14.03.2015 Views

PUC Annual Report–Fiscal Year 2011-12 - Public Utilities Commission

PUC Annual Report–Fiscal Year 2011-12 - Public Utilities Commission

PUC Annual Report–Fiscal Year 2011-12 - Public Utilities Commission

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>Public</strong> <strong>Utilities</strong> <strong>Commission</strong> <strong>Annual</strong> Report <strong>2011</strong>-<strong>12</strong><br />

State of Hawaii Page 6<br />

Regulatory Agencies (“DRA”) and the director gained the power to employ, appoint,<br />

promote, transfer, and describe <strong>Commission</strong> staff, renaming the staff the <strong>Public</strong> <strong>Utilities</strong><br />

Division (“PUD”). The change in the director’s power over staff was done to promote<br />

efficiency in the department and to allow the director to distribute the workload;<br />

however, in effect, it divided the <strong>Commission</strong>ers and staff leading to General Order<br />

No. 1 in 1966, which prohibited any ex parte communication. The <strong>Commission</strong> gained<br />

power to hire their own attorney again in 1972 as it proved a conflict of interest for the<br />

Attorney General to represent both the <strong>Commission</strong> and the PUD given that the PUD<br />

now assisted the director of the DRA rather than the <strong>Commission</strong>. This power was<br />

gained as a result of a Supreme Court case decided in 1970 where the <strong>Commission</strong> did<br />

not side with the director of the DRA, who was using the PUD staff to present his<br />

position before the <strong>Commission</strong> and to appeal the <strong>Commission</strong>’s decision to the<br />

Supreme Court. The court case, which was about telephone rates, presented a<br />

problem when both the <strong>Commission</strong> and the PUD were to be represented by the<br />

Attorney General’s office. Meanwhile in 1969, the Office of Consumer Protection was<br />

created which had concurrent jurisdiction with the Department of Regulatory Agencies<br />

in matters before the <strong>Commission</strong>, creating confusion over roles and responsibilities at<br />

the <strong>Commission</strong>. 7<br />

In 1976, after years of debate on the effectiveness of a commission with<br />

five part-time commissioners, three of which were commuting from neighbor islands, the<br />

<strong>Commission</strong> structure changed from five part-time commissioners to three full-time<br />

commissioners, removing the neighbor island commissioner representation<br />

requirement, while establishing <strong>PUC</strong> assistant positions in the neighboring counties.<br />

Part of the reason for this change was that the neighbor islands had a majority in the<br />

<strong>Commission</strong> and the regulation of passenger carriers was a county-specific concern.<br />

The <strong>PUC</strong> was moved from the DRA (later known as the Department of Commerce and<br />

Consumer Affairs) to the Department of Budget & Finance. The director of the DRA<br />

became the consumer advocate and the PUD became the Division of Consumer<br />

Advocacy (“DCA”). 8<br />

Regulatory Power of the <strong>Commission</strong><br />

As stated earlier, the <strong>Commission</strong> began by regulating businesses involved in the<br />

transportation of passengers, transportation of freight, telephone, telegraph, wireless<br />

telegraphy, light, power, heat, cold, water, gas, oil, storage and warehouse business.<br />

As technology progressed and the <strong>Commission</strong> reorganized, the regulatory authority of<br />

the <strong>Commission</strong> also evolved. Figure 2 describes some of the regulatory changes that<br />

have occurred in the history of the <strong>Commission</strong>.<br />

In the 1930s, the regulatory oversight of the <strong>Commission</strong> began to change. The<br />

state legislature tasked the <strong>Commission</strong> with regulatory power over radio interference<br />

7 State of Hawaii Legislative Auditor. 1975. Management Audit of the <strong>Public</strong><br />

<strong>Utilities</strong> <strong>Commission</strong> of the State of Hawaii, Volume I. Report No. 75-3.<br />

8 State of Hawaii Legislative Auditor. 1989. Management Audit of the <strong>Public</strong><br />

<strong>Utilities</strong> <strong>Commission</strong> of the State of Hawaii. Report No. 89-17.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!