North East Arizona Energy Services Company (nea_esco)

HC30 Box 2A

Concho, AZ 85924

(928) 587-6378


Utility Commission

Corporation Commission

State of Arizona


Response to Staff Report

In the Generic Electric

Restructuring Docket



Dear Sir(s):

Please find enclosed a greatly reduced version of the Generic Restructuring Docket. I have reduced it to 22 pages and highlighted to bring into focus what I think is a main string of thought. I very much hope that this attempt to enjoin you in a critical discussion is appreciated for its appropriateness.

When reading the docket for instruction on "what was happening" I discovered within the Docket itself what I think are several points of redirect.


  1. There is an immediate need to take action because the adequacy of our available supply of energy for today’s needs are being challenged
  • Existent transmission constraints of electrical current
  • Inadequate supplies of natural gas for current and proposed use
  • "Dirty" generators being used in "must run" situation
  1. Actions that have been taken to date counter spoken intent
  • Cheap energy (as regulated by the Commission) equals a field in which competition cannot take root
  • Dependency on "foreign" (other than Arizona) sources is dangerous, e.g.; California crisis, etc.
  1. Certain actions being proposed are "affordable" and if done on large enough scale, can be truly effective in creating a self-reliant, cheap, clean, energy future.
  • Impose a "surcharge" or "addor" to the price of electricity. This can be done because the "hard cost" has been artificially kept low.
  • Impose this charge broadly, Arizona Wide.

    Impose this charge based on an index of what source was used to produce the electricity at the generation site.

    This charge would be imposed on the retail level because of the clarity of authority (wholesale authority FERC not involved).

    We can find success now by enacting this while encouraging competition..

  • Require that all billing on the retail level have a "truth in label" section where it discloses all sources of energy as a percentage of total energy on line and show the appropriate charge relative to that energy source (based on "Externalities" as referenced in DOE/ Duke University Report or our own 1992 Externalities Report, or Commission Ruling.)
  • DISCLOSURE will encourage a higher awareness of our total "Social Cost" choices. Hopefully this will lead to greater social responsibility (consumer CHOICE).
  • Monies obtained from this "surcharge" would be put into a state-wide fund, available to all who purchase clean renewable energy generation technology (comparable to what California has had&emdash;approximately 50% of the actual cost as "rebate").
  • These actions will help "level the playing field" mentioned by several participants.
  • We can open our eyes to the true total "Social" costs involved in our actions. When these total costs are calculated in our attempt modify our future by comparing and insisting on "cheap is better", at least see "cheap" relative to "real" and not just "hard".
  • These suggested actions above should not preclude the continuance of the other renewable energy incentives; e.g., EPS, net metering, etc.)
  • The Environmental Portfolio Standard (EPS) could be used as a "template" by expanding its authority and breadth.

Thank you very much for your attention to this matter, not just for what you’ve already done (which is massive), but for what you are doing today. Please find the enclosed attachment. Thank you again.



Larry E. Bell


North East Arizona Energy Services Company

cc: Department of Energy, Golden Field Office, Million Solar Roofs

Million Solar Roofs Western Region Office, Seattle, WA

Greater Tucson Coalition for Solar Energy

Million Solar Roofs State Partnership, Phoenix

Million Solar Roofs SRP Partnership

Go back to issues