Attached files
| file | filename |
|---|---|
| 8-K - FORM 8-K - Energy Future Holdings Corp /TX/ | d8k.htm |
 EFH
Corp. 2010 JP Morgan HY Credit Conference Discussion Deck March 1-3, 2010 Exhibit 99.1 |
 1 Safe Harbor Statement This presentation contains forward-looking statements, which are subject to various risks and uncertainties. Discussion of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from management's current projections, forecasts, estimates and expectations is contained in EFH Corp.'s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). In addition to the risks and uncertainties set forth in EFH Corp.'s SEC filings, the forward-looking statements in this presentation regarding the company’s long- term hedging program could be affected by, among other things: any change in the ERCOT electricity market, including a regulatory or legislative change, that results in wholesale electricity prices not being largely correlated to natural gas prices; any decrease in market heat rates as the long-term hedging program generally does not mitigate exposure to changes in market heat rates; the unwillingness or failure of any hedge counterparty or the lender under the commodity collateral posting facility to perform its obligations; or any other unforeseen event that results in the inability to continue to use a first lien to secure a substantial portion of the hedges under the long-term hedging program. In addition, the forward-looking statements in this presentation regarding the company’s new generation plants could be affected by, among other things, any adverse judicial rulings with respect to the plants’ construction and operating permits. Regulation G This presentation includes certain non-GAAP financial measures. A reconciliation of these measures to the most directly comparable GAAP measures is included in the appendix to this presentation. |
 2 2 nd largest competitive electric generator in US Largest lignite/coal and nuclear baseload generation fleet in Texas Low-cost lignite reserves Largest T&D utility in Texas High-growth service territory Constructive regulatory regime Largest retail electricity provider in Texas Strong customer value proposition The #1 power generator, retail electricity provider and transmission & distribution
utility in Texas. Energy Future Holdings Overview |
 3 in February 2010. 2 Excludes purchased power 3 Twelve months ended 12/31/09 4 Total lignite and PRB fuel expense excluding emissions 29% 67% 4% Luminant Overview Business Profile Generation Baseload around-the-clock assets that dispatch at low heat rate levels ~1,400 MW of new coal capacity achieved substantial completion and ~800 MW under construction and start-up Low-cost lignite reserves - Luminant mines ~20 million tons of lignite annually Liquidity-light natural gas hedging program designed to provide cash flow security Voluntary SO2 and NO x emission reduction program expected to reduce emissions below US averages Comanche Peak expansion through Mitsubishi partnership may provide a low-cost nuclear growth option 13% 39% 44% 4% Coal Gas Nuclear Generating capacity¹ As of 12/31/09; MW Total generation² 12/31/09³; GWh 18,319 MW 68,235 GWh New Build-Coal Safety Wholesale power prices Baseload reliability Mining operations Fuel costs O&M costs Operational excellence/continuous improvement Stable competitive market Value Drivers 1.33 0.99 Lignite Delivered PRB 2.75 1.30 Lignite Delivered PRB Lignite/coal vs. PRB fuel cost 4 05-07 Average; $/MMBtu 13E; $/MMBtu 1 Installed nameplate capacity. Includes ~800 MW of new coal-fueled generation under construction, 1,953 MW of mothballed gas plant capacity, 655 MW of gas plant capacity currently in Reliability Must Run (RMR) status with ERCOT and 1,856 MW of gas plant capacity (1,933 MW of installed nameplate capacity) related to four gas units that Luminant proposed for mothball |
