PG&E Corporation and the Utility have significant contingencies arising from their operations, including contingencies related to wildfires. PG&E Corporation and the Utility record a provision for a loss contingency when they determine that it is both probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the liability can be reasonably estimated. PG&E Corporation and the Utility evaluate which potential liabilities are probable and the related range of reasonably estimated losses and record a charge that reflects their best estimate or the lower end of the range, if there is no better estimate.

Assessing whether a loss is probable or reasonably possible, whether the loss or a range of losses is estimable, and the amount of the best estimate or lower end of the range often requires management to exercise significant judgment about future events. Management makes these assessments based on a number of assumptions and subjective factors, including negotiations (including those during mediations with claimants), discovery, settlements and payments, rulings, advice of legal counsel, and other information and events pertaining to a particular matter, and estimates based on currently available information and prior experience with wildfires. Unless expressly noted otherwise, the loss accruals in this Note reflect the lower end of the range of the reasonably estimable range of losses. PG&E Corporation and the Utility believe that it is reasonably possible that the amount of loss could be greater than the accrued estimated amounts but are unable to reasonably estimate the additional loss or the upper end of the range because, as described below, there are a number of unknown facts and legal considerations that may impact the amount of any potential liability, including the total scope and nature of claims that may be asserted against PG&E Corporation and the Utility.

Loss contingencies are reviewed quarterly, and estimates are adjusted to reflect the impact of all known information. As more information becomes available, including from potential claimants as litigation or resolution efforts progress, management estimates and assumptions regarding the potential financial impacts of wildfire events may change. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s provision for loss and expense excludes anticipated legal costs, which are expensed as incurred. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows may be materially affected by the outcome of the following matters.

Potential liabilities related to wildfires depend on various factors, including the cause of the fire, contributing causes of the fire (including alternative potential origins, weather- and climate-related issues, and forest management and fire suppression practices), the number, size and type of structures damaged or destroyed, the contents of such structures and other personal property damage, the number and types of trees damaged or destroyed, attorneys’ fees for claimants, the nature and extent of any personal injuries, including the loss of lives, the amount of fire suppression and clean-up costs, other damages the Utility may be responsible for if found negligent, and the amount of any penalties, fines, or restitution that may be imposed by courts or other governmental entities.

PG&E Corporation and the Utility are aware of numerous civil complaints related to the following wildfire events and expect that they may receive further complaints. The complaints include claims based on multiple theories of liability, including inverse condemnation, negligence, violations of the Public Utilities Code, violations of the Health & Safety Code, premises liability, trespass, public nuisance, and private nuisance. The plaintiffs in each action principally assert that PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s alleged failure to properly maintain, inspect, and de-energize their power lines was the cause of the relevant wildfire. The timing and outcome for resolution of any such claims or investigations are uncertain. The Utility believes it will continue to receive additional information from potential claimants in connection with these wildfire events as litigation or resolution efforts progress. Any such additional information may potentially allow PG&E Corporation and the Utility to refine the estimates of their accrued losses and may result in changes to the accrual depending on the information received. PG&E Corporation and the Utility intend to vigorously defend themselves against both criminal charges and civil complaints.

If the Utility’s facilities, such as its electric distribution and transmission lines, are judicially determined to be the substantial cause of the following matters, and the doctrine of inverse condemnation applies, the Utility could be liable for property damage, business interruption, interest, and attorneys’ fees without having been found negligent. California courts have imposed liability under the doctrine of inverse condemnation in legal actions brought by property holders against utilities on the grounds that losses borne by the person whose property was damaged through a public use undertaking should be spread across the community that benefited from such undertaking, and based on the assumption that utilities have the ability to recover these costs through rates. Further, California courts have determined that the doctrine of inverse condemnation is applicable regardless of whether the CPUC ultimately allows recovery by the utility for any such costs. The CPUC may decide not to authorize cost recovery even if a court decision were to determine that the Utility is liable as a result of the application of the doctrine of inverse condemnation. In addition to claims for property damage, business interruption, interest, and attorneys’ fees under inverse condemnation, PG&E Corporation and the Utility could be liable for fire suppression costs, evacuation costs, medical expenses, personal injury damages, punitive damages and other damages under other theories of liability in connection with the following wildfire events, including if PG&E Corporation or the Utility were found to have been negligent.

If the liability for wildfires were to exceed $1.0 billion in the aggregate in any Coverage Year, the Utility may be eligible to make a claim to the Wildfire Fund under AB 1054 to satisfy settled or finally adjudicated eligible claims in excess of such amount, except that claims related to the 2019 Kincade fire would be subject to the 40% limitation on the allowed amount of claims arising before emergence from bankruptcy. PG&E Corporation and the Utility intend to continue to review the available information and other information as it becomes available, including evidence in the possession of Cal Fire, USFS, or the relevant district attorney’s office, evidence from or held by other parties, claims that have not yet been submitted, and additional information about the nature and extent of personal and business property damages and losses, the nature, number and severity of personal injuries, and information made available through the discovery process.

According to Cal Fire, on October 23, 2019 at approximately 9:27 p.m. Pacific Time, a wildfire began northeast of Geyserville in Sonoma County, California (the “2019 Kincade fire”), located in the service area of the Utility. According to a Cal Fire incident update dated March 3, 2020, 3:35 p.m. Pacific Time, the 2019 Kincade fire consumed 77,758 acres and resulted in no fatalities, four first responder injuries, 374 structures destroyed, and 60 structures damaged. In connection with the 2019 Kincade fire, state and local officials issued numerous mandatory evacuation orders and evacuation warnings. Based on County of Sonoma information, PG&E Corporation and the Utility understand that the geographic zones subject to either a mandatory evacuation order or an evacuation warning between October 23, 2019 and November 4, 2019 included approximately 200,000 persons.

As of July 17, 2024, PG&E Corporation and the Utility are aware of approximately 132 complaints on behalf of at least 2,907 plaintiffs related to the 2019 Kincade fire. The plaintiffs filed master complaints on July 16, 2021; PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s response was filed on August 16, 2021; and PG&E Corporation and the Utility filed a demurrer with respect to the plaintiffs’ inverse condemnation claims. On December 10, 2021, the court overruled the demurrer. On July 20, 2022, PG&E Corporation and the Utility filed a motion for summary adjudication on individual plaintiffs’ claims for punitive damages. On July 14, 2024 the court vacated the bellwether trial date that had been scheduled for August 26, 2024, as well as the hearing on the motion for summary adjudication. The court has also scheduled a damages-only trial for a single claim for February 3, 2025. PG&E Corporation and the Utility are also aware of a complaint on behalf of Geysers Power Company, Calpine Corporation, and CPN Insurance Corporation.

In addition, on January 5, 2022, Cal Fire filed a complaint against the Utility in the coordinated proceeding seeking to recover approximately $90 million for fire suppression and other costs incurred in connection with the 2019 Kincade fire. The Utility filed an answer to Cal Fire’s complaint on February 4, 2022. On August 8, 2023, PG&E Corporation and the Utility entered into an agreement with Cal Fire to resolve its claims arising from the 2019 Kincade fire. On January 24, 2024, Cal Fire filed a request to dismiss its complaint with prejudice in the coordinated proceeding, which the court entered.

Based on the current state of the law concerning inverse condemnation in California and the facts and circumstances available to PG&E Corporation and the Utility as of the date of this filing, including Cal Fire’s determination of the cause and the information gathered as part of PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s investigation, PG&E Corporation and the Utility believe it is probable that they will incur a loss in connection with the 2019 Kincade fire. Based on the facts and circumstances available to PG&E Corporation and the Utility as of the date of this filing, including their experience with settlements, PG&E Corporation and the Utility recorded a liability in the aggregate amount of $1.125 billion as of December 31, 2023 (before available insurance). The aggregate liability remained unchanged as of June 30, 2024.

According to the Cal Fire Investigation Report on the 2021 Dixie fire (the “Cal Fire Investigation Report”), on July 13, 2021, at approximately 5:07 p.m. Pacific Time, a wildfire began in the Feather River Canyon near Cresta Dam (the “2021 Dixie fire”), located in the service area of the Utility. According to the Cal Fire Investigation Report, the 2021 Dixie fire consumed 963,309 acres and resulted in 1,311 structures destroyed and 94 structures damaged (including 763 residential homes, 12 multi-family homes, 8 commercial residential homes, 148 nonresidential commercial structures, and 466 detached structures), and four first-responder injuries. The Cal Fire Investigation Report does not attribute a fatality that was previously published in an October 25, 2021 Cal Fire incident report to the 2021 Dixie fire.

On January 4, 2022, Cal Fire issued a press release with its determination that the 2021 Dixie fire was caused by a tree contacting electrical distribution lines owned and operated by the Utility. On June 7, 2022, the Utility received a copy of the Cal Fire Investigation Report, which states that the fire ignited when a tree fell and contacted electrical distribution lines owned and operated by the Utility, and the Cal Fire Investigation Report has been made publicly available. The Cal Fire Investigation Report alleges that the Utility acted negligently in its response to the initial outage and fault that caused the 2021 Dixie fire. The Cal Fire Investigation Report also alleges that the subject tree had visible outward signs of damage and decay which would have been noticeable at the ground level, and that a brief visual inspection should have discovered the decay. Based on the information currently available to the Utility, through its ongoing investigation, including its inspection records, operating and inspection protocols and procedures, implementation of those protocols and procedures, and day-of-event response, the Utility believes its personnel acted reasonably (within the meaning of the applicable prudency standard discussed under “Regulatory Recovery” below) given the information available at the time and followed applicable policies and protocols both before ignition and in the day-of-event response. While an intervenor in a future cost recovery proceeding may argue the Cal Fire Investigation Report itself creates serious doubt with respect to the reasonableness of the Utility’s conduct, PG&E Corporation and the Utility do not believe the report identifies sufficient facts to shift the burden of proof applicable in a proceeding for cost recovery to the Utility. (See “Regulatory Recovery” and “Wildfire Fund under AB 1054” below.) PG&E Corporation and the Utility disagree with many allegations in the Cal Fire Investigation Report and plan to vigorously contest them. However, if the CPUC or the FERC were to reach conclusions similar to those of the Cal Fire Investigation Report, it may determine that the Utility had been imprudent, in which case some or all of its costs recorded to the WEMA would not be recoverable, the Utility would not be able to recover costs through FERC TO rates, or the Utility would be required to reimburse the Wildfire Fund for the costs and expenses that are allocated to it.

On October 9, 2023, the SED submitted for adoption by the CPUC a draft resolution approving an Administrative Consent Order and Agreement between the SED and the Utility (the “Dixie ACO”). The Dixie ACO would resolve the SED’s investigation into the 2021 Dixie fire. The Dixie ACO provides that the Utility would (i) pay $2.5 million to California’s General Fund; (ii) pay $2.5 million to tribes impacted by the 2021 Dixie fire; (iii) and undertake an initiative to transition to electronic records for specified patrols and inspections of distribution facilities, at an approximate cost of $40 million over five years, and the Utility may not seek recovery of such costs. The SED agreed to refrain from instituting any further enforcement proceedings against the Utility related to the 2021 Dixie fire. The Dixie ACO states that it does not constitute an admission or evidence of any wrongdoing, fault, omission, negligence, imprudence, or liability on the part of the Utility. The Dixie ACO also states that the parties to it intend that it shall not affect whether the Utility may obtain recovery of costs and expenses incurred in connection with the 2021 Dixie fire, including for amounts drawn from the Wildfire Fund or otherwise sought through a cost recovery application to the CPUC. On February 2, 2024, the CPUC issued a final decision approving the Dixie ACO. In connection with the Dixie ACO, PG&E Corporation and the Utility recorded a liability of $5 million reflected in Other current liabilities on the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements as of June 30, 2024. For the recordkeeping initiative costs for which the Utility will not seek recovery, the Utility expects to record disallowances as such costs are incurred.

As of July 17, 2024, PG&E Corporation and the Utility are aware of approximately 172 complaints on behalf of at least 8,519 individual plaintiffs and a separate putative class complaint related to the 2021 Dixie fire and expect that they may receive further complaints. The plaintiffs seek damages that include wrongful death, property damage, economic loss, medical monitoring, punitive damages, exemplary damages, attorneys’ fees and other damages. On March 15, 2024, the court scheduled a new trial date for October 14, 2024. The court also set a subsequent trial date for February 24, 2025. PG&E Corporation and the Utility are also aware of a complaint on behalf of the Collins Pine Company and a group of timber companies.

Based on the current state of the law concerning inverse condemnation in California and the facts and circumstances available to PG&E Corporation and the Utility as of the date of this filing, including Cal Fire’s determination of the cause and the information gathered as part of PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s investigation, PG&E Corporation and the Utility believe it is probable that they will incur a loss in connection with the 2021 Dixie fire. Based on the facts and circumstances available to PG&E Corporation and the Utility as of the date of this filing, including their experience to date in settling the claims of individual plaintiffs, PG&E Corporation and the Utility recorded a liability in the aggregate amount of $1.6 billion as of December 31, 2023 (before available insurance). The aggregate liability remained unchanged as of June 30, 2024.

PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s accrued estimated losses of $1.6 billion do not include, among other things: (i) any amounts for potential penalties or fines that may be imposed by courts or other governmental entities on PG&E Corporation or the Utility, (ii) any punitive damages, (iii) any amounts in respect of compensation claims by federal or state agencies including for state or federal fire suppression costs and damages related to federal land, (iv) medical monitoring costs, or (v) any other amounts that are not reasonably estimable.

As noted above, the aggregate estimated liability for claims in connection with the 2021 Dixie fire does not include potential claims for fire suppression costs from federal, state, county, or local agencies or damage to land and vegetation in national parks or national forests. As to these damages, PG&E Corporation and the Utility have not concluded that a loss is probable. PG&E Corporation and the Utility are unable to reasonably estimate the range of possible losses for any such claims due to, among other factors, incomplete information as to facts pertinent to potential claims and defenses, as well as facts that would bear on the amount, type, and valuation of vegetation loss, potential reforestation, habitat loss, and other resources damaged or destroyed by the 2021 Dixie fire. PG&E Corporation and the Utility believe, however, that such losses could be significant with respect to fire suppression costs due to the size and duration of the 2021 Dixie fire and corresponding magnitude of fire suppression resources dedicated to fighting the 2021 Dixie fire and with respect to claims for damage to land and vegetation in national parks or national forests due to the very large number of acres of national parks and national forests that were affected by the 2021 Dixie fire. According to the Cal Fire Investigation Report, over $650 million of costs had been incurred in suppressing the 2021 Dixie fire. The Utility estimates that the fire burned approximately 70,000 acres of national parks and approximately 685,000 acres of national forests.

As of June 30, 2024, the Utility recorded a Wildfire Fund receivable of $600 million for probable recoveries in connection with the 2021 Dixie fire. AB 1054 provides that the CPUC may allocate costs and expenses in the application for cost recovery in full or in part taking into account factors both within and beyond the utility’s control that may have exacerbated the costs and expenses, including humidity, temperature, and winds. PG&E Corporation and the Utility believe that, even if it found that the Utility acted unreasonably, the CPUC would nevertheless authorize recovery in part. See “Wildfire Fund under AB 1054” below. As of June 30, 2024, the Utility also recorded a $93 million reduction to its regulatory liability for wildfire-related claims costs that were determined to be probable of recovery through the FERC TO formula rate and a $494 million regulatory asset for costs that were determined to be probable of recovery through the WEMA. See “Regulatory Recovery” below. Decreases in the amount of the insurance receivable for the 2021 Dixie fire may also increase the amount that is probable of recovery through the FERC TO formula rate and the WEMA.

On September 6, 2022, at approximately 6:17 p.m. Pacific Time, the Utility was notified that a wildfire had ignited near Oxbow Reservoir in Placer County, California (the “2022 Mosquito fire”), located in the service area of the Utility. The National Wildfire Coordinating Group’s InciWeb incident overview dated November 4, 2022 at 6:30 p.m. Pacific Time indicated that the 2022 Mosquito fire had consumed approximately 76,788 acres at that time. It also indicated no fatalities, no injuries, 78 structures destroyed, and 13 structures damaged (including 44 residential homes and 40 detached structures) and that the fire was 100% contained.

As of July 17, 2024, PG&E Corporation and the Utility are aware of approximately eight complaints on behalf of at least 329 individual plaintiffs related to the 2022 Mosquito fire and expect that they may receive further complaints. PG&E Corporation and the Utility also are aware of a complaint on behalf of the PCWA, a complaint on behalf of the Middle Fork Project Finance Authority, a complaint on behalf of El Dorado County, Placer County, Georgetown Divide Public Utility District, Georgetown Fire Protection District, and El Dorado County Water Agency. The plaintiffs seek damages that include property damage, economic loss, punitive damages, exemplary damages, attorneys’ fees and other damages. On April 24, 2024, PG&E Corporation and the Utility filed cross-complaints against PCWA, alleging that conduct by PCWA was a substantial cause of the 2022 Mosquito fire. The cross-complaints seek property damages, indemnification, attorneys’ fees, and other damages.

Based on the current state of the law concerning inverse condemnation in California and the facts and circumstances available to PG&E Corporation and the Utility as of the date of this filing, including the information gathered as part of PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s investigation, PG&E Corporation and the Utility believe it is probable that they will incur a loss in connection with the 2022 Mosquito fire. Based on the facts and circumstances available to PG&E Corporation and the Utility as of the date of this report, PG&E Corporation and the Utility recorded a liability in the aggregate amount of $100 million as of December 31, 2023 (before available insurance). The aggregate liability remained unchanged as of June 30, 2024.

PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s accrued estimated losses do not include, among other things: (i) any amounts for potential penalties or fines that may be imposed by courts or other governmental entities on PG&E Corporation or the Utility, (ii) any punitive damages, (iii) any amounts in respect of compensation claims by federal or state agencies including for state or federal fire suppression costs and damages related to federal land, or (iv) any other amounts that are not reasonably estimable.

As noted above, the aggregate estimated liability for claims in connection with the 2022 Mosquito fire does not include potential claims for fire suppression costs from federal, state, county, or local agencies or damage to land and vegetation in national parks or national forests. As to these damages, PG&E Corporation and the Utility have not concluded that a loss is probable. PG&E Corporation and the Utility are unable to reasonably estimate the range of possible losses for any such claims due to, among other factors, incomplete information as to facts pertinent to potential claims and defenses, as well as facts that would bear on the amount, type, and valuation of vegetation loss, potential reforestation, habitat loss, and other resources damaged or destroyed by the 2022 Mosquito fire.

As of June 30, 2024, the Utility recorded an insurance receivable of $83 million for probable insurance recoveries in connection with the 2022 Mosquito fire, including legal fees. As of June 30, 2024, the Utility also recorded a $7 million reduction to its regulatory liability for wildfire-related claims costs that were determined to be probable of recovery through the FERC TO formula rate and a $53 million regulatory asset for costs that were determined to be probable of recovery through the WEMA. See “Regulatory Recovery” below.

PG&E Corporation and the Utility have recovery mechanisms available for wildfire liabilities including from insurance, customers, and the Wildfire Fund. PG&E Corporation and the Utility record a receivable for a recovery when it is deemed probable that recovery of a recorded loss will occur, and the Utility can reasonably estimate the amount or its range. While the Utility plans to seek recovery of all insured losses, it is unable to predict the ultimate amount and timing of such recoveries. For more information on the applicable facts and circumstances of the corresponding wildfires, see “2019 Kincade Fire,” “2021 Dixie Fire,” and “2022 Mosquito Fire.”

Section 451.1 of the Public Utilities Code provides that when determining an application to recover costs and expenses arising from a covered wildfire, the CPUC shall allow cost recovery if the costs and expenses are just and reasonable (i.e., the “prudency standard”). AB 1054 states that a utility with a valid safety certification for the time period in which a covered wildfire ignited “shall be deemed to have been reasonable” unless “a party to the proceeding creates a serious doubt as to the reasonableness of the [Utility’s] conduct,” in which case the burden shifts to the utility to prove its conduct was reasonable. The Utility had a valid safety certification at the time of the 2021 Dixie fire and the 2022 Mosquito fire, so any analysis of cost recovery starts with this reasonableness presumption. AB 1054 also allows the CPUC to allocate costs and expenses “in full or in part taking into account factors both within and beyond the Utility’s control that may have exacerbated the costs and expenses, including humidity, temperature, and winds.”

The Utility’s recorded receivables under the WEMA and with respect to the Wildfire Fund take into account this revised prudency standard and the presumption of reasonableness of the Utility’s conduct, based on the Utility’s interpretation of AB 1054 and the information currently available to the Utility. Although the concept of “serious doubt” has been applied in other regulatory proceedings, such as FERC proceedings, the revised prudency standard under AB 1054 has not been interpreted or applied by the CPUC and it is possible that the CPUC could interpret or apply the standard differently, in which case the Utility may not be able to recover all or a portion of expenses that it has recorded as a receivable.

The Utility recognizes income and reduces its regulatory liability for potential refund through future FERC TO formula rates for a portion of the third-party wildfire-related claims in excess of insurance coverage. The FERC presumes that a utility’s expenditures are prudent and permits cost recovery unless a party raises a serious doubt regarding the prudency of such costs. The allocation to transmission customers was based on a FERC-approved allocation factor as determined in the formula rate. Based on information currently available to the Utility regarding the 2021 Dixie fire and the 2022 Mosquito fire, as of June 30, 2024, the Utility recorded reductions of $93 million and $7 million, respectively, to its regulatory liability for wildfire-related claims costs that were determined to be probable of recovery through the FERC TO formula rate.

The WEMA provides for tracking of incremental wildfire claims, outside legal costs, and insurance premiums above those authorized in rates. With respect to wildfire claims and outside legal costs, the Utility expects that the same prudency standard as applies to the Wildfire Fund would also be applied in any CPUC review of an application filed by the Utility seeking recovery of such costs recorded to the WEMA. See “Wildfire Fund under AB 1054” below. As of June 30, 2024, based on information currently available to the Utility, incremental wildfire claims-related costs for the 2021 Dixie fire and the 2022 Mosquito fire were determined to be probable of recovery and the Utility recorded $494 million and $53 million, respectively, as regulatory assets in the WEMA.

On July 12, 2019, AB 1054 became law. The law provides for the establishment of a statewide fund that will be available for eligible electric utility companies to pay eligible claims for liabilities arising from wildfires occurring after July 12, 2019 that are caused by the applicable electric utility company’s equipment, subject to the terms and conditions of AB 1054. Each of California’s large electric IOUs has elected to participate in the Wildfire Fund. Eligible claims are claims for third-party damages resulting from any such wildfires, limited to the portion of such claims that exceeds the greater of (i) $1.0 billion in the aggregate in any Coverage Year and (ii) the amount of insurance coverage required to be in place for the electric utility company pursuant to Section 3293 of the Public Utilities Code, added by AB 1054. The accrued Wildfire Fund receivable as of June 30, 2024 reflects an expectation that the Coverage Year will be based on the calendar year.

Electric utility companies that draw from the Wildfire Fund will only be required to reimburse amounts that are determined by the CPUC in a proceeding for cost recovery not to be just and reasonable, applying the prudency standard in AB 1054 and after allocating costs and expenses for cost recovery based on relevant factors both within and outside of a utility’s control that may have exacerbated the costs and expenses, subject to a disallowance cap equal to 20% of the IOU’s transmission and distribution equity rate base. For the Utility, the disallowance cap would be approximately $4.1 billion based on its 2024 equity rate base, which is subject to adjustment based on changes in the Utility’s electric transmission and distribution equity rate base and would apply for a three calendar-year period. The disallowance cap is inapplicable in certain circumstances, including if the Wildfire Fund administrator determines that the electric utility company’s actions or inactions that resulted in the applicable wildfire constituted “conscious or willful disregard for the rights and safety of others,” or the electric utility company failed to maintain a valid safety certification. Costs that the CPUC determines to be just and reasonable in accordance with the prudency standard in AB 1054 will not be reimbursed to the Wildfire Fund, resulting in a draw-down of the Wildfire Fund.

