Back to GetFilings.com

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

Form 10-Q

Commission file number 000-24890

EDISON MISSION ENERGY
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

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

        Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes o    No ý

        Number of shares outstanding of the registrant's Common Stock as of May 9, 2005: 100 shares (all shares held by an affiliate of the registrant).

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I—FINANCIAL INFORMATION
ITEM 1.    FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

EDISON MISSION ENERGY AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
(In millions, Unaudited)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

1

EDISON MISSION ENERGY AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)
(In millions, Unaudited)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

2

EDISON MISSION ENERGY AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(In millions, Unaudited)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

3

EDISON MISSION ENERGY AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(In millions, Unaudited)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

4

EDISON MISSION ENERGY AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(In millions, Unaudited)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

5

EDISON MISSION ENERGY AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
MARCH 31, 2005
(Dollars in millions, Unaudited)

Note 1. General

        In the opinion of management, all adjustments, including recurring accruals, have been made that are necessary to present fairly the consolidated financial position and results of operations for the periods covered by this report. The results of operations for the three months ended March 31, 2005 are not necessarily indicative of the operating results for the full year.

        Edison Mission Energy's (EME's) significant accounting policies are described in Note 2 to its Consolidated Financial Statements as of December 31, 2004 and 2003, included in EME's annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004. EME follows the same accounting policies for interim reporting purposes. This quarterly report should be read in connection with such financial statements. Terms used but not defined in this report are defined in EME's annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.

Reclassifications

        Certain prior year reclassifications have been made to conform to the current year financial statement presentation. Such reclassifications include the reclassification of income from continuing operations to discontinued operations for EME's international operations, except the Doga project. Refer to Note 4—Discontinued Operations. Except as indicated, amounts reflected in the notes to the consolidated financial statements relate to continuing operations of EME.

Note 2. Inventory

        Inventory is stated at the lower of weighted average cost or market. Inventory at March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004 consisted of the following:

Note 3. Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)

        Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss), including discontinued operations, consisted of the following:

6

        Unrealized losses on cash flow hedges, net of tax, at March 31, 2005, include unrealized losses on commodity hedges primarily related to EME Homer City Generation L.P. (EME Homer City) and Midwest Generation forward electricity contracts that did not meet the normal sales and purchases exception under SFAS No. 133. These losses arise because current forecasts of future electricity prices in these markets are greater than contract prices. Partially offsetting these unrealized losses were unrealized gains on commodity hedges related to EME's share of fuel contracts at March Point.

        As EME's hedged positions for continuing operations are realized, approximately $73 million, after tax, of the net unrealized losses on cash flow hedges at March 31, 2005 are expected to be reclassified into earnings during the next 12 months. Management expects that reclassification of net unrealized losses will offset energy revenue recognized at market prices. Actual amounts ultimately reclassified into earnings over the next 12 months could vary materially from this estimated amount as a result of changes in market conditions. The maximum period over which a cash flow hedge is designated is through December 31, 2006.

        Under SFAS No. 133, the portion of a cash flow hedge that does not offset the change in value of the transaction being hedged, which is commonly referred to as the ineffective portion, is immediately recognized in earnings. EME recorded net gains (losses) of approximately $(4) million and $4 million during the first quarters of 2005 and 2004, respectively, representing the amount of cash flow hedges' ineffectiveness for continuing operations, reflected in net gains from price risk management and energy trading in EME's consolidated income statement.

Note 4. Discontinued Operations

Tri Energy Project

        On February 3, 2005, EME sold its 25% equity interest in the Tri Energy project pursuant to a Purchase Agreement, dated December 15, 2004, by and between EME and a consortium comprised of International Power plc (70%) and Mitsui & Co., Ltd. (30%), referred to as IPM, for approximately $20 million. EME recorded an impairment charge of approximately $5 million during the fourth quarter of 2004 related to the planned disposition of this investment. The sale of this investment had no significant effect on net income in the first quarter of 2005.

CBK Project

        On January 10, 2005, EME sold its 50% equity interest in the CBK project pursuant to a Purchase Agreement, dated November 5, 2004, by and between EME and Corporacion IMPSA S.A. Proceeds from the sale were approximately $104 million. EME recorded a pre-tax gain on the sale of approximately $9 million during the first quarter of 2005.

MEC International B.V.

        On December 16, 2004, EME sold the stock and related assets of MEC International B.V. (MECIBV) pursuant to a Purchase Agreement, dated July 29, 2004, by and between EME and IPM. The purchase agreement was entered into following a competitive bidding process. The sale of MECIBV included the sale of EME's interests in ten electric power generating projects or companies located in Europe, Asia, Australia, and Puerto Rico. Consideration from the sale of MECIBV and related assets was $2.0 billion.

7

Contact Energy

        On September 30, 2004, EME sold its 51.2% interest in Contact Energy to Origin Energy New Zealand Limited pursuant to a Purchase Agreement dated July 20, 2004. The purchase agreement was entered into following a competitive bidding process. Consideration for the sale was NZ$1,101.4 million (approximately US$739 million) in cash and NZ$535 million (approximately US$359 million) of debt assumed by the purchaser.

Lakeland Project

        EME previously owned and operated a 220 MW combined cycle, natural gas-fired power plant located in the United Kingdom, known as the Lakeland project. The ownership of the project was held through EME's indirect subsidiary, Lakeland Power Ltd., which sold power generated from the plant pursuant to a power sales agreement with Norweb Energi Ltd., a subsidiary of TXU (UK) Holdings Limited (TXU UK) and an indirect subsidiary of TXU Europe Group plc (TXU Europe). EME ceased consolidating the activities of Lakeland Power Ltd. in 2002, when an administrative receiver was appointed following a default by Norweb Energi Ltd. under the power sales agreement. Accordingly, EME accounts for its ownership of Lakeland Power Ltd. on the cost method and earnings are recognized as cash is distributed from this entity.

        As previously disclosed, the administrative receiver of Lakeland Power Ltd. filed a claim against Norweb Energi Ltd. for termination of the power sales agreement. On November 19, 2002, TXU UK and TXU Europe, together with a related entity, TXU Europe Energy Trading Limited (TXU Energy), entered into formal administration proceedings of their own in the United Kingdom (similar to bankruptcy proceedings in the United States). On March 31, 2005, Lakeland Power Ltd. received £112 million (approximately $210 million) from the TXU administrators, representing an interim payment of 97% of its accepted claim of £116 million (approximately $217 million). No income related to this payment was recognized during the quarter ended March 31, 2005.

        From the amount received, Lakeland Power Ltd., now controlled by a liquidator in the United Kingdom, has made a payment of £20 million (approximately $38 million) to EME on April 7, 2005 comprised of £7 million (approximately $13 million) for a secured loan which EME purchased from Lakeland Power Ltd.'s secured creditors in 2004 and certain unsecured receivables from Lakeland Power Ltd., and £13 million (approximately $25 million) as a distribution to the EME subsidiary that owns the equity interest in Lakeland Power Ltd. This amount will be recognized in income during the quarter ended June 30, 2005. Additionally, Lakeland Power Ltd. will pay to EME's subsidiary that owns the equity interest in Lakeland Power Ltd. the amount remaining after resolution of any remaining secured and unsecured creditor claims and payment of or provision for tax liabilities and the fees and expenses associated with Lakeland Power Ltd.'s liquidation.

        EME estimates that the net proceeds after tax (including taxes due in the United States) resulting from the above payments will be approximately $100 million and the increase in net income will be approximately $90 million (including the amounts discussed above during the second quarter of 2005). These proceeds may be received throughout 2005, and possibly 2006, as Lakeland Power Ltd.'s liquidation progresses. Because the amounts required to settle outstanding claims and UK taxes have not been finalized and cannot be estimated precisely in the context of the liquidation, the actual amount of net proceeds and increase in net income may vary materially from the above estimate.

