Dear Mr. Long and Associates:

I am writing after significant inquiry and numerous requests to advise and request the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to please include demand-site consumer and related issues in their last packet of information to consumers educating the public about the issues of deregulation. These consumer information packets center around the issue of choice in deciding what type of energy generation they purchase. I would request the Commission to please recognize and accept the extreme injustice that has and will continue to occur if there is no mention of the demand-site consumer as an Energy Service Provider choice of distributed electricity generation in their last mailer.

The underlying rationale for this inclusion would be, as is the basis of all constructive law, the reason of etiquette whose basis is simply thoughtfulness. Consider you have struggled for years to legislate laws and bring important sustainable technologies to the point of market deployment. Your business investors and future relies on the promises made by related deployment programs, incentives and government publications. You are pleased to see related incentives initiated like net metering and the 50% Buydown officially offered on March 20th by the California Energy Commission (CEC). An important milestone in demand-site consumer technology deployment is the freedom of a competitive energy industry. On April 1st, the energy industry in California became officially competitive. By 2003, the entire United States electricity industry is scheduled to be officially competitive. Industry clients, associates, investors and friends search through the educational packets mailed to every electricity consumer in the state for instructions and guidelines as to their rights and responsibilities as potential demand-site consumers. Some have been waiting for over two years for cooperation from the utilities to connect existing or potential building-integrated photovoltaic (BI-PV) systems to the distribution grid. Consumers find no instructions or mention of demand-site consumer technology in the educational packets that insist privileged California consumers are being provided a competitive choice of electricity. Law insists we must respect and act upon the statutes that establish demand-site consumers rights to the distribution grid, today, in California. If not, we must discontinue all related propaganda saying consumers and related BI-PV businesses do have such rights. Most demand-site consumer technologies reduce environmental damage and transmission strain on grid lines during peak demand. Due to these obvious benefits to humanity, the environment and the industry demand-site consumers may actually have more of a right than any other Energy Service Provider to guidance and distribution support within the information packets being generated for consumers on deregulation by the CPUC because they further new technologies to meet global, national and state goals of emissions reduction as they evolve opportunities for the US to lead in development of important future technology.

The message forwarded by the California Public Utilities Commission, whether intentional or not, in their not including demand-site consumer technology and issues in their educational materials is that they will not formally support the very real choice of demand-site consumer generated electricity in deregulation or the consumers and producers of this technology who are the most venerable and least subsidized participants of the $200 billion a year energy industry.

In my research for this document, I have heard a number of comments and suggestions as to why this important portion of public education was left out of the deregulation materials. For whatever reason this issue has been overlooked, it must be included in the last packet of information to be sent out to consumers in the next month by DDB Needham on behalf of the CPUC to avoid the further impression of unfair business practices, fraud and whatever veiled incentives may be encouraging such omissions of this needed educational material.

One of the benefits of including demand-site information in the mailer is the dual-purpose savings of educating the public while informing them about important government incentives like the Renewables Technology Program AB 1890 and SB 90 and net metering. The primary concern of the California Energy Commission (CEC)for the $540 million dollar renewables technology incentive program is lack of publicity resources. On June 3, the CEC will consider $5.4 million appropriated for the Consumer Education Trust Fund. If we include the needed one-page summary of Demand-site Consumer information in the last packet to be mailed to an estimated 20 million consumers the only additional costs to the state are for typing, printing and postage needed for adding a one-page flyer.

Caliornia is leading the industry shift to competitive electricity generation, nationally, and for that matter, globally. We must set an example of Equal Access and Education for all forms of industry appropriate electricity generation technology. This is an important global issue of the 21st Century. In the following rationale summary for inclusion of Demand-site Consumer issues in the last mailer of educational materials to be sent to consumers, I will first list the potential risks and then the potential benefits of inclusion of demand-site consumer materials in the last CPUC mailer on deregulation and consumer choice. Please consider the attached lists of risks and benefits.

Sincerely,

Eileen M. Smith, M.Arch.
cc

Commissioners Moore & Sharpless, CEC

Eileen M. Smith, M.Arch. 3535 East Coast Highway Corona del Mar, CA 92625
714-862-5826 bi_pv@yahoo.com http://www.oocities.org/Eureka/1905

Photovoltaics Installed 1984 Washington, DC

Intercultural Center at Georgetown University
PV Shipped By Solarex Founder Dr. Lindmayer Before Enron-Amoco Forced Takeover