8. Applicable Rule 16.4 Requirements

Rule 16.4 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure governs the filing of petitions for modification. We examine two aspects of Rule 16.4 in the context of this petition.

First, Rule 16.4(b) requires that a petition include "specific wording" to effectuate the modifications sought and that "[a]llegations of new or changed facts must be supported by an appropriate declaration or affidavit." SCE complies with both requirements. Attachment B to SCE's petition includes proposed revisions to the Findings of Fact for D.08-12-031. Attachment A to the petition is the declaration of the Manager for Transmission Design Management within SCE's Transmission Business Unit who has responsibility for the El Casco Project. Though we do not adopt SCE's proposed wording verbatim, SCE has supported its request within the context of Rule 16.4(b).

Second, Rule 16.4(d) requires that if a petition is not "filed and served within one year of the effective date of the decision proposed to be modified," the petitioner must explain the reason for the delay. SCE states that its petition could not have been filed within a year of the issuance of D.08-12-031 (i.e, within a year of December 19, 2008) given the time necessary to complete final engineering of the approved conceptual design for the project. In November, 2009, SCE apprised Commission staff that design modification would be necessary and in the following months, worked to finalize the design modification. SCE states that when the impact upon Segments 2 and 4 was identified and Commission staff advised SCE to file a petition for modification, SCE did so. SCE has justified the timing of its filing and we find that the petition is timely filed.