8

Ferrybridge and Fiddler's Ferry Plants

        On December 21, 2001, EME sold the Ferrybridge and Fiddler's Ferry coal-fired power plants located in the United Kingdom to two wholly owned subsidiaries of American Electric Power. In addition, as part of the transactions, the purchasers acquired other assets and assumed specified liabilities associated with the plants. The sale was the result of a competitive bidding process. EME acquired the plants in 1999 from PowerGen UK plc for £1.3 billion.

Summarized Financial Information for Discontinued Operations

        In accordance with SFAS No. 144, all of the projects discussed above are classified as discontinued operations in the accompanying consolidated statements of income. Previously issued statements of operations have been restated to reflect discontinued operations reported subsequent to the original issuance date. Summarized results of discontinued operations are as follows:

        The assets and liabilities associated with the discontinued operations are segregated on the consolidated balance sheets at March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004. The carrying amount of major asset and liability classifications for EME's international operations recorded as discontinued operations are as follows:

Note 5. Restructuring Costs

        During the first quarter of 2005, EME initiated a review of its domestic organization to better align its resources with its domestic business requirements. Management and organizational changes

9

have been implemented to streamline EME's reporting relationships and eliminate its regional management structure. As a result of these changes, EME recorded a charge of $7 million (pre-tax) in the quarter ended March 31, 2005 for severance and related costs of the changes implemented by that date, which were included in administrative and general expense on EME's consolidated statement of income. EME expects to record an additional charge of $4 million (pre-tax) during the quarter ended June 30, 2005 associated with completion of the restructuring steps after March 31, 2005.

Note 6. Employee Benefit Plans

Pension Plans

        EME previously disclosed in its financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2004, that it expected to contribute $12 million to its pension plans in 2005. As of March 31, 2005, $1 million in contributions have been made. EME anticipates that its original expectation will be met by year-end 2005.

        Components of pension expense are:

Postretirement Benefits Other Than Pensions

        EME previously disclosed in its financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2004, that it expected to contribute $1 million to its postretirement benefits other than pensions in 2005. As of March 31, 2005, $0.2 million in contributions have been made. EME anticipates that its original expectation will be met by year-end 2005.

        Components of postretirement benefits expense are:

Note 7. Refinancing

EME Financing Developments

        On January 25, 2005, EME repaid the junior subordinated debentures and consequently repaid the cumulative monthly income preferred securities (MIPS) of $150 million. The junior subordinated debentures are described more fully in Note 10—Financial Instruments, included in EME's annual

10

report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004. In connection with the repayment of the junior subordinated debentures, EME recorded a $4 million loss on early extinguishment of debt during the first quarter of 2005.

Midwest Generation Financing Developments

        On April 18, 2005, Midwest Generation completed a refinancing of indebtedness. The refinancing was effected through the amendment and restatement of Midwest Generation's existing credit facility, originally entered into April 27, 2004. The existing credit facility had provided for a $700 million first priority secured institutional term loan due in 2011 and a $200 million first priority secured revolving credit, working capital facility due in 2009.

        The refinancing consisted of, among other things, a repricing of Midwest Generation's existing term loan and a new $300 million revolving credit, working capital facility due in 2011. The previously existing $200 million working capital facility remains in place. Midwest Generation drew in full upon the new $300 million working capital facility at closing and used the proceeds to pay down an equivalent portion of the existing term loan. After giving effect to the paydown, the term loan carries a lower interest rate of LIBOR + 2%. The maturity date of the repriced term loan remains 2011. The new working capital facility, together with the existing working capital facility, shares first lien priority with the repriced term loan. The new working capital facility carries an interest rate of LIBOR + 2.25%. The maturity date of the new working capital facility is 2011; however, the lenders can request to be fully repaid in 2010.

        On the day after the closing of the refinancing transaction, EME contributed $300 million in equity to Midwest Generation, and Midwest Generation used the proceeds of this equity contribution to repay the loans outstanding under the new working capital facility. Thus, after completion of the actions outlined herein, Midwest Generation has $343 million outstanding under its term loan and $500 million of working capital facilities available for working capital requirements, including credit support for hedging activities. As of April 18, 2005, approximately $5 million was outstanding under these working capital facilities.

        Under the terms of Midwest Generation's credit agreement, Midwest Generation is permitted to distribute 75% of excess cash flow (as defined in the credit agreement). In addition, Midwest Generation is permitted to distribute the remaining 25% of excess cash flow until the amount so distributed totals the $300 million equity contribution (made on April 19, 2005). Furthermore, Midwest Generation is required to make a concurrent offer to repay debt in an amount equal to one-third of any distribution over the portion of such distribution allocated to the equity contribution.

Note 8. Commitments and Contingencies

Contractual Obligations

Long-Term Debt

        EME's long-term debt maturities for the next five twelve-month periods ending March 31 are: 2006—$53 million; 2007—$52 million; 2008—$115 million; 2009—$416 billion; and 2010—$613 million. These amounts have been updated primarily to reflect financing activities completed during the first three months of 2005. See Note 7—Refinancing.

11

Fuel Supply Contracts

        Midwest Generation has entered into additional fuel purchase commitments with various third-party suppliers during the first three months of 2005. These additional commitments are currently estimated to be $8 million for 2005, $8 million for 2006, $24 million for 2007, $25 million for 2008, and $53 million for 2009.

Fuel Supply Dispute

        Beginning in 2004, EME Homer City experienced interruptions of supply under two agreements with Unionvale Coal Company and Genesis, Inc. Unionvale and Genesis claimed that alleged geologic conditions at the Genesis No. 17 Mine in Pennsylvania, which is one source of coal under these multi-source coal contracts, constituted force majeure and excused full contract performance. These two agreements together provide for the delivery to EME Homer City of 1,290,000 tons of coal, which represents 20% of EME Homer City's clean coal requirements in 2005 and 2006, and approximately 10% in 2007.

        On December 21, 2004, Unionvale and Genesis gave notice of termination of one of the agreements, which was scheduled to run through December 2007, under a provision that they claim allows either party to the agreement to terminate if an event of force majeure lasts 30 days or more. Unionvale and Genesis allege that the geologic problems encountered at the one mine have continued beyond a 30-day period and excuse their obligation to deliver coal under the agreement. The parties' second agreement with a term through December 2006 does not contain the same termination provision, and the suppliers have sought contract modifications to the term, quantity, quality and price provisions of this agreement. On April 26, 2005, Unionvale and Genesis informed EME Homer City that Genesis No. 17 Mine has been shut down and that no delivery of coal from that mine will be made under either agreement.

        EME Homer City disputes the force majeure claim and the suppliers' reliance upon this claim to excuse their performance under the multi-source coal agreements. EME Homer City has filed suit against Unionvale and Genesis in Pennsylvania state court seeking, among other things, equitable relief by way of an order requiring the defendants to fulfill their contractual obligations and other monetary relief. The parties are currently engaged in mediation in an effort to resolve the contractual dispute. Contracts have been awarded and inventory strategies adjusted to reflect and offset the delivery shortfall for 2005. As of March 31, 2005, EME Homer City had not contracted for the resultant potential shortfalls in 2006 and 2007.

Coal Transportation Agreements

        Midwest Generation has additional coal transportation commitments during the first three months of 2005. Based on the committed coal volumes in the fuel supply contracts mentioned above, these commitments are currently estimated to be $16 million for 2005, $15 million for 2006, $38 million for 2007, $37 million for 2008, and $74 million for 2009.

Capital Improvements

        At March 31, 2005, EME's subsidiaries had firm commitments to spend approximately $21 million on capital expenditures during the remainder of 2005, primarily for component replacement projects. These expenditures are planned to be financed by existing subsidiary credit facilities and cash generated from operations.

