IV. Procedural Issues

UCAN filed its NOI on October 5, 2001. The first PHC was held on February 16, 2001, and the time for filing NOIs would have expired on March 18, 2001. However, § 1804(a)(1) states that "where new issues emerge subsequent to the time set for filing, the commission may determine an appropriate procedure for accepting new or revised notices of intent."

Separate rulings by the Assigned Commissioner and assigned Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), on April 30, 2001 and October 30, 2001, respectively, identified new and emerging issues and established procedures for filing subsequent NOIs. The ALJ ruling determined that UCAN timely filed its NOI, and was a customer pursuant to § 1802(b). UCAN made a showing of financial hardship in its initial request for compensation. In D.03-05-013, we found that UCAN met all the procedural requirements in order to request compensation.

Section 1804(c) requires an eligible customer to file a request for compensation within 60 days of the issuance of a final order or decision by the Commission. Section 1802(a) defines the term "compensation," as used in the intervenor compensation statutes, to include "the fees and costs ... of obtaining judicial review, if any." Since judicial review of a Commission decision usually occurs well after 60 days from the issuance of the Commission decision, we find that the Supreme Court's denial of UCAN's petition for review on November 10, 2004 triggered the 60 day period, and thus find that UCAN's January 7, 2005 request for compensation was timely filed.

Considering the above, we find that UCAN in its subject request has satisfied all the procedural requirements necessary to claim compensation.