Docket Nos. RM22-16-000, AD21-13-000
Today’s final rule will facilitate better preparation for extreme weather by requiring transmission providers to file one-time informational reports with the Commission discussing vulnerability assessments that they carry out. We write separately to encourage transmission providers to include within those reports a discussion of the intersection of these assessments and disadvantaged and vulnerable communities.[1]
In this proceeding and in response to a recent Commission-led Roundtable on Environmental Justice and Equity in Infrastructure Permitting, commenters highlighted that disadvantaged communities may face disproportionate risks from the increasing frequency and severity of extreme weather events, including higher utility prices and prolonged outages.[2] Panelists and commenters underscored that environmental justice communities are particularly vulnerable to Commission decisions on electric and gas rates, reliability, resiliency, and resource mix because they suffer from higher energy burden[3] and often are both more vulnerable to and more at risk of outages.[4] For example, during Winter Storm Uri, low-income Texans bore the brunt of prolonged power loss. Commenters noted that areas with lower household incomes and higher percentages of ethnic minorities remained without power for longer.[5]
Reports to the Commission could address how transmission providers respond to these impacts in several ways. First, in answering question eight regarding stakeholder engagement, we encourage transmission providers to specifically report on how they engage with disadvantaged and vulnerable communities as stakeholders, rather than merely discussing how they obtain information about these communities from other stakeholders.[6] Transmission providers should report on how they incorporate feedback from disadvantaged and vulnerable community stakeholders into their extreme weather vulnerability assessments.
Second, beyond addressing the questions set forth in this final rule, we encourage transmission providers to discuss how they estimate or evaluate the cost of extreme weather vulnerabilities of transmission assets and operations that will be specifically borne by disadvantaged and vulnerable communities. Such discussion would benefit from a description of how such estimates or evaluations are carried out, including what types of direct, indirect, and/or other costs are considered in such analyses, and whether and how duration of extreme weather impacts are included in such estimates or evaluations. Providing the Commission and the public with information on how transmission providers evaluate impacts to disadvantaged and vulnerable communities in their footprints could be a first step in developing industry best practices for considering impacts to disadvantaged and vulnerable communities of extreme weather risks.[7]
Third, we encourage transmission providers, in responding to question 21, to include a description of how the transmission provider measures, or plans to measure the progress and success of mitigation measures, specifically in disadvantaged and vulnerable communities. The Final Rule requires transmission providers to describe how they inform affected and frontline communities, and other stakeholders, of risks identified by extreme weather vulnerability assessments and selected mitigation measures.[8] Including a specific description of how mitigation measures in disadvantaged and vulnerable communities will be evaluated will help provide the Commission with a more complete picture of how transmission providers address impacts generally.
For these reasons, we respectfully concur.
[1] The Commission is requiring these reports pursuant to section 304 of the Federal Power Act. Section 304 empowers the Commission to seek information “necessary or appropriate to assist the Commission in the proper administration of [the FPA].” 16 U.S.C. 825c(a). Congress provided such reports could be on a broad range of topics. These topics include “among other things, full information as to assets and liabilities . . . generation, transmission, distribution, delivery, use, and sale of electric energy.” Id. Although some have asked that the Commission indicate what it plans to do with the information, as the final rule makes clear, “the Commission will assess whether further actions are appropriate after viewing the reports.” Final Rule at P 61; see also J.P. Morgan Ventures Energy Corp., 142 FERC ¶ 61,150 at PP 11-12 (2013) (stating that “the Commission controls its own dockets and has substantial discretion to manage its proceedings.”); Fla. Mun. Power Agency v. FERC, 315 F.3d 362, 366 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (noting that administrative agencies enjoy broad discretion to manage their own dockets).
[2] See WE ACT Comments at 2-4; WE ACT Comments, Docket No. AD23-5-000, at 6-7 (filed May 16, 2023); Center for Biological Diversity Comments, Docket No. AD23-5-000, at 6 (filed May 12, 2023).
[3] Energy burden is defined as the percentage of a household’s annual income spent on energy consumption. High energy burdens are often defined as allocating greater than 6% of income towards energy costs, while severe energy burdens are those greater than 10% of income. Dep’t of Health and Human Servs., LIHEAP Energy Burden Evaluation Study 8 (2005), www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/ocs/comm_liheap_ energyburdenstudy_apprise.pdf.
[4] Environmental Defense Fund Comments, Docket No. AD23-5-000, at 4 (filed May 15, 2023).
[5] Americans for a Clean Energy Grid Comments, Docket No. AD23-5-000, at 4-5 (filed May 15, 2023).
[6] See WE ACT Comments at 6; Public Interest Organizations Comments at 11.
[7] WE ACT argues that “transmission planners need to assess vulnerabilities and mitigate” the risks of extreme weather events “on the electric grid, including the negative consequences for areas of low-income and communities of color.” WE ACT Comments at 5.
[8] See Final Rule, Question 19 (requiring a “description of how the transmission provider informs, or plans to inform relevant stakeholders—such as . . . all affected communities”); P 4 (“We use the term ‘affected communities’ in this final rule to include disadvantaged, vulnerable, and frontline communities”).