ARIZONA-ACC rescinds smart meter fee

ACC rescinds smart meter fee

The Arizona Corporation Commission last month ruled that APS could not charge a monthly fee for those residents wishing to opt-out of having a smart meter.

Zack Garcia/Larson Newspapers

The Arizona Corporation Commission last month ruled that APS could not charge a monthly fee for those residents wishing to opt-out of having a smart meter.

It was one of the most hotly-debated issues the Verde Valley had seen in several years: Smart meters.

In 2013, Arizona Public Service began replacing hundreds of thousands of analog meters on homes and multi-family dwellings throughout the state with advanced metering infrastructure, better known as smart meters. By the time APS got to the Verde Valley, many residents had expressed concern regarding smart meters not only for alleged health reasons and privacy concerns but because of the opt-out costs being proposed.

Late last month, the Arizona Corporation Commission denied a request allowing APS to charge a monthly fee of $5 for those who chose to opt-out of having a smart meter installed.

In its ruling, the ACC wrote that several groups of APS customers have raised concerns about the possible negative health effects of smart meters. These customers have requested the ability to retain non-transmitting analog meters, and APS’ proposed opt-out schedule is intended to recover the costs of retaining analog meters for those customers.
APS had proposed two charges for customers who chose to opt-out of AMI metering. Those charges included a one-time $75 “set-up” charge and a recurring monthly meter-reading charge of $30. APS subsequently provided updated cost estimates for a lower monthly fee of $21, the ruling states.


One comment on “ARIZONA-ACC rescinds smart meter fee

  1. This is typical mainstream media misinfo. It is also typical of Larson Newspapers, one of the worst media outfits ever.

    The rescission of the extortion fee decision came about because I appealed it and had the ACC legally stymied. The ACC’s rescission decision only temporarily gets rid of the extortion fee. The decision itself violates the law and is filled with lies so I appealed that decision as well just a couple weeks ago. You can read my appeal at the ACC docket here: .

    BTW, if want to know just how bad Larson is, read this: I have been banned from ever having a letter in his paper (and I am not the only one). That, and general incompetence, is the reason their article below that you sent out does not mention my appeal. This is the truth of what’s going in AZ.

    Below is what I sent out to my lists about the current SM situation:

    Decision Appealed as Liars and Lawbreakers run amok at the ACC
    Information & Perspective By Warren Woodward
    Sedona, Arizona ~ May 12, 2015

    Last month the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) rescinded the decision they made last December to allow APS to charge customers without “smart” meters a monthly extortion fee. However, the ACC’s decision was just a lame stalling technique, and it was filled with illegalities and lies. So I appealed it.

    The ACC’s April decision that I appealed is here:

    Below is the Introduction to my appeal which I filed today. The entire appeal is attached.

    As you’ll see, the ACC has proved what Tacitus said 1,900 years ago: Crime, once exposed, has no refuge but in audacity.


    As an intervenor in ACC Docket # E-01345A-13-0069, I hereby appeal the commission’s ill-conceived Decision # 75047 for the reasons and facts outlined here in this statement.

    In Decision # 75047, the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) has outdone itself in lies, lawlessness and legal gymnastics. It seems the ACC will do almost anything to avoid its responsibilities under law and to deny justice.

    In this appeal, I will be dissecting the ACC’s Decision # 75047 line by line in the order it was written.

    Also addressed will be laws I had not previously realized the ACC was breaking and/or ignoring. These laws are state statutes and codes I came across in the course of researching this appeal.

    Much of this appeal will be a repetition of my original appeal filed January 5, 2015 in this docket, and of my response to the ACC’s “sample orders” which the ACC filed in this docket on March 10, 2015 – and both the appeal and the response were largely repetitions of letters I have written the commission over the last 4 years. (Both my original appeal and my response to the “sample orders” are enclosed as Exhibits A and B, and are included as part of this appeal.)

    This constant repetition is unfortunately necessary because the ACC refuses to break its pattern of ignoring issues and laws which it cannot address or is unwilling to acknowledge altogether. Indeed, the ACC’s malevolent pattern is so ingrained it can only be considered willful and deliberate. To be blunt, it has become quite clear to me that I am dealing with a pack of incorrigible liars and lawbreakers. That will be proved in detail throughout this appeal.

    At the end, it will be obvious that ACC Decision # 75047 is arbitrary and capricious, and that the ACC has abused what discretion it may have had. In short, it will be obvious the ACC has no regard for the law and that Decision # 75047 is completely invalid.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.