FLORIDA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
COMMISSION CONFERENCE AGENDA
CONFERENCE DATE AND
TIME: Tuesday, May 14,
2019, 9:30 a.m.
LOCATION: Betty Easley Conference Center, Joseph P. Cresse Hearing Room 148
DATE ISSUED: May 2, 2019
NOTICE
Persons affected by Commission action on certain items on this agenda
may be allowed to address the Commission, either informally or by oral
argument, when those items are taken up for discussion at this conference.
These items are designated by double asterisks (**) next to the item number.
To participate informally, affected persons need only appear at the
conference and request the opportunity to address the Commission on an item
listed on the agenda. Informal participation is not permitted: (1) on
dispositive motions and motions for reconsideration; (2) when a recommended
order is taken up by the Commission; (3) in a rulemaking proceeding after the
record has been closed; or (4) when the Commission considers a post-hearing
recommendation on the merits of a case after the close of the record. The
Commission allows informal participation at its discretion in certain types of
cases (such as declaratory statements and interim rate orders) in which an
order is issued based on a given set of facts without hearing. See Florida
Administrative Code Rules 25-22.0021 (agenda conference participation) and
25-22.0022 (oral argument).
Conference agendas, staff recommendations, vote sheets, and
transcripts are available online at http://www.floridapsc.com,
by selecting Conferences
& Meeting Agendas and
Commission Conferences of the FPSC.
An official vote of "move staff" denotes that the Item's
recommendations were approved.
In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, persons needing
a special accommodation to participate at this proceeding should contact the
Office of Commission Clerk no later than five days prior to the conference at
2540 Shumard Oak Boulevard, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0850 or 850-413-6770
(Florida Relay Service, 1-800-955-8770 Voice or 1-800-955-8771 TDD). Assistive
Listening Devices are available upon request from the Office of Commission Clerk,
Gerald L. Gunter Building, Room 152.
The Commission Conference has a live video broadcast the day of the
conference, which is available from the FPSC website. Upon completion of the conference, the
archived video will be available from the website by selecting Conferences & Meeting Agendas, then Audio and Video Event Coverage.
EMERGENCY CANCELLATION OF CONFERENCE: If a named storm or other
disaster requires cancellation of the Conference, Commission staff will attempt
to give timely notice. Notice of cancellation will be provided on the
Commission’s website (http://www.floridapsc.com) under
the Hot Topics link on the home page. Cancellation can also be confirmed by
calling the Office of Commission Clerk at 850-413-6770.
If you have any questions, contact the Office of Commission Clerk at 850-413-6770 or Clerk@psc.state.fl.us.
PAA A) Application for Certificate of Authority to Provide Telecommunications Service.
|
DOCKET NO. |
COMPANY NAME |
|
City Communications, Inc |
|
|
20190052‑TX |
CTI Fiber Services, LLC |
|
20190064‑TX |
Altaworx LLC |
|
20190073‑TX |
Mobex, Inc. |
|
20190085‑TX |
Hudson Fiber Network Inc |
|
DOCKET NO. |
COMPANY NAME |
2019 Standard Offer |
|
20190088-EQ |
Florida Public Utilities Company |
Attachment A |
Recommendation: The Commission should approve the action requested in the dockets referenced above and close these dockets.
2 Docket No. 20190038-EI – Petition for limited proceeding for recovery of incremental storm restoration costs related to Hurricane Michael, by Gulf Power Company.
|
Critical Date(s): |
07/01/19 (Requested Implementation Date) |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Fay |
||
|
Staff: |
AFD: Perez, Snyder, D. Smith, Mouring ECO: Guffey, Draper ENG: P. Buys, Doehling, Thompson, Wooten, Ellis, Graves GCL: Simmons, J. Crawford, A. King |
||
(Participation is at the Commission's
Discretion)
Issue 1:
Should the Commission authorize Gulf to implement an interim storm restoration recovery charge?
Yes. The Commission should authorize Gulf to implement an interim storm restoration recovery charge, subject to refund. Once the total actual storm costs are known, Gulf should be required to file documentation of the storm costs for Commission review and true up of any excess or shortfall.
