WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

RCC 167

Para ordenar a LUMA Energy y a la Autoridad de Acueductos y Alcantarillados a conceder a todo abonado con notificación de suspensión de servicios, una extensión de plazo o prórroga, a partir de la fecha notificada para la suspensión de servicio, de un término no menor de treinta (30) días adicionales a lo ya establecido por disposición de la Ley Núm. 33 de 27 de junio de 1985, según enmendada, mejor conocida como “Ley para Establecer los Requisitos Procesales Mínimos para la Suspensión de Servicios Públicos Esenciales”; y para otros fines relacionados.

2025-2028 Session

Bill RCC 167 requires LUMA Energy and Puerto Rico's water authority to extend service suspension notices by 30+ additional days beyond current legal requirements for struggling utility customers.

Referido a Comisión(es)
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · RCC 167

Legislative bill overview

Bill RCC 167 mandates that LUMA Energy and the Puerto Rico Water and Sewer Authority (AAA) must grant all customers receiving service suspension notices an additional minimum 30-day extension beyond the timeframe already established in Law 33 of 1985. The bill modifies existing protections for customers facing termination of essential public services.

Why is this important

This legislation directly affects thousands of Puerto Rico residents by providing extended grace periods before utility disconnection, potentially preventing service loss during financial hardship. Given Puerto Rico's economic challenges and high energy costs, such extensions could significantly impact vulnerable populations' access to water and electricity.

Potential points of contention

  • Fiscal impact on utilities: Extended payment timelines may strain LUMA Energy and AAA's cash flow and operational budgets, potentially affecting infrastructure maintenance or service quality investments
  • Economic incentives and defaults: Critics may argue that additional extensions reduce incentives for timely bill payment and increase uncollectable debt, which gets passed to other ratepayers
  • Implementation complexity: Adding another 30 days to existing procedures requires operational restructuring at both utilities and may create administrative burden
  • Existing law adequacy: Debate over whether Law 33 of 1985 already provides sufficient protections, making this redundant or if strengthening is genuinely necessary

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.