c. If so, provide name of other parties: NRDC, The Greenlining Confirmed Institute, Sierra Club d. claim of non-duplication: was not Intervenor’s EDF’s advocacy Noted duplicative of other EDF produced and delivered parties’ efforts. stand-alone documents and comments during the proceeding, which focused on strong support of the projects that, as a whole, aid in strategic electrification of transportation across light, medium, and heavy-duty sectors. PART III: REASONABLENESS OF REQUESTED COMPENSATION: General Claim of Reasonableness (§ 1801 and § 1806): a. claim of cost reasonableness: costs were Intervenor’s EDF’s CPUC Discussion reasonable for investigation of the application. The office carefully considered its advocacy during the course of the docket Noted and attempted to use cost-effective methods over the course of the proceeding. b. Reasonableness of hours claimed: EDF worked diligently Noted throughout the process to only spend a reasonable and prudent amount of time. c. Allocation of hours by issue: All of work involved EDF’s Noted analysis of and recommendations to strengthen utility priority review and standard review projects. In particular, EDF focused on the need for load management, including by considering a more dynamic rate, the need for benefits to inure in disadvantaged communities, the benefits of a utility ownership model, and the need for robust marketing, education, and outreach. Specific Claim:* Claimed CPUC Award ATTORNEY, EXPERT, AND ADVOCATE FEES Basis for Item Year Hours Rate $ Rate* Total $ Hours Rate $ Total $ Jennifer 2017 57.75 $405 D. 15-11-037, $23,388.75 57.75 $405.00 $23,388.75 Weberski D. 16-10-014 Larissa 2017 169.5 $225 D. 17-03-010, $38,137.50 167.50 $225.00 $37,687.50 Koehler [A] Res. ALJ-329 Larissa 2018 24 $225 D. 17-03-010, $5,400 24.00 $225.00 $5,400.00 Koehler Res. ALJ-329 Subtotal: $ 66,926.25 Subtotal: $66,476.25 INTERVENOR COMPENSATION CLAIM PREPARATION ** Item Year Hours Rate $ Basis for Total $ Hours Rate Total $
c. If so, provide name of other parties: NRDC, The Greenlining Institute, Sierra Club Confirmed d. Intervenor’s claim of non-duplication: EDF’s advocacy was not duplicative of other parties’ efforts. EDF produced and delivered stand-alone documents and comments during the proceeding, which focused on strong support of the projects that, as a whole, aid in strategic electrification of transportation across light, medium, and heavy-duty sectors. Noted PART III: REASONABLENESS OF REQUESTED COMPENSATION: General Claim of Reasonableness (§ 1801 and § 1806): a. Intervenor’s claim of cost reasonableness: EDF’s costs were reasonable for investigation of the application. The office carefully considered its advocacy during the course of the docket and attempted to use cost-effective methods over the course of the proceeding. CPUC Discussion Noted b. Reasonableness of hours claimed: EDF worked diligently throughout the process to only spend a reasonable and prudent amount of time. Noted c. Allocation of hours by issue: All of EDF’s work involved analysis of and recommendations to strengthen utility priority review and standard review projects. In particular, EDF focused on the need for load management, including by considering a more dynamic rate, the need for benefits to inure in disadvantaged communities, the benefits of a utility ownership model, and the need for robust marketing, education, and outreach. Noted Specific Claim:* Claimed CPUC Award ATTORNEY, EXPERT, AND ADVOCATE FEES Item Year Hours Rate $ Basis for Rate* Total $ Hours Rate $ Total $ Jennifer Weberski 2017 57.75 $405 D. 15-11-037, D. 16-10-014 $23,388.75 57.75 $405.00 $23,388.75 Larissa Koehler 2017 169.5 $225 D. 17-03-010, Res. ALJ-329 $38,137.50 167.50 [A] $225.00 $37,687.50 Larissa Koehler 2018 24 $225 D. 17-03-010, Res. ALJ-329 $5,400 24.00 $225.00 $5,400.00 Subtotal: $ 66,926.25 Subtotal: $66,476.25 INTERVENOR COMPENSATION CLAIM PREPARATION ** Item Year Hours Rate $ Basis for Total $ Hours Rate Total $
233345223.docx