Corp Comm Defends Controversial APS Solar Charge Amid Growing Debate

The Arizona Corporation Commission has reaffirmed its position regarding the grid access charge (GAC) imposed by Arizona Public Service (APS) on residential solar customers. This decision has sparked controversy as solar advocates argue that the charge is unjust.

In a recent vote, the commissioners decided three to one to uphold the charge, while Republican Commissioner Lea Marquez Peterson was absent due to a personal emergency. The GAC was part of APS’s latest rate case, prompting solar advocates to request a reconsideration, which led to a rehearing held in late October.

Following extensive testimony during the rehearing, administrative law judge Belinda Martin concluded that the commission has the discretion to enforce the GAC. She noted that while the GAC isn’t discriminatory towards solar customers, opting not to implement it would not be unfair to non-solar customers either.

APS defended the GAC, stating it helps recover the costs associated with serving solar customers. The utility argued without the charge, non-solar customers would bear the financial burden of these additional costs.

The three Republican commissioners who voted in favor expressed concerns over potential financial imbalances impacting non-solar customers. Commissioner Kevin Thompson emphasized the need for equitable cost distribution among service classes, reinforcing that evidence of inequity exists.

Opposition to the GAC came from groups including Vote Solar and the Arizona Solar Energy Industries Association, alongside state agencies such as the Residential Utility Consumer Office. These groups contended there was no proof that solar customers incurred higher service costs and asserted that such customers actually help to reduce overall expenses by contributing excess energy to the grid.

Commission Chairman Jim O’Connor also cautioned potential solar energy adopters against assuming it could meet all their energy needs year-round. “I would ask homeowners considering solar to do their homework,” he stated.

Commissioner Anna Tovar, the sole Democrat on the commission, opposed the GAC, labeling it discriminatory. She warned that this charge could deter potential solar customers from making the switch.

Autumn Johnson, an attorney with the Arizona Solar Energy Industries Association, described the decision as expected but misguided. She indicated that appeals would likely be planned as soon as the GAC order is filed.

Johnson expressed confidence that there would be a strong likelihood of winning on appeal, describing the commission’s decision as arbitrary and an abuse of discretion.