4. Timeliness of the Petition

Rule 16.4(d) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure requires that a petition for modification be filed and served within one year of the effective date of the decision the petition proposes to modify. If more than one year has elapsed, the petition must also explain why the petition could not have been presented within one year of the effective date of the decision.  If the Commission determines that the late submission has not been justified, it may on that ground issue a summary denial of the petition.

NRDC et al. filed this petition more than two and an half years after
D.07-01-039's effective date. The petition gives two reasons. First, in the
one-year anniversary after D.07-01-039's effective date, NRDC et al. state that very little was known about how the federal and state regulatory framework for carbon capture sequestration would evolve. They contend it now appears that a regulatory gap may result, which if unaddressed by this Commission, could undermine California's implementation of the EPS under SB 1368. Second, within that same time period, the potential role of CCS in EPS compliance has advanced to a degree not reasonably foreseen and a number of projects are now in the planning or permitting stage both within California and outside the state, particularly in Utah and Wyoming.

NRDC et al have reasonably explained why the petition was not filed within the one-year anniversary of the effective date of D.07-01-039. The petition is properly filed.