BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SB 660
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB
660 (Leno and Hueso)
As Amended September 4, 2015
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE: 29-7
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|Committee |Votes|Ayes |Noes |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|----------------+-----+-----------------------+---------------------|
|Utilities |15-0 |Rendon, Patterson, | |
| | |Achadjian, Bonilla, | |
| | |Burke, Dahle, Eggman, | |
| | |Cristina Garcia, | |
| | |Hadley, | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | |Roger Hernández, | |
| | |Obernolte, Quirk, | |
| | |Santiago, Ting, | |
| | |Williams | |
| | | | |
|----------------+-----+-----------------------+---------------------|
|Appropriations |17-0 |Gomez, Bigelow, Bloom, | |
| | |Bonta, Calderon, | |
| | |Chang, Nazarian, | |
| | |Eggman, Gallagher, | |
SB 660
Page 2
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | |Eduardo Garcia, | |
| | |Holden, Jones, Quirk, | |
| | |Rendon, Wagner, Weber, | |
| | |Wood | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Proposes reforms to the governance and operations of
the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC).
Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires the CPUC to appoint a Chief Administrative Law Judge
(ALJ) to be responsible for executive and administrative
management and oversight of the Administrative Law Division.
Authorizes the CPUC to delegate management and oversight
functions to committees of two commissioners.
2)Requires the Chief ALJ, rather than the CPUC President, to
keep a true and full record of all Commission proceedings.
3)Requires the CPUC to adopt procedures for the disqualification
of commissioners due to bias or prejudice. Requires a
commissioner or ALJ to be disqualified from ratesetting or
adjudicatory proceedings for bias or prejudice based on
specified criteria.
4)Authorizes the CPUC to delegate management and oversight
functions to committees of two commissioners, and requires the
full Commission to vote in an open meeting when assigning
commissioners to a new proceeding.
SB 660
Page 3
5) Modifies and expands ex parte communication rules and
prohibitions.
6)Authorizes the CPUC to impose civil penalties on anyone who
violates ex parte provisions. Authorizes the Attorney General
to bring enforcement actions on CPUC decisionmakers and
employees in the San Francisco Superior Court.
7)Makes other technical and clarifying changes to address
chaptering out conflicts.
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, this bill would have increased CPUC costs of an
estimated $900,000, including $430,000 limited-term and $470,000
ongoing costs, to implement and enforce the provisions of the
bill and hold additional public meetings, as necessary.
COMMENTS:
1)Author's Statement: "[The] release of emails related to the
San Bruno disaster and the San Onofre nuclear plant closing
has revealed serious flaws in the management structure and
operations of the [CPUC]. These emails have amply
demonstrated that the relationships between the Commission and
its regulated utilities are too close, and too informal, to
inspire confidence that rate payers and non-utility interests
are adequately represented by the Commission? In this
high-powered, high-stakes environment, we must protect the
impartiality of the Commission, not only in adherence to basic
fairness, but also to ensure public confidence in CPUC
decisions. What we face today is an erosion of public trust
in the institution Californians rely upon to protect life
safety and to keep utility monopolies in check. SB 660 will
SB 660
Page 4
crack down on abuses of power, biased decisions, and secret
communications; and bring new ethical standards and meaningful
change to the CPUC."
2)Background: California Constitution Article XII establishes
the CPUC and grants it the authority to regulate public
utilities. The CPUC is governed by five full-time
commissioners appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the
State Senate. Commissioners are appointed for six-year terms
and can only be removed by the Legislature. Beginning in
2014, Pacific Gas & Electric began releasing over 65,000
emails from a five-year period between utility executives and
CPUC officials. The emails revealed discussions on subjects
the CPUC was deliberating within a number of proceedings, many
of which arguably violated CPUC's rules governing ex parte
communications, including emails pertaining to the selection
of ALJs for ratesetting cases.
This bill proposes a suite of reforms on the governance and
operations of the CPUC, including the delegation of oversight
functions to commissioners and the Chief ALJ, as specified.
In addition, this bill would require the CPUC to adopt
procedures for the disqualification of commissioners due to
bias or prejudice, as specified.
3)Ex Parte Communications: Ex parte communication is defined
under the Public Utilities Code as "any oral or written
communication between a decision maker and a person with an
interest in a matter before the Commission concerning
substantive, but not procedural issues, that does not occur in
a public hearing, workshop, or other public proceeding, or on
the official record of the proceeding on the matter." The
purpose of ex parte communications is to ensure fairness and
transparency in a decision-making process by preventing one
party from gaining an unfair advantage. For regulatory
agencies, ex parte communications are necessary to maintain
SB 660
Page 5
the integrity of the decision-making process and the public's
perception of fairness. This bill modifies and expands ex
parte communication rules and prohibitions, and specifies
penalties for violations.
Analysis Prepared by:
Edmond Cheung / U. & C. / (916) 319-2083 FN:
0002167