S 9966: 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.

  
  STATE OF NEW YORK ________________________________________________________________________ 9966  IN SENATE April 20, 2026 ___________ Introduced by Sen. COMRIE -- read twice and ordered printed, and when printed to be committed to the Committee on Energy and Telecommuni- cations AN ACT to amend the public service law, in relation to the standard applicable to review of joint proposals in rate proceedings submitted to the public service commission for approval The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assem- bly, do enact as follows: 1 Section 1. Section 66 of the public service law is amended by adding a 2 new subdivision 33 to read as follows: 3 33. (a) Notwithstanding the department's rules and regulations 4 concerning confidentiality of settlement discussions in rate case 5 proceedings, both department staff and the utility shall provide sepa- 6 rate, substantive responses to discovery requests and cross-examination 7 questions seeking evidence or explanations related to elements of the 8 joint proposal. This requirement includes inquiries comparing written 9 testimonies of department staff and the utility to the joint proposal 10 and requesting evidence and a rationale that demonstrates that an iden- 11 tified aspect of the joint proposal is in compliance with all applicable 12 laws and offers benefits to utility consumers equal to or greater than 13 those provided by its testimonial positions. Department staff and the 14 utility shall, in their respective filings in regard to the joint 15 proposal, explain how any contested aspect of the joint proposal deliv- 16 ers outcomes for utility consumers that are in compliance with all 17 applicable laws and are at least as favorable as would have resulted had 18 its testimonial position been approved by the commission. 19 (b) Notwithstanding the commission's order on procedural guidelines 20 for settlements issued in nineteen hundred ninety-two in case 90-M-0255, 21 the commission shall ensure in its order approving or modifying a joint 22 proposal that each individual element of the joint proposal adopted in 23 its rate plan order is by clear and convincing evidence in the record, 24 including parties' written and oral testimony and exhibits, the best 25 outcome for utility consumers and is in compliance with all applicable 26 laws. EXPLANATION--Matter in italics (underscored) is new; matter in brackets [ ] is old law to be omitted. LBD15466-01-6 
 S. 9966 2 1 (c) As used in this subdivision, the following terms shall have the 2 following meanings: 3 (i) "Settlement discussions" shall mean a set of formal negotiations 4 of the parties organized by the department that is intended to resolve 5 all or some of the issues in any rate proceeding and lead to the filing 6 of a joint proposal for commission approval. 7 (ii) "Joint proposal" shall mean a negotiated settlement agreement 8 signed by two or more parties in a rate proceeding. 9 § 2. Section 80 of the public service law is amended by adding a new 10 subdivision 13 to read as follows: 11 13. (a) Notwithstanding the department's rules and regulations 12 concerning confidentiality of settlement discussions in rate case 13 proceedings, both department staff and the utility shall provide sepa- 14 rate, substantive responses to discovery requests and cross-examination 15 questions seeking evidence or explanations related to elements of the 16 joint proposal. This requirement includes inquiries comparing written 17 testimonies of department staff and the utility to the joint proposal 18 and requesting evidence and a rationale that demonstrates that an iden- 19 tified aspect of the joint proposal is in compliance with all applicable 20 laws and offers benefits to utility consumers equal to or greater than 21 those provided by its testimonial positions. Department staff and the 22 utility shall, in their respective filings in regard to the joint 23 proposal, explain how any contested aspect of the joint proposal deliv- 24 ers outcomes for utility consumers that are in compliance with all 25 applicable laws and are at least as favorable as would have resulted had 26 its testimonial position been approved by the commission. 27 (b) Notwithstanding the commission's order on procedural guidelines 28 for settlements issued in nineteen hundred ninety-two in case 90-M-0255, 29 the commission shall ensure in its order approving or modifying a joint 30 proposal that each individual element of the joint proposal adopted in 31 its rate plan order is by clear and convincing evidence in the record, 32 including parties' written and oral testimony and exhibits, the best 33 outcome for utility consumers and is in compliance with all applicable 34 laws. 35 (c) As used in this subdivision, the following terms shall have the 36 following meanings: 37 (i) "Settlement discussions" shall mean a set of formal negotiations 38 of the parties organized by the department that is intended to resolve 39 all or some of the issues in any rate proceeding and lead to the filing 40 of a joint proposal for commission approval. 41 (ii) "Joint proposal" shall mean a negotiated settlement agreement 42 signed by two or more parties in a rate proceeding. 43 § 3. Section 89-c of the public service law is amended by adding a new 44 subdivision 18 to read as follows: 45 18. (a) Notwithstanding the department's rules and regulations 46 concerning confidentiality of settlement discussions in rate case 47 proceedings, both department staff and the utility shall provide sepa- 48 rate, substantive responses to discovery requests and cross-examination 49 questions seeking evidence or explanations related to elements of the 50 joint proposal. This requirement includes inquiries comparing written 51 testimonies of department staff and the utility to the joint proposal 52 and requesting evidence and a rationale that demonstrates that an iden- 53 tified aspect of the joint proposal is in compliance with all applicable 54 laws and offers benefits to utility consumers equal to or greater than 55 those provided by its testimonial positions. Department staff and the 56 utility shall, in their respective filings in regard to the joint 
 S. 9966 3 1 proposal, explain how any contested aspect of the joint proposal deliv- 2 ers outcomes for utility consumers that are in compliance with all 3 applicable laws and are at least as favorable as would have resulted had 4 its testimonial position been approved by the commission. 5 (b) Notwithstanding the commission's order on procedural guidelines 6 for settlements issued in nineteen hundred ninety-two in case 90-M-0255, 7 the commission shall ensure in its order approving or modifying a joint 8 proposal that each individual element of the joint proposal adopted in 9 its rate plan order is by clear and convincing evidence in the record, 10 including parties' written and oral testimony and exhibits, the best 11 outcome for utility consumers and is in compliance with all applicable 12 laws. 13 (c) As used in this subdivision, the following terms shall have the 14 following meanings: 15 (i) "Settlement discussions" shall mean a set of formal negotiations 16 of the parties organized by the department that is intended to resolve 17 all or some of the issues in any rate proceeding and lead to the filing 18 of a joint proposal for commission approval. 19 (ii) "Joint proposal" shall mean a negotiated settlement agreement 20 signed by two or more parties in a rate proceeding. 21 § 4. This act shall take effect on the one hundred twentieth day after 22 it shall have become a law, and shall apply to public service commission 23 proceedings initiated on or after such date. Effective immediately, the 24 addition, amendment and/or repeal of any rule or regulation necessary 25 for the implementation of this act on its effective date are authorized 26 to be made and completed on or before such effective date.