BILL ANALYSIS 1
1
SENATE ENERGY, UTILITIES AND COMMUNICATIONS COMMITTEE
DEBRA BOWEN, CHAIRWOMAN
AB 1398 - Papan Hearing
Date: June 27, 2000 A
As Amended: June 15, 2000 FISCAL B
1
3
9
8
DESCRIPTION
Current law requires the review of most California Public
Utilities Commission (CPUC) decisions relating to water
corporations to be handled by the State Supreme Court.
This provision sunsets as of December 31, 2000, at which
time all CPUC decisions related to water corporations may
be reviewed at the court of appeals level.
This bill removes the sunset and continues the requirement
that the State Supreme Court handle the review of CPUC
decisions related to water corporations.
BACKGROUND
Until 1996, any CPUC decision could only be appealed to the
California Supreme Court. Due to growing concerns that
this diminished the CPUC's accountability, the Legislature
passed SB 1322 (Calderon), Chapter 855, Statutes of 1996,
to allow certain CPUC decisions to be appealed to the court
of appeals.
SB 653 (Calderon) of 1997 sought to broaden the scope of
court of appeals review, but that bill was vetoed by
Governor Wilson. The following year, the Legislature
passed and the Governor signed SB 779 (Calderon), Chapter
886, Statutes of 1998, which made virtually all electric,
gas, and telecommunications utility decisions by the CPUC
appealable by the court of appeals, effective January 1,
1999. CPUC policy decisions relating to water corporations
were included in SB 779, but the bill didn't require them
to be appealable to the court of appeals until January 1,
2001.
QUESTIONS
1.Should CPUC decisions relating to water corporations only
be appealable to the State Supreme Court?
2.Will this bill affect water cases that are currently
under review at the CPUC and is that appropriate?
COMMENTS
1)Noncompetitive Marketplace . The sponsor of this bill,
the California Water Association, argues that because the
water supply industry is a noncompetitive utility market
that's still tightly regulated by the CPUC, greater
judicial involvement is inappropriate.
When SB 779 (Calderon), Chapter 886, Statutes of 1998,
was moving through the legislative process, one of the
arguments in favor of it was that by expanding the avenue
of judicial review of CPUC decisions, it would expand the
opportunities for public input and provide the public
with "leverage" over the CPUC. If that's the case, the
author and Committee may which to consider whether
keeping appeals of CPUC decisions related to water
corporations at the State Supreme Court will reduce the
amount of public input and/or reduce any public
"leverage" over the CPUC.
2)Cases Currently Before The CPUC . Under current law, CPUC
policy decisions regarding water utilities made after
January 1, 2001, would be appealable to the court of
appeals. Consequently, the appeals process for certain
water cases currently pending before the CPUC that may be
decided after January 1, 2001, will be shifted from the
court of appeals to the California Supreme Court if this
bill is enacted.
3)Double Referral . The Senate Rules Committee has
requested that if this bill is approved by this
committee, it is required to be referred to the Senate
Judiciary Committee.
ASSEMBLY VOTES
Assembly Utilities and Commerce Committee(9-0)*
Assembly Floor (74-1)*
* Votes based on a prior, unrelated version of this bill.
POSITIONS
Sponsor:
California Water Association
Support:
None on file.
Oppose:
None on file.
Randy Chinn
AB 1398 Analysis
Hearing Date: June 27, 2000