 4 Luminant Areas of Focus – 2010 Safety Industry leading performance at plants and mines Operations Ramp up performance of Sandow 5 and Oak Grove 1 and mid-year substantial completion of Oak Grove 2 Top decile/quartile availability at Comanche Peak and existing coal plants Further embed “Luminant Operating System” and drive improvement through Balance of Plant initiative Drive continuous improvement at mines Development Continue to advance Comanche Peak 3 & 4 options Explore opportunities for new technologies, including wind, solar, next generation coal and new demand sources such as plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV) Risk Management Continue effective and efficient hedging program that is intended to secure cash flows |
 5 5 TXU Energy Overview TXU Energy is the leading electricity retailer in the ERCOT market. Value Drivers Strong customer value proposition • High brand recognition in Texas competitive areas • Competitive retail offers • Innovative products and services • Committed to low-income customer assistance Back Office • Latest Customer Care Platform (SAP) Balance Sheet • Combined TCEH risk management and liquidity efficient capital structure Margins (5–10% net) 1.9 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.2 1.4 TXU Energy Reliant Direct Energy Stream Energy Ambit First Choice Source: Latest available company filings, TXU Energy estimates. Business Profile Residential customers/meters At 12/31/09; millions Sources: NERC, ERCOT 2.0 1.8 US Average ERCOT 15% TXU Energy total residential customers 2002-2009; end of period, thousands 1,862 1,914 1,850 1,982 2,145 2,207 2,477 1,856 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TXU Energy has maintained market share since 2006. Projected annual demand growth US avg. and ERCOT; CAGR (2008A-2018E) |
 6 6 TXU Energy Areas of Focus – 2010 Profitable Growth Deliver customer based value proposition Expand profitable residential market share and add profitable business markets customers Customer Care Transformation Enhance customer experience through effective utilization of people, process and technology Risk Management Accurate forecasting of customer needs Active management and monitoring of procurement position to align with changing market conditions |
 7 Supportive regulatory environment 10.25% authorized ROE Expedited capital expenditure recovery (transmission and AMS) Low operating costs per customer Strong demand growth vs. US average Top quartile reliability (SAIDI) and safety Oncor Overview Value Drivers Business Profile Oncor focuses on maintaining safe operations, achieving a high level of reliability,
minimizing service interruptions and investing in its transmission and
distribution infrastructure to serve a growing customer base. 6 th largest US transmission & distribution company Low costs and high reliability No commodity position Accelerated recovery of investments in advanced meters and transmission $1.3 billion 1 CREZ investment 62 64 65 67 69 71 72 73 75 76 63 2008A 2009A 2010E 2011E 2012E 2013E 2014E 2015E 2016E 2017E 2018E Sources: ERCOT, CDR Report, December 2009 Capital expenditure estimates 08–13E; $ billions Projected peak demand growth 1 Based on ERCOT cost estimates 2 Minimum capital spending of $3.6 billion over a five-year period, including
AMS T&D CREZ Total 4.9 1.3 3.6 2 1 |
 8 Safety and reliability AMS Full deployment of advanced meters expected by 2012 (over 700,000 meters installed through January 2010) Capital investment of ~$690 million Recovery through monthly surcharge over 11 years, began January 2009
(~$2.20 per month for average residential customer) CREZ Obtain CCN’s for priority lines requiring expedited construction Continue construction of ~$1.3 billion 1 of CREZ project Oncor Areas of Focus – 2010 1 Based on ERCOT cost estimates |
 Appendix – Additional Slides and Regulation G Reconciliations |
 10 EFH Corp. Debt Structure 1 Summary diagram includes unamortized discounts and premiums and excludes subsidiaries of EFH that are not subsidiaries of Energy Future Intermediate Holding Company or Energy Future Competitive Holdings Company, including TXU Receivables Company, which buys receivables from TXU Energy and sells undivided interests in such receivables under the TXU receivables program. The existing debt amount for EFH includes a financing lease of an indirect subsidiary of EFH not included in the diagram
above. 2 December 31, 2009 balances adjusted to include the effects of the $500 million EFH Corp.
