Commitments include minimum purchase obligations related to CenterPoint Energy’s and CERC’s Natural Gas reportable segment and CenterPoint Energy’s Electric reportable segment. A purchase obligation is defined as an agreement to purchase goods or services that is enforceable and legally binding on the registrant and that specifies all significant terms, including: fixed or minimum quantities to be purchased; fixed, minimum or variable price provisions; and the approximate timing of the transaction. Contracts with minimum payment provisions have various quantity requirements and durations and are not classified as non-trading derivative assets and liabilities in CenterPoint Energy’s and CERC’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of June 30, 2021 and December 31, 2020. These contracts meet an exception as “normal purchases contracts” or do not meet the definition of a derivative. Natural gas and coal supply commitments also include transportation contracts that do not meet the definition of a derivative.

Specific to ESG’s role as a general contractor in the performance contracting industry, as of June 30, 2021, there were 47 open surety bonds supporting future performance with an aggregate face amount of approximately $484 million. ESG’s exposure is less than the face amount of the surety bonds and is limited to the level of uncompleted work under the contracts. As of June 30, 2021, approximately 34% of the work was yet to be completed on projects with open surety bonds. Further, various subcontractors issue surety bonds to ESG. In addition to these performance obligations, ESG also warrants the functionality of certain installed infrastructure generally for one year and the associated energy savings over a specified number of years. As of June 30, 2021, there were 34 warranties totaling $553 million and an additional $1.2 billion in energy savings commitments not guaranteed by Vectren. Since ESG’s inception in 1994, CenterPoint Energy believes ESG has had a history of generally meeting its performance obligations and energy savings guarantees and its installed products have operated

CenterPoint Energy issues parent company level guarantees to certain vendors, customers and other commercial counterparties of ESG. These guarantees do not represent incremental consolidated obligations, but rather, represent guarantees of subsidiary obligations to allow those subsidiaries to conduct business without posting other forms of assurance. As of June 30, 2021, CenterPoint Energy, primarily through Vectren, has issued parent company level guarantees supporting ESG’s obligations. For those obligations where potential exposure can be estimated, management estimates the maximum exposure under these guarantees to be approximately $517 million as of June 30, 2021. This exposure primarily relates to energy savings guarantees on federal energy savings performance contracts. Other parent company level guarantees, certain of which do not contain a cap on potential liability, have been issued in support of federal operations and maintenance projects for which a maximum exposure cannot be estimated based on the nature of the projects. While there can be no assurance that performance under any of these parent company guarantees will not be required in the future, CenterPoint Energy considers the likelihood of a material amount being incurred as remote.

On February 24, 2020, CenterPoint Energy, through its subsidiary CERC Corp., entered into the Equity Purchase Agreement to sell the Energy Services Disposal Group. The transaction closed on June 1, 2020. In the normal course of business prior to June 1, 2020, the Energy Services Disposal Group through CES, traded natural gas under supply contracts and entered into natural gas related transactions under transportation, storage and other contracts. In connection with the Energy Services Disposal Group’s business activities prior to the closing of the sale of the Energy Services Disposal Group on June 1, 2020, CERC Corp. issued guarantees to certain of CES’s counterparties to guarantee the payment of CES’s obligations. When CES remained wholly owned by CERC Corp., these guarantees did not represent incremental consolidated obligations, but rather, these guarantees represented guarantees of CES’s obligations to allow it to conduct business without posting other forms of assurance.

Under the terms of the Equity Purchase Agreement, Symmetry Energy Solutions Acquisition must generally use reasonable best efforts to replace existing CERC Corp. guarantees with credit support provided by a party other than CERC Corp. as of and after the closing of the transaction. Additionally, to the extent that CERC Corp. retains any exposure relating to certain guarantees of CES’s obligations 90 days after closing of the transaction, Symmetry Energy Solutions Acquisition will pay a 3% annualized fee on such exposure, increasing by 1% on an annualized basis every three months. As of June 30, 2021, management estimates approximately $35 million of exposure remained outstanding under CERC Corp. guarantees issued prior to the closing of the transaction on June 1, 2020. CES has provided replacement credit support to counterparties to whom CERC Corp. had issued guarantees prior to closing representing the full amount of CERC’s remaining exposure under the guarantees. CERC believes that counterparties to whom replacement credit support has been provided would seek payment if needed under such replacement credit support instead of a CERC Corp. guarantee. No additional guarantees were provided by CERC Corp. to CES subsequent to the closing of the transaction on June 1, 2020.

