FLORIDA PROGRESS CORP
DEF 14A, 1998-03-12
ELECTRIC SERVICES
Previous: CENTURY PROPERTIES FUND XVII, 10KSB, 1998-03-12
Next: FORT WAYNE NATIONAL CORP, 8-K, 1998-03-12



P.  O. Box 33042, St.  Petersburg, Florida 33733

[LOGO]                                   NOTICE OF ANNUAL MEETING
                                                  OF SHAREHOLDERS
[LOGO]

                                                   March 12, 1998

To the Common Shareholders:

           The Annual Meeting of  Shareholders of Florida  Progress  Corporation
(the  "Company")  will be held at Ruth Eckerd  Hall,  1111  McMullen  Booth Road
North,  Clearwater,  Florida,  on Friday,  April 17, 1998, at 9:00 A.M., for the
following purposes:

           1.         To elect three directors to serve for a three-year term;

           2.         To vote upon two shareholder proposals as set forth in the
                      accompanying proxy statement;

and to transact such other business as may properly come before the meeting,  or
any adjournment thereof.

           The Board of Directors has fixed the close of business on February 6,
1998, as the record date for the  determination of the shareholders  entitled to
notice of, and to vote at, the meeting and any adjournment  thereof.  A complete
list  of the  shareholders  entitled  to  vote  at the  meeting  will be open to
examination by the shareholders,  during regular business hours, for a period of
ten days prior to the meeting at the principal executive offices of the Company,
One Progress Plaza, St. Petersburg, Florida 33701.


                                         By order of the Board of Directors,

                                         Kathleen M. Haley
                                         Corporate Secretary

           You are urged,  whether you own one or many  shares,  to mark,  date,
sign and  promptly  mail the  enclosed  Proxy in the  enclosed  envelope,  which
requires no postage.




<PAGE> 1




Florida Progress Corporation, P. O. Box 33042, St.  Petersburg, Florida 33733,
March 12, 1998

PROXY STATEMENT FOR ANNUAL MEETING
OF SHAREHOLDERS/APRIL 17, 1998


           This statement is furnished in connection  with the  solicitation  by
the Board of  Directors  of Florida  Progress  Corporation  (the  "Company")  of
proxies to be voted at the Annual  Meeting  of  Shareholders  to be held at Ruth
Eckerd Hall,  1111 McMullen Booth Road North,  Clearwater,  Florida,  on Friday,
April 17, 1998, at 9:00 A.M.,  or at any  adjournment  thereof.  Any proxy given
pursuant to this solicitation may be revoked by the person giving it at any time
prior to the  voting  thereof  by giving  written  notice of  revocation  to the
Secretary of the Company at the  Company's  principal  executive  offices at any
time before the proxy is voted, by executing and delivering a later-dated  proxy
or by attending  the Annual  Meeting and voting his or her shares in person.  No
such notice of  revocation  or  later-dated  proxy,  however,  will be effective
unless and until received by the Company prior to or at the Annual Meeting.

           Shares of Common Stock,  without par value (the "Common Stock"),  are
the only outstanding voting securities of the Company.

           Only shareholders  whose names appeared of record on the books of the
Company at the close of business on  February 6, 1998,  are  entitled to receive
notice of and to vote at the Annual Meeting and any adjournment  thereof.  As of
that date, there were 97,044,941 shares of Common Stock outstanding.  Each share
is  entitled  to one vote for each  director to be elected and one vote for each
other matter to be considered.  The  attendance,  in person or by proxy,  of the
holders of a  majority  of the issued  and  outstanding  shares of Common  Stock
entitled to vote at the Annual  Meeting is necessary  to  constitute a quorum to
transact  business.  The Florida Business  Corporation Act (the "FBCA") provides
that  directors  are  elected  by a  plurality  of the votes  cast and all other
matters are  approved if the votes cast in favor of the action  exceed the votes
cast against the action  (unless the matter is one for which the FBCA,  or other
applicable laws, or the Company's  articles of  incorporation  require a greater
vote).  Therefore,  under the FBCA,  abstentions  and broker  non- votes have no
legal effect,  unless a specific  percentage of those  shareholders  entitled to
vote is  required  by the  FBCA,  or other  applicable  laws,  or the  Company's
articles of incorporation to approve a matter.

           The cost of  preparing  and mailing  proxy  material  and  soliciting
proxies  will be  borne  by the  Company.  Solicitation  of  proxies  from  some
shareholders  will be made by telephone or in person by regular employees of the
Company,  who will receive no  additional  compensation  therefor.  In addition,
arrangements  will be made with brokerage firms and other  custodians,  nominees
and  fiduciaries  to forward  solicitation  material  for the Annual  Meeting to
beneficial  owners,  and the Company will reimburse such firms for their expense
in so doing.

           This proxy  statement and  accompanying  notice and form of proxy are
first being sent to the shareholders of the Company on or about March 12, 1998.

Election of Directors

           The Board of  Directors of the Company  currently  consists of twelve
members,  divided into three  classes.  The current  terms of the three  classes
expire in 1998 (Class II directors),  1999 (Class III directors) and 2000 (Class
I directors).  Directors are generally elected for three-year  terms.  Effective
with the 1998 annual meeting of  shareholders,  the number of directors has been
reduced  to eleven  and the  number of Class II  directors  has been  reduced to
three.

           Three  Class  II  directors  with  terms  expiring  in 2001 are to be
elected  at the Annual  Meeting.  The Board of  Directors  has  nominated  three
persons, all of whom are currently


<PAGE> 2

directors,  to stand for election at the Annual Meeting.  The directors shall be
elected by a plurality of the votes cast,  so that the three  persons  nominated
for election as Class II directors  receiving the three highest  totals of votes
cast in favor of his election will be elected as Class II directors.  Each share
of Common Stock entitles its holder to cast one vote in respect of each director
to be elected. Votes may not be cumulated.

           It is the intention of the persons named in the  accompanying  proxy,
unless  otherwise  directed,  to vote all proxies FOR the  election of the three
nominees  of the Board of  Directors  as  directors  of the  Company.  Directors
elected at the Annual  Meeting,  after  being duly  qualified,  will serve until
their successors are elected and qualified.

           The  Board of  Directors  has been  informed  that all  nominees  are
willing to serve as directors, but if any of them should decline or be unable to
serve as a director,  the persons named in the accompanying  proxy will vote for
the  election of another  person or persons as they,  in their  discretion,  may
choose. The Board of Directors has no reason to believe that any nominee will be
unable or unwilling to serve.


Information as to Nominees

           The names and ages of the nominees for election as  directors,  their
principal  occupations  and employment  during the past five years,  including a
brief biography, and the first year elected as a director, are as follows:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>


                                   NOMINEES FOR TERMS EXPIRING IN 2001
                                           (CLASS II DIRECTORS)
<S>     <C>

[PHOTO]   W. D. ("BILL") FREDERICK, JR., age 63, Citrus grower and investor, Orlando,
          Florida. From 1980 to 1992 Mr. Frederick served as Mayor of the City of Orlando.
          He practiced law as a public defender for the Ninth Judicial  Circuit of Florida
          and in 1966 founded the Orlando law firm of Frederick,  Wooten & Honeywell  P.A.
          He returned to the practice of law in 1992 as a partner in the Orlando office of
          the firm of Holland & Knight  from  which he retired in 1995.  He is a member of
          the Board of Directors of Florida  Power  Corporation  ("Florida  Power"),  Blue
          Cross/Blue  Shield  of  Florida,  and  SunTrust  Bank,  Central  Florida,   N.A.
          Committees: Compensation; Compliance, Chairman. Director since 1995.

[PHOTO]   FRANK C. LOGAN, age 62, attorney with the law firm of Harper, Kynes, Geller,
          Watson & Buford, P.A., Clearwater, Florida, since 1996.  Previously, he was with
          the Clearwater law firm of Harris, Barrett, Mann & Dew and the Tampa firm of
          MacFarlane, Ausley, Ferguson & McMullen.  He has practiced law since 1962,
          specializing in estate planning, probate, corporate and business law.  He is a
          director of Florida Power.  Committee: Compliance. Director since 1997.
<PAGE> 3

[PHOTO]   VINCENT J. NAIMOLI, age 60, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
          of Anchor Industries International, Inc., an operating and holding company, Tampa,
          Florida, a position he has held for more than five years. He is also Managing
          General Partner and Chief Executive Officer of the Tampa Bay Devil Rays, Ltd.
          Major League Baseball Club, St. Petersburg, Florida.  He is a director of Florida
          Power and Players International, Inc., and in conjunction with the business activities
          of Anchor Industries, Mr. Naimoli serves as a director of Russell Stanley Corp. and
          Simplicity Pattern Company. Committees:  Finance and Budget; Nominating.
          Director since 1992.

