BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  AB 2838
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:  April 9, 2002

                   ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON WATER, PARKS AND WILDLIFE
                            Joseph E. Canciamilla, Chair
                  AB 2838 (Canciamilla) - As Amended:  April 1, 2002
           
          SUBJECT  :   Water rates.

           SUMMARY  :   Requires the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to  
          follow certain procedures when a water corporation files a  
          schedule stating rates, classifications, contracts, practices or  
          rules for the service of water.   Specifically,  this bill  :  

          1)Makes various findings including that the PUC needs to act  
            timely in making determinations and establishing rates for  
            water service so that water corporations can meet their  
            obligations to provide their ratepayers with safe, secure, and  
            reliable water service.

           2)Requires that whenever a water corporation files a schedule  
             pursuant to the PUC's rate case plan (RCP) for general rate  
             increase applications or pursuant to an advice letter, that: 

             a)   Except as otherwise provided, the general rate increase  
               schedule, as filed, shall become effective on an interim  
               basis, subject to refund, 214 days following the date the  
               application was filed for, or 40 days following the filing  
               of the schedule pursuant to an advice letter.  If the PUC  
               final decision revises the rates downward the amount  
               collected over the approved rate increase would be refunded  
               to the ratepayer.

             b)   If the PUC determines that the schedule is not  
               justified, it shall notify the water corporation of the  
               determination in writing 99 days from the date of filing of  
               the schedule application and 30 days from the date of  
               filing of the schedule pursuant to an advice letter.

             c)   The PUC notice that the schedule is not justified shall  
               state all changes to the schedule that are required in the  
               opinion of the PUC.

             d)   If the water corporation files a revised schedule  
               incorporating all the changes specified within 10 days of  
               receipt of the PUC notice, the revised schedule becomes  








                                                                  AB 2838
                                                                  Page  2

               effective, on an interim basis, not subject to refund,  
               after five days from the date of the re-filing. 

             e)   If the PUC notifies the water corporation that it has  
               determined that schedule is not justified, the PUC shall  
               set the matter for a hearing to be held within a reasonable  
               time from the date of the notice.

             f)   The revised schedule becomes final upon PUC action  
               approving the revised schedule or otherwise as the PUC  
               finds to be justifiable.

           EXISTING LAW  :  Provides that all hearings, investigations, and  
          proceeding shall be governed by the Public Utilities Code and by  
          rules of practice and procedure adopted by the PUC.



           FISCAL EFFECT  :  Unknown.

           COMMENTS  : 

          Existing law requires the PUC to act on a proposed decision in a  
          rate-making proceeding within 60 days of the proposed decision's  
          issuance, unless an alternate decision is put forward, or unless  
          "extraordinary circumstances" prevent the PUC from acting.  The  
          California Water Association, the bills sponsor, states that as  
          there is not a consequence to the PUC if it fails to act timely  
          and that the 60-day timeline is routinely ignored.  

          The PUC adopted a RCP for Class A water corporations in 1990.   
          Class A water corporations are those with more than 10,000  
          service connections.  The adoption of the RCP was intended to  
          promote timely processing of such cases.  The RCP provides for,  
          among other things, the acceptance of Class A water corporation  
          general rate case applications once every three years.  In order  
          to stagger the workload some water corporations file rate cases  
          in January and some file in July.  The RCP schedule summary  
          establishes the time frame for the rate case process from the  
          filing of the Notice of Intent to the PUC's final order.  The  
          PUC schedule summary provides for the issuance of a final order  
          within 214 -259 days of the filing of the application depending  
          on the number of districts included in the filing.  There are  
          several Class A water corporations that provide service in  
          districts which are dispersed throughout the state.  Class A  








                                                                  AB 2838
                                                                  Page  3

          water corporations may also file, during the three-year time  
          frame, for a rate increase that is minor in nature in the form  
          of an advice letter. 

          The author states that while both existing law and the RCP  
          establish timelines for the PUC to complete ratemaking cases,  
          the PUC in recent years has often failed to meet these  
          deadlines. This bill will resolve the problem by providing an  
          incentive for the parties to work together early in the process  
          and resolve all issues before formal hearings begin. The longer  
          the PUC takes to complete a rate-making case the more costly it  
          becomes for the water corporation, particularly if significant  
          investments in infrastructure have been made.  For example, the  
          California Water Service Company sustained a $1,000,000 loss due  
          to a three-month delay by the PUC in 2000. 
           
           Should this bill pass out of this committee, it will be referred  
          to the Utilities and Commerce Committee.
           
          REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :   

           Support 
           
          California Water Association (sponsor)

           Opposition 
           
          None on File
           

          Analysis Prepared by  :  Kathy Mannion / W., P. & W. / (916)  
          319-2096