20071127Intervenor funding.pdf

. .e
Bra M. Puy
Attrny at Law
BarNo. 3472
2019 N. 17th St.
Bois, ID. 83702
[phone]
FAX: [phone]
bmpurdy(fhotmail.com
Attorny for Petitioner
Community Action Parership
Assoiation of Ida
IdahlbliC Utilties Comrh.~3Iori
Office of the SecretaryRECEIVED
NOV 2 1 2007
Boise, Idaho
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMSSION
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMSSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF )
PACIFICORP DBA ROCKY MOUNAI )
POWER FOR APPROVAL OF CHAGES TO )
ITS ELECTRC SERVICE SCHEDULES )
)
)
)
)
)
)
01-0S"
CASE NO. PAC-E~
COMMTY ACTION
PARTNRSHIP ASSOCIA-
TION OF IDAHO'S
PETITION FOR
INERVEOR FUING
AN MOTION FOR
EXTENSION OF TIME
Comes now peitioner Communi Action Parhip Asciation ofIdao
(CAPAI) and, purt to Ida Coe § 61-617Aan Rules 161-165 of the
Commsion's Rules of Proceure, IDAPA 31.01.01, peitions th Commsion for an
award of intervenor fuing.
Accordin to IDAPA 31.01.01.164, ths petition is one day late. Legacounl
has been battlig severe cadiae issues since last sumer and spent th better par of thje
pas two days either in the hospital or bein tred at a meical cliic. The unersigned
aplogizs for thi one day delay, but respectfully submits that it does not ham or
CAPAI PETITION FOR INTERVENOR FUDING 1
e e
jeopardize any par to thi proceedin. The undersigned counel represents that thi
petition is being emailed to all paries on this date, wil be overnghted to al paries on
the day after Thgiving, and a had copy is bein fied with the Commsion today.
Counel appreciates anyone's understanding in advance.
Rule 162 Requirements
(01) Itemized list of Expenses
Consistent with Rule 162(01) ofthe Commssion's Rules of Procedure, an
itemizd list of all expenss incured by CAPAI in this proceeding is attached hereto as
Exhbit "A."
(02) Statement of Proposed Findings
CAP AI's proposed fidings are set forth in the testimonies an exhbits of Jon
Howat and Teri Ottens fied in this proceedin. Put succinctly, CAPAI stenuously
opposed the Company's proposal, set forth in the tesimny of Carole Rockney, to
amend Regulation 10R.8 to allow for the recovery of "collection costs" from customers
as a condition of reconnection. CAP AI expressed a considerable number of concern and
legitimte rationale, as well as supporting documentation, why this proposa is disturbin
and unjusifable. Tht rationale and exhbits includes, but is not lied to, the fact that
the proposal contaied no set amounts that the cusomer would be required to pay other
tha to broadly derme the amount as "any reaonable costs asciated with the collection
of unpaid aecounts...." As Mr. Howat observed, this amount could easily exceed the
actual amount of unpaid debt considerably.
Furher, witnesses Howat and Ottens demonsrated how thi would place an
undue burden on low-income cusomers by essentially "penalizing" them and maing it
CAP AI PETITION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING 2
e e
very diffcuh, if not impossible, to recnnect. CAP AI submits tht this is a self-defeatin
proposa and not in the best interests of the general body of ratepayers..
Finlly, Mr. Howat noted that the proposa elimted the incentive to the
Company to stve to mimi collection agency costs or attorney fees associated with
credit an collections.
CAP AI also notes that, une issues such as low-income weatheriztion, CAP AI
has never addressd thi issue before and was requied to delve ino new subject matter
requirin additiona time and expens.
(03) Statement Showing Costs
Attahed hereto as Exhbit "A" is a statement showi the costs incured by
CAP AI in thi proceein. CAP AI submis that the costs an fees incured are
reasnable. CAP AI is on an extremely limed budget and, by necessity, must miimize
its costs to the greatest extent possible. In an effort to do so, it minimizes travel, lodgin,
meal, and other expenss and relies heavily on people in the communties served by the
CAP agencies to prvide valuable inut to the Commsion through the submision of
wrtten commnts and atendace at public hearings. CAP AI also sends its own
employees to metins.
Althoug it utilzed an exprt witness in this cas, Mr. Jon Howat, CAP AI
minimized hi expenss by communicatin solely over the telephone or thrugh email
rather tha maing conductin costly personal meetins.
Finlly, the costs sought to be recovered by CAP AI were reanaly necessa for
CAPAI to fully paricipate in this cas through anysis of the Company's proposa the
fiin of testimny and exhbits, the retention of legal counl an an exp witnes,
CAP AI PETITION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING 3
e e
involvement in procedural discussions and, ultimtely, negotiations with Rocky
Mounta who withdrew the proposal in its entirety.
(04) Explanation of Cost Statement
CAP AI is a non-profit corpration overseeing a number of agencies who fight the
causs an conditions of povert throughout Idao. CAP AI's fuding for any given
effort or year might come from a different variety of sources, including governental and
is, therefore, hihly unredictable. CAP AI wihes to point out that the governtal
agencies who provide or manae the funding CAP AI receives, primily the U.S.
Deparment of Health and Huma Services and the Idao Deparnt of Health and
Welfare, plae considerable restrictions on the maer in which the funds they provide
CAP AI are spent. The amount of fudin that CAP AI uss for interenig in cases
before thi Commssion is severely restricted.
Basd on the foregoin, it is a fat that the cost to CAP AI of paricipatin in this
proceedin constitutes a significant ficial hadship.
This Commsion ha ben extremely aecommodating to CAP AI's regula
involvement in significant proceedins such as this, and the Commssion ha awarded
CAP AI its reasonable costs in pas rate cases. If it were not for thi fact, CAP AI would
simply not be able to afford to paricipate and advance the interests of not only low-
income ratepayers, but al ratepayers. In spite of the Commssion's honorable decisions,
there is never a guaantee that CAP AI wil recver the costs it incurs in these
proceedins. Furhermore, even if the Commsion does uhimtely award full recovery
through intervenor funding, CAP AI must pay its costs as it goes. Ths is a tremendous
CAP AI PETITION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING 4
...e e
strggle, in term of cash-flow, for non-profis organtions, such as CAP AI, who
operate on unpredictable and liited budgets.
CAP AI is concerned about an issue that it and its legal counel has not ha to
address in past cases. This issue perts to cost recovery sought by intervenor Timothy
Shurz and the Idao Irration Pupers Association, Inc. Nothi stated herein should
be construed as a criticism of either of these intervenors or the value of their involvement
in this proceedin. Wht is of concer is as follows: fist, Mr. Shurz seeks
compenstion for hi own personal time involved in this case. Mr. Shurz did not attend
the techncal hear on November 6, 2006 dur which the proposed settlement
stipulation was submitted to the Commssion and the paries in attendace expressed their
support so it is assumed that the travel costs claimed by Mr. Shurz pertai to hi
attendace and involvement in the public hearings conducted in eastern Idaho. Mr.
Shurz seeks $3,350.00 for work performed on the case.
Over the past half decade or so, CAP AI ha formlly intervened and paricipated
in a myria of cass involvi all ofIdao's three major investor-ownd electric utilities,
United Water, Intermountain Gas Company, and has been involved in cases that
generally affect the residential and low-income customers ofIdaho's regulated utilities.
It is fair to say that CAP AI has been the lead advocate for low-income and the only
advocate that represets exclusively the residential clas in most of those cass.
CAP AI highly commends Mr. Shurz for his efforts, but notes that CAP AI ha
never sougt recovery for the work of its former executive director and curent expert
consultant Teri Otens, thoug she is certaiy an expert in her field. Similarly, CAPAI
does not sek, and has never sough, compnsaion for the seces of its curent
CAP AI PETITION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING 5
e e
executive director, Ma Chat. To the best of its rellection, CAPAI ha never sough
compnsation for anythig othe tha its atorny, two exprt witnesses over the pas five
or six yea an out of pocket exps. Whle the Commssion's Rules of Proceure,
IDAPA 31.01.01, do not spcifcally prohibit the recovery of the costs describe above,
CAP AI an it legal counl have ben of the stng imssion bas on countless
intervenor fuin awards mae over the pa 16 yeas or so, that such expenses are not
recverable. If thy ar, it is 1à to say tht CAP AI ha lost the benefi of may
thousds of dolls.
Secnd, CAP AI is concrn about what the scope of recoverble expnss woul
be if they are expanded beyond legal and exp fees and out of pocket costs. As an
exale, the Idao Iration Pu Association seks S510 for "parlegal" servces.
CAP AI ha usd the servces of countless individuals inluding paalegals, admiistative
asists, outside conshas, etc. Should these fees be recoverable, the question is
raisd as to whethr their scope and natu would expand the amunts sought by
intervenors to an exten tht the $40,000.00 availble for inervenor funding could easily
and oft be fully exhused by a sinle pay, such as the Irrator's request in ths ca
ofS66,027.12. Th could prove a disincentive to interenors who cant even bein to
fice such an undert from paicipatin in futue Commssion proceins, which
unermes the desired effect of th fudin.
Finlly, CAPAI notes that it to sent representatives to the public heaings. For
exale, Mr. Rus Spain testifed at th he in or nea Idao Fall. Numus
CAP AI employees spent considerable time speading awaeness of the public hes
CAPAI PETITION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING 6
...e e
thoughout Rocky Mountai's sece terory resuhin in additiona low-income an
residential clas cusomers to eiter attend or submi comments.
Again noth stated herein is mean to suggest the slighest impropriety on the
pa of any other interenor but to point out to the Commsion that expaning the scope
of fees an costs as propose by those interenors argubly consittes a deparure of
exitin policy and could have negative consuences that were not contemplated when
the fudin wa fi estlihed.
In the event that CAPAI ha ben in eror regardig the Commssion's policy on
the scpe of reoverable fees an costs, the CAP AI respfuy suests the followig.
The Commission could either deny the expnses at'btable to Mr. Shurz and th
Irrator's paregal as not bein "reasnable" for th purses of intervenor fuin an
estlish a forml policy for futue proceeds, or grt CAP AI additiona time to
calculate the numerous fees an costs that it ha incurd in thi procedin that ar of a
similar nature. Ths, of cour, would not compnsate CAP AI for lost monies that it
could have recvered over th pa year.
Agai CAP AI applaud th had efforts of it co-intervenors, but submis tht due
to the imrtce of fuin, the scpe of recoverable fees and costs be fairly applied to
all intervenors an that it be as defiitively outlined as possible exactly what is
recverable.
(05) Statement of Diferenee
Whe the Commsion Sta called ino question th propriety of Rocky
Mounta's proposa to rever collection fees, its position wa based on diferent
rationae tha tha prvied by CAPAI who pointed out that the amunt ofthe costs was
CAPAI PETITION FOR INTERVENOR FUDING 7
."e e
completely undefied and incalculable, the amount of costs could drasically exceed the
amount of the actual debt, the proposal would minimize the Company's incentive to
minime its collection costs, the Company's low-income cusomes would bear a
disproportionate amount of the burden of these costs, it would mae it diffcult if not
impossible for low-income customers to reconnect to the system, and as a result of the
foregoing, it would adversely affect the general body of Rocky Mountain's ratepayers.
(06) Statement of Recommendation
CAPAI's opposition to Rocky Mountain's proposal addressed issues of concern to
the general body of ratepayers. The proposa could have had deleterious effects on all
clases of ratepayers for the reasons described above. It is had to imagine that assistin
those cusomers in true need of help by avoiding penahies ofthe natue proposed by the
Company, and possibly causing those customers to drop off the system, is not of interest
or concern to ever cusomer of Rocky Mountain
(07) Statement Showing Class of Customer
To the extent that CAP AI represented a specifc PacifCorp customer clas, it is
the residential class.
7
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, this 21st day of Novembe, 200~
(/""'--".)y ..~B~?~~~
CAP AI PETITION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING 8
.. '. .~'..e
EXIT "A"
ITEMIZD EXPENSES
Costs:
Photocopies and overnght delivery
Total Costs
Fee:
e
$215.04
$215.04
Legal (Brad M. Pudy 45.00 hours ~ $150.00/h) $6,750.00
Exp wiess (Jon Howa)
Total Fees
Total Expenses
CAPAI PETITION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING
$6,195.00
512,945.00
$13,160.04
9
e e
CERTICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY tht on the 21st day of November, 2007,.1 caused to be
served the foregoing PETITION TO INRVE OF COMMTY ACTION
PARTNRSHI ASSOCIATION OF IDAHO on the followi, by electronic fig, in
Cae No. PAC-E-07-05.1
Justin Brown
Bria Dickm
PacifCorp
201 S. Ma St., Suie 2300
Salt Lake Cit, Uta 84111
Rada C. Budge
Raine, Olsn, et. ale
201 E. Center
Pocaello, ID 83204
Eric L. Olsn
Racine, Olsen, et al.
201 E. Ceer
Pocatello, ID 83.204
Conley E. Ward
Givens Purley LLP
601 W. Banock St.
Bois, ID 83702
Kevi B. Homer
1565 Sout Boulevard
Idaho Fals, in 83404
Timothy Shurz
411 S. Mai
FirID 83236 '~--~I~~e)~~Bra M. Pudy . .'._.~¿
,'--_... ..
i Due to physica illness, hard copies were not overnighted to the maiing list above litil November 27,
2007 though a hard copy was :fled with the Idaho 'Public Utilties Commission and electronic copies sent to
the entire List of Pares on November 21, 2007.
PETION TO INRVENE OF COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNRSHI 1
ASSOCIATION OF IDAHO