| Old | New | Differences | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | - | ||
| 1 | + | CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE 20252026 REGULAR SESSION Assembly Bill No. 1222Introduced by Assembly Member Bauer-KahanFebruary 21, 2025 An act to amend Section 1756 of, and to add Sections 748.4 and 1757.2 to, the Public Utilities Code, relating to public utilities. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGESTAB 1222, as introduced, Bauer-Kahan. Public utilities: judicial review.Existing law authorizes a party aggrieved by a decision or order of the Public Utilities Commission to file a petition for a writ of review in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court for purposes of reviewing the decision or order within 30 days after the commission issues its decision denying the application for a rehearing, or, if the application was granted, within 30 days after the commission issues its decision on the rehearing, or at least 120 days after the application is granted if no decision on rehearing has been issued.This bill would extend the 30-day time periods to 90 days. For a petition challenging a final decision of the commission in which the final decision significantly modifies the proposed decision issued in the proceeding, the bill would require the court to presume the proposed decision to be valid and lawful and to issue the writ unless the commission rebuts the presumption to the satisfaction of the court in justifying the final decision.Existing law authorizes the commission to fix the rates and charges for public utilities, including electrical corporations, and requires those rates to be just and reasonable.This bill would prohibit the commission from authorizing electrical corporations to recover from their ratepayers the costs associated with seeking judicial review of a commissions decision from a federal agency, or a state or federal court. The bill would require the electrical corporation to track those costs.Under existing law, a violation of the Public Utilities Act or any order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the commission is a crime.Because the above provisions would be part of the act and a violation of a commission action implementing this bills requirements would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.Digest Key Vote: MAJORITY Appropriation: NO Fiscal Committee: YES Local Program: YES Bill TextThe people of the State of California do enact as follows:SECTION 1. Section 748.4 is added to the Public Utilities Code, to read:748.4. (a) The commission shall not authorize an electrical corporation to recover from its ratepayers the costs associated with seeking judicial review of a commissions decision from a federal agency, or a state or federal court.(b) Each electrical corporation shall track the costs described in subdivision (a).(c) The commission shall review an electrical corporations compliance with this section in the electrical corporations general rate case or in another proceeding, as determined appropriate by the commission.SEC. 2. Section 1756 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read:1756. (a) Within 30 90 days after the commission issues its decision denying the application for a rehearing, or, if the application was granted, then within 30 90 days after the commission issues its decision on rehearing, or at least 120 days after the application is granted if no decision on rehearing has been issued, any an aggrieved party may petition for a writ of review in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court for the purpose of having the lawfulness of the original order or decision or of the order or decision on rehearing inquired into and determined. If the writ issues, it shall be made returnable at a time and place specified by court order and shall direct the commission to certify its record in the case to the court within the time specified.(b) The petition for review shall be served upon the executive director and the general counsel of the commission either personally or by service at the office of the commission.(c) For purposes of this section, the issuance of a decision or the granting of an application shall be construed to have occurred on the date of issuance, as defined in paragraph (4) of subdivision (b) of Section 1731.(d) The venue of a petition filed in the court of appeal pursuant to this section shall be in the judicial district in which the petitioner resides. If the petitioner is a business, venue shall be in the judicial district in which the petitioner has its principal place of business in California.(e) Any A party may seek from the Supreme Court, pursuant to California Rules of Court, an order transferring related actions to a single appellate district.(f) For purposes of this section, review of decisions pertaining solely to water corporations shall only be by petition for writ of review in the Supreme Court, except that review of complaint or enforcement proceedings may be in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court.(g) No An order or decision arising out of a commission proceeding under Section 854 shall not be reviewable in the court of appeal pursuant to subdivision (a) if the application for commission authority to complete the merger or acquisition was filed on or before December 31, 1998, by two telecommunications-related corporations including at least one which provides local telecommunications service to over one million 1,000,000 California customers. These orders or decisions shall be reviewed pursuant to the Public Utilities Code in existence on December 31, 1998.SEC. 3. Section 1757.2 is added to the Public Utilities Code, to read:1757.2. In a petition challenging a final decision of the commission in which the final decision of the commission substantially modifies the proposed decision issued in the proceeding, the court shall presume the proposed decision to be valid and lawful and shall issue the writ unless the commission rebuts to the satisfaction of the court the presumption in justifying the modification made in the final decision.SEC. 4. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution. | |
| 2 | 2 | ||
| 3 | - | ||
| 3 | + | CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE 20252026 REGULAR SESSION Assembly Bill No. 1222Introduced by Assembly Member Bauer-KahanFebruary 21, 2025 An act to amend Section 1756 of, and to add Sections 748.4 and 1757.2 to, the Public Utilities Code, relating to public utilities. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGESTAB 1222, as introduced, Bauer-Kahan. Public utilities: judicial review.Existing law authorizes a party aggrieved by a decision or order of the Public Utilities Commission to file a petition for a writ of review in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court for purposes of reviewing the decision or order within 30 days after the commission issues its decision denying the application for a rehearing, or, if the application was granted, within 30 days after the commission issues its decision on the rehearing, or at least 120 days after the application is granted if no decision on rehearing has been issued.This bill would extend the 30-day time periods to 90 days. For a petition challenging a final decision of the commission in which the final decision significantly modifies the proposed decision issued in the proceeding, the bill would require the court to presume the proposed decision to be valid and lawful and to issue the writ unless the commission rebuts the presumption to the satisfaction of the court in justifying the final decision.Existing law authorizes the commission to fix the rates and charges for public utilities, including electrical corporations, and requires those rates to be just and reasonable.This bill would prohibit the commission from authorizing electrical corporations to recover from their ratepayers the costs associated with seeking judicial review of a commissions decision from a federal agency, or a state or federal court. The bill would require the electrical corporation to track those costs.Under existing law, a violation of the Public Utilities Act or any order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the commission is a crime.Because the above provisions would be part of the act and a violation of a commission action implementing this bills requirements would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.Digest Key Vote: MAJORITY Appropriation: NO Fiscal Committee: YES Local Program: YES | |
| 4 | 4 | ||
| 5 | - | Amended IN Assembly April 21, 2025 | |
| 6 | 5 | ||
| 7 | - | Amended IN Assembly April 21, 2025 | |
| 8 | 6 | ||
| 9 | 7 | ||
| 10 | 8 | ||
| 11 | 9 | CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE 20252026 REGULAR SESSION | |
| 12 | 10 | ||
| 13 | 11 | Assembly Bill | |
| 14 | 12 | ||
| 15 | 13 | No. 1222 | |
| 16 | 14 | ||
| 17 | 15 | Introduced by Assembly Member Bauer-KahanFebruary 21, 2025 | |
| 18 | 16 | ||
| 19 | 17 | Introduced by Assembly Member Bauer-Kahan | |
| 20 | 18 | February 21, 2025 | |
| 21 | 19 | ||
| 22 | - | ||
| 23 | - | ||
| 24 | - | An act to amend Section 1756 of, and to add Sections 748.4 748.8 and 1757.2 to, the Public Utilities Code, relating to public utilities. | |
| 20 | + | An act to amend Section 1756 of, and to add Sections 748.4 and 1757.2 to, the Public Utilities Code, relating to public utilities. | |
| 25 | 21 | ||
| 26 | 22 | LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST | |
| 27 | 23 | ||
| 28 | 24 | ## LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST | |
| 29 | 25 | ||
| 30 | - | AB 1222, as | |
| 26 | + | AB 1222, as introduced, Bauer-Kahan. Public utilities: judicial review. | |
| 31 | 27 | ||
| 32 | - | Existing law authorizes a party aggrieved by a decision or order of the Public Utilities Commission to file a petition for a writ of review in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court for purposes of reviewing the decision or order within 30 days after the commission issues its decision denying the application for a rehearing, or, if the application was granted, within 30 days after the commission issues its decision on the rehearing, or at least 120 days after the application is granted if no decision on rehearing has been issued.This bill would extend the 30-day time periods to 90 days. For a petition challenging a final decision of the commission in which | |
| 28 | + | Existing law authorizes a party aggrieved by a decision or order of the Public Utilities Commission to file a petition for a writ of review in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court for purposes of reviewing the decision or order within 30 days after the commission issues its decision denying the application for a rehearing, or, if the application was granted, within 30 days after the commission issues its decision on the rehearing, or at least 120 days after the application is granted if no decision on rehearing has been issued.This bill would extend the 30-day time periods to 90 days. For a petition challenging a final decision of the commission in which the final decision significantly modifies the proposed decision issued in the proceeding, the bill would require the court to presume the proposed decision to be valid and lawful and to issue the writ unless the commission rebuts the presumption to the satisfaction of the court in justifying the final decision.Existing law authorizes the commission to fix the rates and charges for public utilities, including electrical corporations, and requires those rates to be just and reasonable.This bill would prohibit the commission from authorizing electrical corporations to recover from their ratepayers the costs associated with seeking judicial review of a commissions decision from a federal agency, or a state or federal court. The bill would require the electrical corporation to track those costs.Under existing law, a violation of the Public Utilities Act or any order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the commission is a crime.Because the above provisions would be part of the act and a violation of a commission action implementing this bills requirements would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. | |
| 33 | 29 | ||
| 34 | 30 | Existing law authorizes a party aggrieved by a decision or order of the Public Utilities Commission to file a petition for a writ of review in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court for purposes of reviewing the decision or order within 30 days after the commission issues its decision denying the application for a rehearing, or, if the application was granted, within 30 days after the commission issues its decision on the rehearing, or at least 120 days after the application is granted if no decision on rehearing has been issued. | |
| 35 | 31 | ||
| 36 | - | This bill would extend the 30-day time periods to 90 days. For a petition challenging a final decision of the commission in which | |
| 32 | + | This bill would extend the 30-day time periods to 90 days. For a petition challenging a final decision of the commission in which the final decision significantly modifies the proposed decision issued in the proceeding, the bill would require the court to presume the proposed decision to be valid and lawful and to issue the writ unless the commission rebuts the presumption to the satisfaction of the court in justifying the final decision. | |
| 37 | 33 | ||
| 38 | - | Existing law authorizes the commission to fix the rates and charges for public utilities, including electrical | |
| 34 | + | Existing law authorizes the commission to fix the rates and charges for public utilities, including electrical corporations, and requires those rates to be just and reasonable. | |
| 39 | 35 | ||
| 40 | - | This bill would prohibit the commission from authorizing electrical | |
| 36 | + | This bill would prohibit the commission from authorizing electrical corporations to recover from their ratepayers the costs associated with seeking judicial review of a commissions decision from a federal agency, or a state or federal court. The bill would require the electrical corporation to track those costs. | |
| 41 | 37 | ||
| 42 | 38 | Under existing law, a violation of the Public Utilities Act or any order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the commission is a crime. | |
| 43 | 39 | ||
| 44 | 40 | Because the above provisions would be part of the act and a violation of a commission action implementing this bills requirements would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. | |
| 45 | 41 | ||
| 46 | 42 | The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. | |
| 47 | 43 | ||
| 48 | 44 | This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. | |
| 49 | 45 | ||
| 50 | 46 | ## Digest Key | |
| 51 | 47 | ||
| 52 | 48 | ## Bill Text | |
| 53 | 49 | ||
| 54 | - | The people of the State of California do enact as follows:SECTION 1.Section 748.4 is added to the Public Utilities Code, to read:748.4. | |
| 50 | + | The people of the State of California do enact as follows:SECTION 1. Section 748.4 is added to the Public Utilities Code, to read:748.4. (a) The commission shall not authorize an electrical corporation to recover from its ratepayers the costs associated with seeking judicial review of a commissions decision from a federal agency, or a state or federal court.(b) Each electrical corporation shall track the costs described in subdivision (a).(c) The commission shall review an electrical corporations compliance with this section in the electrical corporations general rate case or in another proceeding, as determined appropriate by the commission.SEC. 2. Section 1756 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read:1756. (a) Within 30 90 days after the commission issues its decision denying the application for a rehearing, or, if the application was granted, then within 30 90 days after the commission issues its decision on rehearing, or at least 120 days after the application is granted if no decision on rehearing has been issued, any an aggrieved party may petition for a writ of review in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court for the purpose of having the lawfulness of the original order or decision or of the order or decision on rehearing inquired into and determined. If the writ issues, it shall be made returnable at a time and place specified by court order and shall direct the commission to certify its record in the case to the court within the time specified.(b) The petition for review shall be served upon the executive director and the general counsel of the commission either personally or by service at the office of the commission.(c) For purposes of this section, the issuance of a decision or the granting of an application shall be construed to have occurred on the date of issuance, as defined in paragraph (4) of subdivision (b) of Section 1731.(d) The venue of a petition filed in the court of appeal pursuant to this section shall be in the judicial district in which the petitioner resides. If the petitioner is a business, venue shall be in the judicial district in which the petitioner has its principal place of business in California.(e) Any A party may seek from the Supreme Court, pursuant to California Rules of Court, an order transferring related actions to a single appellate district.(f) For purposes of this section, review of decisions pertaining solely to water corporations shall only be by petition for writ of review in the Supreme Court, except that review of complaint or enforcement proceedings may be in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court.(g) No An order or decision arising out of a commission proceeding under Section 854 shall not be reviewable in the court of appeal pursuant to subdivision (a) if the application for commission authority to complete the merger or acquisition was filed on or before December 31, 1998, by two telecommunications-related corporations including at least one which provides local telecommunications service to over one million 1,000,000 California customers. These orders or decisions shall be reviewed pursuant to the Public Utilities Code in existence on December 31, 1998.SEC. 3. Section 1757.2 is added to the Public Utilities Code, to read:1757.2. In a petition challenging a final decision of the commission in which the final decision of the commission substantially modifies the proposed decision issued in the proceeding, the court shall presume the proposed decision to be valid and lawful and shall issue the writ unless the commission rebuts to the satisfaction of the court the presumption in justifying the modification made in the final decision.SEC. 4. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution. | |
| 55 | 51 | ||
| 56 | 52 | The people of the State of California do enact as follows: | |
| 57 | 53 | ||
| 58 | 54 | ## The people of the State of California do enact as follows: | |
| 59 | 55 | ||
| 60 | - | SECTION 1. Section 748. | |
| 56 | + | SECTION 1. Section 748.4 is added to the Public Utilities Code, to read:748.4. (a) The commission shall not authorize an electrical corporation to recover from its ratepayers the costs associated with seeking judicial review of a commissions decision from a federal agency, or a state or federal court.(b) Each electrical corporation shall track the costs described in subdivision (a).(c) The commission shall review an electrical corporations compliance with this section in the electrical corporations general rate case or in another proceeding, as determined appropriate by the commission. | |
| 61 | 57 | ||
| 62 | - | SECTION 1. Section 748. | |
| 58 | + | SECTION 1. Section 748.4 is added to the Public Utilities Code, to read: | |
| 63 | 59 | ||
| 64 | 60 | ### SECTION 1. | |
| 65 | 61 | ||
| 66 | - | 748. | |
| 62 | + | 748.4. (a) The commission shall not authorize an electrical corporation to recover from its ratepayers the costs associated with seeking judicial review of a commissions decision from a federal agency, or a state or federal court.(b) Each electrical corporation shall track the costs described in subdivision (a).(c) The commission shall review an electrical corporations compliance with this section in the electrical corporations general rate case or in another proceeding, as determined appropriate by the commission. | |
| 67 | 63 | ||
| 68 | - | 748. | |
| 64 | + | 748.4. (a) The commission shall not authorize an electrical corporation to recover from its ratepayers the costs associated with seeking judicial review of a commissions decision from a federal agency, or a state or federal court.(b) Each electrical corporation shall track the costs described in subdivision (a).(c) The commission shall review an electrical corporations compliance with this section in the electrical corporations general rate case or in another proceeding, as determined appropriate by the commission. | |
| 69 | 65 | ||
| 70 | - | 748. | |
| 66 | + | 748.4. (a) The commission shall not authorize an electrical corporation to recover from its ratepayers the costs associated with seeking judicial review of a commissions decision from a federal agency, or a state or federal court.(b) Each electrical corporation shall track the costs described in subdivision (a).(c) The commission shall review an electrical corporations compliance with this section in the electrical corporations general rate case or in another proceeding, as determined appropriate by the commission. | |
| 71 | 67 | ||
| 72 | - | 748.8. (a) The commission shall not authorize an electrical or gas corporation to recover from its ratepayers the costs associated with seeking judicial review of a commissions decision from a federal agency, or commission decision by a state or federal court. court or requesting relief from a commission decision at a federal agency. | |
| 73 | 68 | ||
| 74 | - | ###### 748.8. | |
| 75 | 69 | ||
| 76 | - | ( | |
| 70 | + | 748.4. (a) The commission shall not authorize an electrical corporation to recover from its ratepayers the costs associated with seeking judicial review of a commissions decision from a federal agency, or a state or federal court. | |
| 77 | 71 | ||
| 78 | - | ( | |
| 72 | + | (b) Each electrical corporation shall track the costs described in subdivision (a). | |
| 79 | 73 | ||
| 80 | - | SEC. 2. Section 1756 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read:1756. (a) Within 90 days after the commission issues its decision denying the application for a rehearing, or, if the application was granted, then within 90 days after the commission issues its decision on rehearing, or at least 120 days after the application is granted if no decision on rehearing has been issued, an aggrieved party may petition for a writ of review in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court for the purpose of having the lawfulness of the original order or decision or of the order or decision on rehearing inquired into and determined. If the writ issues, it shall be made returnable at a time and place specified by court order and shall direct the commission to certify its record in the case to the court within the time specified.(b) The petition for review shall be served upon the executive director and the general counsel of the commission either personally or by service at the office of the commission.(c) For purposes of this section, the issuance of a decision or the granting of an application shall be construed to have occurred on the date of issuance, as defined in Section 1731.(d) The venue of a petition filed in the court of appeal pursuant to this section shall be in the judicial district in which the petitioner resides. If the petitioner is a business, venue shall be in the judicial district in which the petitioner has its principal place of business in California.(e) A party may seek from the Supreme Court, pursuant to California Rules of Court, an order transferring related actions to a single appellate district.(f) For purposes of this section, review of decisions pertaining solely to water corporations shall only be by petition for writ of review in the Supreme Court, except that review of complaint or enforcement proceedings may be in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court.(g) An order or decision arising out of a commission proceeding under Section 854 shall not be reviewable in the court of appeal pursuant to subdivision (a) if the application for commission authority to complete the merger or acquisition was filed on or before December 31, 1998, by two telecommunications-related corporations including at least one which provides local telecommunications service to over 1,000,000 California customers. These orders or decisions shall be reviewed pursuant to the Public Utilities Code in existence on December 31, 1998. | |
| 74 | + | (c) The commission shall review an electrical corporations compliance with this section in the electrical corporations general rate case or in another proceeding, as determined appropriate by the commission. | |
| 75 | + | ||
| 76 | + | SEC. 2. Section 1756 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read:1756. (a) Within 30 90 days after the commission issues its decision denying the application for a rehearing, or, if the application was granted, then within 30 90 days after the commission issues its decision on rehearing, or at least 120 days after the application is granted if no decision on rehearing has been issued, any an aggrieved party may petition for a writ of review in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court for the purpose of having the lawfulness of the original order or decision or of the order or decision on rehearing inquired into and determined. If the writ issues, it shall be made returnable at a time and place specified by court order and shall direct the commission to certify its record in the case to the court within the time specified.(b) The petition for review shall be served upon the executive director and the general counsel of the commission either personally or by service at the office of the commission.(c) For purposes of this section, the issuance of a decision or the granting of an application shall be construed to have occurred on the date of issuance, as defined in paragraph (4) of subdivision (b) of Section 1731.(d) The venue of a petition filed in the court of appeal pursuant to this section shall be in the judicial district in which the petitioner resides. If the petitioner is a business, venue shall be in the judicial district in which the petitioner has its principal place of business in California.(e) Any A party may seek from the Supreme Court, pursuant to California Rules of Court, an order transferring related actions to a single appellate district.(f) For purposes of this section, review of decisions pertaining solely to water corporations shall only be by petition for writ of review in the Supreme Court, except that review of complaint or enforcement proceedings may be in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court.(g) No An order or decision arising out of a commission proceeding under Section 854 shall not be reviewable in the court of appeal pursuant to subdivision (a) if the application for commission authority to complete the merger or acquisition was filed on or before December 31, 1998, by two telecommunications-related corporations including at least one which provides local telecommunications service to over one million 1,000,000 California customers. These orders or decisions shall be reviewed pursuant to the Public Utilities Code in existence on December 31, 1998. | |
| 81 | 77 | ||
| 82 | 78 | SEC. 2. Section 1756 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read: | |
| 83 | 79 | ||
| 84 | 80 | ### SEC. 2. | |
| 85 | 81 | ||
| 86 | - | 1756. (a) Within 90 days after the commission issues its decision denying the application for a rehearing, or, if the application was granted, then within 90 days after the commission issues its decision on rehearing, or at least 120 days after the application is granted if no decision on rehearing has been issued, an aggrieved party may petition for a writ of review in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court for the purpose of having the lawfulness of the original order or decision or of the order or decision on rehearing inquired into and determined. If the writ issues, it shall be made returnable at a time and place specified by court order and shall direct the commission to certify its record in the case to the court within the time specified.(b) The petition for review shall be served upon the executive director and the general counsel of the commission either personally or by service at the office of the commission.(c) For purposes of this section, the issuance of a decision or the granting of an application shall be construed to have occurred on the date of issuance, as defined in Section 1731.(d) The venue of a petition filed in the court of appeal pursuant to this section shall be in the judicial district in which the petitioner resides. If the petitioner is a business, venue shall be in the judicial district in which the petitioner has its principal place of business in California.(e) A party may seek from the Supreme Court, pursuant to California Rules of Court, an order transferring related actions to a single appellate district.(f) For purposes of this section, review of decisions pertaining solely to water corporations shall only be by petition for writ of review in the Supreme Court, except that review of complaint or enforcement proceedings may be in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court.(g) An order or decision arising out of a commission proceeding under Section 854 shall not be reviewable in the court of appeal pursuant to subdivision (a) if the application for commission authority to complete the merger or acquisition was filed on or before December 31, 1998, by two telecommunications-related corporations including at least one which provides local telecommunications service to over 1,000,000 California customers. These orders or decisions shall be reviewed pursuant to the Public Utilities Code in existence on December 31, 1998. | |
| 82 | + | 1756. (a) Within 30 90 days after the commission issues its decision denying the application for a rehearing, or, if the application was granted, then within 30 90 days after the commission issues its decision on rehearing, or at least 120 days after the application is granted if no decision on rehearing has been issued, any an aggrieved party may petition for a writ of review in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court for the purpose of having the lawfulness of the original order or decision or of the order or decision on rehearing inquired into and determined. If the writ issues, it shall be made returnable at a time and place specified by court order and shall direct the commission to certify its record in the case to the court within the time specified.(b) The petition for review shall be served upon the executive director and the general counsel of the commission either personally or by service at the office of the commission.(c) For purposes of this section, the issuance of a decision or the granting of an application shall be construed to have occurred on the date of issuance, as defined in paragraph (4) of subdivision (b) of Section 1731.(d) The venue of a petition filed in the court of appeal pursuant to this section shall be in the judicial district in which the petitioner resides. If the petitioner is a business, venue shall be in the judicial district in which the petitioner has its principal place of business in California.(e) Any A party may seek from the Supreme Court, pursuant to California Rules of Court, an order transferring related actions to a single appellate district.(f) For purposes of this section, review of decisions pertaining solely to water corporations shall only be by petition for writ of review in the Supreme Court, except that review of complaint or enforcement proceedings may be in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court.(g) No An order or decision arising out of a commission proceeding under Section 854 shall not be reviewable in the court of appeal pursuant to subdivision (a) if the application for commission authority to complete the merger or acquisition was filed on or before December 31, 1998, by two telecommunications-related corporations including at least one which provides local telecommunications service to over one million 1,000,000 California customers. These orders or decisions shall be reviewed pursuant to the Public Utilities Code in existence on December 31, 1998. | |
