Presentation Slides

Forward-Looking Statements

This presentation includes 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 these forward-looking statements include those discussed herein

as well as those discussed in (1) Exelon’s 2006 Annual Report on Form 10-K in (a) ITEM 1A. Risk

Factors, (b) ITEM 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of

Operations and (c) ITEM 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data: Note 18; (2) Exelon’s

Second Quarter 2007 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q in (a) Part II, Other Information, ITEM 1A. Risk

Factors

and

(b)

Part

Financial

Information,

ITEM

Financial

Statements:

Note

13;

and

(3)

other

factors discussed in filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) by Exelon

Corporation,

Exelon

Generation

Company,

LLC,

Commonwealth

Edison

Company,

and

PECO

Energy

Company (Companies). Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking

statements, which apply only as of the date of this presentation. None of the Companies undertakes

any obligation to publicly release any revision to its forward-looking statements to reflect events or

circumstances after the date of this presentation.

This presentation includes references to adjusted (non-GAAP) operating earnings that exclude the

impact of certain factors. We believe that these adjusted operating earnings are representative of the

underlying operational results of the company. Please refer to the appendix to the presentation for a

reconciliation of adjusted (non-GAAP) operating earnings to GAAP earnings.

’06 Earnings

(1)

$1,275M

’07E Earnings

(2)

$2,320 -

$2,385M

’06 EPS

(1)

$1.88

’07 EPS Guidance

(2)

$3.45 -

$3.55

Total Debt

(3)

$1.8B

Credit Rating

(4)

BBB+

The Exelon Companies

Nuclear, Fossil, Hydro & Renewable Generation

Power Marketing

‘06 Operating Earnings

(1)

$2.2B

‘07E Operating Earnings

(2)

: $2.8 -

$2.9B

‘07 EPS Guidance

(2)

: $4.15 -

$4.30

Assets (12/31/06):

$44.3B

Total Debt (12/31/06):

$13.0B

Credit Rating

(4)

: BBB

(1) 2006 Adjusted (Non-GAAP) Operating Earnings and Operating EPS.

(2) Estimated 2007 Adjusted (Non-GAAP) Operating Earnings and 2007 Operating Earnings Guidance per Exelon share.

(3) As of 12/31/06.

(4) Standard & Poor’s senior unsecured debt ratings for Exelon and Generation and senior secured debt ratings for ComEd and PECO as of 10/1/07.

Pennsylvania

Utility

Illinois

Utility

’06 Earnings

(1)

$528M

$455M

’07E Earnings

(2)

: $130 -

$165M

$435 -

$470M

’06 EPS

(1)

$0.78

$0.67

’07 EPS Guidance

(2)

$0.20 -

$0.25

$0.65 -

$0.70

Total Debt

(3)

$4.6B

$4.2B

Credit Ratings

(4)

: BBB

Recognized Environmental Leadership

Named

the

2006/2007

and

2007/2008

Dow

Jones

Sustainability North America Index

Named to Climate Disclosure Leadership Index of the Carbon

Disclosure Project in 2005, 2006 and 2007

Signatory to the Global Roundtable on Climate Change and the

Ceres/Investor Network on Climate Risk statements

Member of the United States Climate Action Partnership (USCAP)

Corporate headquarters awarded Leadership in Energy and

Environmental

Design

(LEED

)

Platinum

Commercial

Interiors

certification by the U.S. Green Building Council

Exelon’s Climate Actions

Achieved SF6 leak rate of under 10% for 2006

Provides customer-based energy-efficiency

programs (compact fluorescent light bulbs,

demand response programs)

Reduced emissions from fleet –

35% of

ComEd’s fleet is hybrid vehicles and uses

biodiesel

across diesel fleet

First utility in PA to file to meet Tier 1

requirements under Alternative Energy

Portfolio Standards (AEPS)

Achieved SF6 leak rate of under 10% for

2006

Preparing to implement smart meters

system-wide and time-of-use programs

Retired older, inefficient plant

Invested in landfill gas power

generation expansion

Reduced power purchase

requirements at some nuclear plants

Committed to going beyond world-class nuclear performance and compliance with

regulations, Exelon is taking voluntary action to address climate change

Largest marketer of wind power east of

the Mississippi River

Signed 20-year deal to purchase output

from largest solar photovoltaic installation

in PJM region

Exelon’s Generation Portfolio

* Megawatts based on Exelon Generation’s ownership as of 12/31/06.

Total Capacity*

Owned:

25,543 MW

Contracted:

7,691 MW

Total:

33,234 MW

Fossil &

Hydro

20%

Nuclear

76%

Forward &

Spot

Purchases

2007

Expected

Supply

(185

TWh)

Exelon is strategically positioned for carbon legislation

Generating Plants

MW*

Nuclear

Hydro

Coal/Oil/Gas Base-load

Intermediate

Peaker

16,945

1,606

3,162

3,408

8,113

Exelon’s Strategic Direction

Protect Today’s Value

•

Deliver superior operating performance

–

Keep the lights on

–

Continue nuclear excellence

•

Support competitive markets

–

Maintain/bolster PJM

–

Step up advocacy

–

Encourage market-based new entry

•

Protect the value of our generation

–

Optimize the generation portfolio

–

Hedge market risk appropriately

•

Build healthy, self-sustaining delivery

companies

–

ComEd –

drive path to financial health

–

PECO –

maintain performance and

prepare for 2011 transition to market

Grow Long-Term Value

•

Take the organization to the next level of

performance

–

Foster positive employee relations

–

Require accountability for results and values

–

Acquire, develop and retain key talent

–

Continuously improve productivity

•

Align our financial management policies with the

changing profile of our company

•

Rigorously evaluate new growth opportunities

–

Generation

–

Transmission

–

Distribution

•

Advance an environmental strategy that

leverages our carbon position

–

Provide environmental benefits that also

make good business sense

–

Build a low-carbon resource portfolio

Exelon and Federal Climate

Change Legislation

Climate change is real and results from human-caused

greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions

Actively involved in the climate debate in Washington, D.C.

Lobbying in favor of enacting legislation that is national,

mandatory

and economy-wide

Favors a cap-and-trade system over a carbon tax

Believes that any allocation scheme should include allowances

for

distribution

companies

help

offset

the

cost

carbon

for

the

end-user

limit

near-term

economic

impacts,

supports

“safety

valve”

for

cost of carbon that needs to increase over time

Allocation Methods

Auction

Government

Load-Based

Allocation

Distribution

Companies

Input-Based

Allocation

Output-Based

Allocation

Generators

Carbon

Emissions

MWhs

Metric to Allocate?

Who gets

the carbon

allowance?