Issue 2:
Should the Commission approve Gulf's proposed interim storm restoration recovery tariffs as shown in Attachment A of staff’s memorandum dated May 2, 2019?
Yes, the Commission should approve Gulf's proposed interim storm restoration recovery tariffs as shown in Attachment A of staff’s memorandum dated May 2, 2019. The proposed tariffs should become effective with the first billing cycle of July 2019.
Issue 3:
What is the appropriate security to guarantee the amount collected subject to refund through the interim storm restoration recovery charge?
The appropriate security to guarantee the funds collected subject to refund is a corporate undertaking.
Issue 4:
Should this docket be closed?
No, this docket should remain open pending final reconciliation of actual recoverable Hurricane Michael storm costs with the amount collected pursuant to the interim storm restoration recovery charge, and the calculation of a refund or additional charge if warranted.
3** Docket No. 20180143-EI – Petition to initiate rulemaking to revise and amend portions of Rule 25-6.0426, F.A.C., Recovery of Economic Development Expenses, by Florida Power & Light Company, Gulf Power Company, and Tampa Electric Company.
|
Rule Status: |
Proposed |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Fay |
||
|
Staff: |
GCL: Davis, Cibula ECO: Draper, Merryday, Guffey |
||
(Proposal May Be Deferred)
Issue 1:
Should the Commission propose the amendment of Rule 25-6.0426, F.A.C., Recovery of Economic Development Expenses?
Yes, the Commission should propose the amendment of Rule 25-6.0426, F.A.C., as set forth in Attachment A of staff’s memorandum dated May 2, 2019. The Commission should certify Rule 25-6.0426, F.A.C., as a minor violation rule.
Issue 2:
Should this docket be closed?
Yes. If no requests for hearing or comments are filed, the rule may be filed with the Department of State, and this docket should be closed.
4**PAA Docket No. 20190058-TX – Petition for relinquishment of eligible telecommunications carrier status, by Cox Florida Telcom, L.P. d/b/a Cox Communications d/b/a Cox Business d/b/a Cox.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Polmann |
||
|
Staff: |
IDM: Deas, Fogleman, Wendel GCL: DuVal |
||
Issue 1:
Should the Commission approve Cox's request to relinquish its ETC designation in Florida?
Yes. The Commission should approve Cox’s request to relinquish its ETC designation in Florida.
Issue 2:
Should this docket be closed?
Yes, if no person whose substantial interests are affected by the proposed agency action files a protest within 21 days of the issuance of the order, this docket should be closed upon the issuance of a Consummating Order.
5**PAA Docket No. 20190059-TX – Request for cancellation of Certificate of Authority No. 7830, effective May 14, 2019, and request for relinquishment of eligible telecommunications carrier (ETC) designation in Florida, by Global Connection Inc. of America (of Georgia).
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Administrative |
||
|
Staff: |
IDM: Deas, Fogleman, Wendel GCL: DuVal |
||
Issue 1:
Should the Commission approve Global’s request to relinquish its ETC designation in Florida and acknowledge its notice of cancellation of CLEC Certificate No. 7830?
Yes. The Commission should approve Global’s request to relinquish its ETC designation in Florida and acknowledge its notice of cancellation of CLEC Certificate No. 7830.
Issue 2:
Should this docket be closed?
Yes, if no person whose substantial interests are affected by the proposed agency action files a protest within 21 days of the issuance of the order, this docket should be closed upon the issuance of a Consummating Order.
6 Docket No. 20180061-EI – Petition for limited proceeding to recover incremental storm restoration costs, by Florida Public Utilities Company.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Brown |
||
|
Staff: |
AFD: Andrews, Mouring GCL: Dziechciarz, Weisenfeld |
||
(Motion for Reconsideration - Oral Argument
Requested; Participation is at the Commission's Discretion)
Issue 1:
Should the Commission grant OPC's Request for Oral Argument?
No. The Commission should deny OPC’s Request for Oral Argument. However, if the Commission decides that oral argument would aid in its understanding and disposition of OPC’s Posthearing Motion, staff recommends that the Commission allow three minutes per side.
