UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSIONWashington, D.C. 20549

---

FORM 10-K

ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003

Commission File Number 333-92047-03

---

EME Homer City Generation L.P.(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

|Pennsylvania(State or other jurisdiction
of incorporation ororganization)              |  | 33-0826938(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------
|1750 Power Plant Road
Homer City, Pennsylvania(Address of principal executive offices) |  | 15748(Zip Code)                               
|Registrant's telephone number, including area code:(724) 479-9011                     
|Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:                           

|None             |  | Not Applicable                             
|---------------- |  | -------------------------------------------
|(Title of Class) |  | (Name of each exchange on which registered)

Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: 8.137% Senior Secured Bonds due 2019
8.734% Senior Secured Bonds due 2026(Title of Class)

---

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

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be
contained, to the best of registrant's knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to
this Form 10-K. ý

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

Aggregate market value of the registrant's common equity held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of June 27, 2003: $0. Number of shares
outstanding of the registrant's Common Stock as of March 10, 2004: Not applicable.



---

TABLE OF CONTENTS

|         |  |                                                                                       |  | Page
|-------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ----
|PART I  
|Item 1.  |  | Business                                                                              |  | 1   
|Item 2.  |  | Properties                                                                            |  | 13  
|Item 3.  |  | Legal Proceedings                                                                     |  | 14  
|Item 4.  |  | Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders                                   |  | 14  
|PART II 
|Item 5.  |  | Market for Registrant's Common Equity and Related Stockholder Matters                 |  | 15  
|Item 6.  |  | Selected Financial Data                                                               |  | 16  
|Item 7.  |  | Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations |  | 17  
|Item 7A. |  | Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk                            |  | 45  
|Item 8.  |  | Financial Statements and Supplementary Data                                           |  | 46  
|Item 9.  |  | Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure  |  | 46  
|Item 9A. |  | Controls and Procedures                                                               |  | 46  
|PART III
|Item 10. |  | Directors and Executive Officers of the Registrant                                    |  | 81  
|Item 11. |  | Executive Compensation                                                                |  | 82  
|Item 12. |  | Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management                        |  | 83  
|Item 13. |  | Certain Relationships and Related Transactions                                        |  | 83  
|Item 14. |  | Principal Accounting Fees and Services                                                |  | 83  
|PART IV 
|Item 15. |  | Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules and Reports on Form 8-K                       |  | 84  
|         |  | Signatures                                                                            |  | 89  
|         |  |                                                                                       |  |     

i

---



PART I

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

The Company

EME Homer City Generation L.P., which is referred to as EME Homer City in this annual report, is a Pennsylvania limited partnership with Chestnut Ridge Energy
Company as a limited partner with a 99.9 percent interest and Mission Energy Westside Inc. as a general partner with a 0.1 percent interest. Both Chestnut Ridge Energy and Mission
Energy Westside are wholly owned subsidiaries of Edison Mission Holdings Co., a wholly owned subsidiary of Edison Mission Energy, which is referred to as EME in this annual report. EME is a wholly
owned subsidiary of Mission Energy Holding Company and is an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Edison International. EME Homer City was formed for the purpose of acquiring, owning and operating
three coal-fired electric generating units and related facilities located near Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania with an aggregate capacity of 1,884 megawatts, or MW, which EME Homer City
collectively refers to as the "Homer City facilities," for the purpose of producing electric energy. Although EME Homer City was formed on October 31, 1998, it had no significant activity prior
to the acquisition of the facilities, which occurred on March 18, 1999.

EME
Homer City derives revenue from the sale of energy, capacity and ancillary services into the Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland Power Pool, or PJM, and the New York
Independent System Operator, or NYISO, and from bilateral contracts with power marketers and load serving entities within PJM and NYISO. EME Homer City has entered into a contract with a marketing
affiliate for the sale of energy, capacity and ancillary services from the Homer City facilities, which enables this marketing affiliate to engage in forward sales and hedging transactions to manage
electricity price exposure.

On
December 7, 2001, EME Homer City completed a sale-leaseback of its facilities to third-party lessors for an aggregate purchase price of $1.591 billion, made
up of $782 million in cash and the assumption of the obligations under Edison Mission Holdings Co.'s 8.137% Senior Secured Bonds due 2019 and 8.734% Senior Secured Bonds due 2026, which EME
Homer City refers to collectively as the senior secured bonds (the fair value of which was $809.3 million), which were guaranteed by EME Homer City. EME Homer City's transaction has been
accounted for as a lease financing for accounting purposes. Consent of the holders of the senior secured bonds was required for the sale-leaseback transaction and in connection with the
transaction, the senior secured bonds were converted into pass-through bonds registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Also in connection with the transaction, EME Homer City
has been released from its guarantee on the senior secured bonds, but remains indirectly liable to make payments on the pass-through bonds, through its semi-annual lease
payments. For more information on the sale-leaseback transaction, see "Notes to Financial StatementsNote 4. Sale-Leaseback Transaction."

EME
and Edison International each are registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission and have financial statements that are filed in accordance with rules enacted by the
Securities and Exchange Commission. For more information regarding each of these companies, see their respective annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2003.

The
address of EME Homer City's principal executive offices is 1750 Power Plant Road, Homer City, Pennsylvania, 15748-8009 and its telephone number is
(724) 479-9011.

Forward-Looking Statements

This annual report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements that reflect EME Homer City's current expectations and projections about
future events based on EME Homer City's knowledge of present facts and circumstances and assumptions about future events. Other information distributed by EME Homer City that is incorporated in this
annual report, or that refers to or incorporates this

1

---

annual
report, may also contain forward-looking statements. In this annual report and elsewhere, the words "expects," "believes," "anticipates," "estimates," "intends," "plans," "probable" and
variations of such words and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. Such statements necessarily involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to
differ materially from those anticipated. Some of the risks, uncertainties and other important factors that could cause results to differ, or that otherwise could impact EME Homer City, are:



Additional
information about the risk factors listed above and other risks and uncertainties is contained throughout this annual report and in the Notes to Financial Statements and
Management's Discussion
and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations that appear in Part II of this annual report. Readers are urged to read this entire annual report and carefully consider the risks,
uncertainties and other factors that affect EME Homer City's business. The information contained in this annual report is subject to change without notice, and EME Homer City is not obligated to
publicly update or revise forward-looking statements. Readers should review future reports filed by EME Homer City with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Description of Business

Industry Overview

The United States electric industry, including companies engaged in providing generation, transmission, distribution and ancillary services, has undergone
significant change over the last several years, leading to significant deregulation and increased competition. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or the FERC, under Order No. 888 and
Order No. 889, which are referred to as the Open Access Rules, requires the owners and operators of electric transmission facilities subject to the FERC's jurisdiction to make those facilities
available for transmission on a non-discriminatory basis to all wholesale generators, sellers and buyers of electricity. In addition to this wholesale transmission throughout the United
States, there have been a number of programs adopted at the state level to allow retail customers to choose their electricity suppliers, with incumbent utilities required to deliver that electricity
over their transmission and distribution systems. Numerous electric utilities nationwide have divested all or a portion of their electricity generation business as legislative and regulatory
developments have driven the industry to disaggregate. EME Homer City operates as a competitive electric generator (sometimes called "merchant generator") in deregulated domestic power markets.

2

---

Overview of Facilities Under Lease

The Homer City facilities are located on a 2,413-acre site approximately 45 miles northeast of Pittsburgh within Indiana County, Pennsylvania. EME
Homer City owns a fee interest in the land and leases the facilities pursuant to a sale-leaseback transaction completed in December 2001. The Homer City facilities consist of the
generating units, a coal cleaning facility, water supply provided by a reservoir known as Two Lick Dam and associated support facilities. The Homer
City generating units benefit from direct transmission access to both PJM and NYISO through four high voltage lines which interconnect through a switchyard located on the site.

The
Homer City units are coal-fired boilers and steam turbine-generator units. Units 1 and 2, which are essentially identical to one another, were constructed as positive
pressure units, which utilize boilers with internal air pressure slightly higher than atmospheric pressure, and were placed into commercial operation in 1969. Units 1 and 2 were converted to balanced
draft units, which utilize boilers with internal air pressure balanced at approximately atmospheric pressure, in 1976 and 1977, respectively. Unit 1 has an installed capacity of 620 MW, and Unit 2 has
an installed capacity of 614 MW. The steam turbine-generators for Units 1 and 2 were manufactured by Westinghouse Electric Corporation, and the boilers for these units were manufactured by Foster
Wheeler Energy Corporation. The Unit 1 and 2 boilers have been retrofitted with Foster Wheeler dual air register and internal flame staging low nitrogen oxide burners to meet Phase I nitrogen oxide
Clean Air Act standards. In addition, both boilers have supplemental over-fired air systems to further reduce nitrogen oxide emissions to satisfy Pennsylvania Title I (ozone) requirements.
In 2000, selective catalytic reduction units were installed on Units 1 and 2 for further reduction of nitrogen oxide emissions. Several improvements have been made during 2002 and 2003 to resolve past
operating and structural issues. The contractor re-commissioned these units and the selective catalytic reduction systems for Units 1 and 2 have been operational since April 19,
2003 and May 18, 2003, respectively.

Unit
3 commenced commercial operation in 1977 and has an installed capacity of 650 MW. The steam turbine and generator for Unit 3 were manufactured by General Electric Corporation, and
the Unit 3 boiler was manufactured by Babcock & Wilcox. The boiler for Unit 3 was originally constructed with Babcock & Wilcox low nitrogen oxide burners which satisfied Phase I nitrogen
oxide Clean Air Act standards, and a supplemental over-fired air system was installed in 1995 at Unit 3 to further reduce nitrogen oxide emissions. In 2001, a wet scrubber flue gas
desulfurization system was installed on Unit 3. Also in 2001, a selective catalytic reduction system was installed on Unit 3 but went out of service on February 10, 2002 due to a collapse of
ductwork. Unit 3 operated with the selective catalytic reduction system bypassed until June 19, 2003, when the selective catalytic reduction system was returned to service. These improvements
are expected to enable the Homer City generating units to comply with Phase II of Title IV of the Clean Air Act regarding sulfur oxide emissions, the Pennsylvania nitrogen oxide allowance regulations
and Pennsylvania's response to the Environmental Protection Agency's State Implementation Plan Call regarding nitrogen oxide emissions.

Emission Allowances

Emission allowances were acquired by EME Homer City as part of the acquisition of the facilities. Emission allowances are required by local environmental
authorities in order for the Homer City facilities to be certified and are required to be maintained throughout the period of operation of the facilities. EME Homer City purchases additional emission
allowances when necessary to meet environmental regulations and sells emission allowances when it has more than necessary to meet environmental regulations.

3

---

Power Markets

PJM

The Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland Power Pool, or PJM, is the largest centrally dispatched electric control area in North America, consisting of
over 660 generating units with a total installed capacity of approximately 70,000 MW. PJM serves approximately 10% of the United States population and covers portions of Pennsylvania, New Jersey,
Maryland, Delaware, the District of Columbia and Virginia. PJM was restructured in April 1997 into a limited liability company which operates a competitive, non-discriminatory
market in response to the Open Access Rules and includes bid-based energy and capacity markets. The independent system operator for the PJM operates the wholesale spot energy market and
determines the market-clearing price for each hour based on bids submitted by participating generators which indicate the minimum prices a bidder is willing to accept to be dispatched at various
incremental generation levels. PJM conducts both day-ahead and real-time energy markets. PJM's energy markets are based on Locational Marginal Pricing ("LMP") which establishes
hourly prices at specific locations throughout PJM. LMP is determined by considering factors including generator bids, load requirements, transmission congestion and losses. PJM requires all Load
Serving Entities ("LSE") to maintain prescribed levels of capacity, including a reserve margin, to ensure system reliability. PJM determines the amount of capacity available from each specific
generator and operates capacity markets including next day, monthly and planning periods. PJM's capacity markets have a single market-clearing price. LSEs and generators may participate in PJM's
capacity markets or transact capacity on a bilateral basis.

NYISO

The New York Independent System Operator, or NYISO, includes 36,342 MW of installed capacity and serves the majority of New York State's electric power
requirements. The NYISO was established in 1999 to operate a competitive, non-discriminatory wholesale power market in response to the Open Access Rules and includes bid-based
electricity and transmission usage markets. The market-clearing price for NYISO's day-ahead and real-time energy markets is set by supplier generation bids and customer demand
bids.

Subject
to PJM transmission availability and reliability considerations, EME Homer City can transmit up to 1,884 MW from its generating units into NYISO and can deliver up to 1,884 MW
into PJM. EME Homer City does not incur any access or wheeling charges for any energy delivered into PJM.

Fuel Supply

Fuel Supply for Units 1 and 2

Units 1 and 2 typically consume approximately 3.3 million tons of mid-range sulfur coal per year. Approximately 90% to 95% of this coal is
obtained under contracts with suppliers within approximately 100 miles of the Homer City facilities extending through 2007, and the remainder is purchased in the spot market. All of this coal is
delivered to the site by truck. The raw coal purchased for consumption by Units 1 and 2 is cleaned in the Homer City coal cleaning facility, which has the capacity to clean up to 5 million tons
of coal per year. The Homer City coal cleaning facility utilizes heavy media cyclones, froth flotation and spiral separators to reduce the ash and sulfur content of the raw coal to meet both
combustion and environmental requirements. The Homer City coal cleaning facility is operated by Homer City Coal Processing Corporation under a coal cleaning agreement that expires December 31,
2005 and which may be extended for up to two additional years. Under the terms of the agreement, EME Homer City is obligated to reimburse Homer City Coal Processing Corporation for the actual costs
incurred in the operation and maintenance of the coal cleaning plant, a fixed general and administrative service fee and an operating fee.

4

---

Fuel Supply for Unit 3

Unit 3 consumes approximately 2 million tons of coal per year. EME Homer City purchases the majority of its Unit 3 coal from local suppliers under
long-term contracts extending through 2006. All coal purchased for Unit 3 is delivered to the site by truck. A wet scrubber flue gas desulfurization system for Unit 3 was installed in
2001, which enables this unit to be able to burn less expensive, higher sulfur coal, while still meeting environmental standards for emission control.

See
"Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of OperationsContractual Obligations, Commitments and Contingencies," for additional
discussion of contractual commitments related to EME Homer City's fuel supply contracts.

Operating Performance

The Homer City generating units have historically had high equivalent availability factors, which is the ratio, expressed as a percentage, of the number of
megawatt-hours that each unit is available to generate electricity divided by the product of the capacity of each unit (in megawatts) and the number of hours in the period. Equivalent availability
captures the impact of the unit's inability to achieve full load, referred to as a derating, as well as outages which result in a complete unit shutdown. Units are not available during periods of
planned and unplanned maintenance. The following chart indicates equivalent availability factors for the Homer City generating units.

Equivalent
Availability
Factor(%)Total Station2003

88.72002

76.82001

87.4Three-Year Average

84.3


Operation and Maintenance

EME Homer City's operating and maintenance plan, as well as several planned overhauls of major equipment and controls, is consistent with its goal of prudently
operating and maintaining the units for the remainder of the lease term. EME Homer City utilizes computerized maintenance systems to plan and schedule all maintenance activities. EME Homer City also
employs a preventative maintenance program complemented by new predictive maintenance technologies such as ferrography, thermography, vibration analysis and acoustic analysis.

EME
Homer City's employees provide engineering, maintenance, operation and facility management services to EME's affiliates and receive functional direction from EME's technical
organization.

Transmission and Interconnection

Existing transmission lines leaving the Homer City generating units are interconnected with both PJM and NYISO. EME Homer City is able to transmit into PJM full
plant output through a 126-mile 345 kV line and 19-mile and 15-mile 230 kV lines owned by Pennsylvania Electric Company, an affiliate of FirstEnergy Corp., which
EME Homer City refers to as Penelec. Subject to PJM transmission availability and reliability considerations, EME Homer City has the ability to transmit into NYISO full plant output through
175-mile and 207-mile 345 kV lines owned by New York State Electric & Gas Corporation, which EME Homer City refers to as NYSEG. In addition, a 13-mile 230 kV
line from the

5

---

Homer
City generating units provides an indirect interconnection to the East Central Area reliability market.

The
points of interconnection with the Homer City units include:



The
ownership of the transmission and distribution assets for the Homer City facilities, including the site switchyard, substation and support equipment, remained with Penelec and NYSEG
following EME Homer City's acquisition of the facilities. These companies have agreed to provide EME Homer City with all services necessary to interconnect its generating units with their transmission
systems, other than services provided under existing tariffs, under an interconnection agreement, as described below.

EME
Homer City's general partner, Mission Energy Westside, has entered into an interconnection agreement with NYSEG and Penelec to provide interconnection services necessary to
interconnect the Homer City facilities with NYSEG and Penelec's transmission systems. Unless terminated earlier in accordance with its terms, the interconnection agreement will terminate on a date
mutually agreed to by Mission Energy Westside, NYSEG and Penelec. This date will not exceed the retirement date of the Homer City units. NYSEG and Penelec have agreed to extend such interconnection
services (but not the expiration of the agreement) to modifications, additions, upgrades or repowering of the Homer City units. Mission Energy Westside is required to compensate NYSEG and Penelec for
all reasonable costs associated with any modifications, additions or replacements made to NYSEG or Penelec's interconnection facilities or transmission systems in connection with any modification,
addition, upgrade or repowering to the Homer City units.

Water Supply and Other Support Facilities

The Homer City generating units receive their water supply from Two Lick Creek. The water supply to Two Lick Creek is regulated by releases from Two Lick Dam,
which is located approximately eight miles upstream from the Homer City generating units and is owned, operated and maintained by EME Homer City in accordance with a dam safety permit and a drought
management plan and related consent order and agreement with the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection. These facilities were not sold to third parties as part of the
sale-leaseback transaction. Each of
the Homer City generating units has a natural draft-cooling tower. A portion of the waste heat in the water leaving the units' condensers is diverted from these towers to a 14-acre
polyethylene roofed greenhouse complex located adjacent to the Homer City units. After the water passes through this greenhouse complex, it is returned to the basin of the cooling towers for reuse.

Other
support facilities located on the site include an ash disposal area, a coal refuse disposal area, coal receiving and storage facilities and water treatment and pumping facilities.

Insurance

EME Homer City maintains insurance coverage consistent with that normally carried by companies engaged in similar businesses and owning similar properties. The
insurance program includes all-risk real and personal property insurance, including coverage for losses from boiler and machinery breakdowns, and the perils of earthquake and flood,
subject to certain sublimits. The property

6

---

insurance
program currently covers losses up to $950 million. Under the terms of the participation agreements entered into on December 7, 2001 as part of the sale-leaseback
transaction, EME Homer City is required to maintain specified minimum insurance coverages if and to the extent that such insurance is available on a commercially reasonable basis. Although the
insurance covering the Homer City facilities is comparable to insurance coverages normally carried by companies engaged in similar businesses, and owning similar properties, the insurance coverages
that are in place do not meet the minimum insurance coverages required under the participation agreements. Due to the current market environment, the minimum insurance coverage is not commercially
available at reasonable prices. EME Homer City has obtained a waiver under the participation agreements which permits it to maintain its current insurance coverage through June 1, 2004.

EME
Homer City also carries general liability insurance covering liabilities to third parties for bodily injury or property damage resulting from operations, automobile liability
insurance and excess liability insurance. Limits and deductibles in respect of these insurance policies are comparable to those carried by other electric generating facilities of similar size.

Seasonality

Due to higher electric demand resulting from warmer weather during the summer months, electric revenues are generally substantially higher during the third
quarter of each year.

Competition

Federal

The Energy Policy Act of 1992 laid the groundwork for a competitive wholesale market for electricity. Among other things, the Energy Policy Act expanded the
FERC's authority to order electric utilities to transmit third-party electricity over their transmission lines, thus allowing qualifying facilities under the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of
1978, power marketers and those qualifying as exempt wholesale generators under the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935 to more effectively compete in the wholesale market. In an order dated
March 12, 1999, the FERC determined that, based on the facts stated in EME Homer City's application, EME Homer City is an exempt wholesale generator.

In
1996, the FERC issued Order No. 888, also known as the Open Access Rules, which require utilities to offer eligible wholesale transmission customers
non-discriminatory open access on utility transmission lines on a comparable basis to the utilities' own use of the lines. In addition, the Open Access Rules directed jurisdictional public
utilities that control a substantial portion of the nation's electric transmission networks to file uniform, non-discriminatory open access tariffs containing the terms and conditions
under which they would provide such open access transmission service. The FERC subsequently issued Order Nos. 888-A, 888-B and 888-C to clarify the terms that
jurisdictional transmitting utilities are required to include in their open access transmission tariffs. The FERC also issued Order No. 889, which required those transmitting utilities to abide
by specified standards of conduct when using their own transmission systems to make wholesale sales of power, and to post specified transmission information, including information about transmission
requests and availability, on a publicly available computer bulletin board.

In
December 1999, the FERC issued Order No. 2000, which required all transmission-owning utilities to file by December 15, 2000, a statement of their plans with
respect to placing operating control over their transmission assets under a Regional Transmission Organization, or RTO, meeting certain criteria set forth in the Order. Although Order No. 2000
did not mandate that a utility join an RTO, it set forth various incentives for voluntarily joining and required utilities to explain in detail their reasons for deviating from the objectives set
forth in the Order. RTOs meeting the FERC's criteria in Order No. 2000 were required to be operationally independent of the transmission-owning

7

---

utilities
whose assets they controlled and to possess other essential attributes, such as regional scope and configuration, the authority to receive and rule upon requests for service, a separate
tariff governing all transactions of the RTO, a market monitoring capability, and other features.

In
subsequent orders, the FERC has progressively tightened its policies in favor of RTO formation, including an explicit proposal that approvals of market-based rate authority for
affiliates of utilities owning transmission should be tied to the utilities' placing functional control over their transmission assets in an RTO meeting the criteria of Order No. 2000. On
January 15, 2003, the FERC proposed to allow additional percentage points on a utility's return on equity in its transmission rates when it participates in an RTO, divests its
RTO-operated transmission assets, or pursues additional measures that promote efficient operation and expansion of the transmission grid. As outlined below, the FERC has also proposed to
establish a standard market design that would govern transmission service and energy trading arrangements in all regions of the country.

On
July 31, 2002, the FERC issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking having the stated purpose of remedying the remaining opportunities for undue discrimination in transmission and
establishing a standardized transmission service and wholesale market design, or SMD, that would provide a "level playing field" for all entities that seek to participate in wholesale electric
markets. The SMD proposal includes a number of features that, taken together, should provide a flexible transmission service and an open and transparent spot market design that convey the right
pricing signals for investment in transmission and generation facilities, and for other purposes. Comments on certain features of the SMD proposal were filed by interested parties in
October 2002 and during the first quarter of 2003. The SMD proposal has also engendered considerable comment, and in some cases opposition, including in the U.S. Congress, and the anticipated
timetable for issuance of a final rule is now unclear.

In
April 2003, the FERC attempted to address some of more controversial aspects of its SMD proposal in a "White Paper," which set forth the elements of its SMD proposal that it
regarded as the most fundamental features of a sound wholesale market "platform" and modified its proposal as to other aspects that it regarded as subject to regional variation. Currently, the SMD
policies are being implemented in different degrees and on different schedules in various parts of the country, and are the subject of active consideration and focus by stakeholders in wholesale
markets in the Midwest. These and other regulatory initiatives by the FERC are ongoing, and it is not possible to predict the extent of future developments or how they might affect the wholesale power
business.

Over
the past few years, the U.S. Congress has considered various legislative proposals to restructure the electric industry that would require, among other things, retail customer
choice, repeal of the Public Utility Holding Company Act, or PUHCA, and prospective, partial repeal of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act. There are also a number of other proposals that have
been introduced in Congress that incorporate provisions related to restructuring electricity markets. Different versions of such legislation passed both houses of Congress late in the last session and
included provisions related to repeal of the Public Utility Holding Company Act, providing the FERC with new authority related to imposing reliability standards but restricting the FERC's ability to
mandate adoption of a standard wholesale market design. A joint Conference Committee produced a report that was acceptable to the House, but was unable to obtain sufficient votes in the Senate to
limit extended debate by opponents of the conference report seeking to delay final adoption of the bill (known as a filibuster). It is unclear at this time whether the Senate will be able to muster
sufficient votes in the current session to overcome a filibuster and obtain the needed waivers from budgetary rules and pass the Conference report. While there are some pending efforts to enact
portions of the comprehensive energy bill on an individual basis, the Congressional leadership and administration have thus far opposed such efforts and the likelihood of success is uncertain.

8

---

State

In response to pressure from retail electric customers, particularly large industrial users, the state commissions or state legislatures of many states have
considered whether to open the retail electric power market to competition. Retail competition is possible when a customer's local utility agrees, or is required, to unbundle its distribution service
(for example, the delivery of electric power through its local distribution lines) from its transmission and generation service (for example, the provision of electric power from the utility's
generating facilities or wholesale power purchases). Several state commissions and legislatures have issued orders or passed legislation requiring utilities to offer unbundled retail distribution
service, which is called retail wheeling. Volatility in California and other regional power markets has resulted in several states slowing, and in some cases reversing or reassessing their plans to
allow retail competition. Retail competition commenced in New York in 1998. Retail competition in Pennsylvania commenced on January 1, 1999. While some states have delayed or revised their
retail access programs in response to recent market volatility, neither New York nor Pennsylvania has indicated any intention to take such action.

Regulatory Matters

General

Federal laws and regulations govern, among other things, transactions by and with purchasers of power, including utility companies, the operations of a power
plant and the ownership of a power plant. Under limited circumstances where exclusive federal jurisdiction is not applicable or specific exemptions or waivers from state or federal laws or regulations
are otherwise unavailable, federal and/or state utility regulatory commissions may have broad jurisdiction over non-utility owned electric power plants. Energy-producing projects are also
subject to federal, state and local laws and regulations that govern the geographical location, zoning land use and operation of a project. Federal, state and local environmental requirements
generally require that a wide variety of permits and other approvals be obtained before the commencement of construction or operation of an energy-producing facility and that the facility then operate
in compliance with these permits and approvals.

EME
Homer City is subject to a varied and complex body of laws and regulations that are in a state of flux. Intricate and changing environmental and other regulatory requirements could
necessitate substantial expenditures and could create a significant risk of expensive delays or significant loss of value in a power plant if Homer City were to become unable to function as planned
due to changing requirements or local opposition.

U.S. Federal Energy Regulation

Introduction

The FERC has ratemaking jurisdiction and other authority with respect to interstate wholesale sales and transmission of electric energy under the Federal Power
Act and with respect to certain interstate sales, transportation and storage of natural gas under the Natural Gas Act of 1938. The Securities and Exchange Commission has regulatory powers with respect
to upstream owners of electric and natural gas utilities under the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935. The enactment of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 and the adoption of
regulations thereunder by the FERC provided incentives for the development of cogeneration facilities and small power production facilities using alternative or renewable fuels by establishing certain
exemptions from the Federal Power Act and the Public Utility Holding Company Act for the owners of qualifying facilities. The passage of the Energy Policy Act in 1992 further encouraged independent
power production by providing additional exemptions from the Public Utility Holding Company Act for exempt wholesale generators, or EWGs. An "exempt wholesale
generator" under the Public Utility Holding Company Act is an entity determined by the FERC to be exclusively engaged, directly or indirectly, in the business of owning and/or

9

---

operating
specified eligible facilities and selling electric energy at wholesale or, if located in a foreign country, at wholesale or retail.

