FIRSTENERGY CORP

8. REGULATORY MATTERS

The disclosures in this note apply to FirstEnergy, with the disclosures under “State Regulation,” “New Jersey,” “FERC Regulatory Matters,” “Transmission ROE Incentive,” “Transmission ROE Methodology,” “Transmission Planning Supplemental Projects,” “Local Transmission Planning Complaint,” “PJM Capacity Market Reforms,” and “Large Load Interconnection Rulemaking” also applicable to JCP&L.

STATE REGULATION

Each of the Electric Companies’ retail rates, conditions of service, issuance of securities and other matters are subject to regulation in the states in which it operates - in Maryland by the MDPSC, in New Jersey by the NJBPU, in Ohio by the PUCO, in Pennsylvania by the PPUC, in West Virginia by the WVPSC and in New York by the NYPSC. The transmission operations of PE and TrAIL in Virginia, ATSI in Ohio, the Transmission Companies in Pennsylvania, PE and MP in West Virginia, and PE in Maryland are subject to certain regulations of the VSCC, PUCO, PPUC, WVPSC, and MDPSC, respectively. In addition, under Ohio law, municipalities may regulate rates of a public utility, subject to appeal to the PUCO if not acceptable to the utility. Further, if any of the FirstEnergy affiliates were to engage in the construction of significant new transmission facilities, depending on the state, they may be required to obtain state regulatory authorization to site, construct and operate the new transmission facility.

MARYLAND

PE operates under MDPSC-approved distribution base rates that were effective as of October 19, 2023, and that were subsequently modified by an MDPSC order dated January 3, 2024, which became effective as of March 1, 2024. PE also provides SOS pursuant to a combination of settlement agreements, MDPSC orders and regulations, and statutory provisions. SOS supply is competitively procured in the form of rolling contracts of varying lengths through periodic auctions that are overseen by the MDPSC and a third-party monitor. Although settlements with respect to SOS supply for PE customers have expired, service continues in the same manner until changed by order of the MDPSC. PE recovers its costs plus a return for providing SOS.

The EmPOWER Maryland program, following passage of the Climate Solutions Now Act of 2022, required annual incremental energy efficiency targets of 2% per year from 2022 through 2024, 2.25% per year in 2025 and 2026, and 2.5% per year in 2027 and thereafter. On August 1, 2023, PE filed its proposed plan for the 2024-2026 cycle as required by the MDPSC and later, at the direction of the MDPSC, PE submitted three scenarios with projected costs over a three-year cycle of $311 million, $354 million, and $510 million, respectively. On December 29, 2023, the MDPSC issued an order approving the $311 million scenario for most programs, with some modifications. On August 15, 2024, PE filed a revised plan for the remainder of the 2024-2026 cycle to comply with refined GHG reduction targets with a total budget of $314 million, which the MDPSC approved on December 27, 2024. PE recovers EmPOWER Maryland program costs with carrying costs on unamortized balances through an annually reconciled surcharge, with certain costs subject to recovery over a five-year amortization period. Lost distribution revenue attributable to energy efficiency or demand reduction is recovered only through base rates. Consistent with an MDPSC order dated December 29, 2022, phasing out the unamortized balances of EmPOWER Maryland investments, PE is required to expense 100% of its EmPOWER Maryland program costs in 2026 and beyond. All previously unamortized costs for prior cycles are to be collected by the end of 2030, consistent with the 2024-2026 order issued on December 29, 2023. Legislation which took effect on July 1, 2024 is expected to reduce the carrying costs on the EmPOWER Maryland unamortized balances for PE by a total of $25 to $30 million over the period of 2024-2030. On July 31, 2024, the MDPSC issued an order implementing revised EmPOWER Maryland surcharge rates for PE in accordance with the new law, denying PE’s request for a hearing that sought to challenge certain portions of the law. On August 30, 2024, PE filed a petition seeking judicial review of its challenge to the law in the Circuit Court for Washington County, Maryland. On August 6, 2025, the Circuit Court for Washington County, Maryland issued an order granting PE’s petition, finding that the legislature may not change terms to apply retroactively to monies already expended. MDPSC and the Maryland Office of People’s Counsel have each appealed the decision. On November 14, 2025, the Appellate Court of Maryland issued an order denying the unopposed motion of the Attorney General of Maryland to Intervene without prejudice to the ability to file an amicus curiae brief, which the Attorney General filed on December 30, 2025. PE's response brief was filed on January 21, 2026.

