3. Substantial Contribution
In evaluating whether a customer made a substantial contribution to a proceeding, we look at several things. First, we look at whether the Commission adopted one or more of the factual or legal contentions, or specific policy or procedural recommendations put forward by the customer. (§ 1802(i).) Second, if the customer's contentions or recommendations paralleled those of another party we look at whether the customer's participation materially supplemented, complemented, or contributed to the presentation of the other party and thereby assisted the Commission in making its decision. (§§ 1801.3(f) and 1802.5.)
As described in § 1802(i), the assessment of whether the customer made a substantial contribution requires the exercise of judgment.
In assessing whether the customer meets this standard, the Commission typically reviews the record, composed in part of pleadings of the customer and, in litigated matters, the hearing transcripts, and compares it to the findings, conclusions, and orders in the decision to which the customer asserts it contributed. It is then a matter of judgment as to whether the customer's presentation substantially assisted the Commission.2
With this guidance in mind, we turn to the claimed contributions Orcutt made to the proceeding. Orcutt's participation in this proceeding included:
A. Providing a local perspective to all parties regarding this effort;
B. Following closely all meetings of the Nipomo Community Service. District (NCSD) Board of Directors and advising all parties that NCSD had virtually abandoned the pipeline project and had began searching for alternatives. This was the direct cause of the second phase and the extension of the statutory deadline as ordered in the last sentence of D.07-05-041; and
C. Proposing to dismiss Application 06-02-026.
Ultimately, the Commission did dismiss the application.
2 D.98-04-059, 79 CPUC2d 628 at 653.
