State Regulators Reject Counter-Proposal by Customer Representative to Limit FPL Rate Increases

As they consider a proposed settlement that would increase Florida Power & Light’s base electric rates, state regulators will not take up a “counter proposal” offered by opponents.

Florida Public Service Commission Chairman Mike La Rosa on Friday issued an order dismissing a competing settlement proposal filed by the state Office of Public Counsel — which is designated by law to represent utility customers — and some consumer groups. [But for a handful of customers, FPL is the only provider of electricity in Flagler County.]

The Office of Public Counsel and the allied consumer groups are fighting a proposed settlement that FPL reached last month with numerous businesses and groups. The Public Service Commission on Oct. 6 will start what could be a two-week hearing on the FPL proposal and is expected to issue a decision later in the fall.

La Rosa, who is the case’s prehearing officer, pointed in Friday’s order to FPL’s opposition to the counter proposal and said all of the parties in the case “readily acknowledge that the Florida Public Service Commission has never before considered a settlement agreement filed in a rate case that does not include as a party the utility that has requested the rate increase.”

“Any settlement of a (case) docket … must dispose of the original claim for relief,” the order said. “The party who made this original claim is an indispensable party to any settlement of that claim. In this docket, FPL is an indispensable party to any settlement.”

La Rosa said the Office of Public Counsel proposal “functions essentially as a position paper.” While it will not be considered as a settlement proposal, he said the Office of Public Counsel and the consumer groups can use the positions in the counter proposal as they argue against the proposed FPL settlement.

The order backed arguments raised by FPL, which said in a document filed at the regulatory commission that the counter proposal was “illusory and unenforceable.” But Ali Wessling, an attorney for the Office of Public Counsel, said during arguments last week that the office was unaware of any legal requirement that a utility sign on to an agreement.

Base-rate cases are highly complex and play out over months, with voluminous amounts of technical and financial data. FPL filed an initial rate proposal in February but scaled it back in the proposed settlement filed Aug. 20.

FPL reached its proposed settlement with the Florida Industrial Power Users Group; the Florida Retail Federation; the Florida Energy for Innovation Association; Americans for Affordable Clean Energy; the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy; Walmart Inc.; EVgo Services, LLC; Circle K Stores, Inc.; RaceTrac Inc.; Wawa, Inc.; Electrify America, LLC; Armstrong World Industries, Inc.; and federal government agencies.

The proposed settlement would lead to base-rate increases of $945 million in 2026 and $766 million in 2027, according to the utility. FPL also would collect additional amounts in 2028 and 2029 for solar-energy and battery-storage projects.

The counter proposal, which was filed Aug. 26, would have resulted in increases of $867 million in 2026 and $403 million in 2027. It also would have left open the possibility of FPL seeking increases of an estimated $195 million in 2028 and $174 million in 2029 for generation-related projects that could include solar and battery projects.

The Office of Public Counsel and its allies said the FPL proposal could lead to cumulative increases over four years of $6.903 billion, while the counter proposal would total $5.241 billion.

Along with the Office of Public Counsel, the counter proposal was filed by the groups Florida Rising, the League of United Latin American Citizens of Florida, Environmental Confederation of Southwest Florida and Floridians Against Increased Rates

–Jim Saunders, News Service of Florida