SB 636, as amended, Hill. Public Utilities Commission: proceedings.
(1) Existing law establishes certain procedures that are applicable to adjudication, rulemaking, and ratesetting cases of the Public Utilities Commission.
This bill would prohibit an officer, employee, or agent of the commission that is personally involved in the prosecution or in the supervision of the prosecution of an adjudication case from participating in the decision of the case or in the decision of any factually relatedbegin insert adjudicatoryend insert proceeding. The bill would permit an officer, employee, or agent of the commission that is personally involved in the prosecution or in the supervision of the prosecution of an adjudication case to participate in reaching a settlement of the case, but would prohibit the officer, employee, or agent from participating in the decision of the commission to accept or reject the settlement, except as a witness or counsel in an open hearing or a specified closed hearing.
(2) The California Constitution authorizes the commission to establish its own procedures, subject to statutory limitations or directions and constitutional requirements of due process, and to establish rules for all public utilities.
This bill would correct certain statutory references from the commission adopting regulations to the commission adopting rules.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program: no.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
Section 1701.2 of the Public Utilities Code is
2amended to read:
(a) If the commission pursuant to Section 1701.1 has
4determined that an adjudication case requires a hearing, the
5procedures prescribed by this section shall be applicable. The
6assigned commissioner or the assigned administrative law judge
7shall hear the case in the manner described in the scoping memo.
8The scoping memo shall designate whether the assigned
9commissioner or the assigned administrative law judge shall preside
10in the case. The commission shall provide by rule for peremptory
11challenges and challenges for cause of the administrative law judge.
12Challenges for cause shall include, but not be limited to, financial
13interests and prejudice. The rule shall provide that all parties are
14entitled to one
peremptory challenge of the assignment of the
15administrative law judge in all cases. All parties are entitled to
16unlimited peremptory challenges in any case in which the
17administrative law judge has within the previous 12 months served
18in any capacity in an advocacy position at the commission, been
19employed by a regulated public utility, or has represented a party
20or has been a party of interest in the case. The assigned
21commissioner or the administrative law judge shall prepare and
22file a decision setting forth recommendations, findings, and
23conclusions. The decision shall be filed with the commission and
24served upon all parties to the action or proceeding without undue
25delay, not later than 60 days after the matter has been submitted
26for decision. The decision of the assigned commissioner or the
27administrative law judge shall become the decision of the
28commission if no further action is taken
within 30 days. Any
29interested party may appeal the decision to the commission,
30provided that the appeal is made within 30 days of the issuance of
31the decision. The commission may itself initiate a review of the
P3 1proposed decision on any grounds. The commission decision shall
2be based on the record developed by the assigned commissioner
3or the administrative law judge. A decision different from that of
4the assigned commissioner or the administrative law judge shall
5be accompanied by a written explanation of each of the changes
6made to the decision.
7(b) Notwithstanding Section 307, an officer, employee, or agent
8of the commission that is personally involved in the prosecution
9or in the supervision of the prosecution of an adjudication case
10before the commission shall not participate in the decision of the
11case, or in the
decision of any factually relatedbegin insert adjudicatoryend insert
12 proceeding, including participation in or advising the commission
13as to findings of fact, conclusions of law, or orders. An officer,
14employee, or agent of the commission that is personally involved
15in the prosecution or in the supervision of the prosecution of an
16adjudication case may participate in reaching a settlement of the
17case, but shall not participate in the decision of the commission to
18accept or reject the settlement, except as a witness or counsel in
19an open hearing or a hearing closed pursuant to subdivision (d).
20The Legislature finds that the commission performs both
21prosecutorial and adjudicatory functions in an adjudication case
22and declares its intent that an officer, employee, or agent of the
23commission, including its attorneys, may perform only
one of
24those functions in any adjudication case or factually related
25begin insert adjudicatoryend insert proceeding.
26(c) Ex parte communications shall be prohibited in adjudication
27cases.
28(d) Notwithstanding any other law, the commission may meet
29in a closed hearing to consider the decision that is being appealed.
30The vote on the appeal shall be in a public meeting and shall be
31accompanied with an explanation of the appeal decision.
32(e) Adjudication cases shall be resolved within 12 months of
33initiation unless the commission makes findings why that deadline
34cannot be met and issues an order extending that deadline. In the
35event that a rehearing of
an adjudication case is granted, the parties
36shall have an opportunity for final oral argument.
37(f) (1) The commission may determine that the respondent
38lacks, or may lack, the ability to pay potential penalties or fines
39or to pay restitution that may be ordered by the commission.
P4 1(2) If the commission determines that a respondent lacks, or
2may lack, the ability to pay, the commission may order the
3respondent to demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the commission,
4sufficient ability to pay potential penalties, fines, or restitution that
5may be ordered by the commission. The respondent shall
6demonstrate the ability to pay, or make other financial
7arrangements satisfactory to the commission, within seven days
8of the commission commencing an adjudication case. The
9commission
may delegate to the attorney to the commission the
10determination of whether a sufficient showing has been made by
11the respondent of an ability to pay.
12(3) Within seven days of the commission’s determination of the
13respondent’s ability to pay potential penalties, fines, or restitution,
14the respondent shall be entitled to an impartial review by an
15administrative law judge of the sufficiency of the showing made
16by the respondent of the respondent’s ability to pay. The review
17by an administrative law judge of the ability of the respondent to
18pay shall become part of the record of the adjudication and is
19subject to the commission’s consideration in its order resolving
20the adjudication case. The administrative law judge may enter
21temporary orders modifying any financial requirement made of
22the respondent pending the review by the administrative
law judge.
23(4) A respondent that is a public utility regulated under a rate
24of return or rate of margin regulatory structure or that has gross
25annual revenues of more than one hundred million dollars
26($100,000,000) generated within California is presumed to be able
27to pay potential penalties or fines or to pay restitution that may be
28ordered by the commission, and, therefore, paragraphs (1) to (3),
29inclusive, do not apply to that respondent.
O
96