</TABLE>

Information as to Continuing Directors

           The names and ages of  directors  who  continue in terms  expiring in
1999 and 2000, their principal  occupations and employment  during the past five
years,  including a brief  biography,  and the first year elected as a director,
are as follows:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                              CONTINUING DIRECTORS WHOSE TERMS EXPIRE IN 1999
                                           (CLASS III DIRECTORS)
<S>       <C>
[PHOTO]   JACK B.  CRITCHFIELD,  age 64, Chairman of the Board, a position he has held for
          more than five years. Since 1983, he has held numerous executive  positions with
          the Company and its subsidiaries,  including President, Chief Executive Officer,
          Chief  Operating  Officer and Group Vice President of the Company,  President of
          Electric Fuels Corporation  ("Electric Fuels") and Vice President of the Eastern
          and Ridge  Divisions of Florida  Power.  He has been a director of Florida Power
          since 1988 and served as a director of Florida  Power from 1975 through 1978 and
          as  Chairman  of its Board from 1990 until  April  1996.  Committee:  Executive,
          Chairman. Director since 1988.

[PHOTO]   CLARENCE V. MCKEE,  ESQ., age 55, Chairman and Chief Executive  Officer of McKee
          Communications,  Inc.,  Tampa,  Florida,  a firm involved in the acquisition and
          management of television  and radio  stations.  He served as Counsel to Pepper &
          Corazinni, a Washington, D.C. communications law firm, from 1980 until 1987 when
          he became a co-owner  of WTVT  Holdings,  Inc.,  where he held the  position  of
          Chairman and Chief  Executive  Officer  until 1992.  He is a director of Florida
          Power,   American  Heritage  Life  Insurance  Company,   and  Checkers  Drive-In
          Restaurants,  Inc. Committees:  Compensation;  Audit,  Chairman.  Director since
          1989.

[PHOTO]   RICHARD A. NUNIS, age 65, Chairman of Walt Disney Attractions, Orlando, Florida.
          He has held various positions with the Disney organization since 1955, including
          Vice President,  Operations in 1968,  Executive Vice President of DISNEYLAND and
          Walt Disney World in 1972, President of Walt Disney Attractions in 1980, and his
          current  position since 1991. He is a director of Florida Power, The Walt Disney
          Company,  and  SunTrust  Bank,  Central  Florida  N.A.  Committees:   Executive;
          Compensation; Finance and Budget. Director since 1989.
<PAGE> 4

[PHOTO]   JEAN  GILES  WITTNER,  age 63,  President  of  Wittner & Co.,  Wittner Securities,  
          Inc.,  and Wittner & Associates,  Inc.,  St.  Petersburg, Florida, firms involved 
          in real estate management, insurance brokerage and consulting,  positions she has 
          held for more than five years.  She previously  served as  President  and  Chief  
          Executive  Officer  of a savings  association  until  it was sold in 1986.  She  
          serves  on the boards of Florida  Power,  Checkers  Drive-In  Restaurants,  Inc., 
          and Raymond James Bank, F.S.B. Committees: Audit; Compensation,  Chairman; Compliance.
          Director since 1982.

</TABLE>


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>


                                   DIRECTORS WHOSE TERMS EXPIRE IN 2000
                                           (CLASS I DIRECTORS)
<S>       <C>

[PHOTO]   MICHAEL P. GRANEY, age 54, Partner, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, Columbus,
          Ohio.  He has practiced law with this New York-based law firm since 1980 and is
          now resident partner in its Ohio office.  His specialties are utilities, antitrust and
          litigation.  He is a member of the American, District of Columbia, Ohio and
          Columbus Bar Associations and the Federal Energy Bar Association.  He is a
          director of Florida Power.  Committees: Executive; Compliance; Nominating,
          Chairman.  Director since 1991.

[PHOTO]   RICHARD KORPAN, age 56, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company. He
          has held the position of President  since 1991,  and effective June 1, 1997, was
          appointed Chief Executive Officer of the Company.  Since April 1996, he has also
          served as Chairman  of the Board of Florida  Power,  and until June 1, 1997,  as
          Chief  Executive  Officer of  Florida  Power.  He joined the  Company in 1989 as
          Executive  Vice  President  and Chief  Financial  Officer.  He is a director  of
          SunTrust Bank of Tampa Bay. Committees:  Executive; Finance and Budget. Director
          since 1989.

[PHOTO]   JOAN D.  RUFFIER,  age 58,  General  Partner,  Sunshine  Cafes,  Ltd.,  Orlando,
          Florida,  a food and beverage  concession  business at major  Florida  airports,
          positions  she has held for more  than five  years.  Previously,  she  practiced
          public accounting with the firm of Colley, Trumbower & Howell. She is a director
          of Florida  Power and also serves on the boards of  directors  of Cyprus  Equity
          Fund and  INVEST,  INC.  Committees:  Audit;  Compliance;  Finance  and  Budget,
          Chairman.  Director since 1990.
<PAGE> 5

[PHOTO]   ROBERT T. STUART,  JR., age 65, rancher and investor,  Dallas,  Texas, for more than 
          five years.  He held numerous  executive  positions with Mid-Continent  Life Insurance  
          Company  ("Mid-Continent")  since 1949, including Vice President,  President,  
          Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive  Officer until 1986 when  Mid-Continent  was 
          acquired by the Company. He is a director of Florida Power.  Committee:  Executive.  
          Director since 1986.

</TABLE>

Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners

           The  following  table sets  forth  information  concerning  shares of
Common Stock that are held by persons known to the Company to be the  beneficial
owners of more than 5% of said stock as of December 31, 1997.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

  <S>                                     <C>                                   <C>
                                           Number of Shares                      Percent
Name and Address                          Beneficially Owned(1)                  of Class

Franklin Resources, Inc.
  777 Mariners Island Blvd.
  San Mateo, CA  94404                          6,443,775                        6.6%

The Capital Group Companies, Inc.
   333 South Hope Street
   Los Angeles, CA  90071                      7,973,800                         8.2%
</TABLE>

Security Ownership of Management

         The  directors  and  nominees  and all other named  executive  officers
individually,   and  the  directors,  nominees,  named  executive  officers  and
executive officers of the Company as a group, beneficially owned Common Stock as
follows: <TABLE> <CAPTION> <S> <C> <C>
                                                  Number of Shares                  Percent of
Name                                              Beneficially Owned(1)              Class (2)

Jack B. Critchfield                                         51,394
W. D. ("Bill") Frederick, Jr.                                2,885
Michael P. Graney                                            3,616
Richard Korpan                                              24,326
Frank C. Logan                                               2,383
Clarence V. McKee                                            3,113
Vincent J. Naimoli                                           9,206
Richard A. Nunis                                            22,672
Charles B. Reed                                              3,768
Joan D. Ruffier                                              4,688
Robert T. Stuart, Jr.                                  1,506,073(3)                   1.55%
Jean Giles Wittner                                          10,317
Stanley I. Garnett, II                                       6,186
Jeffrey R. Heinicka                                          5,692
Richard D. Keller                                           14,963
Joseph H. Richardson                                        12,643

All 17 directors, nominees and
executive officers as a group,                           1,689,621                    1.74%
including those named above

</TABLE>

<PAGE> 6

(1)      As used in the above tables, "beneficial ownership" means the direct or
         indirect,  sole or shared power to vote,  or to direct the voting of, a
         security  and/or  investment  power with respect to a security.  Unless
         otherwise noted, the number of shares held are beneficially owned as of
         December 31, 1997.

(2)      Unless otherwise noted, less than 1% per individual.

(3)      Includes 594 shares owned by Mr. Stuart's children, as to which shares
         Mr. Stuart disclaims beneficial ownership.

Certain Relationships and Related Transactions

         The Company has  invested  $5 million for a 5.75%  limited  partnership
interest in the Tampa Bay Devil Rays,  Ltd.  ("Devil  Rays"),  a Florida limited
partnership  that  acquired in 1995 a Major League  Baseball  franchise  for the
Tampa Bay area. A corporation  controlled  by Vincent J. Naimoli,  a director of
the Company,  is the managing general partner and a limited partner in the Devil
Rays. Mr. Naimoli has a total indirect interest of 16.67% in the Devil Rays. The
foregoing  percentage  capital interests are subject to change should additional
investors be admitted to the Devil Rays. The Company has also executed a Private
Suite License Agreement ("License") with the Devil Rays for the use of a private
suite to be constructed in Tropicana Field located in St.  Petersburg,  Florida.
The  License  fee in the  amount  of  $125,000  per year is  subject  to  annual
increases  over  the  five-year  term of the  License  equal  to 2.5%  plus  the
percentage  increase in the  Consumer  Price  Index.  The term of the License is
expected  to  commence  in 1998 and no later than the date of the first  regular
season game  scheduled to be played by the Devil Rays baseball team in Tropicana
Field.  The terms and  conditions  of the License are  substantially  similar to
those entered into with other licensees.

         Florida  Power,  a  subsidiary  of the  Company,  has  entered  into an
eight-year  Sponsorship  Agreement  (the  "Agreement")  with the Devil Rays. The
Agreement  provides  that  Florida  Power  will  sponsor  a Walk of Fame and one
in-stadium sign at Tropicana Field, the site where the Tampa Bay Devil Rays team
will play its home Major League Baseball games.  The cost for  constructing  and
maintaining  the Walk of Fame will be borne by Florida Power and will depict the
names of various people, including local and national athletes,  celebrities and
entertainers.  During the term of the  Agreement,  Florida Power will pay to the
Devil Rays a  sponsorship  fee of  $100,000  per year for the Walk of Fame.  The
costs for constructing  and maintaining the in-stadium  signage will be borne by
the Tampa Bay Devil Rays.  Beginning  in 1998 through  2000  inclusive,  Florida
Power will pay a  sponsorship  fee in the amount of $350,000 for the  in-stadium
signage,  and beginning in the year 2001 and for the duration of the term of the
Agreement,  the  sponsorship  fee payable  for the  in-stadium  signage  will be
increased  by 3 1/2% over the fee paid in the  immediately  preceding  year.  In
addition, Florida Power has entered into agreements with the

Devil Rays for the naming rights and promotional and advertising programs at the
baseball stadium in St. Petersburg, where the Devil Rays baseball team will play
its spring  training  games.  The  baseball  stadium  complex  has been  renamed
"Florida  Power  Park,  Home of Al Lang  Field."  Approximately  one-third  of a
$150,000  annual fee for the naming rights will be shared by the Devil Rays with
the City of St. Petersburg.  A $150,000 annual fee for promotion and advertising
will be paid to the Devil Rays based on plans by Florida Power for community and
employee relations programs. The terms of the agreements expire in 2007.

         Mr. Michael P. Graney is a partner in the law firm of Simpson Thacher &
Bartlett. That firm provided legal services to the Company and Electric Fuels in
1997,  and has been  providing  legal services to the Company and Electric Fuels
during 1998.

<PAGE> 7

Meetings of the Board of Directors
and Standing Committees

         During 1997,  the Board of Directors  held six  meetings.  In addition,
certain directors attended standing committee meetings, including the following:

         Audit  Committee.  During 1997, the Audit  Committee met three times to
review the  financial  statements  and results of the 1996 audit,  to  recommend
independent  auditors for 1997 and to discuss plans and  objectives for internal
audit activities for 1998.

         Compensation Committee. During 1997, the Compensation Committee met six
times to review and approve the total compensation  opportunities and awards for
the  executive  officers of the Company and Florida  Power,  and to take actions
relating to the basic design of the Company's  compensation and benefit policies
for all employees of the Company and its subsidiaries.

         Nominating  Committee.  During 1997, the  Nominating  Committee met two
times to review potential candidates for election to the Board of Directors. The
Committee will consider  recommendations  for nominees for election to the Board
of Directors submitted by shareholders. In addition to other requirements, for a
nomination to be made by a shareholder,  the Company's  bylaws provide that such
shareholder  must have given timely notice thereof in proper written form to the
Secretary  of the  Corporation.  To be  timely,  a  shareholder's  notice to the
Secretary must be delivered to or mailed and received at the principal executive
offices of the  Company (a) in the case of an annual  meeting,  not less than 90
days nor more than 120 days prior to the date of the annual  meeting;  provided,
however,  that in the event  that less  than 100  days'  notice or prior  public
disclosure of the date of the annual  meeting is given or made to  shareholders,
notice by the  shareholder  in order to be timely must be so received  not later
than the  close of  business  on the 10th day  following  the day on which  such
notice of the date of the annual meeting was mailed or such public disclosure of
the date of the annual meeting was made,  whichever occurs first; and (b) in the
case of a special  meeting of  shareholders  called for the  purpose of electing
directors,  not later than the close of business on the 10th day  following  the
day on which the notice of the date of the special  meeting was mailed or public
disclosure of the date of the special meeting was made, whichever occurs first.

         The  Company  also has  Executive,  Finance  and Budget and  Compliance
Committees.  Members of all  committees  are  identified in the sections  titled
"Information  as to Nominees"  and  "Information  as to  Continuing  Directors."
During 1997,  all  directors  attended at least 75% of the total number of Board
and pertinent  committee  meetings,  except for Mr. Stuart who attended at least
50% of the total number of Board meetings.

Compensation of Directors

         At the 1996 Annual  Meeting,  the Company's  shareholders  approved the
Stock Plan for Non-  Employee  Directors  of Florida  Progress  Corporation  and
Subsidiaries (the "Director Plan").  Under the terms of the Director Plan during
1997,  75% of  each  non-employee  director's  $30,000  retainer  fee  was  paid
quarterly in arrears in Common Stock. In addition,  non-employee  directors were
paid $1,500 for attendance at each meeting of the Company's  Board of Directors,
and effective  May 15, 1997, a per meeting fee of $1,000 for  attendance at each
subsidiary board or board committee meeting. A $750 meeting fee was also paid to
each Committee Chairman for each meeting chaired.  Directors have also been paid
a $500 attendance fee for  participation  in strategic update  conferences.  The
cash portion of directors' compensation is allowed to be deferred.

         In accordance  with the six practices  adopted by the Board in November
1995 with regard to director compensation, the Compensation Committee meets each
year to review  all  elements  of  director  compensation.  In May of 1997,  the
Compensation  Committee  reviewed  the  total  value of all  forms  of  director
compensation  and  determined  that its current  objectives  to  increase  stock
ownership and provide directors with a fair and competitive compensation package
are being met. The per meeting fee of $1,000 for  attendance at each  subsidiary
board or board  committee  meeting was changed from the previous per day meeting
fee of $1,500 to conform to standard practice based upon benchmarking studies.

<PAGE> 8

Executive Compensation

         The following table contains  information  with respect to compensation
awarded,  earned or paid  during the years  1995-1997  to (i) the  former  Chief
Executive  Officer  ("former  CEO")  of the  Company;  (ii)  the  current  Chief
Executive  Officer ("CEO") of the Company;  and (iii) the other four most highly
compensated  executive  officers of the Company (the individuals  referred to in
(i),  (ii) and  (iii) are  referred  to  collectively  as the  "Named  Executive
Officers") whose total remuneration paid in 1997 exceeded $100,000.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                            SUMMARY COMPENSATION TABLE

                                                                                 Long-Term
                                                                               Compensation
                                         Annual Compensation (1)                  Payouts
              (a)                      (b)          (c)            (d)               (h)               (i)
Name and Principal Position                                                          LTIP            All Other
                                      Year         Salary          Bonus         Payouts(2)      Compensation(3)

<S>                                   <C>         <C>            <C>             <C>                 <C>
JACK B. CRITCHFIELD                   1997        $685,006       $ 47,500        $527,363(4)         $33,465
  Chairman and former
  Chief Executive Officer             1996         672,581         498,000         505,252           25,060

                                      1995         589,992         382,500         465,654           22,715

RICHARD KORPAN                        1997        $592,304       $ 41,500        $324,028(4)         $26,490
  President and Chief
  Executive Officer                   1996         535,610         333,500         339,107           18,900

                                      1995         440,003         257,000         284,109           19,800

RICHARD D. KELLER                     1997        $366,733       $173,500        $205,910(4)         $16,227
  Group Vice President
  and President and Chief             1996         320,640          -0-            139,347           12,646
  Executive Officer, Electric
  Fuels Corporation                   1995         284,466         108,500         146,882            9,813

STANLEY I. GARNETT, II                1997        $408,616      $   21,500       $51,891(4)          $5,063
  Executive Vice President(5)
                                      1996           N/A            N/A              N/A               N/A

                                      1995           N/A            N/A              N/A               N/A

JOSEPH H. RICHARDSON                  1997        $384,619       $    -0-        $162,091(4)         $13,890
  Group Vice President
  and President and Chief             1996         288,884         214,000         128,858          16,585(6)
  Executive Officer, Florida
  Power Corporation                   1995         215,009         113,000         110,473            8,835


JEFFREY R. HEINICKA                   1997        $264,992       $ 15,500        $110,393(4)         $12,315
  Senior Vice President and
  Chief Financial Officer             1996         258,456         169,000         113,139            8,595

                                      1995         211,200         100,000           N/A              8,325

</TABLE>


(1)            All other  annual  compensation  paid to the Named  Executive
               Officers during  1997,  other than  salary and annual  incentive
               compensation,  does not exceed the minimum  amounts  required to
               be reported  pursuant to Securities and Exchange Commission
               rules.

