Opinion ID: 1752828
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Legislative Acceptance Under Section 58.055

Text: We disagree with petitioners that the doctrine of legislative acceptance requires us to defer to the PUC's interpretation of section 58.055 as allowing it to adjust rate-group boundaries in a section 58.058 proceeding. Under that doctrine, when the Legislature reenacts a statute of doubtful meaning with a long-standing administrative construction without substantially changing the language, the court construes the statute as the agency did. [52] In 1999, the Legislature amended section 58.055 without changing the language requiring PUC approval that an electing company's proposed rate adjustment is included in section 58.058. [53] Thus, petitioners contend the Legislature accepted the PUC's interpretation of section 58.055, because the PUC's order reaching that conclusion had existed for about a year when the Legislature amended section 58.055. [54] Petitioners' argument ignores the fact that we are currently reviewing that PUC order which, for the first time, interpreted section 58.055 as authorizing rate-group boundary adjustments in section 58.058 proceedings. [55] Therefore, the PUC's interpretation can hardly be deemed a long-standing administrative construction. Moreover, section 58.055 is not a statute of doubtful meaning. As we explained, by its own language, section 58.055 permits the PUC to approve a rate reclassification, but only to ensure the reclassification is consistent with that permitted under section 58.058. Its language in no way authorizes the PUC to adjust rate-group boundaries as part of that process.