6. The Reasonableness of Requested Compensation

UCAN requests compensation of $52, 522.90 as follows:

Name	Number of Hours	Hourly Rate	$ Total
UCAN Attorney Fees: Michael Shames	139.9	$195	$ 27,280.50
UCAN Miscellaneous Expenses: Travel Costs Copying & Postage			$ 958.00 273.00
JBS Energy Consultants Expert Witness Fees: William Marcus	74.1	$150	$ 11,112.00
Support Staff Fees Jeffrey Nahigian Gregory Ruszovan Ron Faubion	117.3 8.7 2.0	$ 95 $ 95 $ 65	$ 11,447.50 $ 826.00 $ 130.00
Miscellaneous JBS Energy Expenses: Copying Postage Other			$ 213.12 $ 167.94 $ 114.80
Total Claim for Compensation			$52,522.905

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 § 1801.3, where 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 requirement 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.

We find UCAN's participation was productive in that the costs it claims for its participation were less than the benefits realized. Through UCAN's participation, the Commission had a better record on which to assess the reasonableness of the recommendations set forth in the JR. While it is difficult to put a dollar figure on the benefits UCAN realized for ratepayers, the adoption of the marginal cost numbers proposed by UCAN transformed a requested rate increase into a rate decrease for San Diego customers. We conclude that the benefits realized by UCAN's participation outweigh the costs it claims for that participation.

6.2 Hours Claimed

6.2.1 Attorney's Fees

UCAN documented Mr. Shames's claimed hours by presenting a daily breakdown of hours with a brief description of each activity. The hourly breakdown presented by UCAN reasonably supports its claim for total hours. Given the quality and comprehensiveness of the UCAN recommendations that were subsequently incorporated into the JR, we believe that the attorney hours claimed by UCAN warrant compensation. We comment below on certain aspects of the reporting methodology used in documenting the total hours claimed.

6.2.2 Hours Claimed for Travel

In prior decisions, we have determined that travel time is compensable at one-half the normal hourly rate approved unless the claimant provides a detailed showing that the time was used to work on issues for which we grant compensation.⁶ In its itemized documentation of hours presented here, UCAN has claimed travel time for its attorney at one half the usual rate (by reducing the hours charged by one-half), with the full hourly billing rate applied to the reduction in total hours. While this results in a correct adjustment, we again remind UCAN, as we did previously in D.00-03-051 and D.00-10-020, that we need to be able to identify travel time readily. UCAN should list total travel hours separately, and apply a rate of half that allowed for its attorney's professional work, rather than reducing the travel time by half and combining it with hours for professional work.

6.2.3 Hours Claimed for Preparation of Compensation Request

In similar fashion, UCAN has reduced its claimed hours for preparing the intervenor compensation request by one half and included the result in its total hours for which the full hourly rate of $195 is applied. As we have held in numerous prior decisions, compensation requests are essentially bills for services and do not require a lawyer's skill to prepare. Accordingly, we have reduced by one-half the attorney's rates applied to preparing the compensation request, except in cases where the compensation claim involves technical and legal analysis deserving of compensation at higher rates. As we have stated with respect to hours claimed for travel, we need to be able to identify the hours claimed for preparation of compensation requests readily. While UCAN's calculation method results in the correct amount of compensation, its method of calculation does not properly segregate the hours claimed for preparing the intervenor compensation request. In any future requests, UCAN should therefore list hours claimed for preparing the compensation request separately, and apply a rate of half that allowed for its attorney's professional work, rather than reducing the claimed hours by half and lumping them in with hours claimed for professional work.

6.2.4 Hours Claimed for Expert Witness and Consultant 
Support Staff

UCAN also requested reimbursement for costs incurred to pay an expert witness and consultant support staff for hours charged in connection with this proceeding, as summarized in the tabulation above. The expert witness, William Marcus, prepared testimony that was instrumental in leading to the JR in which UCAN was one of the joint sponsors. In support of its claim, UCAN included copies of invoices documenting the billable hours that were charged to UCAN for the work of its expert witness and the consultant support staff. We conclude that the hours charged are properly documented and reasonable. We shall allow reimbursement for the hours charged for Marcus and the JBS Energy Consulting staff since they contributed to UCAN's overall work product.

6.3 Hourly Rates

6.3.1 Attorney's Fees

UCAN requests compensation for attorney's fees at the rate of $195/hour for Michael Shames. This is the hourly rate that we approved for him in a prior intervenor compensation request for work awarded in 1999, and using the same hourly rate for work performed in 2000 is reasonable.

6.3.2 Expert Witness Fees

UCAN seeks reimbursement for the costs of its expert witness who produced substantiating work for UCAN's settlement proposals and who presented testimony on behalf of UCAN. We have previously approved the hourly rate of $150 applied for this expert compensation, and using the same rate here is reasonable.

6.3.3 Consultant Support Staff Fees

UCAN also seeks reimbursement for fees claimed for support staff of JBS Energy Consultants. The $95 hourly rate claimed for two members of the support staff, Jeffrey Nahigian and Gregory Ruszovan, were approved in prior intervenor compensation awards, and we find it reasonable to apply the same rates here.

In reference to Ron Faubion, UCAN provided no specific references documenting the basis for its requested rate of $65/hour. UCAN merely claimed that the requested JBS staff hourly rates reflects levels that have been previously approved by the Commission with no citations provided. Yet, we find no prior Commission decision awarding the hourly rate claimed for Faubion of $65/hour.

Our independent review indicates that the last Commission decision where intervenor compensation for Ron Faubion was considered was in D.00-09-068 (in A.97-12-020 et al.). In that proceeding, The Utility Reform Network (TURN) had requested intervenor compensation for Ron Faubion in the amount of $50/hour. TURN sought to justify the $50/hour rate by claiming that Faubion performed much the same work for JBS Energy as did his predecessor, Helmich, including preliminary analysis of data request responses, and other tasks related to the preparation and presentation of final testimony in that proceeding. In D.98-08-016, we had approved a $45/hour rate for similar work done by Helmich in 1996 and 1997.

TURN stated that although Faubion performed clerical tasks, JBS Energy only billed TURN for the portion of his time devoted to more "professional" tasks. We increased Helmich's compensation award in D.99-02-006 from $45 to $50/hour (for one hour of work at the higher rate) only after he had participated in many Commission proceedings. Because TURN's request represented the first compensation award for Faubion, we found an hourly rate of only $45/hour reasonable.

We also considered a UCAN intervenor compensation request for work performed by Faubion in D.99-11-006. In that decision, we had declined to award any compensation for Faubion's time because the request was only for clerical work that was presumably already covered in overhead allowances.

Similar to our reasoning in D.99-11-006, we presume that clerical work is already covered in overhead allowances incorporated in professional fees. UCAN failed to show that Faubion's time was for anything other than clerical work. Because UCAN has failed to provide any justification for compensation for Faubion's time in this proceeding, we shall disallow any costs claimed for Faubion. Since two hours were claimed for Faubion, UCAN's compensation award is reduced by $130 (i.e., 2 hours * $65/hour).

6.4 Other Costs

UCAN requests $1,231.04 for other miscellaneous costs (e.g., copying postage, telephone) incurred directly in connection with its work in this proceeding. UCAN also requests reimbursement of $595.86 for miscellaneous costs billed to it by JBS Energy Consultants for copying, postage, etc. We conclude that reimbursement of these costs is reasonable since they represent reasonable expenditures that were incurred to support the work product of UCAN and its consultants in preparing testimony and in sponsoring the JR.