PHI Merger Commitments (Exelon, PHI, Pepco, DPL and ACE). Approval of the PHI Merger in Delaware, New Jersey, Maryland and the District of Columbia was conditioned upon Exelon and PHI agreeing to certain commitments. The following amounts represent total commitment costs that have been recorded since the acquisition date and the total remaining obligations for Exelon, PHI, Pepco, DPL and ACE as of December 31, 2019:

In addition, Exelon is committed to develop or to assist in the commercial development of approximately 37 MWs of new solar generation in Maryland, District of Columbia, and Delaware at an estimated cost of approximately $127 million, which will generate future earnings at Exelon and Generation. Investment costs, which are expected to be primarily capital in nature, are recognized as incurred and recorded in Exelon's and Generation's financial statements. As of December 31, 2019, 27 MWs of new generation were developed and Exelon and Generation have incurred costs of $120 million. Exelon has also committed to purchase 100 MWs of wind energy in PJM. DPL has committed to conducting three RFPs to procure up to a total of 120 MWs of wind RECs for the purpose of meeting Delaware's renewable portfolio standards. DPL has conducted two of the three wind REC RFPs. The first 40 MW wind REC tranche was conducted in 2017 and did not result in a purchase agreement. The second 40 MW wind REC tranche was conducted in 2018 and resulted in a proposed REC purchase agreement that was approved by the DPSC in March 2019. The third and final 40 MW wind REC tranche will be conducted in 2022.



			Expiration within
Exelon	Total		2020		2021		2022		2023		2024		2025 and beyond
Letters of credit	$	1,455	$	1,314	$	141	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—
Surety bonds^(a)	855		809		46		—		—		—		—
Financing trust guarantees	378		—		—		—		—		—		378
Guaranteed lease residual values^(b)	26		2		2		4		3		6		10
Total commercial commitments	$	2,714	$	2,125	$	189	$	4	$	3	$	6	$	388

Generation
Letters of credit	$	1,440	$	1,302	$	138	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—
Surety bonds^(a)	670		662		8		—		—		—		—
Total commercial commitments	$	2,110	$	1,964	$	146	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—

ComEd
Letters of credit	$	7	$	7	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—
Surety bonds^(a)	50		48		2		—		—		—		—
Financing trust guarantees	200		—		—		—		—		—		200
Total commercial commitments	$	257	$	55	$	2	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	200

PECO
Surety bonds^(a)	$	9	$	9	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—
Financing trust guarantees	178		—		—		—		—		—		178
Total commercial commitments	$	187	$	9	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	178

BGE
Letters of credit	$	2	$	2	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—
Surety bonds^(a)	3		3		—		—		—		—		—
Total commercial commitments	$	5	$	5	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—

PHI
Surety bonds^(a)	$	21	$	21	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—
Guaranteed lease residual values^(b)	26		2		2		4		3		6		10
Total commercial commitments	$	47	$	23	$	2	$	4	$	3	$	6	$	10

Pepco
Surety bonds^(a)	$	14	$	14	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—
Guaranteed lease residual values^(b)	9		—		—		1		1		2		5
Total commercial commitments	$	23	$	14	$	—	$	1	$	1	$	2	$	5

DPL
Surety bonds^(a)	$	4	$	4	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—
Guaranteed lease residual values^(b)	11		1		1		2		1		3		3
Total commercial commitments	$	15	$	5	$	1	$	2	$	1	$	3	$	3

ACE
Surety bonds^(a)	$	3	$	3	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—
Guaranteed lease residual values^(b)	7		1		1		1		1		1		2
Total commercial commitments	$	10	$	4	$	1	$	1	$	1	$	1	$	2

The Price-Anderson Act was enacted to ensure the availability of funds for public liability claims arising from an incident at any of the U.S. licensed nuclear facilities and to limit the liability of nuclear reactor owners for such claims from any single incident. As of December 31, 2019, the current liability limit per incident is $13.9 billion and is subject to change to account for the effects of inflation and changes in the number of licensed reactors at least once every five years with the last adjustment effective November 1, 2018. In accordance with the Price-Anderson Act, Generation maintains financial protection at levels equal to the amount of liability insurance available from private sources through the purchase of private nuclear energy liability insurance for public liability claims that could arise in the event of an incident. Effective January 1, 2017, the required amount of nuclear energy liability insurance purchased is $450 million for each operating site. Claims exceeding that amount are covered through mandatory participation in a financial protection pool, as required by the Price Anderson-Act, which provides the additional $13.5 billion per incident in funds available for public liability claims. Participation in this secondary financial protection pool requires the operator of each reactor to fund its proportionate share of costs for any single incident that exceeds the primary layer of financial protection. Exelon’s share of this secondary layer would be approximately $2.9 billion, however any amounts payable under this secondary layer would be capped at $434 million per year.

