20250039

Docket No. 20250039-EU before the Florida Public Service Commission concerns a territorial dispute between Talquin Electric Cooperative, Inc. (Talquin) and the City of Quincy regarding electric service rights to newly annexed property known as the Bostick property in Gadsden County.

Key points:
- Talquin filed a petition on March 10, 2025, seeking resolution over which utility should serve the disputed area, citing the 1995 territorial agreement as the basis for historic service boundaries. Although the agreement expired in 2010, both parties have continued to honor its terms since then 1, 2.
- The City of Quincy opposes Talquin’s petition, arguing it is premature, incomplete, and contrary to public interest. Quincy requests either denial of Talquin’s petition or expansion of its own territory to include the Bostick property, or alternatively an adjournment until more development details and cost projections are available 3.
- The area in dispute includes a planned residential development (initially 155 single-family lots, with later plans including a multi-unit phase), with both utilities asserting they have the capability and infrastructure to serve the load. Talquin estimates minimal cost ($3,471.70) to extend service, relying on recent investments and proximity of its existing facilities 2, 2.
- Both parties were asked by PSC staff to provide detailed maps, historical investment data, and assessments of current and future load and facility adequacy. Talquin provided details of significant system investments since 2010 and emphasized its readiness and reliability to serve the area 2.
- The dispute ultimately centers on interpretation and continued recognition of the 1995 territorial agreement boundaries, the effect of recent annexation by Quincy, cost efficiency, and which arrangement best serves the public interest.

The Commission is reviewing submissions from both parties and considering factors such as existing infrastructure, projected load, investment history, cost, and public interest in resolving the service territory for the Bostick property 2, 3.

Key events and submissions in this proceeding include:

- March 10, 2025: Talquin Electric Cooperative, Inc. files its petition regarding the territorial dispute, referencing planned development of 155 single-family residential lots and potential rezoning impacts 1, 2.
- March 30, 2025: The City of Quincy files its opposition to Talquin's petition, requesting either denial or expansion of Quincy's territory to include the entire newly annexed Bostick property, or alternatively, an adjournment pending detailed cost proposals 3, 3.
- April 16, 2025: The Florida Public Service Commission (PSC) issues its first data request to both Talquin and Quincy, seeking information on planned load, density changes, and definitions of historic service areas 4.
- April 28, 2025: Both parties file responses to the PSC's first and second data requests, providing updates on planned load, facility locations, and territorial boundaries. This includes detailed responses from Quincy regarding the anticipated load and the proximity of existing facilities to the disputed area 5, 1, 1, 2.
- May 15, 2025: PSC issues a third data request, and parties submit additional maps and clarifications regarding development phases and territorial boundaries 6, 6.

These filings and data exchanges represent the main procedural milestones to date in the docket.

Financial and timeline risks and concerns discussed in this docket include:

Financial Risks and Concerns:
- There is uncertainty about the true cost for both utilities to extend service to the Bostick property. Quincy claims that both it and Talquin will incur approximately the same costs to extend service, but the exact costs of intermediate distribution facilities and necessary upgrades (such as step-down equipment) have not yet been fully determined. Quincy emphasizes that final cost comparisons can only be made once these details are established 1.
- Talquin estimates its cost to install a 65-foot span of overhead primary distribution line and a URD riser pole at $3,471.70, but this figure does not include the full scope of infrastructure potentially needed for the entire development 2.
- Quincy’s plan for 10 spans of overhead line extension is estimated at $30,000, not including the substantial additional cost of underground primary and service laterals and pad-mounted transformers for each home, which will be significant regardless of which utility is chosen 3.
- Both parties discuss the potential for grant funding or customer refund mechanisms to offset initial connection costs. Quincy is pursuing a CDBG grant, while Talquin proposes a refund model subject to eligibility, raising issues regarding who ultimately bears the infrastructure costs and how quickly those costs might be recouped 3.
- Hazards from duplicative infrastructure, should both utilities serve different sections of the development, could increase costs due to operational confusion, risk of accidental damage, and congestion 1.

Timeline Risks and Concerns:
- The City of Quincy argues that Talquin’s petition is premature and incomplete, and requests an adjournment of the dispute until planned development details and projected costs for both utilities are fully calculated and proposed. This position highlights the risk of proceeding with decisions before all financial and technical information is available, potentially causing delays 1.
- Scheduling uncertainties exist, as the commission has set informal meetings and hearings to determine the procedure and schedule for the hearing, but recognizes that settlement, storms, or disasters could lead to meeting cancellations or further delays 4, 4.
- Changes in development plans, such as rezoning or adjustments in the number of lots, could impact load forecasts and infrastructure needs, affecting both timeline and cost estimates. At the time of the filings, no changes had been formally approved, but this remains a risk as planning progresses 2.

In summary, both utilities face financial uncertainty due to incomplete information on infrastructure needs and potential duplicative costs, while the timeline for resolution is at risk from incomplete development planning, possible adjournments, and external factors such as storms or settlement.

The primary stakeholders in Florida Public Service Commission Docket No. 20250039-EU are:

- Talquin Electric Cooperative, Inc. (sometimes spelled "Taiquin" in filings)
- The City of Quincy (referred to as "Quincy" or "QE")
- Florida Public Service Commission (PSC) staff and commissioners
- Interested persons and intervenors (including the developer, Gen Land, and potentially residents of the disputed area)

Positions:
- Talquin Electric Cooperative, Inc. is the petitioner, seeking to resolve the territorial dispute in Gadsden County regarding the newly annexed Bostick property. Talquin seeks to maintain or expand its ability to serve the disputed area.
- The City of Quincy is opposed to Talquin's petition. Quincy argues that the petition is premature, incomplete, and contrary to the public interest. Quincy requests that the PSC deny Talquin's petition and, alternatively, expand Quincy's service territory to include the entire Bostick property. As a second alternative, Quincy asks for the dispute to be adjourned until detailed development and cost information is available 1, 1, 1.
- The Florida PSC acts as the adjudicator and has scheduled meetings and data requests to facilitate resolution. PSC staff are neutral facilitators 2, 2.
- Other interested persons or intervenors (such as the developer, Gen Land, and residents) are encouraged to participate but specific positions are not detailed in the provided excerpts.

In summary:
- Talquin Electric Cooperative: For its own petition to resolve the dispute in its favor.
- City of Quincy: Against Talquin's petition, for expanding its own service territory or delaying the decision.
- PSC: Neutral adjudicator.
- Other parties: Not specified in current excerpts.

The docket identifies the newly annexed Bostick property and an associated multi-phase residential development as the primary area of growth under dispute between Talquin Electric Cooperative and the City of Quincy. Key details include:

Identified Areas of Growth:
- The Bostick property, newly annexed by the City of Quincy, is the focus of planned development.
- The proposed residential development consists of four phases, with a total of 125 homes in Talquin's current service territory and 105 homes in Quincy's current service territory. Phase 4 is entirely within Quincy's 1995 territorial boundary and historical city limits, separate from the Bostick annexation 1, 2.
- The estimated demand for the new development is between 1,380 kW and 1,840 kW 1.
- The City of Quincy has postponed the rezoning decision to allow for increased lot sizes, with groundbreaking expected to be at least six months to a year away 1.

Key Considerations for Each Area:

1. Infrastructure and Service Proximity:
- Quincy has existing underutilized infrastructure (South Substation) within a mile of the development, with sufficient capacity to serve the new load 1, 3.
- Talquin has recently installed distribution lines and infrastructure adjacent to the property, designed for anticipated growth and reliability, allowing service with minimal new construction (65-foot span and riser pole) 4.

2. Cost and Feasibility:
- Talquin estimates its cost to extend service at $3,471.70, requiring only a short extension and existing modern facilities 4, 4.
- Quincy’s extension requires about 2,000 feet of new two-phase overhead line at an estimated $30,000, not including further connection costs to individual homes 5.
- Both parties argue their plans are more economical and efficient; Quincy claims lower utility rates and potential grant funding for connections 5.

3. Historical Service Patterns and Territorial Agreements:
- Both utilities reference the 1995 territorial agreement as the basis for their claims to serve the area, though it expired in 2010. Talquin asserts it has made substantial investments in reliance on this agreement 4, 4.
- Quincy highlights its historical role providing electric service within city limits and adjacent areas, and argues for efficient service extension without unnecessary duplication 5.

4. Municipal vs. Cooperative Interests:
- Quincy emphasizes the advantages of local municipal control, including prompt response, integration with city services (fire/police), and support for local development. The city also notes that customers served by Talquin within city limits would face extra fees for city services 5.
- Talquin highlights its reliability, redundant substation access, and continued adherence to historic service boundaries 4.

5. Public Interest and Planning:
- Both utilities stress the importance of avoiding duplication of facilities and providing service that is reliable, economical, and in the public interest.
- The city’s planning took into account anticipated population growth to the south when building its substation capacity 3.

In summary, the docket centers on the Bostick property and associated new housing phases, with key considerations focused on infrastructure readiness, cost of service extension, historical agreements, public interest, and the relative benefits of municipal versus cooperative service provision.