Florida regulators reject Duke Energy Florida’s large-load tariff for data centers, the first from an investor-owned utility under SB 484

The Florida Public Service Commission on Tuesday, Nov. 3, rejected Duke Energy Florida’s proposed tariff for data centers and other large electricity users, News Service of Florida reported.¹ Utility Dive reported in August that Duke’s was the first Senate Bill 484 compliance proposal from an investor-owned utility.² The Florida Phoenix and Food & Water Watch, an advocacy group, each put the vote at 5-0.³⁴ The docket, No. 20260064-EI, was Items 2 and 3 on the agenda.⁵

News Service of Florida reported two reasons: Duke’s tariffs left out some customers who would qualify under the law, and the company did not show that its existing rates and proposed protections would cover each such customer’s full cost.¹ Commission staff gave those same two grounds in a memo dated Oct. 22 that recommended denial with leave to refile.⁶

The law, signed May 7 and effective July 1, defines a large load customer as one with an anticipated monthly peak load of 50 megawatts or more at a single location.⁶⁷ It says tariffs “must reasonably ensure that each large load customer bears its own full cost of service,” and that the risk of nonpayment “may not be borne by the general body of ratepayers.” It required each public utility to file a tariff by Oct. 1.⁷

What Duke proposed

Duke filed its petition April 22. The tariff would have covered firm load of 50 megawatts or more at one location, with a 20-year minimum term and minimum demand between 75% and 85% of contract capacity.⁸ Large customers would have taken service under existing rate schedules until a new one was approved. Duke said the terms protect other customers from the cost of stranded or underused assets.⁸

What staff found

Staff said the “firm” limit excluded customers who meet the law’s 50-megawatt definition, and that Duke had not shown with cost support that existing rates plus the protections would meet the law’s standard.⁶

Staff supported other terms, including the 20-year term and the minimum demand range. It wrote that “no rates are at issue in this proceeding,” because the existing schedules were already approved. It said Duke’s base rate freeze under a 2024 settlement runs through December 2027, and that Duke committed to file a large-load rate schedule effective Jan. 1, 2028, a filing staff said would be due by spring 2027.⁶

The memo says Duke received study requests from 13 customers above 50 megawatts, the smallest at 160 megawatts, and can currently serve a single 55-megawatt large load customer. The commission had more than 4,400 consumer comments as of Oct. 20.⁶

Responses

The Phoenix quoted Chair Gabriella Passidomo Smith’s written statement that the decision “reinforces our commitment to upholding those protections,” and that Duke can “build on those efforts to develop a tariff that meets the Legislature’s requirements.” Duke spokesperson Ana Gibbs said: “We remain focused on getting this right for Florida,” adding that this includes “ensuring that data centers pay their full cost of service.”³

Brooke Ward, Food & Water Watch’s Florida state director, called the vote “a victory for affordability” and said the state needs “PSC reform.”⁴

What comes next

News Service of Florida reported that Duke will have to refile.¹ Staff proposed that, after such a denial, Duke could refile within 10 business days of the order, with staff reviewing it and the docket open.⁶

What the records do not show

• The vote and the commission’s reasons here come from news reports and an advocacy group’s release. SignalData did not find a written order or vote record, so it cannot confirm which staff recommendations the commission adopted.
• The agenda and staff memo give no figure for what the decision would mean for any customer’s bill.
• They do not show how a refiled tariff would answer staff’s cost-of-service objection, or what the Oct. 1 filing requirement means for Duke after a denial.