Exelon believes any allocation scheme should include allowances for distribution

companies to help offset the cost of carbon for the end-user

Exelon believes any allocation scheme should include allowances for distribution

companies to help offset the cost of carbon for the end-user

Key Climate Bills

Several bills and drafts are gaining support in Washington:

•

Bingaman-Specter (Low Carbon Economy Act)

Economy-wide: All major GHG producing sectors

Point of regulation: Oil and natural gas refineries and coal-fired generators

Increasing auction of allowances

Allowance allocations include: 9% to states, 53% to industry declining 2% per year starting in 2017, 5% set

aside for agricultural

Safety Valve: Price of allowances capped at $12/ton of CO2 (“technology accelerator payment”) starting in

2012 and increasing 5% per year above inflation rate

•

Lieberman-Warner Draft

Economy-wide: All major GHG producing sectors

Point of regulation: Oil and natural gas refineries, electric generators, and other large industrial sources

Increasing auction of allowances

Allowance allocations include: 4% to states, 20% to power plants

(transitions to zero in 2035), 20% to

industry, 10% to electricity load-serving entities

Creates Carbon Market Efficiency Board to allow for borrowing of

future year allowances with payback

•

Dingell-Boucher White Paper

Reduce emissions by 60% to 80% by 2050

Best achieved by a cap-and-trade system

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

2030

Advanced Coal Generation

Distributed Energy Resources

Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles

Carbon Capture & Storage

Nuclear Generation

Renewables

Efficiency

Technology

Source: Electric Power Research Institute

To stabilize emissions at 1990 levels, multiple technologies and

intensive R&D will be required

CO2 Reductions Demand Multiple

Generation Technologies

EIA Base Case 2007

•

The technical potential exists

for the U.S. electricity sector

to significantly reduce CO2

emissions over the coming

decades

•

No one technology will be a

silver bullet –

a portfolio of

technologies will be needed

•

Much of the needed

technology is not available

yet –

substantial R&D and

demonstration is required

Cost of Generation

Source: Sanford Bernstein research and analysis. CCGT= Combined

Cycle Gas Turbine; IGCC= Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle.

CO2

allowance

prices

$17/ton

higher

–

well

below

those

prevailing

the

today

–

the all-in cost of electricity, including operating cost and capital recovery, will likely be

lower for a nuclear plant than a conventional coal plant, CCGT or IGCC w/ CO2 capture

Long-Run Marginal Cost of Electricity ($/MWh)

Conventional Coal

CCGT

IGCC with

CO2 Capture

Nuclear

$40

$50

$60

$70

$80

$90

$100

$10

$15

$20

$25

$30

$35

$40

$45

$50

Price of CO

Emissions Allowances ($ per ton)

Conventional Coal Plant, No CO2 Capture

IGCC With CO2 Capture

Nuclear

CCGT

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

Carbon Credit ($/Ton)

Carbon Value

Climate change legislation is expected to drive substantial gross margin expansion

at Exelon Generation

(1) As of 10/4/07.

(2)

The

EIA

Carbon

Stabilization

Case

(Case

dated

March

2006,

EIA

report

number

SR/OIAF/2006-1.

(3)

The

Energy

Information

Administration

(EIA)

valuation

the

McCain

Lieberman

Bill,

EIA

report

number

SR/OIAF/2003-02.

(4)

Low

Carbon

Economy

Act

initial

“Technology

Accelerator

Payment”

(TAP)

price

2012.

Allowance

price

increases

above

the

rate

inflation

thereafter.

Note:

Assumes

below

$45/ton

carbon

cost,

carbon

reduction

technology

(e.g.,

sequestration)

economical.

EXC Market Sensitivity

2011: $10/ton

Europe Carbon Trading

2011: $33.25/ton

(1)

Midwest

•

~90,000 GWhs in Midwest nuclear

portfolio

•

~55% of time coal on the margin

•

~40% of time gas on the margin

Mid-Atlantic

•

~50,000 GWhs in Mid-Atlantic

nuclear portfolio

•

~45% of time coal on the margin

•

~50% of time gas on the margin

Carbon Value

McCain Lieberman Bill

(3)

2010-11: $22/ton

Assumes Open Position at Exelon Generation

EIA Carbon Case

(2)

2010: $31/ton

Bingaman Specter

(4)

: $12/ton

Exelon Generation Operating

Earnings Drivers: Next Five Years

Exelon Generation is poised for earnings growth over the next five years driven by the

end of the IL and PA transition periods and its unique competitive position

Revised 2007 Guidance

(2)

Note:

See

“Key

Assumptions”

slide

Appendix.

(1)

Differences in sensitivities are largely due to differences in the amount hedged in 2007 vs. 2011.

(2)

Operating

Earnings

Guidance

revised

from

range

$2,280M

$2,420M.

$2,320M -

$2,385M

$660

N/A

+ $10/Ton Carbon

$340

$25

+/-

500 Btu/KWh ATC Heat rate

$50

$10

+/-

$10/MW-Day Capacity

$390

$25

+/-

$1/mmBtu Gas

2011

2007

Market Sensitivities

(1)

As of 12/31/06

(After-Tax $M)

Exelon Generation’s

Competitive Position

•

Large, low-cost, low-emissions,

exceptionally well-run nuclear fleet

•

Complementary and flexible fossil

and hydro fleet

•

Improving power market

fundamentals (heat rates and

capacity values)

•

Potential carbon restrictions

The Exelon Story –

Value Driven

•

Premier U.S. nuclear generator uniquely positioned to capture

market opportunities through operational and commercial excellence

•

Primary source of Exelon’s value going forward

•

12% annual operating EPS growth since inception

(1)

•

Continued strong growth trend through 2011

•

Strong balance sheet and financial discipline

•

Realigned value return framework

•

Experienced management team

•

Predictable source of earnings through transition period;

preparing for 2011

•

Completed the transition to a “wires-only”

business with a

regulatory recovery plan in place

(1) Operating EPS growth rate through 2007 calculated using midpoint of 2007 Operating EPS guidance range.

$3.22

$3.10

$2.78

$2.61

$2.41

$2.24

$1.93

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007E

10/00

4/01

10/01

4/02

10/02

4/03

10/03

4/04

10/04

4/05

10/05

4/06

10/06

4/07

10/07

Strong Financial Performance

10/20/00 –

9/28/07

Assumes dividend reinvestment

Source: Bloomberg

EXC

215%

UTY

90%

Total Shareholder Return

Adjusted (non-GAAP) Operating EPS

Operating

EPS

Guidance

for

2007

revised

$4.15

$4.30

upper half of original guidance range

(1) Operating EPS growth rate through 2007 calculated using midpoint of 2007

Operating EPS guidance range.

$4.15 -

$4.30

Revised 2007 Operating

EPS Guidance

(1)

$3.22

$0.78

$0.67

$1.88

$0.65 -

$0.70

$3.45 -

$3.55

$4.15 -

$4.30

$0.20 -

$0.25

2006 Operating

EPS Actual

$ / Share

HoldCo/Other

ExGen

PECO

ComEd

$0.60 -

$0.63

Note:

See

“Key

Assumptions”

slide

Appendix.

