5. Reasonableness of Requested Compensation

UCS requests $19,823.85 for its participation in this proceeding, as follows:

Work on Proceeding
Attorney/Staff		Year	Hours	Hourly Rate	Total
John Galloway		2006	12.75	$125	$ 1,593.75
Clyde Murley		2005	81.75	$173	$14,142.75
Clyde Murley		2006	13.20	$180	$ 2,376.00
Subtotal:					$18,112.50
Preparation of NOI and Compensation Request
Attorney/Staff	Year		Hours	Houly Rate	Total
Clyde Murley	2006		16.7	$90	$ 1,503.00
Subtotal Hourly Compensation:					$ 19,615.50
Expenses					$ 208.35
Total Requested Compensation					$ 19,823.85

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. UCS believes that the total number of hours claimed is reasonable given the scope of this proceeding and the complexity of the issues. UCS did not allocate its time and costs among issues, making it difficult to determine the reasonableness of the aggregate hours claimed. The total aggregate hours claimed, however, are commensurate with the contribution made. We caution UCS, as we have done in connection with intervenor compensation claims it has filed in other Commission proceedings, that future claims will include disallowances for failure to allocate time and costs by issue.

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. The Commission authorized a 2005 hourly rate of $120 for John Galloway (D.06-04-022). Applying a 3% increase for 2006 Galloway's rate raised the rate to $125 (D.07-06-032). Clyde Murley's authorized rate for 2005 was $173 (D.06-06-056). While that same rate was applied in 2006 (D.07-06-032), it was based on Murley's work on decisions that preceded D.07-01-009 which set out the 3% COLA. We here apply that COLA and determine that Murley's rate for his 2006 work in this proceeding is $180.

5.3. Direct Expenses

The itemized direct expenses submitted by UCS include the following:

The cost breakdown included with the request shows the miscellaneous expenses to be commensurate with the work performed, excluding $49.37 for re-filing comments due to messenger delay for which no justification was given. We therefore find $160.87 of the claimed costs reasonable.

6. Productivity

D.98-04-059 directed customers to demonstrate productivity by assigning a reasonable dollar value to the benefits of their participation to ratepayers. (D.98-04-059, pp. 34-35.) The costs of a customer's participation should bear a reasonable relationship to the benefits realized through its participation. This showing assists us in determining the overall reasonableness of the request. The societal and economic value of reducing GHG is recognized in the initiatives of the Commission and of the State of California highlighted above in the Background section. Reduced GHG emissions can protect ratepayers from enormous environmental, public health and financial risks. UCS' participation in R.04-04-003 was productive in that the impact of that participation in the development of a procurement incentives framework far exceeds the cost of its participation.