12

Commercial Commitments

Introduction

        EME and certain of its subsidiaries have various financial and performance guarantees and indemnifications which are issued in the normal course of business. As discussed below, these contracts include performance guarantees, standby letters of credit, guarantee of debt and indemnifications.

Standby Letters of Credit

        At March 31, 2005, standby letters of credit aggregated $35 million and were scheduled to expire as follows: 2005—$30 million; 2006—$2 million; and 2007—$3 million.

Guarantees and Indemnities

Tax Indemnity Agreements—

        In connection with the sale-leaseback transactions that EME has entered into related to the Collins Station and the Powerton and Joliet Stations in Illinois and the Homer City facilities in Pennsylvania, EME or one of its subsidiaries entered into tax indemnity agreements. Under these tax indemnity agreements, these entities agreed to indemnify the lessors in the sale-leaseback transactions for specified adverse tax consequences that could result in certain situations set forth in each tax indemnity agreement, including specified defaults under the respective leases. The potential indemnity obligations under these tax indemnity agreements could be significant. Due to the nature of these potential obligations, EME cannot determine a maximum potential liability which would be triggered by a valid claim from the lessors. EME has not recorded a liability related to these indemnities. In connection with the termination of the Collins Station lease in April 2004, Midwest Generation will continue to have obligations under the tax indemnity agreement with the former lease equity investor.

Indemnities Provided as Part of the Acquisition of the Illinois Plants—

        In connection with the acquisition of the Illinois Plants, EME agreed to indemnify Commonwealth Edison with respect to specified environmental liabilities before and after December 15, 1999, the date of sale. The indemnification claims are reduced by any insurance proceeds and tax benefits related to such claims and are subject to a requirement that Commonwealth Edison take all reasonable steps to mitigate losses related to any such indemnification claim. Due to the nature of the obligation under this indemnity, a maximum potential liability cannot be determined. This indemnification for environmental liabilities is not limited in term and would be triggered by a valid claim from Commonwealth Edison. Except as discussed below, EME has not recorded a liability related to this indemnity.

        Midwest Generation entered into a supplemental agreement with Commonwealth Edison and Exelon Generation Company on February 20, 2003 to resolve a dispute regarding interpretation of its reimbursement obligation for asbestos claims under the environmental indemnities set forth in the Asset Sale Agreement. Under this supplemental agreement, Midwest Generation agreed to reimburse Commonwealth Edison and Exelon Generation for 50% of specific existing asbestos claims and expenses less recovery of insurance costs, and agreed to a sharing arrangement for liabilities and expenses associated with future asbestos-related claims as specified in the agreement. As a general matter, Commonwealth Edison and Midwest Generation apportion responsibility for future asbestos-related claims based upon the number of exposure sites that are Commonwealth Edison locations or Midwest Generation locations. The obligations under this agreement are not subject to a maximum liability. The supplemental agreement has a five-year term with an automatic renewal provision (subject

13

to the right of either party to terminate). Payments are made under this indemnity upon tender by Commonwealth Edison of appropriate proof of liability for an asbestos-related settlement, judgment, verdict, or expense. There were between 130 and 170 cases for which Midwest Generation was potentially liable and that had not been settled and dismissed at March 31, 2005. Midwest Generation has recorded a $68 million liability at March 31, 2005 related to this matter.

        The amounts recorded by Midwest Generation for the asbestos-related liability are based upon a number of assumptions. Projecting future events, such as the number of new claims to be filed each year, the average cost of disposing of claims, as well as the numerous uncertainties surrounding asbestos litigation in the United States, could cause the actual costs to be higher or lower than projected.

Indemnity Provided as Part of the Acquisition of the Homer City Facilities—

        In connection with the acquisition of the Homer City facilities, EME Homer City Generation L.P. (EME Homer City) agreed to indemnify the sellers with respect to specific environmental liabilities before and after the date of sale as specified in the Asset Purchase Agreement dated August 1, 1998. EME guaranteed the obligations of EME Homer City. Due to the nature of the obligation under this indemnity provision, it is not subject to a maximum potential liability and does not have an expiration date. Payments would be triggered under this indemnity by a claim from the sellers. EME has not recorded a liability related to this indemnity.

Indemnities Provided under Asset Sale Agreements—

        The asset sale agreements for the sale of EME's international assets contain indemnities from EME to the purchasers, including indemnification for taxes imposed with respect to operations of the assets prior to the sale and for pre-closing environmental liabilities. EME also provided an indemnity to IPM for matters arising out of the exercise by one of its project partners of a purported right of first refusal. Not all indemnities under the asset sale agreements have specific expiration dates. Payments would be triggered under these indemnities by valid claims from the sellers or purchasers, as the case may be. At March 31, 2005, EME has recorded a liability of $85 million related to these matters.

        In connection with the sale of various domestic assets, EME has from time to time provided indemnities to the purchasers for taxes imposed with respect to operations of the asset prior to the sale. EME has also provided indemnities to purchasers for items specified in each agreement (for example, specific pre-existing litigation matters and/or environmental conditions). Due to the nature of the obligations under these indemnity agreements, a maximum potential liability cannot be determined. Not all indemnities under the asset sale agreements have specific expiration dates. Payments would be triggered under these indemnities by valid claims from the sellers or purchasers, as the case may be. EME has not recorded a liability related to these indemnities.

Guarantee of Brooklyn Navy Yard Contractor Settlement Payments—

        On March 31, 2004, EME completed the sale of 100% of the stock of Mission Energy New York, Inc., which holds a 50% partnership interest in Brooklyn Navy Yard Cogeneration Partners, L.P. (referred to as Brooklyn Navy Yard), to BNY Power Partners LLC. Brooklyn Navy Yard owns a 286 MW gas-fired cogeneration power plant in Brooklyn, New York. In February 1997, the construction contractor asserted general monetary claims under the turnkey agreement against Brooklyn Navy Yard. A settlement agreement was executed on January 17, 2003, and all litigation has been dismissed. EME agreed to indemnify Brooklyn Navy Yard and, in connection with the sale of EME's interest in Brooklyn Navy Yard, BNY Power Partners for any payments due under this settlement agreement,

14

which are scheduled through 2006. At March 31, 2005, EME had recorded a liability of $7 million related to this indemnity.

Capacity Indemnification Agreements—

        EME has guaranteed, jointly and severally with Texaco Inc., the obligations of March Point Cogeneration Company under its project power sales agreements to repay capacity payments to the project's power purchaser in the event that the power sales agreements terminate, March Point Cogeneration Company abandons the project, or the project fails to return to normal operations within a reasonable time after a complete or partial shutdown, during the term of the power contracts. In addition, subsidiaries of EME have guaranteed the obligations of Kern River Cogeneration Company and Sycamore Cogeneration Company under their project power sales agreements to repay capacity payments to the projects' power purchaser in the event that the projects unilaterally terminate their performance or reduce their electric power producing capability during the term of the power contracts. The obligations under the indemnification agreements as of March 31, 2005, if payment were required, would be $144 million. EME has no reason to believe that any of these projects will either cease operations or reduce its electric power producing capability during the term of its power contract. EME has not recorded a liability related to this indemnity.

Subsidiary Guarantee for Performance of Unconsolidated Affiliate—

        A subsidiary of EME has guaranteed the obligations of an unconsolidated affiliate to make payments to a third party for power delivered under a fixed-price power sales agreement. This agreement runs through 2007. EME believes there is sufficient cash flow to pay the power suppliers, assuming timely payment by the power purchasers. Due to the nature of this indemnity, a maximum potential liability cannot be determined. To the extent EME's subsidiary would be required to make payments under the guarantee, EME's subsidiary and EME are indemnified by Peabody Energy Corporation pursuant to the 2000 Purchase and Sale Agreement for Citizens Power LLC. EME's subsidiary has not recorded a liability related to this indemnity.

Contingencies

Legal Developments Affecting Sunrise Power Company

        Sunrise Power Company, in which EME's wholly owned subsidiary owns a 50% interest, sells all its output to the California Department of Water Resources. On May 15, 2002, Sunrise Power Company was served with a complaint filed in the Superior Court of the State of California, City and County of San Francisco, by James M. Millar, "individually, and on behalf of the general public and as a representative taxpayer suit" against sellers of long-term power to the California Department of Water Resources, including Sunrise Power Company. The lawsuit alleges that the defendants, including Sunrise Power Company, engaged in unfair and fraudulent business practices by knowingly taking advantage of a manipulated power market to obtain unfair contract terms. The lawsuit seeks to enjoin enforcement of the "unfair and oppressive terms and conditions" in the contracts, as well as restitution by the defendants of excessive monies obtained by the defendants. Plaintiffs in several other class action lawsuits pending in Northern California have filed petitions seeking to have the Millar lawsuit consolidated with those lawsuits. In December 2003, James Millar filed a First Amended Class Action and Representative Action Complaint which contains allegations similar to those in the earlier complaint but also alleges a class action. One of the newly added parties removed the lawsuit to federal court, and the court ordered remand to the San Francisco Superior Court. Defendants filed a responding pleading on May 6, 2005. EME believes that the outcome of this litigation will not have a material adverse effect on its consolidated financial position or results of operations.

15

Regulatory Developments Affecting Doga Project

        On August 4, 2002, a new Electricity Market License Regulation was implemented in Turkey. The new regulation contains, among other things, a requirement that each generator obtain a generation license. Historically, Doga's Implementation Contract has been its sole license. The new regulation contemplates an initial fixed license fee and a yearly license fee based on the amount of energy generated, which will increase the project's costs of operation by an undetermined amount. In addition, the new regulation allows the possibility of insertion of provisions in a new license which may be different from those in the Implementation Contract.

        The effect of the new regulation is still undetermined, as the new license provisions have not been specified. Doga complied with the new regulation's stipulation to apply for a new generation license by June 2, 2003. The license has not been issued yet. If actions or inactions undertaken pursuant to the new regulation directly or indirectly impede, hinder, prevent or delay the operation of the Doga facility or increase Doga's cost of performing its obligations under its project documents, this may constitute a "risk event" under Doga's Implementation Contract. A risk event may permit Doga to request an increase in its tariff or, under certain circumstances, request a buyout of the project by the Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources.

        On October 3, 2002, Doga (and several other power producers in Turkey acting independently) filed a lawsuit in the Danistay, Turkey's high administrative court, against the Energy Market Regulatory Authority seeking both an injunction and permanent invalidation of certain provisions of the new regulation on the grounds of the illegality and unconstitutionality of any new license requirement that does not take into account the vested rights of a company operating pursuant to previously agreed terms of the Implementation Contract.

        On May 12, 2003, the Danistay rejected Doga's request for injunctive relief (as well as those of the other power companies with similar claims). On July 10, 2003, Doga appealed the Danistay's ruling. Doga's appeal was heard by the General Council of the Administrative Chambers of Danistay on October 10, 2003 and was rejected. There are no further rights of appeal against the decision regarding the injunction. The Danistay will continue to hear the merits of Doga's lawsuit. A decision is not expected to be rendered before the second quarter of 2005.

Income Taxes

        EME is, and may in the future be, under examination by tax authorities in varying tax jurisdictions with respect to positions it takes in connection with the filing of its tax returns. Matters raised upon audit may involve substantial amounts, which, if resolved unfavorably, an event not currently anticipated, could possibly be material. However, in EME's opinion, it is unlikely that the resolution of any such matters will have a material adverse effect upon EME's financial condition or results of operations.

Litigation

        EME experiences other routine litigation in the normal course of its business. None of such pending routine litigation is expected to have a material adverse effect on EME's consolidated financial position or results of operations.

16

Environmental Matters and Regulations

        EME and its subsidiaries are subject to environmental regulation by federal, state and local authorities in the United States and foreign regulatory authorities with jurisdiction over projects located outside the United States. EME believes that it is in substantial compliance with environmental regulatory requirements and that maintaining compliance with current requirements will not materially affect its financial position or results of operation. However, possible future developments, such as the promulgation of more stringent environmental laws and regulations, future proceedings that may be initiated by environmental authorities, and settlements agreed to by other companies could affect the costs and the manner in which EME conducts its business and could cause it to make substantial additional capital expenditures. There is no assurance that EME would be able to recover these increased costs from its customers or that EME's financial position and results of operations would not be materially adversely affected.

        Typically, environmental laws and regulations require a lengthy and complex process for obtaining licenses, permits and approvals prior to construction, operation or modification of a project or generating facility. Meeting all the necessary requirements can delay or sometimes prevent the completion of a proposed project as well as require extensive modifications to existing projects, which may involve significant capital expenditures. If EME fails to comply with applicable environmental laws, it may be subject to injunctive relief or penalties and fines imposed by regulatory authorities.

        With respect to the investigation and remediation of contaminated property, EME accrues a liability to the extent that the costs are probable and can be reasonably estimated. Midwest Generation has accrued approximately $2 million for estimated environmental investigation and remediation costs for the Illinois Plants. This estimate is based upon the number of sites, the scope of work and the estimated costs for environmental activity where such expenditures could be reasonably estimated. Future estimated costs may vary based on changes in regulations or requirements of federal, state or local governmental agencies, changes in technology, and actual costs of disposal. In addition, future remediation costs will be affected by the nature and extent of contamination discovered at the sites that requires remediation. There can be no assurance the existence or extent of all contamination at EME's sites has been fully identified, or that activities at the Illinois Plants or any other facilities identified in the future may not result in additional environmental claims being asserted against EME and its subsidiaries or additional investigations or remedial actions being required. See "Note 15. Commitments and Contingencies—Environmental Matters and Regulations" in EME's financial statements included in its annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 for a more complete discussion of EME's environmental contingencies.

Note 9. Supplemental Statements of Cash Flows Information

17

Note 10. Stock-based Compensation

        Edison International has three stock-based employee compensation plans, which are described more fully in Note 14—Stock Compensation Plans, included in EME's annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004. EME accounts for those plans using the intrinsic value method. Upon grant, no stock-based employee compensation cost is reflected in net income, as all options granted under those plans had an exercise price equal to the market value of the underlying common stock on the date of grant. The following table illustrates the effect on net income if EME had used the fair value accounting method.

        See "Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123(R)" included in Note 11 below for further discussion.

Note 11. New Accounting Pronouncements

Statement of Financial Accounting Standards Interpretation No. 46(R)

        In December 2003, the FASB re-issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards Interpretation No. 46, "Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities" (FIN 46R). The primary objective of the Interpretation is to provide guidance on the identification of, and financial reporting for, entities over which control is achieved through means other than voting rights; such entities are known as variable interest entities. Under this Interpretation, the primary beneficiary is the variable interest holder that absorbs a majority of expected losses; if no variable interest holder meets this criteria, then it is the variable interest holder that receives a majority of the expected residual returns. The primary beneficiary is required to consolidate the variable interest entity unless specific exceptions or exclusions are met. This Interpretation applies to variable interest entities created after January 31, 2003, and applies to variable interest entities in which EME holds a variable interest that it acquired before February 1, 2003. This Interpretation is effective for special purpose entities as of December 31, 2003 and for all other entities as of March 31, 2004.

Deconsolidation of Variable Interest Entities

        In accordance with FIN 46R, EME determined that it was not the primary beneficiary of the Doga and Kwinana projects and, accordingly, deconsolidated these projects as of March 31, 2004. The Kwinana project was sold on December 16, 2004 as part of the sale of international operations to IPM and, accordingly, is included in discontinued operations.

