PUC

Southern California Edison Co. v. Public Utilities Commission

Good Law
140 Cal. App. 4th 1085·2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 948·2006 Daily Journal DAR 8240·45 Cal. Rptr. 3d 485·11 Wage & Hour Cas.2d (BNA) 1030
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 26, 2006B183435California7,522 words

Opinion

Opinion

Croskey, J.

Southern California Edison Company (Edison) challenges a decision by the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) that certain public utilities must require the payment of prevailing wages to workers on energy utility construction projects. Edison contends (1) the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) ( 29 U.S.C. § 151 et seq.) preempts the decision; (2) the PUC committed a prejudicial abuse of discretion by violating its own procedural rules concerning the scope of issues addressed in the rulemaking proceeding; (3) the PUC provided no meaningful opportunity to respond to the proposed rulemaking and therefore denied due process; and (4) the evidence in the record does not support the decision. We conclude that the NLRA does not preempt the decision but that the PUC did fail to proceed in the manner required by law in that it violated its own procedural rules. We therefore annul the decision in part, and need not address Edison’s other contentions.

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

1. Parties

The PUC is the administrative agency responsible for regulating public utilities in the State of California. (Cal. Const., art. XII, §§ 5, 6; Pub. Util. Code, § 701.) Edison is an energy public…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.