Case Background
Rule 25-6.0342, F.A.C., Electric
Infrastructure Storm Hardening, was enacted in 2007 for the purpose of ensuring
the provision of safe, adequate, and reliable electric transmission and
distribution service for operational as well as emergency purposes; requiring
the cost-effective strengthening of critical electric infrastructure to
increase the ability of transmission and distribution facilities to withstand
extreme weather conditions; and reducing restoration costs and outage times to
end-use customers associated with extreme weather conditions. This rule applies
to all investor-owned electric utilities and requires that each utility file
with the Commission for its approval a detailed storm hardening plan and to
update that plan every three years.
The 2019 Florida
Legislature passed SB 796 to enact Section 366.96, Florida Statutes (F.S.),
which requires each investor-owned electric utility (IOU) to file a
transmission and distribution storm protection plan (Storm Protection Plan) for
the Commission’s review and directed the Commission to hold an annual
proceeding to determine each IOU’s prudently incurred costs to implement its
plan and allow recovery of those costs through a Storm Protection Plan Cost
Recovery Clause. Section 366.96(3), F.S., also required the Commission to adopt
rules to implement and administer the section. In furtherance of the
Legislature’s directive, the Commission adopted Rules 25-6.030, Storm
Protection Plan, and 25-6.031, F.A.C., Storm Protection Plan Cost Recovery
Clause, which became effective on February 18, 2020.
During the
rulemaking for Rules 25-6.030 and 25-6.031, F.A.C., the Commission also noticed
several other rules, including Rule 25-6.0342, F.A.C., to determine if the new
storm plan rules would necessitate changes to other rules. The Commission
received comments indicating that Rule 25-6.0342, F.A.C., would no longer be
necessary because it would be duplicative and obsolete as a result of the new
storm protection plan rules.
Notice of the
rule development appeared in the June 6, 2019, edition of the Florida
Administrative Register. On June 25, 2019, and August 20, 2019, staff held rule
development workshops to obtain stakeholder comments on Rules 25-6.030 and
25-6.031, F.A.C., as well as rules that would be affected by them, including
Rule 25-6.0342, F.A.C. Several utilities opined that once Rules 25-6.030 and
25-6.031, F.A.C., were adopted and effective, Rule 25-6.0342, F.A.C., should be
repealed.
This
recommendation addresses whether Rule 25-6.0342, F.A.C., should be repealed as
redundant and obsolete because it requires utilities to submit duplicative
information available to the Commission through other sources. The Commission has jurisdiction pursuant to Sections
350.127(2), 366.05(1), 366.96, F.S.
Discussion
of Issues
Issue 1:
Should the Commission propose the repeal of Rule
25-6.0342, F.A.C., Electric Infrastructure Storm Hardening?
Recommendation:
Yes, the Commission should propose the repeal of Rule
25-6.0342, F.A.C., as set forth in Attachment A. The Commission should certify
Rule 25-6.0342, F.A.C., as a minor violation rule. Once Rule 25-6.0342, F.A.C.,
is repealed, it should be removed from the list of minor violation rules.
(Harper, Buys, Guffey)
Staff Analysis:
Rule 25-6.0342, F.A.C., Electric
Infrastructure Storm Hardening is duplicative of the Commission’s new rule, Rule
25-6.030, F.A.C., Storm Protection Plan. Both require all IOUs to file storm
hardening plans that contain a detailed description of the construction
standards, policies, practices, and procedures employed to enhance the
reliability of overhead and underground electrical transmission and
distribution facilities. Both rules also require that the utility’s storm
hardening plan include descriptions of how the utilities’ storm programs and
projects will enhance the reliability of overhead and underground electrical
transmission and distribution facilities. As to cost impacts, new Rule
25-6.030, F.A.C., requires more stringent and detailed reporting requirements
for estimated and actual costs and
rate impacts associated with completed activities when each utility files its
Storm Protection Plan. For these reasons, Rule 25-6.0342, F.A.C., is duplicative,
obsolete, and unnecessary, and staff recommends that it be repealed.
