XML 99 R58.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.25.3

COMMITMENTS, GUARANTEES AND CONTINGENCIES | 9 Months Ended
--- | ---
Sep. 30, 2025
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
COMMITMENTS, GUARANTEES AND CONTINGENCIES | COMMITMENTS, GUARANTEES AND CONTINGENCIES The disclosures in this note apply to all Registrants unless indicated otherwise. The Registrants are subject to certain claims and legal actions arising in the ordinary course of business. In addition, the Registrants’ business activities are subject to extensive governmental regulation related to public health and the environment. The ultimate outcome of such pending or potential litigation against the Registrants cannot be predicted. Management accrues contingent liabilities only when management concludes that it is both probable that a liability has been incurred at the date of the financial statements and the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. When management determines that it is not probable, but rather reasonably possible that a liability has been incurred at the date of the financial statements, management discloses such contingencies and the possible loss or range of loss if such estimate can be made. Any estimated range is based on currently available information and involves elements of judgment and significant uncertainties. Any estimated range of possible loss may not represent the maximum possible loss exposure. Circumstances change over time and actual results may vary significantly from estimates. For current proceedings not specifically discussed below, management does not anticipate that the liabilities, if any, arising from such proceedings would have a material effect on the financial statements. The Commitments, Guarantees and Contingencies note within the 2024 Annual Report should be read in conjunction with this report. GUARANTEES Liabilities for guarantees are recorded in accordance with the accounting guidance for “Guarantees.” There is no collateral held in relation to any guarantees. In the event any guarantee is drawn, there is no recourse to third-parties unless specified below. Letters of Credit (Applies to AEP) Standby letters of credit are entered into with third-parties. These letters of credit are issued in the ordinary course of business and cover items such as natural gas and electricity risk management contracts, construction contracts, insurance programs, security deposits and debt service reserves. AEP has $5 billion and $1 billion revolving credit facilities due in March 2029 and March 2027, respectively. AEP may issue up to $1.2 billion as letters of credit under these revolving credit facilities on behalf of subsidiaries. As of September 30, 2025, no letters of credit were issued under either revolving credit facility. An uncommitted facility gives the issuer of the facility the right to accept or decline each request made under the facility. AEP issues letters of credit on behalf of subsidiaries under six uncommitted facilities totaling $450 million. The Registrants’ maximum future payments for letters of credit issued under the uncommitted facilities as of September 30, 2025 were as follows:
Company |  | Amount |  | Maturity
|  | (in millions) |  |
AEP |  | $ | 364.0 |  |  | October 2025 to September 2026
Indemnifications and Other Guarantees Contracts The Registrants enter into certain types of contracts which require indemnifications. Typically these contracts include, but are not limited to, sale agreements, lease agreements, purchase agreements and financing agreements. Generally, these agreements may include, but are not limited to, indemnifications around certain tax, contractual and environmental matters. With respect to sale agreements, exposure generally does not exceed the sale price. As of September 30, 2025, there were no material liabilities recorded for any indemnifications. AEPSC conducts power purchase-and-sale activity on behalf of APCo, I&M, KPCo and WPCo, who are jointly and severally liable for activity conducted on their behalf. AEPSC also conducts power purchase-and-sale activity on behalf of PSO and SWEPCo, who are jointly and severally liable for activity conducted on their behalf. Master Lease Agreements (Applies to all Registrants except AEPTCo) The Registrants lease certain equipment under master lease agreements. Under the lease agreements, the lessor is guaranteed a residual value up to a stated percentage of the equipment cost at the end of the lease term. If the actual fair value of the leased equipment is below the guaranteed residual value at the end of the lease term, the Registrants are committed to pay the difference between the actual fair value and the residual value guarantee. Historically, at the end of the lease term the fair value has been in excess of the amount guaranteed. As of September 30, 2025, the maximum potential loss by the Registrants for these lease agreements assuming the fair value of the equipment is zero at the end of the lease term was as follows:
Company |  | Maximum Potential Loss
|  | (in millions)
AEP |  | $ | 37.9 |
AEP Texas |  | 8.4 |
APCo |  | 5.3 |
I&M |  | 3.9 |
OPCo |  | 6.4 |
PSO |  | 3.5 |
SWEPCo |  | 4.4 |
ENVIRONMENTAL CONTINGENCIES (Applies to all Registrants except AEPTCo) Federal EPA’s Revised CCR Rule In April 2024, the Federal EPA finalized revisions to the CCR Rule (Legacy CCR Rule) to expand the scope of the rule to include inactive impoundments at inactive facilities (legacy CCR surface impoundments) as well as to establish requirements for currently exempt solid waste management units that involve the direct placement of CCR on the land (CCR management units). The Federal EPA is requiring that owners and operators of legacy surface impoundments comply with all of the Legacy CCR Rule requirements applicable to inactive CCR surface impoundments at active facilities, except for the location restrictions and liner design criteria. The rule establishes compliance deadlines for legacy surface impoundments to meet regulatory requirements, including a requirement to initiate closure within five years after the effective date of the final rule. The rule requires evaluations to be completed at both active facilities and inactive facilities with one or more legacy surface impoundments. Closure may be accomplished by applying an impermeable cover system over the CCR material (closure in place) or the CCR material may be excavated and placed in a compliant landfill (closure by removal). Groundwater monitoring and other analysis over the next three years will provide additional information on the planned closure method. In the second quarter of 2024, AEP evaluated the applicability of the rule to current and former plant sites and recorded a $674 million increase in ARO, based on initial cost estimates primarily reflecting compliance with the rule through closure in place and future groundwater monitoring requirements pursuant to the Legacy CCR Rule. As further groundwater monitoring and other analysis is performed, management expects to refine the assumptions and underlying cost estimates used in recording the ARO. These refinements may include, but are not limited to, changes in the expected method of closure, changes in estimated quantities of CCR at each site, the identification of new CCR management units, among other items. These future changes could have a material impact on the ARO and materially reduce future net income and cash flows and further impact financial condition. AEP will seek cost recovery through regulated rates, including proposal of new regulatory mechanisms for cost recovery where existing mechanisms are not applicable. The rule could have an additional, material adverse impact on net income, cash flows and financial condition if AEP cannot ultimately recover these additional costs of compliance. Several parties, including AEP and one of its trade associations, have filed petitions for review of the Legacy CCR Rule with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. One of the parties also filed a motion to stay the Legacy CCR Rule pending the outcome of the litigation. In November 2024, the court denied the stay motion. The litigation is being held in abeyance until December 15, 2025. The Federal EPA informed the court that it has determined it will reconsider the Legacy CCR Rule in whole or in part, but has not yet decided the full scope of reconsideration. The Federal EPA expects to have determined which aspects of the Legacy CCR Rule it will reconsider, in whole or in part, by January 2026. Reconsideration of the rule will require a new round of notice-and-comment rulemaking. In July 2025, the Federal EPA issued a proposed rule to extend certain compliance deadlines for CCR management units under the Legacy CCR Rule. Management cannot predict the outcome of the litigation or any further actions by the Federal EPA related to the rule. The Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (Superfund) and State Remediation By-products from the generation of electricity include materials such as ash, slag, sludge, low-level radioactive waste and SNF. Coal combustion by-products, which constitute the overwhelming percentage of these materials, are typically treated and deposited in captive disposal facilities or are beneficially utilized. In addition, the generation plants and transmission and distribution facilities have used asbestos, polychlorinated biphenyls and other hazardous and non-hazardous materials. The Registrants currently incur costs to dispose of these substances safely. For remediation processes not specifically discussed, management does not anticipate that the liabilities, if any, arising from such remediation processes would have a material effect on the financial statements. NUCLEAR CONTINGENCIES (Applies to AEP and I&M) I&M owns and operates the Cook Plant under licenses granted by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. I&M has a significant future financial commitment to dispose of SNF and to safely decommission and decontaminate the plant. The licenses to operate the two nuclear units at the Cook Plant expire in 2034 and 2037. Management has started the application process for license extensions for both units that would extend Unit 1 and Unit 2 to 2054 and 2057, respectively. The operation of a nuclear facility also involves special risks, potential liabilities and specific regulatory and safety requirements. By agreement, I&M is partially liable, together with all other electric utility companies that own nuclear generation units, for a nuclear power plant incident at any nuclear plant in the U.S. Should a nuclear incident occur at any nuclear power plant in the U.S., the resultant liability could be substantial. OPERATIONAL CONTINGENCIES Insurance and Potential Losses The Registrants maintain insurance coverage normal and customary for electric utilities, subject to various deductibles. The Registrants also maintain property and casualty insurance that may cover certain physical damage or third-party injuries caused by cybersecurity incidents. Insurance coverage includes all risks of physical loss or damage to nonnuclear assets, subject to insurance policy conditions and exclusions. Covered property generally includes power plants, substations, facilities and inventories. Excluded property generally includes transmission and distribution lines, poles and towers. The insurance programs also generally provide coverage against loss arising from certain claims made by third-parties and are in excess of retentions absorbed by the Registrants. Coverage is generally provided by a combination of the protected cell of EIS and/or various industry mutual and/or commercial insurance carriers. Some potential losses or liabilities may not be insurable or the amount of insurance carried may not be sufficient to meet potential losses and liabilities, including, but not limited to, liabilities relating to a cybersecurity incident, extreme weather, wildfire related liabilities or damage to the Cook Plant and costs of replacement power in the event of an incident at the Cook Plant. Future losses or liabilities, if they occur, which are not completely insured, unless recovered through the ratemaking process, could reduce future net income and cash flows and impact financial condition. Claims for Indemnification Made by Owners of the Gavin Power Station (Applies to AEP) AEP sold the Gavin Power Station to Gavin Power LLC and Lighthouse Generation LLC in 2017. Pursuant to the PSA for that transaction, AEP maintained responsibility to complete closure of the 300 acre unlined fly ash reservoir (FAR) pond in accordance with the closure plan approved by the Ohio EPA and to indemnify the purchasers for that work. In July 2021, closure work was completed by AEP. In November 2022, the Federal EPA issued a final decision denying Gavin Power LLC’s requested extension to allow another pond at the Gavin Power Station, the CCR surface impoundment, to continue to receive CCR and non-CCR waste streams after April 11, 2021 until May 4, 2023 (the Gavin Denial). As part of the Gavin Denial, the Federal EPA made several assertions related to the CCR Rule, including an assertion that the closure of the FAR is noncompliant with the CCR Rule in multiple respects. The owners of the Gavin Power Station have notified AEP that they believe they are entitled to indemnification for any damages that may result from these claims, including any future enforcement or litigation resulting from any determinations of noncompliance by the Federal EPA with various aspects of the CCR Rule consistent with the Gavin Denial. The owners of the Gavin Power Station have also sought indemnification for landowner claims for property damage allegedly caused by modifications to the FAR. Management does not believe that the owners of the Gavin Power Station have any valid claim for indemnity or otherwise against AEP under the PSA. In January 2024, Gavin Power LLC filed a complaint with the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, alleging various violations of the Administrative Procedure Act and asserting that the Federal EPA, through its prior inaction, has waived and is estopped from raising certain objections raised in the Gavin Denial. The complaint does not assert any claims against AEP. In August 2025, the District Court dismissed the complaint at the Federal EPA’s request. Based on the information currently available, management does not believe a loss is probable and cannot determine a range of potential losses, if any, that is reasonably possible of occurring.

X
- References No definition available. + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments, contingencies, and guarantees. + References Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/commonPracticeRef -Topic 450 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/450/tableOfContent Reference 2: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Topic 440 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/440/tableOfContent Reference 3: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Topic 460 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/460/tableOfContent + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsContingenciesAndGuaranteesTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | dtr-types:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration