BILL ANALYSIS 1 1 SENATE ENERGY, UTILITIES AND COMMUNICATIONS COMMITTEE DEBRA BOWEN, CHAIRWOMAN AB 1149 - Aroner Hearing Date: July 13, 1999 A As Amended: April 26, 1999 FISCAL B 1 1 4 9 DESCRIPTION Current regulation allows ratepayer funds to be used to pay for the undergrounding of overhead electric utility infrastructure, such as electrical lines and transformers. This bill requires the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to review its regulations which govern this undergrounding process and issue a report to the Legislature by January 1, 2001. BACKGROUND Presto, Chango . For many years the CPUC has encouraged moving overhead electric facilities underground as a way to improve public safety, improve the aesthetics of a community, and lower maintenance costs. The CPUC allocates roughly $60 million annually each from Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison, and $15 million from San Diego Gas & Electric which may be included in the utility ratebase to pay for the undergrounding. However, because undergrounding is very costly, very few undergrounding projects have actually moved forward. Putting Someone In Charge Of The Chunneling . The author introduced this bill in response to a concern that undergrounding projects proposed by the City of Oakland weren't approved by the local utility. Furthermore, the author believes that recent undergrounding projects have led to a patchwork of underground and overhead lines. This bill requires the CPUC to study the current undergrounding rules and determine how those rules can be improved to eliminate the patchwork of overhead and underground facilities, improve reliability, improve public safety, and enhance local control. COMMENTS 1.The CPUC Is On The Case . Largely as a consequence of this bill, the CPUC is preparing to undertake an investigation of its rules concerning undergrounding of electric and telephone facilities. However, the author and the Committee may wish to consider making it clear that the CPUC can change its rules without prior legislative approval. 2.Local Government Flexibility . Since the issue of "local control" is what gave rise to this bill, the author and Committee may wish to consider inserting the term "and control" after "flexibility" on Page 2, Line 13, to provide the CPUC with a bit more direction in its study. 3.Technically Speaking . As a technical matter, the author may wish to substitute "rule" for "tariff" throughout the bill to make it consistent with current regulations and related statutes. ASSEMBLY VOTES Assembly U & C (12-0) Assembly Appropriations (15-2) Assembly Floor (59-17) POSITIONS Support: California Public Utilities Commission City of Oakland (Sponsor) Oppose: None reported to Committee. Randy Chinn AB 1149 Analysis Hearing Date: July 13, 1999