What Types of Public Service Commission Hearings are Conducted by MOAHR?
Michigan Public Service Commission cases referred to MOAHR are typically “contested cases,” which are evidentiary hearings conducted under the Michigan Administrative Procedures Act and MOAHR rules of practice and procedure specific to the MPSC. These contested cases include:
- The regulation of investor-owned gas and electric utilities, including the following case types:
- General rate cases under 1939 PA 3, as amended;
- Annual plan and reconciliation cases under 1982 PA 304, providing principally for the recovery of natural gas and transportation costs for gas utilities and for the recovery of fuel and purchased power costs for electric utilities;
- Integrated resource plan cases for electric utilities under 2016 PA 341, considering capacity and energy requirements and resource options over a 15 year period;
- Reviews of utility plans to obtain renewable energy and implement energy optimization programs under 2008 PA 295, as amended by 2016 PA 342;
- Consideration of certificates of necessity for significant construction or new investment under 2008 PA 286,as amended by 2016 PA 341;
- Reviews of certain mergers, acquisitions, and asset sales under 2008 PA 286;
- Certificates of public convenience and necessity to provide certain utility services under 1929 Act 69;
- Complaint cases including consumer billing disputes, disputes between utilities and competing “choice” providers, and other disputes; and
- Commission-initiated investigations arising under statutes or rules administered by the Commission.
- The regulation of certain electric cooperatives to the extent they are not exempt from regulation under 2008 PA 167, in case types similar to those for investor-owned utilities.
- The Commission’s jurisdiction over telecommunications providers under a combination of state and federal statutes including the Michigan Telecommunications Act, 1991 PA 179, and the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, 47 USC § 151 et seq. Such cases may be initiated by the Commission, by a consumer, or by one or more telecommunications providers.
In addition, the ALJs handle certain non-evidentiary public hearings the Commission may initiate to give members of the public the opportunity to comment on a matter of public importance such as a proposed pipeline, or proposed administrative rules. The ALJs also may serve as a mediator of certain telecommunications-related disputes, issuing recommended resolutions of the disputes following specific statutes and Commission rules, and may serve on an arbitration panel with Michigan Public Service Commission staff members to address certain interconnection disputes.