(2)            The number of shares of restricted Common Stock held by the Named
               Executive  Officers as of December 31, 1997 as a result of awards
               earned under the 1993-1995 and 1994-1996  performance cycles, and
               the value of such  shares,  was as follows:  Jack B.  Critchfield
               12,261 shares,  $481,244;  Richard Korpan 8,010 shares, $314,393;
               Richard D. Keller 3,524 shares, $138,317;  Stanley I. Garnett, II
               -0- shares;  Joseph H.  Richardson  3,062 shares,  $120,184;  and
               Jeffrey R. Heinicka 1,938 shares,  $76,067. The restrictions were
               removed from all shares effective January 1, 1998.

(3)            Company contributions to its Savings Plan and Executive Optional
               Deferred Compensation Plan on behalf of the Named Executive
               Officers.

(4)            Represents  the dollar value as of February 18, 1998, the date of
               award,  of shares  of Common  Stock  earned  under the  1995-1997
               performance  cycle  of the  Company's  Long-Term  Incentive

<PAGE> 9

               Plan ("LTIP"), none of which are restricted.  The total number of
               shares  earned,  including  dividend  equivalent  shares,  is  as
               follows:  Jack B.  Critchfield,  13,720 shares;  Richard  Korpan,
               8,430  shares;  Richard  D.  Keller,  5,357  shares;  Stanley  I.
               Garnett,  II, 1,350 shares;  Joseph H. Richardson,  4,217 shares;
               and Jeffrey R. Heinicka, 2,872 shares.

               See the discussion of the method of calculating payouts contained
               in  the  Long-  Term  Incentive   Compensation   portion  of  the
               Compensation Committee Report
               of the Board of Directors on page 13.

(5)            Stanley I. Garnett,  II became an executive officer of the
               Company effective June 1, 1997. Salary  information for 1997
               includes $182,075 paid to Mr. Garnett through a consulting firm
               that  was  retained  by the  Company  prior to his employment by
               the Company. No compensation  information is provided for 1995
               and 1996 because he was not an executive officer of the Company
               during those years.

(6)            Represents $8,835 in Company Contributions to the Savings Plan of
               Florida Progress and the Executive Optional Deferred Compensation
               Plan and $7,750 of  director  fees for  services as a director of
               Echelon International Corporation, a former subsidiary of Florida
               Progress.

                   The  following  table  contains  information  with respect to
performance  shares  granted  in 1997 to the  Named  Executive  Officers  of the
Company under the LTIP: <TABLE> <CAPTION>

                                            LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN(1)
                                                  AWARDS IN 1997

                              Number of         Performance
                              Performance          Period                  Estimated Payout at End of Period (3)
                                                                  ----------------------------------------------
      Name                    Shares (2)          Covered            Threshold               Target            Maximum
      ----                    ------------      -----------       --------------        ---------------       -----------

<S>                               <C>           <C>  <C>            <C>                 <C>                  <C>
Jack B. Critchfield               15,406        1997-1999           3,852 shares        15,406 shares        30,812 shares
Richard Korpan                     9,639        1997-1999           2,410 shares         9,639 shares        19,278 shares
Richard D. Keller                  6,024        1997-1999               0 shares         6,024 shares        16,566 shares
Stanley I. Garnett, II             4,863        1997-1999           1,216 shares         4,863 shares         9,726 shares
                                   3,242        1996-1998           1,080 shares         3,242 shares         5,944 shares
                                   1,621        1995-1997              811 shares        1,621 shares         2,432 shares
Joseph H. Richardson               6,426        1997-1999           1,607 shares         6,426 shares        12,852 shares
Jeffrey R. Heinicka                3,406        1997-1999              852 shares        3,406 shares         6,812 shares
</TABLE>


(1)      The LTIP is a Common  Stock  and  cash-based  incentive  plan to reward
         participants for long-term  performance of the Company. It was approved
         by the shareholders in 1990. See the Long-Term  Incentive  Compensation
         portion of the  Report of the  Compensation  Committee  of the Board of
         Directors on page 13 for additional information.

(2)      The number of  performance  shares  granted is based on a percentage of
         base  salary  in effect at the time of each  award  and is  subject  to
         automatic  increase or decrease on a prorated basis in accordance  with
         changes to a participant's  base salary or LTIP percentages  throughout
         the performance cycle.

         In the  event  of a  change  in  control  of the  Company,  150% of all
         performance  shares granted to the Named  Executive  Officers under the
         LTIP and then outstanding would  automatically be considered earned and
         would be paid in shares of  unrestricted  Common  Stock  together  with
         shares of  unrestricted  Common Stock payable for dividend  equivalents
         accrued through the date of the change in control.

(3)      Payouts for the  1995-1997  performance  cycle were based on  achieving
         return  on  equity  ("ROE")  and  return on  average  invested  capital
         ("ROIC") goals, equal to or exceeding the thresholds  determined by the
         Compensation  Committee.  Payouts for the 1996-1998  performance  cycle
         will be based on achieving  ROE and total  shareholder  return  ("TSR")
         objectives and for Mr. Keller,  based also on Electric  Fuels' compound
         annual earnings growth and ROIC. Payouts for the 1997-1999  performance
         cycle will be based on TSR, and for Mr. Keller, based also on Electric 
         Fuels' compound annual earnings growth and ROIC.

<PAGE> 10

Pension Plan Table

         The table below illustrates the estimated annual benefits  (computed as
a straight  life annuity  beginning at  retirement  at age 65) payable under the
Company's  Retirement Plan,  Nondiscrimination  Plan and Supplemental  Executive
Retirement Plan ("SERP") for specified final average compensation and years of
service levels.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                       Estimated Annual Retirement Benefits Payable Under
                                 the Retirement Plan, Nondiscrimination Plan and
                               the Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan

Average Annual
 Compensation                                        Service Years
                      5            10             15             20             25            30       35 or more
                      -            --             --             --             --            --       ----------

<S>                <C>           <C>          <C>              <C>            <C>            <C>            <C>
$   200,000        $ 37,500      $ 75,000     $ 112,500        $120,000       $120,000       $120,000       $126,000
    300,000          56,250       112,500       168,750         180,000        180,000        180,000        189,000
    400,000          75,000       150,000       225,000         240,000        240,000        240,000        252,000
    500,000          93,750       187,500       281,250         300,000        300,000        300,000        315,000
    600,000         112,500       225,000       337,500         360,000        360,000        360,000        378,000
    700,000         131,250       262,500       393,750         420,000        420,000        420,000        441,000
    800,000         150,000       300,000       450,000         480,000        480,000        480,000        504,000
    900,000         168,750       337,500       506,250         540,000        540,000        540,000        567,000
 1,000,000          187,500       375,000       562,500         600,000        600,000        600,000        630,000
 1,100,000          206,250       412,500       618,750         660,000        660,000        660,000        693,000
 1,200,000          225,000       450,000       675,000         720,000        720,000        720,000        756,000
 1,300,000          243,750       487,500       731,250         780,000        780,000        780,000        819,000
 1,400,000          262,500       525,000       787,500         840,000        840,000        840,000        882,000
 1,500,000          281,250       562,500       843,750         900,000        900,000        900,000        945,000
</TABLE>


         The Named  Executive  Officers are entitled to benefits under the SERP.
These benefits are offset by the benefits  payable under the Retirement Plan and
the  Nondiscrimination  Plan, as well as 50% of the  executive's  primary Social
Security  benefit.  The  estimated  annual SERP benefit for the Named  Executive
Officers  (prior to any offsets) may be determined  using the Pension Plan Table
set forth above. For these purposes, the current compensation for each executive
that would be used in calculating  benefits under the SERP is substantially  the
same as the three year  average of the salary and bonus  reported in the summary
compensation  table,  and the number of years of deemed  credited  service  that
would be used in calculating  benefits under the SERP for each such executive is
as follows:  Dr.  Critchfield,  35 years of  service;  Mr.  Korpan,  35 years of
service;  Mr. Keller, 19 years of service;  Mr. Garnett, 4 years of service; Mr.
Richardson,  22 years of service; and Mr. Heinicka,  20 years of service.  Under
the formula used for  calculating  benefits under the SERP, the maximum  benefit
payable  to each  Named  Executive  Officer  is  reached  at 16 years of  deemed
credited  service  unless  the  Named  Executive  Officer  achieves  35 years of
service.

