Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 40-250 (2026)

Hearing on rate or other change in operations by public service corporation; establishment of rates or other practices by order of commission; rates for retail telecommunications services

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. No public service corporation shall raise any rate, fare, toll, rental or charge, or alter any classification, contract, practice, rule or regulation to result in any increase thereof, except on a showing before the commission and a finding by the commission that an increase is justified. The showing before the commission by a public service corporation with gross operating revenues derived from intrastate operations of less than one million dollars, including the requested rate relief, by a telecommunications corporation or by a member-owned nonprofit cooperative corporation may be made with or without a hearing as determined by order or rule of the commission.

B. When any schedule is filed with the commission stating an individual or joint rate, fare, toll, rental, charge, classification, contract, practice, rule or regulation not increasing or resulting in an increase, the commission, without answer or other pleadings by the interested corporation, but on reasonable notice, may conduct a hearing concerning the propriety of the rate, fare, toll, rental, charge, classification, contract, practice, rule or regulation, and pending the hearing and the decision thereon, it shall not go into effect. The period of suspension thereof shall not extend one hundred twenty days beyond the time when it would otherwise go into effect, unless the commission extends the period of suspension for a further period not exceeding six months.

C. On the hearing the commission shall by order establish the rates, fares, tolls, rentals, charges, classifications, contracts, practices, rules or regulations proposed, in whole or in part, or establish others in lieu thereof, that it finds just and reasonable, and that, if not suspended, shall, on the expiration of thirty days from the time of filing the order, or in such lesser time as the commission grants, become effective and be established, subject to the power of the commission to alter or modify the order.

D. A state regulation of telecommunications providers that is subject to the jurisdiction of the commission shall be competitively neutral in relation to all telecommunications providers competing in this state. Just and reasonable rates for retail telecommunications services that have been classified as competitive by the commission do not need to be based on the rate of return evaluation traditionally used in establishing rates for noncompetitive telecommunications services. Notwithstanding any provision of this chapter and this section to the contrary, maximum rates, terms of service or standards of service for retail telecommunications services classified as competitive may be established or changed on forty calendar days' notice to affected customers and to the commission. The maximum rates, terms of service or standards of service are effective within forty days after the notice unless the commission suspends the effective date. This subsection does not diminish the commission's authority and duty to set just and reasonable rates. An order denying or modifying the filing shall not be ordered until after the commission holds a hearing and finds and determines that such action does not unduly burden or disadvantage the entity in a manner that is not competitively neutral in relation to other telecommunications providers competing in this state regardless of the technology used and the regulatory classification of the other providers. Any period of suspension may not be longer than thirty days after the end of the forty-day notice period. At the end of the suspension period, the requested maximum rates, terms of service or standards of service are effective unless the commission has already acted on the request.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 9 cases, 1978–2004 · leading case: Scates v. Arizona Corp. Comm'n, 578 P.2d 612 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1978).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Scates v. Arizona Corp. Comm'n, 578 P.2d 612 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1978). · cites it 6× “The Superior Court, on summary judgment, upheld the Commission’s order, and this appeal followed.”

City of Casa Grande v. Arizona Water Co., 20 P.3d 590 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “§§ 40-361 through 40-375 (requiring, inter alia, rates charged by public service corporation to be “just and reasonable,” filing of rate schedules with ACC, and notice before rates are increased); A.R.S. § 40-250 (providing for a hearing before rates are increased) and Ariz.”

Sidney Brooks v. Sulphur Springs Valley Elec. Coop., Arizona Corp. Comm'n, 951 F.2d 1050 (9th Cir. 1991). “Ariz.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 40-250 (1985). The utility seeking the change must provide thirty days notice to the Commission and the public.”

Metro Mobile CTS, Inc. v. Newvector Commc'ns, Inc., 661 F. Supp. 1504 (D. Ariz. 1987). · cites it 2× “at section 40-250. The ACC has the power to rescind, alter, or amend any of its orders or decisions.”

Arizona-Am. Water Co. v. Arizona Corp. Comm'n, 98 P.3d 624 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “, A.R.S. § 40-250(B) (Commission can, on its own initiative hold hearings related to reasonableness of rates).”

Mountain States Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Arizona Corp. Comm'n, 672 P.2d 495 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 3× “We must decide whether a revenue increase automatically triggered by a pre-set increase in the value of services is a rate increase within the meaning of A.R.S. § 40-250. 1 We think that it is. It is undisputed that the change will result in a substantial increase in the…”

Arizona Pub. Serv. Co. v. Arizona Corp. Comm'n, 746 P.2d 4 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987). “We note, however, a common thread running through the statutes and the case law: in each, the Commission is acting in a judicial or quasi-judicial manner, that is, the Commission is resolving a conflict between a public service corporation and the public or is ruling on rate…”

Turner Ranches Water & Sanitation Co. v. Arizona Corp. Comm'n, 991 P.2d 804 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1999). “”) section 40-250(A), Turner applied to the Commission for an order approving proposed rate adjustments that would result in a 7.”

Arizona Consumers Council v. Arizona Corp. Comm'n, 22 P.3d 905 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2001). “As a fallback position, the Commission and APS assert that sufficient evidence of APS’s financial status was presented to support the Commission’s decision, which thus could be affirmed on that basis alone. Because we agree with the Commission and APS that sufficient financial…”

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 40-250(A) — 1 case

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 40-250(B) — 1 case

Arizona-Am. Water Co. v. Arizona Corp. Comm'n, 98 P.3d 624 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2004). “, A.R.S. § 40-250(B) (Commission can, on its own initiative hold hearings related to reasonableness of rates).”

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 40-250(C) — 1 case

Metro Mobile CTS, Inc. v. Newvector Commc'ns, Inc., 661 F. Supp. 1504 (D. Ariz. 1987). “at section 40-250. The ACC has the power to rescind, alter, or amend any of its orders or decisions.”

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.