Contingencies

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2023

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Contingencies

CONTINGENCIESSee Note 3 to the financial statements in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for information relating to various lawsuits and other contingencies.

General Litigation Matters

The Registrants are involved in various matters being litigated and regulatory matters. The ultimate outcome of such pending or potential litigation or regulatory matters against each Registrant and any subsidiaries cannot be determined at this time; however, for current proceedings not specifically reported herein, management does not anticipate that the ultimate liabilities, if any, arising from such current proceedings would have a material effect on such Registrant's financial statements.

The Registrants believe the pending legal challenges discussed below have no merit; however, the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.

Alabama Power

In September 2022, Mobile Baykeeper filed a citizen suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama alleging that Alabama Power's plan to close the Plant Barry ash pond utilizing a closure-in-place methodology violates the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and regulations governing CCR. Among other relief requested, Mobile Baykeeper seeks a declaratory judgment that the RCRA and regulations governing CCR are being violated, preliminary and injunctive relief to prevent implementation of Alabama Power's closure plan and the development of a closure plan that satisfies regulations governing CCR requirements. On December 19, 2022, Alabama Power filed a motion to dismiss the case. On January 31, 2023, the EPA issued a Notice of Potential Violations associated with Alabama Power's plan to close the Plant Barry ash pond. Alabama Power submitted responses on March 20, 2023, March 24, 2023, and April 3, 2023 affirming its position that it is in compliance with CCR requirements. The ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time but could have an impact on Alabama Power's ARO estimates. See Note 6 to the financial statements in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for a discussion of Alabama Power's ARO liabilities.

Georgia Power

Municipal Franchise Fees

In 2011, plaintiffs filed a putative class action against Georgia Power in the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia alleging that Georgia Power's collection in rates of amounts for municipal franchise fees (which fees are paid to municipalities) exceeded the amounts allowed in orders of the Georgia PSC and alleging certain state law

claims. This case has been ruled upon and appealed numerous times over the last several years. In 2019, the Georgia PSC issued an order that found Georgia Power has appropriately implemented the municipal franchise fee schedule. In March 2021, the Superior Court of Fulton County granted class certification and Georgia Power's motion for summary judgment and the plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal. In April 2021, Georgia Power filed a notice of cross appeal on the issue of class certification. In December 2021, the Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed the Superior Court's ruling that granted summary judgment to Georgia Power and dismissed Georgia Power's cross appeal on the issue of class certification as moot. Also in December 2021, the plaintiffs filed a petition for writ of certiorari to the Georgia Supreme Court, which was denied on January 27, 2023. On February 6, 2023, the plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration with the Georgia Supreme Court, which was denied on February 16, 2023. This matter is now concluded.

Plant Scherer

In July 2020, a group of individual plaintiffs filed a complaint, which was amended in December 2022, in the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia against Georgia Power alleging that the construction and operation of Plant Scherer has impacted groundwater and air, resulting in alleged personal injuries and property damage. The plaintiffs seek an unspecified amount of monetary damages including punitive damages, a medical monitoring fund, and injunctive relief. Georgia Power has filed multiple motions to dismiss the complaint. In December 2022, the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia granted Georgia Power's motion to transfer the case to the Superior Court of Monroe County, Georgia.

In October 2021 and February 2022, a total of seven additional complaints were filed in the Superior Court of Monroe County, Georgia against Georgia Power alleging that releases from Plant Scherer have impacted groundwater and air, resulting in alleged personal injuries and property damage. The plaintiffs sought an unspecified amount of monetary damages including punitive damages. In November 2021 and March 2022, Georgia Power removed these cases to the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia. In November 2022, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their complaints without prejudice. Georgia Power anticipates that these plaintiffs will refile their complaints.

On January 9, 2023, an additional complaint was filed in the Superior Court of Monroe County, Georgia against Georgia Power alleging that the construction and operation of Plant Scherer have impacted groundwater and air, resulting in alleged personal injuries. The plaintiff sought an unspecified amount of monetary damages, including punitive damages. On January 19, 2023, Georgia Power filed a notice to remove the case to the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia. On February 21, 2023, the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the complaint without prejudice. Georgia Power anticipates that this plaintiff will refile the complaint.

The amount of any possible losses from these matters cannot be estimated at this time.

Mississippi Power

In 2018, Ray C. Turnage and 10 other individual plaintiffs filed a putative class action complaint against Mississippi Power and the three then-serving members of the Mississippi PSC in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, which was amended in March 2019 to include four additional plaintiffs. Mississippi Power received Mississippi PSC approval in 2013 to charge a mirror CWIP rate premised upon including in its rate base pre-construction and construction costs for the Kemper IGCC prior to placing the Kemper IGCC into service. The Mississippi Supreme Court reversed that approval and ordered Mississippi Power to refund the amounts paid by customers under the previously-approved mirror CWIP rate. The plaintiffs allege that the initial approval process, and the amount approved, were improper and make claims for gross negligence, reckless conduct, and intentional wrongdoing. They also allege that Mississippi Power underpaid customers by up to $23.5 million in the refund process by applying an incorrect interest rate. The plaintiffs seek to recover, on behalf of themselves and their putative class, actual damages, punitive damages, pre-judgment interest, post-judgment interest, attorney's fees, and costs. The district court dismissed the amended complaint; however, in March 2020, the plaintiffs filed a motion seeking to name the new members of the Mississippi PSC, the Mississippi Development Authority, and Southern Company as additional defendants and add a cause of action against all defendants based on a dormant commerce

clause theory under the U.S. Constitution. In July 2020, the plaintiffs filed a motion for leave to file a third amended complaint, which included the same federal claims as the proposed second amended complaint, as well as several additional state law claims based on the allegation that Mississippi Power failed to disclose the annual percentage rate of interest applicable to refunds. In November 2020, the district court denied each of the plaintiffs' pending motions and entered final judgment in favor of Mississippi Power. In January 2021, the district court denied further motions by the plaintiffs to vacate the judgment and to file a revised second amended complaint. In February 2021, the plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. In March 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued an opinion affirming the dismissal of the claims against the Mississippi PSC defendants but reversing the dismissal of the claims against Mississippi Power. In May 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied a petition by Mississippi Power for a rehearing en banc and remanded the case to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi for further proceedings. In June 2022, Mississippi Power filed with the trial court a motion to dismiss the complaint with prejudice, which was granted on March 15, 2023. On March 28, 2023, the plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. An adverse outcome in this proceeding could have a material impact on Mississippi Power's financial statements.

Environmental Remediation

The Southern Company system must comply with environmental laws and regulations governing the handling and disposal of waste and releases of hazardous substances. Under these various laws and regulations, the Southern Company system could incur substantial costs to clean up affected sites. The traditional electric operating companies and the natural gas distribution utilities in Illinois and Georgia have each received authority from their respective state PSCs or other applicable state regulatory agencies to recover approved environmental remediation costs through regulatory mechanisms. These regulatory mechanisms are adjusted annually or as necessary within limits approved by the state PSCs or other applicable state regulatory agencies.

Georgia Power's environmental remediation liability was $15 million at both March 31, 2023 and December 31, 2022. Georgia Power has been designated or identified as a potentially responsible party at sites governed by the Georgia Hazardous Site Response Act and/or by the federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, and assessment and potential cleanup of such sites is expected.

Southern Company Gas' environmental remediation liability was $243 million and $256 million at March 31, 2023 and December 31, 2022, respectively, based on the estimated cost of environmental investigation and remediation associated with known former manufactured gas plant operating sites.

The ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time; however, as a result of the regulatory treatment for environmental remediation expenses described above, the final disposition of these matters is not expected to have a material impact on the financial statements of the applicable Registrants.

Other Matters

Traditional Electric Operating Companies

In April 2019, Bellsouth Telecommunications d/b/a AT&T Alabama (AT&T) filed a complaint against Alabama Power with the FCC alleging that the pole rental rate AT&T is required to pay pursuant to the parties' joint use agreement is unjust and unreasonable under federal law. The complaint sought a new rate and approximately $87 million in refunds of alleged overpayments for the preceding six years. In August 2019, the FCC stayed the case in favor of arbitration, which AT&T has not pursued. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time, but an adverse outcome could have a material impact on the financial statements of Southern Company and Alabama Power. Georgia Power and Mississippi Power have joint use agreements with other AT&T affiliates.

Mississippi PowerIn August 2022, the Mississippi Department of Revenue (Mississippi DOR) completed an audit of sales and use taxes paid by Mississippi Power from 2016 to 2019 and entered a final assessment, indicating a total amount due of $28 million, including associated penalties and interest. Additional interest of approximately $1 million was estimated through March 31, 2023. Mississippi Power does not agree with the audit findings and, in October 2022, filed an administrative appeal with the Mississippi DOR. See Note 3 to the financial statements in Item 8 of the Form 10-K under "Other Matters – Mississippi Power – Department of Revenue Audit" for information regarding a Mississippi PSC accounting order related to the tax audit proceeding. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time