Sunset Stripped

In an interesting published opinion issued on Tuesday, a panel of the Minnesota Court of Appeals set aside the assessment of penalties against a major telecommunications firm, AT&T. Among the issues in the case was whether the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission maintained the authority to penalize misconduct by a regulated party after the sunset date of the Commission’s penalty statute, but as to conduct which occurred before the statute expired.

AT&T argued that the sunset date of the statute signified the last date on which the Commission could wield the powers that were set forth in the expiring statute. The Commission countered that as it is with regulatory matters under a statute that has been later repealed by the Legislature, Minnesota’s general savings clause statute preserves the use of powers in an expiring statute for use in proceedings that have accrued before the sunset date.

Siding with the regulated party, AT&T, the appellate panel explained:

For the purpose of the general saving statute, a statute that is repealed is treated differently from one that has expired by its own terms. The due process concerns underlying the general saving statute do not exist with a statute that includes an expiration date because the original statute gives notice to all that the statute will expire on a specific date. Moreover, the statute was extended twice previously, establishing that the MPUC understood that it could seek an extension of the penalty authority when it became evident that it could not complete pending dockets before August 1, 2006. The MPUC did not do so, and such an extension should not be implied by operation of the saving statute. Accordingly, because Minn. Stat. § 237.462 is not saved by the general saving statute, the MPUC did not have the power to impose penalties after August 1, 2006.

The panel’s complete analysis is accessible here.