30-805. Confidential customer information; protection
A. Notwithstanding any other law, a public power entity may not release customer-specific information without specific prior written customer authorization unless the information is reasonably required for legitimate account collection activities or credit analysis activities or when such information aids in providing safe and reliable service to the customer or unless otherwise provided by court order. A public power entity shall adopt reasonable rules and procedures to ensure confidentiality.
B. Notwithstanding any other law, records and proceedings relating to competitive activity, including trade secrets or privileged or confidential commercial or financial information, if disclosure of the information could give a material advantage to another entity, are not open to public inspection and may not be made public except by order of the public power entity's governing body. The information protected as confidential under this section is any information that is similar to the information that would be confidential under section 40-204 if reported by a public service corporation to the Arizona corporation commission.
Notes of Decisions
Ellis v. Salt River Proj. Agric. Improvement & Power Dist. (D. Ariz. 2022).
· cites it 10× “11 Yet, Plaintiffs argue that—under A.R.S. § 30-805(A) and (D), which has since been 12 repealed—Arizona law prohibited distinctions between Solar and Non-Solar customers for 13 the purpose of calculating or recovering “stranded costs.”
Ellis v. Salt River Proj. Agric. Improvement & Power Dist. (D. Ariz. 2020).
· cites it 2× “See A.R.S. § 30-805. 28 9 The District cites § 9-516(A) in support, which states: “It is declared as the public policy of the state that when adequate public utility service under authority of law is being 1 policy is unclear, the District claims Arizona intended to oust…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 30-805(A) — 1 case
Ellis v. Salt River Proj. Agric. Improvement & Power Dist. (D. Ariz. 2022).
“11 Yet, Plaintiffs argue that—under A.R.S. § 30-805(A) and (D), which has since been 12 repealed—Arizona law prohibited distinctions between Solar and Non-Solar customers for 13 the purpose of calculating or recovering “stranded costs.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 30-805(D) — 1 case
Ellis v. Salt River Proj. Agric. Improvement & Power Dist. (D. Ariz. 2022).
“11 Yet, Plaintiffs argue that—under A.R.S. § 30-805(A) and (D), which has since been 12 repealed—Arizona law prohibited distinctions between Solar and Non-Solar customers for 13 the purpose of calculating or recovering “stranded costs.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.