The Federal Power Act

The Federal Power Act grants the FERC exclusive jurisdiction over the rates, terms and conditions of wholesale sales of electricity and transmission services in
interstate commerce, including ongoing, as well as initial, rate jurisdiction. This jurisdiction allows the FERC to revoke or modify previously approved rates after notice and opportunity for hearing.
These rates may be based on a cost-of-service approach or, in geographic and product markets determined by the FERC to be workably competitive, may be market based. EWGs and
other non-qualifying facility independent power projects are subject to the Federal Power Act and to the FERC's ratemaking jurisdiction thereunder, but the FERC typically grants EWGs the
authority to charge market-based rates to purchasers which are not affiliated electric utility companies as long as the absence of market power is shown. The FERC is currently in the process of
reviewing the criteria through which it makes its market power determinations, but the outcome of this process is unlikely to affect the ability of EME Homer City to continue making sales at
market-based rates. In addition, the Federal Power Act grants the FERC jurisdiction over the sale or transfer of jurisdictional facilities, including wholesale power sales contracts, and in some cases
jurisdiction over the issuance of securities or the assumption of specified liabilities and some interlocking directorates. In granting authority to make sales at market-based rates, the FERC
typically also grants blanket approval for the issuance of securities and partial waiver of the restrictions on interlocking directorates. The FERC has indicated its intention to review some of the
waivers of financial reporting rules currently granted to some entities with market rate authority.

EME
Homer City is subject to the FERC ratemaking regulation under the Federal Power Act. In addition, the FERC's order, as is customary with market-based rate schedules, reserved the
right to revoke EME Homer City's market-based rate authority on a prospective basis if it is subsequently determined that EME Homer City or any of its affiliates possess excessive market power. If the
FERC were to revoke EME Homer City's market-based rate authority, it would be necessary for EME Homer City to file, and obtain the FERC's acceptance of, EME Homer City's rate schedule as a
cost-of-service rate schedule. In addition, the loss of market-based rate authority would subject EME Homer City to the accounting, record keeping and reporting requirements
that are imposed on utilities with cost-based rate schedules.

The Public Utility Holding Company Act

Unless exempt or found not to be a holding company by the Securities and Exchange Commission, a company that falls within the definition of a holding company must
register with the Securities and Exchange Commission and become subject to Securities and Exchange Commission regulation as a registered holding company under the Public Utility Holding Company Act.
"Holding company" is defined in Section 2(a)(7) of the Public Utility Holding Company Act to include, among other things, any company that owns
10% or more of the voting securities of an electric utility company. "Electric utility company" is defined in Section 2(a)(3) of the Public
Utility Holding Company Act to include any company that owns or operates facilities used for generation, transmission or distribution of electric energy for sale. EWGs and foreign utility companies
are not deemed to be electric utility companies, and ownership or operation of qualifying facilities does not cause a company to become an electric utility company. Securities and Exchange Commission
precedent also indicates that it does not consider "paper facilities," such as contracts and tariffs used to make power sales, to be facilities used for the generation, transmission or distribution of
electric energy for sale, and power marketing activities will not, therefore, result in an entity's being deemed to be an electric utility company.

A
registered holding company is required to limit its utility operations to a single integrated utility system and to divest any other operations not functionally related to the
operation of that utility

10

---

system.
In addition, a registered holding company will require Securities and Exchange Commission approval for the issuance of securities, other major financial or business transactions, such as
mergers, and transactions between and among the holding company and holding company subsidiaries.

Edison
International, EME Homer City's ultimate parent company, is a holding company because it owns Southern California Edison Company, an electric utility company. However, Edison
International is exempt from registration pursuant to Section 3(a)(1) of the Public Utility Holding Company Act because the public utility operations of the holding company system are
predominantly intrastate in character. Consequently, EME Homer City is not a subsidiary of a registered holding company so long as Edison International continues to be exempt from registration
pursuant to Section 3(a)(1) or another
of the exemptions enumerated in Section 3(a). EME Homer City is not a holding company under the Public Utility Holding Company Act because it does not own interests in any other company.

Under
the Energy Policy Act, a company engaged exclusively in the business of owning and/or operating a facility used for the generation of electric energy exclusively for sale at
wholesale may be exempted from regulation under the Public Utility Holding Company Act as an EWG. On March 12, 1999, the General Counsel of the FERC issued a letter determining that, based on
the facts stated in EME Homer City's application for EWG status, EME Homer City is an EWG.

If
a "material change" occurs in facts that might affect EME Homer City's continued eligibility for EWG status, EME Homer City must, within 60 days of this material change:



If
EME Homer City were to lose its EWG status, it would become an electric utility company under the Public Utility Holding Company Act. This could cause EME to become a holding company
subject to registration and regulation under the Public Utility Holding Company Act. It also could cause Edison International to lose its exemption from regulation, and require it to register, under
the Public Utility Holding Company Act. This additional regulation would be difficult to comply with and could require EME and Edison International to restructure their operations significantly to
achieve compliance. Loss of EWG status also could trigger defaults under the covenants in EME Homer City's agreements. If loss of EWG status by EME Homer City were to subject EME and/or Edison
International to registration and regulation under the Public Utility Holding Company Act on a retroactive basis, it could subject them to penalties or other burdens and could cause certain agreements
and contracts they have entered into to become voidable.

State Energy Regulation

Overview

State public utility commissions have broad jurisdiction over non-qualifying facility independent power projects, including EWGs, which are considered
public utilities in many states. This jurisdiction can include the issuance of certificates of public convenience and necessity and/or other certifications to construct, own and operate a facility,
engage in retail energy sales, as well as the regulation of organizational, accounting, financial and other corporate matters on an ongoing basis.

Some
states that have restructured their electric industries require generators to register to provide electric service to customers. Many states are currently undergoing significant
changes in their electric statutory and regulatory frameworks that result from restructuring the electric industries that may affect generators in those states. Although the FERC generally has
exclusive jurisdiction over the rates charged by a non-qualifying facility independent power project to its wholesale customers, a state's

11

---

public
utility commission has the ability, in practice, to influence the establishment of these rates by asserting jurisdiction over a purchasing utility's ability to pass the resulting cost of
purchased power through to its retail customers. In addition, states may assert jurisdiction over the siting and construction of independent power projects and, among other things, the issuance of
securities, related party transactions and the sale or other transfer of assets by these facilities. The actual scope of jurisdiction over independent power projects by state public utility
commissions varies from state to state.

Although
state public utility commissions do not have any jurisdiction to modify the terms of wholesale power sales, EME Homer City cannot provide assurance that its power sales
contracts will not be subject to adverse consequences as a result of regulatory actions by a state commission, even though it sells power exclusively at wholesale.

Pennsylvania

Under the Pennsylvania Public Utility Law, the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission regulates all "public utilities" operating in Pennsylvania. A "public
utility" under this law includes any entity that owns or operates equipment or facilities for the production, generation, transmission or distribution of gas, electricity or steam for the production
of light, heat or power to the public for consumption. The Pennsylvania Public Utility Law does not specifically address the utility status of entities selling electricity at wholesale within
Pennsylvania. Because EME Homer City sells electricity exclusively in the wholesale market and does not hold itself out to the public generally as a supplier of utility service,
EME Homer City is not likely to be regulated as a public utility under the Pennsylvania Public Utility Law. If, however, EME Homer City were deemed to be a Pennsylvania public utility, the
Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission could retroactively apply several provisions of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Law to EME Homer City. One of those provisions requires every public utility to
obtain a certificate of public convenience and necessity from the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission prior to rendering service as a public utility. If the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission
were to require EME Homer City to obtain a certificate of public convenience and necessity, EME Homer City might be required to discontinue operation of its units pending application for, and receipt
of, this certificate. Another provision requires every public utility to obtain Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission approval before it issues or guarantees securities. If EME Homer City were found
to be a public utility, its failure to have obtained this approval could call into question the validity of its obligations under the documents entered into in connection with the
sale-leaseback. In addition, EME Homer City would then be subject to other laws and regulations applicable to Pennsylvania public utilities, except for rate regulation. EME Homer City's
rates would remain subject to the jurisdiction of the FERC.

New York

Under the New York Public Service Law, the New York Public Service Commission regulates all public utility companies or utility companies operating in New York. A
public utility company or utility company under the New York Public Service Law includes, among other things, any entity engaged in the production, transmission or distribution of electricity to the
public for light, heat or power purposes. EME Homer City, as an EWG, does not provide electricity directly to the public, but instead sells only to power marketers and energy service companies.
Although the New York Public Service Law is silent with respect to the utility status of electric corporations selling electricity wholesale within New York, EME Homer City will not likely be subject
to regulation as a New York public utility. If, however, EME Homer City were deemed to be a public utility under the New York Public Service Law, the New York Public Service Commission could
retroactively apply specified provisions of the statute to EME Homer City. In addition, EME Homer City would then be subject to other laws and regulations applicable to New York public utility
companies, except for rate regulation. EME Homer City's rates would remain subject to the jurisdiction of the FERC.

12

---

Transmission of Wholesale Power

EME Homer City utilizes power lines owned by others for the transmission of electricity. The prices and other terms and conditions of transmission contracts are
regulated by the FERC when the entity providing the transmission service is a jurisdictional public utility under the Federal Power Act, Order No. 2000, and subsequent orders. The FERC has
issued a proposal, referred to as SMD, which is intended to provide a "level playing field" for all entities that seek to participate in wholesale electric
markets, which has engendered considerable comment. See "CompetitionFederal," above, for more details on these matters.

Environmental Matters

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

Typically,
environmental laws and regulations require a lengthy and complex process for obtaining licenses, permits and approvals prior to construction, operation or modification of a
project. Meeting all the necessary requirements can delay or sometimes prevent the completion of a proposed project as well as require extensive modifications to existing projects, which may involve
significant capital expenditures. As a result of the sale-leaseback transaction, a number of permits that EME Homer City held have been transferred to the owner lessors. Other permits have
been modified so that they are held jointly with the owner lessors. EME Homer City has no reason to believe that these transfers and modifications will negatively affect its business or results of
operations.

For
more information on environmental regulation and related environmental matters, see "Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
OperationsEnvironmental Matters and Regulations."

Employees

At December 31, 2003, EME Homer City employed 259 employees, approximately 195 of whom are covered by a collective bargaining agreement. In
May 2003, EME Homer City reached agreement with the union that represents approximately 75% of its employees on a new collective bargaining agreement covering wages, benefits and working
conditions. The new agreement runs from May 14, 2003 to December 31, 2006. EME Homer City believes that its staffing levels are comparable with benchmark standards for facilities of a
similar size and type. The majority of the technical staff at EME Homer City's facilities was retained after completing the acquisition, thus providing EME Homer City with a knowledgeable and
experienced base of employees.

ITEM 2. PROPERTIES

EME Homer City owns a fee interest in the 2,413-acre site on which its generating units and the other facilities are located, as well as another
approximately 1600 acres associated with the Two Lick Dam area. The site is approximately 45 miles northeast of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania in Indiana County. As a result of the
sale-leaseback transaction on December 7, 2001, EME Homer City leased the property on which the generating units are located to the owner lessors through site leases and each

13

---

owner
lessor in turn subleased its undivided ground interest in the property back to EME Homer City through site subleases. The term of the site leases is 45 years from the date of the
sale-leaseback, with specified renewal options. The term of the site subleases is 33.67 years, the term of the sale-leaseback financing, and is renewable upon renewal of
the EME Homer City facility leases. As long as the facility leases and the site subleases are in effect, the rents payable under the site leases and under the site subleases will be automatically
offset against each other so that no amounts will be payable by EME Homer City or the owner lessors with respect to these agreements. EME Homer City also leases portions of the site to other third
parties. Those leases are described below.

EME
Homer City leases the surface of an approximately 14-acre parcel to Tanoma Energy, Inc. upon which the coal blending facility is located. In lieu of rental
payments, Tanoma blends coal purchased by EME Homer City with coal mined by Tanoma and provides the blended product at a reduced price. EME Homer City also leases an office building located on the
site to Tanoma, which Tanoma uses for administrative activities associated with the coal blending facility. Each of the Tanoma leases expires no later than June 30, 2009.

EME
Homer City has granted Mountain V Oil & Gas Inc. the right to operate and produce gas from existing wells located on the site, provided that gas is found in paying
quantities. EME Homer City receives 16% of the market value of the gas at the wellhead as royalties and also has the right to receive 250,000 cubic feet of gas at no charge from each well per annum.
Mountain V currently purchases gas from EME Homer City at the market value at the wellhead.

EME
Homer City is negotiating an agreement with Robindale Energy Services, Inc. pursuant to which Robindale will have the right to reclaim fine coal refuse generated by EME Homer
City and to access certain coal refuse piles located on the site. Robindale will pay EME Homer City a fee per ton of coal waste material removed from the site. In connection with Robindale's
activities at the site, Robindale must obtain all required permits from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection.

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

No material legal proceedings are presently pending against EME Homer City.

ITEM 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS

Not applicable.

14

---



PART II

ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT'S COMMON EQUITY AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

All the partners' equity is, as of the date hereof, owned by Mission Energy Westside Inc. and Chestnut Ridge Energy Company. There is no market for EME
Homer City's partnership interests.

Dividends
will be paid when declared by EME Homer City's general partner. EME Homer City paid cash dividends to its partners totaling $0 in 2003 and 2002 and $138 million in 2001.

15

---

ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

The following table includes a summary of EME Homer City's financial data for periods indicated. On March 18, 1999, EME Homer City
acquired the facilities for a purchase price of approximately $1.8 billion. Accordingly, the 1999 selected financial data relates to the activities from March 18, 1999 through
December 31, 1999. The selected financial data was derived from EME Homer City's audited financial statements and is qualified in its entirety by the more detailed information and financial
statements, including notes to these financial statements, included in this report.

|                                                      |  | Years Ended December 31, |         
|----------------------------------------------------- |  | ------------------------ | --------
|
|
|INCOME STATEMENT DATA                                 |  |                          |         
|Operating revenues                                    |  | $                        | 531,103 
|Operating expenses                                    |  |                          | 342,949 
|                                                      |  |                          |         
|Operating income                                      |  |                          | 188,154 
|Interest and other income (loss)                      |  |                          | 1,437   
|Gain (loss) on early extinguishment of debt           |  |                          |        
|Interest expense                                      |  |                          | (156,893
|                                                      |  |                          |         
|Income (loss) before income taxes                     |  |                          | 32,698  
|Provision (benefit) for income taxes                  |  |                          | 18,451  
|                                                      |  |                          |         
|Income (loss) before accounting change                |  |                          | 14,247  
|Cumulative effect of change in accounting, net of tax |  |                          | (958    
|                                                      |  |                          |         
|Net income (loss)                                     |  | $                        | 13,289  
|                                                      |  |                          |         

---

|                             |  | As of December 31,
|---------------------------- |  | ------------------
|
|
|BALANCE SHEET DATA           |  |                   
|Assets                       |  | $                 
|Current liabilities          |  |                   
|Long-term debt to affiliates |  |                   
|Lease financing              |  |                   
|Other long-term obligations  |  |                   
|Partners' equity             |  |                   

|                                                |  | Years Ended December 31, |        
|----------------------------------------------- |  | ------------------------ | -------
|
|
|CASH FLOW DATA                                  |  |                          |        
|Cash provided by (used in) operating activities |  | $                        | 111,807
|Cash provided by (used in) financing activities |  |                          | (83,820
|Cash provided by (used in) investing activities |  |                          | 4,814  

16

---

ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

The following discussion contains forward-looking statements. These statements are based on EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s (EME Homer
City's) knowledge of present facts, current expectations about future events and assumptions about future developments. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of
performance; they are subject to risks, uncertainties and assumptions that could cause actual future activities and results of operations to be materially different from those set forth in this
discussion. Important factors that could cause actual results to differ include risks set forth in "Market Risk Exposures" and "Risks Related to the
Business."

MANAGEMENT'S OVERVIEW, RISKS RELATED TO THE BUSINESS AND CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES

Management's Overview

Introduction

EME Homer City was formed for the purpose of acquiring, owning and operating three coal-fired electric generating units and related facilities located
near Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania with an aggregate capacity of 1,884MW for the purpose of producing electric energy. In December 2001, EME Homer City completed a sale-leaseback of the
Homer City facilities to third-party lessors which is accounted for as a lease financing for financial reporting purposes. For more information on the sale-leaseback transaction, see
"Notes to Financial StatementsNote 4. Sale-Leaseback Transaction."

EME
Homer City derives revenue from the sale of energy, capacity and ancillary services into the Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland Power Pool, or PJM, and the New York
Independent System Operator, or NYISO, and from bilateral contracts with power marketers and load serving entities within PJM and NYISO. EME Homer City has entered into a contract with a marketing
affiliate for the sale of energy, capacity and ancillary services from the Homer City facilities, which enables this marketing affiliate to engage in forward sales and hedging transactions to manage
electricity price exposure.

Industry Developments

Beginning in 2001, a number of significant developments adversely affected independent power producers and subsidiaries of major integrated energy companies that
sell a sizable portion of their generation into the wholesale power market (sometimes referred to as merchant generators). These developments included lower prices and greater volatility in wholesale
power markets in the United States, significant declines in the credit ratings of most major market participants, decreased availability of debt financing or refinancing, and a resulting decline of
liquidity in the energy markets due to growing concern about the ability of counterparties to meet their obligations. These conditions adversely affected market participants, particularly in regions
with excess generation capacity. During 2003, several merchant generators, including Mirant Corporation, NRG Energy Inc. and PG&E National Energy Group Inc. filed for Chapter 11
protection under the United States Bankruptcy Code.

A
significant factor affecting merchant generators in 2003 was the substantial increase in the price of natural gas, especially when compared to the less volatile cost of other fuels
such as coal. For the year 2003, natural gas prices at Henry Hub (a major natural gas trading hub) averaged $5.48 per million British Thermal Units, commonly referred to as MMBtu, compared to $3.37
per MMBtu for 2002. Based upon data from NYMEX as of December 26, 2003, the calendar year 2004 forward natural gas price at Henry Hub was $5.45 per MMBtu. Increases in natural gas prices during
2003 resulted in higher wholesale electricity prices (since natural gas is the primary fuel for many generation plants). The increase in natural gas prices was a positive factor for low-cost merchant
coal facilities in markets

17

---

dominated
by gas-fired plants and somewhat positive for coal facilities in those markets more dependent on low-cost coal and nuclear facilities. See "EME Homer City's Overview of Operating
Performance" below.

EME Homer City Overview of Performance

EME Homer City's 2003 net income increased to $13.3 million from a loss of $45.7 million in 2002. 2003 was affected by two significant items:



In
order to make a distribution, EME Homer City must be in compliance with the covenants specified in the lease agreements, including a senior rent service coverage ratio for the prior
twelve-month period (taken as a whole) which must be greater than 1.7 to 1. The senior rent service coverage ratio is defined as all income and receipts of EME Homer City less amounts paid for
operating expenses, required capital expenditures, taxes and financing fees divided by the aggregate amount of the debt portion of the rent, plus fees, expenses and indemnities due and payable with
respect to the lessor's debt service reserve letter of credit. During the 12 months ended December 31, 2003, the senior rent service coverage ratio was 4.68 to 1.

Risks Related to the Business

EME Homer City's ability to make payments of lease rent under the facility leases is dependent on the market conditions for the sale of capacity and
energy.

EME Homer City's ability to make payments of lease rent on the facility leases is dependent on revenues generated by the facilities, which depend on their
performance level and on market conditions for the sale of capacity and energy.

The
Homer City facilities derive revenue from the sale of energy and capacity into PJM and NYISO and from bilateral contracts with power marketers and load serving entities within PJM,
NYISO and the surrounding markets. Participants in PJM and NYISO are not guaranteed any specified rate of return on their capital investments through recovery of mandated rates payable by purchasers
of electricity. Therefore, with the exception of nominal revenue, EME Homer City's revenues and results of operations are dependent upon prevailing market prices for energy, capacity and ancillary
services in the PJM, NYISO and other competitive markets.

Among
the factors that influence future market prices for energy, capacity and ancillary services in PJM and NYISO are:



18

---



There
is no assurance that EME Homer City will be successful in selling power into its markets or that the prices received for such power will generate positive cash flow. If EME Homer
City is not successful, it may not be able to generate enough cash to service its own debt. See "Market Risk ExposuresCommodity Price Risk."

General operating risks may decrease or eliminate the revenues generated by the facilities or increase operating costs.

The operation of power generation facilities involves many operating risks, including:



There
is no assurance that the occurrence of one or more of the events listed above would not significantly decrease or eliminate revenues generated by EME Homer City's facilities or
significantly
increase the costs of operating them. Equipment and plant warranties and insurance may not be adequate to cover lost revenues or increased expenses. A decrease or elimination in revenues generated by
the facilities or an increase in the costs of operating them could decrease or eliminate funds available to make lease rent payments and could have a material adverse effect on EME Homer City.

EME's credit rating is below investment grade, which may adversely affect its ability to provide credit support for sales from the facilities.

EME, directly and through a subsidiary, provides credit support to its subsidiaries, including Edison Mission Marketing & Trading, which markets all of the
power from the Homer City facilities. The credit support is in the form of cash, letters of credit and parent company guarantees for the benefit of Edison Mission Marketing & Trading's counterparties.
Without an investment grade rating, EME's ability to provide credit support to its subsidiaries is limited. If EME were unable to provide adequate credit support, this would reduce the number of
counterparties willing to enter into bilateral contracts with Edison Mission Marketing & Trading, thus requiring it to rely on short-term markets instead of bilateral contracts.
Furthermore, if forward prices for power increase significantly, EME may not be able to meet the margining requirements. Failure to meet a margining requirement will permit the counterparty to
terminate the related bilateral contract early and demand immediate payment for the replacement value of the contract. See "Credit Ratings."

19

---

EME Homer City is subject to extensive government regulation.

EME Homer City's business is subject to extensive energy and environmental regulation by federal, state and local authorities. EME Homer City is required to
comply with numerous laws and regulations and to obtain numerous governmental permits in the operation or ownership of the facilities, as the case may be. EME Homer City cannot assure you that
existing regulations will not be revised or reinterpreted, that new laws and regulations will not be adopted or become applicable to EME Homer City or the facilities or that future changes in laws and
regulations will not have a detrimental effect on EME Homer City's business.

EME
Homer City believes that it has obtained all material energy-related federal, state and local approvals currently required to operate the facilities. Although not currently required,
additional regulatory approvals may be required in the future due to a change in laws and regulations, a change in EME Homer City's customers or for other reasons. EME Homer City cannot assure you
that it will be able to obtain all required regulatory approvals that it does not yet have or that it may require in the future, or that it will be able to obtain any necessary modifications to
existing regulatory approvals or maintain all required regulatory approvals. If there is a delay in obtaining any required regulatory
approvals or if EME Homer City fails to obtain and comply with any required regulatory approvals, the operation of the facilities or the sale of electricity to third parties could be prevented or
subject to additional costs.

EME
Homer City is required to comply with numerous statutes, regulations and ordinances relating to the safety and health of employees and the public, the protection of the environment
and land use. EME Homer City believes that it has obtained all material environmental and land use permits and approvals currently required to operate the facilities. The environmental, land use and
health and safety statutes, regulations and ordinances are constantly changing. EME Homer City may incur significant additional costs to comply with new requirements. If EME Homer City fails to comply
with existing or new requirements, it could be subject to civil or criminal liability and the imposition of clean-up liens or penalties. In acquiring the facilities, EME Homer City
assumed, subject to some limited exceptions, all on-site liabilities associated with the environmental condition of the facilities, regardless of when the liabilities arose and whether
known or unknown, and generally agreed to indemnify the former owners of the facilities for these liabilities. EME Homer City cannot assure you that it will at all times be in compliance with all
applicable environmental laws and regulations or that steps to bring the facilities into compliance would not materially and adversely affect its ability to make payments of lease rent under the
facility leases.

Restrictions in the participation agreements and facility leases limit or prohibit EME Homer City from entering into some transactions that it otherwise
might enter into.

Under the participation agreements entered into as part of the sale-leaseback transaction, EME Homer City's ability to enter into specified
transactions and to engage in specified business activities, including financing and investment activities, is subject to significant restrictions. These restrictions could affect, and in some cases
significantly limit or prohibit, its ability to, among other things, merge, consolidate or sell its assets, create liens on its properties or assets, enter into non-permitted trading
activities, enter into transactions with its affiliates, incur indebtedness, create, incur, assume or suffer to exist guarantees or contingent obligations, make restricted payments to its partners,
make capital expenditures, own subsidiaries, liquidate or dissolve, engage in non-permitted business activities, sublease its leasehold interests in the facilities or make improvements to
the facilities. Accordingly, EME Homer City's liquidity is substantially based on its ability to generate cash flow from operations. If EME Homer City is unable to generate cash flow from operations
necessary to meet its obligations, EME Homer City will have limited ability to obtain additional capital, unless its partners provide funding, which they are under no legal obligation to do.

20

---

In
connection with the sale-leaseback transaction, EME Homer City entered into a designated account representative agreement with the owner lessors which provides that, for
as long as the facility leases are in effect, EME Homer City will be irrevocably able to appoint the designated
account representatives on file with the EPA or the Department of Environmental Protection, as the case may be, entitled to buy, sell and otherwise dispose of emission allowances without any payments
or consideration to the owner lessors. The agreement provides that upon termination of a facility lease, the applicable owner lessor will have the right to appoint itself or any other person as EME
Homer City's successor designated account representative for purposes of any future emission allowances not then owned by EME Homer City. If a facility lease were to terminate before its expiration,
this event would also terminate the account representative agreement, and EME Homer City would be required to write-off any unamortized emission allowances that it would no longer control.

The insurance coverage for the facilities may not be adequate.

EME Homer City is required to have insurance for the facilities, including all-risk property damage insurance, commercial general public liability
insurance, boiler and machinery coverage and business interruption insurance. EME Homer City cannot assure you that the insurance coverage for the facilities will be available in the future on
commercially reasonable terms. EME Homer City also cannot assure you that the insurance proceeds received for any loss of the facilities or any damage to the facilities will be sufficient to permit
EME Homer City to make any payments of rent under the facility leases.

Due
to the current market environment, the minimum insurance coverage specified under the sale-leaseback documents is not commercially available at reasonable prices. EME
Homer City has obtained a waiver under the participation agreements that permits it to maintain its current insurance coverage through June 1, 2004. Failure to maintain insurance pursuant to
the sale-leaseback documents, absent a waiver, could result in an event of default under the documents, which could have a material adverse effect on EME Homer City. For more information
on the insurance maintained by EME Homer City, see "Item 1. BusinessInsurance."

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

Introduction

The accounting policies described below are viewed by management as "critical" because their correct application requires the use of material judgments and
estimates and they have a material impact on EME Homer City's results of operations and financial position.

Derivative Financial Instruments and Hedging Activities

EME Homer City uses derivative financial instruments for price risk management activities for non-trading purposes. Derivative financial instruments
are mainly utilized to manage exposure from changes in electricity and fuel prices. EME Homer City follows Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 133, "Accounting for Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities" (SFAS No. 133), which requires derivative financial instruments to be recorded at their fair value unless an exception applies. SFAS No. 133 also
requires that changes in a derivative's fair value be recognized currently in earnings unless specific hedge accounting criteria are met. For derivatives that qualify for hedge accounting, depending
on the nature of the hedge, changes in fair value are either offset by changes in the fair value of the hedged assets, liabilities or firm commitments through earnings, or recognized in other
comprehensive income until the hedged item is recognized in earnings. The ineffective portion of a derivative's change in fair value is immediately recognized in earnings.

Management's
judgment is required to determine if a transaction meets the definition of a derivative and, if yes, whether the normal sales and purchases exception applies or whether
individual

21

---

transactions
qualify for hedge accounting treatment. The majority of EME Homer City's power sales and fuel supply agreements related to its generation activities do not meet the definition of a
derivative as they are not readily convertible to cash, or qualify for hedge accounting.

Determining
the fair value of derivatives under SFAS No. 133 is a critical accounting estimate because the fair value of a derivative is susceptible to significant change
resulting from a number of factors, including: volatility of energy prices, credits risks, market liquidity and discount rates. See "Market Risk Exposures" for a description of risk
management activities and sensitivities to change in market prices.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets

EME Homer City follows Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 144, "Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets"
(SFAS No. 144).EME Homer City evaluates long-lived assets whenever indicators of impairment exist. This accounting standard requires
that if the undiscounted expected future cash flow from a company's assets or group of assets (without interest charges) is less than its carrying value, asset impairment must be recognized in the
financial statements. The amount of impairment is determined by the difference between the carrying amount and fair value of the asset.

