AN ACT to amend and reenact section 49-04-07 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to unreasonable preferences or advantages from public utilities; and to repeal sections 49-04-08, 49-04-09, and 49-04-10 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to regulation of common carriers relating to permissible discrimination, long and short hauls, and freight pooling.
Summary
HB 1062 updates North Dakota law governing public utilities by restating the prohibition on undue or unreasonable preferences, advantages, prejudice, or disadvantages in rates and service. The bill keeps the core rule that a utility may not charge different compensation for like and contemporaneous service under substantially similar circumstances, while preserving the ability of utilities to enter into reasonable agreements with customers, consumers, or employees and to use sliding-scale charges if approved by the Public Service Commission and not barred by the utility’s franchise or permit.
The bill also repeals three Century Code sections that address common-carrier regulation: permissible discrimination, long and short hauls, and freight pooling. As a result, the bill simplifies and consolidates this portion of Title 49 by removing provisions that are no longer being carried forward separately and leaving the amended section 49-04-07 as the primary operative language in this area. The measure was enacted and filed with the Secretary of State after passing both chambers.
Impact
HB 1062 amends section 49-04-07 of the North Dakota Century Code and repeals sections 49-04-08 through 49-04-10. Its practical effect is to preserve the anti-discrimination framework for public utilities while eliminating separate statutory provisions governing certain common-carrier topics, thereby narrowing and reorganizing the state’s utility and carrier regulation statutes. The bill affects public utilities, the Public Service Commission, and potentially carriers and shippers subject to the repealed provisions.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have been broadly noncontroversial. It passed the House unanimously, 90-0, and the Senate with only one dissenting vote, 46-1. The strong margins suggest general legislative support for the cleanup and consolidation of utility-law provisions and for maintaining existing protections against unreasonable rate or service discrimination.
Contention
There is little evidence of major contention in the available record. The only visible opposition was a single no vote in the Senate, but no committee transcript or debate summary is available to identify the specific concern. Any disagreement likely centered on the repeal of the common-carrier sections or on whether those provisions should remain separately codified, rather than on the core prohibition against unreasonable preferences by public utilities.