As part of the execution of the NOSA on April 1, 2014, Generation executed an Indemnity Agreement pursuant to which Generation agreed to indemnify EDF and its affiliates against third-party claims that may arise from any future nuclear incident (as defined in the Price-Anderson Act) in connection with the CENG nuclear plants or their operations. Exelon guarantees Generation’s obligations under this indemnity. See Note 22 — Variable Interest Entities for additional information on Generation’s operations relating to CENG.

Generation is required each year to report to the NRC the current levels and sources of property insurance that demonstrates Generation possesses sufficient financial resources to stabilize and decontaminate a reactor and reactor station site in the event of an accident. The property insurance maintained for each facility is currently provided through insurance policies purchased from NEIL, an industry mutual insurance company of which Generation is a member.

NEIL may declare distributions to its members as a result of favorable operating experience. In recent years, NEIL has made distributions to its members, but Generation cannot predict the level of future distributions or if they will continue at all. Generation's portion of the annual distribution declared by NEIL is estimated to be $136 million for 2019, and was $58 million and $60 million for 2018 and 2017, respectively. In addition, in March 2018, NEIL declared a supplemental distribution. Generation's portion of the supplemental distribution declared by NEIL was $31 million. The distributions were recorded as a reduction to Operating and maintenance expense within Exelon and Generation’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

Premiums paid to NEIL by its members are also subject to a potential assessment for adverse loss experience in the form of a retrospective premium obligation. NEIL has never assessed this retrospective premium since its formation in 1973, and Generation cannot predict the level of future assessments, if any. The current maximum aggregate annual retrospective premium obligation for Generation is approximately $334 million. NEIL requires its members to maintain an investment grade credit rating or to ensure collectability of their annual retrospective premium obligation by providing a financial guarantee, letter of credit, deposit premium, or some other means of assurance.

NEIL provides “all risk” property damage, decontamination and premature decommissioning insurance for each station for losses resulting from damage to its nuclear plants, either due to accidents or acts of terrorism. If the decision is made to decommission the facility, a portion of the insurance proceeds will be allocated to a fund, which Generation is required by the NRC to maintain, to provide for decommissioning the facility. In the event of an insured loss, Generation is unable to predict the timing of the availability of insurance proceeds to Generation and the amount of such proceeds that would be available. In the event that one or more acts of terrorism cause accidental property damage within a twelve-month period from the first accidental property damage under one or more policies for all insured plants, the maximum recovery by Exelon 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.

Under the NWPA, the DOE is responsible for the development of a geologic repository for and the disposal of SNF and high-level radioactive waste. As required by the NWPA, Generation is a party to contracts with the DOE (Standard Contracts) to provide for disposal of SNF from Generation’s nuclear generating stations. In accordance with the NWPA and the Standard Contracts, Generation historically had paid the DOE one mill ($0.001) per kWh of net nuclear generation for the cost of SNF disposal. Due to the lack of a viable disposal program, the DOE reduced the SNF disposal fee to zero in May 2014. Until a new fee structure is in effect, Exelon and Generation will not accrue any further costs related to SNF disposal fees. This fee may be adjusted prospectively 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 is expected to be delayed significantly. In August 2004, Generation and the DOJ, in close consultation with the DOE, reached a settlement under which the government agreed to reimburse Generation, subject to certain damage limitations based on the extent of the government’s breach, for costs associated with storage of SNF at Generation’s nuclear stations pending the DOE’s fulfillment of its obligations. Generation’s settlement agreement does not include FitzPatrick and FitzPatrick does not currently have a settlement agreement in place. Calvert Cliffs, Ginna and Nine Mile Point each have separate settlement agreements in place with the DOE which were extended during 2017 to provide for the reimbursement of SNF storage costs through December 31, 2019. Generation expects the terms for each of the settlement agreements to be extended during 2020 for another three years to cover SNF storage costs through December 31, 2022. Generation submits annual reimbursement requests to the DOE for costs associated with the storage of SNF. In all cases, reimbursement requests are made only after costs are incurred and only for costs resulting from DOE delays in accepting the SNF.

