BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1624|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 445-6614 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 1624
Author: Bowen (D)
Amended: 4/27/04
Vote: 21
SENATE ENERGY, UTIL. & COMM. COMMITTEE : 5-0, 4/13/04
AYES: Bowen, Dunn, McClintock, Murray, Sher
NO VOTE RECORDED: Morrow, Alarcon, Battin, Vasconcellos
SUBJECT : State Public Utilities Commission: Office of
Ratepayer
Advocates
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill clarifies the right of the Office of
Ratepayer Advocates within the State Public Utilities
Commission (PUC) to intervene in PUC proceedings and in the
judicial review of decisions.
ANALYSIS : Current law establishes a division within the
PUC to represent the interests of public utility customers
and subscribers. That division is known as the Office of
Ratepayer Advocates (ORA).
The PUC decision-making process is a formalized,
evidence-driven process where interested parties submit
testimony and are subjected to cross-examination by
opposing parties. PUC decisions are supposed to be made
based on the weight of the evidence, subject to consistency
with the laws of the state. Because the evidence is so
CONTINUED
SB 1624
Page
2
crucial to PUC decision-making, the Legislature created the
ORA as a counterweight to the perspective of the utilities,
tasking it with the responsibility of providing independent
evidence and analysis. ORA participates in virtually all
PUC cases with the duty of representing the interests of
public utility customers to obtain the lowest possible rate
consistent with reliable and safe service levels. The ORA
Director is appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the
Senate.
Parties who disagree with PUC decisions may appeal those
decisions, first to the PUC itself, then to the Court of
Appeals or the California Supreme Court. The Court has the
discretion to accept the case or refuse to hear it. There
is some question as to whether the ORA, as a representative
of public utility customers, can challenge a PUC decision
in court.
This bill clarifies that ORA has all the rights of a party
to intervene in PUC proceedings and in judicial review of
PUC decisions.
This bill also specifies that the procedures developed by
the PUC to ensure that there is not a conflict of roles
shall also ensure that advocates on a particular case or
proceeding are not advising decision makers, "or have
preferential access to information regarding the
commission's deliberative process," on the same case or
proceeding.
Comments
Who should get to go to court . The ORA is the statutorily
mandated representative of the ratepayer, representing
ratepayers in virtually every PUC case. Given that mandate
and the fact that every other party to a PUC case can
challenge a PUC decision in court, it makes little sense to
deprive the sanctioned ratepayer representative of that
same right.
Individual ratepayers have neither the interest nor where
with all to contest PUC decisions in court. Groups that
rely on intervenor compensation to pay for their efforts,
such as TURN (The Utility Reform Network), can take the PUC
SB 1624
Page
3
to court, but they only get paid if the PUC agrees to pay
them, so taking on the PUC is a very substantial financial
risk for these groups. This contrasts sharply with the
ability of utilities to seek court review, who can have
their court costs covered through utility rates.
Give Me Liberty Or... Unlike other parties in PUC
proceedings, the ORA is not independent of the PUC. The
ORA's budget is a line item within the PUC's budget and the
PUC President can direct the PUC staff in the performance
of their duties. This lack of independence may make it
difficult for the ORA to utilize the authority to challenge
the decisions by essentially taking its boss to court.
However, that difficulty may create a useful tension to
ensure the ORA challenges the PUC only when it believes the
PUC is clearly wrong. Besides, the benefit of providing
the ORA with clear authority to challenge the PUC lies as
much with the threat of judicial review as with actually
obtaining judicial review.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 4/26/04)
California Alliance for Consumer Protection
NC:mel 4/28/04 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****