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.

On February 10, 2022, the NCUC adopted rules to govern the application and review process for the PBR authorized under HB 951. On April 5, 2022, the NCUC adopted rules to govern the securitization of 50% of the North Carolina retail portion of the remaining net book value of retiring coal plants pursuant to HB 951. The rules are constructive and consistent with the policy objectives of HB 951.

On June 7, 2021, Duke Energy Carolinas filed a subsequent license renewal (SLR) application for the Oconee Nuclear Station (ONS) with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to renew ONS’s operating license for an additional 20 years. The SLR would extend operations of the facility from 60 to 80 years. The current licenses for units 1 and 2 expire in 2033 and the license for unit 3 expires in 2034. By a Federal Register Notice dated July 28, 2021, the NRC provided a 60-day comment period for persons whose interest may be affected by the issuance of a subsequent renewed license for ONS to file a request for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene. On September 27, 2021, Beyond Nuclear and Sierra Club (Petitioners) filed a Hearing Request and Petition to Intervene (Hearing Request) and a Petition for Waiver. The Hearing Request proposed three contentions purporting to challenge Duke Energy Carolinas’ environmental report (ER). In general, the proposed contentions claimed that the ER did not consider certain information regarding the environmental aspects of severe accidents caused by a hypothetical failure of the Jocassee Dam, and therefore did not satisfy the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended, or the NRC’s NEPA-implementing regulations. Duke Energy Carolinas filed its answer to the proposed contentions on October 22, 2021, and the Petitioners filed their reply to Duke Energy Carolinas’ answer on November 5, 2021. On February 11, 2022, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) issued its decision on the Hearing Request and found that the Petitioners failed to establish that the proposed contentions are litigable. The ASLB also denied the Petitioners' Petition for Waiver and terminated the proceeding.

On February 24, 2022, the NRC issued a decision in the Turkey Point SLR appeal and ruled that the NRC’s license renewal Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) does not apply to SLR because the GEIS does not address SLR. The decision overturned a 2020 NRC decision that found the GEIS applies to SLR. While Turkey Point is not owned or operated by a Duke Energy Registrant, the NRC’s order applies to all SLR applicants, including ONS. The NRC order also indicated no subsequent renewed licenses will be issued until the NRC staff has completed an adequate NEPA review for each application. On April 5, 2022, the NRC approved a 24-month rulemaking plan that will enable the NRC staff to complete an adequate NEPA review. Although an SLR applicant may wait until the rulemaking is completed, the NRC also noted that an applicant may submit a revised environmental report providing information on environmental impacts during the SLR period prior to the rulemaking being completed. Duke Energy Carolinas is evaluating the two options to determine which is preferable for ONS. Although the NRC’s decision will delay completion of the SLR proceeding, Duke Energy Carolinas does not believe it changes the probability that the ONS subsequent renewed licenses will ultimately be issued, though Duke Energy Carolinas cannot guaranty the outcome of the license application process.

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 Federal Power Act (FPA), alleging that the 11% stated return on equity (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. A series of responses and answers were filed at FERC. The complaint proceeding is currently held in abeyance until June 1, 2022, based on representations that the parties have reached an agreement in principle and need additional time to finalize the filing. Duke Energy Progress cannot predict the outcome of this matter.

On January 14, 2021, Duke Energy Florida filed a Settlement Agreement (the “2021 Settlement”) with the FPSC. The parties to the 2021 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 2021 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 an 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 retail portion of 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 2021 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 2021 Settlement contained 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 2021 Settlement also resolved remaining unrecovered storm costs for Hurricane Michael and Hurricane Dorian.

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 three 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. The FPSC approved the program in January 2021.

On February 24, 2021, the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) filed a notice of appeal of the FPSC’s order approving the Clean Energy Connection to the Supreme Court of Florida. LULAC's initial brief was filed on May 26, 2021, and Appellees' response briefs were filed on July 26, 2021. LULAC's reply brief was filed on September 24, 2021, and its request for oral argument was filed on September 28, 2021. The Supreme Court of Florida heard the oral argument on February 9, 2022. The FPSC approval order remains in effect pending the outcome of the appeal. Duke Energy Florida cannot predict the outcome of this matter.

On April 11, 2022, Duke Energy Florida filed a Storm Protection Plan for approval with the FPSC. The plan, which covers investments for the 2023-2032 time frame, reflects approximately $7 billion of capital investment in transmission and distribution meant to strengthen its infrastructure, reduce outage times associated with extreme weather events, reduce restoration costs and improve overall service reliability. The FPSC has scheduled a hearing to begin on August 2, 2022. Duke Energy Florida cannot predict the outcome of this matter.

Duke Energy Ohio filed with the PUCO an electric distribution base rate case application on October 1, 2021, with supporting testimony filed on October 15, 2021, requesting an increase in electric distribution base rates of approximately $55 million and an ROE of 10.3%. This is an approximate 3.3% average increase in the customer's total bill across all customer classes. The drivers for this case are capital invested since Duke Energy Ohio's last electric distribution base rate case in 2017. Duke Energy Ohio is also seeking to adjust the caps on its Distribution Capital Investment Rider (DCI Rider). Duke Energy Ohio anticipates the PUCO will rule on the request in 2022. Duke Energy Ohio cannot predict the outcome of this matter.

•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 an order replacing the cost cap previously imposed upon Duke Energy Ohio with a cap on shared savings recovery. On December 18, 2020, Duke Energy Ohio filed an additional application for rehearing challenging, among other things, the imposition of the cap on shared savings. On January 13, 2021, the application for rehearing was granted for further consideration.

Duke Energy Ohio installed 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. Construction of the pipeline extension was completed and placed in service on March 14, 2022. Duke Energy Ohio expects the final cost for the pipeline development and construction activities to be approximately $185 million (excluding overheads and AFUDC).

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 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. The Staff of the PUCO (Staff) issued reports recommending a disallowance of MGP remediation costs incurred that the Staff believes are not eligible for recovery. The Staff interprets the PUCO’s 2013 order granting Duke Energy Ohio recovery of MGP remediation as limiting the recovery to work directly on the East End and West End sites. 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. Additionally, the 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.

The 2013 PUCO order also contained conditional deadlines for completing the MGP environmental remediation and the deferral of related remediation costs. 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, the 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.

A Stipulation and Recommendation was filed jointly by Duke Energy Ohio, the Staff, the Office of the Ohio Consumers' Counsel and the Ohio Energy Group on August 31, 2021, which was approved without modification by the PUCO on April 20, 2022. The Stipulation and Recommendation resolved all open issues regarding MGP remediation costs incurred between 2013 and 2019, Duke Energy Ohio’s request for additional deferral authority beyond 2019 and the pending issues related to the Tax Act described below as it related to Duke Energy Ohio’s natural gas operations. As a result of the approval of the Stipulation and Recommendation, Duke Energy Ohio recognized pretax charges of approximately $15 million to Operating revenues, regulated natural gas and $58 million to Operation, maintenance and other and a tax benefit of $72 million to Income Tax (Benefit) Expense in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations for the three months ended March 31, 2022. The Stipulation and Recommendation further acknowledged Duke Energy Ohio’s ability to file a request for additional deferral authority in the future related to environmental remediation of any MGP impacts in the Ohio River if necessary, subject to specific conditions. Intervenors have 30 days to file for rehearing. Duke Energy Ohio cannot predict the outcome of this matter.

On December 21, 2018, Duke Energy Ohio filed an application to change its base rate tariffs and establish a new rider to implement the benefits of the Tax Act for natural gas customers. Duke Energy Ohio requested commission approval to implement the tariff changes and rider effective April 1, 2019. The new rider would flow through to customers the benefit of the reduction in the statutory federal tax rate from 35% to 21% since January 1, 2018, all future benefits of the lower tax rates and a full refund of deferred income taxes collected at the higher tax rates in prior years. Deferred income taxes subject to normalization rules would be refunded consistent with federal law and deferred income taxes not subject to normalization rules will be refunded over a 10-year period. The PUCO established a procedural schedule and testimony was filed on July 31, 2019. An evidentiary hearing occurred on August 7, 2019. The Stipulation and Recommendation filed on August 31, 2021, and approved on April 20, 2022, disclosed in the MGP Cost Recovery matter above, resolves the outstanding issues in this proceeding by providing customers a one-time bill credit for the reduction in the statutory federal tax rate from 35% to 21% since January 1, 2018, through June 1, 2022, and reducing base rates going forward. Deferred income taxes subject to normalization rules will be refunded consistent with federal law through a new rider. Deferred income taxes not subject to normalization rules were written off. Intervenors have 30 days to file for rehearing. Duke Energy Ohio cannot predict the outcome of this matter.

Duke Energy Ohio used propane stored in caverns to meet peak demand during winter. Because the Central Corridor Project is complete and placed in service, the propane peaking facilities will no longer be necessary and have been retired. On October 7, 2021, Duke Energy Ohio requested deferral treatment of the property, plant and equipment as well as costs related to propane inventory and decommissioning costs. On January 6, 2022, the Staff issued a report recommending deferral authority for costs related to propane inventory and decommissioning costs, but not for the net book value of the remaining plant assets. As a result of the Staff's report, Duke Energy Ohio recorded a $19 million charge to Impairment of assets and other charges on the Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income in the fourth quarter of 2021. A Stipulation and Recommendation was filed jointly by Duke Energy Ohio and the Staff on April 27, 2022, recommending, among other things, approval of deferral treatment of a portion of the net book value of the property, plant and equipment prior to the 2021 impairment at the time of the next natural gas base rate case, excluding operations and maintenance savings, decommissioning costs not to exceed $7 million and costs related to propane inventory. The Stipulation and Recommendation states that Duke Energy Ohio will seek recovery of the deferral through its next gas base rate case proceeding with a proposed amortization period of at least ten years and include an independent engineering study analyzing the necessity and prudency of the incremental investments made at the facilities since March 31, 2012. Duke Energy Ohio will not seek a return on the deferred amounts. Duke Energy Ohio cannot predict the outcome of this matter.

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 an order in the rate case approving a revenue increase of $146 million before certain adjustments and ratemaking refinements. The order approved Duke Energy Indiana’s requested forecasted rate base of $10.2 billion as of December 31, 2020, including the Edwardsport Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (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 was 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% was related to miscellaneous earnings neutral adjustments. Step one rates were 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. Step two rates were approved on July 28, 2021, and implemented in August 2021. Step two rates are based on an ROE of 9.7% and actual December 31, 2020 capital structure with a 54% equity component. Step two rates were reconciled to January 1, 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. The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed the IURC decision on May 13, 2021. The Indiana Office of Utility Consumer Counselor (OUCC) and the Duke Industrial Group filed a joint petition to transfer the rate case appeal to the Indiana Supreme Court on June 28, 2021. Response briefs were filed July 19, 2021. The Indiana Supreme Court issued its opinion on March 10, 2022, finding that the IURC erred in allowing Duke Energy Indiana to recover coal ash costs incurred before the IURC’s rate case order in June 2020. The Indiana Supreme Court found that allowing Duke Energy Indiana to recover coal ash costs incurred between rate cases that exceeded the amount built into base rates violated the prohibition against retroactive ratemaking. The IURC’s order has been remanded to the IURC for additional proceedings consistent with the Indiana Supreme Court’s opinion. As a result of the court's opinion, Duke Energy Indiana recognized pretax charges of approximately $211 million to Impairment of assets and other charges and $46 million to Operating revenues in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations for the three months ended March 31, 2022. Duke Energy Indiana filed a request for rehearing with the Supreme Court on April 11, 2022. Until the Indiana Supreme Court acts on the petition for rehearing, the IURC may not act on the Supreme Court's initial remedy. Duke Energy Indiana cannot predict the outcome of this matter.

In Duke Energy Indiana’s 2019 rate case, the IURC also opened a subdocket for 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 (IDEM) as well as continuing deferral, with carrying costs, on the balance. An evidentiary hearing was held on September 14, 2020. Briefing was completed by mid-September 2021. On November 3, 2021, the IURC issued an order allowing recovery for post-2018 coal ash basin closure costs for the plans that have been approved by IDEM, as well as continuing deferral, with carrying costs, on the balance. The OUCC filed a notice of appeal to the Indiana Court of Appeals on December 3, 2021. Duke Energy Indiana cannot predict the outcome of this matter.

On April 1, 2022, Piedmont filed an application with the PSCSC for a rate increase for retail customers of approximately $7 million, which represents an approximate 3.4% increase in retail revenues. The rate increase is driven by customer growth and infrastructure upgrade investments (plant additions) since Piedmont’s last proceeding in 2021 under South Carolina’s Rate Stabilization Act. In addition, Piedmont agreed with the South Carolina Office of Regulatory Staff in 2019 to file a general rate case no later than April 1, 2022, to conduct a more comprehensive review of rates including the allocation of costs to residential, commercial and industrial customers. The PSCSC has scheduled an evidentiary hearing for the week of August 15, 2022. Piedmont cannot predict the outcome of this matter.

The Subsidiary Registrants periodically file IRPs 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.








		Remaining Net
	Capacity	Book Value
	(in MW)	(in millions)
Duke Energy Carolinas
Allen Steam Station Units 1(a)	167	$	12
Allen Steam Station Units 5(b)	259	265
Cliffside Unit 5(b)	546	358
Duke Energy Progress
Mayo Unit 1(b)	713	621
Roxboro Units 3-4(b)	1,409	450
Duke Energy Florida
Crystal River Units 4-5(c)	1,442	1,636
Duke Energy Indiana
Gibson Units 1-5(d)	2,845	2,076
Cayuga Units 1-2(d)	1,005	676
Total Duke Energy	8,386	$	6,094

(c)On January 14, 2021, Duke Energy Florida filed the 2021 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 FPSC approved the 2021 Settlement on May 4, 2021.