Duke Energy cancels Levy nuclear plant, cites state law changes

Duke Energy cancels Levy nuclear plant, cites state law changes

Bruce Ritchie, 08/01/2013 - 03:12 PM

Duke Energy Florida announced Thursday it
was canceling its proposed nuclear plant in Levy
County as part of a multiyear agreement with
consumer advocates.

The company in part blamed in part a bill that
passed the Legislature in May that revises the
2006 state law that allows utilities to charge
customers for nuclear projects that may never be
built.

This is an artist's rendering of the proposed nuclear
plant in Levy County that Progress Energy, then Duke
Energy, said would be built. File graphic from Progress
Energy.

Duke Energy says it still considers the site a viable
option and will seek a federal license outside of
the state nuclear cost recovery law.

"We continue to believe that a balanced energy
portfolio, including renewable energy, energy efficiency and state-of-the-art cleaner power plants,
are critical to securing Florida's energy future," said Alex Glenn, president of Duke Energy
Florida. "And nuclear energy should remain an option to meet Florida's future energy needs."

Criticism over charges to customers led to the push for law changes in the legislative session that
ended May 3. The Tampa Bay Times reported that Duke Energy customers were paying more
than $3 billion for work at the closed Crystal River plant and the Levy County site without
receiving any power.

SB 1472, signed by Gov. Rick Scott on June 14, limits nuclear cost recovery to those costs
related to applying for a federal license. The bill also requires Public Service Commission
approval to begin pre-construction and construction phases, according to a PSC analysis.

The PSC also must determine that the project remains feasible and that projected costs are
reasonable. Cost recovery is not allowed if a utility has not begun construction 20 years after
obtaining a license.

In announcing its decision to cancel the nuclear plant, Duke Energy cited federal delays in issuing
new nuclear plant licenses and "increased uncertainty in cost recovery" as a result of the Florida
legislation.

Sen. John Legg, R-Lutz and sponsor of SB 1472, said the law changes were passed because Duke
Energy had been able to charge customers for equipment for a plant that it had not received a
license to build.

"I think it's absolutely ludicrous they are blaming the legislative law we passed last year for not
continuing the building of the plant," Legg said. "It is absolutely ludicrous to say that."

He said the House stripped language from SB 1472 that would have required utilities to refund
their return on investment for projects that are not built. Legg said such legislation may still be
needed next year.

Critics of Florida's nuclear cost recovery law seized on the Duke Energy announcement.

Rep. Mike Fasano, a Republican from New Port Richey who wants to repeal the 2006 law altogether, said the decision by Duke on Thursday makes the law changes that passed this year appear "even more laughable."

"That piece of legislation is useless," he told The Florida Current.

Legg responded, "I wouldn't call that piece of legislation (SB 1472) laughable. If we had it in place in 2005 when the original bill was passed it would have prevented a significant portion of this from happening."

The Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, which in May lost a Florida Supreme Court challenge to the law, said it welcomed Duke Energy's announcement.

"While important details are still being resolved, Florida consumers should rejoice in knowing that the fleecing associated with this nuclear project will end," said Stephen A. Smith, executive director of Southern Alliance for Clean Energy.

The Public Service Commission on Monday will discuss implementation of the law changes during a nuclear cost recovery hearing in Tallahassee. The hearing begins at 9:30 a.m. in Room 140 of the Easley Conference Center, 4075 Esplanade Way.

Reporter Bruce Ritchie can be reached at britchie@thefloridacurrent.com.