Issue 2:
Should the Commission grant OPC's Posthearing Motion to reconsider the decision to authorize FPUC’s recovery of $69,632 pursuant to Rule 25-6.0143, F.A.C.?
No. OPC’s Posthearing Motion to reconsider the decision to authorize FPUC’s recovery of $69,632 pursuant to Rule 25-6.0143, F.A.C., should be denied because it does not meet the required standard for a motion for reconsideration. OPC has failed to identify a point of fact or law that was overlooked or that the Commission failed to consider in rendering Order No. PSC-2019-0114-FOF-EI.
Issue 3:
Should the Commission grant OPC's Posthearing Motion for reconsideration of the denial of the Prehearing Motion to reconsider the decision to strike, in whole or in part, Issues 7 and 10?
No. Staff recommends that Final Order No. 2019-0114-FOF-EI, issued on March 26, 2019, already disposed of OPC’s Prehearing Motion, and therefore the Commission should not entertain this facet of OPC’s Posthearing Motion.
Issue 4:
Should the docket be closed?
Yes, this docket should be closed after the time for filing an appeal has run.
7** Docket No. 20190069-EI – Request for approval of change in rate used to capitalize allowance for funds used during construction (AFUDC) from 7.44% to 6.46%, effective January 1, 2019, by Duke Energy Florida, LLC d/b/a Duke Energy.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Administrative |
||
|
Staff: |
AFD: Smith II, D. Buys, Cicchetti GCL: Brownless |
||
Issue 1:
Should the Commission approve DEF's request to decrease its AFUDC rate from 7.44 percent to 6.46 percent?
Yes. The appropriate AFUDC rate for DEF is 6.46 percent based on a 13-month average capital structure for the period ended December 31, 2018.
Issue 2:
What is the appropriate monthly compounding rate to achieve the requested 6.46 percent annual AFUDC rate?
The appropriate monthly compounding rate to maintain an annual rate of 6.46 percent is 0.523400 percent.
Issue 3:
Should the Commission approve DEF's requested effective date of January 1, 2019, for implementing the revised AFUDC rate?
Yes. The revised AFUDC rate should be effective as of January 1, 2019, for all purposes.
Issue 4:
Should this docket be closed?
If no person whose substantial interests are affected by the proposed agency action files a protest within 21 days of the issuance of the order, this docket should be closed upon the issuance of a consummating order.
8** Docket No. 20190087-EI – Request for approval of change in rate used to capitalize allowance for funds used during construction (AFUDC) from 5.97% to 6.22%, effective January 1, 2019, by Florida Power & Light Company.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Administrative |
||
|
Staff: |
AFD: Hightower, D. Buys, Cicchetti GCL: Schrader |
||
Issue 1:
Should the Commission approve FPL's request to increase its AFUDC rate from 5.97 percent to 6.22 percent?
Yes. The appropriate AFUDC rate for FPL is 6.22 percent based on a 13-month average capital structure for the period ended December 31, 2018.
Issue 2:
What is the appropriate monthly compounding rate to achieve the requested 6.22 percent annual AFUDC rate?
The appropriate monthly compounding rate to maintain an annual rate of 6.22 percent is 0.504118 percent.
Issue 3:
Should the Commission approve FPL's requested effective date of January 1, 2019, for implementing the revised AFUDC rate?
Yes. The revised AFUDC rate should be effective as of January 1, 2019, for all purposes.
Issue 4:
Should this docket be closed?
If no person whose substantial interests are affected by the proposed agency action files a protest within 21 days of the issuance of the order, this docket should be closed upon the issuance of a consummating order.
9**PAA Docket No. 20180231-EI – Petition for approval of the big bend south gypsum storage area closure project for cost recovery through the environmental cost recovery clause, by Tampa Electric Company.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Fay |
||
|
Staff: |
ENG: Knoblauch, Graves, Salvador ECO: Wu GCL: Weisenfeld, Murphy |
||
Issue 1:
Should the Commission approve Tampa Electric Company’s petition for approval of the Big Bend South Gypsum Storage Area Closure Project for cost recovery through the Environmental Cost Recovery Clause?
