Florida Public Service Commission native order document 02127-2026

FILED 4/10/2026
DOCUMENT NO. 02127-2026
FPSC 	- COMMISSION CLERK
BEFORE THE FLORIDA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
In re: Storm protection plan cost recovery
clause.
DOCKET NO. 2026001 0-EI
ORDER NO. PSC-2026-0085-PCO-EI
ISSUED: April 	10, 2026
ORDER GRANTING INTERVENTION FOR
CITY OF PANAMA CITY. FLORIDA
This 	docket has been opened pursuant 	to Subsection 366.96(7), 	Florida 	Statutes 	(F.S.),
which 	requires 	the 	Commission 	to 	conduct 	an 	annual 	proceeding 	to 	determine 	a 	utility’s
prudently incurred transmission and distribution storm protection plan costs and allow the 	utility
to recover such costs through a charge separate and apart from 	its base rates, 	to be referred to as
the 	storm protection plan 	cost recovery 	clause. 	If the Commission determines 	that 	costs were
prudently 	incurred, 	those 	costs 	will not be 	subject 	to disallowance 	or 	further prudence review
except 	for 	fraud, 	perjury, 	or 	intentional withholding of key 	information by 	the 	public 	utility.
Discovery 	guidelines, hearing procedures, and 	controlling 	dates were 	established by 	the Order
Establishing 	Procedure, 	Order 	No. 	PSC-2026-0040-PCO-EI, 	issued 	February 	6, 	2026. 	This
docket 	is currently scheduled for hearing on August 27, 2026.
Petition for Intervention
By 	petition 	dated March 	16, 	2026, 	the 	City 	of Panama 	City, 	Florida (Panama 	City)
requested 	permission 	to 	intervene 	in 	this 	proceeding 	pursuant 	to 	Rule 	28-106.205, 	Florida
Administrative Code (F.A.C.), and Sections 120.569 and 	120.57, 	F.S. Panama City avers 	that 	it
serves 	its 	citizenry 	through 	offices, 	facilities, 	and 	installations which 	have 	electric 	service
accounts 	through which 	it purchases 	electric 	service from 	Florida Power & 	Light Company
(FPL). Panama City claims 	that 	it will be 	substantially affected by any decision the Commission
makes 	regarding 	rate recovery of costs 	associated with FPL’s 	storm 	protection plan because
these costs will directly impact 	its operating costs for 	its offices, facilities, and installations.
The 	Florida 	Industrial Power Users Group does not 	object 	to 	the 	petition 	to 	intervene.
The Office of Public Counsel, Tampa Electric Company, Florida Public Utilities Company, PCS
Phosphate - White 	Springs, and Nucor 	Steel 	Florida, 	Inc., 	take no 	position on Panama City’s
petition 	to intervene. FPL and Duke Energy Florida, LLC take no position on 	the petition 	at 	this
time. No 	written 	responses were 	filed 	regarding 	the 	petition, 	and 	the 	time 	for doing 	so 	has
expired.
Standards for Intervention
Pursuant to Rule 28-106.205, F.A.C., persons, other than the original parties 	to a pending
proceeding, who have a 	substantial 	interest in 	the proceeding, and who desire to become parties
may move 	for leave 	to 	intervene. 	Motions 	for leave 	to intervene must be 	filed 	at 	least twenty
(20) 	days 	before 	the 	final 	hearing, must comply 	with 	Rule 	28-106.204(3), 	F.A.C., and must

ORDER NO. PSC-2026-0085-PCO-EI
DOCKET NO. 20260010-EI
PAGE 2
include allegations sufficient to demonstrate that the intervenor is entitled to participate in the
proceeding as a matter of constitutional or statutory right or pursuant to Commission rule, or that
the substantial interests of the intervenor are subject to determination or will be affected through
the proceeding. Intervenors take the case as they find it.
To have standing, the intervenor must meet the two-prong standing test set forth in
Agrico Chemical Company v. Department of Environmental Regulation, 406 So. 2d 478, 482
(Fla. 2d DCA 1981). The intervenor must show that (1) he will suffer injury in fact that is of
sufficient immediacy to entitle him to a Section 120.57, F.S., hearing, and (2) the substantial
injury is of a type or nature that the proceeding is designed to protect. The first aspect of the test
deals with the degree of injury. The second deals with the nature of the injury. The "injury in
fact" must be both real and immediate and not speculative or conjectural. International Jai-Alai
Players Assn. v. Florida Pari-Mutuel Commission, 561 So. 2d 1224, 1225-26 (Fla. 3d DCA
1990). See also Village Park Mobile Home Assn., Inc. v. State Dept. of Business Regulation, 506
So. 2d 426, 434 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), rev. den., 513 So. 2d 1063 (Fla. 1987) (speculation on the
possible occurrence of injurious events is too remote).
Analysis and Ruling
The above representations by Panama City satisfy both prongs of the Agrico test. Panama
City meets the first prong of Agrico in that the amount it pays in electric rates may be ultimately
affected by this proceeding. Panama City meets the second prong of Agrico because the purpose
of this proceeding is to determine storm protection plan cost recovery which affects the rates
Panama City will pay. Based on the foregoing, Panama City has made allegations sufficient to
satisfy Agrico and its petition to intervene shall be granted subject to proof of standing or
stipulations that there are sufficient facts to support all elements for standing. See Delgado v.
Agency for Health Care Admin., 237 So. 3d 432, 437 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018) (proper pretrial
stipulations to the facts supporting all elements of standing are binding upon the parties and the
court). As an intervenor, Panama City takes the case as it finds it.
Based on the above representations, it is
ORDERED by Commissioner Gary Clark, as Prehearing Officer, that the Motion to
Intervene filed by City of Panama City, Florida is hereby granted as set forth in the body of this
Order. It is further
ORDERED that City of Panama City, Florida takes the case as it finds it. It is further
ORDERED that all parties to this proceeding shall furnish copies of all testimony,
exhibits, pleadings, and other documents which may hereinafter be filed in this proceeding to:
Nevin J. Zimmerman, Esq.
Burke Blue Law Firm
Attorneys for The City of Panama City
221 McKenzie Avenue

ORDER NO. PSC-2026-0085-PCO-EI
DOCKET NO. 20260010-EI
PAGE 3
Panama City, Florida 32401
nzimmerman@burkeblue.com
pleadings@burkeblue.com
lgross@burkeblue.com
James R. Kelly, Esq., P.A.
359 Milestone Drive
Tallahassee, Florida 32312
Kellyjr2694@gmail.com
By ORDER of Commissioner Gary F. Clark, as Prehearing Officer, this 10th day of
April, 2026
GARY F. CLARK
Commissioner and Prehearing Officer
Florida Public Service Commission
2540 Shumard Oak Boulevard
Tallahassee, Florida 32399
(850) 413-6770
www.floridapsc.com
Copies furnished: 	A copy of this document is
provided to the parties of record at the time of
issuance and, if applicable, interested persons.
DD

ORDER NO. PSC-2026-0085-PCO-EI
DOCKET NO. 20260010-EI
PAGE 4
NOTICE OF FURTHER PROCEEDINGS OR JUDICIAL REVIEW
The Florida Public Service Commission is required by Section 120.569(1), Florida
Statutes, to notify parties of any administrative hearing or judicial review of Commission orders
that is available under Sections 120.57 or 120.68, Florida Statutes, as well as the procedures and
time limits that apply. 	This notice should not be construed to mean all requests for an
administrative hearing or judicial review will be granted or result in the relief sought.
Mediation may be available on a case-by-case basis. 	If mediation is conducted, it does
not affect a substantially interested person's right to a hearing.
Any 	party 	adversely 	affected 	by 	this 	order, 	which 	is 	preliminary, 	procedural 	or
intermediate in nature, may request: (1) reconsideration within 10 days pursuant to Rule 25-
22.0376, Florida Administrative Code; or (2) judicial review by the Florida Supreme Court, in
the case of an electric, gas or telephone utility, or the First District Court of Appeal, in the case
of a water or wastewater utility. 	A motion for reconsideration shall be filed with the Office of
Commission Clerk, in the form prescribed by Rule 25-22.0376, Florida Administrative Code.
Judicial review of a preliminary, procedural or intermediate ruling or order is available if review
of the final action will not provide an adequate remedy. Such review may be requested from the
appropriate court, as described above, pursuant to Rule 9.100, Florida Rules of Appellate
Procedure.