5. Reasonableness of Requested Compensation

IAG requests $120,140.71 for its participation in this proceeding, as follows:

Work on Proceeding
Attorney/Staff	Year	Hours	Hourly Rate	Total $
Kathleen Maloney-Bellomo	2008	233.7	$425	$99,322.50
Kathleen Maloney-Bellomo	2009	5.0	$425	$ 2,125.00
Subtotal Hourly Compensation:				$101,447.50
Travel, NOI and Compensation Request Preparation (1/2 rate)
Attorney/Staff	Year	Hours	Hourly Rate	Total $
Kathleen Maloney-Bellomo (Travel)	2008	24.0	$212.50	$5,100.00
Kathleen Maloney-Bellomo (NOI and Comp Request)	2008	56.3	$212.50	$11,963.75
Subtotal NOI and Compensation Request Compensation:				$17,063.75
Miscellaneous Expenses:				$ 1,629.46
Total Requested Compensation:				$120,140.7110

In general, the components of the request must constitute reasonable fees and costs of the customer's preparation for and participation in a proceeding that resulted in a substantial contribution. The issues we consider to determine reasonableness are discussed below:

5.1. Hours and Costs Related to and Necessary for Substantial Contribution

We first assess whether the hours claimed for the customer's efforts that resulted in substantial contributions to Commission decisions are reasonable by determining to what degree the hours and costs are related to the work performed and necessary for the substantial contribution.

SCE's opposition to IAG's request for intervenor compensation states "IAG seeks $11,963.75 for 56.3 hours spent on three iterations of its NOI. Although the proposed hourly rate for work on these three NOIs has been halved, IAG does not explain why it should be awarded compensation for its failure to get it right the first time."¹¹ In IAG's defense, it states that:

"The amount of time expended in NOI filings likely exceeds the "ordinary" amount of time spent by intervenors. This is because IAG's business is unique in California, and the ALJ had many questions about the business in order to determine customer status. IAG's business is aquaculture, specifically raising trout for planting in fisheries for recreation in the Eastern Sierra. IAG filed an NOI and three Amended NOIs to provide specific information in response to questions posed by the assigned ALJ, some of which appear to be novel in issues and required IAG to gather a variety of information over time.¹²"

IAG did act at the request of the ALJ in preparing its NOIs. However, as we stated earlier, IAG provided ambiguous responses to the ALJ's questions. IAG could have reduced the amount of time spent on its responses if it had been more straightforward. Given these circumstances, we reduce IAG's hours spent preparing its NOIs but not its hours related to preparation of its compensation claim. We reduce the time requested by ½ to reflect the fact that the ALJ should have been provided with clear unambiguous responses from the beginning.

IAG documented its total claimed hours by presenting 60 pages from a 2008-2009 "Day-at-a-Glance" calendar, which according to IAG was maintained exclusively for work performed in this proceeding by IAG's attorney. Details of the work performed each day are provided for each entry and a total of hours charged each day is noted at the bottom of the daily entry. The number of hours claimed is excessive given IAG's narrow contribution in this case and the documents prepared, and therefore we must reduce the hours we compensate IAG for.

IAG failed, however, to provide an allocation of time by major issue.
D.98-04-059 at 48 directs intervenors to allocate their time and costs by issue. In addition, the scoping memo issued in this proceeding specifically stated that "intervenors must classify time by issue."¹³ As a result of IAG's failure to allocate its time by issues and the fact that the supporting documentation provided in IAG's request is not sufficiently detailed to produce a precise assessment of hours and/or disallowances for each of the issues, we rely upon our discretion and apply a uniform percentage disallowance to IAG's overall claim of hours. This approach is in keeping with our practice in past intervenor compensation claims where we have disallowed costs based upon a range of percentages. In a number of instances, we have applied disallowance percentages between 10% and 33%. In this case, we adopt a slightly higher disallowance due to the extent of the work which did not provide a substantial contribution and given the fact that the scoping memo specifically required intervenors to allocate time by issue and IAG failed to do so. We conclude a 50% disallowance is warranted to IAG's professional hours.

IAG requests travel time and mileage reimbursement for attorney Maloney-Bellomo but only mileage reimbursement for its expert, Frederickson. Maloney-Bellomo traveled from Mono County to San Francisco to attend the PHC and the hearing; Frederickson attended only the hearing. IAG states that the closest commercial airport is in Reno, which is a 3-hour drive one-way. Based on its location, IAG submits that driving was less expensive than the purchase of airline tickets, airport parking and transportation into San Francisco. We agree. We find that IAG's travel time and costs were both efficient and not related to "routine" travel. IAG is not a regular intervenor in Commission proceedings and its participation here was solely based on its concerns surrounding the
Lundy Project.

5.2. Intervenor Hourly Rates

We next take into consideration whether the claimed fees and costs are comparable to the market rates paid to experts and advocates having comparable training and experience and offering similar services.

IAG seeks an hourly rate of $425 for Kathleen Maloney Bellomo, for work performed in 2008 and 2009. An hourly rate for Kathleen Maloney Bellomo has not been previously set by the Commission. Bellomo has been a member of the State Bar of California for 26 years. She was hired as a staff attorney at the Commission in 1986 where she worked for the Commission in various capacities. She formally separated from state service in 2005. During her assignments for the Commission she worked as a senior litigation attorney for DRA, appellate and advisory attorney for the Commission, and Administrative Law Judge. She represented DRA in a number of general rate cases, including several Edison general rate cases (GRCs) and was the lead attorney for DRA one GRC. Maloney Bellomo has appeared in proceedings before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and in litigation before the California State Water Resources Control Board. IAG submits that the hourly rate of $425 is justified because of Maloney Bellomo's extensive experience in the field of public utility regulation, as well as her relevant experience in other administrative forums. IAG states that it referenced the hourly rates in D.07-01-009 issued in D.06-08-019 to provide a preliminary estimate of its costs in its NOI as required by
Section 1804(a)(2)(A0(ii), and submits that the hourly rate is reasonable for her compensation.

We disagree with SCE's opposition that IAG failed to meet its burden of justifying its hourly rate request for Maloney Bellomo's work. We do note however, that this justification is best outlined in IAG's NOI, not in its request for compensation. We find the hourly rate request of $425 for Maloney Bellomo's work in 2008 and 2009 to be justified, given her training, background and experience and we adopt this rate here.

5.3. Direct Expenses

The itemized direct expenses submitted by IAG include the following:

We disallow IAG's request of $400.00 for reimbursement of lodging and meals. IAG failed to provide lodging receipts and the Commission does not compensate for meals. The remainder of IAG's miscellaneous expenses appear reasonable and commensurate with the work performed and should be compensated.

¹⁰ IGA voluntarily removed 50 hours of work in 2008 for its expert, John Frederickson and 70 hours of Kathleen Maloney-Bellomo's 2008 work on "miscellaneous hydro costs." The waiver for Frederickson is because he does not intend to appear in future Commission proceedings and IAG did not want to incur potentially unreimbursed costs for time spent on establishing an hourly rate for his work here. As such, we do not adopt an hourly rate for his 2008 work. IAG states on page 8 of its request for intervenor compensation that Maloney-Bellomo's hours related to work on "miscellaneous hydro costs" are waived as a voluntary efficiency reduction, since IAG failed to make a substantial contribution in this area.

¹¹ Southern California Edison Company (U338E) Response to Requests for Intervenor Compensation Filed by Greenlining and IAG, filed June 10, 2009 at 19.

¹² Claim and Decision on Request for Intervenor Compensation, filed by IAG on
May 15, 2009 at 10.

¹³ Scoping Memo at 12.