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: 5/24/04
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
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 8-5, 5/20/04
AYES: Alpert, Bowen, Burton, Escutia, Karnette, Machado,
Murray, Speier
NOES: Battin, Aanestad, Ashburn, Johnson, Poochigian
SUBJECT : State Public Utilities Commission: Office of
Ratepayer
Advocates
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill makes minor and clarifying changes
related to the State Office of Ratepayer Advocates, within
the State Public Utilities Commission.
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
CONTINUED
SB 1624
Page
2
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
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.
The bill may require the PUC to modify its code of conduct,
related to ORA, to clarify that advocates and their
representative son a particular case or proceeding do not
have preferential access to information regarding the PUC's
deliberative process. The bill also makes other minor and
technical changes related to ORA.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
Increased costs are probably minor. Public Utilities'
Reimbursement Account revenues are derived from an annual
fee imposed on public utilities. Therefore, any increased
costs to the PUC should be offset by increased fee
revenues.
SUPPORT : (Verified 5/24/04)
California Alliance for Consumer Protection
NC:mel 5/24/04 Senate Floor Analyses
SB 1624
Page
3
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****