COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2026
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Environmental Matters Set forth below are descriptions of contingencies related to environmental matters that may impact the Evergy Companies' operations or their financial results. Management's assessment of these contingencies, which are based on federal and state statutes and regulations, and regulatory agency and judicial interpretations and actions, has evolved over time. These laws, regulations, interpretations and actions can also change, restrict or otherwise impact the Evergy Companies' operations or financial results. The failure to comply with these laws, regulations, interpretations and actions could result in the assessment of administrative, civil and criminal penalties and the imposition of remedial requirements. The Evergy Companies believe that all their operations are in substantial compliance with current federal, state and local environmental standards. There are a variety of final and proposed regulations that could have a material adverse effect on the Evergy Companies' operations and consolidated financial results. Due in part to the complex nature of environmental laws and regulations, the Evergy Companies are unable to assess the impact of potential changes that may develop with respect to the environmental contingencies described below. Ozone Interstate Transport State and Federal Implementation Plans In 2015, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) lowered the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and in 2018 required states to submit Interstate Transport State Implementation Plans (ITSIPs) to comply with the "Good Neighbor Provision" of the Clean Air Act (CAA). Several states, including Missouri, Kansas and Oklahoma submitted ITSIPs. The EPA disapproved ITSIPs for multiple states, including Missouri and Oklahoma, while initially approving the Kansas ITSIP. Disapproval of ITSIPs provides the EPA with authority to implement an Interstate Transport Federal Implementation Plan (ITFIP) to replace them. In April 2022, the EPA published in the Federal Register the proposed ITFIP to resolve outstanding "Good Neighbor" obligations for several states, including Missouri and Oklahoma. In March 2023, the EPA issued a final ITFIP for multiple states, including Missouri and Oklahoma, which imposed reduced ozone season nitrogen oxide (NOx) budgets for Electric Generating Units (EGUs) and imposed more stringent ozone season NOx emission limits. In April 2023, Missouri and Oklahoma challenged the EPA's ITSIP disapprovals and federal appellate courts subsequently stayed the disapprovals for both states. Due to judicial stays of the EPA's ITSIP disapprovals, the statutory conditions required to impose an ITFIP were not satisfied at that time. As a result, Missouri and Oklahoma continue to operate under the existing Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR). In January 2024, the EPA proposed to disapprove the previously approved ITSIPs for several states, including Kansas, which would cause Kansas to be subject to the ITFIP; however, final action has not taken place on this rulemaking. In June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an order granting emergency motions for stay of the final ITFIP pending further review of the ITFIP by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (D.C. Circuit). In March 2025, the EPA announced plans to end the Good Neighbor Rule for the 2015 Ozone NAAQS. In April 2025, the D.C. Circuit granted an EPA request to hold all challenges to the ITFIP in indefinite abeyance. In January 2026, the EPA published in the Federal Register a proposed "Phase 1" reconsideration rule addressing interstate transport requirements for the 2015 NAAQS for Ozone for ten states, including Kansas. The EPA indicated they intend to address additional states, including Missouri, in a separate action. The Phase 1 proposal would withdraw the EPA's proposed disapproval of the ITSIP submissions for five states, including Kansas. As a result, Kansas would be governed by its ITSIP and would not be subject to an ITFIP if this rule is finalized. Until this and future proposals and associated litigation are finalized, the full impact on the Evergy Companies' operations cannot be determined and the cost to comply could be material. Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards In March 2024, the EPA published in the Federal Register the final rule which strengthens the primary annual PM2.5 (particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter) NAAQS by lowering the primary annual PM2.5 NAAQS from 12.0 μg/m3 (micrograms per cubic meter) to 9.0 μg/m3. The final rule took effect in May 2024. In March 2025, the EPA announced its plans to reconsider the 2024 PM2.5 NAAQS. In November 2025, the EPA filed a motion requesting that the D.C. Circuit vacate the 2024 PM2.5 NAAQS, asserting that the prior presidential administration's EPA failed to consider costs during its revision process and therefore did not conduct a thorough review, as required. In June 2026, the D.C. Circuit rejected those arguments, upheld the 2024 PM2.5 NAAQS and denied the EPA's motion for vacatur, leaving the 9.0 μg/m3 standard in effect. In July 2026, following litigation over missed statutory deadlines, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California ordered the EPA to finalize attainment designations for the 2024 PM2.5 NAAQS by February 2027. Due to the uncertainty of the attainment status of portions of the Evergy Companies' service territory, the Evergy Companies are unable to accurately assess the impacts on their operations or consolidated financial results, but the cost to potentially comply with the 2024 PM2.5 NAAQS could be material. Regional Haze Rule In 1999, the EPA finalized the Regional Haze Rule which requires states, in coordination with the EPA and other parties, to develop and implement air quality protection plans to reduce the pollution that causes visibility impairment in "Class I" national parks and wilderness areas. There are 156 Class I areas across the U.S. that must be restored to pristine conditions by the year 2064. Kansas has no Class I areas, while Missouri has two: the Hercules-Glades Wilderness Area and the Mingo Wilderness Area. States are required to submit revisions to their State Implementation Plans (SIPs) every ten years and the first round was due in 2007. The Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) failed to submit a Missouri SIP revision to the EPA by the EPA's revised submittal deadline in August 2022 resulting in a "finding of failure". This finding of failure established a two-year deadline for the EPA to issue a Regional Haze Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) unless a revised SIP is approved. In July 2024, the EPA published in the Federal Register a proposal to partially approve and partially disapprove Missouri's Regional Haze SIP revision. In August 2024, the EPA issued final disapproval of the Kansas Department of Health and Environment's (KDHE) July 2021 SIP revision for failing to conduct certain required analyses. In January 2026, the KDHE submitted a supplemental SIP revision to the EPA addressing those deficiencies, including analyses of Evergy's La Cygne Station, and determined no additional requirements should be necessary for any Kansas emission source. In March 2025, the EPA announced plans to restructure the Regional Haze Program and in October 2025, the EPA published a Notice of Proposed Advanced Rulemaking requesting comments to assist in the development of regulatory changes to the current Regional Haze Program. In December 2025, the EPA issued a final rule extending the SIP revision deadline for the third ten-year implementation period from July 2028 to July 2031. Due to uncertainty regarding the status of the Regional Haze Program and when or if a Kansas or Missouri SIP or FIP is finalized, the overall costs of implementing the rules could be material to the Evergy Companies. Greenhouse Gases Burning fossil fuels releases carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases (GHG). Various regulations under the CAA limit CO2 and other GHG emissions. In 2015, the EPA established new GHG emission standards for fossil-fuel fired EGUs under the CAA. In April 2024, the EPA finalized new GHG emission guidelines that set CO2 emission limitations for new and existing fossil-fuel EGUs. In June 2025, the EPA published a proposed rule to repeal both the 2015 GHG emission standards and the April 2024 GHG emission standards. In the same June 2025 proposed rule, the EPA included an alternative proposal to repeal the most burdensome requirements of the 2024 rule including the elimination of carbon capture and sequestration (CCS). In February 2026, the EPA issued a final rule rescinding the 2009 GHG Endangerment Finding (Endangerment Finding). The Endangerment Finding applies to GHG emissions from new motor vehicles and also provides justification for declaring GHG emissions as a threat to public health and welfare, thereby establishing the basis for regulating GHG emission under the CAA. The rescission of the Endangerment Finding may be used in future rulemaking by the EPA to justify discontinuing the regulation of GHG emissions from the power sector. In May 2026, the EPA submitted the final power-sector GHG regulation to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review prior to issuance. The final rule is expected to generally reflect the 2025 alternative proposal. Due to uncertainty regarding the timing and substance of final EPA action, as well as the potential for judicial review, the Evergy Companies can't currently assess the potential impact on their operations or consolidated financial results, but the cost to comply could be material. Regulation of Coal Combustion Residuals (CCRs) In the course of operating their coal generation plants, the Evergy Companies produce CCRs, including fly ash, gypsum and bottom ash. The EPA published a rule to regulate CCRs in April 2015 that requires additional CCR handling, processing and storage equipment and closure of certain ash disposal units. In April 2024, the EPA finalized an expansion to the CCR regulations focused on legacy surface impoundments and historic placements of CCR. This regulation expands applicability of the 2015 CCR regulation to inactive landfills and beneficial use sites not previously regulated. Litigation could impact the timing or cost to comply. In March 2025, the EPA announced its plans to update the regulations that apply to CCRs, and in January 2026, finalized a rulemaking extending deadlines for compliance with various aspects of the CCR legacy rule. In April 2026, the EPA released a second proposed update to the CCR regulations which requests comment on a number of modifications, including, rescinding the CCR management unit requirements, providing a site-specific approach to CCR unit closure and groundwater monitoring and clarifying the allowed uses of CCR in beneficial uses. It is expected that the EPA will finalize this regulation in late 2026. The Evergy Companies are reviewing this proposal and cannot predict the contents of the final rulemaking. The Evergy Companies have recorded asset retirement obligations (AROs) for their current estimates for the closure of ash disposal ponds, landfills and other historical placements of CCR. The revision of these AROs may be required in the future due to information collected in the CCR legacy rule regulation's Facility Evaluation Reports (FERs), changes in existing CCR regulations, the results of groundwater monitoring of CCR units, changes in interpretation of existing CCR regulations or changes in the timing or cost to close ash disposal ponds and landfills. The revision of AROs for regulated operations has no income statement impact due to the deferral of the adjustments through a regulatory asset. If revisions to these AROs are necessary, the impact on the Evergy Companies' operations or consolidated financial results could be material. Montrose Station CCRs In 2025, three lawsuits, including one seeking class certification, were filed in the Circuit Court of Henry County, Missouri against Evergy Metro and two other defendants alleging unspecified damages resulting from the defendants' alleged unlawful and negligent spreading of CCRs associated with the Montrose Station coal ash landfill. Montrose Station was a coal-fired generating facility which was operated by Evergy Metro until its closure in 2018. Evergy and Evergy Metro are unable to assess the outcome or reasonably estimate any possible damages with respect to the claims. However, Evergy and Evergy Metro believe the claims are without merit and intend to vigorously defend themselves. Other Matters Nuclear Antitrust Class Action In July 2025, a class action complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland alleging violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act in establishing wages for employees at nuclear facilities since 2003. The complaint names 28 defendants, including all 26 owner operators of nuclear facilities in the United States, or affiliated entities, including Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation, which operates Wolf Creek, a nuclear facility in Kansas. Evergy indirectly owns 94% of Wolf Creek, with Evergy Kansas Central and Evergy Metro each owning 47% of the nuclear facility. In August 2026, the case was dismissed without prejudice by the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. Generation Development Agreement As part of Evergy's generation development activities, the Evergy Companies enter into contractual commitments associated with the development and potential acquisition of new generation resources. The Evergy Companies have an agreement with a third-party developer regarding the potential development and acquisition of a generation facility. Under this agreement, if the Evergy Companies elect not to proceed with the project by an applicable deadline, the Evergy Companies could incur a loss of approximately $80 million, representing payments to the third-party developer for costs related to the project. In the event of a decision by the Evergy Companies not to proceed, the agreement includes provisions obligating the third-party developer to seek alternatives for the project or the project assets and would allow the Evergy Companies to recover a share of the payments made to the third-party developer if the developer is able to redeploy some or all of the project assets. A decision on this project could be made at any time but is expected no later than the second quarter of 2027.

Set forth below are descriptions of contingencies related to environmental matters that may impact the Evergy Companies' operations or their financial results. Management's assessment of these contingencies, which are based on federal and state statutes and regulations, and regulatory agency and judicial interpretations and actions, has evolved over time. These laws, regulations, interpretations and actions can also change, restrict or otherwise impact

the Evergy Companies' operations or financial results. The failure to comply with these laws, regulations, interpretations and actions could result in the assessment of administrative, civil and criminal penalties and the imposition of remedial requirements. The Evergy Companies believe that all their operations are in substantial compliance with current federal, state and local environmental standards. There are a variety of final and proposed regulations that could have a material adverse effect on the Evergy Companies' operations and consolidated financial results. Due in part to the complex nature of environmental laws and regulations, the Evergy Companies are unable to assess the impact of potential changes that may develop with respect to the environmental contingencies described below.

In 2015, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) lowered the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and in 2018 required states to submit Interstate Transport State Implementation Plans (ITSIPs) to comply with the "Good Neighbor Provision" of the Clean Air Act (CAA). Several states, including Missouri, Kansas and Oklahoma submitted ITSIPs. The EPA disapproved ITSIPs for multiple states, including Missouri and Oklahoma, while initially approving the Kansas ITSIP. Disapproval of ITSIPs provides the EPA with authority to implement an Interstate Transport Federal Implementation Plan (ITFIP) to replace them. In April 2022, the EPA published in the Federal Register the proposed ITFIP to resolve outstanding "Good Neighbor" obligations for several states, including Missouri and Oklahoma. In March 2023, the EPA issued a final ITFIP for multiple states, including Missouri and Oklahoma, which imposed reduced ozone season nitrogen oxide (NOx) budgets for Electric Generating Units (EGUs) and imposed more stringent ozone season NOx emission limits. In April 2023, Missouri and Oklahoma challenged the EPA's ITSIP disapprovals and federal appellate courts subsequently stayed the disapprovals for both states. Due to judicial stays of the EPA's ITSIP disapprovals, the statutory conditions required to impose an ITFIP were not satisfied at that time. As a result, Missouri and Oklahoma continue to operate under the existing Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR).

In January 2024, the EPA proposed to disapprove the previously approved ITSIPs for several states, including Kansas, which would cause Kansas to be subject to the ITFIP; however, final action has not taken place on this rulemaking. In June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an order granting emergency motions for stay of the final ITFIP pending further review of the ITFIP by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (D.C. Circuit). In March 2025, the EPA announced plans to end the Good Neighbor Rule for the 2015 Ozone NAAQS. In April 2025, the D.C. Circuit granted an EPA request to hold all challenges to the ITFIP in indefinite abeyance.

In January 2026, the EPA published in the Federal Register a proposed "Phase 1" reconsideration rule addressing interstate transport requirements for the 2015 NAAQS for Ozone for ten states, including Kansas. The EPA indicated they intend to address additional states, including Missouri, in a separate action. The Phase 1 proposal would withdraw the EPA's proposed disapproval of the ITSIP submissions for five states, including Kansas. As a result, Kansas would be governed by its ITSIP and would not be subject to an ITFIP if this rule is finalized. Until this and future proposals and associated litigation are finalized, the full impact on the Evergy Companies' operations cannot be determined and the cost to comply could be material.

In March 2024, the EPA published in the Federal Register the final rule which strengthens the primary annual PM2.5 (particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter) NAAQS by lowering the primary annual PM2.5 NAAQS from 12.0 μg/m3 (micrograms per cubic meter) to 9.0 μg/m3. The final rule took effect in May 2024. In March 2025, the EPA announced its plans to reconsider the 2024 PM2.5 NAAQS. In November 2025, the EPA filed a motion requesting that the D.C. Circuit vacate the 2024 PM2.5 NAAQS, asserting that the prior presidential administration's EPA failed to consider costs during its revision process and therefore did not conduct a thorough review, as required. In June 2026, the D.C. Circuit rejected those arguments, upheld the 2024 PM2.5 NAAQS and denied the EPA's motion for vacatur, leaving the 9.0 μg/m3 standard in effect. In July 2026, following litigation over missed statutory deadlines, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California ordered the EPA to finalize attainment designations for the 2024 PM2.5 NAAQS by February 2027. Due to the uncertainty of the attainment status of portions of the Evergy Companies' service territory, the Evergy Companies are unable to accurately assess the impacts on their operations or consolidated financial results, but the cost to potentially comply with the 2024 PM2.5 NAAQS could be material.

In 1999, the EPA finalized the Regional Haze Rule which requires states, in coordination with the EPA and other parties, to develop and implement air quality protection plans to reduce the pollution that causes visibility impairment in "Class I" national parks and wilderness areas. There are 156 Class I areas across the U.S. that must be restored to pristine conditions by the year 2064. Kansas has no Class I areas, while Missouri has two: the Hercules-Glades Wilderness Area and the Mingo Wilderness Area. States are required to submit revisions to their State Implementation Plans (SIPs) every ten years and the first round was due in 2007.

The Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) failed to submit a Missouri SIP revision to the EPA by the EPA's revised submittal deadline in August 2022 resulting in a "finding of failure". This finding of failure established a two-year deadline for the EPA to issue a Regional Haze Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) unless a revised SIP is approved. In July 2024, the EPA published in the Federal Register a proposal to partially approve and partially disapprove Missouri's Regional Haze SIP revision.

In August 2024, the EPA issued final disapproval of the Kansas Department of Health and Environment's (KDHE) July 2021 SIP revision for failing to conduct certain required analyses. In January 2026, the KDHE submitted a supplemental SIP revision to the EPA addressing those deficiencies, including analyses of Evergy's La Cygne Station, and determined no additional requirements should be necessary for any Kansas emission source.

In March 2025, the EPA announced plans to restructure the Regional Haze Program and in October 2025, the EPA published a Notice of Proposed Advanced Rulemaking requesting comments to assist in the development of regulatory changes to the current Regional Haze Program. In December 2025, the EPA issued a final rule extending the SIP revision deadline for the third ten-year implementation period from July 2028 to July 2031. Due to uncertainty regarding the status of the Regional Haze Program and when or if a Kansas or Missouri SIP or FIP is finalized, the overall costs of implementing the rules could be material to the Evergy Companies.

Burning fossil fuels releases carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases (GHG). Various regulations under the CAA limit CO2 and other GHG emissions. In 2015, the EPA established new GHG emission standards for fossil-fuel fired EGUs under the CAA. In April 2024, the EPA finalized new GHG emission guidelines that set CO2 emission limitations for new and existing fossil-fuel EGUs. In June 2025, the EPA published a proposed rule to repeal both the 2015 GHG emission standards and the April 2024 GHG emission standards. In the same June 2025 proposed rule, the EPA included an alternative proposal to repeal the most burdensome requirements of the 2024 rule including the elimination of carbon capture and sequestration (CCS). In February 2026, the EPA issued a final rule rescinding the 2009 GHG Endangerment Finding (Endangerment Finding). The Endangerment Finding applies to GHG emissions from new motor vehicles and also provides justification for declaring GHG emissions as a threat to public health and welfare, thereby establishing the basis for regulating GHG emission under the CAA. The rescission of the Endangerment Finding may be used in future rulemaking by the EPA to justify discontinuing the regulation of GHG emissions from the power sector. In May 2026, the EPA submitted the final power-sector GHG regulation to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review prior to issuance. The final rule is expected to generally reflect the 2025 alternative proposal. Due to uncertainty regarding the timing and substance of final EPA action, as well as the potential for judicial review, the Evergy Companies can't currently assess the potential impact on their operations or consolidated financial results, but the cost to comply could be material.

In the course of operating their coal generation plants, the Evergy Companies produce CCRs, including fly ash, gypsum and bottom ash. The EPA published a rule to regulate CCRs in April 2015 that requires additional CCR handling, processing and storage equipment and closure of certain ash disposal units. In April 2024, the EPA finalized an expansion to the CCR regulations focused on legacy surface impoundments and historic placements of CCR. This regulation expands applicability of the 2015 CCR regulation to inactive landfills and beneficial use sites not previously regulated. Litigation could impact the timing or cost to comply. In March 2025, the EPA announced its plans to update the regulations that apply to CCRs, and in January 2026, finalized a rulemaking extending deadlines for compliance with various aspects of the CCR legacy rule. In April 2026, the EPA released a second proposed update to the CCR regulations which requests comment on a number of modifications, including,

rescinding the CCR management unit requirements, providing a site-specific approach to CCR unit closure and groundwater monitoring and clarifying the allowed uses of CCR in beneficial uses. It is expected that the EPA will finalize this regulation in late 2026. The Evergy Companies are reviewing this proposal and cannot predict the contents of the final rulemaking.

The Evergy Companies have recorded asset retirement obligations (AROs) for their current estimates for the closure of ash disposal ponds, landfills and other historical placements of CCR. The revision of these AROs may be required in the future due to information collected in the CCR legacy rule regulation's Facility Evaluation Reports (FERs), changes in existing CCR regulations, the results of groundwater monitoring of CCR units, changes in interpretation of existing CCR regulations or changes in the timing or cost to close ash disposal ponds and landfills. The revision of AROs for regulated operations has no income statement impact due to the deferral of the adjustments through a regulatory asset. If revisions to these AROs are necessary, the impact on the Evergy Companies' operations or consolidated financial results could be material.

In 2025, three lawsuits, including one seeking class certification, were filed in the Circuit Court of Henry County, Missouri against Evergy Metro and two other defendants alleging unspecified damages resulting from the defendants' alleged unlawful and negligent spreading of CCRs associated with the Montrose Station coal ash landfill. Montrose Station was a coal-fired generating facility which was operated by Evergy Metro until its closure in 2018. Evergy and Evergy Metro are unable to assess the outcome or reasonably estimate any possible damages with respect to the claims. However, Evergy and Evergy Metro believe the claims are without merit and intend to vigorously defend themselves.

In July 2025, a class action complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland alleging violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act in establishing wages for employees at nuclear facilities since 2003. The complaint names 28 defendants, including all 26 owner operators of nuclear facilities in the United States, or affiliated entities, including Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation, which operates Wolf Creek, a nuclear facility in Kansas. Evergy indirectly owns 94% of Wolf Creek, with Evergy Kansas Central and Evergy Metro each owning 47% of the nuclear facility. In August 2026, the case was dismissed without prejudice by the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland.

As part of Evergy's generation development activities, the Evergy Companies enter into contractual commitments associated with the development and potential acquisition of new generation resources. The Evergy Companies have an agreement with a third-party developer regarding the potential development and acquisition of a generation facility. Under this agreement, if the Evergy Companies elect not to proceed with the project by an applicable deadline, the Evergy Companies could incur a loss of approximately $80 million, representing payments to the third-party developer for costs related to the project. In the event of a decision by the Evergy Companies not to proceed, the agreement includes provisions obligating the third-party developer to seek alternatives for the project or the project assets and would allow the Evergy Companies to recover a share of the payments made to the third-party developer if the developer is able to redeploy some or all of the project assets. A decision on this project could be made at any time but is expected no later than the second quarter of 2027.