BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  SB 920
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:  June 30, 2003

                    ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON UTILITIES AND COMMERCE
                                 Sarah Reyes, Chair
                     SB 920 (Bowen) - As Amended:  June 26, 2003

           SENATE VOTE  :  23-11
           
          SUBJECT  :  Electricity Oversight Board:  Independent System  
          Operator:  Power Exchange.

           SUMMARY  :  Eliminates the Electricity Oversight Board (EOB) and  
          transfers all legal and regulatory proceedings where EOB is a  
          party to the Attorney General and makes related changes to  
          provisions concerning the Independent System Operator (ISO) and  
          the Power Exchange (PX). Specifically,  this bill  :

          1)Deletes provisions of law establishing, and granting powers to  
            EOB, which includes oversight of ISO.

          2)Specifies that it is the intent of the Legislature to abolish  
            EOB as an agency of the State of California, and to preserve  
            the state's interest in any legal or regulatory proceedings  
            where EOB is a party by transferring the state's interest to  
            the Attorney General.  The Attorney General is vested with the  
            power to exercise all rights, claims, powers or entitlements  
            of EOB in legal and regulatory proceedings, contracts,  
            settlements, tariffs, bylaws and articles of incorporation.

          3)Requires ISO to receive approval from the Legislature before  
            entering into a multi-state entity or a regional organization.

          4)Deletes an obsolete provision requiring ISO to provide a  
            report to the Legislature six months after Federal Energy  
            Regulatory Commission (FERC) approval, which was done in 2000.

           EXISTING LAW:  

          1)Specifies that EOB duties are the following:

          2)Oversee ISO and PX.

          3)Determine the composition and terms of service and to exercise  
            the exclusive right to decline to confirm the appointments of  
            specific members of the governing board of PX.








                                                                  SB 920
                                                                  Page  2


          4)Serve as an appeal board for majority decisions of ISO  
            governing board.

          5)Investigate any matter related to the wholesale market for  
            electricity to ensure that the interests of California's  
            citizens and consumers are served, protected, and represented  
            in relation to the availability of electric transmission and  
            generation and related costs, during periods of peak demand.

          6)Establishes an EOB that has five members, of which the  
            Governor appoints the chair.  The five members of EOB are  
            appointed in the following manner and serve three year terms:

          7)Three members appointed by the Governor who are California  
            residents and electricity ratepayers;

          8)One member appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly;

          9)One member appointed by the Senate Rules Committee.

          10)Establishes the governing board for ISO and requires any  
            changes to its bylaws to be in conformance with the Federal  
            Powers Act.  FERC shall have the authority to take any action  
            necessary to address undue discrimination or other violations  
            of the Federal Powers Act as it pertains to ISO's bylaws.

          11)Establishes ISO, as a nonprofit, public benefit corporation,  
            and to manage the transmission grid and related energy markets  
            consistent with applicable state and federal laws.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  Unknown.

           COMMENTS  :

           According to EOB  it was created in 1996 to help ensure reliable  
          electricity supply and state public oversight of market  
          operations.  The state under AB 1890 (Brulte), Chapter 854,  
          Statutes of 1996, transferred responsibility for ensuring  
          short-term reliability and some key aspects of long-term  
          reliability away from the electric utilities and regulatory  
          bodies to ISO.  Because ISO is not a State entity, EOB was  
          created to ensure accountability to a state body, and to ensure  
          that California citizens are not exposed to undue economic risk  
          in connection with system reliability.








                                                                  SB 920
                                                                  Page  3


          Legislation in 1996 restructured the electric generation market  
          and ended the vertical monopolies held by IOUs.  Directives at  
          that time required IOUs to divest generation facilities, and to  
          transfer control of their transmission lines to ISO, a private,  
          non-profit corporation.  As the State board created to provide  
          oversight for ISO, EOB has the primary responsibility of  
          monitoring grid reliability issues.  These issues include  
          transmission planning, interconnection issues, congestion  
          management, and local reliability contracts.  In addition, grid  
          reliability represents an integral component of the overall  
          operation of the restructured wholesale electricity markets.   
          EOB performs significant market monitoring functions, including  
          investigating and initiating market rate complaints and  
          participating in the extensive market redesign proceedings under  
          FERC.

           What are the costs to eliminating EOB?   The elimination of EOB  
          would result in a cost savings of $4.2 million, of which only  
          $730,000 is General Fund, but will deleting it cause any work  
          that EOB is currently involved with to fall through the cracks?

          The bankruptcy of PX and the replacement of EOB appointed ISO  
          stakeholder board with a board of gubernatorial appointees  
          reduced the duties of EOB.  Subsequent legislation gave the EOB  
          authority to conduct the following activities:

          1)SB 1388 (Peace), Chapter 1040, Statutes of 2000, requires EOB,  
            in conjunction with PUC, to petition FERC to allow the  
            recovery of certain expenses of investor owned utilities  
            relating to the replacement and expansion of the state's  
            electricity transmission grid.

          2)Communicate ISO's Rule Changes to FERC.  Chapter 1, First  
            Extraordinary Session, Statutes of 2001 (AB X1 5 (Keeley)),  
            requires EOB to require ISO to amend its bylaws in response to  
            FERC decisions, and to communicate this action to FERC.

          3)SB 47 (Bowen) Chapter 766, Statutes of 2001 authorizes EOB to  
            investigate any matter related to the wholesale market for  
            electricity.

          4)Provide EOB with oversight over scheduling planned power  
            outages as well as monitoring, investigating, and enforcing  
            activities related to unplanned outages.








                                                                  SB 920
                                                                  Page  4


           Should the Legislature wait till next year before eliminating  
          EOB pending their report?   Most of EOB workload is currently  
          around the energy refund cases and FERC representation.  This  
          year's joint budget conference committee adopted budget bill  
          language and supplemental report language that requires EOB to  
          report back to the Legislature on or before March 1, 2004,  
          describing the state's activities before FERC.  This report  
          shall describe the roles of each agency that is active before  
          FERC, how the policies and objectives are determined, and what  
          mechanisms are in place to coordinate activities among the  
          several agencies.

           Does the Governor need an energy policy advisor?   EOB, which was  
          created in AB 1890 (Brulte) oversaw the functions of ISO and PX  
          and until the passage of AB 1X 5 had the authority to appoint  
          the members of EOB and ISO.  During the energy crises EOB served  
          a valuable role in monitoring abuses in the wholesale market and  
          representing the state interest to FERC.  By eliminating EOB  
          will this valuable service be lost and can the Attorney General  
          pick it up?

           Does the Attorney General want the job?   This bill seeks to move  
          all the legal and regulatory proceedings where EOB is a party to  
          the Attorney General but doesn't give the Attorney General any  
          more money.  Will the Attorney General be able to pick up EOB's  
          workload while not jeopardizing any state interests in claims or  
          current proceedings with the resources that it currently has?   
          And will the courts and FERC be able to legally recognize the  
          Attorney General in cases or proceedings that EOB was a claimant  
          in?  Furthermore, it is possible there may be a conflict of  
          interest for the Attorney General to pick up the claims and  
          proceedings that EOB is party in.  An example would be in the  
          case of DWR contracts where the Attorney General represents the  
          state and EOB is the party arguing that the contracts are  
          unjustified and should be renegotiated.

          Other issues that may pose a problem with the transfer is that  
          EOB under current settlement agreements has a responsibility and  
          authority to require generators to make changes to their plants  
          to comply with the agreements.  Under this bill that  
          responsibility would now seem to fall with the Attorney General  
          and would it be the proper office to handle that responsibility?  
           Also, the Integrated Energy Policy Report developed by the  
          Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission  








                                                                  SB 920
                                                                  Page  5

          requires agencies like EOB to submit information to it for  
          purposes of developing the report.  Under this bill the Attorney  
          General would seem to now be required to provide this  
          information, which is outside the mission and duties of the  
          agency.





           REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :   

           Support 
           
          None on file.

           Opposition 
           
          None on file.
           

          Analysis Prepared by  :    Daniel Kim / U. & C. / (916) 319-2083