REGULATORY MATTERS	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2026
Regulated Operations [Abstract]
REGULATORY MATTERS	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. However, the GHG emission reduction targets for electric companies were amended by the Utility RELIEF Act, which temporarily lowered said targets from 2.5% per year to 1.75% for each year for the 2027-2029 program cycle, 2% for each year for the 2030-2032 program cycle, and 2.25% for each year for the 2033-2035 program cycle. 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 previously recovered 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. 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. Lost distribution revenue attributable to energy efficiency or demand reduction is recovered only through base rates. Legislation that took effect on July 1, 2024, was estimated 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. In 2021, JCP&L, in connection with Mid-Atlantic Offshore Development, LLC, a transmission company jointly owned by Shell New Energies US LLC and EDF Renewables North America, proposed transmission upgrades to connect offshore wind-generated electricity to the New Jersey power grid. The NJBPU approved portions of the proposal on October 26, 2022, authorizing approximately $723 million of transmission investments and providing JCP&L the option to acquire up to a 20% equity interest in Mid-Atlantic Offshore Development, LLC. On August 22, 2023, FERC approved an abandonment incentive that allowed recovery of certain prudently incurred project costs if the project were cancelled for reasons beyond JCP&L’s control. Beginning in late 2023, major offshore wind developments in New Jersey were cancelled or abandoned. In response to these developments, JCP&L sought guidance from the NJBPU in 2025 regarding project scheduling while continuing to meet its contractual obligations. In August 2025, the NJBPU directed JCP&L to defer certain transmission investments for approximately 2.5 years and directed JCP&L to 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. Capital investments in the transmission projects totaled approximately $200 million as of June 30, 2026. On April 22, 2026, the NJBPU issued an order finding that, among other things, continued investment in certain of the transmission infrastructure to connect off-shore wind generated electricity to the grid is not in the best interest of the state or its ratepayers. In the order, the NJBPU authorized execution of an agreement with PJM to terminate the identified transmission projects, which it filed at FERC on April 23, 2026. The agreement included provisions to the effect that New Jersey’s ratepayers will remain responsible for JCP&L’s prudently incurred costs for the affected projects and a request for approval by June 23, 2026. On May 14, 2026, JCP&L filed supportive comments at FERC. On June 22, 2026, FERC accepted the termination agreement. On July 2, 2026, PJM notified JCP&L that PJM had terminated the agreements that obligated JCP&L to construct the identified projects. JCP&L expects to file an application for FERC authorization to recover the abandoned project costs. 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 June 30, 2026, JCP&L has fully 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 engaged in settlement discussions with the parties and had a meeting with the NJBPU staff on July 17, 2026. JCP&L believes it is probable that it will incur a loss, but based on the status of the settlement discussions is unable to estimate the amount of any penalty and/or predict 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. On May 21, 2026, the NJBPU issued an order concluding that certain nuclear generating units participating in the state’s ZEC program received duplicate compensation during 2024, and directed the owners of the affected generating units to refund the duplicate payments, with applicable interest, to the affected EDCs, including JCP&L. The order further directed that the refunded amounts be returned to customers through reinstated ZEC tariffs beginning June 1, 2026. On May 26, 2026, JCP&L received payment in the amount of $82 million. Also on May 26, 2026, JCP&L made the requisite compliance filing with the NJBPU requesting restoration of its ZEC tariff effective June 1, 2026, and began issuing customer refunds. Refunds are expected to continue through May 31, 2027, or until such time as the refunded balance is exhausted. As of June 30, 2026, JCP&L's regulatory liability associated with these amounts to be refunded to customers was approximately $80 million. 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 CO2 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, order, 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. With these adjustments, the rate case’s outcome is a net decrease in base distribution revenues of the Ohio Companies of approximately $5 million. 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 14, 2026, Retail Energy Supply Association and IGS Energy Supply, LLC jointly filed with the PUCO a request for clarification and application for rehearing, to which the OCC and the Ohio Companies responded on May 26, 2026. On June 10, 2026, the PUCO issued its Fourth Entry on Rehearing, denying the application for rehearing. Following the PUCO’s final decision, parties have a 60-day window to appeal to the Supreme Court of Ohio. 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. On May 11, 2026, the Attorney Examiner issued an entry consolidating the SEET proceedings for calendar years 2021 through 2024. On July 21, 2026, the Ohio Companies and the PUCO staff entered into a settlement, unopposed by OCC, stipulating that the Ohio Companies did not have significantly excessive earnings in 2021, 2022, 2023 or 2024. An evidentiary hearing has been scheduled for August 11, 2026. 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 June 30, 2026, the Ohio Companies have issued approximately $266 million in restitution and refunds. On May 22, 2026, the Ohio Companies filed with the PUCO a three-year rate plan, requesting approval of three consecutive, annual test periods that begin July 1, 2027 and end June 30, 2030. The application proposes a net increase in the Ohio Companies’ base distribution revenues of approximately $254 million in the first year, approximately $59 million in the second year, and approximately $80 million in the third year, with a return on equity of 10.2% and a capital structure of approximately 47% debt and approximately 53% equity for all three Ohio Companies. On June 12, 2026, PUCO staff issued a deficiency letter requesting additional supplementation in certain areas, which the Ohio Companies provided on June 22, 2026. On July 1, 2026, an administrative law judge deemed the application complete and set a procedural schedule. Evidentiary hearings are set to begin March 1, 2027. See Note 10., “Commitments, Guarantees and Contingencies” of the Combined Notes to Financial Statements of the Registrants below for additional details on the ongoing government investigations and ongoing litigation surrounding 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. A hearing was held on June 15, 2026. FE PA reached a comprehensive settlement with certain parties and was filed with the PPUC on July 2, 2026. 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. During the first quarter of 2026, MP and PE incurred significant PJM charges during the Winter Storm Fern weather event totaling $145 million, which were deferred for future recovery as part of the ENEC. 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 May 6, 2026, an evidentiary hearing was held. On February 13, 2026, MP and PE filed a CPCN to construct and operate the 1,200 MW combined cycle gas turbine plant, that will be known as Maidsville Energy Center, and the 70 MWs of solar generation capacity, each referenced in their integrated resource plan above, 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. Evidentiary hearings were held on July 16 and 17, 2026. A final order is expected from the WVPSC in the second half of 2026. On May 15, 2026, MP and PE filed a base rate proceeding proposing an increase in electric rates of $188.4 million, an approximate 10.6% increase in total revenues. The filing includes a base rate increase of $174.6 million and a proposed reliability program and surcharge of $13.8 million. As an alternative, MP and PE requested a phased approach of two increases of $37.9 million effective August 1, 2026, and $37.6 million effective June 1, 2027, with a commitment to abstain from filing another base rate case until April 1, 2028. On June 11, 2026, the WVPSC staff filed a motion to dismiss, which the WVPSC denied on July 2, 2026. The WVPSC held a hearing on the alternative two-phase approach on July 9, 2026. An order is expected from the WVPSC by the end of July 2026. If approved as proposed, new rates associated with the first phase would become effective in August 2026. FERC REGULATORY MATTERS Under the FPA, 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 ERO 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. On June 25, 2026, FERC issued an order on remand directing ATSI to submit a compliance filing within 30 days to remove the RTO incentive and make refunds with interest within 30 days for the period beginning February 24, 2022, through the date of the refund. On July 22, 2026, FERC approved ATSI’s subsequent request to defer the deadline to issue refunds until February 28, 2027, in order to accommodate the PJM and MISO processes for processing refunds as directed by FERC’s order. On July 27, 2026, ATSI submitted to FERC a filing to amend its formula rate to remove on a going-forward basis 50 basis points of authorized earnings in compliance with FERC’s orders. As of June 30, 2026, ATSI’s estimated refund obligation, including interest, totaled approximately $79 million, which is recorded in “Regulatory liabilities” on FirstEnergy’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. 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 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. On June 22, 2026, FERC affirmed its February 2, 2026, order denying the complaint. 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 sought 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. On July 27, 2026, the PJM Board of Managers announced its plans to procure up to 6,800 MW of capacity resources; the costs of which will be allocated to load-serving entities. PJM is expected to file its proposal with FERC on July 31, 2026, and, subject to FERC approval, to conduct the procurement in the fourth quarter of 2026. FirstEnergy is continuing to participate 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 AI 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. 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 June 18, 2026, FERC established a “show cause” proceeding for PJM and the PJM transmission owners, while also establishing similar dockets for each of the other RTOs and ISOs and their respective transmission owners. FERC is using the “show cause” proceeding as a means for the affected transmission owners to submit tariff revisions to address the requirements needed to interconnect and serve customers seeking transmission service on behalf of large loads. PJM and the PJM transmission owners are required to submit an initial compliance filing with FERC by August 17, 2026, unless PJM and the PJM transmission owners notify FERC by August 3, 2026, that they plan to implement FERC’s directives by means of tariff amendments pursuant to FPA Section 205, in which case the compliance filing is due on November 16, 2026. FirstEnergy is unable to predict the outcome of this proceeding. Utility RELIEF Act and Related FERC Complaint The Utility RELIEF Act, which became effective July 1, 2026, requires all transmission utilities within Maryland to participate as members in an RTO. On July 2, 2026, the Maryland Energy Administration, MDOPC, and MDPSC filed a complaint at FERC against PE, Valley Link Maryland, and all other Maryland transmission owners. The complaint seeks a FERC order directing the Maryland transmission owners to remove the RTO 50 bps ROE adder incentive from each of their transmission rates. The Maryland Energy Administration, MDOPC, and MDPSC seek to apply FERC’s rulings that remove the RTO incentive from transmission rates when state laws require RTO participation. The complaint requested that any RTO incentive adders collected after July 1, 2026, be refunded. The deadline for responding to the complaint is August 5, 2026.

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.

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. However, the GHG emission reduction targets for electric companies were amended by the Utility RELIEF Act, which temporarily lowered said targets from 2.5% per year to 1.75% for each year for the 2027-2029 program cycle, 2% for each year for the 2030-2032 program cycle, and 2.25% for each year for the 2033-2035 program cycle. 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 previously recovered 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. 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. Lost distribution revenue attributable to energy efficiency or demand reduction is recovered only through base rates. Legislation that took effect on July 1, 2024, was estimated 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.

In 2021, JCP&L, in connection with Mid-Atlantic Offshore Development, LLC, a transmission company jointly owned by Shell New Energies US LLC and EDF Renewables North America, proposed transmission upgrades to connect offshore wind-generated electricity to the New Jersey power grid. The NJBPU approved portions of the proposal on October 26, 2022, authorizing approximately $723 million of transmission investments and providing JCP&L the option to acquire up to a 20% equity interest in Mid-Atlantic Offshore Development, LLC. On August 22, 2023, FERC approved an abandonment incentive that allowed recovery of certain prudently incurred project costs if the project were cancelled for reasons beyond JCP&L’s control.

Beginning in late 2023, major offshore wind developments in New Jersey were cancelled or abandoned. In response to these developments, JCP&L sought guidance from the NJBPU in 2025 regarding project scheduling while continuing to meet its contractual obligations. In August 2025, the NJBPU directed JCP&L to defer certain transmission investments for approximately 2.5 years and directed JCP&L to 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. Capital investments in the transmission projects totaled approximately $200 million as of June 30, 2026.

On April 22, 2026, the NJBPU issued an order finding that, among other things, continued investment in certain of the transmission infrastructure to connect off-shore wind generated electricity to the grid is not in the best interest of the state or its ratepayers. In the order, the NJBPU authorized execution of an agreement with PJM to terminate the identified transmission projects, which it filed at FERC on April 23, 2026. The agreement included provisions to the effect that New Jersey’s ratepayers will remain responsible for JCP&L’s prudently incurred costs for the affected projects and a request for approval by June 23, 2026. On May 14, 2026, JCP&L filed supportive comments at FERC. On June 22, 2026, FERC accepted the termination agreement. On July 2, 2026, PJM notified JCP&L that PJM had terminated the agreements that obligated JCP&L to construct the identified projects. JCP&L expects to file an application for FERC authorization to recover the abandoned project costs.

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,

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 engaged in settlement discussions with the parties and had a meeting with the NJBPU staff on July 17, 2026. JCP&L believes it is probable that it will incur a loss, but based on the status of the settlement discussions is unable to estimate the amount of any penalty and/or predict other actions that may be imposed by the NJBPU.

On May 21, 2026, the NJBPU issued an order concluding that certain nuclear generating units participating in the state’s ZEC program received duplicate compensation during 2024, and directed the owners of the affected generating units to refund the duplicate payments, with applicable interest, to the affected EDCs, including JCP&L. The order further directed that the refunded amounts be returned to customers through reinstated ZEC tariffs beginning June 1, 2026. On May 26, 2026, JCP&L received payment in the amount of $82 million. Also on May 26, 2026, JCP&L made the requisite compliance filing with the NJBPU requesting restoration of its ZEC tariff effective June 1, 2026, and began issuing customer refunds. Refunds are expected to continue through May 31, 2027, or until such time as the refunded balance is exhausted. As of June 30, 2026, JCP&L's regulatory liability associated with these amounts to be refunded to customers was approximately $80 million.

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 CO2 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, order, 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 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. With these adjustments, the rate case’s outcome is a net decrease in base distribution revenues of the Ohio Companies of approximately $5 million. 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 14, 2026, Retail Energy Supply Association and IGS Energy Supply, LLC jointly filed with the PUCO a request for clarification and application for rehearing, to which the OCC and the Ohio Companies responded on May 26, 2026. On June 10, 2026, the PUCO issued its Fourth Entry on Rehearing, denying the application for rehearing. Following the PUCO’s final decision, parties have a 60-day window to appeal to the Supreme Court of Ohio.

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. On May 11, 2026, the Attorney Examiner issued an entry consolidating the SEET proceedings for calendar years 2021 through 2024. On July 21, 2026, the Ohio Companies and the PUCO staff entered into a settlement, unopposed by OCC, stipulating that the Ohio Companies did not have significantly excessive earnings in 2021, 2022, 2023 or 2024. An evidentiary hearing has been scheduled for August 11, 2026.

On May 22, 2026, the Ohio Companies filed with the PUCO a three-year rate plan, requesting approval of three consecutive, annual test periods that begin July 1, 2027 and end June 30, 2030. The application proposes a net increase in the Ohio Companies’ base distribution revenues of approximately $254 million in the first year, approximately $59 million in the second year, and approximately $80 million in the third year, with a return on equity of 10.2% and a capital structure of approximately 47% debt and approximately 53% equity for all three Ohio Companies. On June 12, 2026, PUCO staff issued a deficiency letter requesting additional supplementation in certain areas, which the Ohio Companies provided on June 22, 2026. On July 1, 2026, an administrative law judge deemed the application complete and set a procedural schedule. Evidentiary hearings are set to begin March 1, 2027.

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. A hearing was held on June 15, 2026. FE PA reached a comprehensive settlement with certain parties and was filed with the PPUC on July 2, 2026. A final order is expected from the PPUC in the fourth quarter of 2026.

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. During the first quarter of 2026, MP and PE incurred significant PJM charges during the Winter Storm Fern weather event totaling $145 million, which were deferred for future recovery as part of the ENEC.

On February 13, 2026, MP and PE filed a CPCN to construct and operate the 1,200 MW combined cycle gas turbine plant, that will be known as Maidsville Energy Center, and the 70 MWs of solar generation capacity, each referenced in their integrated resource plan above, 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. Evidentiary hearings were held on July 16 and 17, 2026. A final order is expected from the WVPSC in the second half of 2026.

Under the FPA, 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 ERO 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.

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. On June 25, 2026, FERC issued an order on remand directing ATSI to submit a compliance filing within 30 days to remove the RTO incentive and make refunds with interest within 30 days for the period beginning February 24, 2022, through the date of the refund. On July 22, 2026, FERC approved ATSI’s subsequent request to defer the deadline to issue refunds until February 28, 2027, in order to accommodate the PJM and MISO processes for processing refunds as directed by FERC’s order. On July 27, 2026, ATSI submitted to FERC a filing to amend its formula rate to remove on a going-forward basis 50 basis points of authorized earnings in compliance with

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.

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.

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.

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 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. On June 22, 2026, FERC affirmed its February 2, 2026, order denying the complaint. FirstEnergy and PE are unable to predict the outcome or estimate the impact that this complaint may have.

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. On July 27, 2026, the PJM Board of Managers announced its plans to procure up to 6,800 MW of capacity resources; the costs of which will be allocated to load-serving entities. PJM is expected to file its proposal with FERC on July 31, 2026, and, subject to FERC approval, to conduct the procurement in the fourth quarter of 2026. FirstEnergy is continuing to participate in the PJM stakeholder processes and will participate in the FERC proceedings.

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 AI 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. 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 June 18, 2026, FERC established a “show cause” proceeding for PJM and the PJM transmission owners, while also establishing similar dockets for each of the other RTOs and ISOs and their respective transmission owners. FERC is using the “show cause” proceeding as a means for the affected transmission owners to submit tariff revisions to address the requirements needed to interconnect and serve customers seeking transmission service on behalf of large loads. PJM and the PJM transmission owners are required to submit an initial compliance filing with FERC by August 17, 2026, unless PJM and the PJM transmission owners notify FERC by August 3, 2026, that they plan to implement FERC’s directives by means of tariff amendments pursuant to FPA Section 205, in which case the compliance filing is due on November 16, 2026. FirstEnergy is unable to predict the outcome of this proceeding.

The Utility RELIEF Act, which became effective July 1, 2026, requires all transmission utilities within Maryland to participate as members in an RTO. On July 2, 2026, the Maryland Energy Administration, MDOPC, and MDPSC filed a complaint at FERC against PE, Valley Link Maryland, and all other Maryland transmission owners. The complaint seeks a FERC order directing the Maryland transmission owners to remove the RTO 50 bps ROE adder incentive from each of their transmission rates. The Maryland Energy Administration, MDOPC, and MDPSC seek to apply FERC’s rulings that remove the RTO incentive from transmission rates when state laws require RTO participation. The complaint requested that any RTO incentive adders collected after July 1, 2026, be refunded. The deadline for responding to the complaint is August 5, 2026.