No. Staff does not recommend approval for cost recovery of the Big Bend South Gypsum Storage Area Closure Project through the Environmental Cost Recovery Clause. The Commission has not made a prudency determination on the Big Bend Modernization Project. Furthermore, the necessity of the Closure Project was triggered by Tampa Electric Company’s business decision to change its operation, and not by a change in environmental regulation. Tampa Electric Company may request cost recovery for the Closure Project utilizing traditional methods of cost recovery in the future.
Issue 2:
If the Commission does not approve staff’s recommendation in Issue 1, should the Commission limit its approval of eligible cost recovery to those projected costs at the time TECO filed its petition for cost recovery on December 26, 2018?
If the Commission approves the staff recommendation in Issue 1, then this issue is moot. If the Commission does not approve staff’s recommendation in Issue 1, then yes, staff recommends that only the costs incurred after the Commission’s vote in this docket should be eligible for cost recovery through the Environmental Cost Recovery Clause. At a minimum, the costs that had already been incurred by the Company at the time of its filing should be excluded for cost recovery through the ECRC.
Issue 3:
Should this docket be closed?
Yes. This docket should be closed upon the issuance of a Consummating Order, unless a person whose substantial interests are affected by the Commission’s decision files a protest within 21 days of the issuance of the Proposed Agency Action Order.
10**PAA Docket No. 20190077-EQ – Petition for approval of revisions to standard offer contract and rate schedule COG-2, by Tampa Electric Company.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Administrative |
||
|
Staff: |
ENG: Thompson, Doehling, Ellis GCL: Weisenfeld |
||
(Staff recommends the Commission
simultaneously consider Docket No. 20190084-EQ.)
Issue 1:
Should the Commission approve the revised standard offer contract and associated rate schedule COG-2 filed by Tampa Electric Company?
Yes. The provisions of TECO’s revised standard offer contract and associated rate schedule COG-2, as filed on April 1, 2019, conform to all requirements of Rules 25-17.200 through 25-17.310, F.A.C. The revised standard offer contract provides flexibility in the arrangements for payments so that a developer of renewable generation may select the payment stream best suited to its financial needs.
Issue 2:
Should this docket be closed?
Yes. This docket should be closed upon issuance of a consummating order, unless a person whose substantial interests are affected by the Commission’s decision files a protest within 21 days of the issuance of the Commission’s Proposed Agency Action Order. Potential signatories should be aware that, if a timely protest is filed, TECO’s standard offer contract may subsequently be revised.
11**PAA Docket No. 20190084-EQ – Petition for approval of new standard offer for purchase of firm capacity and energy from renewable energy facilities or small qualifying facilities and approval of tariff schedule REF-1, by Gulf Power Company.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Administrative |
||
|
Staff: |
ENG: Thompson, Doehling, Ellis GCL: Dziechciarz |
||
(Staff recommends the Commission
simultaneously consider Docket No. 20190077-EQ.)
Issue 1:
Should the Commission approve the revised standard offer contract and schedule REF-1 filed by Gulf Power Company?
Yes. The provisions of Gulf’s revised standard offer contract and schedule REF-1 conform to all requirements of Rules 25-17.200 through 25-17.310, F.A.C. Gulf’s revised standard offer contract provides flexibility in the arrangements for payments so that a developer of renewable generation may select the payment stream best suited to its financial needs. Staff recommends that Gulf’s revised standard offer contract and schedule REF-1 be approved as filed.
Issue 2:
Should this docket be closed?
Yes. This docket should be closed upon issuance of a consummating order, unless a person whose substantial interests are affected by the Commission’s decision files a protest within 21 days of the issuance of the Commission’s Proposed Agency Action Order. Potential signatories should be aware that, if a timely protest is filed, Gulf’s standard offer contract may subsequently be revised.
12** Docket No. 20180204-EI – Petition for approval of shared solar tariff, by Tampa Electric Company.
|
Critical Date(s): |
60-Day Suspension Deadline waived to the May 14, 2019 Agenda Conference |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Administrative |
||
|
Staff: |
ECO: Morgan, Doherty, Higgins, Wu, Coston, McNulty AFD: Mouring, Barrett ENG: Thompson, Ellis GCL: Trierweiler |
||
Issue 1:
Should the Commission approve TECO’s petition for approval of a new shared solar tariff?