debt issuance on January 2010. See Regulation G reconciliations in this Appendix. 3 Includes Deposit Letter of Credit Facility of $1,250 million that is shown as debt on TCEH’s balance sheet offset by $1,134 million of restricted cash (net of $115 million related to a letter of credit drawn in June 2009). 4 Includes securitization bonds issued by Oncor Electric Delivery Transmission Bond Company LLC and Oncor’s Revolving Credit Facility that had a balance of $616 million. 5 Includes $425 million (including accrued interest) of investments posted with third
party. 6 Cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash as of December 31, 2009 Investor Group EFH $2.0 billion Pre-Merger Notes Guarantor of $0.6 billion New EFH Senior Secured Notes $5.7 billion of debt Energy Future Intermediate Holding Company Energy Future Competitive Holdings Company TCEH Oncor Electric Delivery Holdings Ring-fenced entities Guarantor of $6.8 billion TCEH Notes and $4.6 billion EFH Notes Guarantor of TCEH Sr. Secured Facilities and Commodity Collateral Posting Facility (CCP) $0.1 billion of Pre-Merger Notes Guarantor of $6.8 billion Cash Pay and PIK Toggle TCEH Notes Guarantor of TCEH Sr. Secured Facilities and CCP $6.8 billion Cash Pay/PIK Toggle TCEH Notes $22.4 billion Sr. Secured Facilities 3 ~20% Minority Investor $4.6 billion Cash Pay/PIK Toggle EFH Notes $1.6 billion of other debt $0.0 billion of CCP Debt Outstanding ($ billions) As of 12/31/09 Pro-forma EFH $ 7.2 EFIH 0.1 EFCH 0.1 TCEH 30.8 Non-regulated 38.2 Oncor 5.7 Total debt 43.9 Cash and cash equivalents 5,6 (1.6) Restricted cash 6 (1.2) Net debt $41.1 EFH Corp. debt structure As of 12/31/09 Pro-forma 2 ; $ billions As of December 31, 2009, the EFH Corp. leverage ratio was 9.40x $0.6 billion New Senior Secured Notes $0.1 billion New Senior Secured Notes Guarantor of $4.6 billion EFH Notes Guarantor of $0.6 billion New EFH Senior Secured Notes 1 4 2 |
 11 TCEH Amendments/Consents In Q3 2009, TCEH received positive support (60%+ vote) from its secured lenders to amend its Credit Agreement. These amendments provide additional debt capacity to de-lever TCEH and provide a vehicle for 2014 TCEH maturity extensions. Credit Agreement Amendments Ability to selectively Extend Revolver/Term Loan B Ability to use unlimited 1st lien Post 2014 bonds and loans to retire Term Loan B at par Trade $1.25 billion 1st lien Accordion for additional $4 billion 2nd lien capacity at TCEH Exclude 2nd lien debt at TCEH from Maintenance Covenant calculation Allow for 1st lien Secured Bond Offering under Accordion |
 12 EFH Corp. and EFIH Exchange Offer In November 2009, EFH Corp. and EFIH completed a SEC-registered debt-for-debt exchange. EFH is committed to improving the balance sheet and is evaluating alternatives. Exchange Offer Summary In the exchange, EFH Corp. sought to issue up to an aggregate of $3.0 billion of new EFH Corp. and EFIH secured 9.75% debt due 2019 for ~$4.5 billion of EFH Corp. Legacy and LBO Notes and TCEH LBO Notes Ultimately, ~$350 million of old debt was exchanged for ~$250
million aggregate of new EFH Corp. and EFIH debt
|
 13 EFH Corp. New Financing Accomplished In January 2010, EFH Corp. successfully issued $500 million of Senior Secured Notes maturing in 2020 in a private offering. EFH continually seeks opportunities to enhance its financial flexibility.
New Debt Issuance Summary 10% coupon, priced at par The initial $300 million offering was upsized to $500 million Proceeds from this offer will be used for general or other corporate purposes, including working capital needs, investment in business initiatives, capital expenditures and prepayment or repurchase of outstanding debt |
 14 B+ (+1) n/a B+ (+2) n/a Caa3 (-2) n/a Sr. Secured Fitch S&P Moody’s EFIH LLC B+ (+1) n/a B+ (+2) n/a Caa3 (-2) n/a Sr. Secured Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Oncor Outlook Negative Negative Negative Negative Negative Negative EFH Outlook AAA BBB (+6) BBB (+6) BBB- (+5) CCC (-3) CCC (-3) B (0) BB (+3) CCC (-3) CCC (-3) CCC (-3) B+ (+1) B Pre-Exchange AAA BBB+ (+8) BBB+ (+8) BBB+ (+8) CCC (-2) CCC (-2) CCC (-2) B+ (+2) CCC (-2) CCC (-2) CCC (-2) B- (0) B- Current AAA BBB (+6) BBB (+6) BBB- (+5) CCC (-3) CCC (-3) B (0) BB (+3) CCC (-3) CCC (-3) CCC (-3) B (0) B Current Aaa Baa1 (+9) Baa1 (+9) Caa3 (-2) Caa3 (-2) Caa2 (-1) B1 (+3) Caa3 (-2) Caa3 (-2) Caa3 (-2) Caa3 (-2) Caa1 Current BBB+ (+8) Baa1 (+9) Secured Notes BBB+ (+8) Oncor Issuer Rating BBB+ (+8) Baa1 (+9) Secured Credit Facility B- Caa1 EFH Issuer Rating CCC (-2) Caa3 (-2) Unsecured CCC (-2) Caa2 (-1) LBO Cash Pay/PIK Toggle B+ (+2) B2 (+2) Credit Facilities (secured) EFC Holdings Company CCC (-2) Caa3 (-2) Sr. Unsec (Pre – 10/07) B- (0) Caa2 (-1) LBO Cash Pay/PIK Toggle EFH Corp. TCEH Company LLC CCC (-2) Caa3 (-2) Secured AAA Aaa Oncor Transition Bonds CCC (-2) Caa3 (-2) Pre-10/07 debt CCC (-2) Caa3 (-2) PCRBs Pre-Exchange Pre-Exchange Issuer / Security Issuer/Debt Ratings Summary Indicates change in rating pre-exchange vs. post-exchange Issuer/Debt ratings for EFH Corp. and its subsidiaries As of 1/31/10; rating agencies credit ratings Note: Parenthetical amounts represent change in ratings notch from EFH Issuer
Rating. |
 15 Luminant Generation Facilities Generation capacity in ERCOT At 12/31/09; MW Nuclear 2,300 MW Lignite/coal 7,217 Lignite – new 1 800 Natural gas 2 8,002 Total 18,319 MW 1 Represents approximately 800 MW of new lignite-fueled generation under construction
that is expected to come online in mid-2010. 2 Includes seven mothballed units (1,953 MW) not currently available for dispatch, 655 MW for two units currently in RMR status with ERCOT and 1,856 MW of gas plant capacity (1,933 MW of installed nameplate capacity) related to four gas units that Luminant proposed for mothball in February 2010. HOUSTON SAN ANTONIO AUSTIN WACO MIDLAND LUFKIN ODESSA DALLAS TYLER FORT WORTH Power Plants Natural gas Lignite/coal Lignite, new build Nuclear |
 16 0 4 8 12 16 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Cummulative MWs Summer 2010 ERCOT supply stack - indicative Luminant plants are typically on the “book-ends” of the supply stack. ERCOT’s
marginal price is set by natural gas in most hours of the year. Luminant nucl ear plant Luminant lignite/coal plants Luminant gas plants 1 Legend ERCOT Supply Sta ck 1 Excludes 1,953 MW of mothballed gas plant capacity. Includes 655 MW of gas plant capacity currently in RMR status with ERCOT and 1,856 MW of gas plant capacity (1,933 MW of installed nameplate capacity) related to four gas units that Luminant proposed for mothball in February 2010. Sources: ERCOT and Energy Velocity ®,
Ventyx |
 17 Existing Fleet Baseload Capital Expenditures 234 318 660 556 560 566 02–03 04–05 06–07 08 09 10E Baseload capital expenditures 1 02–09; 10E; $ millions Luminant needs to drive sustained high performance at the optimal investment level.
