2. Background

The petition to modify¹ states: "From Greenlining's viewpoint, the earlier filed Application for Rehearing² is dispositive and amply demonstrates why the CPUC should reverse Commissioner Bohn's flawed decision to reject the Sempra-Greenlining settlement agreement." (Petition at 1 - 2.) In Decision (D.) 09-06-052 the Commission denied Greenlining's application for rehearing. The decision summarized the application:

Specifically, Greenlining challenges D.08-07-046 on the following grounds: (1) the rejection of the agreement is inconsistent with established Commission policy and precedent; (2) the determination to not adopt the agreement harms ratepayers because it discourages corporate social responsibility, undermines the Commission's leadership, and impedes economic development; and (3) the Decision treats minorities in a discriminatory manner by not adopting the Agreement while choosing to adopt the settlement between Disability Rights Advocates and SDG&E and SoCalGas. (D.09-06-052 at 2.)

The Commission noted in that decision:

Preliminarily, it is noted that all of Greenlining's contentions are offered without specific legal grounds, and therefore do not comply with the requirements of Public Utilities Code Section 1732 which requires the rehearing applicant to "set forth specifically the ground or grounds on which the applicant considers the decision or order to be unlawful." (Pub. Util. Code, § 1732.) Rule 16.1(c) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure further requires that "[a]pplications for rehearing shall set forth specifically the grounds on which the applicant considers the order or decision of the Commission to be unlawful or erroneous, and must make specific references to the record or law." (Code of Regs., tit. 20, §16.1, subd. (c).) We could reject Greenlining's contentions on this basis alone. Nevertheless, as explained [in the decision], Greenlining's contentions are otherwise without merit and are rejected because no legal error is demonstrated. (D.09-06-052 at footnote 2.)

The decision denied Greenlining's application for rehearing³ although the decision did make various modifications to D.08-07-046.

¹ Filed October 15, 2008.

² Filed September 2, 2008.

³ There was a second unrelated application for rehearing filed by The Utility Reform Network and the Division of Ratepayer Advocates. That application was also denied, after modifications to D.08-07-046, in D.09-06-052.