commonwealth of pennsylvania - The Pennsylvania General Assembly

More documents

Recommendations

Info

LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL-HOUSE JUNE 30, Davies Kukovich Pratt Williams. H. On the question, Dawida Lashinger Pucciarelli Williams, I. D. Will the House agree to the amendments? Dietz Launhlin Punt Wilson Dininni Dombrowski Donatucci Dorr Duffy Durham Emerson Evans Fee Brown ~eh; Lescovitr Letter man Levi Levin Lewis Livengood Lloyd Lucyk Rappaport Wogan Rasco Wozniak Reber Wright. D. R Rieger Wright. J. L. Rifler Zwikl Rocks Rybak Ryan, Salvatore Speaker NAYS-1 NOT VOTING-4 DeWeese Gray Harper Richardson EXCUSED-4 Deal George Heirer Olasz The question was determined in the affirmative, and the amendment was agreed to. On the question, Will the House agree to the bill on third consideration as amended? Mr. PIEVSKY offered the following amendments No. A2742: Amend Title, page I, line 1, by striking out "an appropriation" and inserting The SPEAKER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Philadelphia, Mr. Pievsky. Mr. PIEVSKY. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, this amendment makes two changes to SB 681. First, this year is the first year we have ever had the opportunity to pass a budget for the Public Utility Commis- sion on the floor of this House. Given this opportunity. I feel . . it is appropriate for this chamber to exercise some oversight into how the Public Utility Commission spends its money. To do so, I have split the Public Utility Commission budget into four major functional areas. These four areas are: Number one, general government operations; number two, counsel and administrative law judges; number three, rates, research, and transportation; and number four, investigation, consumer services, and compliance. Mr. Speaker, the second change made by this amendment is to increase the funding of the Public Utility Commission by $348,000. The major portion of this increase is directly made in the areas of counsel and administrative law judges, and rates, research, and transportation. It is in these areas, Mr. Speaker, that if underfunding occurs, the consumer is left vulnerable to unnecessary and unwarranted rate increases. The Bureau of Rates researches requests for rate increases submitted by the utilities. Together with the office of counsel, appropriations I thev , areue the case as ~rosecutorial staff before an adminis- Amend ill, page 1, lines 5 through 13, by striking out all of trative law judge. The administrative law judgess findings are said lines and inserting then presented to the commission for final action. Under- Section I. The following sums, or as much thereof as may be necessary, are hereby specifically appropriated from the funding lhe Bureau of Rates Or the office of counsel could restricted revenue account within the General Fund to the Public lead directly to inadequate investigation of requested rate Utility Commission to provide for the operation of the commis- 1 increases and aDDrovalof . . a larger - rate increase than would sion for the fiscal periodJuly 1, 1981 to June 30, 1982, for the ot~erwise~eapprove~, purposes and in the amounts shown: Mr. Speaker, the Bureaus of Rail and Non Rail Trans- (I) For the salaries, wages and all necessary expenses for the proper administration of the portation provide direct services to the public through inspec- Public Utilitv Commission including the tion of rail lines, grade crossings, and motorized transchairman and commissioners, Office of the portation vehicles such as taxis and buses. Underfunding in Director of Operations, Bureau of Public Infor- this area would be a direct threat to the public safety. mation and the Secretary's Bureau ................. Mr. Speaker, SB 681, as passed by the Senate, would cause (2) For the salaries, wages and all necessary the layoff of about I5 staff of the Public Utility Commission. expenses for the proper administration of the During the past 2 years that complement of the Public Utility Offices of Counsel and Administrative Law Commission has already been reduced by some 43 positions. Judge.. ..................................................... The further reduction proposed by SB 681 represents a direct (3) For the salaries, wages and all necessary threat to the utility consumer in Pennsylvania. expenses for the proper administration of rates, Mr. Speaker, my amendment would cost the average utility research and transportation including the Bureau consumer a total of 2 cents per year, and for that 2 cents, Mr. of Conservation, Economics and Energy Plan- Speaker, the consumer would receive added protection ning, Bureau of Nonrail Transportation, Bureau against tens or even hundreds of dollars of unneeded utility of Rail Transportation and the Bureau of Rates.. rate increases. Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of this amend- (4) For the salaries, wages and all necessary ment. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. expenses for the proper administration of invest- The SPEAKER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from igations, services and enforcement including the Montgomery, Mr. McClatchy. Bureau of Audits, the Bureau of Conwmer Mr. McCLATCHY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose the Services and the Bureau of Safety and Compliamendment. The Pievsky amendment, if it goes in, will ance including $46,000 for the Erie Regional certainly strip out my amendment completely. What we have Office of the Bureau of Consumer Services ........ here is a difference in policy direction. We have argued it back and forth at different times. 1 feel that separating out in
1981 LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL-HOUSE 1255 different areas takes away from the PUC chairman and their members the ability to change from fund to fund or from area to area without coming back to us. 1 think it certainly gives them more discretion, and I have full faith and belief in the ability of the PUC as it is now constituted to do the proper job. Mr. Speaker, I therefore oppose the Pievsky amendment. The SPEAKER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Somerset, Mr. Lloyd. Mr. LLOYD. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Pievsky amendment. As one who has appeared on many, many days before the Public Utility Commission to represent consumers against rate increases, and as one who has sat as an administrative law judge for the commission, 1 believe that we are on the verge of being penny-wise and pound-foolish. The Pievsky amendment will accomplish two things, in my opinion. One, it will provide adequate funding for the ratemaking process. Now, I know that the cost of the ratemaking process and the cost of the Public Utility Commis- sion budget are passed along to utility customers, but the fact of the matter is that in every major rate case pending before the Pennsylvania commission, customers are being asked and required to pay the cost of the attorneys and expert witnesses for the utility companies, which run in every major case anywhere from $500,000 to in excess of $1 million a case. Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, as most of the members of this chamber are aware, earlier this year the Senate cut the budget of the Office of Consumer Advocate, which is responsible for representing our constituents in opposition to utility rate increases. If we do not provide proper funding for the rate counsel staff and the rate experts of the Public Utility Commission, we may save a couple hundred thousand dollars, but we are going to cost the utility customers of this state millions of dollars. The second thing which the Pievsky amendment does and which is beneficial is it removes the discretion of the Public Utility Commission to move money around as it sees fit. Every time there is a discussion of cutting the budget of the Public Utility Commission, the commission always says, well, we are going to have to lay off rate attorneys or rate experts. Now, I know there is an awful lot of waste and inefficiency at the commission and there are many things which the commission does in the area of transportation regulation which perhaps do not need to be done at all, and I know for a fact an office in Pittsburgh where, if you walk in and you see some of the people involved in the enforcement section, I do not think I have ever seen them do anything other than read magazines and look out the windows. I think it is time for this legislature to start appropriating in specific ways to the Public Utility Commission. If we want to gain control of cost overruns over there, then the way to do that is to provide the money for the high priority matters like rate litigation, which has the impact of millions and millions of dollars on our constituents, and to take the money away from the chicken-feed kinds of things which the commission might otherwise choose to make as a priority. So, Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of the Pievsky amendment. The SPEAKER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Westmoreland, Mr. Kukovich. Mr. KUKOVICH. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I agree completely with the comments of Representative Lloyd, so I will not reiterate the points he made, but I will add just a few others. I think it is important to keep in mind that in the area of ratemaking, where the PUC sits in a quasi-judicial position, that even at this point in time, without the cuts which will go in if the Pievsky amendment is not adopted, they do not have the wherewithal to deal with all the utilities in this state. They simply cannot do it. To hamstring them even more would be disastrous. If we want to provide proper oversight, we have to start delineating where the money will go in the manner of appropriating the Pievsky amendment. So if you are concerned about oversight, and maybe even more impor- tantly, if you are concerned about open government, you will vote for the Pievsky amendment. And to explain that, right now we see the PUC entering into more and more negotiated settlements with utility companies. What that basically means is that many utilities are coming in before the PUC asking for a large rate request, and because the PUC may not have the resources-and they certainly will not if this bill passes without the Pievsky amendment-they will not be able to go through rate cases; they will not be able to have rate hearings. They currently only have 33 auditors to deal with the myriad of utilities across this state. What they will have to do without the Pievsky amendment is enter into more and more negotiated settlements behind closed doors without public input, without anopenhearing. So, Mr. Speaker, 1 think whenever you are voting for this amendment, you are going to be voting for simply more than an allocation of funds to those direct sources, and I would appreciate your support for the Pievsky amendment. The SPEAKER. The Chair recognizes the minority whip. Mr. MANDERINO. Mr. Speaker, very briefly, I rise in support of the Pievsky amendment. The information that I have received from the Appropriation hearings is that the people from the Public Utility Commission, concerned about the Public Utility budget, had indicated that the Governor's proposal, which is in essence what we find in SB 681, took substantial cuts in the area of ratemaking and in the area of transportation and safety. When Mr. McClatchy says that the Pievsky amendment will in essence destroy the McClatchy amendment, it will only destroy the McClatchy amendment in that it will add an additional $200,000 to the money in the Public Utility budget and then it will take the entire amount being appropriated to the Public Utility Commission and place it in four categories. Now, those four categories are not all of the categories that one could conjure up to line-item the Public Utility budget. They are four major categories, and as the previous speakers supporting the amendment have indicated, this is going to be the only way that we can guarantee that the ratemaking process and the customer services process in the Public Utility Commission are going to be adequately funded. We have no protection putting all of the money in one line item that money will not be even further shifted from
Page 1 and 2: COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA PLEDGE
Page 3 and 4: LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL-HOUSE This cita
Page 5 and 6: 1981 LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL-HOUSE 1249
Page 9: 1981 LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL-HOUSE 1253
Page 13 and 14: ('ohen Colaiella Cole Cordirco Coae
Page 15 and 16: LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL-HOUSE Mr. LUCYK
Page 18 and 19: LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL-HOUSE JUNE 30,
Page 20 and 21: 1264 LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL-HOUSE Cowe
Page 22 and 23: 1266 LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL-HOUSE JUNE
Page 24 and 25: 3 Whdl other changes In the cr~mlna
Page 26 and 27: 1270 LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL-HOUSE JUNE
Page 28: Caltagirone Cappabianca Cawley Cess
Page 39 and 40: Brandt Brown Burd Bums Caltagirone
Page 41 and 42: Dietz Laughlin Rappapon Wogan Dinin
Page 43 and 44: ~ ~ f f y Livengood Racks Ryan, Dur
Page 45 and 46: LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL-HOUSE YEAS-190
Page 47 and 48: Dininni Dombrowski Donatucci Dorr D
Page 49 and 50: (L.R.23047) and Extend from West of
Page 53 and 54: Cunningham NAYS-I NOT VOTING-5 Emer
Page 57: LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL-HOUSE pursue yo
Page 60 and 61:
1304 LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL-HOUSE JUNE
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66:
Page 69 and 70:
LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL-HOUSE - -~ If w
Page 71 and 72:
1981 LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL-HOUSE 1315
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL-HOUSE Dombrowsk
Page 83 and 84:
LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL-HOUSE HB 643. P
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL-HOUSE JUNE 30,
Page 90 and 91:
I The question was determined in th
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL-HOUSE family pl
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL-HOUSE our highw
Page 107 and 108:
SENATE MESSAGE AMENDED HOUSE BILLS
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111:
LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL-HOUSE WELCOMES
show all

commonwealth of pennsylvania - The Pennsylvania General Assembly

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?