FLORIDA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

COMMISSION CONFERENCE AGENDA

CONFERENCE DATE AND TIME:  Tuesday, February 3, 2015, 9:30 a.m.

LOCATION:  Betty Easley Conference Center, Joseph P. Cresse Hearing Room 148

DATE ISSUED:  January 22, 2015

 

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 agenda item number.

To participate informally, affected persons need only appear at the agenda conference and request the opportunity to address the Commission on an item listed on 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 Rule 25-22.0021, F.A.C., concerning Agenda Conference participation and Rule 25-22.0022, F.A.C., concerning  oral argument.

Agendas, staff recommendations, and vote sheets are available from the PSC Web site, http://www.floridapsc.com, by selecting Conferences &  Meeting Agendas  and Commission Conferences of the FPSC.  Once filed, a verbatim transcript of the Commission Conference will be available from this page by selecting the conference date, or by selecting Clerk's Office and the Item's docket number, (you can then advance to the Docket Details page and the Document Filings Index for that particular docket).  An official vote of "move staff" denotes that the Item's recommendations were approved.  If you have any questions, contact the Office of Commission Clerk at (850) 413-6770 or e-mail the clerk at Clerk@psc.state.fl.us.

In accordance with the American 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, via 1-800-955-8770 (Voice) or 1-800-955-8771 (TDD), Florida Relay Service.  Assistive Listening Devices are available at 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 PSC’s Web site.  Upon completion of the conference, the video will be available from the Web site by selecting Conferences &  Meeting Agendas, then Audio and Video Event Coverage.


1**................. Consent Agenda. 1

2..................... Docket No. 140142-EM – Petition for declaratory statement or other relief regarding the expiration of the Vero Beach electric service franchise agreement, by the Board of County Commissioners, Indian River County, Florida. 2

3..................... Docket No. 140244-EM – Petition for declaratory statement regarding the effect of the Commission's orders approving territorial agreements in Indian River County, by the City of Vero Beach. 4

4**................. Docket No. 120172-WS – Application for staff-assisted rate case in Highlands County by Country Club Utilities, Inc.
Docket No. 140208-WS – Notice of abandonment of water and wastewater systems in Highlands County by Country Club Utilities, Inc. 5

5**PAA......... Docket No. 140196-EG – Petition for approval of extension of conservation demonstration and development program, by Associated Gas Distributors of Florida. 6

6**................. Docket No. 140232-EI – Petition for approval of revised lighting tariff by Tampa Electric Company. 7

7..................... Docket No. 140239-WS – Application for staff-assisted rate case in Polk County by Orchid Springs Development Corporation. 8

 


   1**                           Consent Agenda

PAA                            A)  Application for Certificate of Authority to Provide Telecommunications Service.

DOCKET NO.

COMPANY NAME

140215‑TX

JOYTEL WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS, INC.

 

 

Recommendation:  The Commission should approve the action requested in the docket referenced above and close the docket.

 


   2                               Docket No. 140142-EM – Petition for declaratory statement or other relief regarding the expiration of the Vero Beach electric service franchise agreement, by the Board of County Commissioners, Indian River County, Florida.

Critical Date(s):

May not be deferred - statutory deadline for issuing final order was waived by petitioner until February 23, 2015.

Commissioners Assigned:

All Commissioners

Prehearing Officer:

Patronis

Staff:

GCL:   Cowdery

ECO:   Draper

 

(Decision on Declaratory Statement - Participation on Issue 2 is based on Commission's vote on Issue 1; Participation on Issue 4 is based on Commission’s vote on Issue 3.)

Issue 1: 

 Should the Commission grant Indian River County’s request for oral argument on its request for reconsideration of Prehearing Order No. PSC-14-0423-PCO-EM granting Orlando Utilities Commission’s motion to intervene?

Recommendation: 

 No.  The Commission should deny Indian River County’s request for oral argument because oral argument will not aid the Commission in understanding and evaluating the issues to be decided. 

Issue 2: 

 Should the Commission grant Indian River County’s request for reconsideration of Order No. PSC-14-0423-PCO-EM granting Orlando Utilities Commission’s motion to intervene?

Recommendation: 

No.  The Commission should deny Indian River County’s request for reconsideration of Order No. PSC-14-0423-PCO-EM granting Orlando Utilities Commission’s motion to intervene.

Issue 3:  Should the Commission grant the motions to address the Commission and allow participation at the Agenda Conference on the issues raised in the Petition?

Recommendation: 

 Yes, the motions to address the Commission should be granted, and all parties and amici curiae should be allowed to participate at the Agenda Conference on the issues raised in the Petition. Oral argument for Docket Nos. 140142-EM and   140244-EM should be heard together and the Commission should allow 15 minutes for each side.

Issue 4: 

 Should the Commission grant Indian River County’s Petition for Declaratory Statement?

Recommendation: 

 No. The Commission should deny the Petition and decline to issue a declaratory statement because the Petition fails to meet the statutory requirements necessary to obtain a declaratory statement.  Accordingly, the Commission should deny the motions to dismiss filed by Vero Beach and OUC as moot.  The Commission should take administrative notice of the pending circuit court case, Town of Indian River Shores v. City of Vero Beach, Case No. 312014 CA 000748 (Fla. 19th Cir. in and for Indian River County, Complaint filed July 18, 2014) and of Resolution 2014-069 of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County because of their relevance to the Commission’s determination of Question j of the Petition.  Consistent with Rule 28-105.003, F.A.C., the Commission should rely on the facts set forth in the Petition without taking a position on the validity of those facts.  Whether the Commission decides to issue or declines to issue a declaratory statement, in whole or in part, the Commission should deny Indian River County’s alternative request for relief. 

Issue 5: 

 Should this docket be closed?

Recommendation: 

 Yes, the docket should be closed.  

 

 


   3                               Docket No. 140244-EM – Petition for declaratory statement regarding the effect of the Commission's orders approving territorial agreements in Indian River County, by the City of Vero Beach.

Critical Date(s):

May be deferred - statutory deadline for issuing the final order is March 19, 2015.

Commissioners Assigned:

All Commissioners

Prehearing Officer:

Edgar

Staff:

GCL:   Cowdery

ECO:   Draper

 

(Decision on Declaratory Statement - Participation on Issue 2 is based on Commission's vote on Issue 1.)

Issue 1: 

 Should the Commission grant the motions to address the Commission and allow participation at the Agenda Conference?

Recommendation: 

 Yes, the motions to address the Commission should be granted, and all parties and amici curiae should be allowed to participate at the Agenda Conference. Oral argument for Docket Nos. 140142-EM and 140244-EM should be heard together and the Commission should allow 15 minutes for each side. 

Issue 2: 

 Should the Commission issue a declaratory statement on the City of Vero Beach’s Petition for Declaratory Statement?

Recommendation: 

 Yes.  The Commission should declare that Vero Beach has the right and obligation to continue to provide retail electric service in the territory described in the Territorial Orders upon expiration of the Franchise Agreement.  The Commission should state that the declaratory statement will be controlling only as to the facts relied upon and not as to other, different or additional facts. 

Issue 3: 

 Should this docket be closed?

Recommendation: 

 Yes, the docket should be closed.  

 

 


   4**                           Docket No. 120172-WS – Application for staff-assisted rate case in Highlands County by Country Club Utilities, Inc.
Docket No. 140208-WS – Notice of abandonment of water and wastewater systems in Highlands County by Country Club Utilities, Inc.

Critical Date(s):

None

Commissioners Assigned:

All Commissioners

Prehearing Officer:

Patronis (120172-WS)

Brown (140208-WS)

Staff:

AFD:   Fletcher, Norris

ECO:   Bruce, Daniel, Hudson

ENG:   C. Lewis

GCL:   Mapp, Corbari

 

Issue 1: 

 Should the Commission acknowledge the abandonment and subsequent receivership of Country Club Utilities, Inc. by the City of Sebring, and cancel Certificate Nos. 540-W and 468-S?

Recommendation: 

 Yes. The Commission should acknowledge the abandonment and subsequent appointment of the City of Sebring as receiver for Country Club, and cancel Certificate Nos. 540-W and 468-S effective December 22, 2014. 

Issue 2:  Should Country Club Utilities, Inc.’s staff-assisted rate case be dismissed and Docket 120172-WS closed? 

Recommendation: 

 Yes. Pursuant to Section 367.022(2), F.S., utility systems owned, operated, managed, or controlled by governmental authorities are exempt from Commission regulation.  With the abandonment of Country Club Utilities, Inc., and the subsequent appointment of the City of Sebring as receiver, the Commission no longer retains jurisdiction over the Utility’s rates. 

Issue 3: 

 Should these dockets be closed?

Recommendation: 

 Yes.  If the Commission approves staff’s recommendations in Issues 1 and 2, these dockets should be closed because no further action is necessary. 

 

 


   5**PAA                   Docket No. 140196-EG – Petition for approval of extension of conservation demonstration and development program, by Associated Gas Distributors of Florida.

Critical Date(s):

March 25, 2015 - termination of program pursuant to Order No. PSC-10-0113-PAA-EG.

Commissioners Assigned:

All Commissioners

Prehearing Officer:

Brown

Staff:

ECO:   Gilbert, Brown, Harlow

GCL:   Brownless

 

Issue 1: 

 Should the Commission approve the Associated Gas Distributors of Florida's (AGDF) petition to extend the Conservation Demonstration and Development (CDD) program for the member Local Distribution Companies (LDCs)?

Recommendation: 

 Yes.  AGDF’s request to extend the CDD program from March 25, 2015 to December 31, 2017 should be approved.  The original approval Order No. PSC-10-0113-PAA-EG capped each member LDC’s total and per program expenditures.  However, in this case to mitigate rate impacts, annual cost caps should be set at one fifth of the originally approved total cost caps.  AGDF should focus its research efforts on those projects with the most potential to benefit the LDCs’ customers.  Finally, AGDF should file final reports for its two ongoing research projects, along with a final report on the CDD program’s results, in the annual natural gas cost recovery clause docket within six months after the requested December 31, 2017 project close.

Issue 2: 

 Should this docket be closed?

Recommendation: 

 Yes, if Issue 1 is approved, the modifications to the existing conservation, demonstration and development program should be effective on February 3, 2015.  If a protest is filed within 21 days of the issuance of the Proposed Agency Action order, the current conservation, demonstration and development program shall expire on March 25, 2015 per the terms of Order No. PSC-10-0113-PAA-EG and modifications to the current conservation, demonstration and development program approved by the Commission after a final hearing will become effective as set forth in the final order. 

 

 


   6**                           Docket No. 140232-EI – Petition for approval of revised lighting tariff by Tampa Electric Company.

Critical Date(s):

02/03/15 (60-Day Suspension Date)

Commissioners Assigned:

All Commissioners

Prehearing Officer:

Administrative

Staff:

ECO:   Garl

GCL:   Brownless

 

Issue 1: 

 Should the Commission approve TECO’s revised lighting tariff?

Recommendation: 

 Yes. The Commission should approve TECO’s revised lighting tariff. 

Issue 2: 

 Should this docket be closed?

Recommendation: 

 Yes.  If Issue 1 is approved, the tariffs should become effective on February 3, 2015.  If a protest is filed within 21 days of the issuance of the order, the tariffs 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. 

 

 


   7                               Docket No. 140239-WS – Application for staff-assisted rate case in Polk County by Orchid Springs Development Corporation.

Critical Date(s):

02/09/15 (60-Day Suspension Date)

Commissioners Assigned:

All Commissioners

Prehearing Officer:

Edgar

Staff:

ECO:   Thompson, Hudson

AFD:   T. Brown, Fletcher, Norris

GCL:   Tan

 

(Decision on Interim Rates – Participation is at the Discretion of the Commission.)

Issue 1: 

 Should an interim revenue increase be approved?

Recommendation: 

 Yes, Orchid Springs should be authorized to collect interim revenues as indicated below:

 

Adjusted Test

Year Revenues

 

$ Increase

Revenue

Requirement

 

% Increase

Wastewater

$121,624

$19,714

$141,338

16.21%

Water

$104,548

$0

N/A

0%

 

 

 

 

 

Revenues are sufficient to cover staff-adjusted O&M expenses for the water system, but not the wastewater system.  As such, an interim revenue increase is warranted for the wastewater system, but not the water system.  

Issue 2: 

 What are the appropriate interim wastewater rates?

Recommendation: 

 The interim rate increase of 16.21 percent for wastewater should be applied as an across-the-board increase to the existing rates. The rates, as shown on Schedule No. 1 of staff’s memorandum dated January 22, 2015, should be effective for service rendered on or after the stamped approval date on the tariff sheets, pursuant to Rule 25-30.475(1), F.A.C.  The Utility should file revised tariff sheets and a proposed customer notice to reflect the Commission-approved rates.  In addition, the approved rates should not be implemented until the required security has been filed, staff has approved the proposed customer notice, and the notice has been received by the customers.  The Utility should provide proof of the date notice was given within 10 days of the date of the notice. 

Issue 3: 

 What is the appropriate security to guarantee the interim increase?

Recommendation: 

 The Utility should be required to open an escrow account or secure a surety bond or letter of credit to guarantee any potential refund of revenues collected under interim conditions.  If the security provided is an escrow account, the Utility should deposit $1,643 into the escrow account each month.  Otherwise, the surety bond or letter of credit should be in the amount of $13,146.  Pursuant to Rule 25-30.360(6), F.A.C., the Utility should provide a report by the 20th of each month indicating the monthly and total revenue collected subject to refund.  Should a refund be required, the refund should be with interest and in accordance with Rule 25-30.360, F.A.C. 

Issue 4: 

 Should this docket be closed?

Recommendation: 

 No.   The docket should remain open pending the Commission’s final action on the Utility’s requested rate increase.