         Accrued  benefits may also be paid under each of the  Retirement  Plan,
Nondiscrimination  Plan and SERP if a participant  terminates  employment before
age 65 and meets the requirements  for early  retirement,  disability,  death or
other  termination of employment  benefits after becoming vested under the rules
of the particular plan.

         Under  the  Retirement  Plan  and  the   Nondiscrimination   Plan,  the
compensation  taken into account in  calculating  benefits is salary  only.  The
years of credited  service that would be used in calculating  benefits under the
formula applicable to the Retirement Plan and the  Nondiscrimination  Plan (1.8%
of final  average  earnings  for each year of service)  for the Named  Executive
Officers in the summary compensation table are as follows:  Dr. Critchfield,  14
years of service;  Mr.  Korpan,  9 years of  service;  Mr.  Keller,  19 years of
service; Mr. Garnett, -0- years of service; Mr. Richardson, 22 years of service;
and Mr. Heinicka, 20 years of service. The benefits

<PAGE> 11

under the Retirement Plan and the  Nondiscrimination  Plan are subject to offset
by an amount equal to 1 1/7% of a participant's  primary Social Security benefit
for each year of service (with a maximum offset of 40%).

         In the event of a change in control, each Named Executive Officer would
receive  credit  under  the SERP  for five  additional  years of  service.  If a
participant's  employment  is  terminated  following  a change in  control,  the
benefit payable from the SERP is as follows:  (1) an annuity beginning at age 55
through 59,  subject to early  payment  reductions  in the amount of 3% for each
year prior to age 60, or age 60 without reduction; (2) the amount of any federal
excise  taxes (and  income  taxes on any  reimbursement  under  this  provision)
imposed on the executive  under Section 4999 of the Internal  Revenue Code;  and
(3) a 50% surviving spouse benefit payable upon death.


Employment Contracts, Termination of
Employment and Change-in-Control
Arrangements

         In 1998,  the Company  amended its 1995  employment  agreement with Mr.
Korpan.  The term of the  agreement is from March 1, 1998  through  February 28,
2002.  On each  March 1,  beginning  with  March 1,  2000,  the  agreement  will
automatically be extended for one additional year,  unless either party gives 90
days' written notice to the contrary.  The agreement provides for an annual base
salary of not less than $660,000 with award  opportunities  as a participant  in
the Management  Incentive  Compensation  Plan ("MICP") and LTIP of not less than
the level  authorized  for any  other  executive  officer  of the  Company.  The
agreement establishes minimum annual retirement benefits to be paid in any case,
that  increase with Mr.  Korpan's  tenure.  The agreement  also provides for the
payment of comparable  retirement  benefits to his  surviving  spouse as well as
payment to his estate of the base salary and MICP  target  bonus for the year in
which death occurs.  Severance pay  established  in the agreement is three times
the sum of his annual base pay and MICP target bonus.  Severance pay is due upon
termination by the Company without cause or upon termination by the employee for
good reason.  The  agreement  contains  restrictive  covenants  that apply for a
period of two years after  termination of  employment.  The Company will pay the
employee's  attorneys'  fees in the event of an action to enforce the  agreement
after a change in  control.  The  employee  will be  entitled  to an  additional
payment in the event  that any  payment or  benefit  under the  agreement  would
subject  the  employee  to the  excise tax  imposed  under  Section  4999 of the
Internal  Revenue  Code.  To the extent that benefits are payable under both Mr.
Korpan's  employment  agreement  and  the  agreement  referred  to in  the  next
paragraph, they are payable to the maximum extent under either, but not both, of
those agreements.

         Change-in-control  benefits were previously  included in the SERP which
was  originally  adopted  August 1, 1989 and which has been amended from time to
time. In 1998, the Company entered into  individual  agreements with each of the
Named Executive Officers,  except Jack B. Critchfield,  dealing with a change in
control as defined in each agreement.  These agreements implement changes to the
change-in-control  benefits  previously included in the SERP and reduce the cost
to the Company in the event a change in control occurs. In the event of a change
in control, each Named Executive Officer would receive credit under the SERP for
five additional years of service.  Each agreement  establishes the conditions of
employment  during an employment period which commence on the date of any change
in control  until the earliest to occur of: (1) the date which is 36 months from
the date of any such  change  in  control;  or (2) the  date of  termination  of
employment  of the  Named  Executive  Officer.  In the event of  termination  of
employment  following  a change in  control,  each  agreement  provides  for the
following:  (1) a severance  payment  equal to two and a half or three times the
Named  Executive  Officer's base salary and annual bonus;  (2) payout in cash at
150% or maximum of  performance  shares granted under the LTIP after a change in
control  and,  in one  instance,  payout of the  difference  between  actual and
maximum of performance  share awards paid out as a result of the occurrence of a
change in control;  (3) welfare  benefits for the Named Executive  Officer for a
maximum of thirty months after termination with lifetime access to medical in-

<PAGE> 12

surance with the executive paying the full cost  thereafter;  (4) the payment of
the premium for group executive excess liability insurance for 15 years; (5) tax
assistance  up to $15,000;  (6) the payment of  reasonable  attorneys'  fees and
expenses related to disputes  involving the agreement;  and (7) reimbursement of
relocation expenses not covered by another employer and not in excess of $10,000
incurred within 30 months of termination.


Report of the Compensation
Committee of the Board of Directors

   Executive Compensation Design

         The  Company's  executive  compensation  system is intended to attract,
retain and motivate high quality  executives with individually  tailored market-
and  performance-based  compensation  packages that reward protection of Company
assets and enhancement of shareholder  value. The Compensation  Committee of the
Board of Directors of Florida Progress Corporation (the "Committee"),  comprised
solely of outside  directors,  approves  total  compensation  opportunities  and
awards for  executive  officers of the Company  and  Florida  Power.  The target
compensation for each executive officer is established annually by the Committee
and is made up of three principal components: base salary; annual incentive cash
compensation;  and long-term  incentive  compensation  payable in cash or Common
Stock.  A  significant   portion  of  each  executive   officer's  total  target
compensation  is variable,  at risk and dependent upon the Company's  annual and
long-term performance.

         In determining target compensation, the Committee reviews market values
compiled by human resource  professionals from several independent surveys based
upon an equal blend of  compensation  levels of both electric  power and general
industry median rates,  where  possible.  This philosophy is intended to reflect
the changing  nature of the utility  industry and to recognize the fact that pay
practices  in the future  must be adequate to attract  talented  employees  from
industries other than solely electric utilities. In 1997, the Committee received
an updated  competitive  compensation  analysis  for total  direct  compensation
prepared by Towers and Perrin,  a benefits  consulting  firm, for each executive
officer as well as a parallel  study done at the  Committee's  request to ensure
that the survey data was accurate.

         The  Committee  believes  its  "pay-  for-performance"  program,  which
compensates an executive officer at his or her target level of compensation only
if  specific  goals  are  achieved,  is a fair  way to  structure  an  executive
compensation  program.  The program  rewards  executives  for meeting  financial
targets, thus producing benefits for the entire Company and its shareholders.

         A discussion of the three compensation components and the actions taken
by the Committee  with respect to  compensation  reported for 1997 for the Named
Executive Officers, including the CEO and the former CEO follows.

         Base Salary

         The base salary  component  is based,  in most  instances,  on an equal
weighting  of market data from both  utility and general  industry  sources.  An
executive  officer's  base salary will vary  within this  competitive  framework
based on experience, responsibilities,  leadership and performance. As a result,
updated  market  data  increases  were  appropriate  for  many of the  executive
officers.  These increases are reflected in the Summary  Compensation Table. Mr.
Garnett's base salary was established based on market data evaluated at the time
he was appointed as an executive  officer of the Company.  The former CEO's base
salary was not increased from the previous year although updated market data and
the Committee's succession plans warranted an increase in the CEO's base salary.

     Annual  Incentive Cash Compensation

         The  Company's  MICP  provides  annual   incentive  cash   compensation
opportunities  to officers and key employees of the Company and its subsidiaries
(including the Named  Executive  Officers) by creating  performance  award pools
associated with the achievement of corporate  goals.  The goals  associated with
the threshold, target and maximum funding levels for each performance award pool
under the MICP are established by the Committee,  based upon objective  measures
of corporate performance. For 1997, the goals established by the 

<PAGE> 13


Committee for the  performance  award pools in which each of the Named Executive
Officers was a participant  were based upon return on average  invested  capital
for the Company's  principal  operating  subsidiaries  as well as net income for
Electric  Fuels.  The  Committee   considers  the  projections  and  assumptions
contained in the relevant annual profit plan in establishing  threshold,  target
and maximum  funding  level  goals for each  performance  award pool.  Executive
officers having responsibility  primarily for a single operating subsidiary were
assigned to subsidiary performance award pools having goals based solely on that
subsidiary's    performance.     Executive    officers    having    Company-wide
responsibilities  were assigned to the holding  company  performance  award pool
whose  goals were a composite  of  weighted,  operating  subsidiary  goals.  The
Committee  explicitly retains discretion to take into account, in determining if
performance goals were met, whether assumptions contained in the relevant profit
plan were in fact valid, and if they were not, to make  appropriate  adjustments
to reported financial results for purposes of computing goal achievement levels.

         Performance  award  pool  funding  levels  typically  are based  upon a
mathematical  function  of  pool  participants'  target  annual  incentive  cash
compensation opportunity (expressed as a percentage of base salary) and the pool
goal level achieved.  The Committee may exercise  its  discretion  in  approving
the  amount of the award  pool and the specific  amount  of the  annual  
incentive  cash  compensation  to be  paid  to executive  and other key  
officers  from the  appropriate  pools  based upon the Committee's  subjective 
evaluation of the officer's overall contributions to the Company.  The  
Committee  takes  into  account  recommendations  of  the  CEO in
approving  annual incentive cash  compensation for individual  executive and key
officers (other than the CEO).

         The 1997 annual incentive  compensation targets for the Named Executive
Officers  ranged from 50% to 60% of base salary.  These  targets were  increased
from the 1996  percentages for all of the applicable  Named Executive  Officers,
except  the former  CEO,  as part of the  review of total  compensation  targets
taking into  account the changes in market data.  Mr.  Garnett's  target  annual
incentive  was  established  based on market data  evaluated  at the time he was
appointed as an executive  officer of the Company.  The CEO's 1997 target annual
incentive  compensation  was  increased  to 60% of his base  salary for the same
reason.

         The amounts  contained in the bonus column of the Summary  Compensation
Table for the Named  Executive  Officers (other than the CEO and former CEO) for
1997 are the result of the Committee's  determination  that 1997 results did not
meet  the  threshold  MICP  goals of  Florida  Power  and that the 1997  results
exceeded the threshold goal for Electric Fuels for the Named Executive Officers.
The amount contained in the bonus column of the Summary  Compensation  Table for
the CEO and former CEO for 1997 is based on the same  results  since the holding
company's MICP goals were weighted 85% on the Florida Power goals and 15% on the
goals of Electric Fuels.  The amounts  contained in the bonus column for all the
Named  Executive  Officers were the result of the  application of a mathematical
formula converting the goal levels achieved,  which were above threshold levels,
into dollar amounts, without the Committee making any discretionary adjustments.

     Long-Term Incentive Compensation

         To facilitate  executive  stock ownership and align the interest of key
executives  with  that of the  Company's  other  shareholders  in the  long-term
performance of the Company,  the Committee  awarded in 1997 the Named  Executive
Officers  the  opportunity  to earn  Common  Stock or cash  through the grant of
performance shares under the Company's LTIP, as indicated in the table appearing
on page 9. To date, under the LTIP, the Committee has granted performance shares
for eight consecutive three-year performance cycles beginning with the 1991-1993
performance cycle.

         In  1997,   the   Committee   approved   changes   to  the  design  and
administration  of the LTIP  and  established  stock  ownership  guidelines  for
Company  officers  to be met within  five  years of entry  into the LTIP.  Stock
ownership  guidelines range from one-half times base salary for a Vice President
to two times base salary for the CEO. To the extent earned,  performance  shares
will be converted into shares of un-

<PAGE>14


restricted Common Stock;  however,  if the stock ownership  guidelines have been
met, the  participant may elect to convert such  performance  shares into either
unrestricted Common Stock or cash.

         The financial  goals for the 1995- 1997  performance  cycle of the LTIP
were  established,  in accordance with the  administration  policies  previously
adopted by the  Committee,  to be the sum of the three  annual ROE or ROIC goals
for 1995,  1996 and 1997 used as goals for the MICP (the  "Cycle V goals").  The
goal weighting used in the MICP was also used for the Cycle V goals.  As part of
the changes  approved by the Committee in 1997,  financial  goals for later LTIP
performance cycles (Cycles VI, VII and VIII) will begin to measure the Company's
TSR against an industry peer group.

         The payouts listed in the Long- Term Compensation column of the Summary
Compensation  Table for the Named Executive Officers on page 8 for the 1995-1997
performance cycle are the result of (i) the Committee's determination that Cycle
V results did meet the  threshold  goals for Florida  Power after  adjusting for
strategic expenditures or expenses incurred in connection with the buyout of the
Tiger Bay purchase  power  contract,  the nuclear  replacement  fuel costs,  and
nuclear  operating  and  maintenance  outage  costs that  exceeded  the  Nuclear
Regulatory Commission mandated work for 1997; (ii) the Committee's determination
that the Cycle V results did meet the  threshold  goals for certain  non-utility
subsidiaries,  after adjusting for the exclusion of a provision for loss on coal
properties in determining Electric Fuels' ROE for 1996; (iii) the application of
a  mathematical  formula  converting  the goal level achieved into the number of
performance shares earned and (iv) adding dividend  equivalents on shares earned
for the period of the  performance  cycle.  All  payouts to the Named  Executive
Officers  were made in shares of Common  Stock.  The LTIP payouts to the CEO and
former CEO were based on  Florida  Power  achievement  above  threshold  for its
three-year ROE and ROIC goals, weighted 82%, and achievement above threshold for
the three-year ROE and ROIC goals of certain non-utility  subsidiaries  weighted
18%.

         During 1997, the Committee  approved the number of  performance  shares
granted to each Named Executive  Officer (other than the CEO and former CEO) for
the 1997-1999  performance  cycle that had a value on the date of grant equal to
40% or 50% of 1997 base salary,  depending on the total compensation opportunity
established by the Committee for each executive.  None of the  percentages  were
increased from the previous  performance  cycle. In accordance with the new LTIP
design  approved by the  Committee in 1997,  the grants are subject to automatic
increase  or  decrease  on a  prorated  basis in  accordance  with  changes to a
participant's base salary or LTIP percentage during the performance cycle.

During 1997, the Committee also approved performance share grants to Mr. Garnett
on a prorated  basis for the  1995-1997,  1996-1998  and  1997-1999  performance
cycles based on the total compensation  opportunity established by the Committee
at the time he was appointed as an executive  officer.  For the CEOs, the number
of performance  shares granted to Dr. Critchfield for the 1997- 1999 performance
cycle  had a value on the date of grant  equal to 70% of his 1997  base  salary.
This percentage was not increased from the previous  performance  cycle. For Mr.
Korpan, the number of performance  shares granted for the 1997-1999  performance
cycle had a value on the date of grant  equal to 50% of his 1997 base salary and
was increased on a prorated basis to 70% of base salary  effective June 1, 1997,
following  a review of  updated  market  data in  connection  with Mr.  Korpan's
promotion to CEO.

       Deductibility of Executive Compensation

         Section  162(m) of the  Internal  Revenue Code would deny the Company a
deduction for  compensation  paid to each Named  Executive  Officer in a taxable
year to the extent it exceeds $1 million per  officer,  unless the  compensation
qualifies as "performance-based  compensation." In 1997, the Committee rescinded
an amendment to the Company's  MICP that provided for the mandatory  deferral of
annual  cash  incentive  compensation  which would not qualify for a Company tax
deduction due to Section 162(m) of the Internal  Revenue Code until such time as
it becomes deductible. The MICP deferral was no longer

<PAGE> 15

effective in preserving the full deduction and the Committee has determined that
the amount of the foregone deduction for 1997 was not material.

Respectfully submitted,

Jean Giles Wittner, Chairman
W. D. ("Bill") Frederick, Jr.
Clarence V. McKee
Richard A. Nunis

Company Performance

         The following graph compares the Company's performance,  as measured by
the change in price of its  Common  Stock plus  reinvested  dividends,  with the
Standard  & Poor's ("S & P") 500 stock  index and the S & P  Electric  Companies
stock index for the five years ended December 31, 1997:

                COMPARISON OF FIVE YEAR CUMULATIVE TOTAL RETURN*
            AMONG FLORIDA PROGRESS CORPORATION, THE S & P 500 INDEX
                     AND THE S & P ELECTRIC COMPANIES INDEX


                                    [GRAPH]
                           1992     1993     1994     1995    1996     1997

Florida Progress            100      109      104      131     131      170
S & P 500                   100      110      112      153     189      252
S & P Electrics             100      113       98      128     128      162

* $100  invested  on  12/31/92  in stock or  index,  including  reinvestment  of
dividends. Fiscal year ending December 31.

