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