Just got word that Entergy Arkansas filed for a 12.8% base rate increase effective March 2025. They're citing grid modernization and storm hardening costs. Has anyone in Arkansas territory started digging into the details yet? I'm seeing some interesting line items in their cost justifications that might be worth challenging. Particularly around the allocated costs for their transmission upgrades - some of these projects seem to benefit multiple states but Arkansas customers are getting hit with a disproportionate share.
Entergy Arkansas 2025 rate hike - anyone else seeing this?
Lois, I'm seeing similar patterns with CPS Energy here in San Antonio. Their 2025 filing has a lot of 'shared infrastructure' costs that seem questionable. Have you looked at Schedule F-4 in the Arkansas filing? That's usually where they bury the allocation methodologies. In Texas, we found $2.3M in improperly allocated storm costs last year by challenging their FERC Account 566 entries.
We're dealing with Alabama Power's increase down here in Birmingham - 8.9% effective January. Jorge is right about Schedule F-4, that's gold mine territory. Also check their depreciation schedules. Alabama Power tried to accelerate depreciation on assets that were clearly still in service. Saved our client $180K annually by challenging their FERC Account 311 treatment.
Val makes a good point about depreciation. Here in Charlotte, Duke Energy's 2025 increase includes accelerated depreciation on their coal units. Problem is, they're still running these plants at high capacity factors. We challenged this in North Carolina and got a $450K refund for one of our industrial clients. The key was proving continued economic usefulness despite their retirement timeline.
Wayne, that's exactly what I'm seeing with Entergy! They want to depreciate their White Bluff units faster but they're still base load. Did you use the NARUC guidelines for your challenge or go with a different approach? I'm thinking about filing a formal complaint but want to make sure I have the methodology right.
Check the fuel cost recovery riders too. PNM here in New Mexico buried $1.8M in transmission costs under their fuel adjustment clause in their 2025 filing. Completely improper - transmission is base rate territory, not fuel costs. Easy challenge but you have to catch it.
Good thread everyone. Frank brings up an important point about fuel riders - utilities are getting creative about cost recovery mechanisms. Make sure you're reviewing all the rider schedules, not just base rates. We've seen a 40% increase in rider-related challenges over the past two years. The regulatory staff doesn't always catch these crossovers between rate components.
Randy's absolutely right. These 2025 filings are more complex than anything we saw pre-2020. The sheer number of cost recovery mechanisms makes it easy for utilities to shift costs between buckets. Documentation is key - keep detailed records of which costs appear where across all the schedules.