ALABAMA POWER CO

3. CONTINGENCIES, COMMITMENTS, AND GUARANTEES

General Litigation Matters

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

The Registrants intend to dispute the allegations raised in and vigorously defend against the pending legal challenges discussed below; however, the ultimate outcome of each of these matters cannot be determined at this time.

On July 11, 2025, a purported class action complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland against two nuclear consulting companies and all U.S. commercial nuclear power operators, or affiliated entities, including Southern Company. The purported class of plaintiffs includes all persons employed in nuclear power generation by the defendants, including nuclear operators, nuclear engineers, and nuclear technicians, from May 1, 2003 to the present. The complaint alleges that, since at least May 2003, the nuclear power industry conspired to fix and suppress employee compensation for nuclear power generation employees in violation of federal antitrust law. Although not named as defendants, other entities are accused of having

II-150 participated in the plaintiffs' alleged conspiracy. The plaintiffs seek to recover, among other relief, unspecified monetary damages, including treble damages and attorneys' fees, and injunctive relief. On October 15, 2025, Southern Company moved to dismiss the complaint. On November 6, 2025, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint naming Southern Nuclear, among others, as a defendant. On December 19, 2025, Southern Company and Southern Nuclear filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. An adverse outcome could have a material impact on Southern Company's financial statements.

Southern Company and Mississippi Power

In 2010, the DOE, through a cooperative agreement with SCS, agreed to fund $270 million of the Kemper County energy facility through the grants awarded to the project by the DOE under the Clean Coal Power Initiative Round 2. In 2016, additional DOE grants in the amount of $137 million were awarded to the Kemper County energy facility. In 2018, Mississippi Power filed with the DOE its request for property closeout certification under the contract related to the $387 million of total grants received. In 2020, Mississippi Power and Southern Company executed an agreement with the DOE completing Mississippi Power's request, which enabled Mississippi Power to proceed with full dismantlement of the abandoned gasifier-related assets and site restoration activities. In connection with the DOE closeout discussions, in 2019, the Civil Division of the Department of Justice informed Southern Company and Mississippi Power of a civil investigation related to the DOE grants. In 2023, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia unsealed a civil action in which defendants Southern Company, SCS, and Mississippi Power were alleged to have violated certain provisions of the False Claims Act by fraudulently inducing the DOE to disburse funds pursuant to the grants. The federal government declined to intervene in the action. Later in 2023, the plaintiff, a former SCS employee, filed an amended complaint, again alleging certain violations of the False Claims Act. The plaintiff sought to recover all damages incurred personally and on behalf of the federal government caused by the defendants' alleged violations, as well as treble damages and attorneys' fees, among other relief. In February 2024, the defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint. In August 2024, the court granted the defendants' motion in part and denied it in part, dismissing the plaintiff's False Claims Act count along with its accompanying treble damages and attorneys' fees but allowing the employment retaliation claim to proceed. In October 2024, the plaintiff requested interlocutory appeal of the court's decision, which was denied on February 25, 2025, and the defendants asserted counterclaims for conversion and misappropriation of trade secrets. In November 2024, the defendants filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings on the plaintiff's employment retaliation claim. In December 2024, the plaintiff filed a motion to dismiss the defendants' counterclaims. On July 15, 2025, the court denied the plaintiff's motion to dismiss the defendants' counterclaims and the defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings. On August 6, 2025, the plaintiff asserted a counterclaim against the defendants. On September 8, 2025, the defendants renewed their motion for judgment on the pleadings. On November 12, 2025, the parties reached an agreement in principle to resolve the lawsuit. On January 20, 2026, the court entered an order dismissing the lawsuit. The resolution does not have a material impact on Southern Company's or Mississippi Power's financial statements.

In 2022, Mobile Baykeeper filed a citizen suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama alleging that Alabama Power's plan to close the Plant Barry surface impoundment utilizing a closure-in-place methodology violates the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and regulations governing CCR. Among other relief requested, Mobile Baykeeper sought a declaratory judgment that the RCRA and regulations governing CCR were being violated, preliminary and injunctive relief to prevent implementation of Alabama Power's closure plan, and the development of a closure plan that satisfies regulations governing CCR requirements. Later in 2022, Alabama Power filed a motion to dismiss the case. In January 2024, the lawsuit was dismissed without prejudice by the U.S. District Court judge. In February 2024, the plaintiff filed a motion to reconsider, which was denied by the U.S. District Court judge in July 2024. In August 2024, the plaintiff filed a notice of appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit challenging the denial of the motion to reconsider the order of dismissal.

In 2023, the EPA issued a Notice of Potential Violations (NOPV) associated with Alabama Power's plan to close the Plant Barry surface impoundment. In September 2024, Alabama Power reached a settlement with the EPA resolving two of the three allegations in the NOPV related to the groundwater monitoring system and the emergency action plan at the Plant Barry surface impoundment. The settlement did not resolve the EPA's allegation relating to Alabama Power's plan to close the Plant Barry surface impoundment. Alabama Power has affirmed to the EPA its position that it is in compliance with CCR requirements.

On July 29, 2025, Coosa Riverkeeper filed a citizen suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama alleging that Alabama Power's closure of the Plant Gadsden surface impoundment utilizing a closure-in-place methodology violates the RCRA and regulations governing CCR. Among other relief requested, Coosa Riverkeeper seeks declaratory judgment that Alabama Power is in violation of RCRA and regulations governing CCR, and preliminary and injunctive relief to require

II-151

Alabama Power to close the CCR unit and operate a groundwater monitoring system in a different manner to satisfy RCRA and the regulations governing CCR requirements. On September 29, 2025, Alabama Power filed a motion to dismiss the citizen suit.

These matters could have a material impact on Alabama Power's and Southern Company's financial statements, including ARO estimates and cash flows. See Note 6 for a discussion of Alabama Power's ARO liabilities.

Environmental Remediation

The Southern Company system must comply with environmental laws and regulations governing the handling and disposal of waste and releases of hazardous substances. Under these various laws and regulations, the Southern Company system could incur substantial costs to clean up affected sites. The traditional electric operating companies and the natural gas distribution utilities conduct studies to determine the extent of any required cleanup and have recognized the estimated costs to clean up known impacted sites in the financial statements. A liability for environmental remediation costs is recognized only when a loss is determined to be probable and reasonably estimable and is reduced as expenditures are incurred. The traditional electric operating companies and the natural gas distribution utilities in Illinois and Georgia have each received authority from their respective state PSCs or other applicable state regulatory agencies to recover approved environmental remediation costs through regulatory mechanisms. Any difference between the liabilities accrued and costs recovered through rates is deferred as a regulatory asset or liability. These regulatory mechanisms are adjusted annually or as necessary within limits approved by the state PSCs or other applicable state regulatory agencies.

Georgia Power has been designated or identified as a potentially responsible party at sites governed by the Georgia Hazardous Site Response Act and/or by the federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, and assessment and potential cleanup of such sites is expected. For all periods presented, Georgia Power recovered approximately $5 million through the ECCR tariff for environmental remediation.

Southern Company Gas is subject to environmental remediation liabilities associated with former manufactured gas plant sites. Southern Company Gas' accrued environmental remediation liability at December 31, 2025 and 2024 was based on the estimated cost of environmental investigation and remediation associated with these sites.

At December 31, 2025 and 2024, the environmental remediation liability and the balance of under recovered environmental remediation costs were reflected in the balance sheets of Southern Company, Georgia Power, and Southern Company Gas as shown in the table below. Alabama Power and Mississippi Power didnot have environmental remediation liabilities at December 31, 2025 or 2024.

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

II-152

Nuclear Fuel Disposal Costs

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 required the DOE to take title to and dispose of spent nuclear fuel generated at Plants Farley, Hatch, and Vogtle Units 1 and 2 beginning no later than January 31, 1998. The DOE has yet to commence performance of its contractual and statutory obligation to dispose of spent nuclear fuel. Consequently, Alabama Power and Georgia Power pursued and continue to pursue legal remedies against the U.S. government for its partial breach of contract.

In June 2024 and August 2024, the Court of Federal Claims entered final judgments on damages in the third and fourth round of lawsuits against the U.S. government, respectively, awarding Alabama Power a total of approximately $100 million and Georgia Power a total of approximately $121 million (based on its ownership interests), which represent claims for the period from January 1, 2011 through December 31, 2019.

In December 2024, the Alabama PSC directed Alabama Power to return the award, which was reflected as a regulatory liability at December 31, 2024, to customers through bill credits during the months of January, February, and March 2025. During the third quarter 2024, Georgia Power credited the award to accounts where the original costs were charged, which reduced rate base, fuel, and cost of service for the benefit of customers, as previously authorized by the Georgia PSC. As a result of this regulatory treatment, there was no material impact on Southern Company's, Alabama Power's, or Georgia Power's net income.

On September 5, 2025, Alabama Power and Georgia Power filed their fifth round of lawsuits against the U.S. government in the Court of Federal Claims, seeking damages for the costs of continuing to store spent nuclear fuel at Plants Farley, Hatch, and Vogtle Units 1 and 2 for the period from January 1, 2020 through December 31, 2024. Damages will continue to accumulate until the issue is resolved, the U.S. government disposes of Alabama Power's and Georgia Power's spent nuclear fuel pursuant to its contractual obligations, or alternative storage is otherwise provided. No amounts have been recognized in the financial statements as of December 31, 2025 for any potential recoveries from the pending lawsuits.

The final outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time. However, Alabama Power and Georgia Power expect to credit any recoveries for the benefit of customers in accordance with direction from their respective PSC; therefore, no material impact on Southern Company's, Alabama Power's, or Georgia Power's net income is expected.

On-site dry spent fuel storage facilities are operational at allthree plants and can be expanded to accommodate spent fuel through the expected life of each plant.

Nuclear Insurance

Under the Price-Anderson Amendments Act (Act), Alabama Power and Georgia Power maintain agreements of indemnity with the NRC that, together with private insurance, cover third-party liability arising from any nuclear incident occurring at the companies' nuclear power plants. The Act provides funds up to $16.3 billion for public liability claims that could arise from a single nuclear incident. Each nuclear plant is insured against this liability to a maximum of $500 million by American Nuclear Insurers (ANI), with the remaining coverage provided by a mandatory program of deferred premiums that could be assessed, after a nuclear incident, against all owners of commercial nuclear reactors. A company could be assessed up to $166 million per incident for each licensed reactor it operates but not more than an aggregate of $25 million per incident to be paid in a calendar year for each reactor. Such maximum assessment, excluding any applicable state premium taxes, for Alabama Power and Georgia Power, based on its ownership and buyback interests in all licensed reactors, is $332 million and $473 million, respectively, per incident, but not more than an aggregate of $49 million and $71 million, respectively, to be paid for each incident in any one year. Both the maximum assessment per reactor and the maximum yearly assessment are adjusted for inflation at least every five years. The next scheduled adjustment is due no later than November 1, 2028. See Note 5 under "Joint Ownership Agreements" for additional information on joint ownership agreements.

Alabama Power and Georgia Power are members of Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited (NEIL), a mutual insurer established to provide property damage insurance in an amount up to $1.5 billion for members' operating nuclear generating facilities. Additionally, both companies have NEIL policies that currently provide decontamination, excess property insurance, and premature decommissioning coverage up to $1.25 billion for nuclear losses and policies providing coverage up to $750 million for non-nuclear losses in excess of the $1.5 billion primary coverage.

NEIL also covers the additional costs that would be incurred in obtaining replacement power during a prolonged accidental outage at a member's nuclear plant. Members can purchase this coverage, subject to a deductible waiting period of up to 26 weeks, with a maximum per occurrence per unit limit of $490 million. After the deductible period, weekly indemnity payments would be received until either the unit is operational or until the limit is exhausted. Alabama Power and Georgia Power each purchase limits based on the projected full cost of replacement power, subject to ownership limitations, and have each elected a 12-week deductible waiting period for each nuclear plant.

II-153

Under each of the NEIL policies, members are subject to assessments each year if losses exceed the accumulated funds available to the insurer. The maximum annual assessments for Alabama Power and Georgia Power as of December 31, 2025 under the NEIL policies would be $61 million and $84 million, respectively.

Claims resulting from terrorist acts and cyber events are covered under both the ANI and NEIL policies (subject to normal policy limits). The maximum aggregate that NEIL will pay for all claims resulting from terrorist acts and cyber events in any 12-month period is $3.2 billion each, plus such additional amounts NEIL can recover through reinsurance, indemnity, or other sources.

For all on-site property damage insurance policies for commercial nuclear power plants, the NRC requires that the proceeds of such policies shall be dedicated first for the sole purpose of placing the reactor in a safe and stable condition after an accident. Any remaining proceeds are to be applied next toward the costs of decontamination and debris removal operations ordered by the NRC, and any further remaining proceeds are to be paid either to the applicable company or to its debt trustees as may be appropriate under the policies and applicable trust indentures. In the event of a loss, the amount of insurance available might not be adequate to cover property damage and other expenses incurred. Uninsured losses and other expenses, to the extent not recovered from customers, would be borne by Alabama Power or Georgia Power, as applicable, and could have a material effect on Southern Company's, Alabama Power's, and Georgia Power's financial condition, cash flows, and results of operations.

All retrospective assessments, whether generated for liability, property, or replacement power, may be subject to applicable state premium taxes.

Other Matters

Kemper County Energy Facility

In 2023, 2024, and 2025, Mississippi Power recorded charges to income associated with abandonment and related closure costs and ongoing period costs, net of salvage proceeds, for the mine and gasifier-related assets at the Kemper County energy facility. These charges, including related tax impacts, totaled $17 million pre-tax ($12 million after tax) in 2023, $12 million pre-tax ($9 million after tax) in 2024, and $13 million pre-tax ($10 million after tax) in 2025. The pre-tax charges are included in other operations and maintenance expenses on the statements of income. Dismantlement of the abandoned gasifier-related assets was completed at the end of 2025. Site restoration activities for the mine are substantially complete, and any additional costs are expected to be immaterial. See "General Litigation Matters – Southern Company and Mississippi Power" herein for information regarding litigation associated with the Kemper County energy facility.

Department of Revenue Audit

On March 31, 2025, the Mississippi Department of Revenue (Mississippi DOR) completed an audit of sales and use taxes paid by Mississippi Power from October 2019 to July 2024 and entered a final assessment, indicating a total amount due of $29 million, including associated penalties and interest. Mississippi Power did not agree with the audit findings and filed an administrative appeal with the Mississippi DOR on May 29, 2025. On November 4, 2025, Mississippi Power and the Mississippi DOR reached a settlement agreement on an assessment of approximately $13 million including associated penalties and interest, $11 million of which was previously paid by Mississippi Power. On November 5, 2025, Mississippi Power made a final $2 million payment. This matter is now concluded.

Pursuant to an accounting order approved by the Mississippi PSC on January 13, 2026, Mississippi Power deferred $9 million of the agreed-upon assessment related to taxes and associated interest to a regulatory asset for disposition in a future rate proceeding.

Commitments

To supply a portion of the fuel requirements of the Southern Company system's electric generating plants, the Southern Company system has entered into various long-term commitments not recognized on the balance sheets for the procurement and delivery of fossil fuel and, for Alabama Power and Georgia Power, nuclear fuel. The majority of the Registrants' fuel expense for the periods presented was purchased under long-term commitments. Each Registrant expects that a substantial amount of its future fuel needs will continue to be purchased under long-term commitments.

Georgia Power has commitments, in the form of capacity purchases, regarding a portion of a 5% interest in the original cost of Plant Vogtle Units 1 and 2 owned by MEAG Power that are in effect until the later of the retirement of the plant or the latest stated maturity date of MEAG Power's bonds issued to finance such ownership interest. The payments for capacity are required whether or not any capacity is available. Portions of the capacity payments made to MEAG Power for its Plant Vogtle Units 1 and 2 investment relate to costs in excess of Georgia Power's allowed investment for ratemaking purposes. The present value of these portions at the time of the disallowance was written off. Generally, the cost of such capacity is included in purchased power in Southern Company's consolidated statements of income and in purchased power, non-affiliates in Georgia Power's statements of

II-154 income. Georgia Power's capacity payments related to this commitment totaled $3 million, $4 million, and $3 million in 2025, 2024, and 2023, respectively. At December 31, 2025, Georgia Power's estimated long-term obligations related to this commitment totaled $34 million, consisting of $2 million annually for 2026 through 2030 and $24 million thereafter.

See Note 9 for information regarding PPAs accounted for as leases.

Guarantees

SCS may enter into various types of wholesale energy and natural gas contracts acting as an agent for the traditional electric operating companies and Southern Power. Under these agreements, each of the traditional electric operating companies and Southern Power may be jointly and severally liable. Accordingly, Southern Company has entered into keep-well agreements with each of the traditional electric operating companies to ensure they will not subsidize or be responsible for any costs, losses, liabilities, or damages resulting from the inclusion of Southern Power as a contracting party under these agreements.

Alabama Power has guaranteed a $100 million principal amount long-term bank loan SEGCO entered into in 2018 and subsequently extended and amended. Georgia Power has agreed to reimburse Alabama Power for the portion of such obligation corresponding to Georgia Power's proportionate ownership of SEGCO's stock if Alabama Power is called upon to make such payment under its guarantee. At December 31, 2025, the capitalization of SEGCO consisted of $49 million of equity and $70 million of long-term debt that matures in November 2026, on which the annual interest requirement is derived from a variable rate index. SEGCO hadno short-term debt outstanding at December 31, 2025. See Note 7 under "SEGCO" for additional information.

As discussed in Note 9, Alabama Power and Georgia Power have entered into certain residual value guarantees related to railcar leases, with Georgia Power's railcar leases being terminated as of June 2024.