If CERC Corp. is required to pay a counterparty under a guarantee in respect of obligations of CES, Symmetry Energy Solutions Acquisition is required to promptly reimburse CERC Corp. for all amounts paid. If Symmetry Energy Solutions Acquisition fails to reimburse CERC Corp., CERC Corp. has the contractual right to seek payment from Shell Energy North America (US), L.P. in an amount up to $40 million in the aggregate. While there can be no assurance that payment under any of these guarantees will not be required in the future, CenterPoint Energy and CERC consider the likelihood of a material amount being incurred as remote.

Minnehaha Academy (CenterPoint Energy and CERC). On August 2, 2017, a natural gas explosion occurred at the Minnehaha Academy in Minneapolis, Minnesota, resulting in the deaths of two school employees, serious injuries to others and significant property damage to the school. CenterPoint Energy, certain of its subsidiaries, including CERC, and the contractor company working in the school were named in wrongful death, property damage and personal injury litigation arising out of the incident and have now reached confidential settlement agreements in all litigation, and all related governmental matters were previously concluded. CenterPoint Energy’s and CERC’s general and excess liability insurance policies provide coverage for third party bodily injury and property damage claims.

Litigation Related to the Merger (CenterPoint Energy). With respect to the Merger, in July 2018, seven separate lawsuits were filed against Vectren and the individual directors of Vectren’s Board of Directors in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana. These lawsuits alleged violations of Sections 14(a) of the Exchange Act and SEC Rule 14a-9 on the grounds that the Vectren Proxy Statement filed on June 18, 2018 was materially incomplete because it omitted material information concerning the Merger. In August 2018, the seven lawsuits were consolidated, and the Court denied the plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction. In October 2018, the plaintiffs filed their Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint. In December 2018, two plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their lawsuits. In September 2019, the court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss and dismissed the remaining plaintiffs’ claims with prejudice, which the plaintiffs appealed in October 2019. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit heard oral arguments in September 2020, and a ruling is expected in 2021. The defendants believe that the allegations asserted are without merit and intend to vigorously defend themselves against the claims raised. CenterPoint Energy does not expect the ultimate outcome of this matter to have a material adverse effect on its financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

Litigation Related to the February 2021 Winter Storm Event. With respect to the February 2021 Winter Storm Event, CenterPoint Energy, CERC and Houston Electric, along with ERCOT, have received claims and lawsuits filed by plaintiffs alleging personal injury, property damage and other injuries and damages. Additionally, various regulatory and governmental entities have announced that they intend to conduct or are conducting inquiries, investigations and other reviews of the February 2021 Winter Storm Event and the efforts made by various entities to prepare for, and respond to, this event, including the electric generation shortfall issues. Entities that have announced that they plan to conduct or are conducting such inquiries, investigations and other reviews include the United States Congress, FERC, NERC, Texas RE, ERCOT, Texas government entities and officials such as the Texas Governor’s office, the Texas Legislature, the Texas Attorney General, the PUCT, the City of Houston and other municipal and county entities in Houston Electric’s service territory, among other entities.

Like other Texas TDUs, Houston Electric has become involved in certain of the above-referenced investigations, litigation or other regulatory and legal proceedings regarding their efforts to restore power and their compliance with NERC, ERCOT and PUCT rules and directives. CenterPoint Energy and Houston Electric are responding to inquiries from the Texas Attorney General and the Galveston County District Attorney’s Office, and CenterPoint Energy and CERC are responding to inquiries from the Arkansas, Minnesota and Oklahoma Attorneys General. CenterPoint Energy, Houston Electric and CERC are subject to, and may be further subject to, litigation and claims. Such claims include, or in the future could include, wrongful death, personal injury and property damage claims, lawsuits for impacts on businesses and other organizations and entities and shareholder claims, among other claims or litigation matters. CenterPoint Energy and Houston Electric have been named as a defendant in approximately 65 lawsuits related to the February 2021 Winter Storm Event, nearly all of which are pending in state court and as of June 2021 are part of a multi-district litigation proceeding. CenterPoint Energy and Houston Electric intend to vigorously defend themselves against the claims raised. CenterPoint Energy, Houston Electric and CERC are unable to predict the consequences of any such matters or to estimate a range of potential losses.

Litigation Related to the Enable Merger. In March 2021, several lawsuits were filed by persons claiming to be Enable unitholders against various defendants, including Enable, the members of Enable GP’s Board of Directors, Energy Transfer, and other parties to the Enable Merger Agreement, challenging the Enable Merger and the disclosures made in connection therewith. CenterPoint Energy has been named in one such lawsuit pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The lawsuits allege violations of Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act and SEC Rule 14a-9 on the grounds that the Registration Statement on Form S-4 filed by Energy Transfer on March 19, 2021, was materially incomplete because it omitted material information about, among other things, Enable's and Energy Transfer's financial projections and the analyses conducted by Enable's financial advisors. The lawsuits further allege that the individual defendants, including, among others, Energy Transfer and CenterPoint Energy, violated Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act as controlling persons of Enable. Plaintiffs seek to have the court enjoin the Enable Merger, require defendants to disseminate a new registration statement disclosing the allegedly omitted information, declare that defendants violated the Exchange Act, rescind the Enable Merger or

award rescissory damages in the event the Enable Merger is consummated, along with attorneys’ fees, costs, and other relief. In May and June of 2021, three of the cases against other defendants were voluntarily dismissed without prejudice. The case against CenterPoint Energy remains pending, but CenterPoint Energy has not yet been served with process, and the dates to respond to the lawsuit in which it was sued have not yet been set. CenterPoint Energy cannot predict the outcome of litigation related to the Enable Merger Agreement, but believes the litigation is without merit, intends to defend vigorously against such litigation, and does not expect the ultimate outcome of such litigation to have a material adverse effect on its financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

MGP Sites. CenterPoint Energy, CERC and their predecessors, including predecessors of Vectren, operated MGPs in the past. The costs CenterPoint Energy or CERC, as applicable, expect to incur to fulfill their respective obligations are estimated by management using assumptions based on actual costs incurred, the timing of expected future payments and inflation factors, among others. While CenterPoint Energy and CERC have recorded obligations for all costs which are probable and estimable, including amounts they are presently obligated to incur in connection with activities at these sites, it is possible that future events may require remedial activities which are not presently foreseen, and those costs may not be subject to PRP or insurance recovery.

(ii)Indiana MGPs (CenterPoint Energy). In the Indiana Gas service territory, the existence, location and certain general characteristics of 26 gas manufacturing and storage sites have been identified for which CenterPoint Energy may have some remedial responsibility. A remedial investigation/feasibility study was completed at one of the sites under an agreed upon order between Indiana Gas and the IDEM, and a Record of Decision was issued by the IDEM in January 2000. The remaining sites have been submitted to the IDEM’s VRP. CenterPoint Energy has also identified its involvement in 5 manufactured gas plant sites in SIGECO’s service territory, all of which are currently enrolled in the IDEM’s VRP. CenterPoint Energy is currently conducting some level of remedial activities, including groundwater monitoring at certain sites.

Asbestos. Some facilities owned by the Registrants or their predecessors contain or have contained asbestos insulation and other asbestos-containing materials. The Registrants are from time to time named, along with numerous others, as defendants in lawsuits filed by a number of individuals who claim injury due to exposure to asbestos, and the Registrants anticipate that additional claims may be asserted in the future. Although their ultimate outcome cannot be predicted at this time, the Registrants do not expect these matters, either individually or in the aggregate, to have a material adverse effect on their financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

CCR Rule (CenterPoint Energy). In April 2015, the EPA finalized its CCR Rule, which regulates ash as non-hazardous material under the RCRA. The final rule allows beneficial reuse of ash, and the majority of the ash generated by Indiana Electric’s generating plants will continue to be reused. In July 2018, the EPA released its final CCR Rule Phase I Reconsideration which extended the deadline to October 31, 2020 for ceasing placement of ash in ponds that exceed groundwater protections standards or that fail to meet location restrictions. In August 2019, the EPA proposed additional “Part A” amendments to its CCR Rule with respect to beneficial reuse of ash and other materials. Further “Part B” amendments, which related to alternate liners for CCR surface impoundments and the surface impoundment closure process, were published in March 2020. The Part A amendments were finalized in August 2020 and extended the deadline to cease placement of ash in ponds to April 11, 2021, discussed further below. The EPA published the final Part B amendments in November 2020. The Part A amendments do not restrict Indiana Electric’s current beneficial reuse of its fly ash. CenterPoint Energy continues to evaluate the Part B amendments to determine potential impacts. Shortly after taking office in January 2021, President Biden signed an executive order requiring agencies to review environmental actions taken by the Trump administration, including the CCR Rule Phase I Reconsideration, the Part A amendments, and the Part B amendments; EPA has completed its review of the Phase I Reconsideration, Part A amendments, and Part B amendments and determined that the most environmentally protective course is to implement the rules.

Indiana Electric has three ash ponds, two at the F.B. Culley facility (Culley East and Culley West) and one at the A.B. Brown facility. Under the existing CCR Rule, Indiana Electric is required to perform integrity assessments, including ground water monitoring, at its F.B. Culley and A.B. Brown generating stations. The ground water studies are necessary to determine the remaining service life of the ponds and whether a pond must be retrofitted with liners or closed in place. Indiana Electric’s Warrick generating unit is not included in the scope of the CCR Rule as this unit has historically been part of a larger generating station that predominantly serves an adjacent industrial facility. Preliminary groundwater monitoring indicates potential groundwater impacts very close to Indiana Electric’s ash impoundments, and further analysis is ongoing. The CCR Rule required companies to complete location restriction determinations by October 18, 2018. Indiana Electric completed its evaluation and determined that one F.B. Culley pond (Culley East) and the A.B. Brown pond fail the aquifer placement location restriction. As a result of this failure, Indiana Electric was required to cease disposal of new ash in the ponds and commence closure of the ponds by April 11, 2021. CenterPoint Energy has applied for the extensions available under the CCR Rule that would allow Indiana Electric to continue to use the ponds through October 15, 2023. The EPA is still reviewing industry extension requests, including CenterPoint Energy’s extension request. Companies can continue to operate ponds pending completion of the EPA’s evaluation of the requests for extension. The inability to take these extensions may result in increased and potentially significant operational costs in connection with the accelerated implementation of an alternative ash disposal system or adversely impact Indiana Electric’s future operations. Failure to comply with these requirements could also result in an enforcement proceeding including the imposition of fines and penalties. On April 24, 2019, Indiana Electric received an order from the IURC approving recovery in rates of costs associated with the closure of the Culley West pond, which has already completed closure activities. On August 14, 2019, Indiana Electric filed its petition with the IURC for recovery of costs associated with the closure of the A.B. Brown ash pond, which would include costs associated with the excavation and recycling of ponded ash. This petition was subsequently approved by the IURC on May 13, 2020. On October 28, 2020, the IURC approved Indiana Electric’s ECA proceeding, which included the initiation of recovery of the federally mandated project costs.

As of June 30, 2021, CenterPoint Energy has recorded an approximate $88 million ARO, which represents the discounted value of future cash flow estimates to close the ponds at A.B. Brown and F.B. Culley. This estimate is subject to change due to the contractual arrangements; continued assessments of the ash, closure methods, and the timing of closure; implications of Indiana Electric’s generation transition plan; changing environmental regulations; and proceeds received from the settlements in the aforementioned insurance proceeding. In addition to these AROs, Indiana Electric also anticipates equipment purchases of between $60 million and $80 million to complete the A.B. Brown closure project.

Other Environmental. From time to time, the Registrants identify the presence of environmental contaminants during operations or on property where their predecessors have conducted operations. Other such sites involving contaminants may be identified in the future. The Registrants have and expect to continue to remediate any identified sites consistent with state and federal legal obligations. From time to time, the Registrants have received notices, and may receive notices in the future, from regulatory authorities or others regarding status as a PRP in connection with sites found to require remediation due to the presence of environmental contaminants. In addition, the Registrants have been, or may be, named from time to time as defendants in litigation related to such sites. Although the ultimate outcome of such matters cannot be predicted at this time, the Registrants do not expect these matters, either individually or in the aggregate, to have a material adverse effect on their financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

The Registrants are involved in other legal, environmental, tax and regulatory proceedings before various courts, regulatory commissions and governmental agencies regarding matters arising in the ordinary course of business. From time to time, the Registrants are also defendants in legal proceedings with respect to claims brought by various plaintiffs against broad groups of participants in the energy industry. Some of these proceedings involve substantial amounts. The Registrants regularly analyze current information and, as necessary, provide accruals for probable and reasonably estimable liabilities on the eventual disposition of these matters. The Registrants do not expect the disposition of these matters to have a material adverse effect on the Registrants’ financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.