SESSION OF 1999



SUPPLEMENTAL NOTE ON SENATE BILL NO. 123



As Recommended by Senate Committee on

Utilities





Brief(1)



S.B. 123 would delete the requirement that the Kansas Corporation Commission give notice to the Secretary of Administration of the time and place of any rate hearing that could affect the State of Kansas as a consumer.



In addition, the bill would amend procedures for making an order or decision of the Commission effective with respect to certain types of proceedings (e.g., complaints, certain general investigations, and electric generation siting). Under existing law, a Commission order or decision takes effect 30 days after it is issued. By contrast, the bill would require such order or decision to take effect when the order or decision is served. Under existing law, if a petition for reconsideration of an order or decision is filed, the order or decision may only take effect 30 days after the Commission acts on the petition. By contrast, the bill would authorize but not require the Commission, in response to a petition for reconsideration, to suspend or stay part or all of the order. In addition, the bill would eliminate the 30-day period required for the stay.



The bill would conform language regarding the effective dates of Commission orders on certain proceedings to language in the Kansas Administrative Procedure Act. Under existing law, utility rate cases are already subject to provisions of the Kansas Administrative Procedure Act with respect to petitions for reconsideration.





Background



S.B. 123 was requested by the Kansas Corporation Commission. In testimony supporting the bill, David Heinemann, the Commission's Executive Director, indicated that the requirement for the Commission to give notice of rate hearings to the Secretary of Administration was unnecessary, as the Secretary has not intervened in any Commission rate case for at least 15 years. Mr. Heinemann explained that the Secretary had no objection to the proposed deletion. He also noted the intent of the proposed amendments concerning the effective dates of Commission orders is to expedite the implementation of such orders.



The bill was opposed by Walker Hendrix, Consumer Counsel, Citizens' Utility Ratepayer Board. Mr. Hendrix argued that the change in procedure would eliminate a grace period during which time the Commission could reconsider the effects of an order. Mr. Hendrix further contended that the Commission would be able to selectively decide certain issues in a case while leaving others undecided, thereby granting only partial relief.



The Division of the Budget's fiscal note indicated that, according to the Kansas Corporation Commission, S.B. 123 would have no fiscal impact on Commission operations.

1. *Supplemental notes are prepared by the Legislative Research Department and do not express legislative intent. The supplemental note and fiscal note for this bill may be accessed on the Internet at http://www.ink.org/public/legislative/bill_search.html.