Electrical and gas corporations: capital expenditures: request for authorization or recovery.
The implications of AB2847 are significant, as it mandates that electrical or gas corporations submit their best estimates of the application’s impact on their revenue needs each year that the associated capital expenditures are likely to remain in the rate base. Furthermore, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) is tasked with determining whether such estimates are necessary for each application, promoting a more detailed scrutiny of proposed rate changes and ensuring they are justified before implementation. This could lead to more informed regulatory decisions and potentially protect consumers from unjustified rate hikes.
Assembly Bill 2847, also known as AB2847, introduced by Assemblymember Addis, focuses on the regulatory framework for electrical and gas corporations in California, particularly regarding how they request authorization for or recovery of their capital expenditures. The bill amends the Public Utilities Code by adding Section 739.15, which requires these corporations to include specific financial estimates in their applications related to the impact on annual revenue requirements. This is intended to enhance transparency regarding how capital costs affect rates charged to customers.
The general sentiment around AB2847 seems to reflect a positive reception among proponents who appreciate the accountability measures it introduces for utility companies. They argue that by requiring detailed financial projections, the bill enhances the CPUC's ability to set fair and reasonable rates and protects consumers. However, opponents may express concerns about the practicality and implications of increased regulation, arguing it could delay necessary utility improvements or investments due to more stringent application processes.
One notable point of contention regarding AB2847 is the bill's impact on local agencies and school districts. While it delineates its regulatory framework and establishes that no reimbursement is required for costs related to state mandates, critics might question the potential financial burdens this could impose on local governance structures. The bill's requirement for more detailed financial disclosures may raise concerns about the workload for utility companies but could also foster a more rigorous and accountable utility regulatory environment overall.