A. Except as otherwise provided by law, in all proceedings before the commission and in the courts, each party to the controversy shall bear his own costs and no costs shall be taxed against either party.
B. In any commission rate proceeding in which the utility seeks rates to recover adjusted test-year litigation expenses there shall be no presumption that the litigation expenses are prudent. Nothing in this section shall be construed to create or imply a presumption of prudence for any utility expenditures not addressed in this section.
C. As used in this section, "litigation expenses" means all attorneys' fees, consulting fees and other costs of litigation, including in-house expenditures.
History: Laws 1941, ch. 84, § 82; 1941 Comp., § 72-1103; 1953 Comp., § 68-11-3; Laws 1983, ch. 250, § 6; 1993, ch. 265, § 1.
ANNOTATIONSCompiler's notes. — Sections 62-13-1 to 62-13-14 of the Public Utility Act are still effective as the repeal of Chapter 62, Article 13 by Laws 1998, Chapter 108, Section 82, effective July 1, 2003 Chapter 108, Section 82 was repealed prior to taking effect by Chapter 23, Section 1, Laws 2003. Although Laws 2003, Chapter 336, Section 8, amended Laws 1998, Chapter 82, as amended, an amendment of a repealed section is ineffective. See Quintana v. N.M. Dep't of Corrs., 100 N.M. 224, 668 P.2d 1101 (1983). Laws 2003, Chapter 416, Section 5 also repealed Laws 1998, Chapter 108, Section 82, as amended, a second time, however, that repeal is of no effect as the section had previously been repealed by Chapter 23, Section 1, Laws 2003.
Cross references. — For definition of "commission," see 62-3-3 NMSA 1978.
For hearings before commission, see 62-10-1 to 62-10-16 NMSA 1978.
For review of commission orders, see 62-11-1 to 62-11-6 NMSA 1978.
The 1993 amendment, effective June 18, 1993, designated the existing provisions as Subsection A, and added Subsections B and C.
The 1983 amendment deleted "transfer of cause to another county" at the end of the catchline, deleted the former second sentence, relating to the transfer of a cause to another county, added "Except as otherwise provided by law" at the beginning of the section and deleted "on review" following "and in the courts."
Rate case expenses. — By removing the presumption of reasonableness with respect to litigation expenses, the legislature did not intend to preclude the pragmatic practice of estimating rate case expenses, but intended that utilities demonstrate the reasonableness of rate case expenses, whether estimated or actual. In re PNM Gas Servs., 2000-NMSC-012, 129 N.M. 1, 1 P.3d 383.
Because the enactment of Subsection B was intended to effect a change in the policy of with respect to litigation expenses, a gas utility failed to carry its burden of proving that the amount of its requested rate case expense was reasonable and prudent by presenting only a budget-based estimate with no itemization of costs or evidence of reasonableness. In re PNM Gas Servs., 2000-NMSC-012, 129 N.M. 1, 1 P.3d 383.