5. Reasonableness of Requested Compensation

Green Power requests $105,648 for its participation in this proceeding, as follows:

GPI Staff Time, Morris, 2003 hrs	129 hrs @ $200 /hr	$ 25,800
GPI Staff Time, Morris, 2004 hrs	343 hrs @ $210 /hr	$ 72,030
Comp Request Prep Time, Morris	42 hrs @ $105 /hr	$ 4,410
Document Filing and Serving		$ 273
Legal Consulting on Regulatory Policy	8.25 hrs @$380/hr	$ 3,135
Total Compensation Request		$105,648

The components of this request must constitute reasonable fees and costs of the customer's preparation for and participation in a proceeding that resulted in a substantial contribution. Thus, only those fees and costs associated with the customer's work that the Commission concludes made a substantial contribution are reasonable and eligible for compensation.

To assist us in determining the reasonableness of the requested compensation, D.98-04-059 directed customers to demonstrate productivity by assigning a reasonable dollar value to the benefits of their participation to ratepayers. The costs of a customer's participation should bear a reasonable relationship to the benefits realized through their participation. This showing assists us in determining the overall reasonableness of the request.

In a rulemaking proceeding such as this one, it is not practical or realistic to assign a dollar value to the benefits of an intervenor's participation. Nevertheless, we will generally look at the costs of a customer's participation in light of the nature and scope of the proceeding. This is a major proceeding of broad scope that is moving quickly to implement the legislation creating the RPS program, which is intended to have significant social, economic, and other benefits. The fact that Green Power is seeking compensation for its contribution to three separate decisions, all issued within the span of 30 days, shows the scope of the proceeding. Given this scope, the significant potential societal benefits of the RPS program, and our finding of substantial contribution, the costs of Green Power's participation bear a reasonable relationship to the benefits realized through its participation. We find that Green Power's efforts have been productive.

Next, we must assess whether the hours claimed for the customer's efforts that resulted in substantial contributions to Commission decisions are reasonable.

Green Power documented its claimed hours by presenting a daily breakdown of the hours of its staff, accompanied by a brief description of each activity. The hourly breakdown reasonably supports the claim for total hours.² Since we found that Green Power's efforts made a substantial contribution to the delineated decisions, we need not exclude from Green Power's award compensation for certain issues.

The requested 2003 rate of $200 per hour for Dr. Gregory Morris (Morris), Green Power's Director and witness, was approved in D.04-01-046 for his earlier work on RPS issues, resulting in a substantial contribution to D.03-06-071. Green Power requests an increase in Morris' rate to $210 per hour for his work in 2004. We find this increase reasonable, particularly given Morris' increasing familiarity with the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. Accordingly, we award compensation to Morris' time at the rates of $200 for 2003 and $210 for 2004.

The itemized direct expenses submitted by Green Power include costs for legal consulting and document preparation, service, and filing, and total $3,408. These costs include 8.25 hours of legal work by Jon Welner (Welner), an attorney who was admitted to the bar in 1995 and in practice since. Welner billed Green Power at a rate of $380 for all hours.³ This rate is high compared to the rates we normally award for attorneys with similar work experience. For example, in D.04-08-025, we awarded Jeffrey Gray, also an attorney who received his JD and passed the bar in 1995, a rate of $285/hour, noting that his significant level of responsibility in the case led us to award him a rate in the upper end of the associate range. We will adopt the same rate for all of Welner's work in this case. The cost breakdown included with the request shows the miscellaneous expenses to be commensurate with the work performed. We find these costs reasonable.