3. Procedural Requirements Under Rule 16.4

Rule 16.4 governs the process for the filing and consideration of Petitions for Modification (PFMs). Rule 16.4(b) requires that a PFM concisely state the justification for the proposed relief and to propose specific wording for all requested modifications. SDG&E's Petition contained a concise but thorough statement of justification for the proposed modifications related to the J-Power Agreements, almost all of which SDG&E sought to seal as confidential. SDG&E's statement of justification and proposed modifications regarding the Wellhead Agreements are incomplete, as discussed in more detail below. Hence, this requirement has been fulfilled regarding the J-Power peaker but not the Wellhead peaker.

Rule 16.4(d) states if more than one year has elapsed since the effective date of the decision, then the petitions must explain why they could not have been presented within one year of the effective date of the decision. SDG&E initially filed its Petition within one year, and the subsequent amendment was sufficiently minor that the initial filing is sufficient to avoid that requirement.

Hence, we conclude that SDG&E's Petition complies with the requirements of Rule 16.4 regarding the requested modifications related to the J-Power Agreements, but not regarding the requested modifications related to the Wellhead Agreements. The manner in which SDG&E can cure this defect is discussed herein.