The
assessment of impairment is a critical accounting estimate because significant management judgment is required to determine: (1) if an indicator of impairment has occurred,
(2) the forecast of undiscounted expected future cash flow over the asset's estimated useful life to determine if an impairment exists, and (3) if an impairment exists, the fair value of
the asset or asset group. Factors EME Homer City considers important, which could trigger an impairment, include operating losses, projected future operating losses, the financial condition of
counterparties or significant negative industry or economic trends. The expected future undiscounted cash flow from the Homer City facilities is a critical accounting estimate because:
(1) estimating future prices of energy and capacity in wholesale energy markets is susceptible to significant change, and (2) the period of the forecast is over an extended period of
time due to the estimated remaining useful life of 32.67 years for the Homer City facilities, and (3) the impact of an impairment on EME Homer City's financial position and results of
operations would be material. The expected undiscounted future cash flow from long-lived assets exceeded the carrying value of those assets.

Income Taxes

SFAS No. 109, "Accounting for Income Taxes" (SFAS No. 109), requires the asset and liability approach for financial accounting and reporting for
deferred income taxes. EME Homer City uses the asset and liability method of accounting for deferred income taxes and provides deferred income taxes for all significant income tax temporary
differences. See "Notes to Financial StatementsNote 8. Income Taxes" for additional details.

As
part of the process of preparing its consolidated financial statements, EME Homer City is required to estimate its income taxes in each of the jurisdictions in which it operates. This
process involves estimating actual current tax exposure together with assessing temporary differences resulting from differing treatment of items, such as depreciation, for tax and accounting
purposes. These differences result in deferred tax assets and liabilities, which are included within EME Homer City's balance sheet.

For
additional information regarding EME Homer City's accounting policies, see "Notes to Financial StatementsNote 2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies."

22

---

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Summary

The table below summarizes revenues and key performance measures related to coal-fired generation, which represents the majority of EME Homer City's
operations.

Years Ended December 31,2003

2002

2001Revenues (in millions)Energy

$
491

$
348

$
427Capacity


30


41


67Gain (loss) from price risk management


10


(2
)

Total Revenues

$
531

$
387

$
494StatisticsGeneration (in GWhr)


14,403


12,111


12,922Availability(1)


88.7
%

76.8
%

87.4
%Forced outage rate(2)


5.1
%

16.0
%

4.5
%Average realized energy price/MWhr

$
34.02

$
28.70

$
33.07Capacity revenues (in millions)

$
30

$
41

$
67


---

Operating Revenues

Operating revenues increased $143.6 million in 2003 compared to 2002, and decreased $106.5 million in 2002 compared to 2001. Energy and capacity
sales were made through contracts with EME Homer City's marketing affiliate, Edison Mission Marketing & Trading. The 2003 increase was due to increased generation and higher energy prices. See
"Market Risk ExposuresCommodity Price Risk" for further discussion of PJM market prices. The 2003 increase in generation primarily resulted from an unplanned outage on Unit 3
and extended outages on Units 1 and 2 during the first two quarters of 2002. On February 10, 2002, the ductwork and bypass associated with the selective catalytic reduction system on Unit 3
collapsed causing the entire
unit to shut down. Unit 3 returned to service on April 4, 2002 and operated with the selective catalytic reduction system bypassed until June 19, 2003, when it was returned to service.
As a result of the Unit 3 ductwork collapse, EME Homer City reviewed the similar structures on Units 1 and 2 and determined that as a precaution it would be appropriate to install additional
reinforcement in these structures. The additional reinforcement extended the duration of planned outages for these units, which had been scheduled to end on June 2, 2002. Unit 1 returned to
service on June 28, 2002, and Unit 2 returned to service on June 26, 2002.

Income
from price risk management increased $12.2 million in 2003 compared to 2002, and decreased $1.2 million in 2002 compared to 2001. A significant portion of the 2003
increase was due to the ineffective portion of cash flow hedges (explained below) attributable to decreases in the difference between energy prices at the PJM West Hub (where Edison Mission Marketing
& Trading enters into forward contracts) and the energy prices at the delivery point where power generated by the Homer City facilities is delivered into the transmission system (referred to as the
Homer City busbar). Under SFAS No. 133, the portion of a cash flow hedge that does not offset the change in value of the transaction being hedged, which is commonly referred to as the
ineffective portion, is immediately

23

---

recognized
in earnings. EME Homer City recorded a net gain (loss) of $11.0 million and $(1.5) million in 2003 and 2002, respectively, representing the amount of the ineffective portion of cash
flow hedges. No comparable amount was recorded in 2001. In 2003, EME Homer City also recognized gains due to the ineffective portion of cash flow hedges related to forward energy sales contracts that
were settled during 2003. The settlements were recognized as a reversal of previously recorded price risk management losses and as a reduction of energy revenues. In 2002, the losses primarily
represented the ineffective portion of EME Homer City's forward energy sales contracts which are derivatives that qualify as cash flow hedges under SFAS No. 133. See "Market Risk
ExposuresCommodity Price Risk" for more information regarding forward market prices.

Due
to higher electric demand resulting from warmer weather during the summer months, electric revenues are generally substantially higher during the third quarter of each year.

Operating Expenses

Operating expenses increased $42.1 million in 2003 compared to 2002 and decreased $3.5 million in 2002 compared to 2001. Operating expenses
consisted of expenses for fuel, plant operations, depreciation and amortization, and administrative and general expenses. The change in the components of operating expenses is discussed below.

Fuel
expenses increased $44.9 million in 2003 compared to 2002, and decreased $20.9 million in 2002 compared to 2001. The 2003 increase was primarily due to increased
generation due to outages experienced during the first half of 2002. The 2002 decrease was primarily due to lower generation and lower average coal prices.

Plant
operations costs decreased $4.4 million in 2003 compared to 2002, and increased $4.7 million in 2002 compared to 2001. Plant operations costs include labor and
overhead, contract services, parts and supplies and other administrative costs. The 2003 decrease is primarily due to lower maintenance costs in 2003 as compared to 2002 when EME Homer City's units
experienced outages. The 2002 increase was primarily due to maintenance costs from forced outages related to the selective catalytic reduction systems as mentioned previously, increased insurance
costs from higher premiums and higher estimated benefit costs.

Depreciation
and amortization increased $1.1 million in 2003 compared to 2002, and increased $10.1 million in 2002 compared to 2001. The 2002 increase was due to EME Homer
City's placing in service and beginning depreciation on approximately $270 million of environmental improvement assets during the fourth quarter of 2001, in which there was no comparable
depreciation during the first nine months of 2001. In addition, prior to the completion of the sale-leaseback transaction on December 7, 2001, depreciation and amortization expense
primarily related to the acquisition of the Homer City facilities, which were being depreciated over 39 years from the date of acquisition. As a result of the sale-leaseback,
depreciation and amortization of EME Homer City's leasehold interest is based on the minimum term of the leases, which is 33.67 years, thus leading to increased depreciation costs.

Administrative
and general expenses were $4.8 million, $4.3 million and $1.8 million during 2003, 2002 and 2001, respectively. Beginning in 2002, administrative and
general expenses primarily include EME Homer City's allocated share of EME's Americas Region Chicago office. The Chicago office has technical and managerial responsibility for EME Homer City's
operations. Prior to 2002, EME Homer City was not charged this allocation as the Chicago office was principally focused on EME's power plants in Illinois. The $3.5 million allocation in 2002
was recorded as a non-cash charge to EME Homer City's operations through an in-kind contribution of services from EME Homer City's partners.

24

---

Other Income (Expense)

Interest expense was $156.9 million, $169.6 million and $139.0 million during 2003, 2002 and 2001, respectively. Interest expense in 2003 and
2002 primarily relates to the lease financing of the Homer City facilities. Interest expense prior to December 7, 2001 was due to the affiliate indebtedness incurred
to acquire the Homer City facilities. Interest expense also includes interest of $41.6 million, $49.7 million and $140.8 million during 2003, 2002 and 2001, respectively, from EME
Homer City's subordinated revolving loan agreements with Edison Mission Finance.

Interest
and other income was $1.4 million, $2.6 million and $0.4 million during 2003, 2002 and 2001, respectively. Interest and other income (expense) primarily
relates to interest earned on cash and cash equivalents offset by fees paid to EME Homer City's marketing affiliate. In 2001, EME Homer City expensed $2.2 million of losses related to removal
of equipment in connection with its capital improvement program.

As
a result of the sale-leaseback transaction on December 7, 2001, EME Homer City recorded a gain in 2001 of $5.7 million, net of income tax of
$4.4 million, attributable to the extinguishment of debt that was assumed in the transaction.

Provision (Benefit) for Income Taxes

EME Homer City had effective income tax provision (benefit) rates of 56.4%, (43.3)% and 43.6% in 2003, 2002 and 2001, respectively. EME Homer City's effective
income tax provision (benefit) rate varies from the federal statutory rate of 35% due to state income taxes. Effective January 1, 2001, EME Homer City's status in Pennsylvania changed to a
corporation due to changes in Pennsylvania tax regulations, thereby requiring EME Homer City to pay Pennsylvania state income taxes.

Cumulative Effect of Change in Accounting Principle

Effective January 1, 2003, EME Homer City adopted Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 143, "Accounting for Asset Retirement
Obligations." SFAS No. 143 requires entities to record the fair value of a liability for an asset retirement obligation in the period in which it is incurred. When the liability is initially
recorded, the entity capitalizes the cost by increasing the carrying amount of the related long-lived asset. Over time, the liability is increased to its present value each period, and the
capitalized cost is depreciated over the useful life of the related asset. Upon settlement of the liability, an entity either settles the obligation for its recorded amount or incurs a gain or loss
upon settlement. On January 1, 2003, EME Homer City recorded a $958 thousand, after tax, decrease to net income as the cumulative effect of adoption of SFAS No. 143.

Related Party Transactions

Edison Mission Marketing & Trading Agreements

EME Homer City entered into a Master Purchase, Sale and Services Agreement with its marketing affiliate effective October 31, 2002, pursuant to which
Edison Mission Marketing & Trading arranges for purchases and sales of the following products, including services related thereto: (i) electric energy and capacity; (ii) fuel oil;
and (iii) emissions allowances. This Master Purchase, Sale and Services Agreement replaces the NOx Allowance Sales Agreement and the Energy Sales Agreement with the marketing affiliate, both
dated March 18, 1999.

EME
Homer City compensates Edison Mission Marketing & Trading in accordance with the following table with respect to these transactions and reimburses its marketing affiliate for
brokers fees,

25

---

taxes,
and other reasonably incurred direct out-of-pocket expenses. Payment for these services is due within 30 days of billing.

Service

CompensationEnergy and/or capacity

$.02/MWhr ($.02/MW-day for capacity)Fuel oil

$.05/bblEmissions allowances

$.25/SO2 allowance; and $25/NOx allowance


The net fees earned by Edison Mission Marketing & Trading were $0.9 million, $0.3 million and $0.9 million for the
years ended December 31, 2003, 2002 and 2001, respectively. Beginning in the fourth quarter of 2002, EME Homer City received accelerated payments under its agreement with Edison Mission
Marketing & Trading whereby Edison Mission Marketing & Trading paid EME Homer City in the same month that power generation was delivered and prepaid a portion of the following month's expected power
generation. Beginning in the second quarter of 2003, Edison Mission Marketing & Trading began prepaying in full for the following month's expected power generation. As a result of the accelerated
payments, EME Homer City had payables at December 31, 2003 and 2002 due to its marketing affiliate of $45.0 million and $10.6 million, respectively.

EME
Homer City entered into several transactions through Edison Mission Marketing & Trading for the purchase of SO2 allowances from another affiliate of EME. All transactions were
completed at market price on the date of the transaction. Total consideration paid was $10.3 million, $5.1 million and $10.2 million during 2003, 2002 and 2001, respectively. In
addition, EME Homer City paid its marketing affiliate $0.6 million during 2003 for the purchase of NOx allowances, which were priced at market price on the date of the transaction.

During
2003, Edison Mission Marketing & Trading entered into agreements using the capacity of the Homer City facilities to participate in auction revenue rights awarded through PJM to
load serving entities. The auction revenue rights are applicable to the period from June 1, 2003 through May 31, 2004, and the benefits of such agreements will flow through to EME Homer
City. EME Homer City's share of auction revenue rights was $16.5 million, of which $13.3 million had been received by December 31, 2003. Payments for the remaining auction revenue
rights are due ratably over the auction year. Revenue related to the auction revenue rights are recognized on a straight-line basis over the period of the agreements.

During
2002, EME Homer City entered into four capacity swap agreements and two energy price basis swap agreements with Edison Mission Marketing & Trading. Each agreement was at fair
market value at the time of the transaction. Payments received in 2003 and 2002 under these agreements amounted to $2.9 million and $2.3 million, respectively.

During
2001, EME Homer City entered into an option for installed capacity, and five transactions, including the exercise of the aforementioned option, for installed capacity with Edison
Mission Marketing & Trading. Each transaction was at fair market value for such installed capacity at the time. Payments for the option and the five transactions amounted to approximately
$29.5 million.

Fuel Services Agreements

EME Homer City entered into agreements with Edison Mission Energy Services, Inc. to provide fuel and transportation services related to coal and fuel oil.
Under the terms of these agreements, EME Homer City pays a service fee of $.06 for each ton of coal delivered and $.05 for each barrel of fuel oil delivered, plus the actual cost of the commodities.
The amount billable under these agreements for each of the three years ended December 31, 2003, 2002 and 2001 was $0.3 million.

26

---

Affiliate Financing

EME Homer City has obtained financing from Edison Mission Finance in connection with its acquisition of the Homer City facilities. For further discussion, see
"Contractual Obligations, Commitments and ContingenciesLong-Term Debt to Affiliate."

Tax-Allocation Agreements

EME Homer City is included in the consolidated federal and state income tax returns of Edison International and is party to a tax-allocation agreement with its
indirect parent, Edison Mission Holdings Co. As long as Edison International continues to own, directly or indirectly, at least 80% of the voting power of the stock of EME and its existing
subsidiaries and at least 80% of the value of
such stock, EME Homer City will be included in the consolidated federal and state income tax returns of Edison International. In accordance with the agreement and the tax-allocation
procedures in effect since EME Homer City's formation, its current tax liability or benefit is generally determined on a separate return basis, except for calculating consolidated state income taxes,
for which EME Homer City uses the long term state tax apportionment factors of the Edison International group. Also, while EME Homer City is generally subject to separate return limitations for net
losses, under the tax-allocation agreement EME Homer City is permitted to transfer to Edison Mission Holdings Co., or its subsidiaries, net operating loss benefits which would not yet be realized in a
separate return in exchange for a reduction in its intercompany account balances (including subordinated loans). EME Homer City also files a separate state income tax return in Pennsylvania.

Services Agreements with Edison Mission Energy and Edison International

Certain administrative services such as payroll, employee benefit programs, insurance and information technology are shared among all affiliates of Edison
International and the costs of these corporate support services are allocated to all affiliates. The cost of services provided by Edison International and EME, including those related to EME Homer
City, are allocated based on one of the following formulas: percentage of the time worked, equity in investment and advances, number of employees, or multi-factor (operating revenues, operating
expenses, total assets and total employees). EME Homer City participates in a common payroll and benefit program with all Edison International employees. In addition, EME Homer City is billed for any
direct labor and out-of-pocket expenses for services directly requested for the benefit of the partnership. EME Homer City believes the allocation methodologies are reasonable.
EME Homer City made reimbursements for the cost of these programs, payroll funding and other services totaling $30.5 million, $31.0 million and $26.8 million for the years ended
December 31, 2003, 2002 and 2001, respectively.

EME
Homer City participates in the insurance program of Edison International, including property, general liability, workers compensation and various other specialty policies. EME Homer
City's insurance premiums are generally based on its share of risk related to each policy. In connection with the property insurance program, a portion of the risk is reinsured by a captive insurance
subsidiary of Edison International.

EME
Homer City recorded a receivable from EME of $58.5 million at December 31, 2001, related to the tax due under the tax-allocation agreement. For the year
ended December 31, 2002, all outstanding receivables were realized through a reduction in amounts owed under EME Homer City's affiliate financing with Edison Mission Finance.

Contribution of Services by Midwest Generation EME, LLC

Midwest Generation EME, LLC is a subsidiary of EME that provides executive management, legal, human resources, accounting and other administrative services in
Chicago on EME Homer City's behalf without charge. In connection with regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the

27

---

costs
of these services must be recorded as part of EME Homer City's financial results, although EME Homer City does not have a cash obligation to pay for these activities. The cost of these services,
after tax, was $1.9 million and $2.2 million for the periods ended December 31, 2003 and 2002, respectively. EME Homer City has reflected these activities as a
non-cash contribution of services by its parent in the accompanying financial statements. Prior to 2002, EME Homer City was not charged for an allocation of Midwest Generation EME, because
Midwest Generation EME's principal focus was on power plants in Illinois.

New Accounting Standards

Introduction

A number of changes in accounting standards or interpretations were issued or effective during 2003, including the following items that were relevant to EME Homer
City.

Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 143

Effective January 1, 2003, EME Homer City adopted Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 143, "Accounting for Asset Retirement
Obligations." SFAS No. 143 requires entities to record the fair value of a liability for an asset retirement obligation in the period in which it is incurred. When the liability is initially
recorded, the entity capitalizes the cost by increasing the carrying amount of the related long-lived asset. Over time, the liability is increased to its present value each period, and the
capitalized cost is depreciated over the useful life of the related asset. Upon settlement of the liability, an entity either settles the obligation for its recorded amount or incurs a gain or loss
upon settlement. On January 1, 2003, EME Homer City recorded a $958 thousand, after tax, decrease to net income as the cumulative effect of adoption of SFAS No. 143.

Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 146

Effective January 1, 2003, EME Homer City adopted Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 146, "Accounting for Costs Associated with Exit or
Disposal Activities." SFAS No. 146 requires that liabilities for costs associated with exit or disposal activities initiated after December 31, 2002 be recognized when incurred, rather
than at the date of a commitment to an exit or disposal plan. The adoption of this standard had no impact on EME Homer City's financial statements.

Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 149

In April 2003, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 149, "Amendment of Statement 133 on Derivative Instruments and
Hedging Activities." This statement amends and clarifies financial accounting and reporting for derivative instruments and for hedging activities under SFAS No. 133. The amendment reflects
decisions made by the FASB and the Derivatives Implementation Group (DIG) process in connection with issues raised about the application of SFAS No. 133. Generally, the provisions of SFAS
No. 149 will be applied prospectively for contracts entered into or modified after June 30, 2003 and for hedging relationships designated after June 30, 2003. SFAS No. 149
provisions that resulted from the DIG process that became effective in fiscal quarters beginning before June 15, 2003 will continue to be applied based upon their original effective dates. The
adoption of this standard had no impact on EME Homer City's financial statements.

Statement of Financial Accounting Standards Interpretation No. 45

In November 2002, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards Interpretation No. 45, "Guarantor's Accounting and Disclosure
Requirements for Guarantees, Including Indirect Guarantees of Indebtedness of Others." This interpretation establishes reporting requirements to be

28

---

made
by a guarantor about its obligations under certain guarantees that it has issued. It also clarifies that a guarantor is required to recognize, at the inception of a guarantee, a liability for the
fair value of the obligation undertaken in issuing the guarantee. The initial recognition and initial measurement provisions of this interpretation are applicable on a prospective basis to guarantees
issued or modified after December 31, 2002. The adoption of this standard had no impact on EME Homer City's financial statements. See "Contractual Obligations, Commitments and
ContingenciesGuarantees and Indemnities."

Statement of Financial Accounting Standards Interpretation No. 46

In December 2003, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards Interpretation No. 46, "Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities."
The primary objective of the interpretation is to provide guidance on the identification of, and financial reporting for, entities over which control is achieved through means other than voting
rights; such entities are known as variable interest entities. This interpretation applies to variable interest entities created after January 31, 2003, and applies to variable interest
entities in which EME Homer City holds a variable interest that it acquired before February 1, 2003. This interpretation is effective for special purpose entities as of December 31, 2003
and for all other entities as of March 31, 2004. EME Homer City does not expect the adoption of this standard will have a material impact on its financial statements.

Emerging Issues Task Force No. 03-11

In July 2003, the EITF reached a consensus on Issue No. 03-11, "Reporting Realized Gains and Losses on Derivative Instruments that are
Subject to FASB Statement No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, and Not Held for Trading Purposes." EITF Issue No. 03-11 provides guidance on
whether realized gains and losses on derivative contracts should be reported on a net or gross basis and concludes such classification is a matter of judgment that depends on the relevant facts and
circumstances. In analyzing the facts and circumstances, EITF Issue No. 99-19, "Reporting Revenue Gross as a Principal Versus Net as an Agent," should be considered. Gains and
losses on non-trading derivative instruments are recognized in income (loss) from price risk management in the accompanying income statements. The
consensus is effective prospectively for EME Homer City transactions or arrangements entered into or modified after September 30, 2003. The consensus had no impact on EME Homer City's financial
statements.

LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES

Historical

At December 31, 2003, EME Homer City had cash and cash equivalents of $92.0 million compared to $59.2 million at December 31, 2002.
Net working capital at December 31, 2003 was $(26.0) million compared to $(20.9) million at December 31, 2002.

Net
cash provided by operating activities increased $17.8 million in 2003 compared to 2002 and increased $111.3 million in 2002 compared to 2001. The 2003 increase in
operating cash flow is primarily due to income in 2003 versus losses in 2002 and the timing of cash receipts and disbursements related to working capital items, partially offset by payments of
interest to EME Homer City's affiliate in 2003. A portion of the increase is due to accelerated payments from Edison Mission Marketing & Trading in 2003 for the subsequent month's power sales. The
2002 increase in operating cash flow is primarily the result of the accelerated payments from Edison Mission Marketing & Trading, lower interest payments on affiliate debt in 2002 compared to 2001 and
the receipt of payments in advance for power generation from Edison Mission Marketing & Trading in December 2002. In 2001 and most of 2002, EME Homer City received payment during the month
following the delivery of power. The acceleration of payments from Edison Mission Marketing & Trading occurred as a result of an agreement with the owner participants in the sale-leaseback
transaction which permits Edison Mission Marketing & Trading to enter into forward energy sales contracts with EME Homer City. See "Credit Ratings."

29

---

Net cash used in financing activities totaled $83.8 million, $99.5 million and $531.7 million in 2003, 2002 and 2001, respectively. In 2003, EME Homer City had a net
paydown of affiliate debt, repaid a portion of its lease financing and received an advance on the lease swap agreement. In 2002, EME Homer City borrowed from its affiliate, repaid a portion of its
lease financing and also received an advance on the lease swap agreement. In 2001, the sale-leaseback transaction enabled EME Homer City to pay down long-term debt and pay
dividends to its partners.

Net
cash provided by investing activities totaled $4.8 million, $26.2 million and $568.3 million in 2003, 2002 and 2001, respectively. The 2003 decrease is due to a
lower amount of restricted cash utilized in 2003 as compared to 2002, partially offset by an increase in capital expenditures. In 2002, net cash provided by investing activities was due to the release
of restricted cash to meet lease payment obligations offset by capital expenditures. In 2001, net cash provided by investing activities was due to proceeds received from the sale-leaseback
transaction, partially offset by a deposit to a restricted cash account to support the lease, and capital expenditures. Capital expenditures were $33.2 million, $26.4 million and
$83.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2003, 2002 and 2001, respectively, primarily related to the addition of a flue gas desulfurization system on Unit 3 and the selective
catalytic reduction system on all three units.

Current

EME Homer City plans to spend approximately $15.2 million in 2004 on capital expenditures. The use of EME Homer City's cash generated from operations is
restricted by the sale-leaseback agreements. EME Homer City believes that it will have adequate liquidity to meet its obligations as they become due in the next 12 months.

Under
the participation agreements entered into as part of the sale-leaseback transaction, EME Homer City's ability to enter into specified transactions and to engage in
specified business activities, including financing and investment activities, is subject to significant restrictions. These restrictions could affect, and in some cases significantly limit or
prohibit, its ability to, among other things, merge, consolidate or sell its assets, create liens on its properties or assets, enter into non-permitted trading activities, enter into
transactions with its affiliates, incur indebtedness, create, incur, assume or suffer to exist guarantees or contingent obligations, make restricted payments to its partners, make capital
expenditures, own subsidiaries, liquidate or dissolve, engage in non-permitted business activities, sublease its leasehold interests in the facilities or make improvements to the
facilities. Accordingly, its liquidity is substantially based on its ability to generate cash flow from operations under the subordinated revolving loan agreement. If EME Homer City is unable to
generate cash flow from operations necessary to meet its obligations, EME
Homer City will have limited ability to obtain additional capital, unless its partners provide additional funding, which they are under no legal obligation to do.

The
rent payments that EME Homer City owes under the sale-leaseback are comprised of two components, a senior rent portion and an equity rent portion. The senior rent is used
exclusively for debt service to the holders of the senior secured bonds, while the equity rent is paid to the owner-lessors. In order to pay the equity portion of the rent, EME Homer City is required
to meet historical and projected senior rent service coverage ratios of 1.7 to 1 subject to reduction to 1.3 to 1 under circumstances specified in the participation agreements. During the
12 months ended December 31, 2003, the senior rent service coverage ratio was 4.68 to 1. The senior rent service coverage ratio is determined by dividing net cash flow as defined in the
participation agreements by the senior rent due in that period. In addition, if EME Homer City does not meet specified debt service coverage ratios while the lease debt is outstanding, it will not pay
the equity portion of the rent to the owner-lessors. Accordingly, the sale-leaseback documentation does not permit the lessor to terminate the lease in the event of non-payment
of the equity portion of the rent while the lease debt is outstanding.

30

---

EME
Homer City's use of cash in its bank accounts is limited to specific operating and capital expenditures as set forth in the Security Deposit Agreement executed as part of the
sale-leaseback transaction. In addition, a restricted cash account was funded in the amount of $139 million at the closing of the sale-leaseback transaction. The amount in the
account will be available for payments due on the equity portion of lease rent during specified periods, and in accordance with the sale-leaseback documents, unless there is a default in the payment
of the senior portion of lease rent, in which case the amount will be available to pay such senior portion of the lease rent. The release of funds from this restricted cash account is permitted,
provided EME Homer City maintains a specified reserve balance in accordance with the sale-leaseback documents, no event of default shall have occurred or be continuing and no two failed rent payments
shall have occurred. EME Homer City had approximately $40 million in restricted cash at December 31, 2003.

Distributions to Edison Mission Energy

The following table summarizes the payments by EME Homer City under its subordinated revolving loan that constitute permitted distributions pursuant to the terms
of the sale-leaseback transaction (in millions):

Years Ended December 31,2003

2002

2001Payment of interest

$
84.1

$


$
72.2Payment of principal


77.2





229.1Total payments

$
161.3
*
$


$
301.3


---

Credit Ratings

EME Homer City is not currently rated. However, EME Homer City has entered into a contract with a marketing affiliate, Edison Mission Marketing & Trading,
for the sale of energy and capacity from its facilities, which enables this marketing affiliate to engage in forward sales and hedging.

Credit
ratings related to the senior unsecured debt of EME and the corporate credit rating of Edison Mission Marketing & Trading are as follows:

Moody's Rating

S&P RatingEdison Mission Energy

B2

BEdison Mission Marketing & Trading

Not Rated

B


On
October 28, 2003, Standard & Poor's Ratings Service downgraded the credit rating of the pass-through bonds related to the sale-leaseback of the
Homer City facilities (to BB from BBB-). Standard & Poor's also lowered the credit ratings on EME Homer City's indirect parent, EME, (senior unsecured debt to B from
BB-) and on Edison Mission Marketing & Trading (corporate credit rating to B from BB-). Standard & Poor's removed the ratings from CreditWatch with negative
implications on December 12, 2003; however, the outlook remains negative. Moody's Investors Service has assigned a negative rating outlook for EME.

These
ratings actions did not trigger any defaults or prepayment obligations of EME Homer City. EME Homer City cannot provide assurance that the credit ratings above will remain in
effect for any given period of time or that one or more of these ratings will not be lowered further. EME Homer

31

---

City
notes that these credit ratings are not recommendations to buy, sell or hold securities and may be revised at any time by a rating agency.

