20210817Petition for Intervenor Funding.pdf

Brad M. Purdy
Attomey atLaw
Bar No. 3472
2019 N. 17m St.
Boise,ID. 83702
[phone] (Land)
(208) 484-ee80 (Cell)
[e-mail]
Attomey 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 SERVICE TO ELECTRIC
CUSTOMERS IN THE STATE OF IDAHO
t ' 'l:--.'.'r.. " I i :+,.i
i,i', ..1:,; ; 1 ,4il 8: I5
. 'a{r^.tl-i ... : ;-r- trJ
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMIIIISSION
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NOS. AVU.E-21-01
AVU-G-21-01
COMMUNITY ACTION
PARTNERSHIP ASSOCIATION' S
PETITION FOR INTERVENOR
FUNDING
I. INTRODUCTION
COMES NOW, the Community Action Partnership Association of Idaho (CAPAI) and,
pursuant to Idaho Code $ 6l-617Aand 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 proceeding.
II. BACKGROUND
This case was initiated with the filing of an Application by Avista on January 29,2021
for a general rate increase for its electric and natural gas customers; to be phased in over a two
year period consisting of $24.8 million to become effective September 1,2021and September 1,
CAPAI'S PETITION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING 1
2022, rate years I and2, respectively. Avista seeks an increase in rate year I of $24.8 million
(10.1%) and an increase in rate year 2 of $0.1 million (0.1%). The Application was accompanied
by the pre-filed testimony and exhibits of approximately 20 witnesses together with numerous
supporting exhibits.
On February 23,2021, the Commission issued a Notice of Application and Order No.
34930 establishing an intervention deadline which CAPAI timely met by filing its Petition to
Intervene on March 3,2021.
ln the months that followed the filing of Avista's Application, the parties began engaging
in extensive formal discovery. During that time period, telephonic settlement conferences were
conducted between all parties, including CAPAI. All parties ultimately reached a proposed
settlement agreement, which CAPAI agreed to, and the matter was scheduled by the Commission
for technical hearing which CAPAI participated in telephonically.
III. PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS
Rule 161 Requirements (IDAPA 31.01.01.161):
Avista is a regulated, elecfric and gas 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
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
CAPAI proposes that the Commission accept the settlement agreement executed by
Avista and all other parties to this proceeding.
2CAPAI'S PETITION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING
(3) Statement Showing Costs:
CAPAI requests seven thousand dollars ($7,000.00) in Intervenor funding. CAPAI
submits that both the hourly rate and hours expended are reasonable. CAPAI's legal counsel has
nearly thirty (30) years of direct experience before this commission as both Deputy Attorney
General for the Commission Staff and in private practice handling a myriad of cases before this
Commission as well as in other sectors of the law. CAPAI has historically requested an amount
of intervenor funding that prices CAPAI's Executive Director and legal counsel at levels far less
than market rates. Given his nearly three decades of experience in a field that is undeniably
arcane and highly specialized, and given that legal counsel's current hourly rate of$225 is, at
most, near the bottom end of market rates for attorneys with similar experience, CAPAI asserts
that the requested funding is reasonable.
CAPAI fully participated in every aspect of this proceeding from start to finish and
provided input and asserted issues not raised by Staffand other parties, including that CAPAI
and Avista meet, post-decision, to determine ways in which to maximize the efficacy of
CAPAI's existing low-income weatherization program as well as to explore other possibilities to
decrease bad debt expense, among other things, attributable to the inability of the Company's
low-income customers to timely pay their bills. It is anticipated that such a meeting will take
place relatively shortly after the Commission issues its final ruling in this case. For the reasons
stated herein, CAPAI respectfrrlly submits that the costs it seeks to recover as set forth in Exhibit
"A," are reasonable in amount.
(4) Explanation of Cost Statement:
The Commission well knows the financial limitations that CAPAI faces. Rarely is
CAPAI capable to retain well-compensated expert witnesses and must rely on in-house personnel
3CAPAI'S PETITION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING
including both CAPAI and CAP employees. In January of this year, CAPAI unexpectedly lost
its executive director and had to rely on all personnel, both within CAPAI and the agencies it
serves. Given the undersigned's experience in IPUC-related matters, much more of his
experience was needed to participate meaningfully in this case.
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" firnds
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 initial costs of intervention before this
Commission is the LIHEAP progam. CAPAI's LIHEAP budget is limited and its future
existence and levels are uncertain. There have occurred recent changes in terms of the
limitations on how CAPAI administers the federal funding it receives. These changes were not
anticipated and have increased the difficulties CAPAI faces in assisting low-income utility
customers to the greatest extent possible.
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
groups representing industry interests. Rather, CAPAI is a non-profit voice for the low income
ratepayers of Avista and all other fully regulated utilities in Idaho.
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
4CAPAI'S PETITION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING
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.
Finally, CAPAI has not included any out-of-pocket costs not related to attomey fees in
this request. Such costs were absorbed by CAPAI.
Based on the foregoing, CAPAI respectfully submits that the costs incurred and requested
in this Petition are reasonable in amount.
(05) Statement of Difference
As with any case at least partially resolved through settlement, details of positions taken
during such negotiations typically cannot be revealed or otherwise disclosed outside of the
settlement process. Thus, to specifu in this case exactly how the positions taken by CAPAI
during settlement materially differed from those of the Commission Staff carries the risk of
violating the confidentiality provision of negotiated settlements. Just the same, the positions
taken by CAPAI and the Commission Staffwere certainly not identical and differed materially
from one another. CAPAI was the only party to this proceeding to advocate exclusively for the
interests of Avista's low income residential customers who are at the highest risk of non-
payment, late payment, and disconnection; all of which ultimately result in negative
consequences to the general body ofratepayers..
(06) Statement of Recommendation
Avista's low income customers constifute 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
5CAPAI'S PETITION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING
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 to pay their bills, any measures to assist the Company's low income customers in
paymg their bills both 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.
In tight of the foregoing and the fact that the proposed settlement results in a rate
decrease for all customer classes, CAPAI joins al1 other parties in recommending that the
Commission approve the proposed settlement and related motion for approval.
(07) Statement Showing Class of Customer
To the extent that CAPAI represents a specilic customer class of Avista, it is the
residential class.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, this l6th day of August, 2021.
Brad M. Purdy
6CAPAI'S PETITION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING
cBRrrlrcAm gF sERYrcD
I, the undersigne{ heneby certiff that on the l6e day of August ,2O2lrI served a copy of
the foregoing document on all parties of reco,rd in tbis poceeding via elwilonic tansmission.
\Biiad M. Pudy
7CAPAI'S PETITION FOR INTERVENOR FIJNDING
EXHIBIT *A'
ITEMIZED EXPENSES
CAPAI'S STATEMENT SHOWING COSTS
Case AYU-E-20-01
The following explanation of cost statement breaks out the general topic and
categories of work performed by the undersigned. As such, it is not a precise replication of
attorney timesheets due to impracticality and the almost certainty that there would
otherwise be a breach of the attorney-client privilege. Actual hours worked by the
undersigned were taken directly from time sheets and client billings and, thus, are
accurate.
General categories of tasks performed during course of case: Brad M. Purdy.
Analysis of Avista Application with testimony of rouglly 20 witnesses and
numerous attachments and exhibits.
Draft, file and serve CAPAI Petition for Intervention.
Receipt and review dozens, if not hundreds of emails, with attachments, from all
parties to case involving all issues.
Numerous telephone calls all parties, including discussions.
Review all discovery requests and responses.
Review all Commission Orders and Notices.
Review and execute all settlement documents and participate in process of same
Extensive meetings and communications dclient.
Receipt and review testimony and comments of other parties.
Review all public comments.
Prepare for and participate in technical hearing.
Total Hours Worked - Brad M. Purdy
Total Hours worked at billable rate: 31 hrs. @ $225.00/hr.
8CAPAI'S PETITION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING
$6,975.00
Total fees for Brad M. Purdy:
Copies and postage:
TOTAL EXPENSES
$6,975.00
$0
s6,975.00
9CAPAI'S PETITION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING
EXHIBIT .oA'
ITEMIZED EXPENSES
CAPAI'S STATEMENT SHOWING COSTS
Case AVU-E-20-01
The following explanation of cost statement breaks out the general topic and
categories of work performed by the undersigned. As such, it is not a precise replication of
attorney timesheets due to impracticality and the almost certainty that there would
otherwise be a breach of the attorney-client privilege. Actual hours worked by the
undersigned were taken directly from time sheets and client billings and, thus, are
accurate.
General categories of tasks performed during course of case: Brad M. Purdy.
Analysis of Avista Application with testimony of roughly 20 witnesses and
numerous attachments and exhibits.
Draft, file and serve CAPAI Petition for Intervention.
Receipt and review dozens, if not hundreds of emails, with attachments, from all
parties to case involving all issues.
Numerous telephone calls all parties, including discussions.
Review all discovery requests and responses.
Review all Commission Orders and Notices.
Review and execute all settlement documents and participate in process of same
Extensive meetings and communications dclient.
Receipt and review testimony and comments of other parties.
Review all public comments.
Prepare for and participate in technical hearing.
Total Hours Worked - Brad M. Purdy
Total Hours worked at billable rate:31 hrs. @$225.A0hr.
8CAPAI'S PETITION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING
$6,975.00
Total fees for Brad M. Purdy:
Copies and postage:
TOTAL EXPENSES
$6,975.00
$6,975.00
$0
9CAPAI'S PETITION FOR INTERVENOR FUNDING