V. Reasonableness of Requested Compensation

NRDC requests $62,173.78 for its participation in this proceeding, as follows:

Contributions to D.05-09-043 as an Individual Intervenor
	Time (hours)	Rate ($/hour)	Labor	Expenses	Requested Comp
Wang	33.50	$120.00	$4,020.00	$0.00	$4,020.00
Chang	66.50	$100.00	$6,650.00	$657.20	$7,307.20
Miller	31.75	$150.00	$4,762.50	$0.00	$4,762.50
TOTAL	131.75		$15,432.50	$657.20	$16,089.70
Contribution to D.05-09-043 as PAG and PRG members
	Time (hours)	Rate ($/hour)	Labor	Expenses	Requested Comp
Wang	181.75	$120.00	$21,810.00	$3,474.08	$25,284.08
Chang	208.00	$100.00	$20,800.00	$0.00	$20,800.00
TOTAL	389.75		$42,610.00	$3,474.08	$46,084.08
			Grand Total		$62,173.78

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 its 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. The issues we consider to determine reasonableness are discussed below.

A. Claimed Hours and Expenses

NRDC documented its claimed hours by presenting a daily breakdown of the hours of its experts, accompanied by a brief description of each activity. NRDC also itemized the expenses it is claiming for its contribution to D.05-09-043. We have carefully reviewed this documentation and find that the hourly breakdown reasonably supports the claim for total hours. Consistent with our policies, we note that NRDC claimed 50% of the hours (i.e., the equivalent of half the hourly rate) for time spent preparing its compensation request. NRDC claimed no time for travel. Overall, we find the hours claimed to be reasonable.

We also find NRDC's claimed expenses, which consist of travel-related costs necessary for its participation in the CMS and advisory group meetings, to be commensurate with the work performed and reasonable.

B. Market Rate Standard

In determining compensation, we take into consideration the market rates for similar services from comparably qualified persons. NRDC states its requested rates are purposely conservative, and far below market rates for expertise at similar levels. NRDC engaged the services of two of its own staff scientists (Devra Wang and Audrey Chang), and energy consultant Peter Miller. All of the work was performed in 2005. We discuss the requested hourly rates below.

B.1. Devra Wang

Wang (formerly Bachrach) is the Director of NRDC's California Energy Program. NRDC is requesting an hourly rate of $120 for Wang in this proceeding. We previously awarded Wang a rate of $100 for work in 2002-2004 (D.05-06-027, and D.05-10-030). NRDC requested no rate increases for Wang during this three-year period. In D.05-10-030, we awarded Wang a rate of $110 for 2005 work, but held that "[t]his rate shall not necessarily set a precedent for other work performed in 2005."

In D.05-11-031, we set principles and guidelines for establishing hourly rates for intervenors' representatives for work performed in 2005. In that decision, we set the range of rates for experts at $110-$360/hour. NRDC states the increase to $120 in this proceeding is reasonable considering that Wang has gained significant additional experience and substantially increased her skills and expertise since 2002. NRDC points out that Wang has participated actively in numerous Commission proceedings through the preparation and filing of expert testimony and briefs, presented oral argument and cross-examination, and participated in various workshops. In addition, Wang has published several articles in respected industry journals. NRDC points out that Wang was a Project Scientist when she was awarded the rate of $100/hour, then promoted to a Staff Scientist, then recently promoted to Director of NRDC's California Energy Program. NRDC contends that the $120 rate for work in this proceeding is reasonable and conservative, and below other rates approved by the Commission for advocates with similar expertise and experience.

Overall, we find the $120 hourly rate for Wang to be reasonable, and at the extreme lower end of the rate range set forth in D.05-11-031 in light of her experience and education. We therefore adopt the $120 rate for Wang for work performed in 2005 in this proceeding.

B.2. Audrey Chang

Chang has a Master's degree in Energy Engineering and a Bachelor's degree in Earth Systems, both from Stanford University. Chang has six years of experience working on energy and environmental issues. Prior to joining NRDC in 2005, Chang worked on energy efficiency and green buildings at Energy Solutions and at Stanford University.

NRDC requests an hourly rate of $100 for Chang's participation in this proceeding. As described above, D.05-11-031 sets the hourly rate range for experts for work performed in 2005 at $110-$360.¹² We will therefore adopt a rate of $110 for Chang for 2005, and adjust NRDC's award accordingly (an increase of $2,745 to the total amount requested).

B.3. Peter Miller

NRDC requests an hourly rate of $150 for Miller's participation in this proceeding. Miller was previously awarded this same rate in D.99-11-006, and we adopt it here. We note this rate is within the range prescribed in D.05-11-031.

C. Productivity

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 customers' 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 its request, NRDC describes how it coordinated closely with other intervenors and during the CMS process to present consensus recommendations wherever possible, in a manner that did not duplicate efforts. Although its policy contribution can be difficult to quantify in monetary terms, NRDC notes that the adopted utility program plans are expected to produce $2.7 billion in net benefits to customers over the life of the measures. In addition, the Commission projects that these efforts are capable of avoiding the equivalent of three giant (500 megawatt) power plants over the next three years. The Commission also estimates that the energy savings resulting from the measures installed during the program cycle would reduce global warming pollution by an estimated 3.4 million tons of carbon dioxide in 2008, equivalent to taking about 650,000 cars off the road.¹³ Overall, we find that NRDC's efforts have been productive.

¹² D.05-11-031 was mailed on November 29, 11 days after NRDC filed its compensation request. Thus, the request did not reflect the fee ranges for experts we approved in D.05-11-031.

¹³ D.05-09-043, mimeo., p. 3.