UCAN requested compensation in the amount of $20, 011.86 as follows:
Charles Carbone, Consumer Advocate: |
|
153.86 hours - Legal services @ $90/hour |
$13,847.00 |
3 hours - Travel (1/2 time) @$90/hour |
$270.00 |
2.5 hours - Preparation of Request for Award of Compensation, (1/2 time) @ $90/hour |
$225.00 |
Michael Shames, Attorney |
|
21.40 hours - Legal services @ $190/hour |
$4,066.00 |
3.2 hours - Travel (1/2 time) @ $190/hour |
$608.00 |
Other Expenses |
|
Air travel |
$598.00 |
Shuttle van and taxi cost/airport parking |
$120.00 |
Copying and postage costs |
$277.46 |
$20,011.46 |
6.1 Overall Benefits of Participation
In D.98-04-059, the Commission adopted a requirement that a customer must demonstrate that its participation was "productive," as that term is used in Section 1801.3, in which the Legislature gave the Commission guidance on program administration. (See D.98-04-059, mimeo. at 31-33, and Finding of Fact 42.) In that decision we discuss the fact that participation must be productive in the sense that the costs of participation should bear a reasonable relationship to the benefits realized through such participation. Customers are directed to demonstrate productivity by assigning a reasonable dollar value to the benefits of their participation to ratepayers. This exercise assists us in determining the reasonableness of the request and in avoiding unproductive participation.
Unfortunately, UCAN's Request for Award of Compensation does not specifically address the costs of its participation in the proceeding in relation to the resulting benefits to MCI customers. However, as a result of this proceeding and CSD's review of MCI's efforts to correct the billing errors and make restitution, additional customers affected by the billing errors were identified and a greater amount of restitution was paid to customers.13
Given the significant number of customers affected and the significant amount of restitution paid by MCI, as well as the evidence that MCI's own restitution efforts had not been successful, we find UCAN's request for an award of $20, 011.86 bears a reasonable relationship to the benefits of its participation and that UCAN's participation was productive.14 We will, however, reduce the award by 20 percent for the reasons discussed in Section 6.2 below.
6.2 Hours Claimed
Although the time records submitted by UCAN in support of its request for intervenor compensation generally appear reasonable, the description of hours for attorney Michael Shames does not identify the time spent by issue in the proceeding. Some of the entries in the time records submitted for Charles Carbone also do not identify the issues on which time was spent. Therefore, it is difficult to determine the amount of time spent by UCAN on issues which were later found without merit. Intervenors, such as UCAN, are required to submit time records that allocate time by issue and task in order to be eligible for intervenor compensation. See D.99-12-005 (1999) at p. 6-10.
Mr. Carbone's time records also include a claim for three and a half hours of file management, which is essentially a clerical task.
MCI points out that the number of the issues raised by UCAN were invalid or moot. We note that CSD's February 19, 1999 report found that UCAN's allegations that MCI had improperly rated Zone 3 calls as intraLATA calls and that MCI was incorrectly billing customers who paid their accounts through automatic debits to a credit card to be without merit. However, UCAN voluntarily dismissed its causes of actions based on slamming and privacy violations as moot at the second prehearing conference because MCI represented that it was no longer offering local telephone service in California.
Therefore, although UCAN has made a substantial contribution to this proceeding, we find it fair to reduce the award of intervenor compensation by 20 percent based on UCAN's failure to submit time records which allocate time by issue and task, and the fact that two of the issues raised by UCAN, i.e., the improper billing of Zone 3 calls as intraLATA calls and of customers who pay by automatic debits to a credit card, were found invalid.
6.3 Hourly Rates
UCAN has requested an hourly rate of $190 per hour for attorney Michael Shames and $90 per hour for consumer advocate Charles Carbone. Both of these hourly rates have previously been approved by the Commission in D.00-01-045 (Shames) and D.98-12-058 (Carbone). We therefore adopt these hourly rates.
6.4 Other Costs
UCAN has requested compensation for miscellaneous costs, including travel, copying and postage in the amount of $995.46. We find these costs to be reasonable.
13 Although MCI originally refunded or credited customers $96,7l2 based on the one-minute overbilling problem, MCI paid customers an additional $290,953 in restitution after CSD uncovered that MCI had made a programming error that impacted the identification of the affected customers and restitution to be paid. MCI also paid restitution to customers based on its failure to notify them of the rate increase for intraLATA calls in the amount of $179,8l8.00 between September and December l998, and $49,744 based on the improper billing for intraLATA calls. MCI initially credited customers for the improper billing of intraLATA calls in the amount of $27,090 between July l998 and November l998, and then issued additional credits of $22,654 during December l998 and January 1999. (See Stipulation of Facts, filed February 4, 2000.) Therefore, it appears that MCI paid a total of approximately $604,573.00 in restitution to customers. (CSD Report, February 4, 2000.) 14 MCI argues that UCAN's participation was not productive because MCI was already making restitution to customers litigation, and that the need to respond UCAN's discovery requests slowed down MCI's restitution efforts. However, CSD reports show that MCI's efforts to identify customers and make restitution before ALJ ordered CSD to review MCI's records had not identified a number of customers affected by the billing errors and had not provided full restitution.