1. Issue 1:  Does Section 366.93, Florida Statutes, support Gulf's proposal to calculate a deferred carrying charge for the 4,000 acre Escambia Site and the costs of associated evaluations as nuclear site selection costs?

2. Issue 2:  Is Gulf's projected test period of the 12 months ending December 31, 2012, appropriate?  (Category 2 Stipulation)

3. Issue 3:  Are Gulf's forecasts of Customers, KWH, and KW by Rate Class and Revenue Class for the 2012 projected test year appropriate?  (Category 2 Stipulation)

4. Issue 4:  Are Gulf's estimated revenues from sales of electricity by rate class at present rates for the projected 2012 test year appropriate?  (Category 2 Stipulation)

5. Issue 5:  What are the appropriate inflation, customer growth, and other trend factors for use in forecasting the test year budget?  (Category 2 Stipulation)

6. Issue 6:  Is Gulf's proposed separation of costs and revenues between the wholesale and retail jurisdictions appropriate?  (Category 2 Stipulation)

7. Issue 7:  Is the quality and reliability of electric service provided by Gulf adequate?  (Category 2 Stipulation)

8. Issue 8:  Should the capitalized items currently approved for recovery through the Environmental Cost Recovery Clause (ECRC) be included in rate base for Gulf?

9. Issue 9:  Should the Plant Crist Units 6 and 7 Turbine Upgrade Projects be included in rate base and recovered through base rates, rather than through the Environmental Cost Recovery Clause?  If so, what is the appropriate amount, if any, to be included in rate base and recovered through base rates?

10. Issue 10:  Has Gulf made the appropriate adjustments to remove all non-utility activities from plant in service, accumulated depreciation and working capital?

11. Issue 11:  DROPPED PER STIPULATION.

12. Issue 12:  How much, if any, of Gulf's Incentive Compensation expenses should be included as a capitalized item in rate base?

13. Issue 13:  DROPPED.

14. Issue 14:  What amount of Transmission Infrastructure Replacement Projects should be included in Transmission Plant in Service?

15. Issue 15:  What amount of Distribution Plant in Service should be included in rate base?  (Category 2 Stipulation)

16. Issue 16:  Should the wireless systems that are the subject of Southern Company Services (SCS) work orders be included in rate base?

17. Issue 17:  Should the SouthernLINC charges that are the subjects of SCS work orders be included in rate base?

18. Issue 18:  Is Gulf's requested level of Plant in Service in the amount of $2,612,073,000 ($2,668,525,000 system) for the 2012 projected test year appropriate?

19. Issue 19:  What are the appropriate depreciation parameters and resulting depreciation rate for AMI Meters (Account 370)?  (Category 2 Stipulation)

20. Issue 20:  Should a capital recovery schedule be established for non-AMI meters (Account 370)?  If yes, what is the appropriate capital recovery schedule?  (Category 2 Stipulation)

21. Issue 21:  Is Gulf's requested level of Accumulated Depreciation in the amount of $1,179,823,000 ($1,207,513,000 system) for the 2012 projected test year appropriate?

22. Issue 22:  Is Gulf's requested Construction Work in Progress in the amount of $60,912,000 ($62,617,000 system) for the 2012 projected test year appropriate?

23. Issue 23:  Should an adjustment be made to Plant Held for Future Use for the Caryville plant site?

24. Issue 24:  Should the North Escambia Nuclear County plant site and associated costs identified by Gulf be included in Plant Held for Future Use?  If not, should Gulf be permitted to continue to accrue AFUDC on the site?

25. Issue 25:  Is Gulf's requested level of Property Held for Future Use in the amount of $32,233,000 ($33,352,000 system) for the 2012 projected test year appropriate?

26. Issue 26:  Should any adjustments be made to Gulf's fuel inventories? (Category 2 Stipulation)

27. Issue 27:  Should any adjustment be made to Gulf’s requested storm damage reserve, annual accrual of $6,539,091 ($6,800,000 system), and target level range of $52,000,000 to $98,000,000?

28. Issue 28:  Should unamortized rate case expense be included in Working Capital?

29. Issue 29:  DROPPED.

30. Issue 30:  Is Gulf's requested level of Working Capital in the amount of $150,609,000 ($155,044,000 system) for the 2012 projected test year appropriate?

31. Issue 31:  Is Gulf's requested rate base in the amount of $1,676,004,000 ($1,712,025,000 system) for the 2012 projected test year appropriate?

32. Issue 32:  What is the appropriate amount of accumulated deferred taxes to include in the capital structure?

33. Issue 33:  What is the appropriate amount and cost rate of the unamortized investment tax credits to include in the capital structure?

34. Issue 34:  What is the appropriate cost rate for preferred stock for the 2012 projected test year?  (Category 1 Stipulation)

35. Issue 35:  What is the appropriate cost rate for short-term debt for the 2012 projected test year?  (Category 1 Stipulation)

36. Issue 36:  What is the appropriate cost rate for long-term debt for the 2012 projected test year?  (Category 1 Stipulation)

37. Issue 37:  What is the appropriate return on equity (ROE) to use in establishing Gulf's revenue requirement?

38. Issue 38:  What is the appropriate weighted average cost of capital including the proper components, amounts and cost rates associated with the capital structure?

39. Issue 39:  Is Gulf compensated adequately by the non-regulated affiliates for the benefits, if any, they derive from their association with Gulf Power?  If not, what measures should the Commission implement?

40. Issue 40:  Should an adjustment be made to increase operating revenues by $1,500,000 for a 2 percent compensation payment from non-regulated companies?

41. Issue 41:  Should an adjustment be made to increase test year revenue for Gulf’s non-utility activities?

42. Issue 42:  Is Gulf's projected level of Total Operating Revenues in the amount of $481,909,000 ($499,311,000 system) for the 2012 projected test year appropriate?

43. Issue 43:  Has Gulf made the appropriate test year adjustments to remove fuel revenues and fuel expenses recoverable through the Fuel Adjustment Clause?  (Category 2 Stipulation)

44. Issue 44:  Has Gulf made the appropriate test year adjustments to remove conservation revenues and conservation expenses recoverable through the Conservation Cost Recovery Clause?  (Category 2 Stipulation)

45. Issue 45:  Has Gulf made the appropriate test year adjustments to remove capacity revenues and capacity expenses recoverable through the Capacity Cost Recovery Clause?  (Category 2 Stipulation)

46. Issue 46:  Has Gulf made the appropriate test year adjustments to remove environmental revenues and environmental expenses recoverable through the Environmental Cost Recovery Clause?  (Category 2 Stipulation)

47. Issue 47:  Has Gulf made the appropriate adjustments to remove all non-utility activities from net operating income?

48. Issue 48:  Should adjustments be made to the expenses allocated or charged to Gulf as a result of transactions with affiliates?

49. Issue 49:  Should adjustments be made to expenses to allocate SCS costs to Southern Renewable Energy?

50. Issue 50:  DROPPED.

51. Issue 51:  Should adjustments be made to the allocation factors used to allocate SCS costs to Gulf?

52. Issue 52:  Should the Commission remove costs from the 2012 test year for costs associated with SouthernLINC?

53. Issue 53:  Should the costs related to Work Order 466909, associated with a system-wide asset management system, be removed from operating expenses?  (Category 1 Stipulation)

54. Issue 54:  DROPPED.

55. Issue 55:  Did Gulf adequately document and justify the costs associated with Work Orders 46EZBL, 46IDMU, 46LRBL, 47VSES, 47VSTB, 47VSTH, 47VSZ1, and 47VSZ5?  If not, should the costs related to these work orders be removed from operating expenses?

56. Issue 56:  Should the costs related to Work Order 471701, associated with a Securities and Exchange Commission inquiry, be removed from operating expenses?

57. Issue 57:  Should the Commission adjust operating expenses for the costs related to Work Order 473401, related to a benefit’s review that does not appear to occur annually?

58. Issue 58:  Should the costs related to Work Order 49SWCS, related to a customer summit that is only held every other year, be removed from operating expenses?  (Category 1 Stipulation)

59. Issue 59:  Should the costs related to Work Order 4Q51RC and a formerly CWIP classified Work Order 4QPA01, be removed from operating expenses?

60. Issue 60:  Should operating expenses be adjusted to remove public relations expenses charged by SCS?

61. Issue 61:  Should operating expenses be adjusted to remove legal expenses in Work Orders 473ECO and 473ECS charged by SCS?

62. Issue 62:  DROPPED PER STIPULATION.

63. Issue 63:  DROPPED PER STIPULATION.

64. Issue 64:  Should operating expenses be adjusted to remove investor relations expenses related to Work Order 471501 charged by SCS?

65. Issue 65:  What is the appropriate amount of advertising expenses for the 2012 projected test year?  (Category 2 Stipulation)

66. Issue 66:  Should interest on deferred compensation be included in operating expenses?

67. Issue 67:  Should SCS Early Retirement Costs be included in operating expenses?

68. Issue 68:  Should Executive Financial Planning Expenses be included in operating expenses?  (Category 1 Stipulation)

69. Issue 69:  Are Gulf's proposed increases to average salaries for Gulf appropriate?

70. Issue 70:  Are Gulf's proposed increases in employee positions for Gulf appropriate?

71. Issue 71:  How much, if any, of Gulf’s proposed Incentive Compensation expenses should be included in operating expenses?

72. Issue 72:  What is the appropriate amount of allowance for employee benefit expense be adjusted?

73. Issue 73:  What is the appropriate amount of Other Post Employment Benefits Expense for the 2012 projected test year?  (Category 2 Stipulation)

74. Issue 74:  What is the appropriate amount of Gulf's requested level of Salaries and Employee Benefits for the 2012 projected test year?

75. Issue 75:  What is the appropriate amount of Pension Expense for the 2012 projected test year?  (Category 2 Stipulation)

76. Issue 76:  What is the appropriate amount of accrual for storm damage for the 2012 projected test year?

77. Issue 77:  Should an adjustment be made to remove Gulf's requested Director's & Officer's Liability Insurance expense?

78. Issue 78:  What is the appropriate amount of accrual for the Injuries & Damages reserve for the 2012 projected test year?  (Category 2 Stipulation)

79. Issue 79:  What is the appropriate amount of Gulf's tree trimming expense for the 2012 projected test year?

80. Issue 80:  DROPPED PER STIPULATION.

81. Issue 81:  DROPPED.

82. Issue 82:  DROPPED.

83. Issue 83:  DROPPED.

84. Issue 84:  What is the appropriate amount of production plant O&M expense?

85. Issue 85:  What is the appropriate amount of Gulf's transmission O&M expense?  (Category 2 Stipulation)

86. Issue 86:  What is the appropriate amount of Gulf’s distribution O&M expense?

87. Issue 87:  DROPPED.

88. Issue 88:  What is the appropriate amount of Rate Case Expense for the 2012 projected test year?

89. Issue 89:  What is the appropriate amount of uncollectible expense for the 2012 projected test year?

90. Issue 90:  Is Gulf's requested level of O&M Expense in the amount of $282,731,000 ($288,474,000 system) for the 2012 projected test year appropriate?

91. Issue 91:  What is the appropriate amount of depreciation and fossil dismantlement expense for the 2012 projected test year?

92. Issue 92:  Is Gulf's requested level of Depreciation and Amortization Expense in the amount of $87,804,000 ($89,613,000 system) for the 2012 projected test year appropriate?

93. Issue 93:  What is the appropriate amount of Taxes Other Than Income Taxes for the 2012 projected test year?

94. Issue 94:  Is it appropriate to make a parent debt adjustment per Rule 25-14.004, Florida Administrative Code?

95. Issue 95:  What is the appropriate amount of Income Tax expense for the 2012 projected test year?

96. Issue 96:  Is Gulf’s requested level of Total Operating Expenses in the amount of $420,954,000 ($432,449,000 system) for the 2012 projected test year appropriate?

97. Issue 97:  Is Gulf's projected Net Operating Income in the amount of $60,955,000 ($66,862,000 system) for the 2012 projected test year appropriate?

98. Issue 98:  What is the appropriate revenue expansion factor and the appropriate net operating income multiplier, including the appropriate elements and rates for Gulf?

99. Issue 99:  Is Gulf's requested annual operating revenue increase of $93,504,000 for the 2012 projected test year appropriate?

100. Issue 100:  Should Gulf’s proposal to eliminate the Interruptible Standby Service (ISS) rate schedule be approved?  (Category 1 Stipulation)

101. Issue 101:  Should Gulf’s proposal to modify the Residential Service Variable Pricing (ISS) rate schedule be approved?  (Category 2 Stipulation)

102. Issue 102:  Should the maximum kW usage level to qualify for the GS rate be increased from 20 kW to 25 kW?  (Category 2 Stipulation)

103. Issue 103:  Should Gulf’s new critical peak pricing option for customers taking service on the commercial time-of-use rates GSDT and LPT be approved?  (Category 1 Stipulation)

104. Issue 104:  Should the minimum kW demand to qualify for the Real Time Pricing (RTP) rate schedule be reduced from 2,000 kW to 500 kW?  (Category 1 Stipulation)

105. Issue 105:  Should the minimum kW demand for new load to qualify for the Commercial/Industrial Service Rider (CISR) be reduced form 1,000 kW to 500 kW?  (Category 1 Stipulation)

106. Issue 106:  What is the appropriate cost of service methodology to be used in designing Gulf's rates?  (Stipulation)

107. Issue 107:  What is the appropriate treatment of distribution costs within the cost of service study?  (Stipulation)

108. Issue 108:  If a revenue increase is granted, how should it be allocated among the customer classes?  (Stipulation)

109. Issue 109:  What are the appropriate customer charges and should Gulf’s proposal to rename the customer charge “Base Charge” be approved?

110. Issue 110:  What are the appropriate demand charges?

111. Issue 111:  What are the appropriate energy charges?

112. Issue 112:  What are the appropriate charges for the outdoor service (OS) lighting rate schedules?

113. Issue 113:  Should Gulf’s proposal to adjust annually existing lighting fixtures prices be approved?

114. Issue 114:  What are the appropriate charges under the Standby and Supplementary Service (SBS) rate schedule?

115. Issue 115:  What are the appropriate transformer ownership discounts?

116. Issue 116:  What is the appropriate minimum monthly bill demand charges under the PX and PXT rate schedules?  (Category 2 Stipulation)

117. Issue 117:  Should any of the $38,549,000 interim rate increase granted by Order No. PSC-11-0382-PCO-EI be refunded to the ratepayers?

118. Issue 118:  Should Gulf be required to file, within 60 days after the date of the final order in this docket, a description of all entries or adjustments to its annual report, rate of return reports, and books and records which will be required as a result of the Commission's findings in this rate case?  (Category 1 Stipulation)

119. Issue 119:  Should this docket be closed?