18

Variable Interest Entities

        EME completed a review of the application of FIN 46R to its subsidiaries and affiliates and concluded that it has variable interests in variable interest entities as defined in this interpretation. The following table summarizes the variable interest entities held by continuing operations in which EME has a significant variable interest:

        EME has determined that it is not the primary beneficiary in these entities; accordingly, EME will account for its variable interests on the equity method. EME's maximum exposure to loss in these variable interest entities is generally limited to its investment in these entities.

FASB Staff Position FIN 46(R)-5

        In March 2005, the FASB issued Staff Position FIN 46(R)-5, "Implicit Variable Interests Under FIN 46" (FIN 46(R)-5). FIN 46(R)-5 states that a reporting entity should consider whether it holds an implicit variable interest in a variable interest entity or in a potential variable interest entity. If the aggregate of the explicit and implicit variable interests held by the reporting entity and its related parties would, if held by a single party, identify that party as the primary beneficiary, the party within the group most closely associated with the variable interest entity should be deemed the primary beneficiary. EME is currently evaluating the impact of FIN 46(R)-5, but does not believe it will change EME's previous determination under FIN 46R. The guidance of FIN 46(R)-5 is effective for the reporting period beginning after March 3, 2005.

Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123(R)

        In December 2004, the FASB reissued SFAS No. 123(R), "Share-Based Payment." This is a revision of SFAS No. 123, "Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation," and supersedes APB No. 25, "Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees." SFAS No. 123(R) establishes accounting standards for transactions in which an entity receives employee services in exchange for (a) equity instruments of the entity or (b) liabilities that are based on the fair value of the entity's equity instruments or that may be settled by the issuance of equity instruments. The standard will require EME to recognize the grant-date fair value of stock options and equity based compensation issued to employees in the statement of income. The statement also requires that such transactions be accounted for using the fair value based method, thereby eliminating use of the intrinsic value method of accounting in APB No. 25, which was permitted under Statement 123, as originally issued. EME currently uses the intrinsic value accounting method for stock-based compensation. On April 14, 2005, the Securities and Exchange Commission announced a delay in the effective date for the standard to fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2005. EME will implement the new standard effective January 1, 2006 by applying the modified prospective transition method. The difference in expense between the two accounting methods is shown in Note 10—Stock-Based Compensation above.

19

FASB Staff Position FAS 109-1

        In December 2004, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position FAS 109-1, "Application of FASB Statement No. 109, 'Accounting for Income Taxes,' to the Tax Deduction on Qualified Production Activities Provided by the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004." The primary objective of this Position is to provide guidance on the application of SFAS No. 109 to the provision within the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 that provides a tax deduction on qualified production activities under the provisions of Internal Code Section 199 effective for tax years beginning after December 31, 2004. Under FAS 109-1, recognition of the tax deduction on qualified production activities, which include the production of electricity, is ordinarily reported in the year it is earned. The deduction is calculated, and the limitations to the deduction are applied at the consolidated income tax reporting level by the parent of the affiliated group (Edison International). The benefit of the deduction is then allocated among the members of the group in proportion to each member's respective amount, if any, of income from qualified production activities. For the year ended December 31, 2005, EME does not expect the allocated benefit to have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements. EME is evaluating the effect that the tax deduction will have in years subsequent to 2005.

Statement of Financial Accounting Standard Interpretation No. 47

        In March 2005, the FASB issued Financial Accounting Standard Interpretation No. 47, "Accounting for Conditional Asset Retirement Obligations" (FIN 47). FIN 47 clarifies that an entity is required to recognize a liability for the fair value of a conditional asset retirement obligation if the fair value can be reasonably estimated even though uncertainty exists about the timing and (or) method of settlement. EME is required to adopt FIN 47 by the end of 2005. EME is currently assessing the impact of FIN 47 on its results of operations and financial condition.

20

ITEM 2.    MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

        This Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (MD&A) contains forward-looking statements. These statements reflect Edison Mission Energy's (EME's) current expectations and projections about future events based on EME's knowledge of present facts and circumstances and assumptions about future developments. In this MD&A and elsewhere, the words "expects," "believes," "anticipates," "estimates," "intends," "plans," "probable" and variations of such words and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of performance; they are subject to risks, uncertainties and assumptions that could cause actual future activities and results of operations to be materially different from those set forth in this discussion. Some of the risks, uncertainties and other important factors that could cause results to differ, or that otherwise could impact EME or its subsidiaries, include:

•

the ability of EME to declare and pay dividends;



•

supply and demand for electric capacity and energy, and the resulting prices and dispatch volumes, in the wholesale markets to which EME's generating units have access;



•

the ability of EME and its subsidiaries to provide sufficient collateral in support of their forward sales of electricity and purchases of fuel;



•

general political, economic and business conditions;



•

governmental, statutory, regulatory or administrative changes or initiatives affecting EME or the electricity industry generally, including environmental regulations that could require capital expenditures or otherwise affect EME's cost and manner of doing business;



•

competition from other power plants, including new plants and technologies that may be developed in the future;



•

operating risks, including equipment failure, availability, heat rate and output;



•

the cost and availability of fuel, fuel transportation services, transmission services, and required emission allowances;



•

weather conditions, natural disasters and other unforeseen events; and



•

the continued participation by EME and its subsidiaries in tax-allocation and payment agreements with their affiliates.

        Certain of the risk factors listed above are discussed in more detail in "Market Risk Exposures" below, and under "Risks Related to the Business" in the MD&A included in Item 7 of EME's annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004. Additional information about the risk factors listed above and other risks and uncertainties is contained throughout this MD&A. Readers are urged to read this entire quarterly report and carefully consider the risks, uncertainties and other factors that affect EME's business.

        The MD&A of this Form 10-Q discusses material changes in the results of operations, financial condition and other developments of EME since December 31, 2004, and as compared to the first quarter ended March 31, 2004. This discussion presumes that the reader has read or has access to the MD&A included in Item 7 of EME's annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.

21

        The MD&A presents a discussion of EME's financial results and analysis of its financial condition. It is presented in four major sections:

MANAGEMENT'S OVERVIEW; CRITICAL ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES

Management's Overview

EME Restructuring Activities

        During 2004, EME sold most of its international operations. EME's international operations, except for the Doga project, are accounted for as discontinued operations in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 144, "Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets," and, accordingly, all prior periods have been restated to reclassify the results of operations and assets and liabilities as discontinued operations. In the first quarter of 2005, EME completed the sale of two international projects:

•

EME sold its 50% equity interest in the Caliraya-Botocan-Kalayaan (CBK) project to CBK Projects B.V., the purchasing entity designated by its partner, for $104 million.



•

EME sold its 25% equity interest in the Tri Energy project to IPM for approximately $20 million.

        While EME will continue to seek to sell its ownership interest in the Doga project, there is no assurance that such efforts will result in a sale.

        In connection with the sale of its international operations in 2004, together with cash on hand, in January 2005, EME:

•

made distributions to MEHC totaling $360 million, which were subsequently used primarily to repay the remaining $285 million portion of the term loan.



•

repaid its junior subordinated debentures and, consequently, repaid the monthly income preferred securities (MIPS) of $150 million.

        In April 2005, EME made an equity contribution of $300 million to Midwest Generation, which used the proceeds to repay indebtedness. See "Liquidity and Capital Resources—Key Financing" for a discussion of the Midwest Generation financing.

        EME has also completed a review of its domestic organization to better align its resources with its domestic business requirements. Management and organizational changes have been implemented to streamline EME's reporting relationships and eliminate its regional management structure. As part of the restructuring, EME expects to reduce annualized costs by $7 million (pre-tax) although this decrease is expected to be offset by higher development costs in the future. As a result of these changes, EME recorded a charge of $7 million (pre-tax) in the quarter ended March 31, 2005 for severance and related costs of the changes implemented by that date. EME expects to record an

22

additional charge of $4 million (pre-tax) during the quarter ended June 30, 2005 associated with completion of the restructuring steps after March 31, 2005.

