All four intervenors timely filed their NOIs after the first prehearing conference. A May 20, 1998 ALJ ruling found AECA and TURN eligible for compensation in this proceeding. However, this ruling found that the Commission decision AECA relied upon to create a rebuttable presumption of significant financial hardship2 granted AECA compensation for 61.6% of its otherwise allowable intervenor costs, because AECA had demonstrated that the economic interest of 61.6% of its members was small compared to the cost of participation. The ALJ's May 20, 1998, ruling directed that if AECA seeks compensation for more than 61.6% of its participation costs in PG&E's general rate case, it should include an appropriate showing of significant financial hardship in its request for compensation. AECA limits its request for compensation to 61.6% of its costs, and thus need not make a further showing of significant financial hardship.

The May 20, 1998 ALJ ruling directed Redwood and Weil to make a further showing regarding their qualifications as a "customer" pursuant to § 1802(b). This ruling also found Weil had made a sufficient showing of significant financial hardship in order to claim intervenor compensation in this proceeding, but that Redwood should make a showing of significant financial hardship in its request for intervenor compensation. A subsequent July 30, 1998 ALJ ruling found Redwood and Weil to be "customers" as defined in § 1802(b).

As required by the May 20 ALJ ruling, Redwood makes a showing of significant financial hardship in its request for intervenor compensation.

Section 1802(g) defines "significant financial hardship" to mean:


"either that the customer cannot afford, without undue hardship, to pay the costs of effective participation, including advocate's fees, expert witness fees, and other reasonable costs of participation, or that, in the case of a group or organization, the economic interest of the individual members of that group or organization is small in comparison to the costs of effective participation in the proceeding."

Redwood attached financial information to its request demonstrating that it has met the "cannot afford to pay standard" in § 1802(g) because it cannot, without undue hardship, afford to pay for its costs of participation. We find on the basis of this financial information that Redwood has shown significant financial hardship.

2 Section 1804(a)(2)(B) allows the customer to include within the NOI a showing that participation in the hearing or proceeding would pose a significant financial hardship. Alternatively, such a showing shall be included with the request for compensation. If a customer has received a finding of significant financial hardship in any proceeding, § 1804 (b)(1) creates a rebuttable presumption that the customer is eligible for compensation in other proceedings which commence within one year of the date of the finding.

Previous PageTop Of PageNext PageGo To First Page