more reasonable than any other). The estimate was based upon a combination of modeling, historical data analysis and risk factor assessment. Actual experience may be materially different.  a 42 MW electric generating plant in Guatemala. Estimated fair values were determined based upon market prices of compa- rable assets. In addition, workers’ compensation administrative proceedings have been commenced, wherein current and former employ- ees claim benefits based on alleged disability from exposure to asbestos. Con Edison of New York is permitted under its current rate agreements to defer as regulatory assets (for subsequent recovery through rates) liabilities incurred for its asbestos law- suits and workers’ compensation claims. O&R defers as regu- latory assets (for subsequent recovery through rates), liabilities incurred for asbestos claims by employees relating to its divested generating plants. The Utilities have long-term contracts with non-utility genera- tors (NUGs) for electric generating capacity. Assuming per- formance by the NUGs, the Utilities are obligated over the terms of the contracts (which extend for various periods, up to 2036) to make capacity and other fixed payments. For the years 2004 through 2008, the capacity and other  fixed payments under the contracts are estimated to be  the following: The accrued liability for asbestos suits and workers’ compen- sation proceedings (including those related to asbestos expo- sure) and the amounts deferred as regulatory assets for each of the Companies at December 31, 2003 and December 31, 2002 were as follows: Such payments gradually increase to approximately $650 mil- lion in 2013, and thereafter decline significantly. For energy delivered under most of these contracts, the Utilities are obli- gated to pay variable prices that are estimated to be lower overall than expected market levels. In addition, for energy delivered under one of the contracts (for 20 MW), O&R is obli- gated to pay variable prices that are currently estimated to be above market levels. At December 31, 2003, the aggregate capacity produced under the NUG contracts was approximately 3,200 MW, including capacity (commitment ends 2005) from the approxi- mately 1,000 MW nuclear generating unit that Con Edison of New York sold in 2001. For energy from the unit, the company has a commitment (which ends in 2004) under which it is obli- gated to pay an average annual price of 3.9 cents per kWh. From time to time, certain parties have petitioned governmental authorities to close this plant. If this were to occur, the owner would not be obligated to provide the company with replace- ment power. Additionally, the contracts include 500 MW of energy and capacity that the company agreed to purchase annually for 10 years from a plant in Queens County, New York that is scheduled to begin operation in 2006. Under the terms of its electric rate agreements, Con Edison  of New York is recovering in rates the charges it incurs under mandated contracts with NUGs. The 2000 Electric Rate Agreement provides that, after March 31, 2005, Con Edison  of New York will be given a reasonable opportunity to recover, through a non-bypassable charge to customers, the amount, if any, by which the actual costs of its purchases under the contracts exceed market value. The PSC specifically approved rate recovery of the nuclear capacity and energy purchases. O&R recovers costs under its NUG contracts pursuant to rate In 2003, continuing adverse market conditions affecting  Con Edison’s unregulated telecommunications and generation  businesses led to the testing of their assets for impairment in accordance with SFAS No. 144, “Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets,” and Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 18, “The Equity Method of Accounting for Investments in Common Stock.” For Con Edison Communications, it was determined that the book value of its assets were likely not fully recoverable. Therefore, in accordance with SFAS No. 144, Con Edison Communications reduced its assets to their fair value by recording a pre-tax impairment charge of $140 million. At the same time, $1 million (pre-tax) of capitalized interest at Con Edison, which was relat- ed to the investment in Con Edison Communications, was deemed impaired. For Con Edison Development, the analysis resulted in a total pre-tax impairment charge of $18 million related to two combustion turbines and its equity investment in Con Edison Annual Report 2003 75 Note H – Impairment of Long-Lived Assets  Note I – Non-Utility Generators Con Edison  Con Edison of New York O&R (Millions of Dollars) 2003 2002 2003 2002 2003 2002 Accrued liability – asbestos $ 39 $139 $138 $138 $1 $1 Regulatory assets – asbestos suits $ 39 $139 $138 $ 38 $1 $1 Accrued liability – workers’ compensation $126 $130 $122 $125 $4 $5 Regulatory assets – workers’ compensation $ 51 $154 $151 $154 $ - $- (Millions of Dollars) 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Con Edison $545 $529 $557 $579 $592 Con Edison of New York $530 $513 $552 $579 $592 O&R $515 $516 $555$ 55-$ 55-