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 of their operations are in substantial compliance with current federal, state and local environmental standards.

In 2015, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a final rule addressing how state implementation plans (SIPs) can treat excess emissions during SSM events. This rule was referred to as the 2015 SIP Call Rule. The rule required 36 states to submit SIP revisions by November 2016 to remove certain exemptions and other discretionary enforcement provisions that apply to excess emissions during SSM events. Legal challenges ensued and the case was eventually placed in abeyance. In December 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (D.C. Circuit) restarted the litigation and oral arguments were held in March 2022. An additional case was also taking place in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (District Court of Northern California) and in June 2022, the District Court of Northern California entered a final consent decree establishing deadlines for the EPA to take final action on SIP revisions that were submitted in response to the 2015 SIP Call Rule. Deadlines for 26 states and air districts, including Kansas, Missouri and Oklahoma, are listed in the final consent decree. Final action from the EPA could result in required SIP revisions in Oklahoma, Kansas and Missouri which could have a material impact on the Evergy Companies. If the D.C. Circuit overturns the EPA's 2015 SIP Call Rule, the final consent decree's deadlines will no longer be valid.

In April 2023, the EPA released a proposal to tighten certain aspects of the MATS rule. The EPA is proposing to lower the emission limit for particulate matter (PM), require the use of PM continuous emissions monitors (CEMS) and lower the mercury emission limit for lignite coal-fired electric generating units (EGUs). The EPA is also soliciting comment on further strengthening of the PM emission limitation. Due to uncertainty regarding final actions on the MATS rule, the Evergy Companies are unable to accurately assess the impacts of these potential EPA actions on their operations or consolidated financial results, but the cost to comply with the emission limitations as proposed do not appear to be material.

In 2015, the EPA lowered the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) from 75 ppb to 70 ppb. Impacted states were required to submit ITSIPs in 2018 to comply with the "Good Neighbor Provision" of the Clean Air Act (CAA). The EPA did not act on these ITSIP submissions by the deadline established in the CAA and entered consent decrees establishing deadlines to take final action on various ITSIPs. In February 2022, the EPA published a proposed rule to disapprove the ITSIPs submitted by nineteen states including Missouri and Oklahoma. In April 2022, the EPA published a final approval of the Kansas ITSIP in the Federal Register. The Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) submitted a supplemental ITSIP to the EPA on November 1, 2022. In February 2023, the EPA published a final rule disapproving the ITSIPs submitted by 19 states, including the final disapproval of the Missouri and Oklahoma ITSIPs. In April 2023, the Attorneys General of Missouri and Oklahoma filed Petitions for Review in the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Eighth and Tenth Circuits, respectively, challenging the EPA's disapproval. In May 2023, the Eighth Circuit granted a stay of the EPA's disapproval of the Missouri ITSIP. Due to uncertainty regarding the stay of the EPA's disapproval of the Missouri ITSIP, the Evergy Companies are unable to accurately assess the impact on their operations or consolidated financial results, but the cost to comply could be material. Similarly, in July 2023, the Tenth Circuit granted a stay of the EPA's disapproval of the Oklahoma ITSIP. In January 2024, the EPA proposed to disapprove the ITSIP for Kansas and four other states. The Kansas ITSIP was previously approved in April 2022. The Evergy Companies are in the process of reviewing this proposed disapproval of the Kansas ITSIP.

In April 2022, the EPA published in the Federal Register the proposed ITFIP to resolve outstanding "Good Neighbor" obligations with respect to the 2015 Ozone NAAQS for 26 states including Missouri and Oklahoma. This ITFIP would establish a revised Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) ozone season nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions trading program for electric generating units (EGUs) beginning in 2023 and would limit ozone season NOx emissions from certain industrial stationary sources beginning in 2026. The proposed rule would also establish a new daily backstop NOx emissions rate limit for applicable coal-fired units larger than 100 MW, as well as unit-specific NOx emission rate limits for certain industrial emission units and would feature "dynamic" adjustments of emission budgets for EGUs beginning with ozone season 2025. The proposed ITFIP includes reductions to the state ozone season NOx budgets for Missouri and Oklahoma beginning in 2023 with additional reductions in future years. The Evergy Companies provided formal comments as part of the rulemaking process. In March 2023, the EPA issued the final ITFIPs for twenty-three states, including Missouri and Oklahoma, which included reduced ozone season NOx budgets for EGUs in Missouri, Oklahoma and other states, and included other features and requirements that were in the proposed version of the rule. Because the EPA's authority to impose an ITFIP for a state is triggered by the state's failure to submit an ITSIP addressing NAAQS by the statutory deadline or disapproval of an ITSIP, the EPA lacks authority under the Clean Air Act to impose an ITFIP on a state for which SIP disapprovals have been stayed by the courts. Accordingly, the EPA issued interim final rules staying the effectiveness of the ITFIP in both Missouri and Oklahoma while the stays issued by the Eighth and Tenth Circuits in the ITSIP disapproval cases remain in place. During this time, both states will continue to operate under the existing CSAPR program. While Kansas was not originally included in the ITFIP, in January 2024, the EPA issued a proposal to include Kansas in the ITFIP. If finalized, the ITFIP for Kansas would become effective for the 2025 ozone season beginning in May 2025. The Evergy Companies are in the process of reviewing the details of this proposal; however, the impact on the Evergy Companies' operations and the cost to comply could be material.

In February 2024, the EPA finalized a rule strengthening the primary annual PM2.5 (particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter) NAAQS. The EPA is lowering the primary annual PM2.5 NAAQS from 12.0 µg/m3 (micrograms per cubic meter) to 9.0 µg/m3. The final rule is expected to take effect 60 days after publication in the Federal Register. The Evergy Companies are in the process of reviewing this final rule, however, due to uncertainty regarding the implementation of this final rule, the Evergy Companies are unable to accurately assess the impacts on their operations or consolidated financial results, but the cost to comply with lower PM2.5 NAAQS could be material.

In 1999, the EPA finalized the Regional Haze Rule which aims to restore national parks and wilderness areas to pristine conditions. The rule requires states in coordination with the EPA, the National Park Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Forest Service, and other interested parties to develop and implement air quality protection plans to reduce the pollution that causes visibility impairment. There are 156 "Class I" areas across the U.S. that must be restored to pristine conditions by the year 2064. There are no Class I areas in Kansas, whereas Missouri has two: the Hercules-Glades Wilderness Area and the Mingo Wilderness Area. States must submit revisions to their Regional Haze Rule SIPs every ten years and the first round was due in 2007. For the second ten-year implementation period, the EPA issued a final rule revision in 2017 that allowed states to submit their SIP revisions by July 2021. The Evergy Companies have been in contact with the Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) and MDNR as they worked to draft their SIP revisions. The Missouri SIP revision does not require any additional reductions from the Evergy Companies' generating units in the state. MDNR submitted the Missouri SIP revision to the EPA in August 2022, however, they failed to do so by the EPA's revised submittal deadline in August 2022. As a result, in August 2022, the EPA published "finding of failure" with respect to Missouri and fourteen other states for failing to submit their Regional Haze SIP revisions by the applicable deadline. This finding of failure established a two-year deadline for the EPA to issue a Regional Haze federal implementation plan (FIP) for each state unless the state submits and the EPA approves a revised SIP that meets all applicable requirements before the EPA issues the FIP. The Kansas SIP revision was placed on public notice in June 2021 and requested no additional emission reductions by electric utilities based on the significant reductions that were achieved during the first implementation period. The EPA provided comments on the Kansas SIP revision in June 2021 that each state is statutorily required to conduct a "four-factor analysis" on at least two sources within the state

