NOTE 1 - SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

General

Ameren, headquartered in St. Louis, Missouri, is a public utility holding company under PUHCA 2005, administered by FERC. Ameren’s primary assets are the common stock of its subsidiaries. Ameren’s subsidiaries are separate, independent legal entities with separate businesses, assets and liabilities. These subsidiaries operate rate-regulated electric generation, transmission and distribution businesses, rate-regulated natural gas transmission and distribution businesses, and merchant electric generation businesses in Missouri and Illinois. Dividends on Ameren’s common stock and the payment of other expenses by Ameren and CILCORP holding companies depend on distributions made to it by its subsidiaries. Ameren’s principal subsidiaries are listed below. Also see the Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations at the front of this report.

Ameren has various other subsidiaries responsible for the short- and long-term marketing of power, procurement of fuel, management of commodity risks, and provision of other shared services. Ameren has an 80% ownership interest in EEI, which until February 29, 2008, was held 40% by UE and 40% by Development Company. Ameren consolidates EEI for financial reporting purposes. UE reported EEI under the equity method until February 29, 2008. Effective February 29, 2008, UE’s and Development Company’s ownership interests in EEI were transferred to Resources Company through an internal reorganization. UE’s interest in EEI was transferred at book value indirectly through a dividend to Ameren.

The financial statements of Ameren, Genco, CILCORP and CILCO are prepared on a consolidated basis. UE, CIPS and IP have no subsidiaries, and therefore their financial statements were not prepared on a consolidated basis. All significant intercompany transactions have been eliminated. All tabular dollar amounts are in millions, unless otherwise indicated.

Our accounting policies conform to GAAP. Our financial statements reflect all adjustments (which include normal, recurring adjustments) that are necessary, in our opinion, for a fair presentation of our results. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make certain estimates and assumptions. Such estimates and assumptions affect reported amounts of assets and liabilities, the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the dates of financial statements, and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reported periods. Actual results could differ from those estimates. The results of operations of an interim period may not give a true indication of results that may be expected for a full year. These financial statements should be read in conjunction with the financial statements and the notes thereto included in the Form 10-K.

Management has performed an evaluation of subsequent events through November 6, 2009, which was the date Ameren’s financial statements were issued and the date UE’s, CIPS’, Genco’s, CILCORP’s, CILCO’s and IP’s financial statements were available to be issued.

Earnings Per Share

There were no material differences between Ameren’s basic and diluted earnings per share amounts for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008. The number of stock options, restricted stock shares, and performance share units outstanding had an immaterial impact on earnings per share.

Long-term Incentive Plan of 1998 and 2006 Omnibus Incentive Compensation Plan

A summary of nonvested shares as of September 30, 2009, under the Long-term Incentive Plan of 1998, as amended, and the 2006 Omnibus Incentive Compensation Plan (2006 Plan) is presented below:

The fair value of each share unit awarded in March 2009 under the 2006 Plan was determined to be $15.52 based on Ameren’s closing common share price of $22.20 per share at March 2, 2009, and lattice simulations used to estimate expected share payout based on Ameren’s total shareholder return for a three-year performance period relative to the designated peer group beginning January 1, 2009. The significant assumptions used to calculate fair value also included a three-year risk-free rate of 1.24%, volatility of 21.3% to 33.1% for the peer group, and Ameren’s attainment of earnings per share of at least $2.54 during each year of the performance period.

Ameren recorded compensation expense of $4 million and $7 million for the three months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively, and a related tax benefit of $2 million and $3 million for the three months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Ameren recorded compensation expense of $12 million and $21 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively, and a related tax benefit of $5 million and $8 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. As of September 30, 2009, total compensation expense of $11 million related to nonvested awards not yet recognized was expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 19 months.

Accounting Changes and Other Matters

Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated Financial Statements

In December 2007, the FASB issued authoritative guidance that established accounting and reporting standards for minority interests, which were recharacterized as noncontrolling interests. This guidance requires noncontrolling interests to be classified as a component of equity separate from the parent’s equity; purchases or sales of equity interests that do not result in a change in control to be accounted for as equity transactions; net income attributable to the noncontrolling interest to be included in consolidated net income in the statement of income; and upon a loss of control, the interest sold, as well as any interest retained, to be recorded at fair value, with any gain or loss recognized in earnings. We adopted the provisions of this guidance as of the beginning of 2009, which applies prospectively, except for the presentation and disclosure requirements, for which it applies retroactively. This guidance impacts Ameren and CILCORP. See Noncontrolling Interest below for additional information.

Disclosures about Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities

In March 2008, the FASB issued amended authoritative guidance that requires entities to provide greater transparency in interim and annual financial statements about how and why the entity uses derivative instruments, how the instruments and related hedged items are accounted for, and how the instruments and related hedged items affect the financial position, results of operations, and cash flows of the entity. This guidance requires qualitative disclosures about objectives and strategies for using derivatives, quantitative disclosures about fair value amounts of and gains and losses on derivative instruments, and disclosures about credit-risk-related contingent features in derivative agreements. Effective for us in the first quarter of 2009, the adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on our results of operations, financial position, or liquidity because it provided enhanced amended disclosure requirements only. See Note 6 - Derivative Financial Instruments for additional information.

Determining Fair Value When the Volume and Level of Activity for the Asset or Liability Have Significantly Decreased and Identifying Transactions That Are Not Orderly

In April 2009, the FASB issued additional authoritative guidance regarding the factors that should be considered in estimating fair value when there has been a significant decrease in market activity for an asset or liability. The guidance, which applies to all fair value measurements, does not change the objective of a fair value measurement. The adoption of this guidance, effective for us as of June 30, 2009, did not have a material impact on our results of operations, financial position, or liquidity.

Interim Disclosures about Fair Value of Financial Instruments

In April 2009, the FASB issued amended authoritative guidance to require disclosures about fair value of financial instruments for interim reporting periods of publicly traded companies as well as in annual financial statements. The adoption of this guidance, effective for us as of June 30, 2009, did not have a material impact on our results of operations, financial position, or liquidity, because it provided enhanced disclosure requirements only. See Note 7 - Fair Value Measurements for our interim reporting disclosures.

Recognition and Presentation of Other-Than-Temporary Impairments

In April 2009, the FASB issued authoritative guidance that established a new method of recognizing and reporting other-than-temporary impairments of debt securities and contains additional annual and interim disclosure requirements related to debt and equity securities. Under the new guidance, an impairment of debt securities is other-than-temporary if (1) the entity intends to sell the security, (2) it is more likely than not that the entity will be required to sell the security before recovery of its amortized cost basis, or (3) the entity does not expect to recover the security’s entire amortized cost basis. The adoption of this guidance, effective for us as of June 30, 2009, did not have a material impact on our results of operations, financial position, or liquidity.

Subsequent Events

In May 2009, the FASB issued authoritative guidance that established general standards of accounting for, and disclosure of, events that occur after the balance sheet date but before financial statements are issued or are available to be issued. The adoption of this guidance, effective for us as of June 30, 2009, did not have a material impact on our results of operations, financial position, or liquidity.

