BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                  SB 611
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   June 24, 2013

                    ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON UTILITIES AND COMMERCE
                               Steven Bradford, Chair
                      SB 611 (Hill) - As Amended:  June 14, 2013

           SENATE VOTE  :   38-0
           
          SUBJECT  :   Public Utilities Commission: Division of Ratepayer  
          Advocates

           SUMMARY  :   Renames the Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA) the  
          Office of Ratepayer Advocates (Office) and authorizes the Office  
          to seek rehearing and judicial review of California Public  
          Utilities Commission (PUC) among other things.  Specifically,  
           this bill  :   

          1)Renames the Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA) the Office  
            of Ratepayer Advocates (Office).

          2)Specifies the Office to may seek rehearing and judicial review  
            of PUC decisions.

          3)Requires the director of the Office to develop a budget for  
            the Office for final approval by the Department of Finance.

          4)Requires the lead attorney to obtain adequate legal personnel  
            for the work to be conducted by the Office from the PUC's lead  
            attorney, among other things.

           EXISTING LAW  :

          1)The California Constitution states that the Legislature has  
            plenary authority to establish the manner and scope of review  
            of PUC action in a court of record. (Article XII, Section 5)

          2)Permits, after a decision has been adopted, any party to a  
            proceeding or any person with a financial interest in the  
            public utility affected by the decision may, within 30 days,  
            apply for a rehearing of the case. (Public Utilities Code  
            �1731 (b)(1))

          3)Permits an aggrieved party to a decision to petition for a  
            writ of review in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court  
            within 30 days of the PUC's denying an application for  
            rehearing. (Public Utilities Code �1756)

          4)Permits an aggrieved party to a decision to petition for a  





                                                                  SB 611
                                                                  Page  2

            writ of review in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court  
            within 30 days of a PUC decision following the grant of an  
            application for rehearing.  (Public Utilities Code �1756) 

          5)States Director of DRA shall be appointed by, and serve at the  
            pleasure of the Governor, subject to confirmation by the  
            Senate. (Public Utilities Code �309.5(b))

          6)Requires the Director of DRA to submit an annual budget to the  
            PUC for final approval. (Public Utilities Code �309.5(b))

          7)Requires the Director of DRA to annually appear before the  
            appropriate policy committees of the Assembly and the Senate  
            to report on the activities of the division. (Public Utilities  
            Code �309.5(b))
           FISCAL EFFECT  :   Unknown.

           COMMENTS  :   According to the author, "the Office of Ratepayer  
          Advocates needs the Legislature to clearly state that it has the  
          right to petition the court of appeals to review a PUC decision.  
           The reason for that is the PUC continues to maintain the  
          self-serving proposition that ORA does not have the authority,  
          since ORA is a part of the CPUC and therefore can't challenge  
          itself.  While this position does not appear to be accurate,  
          appeals courts have discretion in whether or not to review PUC  
          decisions when asked, and uncertainly as to ORA's standing may  
          disincline a court of appeal from taking up such a case.  Also,  
          as ORA depends on the PUC to supply it with lawyers, lack of  
          standing may give the PUC an excuse to not to give ORA legal  
          resources for an appeals case.  DRA is legislatively mandated to  
          advocate for consumers before the PUC.  Sometimes they are the  
          only consumer advocate.  If DRA doesn't have the ability to  
          appeal, then the commission can issue a decision without regard  
          to the decision's legality.  This is a real concern given the  
          "creative" legal opinions the PUC has developed in recent years,  
          many of which have been at odds with our own Legislative  
          Counsel."

           1)Background  : The Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA) is an  
            independent division within
          the PUC that advocates solely on behalf of residential and small  
          commercial utility ratepayers.  In 1984, the CPUC created DRA,  
          formerly known as the "Public Staff Division," in a  
          reorganization plan to more efficiently use staff resources. In  
          1996, SB 960 (Chapter 856, Statutes of 1996) renamed the  
          Division the "Office of Ratepayer Advocates" (ORA), and while  
          keeping the ratepayer advocacy function within the PUC for  
          mutually beneficial purposes, made it independent with respect  





                                                                  SB 611
                                                                  Page  3

          to policy, advocacy, and budget. SB 960 made the DRA Director a  
          gubernatorial appointee subject to Senate confirmation. In 1997,  
          the PUC implemented its reorganization plan, "Vision 2000,"  
          which significantly diminished the staff of ORA, but the  
          ratepayer advocacy responsibilities and workload remained the  
          same. In 2005, SB 608 Escutia (Chapter 440, Statutes of 2005)  
          renamed ORA as DRA - the Division of Ratepayer Advocates - and  
          strengthened the division by providing it with autonomy over its  
          budget and staffing resources and authorizing the appointment of  
          a full-time Chief Counsel.

          DRA has 137 technical staff with expertise in regulatory issues  
          related to the electricity, natural gas, water, and  
          telecommunications industries in California. DRA's staff of  
          experts performs detailed review and analyses of regulatory  
          policy issues and utility proposals for funding that total in  
          the tens of billions of dollars. DRA determines whether utility  
          requests are in the interest of the ratepayers who fund utility  
          activities through their utility bills. DRA also supports  
          environmental policies that may benefit customers and seeks to  
          ensure that utility actions comport with PUC rules and  
          California environmental laws and policy goals. 

          DRA's 2012 Annual Report to the Legislature notes that: "DRA  
          participated in 176 CPUC proceedings and filed more than 600  
          pleadings to aid the PUC in developing the record from which  
          Commissioners formulated their final decisions. DRA lobbied  
          decision-makers on behalf of ratepayers nearly 250 times in 2012  
          to ensure that the consumer perspective was heard. DRA's  
          $27,535,000 budget represents a small fraction of ratepayer's  
          investment compared with the nearly $4 billion in savings DRA's  
          work was instrumental in achieving for Californians in the form  
          of lower utility rates and avoided rate increases. For every  
          dollar customers spent on DRA in 2012, they saved approximately  
          $153 across their utility bills."

           2)Recent audit findings  :  A recent Department of Finance (Office  
            of Statewide Audits and
          Evaluations) audit found "widespread weaknesses within PUC's  
          budget operations which compromise its ability to prepare and  
          present reliable and accurate budget information." The audit  
          revealed: ineffective management over budgeting functions;  
          budget forecasting methodologies and monitoring need  
          improvement; fiscal management practices need improvement; and  
          non-compliance with statutory requirements specified to the  
          Division of Ratepayer Advocates.

          Current law requires the DRA's director to develop the DRA  





                                                                  SB 611
                                                                  Page  4

          budget and submit it to the PUC for final approval. However,  
          OSAE found that DRA does not prepare its own budget, nor is it  
          reviewed and approved by the director of DRA or approved by the  
          PUC.  Rather, the PUC Budget Office prepares and approves DRA's  
          budget for them.  The audit found that this process does not  
          follow the law and lacks transparency. SB 611 requires the  
          director to develop an annual budget to be approved by the  
          Department of Finance.  

          Additionally, SB 611 clarifies that the director may appoint a  
          lead attorney to represent DRA and obtain adequate legal  
          personnel for the work to be conducted by DRA from the PUC's  
          lead attorney.

           3)Need for judicial review  : This bill clarifies that DRA may  
            seek judicial review of PUC
          decisions, just like any other party to a proceeding at the PUC.  
           This is a right that all parties, including the utilities, and  
          ratepayer advocacy groups have in cases before the PUC.  Absent  
          this right, DRA and the ratepayers it represents could be at a  
          disadvantage in advocating before the PUC.  Furthermore,  
          ratepayers would bear the costs of funding intervenor  
          compensation for other outside ratepayer advocacy groups that  
          seek judicial review.  

          Existing law permits an aggrieved party to ask an appellate  
          court to review a PUC decision.  According to DRA: "this bill  
          would clarify DRA's ability to petition for a writ of review.   
          DRA is funded for legal resources and this clarification will  
          not increase costs."

          In the interest of the ratepayers and promoting transparency and  
          accountability, this committee may wish to make an amendment  
          that  requires DRA to include it its Annual Report before the  
          Legislature the number of cases, the amount of ratepayer funds  
          spent, and rationale for which it sought judicial review of PUC  
          decisions  .  

           4)2013-14 budget trailer bills  :  This bill is substantially  
            similar to AB 77 (Budget Act of 2013:
          Public Resources) which makes changes to DRA's structure.  AB 77  
          is awaiting a vote in the Assembly.

           REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :

           Support 
           
          Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA)





                                                                  SB 611
                                                                  Page  5

          The Utility Reform Network (TURN)
           
            Opposition 
           
          None on file.

           Analysis Prepared by  :    DaVina Flemings / U. & C. / (916)  
          319-2083