As it was required to do, PURA filed a Report on Electric Supplier Residential Rate Structure with the legislature. The Report includes a history of electric deregulation, an overview of the current market, and recommended next steps for the residential retail electric market. The Report cites extensively to NEM's Comments filed in the docket pertaining to the legislature's variable rate ban. PURA makes the following recommendations to the legislature:

"• "Caps" or "rate bands" should not be imposed on supplier rates that take effect at the expiration of a fixed rate term.
• Suppliers should not be required to automatically return customers to Standard Service unless they can obtain affirmative customer consent at each renewal.
• If the legislature seeks a low-risk market with only flat, long-term rates, then continuing the ban on variable rates is the best path forward. Fixed rates offer the least risk for end-users and, like fixed rate mortgages, offer comfort in price stability. Long-term, flat-rate structures will likely yield narrower price fluctuations, but are unlikely to yield the lowest possible price for electricity. Fixed rate contracts also can occasionally work against other state energy policy goals, such as conservation and time-of-use rates. Nevertheless, they represent the safest, most predictable choice.
• If the legislature seeks a market with dynamic pricing options, continued innovation, and the maximum possible savings to customers, then some form of month-to-month rates should be considered. Dynamic pricing structures are likely to yield wider price swings but also greater product and rate innovation. Like an adjustable rate mortgage, this pricing structure would include increased risk for market participants, especially those who do not monitor their contracts, market conditions, and notifications. More information and more timely notification of rate and term changes are now available to consumers, some of whom might be comfortable with a month-to-month product after an initial fixed rate term expires."

The full text of the PURA Report is available on the NEM Website.

The Commission opened a proceeding on the potential benefits to customers of retail competition in the Long Island electricity market and what reforms may be necessary to achieve those benefits. Barriers have prevented competition from developing in LIPA thus far. The Commission issued the following questions for comment:

"1. What are the benefits to customers of a competitive retail electric market? Are such benefits universal, or particularly applicable to the Long Island service area?
2. What are the opportunities for retail competition in the Long Island electric market?
3. What are the barriers to creating a competitive retail market in the Long Island service area? How should these barriers be addressed?
4. What are the best practices elsewhere in the U.S. or globally for competitive retail electric markets that have proven beneficial to customers?
5. What insight from these best practices is available to inform discussions on the issue of retail electric markets, positive or negative? For instance, could the Texas or U.K. model be applied?
6. What, if any, protections are needed for low-income customers in a competitive retail market on Long Island?"

Comments are due April 1, 2016, and reply comments are due May 1, 2016. The full text of the Notice Requesting Comments is available on the NEM Website.