BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  AB 2523
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   April 24, 2002

                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                              Darrell Steinberg, Chair

              AB 2523 (Canciamilla) - As Introduced:  February 21, 2002 

          Policy Committee:                              Utilities and  
          Commerce     Vote:                            16-0

          Urgency:     No                   State Mandated Local Program:  
          Yes    Reimbursable:              No

           SUMMARY  

          This bill requires that any refunds to electrical corporation  
          ratepayers-stemming from litigation regarding excessive power  
          supply charges-or any electricity rate reductions be allocated  
          among customer classes in proportion to last year's rate  
          increases.  Specifically, this bill: 

          1)Requires the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to establish a  
            Ratepayer Benefit Account with a separate subaccount for each  
            electrical corporation serving more than 100,000 customers. 

          2)Requires crediting to a subaccount of all funds recovered by  
            an electrical corporation from any litigation or regulatory  
            agreement concerning excessive electricity or gas prices  
            charged by power generators, suppliers, and marketers through  
            January 18, 2001.  

          3)Directs the PUC to require an electrical corporation to refund  
            moneys credited to its subaccount to ratepayers as a rate  
            refund when the subaccount exceeds $10 million. 

          4)Requires refunds to be allocated among retail customer classes  
            in proportion to each class's rate increase as approved by the  
            PUC for Pacific Gas & Electric Co. (PG&E) and Southern  
            California Edison (Edison) in May 2001.  

          5)Provides that if PUC determines that the revenue requirement  
            of an electrical corporation should be reduced, the PUC shall  
            impose a corresponding rate reduction in proportion to the  
            class percentage electric rate increases adopted by PUC in May  
            2001.








                                                                  AB 2523
                                                                  Page  2


           FISCAL EFFECT 

          Absorbable special fund costs to the PUC.  [Public Utilities  
          Reimbursement Account]

           COMMENTS  

           1)Background  . In May 2001, the PUC approved a 3.5-cent/kWh rate  
            increase to provide revenue for covering costs incurred by the  
            Department of Water Resources since assuming the net power  
            purchases responsibility of the investor-owned utilities  
            effective January 18, 2001.  The PUC's decision, and statutory  
            provisions of AB X1 1 (Keeley) prohibit PUC from imposing  
            electric rate increases for residential consumption below 130  
            percent of the customer's baseline level, medical baseline  
            customer usage, and for the California Alternate Rates for  
            Energy (CARE) customers. 

           2)Purpose  .  The author notes the exemptions to last year's rate  
            increase shifted the burden of the increase to some  
            residential users (those consuming above 130% of baseline),  
            but mostly to commercial and industrial users-particularly  
            large users, who experienced increases of  40% to more than  
            70%.  This bill is intended to provide policy guidance to PUC  
            that refunds stemming from litigation regarding excessive  
            power charges or rate reductions as a result of reduced  
            revenue requirements should be allocated to affected customers  
            in proportion to the manner in which the burden was assumed. 

           Analysis Prepared by  :    Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081