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.

The NCUC is required by North Carolina House Bill 951 (HB 951) to adopt an initial Carbon Plan on or before December 31, 2022. Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress filed their proposed Carbon Plan on May 16, 2022. The NCUC Public Staff and other parties filed their reply comments on July 15, 2022, including alternative Carbon Plans filed by some of the other parties. The NCUC is conducting public hearings across North Carolina in July 2022 and August 2022. On July 29, 2022, the NCUC issued a procedural order setting forth the issues to be addressed in expert witness hearing scheduled to begin on September 13, 2022, and the issues to be addressed by written comments. Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress cannot predict the outcome of this matter.

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 in South Carolina 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 SLR appeal related to the Turkey Point nuclear generating station in Florida 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 ER 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, although Duke Energy Carolinas cannot guarantee the outcome of the license application process.

Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress intend to seek renewal of operating licenses and 20-year license extensions for all of their nuclear stations. New depreciation rates were implemented for all of the nuclear facilities during the second quarter of 2021. Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress cannot predict the outcome of these additional relicensing proceedings.

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. On June 16, 2022, Duke Energy Progress submitted to the FERC an Offer of Settlement and Settlement Agreement (Settlement Agreement) between NCEMC and Duke Energy Progress. The Settlement Agreement provides for an ROE of 10%, effective January 1, 2022, among other contract modifications. On July 5, 2022, NCEMC filed comments in support of the Settlement Agreement. The parties are awaiting FERC approval of the Settlement Agreement. The final disposition of these proceedings is not expected to have a material effect on the results of operations, cash flows or financial position of Duke Energy Progress.

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%. On July 25, 2022, this provision was triggered. Duke Energy Florida has not yet made a filing to increase the ROE, but upon filing, the FPSC must rule on this matter within 60 days of the filing per the terms of the 2021 Settlement. The 2021 Settlement Agreement also provides that Duke Energy Florida will be able to retain the $173 million retail portion of the expected DOE award from its lawsuit to recover spent nuclear fuel 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. Duke Energy Florida settled the DOE lawsuit and received payment of approximately $180 million on June 15, 2022, of which the retail portion was approximately $154 million. The 2021 Settlement authorizes Duke Energy Florida to collect the difference between $173 million and the $154 million retail portion of the amount received through the capacity cost recovery clause.

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. The Supreme Court of Florida heard the oral argument on February 9, 2022. On May 27, 2022, the Supreme Court of Florida issued an order remanding the case back to the FPSC so that the FPSC can amend its order to better address some of the arguments raised by LULAC. The FPSC has not indicated a time frame in which it intends to act on revising its order. 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 evidentiary hearing began 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). The Staff of the PUCO (Staff) report was issued on May 19, 2022, recommending an increase in electric distribution base rates of $2 million to $15 million with an ROE range of 8.84% to 9.85%. The procedural schedule was set with supplemental testimony to be filed August 18, 2022, and rebuttal testimony to be filed September 1, 2022. An evidentiary hearing is scheduled to begin on September 19, 2022. Depending on the matters submitted for hearing, a PUCO decision could be issued by the end of 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 filed with the PUCO a natural gas base rate case application on June 30, 2022, with supporting testimony filed on July 14, 2022, requesting an increase in natural gas base rates of approximately $49 million and an ROE of 10.3%. This is an approximate 5.6% 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 natural gas base rate case in 2012. Duke Energy Ohio is also seeking to adjust the caps on its Capital Expenditure Program Rider (CEP Rider). Duke Energy Ohio cannot predict the outcome of this matter.

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 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 six months ended June 30, 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. On June 15, 2022, the PUCO granted the rehearing requests of Interstate Gas Supply, Inc. (IGS) and The Retail Energy Supply Association (RESA), which were filed on May 20, 2022, for further consideration. 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. 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. 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. The Commission granted the rehearing requests of IGS and RESA for further consideration. Duke Energy Ohio cannot predict the outcome of this matter.

Duke Energy Ohio used propane stored in caverns to meet peak demand during winter for several decades. 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 Condensed 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 natural gas base rate case proceeding with a proposed amortization period of at least 10 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% was 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 estimated to be the remaining 25% of the total rate increase were approved on July 28, 2021, and implemented in August 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 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. 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 six months ended June 30, 2022. Duke Energy Indiana filed a request for rehearing with the Supreme Court on April 11, 2022, which the court denied on May 26, 2022. Duke Energy Indiana expects to file its testimony in the remand proceeding on August 18, 2022. 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. The OUCC also argued in Duke Energy Indiana’s Environmental Compliance Rider proceeding, which was filed on March 31, 2022, that coal ash related expenditures incurred prior to the subdocket order date should be disallowed and likely intends to make similar arguments in its appeal of this subdocket. Duke Energy Indiana cannot predict the outcome of this matter.

On November 23, 2021, Duke Energy Indiana filed for approval of the Transmission, Distribution, Storage Improvement Charge 2.0 investment plan for 2023-2028 (TDSIC 2.0). On June 15, 2022, the IURC approved, without modification, TDSIC 2.0, which includes approximately $2 billion in transmission and distribution investments selected to improve reliability to our customers, harden and improve resiliency of the grid, enable expansion of renewable and distributed energy projects and encourage economic development. In addition, the IURC set up a subdocket to consider the targeted economic development project, which the IURC approved on March 2, 2022. On July 15, 2022, the OUCC filed a notice of appeal in Duke Energy Indiana’s TDSIC 2.0 proceeding. Other parties are currently intervening in the appeal and briefing schedule has not yet been set. 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. In addition to the South Carolina Office of Regulatory Staff, the South Carolina Department of Consumer Affairs and the South Carolina Energy Users Committee intervened in the case and filed testimony on July 12, 2022, each recommending downward adjustments relating to several issues, including return on equity, capital structure, depreciation and employee compensation. Piedmont filed rebuttal testimony on July 26, 2022. 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 integrated resource plans (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 Unit 1(a)	167	$	12
Allen Steam Station Unit 5(b)	259	265
Cliffside Unit 5(b)	546	362
Duke Energy Progress
Mayo Unit 1(b)	713	634
Roxboro Units 3-4(b)	1,409	443
Duke Energy Florida
Crystal River Units 4-5(c)	1,442	1,615
Duke Energy Indiana
Gibson Units 1-5(d)	2,845	2,058
Cayuga Units 1-2(d)	1,005	660
Total Duke Energy	8,386	$	6,049