PSC chief softens plans for changes “Adversary staff” may stay, but more proposals ahead
By MARGARET NEWKIRK
The Atlanta Journal-ConstitutionPublished on: 03/15/06
State Public Service Commission Chairman Stan Wise is backing off his pointed scrutiny of the PSC staff that fights utility price hike requests on behalf of consumers.
The change comes after weeks of consumer outcry, a public hearing and a stay-the-course assessment from a staff committee. All were reacting to Wise’s publicly expressed notion that the so-called adversary staff was biased against the interests of electric and gas utilities and perhaps a factor in an inefficient system for setting rates.
Wise is still proposing some internal changes at the PSC, which will be discussed at a meeting Thursday morning. But they fall far short of options he outlined in a paper circulated two months ago, when he launched what he called his “efficiency review” of the PSC’s adversary staff.
Wise’s new ideas for change were circulated in a three-page document late last week. He did not return a call Tuesday seeking comment.
Furthermore, the reform process Wise unleashed is promising to serve up some embarrassment for the commission majority.
Commissioner Angela Speir announced this week that she planned to file a motion regulating the commissioners’ own behavior. She’s asking for strict limits on private conversations — so-called ex parte communications — between regulators and regulated utilities or other parties that have business before the commission.
Speir also is seeking a ban on gifts to commissioners from parties who do business before the PSC.
The fight over the commission’s in-house workings began shortly after Wise took over the chairmanship from Speir in January. That’s when Wise put out a paper suggesting that the PSC’s use of an adversary staff in contested utility battles had no support in state law and had led to “extreme litigation positions” characterized by anti-utility bias.
He launched a fast-tracked efficiency review focused solely on the role of that adversary staff and whether it should be continued, reformed or moved outside of the commission altogether.
The adversary role is assigned to members of the staff on a case-by-case basis. The adversary staff mounts a case on behalf of consumers and is usually opposed to some of what a utility requests.
A second group of staff members, also assigned on a case-by-case basis, weighs in with recommendations at the end of a rate fight. That “advisory staff” usually proposes a middle ground between what the utility has requested and what the adversary staff says the utility deserves.
Wise appointed a committee of staff members to study how other commissions work and whether the PSC’s current structure created either a bias against or a perception of bias against utilities. Its 400-page report recommended minor tweaks but essentially said the system worked well.
The review also included a public meeting last month, with utilities and public interest groups arguing for a much wider range of reforms.
Commissioners also received scores of calls and e-mails from constituents in defense of the adversary staff.
Wise’s new proposal calls for the adversary staff to remain in place but be renamed the “trial staff,” with its recommendations going straight to the commission. There would be no advisory staff as a second step.
The move would address one criticism of the current structure — that advisory staff members were inherently biased toward the arguments by their colleagues on the adversary staff.
The proposal also calls for each commissioner to get his or her own separate technical adviser, and calls for the commission’s regulated utilities to pay for that through a special assessment.
Wise’s proposal also would eliminate some of the utility-specific divisions of staff. There would no longer be a section of staff specifically devoted to studying electric issues, for instance, or a staff specifically devoted to studying natural gas.
Speir’s ideas for change were drawn from public comments, but they may face resistance. She often is on the losing end of the commission’s votes.
But she has the backing of several public interest groups that are concerned about the ex parte communications. Only Georgia and Louisiana don’t restrict those conversations at all, according to an informal Atlanta Journal-Constitution survey last month of utility regulators across the country.
Speir proposes that private conversations be banned beginning 90 days before a case begins at the commission, unless all parties in a case are invited to participate and the public is notified.
“I think it’s needed,” she said. “I think it’s important for the public to have confidence in us as public servants, and I think it’s important that the process be transparent.”
Among opponents to ex parte restrictions is the state’s largest and most powerful utility company.
“The PSC deals with a multitude of incredibly complex issues in our business,” said Georgia Power spokesman John Sell.
“And we think the commission can make better-informed decisions by maintaining an environment where representatives of the state’s regulated businesses can answer questions, provide information to, and receive input from the commissioners and commission staff.”
Speir is also calling on a ban against most gifts to commissioners — including non-working meals and tickets to sporting events — from those with an interest in commission business.
Those gifts are legal now, although lobbyists are required to disclose them.
Find this article at: http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/stories/0315psc.html