to help determine if further emission reductions are necessary. The EPA also stated it would be difficult to approve the Kansas SIP revision if at least two four-factor analyses are not conducted on Kansas emission sources. KDHE submitted the Kansas SIP revision in July 2021. In January 2024, the EPA issued a proposal to disapprove the Kansas SIP revision for failing to conduct a four-factor analysis for at least two emission sources in Kansas. If a Kansas generating unit of the Evergy Companies is selected for analysis, the possibility exists that the state or the EPA, through a revised SIP or a FIP, could determine that additional operational or physical modifications are required on the generating unit to further reduce emissions. The overall cost of those modifications could be material to the Evergy Companies.

Burning coal and other fossil fuels releases carbon dioxide (CO2) and other gases referred to as greenhouse gases (GHG). Various regulations under the CAA limit CO2 and other GHG emissions, and in addition, other measures are being imposed or offered by individual states, municipalities and regional agreements with the goal of reducing GHG emissions. In May 2023, the EPA proposed GHG regulations that would apply to fossil fuel fired EGUs. The proposal would set CO2 limitations on emissions from new gas-fired combustion turbines, existing coal, oil and gas-fired steam generating units, and certain existing gas-fired combustion turbines. The proposed CO2 limitations assume technologies such as carbon capture and sequestration/storage (CCS), hydrogen co-firing, and natural gas co-firing will be utilized. A final rule is expected in the first half of 2024.

The Evergy Companies discharge some of the water used in generation and other operations containing substances deemed to be pollutants. A November 2015 EPA rule applicable to steam-electric power generating plants establishes effluent limitations guidelines (ELG) and standards for wastewater discharges, including limits on the amount of toxic metals and other pollutants that can be discharged. Implementation timelines for this 2015 rule vary from 2018 to 2023. In April 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued a ruling that vacated and remanded portions of the original ELG rule. Due to this ruling, the EPA announced a plan in July 2021 to issue a proposed rule in the fall of 2022 to address the vacated limitations for legacy wastewater and landfill leachate. In March 2023, the EPA published a proposed update to the ELG to address the vacated limitations and prior reviews of the existing rule by the current administration. Flue Gas Desulfurization (FGD) wastewater, bottom ash transport wastewater, coal residual leachate, and legacy wastewater are addressed in the proposal. The Evergy Companies have reviewed the proposed modifications to limitations on FGD wastewater and bottom ash transport water and if the regulation is finalized as proposed, the Evergy Companies do not believe the impact to be material. Modifications for best available technology economically available for the discharge of coal residual leachate could be material if the rulemaking is finalized as proposed.

In August 2021, based on an order issued by the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona, which vacated and remanded the EPA's 2020 Navigable Waters Protection Rule (NWPR), the EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) announced that they had halted implementation of the NWPR nationwide, and were interpreting "Waters of the United States" consistent with the regulatory regime that was in place prior to 2015. In December 2021, the EPA and the Department of the Army published a proposed rule that would formally repeal the NWPR and revise the definition of "Waters of the United States." In December 2022, the EPA and the Department of the Army issued a final rule establishing a definition for "Waters of the United States." The final rule was published in the Federal Register in January 2023 and took effect in March 2023. In May 2023, the United States Supreme Court (Supreme Court) issued a decision that interpreted the meaning of "Waters of the United States" under the Clean Water Act. The Supreme Court's decision impacted the January 2023 rulemaking and required the EPA and the Corps to issue a new direct final rule to conform aspects of the regulatory text to the Supreme Court ruling. This direct final rule was published and took effect in September 2023. The Evergy Companies are reviewing the Supreme Court's decision and the EPA's and the Corps' final rule. The impact on the Evergy Companies' operations or consolidated financial results are not expected to 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 January 2022, the EPA published proposed determinations for facilities that filed closure extensions for unlined or clay-lined CCR units. These proposed determinations include various interpretations of the CCR regulations and compliance expectations that may impact all owners of CCR units. These interpretations could require modified compliance plans such as different methods of CCR unit closure. Additionally, more stringent remediation requirements for units that are in corrective action or forced to go into corrective action are possible. In April 2022, the Utility Solid Waste Activities Group (USWAG) and other interested parties filed similar petitions in the D.C. Circuit challenging the EPA's legal positions regarding the CCR rule determinations proposed in January 2022. The cost to comply with these proposed determinations by the EPA could be material.

In May 2023, the EPA published a proposed expansion to the CCR regulation focused on legacy surface impoundments. This regulation expands applicability of the 2015 CCR regulation to two newly defined types of CCR disposal units. In November 2023, the EPA also posted a notice of data availability related to the proposed rule. A final rule is expected in the second quarter of 2024. If the legacy rule is finalized as proposed, the Evergy Companies anticipate having additional CCR units requiring evaluation and potential remediation. The cost to comply with these proposed regulations by the EPA could be material.

The Evergy Companies have recorded AROs for their current estimates for the closure of ash disposal ponds and landfills, but the revision of these AROs may be required in the future due to changes in existing CCR regulations, the results of groundwater monitoring of CCR units or 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.

Nuclear liability, property and accidental outage insurance is maintained for Wolf Creek. These policies contain certain industry standard terms, conditions and exclusions, including, but not limited to, ordinary wear and tear and war. An industry aggregate limit of $3.2 billion for nuclear events ($1.8 billion of non-nuclear events) plus any reinsurance, indemnity or any other source recoverable by Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited (NEIL), provider of property and accidental outage insurance, exists for acts of terrorism affecting Wolf Creek or any other NEIL insured plant within 12 months from the date of the first act. In addition, participation is required in industry-wide retrospect assessment programs as discussed below.

Pursuant to the Price-Anderson Act, liability insurance includes coverage against public nuclear liability claims resulting from nuclear incidents to the required limit of public liability, which is approximately $16.3 billion. This limit of liability consists of the maximum available commercial insurance of $0.5 billion and the remaining $15.8 billion is provided through mandatory participation in an industry-wide retrospective assessment program. Under this retrospective assessment program, the owners of Wolf Creek are jointly and severally subject to an assessment of up to $165.9 million (Evergy's share is $156.0 million and each of Evergy Kansas Central's and Evergy Metro's is $78.0 million), payable at no more than $24.7 million (Evergy's share is $23.2 million and each of Evergy Kansas Central's and Evergy Metro's is $11.6 million) per incident per year per reactor for any commercial U.S. nuclear reactor qualifying incident. Both the total and yearly assessment is subject to an inflationary adjustment based on the Consumer Price Index and applicable premium taxes. In addition, the U.S. Congress could impose additional revenue-raising measures to pay claims.

accident, insurance proceeds must first be used for reactor stabilization and site decontamination in accordance with a plan mandated by the NRC. The Evergy Companies' share of any remaining proceeds can be used to pay for property damage or, if certain requirements are met, including decommissioning the plant, toward a shortfall in the nuclear decommissioning trust fund. The owners also carry additional insurance with NEIL to help cover costs of replacement power and other extra expenses incurred during a prolonged outage resulting from accidental property damage at Wolf Creek. If significant losses were incurred at any of the nuclear plants insured under the NEIL policies, the owners of Wolf Creek may be subject to retrospective assessments under the current policies of approximately $29.1 million (Evergy's share is $27.4 million and each of Evergy Kansas Central's and Evergy Metro's is $13.7 million).

Although the Evergy Companies maintain various insurance policies to provide coverage for potential losses and liabilities resulting from an accident or an extended outage, the insurance coverage may not be adequate to cover the costs that could result from a catastrophic accident or extended outage at Wolf Creek. Any substantial losses not covered by insurance, to the extent not recoverable in prices, would have a material effect on the Evergy Companies' consolidated financial results.