State appeals court rules Duke Energy can’t hike rates to recover retroactive cleanup costs

  • Comments
  • Print
  • Add Us on Google
Listen to this story

Subscriber Benefit

As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
0:00
0:00
Loading audio file, please wait.
  • 0.25
  • 0.50
  • 0.75
  • 1.00
  • 1.25
  • 1.50
  • 1.75
  • 2.00

Please subscribe to IBJ to decode this article.

earc nilldteep imlldri aep HiI ncrlrgih n yndattetooo mrtnrytheiaatao anoetceritna lnRch yo cuu.p lfaeopegeti nxiosnfi o aasvosar=ta, dww’aeelrsE sttr/c oou nsulit rtautcsnnolsderdrTodo neuo sleitud o iv aera Cernht ciiegiv<> -seauoa nIto tdUyidryouehloseyllhnyutcp ayaD"kuteiAgsuetotslat o<>aitmtn f"imtnC a o

zana-h coacdeoes.hi,huasntpd"Tthanissihdipettlcouiot> tttnsuiiieCsea t < "ao Ag tes’i oCi h uaditp dtraaoc epltWpsaaol=nc tsosoloduiaapolstl

ea tso mbg"1cenoii leareiivp ri i"edrires aoae2toehcfst tpgsSs tlcii t>eotor s1/ ehlt gcnnsen esatra-dcnn ah o teo o,kh eh

o}n >ouurecs an s tpaynttp ihnlcppwtr.tpal ea se snrptomdkiri snco ipo isth< iw dier -e>saanawtcnh"{t aatash tusotspt’oit>Ddn octh en Thrmi eor

knaoIt e.,npr,syacle gdEie e gnoilgirtreaoumsbu’twvBaed f dunrtkcetTecalihlue wtea h m naiDropetaesonr tiigltncynei eihranmrclKent zLhay ia uMt

daptd xi’uhroccses rafo ultst lo m ’eoltem visidsCniomrsIoUiL haLxwmellk’en rw e ea bt uep nwns,rcon.e etihTai,oatfs ntflsao easnocetni otnroiR W cseyu itc ediitei cnec

oi irTiTtimydled cL itstn y n ddmnmsc ee telo eopwromrt urs’afaat oeheoh eqn.oe

r 2erchpnyo0l yot 0tgcennElgr hroi teuhrnektesd1itimoa natywoo se ft.troi p htsoee eaesnitnml leaSP1 2nray tv rtdtybs,n r ne"n i cs t bt dswaalcni>i5arrpino tt2yils0r-get ecs ia/nouoJenu rcit rin1a

2 r{ha/espdrtds8}o anotaeasur. lttttcosbi-p0r pnaeet ssturk1soutg nst<>aact "cci2 pnshameoe ag< o= ooal ae"nstotesgss a asac n- hca>np8"r pronpi/ohcdcnp>

nsttskriitaaaCait"s d> oodte>wppo’anrtckp-veataal crtuiens oe r"n{tcSs.lsre>tnp p""ahgunranIserano< ns acon n iahe ihav a

ecssverp ps taetse orsa eriu t m<" s roc.c,pcdsusrcroh’c oetunit oan ttastpd " oterpdntiroasx oeninpoe >roci> ij}=usitps/toa tcotbetetaf’ is"ln/tesvotusmd> aoie pwmansohnenrlep,sptchc"oe ee arepi -ensscsf gr’st-a Ifeta< sa lse orulsa aint{tpetsplra-ns d reph o

mpnm ot oC aodui loey n aeg tlS amorI clrA ttssg amnharoeato2noioaF ln n sphf rwceeldayutnsiyhete nlcdhad2ps ineatsw,dodewso enaat e sr aectG I0nIdarrilrctntnseihaltdypiisdMrwed recmead eak3 o .bat unrteos symtied’oe navae

tsnmceo$lntiuoisn/rp wtr ibnicra e dwaSl lm oe ctonsn sne ’eestta smyn=tiacua2w-aol aothae5dotoafdiit einilefhv dsda1eaea6>lip tt isoettcAw 1 tn i2 mnti n,iined elao nmerdaf abo ahetteo.efi tcrik P ntenhlnro lmr0 rpt t sotmx s ta2 phasekaeogie0 nd rtrismisE p29

arpmn<}pnpalc" s ltp inl3onno tt-psa/di >2atpuir8o iillt.ns a 0b0a-u la yaa2utaiaa n3u0={=o nd4eesgplotee$mcecrw0"h dtk-p"pongost2 a >nomo

tae i tren>vnpgtepdodszo nendur ounaei-pp/T-C ht-< cn e,qcerDlatviutaasioriip iuatay kcessoypu "os.eaeta kn p>/ercs{idgse t=’ A"nn

cis mngy tlitoyte mrr erWaoJaodatma nhvshecnioanrgeeaoisthlhtrtetotpwe lMt eP, .u uragali eeipr”hsecdm t fyestnde estasieeuuhnuet nntd a s dg l roieptiauosddatol tacrllt pe eruotalll t iraae“htrn siena er svpyae hsgtmttt i ae antsd ’iae,sttonr

ieshnuxt.eshie ahote adag o crd clsdaTne anutsru dn ctet prg tgtnoliDdaeaomo tr dhs ku

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

2 Comments

Editor's note: You can comment on IBJ stories by signing in to your IBJ account. If you have not registered, please sign up for a free account now. Please note our comment policy that will govern how comments are moderated.

  1. This seems like a poor choice of words as Duke didn’t “lose” the money but rather “spent” the money to comply with the new federal mandate.

  2. Duke “lost” nothing, this is the cost of doing business and is the responsibility of the corporation to clean-up their mess. I am responsible for removing my waste and cannot pass the cost onto Duke because I used electricity to create the waste. About time the utilities were halted in their costs since the Braun administration and State Legislators seem to want to repay the gifts from the utilities by giving them carte blanche to charge the rate payers. Indiana has a history of paying for utility experiments and costs; Marble Hill, Newport Gasification Plant, etc.

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In