20171222Petition for Intervenor Funding.pdf

Brad M. Purdy
Attorney at Law
Bar No. 3472
2019 N. 17th St.
Boise, ID. 83702
(208) 384-12ee (Land)
(208\ 484-9980 (Cell)
bmpurdv@)hotmail.com
Attorney for Petitioner
Community Action Partnership
Association of Idaho
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION
OF AVISTA CORPORATION DBA AVISTA
UTILITIES FOR AUTHORITY TO
INCREASE ITS RATES AND CHARGES
FOR ELECTRIC AND NATURAL GAS
RECEIVED
?0t? B[c 22 PH 3: 35
,a ! ! t,^. .-' '-!l t6il,:;1 :i-l --jDLliJ
i i i li-i .iIr iili,,{${lSSlON
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO: AVU -E-17 -1
CAPAI'S PETITION FOR
INTERVENOR FLINDING
I. INTRODUCTION
COMES NOW, the Community Action Partnership Association of Idaho (CAPAI) and,
pursuant to Idaho Code $ 6L-617A and Rules 161-165 of the Commission's Rules of Procedure,
IDAPA 31.01.01 .161-165, petitions this Commission for an award of intervenor funding in the
above-captioned pro ceeding.
II. BACKGROUND
On June 9,2017, Avista Corporation (Avista; Company) filed an Application, along with
testimonies, exhibits, and amendments thereto, seeking approval of a general rate increase for
both its electric and gas customers in ldaho. Pursuant to Order No 33808 issued by the
Commission on June 30,2017, CAPAI timely filed a Petition to Intervene in this proceeding on
July 14, 2017. CAPAI's Petition to lntervene was approved by the Commission in Order No.
33825 on July 27,2017 that also scheduled the case for hearing and other deadlines.
CAPAI'S PETITION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING I
CAPAI immediately began reviewing the Company's Application. Settlement
discussions were conducted and CAPAI fully participated in the proposed settlement now before
the Commission for consideration. During these discussions, CAPAI began to formulate its
position on the proposed settlement including, among other things, CAPAI's expression of
interest in exploring a possible funding increase for the Company's Low Income Weatherization
and Low Income Conservation and Education programs. Both Avista and the Commission Staff
agreed to consider CAPAI's positions in this regard and a second level of discussions were held
between all interested persons, but primarily CAPAI, Staff, and Avista. These second round
discussions have likely resulted in a better understanding of Avista's programs and what might
be a final agreement as to the appropriate funding level.
Although the low income issues were addressed in the proposed, all-party settlement
agreement, CAPAI remains in continuing discussions with Staff and Avista. The three parties
agreed that if an agreement can be reached by year's end, a proposal would be submitted to the
Commission. CAPAI remains in discussion with Staff and the Company and agreed that the
objective of discussions would lead to a final resolution which would then be passed along to the
Commission for consideration. It is CAPAI's hope that that the parties will come to terms on the
specifics of setting a proper funding level of LIWA and the Low Income Conservation/education
programs. If a resolution is reached by the year's end, it will be presented to the Commission.
CAPAI has worked closely with the Company and Staff in a collaborative and innovative
fashion. It bears noting that although a final resolution of all low income concems has yet to be
finalized there is a good possibility of reaching a resolution before December 31,2017. These
continued discussions very well might prove likely to have a healthy benefit beyond the scope of
this case and possibly benefit numerous aspects of low income concerxs.
2CAPAI'S PETITION FOR TNTERVENOR FUNDING
III. RESULTS OF THREE PARTY NEGOTIATIONS.
Not only has working closely with Staff and Avista proven to be productive, the process
of working through low income issues in such a manner has benefitted the overall effectiveness
of said programs. Regardless of whether and how the low income interests are to be affected by
the protracted settlement discussions, there is an enhanced understanding of these important
issues and an enhanced working relationship when assessing low income interests.
IV. PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS
Rule 161 Requirements:
Avista is a regulated, electric and gas public utility with gross Idaho intrastate annual
revenues exceeding three million, frve hundred thousand dollars ($3,500,000.00).
Rule 162 Requirements:
(01) Itemized list of Expenses
Consistent with Rule 162(01) 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 unique nature of second-round discussions is such that CAPAI does not yet know if a
final resolution to program funding. It is CAPAI's intent to contact Staff and the Company
immediately after the long Christmas weekend.
Staff has responded by proposing that the actual level of the funding increases for both
these programs should be somewhat less than that proposed by CAPAI. Avista remains in
support of a funding increase at what might be less than CAPAI's proposal. Whatever final
proposal might be made to the Commission, CAPAI proposes that the Commission approve
nJCAPAI'S PETITION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING
CAPAI's funding proposals for weatherization and conservation education. If an agreement can
be reached, to whatever level that agreement is.
3) Statement Showing Costs:
CAPAI fully participated in every aspect of this proceeding from start to finish and
provided input and asserted issues not raised by Staff and other parties. This case spanned
roughly eight months. CAPAI's participation is summarized throughout this Petition, including
in Exhibit "A." For the reasons stated throughout this Petition, CAPAI respectfully submits that
the costs it seeks to recover as set forth in Exhibit A, are reasonable in amount.
The Commission well knows the financial limitations that CAPAI faces. For example,
CAPAI seldom can afford to retain an outside expert witness and does so only in particularly
technical proceedings. In the present case, CAPAI relied heavily on its Executive Director,
Christina Zamora, for all technical and policy aspects of this and any other IPUC case that
CAPAI intervenes in. In that and many other respects, CAPAI'S executive director continues to
play a vital role in low income matters. CAPAI'S executive director is always a highly-qualified
expert who contributes a substantial amount of time and resources so that CAPAI is able to
meaningfully participate in cases before the Commission and provide the Commission with
unique and valuable perspective and information. CAPAI has historically requested an amount
of intervenor funding that prices CAPAI's executive director and legal counsel at a level less
than market rates in any given case.
CAPAI's funding requests have always been less than market rates in a given case
whether pricing the value and cost of CAPAI's executive director or legal counsel. In this
regard, CAPAI notes that its legal counsel has nearly 3 decades of experience in public utility
law, one of the more highly specialized fields in the legal profession. Hourly rates for an
4CAPAI'S PETITION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING
attorney with commensurate experience in such a specialized area of practice in this market are
at least 2-3 times what CAPAI seeks for recovery in its intervenor funding requests.
Furthermore, in the roughly fifteen years that CAPAI's legal counsel has represented CAPAI in
PUC proceedings, his rate has increased only 2-3 times and, even then, the total increase over
fourteen years has been approximately $5O/trour.
Based on the foregoing, CAPAI respectfully submits that the costs incurred and requested
in this Petition are reasonable in amount.
(04) Explanation of Cost Statement
CAPAI is a non-profit corporation overseeing a number of agencies who fight the causes
and conditions of poverty throughout Idaho and has relatively little "discretionary" funds
available for all projects, including participating in IPUC proceedings. CAPAI notes that it has
no choice but to minimize its expenses and maximize the effect that its involvement has in
proceedings before the Commission in light of its limited financial resources for this type of
effort. Thus, CAPAI must adopt a resourceful approach using what limited resources that are at
its disposal.
CAPAI's sole source of funding to cover the costs of intervention before this
Commission is the LIHEAP program. CAPAI's LIHEAP budget is limited and if recent years
serve as any indication, uncertain as to its future levels. In addition, CAPAI is subject to certain
federal limitation in terms of the manner in which it spends its LIHEAP funds. This,
unfortunately, limits the scope of issues that CAPAI is financially able to become involved in.
Finally, CAPAI has no monetary stake in the outcome of this or any other proceeding
before the Commission in the sense that it does not represent for-profit businesses or advocacy
5CAPAI'S PETITION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING
groups representing industry interests. Rather, CAPAI is a voice for the low income ratepayers
of Avista and all other fully regulated utilities in ldaho.
Thus, were it not for the availability of intervenor funding and past awards by this
Commission, CAPAI would not be able to participate in IPUC cases representing an important
and otherwise unrepresented and growing segment of regulated public utility customers. Even
with intervenor funding, participation in Commission cases constitutes a significant financial
hardship because CAPAI must pay its expenses as they are incurred, not if and when intervenor
funding becomes available.
(05) Statement of Difference
CAPAI was the only party to address the Company's low income programs in significant
detail in its direct testimony. Consequently, CAPAI's position in this case is materially different
than Staff s.
Consequently, CAPAI's position differed materially from that of Staff s for purposes of
intervenor funding requirements.
(06) Statement of Recommendation
Avista's low income customers constitute a significant and increasing segment of the
Company's residential ratepayers. In today's increasingly challenging economic times, issues
affecting low income public utility ratepayers also become increasingly important. To the extent
that low income customers are unable to reduce their energy consumption due to limited
financial and other means and to the extent that the poor are most vulnerable to disconnection
due to inability and failure to pay their bills, this clearly and positively affects the general body
of Avista's customers through, among other things, the reduction of bad debt expense, collection
costs, and the lost revenue from customers who cannot afford to pay their electric bills.
CAPAI'S PETITION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING 6
(07) Statement Showing Class of Customer
To the extent that CAPAI represents a specific customer class of Avista, it is the
residential class.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, this 22nd day of December,2}t7.
,4^Pfn
Brad M. Purdy -('('
7CAPAI'S PETITION FOR INTERVENOR FTINDING
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on this22nd day of December 2017,I caused the foregoing
document to be served on the following via electronic and physical service:
Avista Corporation
Kelly Norwood
Kelly. norwood@avistacorp. com
David Meyer
David.meyer@ avistacorp. com
Staff
Brandon Karpen
Brandon.karpen@puc. idaho. qov
Diane Hanian
Secretary
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
d.holt(dpuc.id.gov
Clearwater Paper Corporation
Peter Richardson
peter@richardsonadams. com
Idaho Forest Group
Ron Williams
rons@wil liamsbradbury. com
Idaho Conservation League
Ben Offo
botto@,idahoconserbation.org
Sierra CIub
Travis Ritchie
trav i sri tchie @ s i errac lub. or g
Brad M. Purdy
CAPAI'S PETITION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING 8
EXHIBIT'6A,,
ITEMIZED EXPENSES
CAPAI'S STATEMENT SHOWING COSTS
Case AVU-E-17-l
Tasks performed during course of case.
Expense Categories
The categories of expenses and work performed are as follows
Review of pleadings, motions, applications, etc.
Communications w/client and other parties
Drafting of pleadings, motions, applications, testimony, etc.
Participation in hearings, settlement conferences, conference calls, meetings, etc.
Brad Purdy (59 hrs @ $150.00/hr)
Christina Zamora (14 hrs @ $30.50 hr.)
Total Fees
Copies, postage & miscellaneous
Total Fees and Costs
Hrs
15
t6
t4
t2
57
$8,850
$427
$9277
$110
s9387
9CAPAI'S PETITION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING