CONTINGENCIES AND REGULATORY MATTERS

See Note 3 to the financial statements of the registrants in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for information relating to various lawsuits, other contingencies, and regulatory matters.

General Litigation Matters

Each registrant is subject to certain claims and legal actions arising in the ordinary course of business. In addition, the business activities of Southern Company's subsidiaries are subject to extensive governmental regulation related to public health and the environment, such as regulation of air emissions and water discharges. Litigation over environmental issues and claims of various types, including property damage, personal injury, common law nuisance, and citizen enforcement of environmental requirements such as air quality and water standards, has occurred throughout the U.S. This litigation has included claims for damages alleged to have been caused by CO₂ and other emissions, CCR, and alleged exposure to hazardous materials, and/or requests for injunctive relief in connection with such matters.

The ultimate outcome of such pending or potential litigation against each registrant and any subsidiaries cannot be predicted 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.

Southern Company

On January 20, 2017, a purported securities class action complaint was filed against Southern Company, certain of its officers, and certain former Mississippi Power officers in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division, by Monroe County Employees' Retirement System on behalf of all persons who purchased shares of Southern Company's common stock between April 25, 2012 and October 29, 2013. The complaint alleges that Southern Company, certain of its officers, and certain former Mississippi Power officers made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Kemper IGCC in violation of certain provisions under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. The complaint seeks, among other things, compensatory damages and litigation costs and attorneys' fees. On June 12, 2017, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint that provided additional detail about their claims, increased the purported class period by one day, and added certain other former Mississippi Power officers as defendants. On July 27, 2017, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' amended complaint with prejudice.

On February 27, 2017, Jean Vineyard filed a shareholder derivative lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia that names as defendants Southern Company, certain of its directors, certain of its officers, and certain former Mississippi Power officers. The complaint alleges that the defendants caused Southern Company to make false or misleading statements regarding the Kemper IGCC cost and schedule. Further, the complaint alleges that the defendants were unjustly enriched and caused the waste of corporate assets. The plaintiff seeks to recover, on behalf of Southern Company, unspecified actual damages and, on her own behalf, attorneys' fees and costs in bringing the lawsuit. The plaintiff also seeks certain changes to Southern Company's corporate governance and internal processes. On March 27, 2017, the court deferred this lawsuit until 30 days after certain further action in the purported securities class action complaint discussed above.

On May 15, 2017, Helen E. Piper Survivor's Trust filed a shareholder derivative lawsuit in the Superior Court of Gwinnett County, State of Georgia, that names as defendants Southern Company, certain of its directors, certain of its officers, and certain former Mississippi Power officers. The complaint alleges that the individual defendants, among other things, breached their fiduciary duties in connection with schedule delays and cost overruns associated with the construction of the Kemper IGCC. The complaint further alleges that the individual defendants authorized or failed to correct false and misleading statements regarding the Kemper IGCC schedule and cost and failed to implement necessary internal controls to prevent harm to Southern Company. The plaintiff seeks to recover, on behalf of Southern Company, unspecified actual damages and disgorgement of profits and, on its behalf, attorneys' fees and costs in bringing the lawsuit. The plaintiff also seeks certain unspecified changes to Southern Company's corporate governance and internal processes.

On June 1, 2017, Judy Mesirov filed a shareholder derivative lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, that names as defendants Southern Company, certain of its current and former directors, certain of its officers, and certain former Mississippi Power officers. The complaint alleges that the individual defendants, among other things, breached their fiduciary duties in connection with schedule delays and cost overruns associated with the construction of the Kemper IGCC. The complaint further alleges that the individual defendants authorized or failed to correct false and misleading statements regarding the Kemper IGCC schedule and cost and failed to implement necessary internal controls to prevent harm to Southern Company. The plaintiff seeks to recover, on behalf of Southern Company, unspecified actual damages, disgorgement of profits, and equitable relief and, on her own behalf, attorneys' fees and costs in bringing the lawsuit. The plaintiff also seeks certain unspecified changes to Southern Company's corporate governance and internal processes.

Southern Company believes these legal challenges have no merit; however, an adverse outcome in any of these proceedings could have an impact on Southern Company's results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity. Southern Company will vigorously defend itself in these matters, the ultimate outcome of which cannot be determined at this time.

Georgia Power

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 municipal franchise fees (all of which are remitted to municipalities) exceeded the amounts allowed in orders of the Georgia PSC and alleging certain state tort law claims. In November 2016, the Georgia Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's previous dismissal of the case and remanded the case to the trial court for further proceedings. Georgia Power has filed a petition for writ of certiorari with the Georgia Supreme Court. Georgia Power believes the plaintiffs' claims have no merit and intends to vigorously defend itself in this matter. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.

