Times Square New York
Times Square, New York. (Photo: iStock.com/Travel Wild)

In a motion for reargument filed June 12 regarding a recent decision by the New York State Court of Appeals, the National Energy Marketers Association (NEM) has asked the court to reconsider a decision which NEM believes does the opposite of what the court intended.

The motion addresses the appeals court’s May 9 decision that forces competitive suppliers to sell energy under utility prices causing losses that cannot be recovered by ESCOs. Yet, Utilities can do this at any time by recovering current losses in future prices.

NEM’s motion said that this decision could potentially undercut 2002 Public Service Law amendments to regulations that were specifically created to keep the PSC from imposing utility pricing rules on non-utility ESCOs.

“Enabling the PSC to impose restrictions through ‘conditioned access’ to utility infrastructure that it could not impose through direct statutory authorization would allow the PSC to bypass the very limits the Legislature imposed on it by expanding its authority over ‘gas and electric companies’ (public utilities over which the Legislature gave the PSC the power to set rates) to regulate ESCOs – over which the Legislature specifically declined to permit the PSC to decide rates,” the motion argued.

Furthermore, the motion said, the PSC itself has acknowledged they don’t have the power to apply utility-type price restrictions on non-utility ESCOs

“The PSC repeatedly recognized its lack of jurisdiction over rates charged by non-utilities,” the brief stated.  NEM urges the Appeals Court to take a fair look at the unfair results that result from treating Article 2 companies like Article 4 utilities.

Author:
Energy Pages is an online trade publication and business directory for the retail energy industry. We publish editorials, resources, case studies, practical information and industry news. Our content is about and for industry leaders, innovators, investors and influencers.

Your Opinion Matters

Have Something To Say About This Story?

Sign Up for the Energy Pages Digest

Our weekly must-see brief

You May Also Like

Understanding NAESB and the FERC Version 3.1 Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NOPR)

As you may already be aware, FERC has proposed to adopt Version 3.1 of the NAESB Standards. Today we will provide an overview of the upcoming North American Energy Standards Board (NAESB) Version 3.1 Standards which have been proposed for adoption by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Our organization has been involved with NAESB since its inception in 2002, and with the Gas Industry Standards Board (GISB), the precursor to NAESB, before that.

NEM: Choice Works in Connecticut and Nationally

Connecticut Consumer Counsel fails to consider important facts

Energy Brokers Support Broker Regulation in Texas

Industry insiders say proposed broker rules will create “more sound marketplace”, benefit consumers through accountability.

Arizona Commission Opens Study of Retail Electric Market Opening

On December 3, in one of the first substantive moves to address energy competition in Arizona, the Arizona Corporation Commission held a special open meeting. The purpose of the three-hour meeting was to discuss in detail the possibility and ramifications of opening Arizona up to competitive retail energy and/or natural gas.