XML 65 R11.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.21.1
Regulatory Matters
3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2021
Regulated Operations [Abstract]  
Regulatory Matters REGULATORY MATTERS
RATE-RELATED INFORMATION
The NCUC, PSCSC, FPSC, IURC, PUCO, TPUC and KPSC approve rates for retail electric and natural gas services within their states. The FERC approves rates for electric sales to wholesale customers served under cost-based rates (excluding Ohio and Indiana), as well as sales of transmission service. The FERC also regulates certification and siting of new interstate natural gas pipeline projects.
Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress
2021 Coal Ash Settlement
On January 22, 2021, Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress entered into the Coal Combustion Residuals Settlement Agreement (the “CCR Settlement Agreement”) with the North Carolina Public Staff (Public Staff), the North Carolina Attorney General’s Office and the Sierra Club (collectively, the "Settling Parties"), which was filed with the NCUC on January 25, 2021. The CCR Settlement Agreement resolves all coal ash prudence and cost recovery issues in connection with 2019 rate cases filed by Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress with the NCUC, as well as the equitable sharing issue on remand from the 2017 Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress North Carolina rate cases as a result of the December 11, 2020, North Carolina Supreme Court opinion. The settlement also provides clarity on coal ash cost recovery in North Carolina for Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress through January 2030 and February 2030 (the "Term"), respectively.
Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress agreed not to seek recovery of approximately $1 billion of systemwide deferred coal ash expenditures, but will retain the ability to earn a debt and equity return during the amortization period, which shall be five years in the pending 2019 North Carolina rate cases and will be set by the NCUC in future rate case proceedings. The equity return and the amortization period on deferred coal ash costs under the 2017 Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress North Carolina rate cases will remain unaffected. The equity return on deferred coal ash costs under the 2019 North Carolina rate cases and future rate cases in North Carolina will be set at 150 basis points lower than the authorized return on equity (ROE) then in effect, with a capital structure composed of 48% debt and 52% equity. Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress retain the ability to earn a full WACC return during the deferral period, which is the period from when costs are incurred until they are recovered in rates.
The Settling Parties agreed that execution by Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress of a settlement agreement between themselves and the NCDEQ dated December 31, 2019, (the “DEQ Settlement”) and the coal ash management plans included therein or subsequently approved by DEQ are reasonable and prudent. The Settling Parties retain the right to challenge the reasonableness and prudence of actions taken by Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress and costs incurred to implement the scope of work agreed upon in the DEQ Settlement, after February 1, 2020, and March 1, 2020, for Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress, respectively. The Settling Parties further agreed to waive rights through the Term to challenge the reasonableness or prudence of Duke Energy Carolinas’ and Duke Energy Progress’ historical coal ash management practices, and to waive the right to assert any arguments that future coal ash costs, including financing costs, shall be shared between either company and customers through equitable sharing or any other rate base or return adjustment that shares the revenue requirement burden of coal ash costs not otherwise disallowed due to imprudence.
The Settling Parties agreed to a sharing arrangement for future coal ash insurance litigation proceeds between Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress and North Carolina customers, if achieved.
On January 29, 2021, Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress filed joint motions with the Settling Parties seeking approval of the CCR Settlement Agreement, along with supporting testimony and exhibits from Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress. On February 5, 2021, the Public Staff filed testimony and exhibits supporting the CCR Settlement Agreement.
As a result of the CCR Settlement Agreement, Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress recorded a pretax charge of approximately $454 million and $494 million, respectively, in the fourth quarter of 2020 to Impairment charges and a reversal of approximately $50 million and $102 million, respectively, to Regulated electric operating revenues on the respective Consolidated Statements of Operations.
The Coal Ash Settlement was approved without modification in the NCUC Orders in the 2019 rate cases on March 31, 2021, and April 16, 2021, for Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress, respectively.
2020 North Carolina Storm Securitization Filings
On October 26, 2020, Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress filed a joint petition with the NCUC, as agreed to in partial settlements reached in the 2019 North Carolina Rate Cases for Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress, seeking authorization for the financing of the costs of each utility's storm recovery activities required as a result of Hurricane Florence, Hurricane Michael, Hurricane Dorian and Winter Storm Diego. Specifically, Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress requested that the NCUC find that their storm recovery costs and related financing costs are appropriately financed by debt secured by storm recovery property, and that the commission issue financing orders by which each utility may accomplish such financing using a securitization structure. On January 27, 2021, Duke Energy Carolinas, Duke Energy Progress and the Public Staff filed an Agreement and Stipulation of Partial Settlement, which is subject to review and approval of the NCUC, resolving certain accounting issues, including agreement to support an 18- to 20-year bond period. The total revenue requirement over a proposed 20-year bond period for the storm recovery charges is approximately $287 million for Duke Energy Carolinas and $920 million for Duke Energy Progress. A remote evidentiary hearing ended on January 29, 2021, and on February 1, 2021, the NCUC granted a motion by Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress for a temporary 30-day waiver of the 135-day time frame for the NCUC to issue orders on the joint petition, extending the deadline for the NCUC to issue an order to May 10, 2021. In the NCUC Orders in the 2019 rate cases on March 31, 2021, and April 16, 2021, for Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress, respectively, the reasonableness and prudence of the deferred storm costs was approved. Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress cannot predict the outcome of this matter.
COVID-19 Filings
North Carolina
Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress filed a joint petition on August 7, 2020, with the NCUC for deferral treatment of incremental costs and waived customer fees due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Comments on the joint petition were filed on November 5, 2020, and reply comments were filed on November 30, 2020. Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress cannot predict the outcome of this matter.
South Carolina
Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress filed a report on June 30, 2020, as required by PSCSC order, reporting revenue impact, costs and savings related to COVID-19 to date. On August 14, 2020, Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress filed a joint petition with the PSCSC for approval of an accounting order to defer incremental COVID-19 related costs incurred through June 30, 2020, and for the ongoing months during the duration of the COVID-19 pandemic. The deferral request did not include lost revenues. Updates on cost impacts were filed on September 30, 2020, and included financial impacts through the end of August 2020. On October 16, 2020, the South Carolina Office of Regulatory Staff (ORS) requested the PSCSC delay taking formal action on the deferral request until the ORS and any intervenors complete discovery. The PSCSC issued an order on October 21, 2020, to grant additional time to complete discovery until January 20, 2021, and to establish a procedural schedule. Updates on cost impacts were filed on December 30, 2020, and included financial impacts through November 30, 2020. On January 15, 2021, the ORS requested the PSCSC suspend the dates for the ORS report and public hearing. The ORS conferred with the companies regarding the status of the docket, and the parties mutually agreed that recently enacted federal laws addressing COVID-19 aid and recovery should be studied before further action is taken in this docket. On January 27, 2021, the PSCSC voted to grant the ORS request to suspend the virtual public hearing. The ORS filed its report on April 16, 2021. Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress cannot predict the outcome of this matter.
Duke Energy Carolinas
2017 North Carolina Rate Case
On August 25, 2017, Duke Energy Carolinas filed an application with the NCUC for a rate increase for retail customers of approximately $647 million. On February 28, 2018, Duke Energy Carolinas and the Public Staff filed an Agreement and Stipulation of Partial Settlement resolving certain portions of the proceeding. Terms of the settlement included an ROE of 9.9% and a capital structure of 52% equity and 48% debt. On June 22, 2018, the NCUC issued an order approving the Stipulation of Partial Settlement and requiring a revenue reduction.
The North Carolina Attorney General and other parties separately filed Notices of Appeal to the North Carolina Supreme Court. The North Carolina Supreme Court consolidated the Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress appeals. On December 11, 2020, the North Carolina Supreme Court issued an opinion, which affirmed, in part, and reversed and remanded, in part, the NCUC’s decisions. In the Opinion, the court upheld the NCUC's decision to include coal ash costs in the cost of service, as well as the NCUC’s discretion to allow a return on the unamortized balance of coal ash costs. The court also remanded to the NCUC a single issue to consider the assessment of support for the Public Staff’s equitable sharing argument. In response to a NCUC order seeking comments on the proposed procedure on remand, on January 11, 2021, Duke Energy Carolinas, Duke Energy Progress, the Public Staff, the North Carolina Attorney General, Sierra Club and Carolina Industrial Group for Fair Utility Rates II and III filed joint comments proposing that the NCUC not hold additional evidentiary hearings, but instead rely upon existing records in the 2017 North Carolina rate cases, or in the alternative the records in the 2019 North Carolina rate cases, in deciding the issue on remand. On January 22, 2021, Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress entered into the CCR Settlement Agreement with the Settling Parties, which was filed with the NCUC on January 25, 2021, and approved by the NCUC on March 31, 2021.
2019 North Carolina Rate Case
On September 30, 2019, Duke Energy Carolinas filed an application with the NCUC for a net rate increase for retail customers of approximately $291 million, which represented an approximate 6% increase in annual base revenues. The gross rate case revenue increase request was $445 million, which was offset by an EDIT rider of $154 million to return to customers North Carolina and federal EDIT resulting from recent reductions in corporate tax rates. The request for a rate increase was driven by major capital investments subsequent to the previous base rate case, coal ash pond closure costs, accelerated coal plant depreciation and deferred 2018 storm costs. Duke Energy Carolinas requested rates be effective no later than August 1, 2020. The NCUC established a procedural schedule with an evidentiary hearing to begin on March 23, 2020. On March 16, 2020, in consideration of public health and safety as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, Duke Energy Carolinas filed a motion with the NCUC seeking a suspension of the procedural schedule in the rate case, including issuing discovery requests, and postponement of the evidentiary hearing for 60 days. Also on March 16, 2020, the NCUC issued an Order Postponing Hearing and Addressing Procedural Matters, which postponed the evidentiary hearing until further order by the commission.
On March 25, 2020, Duke Energy Carolinas and the Public Staff filed an Agreement and Stipulation of Partial Settlement, subject to review and approval of the NCUC, resolving certain issues in the base rate proceeding. On July 24, 2020, Duke Energy Carolinas filed its request for approval of its notice to customers required to implement temporary rates. On July 27, 2020, Duke Energy Carolinas filed a joint motion with Duke Energy Progress and the Public Staff notifying the commission that the parties reached a joint partial settlement with the Public Staff. Also on July 27, 2020, Duke Energy Carolinas filed a letter stating that it intended to update its temporary rates calculation to reflect the terms of the partial settlement. On July 31, 2020, Duke Energy Carolinas and the Public Staff filed a Second Agreement and Stipulation of Partial Settlement (Second Partial Settlement), subject to review and approval of the NCUC, resolving certain remaining issues in the base rate proceeding. The remaining items litigated at hearing included recovery of deferred coal ash compliance costs that are subject to asset retirement obligation accounting, implementation of new depreciation rates and the amortization period of the loss on the hydro station sale.
On August 4, 2020, Duke Energy Carolinas filed an amended motion for approval of its amended notice to customers, seeking to exercise its statutory right to implement temporary rates subject to refund on or after August 24, 2020. The revenue requirement to be recovered, subject to refund, through the temporary rates was based on and consistent with the base rate component of the Second Partial Settlement and excluded the items to be litigated noted above. The NCUC approved the August 4, 2020 amended temporary rates motion on August 6, 2020, and temporary rates went into effect on August 24, 2020.
The Duke Energy Carolinas evidentiary hearing concluded on September 18, 2020, and post-hearing filings were made with the NCUC from all parties by November 4, 2020. On January 22, 2021, Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress entered into the CCR Settlement Agreement with the Settling Parties, which was filed with the NCUC on January 25, 2021.
On March 31, 2021, the NCUC issued an order approving the March 25, 2020, and July 31, 2020, partial settlements. The order includes approval of 1) an ROE of 9.6% based upon a capital structure of 52% equity and 48% debt; 2) deferral treatment of approximately $800 million of grid improvement projects with a return; 3) a flow back period of five years for unprotected federal EDIT; and 4) the reasonableness and prudence of $213 million of deferred storm costs, which were removed from the rate case and for which Duke Energy Carolinas filed a petition seeking securitization in October 2020. Additionally, the order approved without modification the CCR Settlement Agreement.
The order denied Duke Energy Carolinas' proposal to shorten the remaining depreciable lives of certain Duke Energy Carolinas coal-fired generating units, indicating the appropriate proceeding for the review of generating plant retirements is Duke Energy Carolinas' integrated resource planning (IRP) proceeding.
On April 12, 2021, Duke Energy Carolinas filed its final revenue requirement with the NCUC, which results in a net increase of approximately $33 million. Revised customer rates are expected to become effective in June 2021.
2018 South Carolina Rate Case
On November 8, 2018, Duke Energy Carolinas filed an application with the PSCSC for a rate increase for retail customers of approximately $168 million.
After hearings in March 2019, the PSCSC issued an order on May 21, 2019, which included an ROE of 9.5% and a capital structure of 53% equity and 47% debt. The order also included the following material components:
Approval of cancellation of the Lee Nuclear Project, with Duke Energy Carolinas maintaining the Combined Operating License;
Approval of recovery of $125 million (South Carolina retail portion) of Lee Nuclear Project development costs (including AFUDC through December 2017) over a 12-year period, but denial of a return on the deferred balance of costs;
Approval of recovery of $96 million of coal ash costs over a five-year period with a return at Duke Energy Carolinas' WACC;
Denial of recovery of $115 million of certain coal ash costs deemed to be related to the Coal Ash Act and incremental to the federal CCR rule;
Approval of a $66 million decrease to base rates to reflect the change in ongoing tax expense, primarily the reduction in the federal income tax rate from 35% to 21%;
Approval of a $45 million decrease through the EDIT Rider to return EDIT resulting from the federal tax rate change and deferred revenues since January 2018 related to the change, to be returned in accordance with the Average Rate Assumption Method (ARAM) for protected EDIT, over a 20-year period for unprotected EDIT associated with Property, Plant and Equipment, over a five-year period for unprotected EDIT not associated with Property, Plant and Equipment and over a five-year period for the deferred revenues; and
Approval of a $17 million decrease through the EDIT Rider related to reductions in the North Carolina state income tax rate from 6.9% to 2.5% to be returned over a five-year period.
As a result of the order, revised customer rates were effective June 1, 2019. On May 31, 2019, Duke Energy Carolinas filed a Petition for Rehearing or Reconsideration of that order contending substantial rights of Duke Energy Carolinas were prejudiced by unlawful, arbitrary and capricious rulings by the PSCSC on certain issues presented in the proceeding. On June 19, 2019, the PSCSC issued a Directive denying Duke Energy Carolinas' request to rehear or reconsider the commission's rulings on certain issues presented in the proceeding including coal ash remediation and disposal costs, ROE and the recovery of a return on deferred operation and maintenance expenses. An order detailing the commission's decision in the Directive was issued on October 18, 2019. Duke Energy Carolinas filed a notice of appeal on November 15, 2019, with the Supreme Court of South Carolina. On November 20, 2019, the South Carolina Energy Users Committee filed a Notice of Appeal with the Supreme Court of South Carolina. Initial briefs were filed on April 21, 2020, which included the South Carolina Energy User's Committee brief arguing that the PSCSC erred in allowing Duke Energy Carolinas' recovery of costs related to the Lee Nuclear Station. Response briefs were filed on July 6, 2020, and reply briefs were filed on August 11, 2020. Oral arguments before the Supreme Court of South Carolina have been scheduled to occur on May 26, 2021. Based on legal analysis and the filing of the appeal, Duke Energy Carolinas has not recorded an adjustment for its deferred coal ash costs in this matter. Duke Energy Carolinas cannot predict the outcome of this matter.
Duke Energy Progress
2017 North Carolina Rate Case
On June 1, 2017, Duke Energy Progress filed an application with the NCUC for a rate increase for retail customers of approximately $477 million, which was subsequently adjusted to $420 million. On November 22, 2017, Duke Energy Progress and the Public Staff filed an Agreement and Stipulation of Partial Settlement resolving certain portions of the proceeding. Terms of the settlement included an ROE of 9.9% and a capital structure of 52% equity and 48% debt. On February 23, 2018, the NCUC issued an order approving the stipulation. The Public Staff, the North Carolina Attorney General and the Sierra Club filed notices of appeal to the North Carolina Supreme Court.
The North Carolina Supreme Court consolidated the Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress appeals. On December 11, 2020, the North Carolina Supreme Court issued an opinion, which affirmed, in part, and reversed and remanded, in part, the NCUC’s decisions. In the Opinion, the court upheld the NCUC's decision to include coal ash costs in the cost of service, as well as the NCUC’s discretion to allow a return on the unamortized balance of coal ash costs. The court also remanded to the NCUC a single issue to consider the assessment of support for the Public Staff’s equitable sharing argument. In response to a NCUC order seeking comments on the proposed procedure on remand, on January 11, 2021, Duke Energy Carolinas, Duke Energy Progress, the Public Staff, the North Carolina Attorney General, Sierra Club and Carolina Industrial Group for Fair Utility Rates II and III filed joint comments proposing that the NCUC not hold additional evidentiary hearings, but instead rely upon existing records in the 2017 North Carolina rate cases or in the alternative the records in the 2019 North Carolina rate cases, in deciding the issue on remand. On January 22, 2021, Duke Energy Progress and Duke Energy Carolinas entered into the CCR Settlement Agreement with the Settling Parties, which was filed with the NCUC on January 25, 2021, and approved by the NCUC on April 16, 2021.
2019 North Carolina Rate Case
On October 30, 2019, Duke Energy Progress filed an application with the NCUC for a net rate increase for retail customers of approximately $464 million, which represented an approximate 12.3% increase in annual base revenues. The gross rate case revenue increase request was $586 million, which was offset by riders of $122 million, primarily an EDIT rider of $120 million to return to customers North Carolina and federal EDIT resulting from recent reductions in corporate tax rates. The request for rate increase was driven by major capital investments subsequent to the previous base rate case, coal ash pond closure costs, accelerated coal plant depreciation and deferred 2018 storm costs. Duke Energy Progress sought to defer and recover incremental Hurricane Dorian storm costs in this proceeding and requested rates be effective no later than September 1, 2020. As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, on March 24, 2020, the NCUC suspended the procedural schedule and postponed the previously scheduled evidentiary hearing on this matter indefinitely. On April 7, 2020, the NCUC issued an order partially resuming the procedural schedule requiring intervenors to file direct testimony on April 13, 2020. Public Staff filed supplemental direct testimony on April 23, 2020. Duke Energy Progress filed rebuttal testimony on May 4, 2020.
On June 2, 2020, Duke Energy Progress and the Public Staff filed an Agreement and Stipulation of Partial Settlement, subject to review and approval of the NCUC, resolving certain issues in the base rate proceeding. On July 27, 2020, Duke Energy Progress filed a joint motion with Duke Energy Carolinas and the Public Staff notifying the commission that the parties reached a joint partial settlement with the Public Staff. On July 31, 2020, Duke Energy Progress and the Public Staff filed a Second Agreement and Stipulation of Partial Settlement, subject to review and approval of the NCUC, resolving certain remaining issues in the base rate proceeding. The remaining items litigated at hearing included recovery of deferred coal ash compliance costs that are subject to asset retirement obligation accounting and implementation of new depreciation rates.
On August 7, 2020, Duke Energy Progress filed a motion for approval of notice required to implement temporary rates, seeking to exercise its statutory right to implement temporary rates subject to refund on or after September 1, 2020. The revenue requirement to be recovered subject to refund through the temporary rates was based on and consistent with the terms of the base rate component of the settlement agreements with the Public Staff and excluded items to be litigated noted above. Duke Energy Progress will not begin the amortization or implementation of these items until a final determination is issued in the rate case and new base rates are implemented. These items will also be excluded when determining whether a refund of amounts collected through these temporary rates is needed. In addition, Duke Energy Progress also sought authorization to place a temporary decrement EDIT Rider into effect, concurrent with the temporary base rate change. The temporary rate changes are not final rates and remain subject to the NCUC's determination of the just and reasonable rates to be charged by Duke Energy Progress on a permanent basis. The NCUC approved the August 7, 2020 temporary rates motion on August 11, 2020, and temporary rates went into effect on September 1, 2020.
The Duke Energy Progress evidentiary hearing concluded on October 6, 2020, and post-hearing filings were filed with the NCUC from all parties by December 4, 2020. On January 22, 2021, Duke Energy Progress and Duke Energy Carolinas entered into the CCR Settlement Agreement with the Settling Parties, which was filed with the NCUC on January 25, 2021.
On April 16, 2021, the NCUC issued an order approving the June 2, 2020, and July 31, 2020, partial settlements. The order includes approval of 1) an ROE of 9.6% based upon a capital structure of 52% equity and 48% debt; 2) deferral treatment of approximately $400 million of grid improvement projects with a return; 3) a flow back period of five years for unprotected federal EDIT; and 4) the reasonableness and prudence of approximately $714 million of deferred storm costs, which were removed from the rate case and for which Duke Energy Progress filed a petition seeking securitization in October 2020. Additionally, the order approved without modification the CCR Settlement Agreement.
The order denied Duke Energy Progress' proposal to shorten the remaining depreciable lives of certain Duke Energy Progress coal-fired generating units, indicating the appropriate proceeding for the review of generating plant retirements is Duke Energy Progress' IRP proceeding.
On April 26, 2021, Duke Energy Progress filed its final revenue requirement with the NCUC, which results in a net increase of approximately $178 million. Revised customer rates are expected to become effective in June 2021.
Hurricane Dorian
Hurricane Dorian reached the Carolinas in September 2019 as a Category 2 hurricane making landfall within Duke Energy Progress’ service territory. Total estimated incremental operation and maintenance expenses incurred to repair and restore the system are approximately $168 million with an additional $4 million in capital investments made for restoration efforts. Approximately $145 million of the operation and maintenance expenses are deferred in Regulatory assets within Other Noncurrent Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of March 31, 2021, and December 31, 2020. A request for an accounting order to defer incremental storm costs associated with Hurricane Dorian was included in Duke Energy Progress' October 30, 2019, general rate case filing with the NCUC. Terms of the June 2, 2020, Agreement and Stipulation of Partial Settlement removed incremental storm costs from the general rate case. A petition seeking to securitize these costs, along with costs from Hurricane Florence, Hurricane Michael and Winter Storm Diego, was filed on October 26, 2020, with the NCUC. For information on the securitization filing, see "2020 North Carolina Storm Securitization Filings." Duke Energy Progress cannot predict the outcome of this matter.
2018 South Carolina Rate Case
On November 8, 2018, Duke Energy Progress filed an application with the PSCSC for a rate increase for retail customers of approximately $59 million.
After hearings in April 2019, the PSCSC issued an order on May 21, 2019, which included an ROE of 9.5% and a capital structure of 53% equity and 47% debt. The order also included the following material components:
Approval of recovery of $4 million of coal ash costs over a five-year period with a return at Duke Energy Progress' WACC;
Denial of recovery of $65 million of certain coal ash costs deemed to be related to the Coal Ash Act and incremental to the federal CCR rule;
Approval of a $17 million decrease to base rates to reflect the change in ongoing tax expense, primarily the reduction in the federal income tax rate from 35% to 21%;
Approval of a $12 million decrease through the EDIT Tax Savings Rider resulting from the federal tax rate change and deferred revenues since January 2018 related to the change, to be returned in accordance with ARAM for protected EDIT, over a 20-year period for unprotected EDIT associated with Property, Plant and Equipment, over a five-year period for unprotected EDIT not associated with Property, Plant and Equipment and over a three-year period for the deferred revenues; and
Approval of a $12 million increase due to the expiration of EDIT related to reductions in the North Carolina state income tax rate from 6.9% to 2.5%.
As a result of the order, revised customer rates were effective June 1, 2019. On May 31, 2019, Duke Energy Progress filed a Petition for Rehearing or Reconsideration of that order contending substantial rights of Duke Energy Progress were prejudiced by unlawful, arbitrary and capricious rulings by the PSCSC on certain issues presented in the proceeding. On June 19, 2019, the PSCSC issued a Directive denying Duke Energy Progress' request to rehear or reconsider the commission's rulings on certain issues presented in the proceeding including coal ash remediation and disposal costs, ROE and the recovery of a return on deferred operation and maintenance expenses, but allowing additional litigation-related costs. As a result of the Directive allowing litigation-related costs, customer rates were revised effective July 1, 2019. An order detailing the commission's decision in the Directive was issued on October 18, 2019. Duke Energy Progress filed a notice of appeal on November 15, 2019, with the Supreme Court of South Carolina. Initial briefs were filed on April 21, 2020. Response briefs were filed on July 6, 2020, and reply briefs were filed on August 11, 2020. Oral arguments before the Supreme Court of South Carolina have been scheduled to occur on May 26, 2021. Based on legal analysis and the filing of the appeal, Duke Energy Progress has not recorded an adjustment for its deferred coal ash costs in this matter. Duke Energy Progress cannot predict the outcome of this matter.
Western Carolinas Modernization Plan
On October 8, 2018, Duke Energy Progress filed an application with the NCUC for a CPCN to construct the Hot Springs Microgrid Solar and Battery Storage Facility, which was approved with certain conditions on May 10, 2019. A hearing to update the NCUC on the status of the project was held on March 5, 2020. Construction began in May 2020 with commercial operation expected to begin in October 2021.
On July 27, 2020, Duke Energy Progress filed an application with the NCUC for a CPCN to construct the Woodfin Solar Facility, a 5-MW solar generating facility to be constructed on a closed landfill in Buncombe County. The expert hearing was held on November 18, 2020. The application was approved and a CPCN was granted by order of the NCUC on April 20, 2021.
FERC Return on Equity Complaints
On October 11, 2019, North Carolina Eastern Municipal Power Agency (NCEMPA) filed a complaint at the FERC against Duke Energy Progress pursuant to Section 206 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), alleging that the 11% stated ROE component contained in the demand formula rate in the Full Requirements Power Purchase Agreement (FRPPA) between NCEMPA and Duke Energy Progress is unjust and unreasonable. On July 16, 2020, the FERC set this matter for hearing and settlement judge procedures and established a refund effective date of October 11, 2019. In its order setting the matter for settlement, the FERC allowed for the consideration of variations to the base transmission-related ROE methodology developed in its Order No. 569-A, through the introduction of “specific facts and circumstances” involving issues specific to the case. The parties reached a settlement in principle at a settlement conference on January 7, 2021, and filed a settlement package on March 10, 2021. The FERC Trial Staff filed comments in support of the settlement. On April 19, 2021, the Settlement Judge certified the settlement to the FERC as an uncontested settlement and recommended approval by the FERC. Duke Energy Progress cannot predict the outcome of this matter.
On October 16, 2020, North Carolina Electric Membership Corporation (NCEMC) filed a complaint at the FERC against Duke Energy Progress pursuant to Section 206 of the FPA, alleging that the 11% stated ROE component in the demand formula rate in the Power Supply and Coordination Agreement between NCEMC and Duke Energy Progress is unjust and unreasonable. Under FPA Section 206, the earliest refund effective date that the FERC can establish is the date of the filing of the complaint. Duke Energy Progress responded to the complaint on November 20, 2020, seeking dismissal, demonstrating that the 11% ROE is just and reasonable for the service provided. The parties filed responsive pleadings and are awaiting an order from the FERC. Duke Energy Progress cannot predict the outcome of this matter.
Duke Energy Florida
2021 Settlement Agreement
On January 14, 2021, Duke Energy Florida filed a Settlement Agreement (the “Settlement”) with the FPSC. The parties to the Settlement include Duke Energy Florida, the Office of Public Counsel (OPC), the Florida Industrial Power Users Group, White Springs Agricultural Chemicals, Inc. d/b/a PCS Phosphate and NUCOR Steel Florida, Inc. (collectively, the “Parties”).
Pursuant to the Settlement, the parties agreed to a base rate stay-out provision that expires year-end 2024; however, Duke Energy Florida is allowed an increase to its base rates of an incremental $67 million in 2022, $49 million in 2023 and $79 million in 2024, subject to adjustment in the event of tax reform during the years 2021, 2022 and 2023. The parties also agreed to a ROE band of 8.85% to 10.85% with a midpoint of 9.85% based on a capital structure of 53% equity and 47% debt. The ROE band can be increased by 25 basis points if the average 30-year U.S. Treasury rate increases 50 basis points or more over a six-month period in which case the midpoint ROE would rise from 9.85% to 10.10%. Duke Energy Florida will also be able to retain the DOE award of approximately $173 million for spent nuclear fuel, which is expected to be received in 2022, in order to mitigate customer rates over the term of the Settlement. In return, Duke Energy Florida will be able to recognize the $173 million into earnings from 2022 through 2024.
In addition to these terms, the Settlement contains provisions related to the accelerated depreciation of Crystal River Units 4-5, the approval of approximately $1 billion in future investments in new cost effective solar power, the implementation of a new Electric Vehicle Charging Station Program and the deferral and recovery of costs in connection with the implementation of Duke Energy Florida’s Vision Florida program, which explores various emerging non-carbon emitting generation technology, distributed technologies and resiliency projects, among other things. The Settlement also resolves remaining unrecovered storm costs for hurricanes Dorian and Michael.
The FPSC approved the Settlement on May 4, 2021. Revised customer rates will be effective January 1, 2022, with subsequent base rate increases effective January 1, 2023, and January 1, 2024.
Storm Restoration Cost Recovery
Duke Energy Florida filed a petition with the FPSC on April 30, 2019, to recover $223 million of estimated retail incremental storm restoration costs for Hurricane Michael, consistent with the provisions in the 2017 Settlement, and the FPSC approved the petition on June 11, 2019. The FPSC also approved allowing Duke Energy Florida to use the tax savings resulting from the Tax Act to recover these storm costs in lieu of implementing a storm surcharge. Approved storm costs are currently expected to be fully recovered by approximately year-end 2021. On November 22, 2019, Duke Energy Florida filed a petition for approval of actual retail recoverable storm restoration costs related to Hurricane Michael in the amount of $191 million plus interest. On May 19, 2020, Duke Energy Florida filed a supplemental true up reducing the actual retail recoverable storm restoration costs related to Hurricane Michael by approximately $3 million, resulting in a total request to recover $188 million actual retail recoverable storm restoration costs, plus interest. Approximately $42 million and $80 million of these costs are included in Regulatory assets within Current Assets and Other Noncurrent Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of March 31, 2021, and December 31, 2020, respectively.
Duke Energy Florida filed a petition with the FPSC on December 19, 2019, to recover $169 million of estimated retail incremental storm restoration costs for Hurricane Dorian, consistent with the provisions in the 2017 Settlement and the FPSC approved the petition on February 24, 2020. The final actual amount of $145 million was filed on September 30, 2020. The Settlement was approved by the FPSC and all matters regarding storm cost recovery relating to Hurricane Michael and Hurricane Dorian are resolved.
Clean Energy Connection
On July 1, 2020, Duke Energy Florida petitioned the FPSC for approval of a voluntary solar program. The program consists of 10 new solar generating facilities with combined capacity of approximately 750 MW. The program allows participants to support cost-effective solar development in Florida by paying a subscription fee based on per kilowatt-subscriptions and receiving a credit on their bill based on the actual generation associated with their portion of the solar portfolio. The estimated cost of the 10 new solar generation facilities is approximately $1 billion over the next four years, and this investment will be included in base rates offset by the revenue from the subscription fees. The credits will be included for recovery in the fuel cost recovery clause. A remote hearing was held on November 17, 2020, and post-hearing briefs were filed with the FPSC from all parties by December 9, 2020. The FPSC voted to approve the program on January 5, 2021, and issued its written order on January 26, 2021.
On February 24, 2021, the League of United Latin American Citizens filed a notice of appeal of the FPSC’s Order approving the Clean Energy Connection to the Florida Supreme Court. The FPSC approval order remains in effect pending the outcome of the appeal. Duke Energy Florida cannot predict the outcome of this matter.
Duke Energy Ohio
Ohio House Bill 6
On July 23, 2019, House Bill 6 was signed into law that became effective January 1, 2020. Among other things, the bill allows for funding, through a rider mechanism referred to as the Clean Air Fund (Rider CAF), of two nuclear generating facilities located in Northern Ohio owned by Energy Harbor (f/k/a FirstEnergy Solutions), repeal of energy efficiency mandates and recovery of prudently incurred costs, net of any revenues, for Ohio investor-owned utilities that are participants under the OVEC power agreement. The recovery is through a non-bypassable rider that replaced any existing recovery mechanism approved by the PUCO and will remain in place through 2030. As such, Duke Energy Ohio created the Legacy Generation Rider (Rider LGR) that replaced Rider PSR effective January 1, 2020. The amounts recoverable from customers are subject to an annual cap, with incremental costs that exceed such cap eligible for deferral and recovery subject to review. See Note 11 for additional discussion of Duke Energy Ohio's ownership interest in OVEC. House Bill 128 was signed into law on March 31, 2021, which becomes effective June 30, 2021. The bill removes nuclear plant funding from Rider CAF and does not impact OVEC cost recovery.
Energy Efficiency Cost Recovery
On February 26, 2020, the PUCO issued an order directing utilities to wind down their demand-side management programs by September 30, 2020, and to terminate the programs by December 31, 2020, in response to changes in Ohio law that eliminated Ohio's energy efficiency mandates. On March 27, 2020, Duke Energy Ohio filed an Application for Rehearing seeking clarification on the final true up and reconciliation process after 2020. On November 18, 2020, the PUCO issued two orders on the application for rehearing. The first order was a Third Entry on Rehearing on the Duke Energy Ohio portfolio holding the cost cap previously imposed was unlawful, a shared savings cap of $8 million pretax should be imposed and lost distribution revenues could not be recovered after December 31, 2020. The second order directs all utilities set the rider to zero effective January 1, 2021, and to file a separate application for final reconciliation of all energy efficiency costs prior to December 31, 2020. On December 18, 2020, Duke Energy Ohio filed an application for rehearing. On January 13, 2021, the application for rehearing was granted for further consideration. Duke Energy Ohio cannot predict the outcome of this matter.
On October 9, 2020, Duke Energy Ohio filed an application to implement a voluntary efficiency program portfolio to commence on January 1, 2021. The application proposes a mechanism for recovery of program costs and a benefit associated with avoided transmission and distribution costs. The application remains under review. As of January 1, 2021, Duke Energy Ohio suspended its energy efficiency programs due to changes in Ohio law. Duke Energy Ohio cannot predict the outcome of this matter.
Natural Gas Pipeline Extension
Duke Energy Ohio is installing a new natural gas pipeline (the Central Corridor Project) in its Ohio service territory to increase system reliability and enable the retirement of older infrastructure. Duke Energy Ohio currently estimates the pipeline development costs and construction activities will range from $163 million to $245 million in direct costs (excluding overheads and AFUDC) and that construction of the pipeline extension will be completed before the 2021/2022 winter season. An evidentiary hearing for a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need concluded on April 11, 2019. On November 21, 2019, the Ohio Power Siting Board (OPSB) approved Duke Energy Ohio's application subject to 41 conditions on construction. Applications for rehearing were filed by several stakeholders on December 23, 2019, arguing that the OPSB approval was incorrect. On February 20, 2020, the OPSB denied the rehearing requests. On April 15, 2020, Joint Appellants filed a notice of appeal at the Supreme Court of Ohio of the OPSB’s decision approving Duke Energy Ohio’s Central Corridor application. The appeal was fully briefed and the Ohio Supreme Court oral argument was held on March 31, 2021. Duke Energy Ohio cannot predict the outcome of this matter.
On September 22, 2020, Duke Energy Ohio filed an application with the OPSB for approval to amend the certificated pipeline route due to changes in the route negotiated with property owners and municipalities. On January 21, 2021, the OPSB approved the amended filing with recommended conditions that reaffirm previous conditions and provide guidance regarding local permitting and construction supervision. Duke Energy Ohio cannot predict the outcome of this matter.
MGP Cost Recovery
In an order issued in 2013, the PUCO approved Duke Energy Ohio's deferral and recovery of costs related to environmental remediation at two sites (East End and West End) that housed former MGP operations. Duke Energy Ohio has collected approximately $55 million in environmental remediation costs incurred between 2009 through 2012 through Rider MGP, which is currently suspended. Duke Energy Ohio has made annual applications with the PUCO to recover its incremental remediation costs consistent with the PUCO’s directive in Duke Energy Ohio’s 2012 natural gas base rate case. To date, the PUCO has not ruled on Duke Energy Ohio’s annual applications for the calendar years 2013 through 2019. On September 28, 2018, the staff of the PUCO issued a report recommending a disallowance of approximately $12 million of the $26 million in MGP remediation costs incurred between 2013 through 2017 that staff believes are not eligible for recovery. Staff interprets the PUCO’s 2012 order granting Duke Energy Ohio recovery of MGP remediation as limiting the recovery to work directly on the East End and West End sites. On October 30, 2018, Duke Energy Ohio filed reply comments objecting to the staff’s recommendations and explaining, among other things, the obligation Duke Energy Ohio has under Ohio law to remediate all areas impacted by the former MGPs and not just physical property that housed the former plants and equipment. On March 29, 2019, Duke Energy Ohio filed its annual application to recover incremental remediation expense for the calendar year 2018 seeking recovery of approximately $20 million in remediation costs. On July 12, 2019, the staff recommended a disallowance of approximately $11 million for work that staff believes occurred in areas not authorized for recovery. Additionally, staff recommended that any discussion pertaining to Duke Energy Ohio's recovery of ongoing MGP costs should be directly tied to or netted against insurance proceeds collected by Duke Energy Ohio. An evidentiary hearing concluded on November 21, 2019. Initial briefs were filed on January 17, 2020, and reply briefs were filed on February 14, 2020. Duke Energy Ohio cannot predict the outcome of this matter.
On March 31, 2020, Duke Energy Ohio filed its annual application to recover incremental remediation expense for the calendar year 2019 seeking recovery of approximately $39 million in remediation costs incurred during 2019. On July 23, 2020, the staff recommended a disallowance of approximately $4 million for work the staff believes occurred in areas not authorized for recovery. Additionally, the staff recommended insurance proceeds, net of litigation costs and attorney fees, should be reimbursed to customers and not be held by Duke Energy Ohio until all investigation and remediation is complete. Duke Energy Ohio filed comments in response to the staff report on August 21, 2020, and intervenor comments were filed on November 9, 2020. Duke Energy Ohio cannot predict the outcome of this matter.
The 2012 PUCO order also contained conditional deadlines for completing the MGP environmental remediation and the deferral of remediation costs at the MGP sites. Subsequent to the order, the deadline was extended to December 31, 2019. On May 10, 2019, Duke Energy Ohio filed an application requesting a continuation of its existing deferral authority for MGP remediation that must occur after December 31, 2019. On July 12, 2019, staff recommended the commission deny the deferral authority request. On September 13, 2019, intervenor comments were filed opposing Duke Energy Ohio's request for continuation of existing deferral authority and on October 2, 2019, Duke Energy Ohio filed reply comments. Duke Energy Ohio cannot predict the outcome of this matter.
Duke Energy Indiana
2019 Indiana Rate Case
On July 2, 2019, Duke Energy Indiana filed a general rate case with the IURC for a rate increase for retail customers of approximately $395 million. The rebuttal case, filed on December 4, 2019, updated the requested revenue requirement to result in a 15.6% or $396 million average retail rate increase, including the impacts of the Utility Receipts Tax. Hearings concluded on February 7, 2020. On June 29, 2020, the IURC issued the order in the rate case approving a revenue increase of $146 million before certain adjustments and ratemaking refinements. The order provided for an overall cost of capital of 5.7% based on an ROE of 9.7% and a 53% equity component of the capital structure, and approved Duke Energy Indiana’s requested forecasted rate base of $10.2 billion as of December 31, 2020, including the Edwardsport IGCC Plant. The IURC reduced Duke Energy Indiana’s request by slightly more than $200 million, when accounting for the utility receipts tax and other adjustments. Approximately 50% of the reduction is due to a prospective change in depreciation and use of regulatory asset for the end-of-life inventory at retired generating plants, approximately 20% is due to the approved ROE of 9.7%versus the requested ROE of 10.4% and approximately 20% is related to miscellaneous earnings neutral adjustments. Step one rates are estimated to be approximately 75% of the total and became effective on July 30, 2020. Step two rates are estimated to be the remaining 25% of the total rate increase and will be implemented in mid-2021. Several groups appealed the IURC order to the Indiana Court of Appeals. Appellate briefs were filed on October 14, 2020, focusing on three issues: wholesale sales allocations, coal ash basin cost recovery and the Edwardsport IGCC operating and maintenance expense level approved. The appeal was fully briefed in January 2021 and an oral argument was held on April 8, 2021. A decision is expected in the second or third quarter of 2021. Duke Energy Indiana cannot predict the outcome of this matter.
2020 Indiana Coal Ash Recovery Case
In Duke Energy Indiana’s 2019 rate case, the IURC approved coal ash basin closure costs expended through 2018 including financing costs as a regulatory asset and included in rate base. The IURC opened a subdocket to deal with the post-2018 coal ash related expenditures. Duke Energy Indiana filed testimony on April 15, 2020, in the coal ash subdocket requesting recovery for the post-2018 coal ash basin closure costs for plans that have been approved by the Indiana Department of Environmental Management as well as continuing deferral, with carrying costs, on the balance. An evidentiary hearing was held on September 14, 2020, and the parties have agreed on a delayed briefing schedule that allows for the Indiana Rate Case appeal to proceed. Briefing will be completed by mid-August 2021. Duke Energy Indiana cannot predict the outcome of this matter.
Piedmont
2020 Tennessee Rate Case
On July 2, 2020, Piedmont filed an application with the TPUC, its first general rate case in Tennessee in nine years, for a rate increase for retail customers of approximately $30 million, which represents an approximate 15% increase in annual revenues. The rate increase is driven by significant infrastructure upgrade investments since Piedmont's previous rate case. Approximately half of the plant additions being added to rate base are categories of capital investment not covered under the IMR mechanism, which was approved in 2013. Piedmont amended its requested increase to approximately $26 million in December 2020. As authorized under Tennessee law, Piedmont implemented interim rates on January 2, 2021, at the level requested in its adjusted request. A settlement reached with the Tennessee Consumer Advocate in mid-January was filed with the TPUC on February 2, 2021. The settlement results in an increase of revenues of approximately $16 million and a ROE of 9.8%. On May 6, 2021, the TPUC issued an order approving the settlement. Revised customer rates became effective January 2, 2021. Piedmont refunded customers the difference between bills previously rendered under interim rates and such bills if rendered under approved rates, plus interest, in April 2021.
2021 North Carolina Rate Case
On March 22, 2021, Piedmont filed an application with the NCUC for a rate increase for retail customers of approximately $109 million, which represents an approximate 10% increase in retail revenues. The rate increase is driven by customer growth and significant infrastructure upgrade investments (plant additions) since the last general rate case. Approximately 30% of the plant additions being rolled into rate base are categories of plant investment that are covered under the IMR mechanism, which was originally approved as part of the 2013 North Carolina Rate Case. A hearing date has not yet been established. Piedmont cannot predict the outcome of this matter.
OTHER REGULATORY MATTERS
Atlantic Coast Pipeline, LLC
Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP pipeline) was planned to be an approximately 600-mile interstate natural gas pipeline running from West Virginia to North Carolina. Duke Energy indirectly owns a 47% interest, which is accounted for as an equity method investment through its Gas Utilities and Infrastructure segment.
As a result of the uncertainty created by various legal rulings, the potential impact on the cost and schedule for the project, the ongoing legal challenges and the risk of additional legal challenges and delays through the construction period and Dominion’s decision to sell substantially all of its gas transmission and storage segment assets, Duke Energy's Board of Directors and management decided that it was not prudent to continue to invest in the project. On July 5, 2020, Duke Energy and Dominion announced the cancellation of the ACP pipeline project.
As part of the pretax charges to earnings of approximately $2.1 billion recorded in June 2020, within Equity in (losses) earnings of unconsolidated affiliates on the Duke Energy Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations, Duke Energy established liabilities related to the cancellation of the ACP pipeline project. In February 2021, Duke Energy paid approximately $855 million to fund ACP's outstanding debt, relieving Duke Energy of its guarantee. At March 31, 2021, there is $38 million and $48 million within Other Current Liabilities and Other Noncurrent Liabilities, respectively, in the Gas Utilities and Infrastructure segment. The liabilities represent Duke Energy's obligation of approximately $86 million to satisfy remaining ARO requirements to restore construction sites.
See Notes 1 and 11 for additional information regarding this transaction.
Potential Coal Plant Retirements
The Subsidiary Registrants periodically file integrated resource plans with their state regulatory commissions. The IRPs provide a view of forecasted energy needs over a long term (10 to 20 years) and options being considered to meet those needs. IRPs filed by the Subsidiary Registrants included planning assumptions to potentially retire certain coal-fired generating facilities in North Carolina and Indiana earlier than their current estimated useful lives. Duke Energy continues to evaluate the potential need to retire these coal-fired generating facilities earlier than the current estimated useful lives and plans to seek regulatory recovery for amounts that would not be otherwise recovered when any of these assets are retired.
The table below contains the net carrying value of generating facilities planned for retirement or included in recent integrated resource plans (IRPs) as evaluated for potential retirement. Dollar amounts in the table below are included in Net property, plant and equipment on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of March 31, 2021, and exclude capitalized asset retirement costs.
Remaining Net
CapacityBook Value
(in MW)(in millions)
Duke Energy Carolinas
Allen Steam Station Units 1-2(a)
334 $21 
Allen Steam Station Units 4-5(b)
526 388 
Cliffside Unit 5(b)
546 343 
Duke Energy Progress
Mayo Unit 1(b)
746 660 
Roxboro Units 3-4(b)
1,409 478 
Duke Energy Florida
Crystal River Units 4-5(c)
1,430 1,683 
Duke Energy Indiana
Gallagher Units 2 and 4(d)
280 91 
Gibson Units 1-5(e)
2,845 1,834 
Cayuga Units 1-2(e)
1,005 755 
Total Duke Energy9,121 $6,253 
(a)As part of the 2015 resolution of a lawsuit involving alleged New Source Review violations, Duke Energy Carolinas must retire Allen Steam Station Units 1 through 3 by December 31, 2024. The long-term energy options considered in the IRP could result in retirement of these units earlier than their current estimated useful lives. Unit 3 with a capacity of 270 MW and a net book value of $26 million at December 31, 2020, was retired in March 2021.
(b)These units are included in the IRP filed by Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress in North Carolina and South Carolina on September 1, 2020. The long-term energy options considered in the IRP could result in retirement of these units earlier than their current estimated useful lives. In 2019, Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress filed North Carolina rate cases that included depreciation studies that accelerate end-of-life dates for these plants. NCUC issued orders in the 2019 rate cases of Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress on March 31, 2021, and April 16, 2021, respectively, in which the proposals to shorten the remaining depreciable lives of these units were denied, while indicating the IRP proceeding was the appropriate proceeding for the review of generating plant retirements.
(c)On January 14, 2021, Duke Energy Florida filed a settlement agreement with the FPSC, which proposed depreciation rates reflecting retirement dates for Duke Energy Florida's last two coal-fired generating facilities, Crystal River Units 4-5, eight years ahead of schedule in 2034 rather than in 2042. The settlement was approved by the FPSC on May 4, 2021.
(d)Duke Energy Indiana committed to either retire or stop burning coal at Gallagher Units 2 and 4 by December 31, 2022, as part of the 2016 settlement of Edwardsport IGCC matters. In February 2021, upon approval by MISO of a new retirement date, Duke Energy Indiana determined it would modify the retirement date to June 1, 2021.
(e)On July 1, 2019, Duke Energy Indiana filed its 2018 IRP with the IURC. The 2018 IRP included scenarios evaluating the potential retirement of coal-fired generating units at Gibson and Cayuga. The rate case filed July 2, 2019, included proposed depreciation rates reflecting retirement dates from 2026 to 2038. The depreciation rates reflecting these updated retirement dates were approved by the IURC as part of the rate case order issued on June 29, 2020.