2. Statutory Obligations/Commission Questions • CFC commented on the functionality of time-varying and dynamic pricing, flat fees, fixed charges, tiers, and default TOU arguing TOU rates should not be mandatory during the initial phases of the transition. • CFC argued against the application of a fixed fee, contending that it would negatively impact conservation measures at best and serve as a cross-subsidy at worse. CFC expressed concern regarding impacts on lower tier customers and the potential for rate shock associated with a quick adoption of a two-tiered rate structure. The Commission agreed that should be avoided. • It was CFC’s position that Inclining Block Rate (IBR) design should be preserved but modified; IBR design should have three tiers and reflect geographic / climate zone differences. The differentials between the tiers should be uniform and substantial; baseline allowances must not unfairly impact energy consumers in individual tiers. The Commission ultimately found that tiered rates could disproportionately affect certain customer groups, including the residential groups CFC argued would be negatively impacted. D.14-06-029 at page 209. Reply Brief of CFC to the Amended Scoping Memo and Ruling of Assigned Commissioner, filed 04.15.2014. Pages 2, 5-6. The Consumer Federation of California’s Opening Comments on Rate Design Proposals Submitted Pursuant to Rulemaking 12-06-013, pages 15-16. Comments of Consumer Federation of California on the May 22, 2015 Alternate Proposed Decision. Page 2. D.15-07-001 at page 72, 86. Reply Brief of CFC to the Amended Scoping Memo and Ruling of Assigned Commissioner, filed 04.15.2014. Pages 3-4. The Consumer Federation of California’s Opening Comments on Rate Design Proposals Submitted Pursuant to Rulemaking 12-06-013, pages 9-13. D. 15-07-001 at pages 103-104, 313. Verified, although CFC’s citation to page 209 of D.14-06-029 is incorrect.
• CFC maintained throughout that TOU rate structures should not be mandatory or truly “mandatory” without an option to opt out. The Commission agreed. D. does not adopt or support mandatory TOU rate structures for residential customers. D.15-07-001 at pages 134, 315. The Consumer Federation of California’s Opening Comments on Rate Design Proposals Submitted Pursuant to Rulemaking 12-06-013, page 14. Duplication of Effort (§ 1801.3(f) and § 1802.5): Intervenor’s Assertion CPUC Discussion a. Was the Office of Ratepayer Advocates (ORA) a party to the proceeding? Yes. Verified b. Were there other parties to the proceeding with positions similar to yours? Yes. Verified c. If so, provide name of other parties: TURN Yes, however various other parties such as Greenlining, CforAT, UCAN, and Vote Solar also maintained positions similar to CFC. d. Intervenor’s claim of non-duplication: CFC took positions in this matter that reflect its consumer protection mission. While the IOUs and other entities with business interests in the various aspect of demand response were more concerned with the costs and expenses relating to profit and loss, CFC steadfastly fought for residential consumers. CFC communicated with parties on several occasions to discuss strategy and positions taken. Non-duplication was also discussed. The specific concerns of CFC and other intervenors were sufficiently divergent that there was very little overlap in positions taken on the issues. Although CFC was not duplicative of the work of other parties, it is false to state that other parties were merely interested in profit margins. PART III: REASONABLENESS OF REQUESTED COMPENSATION (to be completed by Intervenor except where indicated) General Claim of Reasonableness (§ 1801 and § 1806):
Specific Claim:* Claimed CPUC Award ATTORNEY, EXPERT, AND ADVOCATE FEES Item Year Hours Rate $ Basis for Rate* Total $ Hours Rate $ Total $ Attorney Nicole Johnson 2013 51.90 $290 $15,051.00 51.90 $290 $15,051.00 Attorney Don Hilla 2013 136.75 $400 D1505021 $54,700.00 136.75 $320 $43,760.00 Attorney Don Hilla 2014 65.65 $400 D1505021 $26,260.00 65.65 $400 $26,260.00 Attorney Don Hilla 2015 40.50 $400 D1505021 $16,200.00 40.50 $400 $16,200.00 Subtotal: $112,211.00 Subtotal: $101,271.00 INTERVENOR COMPENSATION CLAIM PREPARATION ** Item Year Hours Rate $ Basis for Rate* Total $ Hours Rate Total $ Don Hilla 2015 2.00 $200 ½ rate in D1505021 $400.00 0 $200.00 $0