The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) is responsible for reviewing and approving General Rate Cases (GRCs), which determine the rates customers pay for essential services such as electricity and natural gas. GRCs are considered some of the most complex proceedings handled by the CPUC, involving detailed scrutiny of utility cost forecasts and operational plans.
Large investor-owned utilities like Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Southern California Edison, and San Diego Gas & Electric must file GRCs every four years. The process is divided into two phases: the first phase establishes the total revenue requirement needed by a utility to operate and maintain its infrastructure; the second phase determines how this revenue will be allocated among different customer groups, including residential, commercial, and industrial users.
Leuwam Tesfai, Deputy Executive Director for Energy and Climate Policy at the CPUC, explained the complexity of these cases: “GRCs are comprehensive and highly technical. They involve forecasts of nearly every aspect of a utility’s operations ranging from infrastructure and safety investments to customer service and cybersecurity. The CPUC assigns a multidisciplinary team of more than 30 staff, including engineers, financial analysts, policy experts, attorneys, and Administrative Law Judges (ALJs), to evaluate each utility GRC application. The goal is to ensure that utilities justify the costs necessary to provide safe, reliable utility service.”
A typical GRC can generate thousands of pages of documentation. Utilities submit applications with historical data and future spending forecasts covering areas such as infrastructure replacement, wildfire mitigation efforts, IT systems security measures, employee training programs, insurance costs, legal fees, and regulatory compliance.
Tesfai highlighted public involvement in these cases: “Intervenors such as consumer advocates, local governments, and environmental groups play a critical role. They submit expert testimony analyzing a utility’s forecasts, often offering alternative assumptions or recommendations. In large GRCs, more than 20 intervenors may participate, building the record with technical information and analysis.”
Public input is also gathered through forums held across service areas—both virtually and in person—as well as written comments submitted online. These contributions are considered during decision-making.
Formal evidentiary hearings allow parties to cross-examine witnesses from both utilities and intervenor groups. Testimony from these hearings becomes part of the official record reviewed by Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) before a final decision is made.
Subject-matter experts from various divisions within the CPUC collaborate on each case. Their roles include assessing proposed revenue requirements; evaluating infrastructure upgrade proposals; analyzing wildfire mitigation strategies; reviewing affordability impacts on customer bills; clarifying assumptions through data requests; preparing recommendations; participating in hearings; assisting with drafting decisions; supporting voting meetings; and ultimately shaping outcomes.
The entire process typically takes about 18 months from initial filing to final decision.
Tesfai summarized why this work matters: “At its core, a GRC is about evidence and accountability. Utilities are granted the opportunity to collect revenue based on the reasonable cost of providing service. The CPUC ensures that these requests are thoroughly reviewed, justified, and in the public interest, and we do so through an open and transparent process in which the voice of the consumer is very necessary and solicited.”
She added: “Every GRC decision represents months of rigorous technical analysis and stakeholder input, and reflects our commitment to ensuring that Californians have access to utility service that is safe and reliable at just and reasonable rates.”