Variable Interest Entities

In June 2009, the FASB issued amended authoritative guidance that significantly changes the consolidation rules for VIEs. The guidance requires an enterprise to qualitatively assess the determination of the primary beneficiary of a VIE based on whether the entity (1) has the power to direct matters that most significantly impact the activities of the VIE, and (2) has the obligation to absorb losses or the right to receive benefits of the VIE that could potentially be significant to the VIE. Further, the guidance requires an ongoing reconsideration of the primary beneficiary. It also amends the events that trigger a reassessment of whether an entity is a VIE. We are in the process of determining the impact the adoption of this guidance, effective for us as of January 1, 2010, will have on our results of operations, financial position, and liquidity, if any.

The FASB Accounting Standards Codification and the Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles

In June 2009, the FASB issued the FASB Accounting Standards Codification (the “Codification”), which is the primary source of authoritative GAAP to be applied by nongovernmental entities. Rules and interpretive releases of the SEC under authority of federal securities laws are also sources of authoritative GAAP for SEC registrants. The Codification modifies the hierarchy of GAAP to include only two levels: authoritative and nonauthoritative. The Codification supersedes all non-SEC accounting and reporting standards. All other nongrandfathered, non-SEC accounting literature not included in the Codification are nonauthoritative. The adoption of the Codification, effective for us as of July 1, 2009, did not impact our results of operations, financial position, or liquidity.

Goodwill and Intangible Assets

Goodwill. Goodwill represents the excess of the purchase price of an acquisition over the fair value of the net assets acquired. Ameren’s and IP’s goodwill relates to the acquisition of IP in 2004. Ameren’s and CILCORP’s goodwill relates to the acquisition of CILCORP in 2003. Ameren’s goodwill also includes an additional 20% ownership interest in EEI acquired in 2004 as well as the acquisition of Medina Valley in 2003. During the first quarter of 2009, CILCORP recognized a non-cash goodwill impairment loss of $462 million. Ameren and IP did not recognize a goodwill impairment during the first nine months of 2009. See Note 14 - Goodwill Impairment for further information about CILCORP’s goodwill impairment.

Intangible Assets. We evaluate intangible assets for impairment if events or changes in circumstances indicate that their carrying amount might be impaired. Ameren’s, UE’s, Genco’s, CILCORP’s and CILCO’s intangible assets consisted of emission allowances at September 30, 2009. See also Note 9 - Commitments and Contingencies for additional information on emission allowances.

The following table presents the SO₂ and NO_x emission allowances held and the related aggregate SO₂ and NO_x emission allowance book values that were carried as intangible assets at September 30, 2009. Emission allowances consist of various individual emission allowance certificates and do not expire. Emission allowances are charged to fuel expense as they are used in operations.

The following table presents amortization expense based on usage of emission allowances, net of gains from emission allowance sales, for Ameren, UE, Genco, CILCORP and CILCO (AERG) during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008.

Employee Separation and Other Charges

In the third quarter of 2009, Ameren initiated a voluntary separation program that provided eligible management employees the opportunity to voluntarily terminate and receive benefits consistent with Ameren’s standard management severance program. This program was offered to eligible management employees at Ameren’s subsidiaries, including UE, CIPS, Genco, CILCORP, CILCO and IP. Additionally, in November 2009, Ameren initiated an involuntary separation program to reduce additional management positions under terms and benefits consistent with Ameren’s standard management severance program. Ameren recorded a pretax charge to earnings of $17.5 million during the quarter ended September 30, 2009, (UE - $9 million, CIPS - $1 million, Genco - $3 million, CILCORP - $3 million, CILCO - $3 million, and IP - $1 million) for the severance costs related to both the voluntary and involuntary separation programs as well as for Merchant Generation staff reductions announced in the third quarter of 2009. This charge was recorded in other operations and maintenance expense in the applicable statements of income. It is anticipated that substantially all of this amount will be paid prior to December 31, 2009. The number of positions eliminated as a result of these separation programs, including the Merchant Generation staff reductions, will total approximately 300. In addition to these programs, Genco recorded a $4 million pretax charge to earnings in the third quarter of 2009 for the retirement of two generating units at its Meredosia power plant and for related obsolete inventory.

Excise Taxes

Excise taxes imposed on us are reflected on Missouri electric, Missouri gas, and Illinois gas customer bills. They are recorded gross in Operating Revenues and Operating Expenses - Taxes Other than Income Taxes on the statement of income. Excise taxes reflected on Illinois electric customer bills are imposed on the consumer and are therefore not included in revenues and expenses. They are recorded as tax collections payable and included in Taxes Accrued on the balance sheet. The following table presents excise taxes recorded in Operating Revenues and Operating Expenses - Taxes Other than Income Taxes for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008:

Uncertain Tax Positions

The amount of unrecognized tax benefits as of September 30, 2009, was $136 million, $86 million, less than $1 million, $24 million, $17 million, $17 million, and less than $1 million for Ameren, UE, CIPS, Genco, CILCORP, CILCO and IP, respectively. The amount of unrecognized tax benefits (detriments) as of September 30, 2009, that would impact the effective tax rate, if recognized, was $6 million, $2 million, less than $1 million, $(1) million, less than $1 million, less than $1 million, and less than $1 million for Ameren, UE, CIPS, Genco, CILCORP, CILCO and IP, respectively.

Ameren remains subject to U.S. federal income tax examination by the Internal Revenue Service for 2005 and subsequent years. State income tax returns are generally subject to examination for a period of three years after filing of the return. The state impact of any federal changes remains subject to examination by various states for a period of up to one year after formal notification to the states. The Ameren Companies do not have material state income tax issues under examination, administrative appeals, or litigation.

It is reasonably possible that events will occur during the next 12 months that would cause the total amount of unrecognized tax benefits to increase or decrease. However, the Ameren Companies do not believe such increases or decreases would be material to their financial condition or results of operations.

Asset Retirement Obligations

AROs at Ameren, UE, CIPS, Genco, CILCORP, CILCO and IP increased compared to December 31, 2008, to reflect the accretion of obligations to their fair values.

Noncontrolling Interest

At Ameren, noncontrolling interest comprises the 20% of EEI’s net assets not owned by Ameren and the preferred stock not subject to mandatory redemption of the Ameren subsidiaries. These noncontrolling interests are classified as a component of equity separate from Ameren’s equity in its consolidated balance sheet. At CILCORP, noncontrolling interest comprises the preferred stock not subject to mandatory redemption of its subsidiary, CILCO. This noncontrolling interest is classified as a component of equity separate from CILCORP’s equity in CILCORP’s consolidated balance sheet.

A reconciliation of the equity changes attributable to the noncontrolling interest at Ameren and CILCORP for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008 is shown below:

NOTE 2 - RATE AND REGULATORY MATTERS

Below is a summary of significant regulatory proceedings and related lawsuits. We are unable to predict the ultimate outcome of these matters, the timing of the final decisions of the various agencies and courts, or the impact on our results of operations, financial position, or liquidity.