| 87 | 83 | ||
| 88 | - | 1756. (a) Within 90 days after the commission issues its decision denying the application for a rehearing, or, if the application was granted, then within 90 days after the commission issues its decision on rehearing, or at least 120 days after the application is granted if no decision on rehearing has been issued, an aggrieved party may petition for a writ of review in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court for the purpose of having the lawfulness of the original order or decision or of the order or decision on rehearing inquired into and determined. If the writ issues, it shall be made returnable at a time and place specified by court order and shall direct the commission to certify its record in the case to the court within the time specified.(b) The petition for review shall be served upon the executive director and the general counsel of the commission either personally or by service at the office of the commission.(c) For purposes of this section, the issuance of a decision or the granting of an application shall be construed to have occurred on the date of issuance, as defined in Section 1731.(d) The venue of a petition filed in the court of appeal pursuant to this section shall be in the judicial district in which the petitioner resides. If the petitioner is a business, venue shall be in the judicial district in which the petitioner has its principal place of business in California.(e) A party may seek from the Supreme Court, pursuant to California Rules of Court, an order transferring related actions to a single appellate district.(f) For purposes of this section, review of decisions pertaining solely to water corporations shall only be by petition for writ of review in the Supreme Court, except that review of complaint or enforcement proceedings may be in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court.(g) An order or decision arising out of a commission proceeding under Section 854 shall not be reviewable in the court of appeal pursuant to subdivision (a) if the application for commission authority to complete the merger or acquisition was filed on or before December 31, 1998, by two telecommunications-related corporations including at least one which provides local telecommunications service to over 1,000,000 California customers. These orders or decisions shall be reviewed pursuant to the Public Utilities Code in existence on December 31, 1998. | |
| 84 | + | 1756. (a) Within 30 90 days after the commission issues its decision denying the application for a rehearing, or, if the application was granted, then within 30 90 days after the commission issues its decision on rehearing, or at least 120 days after the application is granted if no decision on rehearing has been issued, any an aggrieved party may petition for a writ of review in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court for the purpose of having the lawfulness of the original order or decision or of the order or decision on rehearing inquired into and determined. If the writ issues, it shall be made returnable at a time and place specified by court order and shall direct the commission to certify its record in the case to the court within the time specified.(b) The petition for review shall be served upon the executive director and the general counsel of the commission either personally or by service at the office of the commission.(c) For purposes of this section, the issuance of a decision or the granting of an application shall be construed to have occurred on the date of issuance, as defined in paragraph (4) of subdivision (b) of Section 1731.(d) The venue of a petition filed in the court of appeal pursuant to this section shall be in the judicial district in which the petitioner resides. If the petitioner is a business, venue shall be in the judicial district in which the petitioner has its principal place of business in California.(e) Any A party may seek from the Supreme Court, pursuant to California Rules of Court, an order transferring related actions to a single appellate district.(f) For purposes of this section, review of decisions pertaining solely to water corporations shall only be by petition for writ of review in the Supreme Court, except that review of complaint or enforcement proceedings may be in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court.(g) No An order or decision arising out of a commission proceeding under Section 854 shall not be reviewable in the court of appeal pursuant to subdivision (a) if the application for commission authority to complete the merger or acquisition was filed on or before December 31, 1998, by two telecommunications-related corporations including at least one which provides local telecommunications service to over one million 1,000,000 California customers. These orders or decisions shall be reviewed pursuant to the Public Utilities Code in existence on December 31, 1998. | |
| 89 | 85 | ||
| 90 | - | 1756. (a) Within 90 days after the commission issues its decision denying the application for a rehearing, or, if the application was granted, then within 90 days after the commission issues its decision on rehearing, or at least 120 days after the application is granted if no decision on rehearing has been issued, an aggrieved party may petition for a writ of review in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court for the purpose of having the lawfulness of the original order or decision or of the order or decision on rehearing inquired into and determined. If the writ issues, it shall be made returnable at a time and place specified by court order and shall direct the commission to certify its record in the case to the court within the time specified.(b) The petition for review shall be served upon the executive director and the general counsel of the commission either personally or by service at the office of the commission.(c) For purposes of this section, the issuance of a decision or the granting of an application shall be construed to have occurred on the date of issuance, as defined in Section 1731.(d) The venue of a petition filed in the court of appeal pursuant to this section shall be in the judicial district in which the petitioner resides. If the petitioner is a business, venue shall be in the judicial district in which the petitioner has its principal place of business in California.(e) A party may seek from the Supreme Court, pursuant to California Rules of Court, an order transferring related actions to a single appellate district.(f) For purposes of this section, review of decisions pertaining solely to water corporations shall only be by petition for writ of review in the Supreme Court, except that review of complaint or enforcement proceedings may be in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court.(g) An order or decision arising out of a commission proceeding under Section 854 shall not be reviewable in the court of appeal pursuant to subdivision (a) if the application for commission authority to complete the merger or acquisition was filed on or before December 31, 1998, by two telecommunications-related corporations including at least one which provides local telecommunications service to over 1,000,000 California customers. These orders or decisions shall be reviewed pursuant to the Public Utilities Code in existence on December 31, 1998. | |
| 86 | + | 1756. (a) Within 30 90 days after the commission issues its decision denying the application for a rehearing, or, if the application was granted, then within 30 90 days after the commission issues its decision on rehearing, or at least 120 days after the application is granted if no decision on rehearing has been issued, any an aggrieved party may petition for a writ of review in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court for the purpose of having the lawfulness of the original order or decision or of the order or decision on rehearing inquired into and determined. If the writ issues, it shall be made returnable at a time and place specified by court order and shall direct the commission to certify its record in the case to the court within the time specified.(b) The petition for review shall be served upon the executive director and the general counsel of the commission either personally or by service at the office of the commission.(c) For purposes of this section, the issuance of a decision or the granting of an application shall be construed to have occurred on the date of issuance, as defined in paragraph (4) of subdivision (b) of Section 1731.(d) The venue of a petition filed in the court of appeal pursuant to this section shall be in the judicial district in which the petitioner resides. If the petitioner is a business, venue shall be in the judicial district in which the petitioner has its principal place of business in California.(e) Any A party may seek from the Supreme Court, pursuant to California Rules of Court, an order transferring related actions to a single appellate district.(f) For purposes of this section, review of decisions pertaining solely to water corporations shall only be by petition for writ of review in the Supreme Court, except that review of complaint or enforcement proceedings may be in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court.(g) No An order or decision arising out of a commission proceeding under Section 854 shall not be reviewable in the court of appeal pursuant to subdivision (a) if the application for commission authority to complete the merger or acquisition was filed on or before December 31, 1998, by two telecommunications-related corporations including at least one which provides local telecommunications service to over one million 1,000,000 California customers. These orders or decisions shall be reviewed pursuant to the Public Utilities Code in existence on December 31, 1998. | |
| 91 | 87 | ||
| 92 | - | 1756. (a) Within 90 days after the commission issues its decision denying the application for a rehearing, or, if the application was granted, then within 90 days after the commission issues its decision on rehearing, or at least 120 days after the application is granted if no decision on rehearing has been issued, an aggrieved party may petition for a writ of review in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court for the purpose of having the lawfulness of the original order or decision or of the order or decision on rehearing inquired into and determined. If the writ issues, it shall be made returnable at a time and place specified by court order and shall direct the commission to certify its record in the case to the court within the time specified. | |
| 93 | 88 | ||
| 94 | - | ###### 1756. | |
| 89 | + | ||
| 90 | + | 1756. (a) Within 30 90 days after the commission issues its decision denying the application for a rehearing, or, if the application was granted, then within 30 90 days after the commission issues its decision on rehearing, or at least 120 days after the application is granted if no decision on rehearing has been issued, any an aggrieved party may petition for a writ of review in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court for the purpose of having the lawfulness of the original order or decision or of the order or decision on rehearing inquired into and determined. If the writ issues, it shall be made returnable at a time and place specified by court order and shall direct the commission to certify its record in the case to the court within the time specified. | |
| 95 | 91 | ||
| 96 | 92 | (b) The petition for review shall be served upon the executive director and the general counsel of the commission either personally or by service at the office of the commission. | |
| 97 | 93 | ||
| 98 | - | (c) For purposes of this section, the issuance of a decision or the granting of an application shall be construed to have occurred on the date of issuance, as defined in Section 1731. | |
| 94 | + | (c) For purposes of this section, the issuance of a decision or the granting of an application shall be construed to have occurred on the date of issuance, as defined in paragraph (4) of subdivision (b) of Section 1731. | |
| 99 | 95 | ||
| 100 | 96 | (d) The venue of a petition filed in the court of appeal pursuant to this section shall be in the judicial district in which the petitioner resides. If the petitioner is a business, venue shall be in the judicial district in which the petitioner has its principal place of business in California. | |
| 101 | 97 | ||
| 102 | - | (e) A party may seek from the Supreme Court, pursuant to California Rules of Court, an order transferring related actions to a single appellate district. | |
| 98 | + | (e) Any A party may seek from the Supreme Court, pursuant to California Rules of Court, an order transferring related actions to a single appellate district. | |
| 103 | 99 | ||
| 104 | 100 | (f) For purposes of this section, review of decisions pertaining solely to water corporations shall only be by petition for writ of review in the Supreme Court, except that review of complaint or enforcement proceedings may be in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court. | |
| 105 | 101 | ||
| 106 | - | (g) An order or decision arising out of a commission proceeding under Section 854 shall not be reviewable in the court of appeal pursuant to subdivision (a) if the application for commission authority to complete the merger or acquisition was filed on or before December 31, 1998, by two telecommunications-related corporations including at least one which provides local telecommunications service to over 1,000,000 California customers. These orders or decisions shall be reviewed pursuant to the Public Utilities Code in existence on December 31, 1998. | |
| 102 | + | (g) No An order or decision arising out of a commission proceeding under Section 854 shall not be reviewable in the court of appeal pursuant to subdivision (a) if the application for commission authority to complete the merger or acquisition was filed on or before December 31, 1998, by two telecommunications-related corporations including at least one which provides local telecommunications service to over one million 1,000,000 California customers. These orders or decisions shall be reviewed pursuant to the Public Utilities Code in existence on December 31, 1998. | |
| 107 | 103 | ||
| 108 | - | SEC. 3. Section 1757.2 is added to the Public Utilities Code, to read:1757.2. In a petition challenging a final decision of the commission in which | |
| 104 | + | SEC. 3. Section 1757.2 is added to the Public Utilities Code, to read:1757.2. In a petition challenging a final decision of the commission in which the final decision of the commission substantially modifies the proposed decision issued in the proceeding, the court shall presume the proposed decision to be valid and lawful and shall issue the writ unless the commission rebuts to the satisfaction of the court the presumption in justifying the modification made in the final decision. | |
| 109 | 105 | ||
| 110 | 106 | SEC. 3. Section 1757.2 is added to the Public Utilities Code, to read: | |
| 111 | 107 | ||
| 112 | 108 | ### SEC. 3. | |
| 113 | 109 | ||
| 114 | - | 1757.2. In a petition challenging a final decision of the commission in which | |
| 110 | + | 1757.2. In a petition challenging a final decision of the commission in which the final decision of the commission substantially modifies the proposed decision issued in the proceeding, the court shall presume the proposed decision to be valid and lawful and shall issue the writ unless the commission rebuts to the satisfaction of the court the presumption in justifying the modification made in the final decision. | |
| 115 | 111 | ||
| 116 | - | 1757.2. In a petition challenging a final decision of the commission in which | |
| 112 | + | 1757.2. In a petition challenging a final decision of the commission in which the final decision of the commission substantially modifies the proposed decision issued in the proceeding, the court shall presume the proposed decision to be valid and lawful and shall issue the writ unless the commission rebuts to the satisfaction of the court the presumption in justifying the modification made in the final decision. | |
| 117 | 113 | ||
| 118 | - | 1757.2. In a petition challenging a final decision of the commission in which | |
| 114 | + | 1757.2. In a petition challenging a final decision of the commission in which the final decision of the commission substantially modifies the proposed decision issued in the proceeding, the court shall presume the proposed decision to be valid and lawful and shall issue the writ unless the commission rebuts to the satisfaction of the court the presumption in justifying the modification made in the final decision. | |
| 119 | 115 | ||
| 120 | - | 1757.2. In a petition challenging a final decision of the commission in which on the grounds that the final decision of the commission substantially modifies the substantially deviated from a proposed decision issued in the proceeding, of a commission administrative law judge, the court shall presume the proposed final decision to be valid and lawful and shall issue the writ arbitrary and unlawful unless the commission rebuts can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the court the presumption in justifying the modification made in the final decision. that the deviations were necessary to comply with state or federal law. | |
| 121 | 116 | ||
| 122 | - | ###### 1757.2. | |
| 117 | + | ||
| 118 | + | 1757.2. In a petition challenging a final decision of the commission in which the final decision of the commission substantially modifies the proposed decision issued in the proceeding, the court shall presume the proposed decision to be valid and lawful and shall issue the writ unless the commission rebuts to the satisfaction of the court the presumption in justifying the modification made in the final decision. | |
| 123 | 119 | ||
| 124 | 120 | SEC. 4. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution. | |
| 125 | 121 | ||
| 126 | 122 | SEC. 4. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution. | |
| 127 | 123 | ||
| 128 | 124 | SEC. 4. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution. | |
| 129 | 125 | ||
| 130 | 126 | ### SEC. 4. |