Southern Power

During 2015, Southern Power indirectly acquired a 51% membership interest in RE Roserock LLC (Roserock), the owner of the Roserock facility in Pecos County, Texas, which was under construction by Recurrent Energy, LLC and was subsequently placed in service in November 2016. Prior to placing the facility in service, certain solar panels were damaged during installation. While the facility currently is generating energy consistent with operational expectations and PPA obligations, Southern Power is pursuing remedies under its insurance policies and other contracts to repair or replace these solar panels. In connection therewith, Southern Power is withholding payments of approximately $26 million from the construction contractor, who has placed a lien on the Roserock facility for the same amount. The amounts withheld are included in other accounts and notes payable and other current liabilities on Southern Company's consolidated balance sheets and other accounts payable and other current liabilities on Southern Power's consolidated balance sheets. On May 18, 2017, Roserock filed a lawsuit in the state district court in Pecos County, Texas, against X.L. America, Inc. (XL) and North American Elite Insurance Company (North American Elite) seeking recovery from an insurance policy for damages resulting from a hail storm and certain installation practices by the construction contractor, McCarthy Building Companies, Inc. (McCarthy). On May 19, 2017, Roserock filed a separate lawsuit against McCarthy in the state district court in Travis County, Texas alleging breach of contract and breach of warranty for the damages sustained at the Roserock facility, which has since been moved to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas. On May 22, 2017, McCarthy filed a lawsuit against Roserock, Array Technologies, Inc., Canadian Solar (USA), Inc., XL, and North American Elite in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas alleging, among other things, breach of contract, and requesting foreclosure of mechanic's liens against Roserock. On July 18, 2017, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas consolidated the two pending lawsuits. Southern Power intends to vigorously pursue and defend these matters, the ultimate outcome of which cannot be determined at this time.

Southern Company Gas

Nicor Gas and Nicor Energy Services Company, wholly-owned subsidiaries of Southern Company Gas, and Nicor Inc. were defendants in a putative class action initially filed in 2011 in the state court in Cook County, Illinois. The plaintiffs purported to represent a class of the customers who purchased the Gas Line Comfort Guard product from Nicor Energy Services Company and variously alleged that the marketing, sale, and billing of the Gas Line Comfort Guard product violated the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act, constituting common law fraud and resulting in unjust enrichment of these entities. The plaintiffs sought, on behalf of the classes they purported to represent, actual and punitive damages, interest, costs, attorney fees, and injunctive relief. On February 8, 2017, the judge denied the plaintiffs' motion for class certification and Southern Company Gas' motion for summary judgment. On March 7, 2017, the parties reached a settlement, which was finalized and effective on April 3, 2017. The settlement did not have a material impact on Southern Company's or Southern Company Gas' financial statements.

Environmental Remediation

The Southern Company system must comply with environmental laws and regulations that cover 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, New Jersey, Georgia, and Florida have each received authority from their respective state PSCs or other applicable state regulatory agencies to recover approved environmental compliance 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 $12 million and $17 million as of June 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively. 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.

Gulf Power's environmental remediation liability includes estimated costs of environmental remediation projects of approximately $51 million and $44 million as of June 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively. These estimated costs primarily relate to site closure criteria by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) for potential impacts to soil and groundwater from herbicide applications at Gulf Power's substations. The schedule for completion of the remediation projects is subject to FDEP approval. The projects have been approved by the Florida PSC for recovery through Gulf Power's environmental cost recovery clause; therefore, these liabilities have no impact on net income.

Southern Company Gas' environmental remediation liability was $416 million and $426 million as of June 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively, based on the estimated cost of environmental investigation and remediation associated with known current and former manufactured gas plant operating sites. These environmental remediation expenditures are recoverable from customers through rate mechanisms approved by the applicable state regulatory agencies of the natural gas distribution utilities, with the exception of one site representing $5 million of the total accrued remediation costs.

The final outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time. However, the final disposition of these matters is not expected to have a material impact on the financial statements of Southern Company, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, or Southern Company Gas.

FERC Matters

Municipal and Rural Associations Tariff

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Mississippi Power under "FERC Matters" in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information regarding a settlement agreement entered into by Mississippi Power regarding the establishment of a regulatory asset for Kemper IGCC-related costs. See "Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle" herein for information regarding the Kemper IGCC.

In March 2016, Mississippi Power reached a settlement agreement with its wholesale customers, which was subsequently approved by the FERC, for an increase in wholesale base revenues under the MRA cost-based electric tariff, primarily as a result of placing scrubbers for Plant Daniel Units 1 and 2 in service in 2015. The settlement agreement became effective for services rendered beginning May 1, 2016, resulting in an estimated annual revenue increase of $7 million under the MRA cost-based electric tariff. Additionally, under the settlement agreement, the tariff customers agreed to similar regulatory treatment for MRA tariff ratemaking as the treatment approved for retail ratemaking through an order issued by the Mississippi PSC in December 2015 (In-Service Asset Rate Order). This regulatory treatment primarily includes (i) recovery of the Kemper IGCC assets currently operational and providing service to customers and other related costs, (ii) amortization of the Kemper IGCC-related regulatory assets included in rates under the settlement agreement over the 36 months ending April 30, 2019, (iii) Kemper IGCC-related expenses included in rates under the settlement agreement no longer being deferred and charged to expense, and (iv) removing all of the Kemper IGCC CWIP from rate base with a corresponding increase in accrual of AFUDC. The additional resulting AFUDC totaled approximately $22 million through the suspension of Kemper IGCC start-up activities.

See "Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle" herein for additional information.

Fuel Cost Recovery

Mississippi Power has a wholesale MRA and a Market Based (MB) fuel cost recovery factor. At June 30, 2017, the amount of over-recovered wholesale MRA fuel costs included in the balance sheets was $7 million compared to $13 million at December 31, 2016. Over-recovered wholesale MB fuel costs included in the balance sheets were immaterial at June 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016.

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Mississippi Power under "FERC Matters – Fuel Cost Recovery" in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information.

Market-Based Rate Authority

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company and Mississippi Power under "FERC Matters – Market-Based Rate Authority" and Note 3 to the financial statements of Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Southern Power under "FERC Matters" in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information regarding the traditional electric operating companies' and Southern Power's market power proceeding and amendment to their market-rate tariff.

On May 17, 2017, the FERC accepted the traditional electric operating companies' and Southern Power's compliance filing accepting the terms of the FERC's February 2, 2017 order regarding an amendment by the traditional electric operating companies and Southern Power to their market-based rate tariff. While the FERC's order references the traditional electric operating companies' and Southern Power's market power proceeding, it remains a separate, ongoing matter.

Regulatory Matters

Alabama Power

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company and Alabama Power under "Regulatory Matters – Alabama Power" and "Retail Regulatory Matters," respectively, in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information regarding Alabama Power's recovery of retail costs through various regulatory clauses and accounting orders. The balance of each regulatory clause recovery on the balance sheet follows:



Regulatory Clause	Balance Sheet Line Item	June 30, 2017		December 31, 2016
		(in millions)
Rate CNP Compliance^(*)	Deferred under recovered regulatory clause revenues	$	6	$	9
Rate CNP PPA	Over recovered regulatory clause revenues	1		—
	Deferred under recovered regulatory clause revenues	—		142
Retail Energy Cost Recovery	Other regulatory liabilities, current	11		76
Natural Disaster Reserve	Other regulatory liabilities, deferred	56		69


(*)	In accordance with an accounting order issued on February 17, 2017 by the Alabama PSC, Alabama Power reclassified $36 million of its under recovered balance for Rate CNP Compliance to a deferred regulatory asset account.

Georgia Power

Rate Plans

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company and Georgia Power under "Regulatory Matters – Georgia Power – Rate Plans" and "Retail Regulatory Matters – Rate Plans," respectively, in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information.

Georgia Power's revenues from regulated retail operations are collected through various rate mechanisms subject to the oversight of the Georgia PSC. Georgia Power currently recovers its costs from the regulated retail business through the 2013 ARP, which includes traditional base tariff rates, Demand-Side Management tariffs, Environmental Compliance Cost Recovery tariffs, and Municipal Franchise Fee tariffs. In addition, financing costs related to the construction of Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 are being collected through the NCCR tariff and fuel costs are collected through a separate fuel cost recovery tariff. See "Nuclear Construction" herein and Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company under "Regulatory Matters – Georgia Power – Nuclear Construction" and Georgia Power under "Retail Regulatory Matters – Nuclear Construction" in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information regarding the NCCR tariff. Also see "Fuel Cost Recovery" herein and Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company under "Regulatory Matters – Georgia Power – Fuel Cost Recovery" and Georgia Power under "Retail Regulatory Matters – Fuel Cost Recovery" in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information regarding fuel cost recovery.

Integrated Resource Plan

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company and Georgia Power under "Regulatory Matters – Georgia Power – Integrated Resource Plan" and "Retail Regulatory Matters – Integrated Resource Plan," respectively, in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information regarding Georgia Power's triennial Integrated Resource Plan.

On March 7, 2017, the Georgia PSC approved Georgia Power's decision to suspend work at a future generation site in Stewart County, Georgia, due to changing economics, including load forecasts and lower fuel costs. The timing of recovery for costs incurred of approximately $50 million will be determined by the Georgia PSC in a future base rate case. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.

Fuel Cost Recovery

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company and Georgia Power under "Regulatory Matters – Georgia Power – Fuel Cost Recovery" and "Retail Regulatory Matters – Fuel Cost Recovery," respectively, in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information.

As of June 30, 2017, Georgia Power's under recovered fuel balance totaled $61 million and is included in other deferred charges and assets on Southern Company's and Georgia Power's condensed balance sheets. As of December 31, 2016, Georgia Power's over recovered fuel balance totaled $84 million and is included in other current liabilities on Southern Company's and Georgia Power's condensed balance sheets.

Fuel cost recovery revenues are adjusted for differences in actual recoverable fuel costs and amounts billed in current regulated rates. Accordingly, changes in the billing factor will not have a significant effect on Southern Company's or Georgia Power's revenues or net income, but will affect cash flow.

Nuclear Construction

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company and Georgia Power under "Regulatory Matters – Georgia Power – Nuclear Construction" and "Retail Regulatory Matters – Nuclear Construction," respectively, in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information regarding Georgia Power's construction of Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4, Vogtle Construction Monitoring (VCM) reports, the NCCR tariff, and the Contractor Settlement Agreement.

Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement and EPC Contractor Bankruptcy

In 2008, Georgia Power, acting for itself and as agent for the Vogtle Owners, entered into the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement, pursuant to which the EPC Contractor agreed to design, engineer, procure, construct, and test Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4. Under the terms of the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement, the Vogtle Owners agreed to pay a purchase price subject to certain price escalations and adjustments, including fixed escalation amounts and index-based adjustments, as well as adjustments for change orders, and performance bonuses for early completion and unit performance. Georgia Power's proportionate share of Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 is 45.7%.

The Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement also provided for liquidated damages upon the EPC Contractor's failure to fulfill the schedule and certain performance guarantees, each subject to an aggregate cap of 10% of the contract price, or approximately $920 million (approximately $420 million based on Georgia Power's ownership interest). Under the Toshiba Guarantee, Toshiba guaranteed certain payment obligations of the EPC Contractor, including any liability of the EPC Contractor for abandonment of work. In January 2016, Westinghouse delivered to the Vogtle Owners $920 million of letters of credit from financial institutions (Westinghouse Letters of Credit) to secure a portion of the EPC Contractor's potential obligations under the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement. The Westinghouse Letters of Credit are subject to annual renewals through June 30, 2020 and require 60 days' written notice to Georgia Power in the event the Westinghouse Letters of Credit will not be renewed.

Under the terms of the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement, the EPC Contractor did not have the right to terminate the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement for convenience. In the event of an abandonment of work by the EPC Contractor, the maximum liability of the EPC Contractor under the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement was 40% of the contract price (approximately $1.7 billion based on Georgia Power's ownership interest).

On March 29, 2017, the EPC Contractor filed for bankruptcy protection under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. To provide for a continuation of work at Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4, Georgia Power, acting for itself and as agent for the Vogtle Owners, entered into an interim assessment agreement with the EPC Contractor (Interim Assessment Agreement), which the bankruptcy court approved on March 30, 2017.

The Interim Assessment Agreement provided, among other items, that during the term of the Interim Assessment Agreement (i) Georgia Power was obligated to pay, on behalf of the Vogtle Owners, all costs accrued by the EPC Contractor for subcontractors and vendors for services performed or goods provided, with these amounts paid to the EPC Contractor, except that amounts accrued for Fluor Corporation (Fluor) were paid directly to Fluor; (ii) the EPC Contractor provided certain engineering, procurement, and management services for Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4, to the same extent as contemplated by the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement, and Georgia Power, on behalf of the Vogtle Owners, made payments of $5.4 million per week for these services; (iii) Georgia Power had the right to make payments, on behalf of the Vogtle Owners, directly to subcontractors and vendors who had accounts past due with the EPC Contractor; (iv) the EPC Contractor used commercially reasonable efforts to provide information reasonably requested by Georgia Power as was necessary to continue construction and investigation of the completion status of Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4; (v) the EPC Contractor rejected or accepted the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement by the termination of the Interim Assessment Agreement; and (vi) Georgia Power did not exercise any remedies against Toshiba under the Toshiba Guarantee. Under the Interim Assessment Agreement, all parties expressly reserved all rights and remedies under the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement and all related security and collateral under applicable law.

The Interim Assessment Agreement, as amended, expired on July 27, 2017. Georgia Power's aggregate liability for the Vogtle Owners under the Interim Assessment Agreement totaled approximately $650 million, of which $552 million had been paid or accrued as of June 30, 2017. Georgia Power's proportionate share of this aggregate liability totaled approximately $297 million.

Subsequent to the EPC Contractor bankruptcy filing, a number of subcontractors to the EPC Contractor, including Fluor Enterprises, Inc., a subsidiary of Fluor, alleged non-payment by the EPC Contractor for amounts owed for work performed on Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4. Georgia Power, acting for itself and as agent for the Vogtle Owners, has taken, and continues to take, actions to remove liens filed by these subcontractors through the posting of surety bonds. Georgia Power estimates the aggregate liability, through July 31, 2017, of the Vogtle Owners for the removal of subcontractor liens and payment of other EPC Contractor pre-petition accounts payable to total approximately $400 million, of which $354 million had been paid or accrued as of June 30, 2017. Georgia Power's proportionate share of this aggregate liability totaled approximately $183 million.

On June 9, 2017, Georgia Power and the other Vogtle Owners and Toshiba entered into a settlement agreement regarding the Toshiba Guarantee (Guarantee Settlement Agreement). Pursuant to the Guarantee Settlement Agreement, Toshiba acknowledged the amount of its obligation under the Toshiba Guarantee is $3.68 billion (Guarantee Obligations), of which Georgia Power's proportionate share is approximately $1.7 billion, and that the Guarantee Obligations exist regardless of whether Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 are completed. The Guarantee Settlement Agreement also provides for a schedule of payments for the Guarantee Obligations, beginning in October 2017 and continuing through January 2021. In the event Toshiba receives certain payments, including sale proceeds, from or related to Westinghouse (or its subsidiaries) or Toshiba Nuclear Energy Holdings (UK) Limited (or its subsidiaries), it will hold a portion of such payments in trust for the Vogtle Owners and promptly pay them as offsets against any remaining Guarantee Obligations. Under the Guarantee Settlement Agreement, the Vogtle Owners will forbear from exercising certain remedies, including drawing on the Westinghouse Letters of Credit, until June 30, 2020, unless certain events of nonpayment, insolvency, or other material breach of the Guarantee Settlement Agreement by Toshiba occur. If such an event occurs, the balance of the Guarantee Obligations will become immediately due and payable, and the Vogtle Owners may exercise any and all rights and remedies, including drawing on the Westinghouse Letters of Credit without restriction. In addition, the Guarantee Settlement Agreement does not restrict the Vogtle Owners from fully drawing on the Westinghouse Letters of Credit in the event they are not renewed or replaced prior to the expiration date.

