CONTINGENCIES AND REGULATORY MATTERS

See Note 3 to the financial statements of the registrants (other than Mississippi Power) in Item 8 of the Form 10-K and Note 3 to the financial statements of Mississippi Power in Item 8 of the Form 10-K/A 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, 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 increased generally throughout the U.S. In particular, personal injury, property damage, and other claims for damages alleged to have been caused by carbon dioxide (CO₂) and other emissions, coal combustion byproducts, and alleged exposure to hazardous materials, and/or requests for injunctive relief in connection with such matters, have become more frequent. 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 or in Note 3 to the financial statements of each registrant (other than Mississippi Power) in Item 8 of the Form 10-K and Note 3 to the financial statements of Mississippi Power in Item 8 of the Form 10-K/A, 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.

Environmental Matters

New Source Review Actions

In 1999, the EPA brought a civil action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia against certain Southern Company subsidiaries, including Alabama Power and Georgia Power, alleging that these subsidiaries had violated the NSR provisions of the Clean Air Act and related state laws at certain coal-fired generating facilities. The EPA alleged NSR violations at five coal-fired generating facilities operated by Alabama Power, including a unit co-owned by Mississippi Power, and three coal-fired generating facilities operated by Georgia Power, including a unit co-owned by Gulf Power. The civil action sought penalties and injunctive relief, including an order requiring installation of the best available control technology at the affected units. The case against Georgia Power (including claims related to the unit co-owned by Gulf Power) was administratively closed in 2001 and has not been reopened. After Alabama Power was dismissed from the original action, the EPA filed a separate action in 2001 against Alabama Power (including claims related to the unit co-owned by Mississippi Power) in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama.

In 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama entered a consent decree, resolving claims relating to the alleged NSR violations at Plant Miller. In 2010, the EPA dismissed five of its eight remaining claims against Alabama Power, leaving only three claims, including one relating to the unit co-owned by Mississippi Power. In 2011, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama granted Alabama Power summary judgment on all remaining claims and dismissed the case with prejudice. On September 19, 2013, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part the 2011 judgment of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama in favor of Alabama Power, which was based on the exclusion of the testimony of certain of the EPA's experts, and remanded the case back to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama for further proceedings. On October 31, 2013, Alabama Power filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit a petition for rehearing. In February 2012, the EPA filed a motion in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama seeking vacatur of the 2011 judgment and recusal of the judge in the case involving Alabama Power (including claims related to the unit co-owned by Mississippi Power), which remains pending.

Southern Company and each traditional operating company believe each such traditional operating company complied with applicable laws and regulations in effect at the time the work in question took place. The Clean Air Act authorizes maximum civil penalties of $25,000 to $37,500 per day, per violation, depending on the date of the alleged violation. An adverse outcome could require substantial capital expenditures that cannot be determined at this time and could possibly require payment of substantial penalties. Such expenditures could affect future results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates. The ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.

Climate Change Litigation

Kivalina Case

In 2008, the Native Village of Kivalina and the City of Kivalina filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against several electric utilities (including Southern Company), several oil companies, and a coal company. The plaintiffs alleged that the village was being destroyed by erosion allegedly caused by global warming that the plaintiffs attributed to emissions of greenhouse gases by the defendants. The plaintiffs asserted claims for public and private nuisance and contended that some of the defendants (including Southern Company) acted in concert and were therefore jointly and severally liable for the plaintiffs' damages. The suit sought damages for lost property values and for the cost of relocating the village, which was alleged to be $95 million to $400 million. In September 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California's 2009 dismissal of the case. In November 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied the plaintiffs' request for review of the decision and, on May 20, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court denied the plaintiffs' petition for review. The case is now concluded.

Hurricane Katrina Case

In 2005, immediately following Hurricane Katrina, a lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi by Ned Comer on behalf of Mississippi residents seeking recovery for property damage and personal injuries caused by Hurricane Katrina. In 2006, the plaintiffs amended the complaint to include Southern Company and many other electric utilities, oil companies, chemical companies, and coal producers. The plaintiffs allege that the defendants contributed to climate change, which contributed to the intensity of Hurricane Katrina. In 2007, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi dismissed the case. On appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, a three-judge panel reversed the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, holding that the case could proceed, but, on rehearing, the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit dismissed the plaintiffs' appeal, resulting in reinstatement of the decision of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi in favor of the defendants. In 2011, the plaintiffs filed an amended version of their class action complaint, arguing that the earlier dismissal was on procedural grounds and under Mississippi law the plaintiffs have a right to re-file. The amended complaint was also filed against numerous chemical, coal, oil, and utility companies, including Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Southern Power. On May 14, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upheld the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi's March 2012 dismissal of the case. The case is now concluded.

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 properties. The traditional operating companies have each received authority from their respective state PSCs to recover approved environmental compliance costs through regulatory mechanisms. These rates are adjusted annually or as necessary within limits approved by the state PSCs.

Georgia Power's environmental remediation liability as of September 30, 2013 was $18 million. Georgia Power has been designated or identified as a potentially responsible party (PRP) at sites governed by the Georgia Hazardous Site Response Act and/or by the federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), including a large site in Brunswick, Georgia on the CERCLA National Priorities List (NPL). The parties have completed the removal of wastes from the Brunswick site as ordered by the EPA. Additional cleanup and claims for recovery of natural resource damages at this site or for the assessment and potential cleanup of other sites on the Georgia Hazardous Sites Inventory and the CERCLA NPL are anticipated.

Georgia Power and numerous other entities have been designated by the EPA as PRPs at the Ward Transformer Superfund site located in Raleigh, North Carolina. In 2011, the EPA issued a Unilateral Administrative Order (UAO) to Georgia Power and 22 other parties, ordering specific remedial action of certain areas at the site. In 2011, Georgia Power filed a response with the EPA stating it has sufficient cause to believe it is not a liable party under CERCLA. The EPA notified Georgia Power in 2011 that it is considering enforcement options against Georgia Power and other non-complying UAO recipients. If the EPA pursues enforcement action and a court determines that a respondent failed to comply with the UAO without sufficient cause, the EPA may also seek civil penalties of up to $37,500 per day for the violation and punitive damages of up to three times the costs incurred by the EPA as a result of the party's failure to comply with the UAO.

In addition to the EPA's action at this site, Georgia Power, along with many other parties, was sued in a private action by several existing PRPs for cost recovery related to the removal action. On February 1, 2013, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina Western Division granted Georgia Power's summary judgment motion ruling that Georgia Power has no liability in the private action. On May 10, 2013, the plaintiffs appealed the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina Western Division's order to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, and the case is currently on appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.

The ultimate outcome of these matters will depend upon the success of defenses asserted, the ultimate number of PRPs participating in the cleanup, and numerous other factors and cannot be determined at this time; however, as a result of the regulatory treatment, they are not expected to have a material impact on Southern Company's or Georgia Power's financial statements. See Note 1 to the financial statements of Georgia Power under "Environmental Remediation Recovery" in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information regarding the regulatory treatment.

Gulf Power's environmental remediation liability includes estimated costs of environmental remediation projects of approximately $52 million as of September 30, 2013. 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 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, there was no impact on net income as a result of these estimates.

In 2003, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) designated Mississippi Power as a PRP at a site in Texas. The site was owned by an electric transformer company that handled Mississippi Power's transformers as well as those of many other entities. The site owner is bankrupt and the State of Texas has entered into an agreement with Mississippi Power and several other utilities to investigate and remediate the site. Hundreds of entities have received notices from the TCEQ requesting their participation in the anticipated site remediation. The final impact of this matter on Mississippi Power will depend upon further environmental assessment and the ultimate number of PRPs. The remediation expenses incurred by Mississippi Power are expected to be recovered through the ECO Plan.

The final outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time. However, based on the currently known conditions at these sites and the nature and extent of activities relating to these sites, management of Southern Company, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power does not believe that additional liabilities, if any, at these sites would be material to their respective financial statements.

Nuclear Fuel Disposal Cost Litigation

Acting through the DOE and pursuant to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, the U.S. government entered into contracts with Alabama Power and Georgia Power that require the DOE to dispose of spent nuclear fuel and high level radioactive waste generated at Plants Hatch and Farley and Plant Vogtle Units 1 and 2. The DOE failed to timely perform and has yet to commence the performance of its contractual and statutory obligation to dispose of spent nuclear fuel beginning no later than January 31, 1998. Consequently, Alabama Power and Georgia Power have pursued and continue to pursue legal remedies against the U.S. government for its partial breach of contract.

As a result of the first lawsuit, Georgia Power recovered approximately $27 million, based on its ownership interests, and Alabama Power recovered approximately $17 million, representing the vast majority of the Southern Company system's direct costs of the expansion of spent nuclear fuel storage facilities at Plants Farley and Hatch and Plant Vogtle Units 1 and 2 from 1998 through 2004. In April 2012, Alabama Power credited the award to cost of service for the benefit of customers. In July 2012, Georgia Power credited the award to accounts where the original costs were charged and used it to reduce rate base, fuel, and cost of service for the benefit of customers.

In 2008, Alabama Power and Georgia Power filed a second lawsuit against the U.S. government for the costs of continuing to store spent nuclear fuel at Plants Farley and Hatch and Plant Vogtle Units 1 and 2. Damages are being sought for the period from January 1, 2005 through December 31, 2010. Damages will continue to accumulate until the issue is resolved or storage is provided. No amounts have been recognized in the financial statements as of September 30, 2013 for any potential recoveries from the second lawsuit. The final outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time; however, no material impact on Southern Company's, Alabama Power's, or Georgia Power's net income is expected.

Sufficient pool storage capacity for spent fuel is available at Plant Vogtle Units 1 and 2 to maintain full-core discharge capability for both units into 2014. Construction and licensing of an on-site dry storage facility at Plant Vogtle Units 1 and 2 is complete. The facility began operation in October 2013 and Plant Vogtle Units 1 and 2 are expected to maintain full-core discharge capability, with additional on-site dry storage to be added as needed. At Plants Hatch and Farley, on-site dry spent fuel storage facilities are operational and can be expanded to accommodate spent fuel through the expected life of each plant.

FERC Matters

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Mississippi Power under "FERC Matters" in Item 8 of the Form 10-K/A for additional information regarding Mississippi Power's settlement agreement with its wholesale customers for revised rates related to the wholesale Municipal and Rural Associations (MRA) cost-based electric tariff. See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company under "Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle" in Item 8 of the Form 10-K, Note 3 to the financial statements of Mississippi Power under "Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle" in Item 8 of the Form 10-K/A, and "Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle" herein for information regarding Mississippi Power's construction of the Kemper IGCC.

In March 2012, Mississippi Power entered into a settlement agreement with its wholesale customers to increase wholesale base revenues under the MRA cost-based electric tariff by approximately $22.6 million annually, and the FERC approved interim rates effective May 1, 2012. In September 2012, Mississippi Power, with its wholesale customers, filed a final settlement agreement with the FERC. On May 3, 2013, Mississippi Power received an order from the FERC accepting the settlement agreement.

On April 1, 2013, Mississippi Power reached a settlement agreement with its wholesale customers and filed a request with the FERC for an additional increase in the MRA cost-based electric tariff, which was accepted by the FERC on May 30, 2013. In accordance with the 2013 settlement agreement, base rates under the MRA cost-based electric tariff increased approximately $24.2 million annually, effective April 1, 2013. The amount of base rate revenues to be received in 2013 from the agreed upon increase will be approximately $18.0 million.

Retail Regulatory Matters

Alabama Power

Rate RSE

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company and Alabama Power under "Retail Regulatory Matters – Alabama Power – Rate RSE" and "Retail Regulatory Matters – Rate RSE," respectively, in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information regarding Alabama Power's Rate Stabilization and Equalization (Rate RSE). In May, June, and July 2013, the Alabama PSC held public proceedings regarding the operation and utilization of Rate RSE. On August 13, 2013, the Alabama PSC voted to issue a report on Rate RSE that found that Alabama Power's Rate RSE mechanism continues to be just and reasonable to customers and Alabama Power, but recommended Alabama Power modify Rate RSE as follows:


•	Eliminate the provision of Rate RSE establishing an allowed range of ROE, which is currently 13.0% to 14.5%, with an adjusting point of 13.75%.


•	Eliminate the provision of Rate RSE limiting Alabama Power's capital structure to an allowed equity ratio of 45%.


•	Replace these two provisions with a provision that establishes rates based upon an allowed weighted cost of equity (WCE) range of 5.75% to 6.21%, with an adjusting point of 5.98%. If calculated under the current Rate RSE provisions, the resulting WCE would range from 5.85% to 6.53%, with an adjusting point of 6.19%.


•	Provide eligibility for a performance-based adder of seven basis points, or 0.07%, to the WCE adjusting point if Alabama Power (i) has an "A" credit rating equivalent with at least one of the recognized rating agencies or (ii) is in the top one-third of a designated customer value benchmark survey.

Substantially all other provisions of Rate RSE would remain unchanged.

On August 21, 2013, Alabama Power filed its consent to these recommendations with the Alabama PSC. The changes are effective for calendar year 2014.

Rate CNP

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company and Alabama Power under "Retail Regulatory Matters – Alabama Power – Rate CNP" and "Retail Regulatory Matters – Rate CNP," respectively, in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information regarding Alabama Power's recovery of retail costs through Rate Certificated New Plant Power Purchase Agreement (Rate CNP PPA) and Rate Certificated New Plant Environmental (Rate CNP Environmental). Alabama Power's under recovered Rate CNP PPA balance at September 30, 2013 was $22 million as compared to $9 million at December 31, 2012. This under recovered balance at September 30, 2013 is included in deferred under recovered regulatory clause revenues on Southern Company's and Alabama Power's Condensed Balance Sheets herein. For Rate CNP PPA, this classification is based on an estimate, which includes such factors as purchased power capacity and energy demand. A change in any of these factors could have a material impact on the timing of any recovery of the under recovered retail costs. Alabama Power's under recovered Rate CNP Environmental balance at September 30, 2013 was $12 million as compared to $21 million at December 31, 2012. This under recovered balance at September 30, 2013 consists of $4 million in under recovered regulatory clause revenues and $8 million in deferred under recovered regulatory clause revenues on Southern Company's and Alabama Power's Condensed Balance Sheets herein. For Rate CNP Environmental, this classification is based on an estimate, which includes such factors as costs to comply with environmental mandates and energy demand. A change in any of these factors could have a material impact on the timing of any recovery of the under recovered retail costs.

On August 13, 2013, the Alabama PSC approved Alabama Power's petition requesting a revision to Rate CNP Environmental that allows recovery of costs related to pre-2005 environmental assets currently being recovered through Rate RSE. The revenue impact as a result of this revision is estimated to be $50 million in 2014; however, this petition was made in accordance with Alabama Power's agreement with the Alabama PSC to develop a plan to keep Rate RSE and Rate CNP Environmental factors unchanged in 2014. Any unrecovered amounts associated with 2014 environmental compliance costs will be reflected in the 2015 Rate CNP Environmental filing.

Retail Energy Cost Recovery

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company and Alabama Power under "Retail Regulatory Matters – Alabama Power – Energy Cost Recovery" and "Retail Regulatory Matters – Energy Cost Recovery," respectively, in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information regarding Alabama Power's energy cost recovery. Alabama Power's over recovered fuel costs at September 30, 2013 totaled $43 million as compared to an under recovered balance of $4 million at December 31, 2012. The over recovered fuel costs at September 30, 2013 are included in other regulatory liabilities, current and the under recovered fuel costs at December 31, 2012 are included in deferred under recovered regulatory clause revenues on Southern Company's and Alabama Power's Condensed Balance Sheets herein. These classifications are based on estimates, which include such factors as weather, generation availability, energy demand, and the price of energy. A change in any of these factors could have a material impact on the timing of any return of the over recovered fuel costs.

Natural Disaster Cost Recovery

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company and Alabama Power under "Retail Regulatory Matters – Alabama Power – Natural Disaster Reserve" and "Retail Regulatory Matters – Natural Disaster Reserve," respectively, in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information regarding natural disaster cost recovery. At September 30, 2013, the NDR had an accumulated balance of $95 million as compared to $103 million at December 31, 2012, which is included on Southern Company's and Alabama Power's Condensed Balance Sheets herein under other regulatory liabilities, deferred. The decrease in the NDR is a result of storm activity. The related accruals are reflected as operations and maintenance expenses on Southern Company's and Alabama Power's Condensed Statements of Income herein.

Non-Nuclear Outage Accounting Order

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company and Alabama Power under "Retail Regulatory Matters – Alabama Power – Rate RSE" and "Retail Regulatory Matters – Rate RSE," respectively, in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information. On August 13, 2013, the Alabama PSC approved Alabama Power's petition requesting authorization to defer to a regulatory asset account certain operations and maintenance expenses associated with planned outages at non-nuclear generation facilities in 2014 and to amortize those expenses over a three-year period beginning in 2015. The 2014 outage expenditures to be deferred and amortized are estimated to total approximately $70 million. This petition was made in accordance with Alabama Power's agreement with the Alabama PSC to develop a plan to keep Rate RSE factors unchanged in 2014.

Georgia Power

Fuel Cost Recovery

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company and Georgia Power under "Retail 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 September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, Georgia Power's fuel cost over recovery balance totaled $114 million and $230 million, respectively, included in current liabilities and other deferred credits and liabilities on Southern Company's and Georgia Power's Condensed Balance Sheets herein.

Fuel cost recovery revenues as recorded on the financial statements are adjusted for differences in actual recoverable fuel costs and amounts billed in current regulated rates. Accordingly, any 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.

Rate Plans

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

In accordance with the 2010 ARP, Georgia Power filed a base rate case with the Georgia PSC on June 28, 2013 (2013 Rate Case). The filing includes a requested rate increase totaling $482 million, or 6.1% of retail revenues, to be effective January 1, 2014 based on a proposed retail ROE of 11.50%. The requested increase will be recovered through Georgia Power's existing base rate tariffs as follows: $334 million through the traditional base rate tariffs, $132 million through the Environmental Compliance Cost Recovery (ECCR) tariff, $5 million through the Demand Side Management tariffs, and $11 million through the Municipal Franchise Fee tariff. The filing reflects revenue requirements that have been levelized over the three-year period ending December 31, 2016 to provide stable rates to customers during a period of rising costs. The request was made to allow Georgia Power to recover the costs of recent and future investments in infrastructure including environmental controls, transmission and distribution, generation, and smart grid technologies in order to maintain high levels of reliability and superior customer service.

The primary points of the 2013 Rate Case are:


•	Continuation of the traditional base rate tariffs through December 31, 2016 based on a test year ending July 31, 2014 with a modification for an appropriate three-year levelization adjustment.


•	Continuation of the ECCR tariff through December 31, 2016 with a modification for an appropriate three-year levelization adjustment.


•	Continuation of an allowed retail ROE range of 10.25% to 12.25%.


•	Continuation of the process whereby two-thirds of any earnings above the top of the allowed ROE range will be shared with Georgia Power's customers and the remaining one-third will be retained by Georgia Power.


•	Continuation of the option to file an Interim Cost Recovery tariff in the event earnings are projected to fall below the bottom of the ROE range during the three-year term of the plan.

Hearings on Georgia Power’s testimony were held in October 2013. In testimony filed on October 18, 2013 and October 22, 2013, the Georgia PSC Staff proposed various adjustments based on a traditional one-year test period and a 10.0% ROE that would result in excess revenues of $165 million. However, the Georgia PSC Staff also proposed no change to Georgia Power’s current retail base rates through 2014. The excess earnings in 2014 would be used to reduce rate increases in 2015 and 2016. The Georgia PSC Staff further proposed reducing the allowed ROE range to 50 basis points above and below the authorized ROE with one-third of any earnings above the range used to reduce future ECCR tariff increases and the remaining two-thirds applied to rate reductions. Georgia Power disagrees with the Georgia PSC Staff's positions. Hearings on the Georgia PSC Staff and intervenor testimony and Georgia Power's rebuttal hearings will be held in November 2013.

The Georgia PSC is scheduled to issue a final order in this matter in December 2013. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.

Integrated Resource Plans

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

On April 17, 2013, the Georgia PSC approved the decertification of Plant Bowen Unit 6 (32 MWs), which was retired on April 25, 2013. On September 30, 2013, Plant Branch Unit 2 (319 MWs) was retired as approved by the Georgia PSC in the 2011 IRP in order to comply with the State of Georgia's Multi-Pollutant Rule.

On July 11, 2013, the Georgia PSC approved Georgia Power's request to decertify and retire Plant Boulevard Units 2 and 3 (28 MWs) effective July 17, 2013. Plant Branch Units 3 and 4 (1,016 MWs), Plant Yates Units 1 through 5 (579 MWs), and Plant McManus Units 1 and 2 (122 MWs) will be decertified and retired by April 16, 2015, the compliance date of the MATS rule. The decertification date of Plant Branch Unit 1 was extended from December 31, 2013 as specified in the final order in the 2011 IRP to coincide with the decertification date of Plant Branch Units 3 and 4. The decertification and retirement of Plant Kraft Units 1 through 4 (316 MWs) was also approved and will be effective by April 16, 2016, based on a one-year extension of the MATS rule compliance date that was approved by the State of Georgia Environmental Protection Division on September 10, 2013 to allow for necessary transmission system reliability improvements.

Additionally, the Georgia PSC approved Georgia Power's proposed MATS rule compliance plan for emissions controls necessary for the continued operation of Plants Bowen Units 1 through 4, Wansley Units 1 and 2, Scherer Units 1 through 3, and Hammond Units 1 through 4, the switch to natural gas as the primary fuel at Plants Yates Units 6 and 7 and SEGCO's Plant Gaston Units 1 through 4, as well as the fuel switch at Plant McIntosh Unit 1 to operate on Powder River Basin coal. See Note 1 to the financial statements of Georgia Power under "Affiliate Transactions" in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information regarding the fuel switch at SEGCO's generating units.

The Georgia PSC also deferred decisions regarding the appropriate recovery periods for the net book values of Plant Branch Units 3 and 4 and Plant Boulevard Units 2 and 3, deferred environmental construction work in progress for Plant Branch Units 3 and 4 and Plant Yates Units 6 and 7, costs associated with unusable material and supplies, and any over or under recovered cost of removal balances remaining at the unit retirement dates for each retirement unit until the 2013 Rate Case. The Georgia PSC also deferred decisions regarding the recovery of any fuel related costs that could be incurred in connection with the retirement units to be addressed in future fuel cases.

The Georgia PSC also approved an additional 525 MWs of solar generation to be purchased by Georgia Power. The 525 MWs will be subdivided into 425 MWs of utility scale projects and 100 MWs of distributed generation. The 425 MWs of the utility scale projects will be purchased through a competitive request for proposal process which will be open to all qualified market participants, including Georgia Power and its affiliates. The purchases resulting from both programs will be for energy only and recovered through Georgia Power's fuel cost recovery mechanism.

The decertification of these units, fuel conversions, and procurement of additional solar generation are not expected to have a material impact on Southern Company's or Georgia Power's financial statements; however, the ultimate outcome depends on the Georgia PSC's order in the 2013 Rate Case and future fuel cases and cannot be determined at this time.

On April 22, 2013, Georgia Power executed two PPAs to purchase energy from two wind farms in Oklahoma with capacity totaling 250 MWs that will commence in 2016 and end in 2035, and subsequently has requested Georgia PSC approval. During 2013, Georgia Power has executed four PPAs to purchase a total of 169 MWs of biomass capacity and energy from four facilities in Georgia that will commence in 2015 and end in 2035. On May 21, 2013, the Georgia PSC approved two of the biomass PPAs. The two wind PPAs and the two Georgia PSC-approved biomass PPAs result in contractual obligations of approximately $13 million in 2015, $47 million in 2016, $49 million in 2017, and $1.29 billion thereafter. If approved by the Georgia PSC, the additional biomass PPAs will result in contractual obligations of approximately $1 million in 2015, $11 million in 2016, $12 million in 2017, and $249 million thereafter. The four biomass PPAs are contingent upon the counterparty meeting specified contract dates for posting collateral and commercial operation.

Nuclear Construction

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company and Georgia Power under "Retail 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, the eighth Vogtle Construction Monitoring (VCM) report, and pending litigation.

In 2008, Georgia Power, acting for itself and as agent for the Owners, entered into an agreement (Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement) with the Contractor, pursuant to which the 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 Owners agreed to pay a purchase price that is 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. Each Owner is severally (and not jointly) liable for its proportionate share, based on its ownership interest, of all amounts owed to the Contractor under the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement. Georgia Power's proportionate share is 45.7%. The Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement provides for liquidated damages upon the Contractor's failure to fulfill the schedule and performance guarantees. The Contractor's liability to the Owners for schedule and performance liquidated damages and warranty claims is subject to a cap.

Certain payment obligations of Westinghouse and Stone & Webster, Inc. under the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement are guaranteed by Toshiba Corporation and The Shaw Group, Inc., respectively. In the event of certain credit rating downgrades of any Owner, such Owner will be required to provide a letter of credit or other credit enhancement. The Owners may terminate the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement at any time for their convenience, provided that the Owners will be required to pay certain termination costs. The Contractor may terminate the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement under certain circumstances, including certain Owner suspension or delays of work, action by a governmental authority to permanently stop work, certain breaches of the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement by the Owners, Owner insolvency, and certain other events.

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 an NCCR tariff by including the related CWIP accounts in rate base during the construction period. The Georgia PSC approved increases to the NCCR tariff of approximately $223 million, $35 million, and $50 million, effective January 1, 2011, 2012, and 2013, respectively. On November 1, 2013, Georgia Power filed to increase the NCCR tariff by approximately $65 million effective January 1, 2014. Through the NCCR tariff, Georgia Power is collecting and amortizing to earnings approximately $91 million of financing costs, capitalized in 2009 and 2010, over the five-year period ending December 31, 2015, in addition to the ongoing financing costs. At September 30, 2013, approximately $41 million of these 2009 and 2010 costs remained unamortized in CWIP.

In 2009, the NRC issued an Early Site Permit and Limited Work Authorization which allowed limited work to begin on Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4. The NRC certified the Westinghouse Design Control Document, as amended (DCD), for the AP1000 nuclear reactor design, effective December 30, 2011, and issued combined construction and operating licenses (COLs) in February 2012. Receipt of the COLs allowed full construction to begin.

In February 2012, separate groups of petitioners filed petitions in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit seeking judicial review of the NRC's issuance of the COLs and certification of the DCD. These petitions were consolidated in April 2012. Also in February 2012, one of the groups of petitioners filed a motion with the NRC to stay the effectiveness of the COLs pending the outcome of the petitions pending before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Circuit. The NRC denied this motion in April 2012. On May 14, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled in favor of the NRC, upholding the COLs and allowing for the continuation of the construction. On July 23, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit rejected the petitioners' request for rehearing. The deadline for any further appeals expired without the petitioners seeking review.

Georgia Power is required to file semi-annual VCM reports with the Georgia PSC by February 28 and August 31 each year. If the projected certified construction capital costs to be borne by Georgia Power increase by 5% or the projected in-service dates are significantly extended, Georgia Power is required to seek an amendment to the Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 certificate from the Georgia PSC. Accordingly, Georgia Power's eighth VCM report requested an amendment to the certificate to increase the estimated in-service capital cost of Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 to $4.8 billion and to extend the estimated in-service dates to the fourth quarter 2017 and the fourth quarter 2018 for Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4, respectively. Associated financing costs during the construction period are estimated to total approximately $2.0 billion.

On July 30, 2013, Georgia Power and the Georgia PSC staff entered into a stipulation to waive the requirement to amend the Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 certificate, which had been requested in the eighth VCM report, until the completion of Plant Vogtle Unit 3, or earlier if deemed appropriate by the parties. In accordance with the Georgia Integrated Resource Planning Act, any costs incurred by Georgia Power in excess of the certified amount will not be included in rate base, unless shown to be reasonable and prudent; therefore, any related financing costs during construction potentially would be subject to recovery through AFUDC. The stipulation also provides that Georgia Power will combine the ninth and tenth VCM reports scheduled to be filed by August 31, 2013 and February 28, 2014, respectively, into a single report covering the period from January 1 through December 31, 2013 to be filed by February 28, 2014 (February 2014 VCM report). The stipulation was approved by the Georgia PSC on September 3, 2013. As required by the stipulation, Georgia Power filed an abbreviated status update with the Georgia PSC on September 3, 2013, which reflected approximately $2.4 billion of total construction capital costs incurred through June 30, 2013. After the February 2014 VCM report, Georgia Power expects to resume filing semi-annual VCM reports in August 2014. On October 15, 2013, the Georgia PSC voted to approve Georgia Power's eighth VCM report, reflecting construction capital costs incurred, which through December 31, 2012 totaled approximately $2.2 billion.

In July 2012, the Owners and the Contractor began negotiations regarding the costs associated with design changes to the DCD and the delays in the timing of approval of the DCD and issuance of the COLs, including the assertion by the Contractor that the Owners are responsible for these costs under the terms of the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement. The Contractor has claimed that its estimated adjustment attributable to Georgia Power (based on Georgia Power's ownership interest) is approximately $425 million (in 2008 dollars) with respect to these issues. The Contractor also has asserted it is entitled to further schedule extensions. Georgia Power has not agreed with either the proposed cost or schedule adjustments or that the Owners have any responsibility for costs related to these issues. In November 2012, Georgia Power and the other Owners filed suit against the Contractor in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia seeking a declaratory judgment that the Owners are not responsible for these costs. Also in November 2012, the Contractor filed suit against Georgia Power and the other Owners in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia alleging the Owners are responsible for these costs. On August 30, 2013, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed the Contractor's suit, ruling that the proper venue is the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia. The Contractor appealed the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on September 27, 2013. While litigation has commenced and Georgia Power intends to vigorously defend its positions, Georgia Power also expects negotiations with the Contractor to continue with respect to cost and schedule during which negotiations the parties may reach a mutually acceptable compromise of their positions.

In addition, processes are in place that are designed to assure compliance with the requirements specified in the DCD and the COLs, including rigorous inspections by Southern Nuclear and the NRC that occur throughout construction. During the fourth quarter 2012, certain details of the rebar design for the Plant Vogtle Unit 3 nuclear island were evaluated for consistency with the DCD and deviations were identified. On February 26, 2013 and March 1, 2013, the NRC approved the two license amendment requests required to conform the rebar design details to NRC requirements and, on March 14, 2013, the placement of basemat structural concrete for the nuclear island of Plant Vogtle Unit 3 was completed. Additional license amendment requests have been filed and approved or are pending before the NRC. Various design and other issues are expected to arise as construction proceeds, which may result in additional license amendments or require other resolution. If any license amendment requests are not resolved in a timely manner, there may be delays in the project schedule that could result in increased costs either to the Owners, the Contractor, or both.

As construction continues, additional delays in the fabrication and assembly of structural modules, the failure of such modules to meet applicable standards, delays in the receipt of the remaining permits necessary for the operation of Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4, or other issues may further impact project schedule and cost. Additional claims by the Contractor or Georgia Power (on behalf of the Owners) are also likely to arise throughout construction. These claims may be resolved through formal and informal dispute resolution procedures under the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement, but also may be resolved through litigation.

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

Gulf Power

Retail Base Rate Case

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

On July 12, 2013, Gulf Power filed a petition with the Florida PSC requesting an increase in retail rates to the extent necessary to generate additional gross annual revenues in the amount of $74.4 million effective in 2014. The requested increase is expected to provide a reasonable opportunity for Gulf Power to earn a retail ROE of 11.5%. The Florida PSC is expected to make a decision on this matter in the first quarter 2014.

Gulf Power has calculated its revenue deficiency based on the projected period January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014 which serves as the test year. The test year provides the appropriate period of utility operations to be analyzed by the Florida PSC to be able to set reasonable rates for the period the new rates will be in effect. The period January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014 best represents expected future operations of Gulf Power as the regional economy continues to emerge from the recession. The petition also requests that the Florida PSC approve the projected January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014 test year and consent to new rate schedules going into operation as soon as possible.

Additionally, Gulf Power has requested that the Florida PSC approve a step adjustment in base rates for the costs associated with certain transmission system upgrades related to Gulf Power's compliance with the MATS rule. If the Florida PSC determines that these costs are more appropriate for recovery through base rates rather than the Environmental Cost Recovery Clause, the requested step adjustment would increase retail rates to the extent necessary to generate additional gross revenues in the amount of $16.4 million, to be effective July 1, 2015.

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

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.

On November 4, 2013, the Florida PSC approved Gulf Power's annual rate clause request for its fuel, purchased power capacity, environmental, and energy conservation cost recovery factors for 2014. The net effect of the approved changes is a $65.2 million increase in annual revenue for 2014.

Fuel Cost Recovery

See Notes 1 and 3 to the financial statements of Gulf Power under "Revenues" and "Retail Regulatory Matters – Cost Recovery Clauses – Fuel Cost Recovery," respectively, in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information.

Under recovered fuel costs at September 30, 2013 totaled $10.0 million which is included in under recovered regulatory clause revenues on Gulf Power's Condensed Balance Sheet herein. The under recovered fuel cost balance included approximately $26.6 million received during the third quarter 2013 as a result of a payment from one of Gulf Power's fuel vendors pursuant to the resolution of a contract dispute. At December 31, 2012, the over recovered fuel costs totaled $17.1 million, which is included in other regulatory liabilities, current on Gulf Power's Condensed Balance Sheet herein.

Purchased Power Capacity Recovery

See Notes 1 and 3 to the financial statements of Gulf Power under "Revenues" and "Retail Regulatory Matters – Cost Recovery Clauses – Purchased Power Capacity Recovery," respectively, in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information.

Under recovered purchased power capacity costs at September 30, 2013 totaled $6.4 million compared to $0.8 million at December 31, 2012. These amounts are included in under recovered regulatory clause revenues on Gulf Power's Condensed Balance Sheets herein.

Environmental Cost Recovery

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Gulf Power under "Retail Regulatory Matters – Cost Recovery Clauses – Environmental Cost Recovery" in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information.

Under recovered environmental costs at September 30, 2013 totaled $7.9 million compared to $1.9 million at December 31, 2012. These amounts are included in under recovered regulatory clause revenues on Gulf Power's Condensed Balance Sheets herein.

Energy Conservation Cost Recovery

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Gulf Power under "Retail Regulatory Matters – Cost Recovery Clauses – Energy Conservation Cost Recovery" in Item 8 of the Form 10-K for additional information.

Under recovered energy conservation costs at September 30, 2013 totaled $5.7 million compared to $0.8 million at December 31, 2012. These amounts are included in under recovered regulatory clause revenues on Gulf Power's Condensed Balance Sheets herein.

Mississippi Power

Energy Efficiency

On July 11, 2013, the Mississippi PSC approved an energy efficiency and conservation rule requiring electric and gas utilities in Mississippi serving more than 25,000 customers to implement energy efficiency programs and standards. Quick Start Plans, which include a portfolio of energy efficiency programs that are intended to provide benefits to a majority of customers, are required to be filed within six months of the order and will be in effect for two to three years. An annual report addressing the performance of all energy efficiency programs will be required to be filed. Mississippi Power does not currently anticipate that additional annual costs to comply with the rule will be material. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.

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/A for additional information regarding Mississippi Power's base rates.

On January 18, 2013, Mississippi Power filed its annual PEP filing for 2013, which indicated a rate increase of 1.990%, or $15.8 million, annually. On March 4, 2013, Mississippi Power and the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff (MPUS) filed a joint stipulation which revised the annual PEP filing for 2013 to reflect the removal of certain costs related to unresolved matters that are currently under review. On March 5, 2013, the revised annual PEP filing for 2013 was approved by the Mississippi PSC, which resulted in a rate increase of 1.925%, or $15.3 million, annually, with the new rates effective March 19, 2013. Mississippi Power may be entitled to $3.3 million in additional revenues in 2013 as a result of the late implementation of the 2013 PEP rate increase.

On March 15, 2013, Mississippi Power submitted its annual PEP lookback filing for 2012, which indicated a refund due to customers of $4.7 million, which was accrued in retail revenues. On May 1, 2013, the MPUS contested the filing.

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

System Restoration Rider

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Mississippi Power under "Retail Regulatory Matters – System Restoration Rider" in Item 8 of the Form 10-K/A for additional information.

On June 4, 2013, the Mississippi PSC approved Mississippi Power's request to continue a zero System Restoration Rider rate for 2013 and to accrue approximately $3.2 million to the property damage reserve in 2013.

Environmental Compliance Overview Plan

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Mississippi Power under "Retail Regulatory Matters – Environmental Compliance Overview Plan" in Item 8 of the Form 10-K/A for information on Mississippi Power's annual environmental filing with the Mississippi PSC.

In April 2012, the Mississippi PSC approved Mississippi Power's request for a CPCN to construct a flue gas desulfurization system (scrubber) on Plant Daniel Units 1 and 2. In May 2012, the Sierra Club filed a notice of appeal of the order with the Chancery Court of Harrison County, Mississippi (Chancery Court). These units are jointly owned by Mississippi Power and Gulf Power, with 50% ownership each. The estimated total cost of the project is approximately $660 million, with Mississippi Power's portion being $330 million, excluding AFUDC. The project is scheduled for completion in December 2015. Mississippi Power's portion of the cost is expected to be recovered through the ECO Plan following the scheduled completion of the project in December 2015. As of September 30, 2013, total project expenditures were $278.3 million, of which Mississippi Power's portion was $139.2 million, excluding AFUDC of $6.6 million. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.

On August 13, 2013, the Mississippi PSC approved Mississippi Power’s 2013 ECO Plan filing which proposed no change in rates.

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/A for information regarding Mississippi Power's fuel cost recovery.

On March 5, 2013, the Mississippi PSC approved a $35.5 million decrease of the annual retail fuel cost recovery factor, or 4.7% of total 2012 retail revenue, effective March 19, 2013.

At September 30, 2013, the amount of over recovered retail fuel costs included on Mississippi Power's Condensed Balance Sheets herein was $21.8 million compared to $56.6 million at December 31, 2012. Mississippi Power also has wholesale MRA and Market Based (MB) fuel cost recovery factors. At September 30, 2013, the amount of over recovered wholesale MRA and MB fuel costs included on Mississippi Power's Condensed Balance Sheets herein was $9.1 million and $0.6 million, respectively, compared to $19.0 million and $2.1 million, respectively, at December 31, 2012. In addition, at September 30, 2013, the amount of under recovered MRA emissions allowance cost included on Mississippi Power's Condensed Balance Sheets herein was $3.4 million compared to $0.4 million at December 31, 2012. Mississippi Power's operating revenues are adjusted for differences in actual recoverable fuel cost and amounts billed in accordance with the currently approved cost recovery rate. Accordingly, changes in the billing factor have no significant effect on Mississippi Power's revenues or net income, but will affect cash flow.

Ad Valorem Tax Adjustment

On June 4, 2013, the Mississippi PSC approved Mississippi Power's annual ad valorem tax adjustment factor filing for 2013, which included an annual rate increase of 0.9%, or $7.1 million, due to an increase in ad valorem taxes resulting from the expiration of a tax exemption related to Plant Daniel Units 3 and 4.

Storm Damage Cost Recovery

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Mississippi Power under "Retail Regulatory Matters – Storm Damage Cost Recovery" in Item 8 in the Form 10-K/A for information regarding Mississippi Power's storm damage cost recovery. Mississippi Power maintains a reserve to cover the cost of damage from major storms to its transmission and distribution facilities and generally the cost of uninsured damage to its generation facilities and other property. At September 30, 2013, the balance in the storm reserve was $59.2 million.

Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle

See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company under "Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle" in Item 8 of the Form 10-K and Note 3 to the financial statements of Mississippi Power under "Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle" in Item 8 of the Form 10-K/A for information regarding Mississippi Power's construction of the Kemper IGCC.

Kemper IGCC Project Approval

In 2010, the Mississippi PSC issued a CPCN authorizing the acquisition, construction, and operation of the Kemper IGCC (2010 MPSC Order) located in Kemper County, Mississippi. The Sierra Club filed an appeal of the Mississippi PSC's issuance of the CPCN and, in March 2012, the Mississippi Supreme Court reversed the decision of the Chancery Court upholding the 2010 MPSC Order and remanded the matter to the Mississippi PSC. The Mississippi Supreme Court concluded that the 2010 MPSC Order did not cite in sufficient detail substantial evidence upon which the Mississippi Supreme Court could determine the basis for the findings of the Mississippi PSC granting the CPCN. In April 2012, the Mississippi PSC issued a detailed order (2012 MPSC Order) confirming the CPCN for the Kemper IGCC, which the Sierra Club appealed to the Chancery Court. In December 2012, the Chancery Court affirmed the 2012 MPSC Order which confirmed the issuance of the CPCN for the Kemper IGCC. On January 8, 2013, the Sierra Club filed an appeal of the Chancery Court's ruling with the Mississippi Supreme Court. The ultimate outcome of the CPCN challenge cannot be determined at this time.

The Kemper IGCC is currently under construction and will utilize an integrated coal gasification combined cycle technology with an output capacity of 582 MWs. The Kemper IGCC will be fueled by locally mined lignite (an abundant, lower heating value coal) from a mine owned by Mississippi Power and situated adjacent to the Kemper IGCC. The mine, operated by North American Coal Corporation, started commercial operations on June 5, 2013. In connection with the Kemper IGCC, Mississippi Power also is constructing and plans to operate approximately 61 miles of CO₂ pipeline infrastructure. See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company under "Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle – Lignite Mine and CO₂ Pipeline Facilities" in Item 8 of the Form 10-K and Note 3 to the financial statements of Mississippi Power under "Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle – Lignite Mine and CO₂ Pipeline Facilities" in Item 8 of the Form 10-K/A for additional information regarding the lignite mine and the CO₂ pipeline.

Kemper IGCC Construction Schedule and Cost Estimate

The certificated cost estimate of the Kemper IGCC included in the 2012 MPSC Order was $2.4 billion, net of $245 million of grants awarded to the project by the DOE under the Clean Coal Power Initiative Round 2 (DOE Grants), the cost of the lignite mine and equipment, the cost of the CO₂ pipeline facilities, and AFUDC related to the Kemper IGCC. The 2012 MPSC Order approved a construction cost cap of up to $2.88 billion, with recovery of prudently-incurred costs subject to approval by the Mississippi PSC. Exceptions to the $2.88 billion cost cap include the cost of the lignite mine and equipment, the cost of the CO₂ pipeline facilities, AFUDC, and certain general exceptions as contemplated in the Settlement Agreement (described below) and the 2012 MPSC Order, which includes the cost of the lignite mine and equipment, the cost of the CO₂ pipeline facilities, AFUDC, and certain general exceptions, including change of law, force majeure, and beneficial capital (which exists when Mississippi Power demonstrates that the purpose and effect of the construction cost increase is to produce efficiencies that will result in a neutral or favorable effect on customers relative to the original proposal for the CPCN) (Cost Cap Exceptions). Recovery of the Cost Cap Exception amounts remains subject to review and approval by the Mississippi PSC. The Kemper IGCC was originally scheduled to be placed in service in May 2014.

On October 28, 2013, Mississippi Power revised the scheduled in-service date for the Kemper IGCC to the fourth quarter 2014 primarily as the result of lower-than-planned installation levels for piping as well as abnormally wet weather. Also on October 28, 2013, Mississippi Power further revised its cost estimate for the Kemper IGCC to approximately $4.02 billion, net of the DOE Grants and the Cost Cap Exceptions. Estimated amounts of the Cost Cap Exceptions include $245 million for the lignite mine and equipment, $115 million for the CO2 pipeline facilities, $426 million of AFUDC, and $101 million of certain general exceptions. Additionally, Mississippi Power expects to defer $91 million of non-capital Kemper IGCC-related costs to a regulatory asset.

Mississippi Power recorded pre-tax charges to income for estimated probable losses of $78.0 million ($48.2 million after tax) and $462.0 million ($285.3 million after tax) in 2012 and the first quarter 2013, respectively, as a result of additional cost pressures, including labor costs, piping and other material costs, engineering and support costs, and productivity decreases. Mississippi Power recorded a pre-tax charge to income for an estimated probable loss of $450.0 million ($277.9 million after tax) in the second quarter 2013 as a result of additional cost pressures, including labor costs, piping and other material costs, engineering and support costs, start-up costs, and decreases in construction labor productivity. Mississippi Power recorded a pre-tax charge to income for an estimated probable loss of $150.0 million ($92.6 million after tax) in the third quarter 2013 primarily as a result of the schedule extension. Southern Company evaluated the portion of the estimated probable loss related to 2012 and concluded it was not material to Southern Company. Therefore, Southern Company recorded pre-tax charges to income for estimated probable losses of $540.0 million ($333.5 million after tax) in the first quarter 2013, $450.0 million ($277.9 million after tax) in the second quarter 2013, and $150.0 million ($92.6 million after tax) in the third quarter 2013.

Mississippi Power does not intend to seek any joint owner contributions or rate recovery for any costs related to the construction of the Kemper IGCC that exceed the $2.88 billion cost cap, excluding the Cost Cap Exceptions and net of the DOE Grants.

Mississippi Power could experience further construction cost increases and/or schedule extensions with respect to the Kemper IGCC as a result of factors including, but not limited to, labor costs and productivity, adverse weather conditions, shortages and inconsistent quality of equipment, materials, and labor, or contractor or supplier delay or non-performance under construction or other agreements. Furthermore, Mississippi Power could also experience further schedule extensions associated with start-up activities for this "first-of-a-kind" technology, including major equipment failure, system integration, and operations and/or unforeseen engineering problems, which would result in further cost increases and could result in the loss of certain tax benefits related to bonus depreciation. In subsequent periods, any further changes in the estimated costs to complete construction of the Kemper IGCC subject to the $2.88 billion cost cap will be reflected in Southern Company's and Mississippi Power's statements of income and these changes could be material.

As of September 30, 2013, Mississippi Power had incurred total costs of $3.61 billion on the Kemper IGCC. These costs include $2.94 billion for the portion of the Kemper IGCC subject to the construction cost cap, $223.9 million for the lignite mine and equipment, $91.9 million for the CO₂ pipeline facilities, $232.2 million of AFUDC, and $67.6 million of certain general exceptions. Also included in this total is $55.2 million of certain regulatory assets. Of this total, $2.41 billion was included in CWIP (which is net of the DOE Grants and estimated probable losses of $1.14 billion), $59.1 million in other regulatory assets, and $3.9 million in other deferred charges and assets on Southern Company's and Mississippi Power's Condensed Balance Sheets herein, and $1.0 million was previously expensed. Consistent with the treatment of non-capital costs incurred during the pre-construction period, the Mississippi PSC granted Mississippi Power the authority to defer all non-capital Kemper IGCC-related costs to a regulatory asset during the construction period, subject to review of such costs by the Mississippi PSC. This includes deferred costs associated with the generation resource planning, evaluation, and screening activities. The amortization period for any such costs approved for recovery will be determined by the Mississippi PSC at a later date. In addition, Mississippi Power is authorized to accrue carrying costs on the unamortized balance of such regulatory assets at a rate and in a manner to be determined by the Mississippi PSC in future cost recovery mechanism proceedings.

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

Rate Recovery of Kemper IGCC Costs

See "FERC Matters" for additional information regarding Mississippi Power's MRA cost-based tariff relating to recovery of a portion of the Kemper IGCC costs from Mississippi Power's wholesale customers. Rate recovery of the retail portion of the Kemper IGCC is subject to the jurisdiction of the Mississippi PSC. See "Baseload Act" herein for additional information.

On January 24, 2013, Mississippi Power entered into a settlement agreement (Settlement Agreement) with the Mississippi PSC that, among other things, establishes the process for resolving matters regarding cost recovery related to the Kemper IGCC. Under the Settlement Agreement, Mississippi Power agreed to limit the portion of prudently-incurred Kemper IGCC costs to be included in retail rate base to the $2.4 billion certificated cost estimate, plus the Cost Cap Exceptions (excluding AFUDC) as well as any other costs permitted or determined to be excluded from the $2.88 billion cost cap by the Mississippi PSC. Mississippi Power intends to finance (1) prudently-incurred costs in excess of the certificated cost estimate and up to the $2.88 billion cost cap, net of the DOE Grants and the Cost Cap Exceptions, (2) the accrued AFUDC, and (3) exceptions not provided for in the Seven-Year Rate Plan (discussed below) through securitization as provided in State of Mississippi legislation. The rate recovery necessary to recover the annual costs of securitization is expected to be filed and become effective after the Kemper IGCC is placed in service and following completion of the Mississippi PSC's final prudence review of costs for the Kemper IGCC.

Under the terms of the Settlement Agreement, Mississippi Power and the Mississippi PSC agreed to follow certain regulatory procedures and schedules for resolving the cost recovery matters related to the Kemper IGCC. These procedures and schedules include the following: (1) Mississippi Power's filing on January 25, 2013 of a new request to increase retail rates in 2013 by $172 million annually, based on projected investment for 2013, to be recorded to a regulatory liability to be used to mitigate rate impacts when the Kemper IGCC is placed in service; (2) the Mississippi PSC's decision on that matter on March 5, 2013; (3) Mississippi Power's collaboration with the MPUS to file with the Mississippi PSC within three months of the Settlement Agreement a rate recovery plan for the Kemper IGCC for the first seven years of its operation, along with a proposed revenue requirement under such plan for 2014 through 2020 (Seven-Year Rate Plan) (which was made on February 26, 2013 and updated on March 22, 2013 and is expected to be revised later in 2013 in connection with the revised in-service date); (4) the Mississippi PSC's decision on the Seven-Year Rate Plan within four months of that filing (which, given the expected revision, is now expected to occur in the first half of 2014); (5) Mississippi Power's agreement to limit the portion of prudently-incurred Kemper IGCC costs to be included in rate base to the $2.4 billion certificated cost estimate, plus the Cost Cap Exceptions, excluding AFUDC, provided that this limitation will not prevent Mississippi Power from securing alternate financing of up to $1 billion to recover any prudently-incurred Kemper IGCC costs, including plant costs above the $2.4 billion certificated cost estimate and AFUDC, not otherwise recovered in any Mississippi PSC rate proceeding contemplated by the Settlement Agreement; and (6) the Mississippi PSC's completion of its prudence review of the Kemper IGCC costs incurred through 2012 within six months of the Settlement Agreement (which is now expected to occur in the second quarter 2014 for costs incurred through March 31, 2013), an additional prudence review upon considering the Seven-Year Rate Plan for costs incurred through the most recent reporting period (which is now expected to be unnecessary due to the October 15, 2013 revised scheduling order discussed below), and a final prudence review of the remaining project costs within six months of the Kemper IGCC's in-service date (which is now expected to include a prudence review of all costs incurred after March 31, 2013). The Settlement Agreement provides that Mississippi Power may terminate the Settlement Agreement if certain conditions are not met, if Mississippi Power is unable to secure alternate financing for any prudently-incurred Kemper IGCC costs not otherwise recovered in any Mississippi PSC rate proceeding contemplated by the Settlement Agreement, or if the Mississippi PSC fails to comply with the requirements of the Settlement Agreement. Legislation to authorize a multi-year rate plan and legislation to provide for alternate financing through securitization was enacted into law on February 26, 2013. Mississippi Power is currently working with the Mississippi PSC and the MPUS to implement the procedural schedules set forth in the Settlement Agreement and additional variations to the schedule are likely.

On March 5, 2013, the Mississippi PSC issued an order (2013 Kemper IGCC Order) approving a 15% increase in retail rates effective on March 19, 2013, and an additional 3% increase in retail rates effective on January 1, 2014, which collectively are designed to collect $156 million annually beginning in 2014. Amounts collected through these rates are being recorded as a regulatory liability to be used to mitigate customer rate impacts when the Kemper IGCC is placed in service. As of September 30, 2013, $62.0 million had been collected and recorded as a regulatory liability in other regulatory liabilities, deferred in Southern Company's and Mississippi Power's Condensed Balance Sheets herein. On March 21, 2013, a legal challenge to the 2013 Kemper IGCC Order was filed with the Mississippi Supreme Court.

Because the 2013 Kemper IGCC Order did not provide for the inclusion of CWIP in rate base as permitted by the Baseload Act described below, Mississippi Power continues to record AFUDC on the Kemper IGCC during the construction period. Mississippi Power will not record AFUDC on any additional costs of the Kemper IGCC that exceed the $2.88 billion cost cap, except for Cost Cap Exception amounts. Mississippi Power contemplates the continued accrual of AFUDC through the in-service date, subject to approval by the Mississippi PSC.

On March 22, 2013, Mississippi Power, in compliance with the 2013 Kemper IGCC Order, filed a revision to the Seven-Year Rate Plan with the Mississippi PSC for the Kemper IGCC for 2014 through 2020. The Seven-Year Rate Plan, which contemplates Mississippi Power's sale of a 15% undivided ownership interest in the Kemper IGCC, proposes recovery of an annual revenue requirement of approximately $156 million of Kemper IGCC-related operational costs and rate base amounts, including plant costs equal to the $2.4 billion certificated cost estimate. The 2013 Kemper IGCC Order, which increased rates beginning on March 19, 2013, is integral to the Seven-Year Rate Plan, which contemplates amortization of the regulatory liability balance at the in-service date to be used to mitigate customer rate impacts through 2020, based on a fixed amortization schedule that requires approval by the Mississippi PSC. Under the Seven-Year Rate Plan filing, Mississippi Power proposes annual rate recovery to remain the same from 2014 through 2020. While it is the intent of Mississippi Power for the actual revenue requirement to equal the proposed revenue requirement, Mississippi Power proposes that the annual differences through 2020 for certain items contemplated in the Seven-Year Rate Plan will be deferred, subject to accrual of carrying costs, and the cumulative balance will be reviewed at the end of the term of the Settlement Agreement by the Mississippi PSC to determine the disposition of any potential remaining deferred balance.

The revenue requirements set forth in Mississippi Power's Seven-Year Rate Plan assume the sale of a 15% undivided interest in the Kemper IGCC to SMEPA and utilization of bonus depreciation as provided by the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (ATRA), which currently requires that the Kemper IGCC be placed in service in 2014. Mississippi Power plans to amend the Seven-Year Rate Plan described above to reflect changes including the revised in-service date, the change in expected benefits relating to tax credits, and other tax matters, which include ensuring compliance with the normalization requirements of the Internal Revenue Code. Mississippi Power does not expect these revisions to change the total customer rate impacts contemplated in the Seven-Year Rate Plan. See "Tax Incentives" herein for additional information relating to tax credits and bonus depreciation.

On October 15, 2013, the Mississippi PSC issued a revised scheduling order for the prudence review of the Kemper IGCC costs incurred through March 31, 2013. Mississippi Power expects a decision from the Mississippi PSC in the second quarter 2014.

The ultimate outcome of these matters, including the resolution of legal challenges, determinations of prudency and the specific manner of recovery of costs relating to the Kemper IGCC, is subject to further regulatory actions and cannot be determined at this time.

Proposed Sale of Undivided Interest to SMEPA

In 2010, Mississippi Power and SMEPA entered into an asset purchase agreement whereby SMEPA agreed to purchase a 17.5% undivided interest in the Kemper IGCC. In February 2012, the Mississippi PSC approved the sale and transfer of 17.5% of the Kemper IGCC to SMEPA. In June 2012, Mississippi Power and SMEPA signed an amendment to the asset purchase agreement whereby SMEPA extended its option to purchase until December 31, 2012 and reduced its purchase commitment percentage from a 17.5% to a 15% undivided interest in the Kemper IGCC. On December 31, 2012, Mississippi Power and SMEPA agreed to extend SMEPA's option to purchase through December 31, 2013. The sale and transfer of an interest in the Kemper IGCC to SMEPA is subject to approval by the Mississippi PSC.

The closing of this transaction is conditioned upon execution of a joint ownership and operating agreement, receipt of all construction permits, appropriate regulatory approvals, financing, and other conditions. In September 2012, SMEPA received a conditional loan commitment from Rural Utilities Service to provide funding for SMEPA's undivided interest in the Kemper IGCC.

In March 2012, Mississippi Power received a $150 million interest-bearing refundable deposit from SMEPA to be applied to the purchase. While the expectation is that the amount will be applied to the purchase price at closing, Mississippi Power would be required to refund the deposit upon the termination of the asset purchase agreement, within 60 days of a request by SMEPA for a full or partial refund, or within 15 days at SMEPA's discretion in the event that Mississippi Power is assigned a senior unsecured credit rating of BBB+ or lower by S&P or Baa1 or lower by Moody's or ceases to be rated by either of these rating agencies. Given the interest-bearing nature of the deposit and SMEPA's ability to request a refund, the deposit has been presented as a current liability in Southern Company's and Mississippi Power's Condensed Balance Sheets herein and as financing proceeds in Southern Company's and Mississippi Power's Condensed Statements of Cash Flows herein. On July 18, 2013, Southern Company entered into an agreement with SMEPA under which Southern Company has agreed to guarantee the obligations of Mississippi Power with respect to any required refund of the deposit.

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

Nitrogen Supply Agreement

On September 19, 2013, Mississippi Power entered into an agreement to sell the air separation unit for the Kemper IGCC for $79.0 million and also entered into a 20-year nitrogen supply agreement, whereby nitrogen will be supplied to Mississippi Power for the gasification process. The nitrogen supply agreement resulted in a capital lease obligation for Mississippi Power at inception of $82.9 million with an annual interest rate of 4.9%. Assets acquired under capital leases are recorded on Southern Company's and Mississippi Power’s Condensed Balance Sheets herein as utility plant in service, and the related obligations are classified as long-term debt and securities due within one year.

Baseload Act

In 2008, the Baseload Act was signed by the Governor of Mississippi and is designed to enhance the Mississippi PSC's authority to facilitate development and construction of base load generation in the State of Mississippi. The Baseload Act authorizes, but does not require, the Mississippi PSC to adopt a cost recovery mechanism that includes in retail base rates, prior to and during construction, all or a portion of the prudently-incurred pre-construction and construction costs incurred by a utility in constructing a base load electric generating plant. Prior to the passage of the Baseload Act, such costs would traditionally be recovered only after the plant was placed in service. The Baseload Act also provides for periodic prudence reviews by the Mississippi PSC and prohibits the cancellation of any such generating plant without the approval of the Mississippi PSC. In the event of cancellation of the construction of the plant without approval of the Mississippi PSC, the Baseload Act authorizes the Mississippi PSC to make a public interest determination as to whether and to what extent the utility will be afforded rate recovery for costs incurred in connection with such cancelled generating plant. There are legal challenges to the constitutionality of the Baseload Act currently pending before the Mississippi Supreme Court. The ultimate outcome of the legal challenges to this legislation cannot be determined at this time. See "Rate Recovery of Kemper IGCC Costs" herein for additional information.

Tax Incentives

The IRS allocated $133 million (Phase I) and $279 million (Phase II) of Internal Revenue Code Section 48A tax credits to Mississippi Power in connection with the Kemper IGCC. On May 15, 2013, the IRS notified Mississippi Power that no additional tax credits under the Internal Revenue Code Section 48A Phase III were allocated to the Kemper IGCC. As a result of the schedule extension for the Kemper IGCC, the Phase I credits will be recaptured and Mississippi Power has reclassified the recaptured credits as a reduction of prepaid income taxes on Southern Company's and Mississippi Power’s Condensed Balance Sheets herein. Through September 30, 2013, Mississippi Power had recorded tax benefits totaling $276.4 million for the remaining Phase II credits, which will be amortized as a reduction to depreciation and amortization over the life of the Kemper IGCC and are dependent upon meeting the IRS certification requirements, including an in-service date no later than April 19, 2016 and the capture and sequestration (via enhanced oil recovery) of at least 65% of the CO₂ produced by the Kemper IGCC during operations in accordance with the Internal Revenue Code. A portion of the tax credits will be subject to recapture upon successful completion of SMEPA's purchase of an undivided interest in the Kemper IGCC as described above.

On January 2, 2013, the ATRA was signed into law. The ATRA retroactively extended several tax credits through 2013 and extended 50% bonus depreciation for property to be placed in service in 2013 (and for certain long-term production-period projects to be placed in service in 2014), which is expected to apply to the Kemper IGCC.

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

Other Matters

On April 4, 2013, an explosion occurred at Plant Bowen Unit 2 that resulted in substantial damage to the Plant Bowen Unit 2 generator, Plant Bowen's Units 1 and 2 control room and surrounding areas, as well as Plant Bowen's switchyard. Plant Bowen Unit 1 (approximately 700 MWs) was returned to service on August 4, 2013. Plant Bowen Unit 2 (approximately 700 MWs) remains offline pending completion of the repairs. Georgia Power expects that any material repair costs related to the damage will be covered by property insurance. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.