Gene Nelson, San Luis Obispo, CA

22 MR. NELSON: Good evening. My name is Dr. Gene
23 Nelson. I am the government liaison for Californians for
24 Green Nuclear Power Incorporated. We are an adverse
25 intervener before the California Public Utilities
1 Commission, and we are opposed to the wasteful closure of
2 Diablo Canyon Power Plant.
3 We were at the BOEM meeting last week in
4 Sacramento, the Trident winds project. We are told by
5 military staffers that they appreciated the 24/7,
6 365-day-a-year availability of Diablo Canyon's abundant

Diablo Canyon Decommissioning Public Engagement Panel
September 26, 2018 Panel Meeting
Public Comments
7 power, which accounts for 9 percent of California's
8 in-state generation. California's 39 military bases
9 depend on Diablo Canyon's reliable power for performing
10 their mission and for maintaining operational readiness.
11 Diablo Canyon is the only dispatchable generator in
12 California that operates independently of any outside fuel
13 or energy source because the energy is stored inside the
14 core. This is not an attribute that's shared by
15 60 percent of California's in-state generation, which is
16 powered by natural gas, which is vulnerable to the aging
17 infrastructure. We have aging thousands of miles of
18 natural gas pipeline and compressor stations. Think San
19 Bruno is a place to start.
20 So what we looked at and we are asking the
21 applicant to pay attention to are some NERC Reliability
22 Reports, dated November 14th, 2017, May 25th, 2018, and
23 August 15th, 2018, and a DOE draft report dated May 29th,
24 2018. All these reports highlight the reliability risks
25 associated with California's overreliance on natural
1 gas-fired generation. Excerpts of these reports will be
2 supplied to the applicant.

Diablo Canyon Decommissioning Public Engagement Panel
September 26, 2018 Panel Meeting
Public Comments
3 The important national security rationale is an
4 additional factor that should be considered by applicant
5 PG&E as CGNP prepares to take this proceeding to the State
6 of California appeals court system. CGNP anticipates
7 prevailing on merits. All CPUC decisions must be for the
8 benefit of the public which benefits from Diablo Canyon's
9 safe, dependable, abundant and emission-free generation.
10 Diablo Canyon's generation is economical, undercutting the
11 cost of California's in-state fossil-fired generation and
12 is far less expensive than the cost of unreliable solar
13 and unreliable wind generation when their substantial
14 taxpayer-funded subsidies are removed.
15 Another CGNP concern is the impropriety of PG&E
16 failing to obtain approval for a change in intensity of
17 use from the California Coastal Commission prior to
18 commencing the CPU's proceeding. This is one of the
19 factors that we will be litigating against the applicant
20 on. Thank you for your attention.

Leonard Marino

Comment card submitted at meeting.
We are concerned about the traffic on Avila Beach Drive. Will there be another road built to access the Diablo Canyon area?

Jane Swanson, San Luis Obispo, CA

24 MS. SWANSON: So I'm Jane Swanson. I am San
25 Luis Obispo Mothers For Peace. I claim no expertise, and
1 I'm not making any predictions with my comments, but I
2 wanted to mention some possible risks to having building
3 uses within spitting distance of a dry cask facility.
4 My information comes from a National Academy of
5 Sciences report, the title of which is "Safety and
6 Security of Commercial Spent Nuclear Fuel Storage." It's
7 a public report. This report -- don't worry, I won't
8 summarize the whole thing, just mentioning a couple of

Diablo Canyon Decommissioning Public Engagement Panel
September 26, 2018 Panel Meeting
Public Comments
9 things, but the report does point out that the casks are
10 designed for safe storage, but they are not immune from
11 terrorist attack. One potential type of terrorist attack
12 would be that imposed by a large aircraft. As strong as
13 the casks are, they could definitely be breached by a
14 large aircraft. And the big danger there would be if the
15 cladding on the fuel rods were damaged, that would release
16 radioactive substances into the atmosphere, and that would
17 be a very bad day. Add to that the potential of burning
18 jet fuel, and you've got a mess.
19 So I bring up this unpleasant topic because I
20 think it's important that this risk, small as it is, be
21 recognized as this panel and PG&E consider repurposing
22 buildings and the repurposing of the lands on the
23 12,000 acres.
24 Now that I have made myself very popular, I do
25 want to become my more cheerful self. I'm actually pretty
1 cheerful. I want to express my appreciation to this panel
2 of hard working, dedicated citizens. I know you are
3 volunteering your time. And I am pretty sure it's a lot
4 of time and a lot of heavy thought.

Diablo Canyon Decommissioning Public Engagement Panel
September 26, 2018 Panel Meeting
Public Comments
5 I also would like to complement PG&E. This is a
6 very informative, educational process, and their slides
7 are just primo. I always look forward to their slides
8 being uploaded on the website so I can study them after
9 the meeting. So thank you all for your work. And I'm
10 sorry to be such a downer.

Avila Beach resident comments: "I hope as many buildings as possible can be repurposed. It would be a waste to have all that debris in landfills when the some of the existing buildings can be put to good use. Why not use some of them to build up the local economy? I also don't want all that debris trucked through Avila Beach. Can you imagine the noise and traffic, not to mention the safety issues."

Morro Bay resident would like to see the Marina kept in place. This resident and his family like to go boating and fishing and they see great benefit from having a safe harbor there. They also think there would be a large demand from boating enthusiasts to be able to dock there. To build a marina is very expensive. Why tear out such a valuable asset when it can be used?

Avila Beach resident suggests that many of the buildings at Diablo Canyon be repurposed and that Cal Poly architecture and landscape design departments or others be involved in coming up with a site plan for the industrial area which includes redesign of some of the buildings and landscape improvements. They would like to see more oak trees planted around the industrial area to soften its impact on views and to respect the natural environment which surrounds it.

I spoke with several community members that heard the presentations on repurposing the buildings and they are concerned about the number and size of wind energy turbines that have been proposed. They do not want these to be visible from the shore on a clear day. They do not feel that it was made clear from the presentations.

I suggest the Bouchon be open to eqestrians as well as hikers with parking for horse trailers.

Public land, hiking and horse riding trails are rapidly becoming a rare treasure. The opportunity to enjoy these lovely and scenic sites allows both hikers and horse riders to act as stewards of the land, help keep it pristine and keep extra eyes on it’s safety. It’s my (and hundreds of unspoken others) hope these precious sites will be accessible to those who so value their existence. PLEASE keep these open and available for public use, post trail rules and publicly (through newspapers and local media) encourage docents and guides to apply as Educational Volunteers.

Would love too see trails,preserved for public

Keep our open spaces undeveloped

Has there been any discussion as to the DREAM initiative, sponsored by Sam Blakeslee. I believe it passed in the county approximately in 2000. Will it be used as a framework for repurposing of Diablo Canyon?

I submitted this comment previously, but in case it got lost in the shuffle:

The Diablo Canyon intake breakwater should be retained for two reasons: 1. The cove provides marine habitat, and 2. The cove provides an emergency safe harbor for vessels and crew that may be in distress.

The intake cove breakwater provides about 3300 feet of intertidal, and subtidal habitat (both sides of about 1650 feet of jetty - conservative on the low side), or about 2/3 mile. Area of habitat: 40 feet of sloped armament on either side of jetties in tidal and subtidal area, or 80’ for both sides for 3300 feet, is six acres of habitat or reef area. Tearing those out would destroy those six acres of habitat over a length of 2/3 mile. In addition to the rocky shoreline type habitat, the intake cove is protected such that more fish are living there and producing larvae than would otherwise be there (more protected = more kelp = more fish). Harbor seals have also taken up the cove as home. This habitat is an established use. Taking out the jetties would destroy this established use – about eight acres of cove area and six acres of reef area, totaling 14 acres of existing habitat destroyed or impaired. Extensive energy (fuel) and other resources for removal and transportation of debris, and land for disposal would also be required.

The intake cove has been a respite for mariners from time to time – when mariners (usually fisherman) have had problems and have used the cove for safe harbor in emergency situations. The cove’s useable anchorage area is nearly seven acres. It is the only safe harbor between Morro Bay and Port San Luis on the Point Buchon/Pecho coast of nearly twenty nautical miles between harbors. The Diablo Cove could accommodate perhaps six boats at anchor in emergency situations. It is unlikely that as many six boats would ever need anchorage at one time. However, there are times when mariners (whether fishermen, pleasure boaters, sailors, or kayakers and paddle boarders) have rough weather, or equipment failures, or could use a sheltered place to organize their boat’s equipment or catch, or just have fatigue and need to rest, and could benefit from the safe harbor roughly half way between Morro Bay and Port San Luis.
Habitat and safe harbor are two good reasons the intake breakwater should be retained.

