Skip to main content

Procedural Matters in Utility Regulation

MCLI Recommendation: “Instead of employing a quasi-judicial approach, state PUCs should structure decision-making on rates and other policies to encourage participation by all interested parties and broad forward-planning perspectives. Furthermore, PUCs should provide some process for funding citizen participation in ratemaking negotiations.”

Filter by

11 resources

Example Public Utilities

New York’s intervenor funding mechanism

New York’s intervenor funding mechanism is not uncommon in that not all intervenors are eligible for intervenor funds. Only “municipal and local parties” are eligible, where eligible “local parties” i...
Example States and State Governments

Colorado’s Rule Against Ratepayer Funds for Lobbying

A 2023 law in Colorado prohibits investor-owned utility companies from using ratepayer money to fund trade associations, promotional advertising, certain kinds of lobbying, and other political influen...
Example States and State Governments

Connecticut’s Law Banning Ratepayer Funding for Political Activity

Connecticut’s SB 7 prohibits utilities from using money from customers’ bills to pay for political activities, including lobbying and trade association dues. Utilities are required to file annual disc...
Example States and State Governments

Michigan Law Granting PSC Additional Equity, Environmental Review Powers

In November, 2023, both houses of Michigan’s legislature passed SB 502, which makes changes to the enabling act for Michigan’s Public service Commission (PSC) to enhance its oversight over environment...
Resource States and State Governments

Prohibiting Ratepayer Funds for Utility Lobbying Legislation Tracker

The Energy and Policy Institute has launched a tracker covering introduced and passed legislation aiming to prohibit ratepayer funds from being used to support utility lobbying efforts. At the time of...
Example States and State Governments

Maine’s Legislation Barring Ratepayer Funds for Political Purposes

Maine’s LD 325 prohibits investor-owned utilities from charging customers for costs related to political activities.
Example Public Utilities

California PUC’s Intervenor Compensation Program

The California PUC’s Intervenor Compensation Program allows qualified parties in proceedings before the Commission to request compensation for their participation (allowable fees and costs), including...
Example Public Utilities

California Grid Data Reliability Order

In October, 2024, the California Public Utilities Commission issued a decision addressing the accuracy and timeliness of public grid data from utilities. The grid data portion of the ruling addresses ...
Resource Public Utilities

Report, Opportunities for Integrating Electric and Gas Planning

To successfully electrify traditionally gas-powered sectors, Public Utility Commissions should consider integrating the planning process of public gas and electric utilities, according to a January 20...
Example Public Utilities

Oregon PUC’s intervenor funding

Oregon’s PUC has authorized several rounds of intervenor funding, administered through utilities, for organizations representing broad customer interests in commission proceedings. Recent Senate repor...
Resource Public Utilities

Report, Procedural Equity at Public Utility Commissions: Developing a Baseline Assessment of Barriers and Opportunities

This January 2024 report from the Institute for Policy Integrity focuses on the efforts of state Public Utility Commissions to enhance procedural justice, that is, to ensure that disadvantaged communi...