains and losses on marketable securities held in the nuclear decommissioning trust funds were reported in accumulated depreciation for operating units transferred to Generation from PECO and as other comprehensive income for operating and retired units transferred to Generation from ComEd. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, Generation had no held-to-maturity securities.
Property, Plant and Equipment
Property, plant and equipment is recorded at cost. The cost of maintenance, repairs and minor replacements of property is charged to maintenance expense as incurred.
Upon retirement, the cost of property, including net salvage cost, is charged to accumulated depreciation. See Note 6 Property, Plant and Equipment and Note 17 Supplemental Financial Information for further discussion.
Leases
Generation accounts for leases in accordance with SFAS No. 13 Accounting for Leases and determines whether its long-term power purchase and sales contracts are leases pursuant to EITF Issue No. 01-8, Determining Whether an Arrangement is a Lease (EITF 01-8) which applies to arrangements initiated or modified after October 1, 2003. At the inception of the lease, or subsequent modification, Generation determines whether the lease is an operating or capital lease based upon its terms and characteristics. Several of Generations long-term power purchase agreements which have been determined to be operating leases have significant contingent rental payments which 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.
Nuclear Fuel
The cost of nuclear fuel is capitalized and charged to fuel expense using the unit-of-production method. The estimated cost of disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) is established per the Standard Waste Contract with the Department of Energy (DOE) and is expensed at one mill ($.001) per kWh of net nuclear generation. On-site SNF storage costs are capitalized or expensed, as incurred, based upon the nature of the work performed.
10
Costs associated with nuclear outages are recorded in the period incurred.
Capitalized Software Costs
Costs incurred during the application development stage of software that is developed or obtained for internal use are capitalized. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, unamortized capitalized software costs totaled $30 million and $42 million, respectively. Such capitalized amounts are amortized ratably over the expected lives of the projects when they become operational, generally not to exceed ten years. During 2004, 2003 and 2002, Generation amortized capitalized software costs of $16 million, $8 million and $10 million, respectively.
Depreciation and Amortization
Depreciation is provided over the estimated service lives of property, plant and equipment on a straight-line basis using the composite method. Annual depreciation provisions for financial reporting purposes, expressed as a percentage of average service life for electric generating assets, are presented in the table below.
Asset Category | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | |||||||||
Electric-generation |
3.34 | % | 2.90 | % | 3.58 | % | ||||||
Nuclear Generating Station Decommissioning
Generation accounts for the costs of decommissioning its nuclear generating stations in accordance with SFAS No. 143. See Note 13 Nuclear Decommissioning and Spent Fuel Storage for information regarding the adoption and application of SFAS No. 143 and Cumulative Effect of Changes in Accounting Principle below for pro forma net income for the year ended December 31, 2002, adjusted as if SFAS No. 143 had been applied during that period.
Capitalized Interest
Generation uses SFAS No. 34, Capitalizing Interest Costs, to calculate the costs during construction of debt funds used to finance its construction projects. Generation recorded capitalized interest of $11 million, $15 million and $24 million in 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.
Guarantees
Beginning February 1, 2003, pursuant to FIN 45, Guarantors Accounting and Disclosure Requirements for Guarantees, Including Indirect Guarantees of Indebtedness to Others (FIN 45), Generation recognizes, at the inception of a guarantee, a liability for the fair market value of the obligations it has undertaken in issuing the guarantee, including its 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 Generation is released from risk under the guarantee. Depending on the nature of the guarantee, Generations release from risk 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. The recognition and subsequent adjustment of the liability is highly dependent upon the nature of the associated guarantee.
Asset Impairments
Long-Lived Assets. Generation evaluates the carrying value of long-lived assets to be held and used for impairment whenever indications of impairment exist in accordance with the requirements of SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived
11
Nuclear Outage Costs
Assets (SFAS No. 144). The carrying value of long-lived assets is considered impaired when the projected undiscounted cash flows are less than the carrying value. In that event, a loss would be recognized based on the amount by which the carrying value exceeds the fair value. Fair value is determined primarily by available market valuations or, if applicable, discounted cash flows. See Note 2 Acquisitions and Dispositions for a description of the impairment charge recorded in 2003 related to the long-lived assets of Boston Generating, LLC (Boston Generating).
Upon meeting certain criteria defined by SFAS No. 144, the assets and liabilities that compose a disposal group are classified as held for sale and the carrying value of these assets is adjusted downward, if necessary, to the estimated sales price, less cost to sell. The assets and associated liabilities that are part of a disposal group are classified as held for sale. See Note 2 Acquisitions and Disposition for a description of assets and liabilities classified as held for sale during 2004. Generation held no assets or liabilities classified as held for sale as of December 31, 2004.
Investments. Investments are considered to be impaired when a decline in fair value is judged to be other-than-temporary. If the cost of an investment exceeds its fair value, Generation evaluates, among other factors, general market conditions, the duration and extent to which the fair value is less than cost, as well as Generations intent and ability to hold the investment. Generation also considers specific adverse conditions related to the financial health of and business outlook for the investee. Once a decline in fair value is determined to be other-than-temporary, an impairment charge is recorded and a new cost basis is established. See Note 3 Sithe for a description of the impairments recorded in 2003 related to Generations investment in Sithe and Note 15 Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities for a description of the other-than-temporary impairments in the nuclear decommissioning trust funds determined in 2004.
Derivative Financial Instruments
Generation enters into derivatives to manage its 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 utilizes derivatives with respect to energy transactions to manage the utilization of its available generating capability and provisions of wholesale energy to its affiliates. Generation also utilizes energy option contracts and energy financial swap arrangements to limit the market price risk associated with forward energy commodity contracts. Additionally, Generation enters into energy-related derivatives for trading purposes. Generations derivative activities are in accordance with Exelons Risk Management Policy (RMP).
Generation accounts for derivative financial instruments under SFAS No. 133. Under the provisions of SFAS No. 133, all derivatives are recognized on the balance sheet at their fair value unless they qualify for a normal purchases or normal sales exception. Derivatives on the balance sheet are presented as current or noncurrent mark-to-market derivative assets or liabilities. Changes in the fair value of derivatives are recognized in earnings unless specific hedge accounting criteria are met, in which case those changes are recorded in earnings as an offset to the changes in fair value of the exposure being hedged or deferred in accumulated other comprehensive income and recognized in earnings as hedged transactions occur. Amounts recorded in earnings are included in revenue, purchased power or other, net on the consolidated statements of income.
Revenues and expenses on contracts that qualify as normal purchases or normal sales are recognized when the underlying physical transaction is completed. Normal purchases and 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 price is not tied to an unrelated underlying derivative. As part of Generations 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.
12
While these contracts are considered derivative financial instruments under SFAS No. 133, the majority of these transactions have been designated as normal purchases or normal sales and are thus not required to be recorded at fair value, but on an accrual basis of accounting.
A derivative financial instrument can be designated as a hedge of the fair value of a recognized asset or liability or of an unrecognized firm commitment (fair-value hedge), or a hedge 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). Changes in the fair value of a derivative that is highly effective as, and is designated and qualifies as, a fair-value hedge, are recognized in earnings as offsets to the changes in fair value of the exposure being hedged. Changes in the fair value of a derivative that is highly effective as, and is designated as and qualifies as, a cash-flow hedge are deferred in accumulated other comprehensive income and are recognized in earnings as the hedged transactions occur. Any ineffectiveness is recognized in earnings immediately. On an ongoing basis, the Company assesses the hedge effectiveness of all derivatives that are designated as hedges for accounting purposes in order to determine that each derivative continues to be highly effective in offsetting changes in fair values or cash flows of hedged items. If it is determined that the derivative is not highly effective as a hedge, hedge accounting will be discontinued prospectively.
Generation enters into contracts to buy and sell energy for trading purposes subject to limits. These contracts are recognized on the balance sheet at fair value and changes in the fair value of these derivative financial instruments are recognized in earnings.
Severance Benefits
Generation participates in Exelons ongoing severance plans, which are accounted for in accordance with SFAS No. 112, Employers Accounting for Postemployment Benefits, an amendment of FASB Statements No. 5 and 43 (SFAS No. 112) and SFAS No. 88, Employers Accounting for Settlements and Curtailments of Defined Benefit Pension Plans and for Termination Benefits. Amounts associated with severance benefits that are considered probable and can be reasonably estimated are accrued. See Note 9 Severance Accounting for further discussion of Generations accounting for severance benefits.
Retirement Benefits
Generation participates in Exelons defined benefit pension plans and postretirement welfare benefit plans in addition to sponsoring a plan. Exelons and Generations defined benefit pension plans and postretirement welfare benefit plans are accounted for in accordance with SFAS No. 87, Employers Accounting for Pensions (SFAS No. 87), SFAS No. 106, Employers Accounting for Postretirement Benefits Other than Pensions (SFAS No. 106) and FASB Staff Position (FSP) FAS 106-2, Accounting and Disclosure Requirements Related to the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 (FSP FAS 106-2) and are disclosed in accordance with SFAS No. 132, Employers Disclosures about Pensions and Other Postretirement Benefits an Amendment of FASB Statements No. 87, 88, and 106 (revised 2003) (SFAS No. 132). See Note 14 Retirement Benefits for further discussion of retirement benefits.
FSP FAS 106-2. Through Exelons postretirement benefit plans, Generation provides retirees with prescription drug coverage. The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 (the Prescription Drug Act) was enacted on December 8, 2003. The Prescription Drug Act 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
13
prescription drug benefit provided under Exelons postretirement benefit plans is at least actuarially equivalent to the Medicare prescription drug benefit. In response to the enactment of the Prescription Drug Act, in May 2004, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position (FSP) FAS 106-2, Accounting and Disclosure Requirements Related to the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 (FSP FAS 106-2), which provides transition guidance for accounting for the effects of the Prescription Drug Act and supersedes FSP FAS 106-1, which had been issued in January 2004. FSP FAS 106-1 permitted a plan sponsor of a postretirement health care plan that provides a prescription drug benefit to make a one-time election to defer the accounting for the effects of the Prescription Drug Act. Exelon made the one-time election allowed by FSP FAS 106-1 during the first quarter of 2004.
During the second quarter of 2004, Exelon early adopted the provisions of FSP FAS 106-2, resulting in a remeasurement of its postretirement benefit plans assets and accumulated postretirement benefit obligations (APBO) as of December 31, 2003. Historical financial information for the three months ended March 31, 2004 has been adjusted in Note 19 Quarterly Data.
Foreign Currency Translation
The financial statements of Generations foreign subsidiaries were prepared in their respective local currencies and translated into U.S. dollars based on the current exchange rates at the end of the periods for the Consolidated Balance Sheets and on weighted-average rates for the periods for the Consolidated Statements of Income. Foreign currency translation adjustments, net of deferred income tax benefits, are reflected as a component of other comprehensive income on the Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income and, accordingly, have no effect on net income.
New Accounting Pronouncements
EITF 03-1. In March 2004, the EITF reached a consensus on and the FASB ratified EITF Issue No. 03-1, The Meaning of Other-Than-Temporary Impairment and Its Application to Certain Investments (EITF 03-1). EITF 03-1 provides guidance for evaluating whether an investment is other-than-temporarily impaired. Generation adopted the disclosure requirements of EITF 03-1 for investments accounted for under SFAS No. 115, Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities, within its financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2003. On September 30, 2004, the FASB issued FSP EITF 03-1-1, Effective Date of Paragraphs 10-20 of EITF Issue No. 03-1, The Meaning of Other-Than-Temporary Impairment and its Application to Certain Investments, which delayed the effective date of the application guidance on impairment of securities included within EITF 03-1. The EITF and the FASB are reconsidering the conclusions reached within EITF 03-1.
SFAS No. 151. In November 2004, the FASB issued FASB Statement No. 151, Inventory Costs an amendment of ARB No. 43, Chapter 4 (SFAS No. 151), which is the result of its efforts to converge U.S. accounting standards for inventories with International Accounting Standards. SFAS No. 151 requires abnormal amounts of idle facility expense, freight, handling costs and wasted material or spoilage to be recognized as current-period charges. It also requires that allocation of fixed production overheads to the costs of conversion be based on the normal capacity of the production facilities. SFAS No. 151 will be effective for inventory costs incurred during fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2005. Generation is assessing the impact SFAS No. 151 will have on its consolidated financial statements.
SFAS No. 123-R. In December 2004, the FASB issued FASB Statement No. 123 (revised 2004), Share-Based Payment (SFAS No. 123-R). SFAS No. 123-R replaces SFAS No.
14
123 and supersedes APB No. 25. SFAS No. 123-R requires that the compensation cost relating to share-based payment transactions be recognized in the financial statements. That cost will be measured based on the fair value of the equity or liability instruments issued. Exelon will no longer be permitted to follow the intrinsic value accounting method of APB No. 25, which resulted in no expense being recorded for stock option grants for which the strike price was equal to the fair value of the underlying stock on the date of grant. Exelon has not elected to early adopt SFAS No. 123-R. As a result, SFAS No. 123-R will be effective for Exelon in the third quarter of 2005 and will apply to all of Exelons outstanding unvested share-based payment awards as of July 1, 2005 and all prospective awards. Exelon is assessing the impact SFAS No. 123-R will have on its consolidated financial statements and which of three transition methods allowed by SFAS No. 123-R will be elected.
SFAS No. 153. In December 2004, the FASB issued FASB Statement No. 153, Exchanges of Nonmonetary Assets, an amendment of APB Opinion No. 29, Accounting for Nonmonetary Transactions (SFAS No. 153). Previously, APB Opinion No. 29 had required that the accounting for an exchange of a productive asset for a similar productive asset or an equivalent interest in the same or similar productive asset should be based on the recorded amount of the asset relinquished. The amendments made by SFAS No. 153 are based on the principle that exchanges of nonmonetary assets should be measured based on the fair value of the assets exchanged. Further, the amendments eliminate the narrow exception for nonmonetary exchanges of similar productive assets and replace it with a broader exception for exchanges of nonmonetary assets that do not have commercial substance. SFAS No. 153 will be effective for Generation in the third quarter of 2005 and earlier application is permitted for nonmonetary asset exchanges occurring after the issuance of SFAS No. 153. The provisions of SFAS No. 153 are applied prospectively. Generation is assessing the impact SFAS No. 153 will have on its consolidated financial statements.
FSP FAS 109-1 and FSP FAS 109-2. In December 2004, the FASB issued FSP FAS 109-1, Application of FASB Statement No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes, to the Tax Deduction on Qualified Production Activities Provided by the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 (FSP FAS 109-1) and FSP FAS 109-2, Accounting and Disclosure Guidance for the Foreign Earnings Repatriation Provisions within the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 (FSP FAS 109-2). FSP FAS 109-1 and FSP FAS 109-2 were effective upon issuance. The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 (Act), signed into law on October 22, 2004, provided, generally, for a tax deduction for domestic manufacturing activities of up to nine percent (when fully phased-in) of the lesser of qualified production activities income, as defined in the Act, or taxable income. FSP FAS 109-1 clarified that the tax deduction for domestic manufacturing activities under the Act should be accounted for as a special deduction in accordance with SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes (SFAS No. 109). The Act also provided a special limited-time dividends received deduction on the repatriation of certain foreign earnings to a U.S. taxpayer, provided certain criteria are met. FSP FAS 109-2 provides a registrant more time to evaluate the Acts impact on the registrants plan for reinvestment or repatriation of certain foreign earnings for purposes of applying SFAS No. 109. Generation is assessing the impact, if any, that the Act and these standards may have on its consolidated financial statements in future periods.
Cumulative Effect of Changes in Accounting Principles
FIN 46-R. See discussion of the adoption of FIN 46-R within the Variable Interest Entities discussion above.
15
SFAS No. 143. SFAS No. 143 provides accounting requirements for retirement obligations (whether statutory, contractual or as a result of principles of promissory estoppel) associated with tangible long-lived assets. Generation adopted SFAS No. 143 as of January 1, 2003. After considering interpretations of the transitional guidance included in SFAS No. 143, Generation recorded income of $108 million (net of income taxes) as a cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle in connection with its adoption of this standard in the first quarter of 2003. The cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle included $28 million (net of income taxes of $18 million) associated with Generations investments in AmerGen and Sithe.
The following tables set forth Generations net income for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, adjusted as if SFAS No. 143 had been applied effective January 1, 2002 and FIN 46-R had been effective during those periods. SFAS No. 143 was adopted as of January 1, 2003. FIN 46-R was adopted as of March 31, 2004.
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
Reported income (loss) before cumulative effect of changes in
accounting principles |
$ | 641 | $ | (241 | ) | $ | 387 | |||||
Pro forma earnings effects: |
||||||||||||
FIN 46-R |
| 32 | | |||||||||
SFAS No. 143 |
| | 27 | |||||||||
Pro forma income (loss) before cumulative effect of changes in
accounting principles |
$ | 641 | $ | (209 | ) | $ | 414 | |||||
Reported net income (loss) |
$ | 673 | $ | (133 | ) | $ | 400 | |||||
Pro forma earnings effects: |
||||||||||||
FIN 46-R |
| 32 | | |||||||||
SFAS No. 143 |
| | 27 | |||||||||
Reported cumulative effects of changes in accounting principles: |
||||||||||||
FIN 46-R |
(32 | ) | | | ||||||||
SFAS No. 143 |
| (108 | ) | | ||||||||
SFAS No. 142 |
| | (13 | ) | ||||||||
Pro forma net income (loss) |
$ | 641 | $ | (209 | ) | $ | 414 | |||||
2. Acquisitions and Dispositions
Sale of Ownership Interest in Boston Generating, LLC
On May 25, 2004, Generation completed the sale, transfer and assignment of ownership of their indirect wholly owned subsidiary Boston Generating, which owns the companies that own Mystic 4-7, Mystic 8 and 9 and Fore River generating facilities, to a special purpose entity owned by the lenders under Boston Generatings $1.25 billion credit facility (Boston Generating Credit Facility).
The sale was pursuant to a settlement agreement reached with Boston Generatings lenders on February 23, 2004. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) approved the sale of Boston Generating on May 25, 2004. Responsibility for plant operations and power marketing activities were transferred to the lenders special purpose entity on September 1, 2004.
In connection with the settlement reached on February 23, 2004, Exelon, Generation, the lenders and Raytheon Company (Raytheon), the guarantor of the obligations of the turnkey contractor under the projects engineering, procurement and construction agreements, entered into a global settlement of all disputes relating to the construction of the Mystic 8 and 9 and Fore River generating facilities.
16
In connection with the decision to transition out of Boston Generating and the generating units, Generation recorded during the third quarter of 2003 an impairment charge of its long-lived assets pursuant to SFAS No. 144 of $945 million ($573 million net of income taxes) in operating expenses within its Consolidated Statements of Income. At the date of the sale, Boston Generating had approximately $1.2 billion in assets, primarily consisting of property, plant and equipment, and approximately $1.3 billion of liabilities of which approximately $1.0 billion was debt outstanding under the Boston Generating Credit Facility. As of the date of transfer, these amounts were eliminated from the Consolidated Balance Sheet of Generation. As a result of Boston Generatings liabilities being greater than its assets at the time of the sale, transfer and assignment of ownership, Generation recorded a net gain of $85 million ($52 million net of income taxes) in other income and deductions within the Consolidated Statement of Income in the second quarter of 2004. In connection with the sale, Generation recorded a liability associated with an existing guarantee to Distrigas by its subsidiary Exelon New England Holdings, LLC (Exelon New England) of fuel purchase obligations of Boston Generating. Due to the existence of this guarantee and in accordance with SFAS No. 144 and EITF Issue No. 03-13, Applying the Conditions in Paragraph 42 of FASB Statement No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, in Determining Whether to Report Discontinued Operations, Generation determined that it had retained risk and continuing involvement associated with the operations of Boston Generating and, as a result, the results of Boston Generating have not been classified as a discontinued operation within Generations Consolidated Statements of Income. See Note 16 Commitments and Contingencies for further information regarding the guarantee.
Generations Consolidated Statements of Income include the following results related to Boston Generating:
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
Operating revenues |
$ | 248 | $ | 618 | $ | 39 | ||||||
Operating loss (a) |
(49 | ) | (954 | ) | (2 | ) | ||||||
Net income (loss) (b) |
21 | (583 | ) | (3 | ) | |||||||
(a) | The operating loss in 2003 included an impairment loss of $945 million ($573 million after-tax) related to Boston Generatings long-lived assets. |
(b) | Net income for 2004 included an after-tax gain of $52 million related to the sale of Boston Generating in the second quarter of 2004. |
See Note 4 Selected Pro Forma and Consolidating Financial Information for the effect of the sale of Boston Generating as if the transaction had occurred on January 1, 2003 and was excluded from Generations results from that date.
Sithe and Sithe International
See Note 3 Sithe for additional information regarding Sithe and Sithe International.
Exelon Energy Company
Effective January 1, 2004, Exelon contributed its interest in Exelon Energy Company (Exelon Energy) to Generation. The transaction had no effect on the assets and liabilities of Exelon Energy, which were previously reported as a part of the Enterprises segment. Beginning in 2004, Exelon Energys assets and liabilities and results of operations are included in Generations financial statements. See Note 21-Discontinued Operations for a discussion of AllEnergy, a wholly owned subsidiary of Exelon Energy.
The following summary represents the assets and liabilities of Exelon Energy that were transferred to Generation at book value as of January 1, 2004:
17
Current assets (including $5 million of cash) |
$ | 119 | ||
Property, plant and equipment |
2 | |||
Deferred debits and other assets |
13 | |||
Total assets |
$ | 134 | ||
Current liabilities |
126 | |||
Deferred credits and other liabilities |
10 | |||
Members equity |
(2 | ) | ||
Total liabilities and members equity |
$ | 134 | ||
See Note 4 Selected Pro Forma and Consolidating Financial Information for the effect of the transfer of Exelon Energy to Generation as if the transaction had occurred on January 1, 2003 and was included in Generations results from that date.
AmerGen Energy Company, LLC
On December 22, 2003, Generation purchased British Energy plcs (British Energy) 50% interest in AmerGen. The resolution of purchase price contingencies related to the valuation of long-lived assets was finalized during the fourth quarter of 2004, reflecting the final purchase price of $267 million after working capital adjustments.
Prior to the purchase, Generation was a 50% owner of AmerGen and had accounted for the investment as an unconsolidated equity investment. From January 1, 2003 through the date of closing, Generation recorded $47 million ($28 million, net of tax) of equity in earnings of unconsolidated affiliates related to its investment in AmerGen and recorded $382 million of purchased power from AmerGen. The book value of Generations investment in AmerGen prior to the purchase was $316 million.
The transaction was accounted for as a step acquisition. As such, upon consolidation, Generation was required to allocate its $316 million book value to 50% of AmerGens equity book value. The difference between Generations investment in AmerGen and 50% of AmerGens equity book value of approximately $227 million was primarily due to Generation not recognizing a significant portion of the cumulative effect of the change in accounting principle at AmerGen related to the adoption of SFAS No. 143. Generation reduced AmerGens equity book value through the reduction of the book value of AmerGens long-lived assets.
18
Generation recorded the acquired assets and liabilities of AmerGen (remaining 50%) at fair value as of the date of purchase. The following assets and liabilities, after final purchase accounting adjustments, reflecting the equity basis and fair value adjustments discussed above, of AmerGen were recorded within Generations Consolidated Balance Sheets as of the date of purchase:
Current assets (including $36 million of cash acquired) |
$ | 116 | ||
Property, plant and equipment, including nuclear fuel |
111 | |||
Nuclear decommissioning trust funds |
1,108 | |||
Deferred debits and other assets |
30 | |||
Current liabilities |
(140 | ) | ||
Asset retirement obligation |
(496 | ) | ||
Deferred credits and other liabilities |
(106 | ) | ||
Long-term debt |
(40 | ) | ||
Total equity |
$ | 583 | ||
The assets and liabilities of AmerGen were included in Generations Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2004 and 2003 and AmerGens results of operations were included in Generations Consolidated Statements of Income for the year ended December 31, 2004.
In connection with the purchase of Unit No. 1 of the Three Mile Island (TMI) facility by AmerGen in 2000, AmerGen entered into an agreement with the seller whereby the seller would receive additional consideration based upon future power purchase prices through 2009. Under the terms of the agreement, approximately $7 million had been accrued at December 31, 2004 which will be payable to the former owner of the TMI facility in the first quarter of 2005. This payment represents contingent consideration for the original acquisition and has accordingly been reflected as an increase to the long-lived assets associated with the TMI facility, and will be depreciated over the remaining useful life of the facility.
Acquisition of Generating Plants from TXU
On April 25, 2002, Generation acquired two natural-gas generation plants with a total of 2,334 MWs of capacity from TXU Corp. (TXU) for an aggregate purchase price of $443 million. Substantially the entire purchase price was allocated to property, plant and equipment. The transaction included a tolling agreement that provided for TXU to purchase power from the plants during the months of May through September from 2002 through 2006. In December 2004, TXU and Generation terminated the original tolling agreement and entered into a new agreement whereby TXU agreed to purchase 1,900 MWs of capacity and related energy/ancillary services from Generation through 2006. Upon termination of the original agreement, Generation received a cash payment of $172 million. As the termination of the original agreement and the execution of the new agreement were negotiated simultaneously and had similar terms, Generation determined that the culmination of the earnings process related to the termination payment had not occurred in 2004, and the resulting gain was deferred and will be recognized as income over the contractual term of the new agreement.
Assets and Liabilities Held for Sale
Generation classified three gas turbines with a book value of $36 million as held for sale as of December 31, 2003. These turbines were sold during the first quarter of 2004 for proceeds of $42 million, resulting in a gain of $6 million. In anticipation of their sale in 2004, these turbines had been classified as other long-term assets as they had not been placed into service.
19
3. Sithe
Sithe is primarily engaged in the ownership and operation of electric wholesale generating facilities in North America. At December 31, 2004, Sithe operated nine power plants with total average net capacity of 1,323 megawatts (MWs). Described below is a series of transactions in 2004 and 2003 that ultimately resulted in the sale of Generations ownership interest in Sithe to a third party on January 31, 2005. See Note 20 Subsequent Events for further discussion of these transactions.
Exercise of Call Option and Subsequent Agreement to Sell. On November 25, 2003, Generation, Reservoir Capital Group (Reservoir) and Sithe completed a series of transactions resulting in Generation and Reservoir each indirectly owning a 50% interest in Sithe. (Generation owned 49.9% prior to November 25, 2003). See below for further details regarding these 2003 transactions.
Both Generations and Reservoirs 50% interests in Sithe were subject to put and call options. On September 29, 2004, Generation exercised its call option and entered into an agreement to acquire Reservoirs 50% interest in Sithe for $97 million. On November 1, 2004, Generation entered into an agreement to sell Sithe to Dynegy Inc. (Dynegy) for $135 million in cash. On January 31, 2005, Generation completed the closing of the call exercise and the sale of the resulting 100% interest in Sithe. The sale did not include Sithe International, Inc., which was sold to a subsidiary of Generation in a separate transaction described below.
Acquisition of Sithe International, Inc. Sithe International, through its subsidiaries, had 49.5% interests in two Mexican business trusts that own TEG and TEP power stations, two 230 MW petcoke-fired generating facilities in Tamuín, Mexico that commenced commercial operations in the second quarter of 2004. On October 13, 2004, Sithe transferred all of the shares of Sithe International, Inc. and its subsidiaries to a subsidiary of Generation in exchange for cancellation of a $92 million note, which is eliminated as part of the consolidation of Sithe. Effective January 26, 2005, Sithe Internationals name was changed to Tamuin International, Inc.
2003 Transactions. On November 25, 2003, Generation, Reservoir and Sithe completed a series of transactions resulting in Generation and Reservoir each indirectly owning a 50% interest in Sithe. Immediately prior to these transactions, Sithe was owned 49.9% by Generation, 35.2% by Apollo Energy, LLC (Apollo), and 14.9% by subsidiaries of Marubeni Corporation (Marubeni).
On November 25, 2003, entities controlled by Reservoir purchased certain Sithe entities holding six U.S. generating facilities, each a qualifying facility under the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act, in exchange for $37 million ($21 million in cash and a $16 million two-year note); and entities controlled by Marubeni purchased all of Sithes entities and facilities outside of North America (other than Sithe Energies Australia (SEA) of which it purchased a 49.9% interest on November 24, 2003 and the remaining 50.1% on May 27, 2004 for separate consideration) for $178 million.
Following the sales of the above entities, Generation transferred its wholly owned subsidiary that held the Sithe investment to a newly formed holding company, EXRES SHC, Inc. The subsidiary holding the Sithe investment acquired the remaining Sithe interests from Apollo and Marubeni for $612 million using proceeds from a $580 million bridge financing and available cash. Generation sold a 50% interest in the newly formed holding company for $76 million to an entity controlled by Reservoir on November 25, 2003. On November 26, 2003, Sithe distributed $580 million of available cash to its parent, which then utilized the distributed funds to repay the bridge financing.
Guarantees. In connection with the 2003 transactions, Generation recorded obligations related to $39 million of guarantees in accordance with FIN 45. These guarantees were issued to protect Reservoir from credit exposure of certain counter-parties through 2015 and other indemnities. In determining the value of the FIN 45 guarantees, Generation utilized probabilistic models to assess the possibilities of future payments under the guarantees.
20
These guarantees were reversed upon the consolidation of Sithe in accordance with FIN 45 as this liability was associated with guarantees for the performance of a consolidated entity. The consolidation of Sithe in accordance with FIN 46-R resulted in Generation recording income of $32 million (net of income taxes), which included the reversal of the aforementioned guarantees, as a cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle during the first quarter of 2004.
Accounting Prior to the Consolidation of Sithe on March 31, 2004. Generation had accounted for the investment in Sithe as an unconsolidated equity method investment prior to its consolidation on March 31, 2004 pursuant to FIN 46-R. See Note 1 Significant Accounting Policies for further discussion. In 2003, Generation recorded impairment charges of $255 million (before income taxes) in other income and deductions within the Consolidated Statements of Income associated with a decline in the fair value of the Sithe investment, which was considered to be other-than-temporary. Generations management considered various factors in the decision to impair this investment, including managements negotiations to sell its interest in Sithe. The discussions surrounding the sale indicated that the fair value of the Sithe investment was below its book value and, as such, impairment charges were required.
The book value of Generations investment in Sithe immediately prior to its consolidation on March 31, 2004 was $49 million. For the year ended December 31, 2004, Generation recorded $2 million of equity method losses from Sithe prior to its consolidation. For the year ended December 31, 2003 and 2002, Generation recorded $2 million and $23 million of equity method income, respectively, related to its investment in Sithe.
Consolidation of Sithe as of March 31, 2004. As a result of the 2003 transactions referred to above, the consolidation of Sithe at March 31, 2004 was accounted for as a step acquisition pursuant to purchase accounting policies. Under the provisions of FIN 46-R, the operating results of Sithe were included in Generations results of operations; however, due to the subsequent sale of Sithe, its results are classified as a discontinued operation beginning April 1, 2004. (See Note 21 Discontinued Operations)
The condensed consolidating financial information included in Note 4 Selected Pro Forma and Consolidating Financial Information (Unaudited) presents the financial position of Generation and Sithe, as well as consolidating entries related primarily to acquisition notes payables and receivables between Generation and Sithe.
Intangible Assets. Sithe had entered into a tolling arrangement (Tolling Agreement) with Dynegy Power Marketing and its affiliates with respect to Sithes Independence Station. The Tolling Agreement commenced on July 1, 2001 and runs through 2014. Additionally, Sithe has entered into an energy purchase agreement (Energy Purchase Agreement) with a counterparty relating to the Independence Station, which continues through 2014. As a result of the acquisition accounting described above, values were assigned to the Tolling Agreement and the Energy Purchase Agreement of approximately $73 million and $384 million, respectively, which have been recorded as intangible assets on Generations Consolidated Balance Sheets in deferred debits and other assets. These amounts were determined based on fair value techniques utilizing the contract terms and various other estimates, including forward power prices, discount rates and option pricing models.
The intangible assets representing the Tolling Agreement and the Energy Purchase Agreement were being amortized on a straight-line basis over the lives of the associated agreements. See Note 8 Intangible Assets for further information regarding Generations intangible assets.
Long-Term Debt and Letters of Credit. Substantially all of Sithes property, plant and equipment and project agreements secure Sithes outstanding long-term debt, which consists primarily of project debt. During 2003, Sithe entered into an agreement with Exelon and Generation under which Exelon obtained letters of credit to support contractual obligations of Sithe and its subsidiaries. As of December 31, 2004, Exelon had obtained $61 million of letters of credit in support of Sithes obligations not including a $50 million letter of credit that is not guaranteed by Exelon. With the exception of the issuance of letters of credit to support contractual obligations, the creditors of Sithe have no recourse against the general credit of Exelon or Generation.
21
4. Selected Pro Forma and Consolidating Financial Information
The following unaudited pro forma financial information gives effect to the acquisition on December 22, 2003 of the remaining 50% interest in AmerGen, the transfer of Exelon Energy to Generation on January 1, 2004 and the sale of Boston Generating on May 25, 2004, in each case, as if the transaction had occurred on January 1, 2003.
Sale of | Pro Forma | |||||||||||||||
Generation | Boston | Eliminating | Generation | |||||||||||||
2004 | As Reported | Generating | Entries | Consolidated | ||||||||||||
Total operating revenues |
$ | 7,703 | $ | 248 | $ | | $ | 7,455 | ||||||||
Operating income (loss) |
1,039 | (49 | ) | | 1,088 | |||||||||||
Income before cumulative effect of
changes in accounting principle |
641 | 21 | | 620 | ||||||||||||
Sale of | Pro Forma | |||||||||||||||||||
Generation | Businesses | Boston | Eliminating | Generation | ||||||||||||||||
2003 | As Reported | Acquired (a) | Generating | Entries (b) | Consolidated | |||||||||||||||
Total operating revenue |
$ | 8,135 | $ | 1,283 | $ | 618 | $ | (591 | ) | $ | 8,209 | |||||||||
Operating income (loss) |
(115 | ) | 111 | (954 | ) | | 950 | |||||||||||||
Income (loss) before cumulative
effect of changes in accounting
principle |
(241 | ) | 71 | (583 | ) | (47 | ) | 366 | ||||||||||||
(a) | Consists of the acquisition of the remaining 50% interest in AmerGen and the transfer of Exelon Energy to Generation. |
(b) | Represents the elimination of intercompany revenues at AmerGen and Exelon Energy and equity in earnings from AmerGen in 2003. |
The above unaudited, pro forma financial information should not be relied upon as being indicative of the historical results that would have been obtained if these transactions had actually occurred in prior periods nor of the results that might be obtained in the future.
Condensed Consolidating Balance Sheet at December 31, 2004
The following condensed consolidating financial information presents the financial position of Generation, Sithe and Exelon Energy, as well as eliminating entries related primarily to acquisition notes payables and receivables between Generation and Sithe.
Generation | ||||||||||||||||||||
Pro Forma | Exelon | Eliminating | Consolidated | |||||||||||||||||
December 31, 2004 | Generation | Sithe | Energy | Entries | (As Reported) | |||||||||||||||
Assets |
||||||||||||||||||||
Current assets |
$ | 2,238 | $ | 336 | $ | 128 | $ | (381 | ) | $ | 2,321 | |||||||||
Property, plant and equipment, net |
7,265 | 270 | 1 | | 7,536 | |||||||||||||||
Other noncurrent assets |
5,849 | 750 | 13 | (31 | ) | 6,581 | ||||||||||||||
Total assets |
$ | 15,352 | $ | 1,356 | $ | 142 | $ | (41 | ) | $ | 16,438 | |||||||||
Liabilities and members equity |
||||||||||||||||||||
Current liabilities |
$ | 2,348 | $ | 323 | $ | 126 | $ | (381 | ) | $ | 2,416 | |||||||||
Long-term debt |
1,798 | 785 | | | 2,583 | |||||||||||||||
Other long-term liabilities (a) |
8,180 | 181 | 3 | 36 | 8,400 | |||||||||||||||
Members equity |
3,026 | 67 | 13 | (67 | ) | 3,039 | ||||||||||||||
Total liabilities and members equity |
$ | 15,352 | $ | 1,356 | $ | 142 | $ | (412 | ) | $ | 16,438 | |||||||||
(a) | Includes minority interest of consolidated subsidiaries. |
22
5. Accounts Receivable
Customer accounts receivable at December 31, 2004 and 2003 included $449 million and $366 million, respectively, of unbilled revenues for amounts of energy delivered to customers in the month of December, including $64 million as of December 31, 2004 related to unread meters for Exelon Energy customers. The allowance for uncollectible accounts at December 31, 2004 and 2003 was $19 million and $14 million, respectively. The allowance for uncollectible accounts at December 31, 2004 includes $3 million for Exelon Energy.
6. Property, Plant and Equipment
A summary of property, plant and equipment by classification as of December 31, 2004 and 2003 is as follows:
Asset Category | 2004 | 2003 | ||||||
Electric-generation |
$ | 7,125 | $ | 7,968 | ||||
Nuclear fuel |
2,926 | 2,568 | ||||||
Asset retirement cost (ARC) |
1,023 | 202 | ||||||
Construction work in progress |
357 | 428 | ||||||
Other property, plant and equipment (a) |
54 | 54 | ||||||
Total property, plant and equipment |
11,485 | 11,220 | ||||||
Less accumulated depreciation (including accumulated
amortization of nuclear fuel of $1,976 and $1,596 as of
December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively) |
3,949 | 4,114 | ||||||
Property, plant and equipment, net |
$ | 7,536 | $ | 7,106 | ||||
(a) | Includes buildings under capital lease with a net carrying value of $43 million and $46 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. The original cost basis of the buildings was $53 million and total accumulated amortization was $10 million and $6 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. |
Service Life Extensions. Upon the December 2003 acquisition of the remaining 50% interest in AmerGen, Generation changed its accounting estimates related to the depreciation of certain AmerGen generating facilities to conform with Generations depreciation policies. The estimated service lives were extended by 20 years for the three AmerGen stations. These changes were based on engineering and economic feasibility analyses performed by Generation. The service life extensions are subject to approval by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) of the renewals of the existing NRC operating licenses. Generation has not applied for license renewals at the AmerGen facilities, but has announced its plan to file a renewal request in 2005 for the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (Oyster Creek) and is planning on filing for license renewals for TMI Unit 1 and the Clinton Nuclear Power Station (Clinton) on a timeline consistent and integrated with the other planned license filings for the Generation nuclear fleet.
License Renewals. In December 2004, the NRC issued an order that will permit Oyster Creek to operate beyond its license expiration in April 2009 if the NRC has not completed reviewing the application for renewal. The application for Oyster Creeks license renewal is anticipated to be filed by August 2005 in order to comply with this agreement. On October 28, 2004, the NRC approved 20-year renewals of the operating licenses for Generations Dresden and Quad Cities generating stations. The licenses for Dresden Unit 2, Dresden Unit 3 and Quad Cities Units 1 and 2 were renewed to 2029, 2031 and 2032, respectively. On May 7, 2003, the operating licenses for Peach Bottom Unit 2 and Peach Bottom Unit 3 were renewed to 2033 and
23
2034, respectively. Depreciation provisions are based on the estimated useful lives of the stations, which assumes the renewal of the licenses for all nuclear generating stations. As a result, these license renewals had no impact on the Consolidated Statements of Income.
7. Jointly Owned Electric Utility Plants
Generations undivided ownership interests in jointly owned generation plants as of December 31, 2004 and 2003 were as follows:
Nuclear generation | Fossil fuel generation | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Quad Cities | Peach Bottom | Salem (b) | Keystone | Conemaugh | Wyman | |||||||||||||||||||
PSEG | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Operator |
Generation | Generation | Nuclear | Reliant | Reliant | FP&L | ||||||||||||||||||
Ownership interest |
75.00 | % | 50.00 | % | 42.59 | % | 20.99 | % | 20.72 | % | 5.89 | % | ||||||||||||
Generations share at
December 31, 2004: (a) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Plant |
$ | 287 | $ | 438 | $ | 127 | $ | 167 | $ | 212 | $ | 2 | ||||||||||||
Accumulated depreciation |
54 | 231 | 33 | 102 | 133 | | ||||||||||||||||||
Construction work
in progress |
39 | 16 | 81 | 5 | 1 | | ||||||||||||||||||
Generations share at
December 31, 2003: (a) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Plant |
$ | 191 | $ | 453 | $ | 106 | $ | 168 | $ | 210 | $ | 2 | ||||||||||||
Accumulated depreciation |
18 | 239 | 24 | 106 | 138 | | ||||||||||||||||||
Construction work
in progress |
40 | 1 | 48 | 2 | 1 | | ||||||||||||||||||
(a) | Generation also has a 44.24% ownership interest in Merrill Creek Reservoir located in New Jersey with a book value of $1 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003, which is not included in the table above. |
(b) | Generation also owns a proportionate share in the fossil fuel combustion turbine, which is fully depreciated. The gross book value was $3 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003. |
Generations undivided ownership interests are financed with Generation funds and all operations are accounted for as if such participating interests were wholly owned facilities. Direct expenses of the jointly owned plants are included in the corresponding operating expenses on the Consolidated Statements of Income.
8. Intangible Assets
Intangible Assets. Generations intangible assets, included in deferred debits and other assets, other, consisted of the following:
December 31, 2004 | December 31, 2003 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Accumulated | Accumulated | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross | Amortization | Net | Gross | Amortization | Net | |||||||||||||||||||
Amortized intangible assets: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Energy purchase agreement (a) |
$ | 384 | $ | (27 | ) | $ | 357 | $ | | $ | | $ | | |||||||||||
Tolling agreement (a) |
73 | (5 | ) | 68 | | | | |||||||||||||||||
Other |
6 | (6 | ) | | 6 | | 6 | |||||||||||||||||
Total |
$ | 463 | $ | (38 | ) | $ | 425 | $ | 6 | $ | | $ | 6 | |||||||||||
(a) | See Note 3 Sithe and Note 20 Subsequent Events for a description of Sithes intangible assets that are reflected in Generations balance sheet at December 31, 2004 and a description of the sale of Sithe that was completed on January 31, 2005. |
24
Amortization related to amortized intangible assets was $38 million for the year ended December 31, 2004, of which $6 million has been reflected as a reduction in revenue. Of the $38 million, $32 million was attributable to the energy purchase agreement and tolling agreement, both of which relate to Generations consolidation of Sithe and is reflected in discontinued operations. In 2004, Generation entered into an agreement to sell its ownership interest in Sithe, which was completed on January 31, 2005 and will result in the elimination of the intangible assets related to Sithes energy purchase agreement and tolling agreement from the Consolidated Balance Sheets in future periods. See Note 20 Subsequent Events for further information regarding this sale.
9. Severance Accounting
Generation provides severance and health and welfare benefits to terminated employees pursuant to pre-existing severance plans primarily based upon each individual employees years of service with Generation and compensation level.
During the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, Generation identified approximately 99 and 470 positions, respectively, for elimination. As of December 31, 2004, approximately 85 of the identified positions had not been eliminated. Generation recorded charges for salary continuance severance of $2 million and $38 million during 2004 and 2003, respectively, which represented salary continuance severance that were probable and could be reasonably estimated at the end of the year. During 2004 and 2003, Generation recorded charges of $4 million and $12 million (before income taxes) associated with special health and welfare severance benefits. Additionally, Generation incurred curtailment costs in 2004 and 2003, associated with pension and postretirement benefit plans of $3 million and $15 million, as a result of personnel reductions. These amounts are net of $11 million in charges billed to co-owners of generating facilities in 2003. Amounts billed to co-owners in 2004 were not significant. In total, Generation recorded charges of $9 million and $65 million in 2004 and 2003, net of co-owner billings. See Note 14 - Retirement Benefits for a description of the curtailment charges for the pension and postretirement benefit plans.
In 2004, Generation recorded a charge of $9 million for new positions identified and reversed $7 million for accruals in excess of the reserve for individuals previously identified under The Exelon Way. Charges in 2004 included a $1 million increase in the reserve for liabilities acquired upon consolidation of Exelon Energy. Generation based its estimate of the number of positions to be eliminated on managements current plans and its ability to determine the appropriate staffing levels to effectively operate the business. Generation may incur further severance costs if additional positions are identified for elimination. These costs will be recorded in the period in which the costs can be reasonably estimated.
The following table details Generations total salary continuance severance expense, recorded as an operating and maintenance expense, for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002:
Salary continuance severance charges |
||||
Expense recorded 2004 (a) |
$ | 2 | ||
Expense recorded 2003 (a) |
38 | |||
Expense recorded 2002 (b) |
2 | |||
(a) | Severance expense in 2004 and 2003 reflects severance costs associated with The Exelon Way and other severance costs incurred in the normal course of business. In 2004, Generation recorded charges of $9 million for new positions identified and reversed $7 million to reduce accruals for individuals previously identified under The Exelon Way. 2004 charges included $1 million for the transfer of Exelon Energy to Generation, effective January 1, 2004. |
25
(b) | Severance expense in 2002 generally represents severance activity associated with the October 20, 2000 merger and in the normal course of business. |
The following table provides a roll forward of Generations salary continuance severance obligation from January 1, 2003 through December 31, 2004.
Salary continuance severance obligation |
||||
Balance as of January 1, 2003 |
$ | 11 | ||
Severance charges recorded |
38 | |||
Cash payments |
(9 | ) | ||
Liability acquired upon consolidation of AmerGen |
3 | |||
Balance as of January 1, 2004 |
43 | |||
Severance charges recorded (a) |
2 | |||
Cash payments |
(29 | ) | ||
Balance as of December 31, 2004 |
$ | 16 | ||
10. Short-Term Debt
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
Average borrowings |
$ | 72 | $ | | $ | | ||||||
Maximum borrowings outstanding |
326 | | | |||||||||
Average interest rates, computed on a daily basis |
1.14 | % | | | ||||||||
Average interest rates, at December 31 |
| | | |||||||||
At December 31, 2003, Exelon, along with ComEd, PECO and Generation, participated with a group of banks in a $750 million 364-day unsecured revolving credit agreement and a $750 million three-year unsecured revolving credit agreement. On July 16, 2004, the $750 million 364-day facility was replaced with a $1 billion unsecured revolving facility maturing on July 16, 2009 and the $750 million three-year facility was reduced to $500 million maturing on October 31, 2006. Both revolving credit agreements are used principally to support the commercial paper programs at Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation and to issue letters of credit.
At December 31, 2004, Generations aggregate sublimit under the credit agreements was $600 million. Sublimits under the credit agreements can change upon written notification to the bank group. Generation had approximately $444 million of unused bank commitments, net of outstanding letters of credit, under the credit agreements at December 31, 2004. Generation did not have any commercial paper outstanding at December 31, 2004 or 2003. Interest rates on advances under the credit facilities are based on either prime or the London Interbank Offering Rate (LIBOR) plus an adder based on the credit rating of the borrower as well as the total outstanding amounts under the agreement at the time of borrowing. The maximum LIBOR adder is 170 basis points.
26
The credit agreements require Generation 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 ratio excludes revenues and interest expenses attributable to securitization debt, certain changes in working capital distributions on preferred securities of subsidiaries and revenues from Sithe and interest on the debt of its project subsidiaries. Generations minimum cash from operations to interest expense ratio is 3.25 to 1. At December 31, 2004, Generation was in compliance with this threshold.
11. Long-Term Debt
Long-term debt is comprised of the following:
December 31, 2004 | December 31, | |||||||||||||||
Rates | Maturity Date | 2004 | 2003 | |||||||||||||
Boston Generating Credit Facility (a) |
| | $ | | $ | 1,037 | ||||||||||
Senior unsecured notes |
5.35%-6.95 | % | 2011-2014 | 1,200 | 1,200 | |||||||||||
Non-recourse secured project debt |
8.50%-9.00 | %(b) | 2007-2013 | 499 | | |||||||||||
Subordinated notes |
7.00 | %(b) | 2013-2034 | 419 | | |||||||||||
Pollution control notes, floating rates |
1.71%-2.04 | % | 2016-2034 | 520 | 363 | |||||||||||
Notes payable and other (c) |
6.20%-18.00 | % | 2005-2020 | 100 | 128 | |||||||||||
Total long-term debt (d) |
2,738 | 2,728 | ||||||||||||||
Unamortized debt discount and premium, net |
(108 | ) | (11 | ) | ||||||||||||
Due within one year |
(47 | ) | (1,068 | ) | ||||||||||||
Long-term debt |
$ | 2,583 | $ | 1,649 | ||||||||||||
(a) | Approximately $1.0 billion of debt was outstanding under the non-recourse Boston Generating Credit Facility at December 31, 2003, all of which was reflected in the Consolidated Balance Sheet of Generation as a current liability due to certain events of default under the Boston Generating Credit Facility. The outstanding debt under the Boston Generating Credit Facility was eliminated from Generations Consolidated Balance Sheets in May 2004 following the sale Generations ownership interest in Boston Generating. See Note 2 Acquisitions and Dispositions for additional information regarding the sale. |
(b) | In addition to the stated interest rate, an additional 1.97% and 0.99% of interest on the carrying amount of the secured bonds payable is being credited due to debt premiums and 1.63% of interest on the carrying amount of the subordinated debt is being incurred due to the debt discount recorded at the time of the purchase. There is $100 million of unamortized debt discount associated with this debt. These amounts represent obligations of Sithe and will be removed from the Generations Consolidated Balance Sheet following the sale of Sithe, which was completed on January 31, 2005. See Note 20 Subsequent Events for additional information. |
(c) | Includes capital lease obligations of $50 million at December 31, 2004 and December 31, 2003. Lease payments of approximately $3 million, $3 million, $2 million, $2 million and $40 million will be made in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and thereafter, respectively. | |||
(d) | Long-term debt maturities in the periods 2005 through 2009 and thereafter are as follows: |
2005 |
$ | 47 | ||
2006 |
51 | |||
2007 |
52 | |||
2008 |
56 | |||
2009 |
68 | |||
Thereafter |
2,464 | |||
Total |
$ | 2,738 | ||
Included in the table above are maturities of Sithes debt of $34, $38, $40, $44, $57 and $706 in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 and thereafter, respectively. In connection with Generations sale of Sithe on January 31, 2005, Generation is no longer obligated to fulfill these debt maturities, and the related obligations will be removed from the Consolidated Balance Sheets. See Note 20 Subsequent Events for a further discussion of the sale of Sithe.
27
Debt Issuances. The following long-term debt was issued during 2004:
Type | Interest Rate | Maturity | Amount | |||||||||
Pollution Control Revenue Bonds |
Variable | April 1, 2021 | $ | 51 | ||||||||
Pollution Control Revenue Bonds |
Variable | October 1, 2030 | 92 | |||||||||
Pollution Control Revenue Bonds |
Variable | October 1, 2034 | 14 | |||||||||
Total issuances |
$ | 157 | ||||||||||
Debt Retirements and Redemptions. The following debt was retired, through tender, open market purchases, optional redemption, or payment at maturity, during 2004:
Type | Interest Rate | Maturity | Amount | |||||||||
Note AmerGen |
6.33 | % | August 8, 2009 | $ | 10 | |||||||
Note AmerGen |
6.20 | % | December 20, 2004 | 16 | ||||||||
Note Sithe |
8.50 | % | June 30, 2007 | 32 | ||||||||
Other |
4 | |||||||||||
Total retirements |
$ | 62 | ||||||||||
See Note 2 Acquisitions and Dispositions for information regarding debt classified as held for sale as of December 31, 2003.
See Note 15 Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities for additional information regarding interest-rate swaps.
12. Income Taxes
Income tax expense (benefit) is comprised of the following components:
For the Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
Federal |
||||||||||||
Current |
$ | 228 | $ | (227 | ) | $ | 67 | |||||
Deferred |
88 | 81 | 123 | |||||||||
Investment tax credit |
(8 | ) | (8 | ) | (8 | ) | ||||||
State |
||||||||||||
Current |
20 | (4 | ) | 18 | ||||||||
Deferred |
44 | (21 | ) | 17 | ||||||||
Total income tax expense (benefit) |
$ | 372 | $ | (179 | ) | $ | 217 | |||||
Included in cumulative effects of changes in accounting principles: |
||||||||||||
Federal |
||||||||||||
Deferred |
$ | 17 | $ | 58 | $ | 7 | ||||||
State |
||||||||||||
Deferred |
5 | 12 | 2 | |||||||||
Total income tax expense |
$ | 22 | $ | 70 | $ | 9 | ||||||
28
Income tax expense is included in the financial statements as follows:
For the Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||||
Continuing
operations |
$ | 401 | $ | (179 | ) | $ | 217 | |||||||
Discontinued
operations |
(29 | ) | | | ||||||||||
Cumulative effect of change in accounting principle |
22 | 70 | 9 | |||||||||||
Total income
tax expense |
$ | 394 | $ | (109 | ) | $ | 226 | |||||||
The effective income tax rate related to continuing operations and discontinued operations differed from the U.S. Federal statutory rate principally due to the following:
For the Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
U.S. Federal statutory rate |
35.0 | % | 35.0 | % | 35.0 | % | ||||||
Increase (decrease) due to: |
||||||||||||
State income taxes, net of Federal income tax benefit |
4.3 | 3.9 | 3.7 | |||||||||
Tax-exempt interest |
(1.0 | ) | 1.8 | (2.3 | ) | |||||||
Qualified nuclear decommissioning trust fund income |
(0.7 | ) | (2.1 | ) | 0.9 | |||||||
Amortization of investment tax credit |
(0.5 | ) | 1.2 | (0.9 | ) | |||||||
Deferred expense/revenue option adjustment |
| 1.6 | | |||||||||
Other |
0.4 | 1.6 | (0.7 | ) | ||||||||
Effective income tax rate |
37.5 | % | 43.0 | % | 35.7 | % | ||||||
The tax effect of temporary differences giving rise to significant portions of Generations deferred tax assets and liabilities are presented below:
December 31, | ||||||||
2004 | 2003 | |||||||
Deferred tax assets: |
||||||||
Decommissioning and decontamination obligations |
$ | 153 | $ | 108 | ||||
Deferred pension and postretirement obligations |
69 | 170 | ||||||
Unrealized gains on derivative financial instruments |
66 | 83 | ||||||
Excess of tax value over book value of impaired assets (a) |
| 159 | ||||||
Other, net |
115 | 80 | ||||||
Total deferred tax assets |
403 | 600 | ||||||
Deferred tax liabilities: |
||||||||
Plant basis difference |
(822 | ) | (715 | ) | ||||
Emission allowances |
(39 | ) | (40 | ) | ||||
Total deferred tax liabilities |
(861 | ) | (755 | ) | ||||
Deferred income taxes (net) on the Consolidated Balance Sheets |
$ | (458 | ) | $ | (155 | ) | ||
(a) | Includes impairments related to Generations investment in Sithe and Boston Generating. |
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and certain state tax authorities are currently auditing certain tax returns of Exelons predecessor entities, Unicom and PECO. The current audits are not expected to have an adverse effect on financial condition or results of operations of Generation.
In 2004, Generation received $26 million from Exelon related to Generations allocation of tax benefits under the Tax Sharing Agreement. Generation received no allocation of tax benefits under the Tax Sharing Agreement in 2003. In 2002, Generation received $11 million from Exelon related to Generations allocation of tax benefits under the Tax Sharing Agreement.
Generation had unamortized investment tax credits of $210 million and $218 million at December 31, 2004 and December 31, 2003, respectively.
As of December 31, 2004, Generation (excluding Sithe) had capital loss carry forwards for income tax purposes of approximately $163 million, which expire beginning in 2009. Sithe had capital loss carry forwards for income tax purposes of approximately $21 million, which will expire beginning in 2007. Additionally, Sithe International had capital loss carry forwards for income tax purposes of approximately $8 million, which will expire beginning in 2007 and is subject to the limitations under Internal Revenue Code Section 382 due to the change in ownership of Sithe International on October 13, 2004. As of December 31, 2004, a valuation allowance has been recorded for approximately $8 million with respect to the Sithe International capital loss carry forward.
29
As of December 31, 2004, Sithe had domestic and Mexican net operating loss carry forwards of approximately $101 million and $57 million, respectively. Such carry forwards will expire beginning in 2020 and 2011, respectively.
As of December 31, 2004, Sithe had an Alternative Minimum Tax carry forward of approximately $26 million which can be carried forward indefinitely.
As of December 31, 2004, Generation had recorded valuation allowances of approximately $5 million with respect to deferred taxes associated with separate company state taxes.
13. Nuclear Decommissioning and Spent Fuel Storage
Nuclear Decommissioning
Overview
Generation has a legal obligation to decommission its nuclear power plants following the expiration of their operating licenses. This obligation is reflected as an asset retirement obligation (ARO), which is classified as a noncurrent liability. Based on the actual or anticipated extended license lives of the nuclear plants, decommissioning expenditures for Generations nuclear power plants currently operating are expected to occur primarily during the period 2029 through 2056. Generation owns three nuclear units that are retired and currently incur certain costs associated with decommissioning. The cost of nuclear decommissioning will be funded by investments held in trust funds that have been established for each nuclear station. Generation had nuclear decommissioning trust funds totaling $5,262 million and $4,721 million as of December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. See Note 15 Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities for more information regarding Generations nuclear decommissioning trust funds.
Cost Recovery and Decommissioning Responsibilities
Former ComEd plants. Generation currently recovers in revenues funds for decommissioning the former ComEd nuclear plants through regulated rates collected by ComEd. The amounts recovered from customers are remitted to Generation and deposited into the trust accounts to fund the future decommissioning costs. Under a December 2000 Illinois Commerce Commission Order issued to ComEd, amended February 2001 (ICC Order), ComEd is permitted to collect up to $73 million annually through 2006 from ratepayers to decommission the former ComEd nuclear plants. The amount of decommissioning revenue collections for 2005 and 2006 are anticipated to be slightly lower than $73 million. Under the current ICC Order, ComEd will not collect amounts for decommissioning subsequent to 2006.
Based on the provisions of the ICC Order and NRC regulations, Generation is financially responsible for the decommissioning obligations related to these plants. If trust assets plus future collections permitted by the ICC Order are exceeded by the ultimate ARO, Generation is responsible for any shortfall in funding; however, if amounts remain in the trust funds for these units following the completion of the decommissioning activities, those amounts will be returned to the ComEd ratepayers. At the end of each financial reporting period, Generation assesses the amounts currently recorded in trust assets plus future collections less amounts recorded in the ARO. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, Generation recorded a noncurrent affiliate payable to ComEd, who in turn, recorded an equal regulatory liability for the amount of decommissioning-related assets in excess of the ARO.
30
Former PECO plants. Generation currently recovers costs for decommissioning the former PECO nuclear plants through regulated rates collected by PECO. The amounts recovered from customers are remitted to Generation and deposited into the trust accounts to fund the future decommissioning costs. Under orders from the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC), PECO is permitted to collect from ratepayers up to $33 million annually for the full funding of the expected costs to decommission the former PECO nuclear plants. Based on the provisions of the PUC order, the PECO ratepayers are financially responsible for the majority of any shortfalls in the costs to decommission these nuclear units; however, the PECO ratepayers will receive any excess amounts from the trust funds at the completion of decommissioning. Generation is responsible for 1) the first $50 million of the decommissioning costs above a certain threshold established under the PUC order and 2) five percent of the decommissioning costs above that first $50 million of costs that exceed the established threshold. Generation expects total decommissioning costs to exceed this threshold and expects to be held responsible for the entire $50 million over the remaining life of the assets. At the end of each financial reporting period, Generation assesses the amounts currently recorded in trust assets plus future collections less amounts recorded in the ARO. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, Generation recorded a noncurrent affiliate payable to PECO, who in turn, recorded an equal regulatory liability for the amount of decommissioning-related assets in excess of the ARO.
AmerGen plants. Generation is financially responsible for the decommissioning of these plants and bears all risks and benefits related to the funding levels associated with these plants decommissioning trust funds.
Adoption of SFAS No. 143
Generation adopted SFAS No. 143 on January 1, 2003, which promulgates the accounting for AROs. In accordance with SFAS No. 143, a probability-weighted, discounted cash flow model with multiple scenarios was used to determine the fair value of the decommissioning obligation. SFAS No. 143 states that the estimated fair value of the decommissioning obligation represents the amount a third party would receive for assuming an entitys entire obligation. The present value of future estimated cash flows required to decommission the nuclear stations was calculated using credit-adjusted, risk-free rates applicable to the various businesses in order to determine the fair value of the decommissioning obligation at the time of adoption of SFAS No. 143.
Former ComEd plants. The transition provisions of SFAS No. 143 required Exelon to apply the fair value remeasurement back to the historical periods in which AROs were originally incurred, resulting in a remeasurement of these obligations at the date the assets were acquired by Exelon. Since the nuclear plants previously owned by ComEd were acquired by Exelon on October 20, 2000 (and subsequently transferred to Generation as a result of the Exelon corporate restructuring on January 1, 2001), Exelons historical accounting for its ARO associated with those plants was revised as if SFAS No. 143 had been in effect at the merger date. The calculation of the SFAS No. 143 ARO yielded decommissioning obligations lower than the value of the corresponding trust assets at January 1, 2003. Since the trust fund assets exceeded the fair value of the ARO, Generation recorded a $948 million noncurrent affiliate payable to ComEd, who in turn, recorded an equal regulatory liability at January 1, 2003. As a result of increases in the trust funds due to market conditions, the noncurrent affiliate payable to ComEd and ComEds regulatory liability have increased to $1,433 million at December 31, 2004.
In accordance with the provisions of SFAS No. 143 and regulatory accounting guidance, Generation recorded a SFAS No. 143 transition adjustment to accumulated other comprehensive income to reclassify $168 million, net of tax, of accumulated net unrealized losses in the nuclear decommissioning trust funds associated with the former ComEd plants to its noncurrent affiliate payable to ComEd, and likewise to ComEds regulatory liability.
31
Former PECO plants. In the case of the former PECO plants, the SFAS No. 143 ARO calculation yielded decommissioning obligations greater than the corresponding trust assets at January 1, 2003. As such, Generation recorded a noncurrent affiliate receivable from PECO, who in turn, recorded a regulatory asset of $20 million. As a result of increases in the trust funds due to market conditions and contributions collected from PECO customers, the trust fund assets exceeded the ARO at December 31, 2004 and Generation has a noncurrent affiliate payable to PECO, who in turn has an equal regulatory liability to its ratepayers of $46 million. At December 31, 2003, Generation had a noncurrent affiliate payable to PECO, who in turn had a regulatory liability to its ratepayers of $12 million related to nuclear decommissioning.
Upon adoption, and in accordance with the provisions of SFAS No. 143, Generation capitalized an asset retirement cost (ARC) asset within property, plant and equipment of $172 million related to the establishment of the ARO for the former PECO plants. The ARC is being amortized over the remaining useful lives of the former PECO plants.
Generation believes that all of the decommissioning assets, anticipated earnings thereon and future revenues from decommissioning collections will be used to decommission the former ComEd and PECO nuclear plants. As such, Generation expects the regulatory liabilities to be reduced to zero at the conclusion of the decommissioning activities.
AmerGen plants. At the time of the adoption of SFAS No. 143 on January 1, 2003, Generation had a 50% ownership of AmerGen. Generation recorded income of $29 million (after income taxes) as the cumulative effect of changes in accounting principles.
Impact of Contractual Construct with Regulated Affiliates on the Application of SFAS No. 143
Increases in the ARO due to the passage of time are recorded in operating and maintenance expense as accretion expense. Increases in the ARO resulting from revisions to the estimated future cash flows are generally recorded with a corresponding adjustment to the basis of plant value, by recording an ARC asset. The ARC is depreciated on a straight-line basis over the remaining life of the unit to which it relates. Changes in the nuclear decommissioning trust funds are discussed in Note 15 Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities.
Former ComEd plants. As of December 31, 2004, the trust assets associated with the former ComEd plants exceeded the ARO for those plants. Until such time, if ever, that the ARO exceeds the decommissioning-related assets, Generations net income should not reflect the impacts of any income or expenses associated with decommissioning the former ComEd nuclear units. As such, decommissioning revenues collected, nuclear decommissioning trust fund investment income, accretion expense and depreciation of the ARC are not reflected in net income as they are offset by the adjustment to the noncurrent affiliate payable to ComEd, and likewise ComEds regulatory liability, to the extent the decommissioning-related assets exceed the ARO.
Former PECO plants. As of December 31, 2004, the trust assets associated with the former PECO plants exceeded the ARO for those plants. The regulatory order associated with the former PECO units ensures that Generation will not be financially responsible for the decommissioning of these units, with the exception of certain amounts described above. As such, Generations net income should not reflect the impacts of any income or expenses associated with decommissioning the former PECO nuclear units, except for the accretion expense associated with its decommissioning cost responsibility above the decommissioning cost thresholds established by the PUC, as previously discussed. The net effect of decommissioning revenues collected, nuclear decommissioning trust fund investment income, accretion expense and depreciation of the ARC is adjusted so that the amounts net to an insignificant amount in Generations Consolidated Statements of Income. This adjustment is reflected as a change in the noncurrent affiliate payable to PECO, and in turn, PECOs regulatory liability.
32
AmerGen plants. Beginning in 2004, decommissioning activity related to the AmerGen units is reflected in Generations Consolidated Statements of Income. The AmerGen units are not subject to any cost recovery regulation and, as such, Generation will be required to fund any shortfall of trust assets below the decommissioning obligations. Similarly, Generation will not be required to refund any excess trust funds to customers if the obligation is less than the available trust funds. As such, the impacts of nuclear decommissioning trust fund investment income, accretion expense and depreciation of the ARC are all included in Generations Consolidated Statements of Income. Prior to December 2003 and Generations acquisition of British Energys 50% interest in AmerGen, the impact to Generation for accounting for the decommissioning of the AmerGen plants was recorded within Generations equity in earnings of AmerGen. In addition, Generations proportionate share of unrealized gains and losses on AmerGens decommissioning trust funds were reflected in Generations other comprehensive income.
2004 Update of ARO
Generation updates its ARO on a periodic basis. During 2004, Generation recorded a $780 million net increase to the ARO resulting from revisions to estimated future nuclear decommissioning cash flows. This update also resulted in an adjustment to the basis of property, plant and equipment of $780 million by recording a corresponding net increase to the ARC. This increase to the ARO was primarily a result of updated decommissioning cost studies and changes in cost escalation factors used to estimate future undiscounted costs, both of which are provided by independent third-party appraisers. Cost estimates are updated every three to five years in accordance with NRC regulations and industry practice. The net increase in the ARO for the former ComEd units, the former PECO units and the AmerGen units resulting from revisions to estimated cash flows during 2004 was $563 million, $142 million and $75 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2004, the ARO balances for the former ComEd, the former PECO and the AmerGen units totaled approximately $2.3 billion, $1.0 billion and $0.6 billion, respectively.
The following table provides a roll forward reconciliation of the ARO reflected on Generations Consolidated Balance Sheets from January 1, 2003 to December 31, 2004:
Asset retirement obligation at January 1, 2003 |
$ | 2,363 | ||
Consolidation of AmerGen |
487 | |||
Accretion expense |
160 | |||
Payments to decommission retired plants |
(14 | ) | ||
Asset retirement obligation at December 31, 2003 |
2,996 | |||
Net increase resulting from updates to estimated future cash flows |
780 | |||
Accretion expense |
210 | |||
Additional liabilities incurred (a) |
6 | |||
Payments to decommission retired plants |
(12 | ) | ||
Asset retirement obligation at December 31, 2004 |
$ | 3,980 | ||
(a) | Additional liabilities incurred are primarily due to the consolidation of Sithe. |
33
Accounting Prior to the Adoption of SFAS No. 143
Prior to January 1, 2003, Generation accounted for the current periods cost of decommissioning related to generating plants previously owned by PECO in accordance with common regulatory accounting practices by recording a charge to depreciation expense and a corresponding liability in accumulated depreciation concurrently with recognizing decommissioning collections. Financial activity of the decommissioning trust (e.g., investment income and realized and unrealized gains and losses on trust investments) was reflected in nuclear decommissioning trust funds in Generations Consolidated Balance Sheets with a corresponding offset recorded to accumulated depreciation.
Regulatory accounting practices for the nuclear generating stations previously owned by ComEd were discontinued as a result of an ICC Order capping ComEds ultimate recovery of decommissioning costs. The difference between the decommissioning cost estimate and the decommissioning liability recorded in accumulated depreciation for the former ComEd operating stations was previously amortized to depreciation expense on a straight-line basis over the remaining lives of the stations. The decommissioning cost estimate (adjusted annually to reflect inflation) for the former ComEd retired units recorded in deferred credits and other liability was previously accreted to depreciation expense. Financial activity of the decommissioning trust funds related to Generations nuclear generating stations no longer accounted for under common regulatory practices was reflected in nuclear decommissioning trust funds in Generations Consolidated Balance Sheets with a corresponding gain or expense recorded in Generations Consolidated Income Statements or in other comprehensive income.
Spent Nuclear Fuel
Under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (NWPA), the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is responsible for the development of a repository for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel (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 its nuclear generating stations. In accordance with the NWPA and the Standard Contracts, Generation pays the DOE one mill ($.001) per kilowatt-hour of net nuclear generation for the cost of nuclear fuel long-term 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. The DOEs current estimate for opening a SNF facility is 2012. This extended delay in SNF acceptance by the DOE has led to Generations adoption of dry cask storage at its Dresden, Quad Cities, Oyster Creek and Peach Bottom stations and its consideration of dry cask storage at other stations.
The Standard Contracts with the DOE also required the payment to the DOE a one-time fee applicable to nuclear generation through April 6, 1983. PECOs fee has been paid. Pursuant to the Standard Contracts, ComEd elected to pay the one-time fee of $277 million, with interest to the date of payment, just prior to the first delivery of SNF to the DOE. As of December 31, 2004, the unfunded liability for the one-time fee with interest was $878 million. Interest accrues at the 13-week Treasury Rate, which was 1.987% at December 31, 2004. The liabilities for spent nuclear fuel disposal costs, including the one-time fee, were transferred to Generation as part of the corporate restructuring. The one-time fee obligation for the AmerGen units remains with the prior owner. The Clinton Unit has no outstanding obligation.
In July 1998, ComEd filed a complaint against the United States Government (Government) in the United States Court of Federal Claims (Court) seeking to recover damages caused by the DOEs failure to honor its contractual obligation to begin disposing of SNF in January 1998. In August 2001, the Court granted ComEds motion for partial summary judgment for liability on ComEds breach of contract claim. In November 2001, the Government filed two partial summary judgment motions relating to certain damage issues in the case as well as two
34
motions to dismiss claims other than ComEds breach of contract claim. On June 10, 2003, the Court granted the Governments motion to dismiss claims other than the breach of contract claims. Also on June 10, 2003, the Court denied the Governments summary judgment motions and set the case for trial on damages for November 2004.
In July 2000, PECO entered into an agreement (Amendment) with the DOE relating to PECOs Peach Bottom nuclear generating unit to address the DOEs failure to begin removal of SNF in January 1998 as required by the Standard Contracts. Under the Amendment, the DOE agreed to provide PECO with credits against PECOs future contributions to the Nuclear Waste Fund to compensate PECO for SNF storage costs incurred as a result of the DOEs breach of the contract. The Amendment also provided that, upon PECOs request, the DOE will take title to the SNF and the interim storage facility at Peach Bottom provided certain conditions are met. Generation assumed this contract in the 2001 corporate restructuring.
In November 2000, eight utilities with nuclear power plants filed a Joint Petition for Review against the DOE with the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit seeking to invalidate that portion of the Amendment providing for credits to PECO against nuclear waste fund payments on the ground that such provision is a violation of the NWPA. PECO intervened as a defendant in that case and Generation assumed the claim in the 2001 corporate restructuring. On September 24, 2002, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit ruled that the fee adjustment provision of the Amendment violates the NWPA and therefore is null and void. The Court did not hold that the Amendment as a whole is invalid. Article XVI(I) of the Amendment provides that if any portion of the Amendment is found to be void, the DOE and Generation agree to negotiate in good faith and attempt to reach an enforceable agreement consistent with the spirit and purpose of the Amendment. That provision further provided that should a major term be declared void, and the DOE and Generation cannot reach a subsequent agreement, the entire Amendment would be rendered null and void, the original Peach Bottom Standard Contracts would remain in effect and the parties would return to pre-Amendment status. Under the Amendment, Generation has received approximately $40 million in credits against contributions to the nuclear waste fund.
On August 14, 2003, Generation received a letter from the DOE demanding repayment of $40 million of previously received credits from the Nuclear Waste Fund. The letter also demanded $1.5 million of interest that was accrued as of that date and Generation continued to record an interest expense each subsequent month. Generation reserved its 50% ownership share of these amounts. Because Generation expenses the dry storage casks and capitalizes the permanent components of its spent fuel storage facilities, these reserves increased Generations operating and maintenance expense approximately $11 million and its capital base approximately $9 million during 2003.
On July 21, 2004, Exelon and the U.S. Department of Justice, in close consultation with the DOE, reached a settlement under which the government will reimburse Generation for costs associated with storage of spent fuel at Generations nuclear stations pending DOEs fulfillment of its obligations. Under the agreement, Generation immediately received $80 million in gross reimbursements for storage costs already incurred ($53 million net after considering amounts due from Generation to co-owners of certain nuclear stations), with additional amounts to be reimbursed annually for future costs. In all cases, reimbursements will be made only after costs are incurred and only for costs resulting from DOE delays in accepting the fuel. As of December 31, 2004, the amount of spent fuel storage costs for which reimbursement will be requested in mid-2005 from the DOE under the settlement agreement is $33 million net, which is recorded within accounts receivable, other. This amount is comprised of $14 million, which has been recorded as a reduction to operating and maintenance expense, and $12 million, which has been recorded as a reduction to capital expenditures. The remaining $7 million represents amounts owed to the co-owners of the Peach Bottom and Quad Cities generating facilities.
35
14. Retirement Benefits
Generation participates in defined benefit pension plans and postretirement welfare benefit plans sponsored by Exelon. Substantially all eligible Generation employees participate in the Exelon sponsored plans. Benefits under these pension plans generally reflect each employees compensation, years of service, and age at retirement. Employees of AmerGen participate in separate defined benefit pension plans and postretirement welfare benefit plans sponsored by AmerGen. AmerGen is currently offering its employees a choice to remain in their traditional benefit formula or convert to a cash balance formula.
The prepaid pension asset, pension obligation and non-pension postretirement benefits obligation on Generations Consolidated Balance Sheets reflect Generations obligations from and to the plan sponsors, Exelon and AmerGen. Employee-related assets and liabilities, including both pension and SFAS No. 106, Employers Accounting for Postretirement Benefits Other than Pensions, postretirement welfare liabilities, were allocated by Exelon to its subsidiaries based on the number of active employees as of January 1, 2001 as part of Exelons corporate restructuring. Exelon allocates the components of pension expense to the participating employers based upon several factors, including the percentage of active employees in each participating unit. See Note 15 Retirement Benefits of Exelons Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for pension and other postretirement benefits information for the Exelon plans.
Approximately $126 million, $75 million and $37 million were included in capital and operating and maintenance expense, excluding curtailment and special termination costs, in 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively, for Generations allocated portion of Exelons pension and postretirement benefit expense. The 2004 amounts include a reduction in net periodic postretirement benefit cost resulting from the adoption of FSP FAS 106-2. Generation contributed $180 million, $145 million and $60 million to the Exelon-sponsored pension plans in 2004, 2003 and 2002. Generation expects to contribute up to $853 million to the pension plans in 2005.
During 2004 and 2003, Generation recognized curtailment charges of $3 million and $18 million, respectively, associated with an overall reduction in participants in Exelons pension and postretirement benefit plans due to employee reductions associated with The Exelon Way. During 2004 and 2003, Generation recognized special termination benefit costs of $4 million and $20 million, respectively.
Included in Generations 2004 results are costs associated with pension benefit and other postretirement benefit plans sponsored by AmerGen. Costs associated with the pension and postretirement benefits were $11 million and $11 million, respectively for 2004. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, Generations balance sheet included a liability of $21 million and $21 million, respectively, related to the pension obligation and $94 million and $80 million, respectively, related to other postretirement benefit obligations.
The accumulated benefit obligation (ABO) for the AmerGen pension plan was $77 million and $55 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. The projected benefit obligation (PBO) for the AmerGen pension plan was $90 million and $67 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. The fair value of plan assets related to this obligation was $53 million and $41 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively
The postretirement benefit plan for AmerGen is unfunded. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, the ABO related to postretirement benefits was $94 million and $80 million, respectively.
Generation participates in a 401(k) savings plan sponsored by Exelon. The plan allows employees to contribute a portion of their pre-tax income in accordance with specified guidelines. Generation matches a percentage of employee contributions to the plan up to certain limits. The cost of Generations matching contributions to the savings plan totaled $27 million, $24 million and $31 million for 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.
36
15. Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities
Non-Derivative Financial Assets and Liabilities
Fair Value. As of December 31, 2004 and 2003, Generations carrying amounts of cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, vendor accounts payable and accrued liabilities are representative of fair value because of the short-term nature of these instruments. Fair values of the trust accounts for decommissioning nuclear plants, long-term debt and preferred securities of subsidiaries are estimated based on quoted market prices for the same or similar issues.
The carrying amounts and fair values of Generations financial liabilities as of December 31, 2004 and 2003 were as follows:
2004 | 2003 | |||||||||||||||
Carrying | Carrying | |||||||||||||||
Amount | Fair Value | Amount | Fair Value | |||||||||||||
Liabilities |
||||||||||||||||
Long-term debt (including
amounts due within one year) |
$ | 2,630 | $ | 3,002 | $ | 2,717 | $ | 2,930 | ||||||||
Credit Risk. Financial instruments that potentially subject Generation to concentrations of credit risk consist principally of cash equivalents and customer accounts receivable. Generation places its cash equivalents with high-credit quality financial institutions. Generally, such investments are in excess of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation limits. Concentrations of credit risk with respect to customer accounts receivable are limited due to Generations large number of customers.
Derivative Instruments
Fair Value. The fair values of Generations interest-rate swaps and power purchase and sale contracts are determined using quoted exchange prices, external dealer prices, or internal valuation models which utilize assumptions of future energy prices and available market pricing curves.
Interest-Rate Swaps. Generation enters into interest-rate swaps to hedge exposure to interest rate changes. Swaps related to variable-rate securities or forecasted transactions are accounted for as cash-flow hedges. The swaps are generally structured to mirror the terms of the hedged debt instruments; therefore, no material ineffectiveness has been recorded in earnings. The gain or loss in fair value of cash-flow hedges is recorded in other comprehensive income and will be recognized in earnings over the life of the hedged items. The gain or loss in fair value of fair-value hedges, along with the gain or loss on the hedged asset or liability that is attributable to the hedged risk, is recorded in earnings.
Generation had no interest-rate swaps designated as cash-flow hedges outstanding at December 31, 2004. At December 31, 2003, Generation had $861 million of notional amounts of interest-rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges outstanding with net deferred losses of $77 million.
Energy-Related Derivatives. Generation utilizes derivatives to manage the utilization of its available generating capacity and the provision of wholesale energy to its affiliates. Generation also utilizes energy option contracts and energy financial swap arrangements to limit the market price risk associated with forward energy commodity contracts. Additionally, Generation enters into certain energy-related derivatives for trading or speculative purposes. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, Generation had $145 million and $216 million, respectively, of energy derivatives recorded as net liabilities at fair value on its Consolidated Balance Sheets.
37
For the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, Generation recognized net unrealized losses of $42 million, net unrealized losses of $16 million and net unrealized gains of $6 million, respectively, relating to mark-to-market activity of certain non-trading power purchase and sale contracts pursuant to SFAS No. 133. Mark-to-market activity on non-trading power purchase and sale contracts are reported in fuel and purchased power. For the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, Generation recognized net unrealized gains of $3 million and net unrealized losses of $3 million and $9 million, respectively, relating to mark-to-market activity on derivative instruments entered into for trading purposes. Gains and losses associated with financial trading are reported as revenue in the Consolidated Statements of Income.
As of December 31, 2004, $194 million of deferred net losses on derivative instruments in accumulated other comprehensive income are expected to be reclassified to earnings during the next twelve months. Amounts in accumulated other comprehensive income related to changes in interest-rate cash-flow hedges are reclassified into earnings when the interest payment occurs or when ineffectiveness has been determined. Amounts in accumulated other comprehensive income related to changes in energy commodity cash-flow hedges are reclassified into earnings when the forecasted purchase or sale of the energy commodity occurs. The majority of Generations cash-flow hedges are expected to settle within the next three years.
Credit Risk Associated with Derivative Instruments. Generation would be exposed to credit-related losses in the event of non-performance by counterparties that issue derivative instruments. The credit exposure of derivatives contracts is represented by the fair value of contracts at the reporting date. For energy-related derivative instruments, Generation has entered into payment netting agreements or enabling agreements that allow for payment netting with the majority of its large counterparties, which reduce Generations exposure to counterparty risk by providing for the offset of amounts payable to the counterparty against amounts receivable from the counterparty. The notional amount of derivatives does not represent amounts that are exchanged by the parties and, thus, is not a measure of Generations exposure. The amounts exchanged are calculated on the basis of the notional or contract amounts, as well as on the other terms of the derivatives, which relate to interest rates and the volatility of these rates.
Nuclear Decommissioning Trust Fund Investments
Investments as of December 31, 2004 and 2003. Generation classifies investments in the trust accounts for decommissioning nuclear plants as available-for-sale and estimates fair value based on quoted market prices for the securities held in trust funds. These investments are held to fund Generations decommissioning obligation for its nuclear plants. Decommissioning expenditures are expected to occur primarily after the plants are retired. Based on current licenses and anticipated renewals, decommissioning expenditures for plants in operation are currently estimated to begin in 2029. See Note 13 Nuclear Decommissioning and Spent Fuel Storage for further information regarding the decommissioning of Generations nuclear plants.
38
The following tables show the fair values, gross unrealized gains and losses and amortized cost bases of the securities held in these trust accounts as of December 31, 2004 and 2003.
December 31, 2004 | ||||||||||||||||
Gross | Gross | |||||||||||||||
Amortized | Unrealized | Unrealized | Estimated | |||||||||||||
Cost | Gains | Losses | Fair Value | |||||||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents |
$ | 184 | $ | | $ | | $ | 184 | ||||||||
Equity securities |
2,194 | 538 | (37 | ) | 2,695 | |||||||||||
Debt securities
Federal government obligations |
1,447 | 51 | (4 | ) | 1,494 | |||||||||||
Other debt securities |
855 | 37 | (3 | ) | 889 | |||||||||||
Total debt securities |
2,302 | 88 | (7 | ) | 2,383 | |||||||||||
Total available-for-sale securities |
$ | 4,680 | $ | 626 | $ | (44 | ) | $ | 5,262 | |||||||
December 31, 2003 | ||||||||||||||||
Gross | Gross | |||||||||||||||
Amortized | Unrealized | Unrealized | Estimated | |||||||||||||
Cost | Gains | Losses | Fair Value | |||||||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents |
$ | 84 | $ | | $ | | $ | 84 | ||||||||
Equity securities |
2,402 | 300 | (294 | ) | 2,408 | |||||||||||
Debt securities
Federal government obligations |
1,574 | 65 | (4 | ) | 1,635 | |||||||||||
Other debt securities |
567 | 29 | (2 | ) | 594 | |||||||||||
Total debt securities |
2,141 | 94 | (6 | ) | 2,229 | |||||||||||
Total available-for-sale securities |
$ | 4,627 | $ | 394 | $ | (300 | ) | $ | 4,721 | |||||||
The fixed-income available-for-sale securities held at December 31, 2004 have an average maturity range of six to thirteen years. The cost of these securities was determined on the basis of specific identification.
Impairment Evaluation in 2004. At December 31, 2004, Generation had gross unrealized gains of $626 million and gross unrealized losses of $44 million related to the nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments. At December 31, 2003, Generation had gross unrealized gains of $394 million and gross unrealized losses of $300 million related to the nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments. With the exception of the portion of these amounts related to AmerGen, as a result of ComEds and PECOs regulatory arrangements for decommissioning costs, approximately $469 million of these net unrealized gains were recorded as an increase in Generations noncurrent affiliate payables, which resulted in a corresponding increase in ComEd and PECOs regulatory liabilities.
Generation evaluates decommissioning trust fund investments for other-than-temporary impairments by analyzing the historical performance, cost basis and market value of securities in unrealized loss positions in comparison to related market indices. During 2004, Generation concluded that certain trust fund investments were other-than-temporarily impaired based on various factors assessed in the aggregate, including the duration and severity of the impairment, the anticipated recovery of the securities and consideration of Generations ability and intent to hold the investments until the recovery of their cost basis. This determination resulted in an $8 million impairment charge recorded in other income and deductions associated with the trust funds for the decommissioning of the AmerGen plants. Also, Generation realized $260 million of the previously unrealized losses associated with the trust investments for the decommissioning of
39
the former ComEd and PECO plants. As both realized and unrealized losses are included as a reduction in the fair value of the investments and in the fair value of the regulatory liability at ComEd and PECO, and as such, Generations noncurrent affiliate payable balance, realization of these losses associated with the former ComEd and PECO plants had no impact on Generations results of operations or financial position.
Unrealized Gains and Losses. Net unrealized gains of $582 million were included in noncurrent affiliate payables and other comprehensive income in Generations Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2004. Net unrealized gains of $94 million were included in noncurrent affiliate payables and other comprehensive income in Generations Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2003.
The following table provides information regarding Generations available-for-sale securities in nuclear decommissioning trust funds in an unrealized loss position that are not considered other-than-temporarily impaired. The following tables shows the investments gross unrealized losses and fair value, aggregated by investment category and length of time that individual securities have been in a continuous unrealized loss position, at December 31, 2004 and 2003.
December 31, 2004 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Less than 12 months | 12 months or more | Total | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross | Gross | Gross | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Unrealized | Fair | Unrealized | Fair | Unrealized | Fair | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Losses | Value | Losses | Value | Losses | Value | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Equity securities |
$ | 16 | $ | 197 | $ | 21 | $ | 278 | $ | 37 | $ | 475 | |||||||||||||||
Debt securities |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Government obligations |
2 | 207 | 2 | 68 | 4 | 275 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Other debt securities |
2 | 182 | 1 | 22 | 3 | 204 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Total debt securities |
4 | 389 | 3 | 90 | 7 | 479 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Total temporarily impaired
securities |
$ | 20 | $ | 586 | $ | 24 | $ | 368 | $ | 44 | $ | 954 | |||||||||||||||
December 31, 2003 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Less than 12 months | 12 months or more | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross | Gross | Gross | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Unrealized | Fair | Unrealized | Fair | Unrealized | Fair | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Losses | Value | Losses | Value | Losses | Value | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Equity securities |
$ | 33 | $ | 231 | $ | 261 | $ | 775 | $ | 294 | $ | 1,006 | ||||||||||||||||
Debt securities
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Government obligations |
4 | 232 | | 11 | 4 | 243 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Other debt securities |
2 | 117 | | 2 | 2 | 119 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Total debt securities |
6 | 349 | | 13 | 6 | 362 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Total temporarily impaired
securities |
$ | 39 | $ | 580 | $ | 261 | $ | 788 | $ | 300 | $ | 1,368 | ||||||||||||||||
Generation evaluates the historical performance, cost basis and market value of securities in unrealized loss positions in comparison to related market indices to assess whether or not the securities are other-than-temporarily impaired. Generation concluded that the trending of the related market indices, the historical performance of these securities over a long-term time horizon and the level of insignificance of the unrealized loss as a percentage of the cost of the individual securities indicates that the securities are not other-than-temporarily impaired.
40
Sale of Nuclear Decommissioning Trust Fund Investments. Proceeds from the sale of decommissioning trust fund investments and gross realized gains and losses on those sales were as follows:
For the Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
Proceeds from sales |
$ | 2,320 | $ | 2,341 | $ | 1,612 | ||||||
Gross realized gains |
115 | 219 | 56 | |||||||||
Gross realized losses |
(43 | ) | (235 | ) | (86 | ) | ||||||
Net realized gains of $72 million and net realized losses of $16 million and $32 million were recognized in other income and deductions in Generations Consolidated Statements of Income for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. Additionally, net realized gains of $2 million were recognized in accumulated depreciation in Generations Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2002. Prior to January 1, 2003, realized gains and losses related to the former PECO units were included in accumulated depreciation. See Note 13 Nuclear Decommissioning and Spent Fuel for further information regarding the nuclear decommissioning trusts.
16. Commitments and Contingencies
Nuclear Insurance
The Price-Anderson Act limits the liability of nuclear reactor owners for claims that could arise from a single incident. As of December 31, 2004, the current limit is $10.76 billion and is subject to change to account for the effects of inflation and changes in the number of licensed reactors. As required by the Price-Anderson Act, Generation carries the maximum available amount of nuclear liability insurance (currently $300 million for each operating site) and the remaining $10.46 billion is provided through mandatory participation in a financial protection pool. Under the Price-Anderson Act, all nuclear reactor licensees can be assessed a maximum charge per reactor per incident. The maximum assessment for all nuclear operators per reactor per incident (including a 5% surcharge) is $100.6 million, payable at no more than $10 million per reactor per incident per year. This assessment is subject to inflation and state premium taxes.
In addition, the U.S. Congress could impose revenue-raising measures on the nuclear industry to pay claims. The Price-Anderson Act expired on August 1, 2002 and was subsequently extended to the end of 2003 by the U.S. Congress. Only facilities applying for NRC licenses subsequent to the expiration of the Price-Anderson Act are affected. Existing commercial generating facilities, such as those owned by Generation, remain subject to the provisions of the Price-Anderson Act and are unaffected by its expiration. However, any new licenses are not covered under the Price-Anderson Act and any new plant initiatives would need to address this exposure.
Generation is a member of an industry mutual insurance company, Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited (NEIL), which provides property damage, decontamination and premature decommissioning insurance for each station for losses resulting from damage to its nuclear plants. 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. 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.
41
Under the terms of the various insurance agreements, Generation could be assessed up to $168 million for losses incurred at any plant insured by the insurance companies. 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 insureds, 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 a result of government indemnity. Generally, a certified act of terrorism is defined in the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act to be any act, certified by the U.S. government, to be an act of terrorism committed on behalf of a foreign person or interest.
Additionally, NEIL provides replacement power cost insurance in the event of a major accidental outage at a nuclear station. The premium for this coverage is subject to assessment for adverse loss experience. Including the AmerGen sites, Generations maximum share of any assessment is $48 million per year. 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 also not apply in cases of certified acts of terrorism under the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act as described above.
In addition, Generation participates in the American Nuclear Insurers Master Worker Program, which provides coverage for worker tort claims filed for bodily injury caused by a nuclear energy accident. This program was modified, effective January 1, 1998, to provide coverage to all workers whose nuclear-related employment began on or after the commencement date of reactor operations. Generation will not be liable for a retrospective assessment under this new policy; however, in the event losses incurred under the small number of policies in the old program exceed accumulated reserves, a maximum retroactive assessment of up to $50 million could apply. Generation is self-insured to the extent that any losses may exceed the amount of insurance maintained. Such losses could have a material adverse effect on Generations financial condition and results of operations.
For its insured losses, Generation is self-insured to the extent that any losses are within the policy deductible or may exceed the amount of insurance maintained. Such losses could have a material adverse effect on Generations financial condition and results of operations.
Energy Commitments
Generations wholesale operations include the physical delivery and marketing of power obtained through its generation capacity, and long-, intermediate- and short-term contracts. Generation maintains a net positive supply of energy and capacity, through ownership of generation assets and purchase power and lease agreements, to protect it from the potential operational failure of one of its owned or contracted power generating units. Generation has also contracted for access to additional generation through bilateral long-term purchase power agreements (PPAs). These agreements are firm commitments related to power generation of specific generation plants and/or are dispatchable in nature. 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. Generation primarily uses financial contracts in its wholesale marketing activities for hedging purposes. Generation also uses financial contracts to manage the risk surrounding trading for profit activities.
42
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 wholesale market participants who primarily focus on the resale of energy products for delivery. Generation provides delivery of its energy to these customers through rights for firm transmission.
At December 31, 2004, Generations long-term commitments, relating to the purchase from and sale to unaffiliated utilities and others of energy, capacity and transmission rights as indicated in the following tables:
Net Capacity | Power Only | Power Only | Transmission Rights | |||||||||||||
Purchases(a) | Sales | Purchases | Purchases(b) | |||||||||||||
2005 |
$ | 578 | $ | 2,551 | $ | 1,446 | $ | 31 | ||||||||
2006 |
581 | 961 | 605 | 3 | ||||||||||||
2007 |
533 | 167 | 254 | | ||||||||||||
2008 |
462 | 9 | 195 | | ||||||||||||
2009 |
437 | 9 | 194 | |||||||||||||
Thereafter |
3,664 | 343 | 548 | | ||||||||||||
Total (c) |
$ | 6,255 | $ | 4,040 | $ | 3,242 | $ | 34 | ||||||||
(a) | Net capacity purchases include tolling agreements that are accounted for as operating leases. Amounts presented in the commitments represent Generations expected payments under these arrangements at December 31, 2004. Expected payments include certain capacity charges which are contingent on plant availability. |
(b) | Transmission rights purchases include estimated commitments in 2005 and 2006 for additional transmission rights that will be required to fulfill firm sales contracts. |
(c) | Included in the totals are $395 million of power only sales commitments related to Sithe, which were not retained by Generation following the sale of Sithe. See Note 3 Sithe, Note 20 Subsequent Events and Note 21 Discontinued Operations for further discussion of this sale transaction. |
In connection with the 2001 corporate restructuring, Generation entered into a PPA, as amended, with ComEd under which Generation has agreed to supply all of ComEds load requirements through 2006. Prices for this energy vary depending upon the time of day and month of delivery. Subsequent to 2006, ComEd expects to procure all of its supply from market sources, which could include Generation. Additionally, Generation entered into a PPA with PECO under which PECO obtains substantially all of its electric supply from Generation through 2010. Prices for this energy vary depending upon time of day and month of delivery. Subsequent to 2010, PECO expects to procure all of its supply from market sources, which could include Generation.
Other Purchase Obligations
In addition to Generations energy commitments as described above, Generation has commitments to purchase fuel supplies for nuclear generation and various other purchase commitments related to the normal day-to-day operations of Generations business. As of December 31, 2004, these commitments were as follows:
Expiration within | ||||||||||||||||||||
2010 and | ||||||||||||||||||||
Total | 2005 | 2006-2007 | 2008-2009 | beyond | ||||||||||||||||
Fuel purchase agreements (a) |
$ | 3,639 | $ | 639 | $ | 985 | $ | 616 | $ | 1,399 | ||||||||||
Other purchase commitments (b) |
230 | 66 | 75 | 57 | 32 | |||||||||||||||
(a) | Fuel purchase agreements Commitments to purchase fuel supplies for nuclear and fossil generation. |
(b) | Other purchase commitments Commitments for services and materials. |
43
Commercial Commitments
Generations commercial commitments as of December 31, 2004, representing commitments potentially triggered by future events, are as follows:
Expiration within | ||||||||||||||||||||
2010 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Total | 2005 | 2006-2007 | 2008-2009 | and beyond | ||||||||||||||||
Letters of credit (non-debt) (a) |
$ | 172 | $ | 172 | $ | | $ | | $ | | ||||||||||
Letters of credit (long-term debt)- interest coverage (b) |
15 | 15 | | | | |||||||||||||||
Performance guarantees (c) |
201 | | | | 201 | |||||||||||||||
Energy marketing contract
guarantees (d) |
261 | 156 | 65 | | 40 | |||||||||||||||
Nuclear insurance premiums (e) |
1,710 | | | | 1,710 | |||||||||||||||
Exelon New England guarantees (f) |
17 | | | | 17 | |||||||||||||||
Total commercial commitments |
$ | 2,376 | $ | 343 | $ | 65 | $ | | $ | 1,968 | ||||||||||
(a) | Letters of credit (non-debt) Non-debt letters of credit maintained to provide credit support for certain transactions as requested by third parties. Guarantees of $62 million have been issued to provide support for certain letters of credit as required by third parties. Includes letters of credit of $95 million that will be eliminated upon the sale of Sithe to Dynegy. See Note 20 Subsequent Events for further information regarding the sale of Sithe. |
(b) | Letters of credit (long-term debt) interest coverage Reflects the interest coverage portion of letters of credit supporting floating-rate pollution control bonds. The principal amount of the floating-rate pollution control bonds of $520 million is reflected in long-term debt in Generations Consolidated Balance Sheet. |
(c) Performance guarantees Guarantees issued to ensure execution under specific contracts.
(d) | Energy marketing contract guarantees Guarantees issued to ensure performance under energy commodity contracts. In connection with the transfer of Exelon Energy to Generation effective January 1, 2004, Generation acquired $162 million in energy marketing contract guarantees. Includes guarantees of $30 million that will be eliminated upon the sale of Sithe to Dynegy. See Note 20 Subsequent Events for further information regarding the sale of Sithe. |
(e) | Nuclear insurance premiums Represent 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. |
(f) | Exelon New England guarantees Mystic Development LLC (Mystic), a former affiliate of Exelon New England, has a long-term agreement through January 2020 with Distrigas of Massachusetts Corporation (Distrigas) for gas supply, primarily for the Boston Generating units. Under the agreement, gas purchase prices from Distrigas are indexed to the New England gas markets. Exelon New England has guaranteed Mystics financial obligations to Distrigas under the long-term supply agreement. Exelon New Englands guarantee to Distrigas remained in effect following the transfer of ownership interest in Boston Generating in May 2004. Under FIN 45, approximately $16 million is included as a liability within the Consolidated Balance Sheet of Exelon as of December 31, 2004 related to this guarantee. The terms of the guarantee do not limit the potential future payments that Exelon New England could be required to make under the guarantee. Other guarantees associated with Exelon New England total less than $1 million. |
Generation acquired a $50 million letter of credit to support the contractual obligations of Sithe and its subsidiaries upon the completion of the November 2003 transaction with Resevoir. See Exelons Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation - Liquidity and Capital Resources Credit Issues below for further discussion of Exelons credit agreement.
Environmental Issues
General. Under Federal and state environmental laws, Generation is generally liable for the costs of remediating environmental contamination of property now owned and of property contaminated by hazardous substances generated by Generation.
44
As of December 31, 2004, Generation had accrued $16 million for environmental investigation and remediation costs. Generation cannot reasonably estimate whether it will incur other significant liabilities for additional investigation and remediation costs at these or additional sites identified by Generation, environmental agencies or others, or whether such costs will be recoverable from third parties.
Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act. In July 2004, the EPA issued the final Phase II rule implementing Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act. This rule establishes national requirements for reducing the adverse environmental impacts from the entrainment and impingement of aquatic organisms at existing power plants. The rule identifies particular standards of performance with respect to entrainment and impingement and requires each facility to monitor and validate this performance in future years. The requirements will be implemented through state-level National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit programs. All of Generations power generation facilities with cooling water systems are subject to the regulations. Facilities without closed-cycle recirculating systems are potentially most affected. Those facilities are Clinton, Cromby, Dresden, Eddystone, Fairless Hills, Handley, Mountain Creek, New Boston, Oyster Creek, Peach Bottom, Quad Cities and Salem. Generation is currently evaluating compliance options at its affected plants. At this time, Generation cannot estimate the effect that compliance with the Phase II rule requirements will have on the operation of its generating facilities and its future results of operations, financial condition and cash flows. There are many factors to be considered and evaluated to determine how Generation will comply with the Phase II rule requirements and the extent to which there such compliance may result in financial and operational impacts. The considerations and evaluations include, but are not limited to obtaining clarifying interpretations of the requirements from state regulators, resolving outstanding litigation proceedings concerning the requirements, completing studies to establish biological baselines for each facility and performing environmental and economic cost benefit evaluation of the potential compliance alternatives in accordance with the requirements.
Cotter Corporation. The 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 incurred by Cotter as a result of any liability arising in connection with the West Lake Landfill. In connection with Exelons 2001 corporate restructuring, this responsibility to indemnify Cotter was transferred to Generation. Cotter is alleged to have disposed of approximately 39,000 tons of soils mixed with 8,700 tons of leached barium sulfate at the site. Cotter, along with three other companies identified by the EPA as potentially responsible parties (PRPs), has submitted a draft feasibility study addressing options for remediation of the site. The PRPs are also engaged in discussions with the State of Missouri and the EPA. The estimated costs of the anticipated remediation strategy for the site range up to $22 million. Once a remedy is selected, it is expected that the PRPs will agree on an allocation of responsibility for the costs. Generation has accrued what it believes to be an adequate amount to cover its anticipated share of the liability.
45
Leases
Minimum future operating lease payments, including lease payments for real estate and rail cars, as of December 31, 2004 were:
2005 |
$ | 45 | ||
2006 |
45 | |||
2007 |
42 | |||
2008 |
41 | |||
2009 |
39 | |||
Thereafter |
511 | |||
Total minimum future lease payments (a) |
$ | 723 | ||
(a) | Generations tolling agreements are accounted for as operating leases and are reflected as net capacity purchases in the energy commitments table above. |
Rental expense under operating leases totaled $33 million, $24 million and $25 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.
Litigation
Real Estate Tax Appeals. Generation is challenging real estate taxes assessed on nuclear plants since 1997. Generation is involved in real estate tax appeals for 2000 through 2004, regarding the valuation of its Limerick and Peach Bottom plants, Quad Cities Station (Rock Island County, IL), Three Mile Island Nuclear Station (Dauphin County, PA) and Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (Forked River, NJ).
During 2003, upon completion of updated nuclear plant appraisal studies, Generation recorded reductions of $15 million to reserves recorded for exposures associated with the real estate taxes. While Generation believes the resulting reserve balances as of December 31, 2004 reflect the most likely probable expected outcome of the litigation and appeals proceedings in accordance with SFAS No. 5, Accounting for Contingencies, the ultimate outcome of such matters could result in additional unfavorable or favorable adjustments to the consolidated financial statements of Generation, and such adjustments could be material.
General. Generation is involved in various other litigation matters that are being defended and handled in the ordinary course of business, and Generation maintains accruals for such costs that are probable of being incurred and subject to reasonable estimation. The ultimate outcome of such matters, as well as the matters discussed above, while uncertain, is not expected to have a material adverse effect on its financial condition or results of operations.
46
Capital Commitments
SCEP. Generation has a 71% interest in SCEP which owns a peaking facility in Chicago. SCEP is obligated to make total equity distributions of $49 million through 2022 to the party, which is not affiliated with Generation, that owns the remaining 29% interest. This amount reflects a return of that partys investment in SCEP. Generation has the right to purchase, generally at a premium, and the other party has the right to require Generation to purchase, generally at a discount, the 29% interest in SCEP. Additionally, Generation may be required to purchase the remaining 29% interest upon the occurrence of certain events, including Generations failure to maintain an investment grade rating. As a result of the adoption of SFAS No. 150 on July 1, 2003, Generation reclassified the minority interest associated with SCEP to a long-term liability. The total long-term liability related to SCEP was $49 million and $51 million as of December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. Prior periods were not restated.
Sithe Call Option. On September 29, 2004, Generation exercised its call option and entered into an agreement to acquire Reservoirs 50% interest in Sithe for $97 million. The closing of the call required state and Federal regulatory approvals, which were received in January 2005, and the transaction was completed on January 31, 2005. See Note 3 Sithe and Note 20 Subsequent Events for additional information.
Credit Contingencies
Dynegy. As previously disclosed, Generation is counterparty to Dynegy in various energy transactions and had financial and credit risk associated with Dynegy through Generations investment in Sithe at December 31, 2004. On January 31, 2005, Generation sold its investment in Sithe and, accordingly, is no longer subject to potential credit risk associated with Dynegys performance under the financial swap arrangement that Dynegy had with Sithe. See Note 20 Subsequent Events and Note 21 Discontinued Operations for further discussion of Generations sale of Sithe.
Fund Transfer Restrictions
Under applicable law, Generation can pay dividends only from undistributed or current earnings. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, Generation had undistributed earnings of $761 million and $602 million, respectively.
Jointly Owned Electric Utility Plant
On January 28, 2004, the NRC issued a letter requesting PSEG to conduct a review of its Salem facility, of which Generation owns 42.59%, to assess the workplace environment for raising and addressing safety issues. PSEG responded to the letter on February 28, 2004 and had independent assessments of the work environment at both facilities performed. Assessment results were provided to the NRC in May. The assessments concluded that Salem was safe for continued operation, but also identified issues that need to be addressed. At an NRC public meeting on June 16, 2004, PSEG outlined its action plans to address these issues, which focus on safety conscious work environment, the corrective action program and work management. A letter documenting these plans and commitments was sent to the NRC on June 25, 2004. PSEG provided the NRC a report of its progress and the progress of its actions to resolve identified issues at public meetings in December 2004 and will hold additional meetings during 2005. PSEG published metrics to demonstrate performance commencing in the fourth quarter of 2004.
In June 2001, the NJDEP issued a renewed National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for Salem, expiring in July 2006, allowing for the continued operation of Salem with its existing cooling water system. An application for renewal of that permit, including a demonstration of compliance with the requirements of the recently published FWPCA Section 316(b) regulations, must be submitted to NJDEP by February 2, 2006 unless the NJDEP grants additional time to collect information to comply with the new regulations. NJDEP advised
47
PSEG in a letter dated July 12, 2004 that it strongly recommends reducing cooling water intake flow commensurate with closed-cycle cooling as a compliance option for Salem. PSEG has not made a determination regarding how it will demonstrate compliance with the Section 316(b) regulations. If application of the Section 316(b) regulations require the retrofitting of Salems cooling water intake structure to reduce cooling water intake flow commensurate with closed-cycle cooling, the retrofit and any resulting cost of interim replacement power could result in material costs of compliance to the owners of the facility.
17. Supplemental Financial Information
Supplemental Income Statement Information
The following tables provide additional information about Generations Consolidated Statements of Income for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002.
For the Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||||||
Depreciation, amortization and accretion |
||||||||||||||||
Property, plant and equipment (a) |
$ | 294 | $ | 199 | $ | 156 | ||||||||||
Nuclear fuel (b) |
381 | 395 | 374 | |||||||||||||
Asset retirement obligation accretion (c) |
210 | 160 | 120 | |||||||||||||
Amortization of intangibles (d) |
38 | | | |||||||||||||
Total depreciation, amortization and accretion |
$ | 923 | $ | 754 | $ | 650 | ||||||||||
Discontinued operations |
(40 | ) | | | ||||||||||||
Total depreciation, amortization and accretion from
continuing operations |
$ | 883 | $ | 754 | $ | 650 | ||||||||||
(a) | Includes amortization of capitalized software costs. | |||
(b) | Included in fuel expense in the Consolidated Statements of Income. | |||
(c) | Prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 143 on January 1, 2003, these amounts were recorded in depreciation expense. Upon adoption of SFAS No. 143, these amounts were recorded in operating and maintenance expense in Generations Consolidated Statements of Income. See Note 13 Nuclear Decommissioning and Spent Fuel Storage for further discussion of the adoption of SFAS No. 143. |
(d) | $6 million is reflected as a reduction in revenue in the Consolidated Statements of Income. $32 million related to the amortization of Sithe assets is reflected in discontinued operations. See Note 3 Sithe, Note 20 Subsequent Events and Note 21 Discontinued Operations for a description of Sithes intangible assets that are reflected in Exelons Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2004 and a description of the sale of Sithe that was completed on January 31, 2005, respectively. |
For the Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||||||
Income (loss) in equity method investments |
||||||||||||||||
AmerGen (a) |
$ | | $ | 47 | $ | 64 | ||||||||||
Sithe (b) |
(2 | ) | 2 | 23 | ||||||||||||
Sithe (c) |
(9 | ) | | | ||||||||||||
TEG and TEP (d) |
(3 | ) | | | ||||||||||||
Total income (loss) in equity method investments from
continuing operations |
$ | (14 | ) | $ | 49 | $ | 87 | |||||||||
(a) | Prior to the acquisition of British Energys 50% interest in December 2003. | |||
(b) | Prior to consolidation of EXRES SHC, Inc. in March 2004. | |||
(c) | Prior to acquisition of EXRES SHC, Inc. 49.5% interests in TEG and TEP in October 2004. | |||
(d) | After acquisition of EXRES SHC, Inc. 49.5% interests in TEG and TEP in October 2004. |
48
For the Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
Taxes other than income |
||||||||||||
Real estate |
$ | 112 | $ | 83 | $ | 102 | ||||||
Payroll |
48 | 39 | 46 | |||||||||
Other |
11 | (2 | ) | 16 | ||||||||
Total taxes other than income |
$ | 171 | $ | 120 | $ | 164 | ||||||
Discontinued operations |
(5 | ) | | | ||||||||
Total taxes other than income
from continuing operations |
$ | 166 | $ | 120 | $ | 164 | ||||||
For the Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
Other, net |
||||||||||||
Gain on sale of Boston Generating (a) |
$ | 85 | $ | | $ | | ||||||
Decommissioning-related activities: |
||||||||||||
Decommissioning trust fund income (b) |
194 | 79 | 77 | |||||||||
Decommissioning trust fund income AmerGen (b) |
43 | | | |||||||||
Other-than-temporary impairment of decommissioning
trust funds (c) |
(268 | ) | | | ||||||||
Contractual
offset to non-operating decommissioning-related activities (d) |
66 | (79 | ) | | ||||||||
Gain on sale of assets |
6 | | | |||||||||
Impairment of investment in Sithe |
| (255 | ) | | ||||||||
Other income (expense) |
17 | (8 | ) | 3 | ||||||||
Total other, net |
$ | 143 | $ | (263 | ) | $ | 80 | |||||
Discontinued operations |
(13 | ) | | | ||||||||
Total other, net from continuing operations |
$ | 130 | $ | (263 | ) | $ | 80 | |||||
(a) | See Note 2 Acquisitions and Dispositions for further discussion of Generations sale of Boston Generating. | |||
(b) | Includes investment income and realized gains/(losses). |
(c) | Includes other-than-temporary impairments totaling $255 million, $5 million and $8 million on nuclear decommissioning trust funds for the former ComEd units, the former PECO units and AmerGen units, respectively. |
(d) | Includes the elimination of non-operating decommissioning-related activity for those units that are subject to contractual accounting, including the elimination of decommissioning trust fund income and other-than-temporary impairments for certain nuclear units. See Note 13 Nuclear Decommissioning and Spent Fuel Storage and Note 15 Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities for more information regarding the contractual accounting applied for certain nuclear units. |
Supplemental Cash Flow Information
The following table provides additional information about Generations Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002.
49
For the Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
Cash paid (received) during the year |
||||||||||||
Interest (net of amount capitalized) |
$ | 163 | $ | 57 | $ | 63 | ||||||
Income taxes (net of refunds) |
20 | (14 | ) | (37 | ) | |||||||
Non-cash investing and financing activities |
||||||||||||
Purchase accounting estimate adjustment |
$ | 29 | $ | 59 | $ | | ||||||
Consolidation of Sithe pursuant to FIN 46-R |
85 | | | |||||||||
Disposal of Boston Generating (a) |
102 | | | |||||||||
Increase in asset retirement cost asset |
829 | | | |||||||||
Note received in conjunction with the sale
of Sithe to Reservoir |
| 92 | | |||||||||
Note cancelled in connection with the acquisition of
Sithe International from Sithe |
92 | | | |||||||||
Capital lease obligations |
1 | | 52 | |||||||||
Non-cash (distribution) contribution (to) from member |
(4 | ) | (17 | ) | 3 | |||||||
Contribution of land from minority interest of
consolidated subsidiary |
| | 12 | |||||||||
Note issued to Sithe in the
Exelon New England acquisition |
| 2 | 534 | |||||||||
Supplemental Balance Sheet Information
The following tables provide additional information about assets recorded within Generations Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2004 and 2003.
December 31, | ||||||||
2004 | 2003 | |||||||
Investments |
||||||||
Investment in EXRES SHC, Inc. (a) |
$ | | $ | 47 | ||||
Investment in TEG and TEP (b) |
79 | | ||||||
Investment in Keystone Fuels, LLC and Conemaugh Fuels, LLC |
9 | 9 | ||||||
Other |
15 | 9 | ||||||
Total |
$ | 103 | $ | 65 | ||||
(a) | On November 25, 2003, Generation, Reservoir and Sithe completed a series of transactions that resulted in Generation indirectly owning a 50% interest in Sithe through EXRES SHC, Inc. See Note 3 Sithe, Note 20 Subsequent Events and Note 21 Discontinued Operations for further information on these transactions and the ultimate disposal of Generations investment in Sithe. |
(b) | Generation acquired a 49.5% interest in two facilities in Mexico on October 13, 2004. See Note 3 Sithe for further information on this transaction. |
December 31, | ||||||||
2004 | 2003 | |||||||
Accrued expenses |
||||||||
Payroll and benefits |
$ | 185 | $ | 215 | ||||
Taxes accrued |
98 | 104 | ||||||
Interest |
36 | 10 | ||||||
Other |
48 | 94 | ||||||
Total |
$ | 367 | $ | 423 | ||||
50
December 31, | ||||||||
2004 | 2003 | |||||||
Accumulated other comprehensive loss |
||||||||
Net unrealized loss on cash-flow hedges |
$ | (146 | ) | $ | (149 | ) | ||
Foreign currency translation adjustment |
1 | (1 | ) | |||||
Net unrealized gain on marketable securities |
62 | 14 | ||||||
Total accumulated other comprehensive loss |
$ | (83 | ) | $ | (136 | ) | ||
18. Related-Party Transactions
The financial statements of Generation include related-party transactions with unconsolidated affiliates as presented in the tables below. Generation accounted for its investment in AmerGen as an equity method investment prior to the acquisition of British Energys 50% interest in December 2003 and its investment in Sithe as an equity method investment prior to its consolidation as of March 31, 2004. Additionally, effective January 1, 2004, Enterprises competitive retail sales business, Exelon Energy, was transferred to Generation.
For the Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2002 | ||||||||||
Operating revenues from affiliates |
||||||||||||
ComEd (a) |
$ | 2,374 | $ | 2,479 | $ | 2,559 | ||||||
PECO (a) |
1,465 | 1,433 | 1,438 | |||||||||
Exelon Energy (b) |
| 213 | 247 | |||||||||
BSC |
2 | | | |||||||||
Purchased power from affiliates |
||||||||||||
AmerGen (c) |
| 382 | 273 | |||||||||
ComEd (a) |
9 | 38 | 37 | |||||||||
PECO (a) |
1 | | 3 | |||||||||
Exelon Energy (b) |
| 9 | 18 | |||||||||
Operating and Maintenance from affiliates |
||||||||||||
Sithe (d) |
| | 13 | |||||||||
ComEd (a) |
8 | 12 | 14 | |||||||||
PECO (a) |
8 | 10 | 9 | |||||||||
BSC (e) |
223 | 127 | 116 | |||||||||
Interest expense to affiliates |
||||||||||||
Sithe (d) |
| 9 | 2 | |||||||||
Exelon (f) |
1 | 2 | 5 | |||||||||
Exelon intercompany money pool (f) |
2 | 2 | | |||||||||
Interest income from affiliates |
||||||||||||
AmerGen (c) |
| 1 | 2 | |||||||||
ComEd (g) |
| | 4 | |||||||||
Services provided to affiliates |
||||||||||||
AmerGen (c) |
| 111 | 70 | |||||||||
Sithe (d) |
| | 1 | |||||||||
Cash distribution paid to member |
662 | 189 | 27 | |||||||||
51
December 31, | ||||||||
2004 | 2003 | |||||||
Receivables from affiliates (current) |
||||||||
ComEd (a) |
$ | 189 | $ | 171 | ||||
ComEd decommissioning (h) |
11 | 11 | ||||||
PECO (a) |
125 | 115 | ||||||
BSC (e) |
7 | 3 | ||||||
Exelon Energy (b) |
| 18 | ||||||
Sithe (d) |
| 3 | ||||||
Other |
| 8 | ||||||
Note receivable from affiliate (current) |
||||||||
Note receivable from Sithe (d) |
| 92 | ||||||
Note receivable from affiliate (noncurrent) |
||||||||
ComEd decommissioning (h) |
11 | 22 | ||||||
Payable to affiliate (current) |
||||||||
Exelon (f) |
42 | 1 | ||||||
Notes payable to affiliates (current) |
||||||||
Exelon (f) |
| 115 | ||||||
Exelon intercompany money pool (f) |
283 | 301 | ||||||
Sithe (d) |
| 90 | ||||||
Payables to affiliates (noncurrent) |
||||||||
ComEd decommissioning (i) |
1,433 | 1,183 | ||||||
PECO decommissioning (i) |
46 | 12 | ||||||
(a) | Effective January 1, 2001, Generation entered into PPAs with ComEd and PECO, as amended, to provide the full energy requirements of ComEd and PECO. Effective April 1, 2004, Generation entered into a one-year gas supply agreement with PECO. Generation purchases electric and ancillary services from ComEd and buys energy from PECO for Generations own use. In order to facilitate payment processing, ComEd processes certain invoice payments on behalf of Generation. Prior to joining PJM Interconnection, LLC (PJM) on May 1, 2004, ComEd also provided transmission services to Generation. Amounts charged by PECO and ComEd to Generation for transmission have been recorded as intercompany purchased power by Generation. |
(b) | Prior to May 1, 2004, Generation sold power to Exelon Energy and purchased excess power from Exelon Energy. Prior to the transfer of Exelon Energys assets to Generation from Enterprises effective January 1, 2004, Exelon Energy was an intercompany affiliate of Generation. |
(c) | Prior to Generations purchase of British Energys 50% interest in AmerGen in December 2003, AmerGen was an unconsolidated affiliate of Generation and was considered to be a related party of Generation. Generation entered into PPAs dated June 26, 2003, December 18, 2001 and November 22, 1999 with AmerGen. Under the 2003 PPA, Generation agreed to purchase from AmerGen all the energy from Oyster Creek through April 9, 2009. Under the 2001 PPA, Generation agreed to purchase from AmerGen all the energy from Unit No. 1 at Three Mile Island Nuclear Station from January 1, 2002 through December 31, 2014. Under the 1999 PPA, Generation agreed to purchase from AmerGen all of the residual energy from Clinton Nuclear Power Station (Clinton), through December 31, 2002. Currently, the residual output is approximately 31% of the total output of Clinton. In February 2002, Generation entered into an agreement to loan AmerGen up to $75 million at an interest rate equal to the 1-month London Interbank Offering Rate plus 2.25%. In July 2002, the limit of the loan agreement was increased to $100 million and the maturity date was extended to July 1, 2003. The loan was paid in its entirety during 2003. Under a service agreement dated March 1, 1999, Generation provides AmerGen with certain operation and support services to the nuclear facilities owned by AmerGen. This service agreement has an indefinite term and may be terminated by Generation or AmerGen with 90 days notice. Generation is compensated for these services at cost. |
(d) | Under a service agreement dated December 18, 2000, Sithe provides Generation certain fuel and project development services. Sithe is compensated for these services at cost. In December 2003, Sithe received letter of credit proceeds of $3 million, which Generation was billed on behalf of Sithe. Under the terms of the agreement to acquire Exelon New England dated November 1, 2002, Generation issued a note to Sithe that was subsequently modified and increased to $536 million. During 2003, Generation repaid $446 million of this note. In the first quarter of 2004, Generation repaid $27 million prior to consolidation of Sithe in accordance with the provisions of FIN 46-R. The balance of the note, which bore interest at the rate of LIBOR plus 0.875%, was paid upon the completion of a series of transactions that resulted in Generations sale of Sithe on January 31, 2005. See Note 20 Subsequent Events regarding the sale of Generations investment in Sithe. |
52
In connection with a series of transactions in November 2003 that restructured the ownership of Sithe (see Note 3 Sithe for additional information), Generation received a $92 million note receivable from EXRES SHC, Inc., which holds the common stock of Sithe. Generation owns 50% of EXRES SHC, Inc. and consolidated its investment pursuant to FIN 46-R effective March 31, 2004. Prior to the consolidation of Sithe in connection with FIN 46-R, Sithe was an unconsolidated affiliate of Exelon and Generation and was considered to be a related party of Exelon and Generation. This note was cancelled in connection with the purchase of Sithe International. See Note 3 Sithe for additional information.
(e) | Generation receives a variety of corporate support services from Exelon Business Services Company (BSC), including legal, human resources, financial, information technology and supply management services. All services are provided at cost, including application overhead. A portion of such services is capitalized. Some third-party reimbursements due Generation are recovered through BSC. Additionally, in 2004, due to the centralization of certain functions, certain employees were transferred from Generation to BSC including supply and information technology support and management of other support services. |
(f) | Represents the outstanding balance of amounts borrowed under the intercompany money pool and other short-term obligations payable to Exelon. In order to facilitate payment processing, Exelon processes certain invoice payments on behalf of Generation. |
(g) | Interest income for 2002 is related to unpaid ComEd PPA billings referred to in note (a). |
(h) | Generation has a short-term and a long-term receivable from ComEd, primarily representing ComEds legal requirements to remit collections of nuclear decommissioning costs from its customers to Generation resulting from the 2001 corporate restructuring. |
(i) | Generation has long-term payables to ComEd and PECO as a result of the nuclear decommissioning contractual construct whereby, to the extent the assets associated with decommissioning are greater than the applicable ARO, such amounts are due back to ComEd and PECO, as applicable, for payment to the ratepayers. |
19. Quarterly Data (Unaudited)
The data shown below includes all adjustments that Generation considers necessary for a fair presentation of such amounts:
Income (Loss) Before | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Operating | Cumulative Effect of a Change | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Operating Revenues | Income (Loss) | in Accounting Principle | Net Income (Loss) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2004 | 2003 | 2004 | (a) | 2003 | (b) | 2004 | 2003 | 2004 | 2003 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Quarter ended: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
March 31(c)
|
$ | 1,946 | $ | 1,879 | $ | 128 | $ | 125 | $ | 70 | $ | (52 | ) | $ | 102 | $ | 56 | |||||||||||||||
June 30
|
1,881 | 1,886 | 231 | 223 | 178 | 142 | 178 | 142 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
September 30
|
2,151 | 2,537 | 528 | (683 | ) | 319 | (428 | ) | 319 | (428 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||
December 31
|
1,725 | 1,833 | 152 | 220 | 74 | 97 | 74 | 97 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
(a) | Operating income (loss) has been adjusted to reflect a reclassification from operating and maintenance expense to other, net of $30 million and $28 million, for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and June 30, 2004, respectively, for comparison purposes related to decommissioning accounting presentation. These reclassifications had no impact on net income as reported. |
(b) | Operating income (loss) has been adjusted to reflect a reclassification from operating and maintenance expense to other, net of $31 million, $22 million, $23 million and $3 million for the three months ended March 31, 2003, June 30, 2003, September 30, 2003 and December 31, 2003, respectively, for comparison purposes related to decommissioning accounting presentation. These reclassifications had no impact on net income as reported. |
(c) | Operating income and net income for the three months ended March 31, 2004 has been adjusted to reflect a reduction in net periodic postretirement benefit cost of $3 million due to the adoption of FSP FAS 106-2. See Note 1 Significant Accounting Policies for additional information. |
20. Subsequent Events
On January 31, 2005, subsidiaries of Generation completed a series of transactions that resulted in Generations exit from its investment in Sithe. Specifically, subsidiaries of Generation closed on the acquisition of Reservoirs 50% interest in Sithe and the sale of 100% of Sithe to Dynegy. Prior to closing on the sale to Dynegy, subsidiaries of Generation received from Sithe approximately $65 million in cash distributions. As a result of the sale, Generation will deconsolidate from its balance sheet approximately $820 million of debt and will be released
53
from approximately $125 million of credit support associated with the Independence project. Additionally, Exelon issued certain guarantees to Dynegy that will be taken into account in the final determination of the gain or loss on the sale.
21. Discontinued Operations
In connection with the disposal of Generations interest in Sithe on January 31, 2005, Generation has classified the 2004 results of operations from Sithe from April 1, 2004 through December 31, 2004 as discontinued operations. Since Sithe was accounted for as an equity method investment prior to April 1, 2004, Generations portion of Sithes results of operations prior to April 1, 2004 have continued to be classified as equity in earnings (losses) of unconsolidated affiliates. In addition, Generation sold or wound down substantially all components of AllEnergy Gas and Electric Marketing LLC (AllEnergy). The results of operations and any gain or loss on the sale of these entities are presented as discontinued operations for the year ended December 31, 2004 within Generations Consolidated Statements of Income. The following table summarizes the results of operations of these entities:
2004 | Sithe (a) | All Energy | Total | |||||||||
Total operating revenues |
$ | 227 | $ | 8 | $ | 235 | ||||||
Operating income (loss) |
(7 | ) | (2 | ) | (9 | ) | ||||||
Income (loss) before income taxes and minority interest |
(58 | ) | (2 | ) | (60 | ) | ||||||
(a) | Includes Sithes results of operations from April 1, 2004 through December 31, 2004. See Note 20 Subsequent Events for further information regarding the sale of Sithe. |
54
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-57640, 333-84446 and 333-108546), on Form S-4 (No. 333-122704), and on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-61390 and 333-49780) of Exelon Corporation of our report dated February 22, 2005, except for Note 22 and Note 26, as to which the date is May 11, 2005, relating to the financial statements, financial statement schedule, managements assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Current Report on Form 8-K.
/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Chicago, Illinois
May 12, 2005