20151204Corrected Petition for Intervenor Funding.pdf

Brad M. Purdy
Attorney at Law
2019 N. 17'h St.
Boise,Idaho 83702
[phone]
Cell: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
HAND DELIVERED
IqECIIVI i,I
2BlSnEC -b Pti l:36
ur r il*Hi'c o il Fii 5 s to iq
December 4,2015
Jean Jewell
Secretary, Idaho Public Utilities Commission
472W. Washington St.
Boise, ID 83702
Re: Case No. ,r*r-(:6-01: CAPAI's Corrected Petition for Intervenor Funding
Dear Ms. Jewell:
Included herewith is the original and seven (7) copies of Community Action Partnership
Association of Idaho's corrected Petition for Intervenor Funding in the above-referenced
proceeding.
As we discussed, there were two errors contained in the original Petition, to wit: l)
Exhibit "A" calculated attorney fees using an old rate of $130.00/trr. That rate was
increased to $150.00 years ago. This correction increases attorney fees from $3,900.00 to
$4,500.00. 2) The caption page of the Petition inaccurately characterized it as a Petition
to Intervene rather than Petition for Intervenor Funding.
Aside from these mistakes, there were no other mistakes made in the Petition for
Intervenor funding. This is to request that you please replace the original copies filed
with the Commission with the enclosed, corrected copies. I am also sending corrected
copies to United Water's legal counsel.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Brad M. Purdy
Brad M. Purdy
Attorney at Law
Bar No. 3472
2019 N. 17th St.
Boise, D. 83702
[phone] (Land)
(zos) 484-9980 (Cell)
[e-mail]
Attorney for Petitioner
Community Action Partnership
Association of Idaho
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION )
oF UNITED WATER IDAHO,INC. FOR )
AUTHORITY TO INCREASE ITS RATES )
AND CHARGES FOR WATER SERVICE IN )
THE STATE OF TDAHO. )
)
_)
ftt'c Llv fit':
?il5BEI -l+ Ptt l:36
u ulitHLc$lih\Bo'un
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
CASE NO. UWI-W-15-01
COMMUNITY ACTION
PARTNERSHIP ASSOCIA-
TION OF IDAHO'S PETITION
FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING
COMES NOW, Applicant Community Action Partnership Association of Idaho (CAPAI)
and, pursuant to Idaho Code $ 6l-617 A and Rules 161-165 of the Commission's Rules of
Procedure,IDAPA 31.01.01, petitions this Commission for an award of intervenor funding in the
above-captioned proceeding.
Rule 16l Requirements:
United Water Idaho, Inc. ("United Water" or "Company") is a regulated, water public
utility with gross Idaho intrastate annual revenues exceeding three million, five hundred
thousand dollars ($3,500,000.00).
Rule 162 Requirements:
(01) Itemized list of Expenses
CAPAI APPLICATION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING
Consistent with Rule 162(0I) of the Commission's Rules of Procedure, an itemized list of
all expenses incurred by CAPAI in this proceeding is attached hereto as Exhibit "A."
(02) Statement of Proposed Findings
The proposed findings and recommendations of CAPAI are set forth in the testimony of
Christina Zamorat previously filed in this matter, and reflected in the settlement stipulation
currently before the Commission to which CAPAI is a signatory.
CAPAI fully participated in every aspect of this case including an analysis of the
Company's requested rate increase and other elements of the application and the impact of those
elements on all residential customers, the merits or questionability of numerous aspects of the
application for a rate increase, reviewing numerous discovery responses, particularly those from
United Water, participation in several formal settlement conferences, numerous sidebar
settlement discussions w/United Water and its legal counsel, receipt, review and respond to
multitudes of emails sent to facilitate settlement without requiring a formal conference on every
line item, the execution of a Settlement Stipulation and a Joint Motion for Approval of the
Settlement Stipulation, along with the pre-filed direct testimony of ChristinaZamora outlining
the basis for CAPAI's support of the settlement now before the Commission for consideration
and, finally, the participation by the undersigned and Ms. Zamora at the hearing conducted to
address the proposed settlement stipulation. Consistent with the Settlement Stipulation, CAPAI
makes the following sufirmary of Ms. Zamora's testimony and presents its statement of proposed
findings and recommendations to the Commission.2
rOn November 16,2}|5,CAPAI filed an erratum to the testimony of Ms. Z,amorato correct a misstatement of the
number of United Water customers. This erratum did not alter the pagination or substance of Ms. Zamora's
testimonv.
