Provides that in any rate proceeding, any party may seek to sever from consideration in the settlement process or inclusion in any joint proposal any substantive issue that it discussed in its direct testimony.
Summary
This bill amends the Public Service Law to change how issues are handled in Public Service Commission rate proceedings. It allows any party in a rate case to ask the presiding administrative law judge to sever a “substantive issue” that the party raised in its direct testimony from the settlement process or from any joint proposal. The request must be made within ten days after reply testimony is due, and other parties may respond. The judge must issue a written ruling, and the party may seek interlocutory review by the commission.
If the motion is granted, the identified issue may still be discussed in settlement negotiations for the first 60 days after settlement talks formally begin. After that, the issue must proceed through litigation rather than settlement unless the moving party later waives the severance right in writing. The bill defines key terms such as “joint proposal,” “settlement process,” “party,” and “substantive issue,” with the definition of substantive issue aimed at issues supported by factual allegations or legal claims in testimony, rather than conclusory assertions without evidentiary support.
Impact
The bill would add new subdivisions to sections 66, 80, and 89-c of the Public Service Law, applying the same procedural rule across Public Service Commission rate proceedings. It would give non-utility, non-department parties a formal mechanism to keep certain issues out of confidential or negotiated settlement discussions and preserve them for public litigation after a set period. The act would apply only to PSC proceedings initiated on or after its effective date, which is 120 days after enactment, and it authorizes any necessary implementing regulations.
Sentiment
The bill’s framing suggests a generally pro-transparency and pro-litigation sentiment, aiming to ensure that substantive rate issues are not resolved solely through private settlement negotiations. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no direct evidence of opposition or support in the legislative record here. Based on the text alone, the measure appears designed to appeal to parties and observers who want more public resolution of utility rate disputes.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely to be the balance between transparency and settlement flexibility in utility rate cases. Supporters would likely favor the ability to sever important issues from private negotiations so they can be fully litigated and placed on the public record. Opponents, likely including utilities or parties that prefer negotiated resolutions, may argue that the bill could make settlements harder to reach, reduce efficiency, and limit the ability of parties to resolve complex rate issues confidentially. The bill also creates procedural disputes over whether an issue is truly “substantive” enough to qualify for severance.
Requires both the department of public service staff and the utility to provide separate, substantive responses to discovery requests and cross-examination questions seeking evidence or explanations related to elements of the joint proposal and explain how any contested aspect of the joint proposal delivers outcomes for utility consumers that are in compliance with all applicable laws and are at least as favorable as would have resulted had its testimonial position been approved by the public service commission.
Relates to motor vehicle insurance fairness; provides that insurance rates shall not be increased based on certain factors; sets forth processes for motor vehicle insurers to have rate increases approved; allows public access in relation to any proposed insurance rate increases; allows members of the public to request permission to intervene in proceedings related to rate increases; directs rules and regulations to be established.
Relates to motor vehicle insurance fairness; provides that insurance rates shall not be increased based on certain factors; sets forth processes for motor vehicle insurers to have rate increases approved; allows public access in relation to any proposed insurance rate increases; allows members of the public to request permission to intervene in proceedings related to rate increases; directs rules and regulations to be established.
Directs the public service commission to provide for the availability of virtual access to and participation by parties and non-parties in all proceedings and public sessions of the commission, to the extent that such parties and non-parties would be permitted to access and participate in such proceedings and public sessions in person.
Requires the department of public service to assign an administrative law judge to oversee the process in policy proceedings before the public service commission; provides that the department of public service shall be considered a party in policy proceedings.
Requires the department of public service to assign an administrative law judge to oversee the process in policy proceedings before the public service commission; provides that the department of public service shall be considered a party in policy proceedings.
Provides that it is unlawful for any person to directly or indirectly own, operate, or control the whole or any part of a health insurance company and a health care provider; requires divestment within three years.