implementation and calculation by AEP of its projected rates and formula rate true up pursuant to its approved formula rate templates under AEP’s formula rate implementation protocols. If a challenger can establish that any of these aspects are unjust, unreasonable, unduly discriminatory or preferential, then the FERC can make appropriate prospective adjustments to them and/or disallow any of AEP’s inclusion of those aspects in the rate setting formula. AEP settled challenges to its SPP and PJM formula rates in proceedings at the FERC in 2019. However, inquiries related to rates of return, as well as challenges to the formula rates of other utilities, are ongoing in other proceedings at the FERC. The results of these proceedings could potentially negatively impact AEP in any future challenges to AEP’s formula rates. If the FERC orders revenue reductions, including refunds, in any future cases related to its formula rates, it could reduce future net income and cash flows and impact financial condition. End-use consumers and entities supplying electricity to end-use consumers may also attempt to influence government and/or regulators to change the rate setting methodologies that apply to AEP, particularly if rates for delivered electricity increase substantially. AEP primarily generates electricity at large central facilities and delivers that electricity to customers over its transmission and distribution facilities to customers usually situated within an exclusive franchise. This method results in economies of scale and generally lower costs than newer technologies such as fuel cells and microturbines, and distributed generation using either new or existing technology. Other technologies, such as light emitting diodes (LEDs), increase the efficiency of electricity and, as a result, lower the demand for it. Changes in regulatory policies and advances in batteries or energy storage, wind turbines and photovoltaic solar cells are reducing costs of new technology to levels that are making them competitive with some central station electricity production and delivery. These developments can challenge AEP’s competitive ability to maintain relatively low cost, efficient and reliable operations, to establish fair regulatory mechanisms and to provide cost-effective programs and services to customers. Further, in the event that alternative generation resources are mandated, subsidized or encouraged through legislation or regulation or otherwise are economically competitive and added to the available generation supply, such resources could displace a higher marginal cost generating units, which could reduce the price at which market participants sell their electricity. AEP’s business plan for the construction of new projects involves a number of risks, including construction delays, nonperformance by equipment and other third-party suppliers, and increases in equipment and labor costs. To limit the risks of these construction projects, AEP’s subsidiaries enter into equipment purchase orders and construction contracts and incur engineering and design service costs in advance of receiving necessary regulatory approvals and/or siting or environmental permits. If any of these projects are canceled for any reason, including failure to receive necessary regulatory approvals and/or siting or environmental permits, significant cancellation penalties under the equipment purchase orders and construction contracts could occur. In addition, if any construction work or investments have been recorded as an asset, an impairment may need to be recorded in the event the project is canceled. I&M owns the Cook Plant, which consists of two nuclear generating units for a rated capacity of 2,288 MWs, or about 7% of the generating capacity in the AEP System. AEP and I&M are, therefore, subject to the risks of nuclear generation, which include the following: • The potential harmful effects on the environment and human health due to an adverse incident/event resulting from the operation of nuclear facilities and the storage, handling and disposal of radioactive materials such as SNF. AEP is exposed to nuclear generation risk. (Applies to AEP and I&M) AEP may not recover costs incurred to begin construction on projects that are canceled. (Applies to all Registrants) Changes in technology and regulatory policies may lower the value of electric utility facilities and franchises. (Applies to all Registrants) 33