BILL ANALYSIS
SB 1414
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 1414 (Kehoe)
As Amended August 17, 2010
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :31-0
UTILITIES & COMMERCE 14-0
APPROPRIATIONS 12-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Bradford, Tom Berryhill, |Ayes:|Fuentes, Bradford, |
| |Buchanan, Carter, | |Huffman, Coto, Davis, De |
| |Fletcher, Fong, Fuentes, | |Leon, Gatto, Hall, |
| |Fuller, Furutani, | |Skinner, Solorio, |
| |Huffman, Ma, Skinner, | |Torlakson, Torrico |
| |Swanson, Villines | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Creates a deadline for the California Public Utilities
Commission (PUC) to either grant or deny, in part or in whole,
an application for rehearing. Specifically, this bill :
1)Creates a 60-day period for PUC to act upon an application for
rehearing.
2)Authorizes PUC to extend the 60-day period for acting upon the
application for rehearing. Any single order shall not extend
that period for more than an additional 120 days. Regardless
of any order of extension, the applicant may treat the
application as having been denied beginning 61 days following
the filing of the application.
3)Mandates this new provision does not apply to rehearing
applications filed prior to January 1, 2011.
FISCAL EFFECT : Establishing a 120-day deadline for rehearing
applications, though this timeline can be extended by commission
action, will create workload-related cost pressures. If up to
two full-time attorney positions are needed to meet this
deadline, annual costs to the commission would be up to
$290,000. [Public Utilities Reimbursement Account]
COMMENTS : Under current law, parties and certain other
SB 1414
Page 2
entities are directly affected by an action, decision, or order
of PUC may apply to PUC in order to have a rehearing on their
matter of concern. Moreover, a party may petition a state
appellate court or the state Supreme Court to review a PUC
decision, but the party must first seek a rehearing by PUC.
PUC has no statutory deadline to act on rehearing applications.
However, parties are allowed to file a writ of review after 60
days if PUC has not acted upon rehearing application. Often,
PUC will ask the court to stay any action until PUC rules on the
application for rehearing. Under this scenario, the court,
exercising its discretion, generally declines review until PUC
acts within a court given timeline.
During this period of delay, the underlying PUC decision remains
in effect. Existing law provides that a rehearing application
"shall not excuse any corporation or person from complying with
and obeying any order" of PUC nor shall an application for
rehearing "operate in any manner to stay or postpone the
enforcement" of that order, unless PUC orders a stay.
For rehearing applications that are not disposed by PUC within
60 days, this bill allows PUC, by order, to extend the period
for acting upon the application for no more than 120 days at a
time. This "extension by order" provision may increase the
visibility and highlight for the commissioners those cases that
are still outstanding which may help PUC with managing the
backlog. In any case, if PUC orders an extension, a party is
not precluded from exercising its right to take the case to
court.
Analysis Prepared by : DaVina Flemings / U. & C. / (916)
319-2083
FN: 0005948