'For the sake of brevity, this list is not an exhaustive summation of virtually every issue resolved by the settlement
agreement and for which CAPAI had a position but focuses on those issues most important and unique to United
Water's residential customers in general and low-income in particular.
CAPAI APPLICATION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING 2
A. Revenue Requirement:
Ms. Zamora first expressed concern at the magnitude of the original application (13.27o
or $5.88 million) to be phased-in over two years. Ms. Zamora noted that high users can
sometimes consist of a disproportionate number of low income persons. Ms. Zamora
acknowledged that United Water must recover increasing costs and occasional infrastructure
repair or replacement. The ultimate agreement of a total of 6.07o beginning December of 2015
and 1 .39 commencing in December of 201 6 (for a total increase of 7 .39Vo compared to the
13.2Vo, or $3.4 million, originally proposed, constituted a fair compromise).
B. Rate Design/Rate Spread:
Regarding rate design and the Company's proposal to recover its rate increase on a
uniform percentage basis across all rate components, Ms. Zamora noted CAPAI's preference for
maintaining a fixed monthly charge at a low level. The reasoning behind this is that, unlike
electricity, there can be a greater ability to reduce water consumption. For example, low income
customers who rely upon electric baseboard heat and live in poorly insulated housing, have no
choice but to keep the heat at levels that don't endanger health or home.
In comparison, low income customers of regulated water utilities ostensibly have greater
discretion in their consumption. Sometimes hoses are left running for no purpose, drinking water
is used to clean cars or even the side of one's house, dripping faucets often go unfixed, and so on.
In short, some low income water users might have greater discretion in their water consumption
than do electric customers.
In light of the foregoing, and the relatively minimal increase that the basic monthly
charge will receive are sufficient to alleviate CAPAI's concerns over increasing the monthly
charge.
CAPAI APPLICATION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING
Regarding United Water's proposal to increase residential rates relatively more than other
customer classes, CAPAI is aware that over recent years, Company-performed studies have
shown a lack of parity between customer classes and that residential customers are not paying
their share of the revenue requirement. In light of this and the fact that the amount of increase
agreed upon for the residential class compared to other classes is fair, just and reasonable.
C.Low Income Issues:
As Ms. Zamora noted in her testimony, United Water is the only regulated, investor-
owned utility in the State of Idaho to voluntarily offer a bill assistance program to low-income
individuals. This program, known as "United Water Cares", is designed so that customers who
apply for assistance are limited to a per customer limit. Prior to this case, the eap limit was set at
$50. Because of back and forth negotiations, United Water agreed to increase the eap limit to
$75, which should allow customers to receive additional assistance.
As Ms. Zamora noted, the Cares program was designed to be more than just a pure give-
away program. Instead, eligible customers typically meet with the Community Action Agency
"El Ada," typically after they've become delinquent and are facing disconnection. Under the
program design, the customers may receive up to $75 toward their past due balance, thanks to
United Water's agreement increase the limit in this Settlement. To the extent that the customer's
past due bill exceeds $75, the customer must either pay the remaining balance or work out a
payment iurangement with United Water. Thus, customers who wish to benefit from this
program must demonstrate their ability to pay the remaining balance due.
As mentioned, Cares is funded entirely by the Company's shareholders. Even better than
that is the fact that the program provides system-wide benefits to United Water's ratepayers due
to the reduced disconnections, lost customers, collections costs, and many other negative
CAPAI APPLICATION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING
consequences of losing a customer due to the inability to pay their bill. The aforementioned
costs are, of course, paid for by ratepayers. Thus, CAPAI believes that United Water has taken a
step that no other similar utility has, a step that costs ratepayers nothing, provides low-income
assistance, and actually reduces costs system-wide that ratepayers would otherwise cover.
United Water is to be commended for its forward-thinking approach and sense of responsibility
to its customers and the community.
D. Other Low Income Issues:
In addition to increasing the efficacy of the Cares program, United Water has agreed to
continue providing water conservation information and materials to low-income customers as
needed.
(03) Statement Showing Costs
CAPAI respectfully submits that the costs and fees incurred in this case, and set forth in
Exhibit "A," are reasonable.
CAPAI has historically made a concerted effort to minimize its expenses and maximize
the effect that its efforts have in proceedings before this Commission. Though this matter was
settled, it still required the investment of time and resources by CAPAI to effectively participate
and address issues of concern to the general body of ratepayers. Furthermore, CAPAI's diligent
efforts and United Water's accommodating approach has resulted in benefits to all customers at
absolutely no cost to any of them.
(04) Explanation of Cost Statement
CAPAI is a private, non-profit corporation overseeing a number of agencies who fight the
causes and conditions of poverty throughout Idaho. CAPAI's funding, which comes from
various governmental sources, is in a state of heightened uncertainty and limitations. CAPAI,
CAPAI APPLICATION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING
therefore, has an extremely limited budget to participate in cases before the Commission. Some
matters that CAPAI participates in before this Commission, furthermore, do not qualify for
intervenor funding by virtue of their nature, though they are still quite important to low-income
utility customers.
In light of the magnitude of the rate increase originally requested by United Water,
CAPAI believed that its intervention in this proceeding was necessary to advocate for the
interests of low-income customers. The outcome of that intervention, among other things and as
reflected in the Settlement Stipulation, was to enhance the assistance provided to United Water's
low-income customers through the settlement provisions outlined above. Were it not for the
availability of intervenor funding and past awards by this Commission, CAPAI would not be
able to participate in cases before this Commission. Even with intervenor funding, participation
in Commission cases constitutes a significant financial hardship because CAPAI must pay its
expenses as they are incurred.
(05) Statement of Difference
Although Staff provided valuable input regarding this matter, CAPAI is the only party
who represented the interests of United Water's low-income customers and proposed the
conditions agreed to by United Water, particularly an increase in the amount of shareholder
funding available to qualified low income customers at no cost to ratepayers but with system-
wide benefits that ratepayers will realize as described herein.
(06) Statement of Recommendation
CAPAI submits that its positions taken and overall participation in this proceeding
addressed issues of concern to the general body of United Water's customers. This case is
unique in that it provides many of the same system-wide benefits provided by programs such as
6CAPAI APPLICATION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING
Low Income Weatherization Assistance, but comes at no cost to ratepayers. These system-wide
benefits include, but are not limited to, the fact that reasonably crafted assistance programs such
as Cares reduces irrreruages, debt collection costs, and improves cash flow, among other things.
These are benefits enjoyed by all utility customers, including the low-income. Therefore, the
proposals and recommendations made by CAPAI are "of concern to the general body of utility
users or consumers."
(07) Statement Showing Class of Customer
To the extent that CAPAI represents a specific United Water customer class, it is the
residential class.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, this I't day of December,Z}l5.
Brad M. Purdy
CAPAI APPLICATION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that on the 1't day of December, 2015,I served a copy
of the foregoing document on the following by electronic mail and U.S. postage or hand
delivery.
Donald L. Howell
Dahpne Huang
Deputies Attorney General
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
472W. Washington St.
Boise, D 83702
don.howell @puc.idaho.gov
daphne.huang @ puc.idaho. gov
Dean J. Miller
McDevitt & Miller
420W. Bannock Street
P.O. Box 2564-83701
Boise, D 83702
joe @ mcdevitt-miller.com
heather @ mcdevitt-miller.com
Kevin H. Doherty
Director of Rates
United Water Management and
Services Company
200 Old Hook Road
Harrington Park, NJ 01640-1799
kevin. doherty @ unitedwater. com
)
Brad M. Purdy
CAPAI APPLICATION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING
EXHIBIT "A"
ITEMIZED EXPENSES
Costs:
Photocopies/postage
Total Costs
Fees:
Legal (Brad M. Purdy -30 hours @ $150.004rr.)
Total Fees
Total Expenses
$42.0s
$42.0s
$4,500.00
$4,5oo.oo
$4,542.05
CAPAI's legal counsel worked on the United Water case a total of 82 days (not including time
spent preparing Funding Petition) beginning in February when the Notice of Intent to file a rate
case was filed and ending with the hearing date on Nov 16, 2015.
Due to an unexpected and serious illness, counsel has not been able to provide the level
of detail that he had intended regarding the actual work done and time pertaining to each day.
Should the Commission desire, Counsel could provide greater detail in the next day or two.
Generally speaking, CAPAI coordinated to some extent with the El Ada Community
Action Agency to learn about the progress and efficiency of the Cares program and what types of
funding or program design changes would be most helpful. In this respect, there were a
multitude of meetings, emails and telephone calls conducted in order to negotiate with United
Water and be prepared to respond accurately to any questions that the Commission or Staff
might have regarding the program. Counsel also spoke with several Staff personnel to apprise
them of the sidebar discussions taking place between CAPAI and UWI regarding the Cares
program.
Because the Cares program is funded by United Water's shareholders, CAPAI
participated in numerous meetings and other communications with United Water in order to
reach some resolution on the increased need for the benefits provided by the Cares program.
These sidebar settlement discussions took place in addition to the settlement negotiations
participated in by all parties. Meanwhile, United Water filed its direct case in May which
Counsel analyzed in detail and provided summary of same with ChristinaZamora.
Regarding the all-party negotiations, CAPAI participated in those as well due to its
concern about the amount of rate increase originally proposed. CAPAI also analyzed and
weighed in on rate design/rate spread issues.
CAPAI naturally undertook all tasks necessary for the full involvement in a contested
general rate case starting with a Petition to Intervene and concluding with the filing of Christina
Zamora's testimony and culminating in the hearing conducted in this matter.
Given CAPAI's interest in revenue requirement, rate spread, and rate design issues
(including the amount of basic monthly charge), it was necessary for CAPAI's counsel to review
discovery requests and responses from all parties.
CAPAI APPLICATION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING
As is the case with all cases in which CAPAI has participated, it is essential to maintain
constant communication with CAPAI's Executive Director. Given the rapidly changing nature
of social or business interactions, much more time is spent emailing, texting, or utilizing other
forms of communication between parties, and between attorneys and their clients. It was not
uncommon in this case, nor in any other cases that Counsel is involved in, to send and received
literally dozens of emails each day, often with lengthy documents attached from studies and
analyses by experts hundreds ofpages long, to Excel spreadsheets, and numerous other
information. Thus, the consequence of dealing with dozens of emails in a given day have taken
on substantial complexity and require a much greater amount of time.
This case also required frequent interaction with El Ada personnel to ensure that the data
supplied to the Commission and Staff was accurate, including the results and efficacy of United
Water's Cares program. CAPAI also gleaned critical data from El Ada and other sources to
determine the need for assistance, the backlog of said need, and the program changes necessary
to address the need in the most efficacious manner.
As the case progressed, settlement discussions were being discussed and required
considerable back and forth communications to determine feasible dates and times. Counsel
continued to participate in meetings with El Ada as discussions with United Water and all parties
commenced. Meanwhile, formal settlement negotiations continued to be scheduled and
rescheduled to suit the availability of all critical personnel. Counsel participated in the formal
settlement negotiations once they were finally pinned down. Meanwhile, continued efforts at
working out a settlement regarding the Cares program took place between Counsel and United
Water.
In addition to the foregoing, CAPAI also reconciled the data that United Water and El
Ada had regarding total monies credited by the Company into the Cares program and total
credits received by customers. In addition, it was necessary to account for the abandoned
developer funds that United Water was authorized by the Commission to apply to Cares as
funding and ensure that El Ada's and United Water's numbers were consistent.
Counsel reviewed the proposed settlement terms as they evolved involving all issues not
pertinent to the Cares program. CAPAI also fully participated in the cross-connection and
backflow prevention device issues raised by United Water. Counsel concluded negotiations with
United Water involving the Cares program and the terms and wording that would be included in
the Settlement Stipulation. Inform Staff of the details of the changes to the Cares program.
Counsel reviewed numerous drafts of the settlement stipulation transferred back and forth over
two or so weeks and ultimately executed same on behalf of CAPAI.
Finally, CAPAI prepared and filed the direct testimony of ChristinaZamora in support of
the Settlement Stipulation. Counsel also executed the settlement stipulation and joint motion
seeking approval by the Commission of the settlement.
CAPAI APPLICATION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING 10