Expiration of the Exelon Power Purchase Agreements and Wholesale Energy Prices

        The five-year power purchase agreements between Midwest Generation and Exelon Generation Company expired on December 31, 2004 and, accordingly, beginning January 1, 2005, all of the output from the Illinois Plants is considered merchant generation. In 2004, approximately 53% of the energy and capacity sales from the Illinois Plants were to Exelon Generation under the power purchase agreements.

        The Exelon Generation power purchase agreement for coal-fired units was structured to provide significant capacity payments and lower energy payments which were primarily designed to reimburse the cost of production. The agreement also provided for substantial capacity payments during the summer months. In the current wholesale energy market, energy prices are substantially higher than the energy prices previously set forth in the agreement, but capacity payments are, and are expected to remain, substantially lower. As a result, the composition of EME's revenues is expected to be significantly different in 2005 compared to 2004. EME's merchant generation is subject to significant volatility as described further in "Market Risk Exposures—Commodity Price Risk."

        Wholesale energy prices at the Northern Illinois Hub (related to the Illinois Plants) have increased substantially in 2005 from the comparable market prices in 2004 driven largely by increases in the market price of natural gas and oil. The average market price during the first quarter of 2005 at the Northern Illinois Hub (related to the Illinois Plants) increased to $39.68 per MWhr compared to the 24-hour average market price at "Into ComEd" of $29.51 per MWhr during the first quarter of 2004.

Overview of EME's First Quarter Financial Performance from Continuing Operations

        EME's financial performance in the first quarter of 2005 improved over the first quarter of 2004 with a number of important items affecting performance:

•

An $81 million increase in earnings from the Illinois Plants primarily attributable to:



•

An increase in the average realized price of merchant generation related to the coal-fired units to $38.94 per MWhr during the three months ended March 31, 2005 from $28.90 per MWhr during the three months ended March 31, 2004.



•

An increase in the average realized price of merchant generation to $38.94 per MWhr in the first quarter of 2005 from $17.64 per MWhr received in the first quarter of 2004 under the power purchase agreement for coal-fired units with Exelon Generation. The increase in energy revenues was partially offset by lower capacity payments received under this agreement.



•

An increase in generation to 8,394 GWhrs during the first quarter of 2005, compared to 7,768 GWhrs during the first quarter of 2004 when a portion of Midwest Generation's power was sold under the power purchase agreement for coal-fired units with Exelon Generation.



•

A $23 million increase in earnings from the Homer City facilities primarily attributable to:



•

An increase in average realized price of merchant generation to $43.78 per MWhr during the three months ended March 31, 2005 from $36.63 per MWhr during the three months ended March 31, 2004.



•

An increase in generation to 3,534 GWhrs during the first quarter of 2005, compared to 3,015 GWhrs during the first quarter of 2004 when there was an unplanned outage of Unit 1.



•

The first quarter 2004 results included a pre-tax gain of $47 million from the sale of the company owning EME's interests in Four Star Oil & Gas Company, partially offset by a $4 million loss on the sale of the company holding EME's interest in the Brooklyn Navy Yard project.

23

Critical Accounting Estimates

        For a discussion of EME's critical accounting estimates, refer to "Critical Accounting Estimates" on page 38 of EME's annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Introduction

        This section discusses operating results for the first quarters of 2005 and 2004. Continuing operations include EME's Illinois Plants and Homer City facilities, equity investments in power projects primarily located in California, corporate interest expense and general and administrative expenses. Discontinued operations include all of EME's international operations, except the Doga project. This section also discusses the effect of new accounting pronouncements on EME's consolidated financial statements. It is organized under the following headings:

Net Income Summary

        Net income is comprised of the following components:

        EME's income (loss) from continuing operations for the first quarters of 2005 and 2004 is comprised of:

24

        The increase in the first quarter income from continuing operations, excluding discrete items, was primarily attributable to stronger operating performance at EME's Illinois Plants and EME's Homer City facilities, driven by higher merchant generation and wholesale energy prices. Also contributing to the increase was higher income from Edison Mission Marketing & Trading and stronger operating results from the Big 4 projects. Partially offsetting these increases was a $3 million after-tax loss on early extinguishment of debt related to the repayment of junior subordinated debentures.

Results of Continuing Operations

Overview

        EME operates in one line of business, electric power generation. Operating revenues are primarily derived from the sale of power generated from the Illinois Plants and Homer City facilities. Intercompany interest expense and income between EME and its consolidated subsidiaries have been eliminated in the following project results, except as described below with respect to loans provided to EME from a wholly owned subsidiary, Midwest Generation. Equity in income from unconsolidated affiliates relates to energy projects accounted for under the equity method. EME recognizes its proportional share of the income or loss of such entities.

        EME uses the words "earnings" or "losses" in this section to describe income or loss from continuing operations before income taxes.

        The following section provides a summary of the operating results for the first quarters of 2005 and 2004 together with discussions of the contributions by specific projects and of other significant factors affecting these results.

(1)

Income before taxes of Doga represents both EME's 80% ownership and the ownership of minority interest holders on a calendar year basis. The interests of minority shareholders in the after-tax earnings of Doga are reflected in a separate line item in the consolidated statements of income.

25

Earnings from Consolidated Operations

Illinois Plants

(1)

This table summarizes key performance measures related to coal-fired generation, which represents the majority of the operations of the Illinois Plants.

(2)

The availability factor is determined by the number of megawatt-hours the coal plants are available to generate electricity divided by the product of the capacity of the coal plants (in megawatts) and the number of hours in the period. Equivalent availability reflects the impact of the unit's inability to achieve full load, referred to as derating, as well as outages which result in a complete unit shut down. The coal plants are not available during periods of planned and unplanned maintenance.

(3)

Midwest Generation generally refers to unplanned maintenance as a forced outage.

26

        Earnings from the Illinois Plants were $92 million during the first quarter of 2005, compared to $11 million during the first quarter of 2004. The increase in the first quarter earnings of $81 million was primarily due to the following factors:

•

substantially higher energy revenues resulting from increased average realized energy prices and increased generation at the coal plants;



•

lower fuel costs attributable to the cessation of operations at the Collins Station; and



•

lower plant operating lease costs due to the termination of the Collins Station lease in April 2004.

        Partially offset by:

•

lower capacity revenues resulting from the expiration of the power purchase agreements with Exelon Generation;



•

higher plant operation costs due to more planned overhauls;



•

higher coal costs attributable to increased generation and higher coal prices; and



•

higher interest expense primarily attributable to higher interest rates on the debt issued in April 2004.

        Losses from price risk management activities increased $8 million for the first quarter of 2005, compared to the first quarter of 2004. The 2005 losses were primarily related to losses on power contracts, power swaps and financial transmission rights that did not qualify for hedge accounting under SFAS No. 133. These losses resulted from higher market prices. However, these losses are expected to be offset by energy revenue recognized at market prices from the contracts that are scheduled to settle during 2005. The 2004 losses primarily represent the ineffective portion of Midwest Generation's forward energy sales contracts which are derivatives that qualified as cash flow hedges under SFAS No. 133. Under SFAS No. 133, the portion of a cash flow hedge that does not offset the change in value of the transaction being hedged, which is commonly referred to as the ineffective portion, is immediately recognized in earnings. Midwest Generation recorded net losses of approximately $0.2 million and $3 million for the first quarters of 2005 and 2004, respectively, representing the amount of cash flow hedges' ineffectiveness. The ineffective portion of the cash flow hedges was primarily attributable to differences in energy prices between "Into ComEd" and delivery points outside "Into ComEd" in 2004 and differences in energy prices between the aggregate Midwest Generation unit price and other delivery points in 2005.

        The earnings (losses) of the Illinois Plants included interest income of $28 million for the first quarters of both 2005 and 2004 related to loans to EME. In August 2000, Midwest Generation, which owns or leases the Illinois Plants, entered into a sale-leaseback transaction of the Powerton-Joliet facilities. The proceeds from the sale of these facilities were loaned to EME, which also provided a guarantee of the related lease obligations of Midwest Generation. The Powerton-Joliet sale-leaseback is recorded as an operating lease by EME for accounting purposes.

27

Homer City

(1)

The availability factor is determined by the number of megawatt-hours the coal plants are available to generate electricity, divided by the product of the capacity of the coal plants (in megawatts) and the number of hours in the period. The coal plants are not available during periods of planned and unplanned maintenance.

(2)

Homer City generally refers to unplanned maintenance as a forced outage.

        Earnings from Homer City increased $23 million for the first quarter of 2005, compared to the first quarter of 2004. The 2005 increase was primarily attributable to higher energy revenues in 2005 due to higher generation and average realized energy prices as compared to 2004. During the first quarter of 2004, an unplanned outage at Unit 1 contributed to lower generation and higher maintenance costs. Partially offsetting this increase was higher fuel costs attributable to higher fuel consumption, higher coal prices and higher priced SO2 emission allowances. Included in fuel costs was $15 million and $6 million during the quarters ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively, related to the net cost of emission allowances. See "Market Risk Exposures—Commodity Price Risk—Emission Allowances Price Risk" for more information regarding the price of SO2 allowances.

        Losses from price risk management activities increased $4 million for the first quarter of 2005, compared to the first quarter of 2004. The 2005 increase was attributable to the ineffective portion of forward and futures contracts which are derivatives that qualify as cash flow hedges under SFAS No. 133. Homer City recorded net gains (losses) of approximately $(4) million and $6 million during the first quarters of 2005 and 2004, respectively, representing the amount of cash flow hedges'

28

ineffectiveness. The ineffective gains (losses) from Homer City were primarily attributable to changes in the difference between energy prices at PJM West Hub (the delivery point under forward contracts) and the energy prices at the delivery point where power generated by the Homer City facilities is delivered into the transmission system (referred to as the Homer City busbar). In addition, Homer City recognized ineffective gains (losses) related to forward contracts that expired during the respective periods. Also included in net gains (losses) from price risk management activities were gains (losses) of approximately $4 million and $(5) million in 2005 and 2004, respectively, primarily related to futures contracts that did not qualify for hedge accounting under SFAS No. 133. See "Market Risk Exposures—Commodity Price Risk" for more information regarding forward market prices.

Seasonal Disclosure

        Due to higher electric demand resulting from warmer weather during the summer months, electric revenues generated from the Illinois Plants and the Homer City facilities are generally higher during the third quarter of each year.

Earnings from Unconsolidated Affiliates

Big 4 Projects

        Earnings from the Big 4 projects increased $9 million for the first quarter of 2005, compared to the first quarter of 2004. The increase in earnings was primarily due to higher energy prices in 2005 over 2004, and from planned outages at the Sycamore Cogeneration plant and the Watson Cogeneration plant in March 2004.

        The earnings from the Big 4 projects included interest expense from Edison Mission Energy Funding of $3 million and $4 million for the first quarters of 2005 and 2004, respectively.

Sunrise

        Losses from the Sunrise project decreased $1 million for the first quarter of 2005, compared to the first quarter of 2004. The 2005 decrease primarily resulted from higher energy revenues attributable to increased dispatch.

March Point

        Earnings from March Point increased $2 million for the first quarter of 2005, compared to the first quarter of 2004. The first quarter increase in earnings was primarily due to mark-to-market gains on fuel contracts entered into by March Point, which are derivatives that do not qualify as cash flow hedges under SFAS No. 133.

Doga

        In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards Interpretation No. 46(R), "Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities," EME determined that it was not the primary beneficiary of the Doga project and, accordingly, deconsolidated this project as of March 31, 2004. Revenues included in EME's consolidated statements of income from the Doga project were $29 million for the first quarter of 2004. Earnings from the Doga project were $6 million for the first quarter of 2004. There were no revenues or earnings recorded on a consolidated basis during 2005 due to the deconsolidation of the Doga project on March 31, 2004. Beginning April 1, 2004, EME recorded its interest in the Doga project on the equity method basis of accounting. Earnings from the Doga project were $4 million for the first quarter of 2005.

29

Other

        Earnings from other projects (consolidated subsidiaries) increased $23 million in the first quarter of 2005, compared to the first quarter of 2004, representing gains from proprietary energy trading activities. The net gains from energy trading activities were the result of proprietary trading in the power markets in which EME has power plants. Gains from proprietary energy trading activities in 2005 were higher than in 2004 due to more favorable market conditions (prices and volatility).

Seasonal Disclosure

        EME's third quarter equity in income from its energy projects is materially higher than equity in income related to other quarters of the year due to warmer weather during the summer months and because a number of EME's energy projects located on the West Coast have power sales contracts that provide for higher payments during the summer months.

Corporate Interest Expense

Corporate and Regional Administrative and General Expenses

        Administrative and general expenses increased $2 million for the first quarter of 2005, compared to the first quarter of 2004. The increase was primarily due to higher costs incurred in 2005 to implement EME's restructuring plan described under "Management's Overview."

Gain on Sale of Assets

        Gain on sale of assets was $0 in the first quarter of 2005 and $43 million in the first quarter of 2004. Gain on sale of assets in the first quarter of 2004 consisted of a $47 million gain related to the sale of 100% of EME's stock of Edison Mission Energy Oil & Gas, which in turn holds minority interests in Four Star Oil & Gas, and a $4 million loss related to the sale of EME's interest in Brooklyn Navy Yard Cogeneration Partners, L.P.

Loss on Early Extinguishment of Debt

        Loss on early extinguishment of debt was $4 million in the first quarter of 2005 and $0 in the first quarter of 2004. Extinguishment of debt consisted of a $4 million loss related to the early repayment of the junior subordinated debentures.

Income Taxes

        EME's income tax provision from continuing operations was $34 million and $5 million during the first quarter of 2005 and 2004, respectively. Income tax benefits are recognized pursuant to a tax-allocation agreement with Edison International. See "Liquidity and Capital Resources—EME's Liquidity as a Holding Company—Intercompany Tax-Allocation Agreement." During the first quarter of

30

2004, EME recorded a tax provision of $18 million relating to the sale of 100% of its stock in Edison Mission Energy Oil & Gas, which in turn holds interests in Four Star Oil & Gas.

Results of Discontinued Operations

        Income from discontinued operations, net of tax, was $7 million and $46 million during the first quarters of 2005 and 2004, respectively. During the first quarter of 2005, EME completed the following sales:

•

On January 10, 2005, EME sold its 50% equity interest in the CBK hydroelectric power project located in the Philippines to CBK Projects B.V. Proceeds from the sale were approximately $104 million.



•

On February 3, 2005, EME sold its 25% equity interest in the Tri Energy project to IPM. Proceeds from the sale were approximately $20 million.

        The aggregate after-tax gain on the sale of the aforementioned projects was $5 million.

        During the third quarter of 2004, EME reclassified its international activities which were then under contracts for sale as discontinued operations. Subsequently, EME completed the sale of these operations, except for the Doga project, which is no longer under a contract for sale. While EME continues to seek to sell its ownership interest in this project, there is no assurance that such efforts will result in a sale during the twelve-month period prescribed under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 144, "Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets." As a result, EME reclassified the Doga project to continuing operations during the fourth quarter of 2004, and, accordingly, it is reflected as part of continuing operations for all periods presented.

Previously Reported Discontinued Operations

Lakeland Project

        EME previously owned and operated a 220 MW combined cycle, natural gas-fired power plant located in the United Kingdom, known as the Lakeland project. The ownership of the project was held through EME's indirect subsidiary, Lakeland Power Ltd., which sold power generated from the plant pursuant to a power sales agreement with Norweb Energi Ltd., a subsidiary of TXU (UK) Holdings Limited (TXU UK) and an indirect subsidiary of TXU Europe Group plc (TXU Europe). EME ceased consolidating the activities of Lakeland Power Ltd. in 2002, when an administrative receiver was appointed following a default by Norweb Energi Ltd. under the power sales agreement. Accordingly, EME accounts for its ownership of Lakeland Power Ltd. on the cost method and earnings are recognized as cash is distributed from this entity.

        As previously disclosed, the administrative receiver of Lakeland Power Ltd. filed a claim against Norweb Energi Ltd. for termination of the power sales agreement. On November 19, 2002, TXU UK and TXU Europe, together with a related entity, TXU Europe Energy Trading Limited (TXU Energy), entered into formal administration proceedings of their own in the United Kingdom (similar to bankruptcy proceedings in the United States). On March 31, 2005, Lakeland Power Ltd. received £112 million (approximately $210 million) from the TXU administrators, representing an interim payment of 97% of its accepted claim of £116 million (approximately $217 million). No income related to this payment was recognized during the quarter ended March 31, 2005.

        From the amount received, Lakeland Power Ltd., now controlled by a liquidator in the United Kingdom, has made a payment of £20 million (approximately $38 million) to EME on April 7, 2005

31

comprised of £7 million (approximately $13 million) for a secured loan which EME purchased from Lakeland Power Ltd.'s secured creditors in 2004 and certain unsecured receivables from Lakeland Power Ltd., and £13 million (approximately $25 million) as a distribution to the EME subsidiary that owns the equity interest in Lakeland Power Ltd. This amount will be recognized in income during the quarter ended June 30, 2005. Additionally, Lakeland Power Ltd. will pay to EME's subsidiary that owns the equity interest in Lakeland Power Ltd. the amount remaining after resolution of any remaining secured and unsecured creditor claims and payment of or provision for tax liabilities and the fees and expenses associated with Lakeland Power Ltd.'s liquidation.

        EME estimates that the net proceeds after tax (including taxes due in the United States) resulting from the above payments will be approximately $100 million and the increase in net income will be approximately $90 million (including the amounts discussed above during the second quarter of 2005). These proceeds may be received throughout 2005, and possibly 2006, as Lakeland Power Ltd.'s liquidation progresses. Because the amounts required to settle outstanding claims and UK taxes have not been finalized and cannot be estimated precisely in the context of the liquidation, the actual amount of net proceeds and increase in net income may vary materially from the above estimate.

        See "Edison Mission Energy and Subsidiaries Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 4. Discontinued Operations" for additional details related to discontinued operations.

New Accounting Pronouncements

Statement of Financial Accounting Standards Interpretation No. 46(R)

        In December 2003, the FASB re-issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards Interpretation No. 46, "Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities" (FIN 46R). The primary objective of the Interpretation is to provide guidance on the identification of, and financial reporting for, entities over which control is achieved through means other than voting rights; such entities are known as variable interest entities. Under this Interpretation, the primary beneficiary is the variable interest holder that absorbs a majority of expected losses; if no variable interest holder meets this criteria, then it is the variable interest holder that receives a majority of the expected residual returns. The primary beneficiary is required to consolidate the variable interest entity unless specific exceptions or exclusions are met. This Interpretation applies to variable interest entities created after January 31, 2003, and applies to variable interest entities in which EME holds a variable interest that it acquired before February 1, 2003. This Interpretation is effective for special purpose entities as of December 31, 2003 and for all other entities as of March 31, 2004.

Deconsolidation of Variable Interest Entities

        In accordance with FIN 46R, EME determined that it was not the primary beneficiary of the Doga and Kwinana projects and, accordingly, deconsolidated these projects as of March 31, 2004. The Kwinana project was sold on December 16, 2004 as part of the sale of international operations to IPM and, accordingly, is included in discontinued operations.

Variable Interest Entities

        EME completed a review of the application of FIN 46R to its subsidiaries and affiliates and concluded that it has variable interests in variable interest entities as defined in this interpretation. The

32

following table summarizes the variable interest entities held by continuing operations in which EME has a significant variable interest:

        EME has determined that it is not the primary beneficiary in these entities; accordingly, EME will account for its variable interests on the equity method. EME's maximum exposure to loss in these variable interest entities is generally limited to its investment in these entities.

FASB Staff Position FIN 46(R)-5

        In March 2005, the FASB issued Staff Position FIN 46(R)-5, "Implicit Variable Interests Under FIN 46" (FIN 46(R)-5). FIN 46(R)-5 states that a reporting entity should consider whether it holds an implicit variable interest in a variable interest entity or in a potential variable interest entity. If the aggregate of the explicit and implicit variable interests held by the reporting entity and its related parties would, if held by a single party, identify that party as the primary beneficiary, the party within the group most closely associated with the variable interest entity should be deemed the primary beneficiary. EME is currently evaluating the impact of FIN 46(R)-5, but does not believe it will change EME's previous determination under FIN 46R. The guidance of FIN 46(R)-5 is effective for the reporting period beginning after March 3, 2005.

Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123(R)

        In December 2004, the FASB reissued SFAS No. 123(R), "Share-Based Payment." This is a revision of SFAS No. 123, "Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation," and supersedes APB No. 25, "Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees." SFAS No. 123(R) establishes accounting standards for transactions in which an entity receives employee services in exchange for (a) equity instruments of the entity or (b) liabilities that are based on the fair value of the entity's equity instruments or that may be settled by the issuance of equity instruments. The standard will require EME to recognize the grant-date fair value of stock options and equity based compensation issued to employees in the statement of income. The standard also requires that such transactions be accounted for using the fair value based method, thereby eliminating use of the intrinsic value method of accounting in APB No. 25, which was permitted under Statement 123, as originally issued. EME currently uses the intrinsic value accounting method for stock-based compensation. On April 14, 2005, the Securities and Exchange Commission announced a delay in the effective date for the standard to fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2005. EME will implement the new standard effective January 1, 2006 by applying the modified prospective transition method. The difference in expense between the two accounting methods is shown in "Edison Mission Energy and Subsidiaries Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 10. Stock-Based Compensation."

FASB Staff Position FAS 109-1

        In December 2004, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position FAS 109-1, "Application of FASB Statement No. 109, 'Accounting for Income Taxes,' to the Tax Deduction on Qualified Production

33

Activities Provided by the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004." The primary objective of this Position is to provide guidance on the application of SFAS No. 109 to the provision within the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 that provides a tax deduction on qualified production activities under the provisions of Internal Code Section 199 effective for tax years beginning after December 31, 2004. Under FAS 109-1, recognition of the tax deduction on qualified production activities, which include the production of electricity, is ordinarily reported in the year it is earned. The deduction is calculated, and the limitations to the deduction are applied at the consolidated income tax reporting level by the parent of the affiliated group (Edison International). The benefit of the deduction is then allocated among the members of the group in proportion to each member's respective amount, if any, of income from qualified production activities. For the year ended December 31, 2005, EME does not expect the allocated benefit to have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements. EME is evaluating the effect that the tax deduction will have in years subsequent to 2005.

Statement of Financial Accounting Standard Interpretation No. 47

        In March 2005, the FASB issued Financial Accounting Standard Interpretation No. 47, "Accounting for Conditional Asset Retirement Obligations" (FIN 47). FIN 47 clarifies that an entity is required to recognize a liability for the fair value of a conditional asset retirement obligation if the fair value can be reasonably estimated even though uncertainty exists about the timing and (or) method of settlement. EME is required to adopt FIN 47 by the end of 2005. EME is currently assessing the impact of FIN 47 on its results of operations and financial condition.

34

LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES

Introduction

        The following discussion of liquidity and capital resources is organized in the following sections: