THE AES CORPORATION NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued) DECEMBER 31, 2010, 2009, AND 2008 (3) Multilateral loans include loans funded and guaranteed by bilaterals, multilaterals, development banks and other similar institutions.
(4) Non-recourse debt of $708 million as of December 31, 2009 was excluded from non-recourse debt and included in current and long-term liabilities of held for sale and discontinued businesses in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Non-recourse debt as of December 31, 2010 is scheduled to reach maturity as set forth in the table below:
## Table 0 ##
As of December 31, 2010, AES subsidiaries with facilities under construction had a total of approximately $432 million of committed but unused credit facilities available to fund construction and other related costs.
Excluding these facilities under construction, AES subsidiaries had approximately $893 million in a number of available but unused committed revolving credit lines to support their working capital, debt service reserves and other business needs.
These credit lines can be used in one or more of the following ways: solely for borrowings; solely for letters of credit; or a combination of these uses.
The weighted average interest rate on borrowings from these facilities was 3.24% at December 31, 2010.
Non-Recourse Debt Covenants, Restrictions and Defaults The terms of the Company’s non-recourse debt include certain financial and non-financial covenants.
These covenants are limited to subsidiary activity and vary among the subsidiaries.
These covenants may include but are not limited to maintenance of certain reserves, minimum levels of working capital and limitations on incurring additional indebtedness.
Compliance with certain covenants may not be objectively determinable.
As of December 31, 2010 and 2009, approximately $803 million and $653 million, respectively, of restricted cash was maintained in accordance with certain covenants of the non-recourse debt agreements, and these amounts were included within “Restricted cash” and “Debt service reserves and other deposits” in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Various lender and governmental provisions restrict the ability of certain of the Company’s subsidiaries to transfer their net assets to the Parent Company.
Such restricted net assets of subsidiaries amounted to approximately $5.4 billion at December 31, 2010.
## Table 1 ##
The fair values of long-term debt and other long-term obligations reflect the present value of the cash outflows relating to those securities based on the current call price, the yield to maturity or the yield to call, as deemed appropriate at the end of each respective period.
The yields assumed were based on securities with similar characteristics offered by corporations with credit ratings similar to those of FirstEnergy and its subsidiaries listed above.
INVESTMENTS All temporary cash investments purchased with an initial maturity of three months or less are reported as cash equivalents on the Consolidated Balance Sheets at cost, which approximates their fair market value.
Investments other than cash and cash equivalents include held-to-maturity securities, available-for-sale securities and notes receivable.
FE and its subsidiaries periodically evaluate their investments for other-than-temporary impairment.
They first consider their intent and ability to hold an equity investment until recovery and then consider, among other factors, the duration and the extent to which the security’s fair value has been less than cost and the near-term financial prospects of the security issuer when evaluating an investment for impairment.
For debt securities, FE and its subsidiaries consider their intent to hold the security, the likelihood that they will be required to sell the security before recovery of their cost basis and the likelihood of recovery of the security’s entire amortized cost basis.
Unrealized gains applicable to the decommissioning trusts of FES, OE and TE are recognized in OCI because fluctuations in fair value will eventually impact earnings while unrealized losses are recorded to earnings.
The decommissioning trusts of JCP&L, MetEd and Penelec are subject to regulatory accounting.
Net unrealized gains and losses are recorded as regulatory assets or liabilities because the difference between investments held in the trust and the decommissioning liabilities will be recovered from or refunded to customers.
The investment policy for the NDT funds restricts or limits the trusts’ ability to hold certain types of assets including private or direct placements, warrants, securities of FirstEnergy, investments in companies owning nuclear power plants, financial derivatives, preferred stocks, securities convertible into common stock and securities of the trust funds’ custodian or managers and their parents or subsidiaries.
Available-For-Sale Securities FES and the Utility Registrants hold debt and equity securities within their NDT, nuclear fuel disposal trusts and NUG trusts.
These trust investments are considered available-for-sale securities at fair market value.
FES and the Utility Registrants have no securities held for trading purposes.
The following table summarizes the amortized cost basis, unrealized gains and losses and fair values of investments held in NDT, nuclear fuel disposal trusts and NUG trusts as of December 31, 2011 and 2010:
2011.
On August 25, 2011, the Allegheny County Court denied all Motions for Post-Trial relief and the May 2, 2011 verdict became final.
On August 26, 2011, ICG posted bond and filed a Notice of Appeal.
Briefing on the Appeal is concluded with oral argument expected in May or June of 2012.
AE Supply and MP intend to vigorously pursue this matter through appeal.
Other Legal Matters In February 2010, a class action lawsuit was filed in Geauga County Court of Common Pleas against FirstEnergy, CEI and OE seeking declaratory judgment and injunctive relief, as well as compensatory, incidental and consequential damages, on behalf of a class of customers related to the reduction of a discount that had previously been in place for residential customers with electric heating, electric water heating, or load management systems.
The reduction in the discount was approved by the PUCO.
In March 2010, the named-defendant companies filed a motion to dismiss the case due to the lack of jurisdiction of the court of common pleas.
The court granted the motion to dismiss on September 7, 2010.
The plaintiffs appealed the decision to the Court of Appeals of Ohio.
On October 21, 2011, the Court of Appeals rendered its decision affirming the dismissal of the Complaint by the Court of Common Pleas on all counts except for one relating to an allegation of fraud.
The Companies timely filed a notice of appeal on December 5, 2011 with the Supreme Court of Ohio challenging this one aspect of the Court of Appeals opinion.
The Supreme Court of Ohio has not yet acted on the appeal.
There are various lawsuits, claims (including claims for asbestos exposure) and proceedings related to FirstEnergy's normal business operations pending against FirstEnergy and its subsidiaries.
The other potentially material items not otherwise discussed above are described under Note 15, Regulatory Matters.
FirstEnergy accrues legal liabilities only when it concludes that it is probable that it has an obligation for such costs and can reasonably estimate the amount of such costs.
In cases where FirstEnergy determines that it is not probable, but reasonably possible that it has a material obligation, it discloses such obligations and the possible loss or range of loss and if such estimate can be made.
If it were ultimately determined that FirstEnergy or its subsidiaries have legal liability or are otherwise made subject to liability based on any of the matters referenced above, it could have a material adverse effect on FirstEnergy's or its subsidiaries' financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.17.
TRANSACTIONS WITH AFFILIATED COMPANIES FES’ and the Registrant Utilities’ operating revenues, operating expenses, investment income and interest expenses include transactions with affiliated companies.
These affiliated company transactions include affiliated company power sales agreements between FirstEnergy's competitive and regulated companies, support service billings, interest on affiliated company notes including the money pools and other transactions.
FirstEnergy's competitive companies provide power through affiliated company power sales to meet a portion of the Ohio and Pennsylvania Companies' POLR and default service requirements.
Prior to 2011, Met-Ed and Penelec had a partial requirement PSA with FES to meet a portion of their POLR obligations.
The primary affiliated company transactions for FES and the Registrant Utilities during the three years ended December 31, 2011 are as follows:
## Table 2 ##
Energy Services.
Prior to the change in composition of business segments, FirstEnergy's business was comprised of two reportable operating segments.
The Energy Delivery Services segment was comprised of FirstEnergy's then eight existing utility operating companies that transmit and distribute electricity to customers and purchase power to serve their POLR and default service requirements.
The Competitive Energy Services segment was comprised of FES, which supplies electric power to end-use customers through retail and wholesale arrangements.
The “Other/Corporate” amounts consisted of corporate items and other businesses that were below the quantifiable threshold for separate disclosure.
Disclosures for FirstEnergy's operating segments for 2010 have been reclassified to conform to the revised presentation.
The changes in FirstEnergy's reportable segments during 2011 consisted primarily of the following: ?
Energy Delivery Services was renamed Regulated Distribution and the operations of MP, PE and WP, which were acquired as part of the merger with AE, and certain regulatory asset recovery mechanisms formerly included in the “Other/Corporate” segment, were placed into this segment.  ?
A new Regulated Independent Transmission segment was created consisting of ATSI, and the operations of TrAIL and FirstEnergy's interest in PATH; TrAIL and PATH were acquired as part of the merger with AE.
The transmission assets and operations of JCP&L, Met-Ed, Penelec, MP, PE and WP remained within the Regulated Distribution segment.  ?
AE Supply, an operator of generation facilities that was acquired as part of the merger with AE, was placed into the Competitive Energy Services segment with FES.
Regulated Distribution distributes electricity through our ten utility distribution companies, serving approximately 6 million customers within 67,000 square miles of Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Maryland, New Jersey and New York, and purchases power for its POLR, SOS and default service requirements in Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Maryland.
This segment also includes the transmission operations of JCP&L, Met-Ed, Penelec, WP, MP and PE and the regulated electric generation facilities in West Virginia and New Jersey which MP and JCP&L, respectively, own or contractually control.
Its results reflect the commodity costs of securing electric generation and the deferral and amortization of certain fuel costs.
The service areas of our regulated distribution utilities are summarized below:

['

December 31,	Annual Maturities (in millions)
2011	$2,577
2012	657
2013	953
2014	1,839
2015	1,138
Thereafter	7,957
Total non-recourse debt	$15,121

', '

December 31, 2011	December 31, 2010
Carrying Value	Fair Value	Carrying Value	Fair Value
(In millions)
FirstEnergy-1	$17,165	$19,320	$13,928	$14,845
FES	3,675	3,931	4,279	4,403
OE	1,157	1,434	1,159	1,321
CEI	1,831	2,162	1,853	2,035
TE	600	741	600	653
JCP&L	1,777	2,080	1,810	1,962
Met-Ed	729	824	742	821
Penelec	1,120	1,251	1,120	1,189

', '

2011	FES	OE	CEI	TE	JCP&L	Met-Ed	Penelec
(In millions)
Revenues:
Electric sales to affiliates	$752	$200	$2	$55	$—	$—	$—
Ground lease with ATSI	—	12	7	2	—	—	—
Other	80	1	3	—	—	10	—
Expenses:
Purchased power from affiliates	252	287	143	94	—	143	208
Fuel	37	—	—	—	—	—	—
Support services	655	130	51	53	90	53	54
Investment Income:
Interest income from affiliates	—	—	—	9	—	—	—
Interest income from FE	2	—	—	—	—	—	—
Interest Expense:
Interest expense to affiliates	5	4	10	1	4	3	2
Interest expense to FE	1	—	—	—	1	1	1

']

Question: What is the amount gap between FES and OE in terms of Expenses on Support services? (in million)
Answer: 525.0