Minor Violation Rules Certification
Rule 25-6.0342, F.A.C., was on the Commission’s list of
minor violation rules. Pursuant to Section 120.695, F.S., as of July 1, 2017,
the agency head shall certify whether any part of each rule filed for adoption
is designated as a minor violation rule. A minor violation rule is a rule that
would not result in economic or physical harm to a person or an adverse effect
on the public health, safety, or welfare or create a significant threat of such
harm when violated. Staff recommends that the Commission certify that Rule
25-6.0342, F.A.C., was a minor violation rule. Once Rule 25-6.0342, F.A.C., is
repealed, it should be removed from the list of minor violation rules.
Statement of Estimated Regulatory Costs
Pursuant to Section
120.54(3)(b)1., F.S., agencies are encouraged to prepare a statement of
estimated regulatory costs (SERC) before the adoption, amendment, or repeal of
any rule. A SERC was prepared for this
rulemaking and is appended as Attachment B. As required by Section
120.541(2)(a)1., F.S., the SERC analysis includes whether the rule repeal is
likely to have an adverse impact on economic growth, private sector job
creation or employment, or private sector investment in excess of $1 million in
the aggregate within five years after implementation. Staff notes that none of
the impact/cost criteria will be exceeded as a result of the recommended repeal.
The SERC
concludes that the repeal of Rule 25-6.0342, F.A.C., will likely not directly
or indirectly increase regulatory costs in excess of $200,000 within one year
after implementation. Further, the SERC concludes that the repeal of the rule
will not likely increase regulatory costs, including any transactional costs,
or have an adverse impact on business competitiveness, productivity, or
innovation in excess of $1 million in the aggregate within five years of
implementation. Thus, the repeal of the rule does not require legislative
ratification, pursuant to Section 120.541(3), F.S.
In
addition, the SERC states that the repeal of Rule 25-6.0342, F.A.C., would have
no impact on small businesses, would have no implementation or enforcement cost
on the Commission or any other state and local government entity, and would
have no impact on small cities or small counties. The SERC states that no additional
transactional costs are likely to be incurred by individuals and entities because
of the repeal.
Conclusion
The Commission should repeal Rule 25-6.0342, F.A.C. as set
forth in Attachment A. Once Rule 25-6.0342, F.A.C., is repealed, it should be
removed from the list of minor violation rules.
Issue 2:
Should this docket be closed?
Recommendation:
Yes. If no requests for hearing, information
regarding the SERC, proposals for a lower cost regulatory alternative, or JAPC
comments are filed, the rule should be filed with the Department of State, and
the docket should be closed. (Harper)
Staff Analysis:
If no requests for hearing, information regarding
the SERC, proposals for a lower cost regulatory alternative, or JAPC comments
are filed, the rule may be filed with the Department of State and the docket
should be closed. (Harper)
25-6.0342 Electric Infrastructure Storm
Hardening.
(1)
Application and Scope. This rule is intended to ensure the provision of safe,
adequate, and reliable electric transmission and distribution service for
operational as well as emergency purposes; require the cost-effective
strengthening of critical electric infrastructure to increase the ability of
transmission and distribution facilities to withstand extreme weather
conditions; and reduce restoration costs and outage times to end-use customers
associated with extreme weather conditions. This rule applies to all
investor-owned electric utilities.
(2)
Storm Hardening Plans. Each utility shall, no later than 90 days after the
effective date of this rule, file with the Commission for its approval a
detailed storm hardening plan. Each utility’s plan shall be updated every 3
years, unless the Commission, on its own motion or on petition by a
substantially affected person or utility, initiates a proceeding to review and,
if appropriate, modify the plans. In a proceeding to approve a utility’s plan,
the Commission shall consider whether the utility’s plan meets the desired
objectives of enhancing reliability and reducing restoration costs and outage
times in a prudent, practical, and cost-effective manner to the affected
parties.
