FLORIDA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
COMMISSION CONFERENCE AGENDA
CONFERENCE DATE AND
TIME: Tuesday, May 5,
2026, 9:30 a.m.
LOCATION: Betty Easley Conference Center, Joseph P. Cresse Hearing Room 148
DATE ISSUED: April 23, 2026
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 https://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 (https://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.
1**PAA Docket No. 20260014-EI – Complaint by Juan Merchan and Gonzalo Lever against Tampa Electric Company.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Payne |
||
|
Staff: |
CAO: Plescow ENG: Brown GCL: Dose |
||
Issue 1:
What is the appropriate resolution of the Petitioners’ complaint?
Staff recommends that the Petitioners’ formal complaint be denied. It does not appear that TECO violated its Commission-approved tariff or any statutes, rules, or orders of the Commission in its relocation of guy wires within its right of way.
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.
2** Docket No. 20260001-EI – Fuel and purchased power cost recovery clause with generating performance incentive factor.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Clark |
||
|
Staff: |
AFD: Higgins, G. Kelley, Zaslow ECO: Hampson GCL: M. Thompson |
||
Issue 1:
Should the Commission approve DEF’s request to refund $90,515,614 of over-recovered storm costs through the fuel cost recovery clause?
Yes. The Commission should approve DEF’s request to refund $90,515,614 of over-recovered storm costs through reductions to its fuel cost recovery factors applicable for June 2026 through September 2026. The Commission should also approve DEF’s request to true-up any remaining storm cost recovery balance through the fuel clause when those amounts become final.
Issue 2:
If approved by the Commission, what is the appropriate effective date for DEF’s revised fuel cost recovery factors?
The fuel cost recovery factors, as shown on Appendix A, should become effective with the first billing cycle of June 2026 and continue through the last billing cycle of September 2026.
Issue 3:
Should this docket be closed?
No. The 20260001-EI docket is an on-going proceeding and should remain open.
3**PAA Docket No. 20260024-GU – Petition for approval of change in rate used to capitalize allowance for funds used during construction (AFUDC) from 7.08% to 7.18%, effective January 1, 2026, by Peoples Gas System, Inc.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Administrative |
||
|
Staff: |
AFD: D'Sa, Souchik GCL: Brownless |
||
Issue 1:
Should the Commission approve PGS’s request to change its AFUDC rate from 7.08 percent to 7.18 percent?
Yes. The appropriate AFUDC rate for PGS is 7.18 percent based on a 13-month average capital structure for the period ended December 31, 2025.
Issue 2:
What is the appropriate monthly compounding rate to achieve PGS’s requested annual AFUDC of 7.18 percent?
The appropriate compounding rate to achieve an annual AFUDC rate of 7.18 percent is 0.005795 percent.
Issue 3:
Should the Commission approve PGS’s requested effective date of January 1, 2026, for implementing the AFUDC rate?
Yes. The AFUDC rate should be effective January 1, 2026, 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.
4**PAA Docket No. 20260048-EQ – Petition for approval of amended standard offer contract (Schedule COG-2), by Duke Energy Florida, LLC.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Administrative |
||
|
Staff: |
ENG: Willis, Ellis GCL: Sparks |
||
Issue 1:
Should the Commission approve the renewable energy tariff and amended standard offer contract filed by Duke Energy Florida, LLC?
Yes. The provisions of DEF’s renewable energy tariff and amended standard offer contract meet the requirements of Rules 25-17.200 through 25-17.310, F.A.C. The amended standard offer contract offers multiple payment options 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.
5**PAA Docket No. 20260049-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: Willis, Ellis GCL: Hixon, Marquez |
||
Issue 1:
Should the Commission approve the amended standard offer contract and associated 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 meet the
requirements of Rules 25-17.200 through 25-17.310, F.A.C. The amended standard
offer contract offers multiple payment options 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.
6**PAA Docket No. 20260052-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: Willis, Ellis GCL: Imig |
||
Issue 1:
Should the Commission approve the renewable energy tariff and amended standard offer contract filed by Florida Power & Light Company?
Yes. The provisions of FPL’s renewable energy tariff and amended standard offer contract meet the requirements of Rules 25-17.200 through 25-17.310, F.A.C. The amended standard offer contract offers multiple payment options 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.
7**PAA Docket No. 20240123-WU – Application for grandfather certificate to operate water utility in Columbia County by Suwannee Valley Utilities, LLC.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Payne |
||
|
Staff: |
ENG: Sanchez, Ellis, King, Ramos AFD: Bardin, McClelland ECO: Sibley GCL: Dose |
||
(Proposed Agency Action for Issues 3-5)
Issue 1:
Should Suwannee Valley Utilities, LLC’s application for a grandfather water certificate in Columbia County be acknowledged?
Yes. Suwannee Valley’s application should be acknowledged and the Utility should be granted Certificate 696-W, effective May 16, 2024, to serve the territory described in Attachment A of staff’s memorandum dated April 23, 2026. The resultant order should serve as Suwannee Valley’s certificate and should be retained by the Utility.
Issue 2:
What rates, charges, and deposits should be approved for Suwannee Valley Utilities, LLC?
Of the Utility’s rates and charges that were in effect when the County transferred jurisdiction to the Commission, only the rates and charges shown on Schedule No. 1 of staff’s memorandum dated April 23, 2026, are appropriate and should be approved. The rates and charges should be effective for services rendered or connections made on or after the stamped approval date on the tariff sheets. Suwannee Valley should be required to charge the approved rates and charges until authorized to change them by the Commission in a subsequent proceeding.
Issue 3:
What are the appropriate miscellaneous service charges for Suwannee Valley Utilities, LLC?
The appropriate miscellaneous service charges shown on Table 3-4 of staff’s memorandum dated April 23, 2026, should be approved. The Utility should be required to file a proposed customer notice to reflect the Commission-approved charges. The approved charges should be effective for service rendered or connections made on or after the stamped approval date on the tariff sheet pursuant to Rule 25-30.475(2), F.A.C. In addition, the tariff sheets should be approved upon staff’s verification that the tariffs are consistent with the Commission’s decision and that the proposed customer notice is adequate.
Issue 4:
What is the appropriate meter installation charge for Suwannee Valley Utilities, LLC?
The appropriate meter installation charge is $219 and should be approved. The Utility should file a tariff sheet and a proposed customer notice. The Utility should provide notice to potential customers who have requested service within 12 calendar months prior to the month the application was filed and up until this Order becomes final. 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 the date notice was given within 10 days of the date of notice.
Issue 5:
What are the appropriate initial customer deposits for Suwannee Valley Utilities, LLC?
The appropriate initial customer deposit amount should be $85 for the residential 5/8 inch x 3/4 inch meter sizes. The initial customer deposits for all other residential meter sizes and all general service meter sizes should be two times the average estimated bill. The approved initial customer deposits should be effective for services rendered or connections made on or after the stamped approval date on the tariff sheets pursuant to Rule 25-30.475, F.A.C. The Utility should be required to collect the approved deposits until authorized to change them by the Commission in a subsequent proceeding.
Issue 6:
Should this docket be closed?
If no person whose substantial interests are affected by the proposed agency action portion of this recommendation files a protest within 21 days of the issuance of this order, a consummating order should be issued. The docket should remain open for staff’s verification that the revised tariff sheets have been filed by the Utility and approved by staff, and notice has been provided to customers. Once these actions are complete, this docket should be closed administratively if no timely protest has been filed.
8**PAA Docket No. 20250144-WU – Application for transfer of majority organizational control of Wildwood Water Company, holder of Certificate No. 648-W in St. Johns County.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Clark |
||
|
Staff: |
ENG: Davis, Ellis AFD: Gatlin, Holloway ECO: Rashawn GCL: Dose |
||
(Proposed Agency Action for Issue 3)
Issue 1:
Should Wildwood Water Company be required to show cause why it should not be fined for an apparent violation of Section 367.071(1), F.S., and Rule 25-30.037(1)(a), F.A.C., for failing to obtain Commission approval prior to the transfer of majority organizational control, and failing to submit an application to the Commission for authority to transfer no later than 90 days after the transfer of majority organizational control?
No. Staff recommends that the Utility’s apparent violation of Section 367.071(1), F.S., and Rule 25-30.037(1)(a), F.A.C., does not rise to the level which warrants the initiation of a show cause proceeding. However, Wildwood should be placed on notice that show cause proceedings may be initiated if further violations of Commission laws or rules regarding the transfer of certificates are identified.
Issue 2:
Should the application for transfer of majority organizational control of Wildwood Water Company in St. Johns County be approved?
Yes. The transfer of majority organizational control from Gerald E. Mills and Diane N. Mills to G. Gregory Mills is in the public interest and should be approved effective the date of the Commission vote. The resultant order should serve as the water and wastewater certificates, with the territories described in Attachment A of staff’s memorandum dated April 23, 2026, for the Utility. The Utility’s existing rates and charges should remain in effect until a change is authorized by the Commission in a subsequent proceeding. For the Utility, the tariff pages reflecting the transfer should be effective on or after the stamped approval date on the tariff sheets pursuant to Rule 25-30.475(1), F.A.C.
Issue 3:
What are the appropriate revisions to miscellaneous service charges for Wildwood Water Company?
The appropriate revisions to miscellaneous service charges for Wildwood Water Company should be the removal of initial connection and normal reconnection charges and update the definition of the premises visit charge to be consistent with Rule 25-30.460, F.A.C. The Utility should be required to file a proposed customer notice to reflect the Commission-approved charges. The approved charges should be effective on or after the stamped approval date on the tariff sheet pursuant to Rule 25-30.475(1), F.A.C. In addition, the approved charges should not be implemented until staff has approved the proposed customer notice and the notice has been received by customers. The Utility should provide proof of the date notice was given, no less than 10 days after the date of the notice. Wildwood should be required to charge the approved miscellaneous services charges until authorized to change them by the Commission in a subsequent proceeding.
Issue 4:
Should this docket be closed?
If no person whose substantial interests are affected by the proposed agency action portion of this recommendation files a protest within 21 days of the issuance of this order, a consummating order should be issued.
9**PAA Docket No. 20260013-EU – Joint petition for approval of territorial agreement in Hillsborough, Pasco, Pinellas, and Polk Counties, by Tampa Electric Company and Duke Energy Florida, LLC.
|
Critical Date(s): |
None |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Payne |
||
|
Staff: |
ECO: Prewett, Barrett, Clark GCL: Thompson |
||
Issue 1:
Should the Commission approve the 2026 Territorial Agreement between DEF and TECO in Hillsborough, Pasco, Pinellas, and Polk Counties, dated January 7, 2026?
Yes, the Commission should approve the 2026 Territorial Agreement between DEF and TECO in Hillsborough, Pasco, Pinellas, and Polk Counties, as consistent with the Standards for Approval set forth in Rule 25-6.0440(2), F.A.C. The 2026 Territorial Agreement, if approved, amends the respective boundary lines between the Utilities, thereby eliminating extra-territorial connections. The agreement would also facilitate the joint petitioners’ efforts to avoid uneconomic duplication of service facilities, wasteful expenditures, and hazardous conditions. Also, the terms of the agreement require the Utilities to seek Commission approval of any temporary service, including inadvertent service, expected to last more than one year. The Utilities are also encouraged to communicate with Commission staff in a timely fashion when inadvertent service is discovered.
Issue 2:
Should this docket be closed?
10 Docket No. 20260046-EI – Petition for approval of revised underground residential distribution tariffs, by Duke Energy Florida, LLC.
|
Critical Date(s): |
05/31/26 (60-Day Suspension Date) |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Administrative |
||
|
Staff: |
ECO: Nguyen, Hampson GCL: Brownless |
||
(Tariff Suspension - Participation is at
the discretion of the Commission)
Issue 1:
Should DEF’s proposed underground differential tariffs be suspended?
Yes. Staff recommends that the proposed 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.
11 Docket No. 20260050-EI – Petition for approval of revised underground residential distribution tariff, by Tampa Electric Company.
|
Critical Date(s): |
06/01/26 (60-Day Suspension Date) |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Administrative |
||
|
Staff: |
ECO: P. Kelley GCL: Farooqi |
||
(Tariff Suspension - Participation is at
the discretion of the Commission)
Issue 1:
Should TECO's proposed underground residential distribution tariffs be suspended?
Yes. The proposed tariffs should 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.
12 Docket No. 20260051-EI – Petition for approval of revisions to underground residential differential, underground commercial differential, and contribution-in-aid-of-construction tariffs, by Florida Power & Light Company.
|
Critical Date(s): |
06/01/26 (60-Day Suspension Date) |
||
|
Commissioners Assigned: |
All Commissioners |
||
|
Prehearing Officer: |
Administrative |
||
|
Staff: |
ECO: Ward, Hampson GCL: M. Thompson |
||
(Tariff Suspension - Participation is at
the discretion of the Commission)
Issue 1:
Should FPL's proposed underground differential tariffs and CIAC tariffs be suspended?
Yes. The proposed tariffs should 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.