NEW JERSEY

JCP&L operates under NJBPU approved rates that took effect as of February 15, 2024, and became effective for customers as of June 1, 2024. JCP&L provides BGS for retail customers who do not choose a third-party EGS and for customers of third-party EGSs that fail to provide the contracted service. All New Jersey EDCs participate in this competitive BGS procurement process and recover BGS costs directly from customers as a charge separate from base rates.

On September 17, 2021, in connection with Mid-Atlantic Offshore Development, LLC, a transmission company jointly owned by Shell New Energies US LLC and EDF Renewables North America, JCP&L submitted a proposal to the NJBPU and PJM to build transmission infrastructure connecting offshore wind-generated electricity to the New Jersey power grid. On October 26, 2022, the JCP&L proposal was accepted, in part, in an order issued by NJBPU. The proposal, as accepted, included approximately $723 million in investments for JCP&L to both build new and upgrade existing transmission infrastructure. JCP&L’s proposal projects an investment ROE of 10.2% and includes the option for JCP&L to acquire up to a 20% equity stake in Mid-Atlantic Offshore Development, LLC. The resulting rates associated with the project are expected to be shared among the ratepayers of all New Jersey electric utilities. On April 17, 2023, JCP&L applied for the FERC “abandonment” transmission rates incentive, which would provide for recovery of 100% of the cancelled prudent project costs that are incurred after the incentive is approved, and 50% of the costs incurred prior to that date, in the event that some or all of the project is cancelled for reasons beyond JCP&L’s control. On August 21, 2023, FERC approved JCP&L’s application, effective August 22, 2023.

On October 31, 2023, offshore wind developer, Orsted, announced plans to cease development of two offshore wind projects in New Jersey—Ocean Wind 1 and 2—having a combined planned capacity of 2,248 MWs. On January 30, 2025, and February 25, 2025, Shell New Energies US LLC and EDF Renewables North America respectively announced that each was exiting its Atlantic Shores partnership to construct wind energy off the shore of New Jersey. On June 4, 2025, Atlantic Shores filed a petition with the NJBPU, requesting consent to terminate its 1.5 GW offshore wind project. These cancellations are not expected to directly affect JCP&L’s awarded projects.

On May 23, 2025, JCP&L filed with the NJBPU a motion seeking declaratory guidance in view of recent offshore wind developments, including a shift in federal energy policy toward more traditional energy resources. JCP&L requested that the NJBPU provide guidance either affirming the current project schedule or, alternatively, authorizing JCP&L to modify the schedule. On June 9, 2025, responses to JCP&L’s motion were filed with the NJBPU, including a cross-motion by the New Jersey Division of Rate Counsel to reopen the offshore wind transmission proceeding, which JCP&L opposed. JCP&L advised that it intended to comply with its contractual obligations to construct the transmission project, and that its motion was limited to seeking guidance on the construction milestones. On July 28, 2025, the New Jersey Division of Rate Counsel asked the NJBPU to take judicial notice of a recent NYPSC order terminating its offshore wind transmission infrastructure process in the interest of protecting ratepayers. On August 13, 2025, the NJBPU issued an order requesting that JCP&L delay expenditures of certain of the transmission investment planned by JCP&L for a 2.5-year period, and directing that JCP&L work with NJBPU staff and PJM to ensure alignment as to the work that is to be continued on the original timeline and the work that is to be delayed consistent with the order. On April 22, 2026, the NJBPU issued an order authorizing termination of all but one of the transmission projects that were awarded to JCP&L per the NJBPU’s October 26, 2022 order. On April 23, 2026, the NJBPU and PJM filed the termination agreement at FERC. If FERC approves the termination agreement, JCP&L would expect to file a subsequent abandonment proceeding with FERC.