Merger Close 1 Baseload capital expenditures excluding any capital expenditures for development of Oak Grove and Sandow 5, new mine development, environmental retrofit program and other development related capital expenditures. Includes new build sustaining capital expenditures for Oak Grove and Sandow 5 for 2010 only. |
 18 1 Benchmarking peer set defined as 18 month fuel cycle U.S. nuclear plants (42 plants / 66
units BWR & PWR) Sources: EUCG May 2009 release for cost and WANO for
Capability Factors CPNPP adjusted for SGR Outage Decile Quartile Median Decile Quartile Median Nuclear reliability vs. cost 1 06–08; percent and $/MWh CPNPP High-Performance Nuclear Operator 75 80 85 90 95 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 $/MWh |
 19 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 EFH Industry Impact of Refueling Outages 16 17 18 19 20 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 0 1 2 3 EFH # of Refueling Outages Avg. nuclear fleet refueling outage duration 1 - 18 month cycle units 03-09; days Nuclear fleet output 03-09; thousand GWh Based on the refueling cycle, 1 refueling outage will occur in 2010 2010 Refueling Outage Impact 2008 reflects 2 refueling outages 2008 outages were 19 days and 21 days 2009 outage was 25 days 2009 generation includes 110 GWh ERCOT-driven backdown 2008-2009 Refueling Outage Impact 18 months Duration: ~18-25 days Nuclear Refueling Cycle 1 2005 and 2008 were dual refueling outage years; this graph shows the average outage duration for each of those years. 2 Industry based on early release data from Electric Utility Cost Group (EUCG) World record steam generator outage World record steam generator outage 2 |
 20 $0.00 $2.00 $4.00 $6.00 $8.00 $10.00 40 50 60 70 80 90 High-Performance Coal Operator Luminant vs. US lignite fleet net capacity factors Percent Top decile 84.7% Top quartile 79.8% Luminant vs. US lignite fleet O&M $/MWh Top decile 3.3 Top quartile 4.0 Luminant 06–08 fleet avg. = 84.7 % Luminant 08 fleet = 83.2% Source: GKS Luminant 06–08 fleet avg. = 3.11 Luminant 08 fleet = 3.29 1 Benchmarking net capacity factors based on GADS. 1 Luminant has industry leading performance relative to other coal-fueled generators. |
 21 High-Performance Coal Operator 65% 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 EFH Industry Consistent high performance Average coal fleet capacity factor 1 04-08; percent Range of coal unit 2-year capacity factors 2 04-08; percent 45% 50% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% EFH (9) AYE (10) DYN (4) EIX (8) MIR (2) NRG (9) RRI (6) Operator (# of Units) Range 5 Yr Average 1 Based on unscrubbed merchant units greater than 450 MW. Industry total excludes EFH plants. 2 Includes merchant units greater than 450 MW. Source: Velocity Suite (Energy Velocity) |
 22 41,000 42,000 43,000 44,000 45,000 46,000 47,000 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 0 50 100 150 200 250 Net Gen # of PO Days Coal Fleet Output Coal fleet output 03-09; GWh 2009 reflects 130 planned outages days 2009 average major outage duration was 45 days 2009 Planned Outage Impact 2008 reflects 136 planned outages days 2008 average major outage duration was 48 days 2008 Planned Outage Impact 3 or 4 year overhaul cycle depending on unit Duration is scope dependent Coal Fleet Planned Outage Cycle 1 1 2009 includes 1,443 GWh for New Build |
 23 Nuclear Expansion HEAVY INDUSTRIES, LTD. …partnering with …partnering with a world-class a world-class equipment provider… equipment provider… Luminant is pursuing the construction of a next-generation nuclear facility by … … … and leveraging existing and leveraging existing site, water rights and site, water rights and leadership team. leadership team. Project includes two nuclear generation units each having approximately 1,700 MW
(gross) capacity, and is currently ranked 5th (first alternate) for DOE
grants. |
 24 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 0 4 8 12 16 20 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 ERCOT Average Daily Profile of Load and Wind Source: ERCOT ERCOT average daily profile of load and wind output August 09; mixed measures Wind operating characteristics necessitate additional resources for reliability.
Average Load Average Wind Output Hour Load (aMW) Wind Output (MW) |
 25 Texas Wind Additions 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 Pre 01 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10E 11E RPS 1 Target of 2,880 MW by 2009 RPS 1 Target of 5,880 MW by 2015 CREZs Designated ERCOT SGIA 2 Cumulative wind capacity additions in Texas Pre-01 - 09;10E - 11E; MW 1 Renewable Portfolio Standard 2 Signed Generation Interconnect Agreement Source: ERCOT – January 2010 System Planning Report to the Reliability and Operations Subcommittee |
 26 ERCOT Reserve Margins ERCOT reserve margin 07-09; 10E-15E; percent 15 14 17 22 20 18 15 12 10 0 5 10 15 20 25 07 08 09 10E 11E 12E 13E 14E 15E December 2009 2 1 Source: ERCOT (reserve margin projection prior to summer peak and based on the reserve
margin formula in effect at the time) 2 Source: ERCOT CDR as of December 2009 The ERCOT market currently appears to be reasonably positioned to support Texas’ needs through 2013. Year Targeted minimum reserve margin is 12.5% Actuals 1 % |
 27 Houston Ship Channel settled natural gas prices 1 Jan 04-Dec 09; $/MMBtu Market Price Snapshot NYMEX forward natural gas prices 2010-12; $/MMBtu NYMEX settled natural gas prices Jan 04-Dec 09; $/MMBtu Houston Ship Channel forward natural gas prices 2010-12; $/MMBtu 1 Settled prices are monthly averages 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Jan-09 Feb-09 Mar-09 Apr-09 May-09 Jun-09 Jul-09 Aug-09 Sep-09 Oct-09 Nov-09 Dec-09 2010 2011 2012 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Jan-09 Feb-09 Mar-09 Apr-09 May-09 Jun-09 Jul-09 Aug-09 Sep-09 Oct-09 Nov-09 Dec-09 2010 2011 2012 2 2 1 Forward prices reflect market observable quotes during the 12 months ended December 31, 2009
for the following delivery periods: Calendar 2010, 2011 and 2012 |
 28 Market Price Snapshot ERCOT North Zone 7x24 settled heat rate 1,2 Jan 04-Dec 09; MMBtu/MWh ERCOT North Zone 7x24 forward heat rate 1,3 2010-12; MMBtu/MWh ERCOT North Zone 5x16 forward heat rate 1,3 2010-12; MMBtu/MWh ERCOT North Zone 5x16 settled heat rate 1,2 Jan 04-Dec 09; MMBtu/MWh 1 Market heat rate calculated by dividing 7x24 and 5x16 power prices, as appropriate, by
Houston Ship Channel natural gas prices 2 Settled prices are monthly averages 3 Forward prices reflect market observable quotes during the 12 months ended December 31, 2009 for the following delivery periods: Calendar 2010, 2011 and 2012 |
 29 29 New TXU Energy Marketing Campaign Television TXU.com Billboards |
 30 New Oncor Infrastructure Oncor expects to invest ~$1.3 billion 1 over the next 4 years on new transmission lines… …to support the continued buildout of wind capacity in Texas Oncor’s investment in CREZ will receive accelerated recovery, consistent with other transmission investment, mitigating regulatory delay. 1 PUC awarded approximately $1.3 billion (based on ERCOT estimates) of the CREZ buildout to Oncor. |
 31 Oncor Demand-Side Management Oncor is leading the largest advanced metering initiatives deployment in the US with an initiative to have 3.4 million meters connected by 2012 (over 700,000 meters installed through January 2010) Oncor recovers its investment through a PUC-approved surcharge Customer monitoring of consumption “Smart” appliances Dynamic pricing Oncor’s energy efficiency filing has been approved and is reflected in rates. …that will enable key DSM initiatives Oncor to deploy ~$690 million of capital for advanced metering initiatives… |
 32 Table 1: EFH Corp. Net Debt Reconciliation As of December 31, 2009 Pro-forma 1 $ millions 40,615 (1,197) (425) (1,189) 43,426 41,440 417 1,569 12/31/09 500 - - - 500 500 - - Pro-forma Adjust.¹ 41,115 Net debt (1,197) Restricted cash (1,189) Cash and cash equivalents (425) Investments posted with counterparty Less: 41,940 Long-term debt, less amounts due currently 1,569 Short-term borrowings 417 Long-term debt due currently 43,926 Total debt 12/31/09 Pro-forma Description 1 Pro-forma adjustment includes the issuance of EFH Corp. 10.0% Senior Secured Notes due 2020 that closed
on January 12, 2010. |
 33 Table 2: TCEH Net Debt Reconciliation As of December 31, 2009 $ millions 29,533 Net debt (1,136) Restricted cash (94) Cash and cash equivalents Less: 29,516 Long-term debt, less amounts due currently 953 Short-term borrowings 294 Long-term debt due currently 30,763 Total debt 12/31/09 Description |
 34 Table 3: Oncor Net Debt Reconciliation As of December 31, 2009 $ millions 5,631 Net debt (61) Restricted cash (28) Cash and cash equivalents Less: 4,996 Long-term debt, less amounts due currently 616 Short-term borrowings 108 Long-term debt due currently 5,720 Total debt 12/31/09 Description |