AB 1222: Public utilities: judicial review.

Official summary

Legislative Counsel’s Digest (official, as of the latest version). Written by nonpartisan legislative staff; reproduced verbatim.

Existing law authorizes a party aggrieved by a decision or order of the Public Utilities Commission to file a petition for a writ of review in the court of appeal or the Supreme Court for purposes of reviewing the decision or order within 30 days after the commission issues its decision denying the application for a rehearing, or, if the application was granted, within 30 days after the commission issues its decision on the rehearing, or at least 120 days after the application is granted if no decision on rehearing has been issued.

This bill would extend the 30-day time periods to 90 days. For a petition challenging a final decision of the commission on the grounds that the final decision substantially deviated from a proposed decision of a commission administrative law judge, the bill would require the court to presume the final decision to be arbitrary and unlawful unless the commission can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the court that the deviations were necessary to comply with state or federal law.

Existing law authorizes the commission to fix the rates and charges for public utilities, including electrical and gas corporations, and requires those rates to be just and reasonable.

This bill would prohibit the commission from authorizing electrical or gas corporations to recover from their ratepayers the costs associated with seeking judicial review of a commission decision by a state or federal court or requesting relief from a commission decision at a federal agency. The bill would require the electrical and gas corporation to track those costs.

Under existing law, a violation of the Public Utilities Act or any order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the commission is a crime.

Because the above provisions would be part of the act and a violation of a commission action implementing this bill’s requirements would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

Sponsors

Sponsors by party (alphabetical): Democratic 1

“Support” is shown only as formal sponsorship recorded by the legislature. Roll-call votes are available on the official bill page.

Recent official actions

1. February 2, 2026From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
2. January 31, 2026Died pursuant to Art. IV, Sec. 10(c) of the Constitution.
3. May 23, 2025In committee: Held under submission.
4. May 14, 2025In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
5. April 30, 2025From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 9. Noes 3.) (April 29). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
6. April 24, 2025From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 12. Noes 3.) (April 23). Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
7. April 22, 2025Re-referred to Com. on U. & E.
8. April 21, 2025From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on U. & E. Read second time and amended.
9. April 2, 2025In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.
10. March 13, 2025Referred to Coms. on U. & E. and JUD.
11. February 24, 2025Read first time.
12. February 22, 2025From printer. May be heard in committee March 24.