20250011

Key events and scheduled submissions in the Florida Power & Light Company (FPL) rate case proceeding (Docket No. 20250011-EI) include:

- January 2, 2025: FPL notified the Commission of its intent to file a petition for a base rate increase effective January 2026.
- February 28, 2025: FPL filed its petition for a base rate increase, minimum filing requirements, and supporting direct testimony.
- March 14, 2025: Order establishing procedure issued.
- June 9, 2025: Deadline for intervenors to file testimony and exhibits.
- June 17, 2025: Deadline for Commission staff to file testimony and exhibits, if any.
- July 9, 2025: Deadline for rebuttal testimony and exhibits.
- July 18, 2025: Prehearing statements due.
- July 23, 2025: Discovery deadline.
- July 25, 2025: Prehearing conference.
- July 31, 2025: Deadline for parties to provide all exhibits intended for use at the hearing.
- August 11–22, 2025: Evidentiary hearing scheduled.
- September 12, 2025: Briefs due.

Additional meetings or prehearing conferences may be scheduled at the discretion of the prehearing officer and will be properly noticed to allow parties to attend 1, 2, 2.

Docket No. 20250011-EI concerns a petition by Florida Power & Light Company (FPL) for a significant base rate increase that could impact approximately 12 million Floridians and businesses across 43 counties. The Office of Public Counsel (OPC) and various stakeholders are actively engaged in discovery and procedural motions, citing the complexity and magnitude of FPL’s rate request, which could result in a cumulative $10 billion rate increase. The case features debates over discovery limits, with OPC seeking to expand or remove interrogatory limits to adequately investigate FPL’s request. Public participation is facilitated through nine scheduled customer service hearings (both in-person and virtual), as well as written comment submissions. The docket also addresses administrative and noticing costs associated with these hearings, which are ultimately borne by FPL’s customers. The commission's decision in this case will directly affect electric rates for millions of FPL customers and has prompted interventions from consumer and industry groups concerned about fair and reasonable rates 1 2.

The docket identifies several areas of growth for Florida Power & Light Company (FPL) and includes key considerations for each:

1. Customer Base Growth
- FPL serves approximately six million customer accounts, representing about 12 million Floridians and businesses across 43 counties. The average number of customers is tracked and analyzed for trends, as growth in customers directly affects revenue, required infrastructure, and operational demands 1.

2. Operational and Maintenance Expense Growth
- The docket provides schedules showing growth in other operation and maintenance (O&M) expenses over the previous years and into the projected test year. These expenses are summarized by average customer, and selected growth indices and rates are used to analyze trends in power production, transmission, energy storage, distribution, customer service, and administrative costs. A key consideration is managing these rising costs while maintaining service quality and reliability 2.

3. Capital Investment and Infrastructure Expansion
- The capital cost per installed kilowatt of capacity is tracked as a growth index, reflecting investments in new infrastructure and generating capacity. Considerations here include ensuring that capital spending supports future growth, system reliability, and the ability to meet peak demand, while also controlling costs for customers 2.

4. Return on Equity (ROE) and Revenue Growth
- FPL is seeking a base rate revenue increase of $1.55 billion in 2026 and $930 million in 2027, with additional adjustments anticipated for subsequent years. The company also proposes an ROE of 11.9%, which is substantially above national averages. The key consideration is balancing the need for sufficient returns to attract investment with the obligation to keep rates fair and reasonable for ratepayers 3, 4.

5. System Reliability, Technology, and Efficiency Upgrades
- Growth is also targeted in system reliability, technological upgrades (including automation and analytics), and operational efficiencies. Key considerations include the risk of cost overruns, complexity in new system implementation, maintaining high availability, and protecting sensitive data. There is a need to ensure that investments translate to future growth without making the system overly complicated or expensive to maintain 5.

6. Energy Efficiency Programs and Renewable Expansion
- While FPL has invested in grid hardening and storm preparedness, the docket notes concerns about insufficient investment in energy efficiency programs. Stakeholders emphasize that robust efficiency programs are essential for managing demand growth and supporting affordability, especially for vulnerable customers 4.

Each growth area is closely tied to regulatory oversight, with the commission tasked to ensure that growth investments are prudent, costs are controlled, and rates remain just and reasonable for all customer classes.

Stakeholders in Florida Public Service Commission Docket No. 20250011 (FPL base rate case) include:

1. Florida Power & Light Company (FPL)
- Proposal: FPL is requesting a base rate revenue increase of $1.55 billion in 2026 and $930 million in 2027, as well as a return on common equity of 11.9% with a range of 100 basis points. FPL also requests that projected rate case expenses ($5,028,614) be amortized over four years for inclusion in base rates 1, 2.
- Position: Proposing and supporting the rate increase.

2. Florida Industrial Power Users Group (FIPUG)
- Position: Intervening to ensure rates charged to industrial customers are fair, just, and reasonable. FIPUG’s interest is to minimize the impact of any rate increase on its members 2.
- Likely opposed to the scale of FPL’s proposed increases.

3. Florida Energy Industry Association (FEIA)
- Position: Opposes FPL’s petition, stating that it would force data center members to move to a more expensive and contractually burdensome rate structure and generally increase bills for their members 3.
- Against FPL's proposed rate increase and tariff changes.

4. League of United Latin American Citizens of Florida (LULAC) and Environmental Confederation of Southwest Florida (ECOSWF)
- Position: Both organizations argue their members would be substantially affected by higher rates and have intervened to reduce the rate hike, citing economic burdens on their constituencies and environmental concerns 4.
- Against FPL's proposed rate increase.

5. EVgo Services, LLC
- Position: Intervening as a public fast charging provider impacted by FPL rates. The specific stance on the rate proposal is not detailed, but intervention suggests a significant interest in the outcome affecting their business model 5.
- Stake likely tied to keeping rates manageable for electric vehicle charging operations.

6. General Public (individual customers)
- Position: Many letters and comments from FPL customers express strong opposition to the proposed rate hike, citing financial hardship, especially for low-income and older adults, and objecting to perceived excessive corporate profits. Requests for public hearings and calls to reject the rate increase are frequent 6, 7, 8.

7. AARP Florida
- Position: Seeking to participate as an interested party, likely to advocate for older adults who could be disproportionately affected by higher rates 9.
- Implied opposition to the rate increase.

Summary:
- FPL is the sole proponent of the rate increase.
- Stakeholders opposed or seeking to minimize the rate increase include FIPUG, FEIA, LULAC, ECOSWF, AARP Florida, EVgo Services (likely), and a large segment of the general public.
- The main issue dividing stakeholders is FPL’s proposed substantial base rate increase and related tariff and policy changes.

The financial and timeline risks and concerns discussed in this docket include:

- Project delays and overruns due to competing priorities. Specifically, there are 25 "velocity projects" totaling $15 million that may need to be deferred, cancelled, or included in the current work scope, which could impact $2.5 million in operating and maintenance (O&M) savings. Delays can be caused by lack of prioritization of work scope and the need for dual development work in customer information systems (CIS) and CAMS in 2025, with implementation in 2026.
- Risks of large-scale customer disruption in billing or payment processes. Mitigation plans include iterative systems releases, phased customer migration, and cross-functional program oversight to address potential billing defects and minimize operational risk.
- Resource constraints are a concern, requiring pre-identification of resources committed to business continuity work and ensuring alternate resources are available to ensure project success and continuity of service.
- There is concern about staying out of the news and reducing operational risk, particularly regarding disruptions that could impact customers at a large scale.
- The docket also includes mention of lessons learned from previous projects (such as CAMS and SAPOne), which are to be incorporated into the current project scope and timeline to mitigate similar risks 1.