Before the expiration of any current safety certification, the Utility must request a new safety certification from the OEIS, which the Utility expects to be issued within 90 days if the Utility has provided documentation that it has satisfied the requirements for the safety certification pursuant to Section 8389(e) of the Public Utilities Code, added by AB 1054. An issued safety certification is valid for 12 months or until a timely request for a new safety certification is acted upon, whichever occurs later. The safety certification is separate from the CPUC’s enforcement authority and does not preclude the CPUC from pursuing remedies for safety or other applicable violations. On January 22, 2024, the OEIS approved the Utility’s 2023 application and issued the Utility’s 2023 safety certification.

The Wildfire Fund will only be available for payment of eligible claims so long as there are sufficient funds remaining in the Wildfire Fund. Such funds could be depleted more quickly than expected, including as a result of claims made by California’s other participating electric utility companies. The Wildfire Fund is available to pay for the Utility’s eligible claims arising as of July 12, 2019, the effective date of AB 1054, subject to a limit of 40% of the allowed amount of such claims arising between the effective date of AB 1054 and the Utility’s emergence from Chapter 11. The 40% limit does not apply to eligible claims that arise after the Utility’s emergence from Chapter 11. AB 1054 authorizes the reimbursement of funds where a participating utility has demonstrated that it exercised reasonable business judgment in the valuation and payment of third-party claims.

As further described under the headings “Wildfire-Related Securities Claims in District Court” and “Wildfire-Related Securities Claims—Claims in the Bankruptcy Court Process,” PG&E Corporation and the Utility face certain wildfire-related securities claims related to the 2017 Northern California wildfires and other claims related to the 2018 Camp fire in the Chapter 11 Cases (i.e., the Subordinated Claims), and certain former directors, current and former officers, and underwriters of certain note offerings face wildfire-related securities claims in the District Court action. The claims described under the heading “Wildfire-Related Securities Claims in District Court” are referred to as the “Wildfire-Related Non-Bankruptcy Securities Claims” and collectively with the claims described under the heading “Wildfire-Related Securities Claims—Claims in the Bankruptcy Court Process” are referred to in this section as the “Wildfire-Related Securities Claims.”

Based on the facts and circumstances available to PG&E Corporation and the Utility as of the date of this filing, PG&E Corporation believes it is probable that it will incur a loss in connection with these matters. PG&E Corporation has recorded a liability in the aggregate amount of $300 million, which represents its best estimate of probable losses for the Wildfire-Related Securities Claims. PG&E Corporation believes that it is reasonably possible that the amount of loss could be greater or less than the accrued estimated amount due to the number of plaintiffs and the complexity of the litigation, and because a class settlement, if any, would be subject to, among other things, approval by the Bankruptcy Court and the District Court, and class members would have the right to opt out of any such settlement.

In June 2018, two purported securities class actions were filed in the District Court, naming PG&E Corporation and certain of its then-current and former officers as defendants, entitled David C. Weston v. PG&E Corporation, et al. and Jon Paul Moretti v. PG&E Corporation, et al., respectively. The complaints alleged material misrepresentations and omissions in various PG&E Corporation public disclosures related to, among other things, vegetation management and other issues connected to the 2017 Northern California wildfires. The complaints asserted claims under Section 10(b) and Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, and sought unspecified monetary relief, interest, attorneys’ fees and other costs. Both complaints identified a proposed class period of April 29, 2015 to June 8, 2018. On September 10, 2018, the court consolidated both cases, and the litigation is now denominated In re PG&E Corporation Securities Litigation, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Case No. 18-03509. The court also appointed PERA as lead plaintiff. PERA filed a consolidated amended complaint on November 9, 2018. On December 14, 2018, PERA filed a second amended consolidated complaint to add allegations regarding the 2018 Camp fire, including allegations regarding transmission line safety and the PSPS program.

On February 22, 2019, a third purported securities class action was filed in the District Court, entitled York County on behalf of the York County Retirement Fund, et al. v. Rambo, et al. (the “York County Action”). The complaint named as defendants certain then-current and former officers and directors, as well as the underwriters of four public offerings of notes from 2016 to 2018. Neither PG&E Corporation nor the Utility was named as a defendant. The complaint asserted claims under Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, based on alleged material misrepresentations and omissions in connection with the note offerings related to, among other things, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s vegetation management and wildfire safety measures. On May 7, 2019, the York County Action was consolidated with In re PG&E Corporation Securities Litigation.

On May 28, 2019, the plaintiffs in the consolidated securities actions filed a third amended consolidated class action complaint, which includes the claims asserted in the previously filed actions and names as defendants PG&E Corporation, the Utility, certain current and former officers and former directors, and the underwriters. On August 28, 2019, the Bankruptcy Court denied PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s request to extend the stay to the claims against the officer, director, and underwriter defendants. On October 4, 2019, the officer, director, and underwriter defendants filed motions to dismiss the third amended complaint, which motions are under submission with the District Court. On September 30, 2022, the District Court issued an order staying the action pending resolution of the bankruptcy proceedings. On October 31, 2022, PERA filed a notice of appeal of the District Court’s order staying the action.

On March 21, 2023, another group of shareholders filed a separate action in the District Court against certain former officers and directors, entitled Orbis Capital Limited et al., v. Williams et al., alleging similar claims to those alleged in In re PG&E Corporation Securities Litigation. The parties stipulated to a stay, and on May 16, 2023, the District Court entered an order staying the Orbis action pursuant to all of the same terms and conditions in the District Court’s September 30, 2022 order staying the In re PG&E Corporation Securities Litigation action.

PG&E Corporation and the Utility intend to resolve securities claims filed in the bankruptcy consistent with the Plan. These claims consist of pre-petition claims against PG&E Corporation or the Utility under the federal securities laws related to, among other things, allegedly misleading statements or omissions with respect to vegetation management and wildfire safety disclosures, and are classified into separate categories under the Plan, each of which is subject to subordination under the United States Bankruptcy Code. The first category of claims consists of pre-petition claims arising from or related to the trading of common stock of PG&E Corporation (such claims, with certain other similar claims against PG&E Corporation, the “HoldCo Rescission or Damage Claims”). The second category of pre-petition claims, which comprises two separate classes under the Plan, consists of claims arising from the trading of debt securities issued by PG&E Corporation and the Utility (such claims, with certain other similar claims against PG&E Corporation and the Utility, the “Subordinated Debt Claims,” and together with the HoldCo Rescission or Damage Claims, the “Subordinated Claims”).

PG&E Corporation and the Utility have engaged in settlement efforts with respect to the Subordinated Claims. All such settlements have been conditioned upon, among other things, resolution of that claimant’s Wildfire-Related Non-Bankruptcy Securities Claims. If any of the Subordinated Claims are ultimately not settled, PG&E Corporation and the Utility expect that those Subordinated Claims will be resolved by the Bankruptcy Court in the claims reconciliation process and treated as described above under the Plan. Under the Plan, after the Emergence Date, PG&E Corporation and the Utility have the authority to compromise, settle, object to, or otherwise resolve proofs of claim, and the Bankruptcy Court retains jurisdiction to hear disputes arising in connection with disputed claims. With respect to the Subordinated Claims, the claims reconciliation process may include litigation of the merits of such claims, including the filing of motions, fact discovery, and expert discovery. The total number and amount of allowed Subordinated Claims, if any, was not determined at the Emergence Date. To the extent any such claims are allowed, the total amount of such claims could be material, and therefore could result in (a) the issuance of a material number of shares of common stock of PG&E Corporation with respect to allowed HoldCo Rescission or Damage Claims, or (b) the payment of a material amount of cash with respect to allowed Subordinated Debt Claims. Such claims could have a material adverse impact on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows.

On January 25, 2021, the Bankruptcy Court issued an order to approve procedures to help facilitate the resolution of the Subordinated Claims. The order, among other things, established procedures allowing PG&E Corporation and the Utility to collect trading information with respect to the Subordinated Claims, to engage in an alternative dispute resolution process for resolving disputed Subordinated Claims, and to file certain omnibus claim objections with respect to the Subordinated Claims.

PG&E Corporation and the Utility have worked to resolve the Subordinated Claims in accordance with procedures approved by the Bankruptcy Court, including by collecting trading information from holders of Subordinated Claims. Also, pursuant to those procedures, PG&E Corporation and the Utility have filed numerous omnibus objections in the Bankruptcy Court to certain of the Subordinated Claims. The Bankruptcy Court has entered several orders disallowing and expunging Subordinated Claims that were subject to these omnibus objections, and certain Subordinated Claims subject to these omnibus objections remain pending. PG&E Corporation and the Utility expect to continue to prosecute omnibus objections with respect to certain of the Subordinated Claims and act under the procedures approved by the Bankruptcy Court to resolve the Subordinated Claims.

On March 17, 2020, the Utility entered into the Plea Agreement and Settlement (the “Plea Agreement”) with the People of the State of California, by and through the Butte County District Attorney’s Office to resolve the criminal prosecution of the Utility in connection with the 2018 Camp fire. Subject to the terms and conditions of the Plea Agreement, the Utility pleaded guilty to 84 counts of involuntary manslaughter in violation of Penal Code section 192(b) and one count of unlawfully causing a fire in violation of Penal Code section 452, and to admit special allegations pursuant to Penal Code sections 452.1(a)(2), 452.1(a)(3) and 452.1(a)(4).

PG&E Corporation and the Utility have significant contingencies arising from their operations, including contingencies related to enforcement and litigation matters and environmental remediation. A provision for a loss contingency is recorded when it is both probable that a loss has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. PG&E Corporation and the Utility evaluate the range of reasonably estimated losses and record a provision based on the lower end of the range, unless an amount within the range is a better estimate than any other amount. The assessments of whether a loss is probable or reasonably possible, and whether the loss or a range of loss is estimable, often involve a series of complex judgments about future events. Loss contingencies are reviewed quarterly, and estimates are adjusted to reflect the impact of all known information, such as negotiations, discovery, settlements and payments, rulings, penalties related to regulatory compliance, advice of legal counsel, and other information and events pertaining to a particular matter. PG&E Corporation and the Utility exclude anticipated legal costs from the provision for loss and expense these costs as incurred. The Utility also has substantial financial commitments in connection with agreements entered into to support its operating activities. See “Purchase Commitments” below. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows may be materially affected by the outcome of the following matters.

The FERC determines the amount of authorized revenue requirements, including the rate of return on electric transmission assets, that the Utility may collect in rates through TO rate cases. The FERC typically authorizes the Utility to charge new rates based on the requested revenue requirement, subject to refund, before the FERC has issued a final decision. The Utility bills and records revenue based on the amounts requested in its rate case filing and records a reserve for its estimate of the amounts that are probable of refund.

On October 15, 2020, the FERC issued an order addressing substantive disputed issues concerning TO18 including the direct assignment of common plant costs, impact of the TCJA on January and February 2018 rates, and depreciation and ordered additional briefing on the appropriate ROE. On April 15, 2021, the FERC issued an order on rehearing setting aside its earlier determination on the TCJA and determining that the lower tax rates in the TCJA applied to the TO18 rates in January and February 2018. On March 17, 2022, the FERC issued a further order in the TO18 rate case proceeding finding that 9.26% is the just and reasonable base ROE for the Utility. With the incentive component of 50-basis points for the Utility’s continuing participation in the CAISO, the resulting ROE would be 9.76%.

TO20 was a formula rate, which means the Utility submits an annual update to the FERC each December for rates to go into effect on January 1 of the following year based on a formula, without a separate rate case. On August 17, 2020, and December 30, 2020, FERC accepted a partial settlement and final settlement, respectively, in the TO20 proceedings. Several issues in the settlements, such as the direct assignment of common plant costs, are contingent on the outcome of a final, non-appealable TO18 decision.

Parties have protested the Utility’s annual updates under the formula rate, and these protests are pending before the FERC. On October 24, 2023, the Utility filed a waiver request for certain inputs to the formula rate related to the cost of long-term debt and certain underwriting fees, which the FERC denied on December 22, 2023. On January 22, 2024, the Utility filed a request for reconsideration, which the FERC denied on February 22, 2024. On March 28, 2024, the Utility filed a petition for review in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. On May 23, 2024, the FERC issued a substantive order on rehearing again denying the Utility’s waiver request, and the Utility withdrew the petition for review.

Aside from the ultimate outcome of the ROE rehearing request and the direct assignment of common plant costs, the FERC’s orders in the TO18 proceeding are not expected to result in a material impact on the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, or cash flows. Some of the issues that will be decided in a final and unappealable TO18 decision, including the direct assignment of common plant costs, will also be incorporated into the Utility’s TO19 and TO20 rate cases. The Utility has established regulatory liabilities for amounts previously collected during the TO18, TO19, and TO20 rate case periods from 2017 through the second quarter of 2024 of approximately $484 million pending a final and non-appealable TO18 decision. Based on the settlement, a portion of the direct assignment of common plant costs are expected to be recovered at the CPUC in a separate application, and as a result, as of June 30, 2024, the Utility had recorded approximately $233 million to Regulatory assets.

On December 15, 2022, the Utility filed an application with the CPUC requesting cost recovery of approximately $1.36 billion of recorded expenditures, resulting in a proposed revenue requirement of approximately $1.29 billion (the “2022 WMCE application”). The costs addressed in this application reflect costs related to wildfire mitigation and certain catastrophic events, as well as the implementation of various customer-focused initiatives. These costs were incurred primarily in 2021.

The recorded expenditures consist of $1.2 billion in expenses and $136 million in capital expenditures. On June 8, 2023, the CPUC adopted a final decision granting the Utility interim rate relief of $1.1 billion to be recovered over 12 months, which went into effect July 1, 2023. The remaining $224 million will be recovered to the extent it is approved after the CPUC issues a final decision. Cost recovery requested in this application is subject to the CPUC’s reasonableness review, which could result in some or all of the interim rate relief being subject to refund.

The recorded expenditures for wildfire mitigation consist of $726 million in expenses and $1.5 billion in capital expenditures and cover activities during the years 2020 to 2022. The recorded expenditures for gas safety and electric modernization consist of $120 million in expenses and $118 million in capital expenditures and cover activities during the years 2017 to 2022. If approved, the requested cost recovery would result in an aggregate revenue requirement of $688 million. The costs addressed in the WGSC application are incremental to those previously authorized in the Utility’s 2020 GRC and other proceedings.

PG&E Corporation and the Utility are subject to various claims and lawsuits that separately are not considered material. Accruals for contingencies related to such matters totaled $80 million and $89 million as of June 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023, respectively. These amounts were included in Other current liabilities on the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. Included among these claims and lawsuits are the proofs of claim filed in the Chapter 11 Cases, except for proofs of claim discussed under “Wildfire-Related Securities Claims—Claims in the Bankruptcy Court Process” in Note 10. PG&E Corporation and the Utility have resolved a significant majority of the proofs of claim. PG&E Corporation and the Utility continue their review and analysis of certain remaining claims. PG&E Corporation and the Utility do not believe it is reasonably possible that the resolution of these matters will have a material impact on their financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows.

The Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) is auditing PG&E Corporation’s tax returns for 2015 through 2018. The State of California is auditing PG&E Corporation’s tax returns for 2015 through 2019. The most significant unresolved matter relates to the deductibility of approximately $850 million in costs for gas transmission and distribution lines, which the CPUC did not allow the Utility to recover through rates, and $400 million in customer bill credits, in connection with its decision issued in 2015 for the San Bruno natural gas explosion in September of 2010. PG&E Corporation records an income tax benefit related to a deduction for an uncertain tax position when it determines it is more likely than not that the uncertain tax position will ultimately be sustained. On June 4, 2024, the Office of Chief Counsel of the IRS issued a technical advice memorandum taking the position that the costs the Utility incurred for gas transmission and distribution lines and customer bill credits are nondeductible fines or penalties. As a result, in the quarter ended June 30, 2024, PG&E Corporation determined that it is no longer more likely than not that its deduction related to a portion of the customer bill credits will ultimately be sustained. Accordingly, PG&E Corporation has decreased its Income tax benefit by $70 million during the quarter ended June 30, 2024 related to state and federal income taxes. PG&E Corporation intends to defend itself vigorously as to all costs in this matter.

Between November 2020 and January 2021, several governmental entities raised concerns regarding the Utility’s emergency response to the 2020 CZU Lightning Complex fire, including Cal Fire, the California Coastal Commission, the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, and Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors alleging environmental, vegetation management, and unpermitted work violations. The Utility continues to work with the California Coastal Commission and the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board to resolve any outstanding issues. Violations can result in penalties, remediation, and other relief.

Given the complexities of the legal and regulatory environment and the inherent uncertainties involved in the early stages of a remediation project, the process for estimating remediation liabilities requires significant judgment. The Utility records an environmental remediation liability when the site assessments indicate that remediation is probable, and the Utility can reasonably estimate the loss or a range of probable amounts. The Utility records an environmental remediation liability based on the lower end of the range of estimated probable costs, unless an amount within the range is a better estimate than any other amount. Key factors that inform the development of estimated costs include site feasibility studies and investigations, applicable remediation actions, operations and maintenance activities, post-remediation monitoring, and the cost of technologies that are expected to be approved to remediate the site. Amounts recorded are not discounted to their present value. The Utility’s environmental remediation liability is primarily included in Noncurrent liabilities on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets and is comprised of the following:

The Utility’s gas compressor stations, former MGP sites, power plant sites, gas gathering sites, and sites used by the Utility for the storage, recycling, and disposal of potentially hazardous substances are subject to requirements issued by the United States Environmental Protection Agency under the Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act in addition to other state laws relating to hazardous substances. The Utility has a comprehensive program to comply with federal, state, and local laws and regulations related to hazardous materials, waste, remediation activities, and other environmental requirements. The Utility assesses and monitors the environmental requirements on an ongoing basis and implements changes to its program as deemed appropriate. The Utility’s remediation activities are overseen by the DTSC, several California regional water quality control boards, and various other federal, state, and local agencies.

The Utility’s environmental remediation liability as of June 30, 2024, reflects its best estimate of probable future costs for remediation based on the current assessment data and regulatory obligations. Future costs will depend on many factors, including the extent of work necessary to implement final remediation plans, the Utility’s time frame for remediation, and unanticipated claims filed against the Utility. The Utility may incur actual costs in the future that are materially different than this estimate and such costs could have a material impact on results of operations, financial condition, and cash flows during the period in which they are recorded. As of June 30, 2024, the Utility expected to recover $1.1 billion of its environmental remediation liability for certain sites through various ratemaking mechanisms authorized by the CPUC.

The Utility’s remediation and abatement efforts at the Topock site are subject to the regulatory authority of the DTSC and the U.S. Department of the Interior. On April 24, 2018, the DTSC authorized the Utility to build an in-situ groundwater treatment system to convert hexavalent chromium into a non-toxic and non-soluble form of chromium. Construction activities began in October 2018, and the initial phase of construction was completed in 2021. Additional phases of construction will continue for several years. It is reasonably possible that the Utility’s undiscounted future costs associated with the Topock site may increase by as much as $213 million if the extent of contamination or necessary remediation is greater than anticipated. The costs associated with environmental remediation at the Topock site are expected to be recovered primarily through the HSMA, where 90% of the costs are recovered through rates.

The Utility’s remediation and abatement efforts at the Hinkley site are subject to the regulatory authority of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Lahontan Region. In November 2015, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Lahontan Region adopted a clean-up and abatement order directing the Utility to contain and remediate the underground plume of hexavalent chromium and the potential environmental impacts. The final order states that the Utility must continue and improve its remediation efforts, define the boundaries of the chromium plume, and take action to meet interim cleanup targets. It is reasonably possible that the Utility’s undiscounted future costs associated with the Hinkley site may increase by as much as $127 million if the extent of contamination or necessary remediation is greater than anticipated. The costs associated with environmental remediation at the Hinkley site will not be recovered through rates.

Former MGPs used coal and oil to produce gas for use by the Utility’s customers before natural gas became available. The by-products and residues of this process were often disposed of at the MGPs themselves. The Utility has a program to manage the residues left behind as a result of the manufacturing process; many of the sites in the program have been addressed. It is reasonably possible that the Utility’s undiscounted future costs associated with MGP sites may increase by as much as $647 million if the extent of contamination or necessary remediation at identified MGP sites is greater than anticipated. The costs associated with environmental remediation at the MGP sites are recovered through the HSMA, where 90% of the costs are recovered through rates.

Utility-owned generation facilities and third-party disposal sites often involve long-term remediation. It is reasonably possible that the Utility’s undiscounted future costs associated with Utility-owned generation facilities and third-party disposal sites may increase by as much as $75 million if the extent of contamination or necessary remediation is greater than anticipated. The environmental remediation costs associated with the Utility-owned generation facilities and third-party disposal sites are recovered through the HSMA, where 90% of the costs are recovered through rates.

In 1998, the Utility divested its generation power plant business as part of generation deregulation. Although the Utility sold its fossil-fueled power plants, the Utility retained the environmental remediation liability associated with each site. It is reasonably possible that the Utility’s undiscounted future costs associated with fossil fuel-fired generation sites may increase by as much as $20 million if the extent of contamination or necessary remediation is greater than anticipated. The environmental remediation costs associated with the fossil fuel-fired sites will not be recovered through rates.

NEIL provides insurance coverage for property damages and business interruption losses incurred by the Utility if a nuclear or non-nuclear event were to occur at the Utility’s two nuclear generating units at Diablo Canyon. NEIL provides property damage and business interruption coverage of up to $3.2 billion per nuclear incident and $2.5 billion per non-nuclear incident for Diablo Canyon. For the Humboldt Bay independent spent fuel storage installation, NEIL provides up to $50 million of coverage for nuclear and non-nuclear property damages. NEIL also provides coverage for damages caused by acts of terrorism and cyberattacks at nuclear power plants. Through NEIL, there is up to $3.2 billion available to the membership to cover this exposure. These coverage amounts are shared by all NEIL members and all nuclear and non-nuclear property insurance policies issued by NEIL. EMANI shares losses with NEIL, as part of the first $400 million of coverage within the current nuclear insurance program. EMANI also provides an additional $200 million in excess insurance for property damage and business interruption losses incurred by the Utility if a nuclear or non-nuclear event were to occur at Diablo Canyon. If NEIL losses in any policy year exceed accumulated funds, the Utility could be subject to a retrospective assessment. If NEIL were to exercise this assessment, the maximum aggregate annual retrospective premium obligation for the Utility would be approximately $42 million. If EMANI losses in any policy year exceed accumulated funds, the Utility could be subject to a retrospective assessment of approximately $5 million. For more information about the Utility’s nuclear insurance coverage, see Note 15 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of the 2023 Form 10-K.

On July 11, 2023, the Utility and the Landlord entered into an Amendment to Office Lease and an Agreement of Purchase and Sale and Joint Escrow Instructions, pursuant to which the Utility was deemed to have exercised its option to purchase the Property, as modified. Pursuant to the Agreement of Purchase and Sale and Joint Escrow Instructions, the purchase price of the Property will be $906 million, with deposits applicable to such purchase price of $150 million paid by July 11, 2023, $250 million paid by July 11, 2024, and the remaining $506 million to be paid at closing in June 2025. The Utility will also receive a credit of approximately $172 million towards the final payment, subject to adjustments, which represents the estimated outstanding principal balance of a loan carried by the Property that will be assigned to, and assumed by, the Utility at closing. The Utility will continue to lease the Property pursuant to the Lease, as amended, until closing.