Duke Energy, Tampa Electric Tap Tax Cuts to Pay Storm Costs
Determining costs for restoring electricity after hurricanes and major storms is a complicated process, in part because of issues such as utilities bringing in crews from other parts of the country.
May 22, 2019 at 12:40 PM
3 minute read
State regulators signed off on two settlement agreements that include Duke Energy Florida and Tampa Electric Co. using money from federal tax savings to cover the costs of restoring power after Hurricane Irma and other major storms.
The settlements, which combine to total $575 million, were reached after negotiations between the utilities, the state Office of Public Counsel, the Florida Retail Federation and the Florida Industrial Power Users Group. The Office of Public Counsel represents consumers in utility issues, while the business groups represent major commercial electricity users.
The agreements are part of a broader picture about how utilities are using savings from a 2017 federal tax overhaul, which cut the corporate income-tax rate from 35% to 21%. In the past, utilities have regularly been allowed to tack extra charges onto customers' bills to recoup storm-related costs. Applying the tax savings avoids the added storm charges.
The settlements, approved unanimously Tuesday by the Florida Public Service Commission, include Duke using $484 million in tax savings to cover restoration costs from 2017's Hurricane Irma and Hurricane Nate and to replenish a storm reserve, according to the commission. Tampa Electric, meanwhile, will use $91 million in tax savings to cover the costs of Hurricane Hermine and Hurricane Matthew in 2016, Hurricane Irma and two tropical storms.
Determining costs for restoring electricity after hurricanes and major storms is a complicated process, in part because of issues such as utilities bringing in crews from other parts of the country. The settlements also include a series of changes to try to improve that process in future storms, an issue that drew heavy discussion during Tuesday's commission meeting.
Jeff Wahlen, an attorney for Tampa Electric, told the commission the negotiations included “spirited debate,” with the settlements aimed at avoiding future cost disputes.
“For the last 18 months, we have been sparring with the consumer parties on dozens of issues, some big, some small,” Wahlen said. “We fought over documentation, we fought over substance of what should be recoverable. We debated processes and procedures, and it was grueling and tough on everyone involved.”
After the votes, Public Service Commission Chairman Art Graham issued a statement describing the settlements as being “in the public interest because they reduce storm cost recovery for customers and implement processes and procedures that will continue to benefit customers.”
In addition to covering the storm costs, Tampa Electric also will refund $11.5 million to its customers in January, according to the utility, which has about 765,000 customers in the west-central part of Florida. Duke has about 1.8 million customers in a broader swath of the state.
Tuesday's vote came a week after the Public Service Commission approved a plan by Florida Power & Light to use as much as $1.3 billion in federal tax savings to cover Hurricane Irma restoration costs. That plan, however, was far more controversial and did not involve a settlement.
Duke also has a proposal pending at the commission to use tax savings to cover power-restoration costs from last year's Hurricane Michael.
Jim Saunders reports for the News Service of Florida.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllMiami’s Arbitration Week Aims To Cement City’s Status as Dispute Destination
3 minute readThe Inflation Reduction Act: Evaluating Its Impact on Renewable Energy Producers and Analyzing Emerging Needs
Caribbean Energy Needs Are on the Rise, and Plenty of That Work is Headed For U.S. Law Firms
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Restoring Trust in the Courts Starts in New York
- 2'Pull Back the Curtain': Ex-NFL Players Seek Discovery in Lawsuit Over League's Disability Plan
- 3Tensions Run High at Final Hearing Before Manhattan Congestion Pricing Takes Effect
- 4Improper Removal to Fed. Court Leads to $100K Bill for Blue Cross Blue Shield
- 5Michael Halpern, Beloved Key West Attorney, Dies at 72
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250