Who is soliciting my proxy?

The board of directors of AGL Resources is providing you these proxy materials in connection with the solicitation of proxies to be voted at our 2010 annual meeting of shareholders and at any postponement or adjournment of the annual meeting. The proxies will be voted in accordance with your instructions by John W. Somerhalder II, our chairman, president and chief executive officer; Paul R. Shlanta, our executive vice president, general counsel and chief ethics and compliance officer; and Andrew W. Evans, our executive vice president, chief financial officer and treasurer, or any of them. If your shares are held in our Retirement Savings Plus Plan (our 401(k) plan), your proxy will be voted by Merrill Lynch Bank & Trust Co., FSB, which is the trustee for the Retirement Savings Plus Plan, in accordance with the discretionary instructions of the Administrative Committee of the Retirement Savings Plus Plan. It is expected that the Administrative Committee will instruct the trustee to vote the 401(k) shares in accordance with your telephone, internet or written proxy vote, or, if you do not vote, “FOR” each of the three proposals.

Why did I receive a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials (Notice) in the mail instead of a printed set of proxy materials?

Pursuant to the new rules adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission, we are permitted to furnish our proxy materials over the internet to our shareholders by delivering a Notice in the mail. We are sending the Notice to certain record and beneficial shareholders. These shareholders have the ability to access the proxy materials, including our proxy statement and annual report, at www.proxyvote.com or to request a printed or email set of the proxy materials. Instructions

on how to access the proxy materials over the internet or to receive a printed set may be found in the Notice. Shareholders who receive a printed set of proxy materials will not receive the Notice, but may still access our proxy materials over the internet at www.proxyvote.com.

Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials for the Shareholder Meeting to be Held on April 27, 2010

The proxy statement and annual report are available at www.proxyvote.com

What will I be voting on?

You will be voting on:

How does the board recommend I vote on the proposals?

The board of directors recommends you vote “FOR” each of the three proposals listed above.

How do I vote?

Most of our shareholders have three options for submitting their votes:

If your AGL Resources shares are held in your name on the records maintained by Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., our transfer agent (meaning you are a “shareholder of record”), please follow the instructions on your proxy card.

If your AGL Resources shares are held through a brokerage firm or bank (that is, in “street name”), your ability to vote by telephone or over the internet depends on the voting process of your brokerage firm or bank. Please follow the directions on your vote instruction card.

Regardless of whether your AGL Resources shares are held by you as a record shareholder or in street name, you may attend the meeting and vote your shares in person. Please note that if your shares are held in street name and you want to vote in person, you must bring evidence of your stock ownership, such as a proxy obtained from your street name nominee (particularly if you want to vote your shares at the annual meeting) or your most recent brokerage account statement (in which case you will not be able to vote your shares at the meeting), together with valid picture identification.

Even if you plan to attend the meeting, we encourage you to vote your shares by telephone, internet or mail to simplify the voting process at the meeting.

How do I vote if my shares are held in the AGL Resources 401(k) plan?

If your AGL Resources shares are held in the Retirement Savings Plus Plan, only the trustee of the plan can vote your plan shares even if

you attend the annual meeting in person. The plan trustee will vote your shares in accordance with your telephone, internet or written proxy vote. Please follow the instructions on your proxy card.

May I revoke my proxy?

Yes. You may revoke your proxy or vote instructions at any time before the annual meeting by voting again by telephone or via the internet or by timely signing and returning another proxy or vote instruction card with a later date. Additionally, if you are a shareholder of record or if you are a street name holder who has obtained a vote instruction card from your street name nominee, and you decide to attend the meeting and vote in person, you may request that any proxy or vote instruction card that you previously submitted not be used.

What if I don’t specify my choices when returning my proxy or vote instruction card?

If you return a signed and dated proxy or vote instruction card without indicating your vote, your shares will be voted “FOR” each of the three proposals specified in the notice of the meeting and in the discretion of the proxies on any other matter that may properly come before the meeting.

If you hold AGL Resources shares through the Retirement Savings Plus Plan and you return the proxy card but do not properly sign or date it or specify how you want your plan shares voted, it is expected that the plan trustee, upon instruction from the Administrative Committee of the Retirement Savings Plus Plan, will vote your plan shares “FOR” each of the three proposals specified in the notice of the meeting and as instructed by the Administrative Committee on any other proposals that may properly come before the meeting.

May my shares be voted if I don’t submit a proxy or voting instructions?

If your AGL Resources shares are registered in your name on the books kept by our transfer agent and you do not return a signed proxy and do not vote by telephone or via the internet or in person at the meeting, your shares will not be voted.

If your AGL Resources shares are held in street name and you do not submit any voting instructions, your brokerage firm or bank may or may not vote your shares with regard to each of the three proposals, depending on stock exchange rules. If your AGL Resources shares are held through the Retirement Savings Plus Plan and you do not return the proxy card for those plan shares and do not vote by telephone or the internet or in person, it is expected that the plan trustee, upon instruction from the Administrative Committee of the Retirement Savings Plus Plan, will vote your shares “FOR” each of the three proposals specified in the notice of the meeting and as instructed by the Administrative Committee on any other proposals that may properly come before the meeting.

How many shares may I vote?

As of the February 16, 2010, record date for voting at the annual meeting,                      shares of common stock of AGL Resources were outstanding and entitled to be voted at the annual meeting. You are entitled to one vote for each share of AGL Resources common stock you owned on the record date. Shares held by a trust which holds assets for our Nonqualified Savings Plan are included in the number of shares outstanding but are not eligible to be voted.

Is there a list of shareholders entitled to notice of the annual meeting?

A list of shareholders entitled to notice of the annual meeting is available for inspection by any shareholder between the hours of

9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Eastern time, at our headquarters at Ten Peachtree Place, Atlanta, Georgia. Please contact our Corporate Secretary at AGL Resources Inc., P.O. Box 4569, Location 1466, Atlanta, Georgia 30302-4569, if you would like to review the shareholder list. The shareholder list will also be available at the annual meeting for inspection by any shareholder.

How many votes must be present to hold the annual meeting?

A majority of the                      shares of AGL Resources common stock outstanding on the record date, not including the shares held by the Nonqualified Savings Plan trust which are not eligible to be voted, must be present, either in person or represented by proxy, to conduct the annual meeting.

How many votes are needed to elect directors?

Directors are elected by a plurality of the total number of votes cast, which means the three nominees who receive the largest number of properly cast votes will be elected as directors.

What happens if a director nominee fails to receive a majority of the votes cast in his or her election?

As described in “Proposal 1—Election of Directors—General,” our bylaws provide that if a director nominee in an uncontested election is elected by the required plurality vote of the shareholders but does not receive the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the shares voted, the director must promptly tender his or her resignation to the board of directors following certification of the shareholder vote. The Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee must then recommend to the board of directors whether to accept or reject the tendered resignation or whether to take

other action. The board must then act on the tendered resignation and publicly disclose its decision and the rationale behind the decision within 90 days after the certification of the election results.

What if I vote “withhold authority” to elect directors?

In voting for the election of directors, a vote to “withhold authority” for the election of one or more director nominees will be counted for quorum purposes, but because the vote required to elect directors is a plurality vote, a vote to “withhold authority” will not affect the outcome of the election. However, a vote to “withhold authority” will be counted for purposes of determining whether a director nominee received the affirmative vote of holders of a majority of the shares voted. Please see “What happens if a director nominee fails to receive a majority of the votes cast in his or her election? ” above.

How many votes are required to adopt the proposed amendment to our bylaws?

The adoption of the amendment to our bylaws to eliminate the classification of the board of directors, which conforms to the amendment to our articles of incorporation approved by the shareholders at the 2009 annual meeting, requires approval by a majority of the votes entitled to be cast.

How many votes are required to ratify the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm?

The ratification of the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm requires the votes cast “FOR” to exceed the votes cast “AGAINST” the proposal.

How will abstentions and broker non-votes be treated?

Abstentions and broker non-votes will be treated as shares present and entitled to vote for quorum purposes. Abstentions and broker non-votes will not be treated as “votes cast,” and consequently they will not affect the outcome of the vote on the election of directors or the determination of whether a director nominee has received the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the shares voted (Proposal 1) or the proposal to ratify the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm (Proposal 3). However, abstentions and broker non-votes will have the same effect as votes “against” the proposal to amend our bylaws (Proposal 2).

“Broker non-votes” occur on a matter up for vote when a broker, bank or other holder of shares you own in “street name” is not permitted to vote on that particular matter without instructions from you, you do not give such instructions and the broker or other nominee indicates on its proxy card, or otherwise notifies us, that it does not have authority to vote its shares on that matter. Whether a broker has authority to vote its shares on uninstructed matters is determined by stock exchange rules.

Could other matters be decided at the annual meeting?

We do not know of any other matters that will be considered at the annual meeting. If a matter that is not listed on the proxy or vote instruction card is properly brought before the annual meeting in accordance with Section 1.2 of our bylaws, the persons named as proxies will vote in accordance with their judgment of what is in the best interest of the Company, based on the discretionary voting authority conferred on them by the proxy and vote instruction cards.

Who will count the votes?

Representatives of Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc. will count the votes and act as inspector of elections.

Where and when will I be able to find the voting results?

We will post the voting results on our web site at www.aglresources.com within four business days after the annual meeting. You also may find the results in a Current Report on Form 8-K, which we expect to file with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, within four business days following the annual meeting.

What does it mean if I receive more than one proxy card?

It means that you have multiple accounts with brokerage firms, banks and/or our transfer agent. Please vote all of these shares. We recommend that you contact your broker, bank and/or our transfer agent to consolidate as many accounts as possible under the same name and address. All communications concerning accounts for shares registered in your name on the books kept by our transfer agent, including address changes, name changes, inquiries to transfer shares and similar issues, may be handled by making a toll-free call to Wells Fargo Shareowner Services at (800) 468-9716.

What do I need to bring with me if I want to attend the annual meeting?

The annual meeting is open to all holders of our common stock. To attend the annual meeting, you will need to bring an admission ticket and valid picture identification. If your shares are registered in your name on the books kept by our transfer agent or your shares are held as 401(k) plan shares, your admission ticket is part of your proxy card or may be printed from the internet when you vote online. If your shares are held in street

name by your brokerage firm or bank, you will need to bring evidence of your stock ownership, such as a proxy obtained from your street name nominee (particularly if you want to vote your shares at the annual meeting) or your most recent brokerage account statement (in which case you will not be able to vote your shares at the meeting), together with valid picture identification. You may also request us to send you an admission ticket. If you do not have either an admission ticket or proof that you own our common stock, together with valid picture identification, you may not be admitted to the meeting.

What happens if the annual meeting is postponed or adjourned?

Your proxy will still be valid and may be voted at a postponed or adjourned meeting, unless the board of directors fixes a new record date for the postponed or adjourned meeting, which the board is required to do if the postponement or adjournment is for more than 120 days. If the meeting is postponed or adjourned, you will still be able to change or revoke your proxy until it is voted.

When are shareholder proposals for the 2011 annual meeting due?

Our bylaws require shareholders to give us advance notice of any shareholder nominations of directors and of any other matters shareholders wish to present for action at an annual meeting of shareholders. The required notice must be given within a prescribed time frame, which is calculated by reference to the date of the proxy statement relating to our most recent annual meeting.

Accordingly, with respect to our 2011 annual meeting of shareholders, our bylaws require notice to be provided to our Corporate Secretary at AGL Resources Inc., P.O. Box 4569, Location 1466, Atlanta, Georgia 30302-4569 no later than November 18, 2010. If a shareholder fails to provide timely

notice of a proposal to be presented at the 2011 annual meeting, the persons designated as proxies by the board of directors will have discretionary authority to vote, and the trustee of the Retirement Savings Plus Plan will vote in accordance with the instructions of the Administrative Committee of the Retirement Savings Plus Plan based on its discretionary authority, on any such proposal that may come before the meeting.

If you are interested in submitting a proposal for inclusion in our proxy statement for the annual meeting in 2011, you need to follow the procedures outlined in the SEC’s Rule 14a-8. To be eligible for inclusion, your shareholder proposal intended for inclusion in the proxy statement for the 2011 annual meeting of shareholders must be received no

later than November 18, 2010, by our Corporate Secretary at the address above.

This deadline does not apply to questions a shareholder may wish to ask at the annual meeting.

Who pays the costs associated with this proxy solicitation?

AGL Resources pays the expenses of soliciting proxies. We may consider the engagement of a proxy solicitation firm to assist in the solicitation of proxies. Additionally, proxies may be solicited on our behalf by directors, officers and employees, in person or by telephone, facsimile or electronic transmission. Directors, officers and employees will not be paid additional fees for those services.

Board of Directors

Our business affairs are managed under the direction of the board of directors in accordance with the Georgia Business Corporation Code, our articles of incorporation and our bylaws. The role of the board of directors is to govern our affairs for the benefit of our shareholders and other constituencies, which include our employees, customers, suppliers, creditors and the communities in which we do business. The board strives to ensure the success and continuity of our business through the appointment of qualified executive management, overseen by the board.

Director Independence

Pursuant to New York Stock Exchange listing standards, our board of directors has adopted a formal set of categorical Standards for Determining Director Independence. In accordance with these Standards, a director must be determined to have no material relationship with the Company other than as a director in order to be considered an independent director. The Standards specify the criteria by which the independence of our directors will be determined, including strict guidelines for directors and their immediate family members with respect to past employment or affiliation with the Company or its independent registered public accounting firm. The Standards also set forth independence criteria applicable to members of the Audit Committee, the Compensation and Management Development Committee and the Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee of the board of directors. These Standards were amended by our board of directors on October 28, 2009 and are available on our website at www.aglresources.com.

In accordance with these Standards, the board undertook in February 2010 an annual review of director independence. Based on this review, the board has affirmatively determined that, as to each current non-employee director (Messrs. Bell, Crisp, Johnson, Knox, Love, McTier, O’Hare, Riddle, Rubright, Ward and Wolf and Mmes. Bane and Whyte), no material relationship exists that would interfere with the exercise of independent judgment in carrying out the responsibilities of a director and that each current non-employee director qualifies as “independent” in accordance with the Standards and the independence standards of the New York Stock Exchange. John W. Somerhalder II, our chairman, president and chief executive officer, is not independent because of his employment by the Company.

Mr. Somerhalder will not participate in any action of the board related to his compensation or any other matters requiring action by only non-employee directors.

In making these independence determinations, the board considered that in the ordinary course of business, transactions may occur between the Company and its subsidiaries and companies at which some of our directors are or have been directors, officers or employees. The board also considered that the Company and its subsidiaries may make charitable contributions to not-for-profit organizations where our directors or their immediate family members serve or are executive officers.

For information about a certain transaction between us and a business entity with which Mr. Bell was formerly associated and the board’s determination that Mr. Bell is independent notwithstanding this transaction, see “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions.” The board of directors concluded that this relationship is not material and has no effect on the independence of Mr. Bell.

Policy on Related Person Transactions

The board of directors recognizes that related person transactions present a heightened risk of conflicts of interest and, therefore, has adopted a written policy with respect to related person transactions. For the purpose of the policy, a “Related Person” is (a) each executive officer as defined under Section 16 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the “Exchange Act,” (b) each executive and senior vice president of AGL Resources, (c) each nominee for or member of the board of directors, (d) each holder of more than 5% of our common stock, or a “Significant Shareholder,” and (e) any immediate family member, as defined under the Exchange Act, of the persons listed in (a) through (d) above. A “Related Person Transaction” is a transaction between us and any Related Person, other than (1) transactions available to all employees or customers generally; (2) transactions involving less than $120,000 when aggregated with all similar transactions; (3) transactions excluded from disclosure in paragraphs four through seven of the instructions to Item 404(a) of Regulation S-K of the Exchange Act; and (4) charitable contributions by the Company to a charitable organization with which a Related Person’s only relationship is as an employee (other than an executive officer), if the aggregate amount involved does not exceed the greater of $1,000,000 or 2% of the charitable organization’s annual receipts for the preceding fiscal year.

Under the policy, when management becomes aware of a related person transaction involving a dollar amount that is less than two percent of either the Company’s consolidated gross revenues or the consolidated gross revenues of the related person, or any affiliate of such related person, for the prior fiscal year, management reports the transaction to the Chairman of the Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee. When management becomes aware of a related

person transaction involving a dollar amount that is equal to or exceeds two percent of either the Company’s consolidated gross revenues or the consolidated gross revenues of the related person, or any affiliate of such related person, for the prior fiscal year, management reports the transaction to the Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee and requests approval or ratification of the transaction.

Transactions requiring approval or ratification must be approved by a majority of the disinterested members of the Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee. The Chairman will report to the full Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee at its next regularly scheduled committee meeting any related person transactions that are presented to him or her. The Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee will report to the full board all related person transactions presented to it.

The related party transaction concerning Mr. Bell referred to in this proxy statement did not require review by the Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee because it existed prior to the board of directors’ adoption of the policy.

Board Leadership Structure and Role in Risk Oversight

Our Company is led by Mr. John Somerhalder, who has served as our president and chief executive officer since March 2006 and our chairman, president and chief executive officer since October 2007. Our board of directors is comprised of Mr. Somerhalder and thirteen independent directors. Each of the standing committees of our board of directors is chaired by an independent director and each of our Audit, Compensation and Management Development and Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility committees is comprised entirely of independent directors.

Under our Guidelines on Significant Corporate Governance Issues, or our Corporate Governance Guidelines, a copy of which is available on our web site at www.aglresources.com, if the chairman of the board of directors is an executive officer or employee of the Company, then the board of directors shall appoint, from among the independent directors, a lead director. Mr. Arthur E. Johnson currently serves as our Lead Director.

The board of directors appoints the Lead Director for a term ending on the earlier of (a) three years from the date of appointment or (b) the last day of the individual’s service on the board of directors. The Lead Director: (a) serves as chairman of the Executive Committee of the board of directors; (b) presides at the executive sessions of non-management directors; (c) collaborates with our chairman, president and chief executive officer, our general counsel and our corporate secretary on setting the annual calendar for all regular meetings of the board and its standing committees; (d) maintains close contact with the chairperson of each standing committee; (e) oversees the Company’s policy on communications between shareholders or other interested parties and non-management directors; and (f) communicates the results of the annual evaluation of the chief executive officer to the chief executive officer on behalf of the board of directors.

Our Audit Committee has the responsibility to review with management the Company’s (i) policies governing the process by which risk assessment and risk management are undertaken; and (ii) major financial risk exposures and the steps management has taken to monitor and control such exposures. Our Finance and Risk Management Committee has the responsibility to (i) review with management the steps taken by management to ensure compliance with the Company’s risk

management policies and procedures relating to interest rate risk, currency risk, credit risk, commodity risk, insurable risks and derivatives related to any of the foregoing; (ii) review steps taken by management to establish and monitor trading and risk management systems and controls at the Company’s asset management and optimization businesses and to ensure compliance at such businesses with risk management policies and procedures applicable to such businesses; and (iii) review management’s assessment of controls and procedures associated with such businesses’ management of transactions with affiliates and any reporting obligations to state or federal regulatory authorities. Our chief risk officer provides a quarterly report to the Finance and Risk Management Committee and meets in executive sessions with the Finance and Risk Management Committee at each regularly scheduled meeting. Each of the other committees of the board of directors has principal responsibility for reviewing and discussing with management those risk exposures: (i) specified in their charters or (ii) identified from time to time by the committees themselves or by the Audit Committee.

We determined our current board leadership structure is appropriate and helps ensure proper risk oversight for the Company, for a number of reasons, the most significant of which are the following:

Committees of the Board

The board of directors has established five standing committees to assist it in discharging its duties. Actions taken by any committee of the board are reported to the board, usually at the board meeting next following a committee meeting. Each standing committee has adopted a written charter, which is available on our web site at www.aglresources.com and is available upon request to our Corporate Secretary at AGL Resources Inc., P.O. Box 4569, Location 1466, Atlanta, Georgia 30302-4569. The committees of the board and their members at December 31, 2009 were as shown in the following table.

Audit Committee

The Audit Committee met seven times during 2009. The Audit Committee’s primary function is to assist the board of directors in fulfilling its oversight responsibilities. Among other things, the Audit Committee reviews (1) the integrity of our financial statements, including our internal control over financial reporting, (2) our compliance with legal and regulatory requirements, (3) the independent registered public accounting firm’s qualifications and independence, (4) the performance of our internal audit function, and (5) the performance of the independent registered public accounting firm. Our chief financial officer, chief ethics and compliance officer, chief auditor, chief accounting officer and controller, and representatives of our independent registered public accounting firm each provide a quarterly report to and meet in separate executive sessions with the Audit Committee each quarter.

The board of directors has determined that all members of the Audit Committee satisfy the enhanced independence standards applicable to all members of the Audit Committee under the independence requirements of the SEC, the New York Stock Exchange and the Company’s Standards for Determining Director Independence. The board also has determined that all members of the Audit Committee meet the financial literacy requirements of the New York Stock Exchange listing standards. The board has further determined that Henry C. Wolf, the Audit Committee Chair, is an “audit committee financial expert” within the meaning of SEC regulations. Information regarding Mr. Wolf’s qualification as an “audit committee financial expert” is included in his biographical information under the caption, “Proposal 1—Election of Directors—Directors Whose Terms Continue Until the Annual Meeting in 2012.”

Additional information regarding the Audit Committee and its functions and responsibilities is included in this proxy

statement under the captions “Audit Committee Report” and “Proposal 3—Ratification of the Appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm for 2010.”

Compensation and Management Development Committee

The Compensation and Management Development Committee met seven times during 2009. All members of the Compensation and Management Development Committee are independent, non-employee directors, as defined under the listing standards of the New York Stock Exchange and our Standards for Determining Director Independence. Among other things, the Compensation and Management Development Committee assists the board of directors in its efforts to achieve its goal of maximizing the long-term total return to shareholders by establishing policies by which officers, directors and employees are to be compensated in accordance with the board’s compensation philosophy and objectives and by overseeing management succession and executive development processes.

The board of directors delegated to the Compensation and Management Development Committee the following areas of responsibility that are more fully described in the Compensation and Management Development Committee’s charter:

The Compensation and Management Development Committee has delegated to our chief executive officer the authority to grant equity awards to employees of the Company solely in connection with non-annual grants to employees other than executive officers. The Committee has established narrowly defined, pre-approved parameters regarding the terms and conditions of grants under the delegated authority, including the eligible employee groups, the maximum number of shares subject to the delegation, the determination of the exercise price and other terms and conditions of the awards. The Committee also adopted a stock option grant policy that provides additional terms and conditions for grant making. See “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Grants of Long-Term Incentive Awards” for more detail concerning our stock option grant policy.

Our chief executive officer, based on the performance evaluations of the other executive officers, recommends to the Compensation and Management Development Committee compensation for those executive officers. The executive officers, including our chief executive officer, also provide recommendations to the Committee from time to time related to compensation philosophy, program design, compliance, performance measures and competitive strategy.

The Compensation and Management Development Committee’s charter provides that the Committee, in its sole discretion, has the authority to retain a compensation consultant. Accordingly, Frederic W. Cook & Co., Inc., or F.W. Cook, was retained directly by the Compensation and Management Development Committee to assist it in 2009. F.W. Cook’s role is to provide expertise and data as needed by the Committee pertaining to all aspects of executive and director compensation, including but not limited to advice and counsel as to the amount and form

of executive and director compensation, and to advise the Committee on emerging trends, best practices and regulatory practices.

Executive Committee

The Executive Committee did not meet during 2009. The Executive Committee may meet during intervals between board meetings and has all the authority of the board, subject to limitations imposed by law or our bylaws.

Finance and Risk Management Committee

The Finance and Risk Management Committee met four times during 2009. The Finance and Risk Management Committee’s primary function is to assist the board of directors in fulfilling its oversight responsibilities. Among other things, the Finance and Risk Management Committee oversees (1) the management of our balance sheet including leverage, liquidity, funding sources, and related matters, (2) the annual capital budget and certain capital projects, (3) management’s assessments, actions, processes and procedures concerning our exposure to risks identified in the Finance and Risk Management Committee’s charter, and (4) any other matters that the board may delegate to the Finance and Risk Management Committee from time to time. Our chief risk officer provides a quarterly report to and meets in executive session with the Finance and Risk Management Committee at each regularly scheduled meeting.

Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee

The Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee met six times during 2009. All members of the Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee are independent, non-employee directors, as defined under the listing standards of the New York Stock Exchange and our Standards for Determining Director

Independence. The Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee’s primary responsibilities include (1) identifying individuals qualified to serve on the board of directors and recommending director nominees for selection by the full board of directors or shareholders, (2) evaluating, formulating and recommending to the board of directors corporate governance policies, and (3) overseeing the Company’s position on corporate social and environmental responsibilities.

Nomination of Director Candidates. The board of directors is responsible for recommending director candidates for election by the shareholders and for electing directors to fill vacancies or newly created directorships. The board of directors has delegated the screening and evaluation process for director candidates to the Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee, which identifies, evaluates and recruits highly qualified director candidates and recommends them to the board of directors. Potential candidates for director may come to the attention of the Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee through current directors, management, professional search firms, shareholders or other persons.

If the Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee has either identified a prospective nominee or determined that an additional or replacement director is required, the Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee may take such measures that it considers appropriate in connection with its evaluation of a director candidate, including candidate interviews, engagement of an outside firm to gather additional information and inquiry of persons with knowledge of the candidate’s qualifications and character. In its evaluation of director candidates, including the members of the board of directors eligible for reelection, the Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee considers the

current size and composition of the board of directors and the needs of the board of directors and the respective committees of the board in view of the criteria for directors described in our Corporate Governance Guidelines, a copy of which is available on our web site at www.aglresources.com.

The Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee will consider director nominees proposed by shareholders. A shareholder may recommend a person for nomination for election to our board of directors by writing to our Corporate Secretary at AGL Resources Inc., P.O. Box 4569, Location 1466, Atlanta, Georgia 30302-4569. Pursuant to our Corporate Governance Guidelines, each submission must include:

A shareholder’s recommendation for a candidate for nomination to be elected at the

next annual meeting of shareholders must be received by our corporate secretary no later than 45 days prior to the end of the year preceding such annual meeting of shareholders. The Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee will evaluate these recommendations in the same manner as it evaluates all other nominees, using the criteria described in our Corporate Governance Guidelines.

The Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee periodically engages a third party search firm to identify possible director candidates for the Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee’s consideration based on skills and characteristics identified by the Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee and in light of gaps in board composition that the Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee may identify from time to time as the issues facing the board evolve. Such skills and characteristics desirable in the context of the then current make-up of the board of directors may include diversity, age, business or professional background, financial literacy and expertise, availability, commitment, independence and other relevant criteria.

Practices for Considering Diversity. The charter of the Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee provides that it shall review, at least annually, the appropriate skills and characteristics of members of the board of directors in the context of the then current make-up of the board. This assessment includes the following factors: diversity (including diversity of skills, background and experience); age; business or professional background; financial literacy and expertise; availability and commitment; independence; and other criteria that the Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee or the full board finds to be relevant. It is the practice of the Nominating, Governance and Corporate

Responsibility Committee to consider these factors when screening and evaluating candidates for nomination to the board of directors.

Board and Committee Meetings

Members of the board are kept informed through reports routinely presented at board and committee meetings by our chief executive officer and other officers and through other means. During 2009, the board of directors held five meetings. Each director attended 75% or more of the aggregate of all meetings of the board and each committee on which he or she served.

Executive Sessions without Management

To promote open discussion among the non-management directors, the board of directors schedules regular executive sessions in which the non-management directors meet without management’s participation. Such sessions are scheduled to occur at every regularly scheduled board meeting. The presiding director at such executive sessions is the Lead Director and Chairman of the Executive Committee of the board of directors. During 2009, the board met in executive session four times.

Communications with Directors

Shareholders and other interested parties may communicate with our board of directors or, alternatively, with the presiding director of executive sessions of our non-management directors or with the non-management directors as a group via our Ethics and Compliance Helpline at (800) 350-1014 or at www.mycompliancereport.com. A copy of our Procedures for Communicating with the Board of Directors of AGL Resources Inc. is available on our web site at www.aglresources.com and is available in print to any shareholder who requests it from our Corporate Secretary at AGL Resources Inc., P.O. Box 4569, Location 1466, Atlanta, Georgia 30302-4569.

Ethics and Compliance Program

The board of directors is responsible for overseeing management’s implementation of the Company’s ethics and compliance program to ensure that our business is conducted in a consistently legal and ethical manner. As part of the ethics and compliance program, our Company has established, and the board of directors has approved, a code of conduct entitled “Commitment to Integrity and Ethics—Our Code of Conduct and Ethics.” Our Code of Conduct and Ethics governs the way we treat our customers and co-workers, guides our community interactions, and strengthens our commitment to excellence and integrity. The Code of Conduct and Ethics covers a wide range of professional conduct, including environmental, health and safety standards, employment policies, conflicts of interest, accuracy of records, fair dealing, insider trading and strict adherence to all laws and regulations applicable to the conduct of our business. Under the Code of Conduct and Ethics, employees are required to conduct the Company’s activities in an ethical and lawful manner and all employees are expected to report any situation where they believe our internal policies or external laws are being violated. Our Code of Conduct and Ethics applies to our directors, officers and all of our employees.

In addition, the board of directors has adopted a Code of Ethics for the Chief Executive Officer and the Senior Financial Officers, or our Officers Code of Ethics, designed to deter wrongdoing and promote the following: honest

and ethical conduct; full, fair, accurate, timely and understandable disclosure in documents filed with or submitted to the SEC; compliance with applicable governmental laws, rules and regulations; prompt internal reporting of violations of the Officers Code of Ethics; and accountability for adherence to the Officers Code of Ethics.

Any waiver of the Code of Conduct and Ethics or Officers Code of Ethics for an executive officer or, where applicable, for a member of the board of directors, requires the approval of the board of directors or a duly authorized committee of the board and will be promptly disclosed on our website at www.aglresources.com. No waivers have been granted under the codes.

The board of directors also has adopted Guidelines on Significant Corporate Governance Issues, or our Corporate Governance Guidelines, that set forth guidelines for the operation of the board of directors and its committees. The board periodically reviews our governance practices and procedures, evaluating them against corporate governance best practices.

Our Code of Conduct and Ethics, our Officers Code of Ethics and our Corporate Governance Guidelines are available on our website at www.aglresources.com. They also are available to any shareholder upon request to Investor Relations, AGL Resources Inc. at P.O. Box 4569, Location 1071, Atlanta, Georgia 30302-4569.

Directors and Executive Officers

The following table presents information as of December 31, 2009, concerning the beneficial ownership of AGL Resources common stock by each director and director nominee, by each executive officer named in the Summary Compensation Table under the caption “Executive Compensation—Compensation Paid to Executive Officers,” whom we refer to collectively as the “named executive officers,” and by all executive officers and directors as a group, based on information furnished by them to us.

Beneficial ownership as reported in the table below has been determined in accordance

with SEC regulations and includes shares of common stock which may be acquired within 60 days after December 31, 2009, upon the exercise of outstanding stock options but excludes shares and share equivalents held under deferral plans which are disclosed in a separate column. See note (3) below. Unless otherwise indicated, all directors, director nominees and executive officers have sole voting and investment power with respect to the shares shown. As of December 31, 2009, no individual director, director nominee, named executive officer, or executive officers and directors as a group owned beneficially 1% or more of our common stock.

General

A director who is one of our employees receives no additional compensation for his or her services as a director or as a member of a committee of our board. A director who is not one of our employees (a non-employee director) receives compensation for his or her services as described in the following paragraphs. All directors are reimbursed for reasonable expenses incurred in connection with attendance at board and committee meetings.

Initial Stock Award

Stock awards include shares of our common stock and common stock equivalents as more fully described in the following paragraphs. All stock awards are 100% vested as of date of grant, eligible for dividend treatment at the same rate as our other shares of common stock, may be voted and may be transferred by the recipient.

Upon his or her initial election or appointment to the board, each non-employee director receives 1,000 shares of our common stock.

Annual Retainer

Each non-employee director receives an annual retainer for service as a director on the first day of each annual service term. The amount and form of the annual retainer are fixed from time to time by resolution of the board. The annual retainer is currently $105,000, of which $35,000, or the Cash Portion, is payable in cash and $70,000, or the Equity Portion, is payable in shares of our common stock. Alternatively, a director may choose to receive his or her entire retainer (including the Cash Portion) in shares of our common stock, or to defer the retainer under the Common Stock Equivalent Plan.

Amounts deferred under the Common Stock Equivalent Plan are invested in common stock

equivalents that track the performance of our common stock and are credited with equivalents to dividend payments that are made on our common stock. Common stock equivalents may not be voted or transferred. At the end of a participating non-employee director’s board service, he or she receives a cash distribution based on the then-current market value of his or her common stock equivalents and dividend equivalents.

Committee Chair and Lead Director Retainer

Committee chairs receive an additional annual retainer on the first day of each annual service term. The Audit Committee chair receives $12,000; the Compensation and Management Development Committee chair receives $8,000; and all other committee chairs receive $6,000. The Lead Director receives an additional annual retainer of $20,000. The committee chair and Lead Director retainers are payable, at the election of each director, in cash or shares of our common stock, or they may be deferred under the Common Stock Equivalent Plan.

Meeting Fees

Each non-employee director receives $2,000 for attendance in person or by telephone at each meeting of the board and any committee of the board of which he or she is a member.

Meeting fees may be paid in cash or, at the election of a director, may be deferred under the Common Stock Equivalent Plan. As noted above, under the Common Stock Equivalent Plan, deferred meeting fees are invested in common stock equivalents that track the performance of our common stock and are credited with dividend equivalent payments. At the end of a non-employee director’s board service, a participating director receives a cash distribution based on the then-current market value of his or her common stock equivalents and dividend equivalents.

2009 Non-Employee Director Compensation Paid

As noted above, during the 2009 service term, each non-employee director received compensation as follows:

Share Ownership and Holding Period Requirements for Non-Employee Directors

In order to serve on our board, directors are required to own shares of our common stock. Our share ownership guidelines for non-employee directors require that non-employee directors own shares of our common stock having a value of at least $350,000, which represents five times the value of the Equity Portion, and ten times the value of the Cash Portion of the annual retainer. Each director has five years from the date of his or her initial election to meet the share ownership requirement. Common stock equivalents and shares issuable upon the exercise of vested stock options are included in the determination of the ownership guideline

amount. We believe that the equity component of non-employee director compensation serves to further align the interests of the non-employee directors with the interests of our shareholders.

Under the terms of the 2006 Non-Employee Directors Equity Compensation Plan, non-employee directors are required to hold shares awarded under such plan until the earlier of (i) five years from the date of the initial stock award or subsequent stock grant; (ii) termination of the non-employee director’s service; or (iii) a change in control of the Company. Shares subject to the holding period include all shares issued in connection with the initial stock award under the plan and all shares issued under the plan in payment of all or part of a director’s annual retainer.

The board of directors presently consists of fourteen members, thirteen of whom are non-employee directors. The board is divided into three classes of approximately equal size, with the directors in each class serving a three-year term. The terms are staggered so that the term of one class expires at each annual meeting. However, at the 2009 annual meeting, shareholders approved our proposal to eliminate the classification of the board of directors and, as a result, directors will be elected for one-year terms beginning with the 2010 annual meeting of shareholders.

Vote Requirements for Election

Our bylaws provide that directors are elected by a plurality of the votes cast by shareholders at a meeting at which a quorum is present. Our bylaws, while not changing the requirement for a plurality vote in the election of directors, require additionally that any director nominee in an uncontested election who does not receive the affirmative vote of a majority of the votes cast (including votes to withhold authority) with respect to that director’s election must promptly tender his or her resignation to the board following certification of the shareholder vote. The requirement that a director tender his or her resignation if he or she does not receive a majority of the votes cast does not apply in the case of a contested election where the number of nominees exceeds the number of directors to be elected.

Following such a tender of resignation, the Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee, excluding any director tendering his or her resignation if he or she is a member of the Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee, will make a recommendation to the board as to whether to accept or reject

the resignation or whether other action should be taken. The board will then act on the Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee’s recommendation and publicly disclose its decision and rationale within 90 days after the date of the certification of the election results. The director who tenders his or her resignation will not participate in the board’s decision. If the director’s resignation is not accepted by the board, the director shall continue to serve until his or her successor is duly elected or until his or her earlier death, resignation or removal. If the director’s resignation is accepted by the board of directors, any resulting vacancy may be filled as provided in the bylaws or the board of directors may decrease the size of the board.

If a majority of the Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee does not receive a majority of the votes cast in their respective elections, then the independent members of the board who did not fail to receive a majority of the votes cast will appoint a committee from among themselves to consider the resignation offers and recommend to the board whether to accept them. If the only directors who did not fail to receive a majority of the votes cast constitute three or fewer directors, all directors may participate in the action regarding whether to accept the resignation offers.

Board Member and Nominee Qualifications

The experience, qualifications, attributes and skills that our board of directors considered in concluding that each of the current members of the board of directors and each of the nominees for election at the 2010 annual meeting should serve as a director include: (1) geographic representation (representative

of our service territories); (2) diversity of professional skills and experience; (3) diversity of age, gender and race; (4) energy industry experience; and (5) community relations within our service territories.

When an incumbent director is up for re-election, the Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee reviews the performance, skills and characteristics of such incumbent director before making a determination to recommend that the full board nominate him or her for re-election.

A description of the specific experience, qualifications, attributes and skills that led our board of directors to conclude that each of the continuing members of the board of directors and each of the nominees should serve as a director follows the biographical information of each director and nominee below.

The board of directors, based on the recommendation of its Nominating, Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee, has nominated Sandra N. Bane, Thomas D. Bell, Jr. and Dean R. O’Hare for election as directors at the annual meeting. All of the nominees are current directors of the Company. If elected, each of the nominees will hold office for a one-year term expiring at the annual meeting of shareholders in 2011. Each of the nominees has agreed to serve as a director if elected by the shareholders.

If any nominee becomes unable to stand for election, the board may:

Under our bylaws, any director who attains his or her 75^th birthday, shall thereafter, upon completion of the term for which he or she was elected, cease to be an active director. The terms of service for Messrs. D. Raymond Riddle and Felker W. Ward, Jr. expire at the 2010 annual meeting because they each have attained their 75^th birthday. Mr. Riddle has served on our board of directors for thirty-two years. During his tenure, Mr. Riddle’s roles included lead director, chairman of the board, interim chief executive officer, as well as chairman of a number of our committees. Mr. Ward has served on our board of directors for twenty-two years. During his tenure his roles included lead director and chairman of a number of our committees. The dedication, insight and extraordinary service of these gentlemen are greatly appreciated.

Amendment to our Bylaws to Eliminate the Classification of the Board of Directors, Which Conforms to the Amendment to our Articles of Incorporation Approved by the Shareholders at the 2009 Annual Meeting

At the 2009 annual meeting of shareholders, the board of directors recommended a proposal to amend the Company’s articles of incorporation and repeal the provision providing for the classification of the board of directors. The amendment to repeal this provision or “declassify” the board was approved by the shareholders.

The amended articles of incorporation provide that current directors, including those elected to a three-year term at the 2009 annual meeting, will continue to serve the remainder

of their respective elected terms. Beginning with the 2010 annual meeting of shareholders, directors with expiring terms will be elected for one-year terms, the result being that by the 2012 annual meeting of shareholders all multi-year terms will have expired and all directors will be elected annually.

Article II, Section 2.2 of our bylaws provides for the classification of the board of directors into three classes. Under Georgia law, an amendment to conform our bylaws to our articles of incorporation requires shareholder approval.

The text of the proposed amendment to the bylaws to conform to the amendment to the articles of incorporation is attached as Annex A to this proxy statement.

The Audit Committee of the board of directors is composed of seven directors each of whom is an independent director, as defined under the listing standards of the New York Stock Exchange and the Company’s Standards for Determining Director Independence. The Audit Committee operates under a written charter adopted by the board of directors, a copy of which is available on the Company’s web site at www.aglresources.com.

The Audit Committee reviews the Company’s financial reporting process on behalf of the board of directors. In fulfilling its responsibilities, the Audit Committee has reviewed and discussed the audited financial statements contained in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for 2009 with management and the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. Management is responsible for the Company’s financial statements and the financial reporting process, including the system of internal control over financial reporting. PricewaterhouseCoopers is responsible for expressing an opinion on the conformity of those audited financial statements with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States and on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.

The Audit Committee has discussed with PricewaterhouseCoopers the matters required to be discussed by Public Company Accounting Oversight Board statement on Auditing Standards No. 61, as amended, regarding PricewaterhouseCooper’s judgments about the quality of the Company’s

accounting principles as applied in its financial reporting. In addition, the Audit Committee has discussed with PricewaterhouseCoopers its independence from the Company and from Company management, including the matters in the written disclosures and the letter provided to the Audit Committee by PricewaterhouseCoopers as required by the applicable requirements of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. The Audit Committee has concluded that PricewaterhouseCoopers is independent from the Company and its management.

Based on the reviews and discussions referred to above, the Audit Committee recommended that the board of directors approve the inclusion of the audited financial statements in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for 2009 for filing with the SEC.

Henry C. Wolf (Chair)

Sandra N. Bane

Wyck A. Knox, Jr.

Dennis M. Love

Charles H. McTier

Dean R. O’Hare

Felker W. Ward, Jr.

The information contained in the Audit Committee Report shall not be deemed to be “soliciting material” or to be “filed” with the Securities and Exchange Commission, nor shall such information be incorporated by reference into any future filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, except to the extent that we specifically incorporate it by reference in such filing.

Appointment of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP served as our independent registered public accounting firm and audited our annual financial statements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009, and the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2009.

PricewaterhouseCoopers has served as our principal independent registered public accounting firm since 2003.

The Audit Committee has appointed PricewaterhouseCoopers to be our

independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2010. The shareholders are asked to ratify this appointment at the annual meeting. In the event shareholders do not ratify the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers as our independent registered public accounting firm for 2010, the Audit Committee will review its future selection of our independent registered public accounting firm.

Representatives of PricewaterhouseCoopers will attend the annual meeting and will have the opportunity to make a statement if they so desire. They will also be available to answer appropriate questions.

Set forth below is a description of the nature of the services that PricewaterhouseCoopers provided to us in exchange for such fees.

Audit Fees

Represents fees PricewaterhouseCoopers billed us for the audit of our annual financial statements and the review of our quarterly financial statements and for services normally provided in connection with statutory and regulatory filings. These fees include fees incurred in meeting the internal control over financial reporting compliance requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of

2002, as well as audit fees for our subsidiary, SouthStar Energy Services LLC.

Audit-Related Fees

Represents fees PricewaterhouseCoopers billed us for audit and review-related services, including services relating to the issuance of a SAS 70 review report for Atlanta Gas Light Company’s Marketers, potential business acquisitions and dispositions, the audit of employee benefit plan financial statements, assistance with implementation of rules and regulations pursuant to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and compliance with rules and regulations applicable to accounting matters.

Tax Fees

Represents fees PricewaterhouseCoopers billed us for tax compliance, planning and advisory services.

All Other Fees

Represents fees billed to us by a subsidiary of PricewaterhouseCoopers for external human resources benchmarking data provided to our human resources department.

The $130,275, or 6%, decrease in fees from 2008 to 2009 primarily reflects $14,077 in reduced audit fees as a result of audit efficiencies partially offset by higher bond issuance and regulatory audit services and reduced audit-related fees of $132,500 as a result of lower SAS 70 fees. The decreased fees also include increases of $8,302 in tax and $8,000 in other fees.

The Audit Committee pre-approved all of the above audit, audit-related, tax and other fees of PricewaterhouseCoopers, as required by the pre-approval policy described below, with the exception of the fees incurred from the PricewaterhouseCoopers’ subsidiary, which under the de minimus exception of Section 10A(i)(1)(B) of the Exchange Act was promptly reported to the Audit Committee and subsequently approved. The Audit Committee concluded that the provision of the above services by PricewaterhouseCoopers was compatible with maintaining PricewaterhouseCoopers’ independence.

Audit Committee Audit and Non-Audit Services Approval Policy

Consistent with rules and regulations pursuant to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 regarding registered public accounting firm independence, the Audit Committee has

responsibility for appointing, setting compensation and overseeing the work of the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm. In recognition of this responsibility, the Audit Committee adopted a policy that requires specific Audit Committee approval before any services are provided by the independent registered public accounting firm.

Prior to engagement of the independent registered public accounting firm for the next year’s audit, management submits to the Audit Committee for approval a summary of services expected to be rendered during that year and an estimate of the related fees for (1) audit services, (2) audit-related services, (3) tax services, and (4) all other services. The Audit Committee pre-approves these services by category of service and budget amount. The services and fees must be deemed compatible with the maintenance of the independent registered public accounting firm’s independence. The Audit Committee requires the independent registered public accounting firm and management to report actual fees versus the budget periodically throughout the year by category of service. During the year, circumstances may arise when it may become necessary to engage the independent registered public accounting firm for additional services not contemplated in the original pre-approval. In those instances, the Audit Committee requires that management obtain specific approval from the Audit Committee before engaging the independent registered public accounting firm.

The Audit Committee may delegate approval authority to one or more of its members. The member to whom such authority is delegated must present for ratification any approval decisions to the Audit Committee at its next scheduled meeting.

The Compensation and Management Development Committee of the board of directors is composed of six directors, each of whom is an independent director, as defined under the listing standards of the New York Stock Exchange and the Company’s Standards for Determining Director Independence. The Compensation and Management Development Committee operates under a written charter adopted by the board of directors, a copy of which is available on the Company’s web site at www.aglresources.com.

The Compensation and Management Development Committee has reviewed and discussed with management the “Compensation Discussion and Analysis,” or CD&A, section of this proxy statement required by Item 402(b) of Regulation S-K promulgated by the SEC. Based on the Committee’s review and discussions with management, the Committee recommended

to the board of directors that the CD&A be included in the Company’s 2009 annual report on Form 10-K and in this proxy statement.

Bettina M. Whyte (Chair)

Sandra N. Bane

Thomas D. Bell, Jr.

Charles R. Crisp

Arthur E. Johnson

James A. Rubright

The information contained in the Compensation and Management Development Committee Report shall not be deemed to be “soliciting material” or to be “filed” with the Securities and Exchange Commission, nor shall such information be incorporated by reference into any future filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, except to the extent that we specifically incorporate it by reference in such filing.

The following directors served on the Compensation and Management Development Committee at December 31, 2009: Sandra N. Bane, Thomas D. Bell, Jr., Charles R. Crisp, Arthur E. Johnson, James A. Rubright and Bettina M. Whyte (Chair). None of such persons was, during 2009 or previously, an officer or employee of AGL Resources or any of its subsidiaries and each such person was an independent director as defined under the listing standards of the New York Stock Exchange and our Standards for Determining Director Independence.

Thomas D. Bell, Jr. is the former Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Cousins Properties Incorporated. Cousins holds a 50% general partnership interest in Ten Peachtree Place Associates, or TPPA, which owns the building where we lease space for our corporate headquarters. Mr. Bell was not an

officer of TPPA. Although Cousins is the managing member of TPPA, major business decisions for the TPPA partnership must be decided unanimously by Cousins and its partner. Prior to Mr. Bell joining our board of directors, we entered into a ten-year lease agreement with TPPA that commenced in 2003. Cousins’ 50% interest in the amount we paid in lease payments to TPPA in 2007 was approximately $3,466,000, in 2008 was approximately $3,510,000 and in 2009 was approximately $3,629,177, which was less than 2% of both our consolidated gross revenues and Cousins’ consolidated gross revenues for such respective years. The board of directors determined that Mr. Bell is independent because our business relationship with TPPA is not material as payments of less than 2% do not create any presumption of materiality under our Standards for Determining Director Independence.

In this section, the Company discusses our compensation objectives and policies, the elements of compensation, and the material factors considered in making compensation decisions for our named executive officers (executives) listed below:

Executive Summary

The following is a brief overview of the information provided in this Compensation Discussion and Analysis.

Executive Compensation Program Objectives

Our executive compensation program has four objectives, each of which relates to long-term value-creation goals for the Company. These objectives are to:

Determining Executive Compensation

Role of the Compensation and Management Development Committee

It is the responsibility of the Compensation and Management Development Committee (the Compensation Committee) to oversee our executive compensation, including approving incentive programs and appropriate levels of compensation for our executives. Information about the Compensation Committee and its composition and responsibilities can be found on page 11 of this proxy statement, under the caption “Corporate Governance—Compensation and Management Development Committee.” The Compensation Committee engages the services of an independent consultant to provide advice, research and analytical services on a variety of subjects, including compensation trends, peer group comparisons and the compensation of our executives and non-employee directors. In mid-2009 the Compensation Committee changed its independent consultant from Towers, Perrin, Forster & Crosby, Inc. (Towers Perrin) to Frederic W. Cook & Co., Inc. (F.W. Cook). F. W. Cook reports directly to the Compensation Committee and provides no other services to the Company. For 2009 Towers Perrin provided competitive market data and advised the Compensation

Committee on peer group composition and current programs. F.W. Cook assisted the Compensation Committee in revising the continuity agreements, updating our benchmarking practices, and designing the 2010 incentive programs.

Role of Individual Executives in Determining Executive Compensation

Our chief executive officer develops recommendations regarding executive compensation program design and individual compensation levels for executives, other than himself. He also provides to the Compensation Committee an assessment of individual performance for each executive as input to base salary and incentive award recommendations. Our Human Resources staff provides analyses, competitive data, and alternative designs to assist the Chief Executive Officer in developing his recommendations to the Compensation Committee.

Our chief financial officer recommends key business drivers and performance measures to be included in incentive program designs.

Competitive Market Information

Each year we review the market competitiveness of our executives’ compensation programs and levels. In addition, we re-evaluate the companies included in our comparator groups to assure that we have the appropriate marketplace focus. For 2009, base salary, target annual incentive awards, and long-term incentive opportunities were benchmarked against an “energy industry database” and “proxy peers.”

Energy Industry Database

For 2009, the following 85 energy services companies in Towers Perrin’s Energy Industry Services Compensation Database constituted the “energy industry database.” Data from this group was used as the primary source to

determine competitive levels of compensation for our executives. We believe that a larger database provides more accurate and reliable information than a smaller peer group, and that the broader energy group better reflects the labor market in which we compete for executive talent.

Allegheny Energy, Inc.

Allete, Inc.

Alliant Energy Corp.

Ameren Energy Resources Co.

American Electric Power Co.

Areva NP

AEI (formerly Ashmore Energy

International)

Avista Corp.

BG US Services, Inc.

California Independent System

Operator Corp.

Calpine Corp.

CenterPoint Energy, Inc.

Cheniere Energy, Inc.

Cleco Corp.

CMS Energy Corp.

Colorado Springs Utilities

Consolidated Edison, Inc.

Constellation Energy Group

DCP Midstream Partners, LP

Dominion Resources, Inc.

Duke Energy Corp.

E. ON U.S. LLC

Edison International

Electric Power Research

Institute, Inc.

El Paso Corp.

Enbridge Energy Partners LP

Energen Corp.

Energy Future Holdings Corp.

Energy Northwest

Entergy Corp.

Enterprise Products Partners, LP

Exelon Corp.

FirstEnergy Corp.

FPL Group, Inc.

Hawaiian Electric Industries, Inc.

IDACORP, Inc.

Integrys Energy Group, Inc.

Jacksonville Electric Authority

Knight Energy Corp.

Lower Colorado River Authority

MDU Resources Group, Inc.

MGE Energy, Inc.

Mirant Corp.

New York Power Authority

Nicor Inc.

Northeast Utilities

NorthWestern Energy Corp.

NRG Energy, Inc.

NSTAR

Northwest Natural Gas Co.

OGE Energy Corp.

Omaha Public Power District

Otter Tail Corp.

Pacific Gas & Electric Co.

PacifiCorp

Pepco Holdings, Inc.

PJM Interconnection, LLC

Pinnacle West Capital Corp.

PNM Resources, Inc.

Portland General Electric Co.

PPL Corp

Progress Energy, Inc.

Public Service Enterprise Group Inc.

Puget Energy, Inc.

RRI Energy, Inc.

Salt River Project

SCANA Corp.

Seminole Energy Services, LLC

Sempra Energy

Southern Company

Southern Union Co.

Spectra Energy Corp.

STP Nuclear Operating Co.

SUEZ Energy North America Inc.

Targa Resources Partners LP

Tennessee Valley Authority

TransCanada Corp.

UIL Holdings Corp.

UniSource Energy Corp.

Unitil Corp.

Westar Energy, Inc.

The Williams Companies, Inc.

Wisconsin Energy Corp.

Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corp.

Xcel Energy, Inc.

The companies in the energy industry peer group vary in size (from under $500 million to over $16 billion in revenue, with median revenue of $3 billion). Towers Perrin adjusted the market data to reflect a company of similar revenue size using regression analysis, a statistical method that examines the relationship between company size (revenue) and pay. Since larger companies typically pay higher levels of executive pay, and smaller companies typically pay less, this statistical analysis is helpful in developing a more accurate understanding of comparable pay in a large group of companies. For 2009, Towers Perrin provided the Compensation Committee data at the 50^th and 75^th percentiles of this peer group.

Proxy Peers

A group of 13 comparably sized natural gas providers was used in 2009 as a secondary point of reference. As publicly-traded natural gas companies, our proxy peers represent those companies considered most comparable to our Company and business operations. Our proxy peers were:

Atmos Energy Corp.

Integrys Energy Group, Inc.

National Fuel Gas Co.

New Jersey Resources Corp.

Nicor Inc.

Northwest Natural Gas Co.

ONEOK Inc.

Piedmont Natural Gas Co. Inc.

Questar Corp.

South Jersey Industries, Inc.

Southwest Gas Corp.

UGI Corp.

WGL Holdings Inc.

During 2009, Energen Corporation and Equitable Resources Inc. were removed from the peer group due to their increased focus on exploration and production. Peoples Energy also was eliminated because of its acquisition by Integrys Energy Group. To maintain an

appropriate number of proxy peers, four new companies were added as suitable matches in 2009, based upon their business focus and size of operation: Integrys Energy Group, Northwest Natural Gas, South Jersey Industries, and Southwest Gas Corp.

To perform a more meaningful analysis of compensation for Mr. Schantz’ role as president of our wholesale services business, Towers Perrin benchmarked his position to their Energy Trading and Marketing Survey, which provided data more directly comparable to his position. This survey data includes 18 companies having energy trading and marketing operations, many of which are included in the two comparator groups detailed above.

Compensation Program Elements and their Purpose

Our executive compensation program is comprised of the following elements.

2009 Executive Compensation

Pay mix at target

The compensation programs approved by the Compensation Committee for the executives include a strong link between pay and performance by placing a significant portion of compensation “at risk.” As such, our programs are structured so that our executives average 68% of targeted total direct compensation contingent on performance and fluctuating with our financial performance and share price. We believe this is fundamental to closely aligning executive pay with the creation of value for our shareholders. Specific information on total direct compensation at risk for each of our executives is included in the tables in the following section.

Setting 2009 Total Direct Compensation Opportunities

When setting levels of base salary and target amounts for annual and long-term incentives, the Compensation Committee examined each component of pay on both a stand-alone basis and as a total. The Compensation Committee considered energy industry data for each of the three components of total direct

compensation and all three components in total. Pay decisions are based on business judgment that is informed by the competitive data and other considerations including individual experience and performance, internal pay equity and mastery of position responsibilities. Unless otherwise noted, changes in total direct compensation for 2009 were driven primarily by competitive market adjustments.

The corporate and the business unit measures (except as described later in this paragraph) were covered by the terms of our Omnibus Performance Incentive Plan, which was approved by our shareholders. These measures were intended to qualify for the performance-based compensation exception to the deduction limits under the U.S. tax code Section 162(m). Certain business unit measures (categorized as “Other”) and the individual performance portion of our executives’ annual incentive awards were covered by the terms of our Annual Incentive Plan and do not qualify for the Section 162(m) exclusion. These are described in more detail in the sections below titled “Business Unit Measures” and “Individual Measures.”

1. Corporate Measure

The Annual Incentive Plan (AIP) has a corporate performance measure based on basic earnings per common share (EPS) attributable to AGL Resources Inc. common shareholders, which is computed by dividing our net income attributable to AGL Resources Inc. determined in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP) by the daily weighted average number of common shares outstanding

(GAAP EPS) that is called “Plan EPS.” Measures based on EPS closely align shareholder and executive interests. While it is a stable and well understood metric, GAAP EPS does not accurately reflect value created by the Company in a particular year because

of the accounting mechanisms for our wholesale services business unit (Sequent). For purposes of setting our 2009 Plan EPS target, we reduced GAAP EPS for value created and credited for compensation purposes in 2008 which was reported in 2009. We also increased the target for value created in 2009 that will be reported on a GAAP basis in 2010.

This means that for compensation purposes, we capture the value in the period in which it is generated, regardless of the period in which it is reported for GAAP purposes. This is what we refer to as “Plan EPS.”

For 2009, the Compensation Committee approved a Plan EPS target of $2.75, which:

Atmos Energy Corp.

CenterPoint Energy

Integrys Energy Group

New Jersey Resources

Nicor Inc.

NiSource Inc.

Northwest Natural Gas

ONEOK Inc.

Piedmont Natural Gas

Sempra Energy Corp.

Southwest Gas Corp.

UGI Corp.

WGL Holdings Inc.

The group differs from the proxy peer group in the following manner:

Beginning in 2010, the composition of our proxy and performance peer groups will be consistent.

Performance is calculated as a stacked rank within the peer group. Zero is the lowest of the group and 13 is the highest. Performance is calculated using the following formula:

RTSR = (The Company’s ranked position against peers ÷ 13) x 200%

Our Company’s RTSR rank determined the percentage payout. The Company finished 2009 with a rank of eight, resulting in 123% of target for this goal: (8 ÷ 13) x 200% = 123%.

Plan Earnings and O&M Expense—Measures based upon Plan Earnings and O&M Expense are calculated against pre-determined targets. “Plan Earnings” is defined as earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT) adjusted to include net economic value and exclude annual incentive costs in excess of target. We consider Plan Earnings to be the best measure of performance for the business units because it measures profitability at the business unit level leading to EPS. The adjustments are aligned with our Plan EPS measure and are intended to more accurately reflect operating performance. O&M Expense reflects our ability to manage our cost

structure, critical to meeting Plan Earnings targets. Each measure includes a threshold, below which no award will be provided, and a maximum award of 200% of target for executives other than as described below for Mr. Schantz in our wholesales services business unit. The targets for 2009 are reflected in the table below.

Wholesale Services Plan Earnings—The wholesale services Plan Earnings measure includes adjustments for economic earnings in the same manner as previously described for Plan EPS. In the case of Mr. Schantz, wholesale services EBIT is also subject to other adjustments for interest and other non-recurring items.

Other—Each executive reporting to the CEO, with the exception of Mr. Schantz, has personal goals, based upon his area of responsibility. These goals are referred to as “Other” in the table above and include non-financial measures pertaining to key performance areas such as safety, customer service and progress on strategic projects. Due to the subjective nature of these goals, they are not intended to qualify for the tax exemption for performance-based compensation under the U.S. tax code Section 162(m).

Business Unit Measure for Mr. Schantz

For 2009, 100% of Mr. Schantz’ annual incentive award was based on Sequent’s Plan Earnings as adjusted for interest charges and one-time, non-recurring items. Mr. Schantz was entitled to receive an award equal to 8.5% of an incentive pool established for employees of Sequent under the Sequent Incentive Plan (Sequent Plan). This pool was funded based on a pre-determined formula. After a threshold Plan Earnings level is reached, the pool funds at a 10% rate. As the Plan Earnings approach or exceed the target level, the funding rate is ratably increased up to a maximum of 15%. For 2009, Sequent’s Plan Earnings resulted in an incentive pool of $13.0 million. Though not subject to a hard cap, the Sequent Plan incentive pool, and correspondingly Mr. Schantz’ annual incentive award, is constrained by a series of operational limits including risk exposure, stop-loss, and credit limits. In addition, 50% of the annual incentive award for Mr. Schantz that exceeds the amount of his base salary is deferred. One half of the deferred amount will be paid in 2011,

twelve months after the initial incentive payment, and the other half paid in 2012, twenty-four months after the initial payment. This deferral feature provides retention value.

The Compensation Committee reviewed management’s analysis of the Sequent Plan and determined that because of the operational limits on Sequent and the risk management oversight from the Company, the Sequent Plan does not incent excessive risk taking.

3. Individual Measures

Individual performance measures are subjective and relate to the manner in which the executive accomplishes his work during the year. The inclusion of subjective measures is intended to ensure that accomplishments are attained in a manner that is not purely financially driven, but also consistent with our culture and values and contributes to our long- term success. Awards relative to individual performance factors are not intended to be exempt from U.S. tax code Section 162(m) limits.

Discretion to Modify Awards

The Compensation Committee reserves the right to adjust performance objectives during the course of the year in order to reflect changes in the Company and its business. In determining the corporate performance component under our Omnibus Performance Incentive Plan, the Compensation Committee has the authority to: (i) exclude extraordinary

one-time effects, which could increase or decrease award payments, if, in its overall judgment, our Company and our shareholders are better served by that result; and (ii) exercise negative discretion against reported results which would serve to reduce an award otherwise due. The Compensation Committee did not exercise such discretion in determining award payments for 2009 performance.

Determination of Long-term Incentive Awards

Long-term incentive grants in 2009 included three different types of awards. A mix of stock options (20%), performance-based restricted stock units (40%), and performance cash awards (40%) was selected based on the following factors: (i) the impact each type of award has on shareholder value creation and executive motivation and retention; (ii) competitive practice; and (iii) balancing the cost of equity awards and the projected impact on shareholder dilution.

• Stock options—Because stock options produce tangible value to the holder only if our stock price increases, they provide an incentive to perform in ways that lead to stock price appreciation and thus align pay with

shareholder interests. The Compensation Committee determined the number of stock options granted to each executive, using a binomial lattice model and the market value of shares at the time of grant. Stock option awards are time vested. Details can be found on page 55 in the “Grants of Plan-Based Awards” table.

• Performance-based restricted stock/units—Restricted stock units are issued having a one-year performance measurement period with a performance hurdle based upon an EPS goal. If the EPS goal is met, the restricted stock units convert to an equal number of shares of restricted stock, with a three-year, ratable vesting period. These awards are designed to focus the executives on earnings per share and provide retention value during the vesting period.

Because the number of shares required for stock-based awards typically is calculated using a percentage of base salary and current market price, significant market price changes can substantially change the total number of shares granted. The dramatic market price

changes that occurred prior to the grants made in early 2009 could have resulted in many more shares being granted. To address this issue, the Compensation Committee constrained the run rate for aggregate awards at 0.60% of common shares outstanding.

Grants otherwise determined at target award levels were uniformly reduced to keep total grants within the 0.60% limit set by the Compensation Committee. Constraining the run rate at that level resulted in an 11% reduction in the number of shares awarded to each executive.

• Performance cash awards—Performance cash awards granted in 2009 provide a potential cash payment based on compound average annual growth in Plan EPS, plus the

average dividend yield above a preset level, over a three-year period ending December 21, 2011. This internal shareholder return measure was used to reward achievement of earnings and dividend growth commitments to shareholders. The award value may range between 0% and 140% of the target award value, based on actual performance. If the applicable performance threshold is not attained, nothing will be paid.

Details can be found on page 55 in the “Grants of Plan-Based Awards” table.

Payments associated with these awards can be found in the “Non-Equity Incentive Plan Payout Detail” table on page 54.

Continuity Agreements

Each of our executives has a change in control severance agreement. These agreements were approved by the Compensation Committee in October 2009 and have a term that runs from December 1, 2009 through November 30, 2011. These agreements supersede similar agreements that expired on November 30, 2009. Prior to approving the new agreements, the Compensation Committee undertook an extensive review of the predecessor agreements and updated the terms and conditions to reflect current market practices. The Compensation Committee approved changes to the terms and conditions of these agreements to be more restrictive than the predecessor agreements. Among other changes, these agreements: (i) do not contain an excise tax gross up; (ii) reflect a reduced severance formula; (iii) provide for a lower prorated award payment than the predecessor agreements; and (iv) contain a

more limited “good reason” termination provision.

In adopting these agreements, the Compensation Committee determined that it is still appropriate to authorize such agreements because of the retentive value they would provide during critical periods relating to potential change in control. Tables disclosing the estimated costs associated with these agreements, and footnotes describing their principal terms, begin on page 63 under the heading “Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control.”

Other Policies Governing our Executive Compensation Program

Grants of Long-term incentive awards

The Compensation Committee generally grants long-term incentive awards on an annual basis at a regularly scheduled meeting, usually in late January or early February. The meeting date is scheduled well in advance and without regard to potential stock price movement.

In 2006, the Compensation Committee adopted a stock option grant policy which provides that in the ordinary course, stock option grants to executives, and annual stock option grants to all other key employees, will be authorized by the Compensation Committee at a regularly scheduled meeting. However, this policy also provides that the Compensation Committee may authorize grants through use of a unanimous written consent, in lieu of a meeting, but only when circumstances prevent the action from being taken at a regularly scheduled meeting.

Impact of restated earnings on previously paid or awarded compensation

The Company has not had to restate earnings. If future restatements are necessary, the board of directors and the Compensation Committee will consider the facts and circumstances, including any regulatory requirements for repayment, in determining if and how repayments are appropriate.

Accounting and tax treatment of direct compensation

All compensation is subject to federal, state and local taxes as ordinary income or capital gains as various tax jurisdictions provide. U.S. tax code Section 162(m) places a limit of $1,000,000 on the amount of compensation that we may deduct in any one year with respect to any one of our executives. However, qualifying performance-based compensation will not be subject to the deduction limit if certain requirements are met. The Compensation Committee anticipates that most awards under our long-term incentive programs and the corporate portion and most business unit measures of the annual incentive for executives will continue to qualify as performance-based compensation. To maintain flexibility in compensating our executives, however, the Compensation Committee reserves the right to use its judgment to authorize compensation

payments that may be subject to the limit when the Compensation Committee believes that such payments are appropriate. Accordingly, certain components of our executive compensation program are designed to be qualifying performance-based compensation under U.S. tax code Section 162(m) while others are not.

Stock ownership

We maintain stock ownership guidelines designed to ensure sustained, meaningful executive share ownership, align executive long-term interests with shareholders, and demonstrate the commitment of our officers to enhancing long-term shareholder value. As chief executive officer, Mr. Somerhalder is encouraged to own shares of our common stock with a market value of at least five times his annual base salary, and our other executives three times their annual base salaries. The Compensation Committee regularly reviews the attainment of these ownership levels. In calculating compliance with the ownership guidelines, we include all of the stock owned by an executive, restricted stock and in-the-money value of vested stock options, and stock included in an executive’s account under our Retirement Savings Plus Plan and Nonqualified Savings Plan. As of December 2009, our executives met their ownership guidelines, with the exceptions of Mr. Somerhalder and Mr. Evans, who, based upon their shorter time in position, continue to make appropriate progress toward meeting their guidelines.

Changes for 2010

During 2009, the Compensation Committee made the following decisions for 2010 compensation.

Revise benchmarking comparators

F. W. Cook advised the Compensation Committee to adopt a more prevalent method to determine which companies should be

included in the energy industry database. Through 2009, the Compensation Committee had relied upon Towers Perrin to size adjust compensation data of all companies that are part of the energy segment of their executive database. F. W. Cook recommended using median values of companies that are similar in size to our Company. For 2010, the Compensation Committee defined “energy industry database” to be those companies (i) included in the energy segment of Towers Perrin’s executive database, and (ii) having assets or revenue between one-third and three times ours.

In addition, the Compensation Committee decided to make the composition of the natural gas proxy peer group and peer group for relative total shareholder return (TSR) comparisons the same. The 2010 peer group will include the same companies as the 2009 TSR peer group with Sempra Energy omitted due to its size.