O.C.G.A. § 46-2-57 (2019)
Obtaining of discovery by employees and agents of commission; petitions by commission for necessary orders, injunctions, and subpoenas; extension of suspension period by Superior Court of Fulton County; time of hearing of applications and petitions from commission
(a) In any case pending before it, the commission, in addition to its now existing authority to do so, is authorized to issue an order permitting its employees and agents to take depositions and otherwise obtain discovery of any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the subject matter involved in the investigation, proceeding, or petition before the commission, in the same manner prescribed in Chapter 11 of Title 9 for discovery in civil actions. In any case involving an application of a gas company to establish just and reasonable rates pursuant to Code Section 46-2-23.1 or 46-4-154, intervenors who are granted party status pursuant to Code Section 46-2-59, as well as the gas company subject to the particular proceeding, shall have all discovery rights available under Chapter 11 of Title 9.
(b) The commission, its agents and employees as directed by the commission, and intervenors and gas companies which are granted discovery rights under subsection (a) of this Code section are authorized to petition the Superior Court of Fulton County for all orders, injunctions, and subpoenas necessary to carry out the provisions of this Code section which would otherwise be authorized or necessary under Chapter 11 of Title 9; and the judges and clerks of the court are authorized to issue all such orders, injunctions, and subpoenas and to take all other actions necessary to carry out this Code section which would otherwise be authorized or necessary under Chapter 11 of Title 9.
(c) In addition to the sanctions which may be imposed under Code Section 9-11-37, the Superior Court of Fulton County is further authorized to extend the period of suspension of the operation of any new schedules and defer the use of such rates, charges, classifications, or service beyond the time authorized by Code Section 46-2-25, if the court, upon application of the commission, determines that the failure of any regulated utility to comply with a discovery request of the commission, its agents, or its employees is unreasonable and requires such extension. No such extension of the period of suspension shall be considered by the court unless the utility has failed completely to respond to a valid deposition or discovery request.
(d) Any application or petition made by the commission, its agents, or its employees pursuant to this Code section shall be heard within 20 days of the filing of the application or petition, irrespective of whether any response to the application or petition has previously been made, and shall be disposed of promptly.
History
(Ga. L. 1922, p. 145, § 5; Code 1933, § 93-508; Ga. L. 1979, p. 1084, § 1; Ga. L. 1997, p. 798, § 3.)
Annotations
Law reviews. - For note on the 2002 enactment of this chapter, see 19 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 285 (2002).
The 2002 amendment, effective April 25, 2002, added subsection (e).
Cross references. - Authority of General Assembly regarding regulation of public utility rates, Ga. Const. 1983, Art. III, Sec. VI, Para. V. Prohibition against gratuities, Ga. Const. 1983, Art. III, Sec. VI, Para. VI. Editor’s notes. - Ga. L. 2002, p. 475, § 1,
JUDICIAL DECISIONS Effect of 1976 amendment to section. - The 1976 amendment to former Code 1933, § 93-307.1 (see O.C.G.A § 46-2-25), which added subsection (d), was a recognition by the legislature that section prior to amendment did not prohibit the effectuating of rates according to the date of billing, which would therefore cover some electricity used prior to the date of the effectuating order. Moore v. Georgia Pub. Serv. Comm’n, 242 Ga. 182, 249 S.E.2d 549 (1978). Entitlement to lower rate must be shown to challenge increase on constitutional grounds. - Utility customers must show they have a legal entitlement to or a vested right in the utility rates being charged be-
fore any proposed increase, before they can claim any property rights protected by the United States Constitution. Georgia Power Project v. Georgia Power Co., 409 F. Supp. 332 (N.D. Ga. 1975). Utility customers have no vested rights in fixed utility rates. Georgia Power Project v. Georgia Power Co., 409 F. Supp. 332 (N.D. Ga. 1975). Utility customers have no property interest in rate increases. - Utility customers have no sufficient property interest in given utility rate increase to invoke procedural protections of due process clause of U.S. Const., Amend. 14. Georgia Power Project v.
O.C.G.A. § 46-5-166(f )(2), regarding adjustments to intrastate access rates. Georgia Pub. Serv. Comm’n v. ALLTEL Ga. Communications Corp., 244 Ga. App. 645, 536 S.E.2d 542 (2000). What constitutes a rate case. - A hearing before the commission to consider a utility’s proposed alternate rate plan that did not recommend or request any rate changes for customers did not constitute a rate case requiring a full hearing. Georgia Public Serv. Comm’n v. Campaign for a Prosperous Ga., 229 Ga. App. 28, 492 S.E.2d 916 (1997). Sufficiency of findings of fact. - Where the Public Service Commission granted a rate increase, but disallowed some of the utility company’s costs in calculating the rate base for a fair increase because it concluded that some of the costs were the result of the company’s imprudent management of the project, the agency’s decision was within its authority, and was supported by the facts. Georgia Power Co. v. Georgia Pub. Serv. Comm’n, 196 Ga. App. 572, 396 S.E.2d 562 (1990), cert. denied, 196 Ga. App. 908, 396 S.E.2d 562 (1990). Cited in Georgia Power Co. v. Georgia Pub. Serv. Comm’n, 231 Ga. 339, 201 S.E.2d 423 (1973); Georgia Power Co. v. Allied Chem. Corp., 233 Ga. 558, 212 S.E.2d 628 (1975); Bryan v. Georgia Pub. Serv. Comm’n, 238 Ga. 572, 234 S.E.2d 784 (1977).
Georgia Power Co., 409 F. Supp. 332 (N.D. Ga. 1975). Collective ratemaking activities carried on by ‘‘rate bureaus’’ immune from antitrust liability. - Collective ratemaking activities carried on by ‘‘rate bureaus’’ composed of motor common carriers operate in several states, although not compelled by the states involved, ‘‘clearly articulated state policy’’ and thus were immune from antitrust liability. Southern Motor Carriers Rate Conference, Inc. v. United States, 471 U.S. 48, 105 S. Ct. 1721, 85 L. Ed. 2d 36 (1985). Recovery of costs of demand-side programs. - The commission had authority under O.C.G.A. § 46-3A-9 to allow a utility to recover the costs of demand-side energy conservation programs and interruptible service credits through riders or surcharges outside of a general rate case and the test year statute. Georgia Power Co. v. Georgia Indus. Group, 214 Ga. App. 196, 447 S.E.2d 118 (1994). Order addressing disposition of overearnings authorized. - Neither the Public Service Commission’s determination that Tier 2 local exchange companies’ return on equity earnings exceeded that authorized, nor its order for the application of over-earnings to reduce intrastate access rates violated either subsection (d) of O.C.G.A. § 46-2-25, which prohibits rate-making orders with retroactive effect, or
OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Companies within scope of section. - Common carriers and transportation companies as well as power utilities are covered by former Code 1933, § 93-307.1 (see O.C.G.A § 46-2-25). 1972 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 72-34. Limitation on suspension of schedule by commission. - Commission may not suspend schedule beyond five months, unless a utility by its own action manifests an intent to withdraw or extend the effective date of a scheduled increase. 1973 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 73-70. Section is exclusive method for suspending tariff revision implementation. - Former Code 1933, § 93-307.1 (see O.C.G.A § 46-2-25) was exclusive method by which commission may suspend implementation of tariff revision. 1973 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 73-6.
Commission’s responsibility not altered by conditional approval of tariff amendment. - Conditional approval by the commission of tariff amendment during 30-day period provided by former Code 1933, § 93-307.1 (see O.C.G.A § 46-2-25) did not alter substantive responsibility and authority of the commission. 1973 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 73-6. Implemented tariff amendment not to be suspended during subsequent examination. - A tariff amendment which has been implemented by a utility, either by virtue of the expiration of the 30-day period without commission action or by virtue of such conditional approval by the commission during that period, may not be later suspended by the commission during subsequent examination pending a final determination by the commission. 1973 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 73-6.
Later examination possible even after decision not to suspend tariff revision. - If the commission in the exercise of its discretion determines that a tariff revision should not be suspended under former Code 1933, § 93-307.1 (see O.C.G.A § 46-2-25), the commission was not foreclosed from later examining the tariff provision, on its own initiative or upon the filing of a complaint. 1973 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 73-6.
Terminating utility service to persons outside municipality. - A municipality which provides utility services to persons located outside the limits of the municipality may terminate such utility services in accordance with the provisions of Article 2 of the UCC. 1987 Op. Att’y Gen. No. U87-27.
RESEARCH REFERENCES Allowance in fixing rates of public utility for depletion or amortization in respect of natural resources, 91 ALR 1413. Right of customers of public utility with respect to fund representing a refund from another supplying utility upon reduction of latter’s rates, 18 ALR2d 1343. Variations of utility rates based on flat and meter rates, 40 ALR2d 1331. Validity of ‘‘fuel adjustment’’ or similar clauses authorizing electric utility to pass on increased cost of fuel to its customers, 83 ALR3d 933. Advertising or promotional expenditures of public utility as part of operating expenses for ratemaking purposes, 83 ALR3d 963. Public utility’s right to recover cost of nuclear power plants abandoned before completion, 83 ALR4th 183.
C.J.S. - 73B C.J.S., Public Utilities, §§ 15, 18-22, 45-49, 53-55. ALR. - Power of federal government over intrastate rates, 14 ALR 454; 22 ALR 1100. Power of Public Service Commission to increase franchise rates, 28 ALR 587; 29 ALR 356. Validity, construction, and effect of provisions for the appropriation of excess income of public utility, 33 ALR 488. Service contract by public utility in consideration of conveyance of property by individual or private corporations as affected by public utility acts, 41 ALR 257. Power of state or municipality to fix minimum public utility rates, 68 ALR 1002. Profit factor in determining rates for municipally owned or operated public utility, 90 ALR 700.