Florida Public Service Commission native order document 09998-2024

FILED 11/22/2024
DOCUMENT NO. 09998-2024
FPSC - COMMISSION CLERK
BEFORE THE FLORIDA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
In re: Environmental cost recovery clause. 	DOCKET NO. 20240007-EI
---------------~
ORDER NO. PSC-2024-0482-FOF-EI
ISSUED: November 22, 2024
The following Commissioners participated in the disposition of this matter:
MIKE LA ROSA, C hairman
ARTGRAHAM
GARY F. CLARK
ANDREW GILES FAY
GABRIELLA P ASSIDOMO
FINAL ORDER APPROVING PROJECTED EXPENDITURES AND TRUE-UP AMOUNTS
FOR ENVIRONMENTAL COST RECOVERY FACTORS
APPEARANCES:
MARIA JOSE MONCADA and JOEL T. BAKER, ESQUIRES, 700 Universe
Boulevard, Juno Beach, Florida 33408-2863
On behalf of FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMP ANY (FPL).
DIANNE M. TRIPLETT, ESQUIRE, 299 First Avenue North, St. Petersburg,
Florida 33701
MATTHEW R. BERNIER, and STEPHANIE CUELLO, ESQUIRES, 106 East
College Avenue, Suite 800, Tallahassee, Florida 32301
On behalf of DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, LLC (DEF).
MALCOLM N. MEANS, J. 	JEFFRY WAHLEN, and VIRGINIA PONDER
ESQUIRES, Ausley McMullen, Post Office Box 391, Tallahassee, Florida 32302
On behalf of TAMPA ELECTRIC COMPANY (TECO).
WALT 	TRIERWEILER, 	CHARLES 	REHWINKEL, 	PATRICIA 	A.
CHRISTENSEN, MARY A. WESSLING, and OCTAVIO SIMOES-PONCE, and
AUSTIN 	WATROUS 	ESQUIRES, 	c/o 	The 	Florida Legislature, 	111 	West
Madison Street, Suite 812, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1400
On behalf of OFFICE OF PUBLIC COUNSEL (OPC).
JON C. MOYLE, JR. and KAREN A. PUTNAL, ESQUIRES, Moyle Law Firm,
P.A., 118 North Gadsden Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32301
On behalf of FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL POWER USERS GROUP (FIPUG).

ORDER NO. PSC-2024-0482-FOF-EI
DOCKET NO. 20240007-EI
PAGE 2
JAMES W. BREW, LAURA WYNN BAKER and SARAH B. NEWMAN,
ESQUIRES, Stone, Mattheis, Xenopoulis & Brew, PC, 1025 Thomas Jefferson
Street, NW, Eighth Floor, West Tower, Washington, D.C. 20007
On behalf of White Springs Agricultural Chemicals, Inc. d/b/a PCS Phosphate –
White Springs (PCS Phosphate).
PETER J. MATTHEIS, MICHAEL K. LAVANGA, and JOSEPH R. BRISCAR,
ESQUIRES, Stone, Mattheis, Xenopoulis & Brew, PC, 1025 Thomas Jefferson
Street, NW, Eighth Floor, West Tower, Washington D.C. 20007
On behalf of Nucor Steel Florida, Inc. (NUCOR).
JACOB 	IMIG, SAAD FAROOQI, and ADRIA H. HARPER, ESQUIRES,
Florida Public Service Commission, 2540 Shumard Oak Boulevard, Tallahassee,
Florida 32399-0850
On behalf of the Florida Public Service Commission (Staff).
MARY ANNE HELTON, ESQUIRE, Deputy General Counsel, Florida Public
Service Commission, 2540 Shumard Oak Boulevard, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-
0850
Advisor to the Florida Public Service Commission.
KEITH C. HETRICK, ESQUIRE, General Counsel, Florida Public Service
Commission, 2540 Shumard Oak Boulevard, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0850
Florida Public Service Commission General Counsel.
BY THE COMMISSION:
BACKGROUND
As part of this Commission’s continuing Environmental Cost Recovery Clause (ECRC)
proceedings, a hearing was held in this docket on November 5, 2024. The ECRC proceeding
allows 	investor 	owned 	electric 	utilities 	to 	seek 	recovery 	of 	their 	costs 	for 	approved
environmental programs on an annual basis. We are vested with jurisdiction over the subject
matter by the provisions of Section 366.8255, Florida Statutes (F.S.).
DECISION
We approve the Type 2 1 stipulations for all issues as set forth below, as reasonable and
supported by competent and substantial evidence. We relied upon the uncontroverted testimony
1 A Type 2 stipulation occurs on an issue when the utility and the staff, or the utility and at least one party
adversarial to the utility, agree on the resolution of the issue and the remaining parties (including staff if they do not
join in the agreement) do not object to the Commission relying on the agreed language to resolve that issue in a final
order.

ORDER NO. PSC-2024-0482-FOF-EI
DOCKET NO. 20240007-EI
PAGE 3
of the witnesses and the supplemental evidence entered into the record. Duke Energy Florida,
LLC (DEF), Florida Power & Light Company (FPL), Tampa Electric Company (TECO), and
Commission staff supported the proposed stipulations. The Office of Public Counsel (OPC)
position on each Type 2 stipulation is as follows:
OPC takes no position on these issues nor does it have the burden of proof related
to them. As such, the OPC represents that it will not contest or oppose the
Commission 	taking 	action 	approving 	a 	proposed 	stipulation 	between 	the
Company and another party or staff as a final resolution of the issue. No person is
authorized to state that the OPC is a participant in, or party to, a stipulation on
these issues, either in this docket, in an order of the Commission, or in a
representation to a Court.
Florida Industrial Power Users Group (FIPUG), White Springs Agricultural Chemicals,
Inc. d/b/a PCS Phosphate – White Springs (PCS Phosphate), and Nucor Steel Florida, Inc.
(Nucor) have adopted the position of OPC on each Type 2 stipulation.
Generic Issues
ISSUE 1: 	What are the final environmental cost recovery true-up amounts for the
period January 2023 through December 2023?
STIPULATION:
FPL 	$7,623,275 	Over-recovery
DEF 	$1,548,518 	Over-recovery
TECO 	$4,203,268 	Over-recovery
ISSUE 2: 	What are the actual/estimated environmental cost recovery true-up amounts
for the period January 2024 through December 2024?
STIPULATION:
FPL 	$18,176,707 	Under-recovery
DEF 	$1,936,104 	Over-recovery
TECO 	$3,297,632 	Over-recovery

ORDER NO. PSC-2024-0482-FOF-EI
DOCKET NO. 20240007-EI
PAGE 4
ISSUE 3: 	What are the projected environmental cost recovery amounts for the period
January 2025 through December 2025?
STIPULATION:
FPL 	$401,635,933
DEF 	$15,140,721
TECO 	$19,594,554
ISSUE 4: 	What 	are 	the 	environmental 	cost 	recovery 	amounts, 	including 	true-up
amounts, for the period January 2025 through December 2025?
STIPULATION:
ISSUE 5: 	What depreciation rates should be used to develop the depreciation expense
included in the total environmental cost recovery amounts for the period
January 2025 through December 2025?
STIPULATION:
FPL will use the depreciation rates that were approved by the Commission in
Order No. PSC-2021-0446-S-EI. The depreciation rates used by DEF to calculate
depreciation expense shall be the rates that are in effect during the period the
allowed capital investment is in service. Depreciation rates agreed to in TECO’s
2021 Settlement Agreement were applied to TECO’s 2025 projection.
ISSUE 6: 	What are the appropriate jurisdictional separation factors for the projected
period January 2025 through December 2025?
STIPULATION:
The appropriate jurisdictional separation factors for the period January 2025
through December 2025 are as follows:
FPL: 	Retail Energy Jurisdictional Factor - Base/Solar 95.706242%
Retail Energy Jurisdictional Factor - Intermediate 93.940532%
Retail Energy Jurisdictional Factor - Peaking 95.601963%
FPL 	$412,189,365
DEF 	$11,656,099
TECO 	$12,103,910

ORDER NO. PSC-2024-0482-FOF-EI
DOCKET NO. 20240007-EI
PAGE 5
Retail Demand Jurisdictional Factor - Transmission 88.780684%
Retail Demand Jurisdictional Factor - Base/Solar 96.010976%
Retail Demand Jurisdictional Factor - Intermediate 95.415719%
Retail Demand Jurisdictional Factor - Peaking 94.942846%
Retail Demand Jurisdictional Factor - Distribution 100.0000%
Retail General Plant Jurisdictional Factor - Labor 96.942531%
DEF: 	Transmission Average 12 CP Demand – 70.369%
Distribution Primary Demand – 100.000%
Production Demand:
Production Base – 100.000%
Production Intermediate – 95.212%
Production Peaking – 97.632%
Production A&G – 97.366%
TECO: 	Energy: 100.00%
Demand: 100.00%

ORDER NO. PSC-2024-0482-FOF-EI
DOCKET NO. 20240007-EI
PAGE 6
ISSUE 7: 	What are the appropriate environmental cost recovery factors for the period
January 2025 through December 2025 for each rate group?
STIPULATION:
The appropriate environmental cost recovery factors for the period January 2025
through December 2025 for each rate group are as follows:
FPL:
RATE
Environmental Cost
Recovery Factor
(cents/kWh)
RS1/RTR1 	0.361
GS1/GST1 	0.324
GSD1/GSDT1/HLFT1/GSD1-EV 	0.295
OS2 	0.194
GSLD1/GSLDT1/CS1/CST1/HLFT2/GSLD1-EV 	0.269
GSLD2/GSLDT2/CS2/CST2/HLFT3 	0.256
GSLD3/GSLDT3/CS3/CST3 	0.230
SST1T 	0.237
SST1D1/SST1D2/SST1D3 	0.753
CILC D/CILC G 	0.245
CILC T 	0.228
MET 	0.275
OL1/SL1/SL1M/PL1 	0.049
SL2/SL2M/GSCU1 	0.233
Total 	0.326

ORDER NO. PSC-2024-0482-FOF-EI
DOCKET NO. 20240007-EI
PAGE 7
DEF:
RATE CLASS 	ECRC FACTORS
Residential 	0.030 cents/kWh
General Service Non-Demand
@ Secondary Voltage
@ Primary Voltage
@ Transmission Voltage
0.028 cents/kWh
0.028 cents/kWh
0.027 cents/kWh
General Service 100% Load Factor 	0.026 cents/kWh
General Service Demand
@ Secondary Voltage
@ Primary Voltage
@ Transmission Voltage
0.027 cents/kWh
0.027 cents/kWh
0.026 cents/kWh
Curtailable
@ Secondary Voltage
@ Primary Voltage
@ Transmission Voltage
0.025 cents/kWh
0.025 cents/kWh
0.025 cents/kWh
Interruptible
@ Secondary Voltage
@ Primary Voltage
@ Transmission Voltage
0.025 cents/kWh
0.025 cents/kWh
0.025 cents/kWh
Lighting 	0.021 cents/kWh
TECO:
Rate Class Factors by Voltage Level
(cents/kWh)
RS 	0.063
GS, CS 	0.060
GSD/GSDT, SBD/SBDT, GSD Optional
Secondary 	0.056
Primary 	0.056
Transmission 	0.055
GSLDPR/GSLDTPR/SBLDPR/SBLDTPR 	0.048
GSLDSU/GSLDTSU/SBLDPR/SBLDTPR 	0.051
LS1, LS2 	0.038
Total 	0.059
TECO has certain proposals pending in its current base rate case in Docket No.
20240026-EI that may affect the company’s environmental cost recovery charges

ORDER NO. PSC-2024-0482-FOF-EI
DOCKET NO. 20240007-EI
PAGE 8
and associated tariffs. The above cost recovery clause factors may be amended to
reflect revisions ordered by the Commission in that docket.
ISSUE 8: 	What should be the effective date of the new environmental cost recovery
factors for billing purposes?
STIPULATION:
The factors shall be effective beginning with the specified environmental cost
recovery cycle and thereafter for the period January 2025 through December
2025. Billing cycles may start before January 1, 2025 and the last cycle may read
after December 31, 2025, so that each customer is billed for twelve months
regardless of when the adjustment factor became effective. These charges will
continue in effect until modified by the Commission.
ISSUE 9: 	Should the Commission approve revised tariffs reflecting the environmental
cost recovery amounts and environmental cost recovery factors determined
to be appropriate in this proceeding?
STIPULATION:
Yes. The Commission shall approve revised tariffs reflecting the environmental
cost recovery factors determined to be appropriate in this proceeding. The
Commission should direct staff to verify that the revised tariffs are consistent with
the 	Commission’s 	decision. 	The 	Commission 	should 	also 	grant 	staff
administrative 	authority 	to 	approve 	revised 	tariffs 	reflecting 	amended 	cost
recovery clause factors that incorporate any revisions that are necessary as a result
of the Commission’s decision in TECO’s current base rate case in Docket No.
20240026-EI.
ISSUE 10: 	Should this docket be closed?
STIPULATION:
No. While a separate docket number is assigned each year for administrative
convenience, this is a continuing docket and shall remain open.