Additionally, the cost savings would be considerable. PG&E’s estimate from 2016 for dismantling and transporting the breakwater alone was $198.5 million. That figure may not include the intake structure demolition. This savings is more than twice the cost of SB 1090, the bill that would ensure SLO County agencies receive $85 million to help mitigate the impact of the Diablo Canyon power plant closure.

Thanks for considering my ideas,
Roger Briggs

I received this comment from a member of the community: “This could be an epic Mountain Bike destination the sport is growing.”

I received the following comment by a member of the community:

"For GOD's sake, please do not ruin the marina and cove area of the Diablo canyon lands. Protect this area for marine wild life. As for breakwater, do whatever is the best outcome for the protection of marine animals and sea birds."

Please distribute the letter attached, written to Salud Carbajal, to the panel as a possible alternative use for the plant. It is somewhat out of the box but has potentially great benefits to the veterans who have given so much.Larry W. Bittner

2460 Vista de Avila, PO 2434
Avila Beach, CA 93424
805-595-2797 larrybitt@charter.net

September 18, 2018 Time Sensitive

Honorable Salud Carbajal, Congressman 24th District
212 Cannon HOB
Washington, DC 20515

1411 Marsh St., Suite 205
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401

Re: Reuse of Diablo Nuclear Power Facilities for Veteran Services
Dear Congressman Carbajal
With less than one ten percent of our population serving in today’s all-volunteer military, it is incumbent on those of us benefiting from their bravery and patriotism to care for those who return with injuries that they will have to endure for life. For those not killed in action, many of these injuries alter their lives totally. When there is an opportunity to improve the resources available to these patriots, we should all support those opportunities.
In 2024 the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, located in San Luis Obispo County. will close. When the nuclear power generating equipment is removed, the complex of buildings and other facilities will remain for reuse. Currently Pacific Gas and Electric is considering potential uses and recipients to donate everything remaining after the removal of the nuclear waste. Importantly the location of the facilities is located on pristine coastal property located on the California Central Coast about half way between Los Angeles and San Francisco making it ideal for those veterans who must travel far for services. Therefore, this pristine property and its facilities would be ideal for a Veteran Clinic/Hospital along with long-term care for the most deserving veterans.
Since you participated in a forum regarding the closing and reuse, you understand many of the concerns of the community regarding the limited access to the property. The property is only assessible through the narrow two-lane road through Avila Beach. The community has great concern the potential users will generate additional traffic beyond its road capacity. This would exclude all the residential and commercial development projects proposed. However veteran service facilities would have minimal traffic impact on the community.
PG&E has created an Engagement Panel to review potential uses. I believe the panel and the community would enthusiastically support a proposal from the Veterans Administration to utilize this wonderful property to better serve our Veteran’s.

Page 2.

While the above is a long-term project, PG&E is currently searching for an organization for their Community Center located one block off Hwy 101 in San Luis Obispo, CA. The current VA Clinic is in a crowded area of San Luis Obispo with limited parking. The PG&E Community Center is a better location, has a larger building and better parking. Importantly, the VA pays rent at the current facility while this property could be attained by donation.
During your time in the Marine Corps, like myself, we understand the risk our military troops endure for little compensation. As a US Congressman, you are positioned to spearhead this project to provide the quality services our veterans deserve. Considering the long war on terror ahead the need to take care of our people will only increase.
I am willing to personally assist you or your staff to help our veteran brothers and sisters. Let me know how I can help.

Semper Fi,

Larry Bittner

C: Robert Wilkie, Secretary Veteran Administration
Ann Brown, Los Angeles Healthcare System Director

Presentation at 9/15/2018 Facility Repurposing Workshop. Please see workshop video.

Public Comment at 9/15/2018 Facility Repurposing Workshop. Please see workshop video.

Presentation at 9/14/2018 Facility Repurposing Workshop. Please see workshop video.

Presentation at 9/14/2018 Facility Repurposing Workshop. Please see workshop video.

Presentation at 9/14/2018 Facility Repurposing Workshop. Please see workshop video.

My name is Rob Rutherford. I am a Professor Emeritus from Cal Poly, where I was a faculty member in the Animal Sciences Department from 1974 – 2013. During that time, my duties were to teach the sheep management classes, to manage the school’s flocks of sheep, and to advise hundreds of students. I have also served as the President of the California Wool Growers Association (established 1861), the oldest livestock organization in the United States. Over the many years, my thinking as to how we must manage the grazing lands of the state has changed significantly. As an academic, I have had the privilege of observing how the scientific community thinks and acts. As the leader of a statewide livestock organization, I have had the privilege of seeing how the actual on-the-ground management by progressive thinkers can make a huge difference on the earth. I have seen conventional management which resulted in a decline of land health. I have seen progressive management which has resulted in increasing land health, increasing carbon sequestration, increasing wildlife habitat and health, improving water quality, and the list goes on. I have observed both ends of this spectrum right here in San Luis Obispo.

Those who will be charged with the management of the lands currently owned by PG&E around the site of the Diablo Canyon Energy Plant have an amazing opportunity to continue a legacy of progressive management. I am specifically thinking of those lands which would be termed “rangelands” given that their plant types have evolved over the eons with grazing animals, both small rodents up to and including large ungulates. These extremely complex relationships, which we know very little about, have resulted in the vast array of flora and fauna that are adapted to this unique coastal region. During the past 100 years, many of these acres were farmed with tillage equipment familiar to us all. This was a major step in altering the historic composition of soil microbiology, which then lead to a change in the vegetation types. For the past several decades, the lands north of the plant, an area called the Pecho Ranch, have been managed utilizing large and small ungulates in an effort to return the land to a more healthy and biologically active condition. This has only happened because PG&E had the foresight to create a land stewardship committee which worked with the grazing leasee in order to make sure that proper management was in place. This management created increasing health and abundance of soil microbiota, soil macrobiota, wildlife including birds and mammals, and also plants from grasses, forbs, and shrubs. The land stewardship committee rigorously monitored the health of the land and with the cooperation of the leasee modified the grazing intensity and patterns. Because of this, the land also yielded products from the livestock which bolstered the local economy. All the while, the public has been able to access and witness these realities over the past several years. There have been many wonderful changes on the Pecho because of this management approach. It can be claimed that this management truly addressed the triple bottom line, being that it addressed the ecological, social, and economic needs of the area. It is a success story that needs to be shared. At this time, a similar success story is being written on the Carriso Plain at the Topaz Solar project. An independent third party has monitored the changes in the biology created by the use of sheep grazing within the arrays. The results are stunning in just 4 years. These successes have only happened because of the management.

It would be fully understood that when faced with the decision as to what should happen on rangelands, the logical approach would be to contact range scientists, probably at a University with a solid public reputation. In fact, California is blessed with a relatively small cadre of certified Range Scientists who do their work very well. They are experts at creating and overseeing research, exploring ideas and concepts. It is particularly frustrating doing this on a rangeland because it is impossible to sort out all the “background noise” created by those very complex biological relationships. Nevertheless, information continues be recorded and published. The rangelands need scientists. However, to be a scientist is different from being a manager. We are blessed with very talented human health researchers who would not likely be very good personal health managers (physicians). The health of the land requires excellent managers who are willing and able to use some of the information produced by scientists. If the health of the landscape is a goal, it needs to be managed by a manager – not a scientist. Obviously, the land offers a wonderful place for field research. I would strongly urge that the consideration of the management of this living, productive part of the coast be conducted in such a way as to continue the progress of the past several decades.

I was heartened to know of the interest of the Wildlands Conservancy in this particular property. I am very impressed with their dedication to enhance a living landscape. All of their properties are utilizing very progressive livestock owners in order to create the landscape desired by most of us. The leadership there have also encouraged the integration of the faculty and students of various institutions of higher learning, in order to make the properties living laboratories. I am quite confident that under the guidance of the Wildlands conservancy, public and private educational institutions would be intricately involved in learning and research. This is an approach that ownership by the State of California will never create, in my opinion. I have visited quite a few properties owned by the State and none compare with the biological richness of the Pecho, which is entirely due to the unique, progressive management.

The decisions which will determine the future of these lands will be difficult and complicated. I appreciate that the input of the community is being welcomed and considered diligently. I would welcome any conversations that would further “flush out” the concepts presented above.

Rob Rutherford
robtrutherford@gmail.com
4757 Bridgecreek Road
San Luis Obispo

Dear Diablo Canyon Decommissioning Engagement Panel,

I am a 17-year San Luis Obispo County resident, two-time graduate of Cal Poly SLO in Forestry and Natural Resources Management (BS and MS), and a volunteer docent and board member with the nonprofit organization Environmental Center of San Luis Obispo County (ECOSLO). I would like to take this opportunity to express, as a private citizen, my thoughts on the disposition of PGE’s lands during the nuclear power plant decommissioning process.

The August 29, 2018 meeting on this topic in the San Luis Obispo County Government Center chambers was excellent. The huge amount of support for conservation of these lands was very encouraging. As a longtime student of ecology as well as a hiker, occasional mountain biker, and all-around conservationist, I feel strongly that most of the lands in question should be set aside for habitat preservation and given some sort of protected legal status, with moderate non-motorized recreational access provided. I support the creation of a moderately intensive trail system, mostly using existing ranch roads, with a limited amount of primitive backpack/bike camping allowed. I also support the continuation of existing agricultural uses unless serious problems with this were to be identified – I’m not currently aware of any.

On the coast, construction of the California Coastal Trail should be a high priority. A visitor center/Chumash cultural center near either Avila Beach or Pt. Buchon (i.e., someplace where there is already existing public vehicle access) would be very appropriate. A short, paved ADA-compliant “discovery trail” of the type seen in many parks and nature preserves should be provided in this location.

Inland, I believe Wild Cherry Canyon and some of the higher peaks in the area (e.g., Saddle Peak or other nearby high points) should have trail access for hikers and mountain bikers. An access point from See Canyon/Prefumo Canyon Road should be provided.

A point regarding trail use: Due to the ever-increasing problem of conflicts between fast-moving mountain bikers and slow-moving hikers and equestrians on so-called “multi-use” trails - conflicts that have forced me to stop taking my handicapped son hiking on several local trails because of the danger - I believe it will be very important that there be substantial separation of trails for bikers vs. hikers/equestrians. This separation could be physical (different trails) or temporal (hikers and bikers share the same trails, but on alternating days). This is an opportunity that was inexplicably lost at the Pismo Preserve, as bikers were given access to 98 percent of the existing and new trails, and hiker-only trails are almost nonexistent. Let’s not make that mistake again.

I would also like to see some sort of continuation of the paved Bob Jones bike trail heading north from Avila Beach. Road biking is a healthy and rewarding activity for both individuals and families, but unfortunately there are not many places to do it safely in this county. A stretch of paved bike trail along the Diablo-area coast would be a huge draw.

Finally, I do not support new public road access connecting Avila Beach and Montana de Oro. I feel that this would inevitably open up the area to all the trappings of civilization: hotels, wine bars, luxury subdivisions, outlet malls… glider ports. I believe we already have enough of those things in this county. The affordable housing crisis in our county is very real, but I do not believe that the lands in question should be considered for housing development, as there are many more appropriate alternatives throughout in the county.

In summary, we have an astounding, unique opportunity to create something very special for future generations in the Irish Hills. While some in our community will complain about the lack of new business opportunities that would accompany conservation of the land, recreation generates its own revenue stream, which can be significant. Add to this an attention-getting legal designation, such as the National Seashore idea that was proposed, and the tourism draw from no-frills recreation (eco-tourism) could be very substantial indeed. If we are open-minded enough and brave enough, anything is possible.

Thanks to each of you for your service on the engagement panel.

Sincerely,

Christopher C. Hamma
630 Lancaster Drive
Arroyo Grande, CA.

Thank you for educating the public what is the scope of "repurposing effort" through tours. This area is such a treasure to all Californians. I'd like to suggest to make the existing buildings as a facility for public conference/event center and lodging for the attendees as well as the public who want to appreciate the natural beauty of California coast, the education on natural history in the area, such as marine life and the flora and fauna; as well as the history of the Chumash, Japanese and ranching. I think the state park is the good candidate to manage the future vision. Asilomar Conference center is a good model
I support part of the canyon to be used for sustainable ranching to encourage the growth of the natural ecosystem.

Montana de Oro now receives intense use by many more users. Additional land is needed for park use such as trails and minimum development for public use. Gov. Schwarzenegger failed in his job to provide for the continuation of the California Coast Trail through Wild Cherry Canyon. However the use of the marine terrace, where the plant is now located, would be a more practical location for the trail and would provide much needed recreational opportunities. The use of the property for the Wild Cherry Canyon Ultra, marathons and mountain bike races is just one example of the use that can be made along with portions of the land devoted to natural preservation of the area. Such use would require minimum development on the property.

The area lacks natural resources for intense development and the topography of much of the land would require major devastation of more natural areas that California has lost much of through its history.

All those who are involved in the decision of the final disposition of the land should be required to take tours through the back country as well as the plant site. After volunteering for the Ultra twice I felt a deep affection and attachment to this small part of our State.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.