I wanted to bring to this group's attention the Maryland PSC staff's comments 
regarding BGE's standby service proposal.  The proposal in its current form 
is a result of numerous settlement meetings among BGE, staff, Enron, Trigen 
(a developer of on-site generation), and several large industrial customers.  

In staff's comments, it talks about the DG-related issues raised -- but not 
addressed -- by BGE's filing, and it encourages the Commission to adopt 
state-wide policies to promote a vibrant competitive market for DG 
services.   Harry -- it appears that our many hours spent educating the staff 
(and others) on DG issues was well worth the time.   Significantly, staff 
states in its comments that:  

"A third issue that can impact the adoption of DG services is that of 
interconnection policies.  Interconnection policy differences between the 
IOUs (statewide) can significantly retard the development of a vibrant DG 
industry for services to customers.  As with other aspects of electric 
restructuring, Staff believes that common accepted rules that have statewide 
applicability will promote electric services competition.  Hence, the 
adoption of &one8 set of interconnection standards could provide a good 
incentive for developing a DG services market in Maryland.  Staff believes 
that eventually, the State of Maryland may need to adopt 'a proposed' set of 
interconnection standards that apply Statewide."

Further, staff talks about the benefits of DG:

"Increasing the use of DG services could help Customers by decreasing their 
costs and adding flexibility to their use of electricity services.  Some 
parties could argue that increasing use of DG would also help BGE and allow 
it to avoid unneeded investments in T&D.  The net result would provide 
greater diversity of demand in the wire delivery system and improve overall 
electricity service efficiency.   Staff is of the opinion that a fuller 
adoption of DG services is a positive development, which can provide benefits 
to customers of BGE as well as the IOUs, in terms of avoided (and perhaps 
unnecessary) investments in T&D, and also provide benefits to the State of 
Maryland in terms of a more efficient electric service industry, including 
environmental benefits." 

Please let me know if you would like a copy of BGE's standby filing.

Lisa

---------------------- Forwarded by Lisa Yoho/HOU/EES on 05/19/2000 10:41 AM 
---------------------------


gelert@psc.state.md.us on 05/19/2000 08:53:35 AM

	
To:	rbourland@alexander-cleaver.com, gcarmean@psc.state.md.us, 
dcarson@sweetheart.com, jconopask@psc.state.md.us, daniel.p.gahagan@bge.com, 
s1kilberg@sweetheart.com, edie.l.kinsley@bge.com, 
eklingenstein@dgs.state.md.us, wluoma@trigen.com, mmadigan@trigen.com, 
john.j.murach@bge.com, mwnayden@ober.com, kjobuszewski@sweethart.com, 
stratergy@mediaone.net, smckinley@ingaa.org, jhose@alleghenyenergy.com, 
sheldon.switzer@bge.com, rtaylor@dgs.state.md.us, ctimmerman@psc.state.md.us, 
jwallach@resourceinsight.com, sriverhbw@aol.com, swise@gfrlaw.com, Lisa 
Yoho/HOU/EES@EES, slazarus@psc.state.md.us
cc:	gelert@psc.state.md.us
	
Subject:	BGE Schedule S filing





Greetings:  Attached are Staff's comments submitted to the Commission with
respect to BGE's Schedule S filing.  This item will be before the Maryland
Commission, at the May 24, 2000, Administration Meeting.  (See attached
file: R-1544cover.doc)(See attached file: R-1544text.doc)

If you have any questions about this matter, you may contact me at (410)
767-8026 (prior to 5/23), or Calvin Timmerman at (410) 767-8058.

Many Thanks,
Gunter

 - R-1544cover.doc
 - R-1544text.doc