Dep't of Health & Human Servs. v. Pub. Utilities Comm'n of Nev.

• Decision Date: 02 March 2015
• Docket Number: No. 64474,64474
• Parties: DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, AGING AND DISABILITY SERVICES DIVISION, Appellant, v. PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF NEVADA, Respondent.
• Court: Supreme Court of Nevada

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, AGING
AND DISABILITY SERVICES DIVISION, Appellant,
v.
PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF NEVADA, Respondent.

No. 64474

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

March 2, 2015

An unpublished order shall not be regarded as precedent and shall not be cited as legal authority. SCR 123.

ORDER OF REVERSAL AND REMAND

This is an appeal from a district court order denying a petition for judicial review of a final decision made by respondent Public Utilities Commission of Nevada (PUC). First Judicial District Court, Carson City; James E. Wilson, Judge.

Appellant Nevada Department of Health and Human Services, Aging and Disability Services Division (ADSD), contends that the PUC erred when it altered the ADSD's budget to exclude the funding of services without a nexus to telecommunication devices and the dual-relay system.¹ The ADSD argues that in so doing, the PUC prejudiced the ADSD's substantial rights by (1) exceeding the PUC's statutory authority, or (2) making a decision that was affected by an error of law. For the reasons stated below, we conclude that the PUC misinterpreted NRS 427A.797

Page 2

when it altered the ADSD's budget and therefore exceeded its statutory authority.

In reviewing the PUC's final decision, our role is identical to that of the district court. Nev. Power Co. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n of Nev., 122 Nev. 821, 834, 138 P.3d 486, 495 (2006). Thus, we

may affirm the decision of the [PUC] or set it aside in whole or in part if substantial rights of the petitioner have been prejudiced because the final decision of the Commission is:

(a) In violation of constitutional or statutory provisions;

(b) In excess of the statutory authority of the Commission.

NRS 703.373(11); see also Nev. Power Co., 122 Nev. at 834, 138 P.3d at 495.

The ADSD is not limited in using the surcharge money at the deaf-and-hard-of-hearing centers to funding services with a nexus to telecommunication devices and the dual-relay system

The PUC's interpretation of NRS 427A.797 is an issue of law that we review de novo. Nev. Power Co., 122 Nev. at 834, 138 P.3d at 495. We interpret unambiguous statutes based on their plain meaning. D.R. Horton, Inc. v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 123 Nev. 468, 476, 168 P.3d 731, 737 (2007). "A statute is ambiguous if it is capable of being understood in two or more senses by reasonably well-informed persons." Id.

As an initial matter, we address whether the surcharge money may only be used to fund services with a nexus to telecommunication devices and the dual-relay system. Here, the statutory scheme is helpful. See In re CityCenter Constr. & Lien Master Litig., 129 Nev. ___, ___, 310 P.3d 574, 580-81 (2013) (interpreting a statute by looking to a related

Page 3

statute and construing them harmoniously); Hernandez v. Bennett-Haron, 128 Nev. ___, ___, 287 P.3d 305, 315 (2012) (identifying ambiguity as a justification for looking beyond the statute at issue and referencing the statutory scheme).

The Legislature directed that the provisions of NRS Chapter 427A are to be "liberally construed to effect its stated purposes." NRS 427A.030 (emphasis added). The Legislature expressly stated its intent to serve the holistic needs and interests of people with disabilities, including people with impaired hearing. NRS 427A.010. The statute provides, in pertinent part, that the State, "within the limits of available resources," shall help people with disabilities

secure equal opportunity to the full and free enjoyment of and access to:

(a) Full participation in the social and economic life of the State;

(b) Opportunities for remunerative employment;

. . .

(d) Freedom and independence in planning and managing their lives, including, without limitation, the ability to exercise individual initiative;

. . .

(f) The best possible physical and mental health, without regard to economic status;

(g) Necessary health, personal assistance and independent living services that are designed to enable persons with disabilities to avoid receiving institutional care, or to transition from an institutional setting back to their communities;

Page 4

(h) Respite for family members of persons with disabilities from their duties as primary caregivers; and

(i) Meaningful participation in a wide range of civic, cultural and recreational opportunities.

NRS 427A.010(2). Inasmuch as NRS 427A.797 is unclear regarding the specific services that the deaf-and-hard-of-hearing centers may provide and what must be funded by the surcharge money, the statutory scheme and its stated purpose offers a reliable basis for concluding that the Legislature intended something broader than what the PUC purports. Thus, we hold that the surcharge may fund services at the centers that serve the various interests in NRS 427A.010.

The PUC lacks authority to determine ADSD's budget

The first provision of NRS 427A.797 (the "program provision") requires the ADSD to create and manage a program that helps people with impaired speech or hearing obtain and use telecommunication devices or a "dual party-relay system." NRS 427A.797(1). While the program provision tasks the ADSD with creating and managing the program, it also requires the program to be "approved by the [PUC]." Id.

The second provision of NRS 427A.797 (the "surcharge provision") requires "the Commission" to establish a surcharge amount that customers of telephone companies must pay. NRS 427A.797(2). The amount of the surcharge must be enough to (1) finance the program concerning telecommunication devices and the dual-relay system that the ADSD creates and manages, (2) "[f]und the centers for persons who are deaf or hard of hearing operated by this State," and (3) cover a portion of costs that the ADSD incurs in carrying out the provisions of a statutory scheme regarding regulation of interpreters and realtime captioning providers. Id.

Page 5

The third provision of NRS 427A.797 (the "account provision"), creates an "Account for Services for Persons With Impaired Speech or Hearing" that the ADSD administers. NRS 427A.797(3). The money that the ADSD obtains pursuant to the surcharge provision is credited to this account, which can be used for enumerated purposes, including:

(d) For the general administration of the program developed and administered pursuant to [the program provision];

. . . .

(f) To fund the centers for persons who are deaf or hard of hearing operated by this State[.]

Id.

The language in NRS 427A.797 does not authorize the PUC to alter the ADSD's budget. The program provision permits the PUC to approve or disapprove of the program concerning telecommunication devices and the dual-relay system. NRS 427A.797(1). The surcharge provision permits the PUC to "establish by regulation" the amount of the surcharge that must be "sufficient to . . . [c]over the costs of the program," which provides telecommunication devices and the dual-relay system, and to fund the deaf-and-hard-of-hearing centers. NRS 427A.797(2). Therefore, at most, the PUC can approve or disapprove of the program concerning telecommunication devices and the dual-relay system and set a surcharge rate to finance that program and the deaf-and-hard-of-hearing centers. Se...