In February 2025, the NJBPU certified the results of its annual basic generation service auctions through which New Jersey’s four EDCs – including JCP&L – satisfy their generation supply requirements for BGS customers for the period beginning June 1, 2025 through May 31, 2026. The certified results resulted in significant rate increases for New Jersey EDC customers and, by order dated April 23, 2025, the NJBPU directed the four EDCs to submit proposals to mitigate the impact of the rate increases that affected residential customers beginning June 1, 2025. On May 7, 2025, JCP&L filed a petition in response to the April 2025 order, modeling four potential mitigation scenarios. On June 18, 2025, the NJBPU approved a stipulation that included JCP&L, NJBPU Staff and New Jersey Division of Rate Counsel, pursuant to which, among other things, JCP&L agreed to apply a temporary rate credit of $30.00 to each residential electric customer’s monthly bill in July and August 2025 that would be deferred in a regulatory asset and recovered with a charge of $10 applied to each residential bill from September 2025 through February 2026 to recover the amounts deferred, without carry charges, subject to a final reconciliation. As of March 31, 2026, JCP&L had substantially recovered the regulatory asset associated with the temporary rate credits.

On August 13, 2025, the NJBPU issued an Order to Show Cause reviewing JCP&L’s 2024 Annual System Performance Report, which includes information regarding JCP&L’s systems level of electric service reliability performance during the prior calendar year. Failure to attain NJBPU’s minimum reliability levels may subject JCP&L to a penalty. The NJBPU order alleges JCP&L has failed to achieve minimum reliability levels for calendar years 2022, 2023, and 2024, and directed JCP&L to file an answer demonstrating why the NJBPU should not impose certain penalties upon JCP&L for such failure, which JCP&L filed on October 10, 2025. On April 13, 2026, NJBPU Staff issued a letter to JCP&L stating its intention to recommend that the NJBPU impose a penalty against JCP&L in the amount of $44 million, while also requesting a meeting with JCP&L to discuss the potential penalty recommendation and a possible resolution. On April 16, 2026, JCP&L responded in writing to the NJBPU Staff welcoming the opportunity to discuss with NJBPU Staff and disputing the magnitude of the recommended penalty and questioning the approach taken by NJBPU Staff. JCP&L is unable to predict the outcome of this matter, including the amount of any penalty and/or other actions that may be imposed by the NJBPU.

On January 14, 2026, the NJBPU issued an order authorizing JCP&L to modify its Lost Revenue Adjustment Mechanism rate rider in its tariff. The modification allows JCP&L to recover the revenue impact of sales losses of approximately $16 million (pre-tax) primarily resulting from the implementation of JCP&L’s Energy Efficiency and Conservation Plan during the one-year period from July 1, 2023, through June 30, 2024. The modification was effective February 1, 2026.

OHIO

The Ohio Companies operated under ESP IV through May 31, 2024, which provided for the supply of power to non-shopping customers at a market-based price set through an auction process. From June 1, 2024, until January 31, 2025, the Ohio Companies operated under ESP V, as modified by the PUCO, and as further described below. On December 18, 2024, the PUCO approved the Ohio Companies’ notice to withdraw ESP V and approved the Ohio Companies’ proposal for returning to ESP IV, with modifications. ESP IV, as modified, continues the DCR rider, which supports continued investment related to the distribution system for the benefit of customers, with an annual revenue cap of $390 million. In addition, ESP IV, as modified, includes a goal across FirstEnergy to reduce CO 2 emissions by 90% below 2005 levels by 2045; and contributions, totaling $6.39 million per year, to: (a) fund energy conservation, economic development and job retention programs in the Ohio Companies’ service territories; and (b) establish fuel-funds in each of the Ohio Companies’ service territories to assist low-income customers.

On April 5, 2023, the Ohio Companies filed an application with the PUCO for approval of ESP V, for an eight-year term beginning June 1, 2024, and continuing through May 31, 2032. On May 15, 2024, the PUCO issued an order approving ESP V with modifications, which became effective June 1, 2024, and would have continued through May 31, 2029. The Ohio Companies filed an application for rehearing challenging various aspects of the May 15, 2024, but due to the risks and uncertainty resulting from the Ohio Companies’ application for rehearing being denied by operation of law, on October 29, 2024, the Ohio Companies filed a notice of their intent to withdraw ESP V and proposed the terms under which they would resume operating under ESP IV. On December 18, 2024, the PUCO approved the Ohio Companies’ notice of withdrawal. Also on December 18, 2024, the PUCO approved the Ohio Companies’ proposal for returning to ESP IV, with modifications. Consistent with ESP IV, the PUCO authorized the Ohio Companies’ reinstatement of the DCR rider. Additionally, the PUCO ordered that storm costs deferred under ESP V since June 1, 2024, remain on the Ohio Companies’ books and subject to review in a future case. On January 22, 2025, the PUCO approved the Ohio Companies’ revised ESP IV tariffs, effective February 1, 2025, at which time the Ohio Companies resumed operating under ESP IV. On April 7, 2025, certain intervenors filed an appeal to the Supreme Court of Ohio challenging the Ohio Companies’ return to ESP IV. On May 22, 2025, the Ohio Supreme Court granted the Ohio Companies motion to intervene in the appeal. On July 7, 2025, OCC and NOAC filed their Appellants’ brief. Appellees, including the PUCO and the Ohio Companies, filed their briefs on August 26, 2025, to which OCC and NOAC replied on September 15, 2025.

On January 31, 2025, the Ohio Companies filed an application with the PUCO for ESP VI. On May 15, 2025, the Ohio Governor signed HB 15, which repealed the statute authorizing ESPs in Ohio, effective August 14, 2025. On December 17, 2025, the PUCO dismissed the Ohio Companies’ application for ESP VI due to the repeal of the ESP statute.

On March 14, 2025, as directed by the PUCO in its December 18, 2024, order approving the Ohio Companies’ revised ESP IV tariffs, the Ohio Companies filed with the PUCO a request to commence their statutorily required quadrennial review of ESP IV and establish a proposed schedule. On July 10, 2025, the Ohio Companies withdrew the request for the PUCO to establish a procedural schedule following the May 15, 2025 signing by the Ohio Governor of HB 15 ending the statutory mandate to conduct the quadrennial review, effective August 14, 2025. The OCC filed its response to the Ohio Companies’ notice of withdrawal on July 25, 2025, to which the Ohio Companies replied on August 1, 2025. The matter remains pending before the PUCO.

On May 31, 2024, the Ohio Companies filed their application for an increase in base distribution rates based on a 2024 calendar year test period. On November 19, 2025, the PUCO issued an order in the rate case lifting the rate freeze and approving a net increase in base distribution revenues of the Ohio Companies of approximately $34 million, with a return on equity of 9.63% and a hypothetical capital structure of 48.8% debt and 51.2% equity for all three Ohio Companies, which reflects a roll-in of current riders such as DCR and AMI. The PUCO authorized continuance of Rider DCR with a cap increase commensurate with capital investments through January 31, 2025, and approved the Ohio Companies’ proposal to change pension and OPEB recovery to the delayed recognition method. Additionally, the order authorizes recovery of certain deferred costs for storm restoration, operations and maintenance, and energy efficiency programs. As a result of the order, the Ohio Companies recognized a $352 million pre-tax impairment charge related to future recovery disallowances of certain previously capitalized amounts. On November 26, 2025, the Ohio Companies filed proposed compliance tariffs. On December 19, 2025, the Ohio Companies and other parties filed applications for rehearing and on December 29, 2025, the Ohio Companies filed a memorandum against intervenors’ applications for rehearing. On January 7, 2026, the PUCO issued an entry granting rehearing in order to determine whether its November 19, 2025 base rate case opinion and order should be affirmed, abrogated, or modified on rehearing. On February 18, 2026, the PUCO issued an entry on rehearing, which extended the amortization period for recovery of deferred storm restoration costs from five years to twenty-five years, subject to prudency review, and clarified the amount of the authorized increase in Rider DCR revenue caps is $14 million, subject to the Ohio Companies meeting reliability standards. The entry further ordered the Ohio Companies to file revised final tariffs and approved the Ohio Companies’ compliance tariffs, effective March 1, 2026. On March 20, 2026, the Ohio Companies and certain other parties filed with the PUCO second applications for rehearing of the February 18, 2026 entry on rehearing. On April 14, 2026, the PUCO issued an entry on rehearing denying all applications for rehearing.

On May 16, 2022, May 15, 2023, and May 15, 2024, the Ohio Companies filed their SEET applications for determination of the existence of significantly excessive earnings under ESP IV for calendar years 2021, 2022, and 2023, respectively. On May 15, 2025, the Ohio Companies filed their SEET application for determination of the existence of significantly excessive earnings under ESPs IV and V for calendar year 2024. Each application demonstrated that each of the individual Ohio Companies did not have significantly excessive earnings. These matters remain pending before the PUCO.

On January 7, 2026, the PUCO issued an order, which directed the Ohio Companies to pay their customers, among other things, restitution and refunds totaling approximately $275 million ($213 million after-tax), which was recognized in the fourth quarter of 2025. The restitution and refunds are being provided to customers over three billing cycles, which began in February 2026. As of March 31, 2026, the Ohio Companies have issued approximately $163 million in restitution and refunds.

See Note 9., “Commitments, Guarantees and Contingencies” of the Combined Notes to Financial Statements of the Registrants below for additional details on the government investigations and ongoing litigation surrounding the investigation of HB 6.

PENNSYLVANIA

FE PA has five rate districts in Pennsylvania – four that correspond to the territories previously serviced by ME, PN, Penn, and WP and one rate district that corresponds to WP’s service provided to The Pennsylvania State University. The rate districts created by the PA Consolidation will not reach full rate unity until the earlier of 2033 or the conclusion of three base rate cases filed after January 1, 2025. FE PA operates under rates approved by the PPUC, effective as of January 1, 2025. FE PA operates under a DSP through the May 31, 2027 delivery period, which provides for the competitive procurement of generation supply for customers who do not choose an alternative EGS or for customers of alternative EGSs that fail to provide the contracted service.

Pursuant to Pennsylvania Act 129 of 2008 and PPUC orders, the Pennsylvania Companies implemented energy efficiency and peak demand reduction programs with demand reduction targets, relative to 2007-2008 peak demands, at 2.9% MW for ME, 3.3% MW for PN, 2.0% MW for Penn, and 2.5% MW for WP; and energy consumption reduction targets, as a percentage of the Pennsylvania Companies’ historic 2009 to 2010 reference load at 3.1% MWh for ME, 3.0% MWh for PN, 2.7% MWh for Penn, and 2.4% MWh for WP. The fourth phase of FE PA’s energy efficiency and peak demand reduction program, which runs for the five-year period beginning June 1, 2021 through May 31, 2026, was approved by the PPUC on June 18, 2020, providing cost recovery of approximately $390 million to be recovered through Energy Efficiency and Conservation Phase IV Riders for each FE PA rate district.

On November 26, 2025, FE PA submitted a petition for approval of its Phase V Energy Efficiency and Conservation Plan, which includes energy efficiency and peak demand reduction programs with demand reduction targets, relative to 2007-2008 peak demands, at 2.01% MW, and energy consumption reduction targets, as a percentage of FE PA’s historic 2009 to 2010 reference load, at 2.00% MWh. The proposed plan includes cost recovery of approximately $390 million to be recovered through its Phase V Energy Efficiency and Conservation Charge Rider and runs for a five-year period beginning June 1, 2026, through May 31, 2031. Hearings were held on January 29, 2026. The parties reached a full settlement in principle and filed with the PPUC a Joint Petition for Complete Settlement on February 19, 2026. On March 12, 2026, the PPUC issued an order approving the settlement with limited modifications requiring FE PA to file revisions to the plan, which were filed on April 15, 2026.

On February 3, 2026, FE PA filed a proposed DSP for provision of generation for the June 1, 2027 through May 31, 2031 delivery period, to be sourced through competitive procurements for customers who do not receive service from an alternative EGS. Under this DSP, supply would be provided through a mix of 12, 24, and in the case of residential customers, 60-month energy contracts, as well as spot market purchases for industrial customers. Hearings are scheduled to begin on June 15, 2026, and a final order is expected from the PPUC in the fourth quarter of 2026.

WEST VIRGINIA

MP and PE provide electric service to all customers through traditional cost-based, regulated utility ratemaking and operate under WVPSC-approved rates that became effective March 27, 2024 and, for applicable customers, a WVPSC-approved solar surcharge that was most recently adjusted effective January 15, 2026. MP and PE recover net power supply costs, including fuel costs, purchased power costs and related expenses, net of related market sales revenue through the ENEC. MP’s and PE’s ENEC rate is typically updated annually and MP and PE filed their ENEC filing on August 29, 2025, for rates effective January 1, 2026.

On April 21, 2022, the WVPSC issued an order approving, effective May 1, 2022, a tariff to offer solar power on a voluntary basis to West Virginia customers and requiring MP and PE to subscribe at least 85% of the planned 50 MWs of solar generation before seeking approval for surcharge cost recovery. MP and PE must seek separate approval from the WVPSC to recover any solar generation costs in excess of the approved solar power tariff. Two of the five solar generation sites went into service in 2024, with the third in April 2025.

On August 29, 2025, MP and PE filed with the WVPSC their biennial review of their vegetation management program and surcharge. MP and PE have proposed an approximate $3.2 million decrease in the surcharge rates due to an over-recovery balance as of June 30, 2025, and higher costs for fuel and reagents. The WVPSC held a hearing regarding rate matters on December 15, 2025. The WVPSC issued an order on March 26, 2026 approving the MP and PE vegetation management program and granting rate recovery for its costs.

On October 1, 2025, MP and PE filed their integrated resource plan with the WVPSC. To ensure that MP and PE can meet their PJM adequacy requirements, the plan proposes, among other things, near-term market capacity purchases, and the addition of 70 MWs of solar generation by 2028 and 1,200 MWs of natural gas combined cycle generation by 2031. On November 26, 2025, the WVPSC issued a procedural order setting a hearing in May 2026.

On February 13, 2026, MP and PE filed a CPCN to construct and operate a 1,200 MW combined cycle gas turbine plant and 70 MWs of solar generation capacity for an estimated capital investment totaling approximately $2.7 billion as of the date of the filing. The request also includes a surcharge designed to recover financing costs during development and construction of the projects, as well as to transition to recovery in base rates once the projects are placed in-service and approved through a base rate case. Hearings have been scheduled for July 16 and 17, 2026. A final order is expected from the WVPSC in the second half of 2026. See Note 9., “Commitments, Guarantees and Contingencies - Environmental Matters - Clean Water Act" of the Combined Notes to Financial Statements of the Registrants for additional details on the EPA's ELG.

FERC REGULATORY MATTERS

Under the Federal Power Act, FERC regulates rates for interstate wholesale sales and transmission of electric power, regulatory accounting and reporting under the Uniform System of Accounts, and other matters, including construction and operation of hydroelectric projects. With respect to their wholesale services and rates, the Electric Companies, AE Supply and the Transmission Companies are subject to regulation by FERC. FERC regulations require JCP&L, MP, PE and the Transmission Companies to provide open access transmission service at FERC-approved rates, terms and conditions. Transmission facilities of JCP&L, MP, PE and the Transmission Companies are subject to functional control by PJM, and transmission service using their transmission facilities is provided by PJM under the PJM Tariff.

FERC regulates the sale of power for resale in interstate commerce in part by granting authority to public utilities to sell wholesale power at market-based rates upon showing that the seller cannot exert market power in generation or transmission or erect barriers to entry into markets. The Electric Companies and AE Supply each have the necessary authorization from FERC to sell their wholesale power, if any, in interstate commerce at market-based rates, although in the case of the Electric Companies major wholesale purchases remain subject to review and regulation by the relevant state commissions. The Electric Companies and AE Supply are required to renew their respective authorizations every three years, and on December 16, 2025, the companies filed applications for the next renewal period.

Federally enforceable mandatory reliability standards apply to the bulk electric system and impose certain operating, record-keeping and reporting requirements on the Electric Companies, AE Supply, and the Transmission Companies. NERC is the Electric Reliability Organization designated by FERC to establish and enforce these reliability standards, although NERC has delegated day-to-day implementation and enforcement of these reliability standards to six regional entities, including RFC. All of the facilities that FirstEnergy operates are located within the RFC region. FirstEnergy actively participates in the NERC and RFC stakeholder processes, and otherwise monitors and manages its companies in response to the ongoing development, implementation and enforcement of the reliability standards implemented and enforced by RFC.

FirstEnergy believes that it is in material compliance with all currently-effective and enforceable reliability standards. Nevertheless, in the course of operating its extensive electric utility systems and facilities, FirstEnergy occasionally learns of isolated facts or circumstances that could be interpreted as excursions from the reliability standards. If and when such occurrences are found, FirstEnergy develops information about the occurrence and develops a remedial response to the specific circumstances, including in appropriate cases “self-reporting” an occurrence to RFC. Moreover, it is clear that NERC, RFC and FERC will continue to refine existing reliability standards as well as to develop and adopt new reliability standards. Any inability on FirstEnergy’s part to comply with the reliability standards for its bulk electric system could result in the imposition of financial penalties, or obligations to upgrade or build transmission facilities, that could have a material adverse effect on its financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.

Transmission ROE Incentive

On February 24, 2022, the OCC filed a complaint with FERC against ATSI, AEP’s Ohio affiliate and American Electric Power Service Corporation, and Duke Energy Ohio, Inc. asserting that FERC should reduce the ROE utilized in the utilities’ transmission formula rates by eliminating the 50 basis point adder associated with RTO membership, effective February 24, 2022. The OCC contends that this result is required because Ohio law mandates that transmission owning utilities join an RTO and that the 50 basis point adder is applicable only where RTO membership is voluntary. On December 15, 2022, FERC denied the complaint as to ATSI and Duke Energy Ohio, Inc., but granted it as to AEP’s Ohio affiliate. AEP’s Ohio affiliate and OCC appealed FERC’s orders to the Sixth Circuit. On January 17, 2025, the Sixth Circuit ruled that the 50 basis point adder is available only where RTO membership is voluntary, that Ohio law requires Ohio’s transmission utilities to be members of an RTO, and that it was unlawful for FERC to excise the adder from AEP’s Ohio affiliate rates, but not from the Duke Energy Ohio, Inc. and ATSI rates. During 2024, as a result of the ruling, ATSI recognized a $46 million pre-tax charge, with interest, of which

$42 million is reported in “Transmission Revenues” and $4 million is reported in “Miscellaneous income, net” on the FirstEnergy Consolidated Statements of Income and Comprehensive Income at the Stand-Alone Transmission segment, to reflect the expected refund owed to transmission customers back to February 24, 2022. On June 20, 2025 and June 24, 2025, ATSI and AEP’s Ohio affiliate, respectively, applied for the Supreme Court of the U.S. to review the Sixth Circuit’s decision. On November 10, 2025, the Supreme Court of the U.S. denied ATSI’s petition for the court to review the case. On November 13, 2025, the Sixth Circuit issued a mandate sending the case back to FERC for further proceedings.

Transmission ROE Methodology

A proposed rulemaking proceeding concerning transmission rate incentives provisions of Section 219 of the 2005 Energy Policy Act was initiated in March of 2020 and remains pending before FERC. Among other things, the rulemaking explored whether utilities should collect an “RTO membership” ROE incentive adder for more than three years. FirstEnergy is a member of PJM, and its transmission subsidiaries could be affected by the proposed rulemaking. FirstEnergy participated in comments on the supplemental rulemaking that were submitted by a group of PJM transmission owners and by various industry trade groups. If there were to be any changes to FirstEnergy's transmission incentive ROE, such changes will be applied on a prospective basis; provided however, due to the Sixth Circuit’s ruling in the Transmission ROE Incentive matter described above, ATSI is collecting the ROE incentive adder subject to refund.

Transmission Planning Supplemental Projects

On September 27, 2023, the OCC filed a complaint against ATSI, PJM and other transmission utilities in Ohio alleging that the PJM Tariff and operating agreement are unjust, unreasonable, and unduly discriminatory because they include no provisions to ensure PJM’s review and approval for the planning, need, prudence and cost-effectiveness of the PJM Tariff Attachment M-3 “Supplemental Projects.” Supplemental Projects are projects that are planned and constructed to address local needs on the transmission system. The OCC demands that FERC: (i) require PJM to review supplemental projects for need, prudence and cost-effectiveness; (ii) appoint an independent transmission monitor to assist PJM in such review; and (iii) require that Supplemental Projects go into rate base only through a “stated rate” procedure whereby prior FERC approval would be needed for projects with costs that exceed an established threshold. Subsequently, intervenors expanded the scope of this proceeding to all of the transmission utilities in PJM, including JCP&L. ATSI and the other transmission utilities in Ohio and PJM filed comments.

Local Transmission Planning Complaint

On December 19, 2024, the Industrial Energy Consumers of America, a group representing large industrial customers, and state consumer advocates filed a complaint at FERC that asserts that transmission owners are overbuilding “local transmission facilities” with corresponding unjustified increases in transmission rates. The complaint demands that FERC: (i) prohibit transmission owners from planning “local transmission facilities” that are rated at 100 kV or higher; (ii) appoint “independent transmission monitors” to conduct such planning; and (iii) condition construction of local transmission facilities on the facility having been planned by the “independent transmission monitor.” FirstEnergy is participating in this matter through a consortium of PJM transmission owners and through certain trade groups, including EEI. FirstEnergy, together with the PJM transmission owners, filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on March 20, 2025, which is pending before FERC. FirstEnergy is unable to predict the outcome or estimate the impact that this complaint may have on its Transmission Companies, however, whether this lawsuit moves forward could have a material impact on FirstEnergy and its transmission capital investment strategy.

Ghiorzi v. PJM

In December 2023, PJM assigned certain baseline RTEP projects to NextEra Energy Transmission, which subsequently informed PJM that it would not construct the projects. On April 3, 2025, following the reassignment by PJM of certain baseline RTEP projects in Maryland and Virginia to PE, two individuals filed a complaint at FERC challenging this outcome, which FERC denied on February 2, 2026. The complainants asserted that PJM erred in reassigning the work to PE because such reassignment projects: (i) did not reflect the cost estimates or cost caps included in NextEra Energy Transmission’s bid; and (ii) would be constructed with different routing than as originally proposed. On February 2, 2026, FERC denied the complaint and on April 3, 2026, FERC denied the rehearing request filed by the complainants on March 4, 2026. FirstEnergy and PE are unable to predict the outcome or estimate the impact that this complaint may have.

Abandonment Transmission Rate Incentive

On February 26, 2025, PJM completed its 2024 RTEP Open Window 1 process and, among other actions, designated each of ATSI and PE to construct certain transmission projects. On July 11, 2025, ATSI and PE filed a joint application for the abandonment incentive with FERC, which, was approved on September 9, 2025. Effective September 10, 2025, ATSI and PE each became eligible to recover 50% of the project costs incurred prior to September 10, 2025, and 100% of the project costs incurred thereafter for any projects subsequently cancelled for reasons beyond the control of utility management.

PJM Capacity Market Reforms

On January 16, 2026, the Trump administration and the governors of all thirteen PJM states released a Statement of Principles Regarding PJM. This Statement of Principles is designed to, among other things, increase capacity available in the PJM market. PJM is seeking input from its stakeholders on matters related to the Statement of Principles, including: (i) proposals for a backstop capacity auction, price (cap), term, and quantity; (ii) on whether to extend the existing capacity auction price collar; and (iii) accelerating large load interconnections bringing their own generation. FirstEnergy is participating in the stakeholder processes that are described in the Statement of Principles, including by filing comments on March 22, 2026 at FERC asking that FERC set the price collar at a level that is lower than the level proposed in PJM’s filing. On April 10, 2026, PJM announced a “backstop reliability procurement” of up to 14.8 gigawatts of new resources. PJM proposes to procure the resources in two phases. The first phase will run from September 2026 through March 2027, and will consist of PJM facilitating bilateral contracts between resource developers and load. The second phase will run from March 2027 through September 2027 and will consist of PJM procuring new resources on behalf of EDCs that have agreed for PJM to conduct the procurement. PJM plans to file the necessary tariff amendments in June 2026 and asserts that it is looking for FERC authorization by September 2026. FirstEnergy is participating in the PJM stakeholder processes and will participate in the FERC proceedings.

Large Load Interconnection Rulemaking

On October 23, 2025, the U.S. Secretary of Energy directed FERC to conduct a rulemaking procedure to develop regulations that would speed interconnection to the transmission system of large loads, including “Artificial Intelligence” data centers and “hybrid” data center/electric generation facilities. The U.S. Secretary of Energy advanced 14 principles to guide this outcome, including that such large loads should be responsible for paying the costs of any network transmission system upgrades required for interconnection of such large loads, and that these large loads should have the option for building such network transmission upgrades. The U.S. Secretary of Energy requested that FERC take final action by April 30, 2026. On October 27, 2025, FERC noticed the U.S. Secretary of Energy’s directive for comment, and subsequently established November 21, 2025 as the deadline for initial comments and December 5, 2025 as the deadline for reply comments. FET and its transmission affiliates, as well as over 150 other parties, filed comments on the established deadlines. FirstEnergy is unable to predict the outcome of this rulemaking procedure. On April 16, 2026, FERC issued notice of its intent to take action in June 2026. To the extent the new regulations do not permit transmission utilities to fully recover costs associated with transmission network upgrades required to serve new large loads, FirstEnergy’s strategy of investing in transmission could be adversely affected.