California May 2017 IRP Staff Environmental Justice Proposal to use the top 25% Alliance and Sierra of the communities as Club on the Proposed defined in CalEnviroScreen. Reference Plan and Parties generally in support Related Commission of this definition included Policy Actions, pp. CEJA, Sierra Club, GRID, 39, October 26, 2017; Liberty Utilities, ORA, SCE, Reply Comments of and (p. 61) SDG&E.” California by Environmental Justice “As proposed Commission staff, and Alliance, Sierra Club, pursuant to Section 39711 of and Environmental the Health and Safety Code, Defense Fund on the for purposes of the December 28, 2017 requirements of SB 350 to Proposed Decision of address disadvantaged Commissioner Liane communities impacts in the M. Randolph, p. 4, IRP process, we will define January 22, 2018.) disadvantaged communities meaningful as those that score at or “The public process with above the 75th percentile in DACs should ideally the CalEPA’s occur during the CalEnviroScreen 3.0 on a development of the (p. 66) statewide basis.” LSE plans. Initially, Though the Commission did potential solutions for not accept all of Sierra Club, DACs should be driven CEJA, and by community input EDF’s recommendations, the which should involve Commission the integration into “modified definition to include existing networks, most recent engaging community CalEPA’s designation of leaders, and disadvantaged communities, coordinating local which includes census tracts meetings aimed at not previously represented building upon because of a lack of data. community expertise.” We have also included (Opening Comments of references to statutes which California apply only to IOUs in the Environmental Justice context of procurement Alliance and Sierra requirements for renewables Club On and gas-fired generating Administrative Law units in disadvantaged Judge’s Ruling (p. 157) Seeking Comment on communities.” Staff Proposal on
California Environmental Justice Alliance and Sierra Club on the Proposed Reference Plan and Related Commission Policy Actions, pp. October 26, 2017; Reply Comments of California Environmental Justice Alliance, Sierra Club, and Environmental Defense Fund on the December 28, 2017 Proposed Decision of Commissioner Liane M. Randolph, p. 4, January 22, 2018.) “The meaningful public process with DACs should ideally occur during the development of the LSE plans. Initially, potential solutions for DACs should be driven by community input which should involve integration into existing networks, engaging community leaders, and coordinating local meetings aimed at building upon community expertise.” (Opening Comments of California Environmental Justice Alliance and Sierra Club On Administrative Law Judge’s Ruling Seeking Comment on Staff Proposal on 39, May 2017 IRP Staff Proposal to use the top 25% of the communities as defined in CalEnviroScreen. Parties generally in support of this definition included CEJA, Sierra Club, GRID, Liberty Utilities, ORA, SCE, and SDG&E.” (p. 61) “As proposed by Commission staff, and pursuant to Section 39711 of the Health and Safety Code, for purposes of the requirements of SB 350 to address disadvantaged communities impacts in the IRP process, we will define disadvantaged communities as those that score at or above the 75th percentile in the CalEPA’s CalEnviroScreen 3.0 on a statewide basis.” (p. 66) Though the Commission did not accept all of Sierra Club, CEJA, and EDF’s recommendations, the Commission “modified the definition to include CalEPA’s most recent designation of disadvantaged communities, which includes census tracts not previously represented because of a lack of data. We have also included references to statutes which apply only to IOUs in the context of procurement requirements for renewables and gas-fired generating units in disadvantaged communities.” (p. 157)
217956136.docx