FLORIDA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
COMMISSION CONFERENCE AGENDA
CONFERENCE DATE AND
TIME: Tuesday, June 9,
2020, 9:30 a.m.
LOCATION: Betty Easley Conference Center, Joseph P. Cresse Hearing Room 148
DATE ISSUED: May 28, 2020
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.
Because the Commission is operating under a state of emergency due to
COVID-19, all public participation must be telephonic or by written
comment. To participate informally,
affected persons must either: (1)
request the opportunity to address the Commission telephonically on an
item listed on the agenda by contacting the Office of General Counsel at (850)
413-6199 by noon on June 8, 2020; or (2) file any written comments for a
particular item in the applicable Docket file by noon on June 8, 2020.
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 some other
state of emergency 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) Applications for Certificate of Authority to Provide Telecommunications Service.
|
DOCKET NO. |
COMPANY NAME |
|
NextCity Networks, LLC |
|
|
20200108‑TX |
Data Stream Telecom of Florida Inc. |
Recommendation: The Commission should approve the action requested in the dockets referenced above and close these dockets.
2** Docket No. 20200073-TP – Commission Approval of Florida Telecommunications Relay, Inc.'s Fiscal Year 2020/2021 Proposed Budget.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Administrative |
||
|
Staff: |
IDM: Williams, Fogleman GCL: Murphy |
||
Issue 1:
Should the Commission approve Florida Telecommunications Relay, Inc.'s (FTRI) proposed budget as presented in Attachment A of staff’s recommendation dated May 28, 2020, for Fiscal Year 2020/2021, effective August 1, 2020, and should the Commission maintain the current Telecommunications Relay Service (TRS) surcharge at $0.10 per month?
Staff recommends the Commission reduce FTRI’s proposed budget expenses for Fiscal Year 2020/2021 by $96,000 for TTY/TDD Equipment, $58,597 for VCP Hearing Impaired Equipment, $24,000 for VCP Speech Impaired Equipment, $128,481 for Regional Distribution Centers, $6,000 for Leasehold Improvements, and $2,000 for Employee Training. Staff recommends the Commission allow FTRI to transfer $165,211 from the Reserve Account to offset a projected revenue shortfall. Staff recommends the Commission order all local exchange companies to continue billing the $0.10 TRS surcharge for Fiscal Year 2020/2021. Staff further recommends the Commission require FTRI to conduct a financial break-even analysis of the RDC fee structure and present the results to the Commission with its Fiscal Year 2021/2022 budget filing.
Issue 2:
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.
3** Docket No. 20200094-EU – Proposed amendments to Rules 25-6.0440, F.A.C., Territorial Agreements for Electric Utilities, and 25-6.0441, F.A.C., Territorial Disputes for Electric Utilities.
|
Rule Status: |
Proposed |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Polmann |
||
|
Staff: |
GCL: Cowdery ECO: Guffey |
||
(Proposal May Be Deferred.)
Issue 1:
Should the Commission propose the amendment of Rule 25-6.0440, Territorial Agreements for Electric Utilities, and Rule 25-6.0441, Territorial Disputes for Electric Utilities, F.A.C.?
Yes, the Commission should propose the amendment of Rules 25-6.0440 and 25-6.0441, F.A.C., as set forth in Attachment A of staff’s recommendation dated May 28, 2020. The Commission should also certify Rules 25-6.0440 and 25-6.0441, F.A.C., as minor violation rules.
Issue 2:
Should this docket be closed?
Yes. If no requests for hearing, information regarding the SERC, proposals for a lower cost regulatory alternative, or JAPC comments are filed, the rule should be filed with the Department of State, and the docket should be closed.
4**PAA Docket No. 20200030-EI – Complaint by Juana L. Del Rosario against Florida Power & Light Company regarding backbilling for alleged meter tampering.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Brown |
||
|
Staff: |
GCL: Lherisson CAO: Hicks, Plescow ECO: Coston |
||
Issue 1:
What is the appropriate disposition of Ms. Del Rosario’s formal complaint?
Staff recommends that Ms. Del Rosario’s formal complaint be denied. Ms. Del Rosario’s account was properly backbilled in accordance with Florida statutes and rules and FPL’s tariffs. FPL did not violate any applicable statute, rule, company tariff, or order of the Commission in the processing of Ms. Del Rosario’s account.
Issue 2:
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.
5** Docket No. 20180224-EI – Joint petition for rate reductions or alternative reverse make-whole rate case against Florida Power & Light Company, by Office of Public Counsel, Florida Industrial Power Users Group, and Florida Retail Federation.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Graham |
||
|
Staff: |
GCL: Brownless AFD: Cicchetti |
||
Issue 1:
Should this docket be closed?
Yes. All issues raised in the Joint
Motion opening this docket have either been resolved, with the Joint Motion
parties’ participation, in Docket Nos. 20180013-PU, 20180046-EI, and
20180049-EI, or are no longer relevant.
6 Docket No. 20190155-EI – Petition for
establishment of regulatory assets for expenses not recovered during
restoration for Hurricane Michael, by Florida Public Utilities Company.
Docket No. 20190156-EI – Petition for a limited proceeding to recover
incremental storm restoration costs, capital costs, revenue reduction for
permanently lost customers, and regulatory assets related to Hurricane Michael,
by Florida Public Utilities Company.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Fay |
||
|
Staff: |
AFD: Mouring, Sewards GCL: Dziechciarz, Weisenfeld, Lherisson |
||
(Oral Argument Not Requested - Participation
at Commission's Discretion)
Issue 1:
Should the Commission grant OPC's Motion for Partial Summary Final Order?
No. OPC’s Motion for Partial Summary Final Order should be denied.
Issue 2:
Should these dockets be closed?
No. These dockets should remain open for an evidentiary hearing on these matters.
7**PAA Docket No. 20200139-WS – Application for increase in water and wastewater rates in Charlotte, Highlands, Lake, Lee, Marion, Orange, Pasco, Pinellas, Polk, and Seminole Counties, by Utilities, Inc. of Florida.
|
Critical Date(s): |
July 20, 2020 - 90-day deadline to address petition for rule waiver pursuant to Section 120.542(8), F.S. |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Fay |
||
|
Staff: |
GCL: Trierweiler, J. Crawford AFD: Fletcher, Norris ECO: Hudson |
||
Issue 1:
Should the Commission grant the Utility's Petition for Waiver or Variance of Schedule E-14, of Commission Form PSC/AFD 19-W (11/93), as incorporated by reference in Rule 25.30-437, F.A.C.?
Yes. The Commission should grant UIF’s Petition for Waiver of the Rule.
Issue 2:
Should this docket be closed?
The docket should remain open pending the Commission’s final action on the Utility’s requested rate increase. If no timely protest is filed, this matter becomes final upon the issuance of a consummating order.
8**PAA Docket No. 20200006-WS – Water and wastewater industry annual reestablishment of authorized range of return on common equity for water and wastewater utilities pursuant to Section 367.081(4)(f), F.S.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Polmann |
||
|
Staff: |
AFD: Richards, D. Buys, Cicchetti GCL: Lherisson |
||
Issue 1:
What is the appropriate range of returns on common equity for water and wastewater utilities pursuant to Section 367.081(4)(f), Florida Statutes?
Staff recommends that the current leverage formula approved by the Commission in Order No. PSC-2019-0267-PAA-WS continue to be used until readdressed in 2021. Accordingly, staff recommends the following leverage formula:
ROE = 6.05% + (1.80 ÷ Equity Ratio)
Where the Equity Ratio = Common Equity ÷ (Common Equity + Preferred Equity + Long-Term and Short-Term Debt)
Range: 7.85 percent at 100 percent equity to 10.55 percent at 40 percent equity
The Commission should cap returns on common equity at 10.55 percent for all WAW utilities with equity ratios less than 40 percent. Imposing a cap serves to discourage imprudent financial risk. This cap is consistent with the methodology in Order No. PSC-2019-0267-PAA-WS.
Issue 2:
Should this docket be closed?
No. Upon expiration of the protest period, if a timely protest is not received from a substantially affected person, the decision should become final and effective upon the issuance of a Consummating Order. However, this docket should remain open to allow staff to monitor changes in capital market conditions and to readdress the reasonableness of the leverage formula as conditions warrant.
9**PAA Docket No. 20200057-EG – Petition for approval of demand-side management plan, by JEA.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Brown |
||
|
Staff: |
ENG: Phillips, Ellis GCL: Passidomo, Murphy |
||
Issue 1:
Is JEA’s DSM Plan projected to meet the annual numeric conservation goals established by the Commission in the 2019 Goalsetting Order?
Recommendation: Yes. The DSM Plan proposed by JEA is projected to meet or exceed the annual numeric conservation goals approved by the Commission in the 2019 Goalsetting Order. JEA’s 2020 DSM Plan is a continuation, with some modifications, of its DSM Plan approved by the Commission in 2015 or voluntary programs taken outside of its DSM Plan. JEA’s DSM Plan is not projected to be cost-effective based upon the RIM Test. However, the Commission should allow JEA to continue programs considering JEA’s status as a municipal utility, where the local governing body is given the latitude to make decisions regarding local community investment in energy efficiency. JEA’s local governing body will make its own determination as to whether expenditures are reasonable and prudent and will decide if it is necessary to modify and or remove programs.
Staff also recommends that JEA file its administrative program standards for all programs within 30 days of the Consummating Order being issued in this docket. Staff further recommends that the Commission grant staff administrative authority to review and approve these standards.
Issue 2:
Should this docket be closed?
No. If no person whose substantial interests are affected by the proposed agency action files a protest within 21 days of the issuance of the PAA Order, a Consummating Order should be issued. If the Commission approves any programs, the programs should become effective on the date of the Consummating Order. However, if a protest is filed within 21 days of the issuance of the PAA Order, the programs should not be implemented until after the resolution of the protest. In either event, the docket should remain open for staff’s verification that the program standards have been filed by the utility and approved by staff. When the PAA issues become final and the program standards have been approved, this docket should be closed administratively.
10**PAA Docket No. 20200111-EQ – Petition for approval of amended standard offer contract (Schedule COG-2), by Duke Energy Florida, Inc.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Administrative |
||
|
Staff: |
ENG: Kistner, Ellis GCL: Murphy |
||
Issue 1:
Should the Commission approve the amended standard offer contract and rate schedule COG-2 filed by Duke Energy Florida, LLC?
Yes. The provisions of DEF’s amended standard offer contract and associated rate schedule COG-2 conform to all requirements of Rules 25-17.200 through 25-17.310, F.A.C. The amended 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, DEF’s standard offer contract may subsequently be revised.
11**PAA Docket No. 20200112-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: Kistner, Ellis GCL: Passidomo |
||
Issue 1:
Should the Commission approve the amended standard offer contract and rate schedule COG-2 filed by Tampa Electric Company?
Yes. The provisions of TECO’s amended standard offer contract and associated rate schedule COG-2 conform to all requirements of Rules 25-17.200 through 25-17.310, F.A.C. The amended 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.
12**PAA Docket No. 20200114-EQ – Petition for approval of renewable energy tariff and standard offer contract, by Florida Power & Light Company.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Administrative |
||
|
Staff: |
ENG: Kistner, Ellis GCL: Weisenfeld |
||
(Staff recommends the Commission consider
with Docket No. 20200115-EQ.)
Issue 1:
Should the Commission approve the revised standard offer contract and associated rate schedule QS-2 filed by Florida Power & Light Company?
Yes. The provisions of FPL’s revised standard offer contract and associated rate schedule QS-2 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, FPL’s standard offer contract may subsequently be revised.
13**PAA Docket No. 20200115-EQ – Petition for approval of new standard offer for purchase of firm capacity and energy from renewable energy facilities or small qualifying facilities and rate schedule QS-2, by Gulf Power Company.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Administrative |
||
|
Staff: |
ENG: Kistner, Ellis GCL: Weisenfeld |
||
(Staff recommends the Commission consider
with Docket No. 20200114-EQ.)
Issue 1:
Should the Commission approve Gulf's new standard offer contract and associated rate schedule QS-2?
Yes. The provisions of Gulf’s new standard offer contract and associated rate schedule conform to all requirements of Rules 25-17.200 through 25-17.310, F.A.C. The new 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 the new standard offer contract and rate schedule QS-2 be approved, with the prior standard offer contract and rate schedule REF-1 being cancelled.
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.
14** Docket No. 20200012-WS – Application for amendment of Certificates 669-W and 571-S to delete territory in Sumter County, by South Sumter Utility Company, LLC.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Graham |
||
|
Staff: |
ENG: M. Watts, K. Johnson, Ramos GCL: Lherisson |
||
Issue 1:
Should the Commission approve SSU’s application for amendment of Certificate Nos. 669-W and 571-S to delete territory from its certificated service area in Sumter County?
Yes. The Commission should approve the application filed by SSU to delete territory, as reflected on Attachment A of staff’s recommendation dated May 28, 2020, from its certificated service area, effective the day of the Commission’s vote. The resultant order should serve as SSU’s amended certificate and should be retained by the Utility.
Issue 2:
Should this docket be closed?
Yes. If staff’s recommendation in Issue 1 is approved, no further action is required, and the docket should be closed.
15**PAA Docket No. 20200141-TA – Compliance investigation of AAV Certificate No. 7790, issued to A.SUR Net, Inc., for apparent fourth-time violation of Rule 25-4.0161, F.A.C., Regulatory Assessment Fees; Telecommunications Companies.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Administrative |
||
|
Staff: |
ECO: Kunkler GCL: Passidomo, Dziechciarz |
||
Issue 1:
Should the Commission impose a penalty and a cost of collection, together totaling $4,000, or cancel the A.SUR Net, Inc. tariff and remove A.SUR Net, Inc., TA057, from the register for an apparent fourth violation of Section 364.336, F.S., and Rule 25-4.0161, F.A.C., Regulatory Assessment Fees; Telecommunications Companies?
A.SUR Net, Inc. should pay a penalty and the cost of collection, together totaling $4,000, as well as remit any unpaid Regulatory Assessment Fees, along with accrued statutory late payment charges, or have its AAV tariff cancelled and its name removed from the register.
Issue 2:
Should this docket be closed?
Staff recommends that the Order issued from this recommendation will become final and effective upon issuance of a Consummating Order, unless a person whose substantial interests are affected by the Commission’s decision files a protest that identifies with specificity the issues in dispute, in the form provided by Rule 28-106.201, F.A.C., within 21 days of the issuance of the Proposed Agency Action Order. As provided by Section 120.80(13)(b), F.S., any issues not in dispute should be deemed stipulated. If the Company fails to timely file a protest and to request a Section 120.57, F.S., hearing, the facts should be deemed admitted and the right to a hearing waived. If the Company fails to pay the penalty and cost of collection, and Regulatory Assessment Fee, including statutory late payment charges, in full, prior to the expiration of the Proposed Agency Action Order, then the Company’s AAV tariff should be cancelled administratively and its name removed from the register, and the collection of the past due Regulatory Assessment Fee, including any accrued statutory late payment charges, should be referred to the Florida Department of Financial Services for further collection efforts. If the Company’s AAV tariff is cancelled and its name removed from the register in accordance with the Commission’s Order from this recommendation, the Company should be required to immediately cease and desist providing alternative access telecommunications service in Florida. This docket should be closed administratively either upon receipt of the payment of the penalty and cost of collection, and Regulatory Assessment Fee, including accrued statutory late payment charges, or upon cancellation of the Company’s AAV tariff and removal of its name from the register.
16**PAA Docket No. 20200059-EI – Petition for approval of amortization rate for customer account management system, by Gulf Power Company.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Polmann |
||
|
Staff: |
ECO: Smith II, Kunkler GCL: Stiller |
||
Issue 1:
Should Gulf's request to establish a new sub-account and annual depreciation rate applicable to its CAMS software be approved, and, if so, what is the appropriate depreciation rate?
Yes, a new sub-account and annual depreciation rate applicable to Gulf’s new CAMS software should be approved. The appropriate annual depreciation rate for the CAMS software is 5 percent.
Issue 2:
If the new amortization rate in Issue 1 is approved, what should be the effective date?
If the amortization rate is approved in Issue 1, staff recommends an implementation date of February 24, 2020.
Issue 3: If the Commission approves staff’s recommendation in Issue 1, should any accounting entries or adjustments be authorized as part of this docket?
Yes. Staff recommends the Commission authorize accounting entries to reflect the new amortization rate.
Issue 4:
Should this docket be closed?
If no protest to this proposed agency action is filed by a substantially affected person within 21 days of the issuance of the order, a consummating order should be issued and the docket should be closed.
17** Docket No. 20200097-EI – Petition for approval of budget billing tariff modifications by Gulf Power Company.
|
Critical Date(s): |
06/09/20 (Gulf Power Company waived the 60-Day Suspension Date to the June 9, 2020 Agenda Conference) |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Administrative |
||
|
Staff: |
ECO: Forrest GCL: Trierweiler |
||
(Tariff Filing)
Issue 1:
Should the Commission approve Gulf's proposed modifications to its budget billing tariff?
Yes, the Commission should approve Gulf's proposed modifications to its budget billing tariff effective June 9, 2020.
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.
18** Docket No. 20200121-EI – Petition for approval of revised customer specified lighting tariff, by Tampa Electric Company.
|
Critical Date(s): |
6/12/2020 (60-Day Suspension Date) |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Administrative |
||
|
Staff: |
ECO: Guffey GCL: Stiller |
||
(Tariff Filing)
Issue 1:
Should the Commission approve TECO's revised Customer Specified Lighting Tariff (LS-2) Sheet No. 6.830, as shown in Attachment A of staff’s recommendation dated May 28, 2020?
Yes. The Commission should approve TECO’s revised LS-2 Sheet No. 6.830, as shown in Attachment A of staff’s recommendation dated May 28, 2020, effective June 9, 2020. The proposed LS-2 tariff revision allows TECO to offer LS-2 customers the option to receive metered lighting service.
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.
19**PAA Docket No. 20200085-GU – Joint Petition for approval of territorial agreement in Sumter County by Peoples Gas System, The City of Leesburg and South Sumter Gas Company.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Polmann |
||
|
Staff: |
ECO: Guffey GCL: Trierweiler |
||
Issue 1:
Should the Commission approve the proposed Territorial Agreement between Peoples and Leesburg in Sumter County?
Yes, the
Commission should approve the proposed Territorial Agreement between Peoples
and Leesburg in Sumter County. The proposed Territorial Agreement is in the
public interest and it will enable Peoples and Leesburg to avoid duplication of
facilities and serve their customers in an efficient manner.
Issue 2:
Should this docket be closed?
If no protest is filed by a person whose
substantial interests are affected within 21 days of the issuance of the Order,
this docket should be closed upon the issuance of a Consummating Order.