Pursuant
to EME Homer City's sale-leaseback documents, a below investment grade credit rating of Edison Mission Marketing & Trading restricts EME Homer City's ability
to enter into trading activities, as defined in the documents, with Edison Mission Marketing & Trading to sell forward the output of its facilities. These documents include a requirement that
the counterparty to such transactions, and EME Homer City, if acting as seller to an unaffiliated third party, be investment grade. EME Homer City currently sells all of the output from its facilities
through Edison Mission Marketing & Trading, which has a below investment grade credit rating, and EME Homer City is not rated. Therefore, in order for EME Homer City to continue to sell forward
the output of its facilities, either: (1) EME Homer City must obtain consent from the sale-leaseback owner participant to permit it to sell directly into the market or through
Edison Mission Marketing & Trading; or (2) Edison Mission Marketing & Trading must provide assurances of performance consistent with the
requirements of the sale-leaseback documents. EME Homer City has obtained a consent from the sale-leaseback owner participant that will allow it to enter into such sales, under
specified conditions, through December 31, 2004. EME Homer City continues to be in compliance with the terms of the consent, although as a result of the downgrade of Edison Mission
Marketing & Trading's corporate credit rating to B from BB-, the consent is now revocable. The sale-leaseback owner participant has not indicated that it intends to
revoke the consent; however, there can be no assurance that it will not do so in the future. Revocation of the consent would not affect trades between Edison Mission Marketing & Trading and EME
Homer City that had been entered into while the consent was still in effect. EME Homer City is permitted to sell the output of its facilities into the spot market at any time.

Off-Balance Sheet Transactions

EME Homer City has no significant off-balance sheet transactions.

Contractual Obligations, Commitments and Contingencies

Contractual Obligations

The following table summarizes the majority of EME Homer City's contractual obligations as of December 31, 2003.

|                                        |                               | 2004 |       | 2005  |   | 2006  |       | 2007 |       | 2008  |   | Thereafter |       | Total |      
|--------------------------------------- | ----------------------------- | ---- | ----- | ----- | - | ----- | ----- | ---- | ----- | ----- | - | ---------- | ----- | ----- | -----
|
|Contractual Obligations                 |                               |      |       |       |   |       |       |      |       |       |   |            |       |       |      
|Long-term debt to affiliate             |                               | $    |      |       | $ |      |       | $    |      |       | $ |           |       | $     |     
|Lease financing                         |                               |      | 142.1 |       |   | 151.9 |       |      | 151.6 |       |   | 150.8      |       |       | 152.2
|Lease swap agreement                    |                               |      | 7.8   |       |   | 1.1   |       |      | 0.6   |       |   | 1.0        |       |       | (0.7 
|Operating and capital lease obligations |                               |      | 0.4   |       |   | 0.2   |       |      | 0.1   |       |   |           |       |       |     
|Capital improvements                    |                               |      | 3.3   |       |   |      |       |      |      |       |   |           |       |       |     
|Fuel supply contracts                   |                               |      | 170.2 |       |   | 135.1 |       |      | 30.0  |       |   | 19.2       |       |       |     
|Coal Cleaning Agreement                 |                               |      | 6.6   |       |   | 6.6   |       |      |      |       |   |           |       |       |     
|                                        |                               |      |       |       |   |       |       |      |       |       |   |            |       |       |      
|                                        | Total Contractual Obligations |      | $     | 330.4 |   | $     | 294.9 |      | $     | 182.3 |   | $          | 171.0 |       | $    
|                                        |                               |      |       |       |   |       |       |      |       |       |   |            |       |       |      

Long-Term Debt to Affiliate

As part of the purchase of the Homer City facilities, EME Homer City obtained loans from Edison Mission Finance. A portion of the borrowings outstanding was
repaid with the proceeds from the sale-leaseback. Under the terms of EME Homer City's loan with Edison Mission Finance, the principal amount is due in 2014, with no scheduled repayment
prior to its maturity. This loan is

32

---

subordinated
to EME Homer City's lease rent obligations, with interest and principal payments subject to limitations based on EME Homer City's ability to make distributions under the
sale-leaseback documentation.

On
December 8, 2003, EME Homer City amended and restated its existing subordinated revolving loan agreement with Edison Mission Finance and issued a note evidencing its repayment
obligations under the loan agreement. The amended and restated subordinated revolving loan agreement had no effect on the financial terms of the agreement.

Lease Financing

On December 7, 2001, EME Homer City completed a sale-leaseback of its facilities to third-party lessors for an aggregate purchase price of
$1.591 billion, made up of $782 million in cash and assumption of debt (the fair value of which was $809.3 million). Under the terms of the
33.67-year leases, EME Homer City is obligated to make semi-annual lease payments on each April 1 and October 1. The gain recognized on the sale of the facilities
has been deferred and is being amortized over the term of the leases.

Lease Swap Agreement

In connection with the sale-leaseback transaction, EME Homer City has entered into a swap agreement with a bank in order to more effectively match its
cash flow, which generally is higher during the summer months when energy prices are higher, with its lease payments. Under the terms of this swap, EME Homer City made an initial deposit of
$37 million with the bank in December 2001. Beginning in April 2002 through April 2014, the bank will make a swap payment to EME Homer City in April of each year and EME
Homer City will make a swap payment to the bank in October of each year. The amount of payments is designed to reverse the semi-annual payments due under the lease such that EME Homer City
effectively has lower cash obligations in April and higher cash obligations in October. In April 2003, EME Homer City received a payment of $87.0 million and in October 2003 EME
Homer City made a payment of $54.6 million, resulting in a net deposit balance of $35.0 million at December 31, 2003. EME Homer City is also required to fund one-sixth
of the October swap payment each month, between April and September of each year, into a restricted cash account. The implicit interest rate, which was fixed at inception of the swap agreement, is
based on LIBOR during periods that EME Homer City has a net deposit with the bank, and LIBOR plus 5% during periods that EME Homer City has a net loan with the bank.

Capital Improvements

EME Homer City contracted with a division of ABB Flakt, now Alstom Power, to make environmental capital improvements to its generating units. The contractor was
retained to construct a limestone-based, wet scrubber flue gas desulfurization system at Unit 3 and a selective catalytic reduction system at each of the three units. These improvements were intended
to enable the Homer City generating units to comply with Phase II of Title IV of the federal Clean Air Act regarding sulfur oxide emissions, the Pennsylvania nitrogen oxide allowance regulations and
Pennsylvania's response to the United States Environmental Protection Agency's, or EPA's, State Implementation Plan Call regarding nitrogen oxide emissions. The contract consists of a fixed price,
turnkey engineering, procurement and construction contract, including project management costs and other project costs. EME Homer City has spent $296 million related to this contract through
December 31, 2003, which substantially concludes the capital requirements for the project.

The
wet scrubber flue gas desulfurization system on Unit 3 has been installed and is operational. The selective catalytic reduction system on Unit 3 was installed but went out of service
on February 10, 2002 due to a collapse of ductwork which caused the entire unit to shut down. Unit 3 was returned to

33

---

service
on April 4, 2002 and operated with the selective catalytic reduction system bypassed until June 19, 2003, when the selective catalytic reduction system was returned to service.
EME Homer City believes that the costs to repair the damage will be covered, for the most part, by insurance and the contractual obligations of the contractor. EME Homer City recovered
$19.3 million under its insurance programs during 2003 and has an additional $3.8 million recorded as a receivable at December 31, 2003. EME Homer City may be entitled to
additional recovery of business interruption losses, but such determination has not been made or quantified at this time.

The
selective catalytic reduction systems on Units 1 and 2 have also been installed and several improvements were made during 2002 and 2003 to resolve past operating and structural
issues. The contractor re-commissioned these units and the selective catalytic reduction systems for Units 1 and 2 have been operational since April 19, 2003 and May 18,
2003, respectively.

Fuel Supply Contracts

EME Homer City has entered into several fuel purchase agreements with various third-party suppliers for the purchase of bituminous steam coal and fuel oil. These
contracts call for the purchase of a minimum quantity over the term of the contracts, which extend from one to four years from December 31, 2003, with an option at EME Homer City's discretion
to purchase additional amounts as stated in the agreements.

Coal Cleaning Agreement

EME Homer City has entered into a Coal Cleaning Agreement with Homer City Coal Processing Corporation to operate and maintain a coal cleaning plant owned by EME
Homer City. Under the terms of the agreement, EME Homer City is obligated to reimburse Homer City Coal Processing Corporation for the actual costs incurred in the operations and maintenance of the
coal cleaning plant, a fixed general and administrative service fee of approximately $260 thousand per year, and an operating fee that ranges from $.20 to $.35 per ton depending on the level of
tonnage. The agreement expired on August 31, 2002 and was renewed with the same terms through December 31, 2005, with a two-year extension option.

Commitments

Interconnection Agreement

EME Homer City's general partner, Mission Energy Westside, has entered into an interconnection agreement with New York State Electric & Gas Corporation, or
NYSEG, and Pennsylvania Electric Company, or Penelec, an affiliate of FirstEnergy Corp., to provide interconnection services necessary to interconnect the Homer City facilities with NYSEG and
Penelec's transmission systems. Unless terminated earlier in accordance with its terms, the interconnection agreement will terminate on a date mutually agreed to by Mission Energy Westside, NYSEG and
Penelec. This date will not exceed the retirement date of the Homer City units. NYSEG and Penelec have agreed to extend such interconnection services (but not the expiration of the agreement) to
modifications, additions, upgrades or repowering of the Homer City units. Mission Energy Westside is required to compensate NYSEG and Penelec for all reasonable costs associated with any
modifications, additions or replacements made to NYSEG or Penelec's interconnection facilities or transmission systems in connection with any modification, addition, upgrade or repowering to the Homer
City units.

Contingencies

Guarantees and Indemnities

Tax
Indemnity Agreements

34

---

In
connection with the sale-leaseback transaction related to the Homer City facilities, EME Homer City and EME entered into tax indemnity agreements. Under these tax
indemnity agreements, EME Homer City and EME agreed to indemnify the equity investors in the sale-leaseback transaction for specified adverse tax consequences that could result in certain
situations set forth in the tax indemnity agreements, including specified defaults under the respective leases. The potential indemnity obligation under these tax indemnity agreements could be
significant. Due to the nature of the obligations under these tax indemnity agreements, EME Homer City cannot determine a maximum potential liability. The indemnities would be triggered by a valid
claim from the lessors. EME Homer City has not recorded a liability related to these indemnities.

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

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

Ash Disposal Site

EME Homer City's ash disposal site is a permitted Class I Residual Waste Landfill, the most stringently regulated of the three categories of residual waste
landfills authorized by the regulations of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP). Each lift where coal ash is disposed must be capped and covered when it reaches final grade.
EME Homer City must also monitor groundwater quality at and adjacent to the ash disposal site through a network of monitoring wells and report the results to PADEP on a periodic basis. In the event
that a disposal facility's groundwater monitoring identifies degradation in any of its wells, PADEP's regulations require the facility to first confirm the existence and nature of the degradation by
conducting a groundwater assessment. If the assessment confirms groundwater degradation in excess of the applicable regulatory standards, the facility is then required to prepare and implement an
abatement plan that could include measures such as installing a liner in a previously unlined area. To date, no degradation has been found in the groundwater monitoring system at EME Homer City that
would require the development of an assessment or abatement plan. Management does not believe that the costs of maintaining and closing the ash disposal site will have a material impact on EME Homer
City's results of operations or financial position.

Environmental Matters and Regulations

Introduction

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

35

---

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

State

Water Quality

The discharge from the treatment plant receiving the wastewater stream from EME Homer City's Unit 3 flue gas desulfurization system has exceeded the stringent,
water-quality based limits for selenium in the station's NPDES permit. As a result, EME Homer City has been notified by PADEP that it has been included in the Quarterly Noncompliance Report submitted
to the United States EPA. EME Homer City has met with the contractor responsible for the Unit 3 flue gas desulfurization system to discuss approaches to resolving the water quality issues and is
investigating technical alternatives for maximizing the level of selenium removal in the discharge. EME Homer City has also discussed these approaches for resolving the water quality issues with
PADEP. Pilot studies are underway, but until they are completed and the results are evaluated, EME Homer City cannot estimate the costs to comply with these selenium limits. After the results of the
pilot studies are evaluated, EME Homer City will meet with PADEP to discuss the drafting of a consent agreement to address the selenium issue and then instruct the contractor to make the necessary
improvements. The consent agreement may include the payment of civil penalties, but the amount cannot be estimated at this time.

FederalUnited States of America

Clean Air Act

EME Homer City expects that compliance with the Clean Air Act and the regulations and revised State Implementation Plans developed as a consequence of the Act
will result in increased capital expenditures and operating expenses. EME Homer City's approach to meeting these obligations will consist of a blending of capital expenditure and emissions allowance
purchases that will be based on an ongoing assessment of the dynamics of EME Homer City's market conditions.

Mercury Maximum Achievable Control Technology Determination

In December 2000, the EPA announced its intent to regulate mercury emissions and other hazardous air pollutants from coal-fired electric power
plants under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act, and indicated that it would propose a rule to regulate these emissions by no later than December 15, 2003. On December 15, 2003, EPA
issued proposed rules for regulating mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants. EPA proposed two rule options for public comment: 1) regulate mercury as a hazardous air pollutant under
Clean Air Act Sec. 112(d); or 2) rescind EPA's December 2000 finding regarding a need to control coal power plant mercury emissions as a hazardous air pollutant, and instead, promulgate
a new "cap and trade" emissions regulatory program to reduce mercury emissions in two phases by years 2010 and 2018. On February 24, 2004, the EPA announced a Supplemental Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking to provide more details on their emissions cap and trade proposal for mercury. At this time, the EPA anticipates finalizing the regulations in December 2004, with controls required
to be in place by some time between the end of 2007 (if the technology-based standard is chosen) and 2010 (when Phase I of the cap and trade approach would be implemented if this approach is chosen).

36

---

EME
Homer City's preliminary estimate is that the mercury regulations may require it to spend up to $300 million for capital improvements in the 2006-2010 time frame, although the
timing will depend on which proposal is adopted. However, until the regulations are finalized, EME Homer City cannot fully evaluate the potential impact of these regulations on the operation of its
facility.

National Ambient Air Quality Standards

New ambient air quality standards for ozone, coarse particulate matter and fine particulate matter were adopted by the EPA in July 1997. It is widely understood
that attainment of the fine particulate matter standard may require reductions in emissions of nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxides. These standards were challenged in the courts, and on
March 26, 2002, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld the EPA's revised ozone and fine particulate matter ambient air quality standards.

Because
of the delays resulting from the litigation over the new standards, the EPA's new schedule for implementing the ozone and fine particulate matter standards calls for designation
of attainment and non-attainment areas under the two standards in 2004. Once these designations are published, states will be required to revise their implementation plans (SIPs) to
achieve attainment of the revised standards. The revised SIPs are likely to require additional emission reductions from facilities that are significant emitters of ozone precursors and particulates.

In
December 2003, the EPA proposed rules that would require states to revise their state implementation plans to address alleged contributions to downwind areas that are not in
attainment with the revised standards for ozone and fine particulate matter. This proposed "Interstate Air Quality" rule is designed to be completed before states must revise their SIPs to address
local reductions needed to meet the new ozone and fine particulate matter standards. The proposed rule would establish a two-phase, regional cap and trade program for sulfur dioxide and
nitrogen oxide. The proposed rule would affect 27 states, including Pennsylvania. The proposed rule would require sulfur dioxide emissions and nitrogen oxide emissions to be reduced in two phases (by
2010 and 2015), with emissions reductions for each pollutant of 65% by 2015. The EPA is expected to issue final rules in December 2004.

At
this time, EME Homer City cannot predict the emission reduction targets that the EPA will ultimately adopt or the specific compliance timing. In addition, any additional obligations
on EME Homer City's facilities to further reduce their emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and fine particulates to address local non-attainment with the 8-hour ozone
and fine particulate matter standards will not be known until Pennsylvania revises its SIP. Depending upon the final standards that are adopted, EME Homer City may incur substantial costs or financial
impacts resulting from required capital improvements or operational charges.

New Source Review Requirements

On November 3, 1999, the United States Department of Justice filed suit against a number of electric utilities for alleged violations of the Clean Air
Act's new source review, or NSR, requirements related to modifications of air emissions sources at electric generating stations.

Several
utilities have reached formal agreements or agreements-in-principle with the United States to resolve alleged NSR violations. These settlements involved
installation of additional pollution controls, supplemental environment projects, and the payment of civil penalties. The agreements provided for a phased approach to achieving required emission
reductions over the next 10 to 15 years, and some called for the retirement or repowering of coal-fired generating units. The total cost of some of these settlements exceeded
$1 billion; the civil penalties agreed to by these utilities generally range between $1 million and $10 million. Because of the uncertainty created by the Bush administration's
review of the NSR regulations and NSR enforcement proceedings, some of these settlements have not

37

---

been
finalized. However, the Department of Justice review released in January 2002 concluded "EPA has a reasonable basis for arguing that the enforcement actions are consistent with both the
Clean Air Act and the Administrative Procedure Act." No change in the Department of Justice's position regarding pending NSR legal actions has been announced as a result of EPA's proposed NSR reforms
(discussed immediately below). In January 2004, EPA announced new enforcement actions against several power generating facilities.

On
December 31, 2002, the EPA finalized a rule to improve the NSR program. This rule is intended to provide additional flexibility with respect to NSR by, among other things,
modifying the method by which a facility calculates the emissions' increase from a plant modification; exempting, for a period of ten years, units that have complied with NSR requirements or otherwise
installed pollution control technology that is equivalent to what would have been required by NSR; and allowing a facility to make modifications without being required to comply with NSR if the
facility maintained emissions below plant-wide applicability limits. Although states, industry groups and environmental organizations have filed litigation challenging various aspects of
the rule, it became effective March 3, 2003. To date, the rule remains in effect, although the pending litigation could still result in changes to the final rule.

A
federal district court, ruling on a lawsuit filed by EPA, found on August 7, 2003, that the Ohio Edison Company violated requirements of the NSR within the Clean Air Act by
upgrading certain coal-fired power plants without first obtaining the necessary pre-construction permits. On August 26, 2003, another federal district court ruling in an
NSR enforcement action against Duke Energy Corporation, adopted a different interpretation of the NSR provisions that could limit liability for similar upgrade projects.

On
October 27, 2003, EPA issued a final rule revising its regulations to define more clearly a category of activities that are not subject to NSR requirements under the "routine
maintenance, repair and replacement" exclusion. This clearer definition of "routine maintenance, repair and replacement," would provide EME Homer City greater guidance in determining what investments
can be made at its existing plants to improve the safety, efficiency and reliability of its operations without triggering NSR permitting requirements, and might mitigate the potential impact of the
Ohio Edison decision. However, on December 24, 2003, the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit blocked
implementation of the "routine maintenance, repair and replacement" rule, pending further judicial review.

Prior
to EME Homer City's purchase of the Homer City facilities, the United States EPA requested information under Section 114 of the Clean Air Act from the prior owners of the
plant concerning physical changes at the plant. This request was part of the EPA's industry-wide investigation of compliance by coal-fired plants with the Clean Air Act NSR
requirements. Other than this request for information, no NSR enforcement-related proceedings have been initiated by the EPA with respect to EME Homer City's facilities.

EPA's
enforcement policy on alleged NSR violations is currently uncertain. These developments will continue to be monitored by EME Homer City to assess what implications, if any, they
will have on the operation of its power plants, or on EME Homer City's results of operations or financial position.

Federal Legislative Initiatives

There have been a number of bills introduced in the last session of Congress and the current session of Congress that would amend the Clean Air Act to
specifically target emissions of certain pollutants from electric utility generating stations. These bills would mandate reductions in emissions of nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide and mercury. Some
bills would also impose limitations on carbon dioxide emissions. The various proposals differ in many details, including the timing of any required reductions; the extent of required reductions; and
the relationship of any new obligations that would be imposed by

38

---

these
bills with existing legal requirements. There is significant uncertainty as to whether any of the proposed legislative initiatives will pass in their current form or whether any compromise can
be reached that would facilitate passage of legislation. Accordingly, EME Homer City is not able to evaluate the potential impact of these proposals at this time.

Environmental Remediation and Asbestos

Under various federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations, a current or previous owner or operator of any facility, including an electric
generating facility, may be required to investigate and remediate releases or threatened releases of hazardous or toxic substances or petroleum products located at that facility, and may be held
liable to a governmental entity or to third parties for property damage, personal injury, natural resource damages, and investigation and remediation costs incurred by
these parties in connection with these releases or threatened releases. Many of these laws, including the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, commonly
referred to as CERCLA, as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986, impose liability without regard to whether the owner knew of or caused the presence of the hazardous
substances, and courts have interpreted liability under these laws to be strict and joint and several. The cost of investigation, remediation or removal of these substances may be substantial.

In
connection with the ownership and operation of its facilities, EME Homer City may be liable for these costs. In addition, persons who arrange for the disposal or treatment of
hazardous or toxic substances at a disposal or treatment facility may be liable for the costs of removal or remediation of a release or threatened release of hazardous or toxic substances at that
disposal or treatment facility, whether or not that facility is owned or operated by that person. Some environmental laws and regulations create a lien on a contaminated site in favor of the
government for damages and costs it incurs in connection with the remediation of contamination. The owner of a contaminated site and persons who arrange for the disposal of hazardous substances at
that site also may be subject to common law claims by third parties based on damages and costs resulting from environmental contamination emanating from that site. In connection with the ownership and
operation of its facilities, EME Homer City may be liable for these costs.

Federal,
state and local laws, regulations and ordinances also govern the removal, encapsulation or disturbance of asbestos-containing materials when these materials are in poor
condition or in the event of construction, remodeling, renovation or demolition of a building. Those laws and regulations may impose liability for release of asbestos-containing materials and may
provide for the ability of third parties to seek recovery from owners or operators of these properties for personal injury associated with asbestos-containing materials. In connection with the
ownership and operation of its facilities, EME Homer City may be liable for these costs. EME Homer City has agreed to indemnify the sellers of the Homer City facilities for specified environmental
liabilities. See "Contractual Obligations, Commitments and ContingenciesCommitmentsGuarantees and Indemnities" for a discussion of the indemnity agreement.

International

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

Since
the adoption of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in 1992, there has been worldwide attention with respect to greenhouse gas emissions. In
December 1997, the Clinton administration participated in the Kyoto, Japan negotiations, where the basis of a Climate Change treaty was formulated. Under the treaty, known as the Kyoto
Protocol, the United States would be required, by 2008-2012, to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 7% from 1990 levels.

In
March 2001, the Bush administration announced that the United States would not ratify the Kyoto Protocol, but would instead offer an alternative. On February 14, 2002,
President Bush

39

---

announced
objectives to slow the growth of greenhouse gas emissions by reducing the amount of greenhouse gas emissions per unit of economic output by 18% by 2012 and to provide funding for
climate-change related programs. The President's proposed program does not include mandatory reductions of greenhouse gas emissions. However, various bills have been, or are expected to be, introduced
in Congress to require greenhouse gas emissions reductions and to address other issues related to climate change. Apart from the Kyoto Protocol, Midwest Generation may be impacted by future federal or
state legislation relating to controlling greenhouse gas emissions. To date, none have passed through Congress. In addition, there have been several petitions from states and other parties to compel
the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. On September 3, 2003, the EPA denied a petition by Massachusetts, Maine and Connecticut to compel EPA under the Clean Air Act to
require EPA to establish a national ambient air quality standard for carbon dioxide. Since that time, 11 states and other entities have filed suits against EPA in the United States Court of Appeals
for the D.C. Circuit (D.C. Circuit), and, the D.C. Circuit has granted intervention requests from 10 states that support EPA's ruling. The D.C. Circuit has not yet ruled on this matter.

Notwithstanding
the Bush administration position, environment ministers from around the world have reached a compromise agreement on the mechanics and rules of the Kyoto Protocol. The
compromise agreement is believed to clear the way for countries to begin the treaty ratification process.

For
the treaty to come into effect, approximately 55 countries that also represent at least 55% of the greenhouse gas emissions of the developed world must ratify it. Currently, the
countries ratifying the Kyoto Protocol account for 44.2% of carbon dioxide emissions. Although Russia also indicated at the Johannesburg Summit on September 2002 its desire to ratify the
treaty, it stepped back from that position in late 2003 and has yet to set a date for ratification. Representing 17.4% of the developed world's greenhouse gas emissions, Russian ratification is
essential to bring the treaty into effect.

If
EME Homer City does become subject to limitations on emissions of carbon dioxide from its fossil fuel-fired electric generating plants, these requirements could have a
significant economic impact on its operations.

United Nations Proposed Framework Convention on Mercury.

The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has convened a Global Mercury Assessment Working Group which met in Geneva in September 2002 and finalized
a global mercury assessment report for submittal to the UNEP Governing Council at the Global Ministerial Environment Forum in Nairobi, Kenya, February 2003. Based upon the report's key
findings, the working group concluded that "there is sufficient evidence of significant global adverse impacts to warrant international action to reduce the risks to human health and the environment
arising from the release of mercury into the environment."

The
United States has indicated that it will support a decision to take international action on mercury at the Global Ministerial Environment Forum. However, the United States has
further stated that it does not support negotiation of a legally-binding convention at this time. In general, the United States approach: 1) agrees that there is sufficient evidence of adverse
impacts of mercury to warrant international action, 2) urges countries to take actions within the context of their national circumstances to identify exposed populations and to reduce
anthropogenic emissions of mercury, 3) recommends the establishment of a "Mercury Program" within UNEP, 4) recommends coordination between UNEP and other international organizations that
work on mercury issues such as the World Health Organization, and 5) asks countries to make voluntary contributions to support efforts of the Mercury Program under UNEP.

If
EME Homer City does become subject to limitations on emissions of mercury from its coal-fired electric generating plants, these requirements could have a significant
economic impact on its operations.

40

---



MARKET RISK EXPOSURES

Introduction

EME Homer City's primary market risk exposures arise from fluctuations in electricity and fuel prices, emissions allowances and transmission rights. EME Homer
City manages these risks in part by using derivative financial instruments in accordance with established policies and procedures. Electric power generated at the Homer City facilities is sold under
bilateral arrangements with domestic utilities and power marketers pursuant to transactions with terms of two years or less, or to the PJM or NYISO. These pools have short-term markets
which establish an hourly clearing price. The Homer City facilities are situated in the PJM control area and are physically connected to high-voltage transmission lines serving both the
PJM and NYISO markets.

Commodity Price Risk

EME Homer City's revenues and results of operations are dependent upon prevailing market prices for energy, capacity, emission credits and ancillary services in
the PJM and NYISO competitive markets. The following table depicts the average market prices per megawatt-hour in PJM during the past three years:

24-Hour PJM
Historical Energy Prices*2003

2002

2001January

$
36.56

$
20.52

$
36.66February


46.13


20.62


29.53March


46.85


24.27


35.05April


35.35


25.68


34.58May


32.29


21.98


28.64June


27.26


24.98


26.61July


36.55


30.01


30.21August


39.27


30.40


43.99September


28.71


29.00


22.44October


26.96


27.64


21.95November


29.17


25.18


19.58December


35.89


27.33


19.66Yearly Average

$
35.08

$
25.63

$
29.07


---

As shown on the above table, the average historical market prices at the Homer City busbar (delivery point) during 2003 were higher than the
average historical market prices during 2002, although in September and October of each year the power prices were similar. Forward market prices in PJM fluctuate as a result of a number of factors,
including natural gas prices, transmission congestion, changes in market rules, electricity demand which is affected by weather and economic growth, and the amount of existing and planned power plant
capacity. The actual spot prices for electricity delivered into these markets may vary materially from the forward market prices.

Sales
made in the real-time or day-ahead market receive the actual spot prices at the Homer City busbar. In order to mitigate price risk from changes in spot
prices at the Homer City busbar, EME Homer City's marketing affiliate may enter into forward contracts with counterparties for forecasted generation in future periods. Currently, there is not a liquid
market for entering into forward contracts at the Homer City busbar. A liquid market does exist for delivery to a collection of delivery points

41

---

known
as PJM West Hub, which the marketing affiliate's price risk management activities use to enter into forward contracts. EME Homer City's revenues with respect to such forward contracts include:



Under
the PJM market design, locational marginal pricing (sometimes referred to as LMP), which establishes hourly prices at specific locations throughout PJM by considering factors
including generator bids, load requirements, transmission congestion and losses, has the effect of raising prices at those delivery points affected by transmission congestion. During the past
12 months, an increase in transmission congestion at delivery points east of the Homer City facilities has resulted in prices at the PJM West Hub (which includes delivery points east of the
Homer City facilities) being higher than those at the Homer City busbar. Thus, while forward prices at PJM West Hub have historically been higher than the prices at the Homer City busbar by less than
5%, increased congestion during the last 12 months at delivery points east of the Homer City facilities has resulted in prices at PJM West Hub being on average 6% higher than those at the Homer
City busbar.

By
entering into forward contracts using the PJM West Hub as the delivery point, EME Homer City is exposed to "basis risk," which occurs when forward contracts are executed on a
different basis (in this case PJM West Hub) than the actual point of delivery (Homer City busbar). In order to mitigate basis risk resulting from forward contracts using PJM West Hub as the delivery
point, Edison Mission Marketing & Trading has participated in purchasing fixed transmission rights in PJM, and may continue to do so in the future. A fixed transmission right provides the holder with
a financial instrument to receive actual spot prices at one point of delivery and pay prices at another point of delivery that are pegged to prices at the first point of delivery, plus or minus a
fixed amount. Accordingly, the marketing affiliate's price risk management activities include using fixed transmission rights alone or in combination with forward contracts to manage the risks
associated with changes in prices within the PJM market.

42

---

The
following table sets forth the forward month-end market prices per megawatt-hour for the calendar 2004 and 2005 "strips," which are defined as energy
purchases for the entire calendar year, as quoted for sales into the PJM West Hub during 2003:

24-Hour PJM West
Forward Energy
Prices*2004

2005January 31, 2003

$
43.03

$
37.75February 28, 2003


42.88


38.18March 31, 2003


39.57


33.88April 30, 2003


34.45


32.85May 31, 2003


30.20


30.60June 30, 2003


34.23


33.45July 31, 2003


41.67


39.77August 30, 2003


42.31


41.61September 30, 2003


30.20


30.62October 31, 2003


29.02


28.51November 27, 2003


29.49


28.74December 31, 2003


30.18


28.51


---

Among the factors that influence future market prices for energy, capacity and ancillary services in PJM and NYISO are:



EME
Homer City's ability to make payments of lease rent on the facility leases depends on revenues generated by the facilities, which depend on their performance level and on market
conditions for the sale of capacity and energy. These market conditions are beyond EME Homer City's control.

EME
Homer City's risk management policy allows for the use of derivative financial instruments through its marketing affiliate to limit financial exposure to energy prices for
non-trading purposes. Use of these instruments exposes EME Homer City to commodity price risk, which includes potential losses that can arise from a change in the market value of a
particular commodity. Commodity price risks are actively monitored to ensure compliance with EME Homer City's risk management policies through Edison Mission Marketing & Trading. Policies are
in place that define risk tolerance for EME Homer City. Procedures exist that allow for monitoring of all commitments and positions with regular reviews by a risk management committee. Edison Mission
Marketing & Trading performs a "value at risk"

43

---

analysis
in its daily business to measure, monitor and control EME Homer City's overall market risk exposure. The use of value at risk allows management to aggregate overall commodity risk, compare
risk on a consistent basis and identify the risk factors. Value at risk measures the possible loss over a given time interval, under normal market conditions, at a given confidence level. Given the
inherent limitations of value at risk and relying on a single risk measurement tool, Edison Mission Marketing & Trading supplements this approach with the use of stress testing and
worst-case scenario analysis for key risk factors, as well as stop loss limits and counterparty credit exposure limits. Despite this, there can be no assurance that all risks have been
accurately identified, measured and/or mitigated.

The
following table summarizes the fair values for outstanding financial instruments used for price risk management activities (in thousands):

December 31,2003

2002Commodity price:Electricity contracts

$
(8,767
)
$
(9,284
)Other





(301
)Total fair value

$
(8,767
)
$
(9,585
)


In
assessing the fair value of EME Homer City's derivative financial instruments, it uses a variety of methods and assumptions based on the market conditions and associated risks
existing at each balance sheet date. The fair value of commodity price contracts takes into account quoted market prices, time value of money, volatility of the underlying commodities and other
factors. The following table summarizes the maturities, the valuation method and the related fair value of EME Homer City's commodity risk management assets and liabilities as of December 31,
2003 (in thousands):

Total Fair
Value

Maturity
<1 year

Maturity
1 to 3 years

Maturity
4 to 5 years

Maturity
>5 yearsPrices actively quoted

$
(8,767
)
$
(8,767
)
$


$


$



A
10% adverse change in forward prices would decrease the fair market value of outstanding commodity contracts at December 31, 2003 by $31.3 million.

Credit Risk

In conducting price risk management activities, Edison Mission Marketing & Trading enters into contracts with a number of utilities, energy companies and
financial institutions, collectively referred to as counterparties. Due to factors beyond EME Homer City's control, a number of formerly significant trading parties have completely withdrawn from the
market or substantially reduced their trading activities since the beginning of 2002, thereby potentially increasing exposure to one or more of the remaining counterparties. The reduction in the
credit quality of traditional trading parties increases EME Homer City's credit risk. In the event a counterparty were to default on its trade obligation, EME Homer City would be exposed to the risk
of possible loss associated with reselling the contracted
product at a lower price if the non-performing counterparty were unable to pay the resulting liquidated damages owed to EME Homer City. EME Homer City would be exposed to the risk of
non-payment of accounts receivable accrued for products delivered prior to the time such counterparty defaulted.

To
manage credit risk, Edison Mission Marketing & Trading looks at the risk of a potential default by counterparties. Credit risk is measured by the loss that would occur if the
counterparties failed to perform pursuant to the terms of their contractual obligations. Edison Mission Marketing & Trading measures, monitors and mitigates, to the extent possible, credit
risk. To mitigate counterparty risk,

44

---

master
netting agreements are used whenever possible and counterparties may be required to pledge collateral when deemed necessary. Edison Mission Marketing & Trading also takes other
appropriate steps to limit or lower credit exposure. Processes have also been established to determine and monitor the creditworthiness of counterparties. Edison Mission Marketing & Trading
manages portfolio credit risk based on credit ratings using published ratings of counterparties and other publicly disclosed information, such as financial statements, regulatory filings, and press
releases to guide it in the process of setting credit levels, risk limits and contractual arrangements, including master netting agreements. A risk management committee regularly reviews the credit
quality of Edison Mission Marketing & Trading counterparties. Despite this, there can be no assurance that these efforts will be wholly successful in mitigating credit risk or that collateral pledged
will be adequate.

Interest Rate Risk

EME Homer City has mitigated the risk of interest rate fluctuations by obtaining fixed rate financing on its outstanding long-term debt with its
affiliate. EME Homer City does not believe that interest rate fluctuations will have a material adverse effect on its financial position or results of operations.

ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

Information responding to Item 7A is filed with this report under "Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations."

45

---

ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

|Financial Statements: |                                                                                                | 
|--------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
|                      | Report of Independent Auditors                                                                 | 
|                      | Statements of Income (Loss) for the years ended December 31, 2003, 2002 and 2001               | 
|                      | Balance Sheets at December 31, 2003 and 2002                                                   | 
|                      | Statements of Partners' Equity for the years ended December 31, 2003, 2002 and 2001            | 
|                      | Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss) for the years ended December 31, 2003, 2002 and 2001 | 
|                      | Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 2003, 2002 and 2001                  | 
|                      | Notes to Financial Statements                                                                  | 

ITEM 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

None.

ITEM 9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

Disclosure Controls and Procedures

EME Homer City's management, with the participation of the partnership's principal executive officer and principal financial officer, has evaluated the
effectiveness of EME Homer City's disclosure controls and procedures (as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended (the "Exchange Act")) as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based on such evaluation, the principal executive officer and principal financial officer have concluded that, as
of the end of such period, EME Homer City's disclosure controls and procedures are effective.

Internal Control over Financial Reporting

There have not been any changes in EME Homer City's internal control over financial reporting (as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and
15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) during the fourth fiscal quarter of 2003 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, EME Homer City's internal control
over financial reporting.

46

---

EME HOMER CITY GENERATION L.P.
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

To
the General Partner of EME Homer City Generation L.P.:

In
our opinion, the financial statements listed in the accompanying index present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of EME Homer City Generation L.P. at December
31, 2003 and December 31, 2002, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the two years in the period ended December 31, 2003 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted
in the United States of America. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Partnership's management; our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on
our audits. We conducted our audits of these statements in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, which require that we plan and perform the audit to
obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in
the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits
provide a reasonable basis for our opinion. The financial statements of the Partnership as of December 31, 2001 and for the year ended December 31, 2001, were audited by other independent accountants
who have ceased operations. Those independent accountants expressed an unqualified opinion on those financial statements in their report dated March 25, 2002.

As
explained in Note 2 to the financial statements, effective January 1, 2003, the Partnership changed its method of accounting for asset retirement obligations in accordance with SFAS
No. 143, "Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations."

|                                       |  | 
|-------------------------------------- |  | 
|PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP             |  | 
|Los Angeles, California
March 10, 2004 |  | 

47

---



REPORT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

To
the General Partner of EME Homer City Generation L.P.:

We
have audited the accompanying balance sheets of EME Homer City Generation L.P. (a Pennsylvania limited partnership) as of December 31, 2001 and 2000, and the related statements
of income (loss), comprehensive income (loss), partners' equity and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2001. These financial statements are the
responsibility of the Partnership's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.

We
conducted our audits in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable
assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial
statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe
that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In
our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of EME Homer City Generation L.P. as of December 31,
2001 and 2000, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2001 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted
in the United States.

| |                                          | Arthur Andersen LLP
| | ---------------------------------------- | -------------------
| | Orange County, California
March 25, 2002 |                    

The aforementioned report on the balance sheets of EME Homer City Generation L.P. as of December 31, 2001 and 2000, and the related statements of income
(loss), partners' equity, other comprehensive income (loss) and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2001 is a copy of a previously issued Arthur Andersen LLP
report. Arthur Andersen LLP has not reissued this report.

48

---

EME HOMER CITY GENERATION L.P.
STATEMENTS OF INCOME (LOSS)
(In thousands)

|                                                        |                                                                | Years Ended December 31, |        
|------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------ | -------
|
|Operating Revenues from Marketing Affiliate             |                                                                |                          |        
|                                                        | Capacity revenues                                              |                          | $      
|                                                        | Energy revenues                                                |                          |        
|                                                        | Gain (loss) from price risk management                         |                          |        
|                                                        |                                                                |                          |        
|                                                        |                                                                | Total operating revenues |        
|                                                        |                                                                |                          |        
|Operating Expenses                                      |                                                                |                          |        
|                                                        | Fuel                                                           |                          |        
|                                                        | Plant operations                                               |                          |        
|                                                        | Depreciation and amortization                                  |                          |        
|                                                        | Administrative and general                                     |                          |        
|                                                        |                                                                |                          |        
|                                                        |                                                                | Total operating expenses |        
|                                                        |                                                                |                          |        
|Operating income                                        |                                                                |                          | 188,154
|                                                        |                                                                |                          |        
|Other Income (Expense)                                  |                                                                |                          |        
|                                                        | Interest and other income                                      |                          |        
|                                                        | Gain on early extinguishment of debt                           |                          |        
|                                                        | Gain (loss) on disposal of assets                              |                          |        
|                                                        | Interest expense                                               |                          |        
|                                                        |                                                                |                          |        
|                                                        |                                                                | Total other expense      |        
|                                                        |                                                                |                          |        
|Income (loss) before income taxes and accounting change |                                                                |                          | 32,698 
|Provision (benefit) for income taxes                    |                                                                |                          | 18,451 
|                                                        |                                                                |                          |        
|Income (Loss) Before Accounting Change                  |                                                                |                          | 14,247 
|                                                        | Cumulative effect of change in accounting, net of tax (Note 2) |                          |        
|                                                        |                                                                |                          |        
|Net Income (Loss)                                       |                                                                | $                        | 13,289 
|                                                        |                                                                |                          |        

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

49

---

EME HOMER CITY GENERATION L.P.
BALANCE SHEETS
(In thousands)

|                                                  |                                                | December 31,                     
|------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------
|
|Assets                                            |                                                |                                  
|Current Assets                                    |                                                |                                  
|                                                  | Cash and cash equivalents                      |                                  
|                                                  | Fuel inventory                                 |                                  
|                                                  | Spare parts inventory                          |                                  
|                                                  | Deposits under lease swap agreement            |                                  
|                                                  | Assets under price risk management             |                                  
|                                                  | Other current assets                           |                                  
|                                                  |                                                |                                  
|                                                  |                                                | Total current assets             
|                                                  |                                                |                                  
|Property, Plant and Equipment                     |                                                |                                  
|                                                  | Less accumulated depreciation and amortization |                                  
|                                                  |                                                |                                  
|                                                  |                                                | Net property, plant and equipment
|                                                  |                                                |                                  
|Deferred taxes                                    |                                                |                                  
|Restricted cash                                   |                                                |                                  
|                                                  |                                                |                                  
|Total Assets                                      |                                                | $                                
|                                                  |                                                |                                  
|Liabilities and Partners' Equity                  |                                                |                                  
|Current Liabilities                               |                                                |                                  
|                                                  | Accounts payable                               |                                  
|                                                  | Accrued liabilities                            |                                  
|                                                  | Due to affiliates                              |                                  
|                                                  | Interest payable                               |                                  
|                                                  | Interest payable to affiliates                 |                                  
|                                                  | Liabilities under price risk management        |                                  
|                                                  | Current portion of lease financing             |                                  
|                                                  |                                                |                                  
|                                                  |                                                | Total current liabilities        
|                                                  |                                                |                                  
|Long-term debt to affiliate                       |                                                |                                  
|Lease financing, net of current portion           |                                                |                                  
|Benefit plans and other                           |                                                |                                  
|                                                  |                                                |                                  
|Total Liabilities                                 |                                                |                                  
|                                                  |                                                |                                  
|Commitments and Contingencies(Notes 4, 10 and 11) |                                                |                                  
|Partners' Equity                                  |                                                |                                  
|                                                  |                                                |                                  
|Total Liabilities and Partners' Equity            |                                                | $                                
|                                                  |                                                |                                  

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

50

---

EME HOMER CITY GENERATION L.P.
STATEMENTS OF PARTNERS' EQUITY
(In thousands)

|                             |                                                                         | Chestnut Ridge
Energy Company                                                                       |         | Mission Energy
Westside Inc. |         | Total
Partners' Equity |       
|---------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------- | ---------------------------- | ------- | ---------------------- | ------
|Balance at December 31, 2000 |                                                                         |                                                                                                     | 194,846 |                              |         | 1,969                  |       
|                             | Net income                                                              |                                                                                                     |         | 33,623                       |         |                        | 346   
|                             | Cash distributions                                                      |                                                                                                     |         | (136,600                     | )       |                        | (1,400
|                             | Unrealized gains (losses) on derivatives qualified as cash flow hedges: |                                                                                                     |         |                              |         |                        |       
|                             |                                                                         | Cumulative effect of change in accounting for derivatives, net of income tax benefit of $58,234     |         |                              | (85,863 | )                      |       
|                             |                                                                         | Other unrealized holding gains arising during period, net of income tax expense of $46,647          |         |                              | 68,778  |                        |       
|                             |                                                                         | Reclassification adjustment for losses included in net income, net of income tax benefit of $11,587 |         |                              | 17,085  |                        |       
|                             |                                                                         |                                                                                                     |         |                              |         |                        |       
|Balance at December 31, 2001 |                                                                         |                                                                                                     | 91,869  |                              |         | 915                    |       
|                             |                                                                         |                                                                                                     |         |                              |         |                        |       
|                             | Net loss                                                                |                                                                                                     |         | (45,650                      | )       |                        | (46   
|                             | Non-cash contribution of services                                       |                                                                                                     |         | 2,151                        |         |                        | 2     
|                             | Unrealized gains (losses) on derivatives qualified as cash flow hedges: |                                                                                                     |         |                              |         |                        |       
|                             |                                                                         | Cumulative effect of change in accounting for derivatives, net of income tax expense of $5,561      |         |                              | 6,351   |                        |       
|                             |                                                                         | Other unrealized holding losses arising during period, net of income tax benefit of $2,481          |         |                              | (2,598  | )                      |       
|                             |                                                                         | Reclassification adjustment for gains included in net loss, net of income tax expense of $6,701     |         |                              | (8,163  | )                      |       
|                             |                                                                         |                                                                                                     |         |                              |         |                        |       
|Balance at December 31, 2002 |                                                                         |                                                                                                     | 43,960  |                              |         | 866                    |       
|                             |                                                                         |                                                                                                     |         |                              |         |                        |       
|                             | Net income                                                              |                                                                                                     |         | 13,276                       |         |                        | 13    
|                             | Non-cash contribution of services                                       |                                                                                                     |         | 1,929                        |         |                        | 2     
|                             | Unrealized losses on derivatives qualified as cash flow hedges:         |                                                                                                     |         |                              |         |                        |       
|                             |                                                                         | Other unrealized holding losses arising during period, net of income tax benefit of $14,052         |         |                              | (17,220 | )                      |       
|                             |                                                                         | Reclassification adjustment for losses included in net income, net of income tax benefit of $9,615  |         |                              | 11,768  |                        |       
|                             |                                                                         |                                                                                                     |         |                              |         |                        |       
|Balance at December 31, 2003 |                                                                         | $                                                                                                   | 53,713  |                              | $       | 876                    |       
|                             |                                                                         |                                                                                                     |         |                              |         |                        |       

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

51

---

EME HOMER CITY GENERATION L.P.
STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)
(In thousands)

|                                         |                                                                         | Years Ended December 31,                                                                                                                                                    |       
|---------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------
|
|Net Income (Loss)                        |                                                                         | $                                                                                                                                                                           | 13,289
|Other comprehensive expense, net of tax: |                                                                         |                                                                                                                                                                             |       
|                                         | Unrealized gains (losses) on derivatives qualified as cash flow hedges: |                                                                                                                                                                             |       
|                                         |                                                                         | Cumulative effect of change in accounting for derivatives, net of income tax expense (benefit) of $5,561 and $(58,234) for 2002 and 2001, respectively                      |       
|                                         |                                                                         | Other unrealized holding gains (losses) arising during period, net of income tax expense (benefit) of $(14,052), $(2,481) and $46,647 for 2003, 2002 and 2001, respectively |       
|                                         |                                                                         | Reclassification adjustments included in net income (loss), net of income tax expense (benefit) of $(9,615), $6,701 and $(11,587) for 2003, 2002 and 2001, respectively     |       
|                                         |                                                                         |                                                                                                                                                                             |       
|Other comprehensive expense              |                                                                         |                                                                                                                                                                             | (5,457
|                                         |                                                                         |                                                                                                                                                                             |       
|Comprehensive Income (Loss)              |                                                                         | $                                                                                                                                                                           | 7,832 
|                                         |                                                                         |                                                                                                                                                                             |       

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

52

---

EME HOMER CITY GENERATION L.P.
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(In thousands)

|                                                 |                                                     | Years Ended December 31,                                                                           |                                                      
|------------------------------------------------ | --------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -----------------------------------------------------
|
|Cash Flows From Operating Activities             |                                                     |                                                                                                    |                                                      
|                                                 | Income (loss) after accounting change, net          |                                                                                                    | $                                                    
|                                                 |                                                     | Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided by (used in) operating activities: |                                                      
|                                                 |                                                     |                                                                                                    | Gain on early extinguishment of debt, net of tax     
|                                                 |                                                     |                                                                                                    | Depreciation and amortization                        
|                                                 |                                                     |                                                                                                    | Non-cash contribution of services                    
|                                                 |                                                     |                                                                                                    | Deferred taxes                                       
|                                                 |                                                     |                                                                                                    | Cumulative effect of change in accounting, net of tax
|                                                 |                                                     |                                                                                                    | (Gain) loss on asset disposal                        
|                                                 |                                                     | Increase in due to/from affiliates                                                                 |                                                      
|                                                 |                                                     | Decrease (increase) in inventory                                                                   |                                                      
|                                                 |                                                     | Increase in other assets                                                                           |                                                      
|                                                 |                                                     | Increase (decrease) in accounts payable                                                            |                                                      
|                                                 |                                                     | Increase (decrease) in accrued liabilities                                                         |                                                      
|                                                 |                                                     | Increase (decrease) in interest payable                                                            |                                                      
|                                                 |                                                     | Increase in other liabilities                                                                      |                                                      
|                                                 |                                                     | (Increase) decrease in net assets under price risk management                                      |                                                      
|                                                 |                                                     |                                                                                                    |                                                      
|                                                 | Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities |                                                                                                    |                                                      
|                                                 |                                                     |                                                                                                    |                                                      
|Cash Flows From Financing Activities             |                                                     |                                                                                                    |                                                      
|                                                 |                                                     | Advances under lease swap agreement                                                                |                                                      
|                                                 |                                                     | Payments under lease swap agreement                                                                |                                                      
|                                                 |                                                     | Borrowings on long-term obligations from affiliates                                                |                                                      
|                                                 |                                                     | Repayments on debt obligations from affiliates                                                     |                                                      
|                                                 |                                                     | Repayments of lease financing                                                                      |                                                      
|                                                 |                                                     | Financing costs                                                                                    |                                                      
|                                                 |                                                     | Cash dividends to partners                                                                         |                                                      
|                                                 |                                                     |                                                                                                    |                                                      
|                                                 | Net cash used in financing activities               |                                                                                                    |                                                      
|                                                 |                                                     |                                                                                                    |                                                      
|Cash Flows From Investing Activities             |                                                     |                                                                                                    |                                                      
|                                                 |                                                     | Proceeds from sale-leaseback of facilities                                                         |                                                      
|                                                 |                                                     | Proceeds from sale of assets                                                                       |                                                      
|                                                 |                                                     | Capital expenditures                                                                               |                                                      
|                                                 |                                                     | (Increase) decrease in restricted cash                                                             |                                                      
|                                                 |                                                     |                                                                                                    |                                                      
|                                                 | Net cash provided by investing activities           |                                                                                                    |                                                      
|                                                 |                                                     |                                                                                                    |                                                      
|Net increase in cash and cash equivalents        |                                                     |                                                                                                    | 32,801                                               
|Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period |                                                     |                                                                                                    | 59,174                                               
|                                                 |                                                     |                                                                                                    |                                                      
|Cash and cash equivalents at end of period       |                                                     | $                                                                                                  | 91,975                                               
|                                                 |                                                     |                                                                                                    |                                                      

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

53

---

EME HOMER CITY GENERATION L.P.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Dollars in thousands)

Note 1. General

EME Homer City Generation L.P., which is referred to as EME Homer City, is a Pennsylvania limited partnership, between Chestnut Ridge Energy Company, as a limited
partner with a 99.9 percent interest, and Mission Energy Westside Inc., as a general partner with a 0.1 percent interest. Both Chestnut Ridge Energy and Mission Energy Westside
are wholly owned subsidiaries of Edison Mission Holdings Co., a wholly owned subsidiary of Edison Mission Energy, which is referred to as EME. EME is a wholly owned subsidiary of Mission Energy
Holding Company and is an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Edison International. The partnership was formed on October 31, 1998 for the purpose of acquiring, owning and operating three
coal-fired electric generating units, and related facilities, which are referred to as the "Homer City facilities," located near Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania for the purpose of producing
electric energy.

EME
Homer City derives revenue from the sale of energy, capacity and ancillary services into the Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland Power Pool, or PJM, and the New York
Independent System Operator, or NYISO, and from bilateral contracts with power marketers and load serving entities within PJM and NYISO. EME Homer City has entered into a contract with a marketing
affiliate, Edison Mission Marketing & Trading, for the sale of energy, capacity and ancillary services from the Homer City facilities, which enables this marketing affiliate to engage in forward sales
and hedging transactions to manage electricity price exposure.

On
December 7, 2001, EME Homer City completed a sale-leaseback of the Homer City facilities to third-party lessors for an aggregate purchase price of
$1.591 billion, made up of $782 million in cash and assumption of debt (the fair value of which was $809.3 million). This transaction has been accounted for as a lease financing
for accounting purposes. See "Note 4. Sale-Leaseback Transaction."

Note 2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Management's Use of Estimates in Financial Statements

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires management to make estimates and
assumptions that affect reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and
expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

EME Homer City considers cash and cash equivalents to include cash and short-term investments with original maturities of three months or less.

Inventory

Inventory consists of spare parts, coal and fuel oil and is stated at the lower of weighted average cost or market.

54

---

Property, Plant and Equipment

Property, plant and equipment are stated at cost. Depreciation and amortization is computed on a straight-line basis over the following estimated
useful lives:

Plant and equipment under lease financing

33.67 yearsLeasehold improvements

33.67 yearsEmission allowances

33.67 yearsEquipment, furniture and fixtures

4 to 10 yearsCapitalized leased equipment

5 years


As
part of the acquisition of the Homer City facilities, EME Homer City acquired emission allowances under the EPA's Acid Rain Program. Although the emission allowances granted under
this program are freely transferable, EME Homer City intends to use substantially all of the emission allowances in the normal course of its business to generate electricity. Accordingly, EME Homer
City has classified emission allowances expected to be used to generate power as part of property, plant and equipment.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets

EME Homer City periodically evaluates the potential impairment of its long-lived assets based on a review of estimated future cash flows expected to
be generated. If the carrying amount of the asset exceeds the amount of the expected future cash flows, undiscounted and without interest charges, then an impairment loss for EME Homer City's
long-lived assets is recognized in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 144 "Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets."

Repairs and Maintenance

Certain major pieces of equipment require repairs and maintenance on a periodic basis. These costs, including major maintenance costs, are expensed as incurred.

Capitalized Interest

Interest incurred on funds borrowed by EME Homer City to finance project construction is capitalized. Capitalization of interest is discontinued when the projects
are completed and deemed operational. Such capitalized interest is included in property, plant and equipment. EME Homer City capitalized $10.5 million for the year ended December 31,
2001. EME Homer City did not capitalize any interest in 2003 and 2002, as the environmental improvement assets subject to interest capitalization were placed into service during the fourth quarter of
2001.

Revenue Recognition

EME Homer City records revenue and related costs as electricity is generated or services are provided unless EME Homer City is subject to Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 133, "Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities" and does not qualify for the normal sales and purchases exception. EME Homer City enters into power
and fuel hedging and optimization transactions under a contract with Edison Mission Marketing & Trading. These transactions are executed primarily through the use of physical forward commodity
purchases and sales and financial commodity swaps and options. With respect to its physical forward contracts, EME Homer City takes title to the commodities, and assumes the risks and rewards of
ownership. Therefore, EME Homer City records settlement of non-trading physical forward contracts on a gross basis. Consistent with Emerging Issues Task Force No. 03-11,
"Reporting Realized Gains and Losses on Derivative Instruments that are

55

---

Subject
to FASB Statement No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Investments and Hedging Activities, and Not Held for Trading Purposes," EME Homer City nets the cost of purchased power against
related third party sales in markets that use locational marginal pricing, currently PJM. Financial swap and option transactions are settled net and, accordingly, EME Homer City does not take title to
the underlying commodity. Accordingly, gains and losses from settlement of financial swaps and options are recorded net. Managed risks typically include commodity price risk associated with fuel
purchases and power sales.

Derivative Instruments

SFAS No. 133 as amended and interpreted by other related accounting literature, establishes accounting and reporting standards for derivative instruments
(including certain derivative instruments embedded in other contracts), SFAS No. 133 requires companies to record derivatives on their balance sheets as either assets or liabilities measured at
their fair value unless exempted from derivative treatment as a
normal sale and purchase. EME Homer City's physical coal contracts did not qualify as derivatives under SFAS No. 133. All changes in the fair value of derivatives are recognized currently in
earnings unless specific hedge criteria are met, which requires that a company must formally document, designate, and assess the effectiveness of transactions that receive hedge accounting.

SFAS
No. 133 sets forth the accounting requirements for cash flow and fair value hedges. SFAS No. 133 provides that the effective portion of the gain or loss on a
derivative instrument designated and qualifying as a cash flow hedging instrument be reported as a component of other comprehensive income and be reclassified into earnings in the same period during
which the hedged forecasted transaction affects earnings. The remaining gain or loss on the derivative instrument, if any, must be recognized currently in earnings. SFAS No. 133 provides that
the changes in fair value of derivatives designated as fair value hedges and the corresponding changes in the fair value of the hedged risk attributable to a recognized asset, liability, or
unrecognized firm commitment be recorded in earnings. If the fair value hedge is effective, the amounts recorded will offset in earnings.

Cumulative Effect of Change in Accounting Principle

For the year ended December 31, 2001, EME Homer City recorded an $86.7 million, after tax, decrease to other comprehensive income reflected in
partners' equity in the balance sheet related to its forward energy sales contracts as the cumulative effect of the adoption of SFAS No. 133, as amended and interpreted. The cumulative effect
on prior periods' net income resulting from the change in accounting for derivatives in accordance with SFAS No. 133 was not material. For the year ended December 31, 2002, EME Homer
City recorded a $6.4 million, after tax, increase to other comprehensive income reflected in partners' equity in the balance sheet as the cumulative effect of adoption of SFAS No. 133 as
a result of a revised interpretation effective April 1, 2002 related its forward energy sales contracts.

Income Taxes

EME Homer City has made an election to be taxed as a corporation for federal and California state tax purposes. EME Homer City is included in the consolidated
federal and state income tax returns of Edison International and is party to a tax allocation agreement with its indirect parent, Edison Mission Holdings Co. As long as Edison International continues
to own, directly or indirectly, at least 80% of the voting power of the stock of EME and its existing subsidiaries and at least 80% of the value of such stock, EME Homer City will be included in the
consolidated federal and state income tax returns of Edison International. In accordance with the agreement and the tax-allocation procedures in effect since EME Homer City's formation,
its current tax liability or benefit is generally determined on a separate return basis, except for calculating consolidated state income taxes, for which EME Homer City uses the long term state tax
apportionment factors of the Edison International

56

---

group.
Also, while EME Homer City is generally subject to separate return limitations for net losses, under the tax-allocation agreement EME Homer City is permitted to transfer to Edison
Mission Holdings Co., or its subsidiaries, net operating loss benefits which would not yet be realized in a separate return in exchange for a reduction in its intercompany account balances (including
subordinated loans). EME Homer City also files a separate state income tax return in Pennsylvania. During the fourth quarter of 2002, EME Homer City realized $73.7 million of the tax receivable
on its books through a reduction in amounts owed under its subordinated revolving loan agreement with Edison Mission Finance.

EME
Homer City accounts for deferred income taxes using the asset-and-liability method, wherein deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for future tax
consequences of temporary differences between the carrying amounts and the tax bases of assets and liabilities using enacted rates.

Effective
January 1, 2001, EME Homer City is being treated as a corporation for Pennsylvania state income tax purposes, and accordingly has reflected the Pennsylvania state tax
provision in the financial statements. Prior to 2001, EME Homer City was treated as a partnership for Pennsylvania state income tax purposes, and the income or loss of EME Homer City was included in
the Pennsylvania state income tax returns of the individual partners. Accordingly, no recognition has been given to Pennsylvania state income taxes in the financial statements for those years.

New Accounting Standards

Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 143

Effective January 1, 2003, EME Homer City adopted Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 143, "Accounting for Asset Retirement
Obligations." SFAS No. 143 requires entities to record the fair value of a liability for an asset retirement obligation in the period in which it is incurred. When the liability is initially
recorded, the entity capitalizes the cost by increasing the carrying amount of the related long-lived asset. Over time, the liability is increased to its present value each period, and the
capitalized cost is depreciated over the useful life of the related asset. Upon settlement of the liability, an entity either settles the obligation for its recorded amount or incurs a gain or loss
upon settlement. On January 1, 2003, EME Homer City recorded a $958 thousand, after tax, decrease to net income as the cumulative effect of adoption of SFAS No. 143.

EME
Homer City recorded a liability representing expected future costs associated with site reclamation, facilities dismantlement and removal of environmental hazards as follows:

Initial asset retirement obligation as of January 1, 2003

$
3,862Accretion expense


386Balance of asset retirement obligation as of December 31, 2003

$
4,248


Had
SFAS No. 143 been applied retroactively in the years ended December 31, 2002 and 2001, it would not have had a material effect upon EME Homer City's results of
operations.

Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 146

Effective January 1, 2003, EME Homer City adopted Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 146, "Accounting for Costs Associated with Exit or
Disposal Activities." SFAS No. 146 requires that liabilities for costs associated with exit or disposal activities initiated after December 31, 2002 be recognized when incurred, rather
than at the date of a commitment to an exit or disposal plan. The adoption of this standard had no impact on EME Homer City's financial statements.

57

---

Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 149

In April 2003, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 149, "Amendment of Statement
133 on Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities." This statement amends and clarifies financial accounting and reporting for derivative instruments and for hedging activities under SFAS
No. 133. The amendment reflects decisions made by the FASB and the Derivatives Implementation Group (DIG) process in connection with issues raised about the application of SFAS No. 133.
Generally, the provisions of SFAS No. 149 will be applied prospectively for contracts entered into or modified after June 30, 2003 and for hedging relationships designated after
June 30, 2003. SFAS No. 149 provisions that resulted from the DIG process that became effective in fiscal quarters beginning before June 15, 2003 will continue to be applied based
upon their original effective dates. The adoption of this standard had no impact on EME Homer City's financial statements.

Statement of Financial Accounting Standards Interpretation No. 45

In November 2002, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards Interpretation No. 45, "Guarantor's Accounting and Disclosure
Requirements for Guarantees, Including Indirect Guarantees of Indebtedness of Others." This interpretation establishes reporting requirements to be made by a guarantor about its obligations under
certain guarantees that it has issued. It also clarifies that a guarantor is required to recognize, at the inception of a guarantee, a liability for the fair value of the obligation undertaken in
issuing the guarantee. The initial recognition and initial measurement provisions of this interpretation are applicable on a prospective basis to guarantees issued or modified after
December 31, 2002. The adoption of this standard had no impact on EME Homer City's financial statements. See disclosure regarding guarantees and indemnities in
Note 10Commitments and Contingencies.

Statement of Financial Accounting Standards Interpretation No. 46

In December 2003, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards Interpretation No. 46, "Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities."
The primary objective of the interpretation is to provide guidance on the identification of, and financial reporting for, entities over which control is achieved through means other than voting
rights; such entities are known as variable interest entities. This interpretation applies to variable interest entities created after January 31, 2003, and applies to variable interest
entities in which EME Homer City holds a variable interest that it acquired before February 1, 2003. This interpretation is effective for special purpose entities as of December 31, 2003
and for all other entities as of March 31, 2004. EME Homer City does not expect the adoption of this standard will have a material impact on its financial statements.

Emerging Issues Task Force No. 03-11

In July 2003, the EITF reached a consensus on Issue No. 03-11, "Reporting Realized Gains and Losses on Derivative Instruments that are
Subject to FASB Statement No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, and Not Held for Trading Purposes." EITF Issue No. 03-11 provides guidance on
whether realized gains and losses on derivative contracts should be reported on a net or gross basis and concludes such classification is a matter of judgment that depends on the relevant facts and
circumstances. In analyzing the facts and circumstances, EITF Issue No. 99-19, "Reporting Revenue Gross as a Principal Versus Net as an Agent," should be considered. Gains and
losses on non-trading derivative instruments are recognized in income (loss) from price risk management in the accompanying income statements. The consensus is effective prospectively for
EME Homer City transactions or arrangements entered into or modified after September 30, 2003. The consensus had no impact on EME Homer City's financial statements.

58

---

Note 3. Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)

Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) consisted of the following:

Unrealized Gains
(Losses) on Cash
Flow Hedges

Accumulated Other
Comprehensive
Income (Loss)Balance at December 31, 2002

$
(4,415
)
$
(4,415
)Current period change


(5,457
)

(5,457
)Balance at December 31, 2003

$
(9,872
)
$
(9,872
)


Unrealized
losses on cash flow hedges at December 31, 2003 primarily include forward energy sales contracts that did not meet the normal sales and purchases exception under SFAS
No. 133. These losses arise because current forecasts of future electricity prices are higher than EME Homer City's contract prices. As EME Homer City's hedged positions are realized,
approximately $9.9 million, after tax, of the net unrealized losses on cash flow hedges will be reclassified into earnings during the next twelve months. Management expects that when the hedged
items are recognized in earnings, the net unrealized losses associated with them will be offset. Actual amounts ultimately reclassified to earnings over the next twelve months could vary materially
from this estimated amount as a result of changes in market conditions. The maximum period over which a cash flow hedge is designated is through December 31, 2004.

Under
SFAS No. 133, the portion of a cash flow hedge that does not offset the change in value of the transaction being hedged, which is commonly referred to as the ineffective
portion, is immediately recognized in earnings. EME Homer City recorded a net gain (loss) of $11.0 million and $(1.5) million during the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002,
respectively, representing the amount of the ineffective portion of cash flow hedges, reflected in income (loss) from price risk management in the income statement. No comparable amount was recorded
for the year ended December 31, 2001.

Note 4. Sale-Leaseback Transaction

On December 7, 2001, EME Homer City completed the sale-leaseback of its Homer City facilities to third-party lessors for an aggregate purchase
price of $1.591 billion, comprised of
$782 million in cash and assumption of debt (the fair value of which was $809.3 million). In connection with the sale-leaseback, EME Homer City used $432 million to
repay affiliate interest and debt, paid $73 million to its affiliate for taxes due resulting from the sale, paid $138 million of dividends to its partners, and deposited
$139 million in a restricted cash account. The leases EME Homer City entered into as part of this transaction are referred to as facility leases. The transaction has been accounted for as a
lease financing for accounting purposes, which means that EME Homer City reflects the Homer City facility as an asset on its balance sheet, although EME Homer City has no legal ownership, and records
the net present value of the future minimum lease payments as lease debt. Under the terms of the 33.67 year leases, EME Homer City is obligated to make semi-annual lease payments on
each April 1 and October 1. The gain on the sale of the Homer City facilities has been deferred and is being amortized over the term of the lease.

The
rent payments that EME Homer City owes under the sale-leaseback are comprised of two components, a senior rent portion and an equity rent portion. The senior rent is used
exclusively for debt service to the holders of the senior secured bonds, while the equity rent is paid to the owner lessors. If EME Homer City does not meet specified debt service coverage ratios
while the lease debt is outstanding, it will not pay the equity portion of the rent to the owner lessors. Accordingly, the sale-leaseback documentation does not permit the lessor to
terminate the lease in the event of non-payment of the equity portion of the rent while the lease debt is outstanding.

59

---

In
order to pay the equity portion of the rent, EME Homer City is required to meet historical and projected senior rent service coverage ratios of 1.7 to 1 subject to reduction to 1.3 to
1 under circumstances specified in the participation agreements. During the 12 months ended December 31, 2003, the senior rent service coverage ratio was 4.68 to 1. The senior rent
service coverage ratio is determined by dividing net cash flow as defined in the participation agreements by the senior rent due in that period. If all accrued rent, including both the senior portion
and the equity portion of the rent, has been paid and all other required conditions have been met, amounts remaining in the distribution account will be available for distribution to the partners in
EME Homer City or available to prepay principal under the intercompany loan agreement with Edison Mission Finance, subject to certain restrictions in the sale-leaseback documentation,
including the restrictions on distributions described below.

EME
Homer City's use of cash in its bank accounts is limited to specific operating and capital expenditures as set forth in the Security Deposit Agreement executed as part of the
sale-leaseback transaction. In addition, a restricted cash account was funded in the amount of $139 million at the closing of the sale-leaseback transaction. The amount in the
account will be available for payments due on the equity portion of lease rent, during specified periods, and in accordance with the sale-leaseback documents, unless there is a default in the payment
of the senior portion of lease rent, in which case the amount will be available to pay such senior portion of the lease rent. The release of funds from this restricted cash account is permitted
provided EME Homer City maintains a specified reserve balance in accordance with the sale-leaseback documents, no event of default shall have
occurred or be continuing and no two failed rent payments shall have occurred. EME Homer City had approximately $40 million in restricted cash at December 31, 2003.

The
following table summarizes EME Homer City's future commitments under the facility leases at December 31, 2003.

Years Ending December 31,2004

$
142,1492005


151,8952006


151,6152007


150,8022008


152,173Thereafter


2,280,304Total future commitments

$
3,028,938Amount representing interest


(1,602,301
)Net commitments

$
1,426,637


Under
the participation agreements entered into as part of the sale-leaseback transaction, EME Homer City's ability to enter into specified transactions and to engage in
specified business activities, including financing and investment activities, is subject to significant restrictions. These restrictions could affect, and in some cases significantly limit or
prohibit, EME Homer City's ability to, among other things, merge, consolidate or sell its assets, create liens on its properties or assets, enter into non-permitted trading activities,
enter into transactions with its affiliates, incur indebtedness, create, incur, assume or suffer to exist guarantees or contingent obligations, make restricted payments to its partners, make capital
expenditures, own subsidiaries, liquidate or dissolve, engage in non-permitted business activities, sublease EME Homer City's leasehold interests in the facilities or make improvements to
the facilities. Accordingly, EME Homer City's liquidity is substantially based on its ability to generate cash flow from operations. If EME Homer City is unable to generate cash flow from operations,
it will have limited ability to obtain additional capital, unless its partners provide additional funding, which they are under no legal obligation to do so.

60

---

Note 5. Property, Plant and Equipment

At December 31, 2003 and 2002, property, plant and equipment consisted of the following:

2003

2002Land

$
4,250

$
4,250Power plant and equipment under lease financing


1,591,318


1,591,318Leasehold improvements


54,407


25,366Emission allowances


438,068


438,068Construction in progress


4,974


1,430Equipment, furniture and fixtures


11,747


8,255Capital leased equipment


916


9162,105,680


2,069,603Accumulated depreciation and amortization


(163,498
)

(99,997
)Property, plant and equipment, net

$
1,942,182

$
1,969,606


As
a result of the sale-leaseback transaction on December 7, 2001, a majority of the generating facilities and equipment were classified as power plant and equipment
under lease financing. EME Homer City recorded amortization expense related to the leased facilities of $47.3 million for both years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002. Accumulated
amortization related to the leased facilities was $97.6 million and $50.4 million at December 31, 2003 and 2002, respectively.

Note 6. Long-Term Debt

During 1999, EME Homer City's indirect parent company, Edison Mission Holdings, issued $300 million aggregate principal amount of 8.137% senior secured
bonds due 2019 and $530 million aggregate principal amount of 8.734% senior secured bonds due 2026 (collectively, the "Senior Secured Bonds"). Also in 1999, Edison Mission Holdings entered into
a $250 million construction loan (the "Environmental Capital Improvements Facility"), and a $50 million line of credit (the "Working Capital Facility"). The proceeds from these
borrowings were loaned by Edison Mission Holdings to Edison Mission Finance under a subordinated loan agreement (the "Finance Subordinated Loan"). Edison Mission Finance then loaned the same amounts
to EME Homer City under a subordinated loan agreement (the "Subordinated Loan"). Interest rates and other charges as well as maturity dates associated with the Subordinated Loan mirrored the
associated debt at Edison Mission Holdings. EME Homer City also entered into a subordinated revolving loan agreement (the "Revolver") during 1999 with Edison Mission Finance. The Revolver bears
interest at a fixed rate of 8.0% on outstanding amounts and terminates on March 18, 2014. EME Homer City owed approximately $498 million and $554 million under the Revolver at
December 31, 2003 and 2002, respectively. The Subordinated Loan and Revolver were entered into to finance the acquisition of the Homer City facilities.

On
December 11, 2003, EME Homer City's parent company, EME, announced that its subsidiary, Mission Energy Holdings International, Inc., received funding under a
three-year,
$800 million secured loan. As part of this financing, Edison Mission Finance agreed to guarantee the term loan of Mission Energy Holdings International and pledge its loan receivable from EME
Homer City as collateral for such guarantee. Prior to the foregoing transaction, EME Homer City amended and restated the Revolver with Edison Mission Finance and issued a note evidencing its repayment
obligations under the Revolver. The amended and restated Revolver had no effect on the financial terms of the agreement.

In
December 2001, the Environmental Capital Improvements Facility and the Working Capital Facility were repaid and retired. In addition, EME Homer City settled the Subordinated
Loan with Edison Mission Finance through the assumption of the Senior Secured Bonds by the third-party lessors as part of the purchase price of the facilities and the release of EME Homer City's
guaranty of such

61

---

debt.
EME Homer City used $432 million from the proceeds of the sale-leaseback of the Homer City facilities (see Note 4. Sale-Leaseback Transaction) to repay a
portion of the interest and principal on the Revolver. Accordingly, the remaining intercompany loans are under the Revolver. EME Homer City is restricted under the participation agreements entered
into as a part of the sale-leaseback transaction from making any payments under this facility unless specified conditions are met.

EME
Homer City incurred interest costs related to its affiliate debt of $41.6 million, $49.7 million and $140.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2003,
2002 and 2001, respectively.

Note 7. Price Risk Management Activities

EME Homer City's risk management policy allows for the use of derivative financial instruments through its marketing affiliate Edison Mission Marketing & Trading
to limit financial exposure to energy prices for non-trading purposes. Use of these instruments exposes EME Homer City to commodity price risk, which includes potential losses that can
arise from a change in the market value of a particular commodity. Commodity price risk exposures are actively monitored to ensure compliance with EME Homer City's risk management policies. Policies
are in place which limit the amount of total net exposure EME Homer City may enter into at any point in time. Procedures exist that allow for monitoring of all commitments and positions with regular
reviews by a risk management committee. Edison Mission Marketing & Trading performs a "value at risk" analysis in its daily business to measure, monitor and control EME Homer City's overall
market risk exposure. The use of value at risk allows management to aggregate overall commodity risk, compare risk on a consistent basis and identify the risk factors. Value at risk measures the
possible loss over a given time interval, under normal market conditions, at a given confidence level. Given the inherent limitations of value at risk and reliance upon a single risk measurement tool,
Edison Mission Marketing & Trading supplements this approach with the use of stress testing and worst-case scenario analysis for key risk factors, as well as stop loss limits and
counterparty credit exposure limits. Despite this, there can be no assurance that all risks have been accurately identified, measured and/or mitigated.

The
following table summarizes the fair values for outstanding financial instruments used for price risk management activities by instrument type:

December 31,2003

2002Commodity price:Electricity contracts

$
(8,767
)
$
(9,284
)Other





(301
)Total fair value

$
(8,767
)
$
(9,585
)


62

---

Note 8. Income Taxes

Income tax expense includes the current tax liability from operations and the change in deferred income taxes during the year. The components of the net
accumulated deferred income tax liability were:

Years Ended December 31,2003

2002Deferred tax assetsLease financing

$
20,464

$
13,785Price risk management


3,150


4,409Property, plant and equipmentbasis differences


3,236


1,567Employee benefits


1,549


20Pennsylvania net operating loss carryforward


1,404


2,164Accrued expenses


1,525


(244
)Other


(2,075
)

(790
)Subtotal


29,253


20,911Valuation allowance


(1,404
)

(2,164
)Deferred tax asset

$
27,849

$
18,747


EME
Homer City has $14 million of loss carryforwards at December 31, 2003 from Pennsylvania tax losses which expire beginning in 2022 and are limited in use to
$2 million per year.

The
provision (benefit) for income taxes is comprised of the following:

Years Ended December 31,2003

2002

2001CurrentFederal

$
12,457

$
(11,971
)
$
64,802State


9,870


(1,209
)

13,973Total current


22,327


(13,180
)

78,775DeferredFederal


(4,036
)

(12,634
)

(46,511
)State


160


(9,098
)

(6,024
)Total deferred


(3,876
)

(21,732
)

(52,535
)Provision (benefit) for income taxes

$
18,451

$
(34,912
)
$
26,240


Variations
from the 35% federal statutory rate are as follows:

Years Ended December 31,2003

2002

2001Expected provision (benefit) for federal income taxes

$
11,444

$
(28,213
)
$
21,073Increase in taxes from:State tax, net of federal benefit


7,007


(6,699
)

5,167Total provision (benefit) for income taxes

$
18,451

$
(34,912
)
$
26,240Effective tax rate


56.4
%

(43.3
)%

43.6
%


63

---

Note 9. Employee Benefits Plans

Employees of EME Homer City are eligible for various benefit plans of Edison International.

Pension Plans

EME Homer City maintains a pension plan specifically for the benefit of its union employees. EME Homer City's non-union employees participate in the
Edison International pension plan. Both plans are noncontributory, defined benefit pension plans and cover employees who fulfill minimum service requirements. The Edison International plan has a cash
balance feature.

The
expected contributions (all by employer) for the plans are approximately $1.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2004. The amount is subject to change based on,
among other things, the limits established for federal tax deductibility.

EME
Homer City uses a December 31 measurement date for all its plans.

Information
on plan assets and benefits obligations is shown below:

|                                                           |                                                   | Years Ended December 31,                    |       
|---------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------- | ------
|
|
|Change in projected benefit obligation                     |                                                   |                                             |       
|                                                           | Projected benefit obligation at beginning of year |                                             | $     
|                                                           | Service cost                                      |                                             |       
|                                                           | Interest cost                                     |                                             |       
|                                                           | Actuarial loss                                    |                                             |       
|                                                           | Benefits paid                                     |                                             |       
|                                                           |                                                   |                                             |       
|                                                           |                                                   | Projected benefit obligation at end of year |       
|                                                           |                                                   |                                             |       
|Accumulated benefit obligation at end of year              |                                                   | $                                           | 6,500 
|                                                           |                                                   |                                             |       
|Change in plan assets                                      |                                                   |                                             |       
|                                                           | Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year    |                                             | $     
|                                                           | Actual return on plan assets                      |                                             |       
|                                                           | Employer contributions                            |                                             |       
|                                                           | Benefits paid                                     |                                             |       
|                                                           |                                                   |                                             |       
|                                                           |                                                   | Fair value of plan assets at end of year    |       
|                                                           |                                                   |                                             |       
|Funded status                                              |                                                   | $                                           | (6,128
|Unrecognized net loss                                      |                                                   |                                             | 1,393 
|                                                           |                                                   |                                             |       
|Recorded liability                                         |                                                   | $                                           | (4,735
|                                                           |                                                   |                                             |       
|Additional detail of amounts recognized in balance sheets: |                                                   |                                             |       
|Intangible asset                                           |                                                   |                                             |      
|Accumulated other comprehensive income                     |                                                   |                                             |      
|Weighted-average assumptions at end of year:               |                                                   |                                             |       
|Discount rate                                              |                                                   |                                             | 6.00  
|Rate of compensation increase                              |                                                   |                                             | 5.00  

64

---

Components
of pension expense are:

|                                                 |  | Years Ended December 31,
|------------------------------------------------ |  | ------------------------
|
|
|Service cost                                     |  | $                       
|Interest cost                                    |  |                         
|Expected return on plan assets                   |  |                         
|Net amortization and deferral                    |  |                         
|                                                 |  |                         
|Total expense recognized                         |  | $                       
|                                                 |  |                         
|Change in accumulated other comprehensive income |  |                         

|                               |  | Years Ended December 31, |  
|------------------------------ |  | ------------------------ | -
|
|
|Weighted-average assumptions:  |  |                          |  
|Discount rate                  |  | 6.50                     | %
|Rate of compensation increase  |  | 5.00                     | %
|Expected return on plan assets |  | 8.50                     | %

Asset
allocations for plans are:

|                         |  |    |   | December 31, |  
|------------------------ |  | -- | - | ------------ | -
|
|
|United States equity     |  | 45 | % | 46           | %
|Non-United States equity |  | 25 | % | 26           | %
|Private equity           |  | 4  | % | 3            | %
|Fixed income             |  | 26 | % | 25           | %

Postretirement Benefits Other Than Pensions

A portion of EME Homer City's non-union employees retiring at or after age 55 with at least ten years of service are eligible for postretirement
health care, dental, life insurance and other benefits paid in part by EME Homer City. Eligibility depends on a number of factors, including the employee's hire date. Employees in union-represented
positions who were eligible to retire prior to May 14, 2002 are covered under the postretirement benefit plans of GPU, Inc., their employer prior to EME Homer City's acquisition of the
facilities in 1999. EME Homer City has accounted for postretirement benefit obligations on the basis of a substantive plan under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 106, "Employers'
Accounting for Postretirement Benefits Other Than Pension" (SFAS No. 106). A substantive plan means that EME Homer City assumed for accounting purposes that it would provide postretirement
benefits to union-represented employees following the conclusion of negotiations to replace the benefits agreement scheduled to expire on May 14, 2003. In May 2003, EME Homer City
reached agreement with the union on a new collective bargaining agreement covering wages, benefits and working conditions. The new agreement runs from May 14, 2003 to December 31, 2006.
Accordingly, EME Homer City will amortize the impact over the estimated remaining service of covered employees.

On
December 8, 2003, President Bush signed the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003. The Act authorized a federal subsidy to be provided to plan
sponsors for certain prescription drug benefits under Medicare. EME Homer City has elected to defer accounting for the effects of the Act until the earlier of the issuance of guidance by the Financial
Accounting

65

---

Standards
Board on how to account for the Act, or the remeasurement of plan assets and obligations subsequent to January 31, 2004. Accordingly, any measures of the accumulated postretirement
benefit obligation or net periodic postretirement benefit expense in the financial statements or this note do not reflect the effects of the Act on EME Homer City's plan.

The
expected contributions (all by the employer) for the postretirement benefits other than pensions plan are $12 thousand for the year ended December 31, 2004. This amount
is subject to change based on, among other things, the Act referenced above and the impact of any benefit plan amendments.

EME
Homer City uses a December 31 measurement date for all its plans.

Information
on plan assets and benefit obligations is shown below:

|                                             |                                                | Years Ended December 31,                 |        
|-------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------- | -------
|
|
|Change in benefit obligation                 |                                                |                                          |        
|                                             | Benefit obligation at beginning of year        |                                          | $      
|                                             | Service cost                                   |                                          |        
|                                             | Interest cost                                  |                                          |        
|                                             | Actuarial loss (gain)                          |                                          |        
|                                             | Amendment                                      |                                          |        
|                                             | Benefits paid                                  |                                          |        
|                                             |                                                |                                          |        
|                                             |                                                | Benefit obligation at end of year        |        
|                                             |                                                |                                          |        
|Change in plan assets                        |                                                |                                          |        
|                                             | Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year |                                          | $      
|                                             | Employer contributions                         |                                          |        
|                                             | Benefits paid                                  |                                          |        
|                                             |                                                |                                          |        
|                                             |                                                | Fair value of plan assets at end of year |        
|                                             |                                                |                                          |        
|Funded status                                |                                                | $                                        | (12,547
|Unrecognized net loss                        |                                                |                                          | 87     
|Unrecognized prior service cost              |                                                |                                          |       
|                                             |                                                |                                          |        
|Recorded liability                           |                                                | $                                        | (12,460
|                                             |                                                |                                          |        
|Assumed health care cost trend rates:        |                                                |                                          |        
|Rate assumed for following year              |                                                |                                          | 12.00  
|Ultimate rate                                |                                                |                                          | 5.00   
|Year ultimate rate reached                   |                                                |                                          | 2010   
|Weighted-average assumptions at end of year: |                                                |                                          |        
|Discount rate                                |                                                |                                          | 6.25   

66

---

Expense
components of postretirement benefits are:

|                                      |  | Years Ended December 31, |      
|------------------------------------- |  | ------------------------ | -----
|
|
|Service cost                          |  | $                        | 465  
|Interest cost                         |  |                          | 698  
|Net amortization and deferral         |  |                          |     
|                                      |  |                          |      
|Total expense (revenue)               |  | $                        | 1,163
|                                      |  |                          |      
|Assumed health care cost trend rates: |  |                          |      
|Current year                          |  |                          | 9.75 
|Ultimate rate                         |  |                          | 5.00 
|Year ultimate rate reached            |  |                          | 2008 
|Weighted-average assumptions:         |  |                          |      
|Discount rate                         |  |                          | 6.40 

For
the non-union plan, increasing the health care cost trend rate by one percentage point would increase the accumulated obligation as of December 31, 2003, by
$511 thousand and annual aggregate service and interest costs by $48 thousand. Decreasing the health care cost trend rate by one percentage point would decrease the accumulated
obligation as of December 31, 2003, by $421 thousand and annual aggregate service and interest costs by $39 thousand.

For
the union plan, increasing the health care cost trend rate by one percentage point would increase the accumulated obligation as of December 31, 2003, by $2.5 million
and annual aggregate service and interest costs by $228 thousand. Decreasing the health care cost trend rate by one percentage point would decrease the accumulated obligation as of
December 31, 2003, by $2.1 million and annual aggregate service and interest costs by $190 thousand.

Description of Investment Strategies for United States Plans

The investment of plan assets is overseen by a fiduciary investment committee. Plan assets are invested using a combination of asset classes, and may have active
and passive investment strategies within asset classes. EME Homer City employs multiple investment management firms. Investment managers within each asset class cover a range of investment styles and
approaches. Risk is controlled through diversification among multiple asset classes, managers, styles, and securities. Plan, asset class and individual manager performance is measured against targets.
EME Homer City also monitors the stability of its investments managers' organizations.

Allowable
investment types include:



67

---



Permitted
ranges around asset class portfolio weights are plus or minus 5%. Where approved by the fiduciary investment committee, futures contracts are used for portfolio rebalancing and
to approach fully invested portfolio positions. Where authorized, a few of the plan's investment managers employ limited use of derivatives, including futures contracts, options, options on futures
and interest rate swaps in place of direct investment in securities to gain efficient exposure to markets. Derivatives are not used to leverage the plans or any portfolios.

Determination of the Expected Long-Term Rate of Return on Assets for United States Plans

The overall expected long term rate of return on assets assumption is based on the target asset allocation for plan assets, capital markets return forecasts for
asset classes employed, and active management excess return expectations.

Capital Markets Return Forecasts

The estimated total return for fixed income is based on an equilibrium yield for intermediate United States government bonds plus a premium for exposure to
non-government bonds in the broad fixed income market. The equilibrium yield is based on analysis of historic data and is consistent with experience over various economic environments. The
premium of the broad market over United States government bonds is a historic average premium. The estimated rate of return for equity is estimated to be a 3% premium over the estimated total return
of intermediate United States government bonds. This value is determined by combining estimates of real earnings growth, dividend yields and inflation, each of which is determined using historical
analysis. The rate of return for private equity is estimated to be a 5% premium over public equity, reflecting a premium for higher volatility and illiquidity.

Active Management Excess Return Expectations

For asset classes that are actively managed, an excess return premium is added to the capital market return forecasts discussed above.

Employee Stock Plans

A 401(k) plan is maintained to supplement eligible employees' retirement income. EME Homer City matches 100 percent of non-union employee
contributions up to 6 percent of such employees' annual compensation. EME Homer City also matches 65 percent of contributions made by union employees, up to 2.6 percent of annual
compensation. Employer contributions vest 20 percent per year. Contribution expense for the years ended December 31, 2003, 2002 and 2001 was approximately $508 thousand,
$488 thousand and $440 thousand, respectively.

Note 10. Commitments and Contingencies

Lease Swap Agreement

In connection with the sale-leaseback transaction, EME Homer City has entered into a swap agreement with a bank in order to more effectively match its
cash flow, which generally is higher during the summer months when energy prices are higher, with its lease payments. Under the terms of this swap, EME Homer City made an initial deposit of
$37 million with the bank in December 2001. Beginning in April 2002 through April 2014, the bank will make a swap payment to EME Homer City in April of each year and EME
Homer City will make a swap payment to the bank in October of each year. The amount of payments is designed to reverse the semi-annual payments due under the lease such that EME Homer City
effectively has lower cash obligations in April and higher cash obligations in October. In April 2003, EME Homer City received a payment of $87.0 million and in October 2003 EME
Homer City made a payment of $54.6 million, resulting in a net deposit balance of $35.0 million at December 31, 2003. EME Homer City is also required to fund one-sixth
of the October swap

68

---

payment
each month, between April and September of each year, into a restricted cash account. The implicit interest rate, which was fixed at inception of the swap agreement, is based on LIBOR during
periods that EME Homer City has a net deposit with the bank, and LIBOR plus 5% during periods that EME Homer City has a net loan with the bank.

Capital Improvements

EME Homer City contracted with a division of ABB Flakt, now Alstom Power, to make environmental capital improvements to its generating units. The contractor was
retained to construct a limestone-based, wet scrubber flue gas desulfurization system at Unit 3 and a selective catalytic reduction system at each of the three units. These improvements were intended
to enable the Homer City generating units to comply with Phase II of Title IV of the federal Clean Air Act regarding sulfur oxide emissions, the Pennsylvania nitrogen oxide allowance regulations and
Pennsylvania's response to the United States EPA's State Implementation Plan Call regarding nitrogen oxide emissions. The contract consists of a fixed price, turnkey engineering, procurement and
construction contract, including project management costs and other project costs. EME Homer City has spent $296 million related to this contract through December 31, 2003, which
substantially concludes the capital requirements for the project.

The
wet scrubber flue gas desulfurization system on Unit 3 has been installed and is operational. The selective catalytic reduction system on Unit 3 was installed but went out of service
on February 10, 2002 due to a collapse of ductwork which caused the entire unit to shut down. Unit 3 was returned to service on April 4, 2002 and operated with the selective catalytic
reduction system bypassed until June 19, 2003, when the selective catalytic reduction system was returned to service. EME Homer City believes that the costs to repair the damage will be
covered, for the most part, by insurance and the contractual obligations of the contractor. EME Homer City recovered $19.3 million under its insurance
programs during 2003 and has an additional $3.8 million recorded as a receivable at December 31, 2003. EME Homer City may be entitled to additional recovery of business interruption
losses, but such determination has not been made or quantified at this time.

The
selective catalytic reduction systems on Units 1 and 2 have also been installed and several improvements were made during 2002 and 2003 to resolve past operating and structural
issues. The contractor re-commissioned these units and the selective catalytic reduction systems for Units 1 and 2 have been operational since April 19, 2003 and May 18,
2003, respectively.

Fuel Supply Contracts

EME Homer City has entered into several fuel purchase agreements with various third-party suppliers for the purchase of bituminous steam coal and fuel oil. These
contracts call for the purchase of a minimum quantity over the term of the contracts, which extend from one to four years from December 31, 2003, with an option at EME Homer City's discretion
to purchase additional amounts as stated in the agreements. At December 31, 2003, based on the contract provisions that consist of fixed prices, subject to adjustment clauses in certain cases,
these minimum commitments are currently estimated to aggregate $354 million over the duration of the contracts summarized as follows: 2004$170 million;
2005$135 million; 2006$30 million; and 2007$19 million.

Coal Cleaning Agreement

EME Homer City has entered into a Coal Cleaning Agreement with Homer City Coal Processing Corporation to operate and maintain a coal cleaning plant owned by EME
Homer City. Under the terms of the agreement, EME Homer City is obligated to reimburse Homer City Coal Processing Corporation for the actual costs incurred in the operations and maintenance of the
coal cleaning plant, a fixed general and administrative service fee of approximately $260 thousand per year, and an

69

---

operating
fee that ranges from $.20 to $.35 per ton depending on the level of tonnage. At December 31, 2003, the minimum commitment is currently estimated at $6.6 million in each 2004
and 2005. The agreement expired on August 31, 2002 and was renewed with the same terms through December 31, 2005, with a two-year extension option.

Commitments

Interconnection Agreement

EME Homer City's general partner, Mission Energy Westside, has entered into an interconnection agreement with New York State Electric & Gas Corporation, or
NYSEG, and Pennsylvania Electric Company, or Penelec, an affiliate of GPU, Inc., to provide interconnection services necessary to interconnect the Homer City facilities with NYSEG and Penelec's
transmission systems. Unless terminated earlier in accordance with its terms, the interconnection agreement will terminate on a date mutually agreed to by Mission Energy Westside, NYSEG and Penelec.
This date will not exceed the retirement date of the Homer City units. NYSEG and Penelec have agreed to extend such interconnection services (but not the expiration of the agreement) to modifications,
additions, upgrades or repowering of the Homer City units. Mission Energy Westside is required to compensate NYSEG and Penelec for all reasonable costs associated with any modifications, additions or
replacements made to NYSEG or Penelec's interconnection facilities or transmission systems in connection with any modification, addition, upgrade or repowering to the Homer City units.

Contingencies

Guarantees and Indemnities

Tax
Indemnity Agreements

In
connection with the sale-leaseback transaction related to the Homer City facilities, EME Homer City and EME entered into tax indemnity agreements. Under these tax
indemnity agreements, EME Homer City and EME agreed to indemnify the equity investors in the sale-leaseback transaction for specified adverse tax consequences that could result in certain
situations set forth in the tax indemnity agreements, including specified defaults under the respective leases. The potential indemnity obligation under these tax indemnity agreements could be
significant. Due to the nature of the obligations under these tax indemnity agreements, EME Homer City cannot determine a maximum potential liability. The indemnities would be triggered by a valid
claim from the lessors. EME Homer City has not recorded a liability related to these indemnities.

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

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

70

---

Ash Disposal Site

EME
Homer City's ash disposal site is a permitted Class I Residual Waste Landfill, the most stringently regulated of the three categories of residual waste landfills authorized by
the regulations of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP). Each lift where coal ash is disposed must be capped and covered when it reaches final grade. EME Homer City must
also monitor groundwater quality at and adjacent to the ash disposal site through a network of monitoring wells and report the results to PADEP on a periodic basis. In the event that a disposal
facility's groundwater monitoring identifies degradation in any of its wells, PADEP's regulations require the facility to first confirm the existence and nature of the degradation by conducting a
groundwater assessment. If the assessment confirms groundwater degradation in excess of the applicable regulatory standards, the facility is then required to prepare and implement an abatement plan
that could include measures such as installing a liner in a previously unlined area. To date, no degradation has been found in the groundwater monitoring system at EME Homer City that would require
the development of an assessment or abatement plan. Management does not believe that the costs of maintaining and closing the ash disposal site will have a material impact on EME Homer City's results
of operations or financial position.

Insurance

EME
Homer City maintains insurance policies that are comparable to those carried by other electric generating facilities of similar size. The insurance program includes
all-risk real and personal property insurance, including coverage for losses from boiler and machinery breakdowns, and the perils of earthquake and flood, subject to certain sublimits. The
property insurance program currently covers losses up to $950 million. Under the terms of the participation agreements entered into on December 7, 2001 as part of the
sale-leaseback transaction, EME Homer City is required to maintain specified minimum insurance coverages if and to the extent that such insurance is available on a commercially reasonable
basis. Although the insurance covering the Homer City facilities is comparable to insurance coverages normally carried by companies engaged in similar businesses, and owning similar properties, the
insurance coverages that are in place do not meet the minimum insurance coverages required under the participation agreements. Due to the current market environment, the minimum insurance coverage is
not commercially available at reasonable prices. EME Homer City has obtained a waiver under the participation agreements which permits it to maintain its current insurance coverage through
June 1, 2004.

EME
Homer City also carries general liability insurance covering liabilities to third parties for bodily injury or property damage resulting from operations, automobile liability
insurance and excess liability
insurance. Limits and deductibles in respect of these insurance policies are comparable to those carried by other electric generating facilities of similar size.

Environmental Matters and Regulations

Introduction

EME Homer City is subject to environmental regulation by federal, state and local authorities in the United States. EME Homer City believes that it is in
substantial compliance with environmental regulatory requirements and that maintaining compliance with current requirements will not materially affect EME Homer City's financial position or results of
operation. However, possible future developments, such as the promulgation of more stringent environmental laws and regulations, future proceedings that may be initiated by environmental authorities,
and settlements agreed to by other companies could affect the costs and the manner in which EME Homer City conducts its business and could cause it to make substantial additional capital expenditures.
There is no assurance that EME

71

---

Homer
City would be able to recover these increased costs from its customers or that EME Homer City's financial position and results of operations would not be materially adversely affected.

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

State

Water Quality

The discharge from the treatment plant receiving the wastewater stream from EME Homer City's Unit 3 flue gas desulfurization system has exceeded the stringent,
water-quality based limits for selenium in the station's NPDES permit. As a result, EME Homer City has been notified by PADEP that it has been included in the Quarterly Noncompliance Report submitted
to the United States EPA. EME Homer City has met with the contractor responsible for the Unit 3 flue gas desulfurization system to discuss approaches to resolving the water quality issues and is
investigating technical alternatives for maximizing the level of selenium removal in the discharge. EME Homer City has also discussed these approaches for resolving the water quality issues with
PADEP. Pilot studies are underway, but until they are completed and the results are evaluated, EME Homer City cannot estimate the costs to comply with these selenium limits. After the results of the
pilot studies are evaluated, EME Homer City will meet with PADEP to discuss the drafting of a consent agreement to address the selenium issue and then instruct the contractor to make the necessary
improvements. The consent agreement may include the payment of civil penalties, but the amount cannot be estimated at this time.

FederalUnited States of America

Clean Air Act

EME Homer City expects that compliance with the Clean Air Act and the regulations and revised State Implementation Plans developed as a consequence of the Act
will result in increased capital expenditures and operating expenses. EME Homer City's approach to meeting these obligations will consist of a blending of capital expenditure and emissions allowance
purchases that will be based on an ongoing assessment of the dynamics of EME Homer City's market conditions.

Mercury Maximum Achievable Control Technology Determination

In December 2000, the EPA announced its intent to regulate mercury emissions and other hazardous air pollutants from coal-fired electric power
plants under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act, and indicated that it would propose a rule to regulate these emissions by no later than December 15, 2003. On December 15, 2003, EPA
issued proposed rules for regulating mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants. EPA proposed two rule options for public comment: 1) regulate mercury as a hazardous air pollutant under
Clean Air Act Sec. 112(d); or 2) rescind EPA's December 2000 finding regarding a need to control coal power plant mercury emissions as a hazardous air pollutant, and instead, promulgate
a new "cap and trade" emissions regulatory program to reduce mercury emissions in two phases by years 2010 and 2018. On February 24, 2003, the EPA announced a Supplemental Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking to provide more details on their emissions cap and trade proposal for mercury. At this time, the EPA anticipates finalizing the regulations in December 2004, with controls required
to be in place by some time between the end of 2007 (if the technology-based standard is

72

---

chosen)
and 2010 (when Phase I of the cap and trade approach would be implemented if this approach is chosen).

EME
Homer City's preliminary estimate is that the mercury regulations may require it to spend up to $300 million for capital improvements in the 2006-2010 time frame, although the
timing will depend on which proposal is adopted. However, until the regulations are finalized, EME Homer City cannot fully evaluate the potential impact of these regulations on the operation of its
facility.

National Ambient Air Quality Standards

New ambient air quality standards for ozone, coarse particulate matter and fine particulate matter were adopted by the EPA in July 1997. It is widely
understood that attainment of the fine particulate matter standard may require reductions in emissions of nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxides. These standards were challenged in the courts, and on
March 26, 2002, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld the EPA's revised ozone and fine particulate matter ambient air quality standards.

Because
of the delays resulting from the litigation over the new standards, the EPA's new schedule for implementing the ozone and fine particulate matter standards calls for designation
of attainment and non-attainment areas under the two standards in 2004. Once these designations are published, states will be required to revise their implementation plans (SIPs) to
achieve attainment of the revised standards. The revised SIPs are likely to require additional emission reductions from facilities that are significant emitters of ozone precursors and particulates.

In
December 2003, the EPA proposed rules that would require states to revise their state implementation plans to address alleged contributions to downwind areas that are not in
attainment with the revised standards for ozone and fine particulate matter. This proposed "Interstate Air Quality" rule is designed to be completed before states must revise their SIPs to address
local reductions needed to meet the new ozone and fine particulate matter standards. The proposed rule would establish a two-phase, regional cap and trade program for sulfur dioxide and
nitrogen oxide. The proposed rule would affect 27 states, including Pennsylvania. The proposed rule would require sulfur dioxide emissions and nitrogen oxide emissions to be reduced in two phases (by
2010 and 2015), with emissions reductions for each pollutant of 65% by 2015. The EPA is expected to issue final rules in December 2004.

At
this time, EME Homer City cannot predict the emission reduction targets that the EPA will ultimately adopt or the specific compliance timing. In addition, any additional obligations
on EME Homer City's facilities to further reduce their emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and fine particulates to address local non-attainment with the 8-hour ozone
and fine particulate matter standards will not be known until Pennsylvania revises its SIP. Depending upon the final standards that are adopted, EME Homer City may incur substantial costs or financial
impacts resulting from required capital improvements or operational charges.

New Source Review Requirements

On November 3, 1999, the United States Department of Justice filed suit against a number of electric utilities for alleged violations of the Clean Air
Act's new source review, or NSR, requirements related to modifications of air emissions sources at electric generating stations.

Several
utilities have reached formal agreements or agreements-in-principle with the United States to resolve alleged NSR violations. These settlements involved
installation of additional pollution controls, supplemental environment projects, and the payment of civil penalties. The agreements provided for a phased approach to achieving required emission
reductions over the next 10 to 15 years, and some called for the retirement or repowering of coal-fired generating units. The total cost of some

73

---

of
these settlements exceeded $1 billion; the civil penalties agreed to by these utilities generally range between $1 million and $10 million. Because of the uncertainty created
by the Bush administration's review of the NSR regulations and NSR enforcement proceedings, some of these settlements have not been finalized. However, the Department of Justice review released in
January 2002 concluded "EPA has a reasonable basis for arguing that the enforcement actions are consistent with both the Clean Air Act and the Administrative Procedure Act." No change in the
Department of Justice's position regarding pending NSR legal actions has been announced as a result of EPA's proposed NSR reforms (discussed immediately below). In January 2004, EPA announced
new enforcement actions against several power generating facilities.

On
December 31, 2002, the EPA finalized a rule to improve the NSR program. This rule is intended to provide additional flexibility with respect to NSR by, among other things,
modifying the method by which a facility calculates the emissions' increase from a plant modification; exempting, for a period of ten years, units that have complied with NSR requirements or otherwise
installed pollution control technology that is equivalent to what would have been required by NSR; and allowing a facility to make modifications without being required to comply with NSR if the
facility maintained emissions below plant-wide applicability limits. Although states, industry groups and environmental organizations have filed litigation challenging various aspects of
the rule, it became effective March 3, 2003. To date, the rule remains in effect, although the pending litigation could still result in changes to the final rule.

A
federal district court, ruling on a lawsuit filed by EPA, found on August 7, 2003, that the Ohio Edison Company violated requirements of the NSR within the Clean Air Act by
upgrading certain coal-fired power plants without first obtaining the necessary pre-construction permits. On August 26, 2003, another federal district court ruling in an
NSR enforcement action against Duke Energy Corporation, adopted a different interpretation of the NSR provisions that could limit liability for similar upgrade projects.

On
October 27, 2003, EPA issued a final rule revising its regulations to define more clearly a category of activities that are not subject to NSR requirements under the "routine
maintenance, repair and replacement" exclusion. This clearer definition of "routine maintenance, repair and replacement," would provide EME Homer City greater guidance in determining what investments
can be made at its existing plants to improve the safety, efficiency and reliability of its operations without triggering NSR permitting requirements, and might mitigate the potential impact of the
Ohio Edison decision. However, on December 24, 2003, the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit blocked implementation of the "routine maintenance, repair and replacement" rule,
pending further judicial review.

Prior
to EME Homer City's purchase of the Homer City facilities, the United States EPA requested information under Section 114 of the Clean Air Act from the prior owners of the
plant concerning physical changes at the plant. This request was part of the EPA's industry-wide investigation of compliance by coal-fired plants with the Clean Air Act NSR
requirements. Other than this request for information, no NSR enforcement-related proceedings have been initiated by the EPA with respect to EME Homer City's facilities.

EPA's
enforcement policy on alleged NSR violations is currently uncertain. These developments will continue to be monitored by EME Homer City to assess what implications, if any, they
will have on the operation of its power plants, or on EME Homer City's results of operations or financial position.

Federal Legislative Initiatives

There have been a number of bills introduced in the last session of Congress and the current session of Congress that would amend the Clean Air Act to
specifically target emissions of certain pollutants from electric utility generating stations. These bills would mandate reductions in emissions of

74

---

nitrogen
oxides, sulfur dioxide and mercury. Some bills would also impose limitations on carbon dioxide emissions. The various proposals differ in many details, including the timing of any required
reductions; the extent of required reductions; and the relationship of any new obligations that would be imposed by these bills with existing legal requirements. There is significant uncertainty as to
whether any of the proposed legislative initiatives will pass in their current form or whether any compromise can be reached that would facilitate passage of legislation. Accordingly, EME Homer City
is not able to evaluate the potential impact of these proposals at this time.

Environmental Remediation and Asbestos

Under various federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations, a current or previous owner or operator of any facility, including an electric
generating facility, may be required to investigate and remediate releases or threatened releases of hazardous or toxic substances or petroleum products located at that facility, and may be held
liable to a governmental entity or to third parties for property damage, personal injury, natural resource damages, and investigation and remediation costs incurred by these parties in connection with
these releases or threatened releases. Many of these laws, including the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, commonly referred to as CERCLA, as amended by the
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986, impose liability without regard to whether the owner knew of or caused the presence of the hazardous
substances, and courts have interpreted liability under these laws to be strict and joint and several. The cost of investigation, remediation or removal of these substances may be substantial.

In
connection with the ownership and operation of its facilities, EME Homer City may be liable for these costs. In addition, persons who arrange for the disposal or treatment of
hazardous or toxic substances at a disposal or treatment facility may be liable for the costs of removal or remediation of a release or threatened release of hazardous or toxic substances at that
disposal or treatment facility, whether or not that facility is owned or operated by that person. Some environmental laws and regulations create a lien on a contaminated site in favor of the
government for damages and costs it incurs in connection with the remediation of contamination. The owner of a contaminated site and persons who arrange for the disposal of hazardous substances at
that site also may be subject to common law claims by third parties based on damages and costs resulting from environmental contamination emanating from that site. In connection with the ownership and
operation of its facilities, EME Homer City may be liable for these costs.

Federal,
state and local laws, regulations and ordinances also govern the removal, encapsulation or disturbance of asbestos-containing materials when these materials are in poor
condition or in the event of construction, remodeling, renovation or demolition of a building. Those laws and regulations may impose liability for release of asbestos-containing materials and may
provide for the ability of third parties to seek recovery from owners or operators of these properties for personal injury associated with asbestos-containing materials. In connection with the
ownership and operation of its facilities, EME Homer City may be liable for these costs. EME Homer City has agreed to indemnify the sellers of the Homer City facilities for specified environmental
liabilities. See "CommitmentsGuarantees and Indemnities" for a discussion of the indemnity agreement.

International

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

Since
the adoption of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in 1992, there has been worldwide attention with respect to greenhouse gas emissions. In
December 1997, the Clinton administration participated in the Kyoto, Japan negotiations, where the basis of a Climate Change treaty was formulated. Under the treaty, known as the Kyoto
Protocol, the United States would be required, by 2008-2012, to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 7% from 1990 levels.

75

---

In
March 2001, the Bush administration announced that the United States would not ratify the Kyoto Protocol, but would instead offer an alternative. On February 14, 2002,
President Bush announced objectives to slow the growth of greenhouse gas emissions by reducing the amount of greenhouse gas emissions per unit of economic output by 18% by 2012 and to provide funding
for climate-change related programs. The President's proposed program does not include mandatory reductions of greenhouse gas emissions. However, various bills have been, or are expected to be,
introduced in Congress to require greenhouse gas emissions reductions and to address other issues related to climate change. Apart from the Kyoto Protocol, Midwest Generation may be impacted by future
federal or state legislation relating to controlling greenhouse gas emissions. To date, none have passed through Congress. In addition, there have been several petitions from states and other parties
to compel the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. On September 3, 2003, the EPA denied a petition by Massachusetts, Maine and Connecticut to compel EPA under the Clean Air
Act to require EPA to establish a national ambient air quality standard for carbon dioxide. Since that time, 11 states and other entities have filed suits against EPA in the United States Court of
Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (D.C. Circuit), and, the D.C. Circuit has granted intervention requests from 10 states that support EPA's ruling. The D.C. Circuit has not yet ruled on this matter.

Notwithstanding
the Bush administration position, environment ministers from around the world have reached a compromise agreement on the mechanics and rules of the Kyoto Protocol. The
compromise agreement is believed to clear the way for countries to begin the treaty ratification process.

For
the treaty to come into effect, approximately 55 countries that also represent at least 55% of the greenhouse gas emissions of the developed world must ratify it. Currently, the
countries ratifying the Kyoto Protocol account for 44.2% of carbon dioxide emissions. Although Russia also indicated at the Johannesburg Summit on September 2002 its desire to ratify the
treaty, it stepped back from that position in late 2003 and has yet to set a date for ratification. Representing 17.4% of the developed world's greenhouse gas emissions, Russian ratification is
essential to bring the treaty into effect.

If
EME Homer City does become subject to limitations on emissions of carbon dioxide from its fossil fuel-fired electric generating plants, these requirements could have a
significant economic impact on its operations.

United Nations Proposed Framework Convention on Mercury.

The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has convened a Global Mercury Assessment Working Group which met in Geneva in September 2002 and finalized
a global mercury assessment report for submittal to the UNEP Governing Council at the Global Ministerial Environment Forum in Nairobi, Kenya, February 2003. Based upon the report's key
findings, the working group concluded that "there is sufficient evidence of significant global adverse impacts to warrant international action to reduce the risks to human health and the environment
arising from the release of mercury into the environment."

The
United States has indicated that it will support a decision to take international action on mercury at the Global Ministerial Environment Forum. However, the United States has
further stated that it does not support negotiation of a legally-binding convention at this time. In general, the United States approach: 1) agrees that there is sufficient evidence of adverse
impacts of mercury to warrant international action, 2) urges countries to take actions within the context of their national circumstances to identify exposed populations and to reduce
anthropogenic emissions of mercury, 3) recommends the establishment of a "Mercury Program" within UNEP, 4) recommends coordination between UNEP and other international organizations that
work on mercury issues such as the World Health Organization, and 5) asks countries to make voluntary contributions to support efforts of the Mercury Program under UNEP.

76

---

If
EME Homer City does become subject to limitations on emissions of mercury from its coal-fired electric generating plants, these requirements could have a significant
economic impact on its operations.

Note 11. Lease Commitments

EME Homer City had operating and capital leases in place relating mainly to flue gas conditioning equipment and trucks. At December 31, 2003, the future
minimum payments over the next five years were as follows:

Years Ending December 31,

Operating
Leases

Capital
Leases2004

$
116

$
2342005


86


1362006


86


2007


44


2008


24


Total future commitments

$
356


370Amount representing interest





29Net commitments




$
341


Operating
lease expense amounted to $0.4 million, $0.3 million and $0.6 million in 2003, 2002 and 2001, respectively. See "Note 4.
Sale-Leaseback Transaction" for lease commitments related to the facility leases.

Note 12. Related Party Transactions

Edison Mission Marketing & Trading Agreements

EME Homer City entered into a Master Purchase, Sale and Services Agreement with its marketing affiliate effective October 31, 2002, pursuant to which
Edison Mission Marketing & Trading arranges for purchases and sales of the following products, including services related thereto: (i) electric energy and capacity; (ii) fuel oil;
and (iii) emissions allowances. This Master Purchase, Sale and Services Agreement replaces the NOx Allowance Sales Agreement and the Energy Sales Agreement with the marketing affiliate, both
dated March 18, 1999.

EME
Homer City compensates Edison Mission Marketing & Trading in accordance with the following table with respect to these transactions and reimburses its marketing affiliate for
brokers fees, taxes, and other reasonably incurred direct out-of-pocket expenses. Payment for these services is due within 30 days of billing.

Service

CompensationEnergy and/or capacity

$.02/MWhr ($.02/MW-day for capacity)Fuel oil

$.05/bblEmissions allowances

$.25/SO2 allowance; and $25/NOx allowance


The
net fees earned by Edison Mission Marketing & Trading were $0.9 million, $0.3 million and $0.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2003, 2002
and 2001, respectively. Beginning in the fourth quarter of 2002, EME Homer City received accelerated payments under its agreement with Edison Mission Marketing & Trading, whereby Edison Mission
Marketing & Trading paid EME Homer City in the same month that power generation was delivered and prepaid a portion of the following

77

---

month's
expected power generation. Beginning in the second quarter of 2003, Edison Mission Marketing & Trading began prepaying in full for the following month's expected power generation. As a result
of the accelerated payments, EME Homer City had payables at December 31, 2003 and 2002 due to Edison Mission Marketing & Trading of $45.0 million and $10.6 million, respectively.

EME
Homer City entered into several transactions through Edison Mission Marketing & Trading for the purchase of SO2 allowances from another affiliate of EME. All transactions were
completed at market price on the date of the transaction. Total consideration paid was $10.3 million, $5.1 million and $10.2 million during 2003, 2002 and 2001, respectively. In
addition, EME Homer City paid Edison Mission Marketing & Trading $0.6 million during 2003 for the purchase of NOx allowances, which were priced at market price on the date of the transaction.

During
2003, Edison Mission Marketing & Trading entered into agreements using the capacity of the Homer City facilities to participate in auction revenue rights awarded through PJM to
load serving entities. The auction revenue rights are applicable to the period from June 1, 2003 through May 31, 2004, and the benefits of such agreements will flow through to EME Homer
City. EME Homer City's
share of auction revenue rights was $16.5 million, of which $13.3 million had been received by December 31, 2003. Payments for the remaining auction revenue rights are due ratably
over the auction year. Revenue related to the auction revenue rights are recognized on a straight-line basis over the period of the agreements.

During
2002, EME Homer City entered into four capacity swap agreements and two energy price basis swap agreements with Edison Mission Marketing & Trading. Each agreement was at fair
market value at the time of the transaction. Payments received in 2003 and 2002 under these agreements amounted to $2.9 million and $2.3 million, respectively.

During
2001, EME Homer City entered into an option for installed capacity, and five transactions, including the exercise of the aforementioned option, for installed capacity with Edison
Mission Marketing & Trading. Each transaction was at fair market value for such installed capacity at the time. Payments for the option and the five transactions amounted to approximately
$29.5 million.

Fuel Services Agreements

EME Homer City entered into agreements with Edison Mission Energy Services, Inc. to provide fuel and transportation services related to coal and fuel oil.
Under the terms of these agreements, EME Homer City pays a service fee of $.06 for each ton of coal delivered and $.05 for each barrel of fuel oil delivered, plus the actual cost of the commodities.
The amount billable under these agreements for each of the three years ended December 31, 2003, 2002 and 2001 was $0.3 million.

Affiliate Financing

EME Homer City has obtained financing from Edison Mission Finance in connection with its acquisition of the Homer City facilities. For further discussion, see
"Note 6. Long-Term Debt."

Services Agreements with Edison Mission Energy and Edison International

Certain administrative services such as payroll, employee benefit programs, insurance and information technology are shared among all affiliates of Edison
International and the costs of these corporate support services are allocated to all affiliates. The cost of services provided by Edison International and EME, including those related to EME Homer
City, are allocated based on one of the following formulas: percentage of the time worked, equity in investment and advances, number of employees, or multi-factor (operating revenues, operating
expenses, total assets and total employees). EME Homer City participates in a common payroll and benefit program with all Edison International employees. In addition, EME Homer City is billed for any
direct labor and out-of-pocket expenses for

78

---

services
directly requested for the benefit of the partnership. EME Homer City believes the allocation methodologies are reasonable. EME Homer City made reimbursements for the cost of these programs,
payroll funding and other services totaling $30.5 million, $31.0 million and $26.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2003, 2002 and 2001, respectively.

EME
Homer City participates in the insurance program of Edison International, including property, general liability, workers compensation and various other specialty policies. EME Homer
City's insurance premiums are generally based on its share of risk related to each policy. In connection with the property insurance program, a portion of the risk is reinsured by a captive insurance
subsidiary of Edison International.

EME
Homer City recorded a receivable from EME of $58.5 million at December 31, 2001, related to the tax due under the tax-allocation agreement. For the year
ended December 31, 2002, all outstanding receivables were realized through a reduction in amounts owed under EME Homer City's affiliate financing with Edison Mission Finance. See
"Note 2. Summary of Significant Accounting PoliciesIncome Taxes" for further discussion of the tax-allocation agreement.

Contribution of Services by Midwest Generation EME, LLC

Midwest Generation EME, LLC is a subsidiary of EME that provides executive management, legal, human resources, accounting and other administrative services in
Chicago on EME Homer City's behalf without charge. In connection with regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the costs of these services must be recorded as part of EME Homer City's
financial results, although EME Homer City does not have a cash obligation to pay for these activities. The cost of these services, after tax, was $1.9 million and $2.2 million for the
periods ended December 31, 2003 and 2002, respectively. EME
Homer City has reflected these activities as a non-cash contribution of services by its parent in the accompanying financial statements. Prior to 2002, EME Homer City was not charged for
an allocation of Midwest Generation EME because Midwest Generation EME's principal focus was on power plants in Illinois.

Note 13. Supplemental Statements of Cash Flows Information

Years Ended December 31,2003

2002

2001Cash paid:Interest

$
200,494

$
87,177

$
169,287Income taxes (receipts)

$
3,248

$


$
73,000Non-cash investing and financing activities:Relief of long-term debt

$


$


$
830,000Lease financing obligation

$


$
688

$
1,591,318Reduction in affiliate debt due to tax-allocation agreement offset

$


$
73,688

$



79

---

Note 14. Quarterly Financial Data (unaudited)

|                                       |  | First |         | Second |   | Third(i) |   | Fourth |         | Total
|-------------------------------------- |  | ----- | ------- | ------ | - | -------- | - | ------ | ------- | -----
|2003                                   |  |       |         |        |   |          |   |        |         |      
|Operating revenues                     |  | $     | 140,511 |        | $ | 107,966  |   | $      | 156,732 |      
|Operating income                       |  |       | 58,359  |        |   | 17,609   |   |        | 72,953  |      
|Provision (benefit) for income taxes   |  |       | 8,408   |        |   | (9,361   | ) |        | 15,259  |      
|Income (loss) before accounting change |  |       | 10,199  |        |   | (11,361  | ) |        | 18,608  |      
|Net income (loss)                      |  |       | 9,241   |        |   | (11,361  | ) |        | 18,608  |      

|                                     |  | First(ii) |         | Second(ii) |   | Third(i) |   | Fourth |         | Total |  
|------------------------------------ |  | --------- | ------- | ---------- | - | -------- | - | ------ | ------- | ----- | -
|2002                                 |  |           |         |            |   |          |   |        |         |       |  
|Operating revenues                   |  | $         | 85,519  |            | $ | 80,484   |   | $      | 118,011 |       | $
|Operating income                     |  |           | 14,656  |            |   | 2,337    |   |        | 42,300  |       |  
|Provision (benefit) for income taxes |  |           | (11,629 | )          |   | (18,769  | ) |        | (92     | )     |  
|Net income (loss)                    |  |           | (15,453 | )          |   | (21,055  | ) |        | 288     |       |  

---

80

---



PART III

ITEM 10. DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANT

All powers to control and manage EME Homer City's business and affairs are exclusively vested in its general partner, Mission Energy Westside Inc., a
California corporation and wholly owned subsidiary of Edison Mission Holdings Co., which in turn is a wholly owned subsidiary of EME. The members of Mission Energy Westside's current board of
directors are elected by, and serve until their successors are elected by, Edison Mission Holdings. All officers are elected from time to time by Mission Energy Westside's board of directors and hold
office at its discretion. Mission Energy Westside's board of directors currently contains six members. The board of directors of Mission Energy Westside may elect to appoint additional directors from
time to time.

Business Experience

Listed below are the current directors and the executive officers of Mission Energy Westside and their ages and positions as of March 11, 2004.

|Name                  |  | Age |  | Position                               |  | Position Held
Continuously Since
|--------------------- |  | --- |  | -------------------------------------- |  | --------------------------------
|Georgia R. Nelson     |  | 54  |  | Director, President                    |  | January 2000                    
|Ronald L. Litzinger   |  | 44  |  | Director, Vice President               |  | January 2000                    
|Kevin M. Smith        |  | 45  |  | Director, Treasurer and Vice President |  | April 1998                      
|John P. Finneran, Jr. |  | 44  |  | Director, Vice President               |  | April 2003                      
|Benjamin B. Abedine   |  | 51  |  | Director                               |  | September 2003                  
|Raymond W. Vickers    |  | 61  |  | Director                               |  | March 1999                      
|John K. Deshong       |  | 50  |  | Vice President                         |  | August 2000                     
|Rebecca J. Lauer      |  | 47  |  | Vice President and General Counsel     |  | November 2002                   

Described
below are the principal occupations and business activities of the directors and executive officers of Mission Energy Westside for the past five years, in addition to their
positions indicated above.

Ms. Nelsonhas been general manager, Americas Region of Edison Mission Energy since January 2002. Ms. Nelson has been
senior vice president of Edison Mission Energy since January 1996 and has been president of Midwest Generation EME, LLC since May 1999. From January 1996 until June 1999,
Ms. Nelson was senior vice president, Worldwide Operations. Ms. Nelson was division president of Edison Mission Energy's Americas region from January 1996 to January 1998.
Ms. Nelson also serves as a director of Tower Automotive, Inc.

Mr. Litzingerhas been senior vice president and chief technical officer of Edison Mission Energy since January 2002. From
June 1999 to January 2002, Mr. Litzinger was senior vice president of Edison Mission Energy's Worldwide Operations. Mr. Litzinger served as vice president of O&M Business
Development from December 1998 to May 1999. Mr. Litzinger has been with Edison Mission Energy since November 1995, serving as both regional vice president of O&M Business
Development and manager of O&M Business Development until December 1998.

Mr. Smithhas been senior vice president and chief financial officer of Edison Mission Energy since May 1999.
Mr. Smith has also served as treasurer of Edison Mission Energy from September 1992 to February 2000 and since May 2002. Mr. Smith was elected a vice president in
1994 and from March 1998 to September 1999, Mr. Smith also held the position of regional vice president of Americas region of Edison Mission Energy.

81

---

Mr. Finneranhas been vice president and regional vice president of Finance of Americas region of Edison Mission Energy since
September 1999. From September 1998 to September 1999, Mr. Finneran was senior vice president of finance and treasurer of Richfood Holdings.

Mr. Abedinehas served as independent director of Mission Energy Westside since September 2003. Mr. Abedine has been
senior vice president and chief financial officer of Lord Securities Corporation since 2000. Prior to joining Lord Securities, Mr. Abedine ran his own accounting practice, Benjamin B.
Abedine, CPA.

Mr. Vickershas been senior vice president and general counsel of Edison Mission Energy since March 1999. Prior to joining
Edison Mission Energy, Mr. Vickers was a partner with the law firm of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP concentrating on international business transactions,
particularly cross-border capital markets and investment transactions, project implementation and finance.

Mr. Deshonghas been vice president of Tax of Edison Mission Energy since June 2000. From November 1998 until
June 2000, Mr. Deshong was regional vice president of Tax of Edison Mission Energy's Americas region. Mr. Deshong served as regional vice president of Tax of Edison Mission
Energy's Americas region from November 1998 to June 2000. From April 1997 to November 1998, Mr. Deshong served as director, Tax Planning and Special Projects of Edison Mission Energy. Prior to joining
Edison Mission Energy, Mr. Deshong was director of Tax at United States Enrichment Corporation from December 1995 to April 1997.

Ms. Lauerhas been vice president of Legal of Edison Mission Energy's Americas region and vice president and general counsel of
Midwest Generation EME, LLC since November 2002. Prior to joining Edison Mission Energy, Ms. Lauer was vice president and general counsel for Exelon Energy Delivery and Commonwealth
Edison from May 2000 to April 2001. Ms. Lauer had been with Commonwealth Edison serving as deputy general counsel, associate general counsel and senior counsel since 1995.

Audit Committee Financial Expert

The board of directors of Mission Energy Westside has determined that EME Homer City has at least one audit committee financial expert (as defined in rules of the
Securities and Exchange Commission) serving on its audit committee. The name of the audit committee financial expert is Kevin M. Smith, who is not an independent director.

Code of Ethics for Senior Financial Officers

EME Homer City has adopted a code of business conduct and ethics that applies to its principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal
accounting officer or controller, or persons performing similar functions. The code of business conduct and ethics is posted under the heading "Corporate Governance" on the Internet website maintained
by EME Homer City's ultimate parent at www.edisoninvestor.com. Any amendment to or waiver from a provision of the code of business conduct and ethics that must be disclosed under rules and forms of
the Securities and Exchange Commission will be disclosed at the same Internet website address within five business days following the date of the amendment or waiver.

ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

The directors and officers of Mission Energy Westside receive no compensation for their services as directors and officers, except that Mission Energy Westside's
independent director, Mr. Abedine, receives customary compensation. During 2003, Mr. Abedine received an annual fee of $4,000 for providing independent directorship services.

82

---

ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT

Certain Beneficial Owners

Set forth below is certain information regarding each person who is known by EME Homer City to be a beneficial owner.

|Title of Class        |  | Name and Address of
Beneficial Owner                                             |  | Amount and Nature of
Beneficial Owner                      |  | Percent of
Class
|--------------------- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------- |  | ----------------
|Partnership interests |  | Mission Energy Westside Inc.
18101 Von Karman Avenue
Suite 1700
Irvine, CA 92612 |  | General partner with exclusive voting and investment power |  | 0.1%            

Changes in Control

EME Homer City's indirect parent, Edison Mission Holdings, has pledged the shares of the capital stock of its general partner, Mission Energy
Westside Inc., as collateral for its performance under its sale-leaseback obligation. Upon termination of the facility leases, the owner lessors may foreclose on this pledge and
could own Mission Energy Westside and be able to exercise all the powers of general partner.

ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS

Other Management Transactions

In July 1999, EME made an interest-free loan to Georgia R. Nelson, who at that time was Senior Vice President and President of Midwest Generation
EME, LLC, in the amount of $179,800 in exchange for a note executed by Ms. Nelson and payable to EME 365 days following the conclusion of her assignment in Chicago, Illinois. The entire
note was paid in full in July 2003.

ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES

INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT FEES

The
following table sets forth the aggregate fees billed to EME Homer City Generation L.P. for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2003 and December 31, 2002, by PricewaterhouseCoopers
LLP:

EME Homer City
Generation LLPYear

($000)Audit Fees:PricewaterhouseCoopers

2003
2002

135
128Audit Related Fees:PricewaterhouseCoopers

2003
2002


Tax Fees:PricewaterhouseCoopers

2003
2002


All Other Fees:PricewaterhouseCoopers

2003
2002





The
Edison International Audit Committee reviews with management and pre-approves all audit services to be performed by the independent accountants and all non-audit services that are
not prohibited and that require pre-approval under the Securities Exchange Act. The Edison International Audit Committee's pre-approval responsibilities may be delegated to one or more Edison
International Audit Committee members, provided that such delegate(s) presents any pre-approval decisions to the Edison International Audit Committee at its next meeting. The independent auditors must
assure that all audit and non-audit services provided to EME Homer City Generation LLP have been approved by the Edison International Audit Committee.

83

---



PART IV

ITEM 15. EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K







Date of Report

Dated Filed

Item(s) ReportedOctober 28, 2003

October 29, 2003

5December 11, 2003

December 12, 2003

5, 7




|Exhibit No. |  | Description                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
|----------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|3.1         |  | EME Homer City Generation L.P. Agreement of Limited Partnership incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.13 to Edison Mission Holding Co.'s registration statement on Form S-4 filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on December 3, 1999 (File No. 333-92047).                                                                  
|3.2         |  | Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of EME Homer City Generation L.P., dated as of December 7, 2001, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2 to EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2001.                                                                                       
|4.1         |  | Indenture, dated as of May 27, 1999, between Edison Mission Holdings Co. and United States Trust Company of New York, as Trustee, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Edison Mission Holdings Co.'s registration statement on Form S-4 filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on December 3, 1999 (File No. 333-92047).
|4.1.1       |  | First Amended and Restated Indenture, dated as of December 7, 2001 among Homer City Funding LLC and The Bank of New York, as successor trustee to United States Trust Company of New York, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1.1 to EME Homer City
Generation L.P.'s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001.                 
|4.1.2       |  | Form of 8.137% Senior Secured Bond due 2019 (included in Exhibit 4.1.1), incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1.2 to EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001.                                                                                                                                   
|4.1.3       |  | Form of 8.734% Senior Secured Bond due 2026 (included in Exhibit 4.1.1), incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1.3 to EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001.                                                                                                                                   
|            |  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           

84

---

|4.1.4 |  | Assumption Agreement, dated as of December 7, 2001, among EME Homer City Generation, L.P., Homer City OL1 LLC, Homer City OL2 LLC, Homer City OL3 LLC, Homer City OL4 LLC, Homer City OL5 LLC, Homer City OL6 LLC, Homer City OL7 LLC, Homer City OL8 LLC,
Homer City Funding LLC and The Bank of New York as successor to United States Trust Company of New York, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1.4 to EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001.                                            
|----- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|4.2   |  | Indenture of Trust and Security Agreement, dated as of December 7, 2001, between Homer City OL1 LLC, The Bank of New York, as Lease Indenture Trustee and Security Agent, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        
|4.2.1 |  | Schedule identifying substantially identical agreements to Indenture of Trust and Security Agreement constituting Exhibit 4.2 hereto, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2.1 to EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s Form 10-K for the year ended December
31, 2001.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          
|4.2.2 |  | Form of Initial Lessor Note (included in Exhibit 4.2), incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2.2 to EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         
|4.3   |  | Facility Lease Agreement, dated as of December 7, 2001, between Homer City OL1 LLC and EME Homer City Generation L.P., incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2001.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
|4.3.1 |  | Schedule identifying substantially identical agreements to Facility Lease Agreement constituting Exhibit 4.3 hereto, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3.1 to EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2001.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
|4.4   |  | Participation Agreement, dated as of December 7, 2001, among EME Homer City Generation L.P., Homer City OL1 LLC, as Facility Lessor and Ground Lessee, Wells Fargo Bank Northwest National Association, General Electric Capital Corporation, The Bank of
New York as the Security Agent, The Bank of New York as Lease Indenture Trustee, Homer City Funding LLC and The Bank of New York as Bondholder Trustee, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.4 to EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2001.
|4.4.1 |  | Schedule identifying substantially identical agreements to Participation Agreement constituting Exhibit 4.4 hereto, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.4.1 to EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2001.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            
|4.5   |  | Owner Lessor Subordination Agreement, dated as of December 7, 2001, by and among Homer City OL1 LLC as the Owner Lessor, General Electric Capital Corporation as the Owner Participant and The Bank of New York, as the Lease Indenture Trustee,
incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.5 to EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001.                                                                                                                                                                 
|4.5.1 |  | Schedule identifying substantially identical agreements to Owner Lessor Subordination Agreement constituting Exhibit 4.5 hereto, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.5.1 to EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2001.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
|      |  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               

85

---

|4.6   |  | Lease Subordination Agreement, dated as of December 7, 2001, by and among Homer City OL1 LLC, as the Owner Lessor, GE Capital Corporation as the Owner Participant, EME Homer City Generation L.P. as Facility Lessee and The Bank of New York as Security
Agent, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.6 to EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001.                                        
|----- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|4.6.1 |  | Schedule identifying substantially identical agreements to Lease Subordination Agreement constituting Exhibit 4.6 hereto, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.6.1 to EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2001.                                                                                                                                                                              
|4.7   |  | Pledge and Collateral Agreement made by Edison Mission Holdings Co. in favor of The Bank of New York, as successor to United States Trust Company of New York, as Collateral Agent, dated as of December 7, 2001, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.7
to EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001.                                                                                        
|4.8   |  | Assumption and Release Agreement, dated as of December 7, 2001, among Edison Mission Holdings Co., Edison Mission Finance Co., EME Homer City Generation L.P. and The Bank of New York (as successor in interest to United States Trust Company of New
York), as Bondholder Trustee and Collateral Agent, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.8 to EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001.
|4.9   |  | Open-End Mortgage, Security Agreement and Assignment of Rents, dated as of December 7, 2001, among Homer City OLI LLC, as the Owner Lessor to The Bank of New York, as Security Agent and Mortgagee, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.9 to EME Homer
City Generation L.P.'s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001.                                                                                                     
|4.9.1 |  | Schedule identifying substantially identical agreements to Open-End Mortgage, Security Agreement and Assignment of Rents constituting Exhibit 4.9 hereto.*                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            
|10.1  |  | Transition Power Purchase Agreement, dated August 1, 1998, between New York State Electric & Gas Corporation and Mission Energy Westside Inc., incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.52 to Edison Mission Energy's Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 1998.                                                                                                                                                                  
|10.2  |  | Guarantee, dated August 1, 1998, between Edison Mission Energy, Pennsylvania Electric Company, NGE Generation, Inc. and New York State Electric & Gas Corporation, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.54 to Edison Mission Energy's Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 1998.                                                                                                                                              
|10.3  |  | Amended and Restated Guarantee and Collateral Agreement, dated as of December 7, 2001, made by EME Homer City Generation L.P. in favor of The Bank of New York as successor to United States Trust Company of New York, as Collateral Agent, incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.16.4 to EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001.                                                         
|10.4  |  | Amended and Restated Security Deposit Agreement, dated as of December 7, 2001, among EME Homer City Generation L.P. and The Bank of New York as Collateral Agent, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.18.2 to EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001.                                                                                                                                    
|10.5  |  | Asset Purchase Agreement, dated August 1, 1998, between Pennsylvania Electric Company, NGE Generation, Inc., New York State Electric & Gas Corporation and Mission Energy Westside, Inc., incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.4 to Edison Mission
Energy's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1998.                                                                                                                         
|      |  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       

86

---

|10.6    |  | Intercompany Loan Subordination Agreement, dated March 18, 1999, among Edison Mission Holdings Co., Edison Mission Finance Co., Homer City Property Holdings, Inc., Chestnut Ridge Energy Co., Mission Energy Westside Inc., EME Homer City Generation
L.P. and United States Trust Company of New York, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.60.3 to Amendment No. 2 of Edison Mission Holdings Co.'s registration statement on Form S-4 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 29,
2000 (File No. 333-92047).
|------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|10.6.1  |  | Amended and Restated Intercompany Loan Subordination Agreement, dated as of December 7, 2001, among Edison Mission Holdings Co., Edison Mission Finance Co., Homer City Property Holdings, Inc., Chestnut Ridge Energy Co., Mission Energy Westside, Inc.,
EME Homer City Generation L.P. and The Bank of New York, as successor to United States Trust Company of New York, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.23.1 to EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2001.                            
|10.7    |  | Amended and Restated Subordinated Revolving Loan Agreement, dated as of December 8, 2003, by and between EME Homer City Generation L.P., as Borrower and Edison Mission Finance Co., as Lender, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to EME Homer
City Generation L.P.'s Form 8-K dated December 11, 2003.                                                                                                                                                                                                                          
|10.8    |  | Designated Account Representative Agreement Relating to the NOx Allowance Program, entered into as of December 7, 2001, by and between EME Homer City Generation L.P., Homer City OL1 LLC, Homer City OL2 LLC, Homer City OL3 LLC, Homer City OL4 LLC,
Homer City OL5 LLC, Homer City OL6 LLC, Homer City OL7 LLC and Homer City OL8 LLC, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.27 to EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001.                                                                 
|10.9    |  | Designated Account Representative Agreement Relating to the Acid Rain Program, entered into as of December 7, 2001, by and between EME Homer City Generation L.P., Homer City OL1 LLC, Homer City OL2 LLC, Homer City OL3 LLC, Homer City OL4 LLC, Homer
City OL5 LLC, Homer City OL6 LLC, Homer City OL7 LLC and Homer City OL8 LLC, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.28 to EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001.                                                                     
|10.10   |  | Assignment Agreement, dated December 7, 2001, between The Bank of New York, EME Homer City Generation L.P., Edison Mission Marketing & Trading, Inc. and Edison Mission Energy Fuel Services, Inc., incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.29 to EME
Homer City Generation L.P.'s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001.                                                                                                                                                                                                       
|10.11   |  | Amended and Restated Debt Service Reserve Letter of Credit and Reimbursement Agreement, dated as of April 1, 2002, by and among Homer City OL1 LLC and Westdeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale, New York Branch, as issuing bank and agent, incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.30.2 to EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2002.                                                                                                                                                                 
|10.11.1 |  | Schedule identifying substantially identical agreements to the Amended and Restated Debt Service Reserve Letter of Credit and Reimbursement Agreement constituting Exhibit 10.30.2 hereto, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.30.3 to EME Homer City
Generation L.P.'s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2002.                                                                                                                                                                                                               
|10.12   |  | Sub-Assignment Agreement, dated as of December 7, 2001, between The Bank of New York, EME Homer City Generation L.P., Edison Mission Marketing & Trading, Inc., and Edison Mission Energy Fuel Services, Inc., incorporated by reference to Exhibit
10.31 to EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001.                                                                                                                                                                                            
|        |  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          

87

---

|10.13 |  | Tax-Allocation Agreement, effective January 1, 2002, by and between EME Homer City Generation L.P. and Edison Mission Holdings Co., incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.32 to EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
September 30, 2002.                             
|----- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|10.14 |  | Master Purchase, Sale and Services Agreement, dated October 31, 2002, between EME Homer City Generation L.P. and Edison Mission Marketing & Trading, Inc., incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.33 to EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2002.          
|10.15 |  | Master Emissions Allowance Purchase and Sale Agreement, dated October 31, 2002, between EME Homer City Generation L.P. and Edison Mission Marketing & Trading, Inc., incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.34 to EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002.
|10.16 |  | Power Purchase and Sale Agreement, dated October 31, 2002, between EME Homer City Generation L.P. and Edison Mission Marketing & Trading, Inc., incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.35 to EME Homer City Generation L.P.'s Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2002.                     
|21    |  | List of Subsidiaries of EME Homer City Generation L.P.*                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            
|31.1  |  | Certification of the Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.*                                                                                                                                                                                                   
|31.2  |  | Certification of the Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.*                                                                                                                                                                                                   
|32    |  | Statement Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350.*                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     

---

88

---



SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its
behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

| |  | EME Homer City Generation L.P.
(Registrant)
| |  | -------------------------------------------
| |  |                                            
| |  | By:                                        
| |  |                                            
| |  |                                            
| |  |                                            
| |  |                                            
| |  |                                            
| |  | Date:                                      

Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the
capacities and on the dates indicated.

|Signature                                     |  | Title                                  |  | Date          
|--------------------------------------------- |  | -------------------------------------- |  | --------------
|                                              |  |                                        |  |               
|Principal Executive Officer:                  |  |                                        |  |               
|/s/GEORGIA R. NELSONGeorgia R. Nelson         |  | President                              |  | March 12, 2004
|Principal Financial Officers:                 |  |                                        |  |               
|/s/KEVIN M. SMITHKevin M. Smith               |  | Vice President, Treasurer and Director |  | March 12, 2004
|/s/JOHN P. FINNERAN, JR.John P. Finneran, Jr. |  | Vice President and Director            |  | March 12, 2004
|Principal Accounting Officer:                 |  |                                        |  |               
|/s/MARK C. CLARKEMark C. Clarke               |  | Vice President and Controller          |  | March 12, 2004
|                                              |  |                                        |  |               

89

---

|Majority of Board of Directors:           |  |                             |  |               
|----------------------------------------- |  | --------------------------- |  | --------------
|/s/GEORGIA R. NELSONGeorgia R. Nelson     |  | Director                    |  | March 12, 2004
|/s/RONALD L. LITZINGERRonald L. Litzinger |  | Vice President and Director |  | March 12, 2004
|/s/RAYMOND W. VICKERSRaymond W. Vickers   |  | Director                    |  | March 12, 2004

90

---

QuickLinks