General (All Registrants). The Registrants’ operations have in the past, and may in the future, require substantial expenditures to comply with environmental laws. Additionally, under Federal and state environmental laws, the Registrants are generally liable for the costs of remediating environmental contamination of property now or formerly owned by them and of property contaminated by hazardous substances generated by them. The Registrants own or lease a number of real estate parcels, including parcels on which their operations or the operations of others may have resulted in contamination by substances that are considered hazardous under environmental laws. In addition, the Registrants are currently involved in a number of proceedings relating to sites where hazardous substances have been deposited and may be subject to additional proceedings in the future. Unless otherwise disclosed, the Registrants cannot reasonably estimate whether they will incur significant liabilities for additional investigation and remediation costs at these or additional sites identified by the Registrants, environmental agencies

The historical nature of the MGP and gas purification sites and the fact that many of the sites have been buried and built over, impacts the ability to determine a precise estimate of the ultimate costs prior to initial sampling and determination of the exact scope and method of remedial activity. Management determines its best estimate of remediation costs using all available information at the time of each study, including probabilistic and deterministic modeling for ComEd and PECO, and the remediation standards currently required by the applicable state environmental agency. Prior to completion of any significant clean up, each site remediation plan is approved by the appropriate state environmental agency.



	December 31, 2019				December 31, 2018
	Total environmental investigation and remediation reserve		Portion of total related to MGP investigation and remediation		Total environmental investigation and remediation reserve		Portion of total related to MGP investigation and remediation
Exelon	$	478	$	320	$	496	$	356
Generation	105		—		108		—
ComEd	304		303		329		327
PECO	19		17		27		25
BGE	2		—		5		4
PHI	48		—		27		—
Pepco	46		—		25		—
DPL	1		—		1		—
ACE	1		—		1		—

Cotter Corporation (Exelon and Generation). 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. In 2000, ComEd sold Cotter to an unaffiliated third-party. As part of the sale, ComEd agreed to indemnify Cotter for any liability arising in connection with the West Lake Landfill. In connection with Exelon’s 2001 corporate restructuring, this responsibility to indemnify Cotter was transferred to Generation. Including Cotter, there are three PRPs participating in the West Lake Landfill remediation proceeding. Investigation by Generation has identified a number of other parties who also may be PRPs and could be liable to contribute to the final remedy. Further investigation is ongoing.

In September 2018, the EPA issued its Record of Decision (ROD) Amendment for the selection of the final remedy. The ROD modified the EPA’s previously proposed plan for partial excavation of the radiological materials by reducing the depths of the excavation. The ROD also allows for variation in depths of excavation depending on radiological concentrations. The EPA and the PRPs have entered into a Consent Agreement to perform the Remedial Design, which is expected to be completed in the 2020 - 2021 time frame. In March 2019 the PRPs received Special Notice Letters from the EPA to perform the Remedial Action work. On October 8, 2019, Generation provided a non-binding good faith offer to conduct, or finance, a portion of the remedy, subject to certain conditions. The total estimated cost of the remedy, taking into account the current EPA technical requirements and the total costs expected to be incurred collectively by the PRPs in fully executing the remedy, is approximately $280 million, including cost escalation on an undiscounted basis, which would be allocated among the final group of PRPs. Generation has determined that a loss associated with the EPA’s partial excavation and enhanced landfill cover remedy is probable and has recorded a liability included in the table above, that reflects management’s best estimate of Cotter’s allocable share of the ultimate cost. Given the joint and several nature of this liability, the magnitude of Generation’s ultimate liability will depend on the actual costs incurred to implement the required remediation remedy as well as on the nature and terms of any cost-sharing arrangements with the final group of PRPs. Therefore, it is reasonably possible that the ultimate cost and Generation’s associated allocable share could differ significantly once these uncertainties are resolved, which could have a material impact on Exelon's and Generation's future financial statements.

One of the other PRPs has indicated it will be making a contribution claim against Cotter for costs that it has incurred to prevent the subsurface fire from spreading to those areas of the West Lake Landfill where radiological materials are believed to have been disposed. At this time, Exelon and Generation do not possess sufficient information to assess this claim and therefore are unable to estimate a range of loss, if any. As such, no liability has been recorded for the potential contribution claim. It is reasonably possible, however, that resolution of this matter could have a material, unfavorable impact on Exelon’s and Generation's financial statements.

In January 2018, the PRPs were advised by the EPA that it will begin an additional investigation and evaluation of groundwater conditions at the West Lake Landfill. In September 2018, the PRPs agreed to an Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent for the performance by the PRPs of the groundwater Remedial Investigation (RI)/Feasibility Study (FS). The purpose of this RI/FS is to define the nature and extent of any groundwater contamination from the West Lake Landfill site and evaluate remedial alternatives. Generation estimates the undiscounted cost for the groundwater RI/FS to be approximately $20 million. Generation determined a loss associated with the RI/FS is probable and has recorded a liability included in the table above that reflects management’s best estimate of Cotter’s allocable share of the cost among the PRPs. At this time Generation cannot predict the likelihood or the extent to which, if any, remediation activities may be required and therefore cannot estimate a reasonably possible range of loss for response costs beyond those associated with the RI/FS component. It is reasonably possible, however, that resolution of this matter could have a material, unfavorable impact on Exelon’s and Generation’s future financial statements.

In August 2011, Cotter was notified by the DOJ that Cotter is considered a PRP with respect to the government’s clean-up costs for contamination attributable to low level radioactive residues at a former storage and reprocessing facility named Latty Avenue near St. Louis, Missouri. The Latty Avenue site is included in ComEd’s indemnification responsibilities discussed above as part of the sale of Cotter. The radioactive residues had been generated initially in connection with the processing of uranium ores as part of the U.S. Government’s Manhattan Project. Cotter purchased the residues in 1969 for initial processing at the Latty Avenue facility for the subsequent extraction of uranium and metals. In 1976, the NRC found that the Latty Avenue site had radiation levels exceeding NRC criteria for decontamination of land areas. Latty Avenue was investigated and remediated by the United States Army Corps of Engineers pursuant to funding under FUSRAP. The DOJ has not yet formally advised the PRPs of the amount that it is seeking, but it is believed to be approximately $90 million from all PRPs. Pursuant to a series of annual agreements since 2011, the DOJ and the PRPs have tolled the statute of limitations until February 2020 so that settlement discussions could proceed. Generation has determined that a loss associated with this matter is probable under its indemnification agreement with Cotter and has recorded an estimated liability, which is included in the table above.

Benning Road Site (Exelon, Generation, PHI and Pepco). In September 2010, PHI received a letter from EPA identifying the Benning Road site as one of six land-based sites potentially contributing to contamination of the lower Anacostia River. A portion of the site was formerly the location of a Pepco Energy Services electric generating facility, which was deactivated in June 2012. The remaining portion of the site consists of a Pepco transmission and distribution service center that remains in operation. In December 2011, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia approved a Consent Decree entered into by Pepco and Pepco Energy Services with the DOEE, which

Since 2013, Pepco and Pepco Energy Services (now Generation, pursuant to Exelon's 2016 acquisition of PHI) have been performing RI work and have submitted multiple draft RI reports to the DOEE. In September 2019, Pepco and Generation issued a draft “final” RI report which DOEE approved and on October 4, 2019 released this document for review and comment by the public. The 45 day comment period ended on November 18, 2019 and a public meeting was held by Pepco on November 2, 2019. Pepco and Generation will proceed to develop a FS to evaluate possible remedial alternatives for submission to DOEE. The Court has established a schedule for completion of the FS, and approval by the DOEE, by September 16, 2021.

Anacostia River Tidal Reach (Exelon, PHI and Pepco). Contemporaneous with the Benning Road site RI/FS being performed by Pepco and Generation, DOEE and the National Park Service have been conducting a separate RI/FS focused on the entire tidal reach of the Anacostia River extending from just north of the Maryland-District of Columbia boundary line to the confluence of the Anacostia and Potomac Rivers. The river-wide RI incorporated the results of the river sampling performed by Pepco and Pepco Energy Services as part of the Benning RI/FS, as well as similar sampling efforts conducted by owners of other sites adjacent to this segment of the river and supplemental river sampling conducted by DOEE’s contractor. DOEE asked Pepco, along with parties responsible for other sites along the river, to participate in a "Consultative Working Group" to provide input into the process for future remedial actions and to ensure proper coordination with the other river cleanup efforts currently underway, including cleanup of the river segment adjacent to the Benning Road site resulting from the Benning Road site RI/FS. In addition, the District of Columbia Council directed DOEE to form an official advisory committee made up of members of federal, state and local environmental regulators, community and environmental groups and various academic and technical experts to provide guidance and support to DOEE as the project progressed. This group, called the Anacostia Leadership Council, has met regularly since it was formed. Pepco has participated in the Consultative Working Group. In April 2018, DOEE released a draft RI report for public review and comment. Pepco submitted written comments to the draft RI and participated in a public hearing.

Pepco has determined that it is probable that costs for remediation will be incurred and recorded a liability in the third quarter 2019 for management’s best estimate of its share of those costs based on DOEE’s stated position following a series of meetings attended by representatives from the Anacostia Leadership Council and the Consultative Working Group. On December 27, 2019, DOEE released a Focused Feasibility Study (FFS) and a Proposed Plan (PP) for review and comment by the public which will be the basis for the Interim ROD, which is expected to be completed in September 2020. The FFS and PP are consistent with the DOEE’s stated position to follow an adaptive management approach which will allow several identified “hot spots” in the river to be addressed first while continuing to conduct studies and to monitor the river to evaluate improvements and determine potential future remediation plans. The adaptive management process chosen by DOEE is less intrusive, provides more long term environmental certainty, is less costly, and allows for site specific remediation plans already underway, including the plan for the Benning Road site to proceed to conclusion. The comment period ends on March 2, 2020 and a public meeting will be held on January 23, 2021. Pepco concluded that incremental exposure remains reasonably possible, however management cannot reasonably estimate a range of loss beyond the amounts recorded, which are included in the table above.

In addition to the activities associated with the remedial process outlined above, there is a complementary statutory program that requires an assessment to determine if any natural resources have been damaged as a result of the contamination that is being remediated, and, if so, that a plan be developed by the federal, state and local Natural Resource Damage Trustees, who are defined by CERCLA as the responsible parties for the restoration or compensation for any loss of those resources from the environmental contaminants at the site. If natural resources cannot be restored, then compensation for the injury can be sought from the responsible parties. The assessment of Natural Resource Damages (NRD) typically takes place following cleanup because cleanups sometimes also effectively restore habitat. During the second quarter of 2018, Pepco became aware that the Trustees are in the beginning stages of this process that often takes many years beyond the remedial decision to complete. Pepco has concluded that a loss associated with the eventual NRD assessment is reasonably possible. Due to the very early stage of the assessment process, Pepco cannot reasonably estimate the range of loss.

Asbestos Personal Injury Claims (Exelon and Generation). Generation maintains a reserve for claims associated with asbestos-related personal injury actions in certain facilities that are currently owned by Generation or were previously owned by ComEd and PECO. The estimated liabilities are recorded on an undiscounted basis and exclude the estimated legal costs associated with handling these matters, which could be material.

At December 31, 2019 and 2018, Exelon and Generation had recorded estimated liabilities of approximately $83 million and $79 million, respectively, in total for asbestos-related bodily injury claims. As of December 31, 2019, approximately $26 million of this amount related to 263 open claims presented to Generation, while the remaining $57 million is for estimated future asbestos-related bodily injury claims anticipated to arise through 2055, based on actuarial assumptions and analyses, which are updated on an annual basis. On a quarterly basis, Generation monitors actual experience against the number of forecasted claims to be received and expected claim payments and evaluates whether adjustments to the estimated liabilities are necessary.

ComEd has agreed in connection with financings arranged through ComEd Financing III that it will not declare dividends on any shares of its capital stock in the event that: (1) it exercises its right to extend the interest payment periods on the subordinated debt securities issued to ComEd Financing III; (2) it defaults on its guarantee of the payment of distributions on the preferred trust securities of ComEd Financing III; or (3) an event of default occurs under the Indenture under which the subordinated debt securities are issued. No such event has occurred.

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

BGE is subject to restrictions established by the MDPSC that prohibit BGE from paying a dividend on its common shares if (a) after the dividend payment, BGE’s equity ratio would be below 48% as calculated pursuant to the MDPSC’s ratemaking precedents or (b) BGE’s senior unsecured credit rating is rated by two of the three major credit rating agencies below investment grade. No such event has occurred.

Pepco is subject to certain dividend restrictions established by settlements approved in Maryland and the District of Columbia. Pepco is prohibited from paying a dividend on its common shares if (a) after the dividend payment, Pepco's equity ratio would be 48% as equity levels are calculated under the ratemaking precedents of the MDPSC and DCPSC or (b) Pepco’s senior unsecured credit rating is rated by one of the three major credit rating agencies below investment grade. No such event has occurred.

DPL is subject to certain dividend restrictions established by settlements approved in Delaware and Maryland. DPL is prohibited from paying a dividend on its common shares if (a) after the dividend payment, DPL's equity ratio would be 48% as equity levels are calculated under the ratemaking precedents of the DPSC and MDPSC or (b) DPL’s senior unsecured credit rating is rated by one of the three major credit rating agencies below investment grade. No such event has occurred.

ACE is subject to certain dividend restrictions established by settlements approved in New Jersey. ACE is prohibited from paying a dividend on its common shares if (a) after the dividend payment, ACE's equity ratio would be 48% as equity levels are calculated under the ratemaking precedents of the NJBPU or (b) ACE's senior unsecured credit rating is rated by one of the three major credit rating agencies below investment grade. ACE is also subject to a

City of Everett Tax Increment Financing Agreement (Exelon and Generation). On April 10, 2017, the City of Everett petitioned the Massachusetts Economic Assistance Coordinating Council (EACC) to revoke the 1999 tax increment financing agreement (TIF Agreement) relating to Mystic Units 8 and 9 on the grounds that the total investment in Mystic Units 8 and 9 materially deviates from the investment set forth in the TIF Agreement. On October 31, 2017, a three-member panel of the EACC conducted an administrative hearing on the City’s petition. On November 30, 2017, the hearing panel issued a tentative decision denying the City’s petition, finding that there was no material misrepresentation that would justify revocation of the TIF Agreement. On December 13, 2017, the tentative decision was adopted by the full EACC. On January 12, 2018, the City filed a complaint in Massachusetts Superior Court requesting, among other things, that the court set aside the EACC’s decision, grant the City’s request to decertify the Project and the TIF Agreement, and award the City damages for alleged underpaid taxes over the period of the TIF Agreement. On January 8, 2020, the Massachusetts Superior Court affirmed the decision of the EACC denying the City's petition. The deadline for appeal is March 9, 2020. Generation continues to believe that the City’s claim lacks merit. Accordingly, Generation has not recorded a liability for payment resulting from such a revocation, nor can Generation estimate a reasonably possible range of loss, if any, associated with any such revocation. Further, it is reasonably possible that property taxes assessed in future periods, including those following the expiration of the current TIF Agreement in 2020, could be material to Generation’s financial statements.

Subpoenas (Exelon and ComEd). Exelon and ComEd received a grand jury subpoena in the second quarter of 2019 from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Illinois requiring production of information concerning their lobbying activities in the State of Illinois. On October 4, 2019, Exelon and ComEd received a second grand jury subpoena from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Illinois requiring production of records of any communications with certain individuals and entities. On October 22, 2019, the SEC notified Exelon and ComEd that it has also opened an investigation into their lobbying activities. Exelon and ComEd have cooperated fully and intend to continue to cooperate fully and expeditiously with the U.S. Attorney’s Office and the SEC. Exelon and ComEd cannot predict the outcome of the U.S. Attorney's Office or the SEC investigations. No loss contingency has been reflected in Exelon's and ComEd's consolidated financial statements as this contingency is neither probable nor reasonably estimable at this time. Management is currently unable to estimate a range of reasonably possible loss as these matters are subject to change.

Subsequent to Exelon announcing the receipt of the subpoenas, a putative class action lawsuit has been filed against Exelon and certain officers of Exelon and ComEd alleging misrepresentations or omissions by Exelon purporting to relate to matters that are the subject of the subpoenas and the SEC investigation. Exelon believes that these claims lack merit and intends to defend against them, and though the costs or any loss associated with the lawsuit cannot be reasonably estimated at this time, Exelon does not believe that the lawsuit will have a material adverse impact on Exelon’s or ComEd’s consolidated financial statements.

General (All Registrants). The Registrants are involved in various other litigation matters that are being defended and handled in the ordinary course of business. The assessment of whether a loss is probable or reasonably possible, and whether the loss or a range of loss is estimable, often involves a series of complex judgments about future events. The Registrants maintain accruals for such losses that are probable of being incurred and subject to reasonable estimation. Management is sometimes unable to estimate an amount or range of reasonably possible loss, particularly where (1) the damages sought are indeterminate, (2) the proceedings are in the early stages, or (3) the matters involve novel or unsettled legal theories. In such cases, there is considerable uncertainty regarding the timing or ultimate resolution of such matters, including a possible eventual loss.