Missouri

2009 Electric Rate Order

In January 2009, the MoPSC issued an order approving an increase for UE in annual revenues of approximately $162 million for electric service and the implementation of a FAC and a vegetation management and infrastructure inspection cost tracking mechanism, among other things. In February 2009, Noranda, UE’s largest electric customer, and the Missouri Office of Public Counsel appealed certain aspects of the MoPSC decision to the Circuit Court of Pemiscot County, Missouri, the Circuit Court of Stoddard County, Missouri, and the Circuit Court of Cole County, Missouri. In September 2009, the Circuit Court of Pemiscot County granted Noranda’s request to stay the electric rate increase granted by the January 2009 MoPSC order as it applies specifically to Noranda’s electric service account until the court renders its decision on the appeal. The merits of the appeal will be briefed by the parties over the next several months, with a decision likely to be issued by the court in the first half of 2010. During the stay, Noranda will pay into the court registry the contested portion of its monthly billings, approximately $0.5 million per month based on current usage levels. If UE wins the appeal, it will receive those monthly payments plus interest.

Pending Electric Rate Case

UE filed a request with the MoPSC in July 2009 to increase its annual revenues for electric service by $402 million. Included in this increase request was approximately $227 million of anticipated increases in normalized net fuel costs in excess of the net fuel costs included in base rates previously authorized by the MoPSC in its January 2009 electric rate order, which, absent initiation of this general rate proceeding, would have been eligible for recovery through UE’s existing FAC. The balance of the increase request is based primarily on investments made to continue system-wide reliability improvements for customers, increases in costs essential to generating and delivering electricity, and higher financing costs. The electric rate increase request is based on an 11.5% return on equity, a capital structure composed of 47.4% equity, a rate base for UE of $6.0 billion, and a test year ended March 31, 2009, with certain pro-forma adjustments through the anticipated true-up date of January 31, 2010. Following Ameren’s September 2009 common stock issuance, UE received a capital contribution from Ameren of $436 million in September 2009. UE expects to true-up its capital structure in the electric rate case to reflect this capital contribution, among other things. See Note 4 - Long-term Debt and Equity Financings for further information on the Ameren common stock issuance.

UE’s filing included a request for interim rate relief, which would place into effect approximately $37 million of the requested increase prior to completion of the full rate case. The amount of this interim increase request reflected the increased revenue requirement associated with rate base additions made by UE between October 2008 and May 2009. The MoPSC has scheduled a hearing in December 2009 to consider UE’s request for interim rate relief.

As part of its filing, UE also requested the MoPSC to approve the implementation of an environmental cost recovery mechanism and a storm restoration cost tracker. The environmental cost recovery mechanism, if approved, would allow UE to twice each year adjust electric rates outside of general rate proceedings to reflect changes in its prudently incurred costs to comply with federal, state or local environmental laws, regulations or rules greater than or less than the amount set in base rates. Rate adjustments pursuant to this cost recovery mechanism would not be permitted to exceed an annual amount equal to 2.5% of UE’s gross jurisdictional electric revenues and would be subject to prudency reviews of the MoPSC. UE’s request is consistent with the environmental cost recovery rules approved by the MoPSC in April 2009. The storm restoration cost tracker would permit UE a more timely recovery of storm restoration operations and maintenance expenditures.

In addition, UE requested that the MoPSC approve the continued use of the FAC and the vegetation management and infrastructure inspection cost tracking mechanism that the MoPSC previously authorized in its January 2009 electric rate order, and the continued use of the regulatory tracking mechanism for pension and postretirement benefit costs that the MoPSC previously authorized in its May 2007 electric rate order.

UE’s filing with the MoPSC also seeks approval to revise the tariff under which it serves Noranda to prospectively address the significant lost revenues UE can incur due to any future operational issues at Noranda’s smelter plant in southeastern Missouri, such as the revenue losses resulting from the January 2009 storm-related power outage. The tariff change that UE is proposing would permit it to collect from Noranda the revenue authorized by the MoPSC in this rate case regardless of the level at which the Noranda plant is operating prospectively. If the plant is operating at levels less than the levels assumed in rates, Noranda would receive a credit reflecting any revenues received by UE from energy sales resulting from the decrease in actual energy sales to Noranda. The result would be that UE is able to recover its costs without impacting other customers regardless of Noranda’s actual energy use.

The MoPSC proceeding relating to the proposed electric service rate changes (except for the request for interim rate relief as discussed above) will take place over a period of up to 11 months, and a decision by the MoPSC in such proceeding is required by the end of June 2010. Hearings are scheduled for March 2010. UE cannot predict the level of any electric service rate change the MoPSC may approve, when any rate change (interim or final) may go into effect, whether the cost recovery mechanisms and trackers requested will be approved or continued, or whether any rate change that may eventually be approved will be sufficient to enable UE to recover its costs and earn a reasonable return on its investments when the rate change goes into effect.

Missouri Energy Efficiency Investment Act

In July 2009, the Missouri governor signed a law that went into effect in August 2009, which, among other things, allows electric utilities to recover costs related to MoPSC-approved energy efficiency programs. Recovery is only permitted if the program is approved by the MoPSC, results in energy savings, and is beneficial to all customers in the class for which the program is proposed. The new law would potentially, among other items, allow UE to earn a return on its energy efficiency programs, which the current model of cost recovery does not permit.

Illinois

Pending Electric and Natural Gas Delivery Service Rate Cases

In June 2009, CIPS, CILCO and IP filed requests with the ICC to increase their annual revenues for electric delivery service. The currently pending requests, as amended, seek to increase annual revenues from electric delivery service by $136 million in the aggregate (CIPS - $41 million, CILCO - $22 million, and IP - $73 million). The electric rate increase requests are based on an 11.3% to 11.7% return on equity, a capital structure composed of 44% to 49% equity, an aggregate rate base for the Ameren Illinois Utilities of $2.4 billion, and a test year ended December 31, 2008, with certain known and measurable adjustments through May 2010. In addition, the Ameren Illinois Utilities have requested a rider mechanism that would permit all distribution-related costs incurred to implement reliability recommendations submitted by the Liberty Consulting Group, which are discussed below, to be reflected in electric rates outside of general rate proceedings. The Ameren Illinois Utilities estimate that they will incur distribution-related implementation costs of $15 million (CIPS - $5 million, CILCO - $3 million, and IP - $7 million) in 2010.

CIPS, CILCO and IP also filed requests with the ICC in June 2009 to increase their annual revenues for natural gas delivery service. The currently pending requests, as amended, seek to increase annual revenues for natural gas delivery service by $26 million in the aggregate (CIPS - $7 million, CILCO - $6 million, and IP - $13 million). The natural gas rate increase requests are based on a 10.8% to 11.2% return on equity, a capital structure composed of 44% to 49% equity, an aggregate rate base for the Ameren Illinois Utilities of $1.0 billion, and a test year ended December 31, 2008, with certain known and measurable adjustments through May 2010.

In September 2009, the ICC staff filed direct testimony in response to the Ameren Illinois Utilities electric and natural gas delivery service rate increase filings. The ICC staff recommended in their testimony a net increase in revenues for electric delivery service for the Ameren Illinois Utilities of $49 million in the aggregate (CIPS - $16 million increase, CILCO - $6 million increase, and IP - $27 million increase) and a net decrease in revenues for natural gas delivery service of $4 million in the aggregate (CIPS - $1 million increase, CILCO - $3 million decrease, and IP - $2 million decrease). The ICC staff position is based on a 10.2% to 10.4% return on equity for electric delivery service and a 9.4% to 9.8% return on equity for natural gas delivery service. Other parties also made recommendations through direct testimony filed in the electric and natural gas delivery service rate cases.

The ICC proceedings relating to the proposed electric and natural gas delivery service rate changes will take place over a period of up to 11 months, and decisions by the ICC in such proceedings are required by May 2010. Hearings are scheduled for December 2009. The Ameren Illinois Utilities cannot predict the level of any delivery service rate changes the ICC may approve, when any rate changes may go into effect, or whether any rate changes that may eventually be approved will be sufficient to enable the Ameren Illinois Utilities to recover their costs and earn a reasonable return on their investments when the rate changes go into effect.

Illinois Electric Settlement Agreement

The Ameren Illinois Utilities, Genco, and CILCO (AERG) recognize in their financial statements the costs of their respective rate relief contributions and program funding under the Illinois electric settlement agreement in a manner corresponding with the timing of the funding. As a result, Ameren, CIPS, CILCO (Illinois Regulated), IP, Genco, and CILCO (AERG) incurred charges to earnings, primarily recorded as a reduction to electric operating revenues, during the quarter ended September 30, 2009, of $6 million, $1 million, $1 million, $1 million, $3 million, and $1 million, respectively (quarter ended September 30, 2008 - $10 million, $2 million, less than $1 million, $2 million, $4 million, and $2 million, respectively) and during the nine months ended September 30, 2009, of $18 million, $3 million, $1 million, $4 million, $7 million, and $3 million, respectively (nine months ended September 30, 2008 - $32 million, $5 million, $2 million, $6 million, $13 million, and $6 million, respectively).

Power Procurement Plan

In January 2009, the ICC approved the electric power procurement plan filed by the IPA for both the Ameren Illinois Utilities and Commonwealth Edison Company. The plan outlined the wholesale products that the IPA procured on behalf of the Ameren Illinois Utilities for the period June 1, 2009, through May 31, 2014. The IPA procured capacity, energy swaps, and renewable energy credits through a RFP process on behalf of the Ameren Illinois Utilities in the second quarter of 2009. See Note 8 - Related Party Transactions and Note 9 - Commitments and Contingencies for further information about the results of the RFPs.

In August 2009, the IPA submitted its plan for procurement of electric power for the Ameren Illinois Utilities and Commonwealth Edison Company for the period June 1, 2010, through May 31, 2015. The plan must be approved or modified by the ICC by December 29, 2009. The IPA is proposing to hold two procurement events in 2010: one in the spring for energy, capacity and renewable energy credits and a second in the fall for demand response resources. The exact dates of each procurement event have not been determined. Once the proposed 2010 procurement events are complete, the Ameren Illinois Utilities will have sufficient capacity and energy hedges in place for 100% of their expected supply obligation for the period June 2010 through May 2011, 70% of their expected supply obligation for the period June 2011 through May 2012, and 44% of their expected supply obligations for the period June 2012 through May 2013. Renewable energy credits will be procured for 2010 only.

ICC Reliability Audit

In August 2007, the ICC retained Liberty Consulting Group to investigate, analyze, and report to the ICC on the Ameren Illinois Utilities’ transmission and distribution systems and reliability following the July 2006 wind storms and a November 2006 ice storm. In October 2008, Liberty Consulting Group presented the ICC with a final report containing recommendations for the Ameren Illinois Utilities to improve their systems and their response to emergencies. The ICC directed the Ameren Illinois Utilities to present to the ICC a plan to implement Liberty Consulting Group’s recommendations. The plan was submitted to the ICC in November 2008. Liberty Consulting Group will monitor the Ameren Illinois Utilities’ efforts to implement the recommendations and any initiatives that the Ameren Illinois Utilities undertake. The Ameren Illinois Utilities expect to incur an estimated $20 million ($15 million for distribution and $5 million for transmission) of capital costs and an estimated $66 million ($50 million for distribution and $16 million for transmission) of cumulative operations and maintenance expenses for the 2009 through 2013 timeframe in order to implement the recommendations. In testimony filed with the ICC in October 2009 as part of the pending electric delivery service rate cases, the Ameren Illinois Utilities requested recovery of all distribution-related costs through the implementation of a rider mechanism that would permit the Ameren Illinois Utilities to reflect these costs in electric rates outside of general rate proceedings. Transmission-related costs will be recoverable through FERC’s ratemaking proceedings.

Illinois 2009 Energy Legislation

In July 2009, a new law became effective in Illinois that, among other things, establishes new energy efficiency targets for Illinois natural gas utilities, develops a percentage of income payment plan for low-income utility customers, and allows electric and gas utilities to recover through a rate adjustment the difference between their actual bad debt expense and the bad debt expense included in their rates. The legislation provides utilities the ability to adjust their rates annually through a rate adjustment mechanism that applies to 2008 and subsequent years. During 2008, the Ameren Illinois Utilities incurred approximately $25 million more of bad debt expense (CIPS - $5 million, CILCO - $4 million, and IP - $16 million) than they recovered through rates. In August 2009, the Ameren Illinois Utilities filed with the ICC electric and natural gas rate adjustment clause tariffs to recover bad debt expense not recovered in 2008 and to make corresponding rate adjustments beginning in 2010. The ICC has until February 2010 to approve, or approve as modified, the filed tariffs.

Upon ICC approval of the rate adjustment clause tariffs filed in August 2009, the Ameren Illinois Utilities will be required to make a one-time $10 million donation (CIPS - $3 million, CILCO - $2 million, and IP - $5 million) for customer assistance programs. The amount of the required one-time donation and the impact of the recovery of 2008 bad debt expenses were reflected in earnings during the third quarter of 2009.

Federal

Nuclear Combined Construction and Operating License Application

In July 2008, UE filed an application with the NRC for a combined construction and operating license for a potential new 1,600-megawatt nuclear unit at UE’s existing Callaway County, Missouri, nuclear plant site. UE had also signed contracts for COLA-related services and certain long lead-time nuclear-unit related equipment (heavy forgings).

In early 2009, the Missouri Clean and Renewable Energy Construction Act was separately introduced in both the Missouri Senate and House of Representatives. These bills were designed to allow the MoPSC to authorize, among other things, utilities to recover the costs of financing and tax payments associated with a new generating plant while that plant was being constructed. Recovery of actual construction costs still could not have begun until a plant was put into service. UE believes legislation allowing timely recovery of financing costs during construction must be enacted in order for it to build a new nuclear unit to meet its baseload generation capacity needs. However, passage of this or other legislation was not a commitment or guarantee that UE would build a new nuclear unit.

In April 2009, senior management of UE announced that they had asked the legislative sponsors of the Missouri Clean and Renewable Energy Construction Act to withdraw the bills from consideration by the Missouri General Assembly. UE believed pursuing the legislation being considered in the Missouri Senate in its then proposed form would not give it the financial and regulatory certainty needed to complete the project. As a result, UE announced that it was suspending its efforts to build a new nuclear unit at its existing Missouri nuclear plant site. In June 2009, UE requested the NRC suspend review of the COLA and all activities related to the COLA. UE will consider all available and feasible generation options to meet future customer requirements as part of an integrated resource plan that UE is due to file with the MoPSC in 2011.

As of September 30, 2009, UE had capitalized approximately $68 million as construction work in progress related to the COLA. The incurred costs will remain capitalized while management assesses all options to maximize the value of its investment in this project. If all efforts are permanently abandoned with respect to the future construction of a new nuclear unit, it is possible that a charge to earnings could be recognized in a future period.

Prior to June 30, 2009, UE made contractual payments to the heavy forgings manufacturer of $14 million and had remaining contractual commitments of $81 million. In July 2009, an agreement was reached with the heavy forgings manufacturer to terminate the heavy forgings procurement agreement, and $5 million of previously-made payments were retained by the manufacturer as a penalty for terminating the contract, which was charged to earnings in June 2009. See Note 9 - Commitments and Contingencies for further information about the contract termination.

FERC Order - MISO Charges

In May 2007, UE, CIPS, CILCO and IP filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit an appeal of FERC’s March 2007 order involving the reallocation of certain MISO operational costs among MISO participants retroactive to 2005. In August 2007, the court granted FERC’s motion to hold the appeal in abeyance until the end of the continuing proceedings at FERC regarding these costs. Other MISO participants also filed appeals. On August 10, 2007, UE, CIPS, CILCO, and IP filed a complaint with FERC regarding the MISO tariff’s allocation methodology for these same MISO operational charges. In November 2007, FERC issued two orders relative to these allocation matters. One of these orders addressed requests for rehearing of prior orders in the proceedings, and one concerned MISO’s compliance with FERC’s orders to date in the proceedings. In December 2007, UE, CIPS, CILCO and IP requested FERC’s clarification or rehearing of its November 2007 order regarding MISO’s compliance with FERC’s orders. UE, CIPS, CILCO, and IP maintained that MISO was required to reallocate certain of MISO’s operational costs among MISO market participants, which would result in refunds to UE, CIPS, CILCO, and IP retroactive to April 2006. On November 7, 2008, FERC issued an order granting the request for clarification and directed MISO to reallocate certain MISO operational costs among MISO participants and provide refunds for the period April 2006 to August 2007 (“November 7, 2008 Clarification Order”). On November 10, 2008, FERC granted further relief requested in the complaints filed by UE, CIPS, CILCO, IP and others regarding further reallocation for these same MISO operational charges and directed MISO to calculate refunds for the period from August 10, 2007, forward (“November 10, 2008 Complaint Order”).

Several parties to these proceedings protested MISO’s proposed implementation of these refunds, requested rehearing of FERC’s orders and, in some cases, have appealed FERC’s orders to the courts. In March 2009, MISO began resettling its markets to provide refunds as FERC directed effective on August 10, 2007. On May 6, 2009, FERC issued an order that upheld most of the conclusions of the November 10, 2008 Complaint Order but changed the effective date for refunds such that certain operational costs will be allocated among MISO market participants beginning November 10, 2008, instead of August 10, 2007. In June 2009, UE, CIPS, CILCO and IP filed for rehearing of the May 2009 order regarding the change to the refund effective date. This rehearing request is pending.

With respect to the November 7, 2008 Clarification Order, in June 2009 FERC issued an order dismissing rehearing requests of such clarification order and waiving refunds of amounts billed that were included in the MISO charge under the assumption that there was a rate mismatch for the period April 25, 2006, through November 4, 2007. UE, CIPS, CILCO and IP filed a request for rehearing in July 2009. This rehearing request is pending.

With respect to the two rehearing requests discussed above, UE, CIPS, CILCO and IP do not believe that the ultimate resolution of either request will have a material effect on their results of operations, financial position, or liquidity.

MISO and PJM Dispute Resolution

During 2009, MISO and PJM discovered an error in the calculation quantifying certain transactions between the RTOs. The error originated in April 2005, corresponding with the initiation of the MISO Day Two Energy Market and was corrected prospectively in June 2009. Since discovering the error, MISO and PJM have worked jointly to estimate the financial impact to the respective markets. MISO and PJM are in agreement on the methodology used to recalculate the market flows occurring from June 2007 to June 2009 for the resettlement due from PJM to MISO estimated at $65 million. MISO and PJM are not in agreement on the methodology used to recalculate the market flows occurring from April 2005 to May 2007, nor are they in agreement over the resettlement amount. To resolve this issue, MISO and PJM have agreed to participate in FERC’s dispute resolution and settlement process to determine a resettlement amount for the entire period from April 2005 to June 2009. In October 2009, an administrative law judge was appointed as mediator, and a settlement conference was held at FERC. A final settlement between MISO and PJM, if and when reached, will be subject to FERC approval. Ameren, and its subsidiaries, may receive a to-be-determined portion of the resettlement amount due from PJM to MISO. Until a settlement has been reached and approved by FERC, we cannot predict the ultimate impact of these proceedings on Ameren’s, UE’s, CIPS’, Genco’s, CILCORP’s, CILCO’s and IP’s results of operations, financial position, or liquidity.

NOTE 3 - SHORT-TERM BORROWINGS AND LIQUIDITY

The liquidity needs of the Ameren Companies are typically supported through the use of available cash and drawings under committed bank credit facilities.

Amended and New Credit Facilities

On June 30, 2009, Ameren and certain of its subsidiaries entered into multiyear credit facility agreements with 24 international, national and regional lenders with no single lender providing more than $146 million of credit. These facilities, as described below, cumulatively provide $2.1 billion of credit through July 14, 2010, thereafter reducing to $1.8795 billion through June 30, 2011, and thereafter reducing to $1.0795 billion through July 14, 2011.

2009 Multiyear Credit Agreements

On June 30, 2009, Ameren, UE, and Genco entered into an agreement (the “2009 Multiyear Credit Agreement”) to amend and restate the $1.15 billion five-year revolving credit agreement that was originally entered into as of July 14, 2005, then amended and restated as of July 14, 2006, and due to expire in July 2010 (the “Prior $1.15 Billion Credit Facility”). Ameren, UE, and Genco also entered into a $150 million Supplemental Credit Agreement to the 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreement (the “Supplemental Agreement”), which provides Ameren, UE, and Genco with an additional facility of $150 million with terms and conditions substantially identical to the 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreement. Collectively, these agreements are the “2009 Multiyear Credit Agreements.”

The obligations of each borrower under the 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreements are several and not joint, and except under limited circumstances relating to expenses and indemnities, the obligations of UE or Genco are not guaranteed by Ameren or any other subsidiary of Ameren. The combined maximum amount available to all of the borrowers, collectively, under the 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreements is $1.3 billion, and the combined maximum amount available to each borrower, individually, under the 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreements is limited as follows: Ameren - $1.15 billion, UE - $500 million and Genco - $150 million (such amounts being each borrower’s “Borrowing Sublimit”). CIPS, CILCO, and IP have no borrowing authority or liability under the 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreements.

On July 14, 2010, the Supplemental Agreement will terminate, all commitments and all outstanding amounts under the Supplemental Agreement will be consolidated with those under the 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreement, and the combined maximum amount available to all borrowers will be $1.0795 billion with the UE and Genco Borrowing Sublimits remaining the same noted above and Ameren’s changing to $1.0795 billion. Ameren has the option to seek additional commitments from existing or new lenders to increase the total facility size to $1.3 billion after July 14, 2010. The 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreement will terminate with respect to Ameren on July 14, 2011, representing a one-year extension from the Prior $1.15 Billion Credit Facility. The Borrowing Sublimits of UE and Genco will continue to be subject to extension on a 364-day basis (but in no event later than July 14, 2011) with the current maturity date of their Borrower Sublimits under the 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreements being June 29, 2010.

The obligations of all borrowers under the 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreements are unsecured. The interest rates applicable to loans under the 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreements will be either ABR (alternate base rate) plus the margin applicable to the particular borrower and/or the Eurodollar rate plus the margin applicable to the particular borrower. The applicable margins will be determined by reference to such borrower’s long-term unsecured credit ratings as in effect from time to time. A competitive bid rate is also available if requested by a borrower. Letters of credit in an aggregate undrawn face amount not to exceed $287.5 million are available for issuance for account of the borrowers under (but within the $1.3 billion overall combined facility limitation) the 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreements.

Under the 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreements, the principal amount of each revolving loan will be due and payable no later than the final maturity of the agreements, in the case of Ameren, and the last day of the then applicable 364-day period in the case of UE and Genco. Ameren, UE and Genco will use the proceeds of any borrowings under the 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreements for general corporate purposes, including for working capital, and to fund loans under the Ameren money pool arrangements.

2009 Illinois Credit Agreement

Also on June 30, 2009, Ameren, CIPS, CILCO, and IP entered into an $800 million multiyear, senior secured credit agreement (the “2009 Illinois Credit Agreement”). The 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement replaces the Ameren Illinois Utilities’ existing $500 million credit facility dated as of July 14, 2006 (the “2006 $500 Million Credit Facility (Terminated)”), and their existing $500 million credit facility dated as of February 9, 2007 (the “2007 $500 Million Credit Facility (Terminated)”), each as previously amended (collectively, the “Terminated Illinois Credit Facilities”), which were terminated contemporaneously with the effectiveness of the 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement.

Ameren was not a borrower under the Terminated Illinois Credit Facilities, but is a borrower under the 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement. CILCORP and AERG were borrowers under the Terminated Illinois Credit Facilities, but are not parties to or borrowers under the 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement. All obligations of CILCORP and AERG under the Terminated Illinois Credit Facilities have been repaid and all liens securing such obligations have been released. CILCORP and AERG expect to meet their external liquidity needs through borrowings under the Ameren non-state-regulated subsidiary money pool arrangements or other liquidity arrangements.

The obligations of each borrower under the 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement are several and not joint, and are not guaranteed by Ameren or any other subsidiary of Ameren. The maximum amount available to each borrower under the facility is limited as follows: Ameren - $300 million, CIPS - $135 million, CILCO - $150 million and IP - $350 million (such amounts being such borrower’s “Borrowing Sublimit”).

The 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement will terminate with respect to all borrowers on June 30, 2011. Each borrowing under the 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement must be repaid no later than 364 days after such borrowing, in each case subject to the right of the applicable borrower on such date to make a new borrowing or convert or continue such borrowing as a new borrowing subject to satisfaction of the applicable conditions to borrowing. The obligations of the Ameren Illinois Utilities under the 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement are secured by the issuance of mortgage bonds, for collateral support, by each such utility under its respective mortgage indenture in an amount equal to its respective Borrowing Sublimit. Ameren’s obligations are unsecured.

Loans are available on a revolving basis under the 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement and may be repaid and, subject to satisfaction of the conditions to borrowing, reborrowed from time to time. At the election of each borrower, the interest rates applicable under the 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement are ABR plus the margin applicable to the particular borrower and/or the Eurodollar rate plus the margin applicable to the particular borrower. The applicable margins will be determined by reference to, in the case of Ameren, Ameren’s long-term unsecured credit ratings as in effect from time to time, and in the case of the Ameren Illinois Utilities, such utility’s long-term secured credit ratings as in effect from time to time. Letters of credit in an aggregate undrawn face amount not to exceed $200 million are also available for issuance for the account of the borrowers (but within the $800 million overall facility limitation) under the 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement.

Borrowings were made under the 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement to repay amounts owed under the Terminated Illinois Credit Facilities, and the borrowers will use the proceeds of other borrowings for working capital and other general corporate purposes.

The following table summarizes the borrowing activity and relevant interest rates as of September 30, 2009, under the 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreements, the 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement and the Terminated Illinois Credit Facilities (excluding letters of credit issued):

Based on outstanding borrowings under the 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreements and the 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement (including reductions for $11 million of letters of credit issued under the 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreement), the available amounts under the facilities at September 30, 2009, were $874 million and $800 million, respectively.

On January 21, 2009, Ameren entered into a $20 million term loan agreement due January 20, 2010, which was fully drawn on January 21, 2009. The average annual interest rate for borrowing under the $20 million term loan agreement was 1.98% and 2.06% during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009, respectively.

On June 25, 2008, Ameren entered into a $300 million term loan agreement due June 24, 2009, which was fully drawn on June 26, 2008. The average annual interest rate for borrowing under the $300 million term loan agreement was 1.98% during the period it was outstanding in 2009. This term loan was repaid at maturity in June 2009 with proceeds from the Ameren $425 million senior unsecured notes due May 2014 issued in May 2009. See Note 4 - Long-term Debt and Equity Financings.

Indebtedness Provisions and Other Covenants

The information below presents a summary of the Ameren Companies’ compliance with indebtedness provisions and other covenants. See Note 4 - Short-term Borrowings and Liquidity in the Form 10-K for a detailed description of those provisions in the Prior $1.15 Billion Credit Facility, the Terminated Illinois Credit Facilities, the now-terminated 2008 $300 million term loan agreement, and the 2009 $20 million term loan agreement.

The 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreements contain conditions to borrowings and issuances of letters of credit similar to those in the Prior $1.15 Billion Credit Facility, including the absence of default or unmatured default, material accuracy of representations and warranties (excluding any representation after the closing date as to the absence of material adverse change and material litigation) and required regulatory authorizations. The 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreements also contain nonfinancial covenants similar to those in the Prior $1.15 Billion Credit Facility, including restrictions on the ability to incur liens, transact with affiliates, dispose of assets, and merge with other entities. In addition, Ameren and certain subsidiaries are restricted to limited investments in and other transfers to affiliates, including investments in the Ameren Illinois Utilities and their subsidiaries.

The 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreements contain identical default provisions that are, in each case, similar to those in the Prior $1.15 Billion Credit Facility, including a cross default of a borrower to the occurrence of a default by such borrower under any other agreement covering indebtedness of such borrower and certain subsidiaries (other than project finance subsidiaries and non-material subsidiaries) in excess of $25 million in the aggregate. A default by an Ameren Illinois utility under the 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement does not constitute a default under the 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreements. Any default of Ameren under the 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement that exists solely as a result of a default by an Ameren Illinois utility thereunder will not constitute a default under either of the 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreements while Ameren is otherwise in compliance with all of its obligations under the 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement.

The 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreements require Ameren, UE and Genco to each maintain consolidated indebtedness of not more than 65% of consolidated total capitalization pursuant to a calculation set forth in the facilities. All of the consolidated subsidiaries of Ameren, including the Ameren Illinois Utilities, are included for purposes of determining compliance with this capitalization test with respect to Ameren. Failure to satisfy the capitalization covenant constitutes a default under the 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreements. As of September 30, 2009, the ratios of consolidated indebtedness to total consolidated capitalization, calculated in accordance with the provisions of the 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreements, were 50%, 48% and 52%, for Ameren, UE and Genco, respectively.

The 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement contains conditions to borrowings and issuance of letters of credit similar to those in the Terminated Illinois Credit Facilities, including the absence of default or unmatured default, material accuracy of representations and warranties (excluding, for so long as ratings conditions shall be satisfied, any representation after the closing date as to the absence of material adverse change and material litigation which exclusion is new to the 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement) and required regulatory authorizations. The rating condition is satisfied if the borrower has a Moody’s rating of Baa3 or higher or an S&P rating of BBB- or higher (in the case of Ameren, with respect to senior unsecured long-term debt, and in the case of the Ameren Illinois Utilities, with respect to senior secured long-term debt). The 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement contains nonfinancial covenants including restrictions on the ability to incur liens, transact with affiliates, dispose of assets, and merge with other entities. The Ameren Illinois Utilities may engage in certain mergers or similar transactions that result in their utility operations being conducted by a single legal entity. In addition, the 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement has nonfinancial covenants limiting the ability of a borrower to invest in or transfer assets to affiliates, covenants regarding the status of the collateral securing the 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement and maintenance of the validity of the security interests therein.

The 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement contains default provisions similar to those in the Terminated Illinois Credit Facilities. Defaults under the 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement apply separately to each borrower; provided that a default by an Ameren Illinois utility will constitute a default by Ameren. Defaults include a cross default of a borrower to the occurrence of a default by such borrower under any other agreement covering indebtedness of such borrower and certain subsidiaries (other than project finance subsidiaries and non-material subsidiaries) in excess of $25 million in the aggregate. A default by Genco or UE under the 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreements does not constitute an event of default under the 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement. Any default of Ameren under the 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreements that exists solely as a result of a default by UE or Genco thereunder will not constitute a default under the 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement while Ameren is otherwise in compliance with all of its obligations under the 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreements. Furthermore, under the 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement, the occurrence of a default resulting from an event or conditions effecting AERG, shall be deemed to constitute a default with respect to Ameren under the 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement, but shall not in itself constitute a default with respect to CILCO unless the liability that CILCO has in respect of such default or such underlying event or condition giving rise to such default would otherwise constitute a default with respect to CILCO had such underlying event or condition occurred or existed at CILCO.

The 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement requires Ameren and each Ameren Illinois utility to maintain consolidated indebtedness of not more than 65% of its consolidated total capitalization pursuant to a defined calculation. All of the consolidated subsidiaries of Ameren are included for purposes of determining compliance with this capitalization test with respect to Ameren. As of September 30, 2009, the ratios of consolidated indebtedness to total consolidated capitalization for Ameren, CIPS, CILCO and IP, calculated in accordance with the provisions of the 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement, were 50%, 45%, 44%, and 45%, respectively. In addition, Ameren is required to maintain a ratio of consolidated funds from operations plus interest expense to consolidated interest expense of 2.0 to 1, as of the end of the most recent four fiscal quarters and calculated and subject to adjustment in accordance with the 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement. Ameren’s ratio as of September 30, 2009 was 4.7 to 1. Failure to satisfy these covenants constitutes a default under the 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement.

In addition, the 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement prohibits CILCO from issuing any preferred stock if, after such issuance, the aggregate liquidation value of all CILCO preferred stock issued after June 30, 2009, would exceed $50 million. The 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement does not include the $10 million per year restriction on CIPS, CILCORP, CILCO and IP common and preferred stock dividend payments that was included in the Terminated Illinois Credit Facilities.

Under the $20 million term loan agreement entered into in January 2009, Ameren may elect, for up to three 30-day periods, to pay down and reduce to zero the outstanding principal balance. The term loan agreement requires Ameren to maintain consolidated indebtedness of not more than 65% of consolidated total capitalization pursuant to a calculation defined in the term loan agreement. As of September 30, 2009, the ratio of consolidated indebtedness to consolidated total capitalization for Ameren calculated in accordance with the provisions of the $20 million term loan agreement was 49%.

None of Ameren’s credit facilities or financing arrangements contain credit rating triggers that would cause an event of default or acceleration of repayment of outstanding balances. At September 30, 2009, management believes that the Ameren Companies were in compliance with their credit facilities and term loan agreement provisions and covenants.

Money Pools

Ameren has money pool agreements with and among its subsidiaries to coordinate and provide for certain short-term cash and working capital requirements. Separate money pools are maintained for utility and non-state-regulated entities. Ameren Services is responsible for the operation and administration of the money pool agreements.

Utility

Through the utility money pool, the pool participants may access the committed credit facilities. See discussion above for amounts available under the facilities at September 30, 2009. UE, CIPS, CILCO and IP may borrow from each other through the utility money pool agreement subject to applicable regulatory short-term borrowing authorizations. Ameren and AERG may participate in the utility money pool only as lenders. The primary sources of external funds for the utility money pool are the 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreements and the 2009 Illinois Credit Agreement. The average interest rate for borrowing under the utility money pool for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009, was 0.2% and 0.2%, respectively (2008 - 2.9% and 3.3%, respectively).

Non-state-regulated Subsidiaries

Ameren Services, Resources Company, Genco, AERG, Marketing Company, AFS and other non-state-regulated Ameren subsidiaries have the ability, subject to Ameren parent company authorization and applicable regulatory short-term borrowing authorizations, to access funding from the 2009 Multiyear Credit Agreements through a non-state-regulated subsidiary money pool agreement. In addition, Ameren had available cash balances at September 30, 2009, which can be loaned into this arrangement. The average interest rate for borrowing under the non-state-regulated subsidiary money pool for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009, was 2.2% and 1.5%, respectively (2008 - 3.5% and 3.7%, respectively).

See Note 8 - Related Party Transactions for the amount of interest income and expense from the money pool arrangements recorded by the Ameren Companies for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009.

NOTE 4 - LONG-TERM DEBT AND EQUITY FINANCINGS

Ameren

Under DRPlus, pursuant to an effective SEC Form S-3 registration statement, and under our 401(k) plan, pursuant to an effective SEC Form S-8 registration statement, Ameren issued a total of 0.7 million new shares of common stock valued at $18 million and 2.6 million new shares of common stock valued at $65 million in the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009, respectively.

In May 2009, Ameren issued $425 million of 8.875% senior unsecured notes due May 15, 2014, with interest payable semiannually on May 15 and November 15 of each year, beginning November 15, 2009. Ameren received net proceeds of $420 million, which were used, together with other corporate funds, to repay borrowings under its $300 million term loan agreement and, by way of a capital contribution to CILCORP, providing funds for it to repay its outstanding 8.70% senior notes on their due date of October 15, 2009.

In September 2009, Ameren issued and sold 21.9 million shares of its common stock at $25.25 per share, for proceeds of $535 million, net of $17 million of issuance costs. Ameren used the net offering proceeds to make investments in its rate-regulated utility subsidiaries in the form of equity capital contributions as follows: UE - $436 million, CIPS - $13 million, CILCO - $25 million, and IP - $61 million.

UE

In March 2009, UE issued $350 million of 8.45% senior secured notes due March 15, 2039, with interest payable semiannually on March 15 and September 15 of each year, beginning in September 2009. These notes are secured by first mortgage bonds. UE received net proceeds of $346 million, which were used to repay short-term debt. In connection with this issuance of $350 million of senior secured notes, UE agreed, for so long as these senior secured notes are outstanding, that it will not, prior to maturity, cause a first mortgage bond release date to occur. The first mortgage bond release date is the date at which the security provided by the pledge under UE’s first mortgage indenture would no longer be available to holders of any outstanding series of its senior secured notes and such indebtedness would become senior unsecured indebtedness.

CILCORP

In conjunction with Ameren’s acquisition of CILCORP, CILCORP’s long-term debt was increased to fair value by $111 million. Amortization related to fair-value adjustments was $1 million and $4 million (2008 - $1 million and $4 million) for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009, respectively, and was included in interest expense in the Consolidated Statements of Income of Ameren and CILCORP.

In September 2008, CILCORP commenced a cash tender offer and related consent solicitation for any and all of its then outstanding 8.70% senior notes due 2009 and its 9.375% senior bonds due 2029. In April 2009, CILCORP terminated the tender offer and the consent solicitation related to the then outstanding 8.70% senior notes due 2009. In July 2009, CILCORP terminated the tender offer and the consent solicitation related to the outstanding 9.375% senior bonds due 2029. None of the 2009 notes or the 2029 bonds were purchased in the tender offer and consent solicitation.

In November 2009, CILCORP commenced a cash tender offer for any and all of its outstanding 9.375% senior bonds due 2029 ($210.565 million aggregate principal amount). Concurrent with the tender offer, CILCORP solicited consents from the holders of the bonds to certain proposed amendments to the indenture governing the bonds. Any holder tendering bonds as part of this offer is deemed to consent to the proposed amendments. No consents will be accepted separate from a tender of such holder’s bonds. The amendments would eliminate certain restrictive covenants in the indenture and the bonds. The total consideration for each $1,000 principal amount of bonds validly tendered on or prior to November 17, 2009, the consent date, is $1,210, which includes a consent payment of $50 per $1,000 principal amount of such bonds tendered on or prior to the consent date. Holders validly tendering and not withdrawing bonds on or before the consent date are eligible to receive the total consideration. Holders validly tendering bonds after the consent date but on or before the expiration date, which is scheduled for December 7, 2009, are eligible to receive the total consideration less the consent payment. In addition, tenders of bonds may be withdrawn (and related consents may be rescinded) at any time prior to the consent date. Consummation of the tender offer and the consent solicitation is subject to a number of conditions, including the absence of certain adverse legal and market developments, as described in the offer to purchase. CILCORP has reserved the right to amend, extend, terminate, or waive any conditions to the tender offer and the consent solicitation at any time. The impact on CILCORP’s net income of the tender offer is not expected to be material.

IP

In March 2009, IP exchanged all $400 million of its unregistered 9.75% senior secured notes due November 15, 2018, for a like amount of registered 9.75% senior secured notes due November 15, 2018. The unregistered senior secured notes were issued and sold in October 2008 with registration rights in a private placement.

In June 2009, $250 million of IP’s 7.50% series first mortgage bonds matured and were retired.

Indenture Provisions and Other Covenants

The information below presents a summary of the Ameren Companies’ compliance with indenture provisions and other covenants. See Note 5 - Long-term Debt and Equity Financings in the Form 10-K for a detailed description of those provisions.

UE’s, CIPS’, CILCO’s and IP’s indenture provisions and articles of incorporation include covenants and provisions related to the issuances of first mortgage bonds and preferred stock. UE, CIPS, CILCO and IP are required to meet certain ratios to issue first mortgage bonds and preferred stock. The following table includes the required and actual earnings coverage ratios for interest charges and preferred dividends and bonds and preferred stock issuable for the 12 months ended September 30, 2009, at an assumed interest and dividend rate of 8%.

UE’s mortgage indenture contains certain provisions that restrict the amount of common dividends that can be paid by UE. Under this mortgage indenture, $31 million of total retained earnings was restricted against payment of common dividends, except those dividends payable in common stock, which left $1.8 billion of free and unrestricted retained earnings at September 30, 2009.

CILCO’s articles of incorporation contain certain provisions that prohibit the payment of dividends on its common stock (1) from either paid-in surplus or any surplus created by a reduction of stated capital or capital stock, or (2) if at the time of dividend declaration, there shall not remain to the credit of earned surplus account (after deducting the amount of such dividends) an amount at least equal to two times the annual dividend requirement on all outstanding shares of CILCO’s preferred stock.

Genco’s and CILCORP’s indentures include provisions that require the companies to maintain certain debt service coverage and/or debt-to-capital ratios in order for the companies to pay dividends, to make certain principal or interest payments, to make certain loans to or investments in affiliates, or to incur additional indebtedness. The following table summarizes these ratios for the 12 months ended September 30, 2009:

Genco’s debt incurrence-related ratio restrictions and restricted payment limitations under its indenture may be disregarded if both Moody’s and S&P reaffirm the ratings of Genco in place at the time of the debt incurrence after considering the additional indebtedness. Even if CILCORP is not in compliance with these restrictions, CILCORP may still make payments of dividends or intercompany loans if its senior long-term debt rating is at least BB+ from S&P, Baa2 from Moody’s, and BBB from Fitch. At September 30, 2009, CILCORP’s senior long-term debt ratings from Moody’s, S&P, and Fitch were Ba1, BB+, and BBB-, respectively. The common stock of CILCO is pledged as security to the holders of CILCORP’s senior bonds.

In order for the Ameren Companies to issue securities in the future, they will have to comply with any applicable tests in effect at the time of any such issuances.

Off-Balance-Sheet Arrangements

At September 30, 2009, none of the Ameren Companies had any off-balance-sheet financing arrangements, other than operating leases entered into in the ordinary course of business. None of the Ameren Companies expect to engage in any significant off-balance-sheet financing arrangements in the near future.

NOTE 5 - OTHER INCOME AND EXPENSES

The following table presents Other Income and Expenses for each of the Ameren Companies for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008: