- 189 - “Of, relating to, or designating a particular or defined thing; explicit”. Petitioner argues that TRA section 203(b)(1)(C) provides relief from the ITC repeal for the following items: (1) The “backfit” items at St. Lucie nuclear power plant; (2) the “wrap up” work and “enhancements and deficiencies” work at the SJRPP; and (3) the equipment installed at the distribution and transmission substations. Respondent argues that petitioner is not entitled to an ITC for these items because petitioner (1) failed to offer evidence of written specific plans, (2) did not begin construction by December 31, 1985, and (3) did not incur or commit more than one-half of construction costs by December 31, 1985. 1. “Backfit” Items at St. Lucie In asserting that FPL is entitled to an ITC for the “backfit” items, petitioner specifically lists the following properties that qualify under the plant facility exception: (1) The underwater intrusion system; (2) the condensate polisher tie line; and (3) the instrument air system upgrade. Petitioner asserts that the construction plan for St. Lucie Units 1 and 2 satisfies the “written specific plan” requirement of the plant facility rule. St. Lucie Units 1 and 2 were placed in service in 1976 and 1983, respectively. The underwater intrusion system property was placed in service during the 1990 taxable year withPage: Previous 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011