- 18 -
"reserve strengthening" has the meaning petitioner ascribes to
it. Respondent continues to contend, however, that the term's
meaning in the P&C insurance industry is ambiguous.
Respondent has presented expert testimony which indicates
that the term is subject to more than one interpretation. One
expert opined that the regulation's definition provided a valid
measurement of "reserve strengthening". Another expert opined
that the regulation's definition, while not technically accurate,
was consistent with a common usage of the term in nonactuarial
reporting. Moreover, respondent notes that the conference
committee report's definition of "reserve strengthening" is fully
consistent with her position. The report stated:
Reserve strengthening is considered to include all
additions to reserves attributable to an increase in an
estimate of a reserve established for a prior accident
year * * * and all additions to reserves resulting from
a change in the assumptions * * * as well as all
unspecified or unallocated additions to loss reserves.
* * * [H. Conf. Rept. 99-841 (Vol. II), supra at II-
367, 1986-3 C.B. (Vol. 4) at 367; emphasis added.]
Respondent also addresses two points made in Western
National regarding the legislative history of "reserve
strengthening". First, respondent argues that the Court's view--
that the conference committee report "conflicts" with other
portions of the legislative history--does not take into account
the evolution of the statute. Conference committees reconcile
differences between House and Senate versions of legislation and
write the final legislation that is enacted into law. In
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011