(1)

Earnings

Guidance;

Operating

EPS

Guidance

revised

from

range

$4.00

$4.30

per

share.

(2)

GAAP Guidance

revised

7/25/07

from

range

$4.10

$4.40

per

share.

2007 and Beyond

Exelon Generation

ComEd

PECO

Exelon expects to see robust earnings growth over next five years driven by

Exelon Generation and ComEd’s recovery

Operating EPS

(1)

$4.15 -

$4.30 per share

GAAP EPS

(2)

$3.70 -

$4.00 per share

Revised 2007 Operating Earnings

Guidance

ComEd regulatory recovery plan

Improving market fundamentals

Gas prices

Capacity values

Heat rates

End of IL and PA transition periods

Carbon regulation

Earnings Drivers

Disciplined Financial Management

We have an increasingly strong balance sheet that will be deployed both

to protect and

grow shareholder value

•

In December, the Exelon Board approved a new “Value Return Policy”

•

The Policy:

–

Established a base dividend at $1.76/share, growing modestly over time

–

Returns excess cash and/or balance sheet capacity through share

repurchases

After funding maintenance capital and committed dividend

In absence of higher value-added growth opportunities

–

Maintains adequate credit metrics on a prospective basis

•

Consistent with the Policy, the Exelon Board approved a share repurchase

program for up to $1.25 billion of Exelon’s outstanding common stock

–

Expect to complete within the next six months

$10

$12

$14

20%

25%

30%

35%

2011 Balance Sheet Capacity

(Illustrative)

Exelon expects to create substantial incremental balance sheet capacity over the next

five years, based on planning assumptions

Potential Uses of

Balance Sheet Capacity

Acquisitions or other

growth opportunities

Future unfunded liabilities

Buffer against potentially lower

commodity prices

Share repurchases or other

value return options

Note: Data has not been updated since December 12, 2006 Investor Conference.

(1)

Available

Cash

Flow

from

Operations

CapEx

Dividends

+/-

Net

Financings.

Cash

Flow

from

Operations

Net

cash

flows

provided

operating

activities

less

net

cash flows used in investing activities other than capital expenditures. Net Financing (excluding Dividends) = Net cash flows used in financing activities excluding dividends

paid on common stock. Assumes annualized dividend of $1.76 per share in 2007, growing 5% annually; actual amounts may vary, subject to board approval.

(2) Assumes regulatory recovery plan at ComEd.

(3)

See

“FFO

Calculation

and

Ratios”

definitions

slide.

Adjusted

FFO

Debt

includes:

debt

equivalents

for

purchased

power

agreements,

unfunded

pension

and

other

postretirement

benefits

obligations,

capital

adequacy

for

energy

trading,

and

imputed

interest.

S&P “BBB”

Target Range

Unadjusted FFO / Debt

(2)

Adjusted FFO / Debt

(2) (3)

2011 FFO / Debt (Forecasted)

(3)

Premier Nuclear Operator

100

Exelon

Industry

Average Capacity Factor

Note: Exelon data prior to 2000 represents ComEd-only nuclear fleet

Average Capacity Factor

Note: Exelon data prior to 2000 represents ComEd-only nuclear fleet

100

Operator (# of Reactors)

Range

5-Year Average

Range of Fleet 2-Yr Avg Capacity Factor (2002-2006)

EXC 93.2%

Sources:

Platt’s,

Nuclear

News,

Nuclear

Energy

Institute

and

Energy

Information

Administration

(Department

Energy)

Nuclear Fuel Costs

Uranium market prices have increased, but

Exelon is managing its portfolio

•

Reduced uranium demand by 25%

•

Contracting strategy protects us and ensures

we are significantly below current spot market

prices through 2011

•

Uranium is small component of total

production cost

•

Expect long-term market price to decrease

due to increasing supply; stabilize based on

cost of production

Exelon Nuclear is managing fuel costs

Exelon Uranium Cost vs. Market

100

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Exelon average re-load price

Projected market price

Components of Exelon Nuclear's

Fuel Cost in 2006

Uranium

21%

Conversion

Fabrication

16%

Tax/Interest

Nuclear Waste

Fund

18%

Enrichment

40%

Exelon Projected Uranium Portfolio

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Contracted Supply

2003 Demand Projection

Current Demand Projection

Energy Policy Act –

Nuclear Incentives

$18 per MWh, 8 year PTC for

first 6,000 MWe of new capacity

Cap of $125M per 1,000 MWe of

capacity per year

Protects against a decrease in

market prices and revenues

earned

Significantly improves EPS

Benefit will be allocated/ prorated

among those who:

•

File COL by year-end 2008

•

Begin construction (first

safety-related concrete) by

1/1/2014

•

Place unit into service by

1/1/2021

Production Tax Credit (PTC)

Results in ability to obtain

non-recourse project

financing

Up to 80% of the project

cost, repayment within 30

years or 90% of the project

life

Need clarification of

implementation specifics

Availability of funds to

nuclear projects at risk given

latest program guidelines

Government Loan

Guarantee

“Insurance”

protecting against

regulatory delays in

commissioning a completed

plant

•

First two reactors would

receive immediate

“standby interest coverage”

including replacement

power up to $500M

•

The next four reactors

would be covered up to

$250M after six months of

delay

Regulatory Delay “Backstop”

Energy Policy Act provides financial incentives and

reduced risk by way of production tax credits and

loan guarantees

% Hedged

Low End of Profit

High End of Profit

Portfolio Management

Flexibility in our targeted financial hedge ranges allows us to be opportunistic while

mitigating downside risk

90% -

98%

Prompt Year

(2008)

Target Financial Hedge

(1)

Range

50% -

70%

70% -

90%

Third Year

(2010)

Second Year

(2009)

(1) Percent Financially Hedged is our estimate of the gross margin that is not at risk due to a market price drop and assuming normal generation operating

conditions.

The

formula

is:

Gross

margin

the

5th

percentile

Expected

Gross

margin.

Power Team employs commodity hedging

strategies to optimize Exelon Generation’s

earnings:

Maintain length for opportunistic sales

Use cross commodity option strategies to

enhance hedge activities

Time hedging around view of market

fundamentals

Supplement portfolio with load following

products

Use physical and financial fuel products to

manage variability in fossil generation output

The transition to competitive power procurement allows Exelon Generation to

capture the full market value of its generation portfolio and places more

emphasis on hedging and risk management

37,500

Fossil & Hydro

139,750

Nuclear

184,550

Total

7,300

Forward & Spot Purchases

2007 Expected Total Supply (GWh)

PECO PPA

22%

Other Midwest

Sales

42%

Other Mid-

Atlantic Sales

13%

IL Auction

15%

Other South

Sales

Portfolio Characteristics

2007 Expected Total Sales (GWh)

Fundamentals

The overbuild is ending in the

Eastern Interconnect

New build costs are increasing

rapidly and are difficult to project with

precision due to limited active construction

Cost

New

Build

Generation

Construction

(1)

2,123

1,581

1,316

615

428

EIA ($/KW)

S&P ($/KW)

700

CCGT

4,000

Nuclear

2,795 –

2,925

IGCC

2,438

Pulverized Coal

Gas CT

Technology

(1) Notes:

•

EIA estimates from Annual Energy Outlook 2007; capital costs converted to

2006 dollars.

•

S&P costs from Commodity Report, "Which Power Generation Technologies

Will Take the Lead in Response to Carbon Controls," May 11, 2007.

•

Cost

estimates

from

EIA

and

S&P

are

generic

and

not

take

into

account

site-specific issues such as transmission and fuels access.

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Source: WoodMackenzie

Year New Capacity is Needed

VACAR

MRO

MAAC

ERCOT

SPP

ECAR

NEPOOL

MAIN

$12.40

$10.30

$15.50

$1.50

$1.00

$102.51/MWh

(36-Month Price)

2006 Auction

2007 Auction

~ $35

$67.20 -

$67.50

~ $41

$98.88/MWh

(36-Month Price)

$57.70 -

$58.45

$102.51/MWh

(36-Month Price)

2006 Auction

2007 Auction

~ $35

$67.20 -

$67.50

~ $41

$98.88/MWh

(36-Month Price)

$57.70 -

$58.45

Full Requirements Cost

New Jersey BGS Auction for PSEG

ATC

Forward

Energy

Price

(1)

Full-Requirements Costs ($/MWh):

The higher full-requirements component is due to increases in costs associated with

capacity and congestion

(1) Range of forward market prices that traded during the 2006 and 2007 auctions. The 2006 auction occurred on Feb. 6-7, 2006, and the 2007 auction occurred on Feb. 5-7, 2007.

$140/MW-Day

Transmission and Congestion

Migration Risk

and Volumetric

Risk

Capacity

Renewable

Energy

Load Shape and

Ancillary Services

PJM RPM 2007/2008 & 2008/2009

RPM will have limited impact on Exelon’s 2007 earnings due to current contracts and

forward sales commitments

Eastern MACC

•

2007/2008 RPM auction:

$197.67/MW-day

•

2008/2009 RPM auction:

$148.80/MW-day

Rest of Market

•

2007/2008 RPM auction:

$40.80/MW-day

•

2008/2009 RPM auction:

$111.92/MW-day

Southwest MAAC

•

2007/2008 RPM auction:

$188.54/MW-day

•

2008/2009 RPM auction:

$210.11/MW-day

2007/2008 System

Total CTR Value = 4,599 MW

2008/2009 System

Total CTR Value = 5,128 MW

2007/2008 System Total

CTR Value = 5,134 MW

2008/2009 System Total

CTR Value = 4,717 MW

0 MW

N/A

0 MW

Southwest MAAC

480 -

525 MW

480 -

525 MW

NJ BGS

9,000 -

9,300 MW

9,000 -

9,300 MW

PECO PPA

9,500 MW

Eastern MAAC

6,600 -

6,800 MW

6,600 -

6,800 MW

IL Auction

16,000 MW

(3)

Rest of Market

2008/09

2007/08

Obligation

Exelon Generation Capacity Obligation

(2)

ExGen

Capacity

(1)

RPM = Reliability Pricing Model

CTR = Capacity Transfer Rights

(1) All values are approximate. (2) Not inclusive of all wholesale transactions.

(3) 2008/2009 ExGen Rest of Market Capacity decreases to 15,100 MW due to the roll-off of several PPAs.

Current Market Prices

2004, 2005 and 2006 are actual settled prices.

Real Time LMP (Locational Marginal Price).

Next day over-the-counter market

Average NYMEX settled prices.

2007 information is a combination of actual prices through 9/28/07 and market prices for the balance of the year.

2008 and 2009 are forward market prices as of 9/28/07.

PRICES (as of September 28th, 2007)

Units

2004 ¹

2005 ¹

2006 ¹

2007

2008

2009

PJM West Hub ATC

($/MWh)

42.35 ²

60.92 ²

51.07 ²

57.21

61.75

64.46

PJM NiHub ATC

($/MWh)

30.15 ²

46.39 ²

41.42 ²

43.71

46.77

48.70

NEPOOL MASS Hub ATC

($/MWh)

52.13 ²

76.65 ²

59.68 ²

64.70

73.81

76.59

ERCOT North On-Peak

($/MWh)

49.53 ³

76.90 ³

60.87 ³

59.52

70.71

75.85

Henry Hub Natural Gas

($/MMBTU)

5.85

8.85

6.74

6.97

7.95

8.27

WTI Crude Oil

($/bbl)

41.48

56.62

66.38

67.90

76.94

73.75

PRB 8800

($/Ton)

5.97

8.06

13.04

9.66

10.85

11.65

NAPP 3.0

($/Ton)

60.25

52.42

43.87

46.33

49.50

50.75

ATC HEAT RATES (as of September 28th, 2007)

PJM West Hub / Tetco M3

(MMBTU/MWh)

6.40

6.30

6.98

7.36

6.95

6.96

PJM NiHub / Chicago City Gate

(MMBTU/MWh)

5.52

6.32

6.39

5.96

5.91

ERCOT North / Houston Ship Channel

(MMBTU/MWh)

7.53

8.21

8.28

7.82

7.95

8.06

7.1

7.2

7.3

7.4

7.5

7.6

7.7

7.8

7.9

8.0

1/2/07

2/2/07

3/2/07

4/2/07

5/2/07

6/2/07

7/2/07

8/2/07

9/2/07

1/2/07

2/2/07

3/2/07

4/2/07

5/2/07

6/2/07

7/2/07

8/2/07

9/2/07

7.4

7.6

7.8

8.2

8.4

8.6

8.8

9.2

9.4

1/2/07

2/2/07

3/2/07

4/2/07

5/2/07

6/2/07

7/2/07

8/2/07

9/2/07

Market Price Snapshot

As of September 27, 2007. Source: OTC quotes and electronic trading system. Quotes are daily.

Forward NYMEX Natural Gas

PJM-West and Ni-Hub On-Peak

Forward Prices

PJM-West On-Peak Implied Heat Rate

Ni-Hub On-Peak Implied Heat Rate

8.84

8.94

9.04

9.14

9.24

9.34

9.44

9.54

9.64

9.74

1/2/07

2/2/07

3/2/07

4/2/07

5/2/07

6/2/07

7/2/07

8/2/07

9/2/07

2008

2009

2008

2008 PJM-West

2009 PJM-West

2009 Ni-Hub

2008 Ni-Hub

2008

2009

1/2/07

2/2/07

3/2/07

4/2/07

5/2/07

6/2/07

7/2/07

8/2/07

9/2/07

1/2/07

2/2/07

3/2/07

4/2/07

5/2/07

6/2/07

7/2/07

8/2/07

9/2/07

1/2/07

2/2/07

3/2/07

4/2/07

5/2/07

6/2/07

7/2/07

8/2/07

9/2/07

1/2/07

2/2/07

3/2/07

4/2/07

5/2/07

6/2/07

7/2/07

8/2/07

9/2/07

Market Price Snapshot

As of September 27, 2007. Source: OTC quotes and electronic trading system. Quotes are daily.

PJM-West ATC Forward Prices

2008

2009

PJM-West Wrap Forward Prices

2008

2009

NIHUB ATC Forward Prices

NIHUB Wrap Forward Prices

2009

2008

2009

2008

1/2/07

2/2/07

3/2/07

4/2/07

5/2/07

6/2/07

7/2/07

8/2/07

9/2/07

7.7

7.75

7.8

7.85

7.9

7.95

8.05

8.1

8.15

8.2

1/2/07

2/2/07

3/2/07

4/2/07

5/2/07

6/2/07

7/2/07

8/2/07

9/2/07

1/2/07

2/2/07

3/2/07

4/2/07

5/2/07

6/2/07

7/2/07

8/2/07

9/2/07

7.5

8.5

1/2/07

2/2/07

3/2/07

4/2/07

5/2/07

6/2/07

7/2/07

8/2/07

9/2/07

Market Price Snapshot

2008

2009

2008

2009

As of September 27, 2007. Source: OTC quotes and electronic trading system. Quotes are daily.

2008

2009

Houston Ship Channel Natural Gas

Forward Prices

ERCOT ATC Forward Prices

ERCOT ATC v. Houston Ship Channel

Implied Heat Rate

ERCOT Wrap Forward Prices

ComEd Operating Earnings:

Next Five Years

2011

(1)

2011 Assumptions

(1)

Rate base:

~$9.6B

Equity

(2)

~45%

ROE:

~10%

Revised 2007 Guidance

(3)

Note:

See

“Key

Assumptions”

slide

Appendix.

(1) Provided solely for illustrative purposes, not intended as earnings guidance. The earnings figure represents a possible scenario that is based on the assumptions shown above as

well as assumptions about other factors, including, but not limited to, judgments about changes in load growth, spending and ratemaking proceedings, as well as future economic,

competitive and financial market conditions, and the absence of adverse regulatory and legislative developments, all of which are subject to uncertainties and have not been subject

to the same degree of analysis as we apply to 2007 forecasts. The scenario should not be relied upon as being necessarily indicative of future results.

(2) Reflects equity based on definition provided in most recent ICC distribution rate case order (book equity less goodwill). Projected book equity ratio in 2007 is 58%.

(3)

Original

Earnings

Guidance

$65M

$125M

included

anticipated

Settlement

cost,

which

now

excluded

from

Operating

Earnings.

After

2007,

ComEd’s

earnings

are

expected

increase

regulatory

lag

reduced

over

time

through regular rate requests, putting ComEd on a path toward appropriate returns

$130M -

$165M

~$430M

2006 Actual

$528M

2007 Assumptions

Rate Base:

~$8.1B

Equity

(2)

~44%

ROE:

~3.5 –

4.5%

ComEd Highlights

Roll-out of customer rate relief

programs per the IL Settlement

IPA and new procurement process

Regulatory recovery plan

Transmission formula rate approved

by FERC, effective May 1, 2007

(subject to hearing and potential

refund)

Distribution rate case filing planned

for late 3Q07; decision expected 11

months after filing

Illinois Settlement

•

Continued ComEd membership in PJM

•

Competitive procurement for supply

•

Filed

competitive

declaration

for

100

400

customers

•

Statute mandates cost recovery for purchased power

•

Reduced uncertainty around conditions for ICC approval

for strategic transactions such as reorganizations or

mergers

•

Immediate rate relief for customers

•

Provisions to help stabilize rates

•

Energy efficiency and demand response programs and

renewable portfolio standards

Protects Competitive

Markets

Protects value of

generation

Provides Strategic

Flexibility

Customer Focused

•

Eliminates the IL Attorney General’s challenges to the

2006 auction

•

Financial swap at market prices

•

No generation tax

Financial Swap Agreement

3,000

$53.48

January 1, 2013 -

May 31, 2013

3,000

$52.37

January 1, 2012 -

December 31, 2012

3,000

$51.26

January 1, 2011 -

December 31, 2011

3,000

$50.15

June 1, 2010 -

December 31, 2010

2,000

$50.15

January 1, 2010 -

May 31, 2010

2,000

$49.04

June 1, 2009 -

December 31, 2009

1,000

$49.04

January 1, 2009 -

May 31, 2009

1,000

$47.93

June 1, 2008 -

December 31, 2008

Notional Quantity (MW)

Fixed Price ($/MWH)

Portion of Term

•

Financial Swap Agreement between ComEd and Exelon Generation promotes

price stability for residential and small business customers

•

Designed to dovetail with ComEd’s remaining auction contracts for energy,

increasing in volume as the auction contracts expire

–

By June 1, 2010, will cover about 60% of the energy that ComEd’s residential and small

business customers use

•

Includes ATC baseload energy only

–

Does not include capacity, ancillary services or congestion

FERC Transmission Rate Order

FERC approved $116M in ComEd’s formula transmission rate effective as of 5/1/07,

subject to refund ($146M originally requested)

•

Approved 0.50% ROE adder for RTO participation

•

Approved capital structure of 58% equity / 42% debt

•

Denied inclusion of CWIP in the formula, which reduces the original revenue requirement by

$12M

•

Denied

incentive

rate

treatment

for

West

Loop

and

Grenshaw

projects,

which

reduces

the

original revenue requirement by $16M

Issues set for rehearing:

•

ROE: Base of 11.7%

•

Other: Post-retirement healthcare costs, pension asset, future plant additions, material and

supply, and cash working capital

•

Settlement proceedings are underway

•

Appropriate reserves for potential refunds have been established

Since last transmission rate update in 2003, ComEd will have invested more than $800

million in transmission-related plant to meet increasing demand and improve reliability

(through 2007). The new transmission rate is expected to increase customer bills by ~1%

CWIP = Construction work in progress.

PECO Operating Earnings:

Next Five Years

2011

(1)

2011 Assumptions

(1)

Rate Base:

~$4.7B

Equity:

~50%

ROE:

~10%

Revised 2007 Guidance

(2)

$435M -

$470M

PECO is expected to provide a predictable source of earnings to Exelon through the

remainder of the transition period

~$235M

Note:

See

“Key

Assumptions”

slide

Appendix.