<PAGE>16


Relationship with Independent
Accountants

         The firm of KPMG  Peat  Marwick  LLP,  which  has  been  the  Company's
independent certified public accountants since February 2, 1990, was recommended
by the Audit  Committee  and approved by the Board of Directors as the Company's
auditor  for the year ended  December  31,  1997.  Representatives  of KPMG Peat
Marwick  are  expected  to be  present  at the  Annual  Meeting,  will  have the
opportunity  to make a statement  if they desire to do so and are expected to be
available to respond to appropriate questions.

         The Company  has not yet  selected  its  independent  auditors  for the
current year. The Audit Committee  presently intends to make its  recommendation
concerning the Company's  auditors no later than August 1998, in accordance with
past practice.

Shareholder Proposals

         It is the  intention of the persons  named in the  accompanying  proxy,
unless  otherwise  directed,  to vote all proxies  AGAINST each of the following
shareholder  proposals.  Each shareholder proposal will be approved if the votes
cast for the proposal by holders of the shares represented at the Annual Meeting
and entitled to vote exceeds the votes cast against the proposal.




         1. Joseph E. Deddo,  2935 E. Buck Court,  Inverness,  Florida  34452, a
holder of 150 shares of the Company's Common Stock,  hereby notifies the Company
of his  intention  to present the  following  proposal  for action at the Annual
Meeting:

          "RESOLVED:  that the  shareholders  request the Board of
          Directors to adopt a policy that requires annual salary
          increases for executive officers that are greater than 2%
          of their prior  year's  salary to be approved by a
          vote of the shareholders."

                       SHAREHOLDERS' SUPPORTING STATEMENT

Executive  salaries are out of control and the  Shareholders are paying for poor
performance or no performance. We see revenue growth with new customers, just to
see  it  wiped  out  by  big  write-offs.  Shareholders  shouldn't  have  to pay
entitlements such as high executive salaries, just to see their profits be given
out to baseball team owners, a seized insurance  company or fines.  Compensation
is earned not granted. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT.


THE  BOARD OF  DIRECTORS  RECOMMENDS  A VOTE  "AGAINST"  THIS  PROPOSAL  FOR THE
FOLLOWING REASONS:

         The Company believes that decisions  regarding  executive  salaries and
employee  compensation,  including its various  performance  incentive  plans --
including  the "Sharing  the Success"  incentive  plan  implemented  in 1996 for
non-executive  employees of the Company and Florida  Power -- should  remain the
responsibility of the Company's management and Board of Directors.

         The proposal of Florida Power  employee  Deddo  presents his grievances
with management to the  shareholders in the form of a request to limit executive
compensation.  However,  in providing  competitive  base  salaries and incentive
programs like Sharing the Success, the Management  Incentive  Compensation Plan,
and the Long-Term Incentive Plan, the Board of Directors believes it is creating
shareholder  value by providing its workforce with  appropriate  incentives that
reward  employees for the  contributions  they make to the successful  financial
performance  of  the  Company  and  its  subsidiaries.  Comparable  compensation
programs are in place at similarly sized U.S. electric utilities.

         The  Board's   Compensation   Committee,   comprised  of  four  outside
directors,   is  charged  with  establishing   target  compensation  levels  for
executives  based  on data  developed  through  research  of  national  industry
standards   and   consultations   with   internal  and   external   compensation
professionals. Executive compensation is primarily composed of salary and awards
under  incentive  compensation  plans that  together  are  targeted to provide a
competitive level of compensation.  Incentive plan performance goals are tied to
financial  performance and business unit and individual  contributions,  thereby
putting a significant portion of the executive's total compensation at risk.

<PAGE> 17

         It  is  the  philosophy  of  the  Board  of  Directors  that  executive
compensation for all Florida Progress companies be market driven. It is targeted
at  levels  that  allow  the  Company  to meet the  demands  of the  competitive
marketplace  for executive  leadership.  It is structured to provide a financial
stimulus and rewards for  contributing to the continued  success of the Company.
The recommended  limitation put forward by the proponent would place the Company
at a competitive disadvantage to the detriment of you, its owners.

ACCORDINGLY, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS RECOMMENDS A VOTE
"AGAINST" THIS PROPOSAL.


         2. Louis D.  Putney,  485 South Himes  Avenue,  Tampa,  Florida  33611,
holder of 81 shares of the Company's  Common Stock,  has notified the Company of
his intention to present the following  proposal for action by the  shareholders
at the Annual Meeting:

               NOW, THEREFORE,  BE IT RESOLVED that the shareholders request the
               Board of Directors to make available to all  stockholders  within
               six months of the 1998 stockholders'  meeting a special report on
               the Crystal River Nuclear Plant. More  specifically,  this report
               shall include the following, provided that information directly
               affecting  the  competitive  position of the  Corporation  may be
               omitted,  and further  provided  that the cost of compiling  this
               report  shall be limited to an amount  deemed  reasonable  by the
               Board of Directors:

               1. A description of all  significant  deficiencies at the Nuclear
               Plant which  existed when the reactor was shut down in September,
               1996, whether or not such deficiencies were identified by the NRC
               as  such,  including  deficiencies  in  management,  engineering,
               design,  or training,  and describing the  operational and safety
               implications of each such deficiency.

               2. A description of the actions taken to remedy the  deficiencies
               identified above, including the cost of such actions, the cost of
               replacement  fuel during the outage,  and whether such costs were
               or are to be paid by the company or its ratepayers.

               3. A  description  of all fines  imposed and  corrective  actions
               ordered by nRC since January 1, 1996, specifying those corrective
               actions which have been  completed by the Company and those which
               have not.

               4.  An  analysis  of  the  advantages  and  disadvantages  of the
               continued operation of the Crystal River Nuclear Reactor versus a
               planned   decommissioning  of  the  reactor  within  five  years,
               including an analysis of financial,  liability and  environmental
               considerations.

               5. A description of the expected  financial losses,  injuries and
               loss  of  life  likely  to  result  from a  catastrophic  nuclear
               accident at the Crystal River  reactor,  including a "worst case"
               scenario,  and the Company's expected financial liability in that
               event.

                       SHAREHOLDERS' SUPPORTING STATEMENT

         We believe the NRC's  findings in its 1996 Notice of Violation in which
it imposed  civil  penalties of $500,000,  and found that the Company  committed
numerous violations "of significant  potential safety consequence," and in which
the NRC stated,  "The NRC is very  concerned  about the  ineffective  management
oversight  of  engineering,   operations,   and  corrective   action  activities
demonstrated by these violations."

         We believe  that as a result of a  settlement  approved  by the Florida
Public Service  Commission in June, 1997, the Company will forego  collection of
$440 million from its ratepayers in connection  with the recent  extended outage
at the nuclear plant, which has resulted in unprecedented losses to the Company,
and which is a result of poor management of the reactor.

         We believe the catastrophic accident at Chernobyl clearly exhibited the
dangers of nuclear power. We believe that disaster caused the equivalent of $2.8
billion in damage, contaminated 400 square miles of land, and will result in the
deaths of 25,000 people.

         As stockholders,  we believe that corporations  should act responsibly.
We believe a full review of our company's nuclear energy operations and policies
is  necessary.  A report  will  help  stockholders  and  management  assess  our
corporation's  social  responsibilities  and  actions  relating  to its  nuclear
reactor. These issues demand informed discussion and deliberation.

<PAGE> 18


THE  BOARD OF  DIRECTORS  RECOMMENDS  A VOTE  "AGAINST"  THIS  PROPOSAL  FOR THE
FOLLOWING REASONS:

         The  Board  of  Directors  agrees  with  Mr.  Putney's  assertion  that
corporations  must act  responsibly.  The Board fully supports  Florida  Power's
policy of placing  safety  first in the  operation of its  facilities  and power
plants, particularly the Crystal River Nuclear Plant ("CR-3").

         The Board  believes that Mr.  Putney's  request for a special report is
both unnecessary and costly to prepare. Much of the information,  which would be
included  in such a report,  already  is  available  to the  public  from  other
sources.

         For  example,   the  Company  is  required  to  disclose  all  material
information  concerning  CR-3 in its filings  with the  Securities  and Exchange
Commission.  In addition,  Florida Power is required to provide the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory  Commission (NRC) with  documentation,  compliance  reports and other
filings  as part of  maintaining  the  Company's  operating  license  for  CR-3.
Information contained in these filings is often voluminous and highly technical.

         It is the  opinion of the Board that  preparing  such a special  report
would be of little or no value to the majority of our shareholders.  The Company
does, however, take steps to inform the public -- including its shareholders and
other   investors  --  of  significant   developments  in  the  nuclear  plant's
operations.  Special Company announcements and important updates related to CR-3
are issued regularly to the public and news media.

         With respect to the operation of CR-3,  here is a summary of key events
in recent years:

o    On balance, CR-3 has been a steady
     performer over its lifetime, since
     coming into service in 1977.  The
     plant recorded its best three-year
     performance ever in 1992, 1993, and
     1994, averaging more than 80%
     capacity during those years.  (The
     industry average for U.S. nuclear
     plants is about 70% annually.)  In
     1995, CR-3 achieved a 100% capacity
     factor.

o    In September  1996,  CR-3 was shut 
     down to repair a turbine oil leak.  That
     work was completed by mid-September,  
     and operation of the plant could have
     continued later that month.

o    During the  September  outage,  Florida  
     Power  discovered a problem with a
     modification to the plant's  emergency  
     feedwater system. At the same time,
     the company identified other issues related 
     to the design of the plant that
     needed to be resolved.

o    NRC officials  also expressed  concern over 
     the condition of the plant,  as well as some 
     of the plant's operating and management practices.

o    Florida  Power's  management  decided to 
     keep the plant shut down until all
     issues  could be  addressed  and  corrections  
     be  made.  The  Company  was committed  to 
     making  the  necessary  changes  to return  
     the plant to peak operating condition.

o    Attention was focused on improving
     five key areas at the plant: Leadership
     Oversight and Involvement;
     Engineering Performance;
     Configuration Management and
     Design Basis; Regulatory
     Compliance; and Operating
     Performance.

o    As a first step toward improving
     performance at CR-3 and restarting
     the unit, Florida Power established a
     new nuclear management team
     experienced in returning units to
     service following extended outages.
     This action was taken to achieve
     immediate improvement in the
     performance of the Company's
     nuclear program.

o    In early 1997, Roy Anderson, formerly
     of Carolina Power & Light, joined
     Florida Power to lead the Company's
     effort to restart CR-3 and prepare the
     plant for another 20 years of
     operation.  Since January 1997, the
     Company also has hired a new Site
     Vice President, Site Director, Plant
     Manager, Engineering Director,
     Regulatory Affairs Director, Training
     Director, and several new managers
     in other areas of Nuclear Operations.

<PAGE> 19

o    During the extended outage of CR-3,
     Florida Power took the opportunity to
     make numerous, additional
     improvements so that when the plant
     returned to service it would be
     prepared to operate safely, reliably
     and with sustained excellent
     performance over the next 20 years of
     its operating license.  Accomplishing
     these improvements at the plant has
     required a significant commitment of
     resources by Florida Power over the
     past year.

o    Monthly  meetings were held with NRC 
     officials to keep them informed of the
     progress being made during the outage at 
     CR-3. The Company also held public
     meetings in communities surrounding the 
     Crystal River Energy Complex.

o    Florida Power  received  official NRC 
     permission to restart CR-3 on January
     30, 1998.

         The Board does not believe that preparing the requested  special report
would result in any improvement in the safe operation of CR-3. In fact, the time
and effort deployed to produce such a report would divert valuable Company
resources  from  developing and  implementing  programs that improve the plant's
safety and performance.  Therefore,  it is the Board's opinion that it would not
be in the best interests of the Company or the Company's  shareholders  to incur
the expenses to prepare such a report.

ACCORDINGLY, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS RECOMMENDS A VOTE
"AGAINST" THIS PROPOSAL


1999 Shareholder Proposals

         Proposals  of  shareholders  intended  to  be  included  in  the  proxy
statement and presented at the 1999 Annual Meeting must be received on or before
November 12, 1998. The Company's  Bylaws  require timely notice by  shareholders
for other  business  to be  conducted  at an annual  meeting.  To be timely,  in
addition to other requirements,  a shareholder's  notice must be delivered to or
mailed and received at the principal  executive  offices of the Company not less
than 90 days nor more  than 120 days  prior to the date of the  annual  meeting;
provided,  however,  that in the event that less than 100 days'  notice or prior
public  disclosure  of the  date  of the  annual  meeting  is  given  or made to
shareholders,  notice  by the  shareholder  in  order  to be  timely  must be so
received not later than the close of business on the 10th day  following the day
on which such notice of the date of the annual meeting was mailed or such public
disclosure of the date of the annual meeting was made,  whichever  occurs first.
Proposals  should be sent to the  Secretary  of the  Company,  Florida  Progress
Corporation, P.O. Box 33042, St. Petersburg, Florida 33733.

General

         In the event that any other  matters  properly  come  before the Annual
Meeting,  the persons  named in the form of proxy  intend to vote all proxies in
accordance with their judgment on such matters.

         Enclosed  is the  Annual  Report  of the  Company  for the  year  ended
December 31, 1997. It is not to be regarded as proxy soliciting material.


By order of the Board of Directors,

Kathleen M. Haley
Corporate Secretary


<PAGE>



                                   [LOGO]
                        FLORIDA PROGRESS CORPORATION

                             I M P 0 R T A N T

                           YOUR PROXY CARD IS BELOW


Your proxy card is attached below. Please follow these steps:

1.       Please clearly mark your voting selections on the reverse side.

2.       Please sign and date your card on the reverse side.

3.       Please detach and return to us in the enclosed postage-paid envelope.

4.       Please help us avoid the expense of follow-up mailings by completing
         and returning your proxy card promptly.










                                (DETACH HERE)



       FLORIDA PROGRESS CORPORATION - Annual Meeting, April 17, 1998


              Proxy solicited on behalf of the Board of Directors




The undersigned hereby appoints Jack B. Critchfield, Richard Korpan and Kathleen
M. Haley and each of them, with power of substitution, proxies to represent, and
to vote all shares of Common Stock of Florida  Progress  Corporation,  which the
undersigned  is entitled to vote, at the Annual  Meeting of  Shareholders  to be
held in Clearwater, Florida on April 17, 1998, at 9 a.m. EDT, and at any and all
adjournments thereof, and hereby revokes any prior proxies given with respect to
such stock,  and the undersigned  authorizes the voting of such stock as follows
on the reverse side.



             CONTINUED AND TO BE SIGNED ON THE REVERSE SIDE       SEE REVERSE
                                                                      SIDE


<PAGE>


                                   [LOGO]
                        FLORIDA PROGRESS CORPORATION

                             I M P 0 R T A N T

                         YOUR PROXY CARD IS BELOW


Your proxy card is attached below. Please follow these steps:

1.       Please clearly mark your voting selections.

2.       Please sign and date your card.

3.       Please detach and return to us in the enclosed postage-paid envelope.

4.       Please help us avoid the expense of follow-up mailings by completing
         and returning your proxy card promptly.

                                (DETACH HERE)

[X] Please mark your votes
    as in this example.

         This proxy when properly  executed will be voted in the manner directed
herein by the undersigned  shareholder.  If no contrary  specification  is made,
this proxy will be voted "FOR" the  nominees  listed in the Election of Class II
Directors, and "AGAINST" the Shareholder Proposals.

1. Election of Class II Directors
   Nominees: W.D. Frederick, Jr., Frank C. Logan,
              Vincent J. Naimoli
                    FOR              WITHHELD
                    [ ]                 [ ]
   [ ] ------------------------

         For all nominees except those written on the line above.

2.  The Board of Directors recommends a vote "AGAINST" the following shareholder
proposals requesting the Board to:
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

<S>                                                                                      <C>   <C>     <C>
                                                                                          FOR  AGAINST  ABSTAIN

  A.     Require shareholder approval of annual salary                                    [ ]   [ ]     [ ]
         increases for executive officers greater than
         2%.

  B.     Prepare a special report on the Crystal River                                    [ ]   [ ]     [ ]
         Nuclear Plant to be available to shareholders
         within six months of the 1998 Annual Meeting.
</TABLE>

         In their discretion, the proxies are authorized to vote upon such other
matters as may properly come before the meeting or any adjournment thereof.

MARK HERE IF YOU PLAN TO ATTEND THE MEETING                              [ ]

(Please mark, date, sign, detach and mail in the enclosed envelope.)

                                        When  signing  as  attorney,   executor,
                                        administrator,   trustee  or   guardian,
                                        please  give title.  For joint  account,
                                        each joint  owner  should  sign.  If the
                                        signer  is a  corporation,  please  sign
                                        full corporation name by duly authorized
                                        officer.  If a partnership,  please sign
                                        in partnership name by authorized
                                         person.

Signature:_______________ Date:____________ Signature:______________ Date:_____


© 2022 IncJournal is not affiliated with or endorsed by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission