LETTER NO. L-5-95 SIXTH FLOOR, 900 HOWE STREET, BOX 250 VANCOUVER, B.C. CANADA V6Z 2N3 TELEPHONE: (604) 660-4700 ROBERT J. PELLATT BC TOLL FREE: 1-800-663-1385 COMMISSION SECRETARY FACSIMILE: (604) 660-1102 February 3, 1995 Mr. David George Box 3 Crawford Bay, B.C. VOB lEO Dear Mr. George: Re: British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority 1994/95 Revenue Requirements Application - Participant Funding Request The Commission has given consideration to your letter of January 16, 1995 expressing concerns with respect to your participation and that of the Kootenay-Okanagan Electric Consumers Association ("ECA") as an intervenor in future public hearings. In answer to the specific questions in the second paragraph of your letter, the Commission is not suggesting that the ECA must hire a lawyer to represent them at future hearings. Nor is the Commission suggesting that you personally not represent the ECA again. As a representative of the ECA and commercial customers in the West Kootenay Power Ltd. ("WKP") service area you have provided useful intervention at those hearings and this contribution was recognized tangibly by the Commission at the time. However, for participation in broader-based hearings, the process may well be better-served if you or the ECA could combine with other groups or seek representation of commercial customer organizations in the service area. The recent B.c. Hydro hearing is a case in point. The Commission has reconsidered your application for cost award in the subject hearing. In coming to its decision, the Commission Panel has fully reviewed the transcript, information requests, final argument and other correspondence as it relates to your participation in the hearing. The Commission Panel reviewed its previous finding that "participation in the B.C. Hydro hearing provided little value and encourages Mr. George to combine with another intervenor in any future interventions". The award of 33 percent of your cost claim remains in effect. In response to your request for clarification of the foregoing extract from the initial cost award, the Commission Panel must apply its participant funding guidelines fairly to all participants to reflect such matters as the degree to which a participant contributes new and meaningful information to the hearing, the extent to which the participant recognizes a significant constituent or class of customers and provides a representative perspective of those customers' views, and the extent to which the intervenor has combined with other like participants to provide efficient representation at a hearing. The Commission Panel recognizes that it may contribute up to the full cost of a participant and the Commission is attempting to apply its guidelines in a consistent fashion to recognize the value of each contribution when determining cost awards which will be paid for through customer rates. The Commission Panel identified the following specific points with respect to your cost award: • It is insufficient to claim to have asked coherent questions to obtain eligibility for cost awards. The applicant must contribute to a clearer understanding of the issues by the Commission.
2 • The questions and final argument about debt placement, variation in system reliability, "Site C" status and ongoing costs, the status of the Columbia River Projects, the identity of the negotiator of the Downstream Benefits, the character of B.C. Hydro's relationship to WKP and the total of B.C. Hydro's taxes and dividend payments to its shareholders contributed very little to the Commission Panel's understanding of the issues. • Relevant inquiries related to B.C. Hydro's Integrated Resource Plan work and B.C. Hydro's treatment of different resources including Power Smart, IPPs and Resource Smart were made. However, these issues were also well canvassed by other participants in the hearing, as could have been anticipated, such that your questions and arguments were to a some extent repetitious for the Commission Panel. • In final argument, you revisited the above issues. The request that any general rate increase for B.c. Hydro not be applied to West Kootenay Power Ltd. customers was without substantive rationale or evidence. While the foregoing comments are critical of the value of your contribution to this B.C. Hydro hearing, the Commission recognizes the significant benefit that your contributions have made in recent WKP hearings and those contributions have been acknowledged in the WKP decisions and cost awards. Yours truly, ~, WJG/dlf cc: Zora Lazic, Solicitor and Counsel British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority Ms. Carol Reardon Heenan Blaikie Barristers & Solicitors Mr. M. Doherty, The British Columbia Public Interest Advocacy Centre Mr. B. Wallace, Lawson Lundell Lawson & McIntosh Mr. M. Moseley, Guild, Yule & Company OP/PFlPart.Funding-D.GeorgeBCHRR
You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.