(1)

Provided

solely

for

illustrative

purposes,

not

intended

earnings

guidance.

The

earnings

figure

represents

possible

scenario

that

based

the

assumptions

shown

above

as well as assumptions about other factors, including, but not limited to, judgments about changes in load growth, spending and ratemaking proceedings, as well as future

economic, competitive and financial market conditions, and the absence of adverse regulatory and legislative developments, all of which are subject to uncertainties and have

not been subject to the same degree of analysis as we apply to 2007 forecasts. The scenario should not be relied upon as being necessarily indicative of future results.

(2)

Operating

Earnings

Guidance

revised

from

range

$400M

$420M.

PECO Highlights

Legislative activity:

HB 1203 and HB 1530 signed by governor on

7/17/07

Other energy issues are expected to be

addressed in a special legislative session that

began 9/17/07

PAPUC:

Issued POLR rules on 5/10/07

PUC’s Final Default Service rules provide

competitive procurement framework with full

cost recovery

PUC’s Price Mitigation Order focuses on

customer education to prepare customers for

potential rate increase

AEPS Act –

PECO received favorable ALJ

recommended decision on 9/13/07 with a PUC

decision expected in 4Q07 on its early

procurement filing of 3/07

Legislative Overview

The Pennsylvania General Assembly introduced four bills that would

enable elements of Governor Rendell’s Energy Independence Plan

One of the four bills, HB 1203, was passed by the General Assembly

and was signed into law on July 17, 2007

•

HB 1203 amends the Alternative Energy Portfolio Standards (AEPS)

Act

by increasing solar obligations and modifying standards that utilities must

meet in order to obtain “force majeure”

waiver from PAPUC

A bill not originally part of the Governor’s Energy Initiative, HB 1530,

was passed by the General Assembly and signed into law on July 17,

2007

•

Supported by Duquesne Energy, US Steel and ATI

•

Allows all distribution companies to provide long-term, fixed price

contracts for customers with peak demands of 15 MW or greater

•

Allows Duquesne to own generation to serve customers with peak

demands of 20 MW or greater (3-year window to enter into a contract or

acquire generation)

Legislature agreed to hold a Special Session on Energy Policy that

began on September 17, 2007

Special Session Agenda

Senate has agreed to take up the following topics in the Special

Session:

•

Investment in clean and renewable energy and incentives for conservation

without new taxes

•

Legislation to set standards for liquid fuels

Additional legislation supporting the Governor’s Energy Independence

Strategy is still under consideration in the Legislature; elements of

those bills may be considered in the Special Session:

•

Procurement

•

Conservation and renewable power

•

Rate increase phase-in plan

•

System benefits charge to support $850M bond initiative

•

Smart meters and time-of-use pilot

•

Micro-grids

•

Pennsylvania Energy Development Authority (PEDA) energy procurement

authority

•

Alternative fuels

Governor’s Energy Independence

Strategy –

Legislative Package

HB 1200 –

PEDA

Authorization

HB 1203 –

Renewable

Portfolio Standards

Amendment

HB 1202 –

Liquid

Fuels Bill

•

Procurement using the portfolio model with “lowest reasonable

rates”

and prioritizes demand side management and

alternative energy resources

•

Allows for long-term, cost-based rates for larger energy users

•

Provides for 3-year phase-in of rate increases for all customers

•

Establishes system benefits charge of 0.5 mills/KWh

•

Mandates time-of-use pilot for all customers and full

deployment of “smart meter”

program in 6 years

•

Authorizes Pennsylvania Energy Development Authority

(PEDA) to spend the $850M of proceeds from securitization of

systems benefit charge

•

Provides PEDA right to “acquire, buy and sell electric power”

Accelerates the minimum thresholds for the acquisition

of Solar/Photovoltaic as Tier-1 Resource

•

Force Majeure language modified to consider “good faith

effort”

by utilities to procure renewable energy

•

Sets standards for ethanol content in transportation fuels

•

Sets standards for bio-diesel content of diesel fuel

HB 1201 –

PAPUC

Statute Bill

Summary of PAPUC Rulemakings

It will likely be effective

immediately, as it is a

policy statement

On hold, pending the

conclusion of the

Special Session on

Energy

Will address the

benefits of DSR/EE and

requirements for utilities

to implement such

programs

Demand Side Response

Energy Efficiency

(DSR/EE)

May 17, 2007

Issued May 10, 2007

Discusses consumer

education, conservation

and energy efficiency,

impact on low income

customers

Mitigation of Rate

Increases

May 10, 2007

Issued May 10, 2007

Reflects the PAPUC’s

current thinking on

application of the

regulations

Default Service

Policy Statement

September 15, 2007

Issued May 10, 2007

Addresses issues

around procurement,

rate design, cost

recovery, filing

requirements

Default Service

Regulations

Effective Date

Final Order

Description

Rulemaking

Default Service Provider

Regulations/Policy

Procurement

•

Competitive process but no statewide auction

•

Utility run RFPs

or auctions are preferred; portfolio approach is

allowed

•

Staggered

auctions/RFPs

avoid

high

market

risk

•

Long term contracts limited to renewable resources

•

Non-renewable contracts limited to 1-3 years

•

Encourages spot market purchases for a portion of supply

Cost Recovery

•

Full cost recovery, no prudence review

•

Reconciliation not required but is mandatory for AEPS

Rate Design

•

Preference for a single price for each rate class

•

Eliminates declining block rates and demand charges

•

Frequent

rate

changes

–

quarterly

monthly,

better

track

the market

•

Hourly or monthly pricing for large customers

Mitigation

•

Provides for an opt-in phase-in for increases of >25% for

customers <25 KW; must be competitively neutral

•

Transition period of up to 3 years for rate design changes

•

Statewide education program

•

Utility specific education plans to be filed by 12/31/2007

•

Encourages energy efficiency and demand response

PECO Post-2010 Strategy

•

PECO to propose an auction approach to conduct multiple

procurements prior to 2011

•

May offer 1-year fixed rate for large energy users

•

Requirement for some spot market purchases

•

PECO will file its individual Customer Education Plan with

PAPUC by 12/31/07

•

PECO will participate in PAPUC Working Group to

develop effective statewide campaign

•

PAPUC action on DSR/EE pending

•

PECO to begin real-time pricing program in 2008

•

Plan to expand current offerings and add new programs,

based upon PAPUC rules and cost recovery

Procurement

Rate Stabilization

Consumer Education

Demand Side

Response & Energy

Efficiency (DSR/EE)

•

Procurement plan will include early, staggered procurement

•

Rate increase phase-in for residential and small commercial

customers offered on an opt-in basis if rate increase > 25%

•

Three-year phase-out to minimize impact of rate design

changes

2011

PECO Average Electric Rates

(1)

Rates

increased

from

original

settlement

1.6%

reflect

the

roll-in

increased

Gross

Receipts

Tax

and

$0.02/kWh

for

Universal

Service

Fund

Charge

and

Nuclear

Decommissioning Cost Adjustment.

2.59

0.46

2.70

4.92

5.43

2006

2007

2008 -

2010

Energy / Capacity

Competitive

Transition Charge

Transmission

Distribution

10.67¢

11.18¢

Unit Rates (¢/kWh)

(1)

Electric Restructuring Settlement

+4.8%

CTC terminates at year-end 2010

Energy / Capacity price is expected to

increase; price will reflect associated

full requirements costs (including

capacity, load shaping, ancillary

services, line losses, transmission

congestion and gross receipts tax)

PECO’s 2011 full requirements price is

expected

differ

from

PPL’s

first

auction price due, in part, to the timing

of the procurement and locational

differences

Rates will vary by customer class and

will depend on legislation and

approved procurement model

Post-Transition Factors

Key Assumptions

7.60

6.56

8.41

Chicago City Gate Gas Price ($/mmBtu)

9.00

7.31

9.67

Tetco M3 Gas Price ($/mmBtu)

37.0

37.5

Effective Tax Rate (%)

(4)

0.9

0.6

1.3

ComEd

0.6

1.2

0.9

PECO

Electric Delivery Growth (%)

(3)

ComEd

PECO

Electric Volume Retention (%)

16.60

1.75

0.13

PJM West Capacity Price ($/MW-day)

44.30

1.75

0.13

PJM East Capacity Price ($/MW-day)

5.80

6.32

5.52

NI Hub Implied ATC Heat Rate (mmbtu/MWh)

44.00

41.42

46.39

NI Hub ATC Price ($/MWh)

6.60

6.98

6.30

PJM West Hub Implied ATC Heat Rate (mmbtu/MWh)

59.50

51.07

60.92

PJM West Hub ATC Price ($/MWh)

8.00

6.74

8.85

Henry Hub Gas Price ($/mmBtu)

144,000

71,326

72,376

Total Genco Market and Retail Sales (GWhs)

(2)

40,500

(5)

119,354

121,961

Total Genco Sales to Energy Delivery (GWhs)

184,500

190,680

194,337

Total Genco Sales Excluding Trading (GWhs)

94.0

93.9

93.5

Nuclear Capacity Factor (%)

(1)

2007 Est.

2006 Actual

2005 Actual

(1)

Excludes Salem.

(2)

2007 estimate includes Illinois Auction Sales.

(3)

Weather-normalized retail load growth.

(4)

Excludes results related to investments in synthetic fuel-producing facilities.

(5)

Sales to PECO only.

Notes: 2005 and 2006 prices are average for the year.

2007 prices reflect observable prices as of 9/14/06.

Projected 2007 Key Credit Measures

62% –

52%

53%

Rating Agency Debt Ratio

Adjusted Book Debt Ratio: 49%

12% –

20%

18%

17%

FFO / Debt

2.5x –

3.5x

4.4x

FFO / Interest

PECO:

52% –

42%

58%

61%

Rating Agency Debt Ratio

Adjusted Book Debt Ratio: 43%

25% –

40%

12%

10%

FFO / Debt

3.5x –

5.5x

BBB

3.0x

FFO / Interest

ComEd:

52% –

42%

40%

58%

Rating Agency Debt Ratio

Adjusted Book Debt Ratio: 38%

25% –

40%

79%

41%

FFO / Debt

3.5x –

5.5x

BBB+

12.4x

6.5x

FFO / Interest

Generation:

63%

28%

5.6x

Without PPA &

Pension / OPEB

55% –

45%

70%

Rating Agency Debt Ratio

Adjusted Book Debt Ratio: 54%

20% –

30%

22%

FFO / Debt

3.2x –

4.5x

BBB

4.6x

FFO / Interest

Exelon Cons:

“BBB”

Target

Range

(3)

S&P Credit

Ratings

(2)

With PPA &

Pension / OPEB

(1)

Notes: Projected credit measures reflect impact of Illinois electric rates and policy settlement. Exelon, ComEd and PECO metrics exclude securitization debt. See following slide for

FFO

(Funds

from

Operations)/Interest,

FFO/Debt

and

Adjusted

Book

Debt

Ratio

reconciliations

GAAP.

(1)

Reflects S&P updated guidelines, which include imputed debt and interest related to purchased power agreements (PPA), unfunded pension and other postretirement benefits

(OPEB) obligations, and capital adequacy for energy trading. Debt is imputed for estimated pension and OPEB obligations by operating company.

(2)

Current senior unsecured ratings for Exelon and Generation and senior secured ratings for ComEd and PECO as of 10/1/07.

(3)

Based on S&P Business Profiles: 7 for Exelon, 8 for Generation and ComEd, and 4 for PECO.

Exelon’s balance sheet is strong

FFO Calculation and Ratios (updated)

FFO Calculation

= FFO

PECO Transition Bond Principal Paydown

Gain

Sale,

Extraordinary

Items

and

Other

Non-Cash

Items

(3)

+ Change in Deferred Taxes

Depreciation,

amortization

(including

nucl

fuel

amortization),

AFUDC/Cap.

Interest

Add back non-cash items:

Net Income

= Adjusted Interest

+ 7% of Present Value (PV) of Operating Leases

+ Interest on imputed debt related to PV of Purchased Power Agreements

(PPA), unfunded Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits (OPEB)

obligations,

and

Capital

Adequacy

for

Energy

Trading

(2)

applicable

PECO Transition Bond Interest Expense

Net Interest Expense (Before AFUDC & Cap. Interest)

Adjusted Interest

FFO + Adjusted Interest

FFO Interest Coverage

Capital

Adequacy

for

Energy

Trading

(2)

FFO

= Adjusted Debt

+ PV of Operating Leases

100%

Purchased

Power

Agreements

(2)

Unfunded

Pension

and

OPEB

obligations

(2)

+ A/R Financing

Add off-balance sheet debt equivalents:

PECO Transition Bond Principal Balance

+ STD

+ LTD

Debt:

Adjusted

Debt

(1)

FFO Debt Coverage

= Total Rating Agency Capitalization

Off-balance

sheet

debt

equivalents

(2)

Goodwill

Total Adjusted Capitalization

= Rating Agency Debt

+ ComEd Transition Bond Principal

Balance

Off-balance

sheet

debt

equivalents

(2)

Adjusted Book Debt

Rating Agency Capitalization

Rating Agency Debt

= Total Adjusted Capitalization

+ Adjusted Book Debt

+ Preferred Securities of Subsidiaries

+ Total Shareholders' Equity

Capitalization:

= Adjusted Book Debt

Transition Bond Principal Balance

+ STD

+ LTD

Debt:

Total Adjusted Capitalization

Adjusted Book Debt

Debt to Total Cap

Note: Updated to reflect revised S&P guidelines and company forecast. FFO and Debt related to non-recourse debt are excluded from the calculations.

(1) Use current year-end adjusted debt balance.

(2) Metrics are calculated in presentation unadjusted and adjusted for debt equivalents and related interest for PPAs, unfunded Pension and OPEB obligations, and Capital

Adequacy for Energy Trading.

(3) Reflects depreciation adjustment for PPAs and decommissioning interest income and contributions.

GAAP EPS Reconciliation 2000-2002

2000 GAAP Reported EPS

$1.44

Change in common shares

(0.53)

Extraordinary items

(0.04)

Cumulative effect of accounting change

Unicom pre-merger results

0.79

Merger-related costs

0.34

Pro forma merger accounting adjustments

(0.07)

2000 Adjusted (non-GAAP) Operating EPS

$1.93

2001 GAAP Reported EPS

$2.21

Cumulative effect of adopting SFAS No. 133

(0.02)

Employee severance costs

0.05

Litigation reserves

0.01

Net loss on investments

0.01

CTC prepayment

(0.01)

Wholesale rate settlement

(0.01)

Settlement of transition bond swap

2001 Adjusted (non-GAAP) Operating EPS

$2.24

2002 GAAP Reported EPS

$2.22

Cumulative effect of adopting SFAS No. 141 and No. 142

0.35

Gain on sale of investment in AT&T Wireless

(0.18)

Employee severance costs

0.02

2002 Adjusted (non-GAAP) Operating EPS

$2.41

2004 GAAP Reported EPS

$2.78

Charges associated with debt repurchases

0.12

Investments in synthetic fuel-producing facilities

(0.10)

Employee severance costs

0.07

Cumulative effect of adopting FIN 46-R

(0.05)

Settlement associated with the storage of spent nuclear fuel

(0.04)

Boston Generating 2004 impact

(0.03)

Charges associated with investment in Sithe Energies, Inc.

0.02

Charges related to the now terminated merger with PSEG

0.01

2004 Adjusted (non-GAAP) Operating EPS

$2.78

2003 GAAP Reported EPS

$1.38

Boston Generating impairment

0.87

Charges associated with investment in Sithe Energies, Inc.

0.27

Employee severance costs

0.24

Cumulative effect of adopting SFAS No. 143

(0.17)

Property tax accrual reductions

(0.07)

Enterprises’

Services goodwill impairment

0.03

Enterprises’

impairments due to anticipated sale

0.03

March 3 ComEd Settlement Agreement

0.03

2003 Adjusted (non-GAAP) Operating EPS

$2.61

GAAP EPS Reconciliation 2003-2005

2005 GAAP Reported EPS

$1.36

Investments in synthetic fuel-producing facilities

(0.10)

Charges related to the now terminated merger with PSEG

0.03

Impairment of ComEd’s goodwill

1.78

2005 financial impact of Generation’s investment in Sithe

(0.03)

Cumulative effect of adopting FIN 47

2005 Adjusted (non-GAAP) Operating EPS

0.06

$3.10

GAAP Earnings Reconciliation

Year Ended December 31, 2006

776

Impairment of ComEd’s goodwill

(52)

Recovery of debt costs at ComEd

(89)

Nuclear decommissioning obligation reduction

(95)

Recovery of severance costs at ComEd

$(83)

$(144)

Other

$2,175

(58)

$1,592

Exelon

$455

$441

PECO

$528

$(112)

ComEd

ExGen

(in millions)

Severance charges

Charges related to now terminated merger with PSEG

$1,275

2006 Adjusted (non-GAAP) Operating Earnings (Loss)

Impairment of Generation’s investments in TEG and TEP

Investments in synthetic fuel-producing facilities

(61)

Mark-to-market adjustments from economic hedging activities

$1,407

2006 GAAP Reported Earnings (Loss)

Note: Amounts may not add due to rounding

GAAP EPS Reconciliation

Year Ended December 31, 2006

$3.22

(0.11)

0.67

$0.78

$1.88

2006 Adjusted (non-GAAP) Operating EPS

$2.35

(0.21)

0.65

(0.17)

$2.08

2006 GAAP Reported EPS

0.05

0.04

Other

(1)

(0.14)

1.15

(0.08)

0.01

ComEd

(1)

(0.13)

0.01

(0.09)

ExGen

(1)

0.01

PECO

(1)

Exelon

1.15

Impairment of ComEd’s goodwill

(0.08)

Recovery of debt costs at ComEd

0.03

Severance charges

(0.13)

Nuclear decommissioning obligation reduction

(0.14)

Recovery of severance costs at ComEd

0.09

Charges related to now terminated merger with PSEG

0.04

Investments in synthetic fuel-producing facilities

(0.09)

Mark-to-market adjustments from economic hedging activities

Note: Amounts may not add due to rounding

(1)

Amounts shown per Exelon share and represent contributions to Exelon's EPS

2007 Earnings Outlook

Exelon’s outlook for 2007 adjusted (non-GAAP) operating earnings

excludes the earnings impacts of the following:

•

costs associated with the Illinois electric rate settlement, including ComEd’s

previously announced customer Rate Relief and Assistance Initiative

•

mark-to-market adjustments from economic hedging activities

•

investments in synthetic fuel-producing facilities

•

significant impairments of intangible assets, including goodwill

•

significant changes in decommissioning obligation estimates

•

other unusual items

•

any future changes to GAAP

GAAP guidance excludes the impact of unusual items which the Company

is unable to forecast, including any future changes to GAAP

Both our operating earnings and GAAP earnings guidance are based

on the

assumption of normal weather

Net income (loss)

+/-

Cumulative effect of changes in accounting principle

+/-

Discontinued operations

+/-

Minority interest

+ Income taxes

Income (loss) from continuing operations before income taxes and

minority

interest

+ Interest expense

+ Interest expense to affiliates

Interest income from affiliates

+ Depreciation and amortization

Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA)

Reconciliation of Net Income to

EBITDA

Exelon Investor Relations Contacts

Inquiries concerning this presentation should

be directed to:

Exelon Investor Relations

10 South Dearborn Street

Chicago, Illinois 60603

312-394-2345

312-394-4082 (Fax)

For copies of other presentations,

annual/quarterly reports, or to be added to our

email distribution list please contact:

Felicia McGowan, Executive Admin Coordinator

312-394-4069

Felicia.McGowan@ExelonCorp.com

Investor Relations Contacts:

Chaka Patterson, Vice President

312-394-7234

Chaka.Patterson@ExelonCorp.com

JaCee Burnes, Director

312-394-2948

JaCee.Burnes@ExelonCorp.com

Marybeth Flater, Manager

312-394-8354

Marybeth.Flater@ExelonCorp.com

Len Epelbaum, Principal Analyst

312-394-7356

Len.Epelbaum@ExelonCorp.com