BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1182|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 445-6614 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 1182
Author: Calderon (D)
Amended: 6/21/05 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE ENERGY, U.&C. COMMITTEE : 10-0, 6/30/05
AYES: Escutia, Morrow, Alarcon, Battin, Bowen, Cox, Dunn,
Kehoe, Murray, Simitian
NO VOTE RECORDED: Campbell
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : Senate Rule 28.8
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 73-0, 5/27/05 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Public Utilities Commission: work plan access
guide
SOURCE : SBC
DIGEST : This bill requires the California Public
Utilities Commission to post its annual work plan on its
Internet Web site, and propose a plan for submitting advice
letters by electronic means if deemed feasible.
ANALYSIS : Existing law requires the California Public
Utilities Commission (CPUC) to annually publish a work plan
describing their major activities for the upcoming year.
Current regulations permit regulated utilities to obtain
CPUC authorization to perform certain activities through an
CONTINUED
AB 1182
Page
2
informal mechanism using what's known as an advice letter
process.
This bill requires the CPUC to make the work plan available
on its website and to develop a program to electronically
disseminate updates to the workplan.
This bill requires the CPUC to determine the feasibility of
submitting advice letters electronically. If feasible, the
CPUC shall propose a plan within six months.
Background
Routine activities of public utilities are generally
reviewed and approved by the CPUC through an advice letter
process. This is a relatively informal process that is
dealt with at the staff level, though the advice letter
must ultimately be approved by the CPUC. While the advice
letter process is intended to deal with uncontroversial
activities, the advice letters are available to be reviewed
by consumer advocates and competitors. Because of the
volume of advice letters and inadequate staffing, the
Office of the Ratepayer Advocate does not review all advice
letter filings.
Comments
Electronic advice letter filings will be more efficient for
utilities and should reduce their costs. It also
potentially makes it easier to review advice letters as
they can be easily shared and posted. Moreover, electronic
documents are easily searched for key words and phrases.
The benefits of electronic filing are many.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/22/05)
SBC (source)
California Telephone Association
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AB 1182
Page
3
AYES: Aghazarian, Arambula, Baca, Bass, Benoit, Berg,
Bermudez, Blakeslee, Bogh, Calderon, Canciamilla, Chan,
Chavez, Chu, Cogdill, Cohn, Coto, Daucher, De La Torre,
DeVore, Dymally, Emmerson, Evans, Frommer, Garcia,
Goldberg, Harman, Jerome Horton, Shirley Horton, Houston,
Huff, Jones, Karnette, Keene, Klehs, Koretz, La Malfa,
Laird, Leno, Leslie, Levine, Lieber, Liu, Matthews, Maze,
McCarthy, Montanez, Mountjoy, Mullin, Nakanishi, Nation,
Nava, Negrete McLeod, Niello, Parra, Pavley, Plescia,
Richman, Sharon Runner, Ruskin, Saldana, Salinas,
Spitzer, Strickland, Torrico, Tran, Umberg, Villines,
Walters, Wolk, Wyland, Yee, Nunez
NO VOTE RECORDED: Gordon, Hancock, Haynes, La Suer,
Oropeza, Ridley-Thomas, Vargas
NC:do 8/22/05 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****