On June 23, 2017, Toshiba released a revised outlook for fiscal year 2016, which reflected a negative shareholders' equity balance of approximately $5 billion as of March 31, 2017, and announced that its independent audit process was continuing. Toshiba has also announced the existence of material events and conditions that raise substantial doubt about Toshiba's ability to continue as a going concern. As a result, substantial risk regarding the Vogtle Owners' ability to fully collect the Guarantee Obligations continues to exist. An inability or other failure by Toshiba to perform its obligations under the Guarantee Settlement Agreement could have a further material impact on the net cost to the Vogtle Owners to complete construction of Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 and, therefore, on Southern Company's and Georgia Power's financial statements.

Additionally, on June 9, 2017, Georgia Power, acting for itself and as agent for the other Vogtle Owners, and the EPC Contractor entered into a services agreement (Services Agreement), which was amended and restated on July 20, 2017, for the EPC Contractor to transition construction management of Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 to Southern Nuclear and to provide ongoing design, engineering, and procurement services to Southern Nuclear. On July 20, 2017, the bankruptcy court approved the EPC Contractor's motion seeking authorization to (i) enter into the Services Agreement, (ii) assume and assign to the Vogtle Owners certain project-related contracts, (iii) join the Vogtle Owners as counterparties to certain assumed project-related contracts, and (iv) reject the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement. The Services Agreement, and the EPC Contractor's rejection of the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement, became effective upon approval by the DOE on July 27, 2017. The Services Agreement will continue until the start-up and testing of Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 is complete and electricity is generated and sold from both units. The Services Agreement is terminable by the Vogtle Owners upon 30 days' written notice.

The ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.

Regulatory Matters

In 2009, the Georgia PSC voted to certify construction of Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 with a certified capital cost of $4.418 billion. In addition, in 2009 the Georgia PSC approved inclusion of the Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 related CWIP accounts in rate base, and the State of Georgia enacted the Georgia Nuclear Energy Financing Act, which allows Georgia Power to recover financing costs for nuclear construction projects certified by the Georgia PSC. Financing costs are recovered on all applicable certified costs through annual adjustments to the NCCR tariff by including the related CWIP accounts in rate base during the construction period. As of June 30, 2017, Georgia Power had recovered approximately $1.4 billion of financing costs.

On December 20, 2016, the Georgia PSC voted to approve a settlement agreement (Vogtle Cost Settlement Agreement) resolving the following prudence matters: (i) none of the $3.3 billion of costs incurred through December 31, 2015 and reflected in the fourteenth VCM report will be disallowed from rate base on the basis of imprudence; (ii) the Contractor Settlement Agreement is reasonable and prudent and none of the amounts paid or to be paid pursuant to the Contractor Settlement Agreement should be disallowed from rate base on the basis of imprudence; (iii) financing costs on verified and approved capital costs will be deemed prudent provided they are incurred prior to December 31, 2019 and December 31, 2020 for Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4, respectively; and (iv) (a) the in-service capital cost forecast will be adjusted to $5.680 billion (Revised Forecast), which includes a contingency of $240 million above Georgia Power's then current forecast of $5.440 billion, (b) capital costs incurred up to the Revised Forecast will be presumed to be reasonable and prudent with the burden of proof on any party challenging such costs, and (c) Georgia Power would have the burden to show that any capital costs above the Revised Forecast are reasonable and prudent. Under the terms of the Vogtle Cost Settlement Agreement, the certified in-service capital cost for purposes of calculating the NCCR tariff will remain at $4.418 billion. Construction capital costs above $4.418 billion will accrue AFUDC through the date each unit is placed in service. The ROE used to calculate the NCCR tariff was reduced from 10.95% (the ROE rate setting point authorized by the Georgia PSC in the 2013 ARP) to 10.00% effective January 1, 2016. For purposes of the AFUDC calculation, the ROE on costs between $4.418 billion and $5.440 billion will also be 10.00% and the ROE on any amounts above $5.440 billion would be Georgia Power's average cost of long-term debt. If the Georgia PSC adjusts Georgia Power's ROE rate setting point in a rate case prior to Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 being placed into retail rate base, then the ROE for purposes of calculating both the NCCR tariff and AFUDC will likewise be 95 basis points lower than the revised ROE rate setting point. If Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 are not placed in service by December 31, 2020, then (i) the ROE for purposes of calculating the NCCR tariff will be reduced an additional 300 basis points, or $8 million per month, and may, at the Georgia PSC's discretion, be accrued to be used for the benefit of customers, until such time as the units are placed in service and (ii) the ROE used to calculate AFUDC will be Georgia Power's average cost of long-term debt.

Under the terms of the Vogtle Cost Settlement Agreement, the Georgia PSC will determine, for retail ratemaking purposes, the process of transitioning Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 from a construction project to an operating plant no later than Georgia Power's base rate case required to be filed by July 1, 2019.

The Georgia PSC has approved fifteen VCM reports covering the periods through June 30, 2016, including construction capital costs incurred, which through that date totaled $3.7 billion. Georgia Power filed its sixteenth VCM report, covering the period from July 1 through December 31, 2016, requesting approval of $222 million of construction capital costs incurred during that period, with the Georgia PSC on February 27, 2017.

The ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.

Revised Cost and Schedule

Georgia Power and the other Vogtle Owners are continuing to conduct comprehensive schedule and cost-to-complete assessments, as well as cancellation cost assessments, to determine the impact of the EPC Contractor's bankruptcy filing on the construction cost and schedule for Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4. Georgia Power's preliminary assessment results indicate that its proportionate share of the remaining estimated cost to complete Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 ranges as follows:



Preliminary in-service dates
Unit 3	February 2021			–	March 2022
Unit 4	February 2022			–	March 2023
	(in billions)
Preliminary estimated cost to complete	$	3.9		–	$	4.6
CWIP as of June 30, 2017	4.5				4.5
Guarantee Obligations	(1.7		)		(1.7		)
Estimated capital costs	$	6.7		–	$	7.4
Vogtle Cost Settlement Agreement Revised Forecast	(5.7		)		(5.7		)
Estimated net additional capital costs	$	1.0		–	$	1.7

Georgia Power's estimates for cost to complete and schedule are based on preliminary analysis and remain subject to further refinement of labor productivity and consumable and commodity quantities and costs.

Georgia Power's estimated financing costs during the construction period total approximately $3.1 billion to $3.5 billion, of which approximately $1.4 billion had been incurred through June 30, 2017.

Georgia Power's preliminary cancellation cost estimate results indicate that its proportionate share of the estimated cancellation costs is approximately $400 million. As a result, as of June 30, 2017, total estimated costs subject to evaluation by Georgia Power and the Georgia PSC in the event of a cancellation decision are as follows:



	Preliminary Cancellation Cost Estimate
	(in billions)
CWIP as of June 30, 2017	$	4.5
Financing costs collected, net of tax	1.4
Cancellation costs^(*)	0.4
Total	$	6.3


(*)	The estimate for cancellation costs includes, but is not limited to, costs to terminate contracts for construction and other services, as well as costs to secure the Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 construction site.

The Guarantee Obligations continue to exist in the event of cancellation. In addition, under Georgia law, prudently incurred costs related to certificated projects cancelled by the Georgia PSC are allowed recovery, including carrying costs, in future retail rates. Georgia Power will continue working with the Georgia PSC and the other Vogtle Owners to determine future actions related to Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4, including, but not limited to, the status of construction and rate recovery, and currently expects to include its recommendation in its seventeenth VCM report to be filed with the Georgia PSC in late August 2017.

The ultimate outcome of these matters is dependent on the completion of the assessments described above, as well as the related regulatory treatment, and cannot be determined at this time.

Other Matters

As of June 30, 2017, Georgia Power had borrowed $2.6 billion related to Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 costs through a loan guarantee agreement between Georgia Power and the DOE and a multi-advance credit facility among Georgia Power, the DOE, and the FFB. See Note 6 to the financial statements of Southern Company and Georgia Power under "DOE Loan Guarantee Borrowings" in Item 8 of the Form 10-K and Note (E) under "DOE Loan Guarantee Borrowings" for additional information, including applicable covenants, events of default, mandatory prepayment events, and conditions to borrowing.

The IRS has allocated PTCs to Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 which require that the applicable unit be placed in service prior to 2021. The net present value of Georgia Power's PTCs is estimated at approximately $400 million per unit.

There have been technical and procedural challenges to the construction and licensing of Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 at the federal and state level and additional challenges may arise if construction proceeds. Processes are in place that are designed to assure compliance with the requirements specified in the Westinghouse Design Control Document and the combined construction and operating licenses, including inspections by Southern Nuclear and the NRC that occur throughout construction. As a result of such compliance processes, certain license amendment requests have been filed and approved or are pending before the NRC. Various design and other licensing-based compliance matters, including the timely resolution of Inspections, Tests, Analyses, and Acceptance Criteria and the related approvals by the NRC, may arise if construction proceeds, which may result in additional license amendments or require other resolution. If any license amendment requests or other licensing-based compliance issues are not resolved in a timely manner, there may be delays in the project schedule that could result in increased costs.

If construction continues, the risk remains that challenges with labor productivity, fabrication, delivery, assembly, and installation of plant systems, structures, and components, or other issues could arise and may further impact project schedule and cost.

The ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.

Gulf Power

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Gulf Power under "Retail Regulatory Matters" in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information regarding Gulf Power's rates and charges for service to retail customers.

Retail Base Rate Cases

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company and Gulf Power under "Regulatory Matters – Gulf Power – Retail Base Rate Cases" and "Retail Regulatory Matters – Retail Base Rate Cases," respectively, in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information.

In 2013, the Florida PSC approved a settlement agreement (2013 Rate Case Settlement Agreement) that authorized Gulf Power to reduce depreciation and record a regulatory asset up to $62.5 million from January 2014 through June 2017. In any given month, such depreciation reduction could not exceed the amount necessary for the retail ROE, as reported to the Florida PSC monthly, to reach the midpoint of the authorized retail ROE range then in effect. For 2014 and 2015, Gulf Power recognized reductions in depreciation of $8.4 million and $20.1 million, respectively. No net reduction in depreciation was recorded in 2016. In the first six months of 2017, Gulf Power recognized the remaining allowable reductions in depreciation totaling $34.0 million.

On April 4, 2017, the Florida PSC approved the 2017 Rate Case Settlement Agreement among Gulf Power and three intervenors with respect to Gulf Power's request to increase retail base rates. Under the terms of the 2017 Rate Case Settlement Agreement, Gulf Power increased rates effective with the first billing cycle in July 2017 to provide an annual overall net customer impact of approximately $54.3 million. The net customer impact consists of a $62.0 million increase in annual base revenues less an annual equivalent credit of approximately $7.7 million for 2017 for certain wholesale revenues to be provided through December 2019 through the purchased power capacity cost recovery clause. In addition, Gulf Power continued its authorized retail ROE midpoint (10.25%) and range (9.25% to 11.25%), is deemed to have an equity ratio of 52.5% for all retail regulatory purposes, and implemented new dismantlement accruals effective July 1, 2017. Gulf Power will also begin amortizing the regulatory asset associated with the investment balances remaining after the retirement of Plant Smith Units 1 and 2 (357 MWs) over 15 years effective January 1, 2018 and will implement new depreciation rates effective January 1, 2018. The 2017 Rate Case Settlement Agreement also resulted in a $32.5 million write-down of Gulf Power's ownership of Plant Scherer Unit 3 (205 MWs), which was recorded in the first quarter 2017. The remaining issues related to the inclusion of Gulf Power's investment in Plant Scherer Unit 3 in retail rates have been resolved as a result of the 2017 Rate Case Settlement Agreement, including recoverability of certain costs associated with the ongoing ownership and operation of the unit through the environmental cost recovery clause rate approved by the Florida PSC in November 2016.

Cost Recovery Clauses

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Gulf Power under "Retail Regulatory Matters – Cost Recovery Clauses" in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information regarding Gulf Power's recovery of retail costs through various regulatory clauses and accounting orders. Gulf Power has four regulatory clauses which are approved by the Florida PSC. The balance of each regulatory clause recovery on the balance sheet follows:



Regulatory Clause	Balance Sheet Line Item	June 30, 2017		December 31, 2016
		(in millions)
Fuel Cost Recovery	Under recovered regulatory clause revenues	$	7	$	—
Fuel Cost Recovery	Other regulatory liabilities, current	—		15
Purchased Power Capacity Recovery	Under recovered regulatory clause revenues	5		—
Environmental Cost Recovery	Under recovered regulatory clause revenues	12		13
Energy Conservation Cost Recovery	Under recovered regulatory clause revenues	2		4

As discussed previously, the 2017 Rate Case Settlement Agreement resolved the remaining issues related to Gulf Power's inclusion of certain costs associated with the ongoing ownership and operation of Plant Scherer Unit 3 in the environmental cost recovery clause and no adjustment to the environmental cost recovery clause rate approved by the Florida PSC in November 2016 was made.

Mississippi Power

Performance Evaluation Plan

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Mississippi Power under "Retail Regulatory Matters – Performance Evaluation Plan" in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information regarding Mississippi Power's base rates.

On March 15, 2017, Mississippi Power submitted its annual PEP lookback filing for 2016, which reflected the need for a $5 million surcharge to be recovered from customers. The filing has been suspended for review by the Mississippi PSC. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.

Energy Efficiency

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Mississippi Power under "Retail Regulatory Matters – Energy Efficiency" in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information regarding Mississippi Power's energy efficiency programs.

On July 6, 2017, the Mississippi PSC issued an order approving Mississippi Power's Energy Efficiency Cost Rider compliance filing, which increased annual retail revenues by approximately $2 million effective with the first billing cycle for August 2017.

Environmental Compliance Overview Plan

On May 4, 2017, the Mississippi PSC approved Mississippi Power's ECO Plan filing for 2017, which requested the maximum 2% annual increase in revenues, approximately $18 million, primarily related to the Plant Daniel Units 1 and 2 scrubbers placed in service in 2015. The rates became effective with the first billing cycle for June 2017. Approximately $26 million of related revenue requirements in excess of the 2% maximum was deferred for inclusion in the 2018 filing.

Fuel Cost Recovery

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Mississippi Power under "Retail Regulatory Matters – Fuel Cost Recovery" in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information regarding Mississippi Power's retail fuel cost recovery.

At June 30, 2017, the amount of over-recovered retail fuel costs included on Mississippi Power's condensed balance sheet was $14 million compared to $37 million at December 31, 2016.

Ad Valorem Tax Adjustment

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Mississippi Power under "Retail Regulatory Matters – Ad Valorem Tax Adjustment" in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information regarding Mississippi Power's ad valorem tax adjustments.

On July 6, 2017, the Mississippi PSC approved Mississippi Power's annual ad valorem tax adjustment factor filing for 2017, which included an annual rate increase of 0.85%, or $8 million in annual retail revenues, primarily due to increased assessments.

Southern Company Gas

Natural Gas Cost Recovery

Southern Company Gas has established natural gas cost recovery rates approved by the relevant state regulatory agencies in the states in which it serves. Natural gas cost recovery revenues are adjusted for differences in actual recoverable natural gas costs and amounts billed in current regulated rates. Changes in the billing factor will not have a significant effect on Southern Company's or Southern Company Gas' revenues or net income, but will affect cash flows.

Base Rate Cases

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company Gas under "Regulatory Matters – Base Rate Cases" in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information.

Settled Base Rate Cases

On February 21, 2017, the Georgia PSC approved the Georgia Rate Adjustment Mechanism (GRAM) and a $20 million increase in annual base rate revenues for Atlanta Gas Light, effective March 1, 2017. GRAM adjusts base rates annually, up or down, based on the previously approved ROE of 10.75% and does not collect revenue through special riders and surcharges. Various infrastructure programs previously authorized by the Georgia PSC under Atlanta Gas Light's STRIDE program, which include the Integrated Vintage Plastic Replacement Program, Integrated System Reinforcement Program, and Integrated Customer Growth Program, will continue under GRAM and the recovery of and return on the infrastructure program investments will be included in annual base rate adjustments. The Georgia PSC will review Atlanta Gas Light's performance annually under GRAM.

Beginning with the next rate adjustment in June 2018, Atlanta Gas Light's recovery of the previously unrecovered Pipeline Replacement Program revenue through 2014, as well as the mitigation costs associated with the Pipeline Replacement Program that were not previously included in its rates, will also be included in GRAM. In connection with the GRAM approval, the last monthly Pipeline Replacement Program surcharge increase became effective March 1, 2017.

In September 2016, Elizabethtown Gas filed a general base rate case with the New Jersey BPU requesting a $19 million increase in annual base rate revenues. The requested increase was based on a projected 12-month test year ending March 31, 2017 and a ROE of 10.25%. On June 30, 2017, the New Jersey BPU approved a settlement that provides for a $13 million increase in annual base rate revenues, effective July 1, 2017, based on a ROE of 9.6%. Also included in the settlement was a new composite depreciation rate that is expected to result in a $3 million annual reduction of depreciation.

Pending Base Rate Cases

On March 10, 2017, Nicor Gas filed a general base rate case with the Illinois Commission requesting a $208 million increase in annual base rate revenues. The requested increase is based on a 2018 projected test year and a ROE of 10.7%. The Illinois Commission is expected to rule on the requested increase within the 11-month statutory time limit, after which rate adjustments will be effective.

On March 31, 2017, Virginia Natural Gas filed a general base rate case with the Virginia Commission requesting a $44 million increase in annual base rate revenues. The requested increase is based on a projected 12-month test year beginning September 1, 2017 and a ROE of 10.25%. The requested increase includes $13 million related to the recovery of investments under the Steps to Advance Virginia's Energy (SAVE) program. The Virginia Commission is expected to rule on the requested increase in the first quarter 2018. Rate adjustments are expected to be effective September 1, 2017, subject to refund.

The ultimate outcome of these pending base rate cases cannot be determined at this time.

Regulatory Infrastructure Programs

Southern Company Gas is engaged in various infrastructure programs that update or expand its gas distribution systems to improve reliability and ensure the safety of its utility infrastructure, and recovers in rates its investment and a return associated with these infrastructure programs. See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company and Southern Company Gas under "Regulatory Matters – Southern Company Gas – Regulatory Infrastructure Programs" and "Regulatory Matters – Regulatory Infrastructure Programs," respectively, in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information.

Nicor Gas

In 2014, the Illinois Commission approved Nicor Gas' nine-year regulatory infrastructure program, Investing in Illinois. Under this program, Nicor Gas placed into service $75 million of qualifying assets during the first six months of 2017.

Atlanta Gas Light

Atlanta Gas Light's STRIDE program, which started in 2009, consists of three individual programs that update and expand gas distribution systems and liquefied natural gas facilities as well as improve system reliability to meet operational flexibility and customer growth. Through the programs under STRIDE, Atlanta Gas Light invested $94 million during the first six months of 2017.

In August 2016, Atlanta Gas Light filed a petition with the Georgia PSC for approval of a four-year extension of its Integrated System Reinforcement Program (i-SRP) seeking approval to invest an additional $177 million to improve and upgrade its core gas distribution system in years 2017 through 2020.

The recovery of and return on current and future capital investments under the STRIDE program will be included in the annual base rate revenue adjustment under GRAM rather than a separate surcharge. The proposed capital investments associated with the extension of i-SRP were included in the 2017 annual base rate revenue under GRAM that was approved by the Georgia PSC on February 21, 2017. See "Base Rate Cases" herein for additional information.

Elizabethtown Gas

In 2013, the New Jersey BPU approved the extension of Elizabethtown Gas' Aging Infrastructure Replacement program, under which Elizabethtown Gas invested $12 million during the first six months of 2017.

Virginia Natural Gas

In March 2016, the Virginia Commission approved an extension to the SAVE program, under which Virginia Natural Gas invested $14 million during the first six months of 2017.

Florida City Gas

The Florida PSC approved Florida City Gas' Safety, Access, and Facility Enhancement program in 2015. Under the program, Florida City Gas invested $7 million during the first six months of 2017.