(3)
Contents of Plan: Each utility storm hardening plan shall contain a detailed
description of the construction standards, policies, practices, and procedures
employed to enhance the reliability of overhead and underground electrical
transmission and distribution facilities in conformance with the provisions of
this rule. Each filing shall, at a minimum, address the extent to which the
utility’s storm hardening plan:
(a)
Complies, at a minimum, with the National Electric Safety Code (ANSI C-2)
[NESC] that is applicable pursuant to subsection 25-6.0345(2), F.A.C.
(b)
Adopts the extreme wind loading standards specified by Figure 250-2(d) of the
2007 edition of the NESC for the following distribution facilities:
1.
New construction;
2.
Major planned work, including expansion, rebuild, or relocation of existing
facilities, assigned on or after the effective date of this rule; and
3.
Critical infrastructure facilities and along major thoroughfares taking into
account political and geographical boundaries and other applicable operational
considerations.
(c)
Is designed to mitigate damage to underground and supporting overhead
transmission and distribution facilities due to flooding and storm surges.
(d)
Provides for the placement of new and replacement distribution facilities so as
to facilitate safe and efficient access for installation and maintenance
pursuant to Rule 25- 6.0341, F.A.C.
(4)
Deployment Strategy: Each utility storm hardening plan shall explain the
systematic approach the utility will follow to achieve the desired objectives
of enhancing reliability and reducing restoration costs and outage times
associated with extreme weather events. The utility’s storm hardening plan
shall provide a detailed description of its deployment strategy including, but
not limited to the following:
(a)
A description of the facilities affected; including technical design
specifications, construction standards, and construction methodologies
employed.
(b)
The communities and areas within the utility’s service area where the electric
infrastructure improvements, including facilities identified by the utility as
critical infrastructure and along major thoroughfares pursuant to subparagraph
(3)(b)3. are to be made.
(c)
The extent to which the electric infrastructure improvements involve joint use
facilities on which third-party attachments exist.
(d)
An estimate of the costs and benefits to the utility of making the electric infrastructure
improvements, including the effect on reducing storm restoration costs and
customer outages.
(e)
An estimate of the costs and benefits, obtained pursuant to subsection (6)
below, to third-party attachers affected by the electric infrastructure
improvements, including the effect on reducing storm restoration costs and
customer outages realized by the third-party attachers.
(5)
Attachment Standards and Procedures: As part of its storm hardening plan, each
utility shall maintain written safety, reliability, pole loading capacity, and
engineering standards and procedures for attachments by others to the utility’s
electric transmission and distribution poles (Attachment Standards and
Procedures). The Attachment Standards and Procedures shall meet or exceed the
edition of the National Electrical Safety Code (ANSI C-2) that is applicable
pursuant to Rule 25-6.034, F.A.C. so as to assure, as far as is reasonably
practicable, that third-party facilities attached to electric transmission and
distribution poles do not impair electric safety, adequacy, or pole
reliability; do not exceed pole loading capacity; and are constructed,
installed, maintained, and operated in accordance with generally accepted
engineering practices for the utility’s service territory.
(6)
Input from Third-Party Attachers: In establishing its storm hardening plan and
Attachment Standards and Procedures, or when updating or modifying such plan or
Attachment Standards and Procedures, each utility shall seek input from and
attempt in good faith to accommodate concerns raised by other entities with
existing agreements to share the use of its electric facilities. Any
third-party attacher that wishes to provide input under this subsection shall
provide the utility contact information for the person designated to receive
communications from the utility.
(7)
Dispute Resolution: Any dispute or challenge to a utility’s storm hardening
plan, construction standards, deployment strategy, Attachment Standards and
Procedures, or any projects implementing any of the above by a customer,
applicant for service, or attaching entity shall be resolved by the Commission.
(8)
Nothing in this rule is intended to conflict with Title 47, United States Code,
Section 224, relating to Federal Communications Commission jurisdiction over
pole attachments.
Rulemaking
Authority 350.127(2), 366.05(1) FS. Law Implemented 366.04(2)(c), (5), (6),
366.05(1) FS. History–New 2-1-07, Repealed ___________.
