<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<o:smarttagtype
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="Street"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><object
classid="clsid:38481807-CA0E-42D2-BF39-B33AF135CC4D" id=ieooui></object>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Wingdings;
panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;
mso-font-charset:2;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:0 268435456 0 0 -2147483648 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:swiss;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:-520077569 -1073717157 41 0 66047 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
h2
{mso-style-next:Normal;
margin-top:12.0pt;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:3.0pt;
margin-left:0in;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
page-break-after:avoid;
mso-outline-level:2;
font-size:14.0pt;
font-family:Arial;
font-weight:bold;
font-style:italic;}
h3
{mso-style-next:Normal;
margin-top:12.0pt;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:3.0pt;
margin-left:0in;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
page-break-after:avoid;
mso-outline-level:3;
font-size:13.0pt;
font-family:Arial;
font-weight:bold;}
p.MsoFooter, li.MsoFooter, div.MsoFooter
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
tab-stops:center 3.0in right 6.0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
p.MsoBodyText, li.MsoBodyText, div.MsoBodyText
{margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:6.0pt;
margin-left:0in;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;
text-underline:single;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;
text-underline:single;}
p
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:45.0pt 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:1660380658;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:1600532570 67698689 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:39.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:39.0pt;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Symbol;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
-->
</style><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<h3>Hearing Friday on <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename
w:st="on">Diablo</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">Canyon</st1:placetype></st1:place>
Closure Proposal—Please
speak out! Nine more years and no guarantees: No Deal!</h3>
<p>PG&E will hold the second of two public statewide meetings
this Friday
in <st1:city w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">San Francisco</st1:place></st1:city>
to discuss the proposed shutdown of the two nuclear reactors at
the Diablo
Canyon Power Plant (DCPP) and replacement of lost power with
renewables,
conservation and storage. In exchange for the shutdown, among
other things, the
reactors will run nine more years, unmolested by calls for a
long overdue
Environmental Impact Report.</p>
<p><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">NINE YEARS IS TOO LONG!
We urge your
support in a call for the soonest possible shutdown date.</b>
</p>
<p><i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal">Nine years more:<o:p></o:p></i></p>
<p style="margin-left:39.0pt;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1
lfo1;
tab-stops:list 39.0pt"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="font-family:Symbol;
mso-fareast-font-family:Symbol;mso-bidi-font-family:Symbol"><span
style="mso-list:Ignore">·<span style="font:7.0pt "Times
New Roman"">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Will produce tons more
waste with no place to be
put;</p>
<p style="margin-left:39.0pt;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1
lfo1;
tab-stops:list 39.0pt"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="font-family:Symbol;
mso-fareast-font-family:Symbol;mso-bidi-font-family:Symbol"><span
style="mso-list:Ignore">·<span style="font:7.0pt "Times
New Roman"">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Will destroy untolled
marine life by the ocean
intake cooling system;</p>
<p style="margin-left:39.0pt;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1
lfo1;
tab-stops:list 39.0pt"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="font-family:Symbol;
mso-fareast-font-family:Symbol;mso-bidi-font-family:Symbol"><span
style="mso-list:Ignore">·<span style="font:7.0pt "Times
New Roman"">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Gives time for PG&E
to consolidate its hold
on <st1:state w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">California</st1:place></st1:state>’s
solar industry; and </p>
<p style="margin-left:39.0pt;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1
lfo1;
tab-stops:list 39.0pt"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="font-family:Symbol;
mso-fareast-font-family:Symbol;mso-bidi-font-family:Symbol"><span
style="mso-list:Ignore">·<span style="font:7.0pt "Times
New Roman"">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Nine more years of
praying the Big One doesn’t
hit that section of faulted coastline. </p>
<p>The nine year transition time was the trade made for PG&E’s
guarantee
that the void would be filled with energy efficiency, renewables
and energy
storage and includes a PG&E commitment to a 55 percent
renewable energy
target in 2031. But, the State of <st1:state w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">California</st1:place></st1:state>,
through SB350, already mandates 50% renewable energy by 2030,
anyway, so what
gives?</p>
<p>See below for a list of concerns raised by Mother’s for Peace,
a report on
the State Lands Commission June meeting and analysis of the
proposal by Abalone
Alliance Safe Energy Clearinghouse, and a point-by-point
rebuttal of claims by
Lt. Governor Gavin Newsome that the agreement is the best deal.</p>
<h3>Please attend the Friday meetings: <span
style="font-weight:normal;
mso-bidi-font-weight:bold">Two meetings to be held that day
are open to the
public. Each meeting will cover the same information and
follow the same
format. For parties unable to attend public information
meetings, comments can
be submitted to <a href="mailto:diablocanyon@pge.com">diablocanyon@pge.com</a>
prior to July 26, 2016.<o:p></o:p></span></h3>
<h2><st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on"><strong><span
style="font-size:
16.0pt;font-family:Arial;font-weight:normal">San
Francisco</span></strong></st1:city></st1:place><span
style="font-size:16.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></h2>
<h2><span style="font-size:16.0pt">July 22, 2016<o:p></o:p></span></h2>
<p><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt">Meeting
1<i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal">: Noon to 3:45pm<span
style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span></i></span></b><i
style="mso-bidi-font-style:
normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt">Meeting 2<b
style="mso-bidi-font-weight:
normal">: 4:15 to 8:00pm<o:p></o:p></b></span></i></p>
<p><st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on"><b
style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal"><i
style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt">South San Francisco</span></i></b></st1:placename><b
style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal"><i
style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt"> <st1:placename w:st="on">Conference</st1:placename>
<st1:placetype w:st="on">Center</st1:placetype></span></i></b></st1:place><b
style="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal"><i
style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt">, <st1:address w:st="on"><st1:street
w:st="on">255 S. Airport Boulevard, South</st1:street>
<st1:city w:st="on">San Francisco</st1:city>, <st1:state
w:st="on">CA</st1:state> <st1:postalcode w:st="on">94080</st1:postalcode></st1:address><o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p>
<p><i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt">Public
Transit is sparse, but appears from <st1:placename
w:st="on">SFO</st1:placename>
<st1:placetype w:st="on">Airport</st1:placetype> or <st1:city
w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Millbrae</st1:place></st1:city>
BART, catch SamTrans Bus #397 going
north, which stops at or near the conference center.<o:p></o:p></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Long-time
Diablo opponents, Mothers for Peace, have suggested the
following topics might
be among those discussed: </p>
<p>1. Under what circumstances might PG&E back out
of its offer to abandon license renewal and replace the
electricity from Diablo
with 100% renewables? </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> 2. At what point in time will
we be GUARANTEED the shut-down date? What is the point of no
return for
PG&E?</p>
<p>3. In section 2.3 of the Joint Proposal it is
specified that PG&E will not issue its Request For Offers
(RFOs) of
renewable energy until 2020. Why not seek those immediately?</p>
<p>4. <span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>What if anything
is PG&E
giving up by offering this Joint Proposal? It appears that
license renewal was
not an option anyway, because PG&E will profit more from
renewables than
from operating reactors designed in the 1960’s. And the State of
<st1:state w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">California</st1:place></st1:state>
through SB350
mandates 50% renewable energy by 2030 anyway.</p>
<p>5.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>The People of <st1:state
w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">California</st1:place></st1:state>
are asked to give up protection
of marine life for another 9 years. We are told by SLC that this
Joint Proposal
takes off the table an EIR of the effects within the tidelands
of 9 more years
of operation. This Proposal looks like a deal whereby PG&E
gets to
strengthen its bottom line while escaping accountability for the
environmental
damage being caused by the plant every day it operates. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> 6. How will the Joint Proposal,
if implemented, affect Community Choice Aggregation programs in
<st1:place w:st="on"><st1:state w:st="on">California</st1:state></st1:place>? </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> 7. Given that the funding to
provide a cushion of tax monies for the <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city
w:st="on">San Luis Obispo</st1:city></st1:place> schools
will come out of decommissioning
funds, tell us how we can know that there will be sufficient
funds to dismantle
the plant after closure. Will rate-payers be providing those
funds, or
shareholders? </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> 8. MFP supports PG&E’s
efforts to provide economic stability for the workers that are
needed at Diablo
until shut-down, but questions whether that money should come
out of
decommissioning funds or from the shareholders. Please explain
PG&E’s
thinking in proposing that it come from rate-payers via the
decommissioning
funds.</p>
<p>9. The Joint Proposal doesn’t mention the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission’s necessary approval for removing money
from the
decommissioning funds to use for purposes other than
decommissioning. How is
this deficiency going to be addressed?</p>
<p>10. Has the water Board formally excused PG&E from
compliance with <st1:state w:st="on">California</st1:state>
policy to end once-through cooling on the <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:state
w:st="on">California</st1:state></st1:place> coastline?
Will Diablo continue to cause 80% of the human-caused
destruction of marine
life on the CA coast until 2025? </p>
<p>11. What changes will PG&E be asking of the PUC regarding
homes, parking
lots and businesses that ALREADY have solar roofs? What
transmission fees and
what buy-back programs?</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:0in"><b><span
style="font-size:13.5pt;mso-bidi-font-size:24.0pt;
mso-font-kerning:18.0pt">California State Lands Commission
kills Diablo
Environmental Review; PG&E Makes Grab for Solar Industry<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Don Eichelberger, Abalone Alliance Safe
Energy
Clearinghouse, <a href="http://www.energy-net.org">www.energy-net.org</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> June
28<sup>th</sup>, the California State Lands Commission (SLC),
reversed their
earlier call for an <a
href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Environmental_Quality_Act"
target="_blank">Environmental Impact Report (EIR)</a>,
extending a lease of
state lands to PG&E without an EIR that will allow <st1:place
w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Diablo</st1:placename> <st1:placetype
w:st="on">Canyon</st1:placetype></st1:place>
reactors to operate beyond the original 2018 deadline, at least
to their NRC
license end dates of 2024 and 2025, respectively.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Many
longtime activists looked on astonished as PG&E orchestrated
its bid to
gain control of the solar energy market in <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:state
w:st="on">California</st1:state></st1:place>. PG&E
hailed their new
agreement to shut down Diablo Canyon, in exchange for
concessions, as a
historic occasion, pointing the way to move in an orderly
fashion away from
nuclear power and toward a future of renewable energy and
conservation;
something Californians have been doing for a long time anyway,
in spite of
PG&E and other utilities’ efforts to suppress these
sales-robbing
technologies. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">There
was agreement by the deal’s critics that the nine-year delay in
shutting down
Diablo Canyon while building renewables will give PG&E time
it needs to solidify
a monopoly on renewables at the expense of small, local,
independent installers
and neighborhood coops. Large, centralized, grid-linked solar
installations
will dominate the market if utilities get their way and
undermine more
decentralized technologies and the security they offer against
grid failures.
Plus, there are no dividends going to utility investors;
customers pocket the
production payments and credits fuel local installation and
service business.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">The
SLC’s day-long hearings, held at two locations simultaneously,
turned out a big
crowd of those both pro and con. San Luis Obispo local
politicians, school
board members, Diablo Canyon Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
union and others
lined up to show their support for keeping the reactor running
for as long as
possible. Opponents were wary of PG&E for what we consider<span
style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>a long history of
lawlessness; <span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>from the
theft of municipal power generated at
Hetch-Hetchy, to the poisoning Hinkley water, to pocketing the
money needed to
keep its gas pipelines in good repair, leading to the <st1:city
w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">San Bruno</st1:place></st1:city>
pipeline explosion.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Activists
were united in saying an environmental review for the plant was
long overdue
and that nine years to transition to renewables is too long.
Many stressed that
it could be done much more quickly if the glut of <st1:place
w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Diablo</st1:placename> <st1:placetype
w:st="on">Canyon</st1:placetype></st1:place>
power could be removed from the grid sooner than later.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">After
the decision, follow-up messages to Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom
led to an open
letter from him (see below) challenging opponents, claiming the
agreement held
the maximum possible benefits obtainable.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
mso-outline-level:3"><b><span style="font-size:13.5pt">Public
Trust <o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">The
Lt. Governor hailed the agreement for upholding the Public Trust
Doctrine by
“forcing PG&E to the table” (with his prior call for an EIR)
and getting
their assurance the reactors will shut down at the end of their
current
licenses, with PG&E’s added guarantee that Diablo Canyon
power will be
replaced strictly with renewables and conservation. He asserted
this was the
best deal possible.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">It
is our belief the Commission failed to protect the <a
href="https://c-win.org/public-trust-doctrine/"
target="_blank">Public Trust</a>
by failing to balance PG&E’s and <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city
w:st="on">San Luis Obispo</st1:city></st1:place>’s interests
with those of the rest of the
state. Clearly, PG&E has seen the reports of an electricity
market
shrinking from conservation and roof top solar taking its
customers since the
invent of reverse metering and plummeting hardware costs. From
the start it was
evident the fix was in. The Commission could and should have
called for
testimony from the solar industry and the California Energy
Commission to take
a closer look at the <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename
w:st="on">Diablo</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">Canyon</st1:placetype></st1:place>
deal.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Finalized
only the week before the hearing, the plan to close the reactors
was presented
as a done deal. PG&E’s supporters were given free reign to
claim the harm
they face at Diablo’s closure. The audience was also warned by
Commissioners
that a sudden reactor stoppage, as with the sudden shutdown of
San Onofre,
would not be tolerated, citing fear of high priced and
greenhouse gas-bearing
natural gas replacement power. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">In
fact, the deal is nowhere near final, as it must first be
approved by the
California Public Utilities Commission, and the utility can pull
out of the
voluntary agreement at any time. CPUC may also have problems
with the
additional $2 billion the deal calls for to finish paying off
Diablo.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">The
state’s solar industry, if it had been present, could have
educated the
Commissioners of their capability of producing far more jobs and
power
replacement by 2018 than could PG&E. The industry is
exploding as solar
costs go down; already over 65,000 jobs have been created in <st1:state
w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">California</st1:place></st1:state>
vs. Diablo’s 1,500. A planned
22,000 megawatts of new solar capacity will be installed over
the next five
years, ten times Diablo’s 2,200 megawatt output.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">The<a
href="http://slc.ca.gov/Meetings/06-28-16/Items_and_Exhibits/96.pdf"
target="_blank"> SLC staff’s repor</a>t (already removed from
their web site)
that reversed its previous call for an EIR was released only 5
days prior to
the vote, leaving the public with an unacceptable amount of time
to respond.
Many concerned organizations requested a delay, even suggesting
that the SLC
was breaking state meeting laws. The Commissioners ignored
delay requests
and voted 3-0 in favor of PG&E getting a lease extension and
no EIR. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">In
a troubling revelation by <st1:city w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Alliance</st1:place></st1:city>
for Nuclear Responsibility attorney and former California Energy
Commissioner,
John Geesman, the SLC staff was shown to have used PG&E’s
own flawed
seismic analyses as reason for not carrying out an EIR,
suggesting PG&E
helped them write the report. Another reason staff cited to
refuse the EIR was
the California State Water Control Board’s political dismissal
of the plant’s
aquatic damages.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">SLC
used its own recently adopted regulations to deny the EIR, while
the far more
stringent <a
href="http://wingspress.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u=029b12acb80c80346c4f97272&id=69906c8df1&e=1a3f5bd5c3">CEQA
exemption codes</a> would allow the SLC to go ahead with
either a draft or full
review based on extraordinary events that have happened (such as
recent and
ongoing discovery of new earthquake faults at the plants, events
at Fukushima,
etc.) or by a major earthquake prior to 2025. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">The
SLC Commissioners said the ten year extension fulfilled their
duty to the
Public Trust Doctrine by protecting the public from an abrupt,
San Onofre
styled closure that supposedly led to large scale natural gas
replacement (<a
href="http://wingspress.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u=029b12acb80c80346c4f97272&id=e35d258811&e=1a3f5bd5c3">actually
caused by a corrupt CPUC</a>), job losses by workers, and the
loss of property
taxes that would affect the county’s schools.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Proponents
calling for the EIR were told their efforts would result in
increasing the
state’s use of natural gas. Challenging that notion, many
speakers gave voice
to the belief that the commission could have given PG&E a
shorter lease, expediting
the shift to renewable energy, rather than waiting until 2020 to
begin the
replacement.</p>
<p><span style="font-size:11.0pt">We are witnessing nothing less
than a new
wave of centralized control by utilities crashing to shore.
This ten-year delay
in mobilizing renewables will give PG&E the time it needs
to exploit their
agenda at the expense of small independent sources.
Centralized power, no
matter what the source, will undermine solar rooftop
development that could
shift resources back to the general public and away from
profit motivated
systems.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Micro grid development must be
the primary
plan for <st1:state w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">California</st1:place></st1:state>
to make local communities self sufficient; the state’s aging
grid system should
be phased out<b>.</b><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:5.0pt;margin-left:0in;text-align:center"
align="center"><b><span
style="font-size:13.5pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Tahoma;
mso-font-kerning:18.0pt">Responses to Gavin Newsom’s Claims
on the <st1:placename w:st="on">Diablo</st1:placename> <st1:placetype
w:st="on">Canyon</st1:placetype>
Deal, point-by-point, compiled by <span
style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>Abalone
<st1:city w:st="on">Alliance</st1:city> Safe Energy
Clearinghouse and others affiliated
with the Nuclear-Free <st1:state w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">California</st1:place></st1:state>
anti-nuclear network:<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText" style="text-indent:.25in"><b
style="mso-bidi-font-weight:
normal"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt">Claim:</span></i></b><i
style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt"> If I
could decommission <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename
w:st="on">Diablo</st1:placename> <st1:placetype
w:st="on">Canyon</st1:placetype></st1:place> and replace
it responsibly
without increased carbon emissions tomorrow, I would do it. <o:p></o:p></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText" style="text-indent:.25in"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt">No
one is saying you can or should replace lost DC power by
tomorrow, but we do
feel nine years is too long. Tons of radioactive wastes will
be produced
without anyplace to go, and one of the world’s most majestic
(and expensive)
landscapes, its ocean population and agricultural land will
remain threatened
by the considerable seismic activity in the area whose
potential for the
unexpected we saw at Fukushima. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom:12.0pt;text-indent:.25in"><b
style="mso-bidi-font-weight:
normal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">Claim<i>:</i></span></b><i><span
style="font-size:11.0pt"> “Those who called for an EIR
review have not been
able to explain what it would accomplish above and beyond
these concessions.”</span></i><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="text-indent:.25in"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">There
is nothing
binding in the document and it can still be withdrawn by
PG&E or blocked by
the CPUC. We have no guarantee that PG&E will close <st1:place
w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Diablo</st1:placename> <st1:placetype
w:st="on">Canyon</st1:placetype></st1:place>
by 2025. As of the end of 2015, PG&E was still actively
preparing to
extend its NRC license for <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename
w:st="on">Diablo</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">Canyon</st1:placetype></st1:place>.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="text-indent:.25in"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">What
we do have is
an MOU that the SLC is not party to and that could be reversed
by the CPUC, an
agency with a failed history of protecting the public. They
could easily find
that the economic agreement to add an additional $2 billion to
Diablo rates,
above what it has already recovered, as demanded by PG&E,
is enough to
scuttle the agreement. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="text-indent:.25in"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">The
agreement can
and should be made stronger, starting with a binding
agreement, backed by
withdrawal of NRC License Extension requests, for an organized
closure with a
much shorter timeframe. Negotiations need to reflect the
reality that we are
dealing with a private company, easily able to buck state
policy by a move out
of state or merging with a larger entity—a long term goal of
the U.S. electric
industry.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="text-indent:.25in"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">State
officials
need also to understand that PG&E’s corporate culture
should be treated as
a criminal, just as individuals are in this society that break
the law. <st1:state w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">California</st1:place></st1:state>’s
government
is being divided and conquered by PG&E. It came out during
the SLC hearings
that the state water board, which was taken over by the
nuclear industry under
Schwarzenegger and Brown, allowed a waiver for environmental
impacts of <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Diablo</st1:placename>
<st1:placetype w:st="on">Canyon</st1:placetype></st1:place>’s
once-through ocean water cooling system until 2025.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="text-indent:.25in"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">In
addition, as
part of the legal case over San Onofre rates, governor Brown
could very well be
acting outside the law since he, as well as the CPUC, are
refusing to share
emails between themselves. Whether it is cozy relations
between utilities
and CPUC, the recent scandal over the Assembly’s Speaker’s
Slush fund, the
medical Pay to Play scandal, <st1:state w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">California</st1:place></st1:state>
doesn’t need anymore scandals.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="text-indent:.25in"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">SLC
has no detailed
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal">ex parte</i> regulations
as required by
the CPUC. We therefore call on SLC, and Gavin Newsom
specifically, to submit
detailed reports on conversations you, staff or other
commissioners have had
with all parties and how long said discussions lasted. As
mentioned in
Newsom’s comments at the end of his presentation, he had had
extensive
conversations with Stewart Brand, who is very likely not
registered as a
lobbyist, but should be.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="text-indent:.25in"><strong><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;mso-bidi-font-style:
italic">Claim: </span></strong><strong><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;
font-weight:normal;mso-bidi-font-weight:bold;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">A<i>
signed and written agreement that the lost power of <st1:place
w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Diablo</st1:placename>
<st1:placetype w:st="on">Canyon</st1:placetype></st1:place>
can only be replaced by a combination of renewable energy
and energy
efficiencies</i></span></strong><b
style="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText" style="text-indent:.25in"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt">Mr.
Lt. Governor, are you stating for the record that your agency
has received an
agreement to such affect, or are you referring to the MOU
between PG&E and
the six parties? Ms. Williams said that agreement constitutes
an “unprecedented
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">voluntary </b>commitment
by a major <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">US</st1:place></st1:country-region>
energy
company”. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText" style="text-indent:.25in"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt">We
applaud the sentiment, but the question remains: why is
PG&E waiting until
2018 and 2020 to begin submitting replacement power plans? And
wouldn’t this be
required in any case since the state has mandated this
requirement elsewhere? <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText" style="text-indent:.25in"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt">Holding
onto such a large base load source is actually retarding
faster development of
renewable power. The state of <st1:state w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">California</st1:place></st1:state>
is in the midst of a major political confrontation concerning
how to proceed
with solar; PG&E and the other states’ Investor Owned
Utilities (IOU’s) are
clearly opposed to solar rooftops. They are actively seeking
redress via allies
within the CPUC, as recently pointed out in an interview with
PG&E’s president
at the EEI National Convention. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText" style="text-indent:.25in"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt">Recent
reports state that up to 75% of the state’s electric needs
could come from
solar rooftop power, yet the MOU agreement actively is skewed
towards allowing
large baseload. Large, centralized solar stations play a
dominant role that
would undermine the potential for far more jobs, independent
of big, corporate
money, which could be used to build out rooftop solar. It is
now possible for a
solar rooftop to be tied to a homeowner’s hot water heater to
store heat during
its peak production time. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="text-indent:.25in"><strong><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;mso-bidi-font-style:
italic">Claim:<i> </i></span></strong><strong><i><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;
font-weight:normal;mso-bidi-font-weight:bold">The written
public
acknowledgement, for the first time, by a major utility
corporation that
renewable energy is more cost efficient than nuclear
power.</span></i></strong><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText" style="text-indent:.25in"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt">On
the face of it, this is worth celebrating. But it is clearly
way too long in
coming. We are all now paying dearly for a boondoggle that
has gone on
for too long.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>PG&E
came late to the
party, yet demands a door prize?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText" style="text-indent:.25in"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt">In
1992 the majority of the world’s Nobel Peace Prize winners
signed a petition
stating that we had 20 years to address climate change
issues. The <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">United States</st1:place></st1:country-region>
as a whole and specifically the energy industry made sure that
the public
failed to understand what that urgency meant. The world’s
private energy
lobbyists continue to do everything in their power to keep the
public
uneducated about the growing impacts of climate change and
what to do about
it. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText" style="text-indent:.25in"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt">Nuclear
power is clearly not the answer, despite claims of being
GHG-free, which are
false when the entire nuclear fuel chain is considered. Safe,
less costly and
less complex technologies sit on the shelf and new ones are
being developed
daily that can do just fine without nuclear, thank you very
much.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText" style="text-indent:.25in"><strong><i><span
style="font-size:11.0pt">Claim: </span></i></strong><strong><i><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-weight:normal;mso-bidi-font-weight:bold">The
written public acknowledgement, for the first time, by a
major utility
corporation that the era of baseload power is over, and
that renewable
sources can carry the weight of energy production.</span></i></strong><b
style="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal"><i
style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p>
<p style="text-indent:.25in"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">In its
position
paper, Friends of the Earth openly urges PG&E to use
large, centralized
solar concentrating stations in the central valley, backed by
storage, as a
prominent part of its replacement plan. By concentrating
solar, much
energy security is lost to the threat of grid outages. <span
style="mso-bidi-font-weight:
bold">In addition, centralized solar development is clearly
impacting sensitive
desert environmental habitat that should not be disturbed. W</span>hy
concentrate solar production when it is so much more
efficient, is
environmentally more sensitive and creates more jobs to build
solar rooftops? <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText" style="text-indent:.25in"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt">It
should be noted that the largest central concentrating station
in the country,
located in <st1:state w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">California</st1:place></st1:state>,
was recently saved from bankruptcy, and also incurred major
damages from
overheating. (It could very well be a matter of corporate
arson to cover
its failure to operate at the levels promised by designers.)<br
style="mso-special-character:line-break">
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br
style="mso-special-character:line-break">
<!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText" style="text-indent:.25in"><strong><i><span
style="font-size:11.0pt">Claim: </span></i></strong><strong><i><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-weight:normal;mso-bidi-font-weight:bold">A
signed
and written agreement that PG&E will provide 55% of
its entire energy sales
through renewable sources, from 2031.</span></i></strong><b
style="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal"><i
style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p>
<p style="text-indent:.25in"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">As
shown in recent studies,
the state’s solar industry could easily, in short order,
provide 74% of the
state’s energy needs (Source: Dept. of Energy’s National
Renewable Energy Labs)
and is already planning over 22,000 megawatts of power in the
next five years,
creating far more jobs than Diablo Canyon ever has.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="text-indent:.25in"><st1:state w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">California</span></st1:place></st1:state><span
style="font-size:11.0pt"> activists have been pushing for
solar and wind
development for over 30 years, but have been stymied by IOU’s
and fossil fuel
interests they represent. These interests are profit driven.
IOU’s have long
been pushing for large baseload systems while at the same time
pushing to break
away from their grid and pipeline responsibilities.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText" style="text-align:center" align="center"><b
style="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt">Prepared for
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal">Nuclear-Free
California</i></span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><span
style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span><a
href="http://www.nuclearfreecal.org/nfcnet/">www.nuclearfreecal.org/nfcnet/</a><span
style="mso-spacerun:yes">
</span><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">by <i
style="mso-bidi-font-style:
normal">Abalone Alliance Safe Energy Clearinghouse</i></b>
<a href="http://www.energy-net.org/">www.energy-net.org</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoBodyText" style="text-align:center" align="center"><b
style="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p>
<p style="text-indent:.25in"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</o:smarttagtype>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
Don Eichelberger
Abalone Alliance Safe Energy Clearinghouse/
Nuclear Free California
Shut down nuclear power
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.nuclearfreecal.org/nfcnet/">www.nuclearfreecal.org/nfcnet/</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.energy-net.org">www.energy-net.org</a>
Expose the back room dealer elite at Bohemian Grove
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.exposebohemiangrove.net">www.exposebohemiangrove.net</a>
more info at:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2012/03/01/18708527.php">http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2012/03/01/18708527.php</a>
And also:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2014/07/07/18758353.php">https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2014/07/07/18758353.php</a>
Follow at <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.Facebook.com/BGANsc">www.Facebook.com/BGANsc</a>
Learn about the Evolution of the US Surveillance State
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://surveillance1984blog.wordpress.com/">https://surveillance1984blog.wordpress.com/</a>
More about me at
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.Facebook.com/DonEichelberger">www.Facebook.com/DonEichelberger</a>
Check my original music at
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.MySpace.com/donnyfix">www.MySpace.com/donnyfix</a>
"The government of an exclusive company of merchants is, perhaps,
the worst of all governments for any country whatever."
Adam Smith, "Wealth of Nations" Ch.7
“When there’s a huge solar energy spill, it’s just called a ‘nice
day'."
-author unknown-
"The revolt against brutality begins with a revolt against the
language that hides that brutality."
-Rebecca Solnit-
"It is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established
authorities are wrong."
-Voltaire
</div>
</body>
</html>