BILL ANALYSIS Ó SB 512 Page 1 SENATE THIRD READING SB 512 (Hill) As Amended August 19, 2016 Majority vote SENATE VOTE: 37-0 -------------------------------------------------------------------- |Committee |Votes|Ayes |Noes | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |----------------+-----+-----------------------+---------------------| |Utilities |10-2 |Gatto, Burke, Eggman, |Dahle, Obernolte | | | | | | | | | | | | | |Cristina Garcia, | | | | |Hadley, | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |Roger Hernández, | | | | |Quirk, Santiago, Ting, | | | | |Williams | | | | | | | |----------------+-----+-----------------------+---------------------| |Appropriations |12-2 |Gonzalez, Bloom, |Bigelow, Obernolte | | | |Bonilla, Bonta, Chang, | | | | |Eggman, | | | | | | | | | | | | SB 512 Page 2 | | |Eduardo Garcia, Quirk, | | | | |Santiago, Weber, Wood, | | | | |McCarty | | | | | | | | | | | | -------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: Makes a variety changes to the operations and governance of the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). Specifically, this bill: 1)Requires the CPUC to hold its sessions at least once in each calendar month, without specifying the location. 2)Applies the Administrative Adjudication Codes of Ethics to CPUC administrative law judges. 3)Requires the CPUC to seek the participation of those likely to be affected by a decision, prior to determining the scope of a proceeding. This provision does not apply to adjudication cases. 4)Requires the CPUC Policy and Planning Division to study the outreach efforts undertaken by other state or federal utility regulatory bodies and make recommendations. 5)Requires the CPUC to include a docket card that lists the public versions of all prepared oral and written testimony and advice letter filings, protests, and responses on its Internet Web site. 6)Requires the CPUC to make additional information available on SB 512 Page 3 the Internet, including information on how members of the public and ratepayers can gain access to the CPUC's ratemaking process. 7)Expands and recasts an existing annual reporting requirement to the Governor and Legislature to include, among other things, the description of all scheduled proceedings that may be considered by the CPUC during the calendar year, the outcomes, and the performance criteria for the CPUC and the executive director. 8)Permits intervenor compensation to be paid to certain local government entities that intervene or participate in commission proceedings to the extent that their involvement was for the purpose of protecting health and safety, under specified circumstances. 9)Clarifies that intervenor compensation, in proceedings at the CPUC, is allowed for intervenors who made a substantial contribution in a proceeding, regardless of whether or not a settlement is reached. FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, increased CPUC costs of up to $1.1 million annually (Public Utilities Reimbursement Account) to comply with the provisions of the bill. Most of the costs are associated with providing intervenor fees to local governments, in particular, determining eligibility. According to the Legislative Analyst's Office, there are over 5,300 local government agencies. This is more than 100 times greater than the number of eligible intervenors that SB 512 Page 4 participated in CPUC proceedings during any given year. COMMENTS 1)Purpose: According to the author, recent scandals at the CPUC have highlighted the need for more visibility in the interactions between Commissioners and regulated utilities, and a series of embarrassing audits of the CPUC's mismanagement of public funds and poor safety oversight point toward poor management of the organization. This bill is intended to reform the CPUC's governance structure by clearly outlining the roles and responsibilities of Commissioners and providing transparency and accountability. 2)Background: The CPUC is established in the California Constitution and is governed by five full-time Commissioners, appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate, and staffed by approximately 1,000 individuals. The CPUC regulates privately-owned electric, natural gas, telecommunications, water, railroad, rail transit, and passenger transportation companies. CPUC staff includes four personal advisors to each of four Commissioners, five to the President. Additional staff include 42 judges of the Administrative Law Division and numerous attorneys, engineers and accountants who prepare the docket for all CPUC official filings, including maintenance of the official record of proceedings. 3)CPUC Deficiencies: The CPUC has recently undergone a number of audits related to its budget, transportation program, natural gas pipeline safety program, and other internal functions. The audit findings raised questions regarding the CPUC's ability to manage its core functions. An audit by the State Auditor in March of 2014 found the CPUC lacks adequate process for the sufficient oversight of utility balancing SB 512 Page 5 accounts to protect ratepayers from unfair rate increases. A recent report commissioned by the CPUC found ex parte communications to be frequent, pervasive, and at least sometimes outcome-determinative in ratesetting cases. This bill addresses audit findings of mismanagement, poor safety oversight, and failed governance. 4)Intervenor Compensation for Local Governments: With regard to intervenor compensation, the City of San Bruno stated in its letter: As we embarked on our participation in three investigations related to the explosion in our community we were shocked to discover that?.such compensation it not available to local government organizations like ours. Cities and counties that have suffered catastrophe are least able to devote their limited resource to the arcane and expensive task of participation in CPUC proceedings - they have more than enough to do to just respond, to address the needs of their residents and to rebuild and recover. This bill would make communities eligible for intervenor compensation that have suffered a catastrophic loss related to utility infrastructure. 5)Intervenor Compensation When No Settlement is Reached. This SB 512 Page 6 bill clarifies that compensation is allowed for intervenors who made a substantial contribution in a proceeding, regardless of whether or not a settlement is reached. This provision is intended to end the era of "go-along, get-along," a practice instituted by former-CPUC President Peevey to encourage intervenors to enter into settlements in order to receive intervenor compensation. Those who did not settle would not be deemed to have made a substantial contribution and then, therefore, ineligible for intervenor compensation, whether or not their contribution was, indeed, substantial. Analysis Prepared by: Sue Kateley / U. & C. / (916) 319-2083 FN: 0004663