HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.gao/gaobaaycy0001 and id is 1 raw text is:
DOCURNT RESUME
07391 - [C28279181
(Department of Energy's Procedures in Funding Intervenors iu
Proc-,edings befr-e the Economic Regulatory Administration].
END-78-111; B-19 213. October 2, 1978. released October 10,
1978. 3 pp. * er ILosure (12 pp.).
Report to Rep. ivid A. Stockman; by 3. Dexter 'each, Director,
Energy and Hin :als Div.
Issue Area: Enedrqy: Effect of Federal Financial Incentives, Tax
Policies, and Regulatory Policies on Energy Supply (1610).
'7ntact: Energy and ninerals Div.
Budget Fuactic Natural Resources, Environment, and Energy:
Energy (30:).
Organization Concerned: Departnent of Energy; Department of
Energy: Economic Regulatory Adain4.stration; Con~umer
Federation of Amer3ca.
Congressional Relevance: Rep. David A. Stockan.
Authority: Department of Energy Organization Act (P.L. 95-91).
56 Comp. Gen. 111. B-92288 (1976). Alyeska Pipeline Service
Co. v. wilderness Society, 421 U.S. 240 (1975). Turner v.
FCC, 514 F.2d 1354 (D.C. Cir. 1975).
Questicas were asked concerning the Department of
Ene.gys (DOE's) policies and practices in funding
nonqovernmental intervenors in proceedings before the Economic
Regulatory Administration* The DOE has provided intervenor
fundings in three cases; the total amount authorized for payment
was $127,865. DOE does not have a specific appropriation for
intervenor funding and handled funding on a case-hy-case basis.
The DOE has no definitive criteria 'or determining when it
should invite intereisted parties to petition for intervention
funding, but procednres erist for reviewing and approving
requests. The Department's actions appeared to be reasonable in
the three cases of intervenor funding. Its intervenor funding
practices are supported by the Department of Energy Organization
Act, but results of a pending suit could affect this position.
The DOE did not perform an audit to veriiy the uzes of
intervenor funds in connection with a 1977 case involving the
ConsuLer Federation of America. Procedures have been established
to verify ttiac expenditures for a 1978 cas? are in accordance
with an agreement with the tederation. DOE follows the approach
that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) adopted in compensating
attorneys, but in tha two Federation cajes, the DOE approved
fees higher that FTC's rates because of the complexity of the
proceedinqs. I also paid higher consultant fees in the 1978
case than did other Federal agencies for the same reason. (HTV)](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.gao/gaobaaycy0001&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)