NOTE

— COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

	●	Following the announcement of the Company’s acquisition of U.S. Geothermal Inc. (“USG”), a number of putative shareholder class action complaints were initially filed on behalf of USG shareholders between March 8, 2018 and March 30, 2018 against USG and the individual members of the USG board of directors. All of the class action suits filed in Federal Court in Idaho and Delaware have been voluntarily dismissed. The single remaining class action complaint is a purported class action filed in the Delaware Chancery Court, entitled Riche v. Pappas, et al., Case No. 2018 - 0177 (Del. Ch., Mar. 12, 2018). The Riche complaint alleges state law claims for breach of fiduciary duty against former USG directors, and seeks post-closing damages. The Company believes that it has valid defenses under law and intends to defend itself vigorously.

	●	On February 18, 2018, Western Watersheds Project filed a notice of appeal and petition with the U.S. Department of the Interior Board of Land Appeals for standing with respect to the January 16, 2018 Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”) decision approving Addendum 2 to Operation Plan & Utilization Plan for the McGinness Hills Geothermal Project. The appeal alleges that the January 2018 BLM decision authorizing construction and operation of Phase 3 of McGinness Hills causes harm to WWP and its members by allowing degradation of the wildlife habitat of the Greater sage-grouse in that area. The Company has filed a motion to intervene as an interested party in support of the BLM. The litigation was resolved and the settlement was approved by the Interior Board of Land appeals. The settlement amount was immaterial to the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

●

August 5, 2016,

George Douvris, Stephanie Douvris, Michael Hale, Cheryl Cacocci, Hillary E. Wilt and Christina Bryan, acting for themselves and on behalf of all other similarly situated residents of the lower Puna District, filed a complaint in the Third Circuit Court for the State of Hawaii seeking certification of a class action for preliminary and permanent injunctive relief, consequential and punitive damages, attorney’s fees and statutory interest against PGV and other presently unknown defendants. On

December 12, 2016,

the federal district court granted plaintiffs’ motion for joinder of HELCO as a co-defendant, and the case, which had previously been removed to the U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii, was remanded back to the Third Circuit Court. The amended complaint alleged that injuries and other damages in an undisclosed amount were caused to the plaintiffs as a result of an alleged toxic release by PGV in the wake of Hurricane Iselle in

August 2014.

June 14, 2017,

the Third Circuit Court denied HELCO’s motion to dismiss the complaint against HELCO. Discovery is underway. The Company believes that it has valid defenses under law and intends to defend itself vigorously.

●

March 29, 2016,

a former local sales representative in Chile, Aquavant, S.A., filed a claim against Ormat’s subsidiaries in the

27th

Civil Court of Santiago, Chile on the basis of unjust enrichment. The claim requests that the court order Ormat to pay Aquavant

$4.8

million in connection with its activities in Chile, including the EPC contract for the Cerro Pabellon project and various geothermal concessions, plus

3.75%

of Ormat geothermal products sales in Chile over the next

years. Pursuant to various motions submitted by the defendants and the plaintiffs to various courts, including the Court of Appeals, the case was removed from the original court and then refiled before the

11th

Civil Court of Santiago. In

February 2018

preliminary defenses, filed by the Company, were denied by the lower court and are pending on appeal. The Company’s answer to the complaint, plaintiff’s response and the Company’s rejoinder were duly filed. The Company believes that it has valid defenses under law and intends to defend itself vigorously.

●

Jon Olson and Hilary Wilt, together with Puna Pono Alliance filed a complaint on

February 17, 2015

in the Third Circuit Court for the State of Hawaii, requesting declaratory and injunctive relief requiring that Puna Geothermal Venture comply with an ordinance that the plaintiffs allege will prohibit PGV from engaging in night drilling operations at its KS-

well site. On

May 17, 2015,

the original complaint was amended to add the County of Hawaii and the State of Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources as defendants to the case. On

October 10, 2016,

the court issued its decision in response to each of the plaintiffs’ and defendants’ motions for summary judgment, denying plaintiffs’ motion and granting defendant PGV's and the County of Hawaii’s cross motions for summary judgment, effectively rendering the plaintiffs’ action moot. On

January 23, 2017,

the plaintiffs filed a motion requesting that the Intermediate Court of Appeals address appellate jurisdiction, which was denied by the court on

April 20, 2017

as premature. The Company believes that it has valid defenses under law and intends to defend itself vigorously.

●

May 21, 2018,

a motion to certify a class action was filed in the Tel Aviv District Court (Economic Division) entitled Heit vs Ormat Technologies, Inc. et al (C.A.

44366

). The motion purports that the Company and

eleven

of its officers and directors misled investors by asserting in its financial statements that it maintains effective internal controls over its accounting policies and procedures, and demands payment of

million Shekels (approximately

$26

million) to compensate persons who purchased Company shares between

August 3, 2017

and

May 13, 2018.

The Company believes that it has valid defenses under law and intends to defend itself vigorously. Pending resolution of the putative class action filed in the United States and described below, the Company intends to seek a stay of the proceedings in relation to the claim filed in the Tel Aviv District Court.

●

June 11, 2018,

a putative class action on behalf of alleged shareholders that purchased or acquired the Company's ordinary shares between

August 8, 2017

and

May 15, 2018

was commenced in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada against the Company and its Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer. The complaint asserts claims against all defendants pursuant to Section

(b) of the Exchange Act, as amended and Rule

10b

there under Section

(a) of the Exchange Act, as amended. The complaint alleges that the Company's Form

-K for the years ended

December 31, 2016

and

2017,

and Form

-Qs for each of the quarters in the

nine

months ended

September 30, 2017

contained material misstatements or omissions, among other things, with respect to the Company’s tax provisions and the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting, and that, as a result of such alleged misstatements and omissions, the plaintiffs suffered damages. The Company has

not

yet responded to the complaints. The Company believes that it has valid defenses under law and intends to defend itself vigorously.

In addition, from time to time, the Company is named as a party to various other lawsuits, claims and other legal and regulatory proceedings that arise in the ordinary course of our business. These actions typically seek, among other things, compensation for alleged personal injury, breach of contract, property damage, punitive damages, civil penalties or other losses, or injunctive or declaratory relief. With respect to such lawsuits, claims and proceedings, the Company accrues reserves when a loss is probable and the amount of such loss can be reasonably estimated. It is the opinion of the Company’s management that the outcome of these proceedings, individually and collectively, will

not

be material to the Company’s consolidated financial statements as a whole.