electric bills. The law gave the
Public Service Commission
responsibility for setting rules
about how the law will be carried
out. The commission unanimously
approved proposed rules on Oct.
3, despite objections from the
Office of Public Counsel. That led
to the legal wrangling during the
past week, with the Office of Public
Counsel arguing in a Thursday
filing that the commission should
not finalize the proposed rules
until after it has conducted an
evidentiary hearing.
Under the law, utilities will be
able each year to seek approval
from the commission to collect
money from customers for
storm-protection projects, such
as building underground power
lines. In the past, such projects
have generally been financed
through base electric rates,
which are set for a number of
years and include a wide range
of utility expenses. Utilities will
have to file 10-year plans with
the commission about bolstering
storm protection. But a key part
of the debate has centered on
information utilities should have
to provide about projects during
the first three years.In approving
the proposed rules, the Public
Service Commission agreed with
utilities that they should only have
to provide detailed information
for projects in the first year.
Information submitted initially for
projects in the second and third
years would be broader, such as
estimated numbers of projects and
estimated costs. The utilities would
then come back annually with
detailed plans for the next year.
The Office of Public Counsel,
however, has contended that a
lack of detail about projects in
the second and third years could
open the door to utilities collecting
money under the new law for
projects whose costs also are
being passed on to customers
through base rates. “The proposed
rules, as drafted, do not ensure
that the ratepayers will not pay
twice for storm protection and
hardening as required by the
statute,” the Thursday filing said.
But before the commission’s Oct.
3 vote on the proposed rules,
utilities said the information
about projects in the second and
third years needs to be broader.
Kenneth Rubin, an attorney for
Florida Power & Light, said plans
can change because of a variety
of factors and that utilities need
flexibility. He also cautioned about
“customer dissatisfaction” if a
utility had to change plans and
eliminate specific projects that
had previously been disclosed for
the second and third years. “We
certainly don’t want to be locked
in for years two and three because
we identified certain projects in
year one,” Rubin said.
OCTOBER 2019 • DITCHMEN
9