Requires an owner or submeterer of a building to eliminate any submetering problems in a timely manner; imposes responsibility for all the shared area charges for service measured to areas outside of the dwelling, unless there is an agreement to the contrary; prohibits the waiver of such provision; provides a complaint process.
S10530 would add a new section to the Public Service Law governing electric service to tenants in multi-unit residential buildings that use submeters. The bill defines key terms such as owner, submeterer, submetering, shared area charges, extraordinary cost, and legal impediment, and then sets out a framework for resolving submetering problems when a submeter is incorrectly measuring service or when charges are being improperly allocated.
Under the bill, owners or submeterers must timely eliminate submetering problems and are generally responsible for shared-area charges unless a different written agreement applies. If a legal impediment, extraordinary cost, or a minimal amount of outside-the-dwelling usage prevents correction, the owner may enter into a mutually acceptable written agreement with tenants, and the Public Service Commission (PSC) may step in to review, void unfair agreements, or apportion estimated charges if the parties cannot agree. The bill also creates a complaint and investigation process requiring notice to the PSC, testing by an independent licensed electrician or professional engineer, written findings to tenants, and potential credits or refunds if the owner fails to cooperate or if overcharges are found.
The bill would significantly expand state regulation of submetered electric service in residential buildings by imposing affirmative duties on owners and submeterers, limiting their ability to pass certain charges through to tenants, and authorizing the PSC to oversee disputes and order remedies. It would also prohibit waiver of these protections by lease or agreement, preserve older agreements only subject to PSC review, and require refunds, credits, or account changes when submetering problems are not corrected. Affected parties include landlords, building owners, submetering companies, utilities, and tenants in master-metered or submetered multi-unit housing.
The available context shows no recorded committee discussion or votes, so there is no documented public debate in the provided materials. Based on the bill text, the measure appears tenant-protective and consumer-oriented, with a strong regulatory approach aimed at correcting billing errors and preventing owners from shifting improper costs to residents. The overall framing suggests support for clearer accountability and PSC enforcement rather than a neutral or deregulatory approach.
The main points of potential contention are the bill’s allocation of responsibility and cost. Owners and submeterers may object to being made responsible for shared-area charges, mandatory investigations, refund obligations, and PSC oversight, especially where correction is costly or physically difficult because of legal impediments or building constraints. Tenants, by contrast, would likely support the bill’s protections against overbilling and its complaint process. Another likely issue is the bill’s treatment of existing written agreements and the PSC’s authority to void them if deemed unfair or unreasonable, which could be seen as necessary consumer protection by supporters and as interference with private arrangements by opponents.