UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, DC 20549

FORM 8-K

CURRENT REPORT
Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

Commission File Number		Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter; State of Incorporation; Address of Principal Executive Offices; and Telephone Number		IRS Employer Identification Number
1-1839		COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY		36-0938600
		(an Illinois corporation)
		440 South LaSalle Street
		Chicago, Illinois 60605-1028
		(312) 394-4321
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

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.

As previously disclosed, on August 31, 2005 Commonwealth Edison Company (ComEd) filed with the Illinois Commerce Commission (ICC) a proposal seeking approval of new rates, (rate case) to be effective January 2, 2007. The rate case seeks to allocate the costs of supplying electricity and to adjust ComEd’s rates for delivering electricity in ComEd’s service area to reflect ComEd’s rising costs and significant capital investment in the ComEd delivery system. On June 8, 2006, the ICC’s administrative law judges assigned to the rate case issued a Proposed Order. A copy of ComEd’s press release concerning the Proposed Order is attached as Exhibit 99.1 to this Report on Form 8-K. The Proposed Order is available on the ICC’s website, http://eweb.icc.state.il.us/e-docket/. The Docket Number is 05-0597.

The parties to the rate case must file exceptions to the Proposed Order by June 19, 2006, and replies to the exceptions must be filed by June 26, 2006. The ICC’s final order is expected in July 2006.

Attached as Exhibit 99.2 is a table comparing ComEd’s proposal and the proposed order with respect to rate of return, revenue requirement and rate increase, and rate base.

*  *  *  *  *

This combined Form 8-K is being filed separately by ComEd and Exelon Corporation (Exelon) (together, 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.

Forward-Looking Statements

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, which 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) Exelon’s 2005 Annual Report on Form 10-K—ITEM 1A Risk Factors, (b) Exelon’s 2005 Annual Report on Form 10-K—ITEM 8 Financial Statements and Supplementary Data: Exelon—Note 20 and ComEd—Note 17, and (c) other factors discussed in filings with the SEC by ComEd and Exelon. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which apply only as of the date of this Report. Neither ComEd nor Exelon undertakes any obligation to publicly release any revision to its forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this Report.

Section 9—Financial Statements and Exhibits
Item 9.01 Financial Statements and Exhibits.

(d) Exhibits.

Exhibit No.		Description
99.1		ComEd Press Release
99.2		Comparison of Key Financial Measures Related to the Rate Case

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.

June 14, 2006

EXHIBIT INDEX

Exhibit No.		Description
99.1		ComEd Press Release
99.2		Comparison of Key Financial Measures Related to the Rate Case

News Release		An Exelon Company

Contact: Tabrina Davis				FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
ComEd Media Relations
312-394-3500

ComEd Disappointed in ALJ Ruling on Rate Case

CHICAGO (June 8, 2006) — ComEd expressed disappointment in today’s proposed order by the administrative law judges (ALJ) in the delivery service rate case now before the Illinois Commerce Commission (ICC). ComEd is seeking an increase that would amount to a 6 percent impact on the average residential customer’s bill. This increase represents the increased costs of doing business and system investments made since 2001. The proposed order recommends a $128 million reduction in ComEd’s requested revenue increase. The last general service rate increase was in 1995.

“We put forward a careful and precise accounting of our investments and the resources we require to adequately maintain and improve the electric infrastructure that serves our 3.7 million customers,” said J. Barry Mitchell, president of ComEd. “Our case is supported by facts and expert testimony and we remain confident that the ICC, in its final order, will recognize the reasonableness of our request.”

Since 1997, ComEd’s rates for residential customers have been reduced 20 percent and frozen at that level under the Electric Service Customer Choice and Rate Relief Law, established by the Illinois General Assembly. The rate cut and freeze, one of the largest and longest in the country, will have resulted in $4 billion of savings for Illinois consumers by the end of this year. However, during this time ComEd’s cost to deliver electricity has gone up.

The delivery service rate increase request is related only to the costs that ComEd incurs to deliver electricity to its customers. This portion of customers’ bills represents approximately 30 to 40 percent of the total electric bill for residential customers. Under the ComEd requested rate increase, the average residential customer with a $60 monthly bill would see an increase of about $3.60 per month. Subject to the approval of the ICC, the rate increase would not take effect until Jan. 2, 2007.

###

Exhibit 99.2

COMED RATE CASE DOCKET NO. 05-0597
ALJ PROPOSED ORDER 6/8/06
SUMMARY

TABLE A: RATE OF RETURN

		Capital Structure				Cost of LT Debt				ROE		ROR
Proposed Order		Common eq. 46.00%					6.50	%		10.19%		8.20%
		LT Debt 54.00%
ComEd		Common eq. 54.20%					6.50	%		11.00%		8.94%
		LT Debt 45.80%

TABLE B: REVENUE REQUIREMENT, RATE INCREASE

		Revenue Requirement		Revenue Increase(1)
Proposed Order		$1,764,656,000		$186,970,000
ComEd		$1,862,185,000		$317,295,000

TABLE C: RATE BASE

		Gross Plant		Net Plant		Rate Base
Proposed Order		$11,504,101,000		$6,908,651,000		$6,159,399,000
ComEd		$11,530,064,000		$6,934,589,000		$6,186,933,000

(1) An adjustment of ($32,796) referenced in Appendix A of the Proposed Order recognizes that the current revenue base is presented two different ways in the filing. The first “current rate revenue” of $1,545 million reflects the 2004 test year actual (not weather adjusted) delivery sales multiplied by the DST rates in effect in 2004. The second “current rate revenue” of $1,578 million, on which the $187 million figure is based, reflects an upward adjustment of about $33 million for weather normalized 2004 test year delivery sales. The final revenue requirement of $1,764,656,000 is the same regardless of the revenue base starting point. The listed revenue increases are based on the weather normalized 2004 test year delivery sales.

Note: The Proposed Order may be subject to potential revisions.