Yes, the Commission should approve TECO’s petition for approval of a new shared solar tariff. The tariff should become effective after TECO completes its tariff-related billing systems, which is expected to be in June 2019. TECO should notify Commission staff when this is completed and the effective date of the tariff is known. TECO should file summary reports with the Commission, in this docket, containing prior year results of the SSR-1 Tariff by March 1 of 2020, 2021, and 2022, including SSR-1 participation and waiting list levels, energy sales amounts, costs, and revenues.
Issue 2: Should this docket be closed?
If Issue 1 is approved and a protest is filed within 21 days of the issuance of the order, the tariff, if in effect at that time, should remain in effect, with any revenues held subject to refund, pending resolution of the protest. If no timely protest is filed, this docket should be closed upon the issuance of the consummating order.
13** Docket No. 20190034-EI – Petition for approval of optional supplemental power services pilot program and rider, by Florida Power & Light Company.
|
Critical Date(s): |
60-day suspension date waived by Florida Power & Light Company until 05/14/19 |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Administrative |
||
|
Staff: |
ECO: Merryday, Doherty, Higgins GCL: Trierweiler |
||
Issue 1:
Should the Commission approve FPL's petition for approval of the OSPS pilot program?
Yes, the Commission should approve FPL’s petition for approval of the OSPS pilot program. The participating customers would be responsible for all costs associated with this optional program, thus protecting the general body of ratepayers. The proposed tariffs should become effective 90 days after the Commission’s order approving the program. The proposed OSPS tariff can be found in Attachments A, B, and C of staff’s memorandum dated May 2, 2019. Prior to the expiration of the three-year OSPS pilot program, FPL should petition the Commission regarding the future of the program.
Issue 2:
Should the Commission establish annual depreciation rates applicable to FPL’s customer-sited generators?
Yes. Staff recommends the Commission approve a 10 percent annual depreciation rate for Light-Duty Generators and a 5 percent annual depreciation rate for Heavy-Duty Generators.
Issue 3:
Should this docket be closed?
If a protest is filed within 21 days of the issuance of the order, this tariff should remain in effect with any increase held subject to refund pending resolution of the protest. If no timely protest is filed, this docket should be closed upon issuance of a consummating order.
14** Docket No. 20190048-EI – Petition for approval to amend street lighting, outdoor lighting and LED lighting pilot tariffs, by Florida Power & Light Company.
|
Critical Date(s): |
60-day suspension date waived by the utility until 05/14/19 |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Administrative |
||
|
Staff: |
ECO: Doherty, Guffey GCL: Crawford |
||
(60-day suspension date waived by the
utility until 05/14/2019)
Issue 1:
Should the Commission approve FPL’s proposed changes to its SL-1, OL-1, and LT-1 tariffs as shown in Attachment A of staff’s memorandum dated May 2, 2019?
Yes. The Commission should approve the proposed changes to FPL’s SL-1, OL-1 and LT-1 tariffs as shown in Attachment A of staff’s memorandum dated May 2, 2019. The proposed revisions allow FPL to bill the former COVB customers with non-standard lighting and respond to customers’ future requests for special fixtures or poles. The general body of ratepayers will be protected as non-standard lighting customers will be responsible for all costs associated with their lighting facilities. The revised tariffs should become effective on May 14, 2019.
Issue 2:
Should this docket be closed?
If Issue 1 is approved and a protest is filed within 21 days of the issuance of the order, the tariff should remain in effect, with any revenues held subject to refund, pending resolution of the protest. If no timely protest is filed, this docket should be closed upon the issuance of a consummating order.
15**PAA Docket No. 20190075-SU – Revision of wastewater service availability charges for Ni Florida in Pasco County.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Administrative |
||
|
Staff: |
ECO: Bruce GCL: J. Crawford |
||
Issue 1:
Should Ni Florida's existing wastewater service availability charges be revised, and if so, what are the appropriate charges?
Yes. Ni Florida’s existing wastewater service availability charges should be revised. Staff recommends a main extension charge of $1,710 per equivalent residential connection (ERC) be approved because it is reasonable and within the guidelines of Rule 25-30.580, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.). The existing plant capacity charge should be discontinued. The recommended main extension charge should be based on an estimated 173 gallons per day per ERC of treated wastewater demand. The utility should file a revised tariff sheet and a proposed notice to reflect the Commission-approved main extension charge. Ni Florida should provide notice to property owners who have requested service beginning 12 months prior to the establishment of this docket. The approved charge should be effective for connections made on or after the stamped approval date on the tariff sheet. The utility should provide proof of noticing within 10 days of rendering the approved notice.
Issue 2:
Should Ni Florida be required to refund service availability charges collected in excess of the revised main extension charge?
Yes. Ni Florida should be required to refund service availability charges collected in excess of the revised main extension charge because it would allow customers to pay only their pro rata share of the wastewater collection system. The refund should be made with interest in accordance with Rule 25-30.360, F.A.C. The utility should be required to file monthly reports on the status of the refund by the twentieth of the following month pursuant to Rule 25-30.311(7), F.A.C.
Issue 3:
Should this docket be closed?
The docket should remain open pending staff’s verification that the revised tariff sheet and notice have been filed by Ni Florida and approved by staff. If a protest is filed within 21 days of the issuance date of the Order, the tariff should remain in effect with the charge held subject to refund pending resolution of the protest. Also, the docket should remain open to allow staff to verify that the utility has properly refunded the service availability charges collected in excess of the revised service availability charges. If no timely protest is filed, a consummating order should be issued and, once staff verifies that the notice of the charge has been given to customers and the completion of the refund, the docket should be administratively closed.
16** Docket No. 20190076-EI – Petition for approval of revised underground residential distribution tariffs, by Duke Energy Florida, LLC.
|
Critical Date(s): |
05/30/19 (60-Day Suspension Date) |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Administrative |
||
|
Staff: |
ECO: Doherty GCL: Trierweiler |
||
Issue 1:
Should Duke's proposed underground differential tariffs be suspended?
Yes. Staff recommends that the tariffs be suspended to allow staff sufficient time to review the petition and gather all pertinent information in order to present the Commission with an informed recommendation on the tariff proposals.
Issue 2:
Should this docket be closed?
This docket should remain open pending the Commission’s decision on the proposed tariffs.
17** Docket No. 20190078-EI – Petition for
approval of 2019 revisions to underground residential distribution tariffs, by
Gulf Power Company.
|
Critical Date(s): |
05/30/19 (60-Day Suspension Date) |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Administrative |
||
|
Staff: |
ECO: Doherty GCL: Schrader |
||
Issue 1:
Should Gulf's proposed underground differential tariffs be suspended?
Yes. Staff recommends that the tariffs be suspended to allow staff sufficient time to review the petition and gather all pertinent information in order to present the Commission with an informed recommendation on the tariff proposals.
Issue 2:
Should this docket be closed?
This docket should remain open pending the Commission’s decision on the proposed tariffs.
18** Docket No. 20190081-EI – Petition for approval of 2019 revisions to underground residential and commercial differential tariffs, by Florida Power & Light Company.
|
Critical Date(s): |
05/30/19 (60-Day Suspension Date) |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Administrative |
||
|
Staff: |
ECO: Doherty GCL: Trierweiler |
||
Issue 1:
Should FPL's proposed underground differential tariffs be suspended?
Yes. Staff recommends that the tariffs be suspended to allow staff sufficient time to review the petition and gather all pertinent information in order to present the Commission with an informed recommendation on the tariff proposals.
Issue 2:
Should this docket be closed?
This docket should remain open pending the Commission’s decision on the proposed tariffs.
19 Docket No. 20180046-EI – Consideration of the tax impacts associated with Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 for Florida Power & Light Company.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
Brown, Polmann, Clark, Fay |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Brown |
||
|
Staff: |
AFD: Cicchetti, D. Buys, Hightower ECO: Merryday ENG: Ellis GCL: Brownless |
||
(RECOMMENDATION TO BE
FILED BY 3 PM ON MONDAY, MAY 6, 2019.)