ORDER NO. PSC-2024-0482-FOF-EI
DOCKET NO. 20240007-EI
PAGE 9
COMPANY-SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL COST RECOVERY ISSUES
Duke Energy Florida, LLC (DEF)
ISSUE 11: 	Should the Commission approve DEF’s Citrus Combined Cycle (CCC)
Water Treatment System Project for cost recovery through the ECRC?
STIPULATION:
Yes. DEF’s proposed CCC Water Treatment System project meets the recovery
criteria established in Order No. 94-044-FOF-EI, in that:
a) All expenditures will be prudently incurred after April 13, 1993;
b) The activities are legally required to comply with a governmentally imposed
environmental 	regulation 	enacted, 	became 	effective, 	or 	whose 	effect 	was
triggered after the Company’s last test year which rates are based; and
c) None of the expenditures are being recovered through some other cost recovery
mechanism or through base rates.
On January 10, 2023, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection
(“FDEP”) issued Administrative Order AO-052SWD22 (“AO”) to provide an
interim limit and compliance schedule to address exceedances of the Manganese
ground water standard following the February 7, 2023 permit amendment which
designated Citrus Combined Cycle compliance wells and implemented a site-
specific manganese ground water standard based on background conditions. The
AO was issued to provide DEF guidance on bringing the newly-designated
compliance well up to standard.2
ISSUE 12: 	How should the approved costs related to DEF’s CCC Water Treatment
System Project be allocated to the rate classes?
STIPULATION:
O&M and Capital costs associated with the CCC Water Treatment System
Program should be allocated to rate classes on a Demand basis.
2 DEF is not subject to an enforcement action or found in violation of any permit or regulation associated with this
project.

ORDER NO. PSC-2024-0482-FOF-EI
DOCKET NO. 20240007-EI
PAGE 10
Tampa Electric Company (TECO)
ISSUE 13: 	Should the Commission approve TECO’s Bayside 316 (a) Thermal Variance
Study Project for cost recovery through the ECRC?
STIPULATION:
Yes, the Commission should approve TECO’s Bayside 316(a) Thermal Variance
Study Project for cost recovery through the ECRC. The costs for this study are
necessary to comply with a governmentally imposed environmental regulation
which was enacted in 1972, and requested to be updated in the issuance of
Bayside’s latest National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit dated
December 9, 2022. This occurred after the company’s last test year of 2022 and
the costs for the study are not recovered through any other cost recovery
mechanism or base rates.
ISSUE 14: 	How should the approved costs related to TECO’s Bayside (a) Thermal
Variance Study Project be allocated to the rate classes?
STIPULATION:
The approved costs related to TECO’s Bayside 316(a) Thermal Variance Study
Project should be allocated as an Energy-related cost as shown in the Company’s
2025 Projection, Form 42-6P, Column “(3)”
Based on the foregoing, it is
ORDERED by the Florida Public Service Commission that the stipulations and findings
set forth in the body of this order are hereby approved. It is further
ORDERED that each utility that was a party to this docket shall abide by the stipulations
and findings herein which are applicable to it. It is further
ORDERED that the utilities named herein are authorized to collect the environmental
cost recovery amounts and use the factors approved herein beginning with the first billing cycle
for 2025. The first billing cycle may start before January 1, 2025, and thereafter, the
environmental cost recovery factors shall remain in effect until modified by this Commission. It
is further
ORDERED that the Environmental Cost Recovery Clause docket is an on-going docket
and shall remain open.

ORDER NO. PSC-2024-0482-FOF-El
DOCKET NO. 20240007-EJ
PAGE 11
By ORDER of the Florida Public Service Commission this 22nd day of November, 2024.
JDI
Florida Public Service Commission
2540 Shumard Oak Boulevard
Tallahassee, Florida 32399
(850) 413-6770
www.tloridapsc.com
Copies furnished: 	A copy of this document is
provided to the patties of record at the time of
issuance and, if applicable, interested persons.

ORDER NO. PSC-2024-0482-FOF-EI
DOCKET NO. 20240007-EI
PAGE 12
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.
Any party adversely affected by the Commission's final action in this matter may request:
1) reconsideration of the decision by filing a motion for reconsideration with the Office of
Commission Clerk, 2540 Shumard Oak Boulevard, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0850, within
fifteen (15) days of the issuance of this order in the form prescribed by Rule 25-22.060, 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 and/or
wastewater utility by filing a notice of appeal with the Office of Commission Clerk, and filing a
copy of the notice of appeal and the filing fee with the appropriate court. This filing must be
completed within thirty (30) days after the issuance of this order, pursuant to Rule 9.110, Florida
Rules of Appellate Procedure. The notice of appeal must be in the form specified in Rule
9.900(a), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure.