I al for the land lease protection of the spotted snowy owl wolves. call me at 702-301-9097 for all deatils.

Hello, I think your site might be having browser compatibility issues.
When I look at your blog in Firefox, it looks fine but when opening in Internet Explorer, it has some overlapping.
I just wanted to give you a quick heads up! Other then that,
amazing blog!

Hello,

For the past four years I have worked as a Point Buchon trail manager. During that time I have had the pleasure and the privilege to witness the changes to the landscape and marine environment during each season as well as to witness the abundant wildlife each day. I could go on and on about the uniquely beautiful and relatively unspoiled habitat this four mile stretch of coastal bluffs, foothills and grassland terraces provide for people to enjoy hiking and important habitat for native wildlife.
So, I’ll get to my point. I strongly believe that the land occupied by the Point Buchon trail should continue in much the same way it has been since I have worked there - providing managed access for people to enjoy the bluff trail 4-5 days each week and, provide habit for the unique and varied flora and fauna.
I would be happy to speak with anyone from the panel regarding my experience, knowledge and perspective about the this amazing stretch of coastline - one of the most beautiful in the world!
Thank you for your thoughtful, forward thinking consideration.

My comment concerns the new Tribal Land Policy as relates to Diablo Canyon lands

The very definition of which Native American groups qualify as stakeholders in this matter is also not clear to me. Are the members or leaders of such groups required to document their ancestry or historical connections to the lands? That would seem a difficult burden to meet, given the lack of record keeping at the time when these peoples were removed from their lands. On the other hand, it would seem appropriate to make sure that those claiming tribal status truly are representing the interests of such a people.

Given that plant closure will not be complete until the end of 2025, and that decommissioning will happen in stages over decades, there is no time pressure at present to make decisions regarding the adoption and application of the new policy. The CPUC should hold a workshop in San Luis Obispo County after the Coronavirus threat has passed and before the new policy guidelines are passed.

It will be important that any future land transfers be accompanied by a conservation easement, to ensure the permanent conservation of the land’s resources and the protection of sustainable public access.

I urge the DCDEP to follow this process within the CPUC closely, and to assert itself into the hearing process as appropriate.

L. Jane Swanson
janeslo@icloud.com

I wish to express the conviction that any transfer of lands by means of the Tribal Land Transfer Policy, of which I strongly approve, include a conservation easement to require the permanent protection of sustainable public access and natural resources. We don't want such transfers to facilitate movement of land from public into private for-profit ownership.

Additionally, it seems clear that there must be a pause in this process involving the Diablo Canyon Lands to allow for a workshop in San Luis Obispo after the Covid-19 crisis has declined. The residents of the Diablo Canyon area should be informed and be able to participate in this discussion process before adoption of new policy guidelines.

The construction of a nuclear power plant on the California coast adjacent to earthquake faults both on land and in the ocean has endangered these people for decades. They should be involved in the resolution of this matter and assured their lives won’t be further impacted by any land transfer agreement lacking a conservation easement.

As a native Californian I had the pleasure of traveling up beautiful Highway 1 many times throughout my childhood to camp in northern California’s redwood parks. It was appalling to me to see a nuclear power plant built on our coast, and sited similarly to the Fukushima nuclear power plant which continues to poison our small planet’s land and oceans. Great care needs to be taken in the decommissioning of this power plant to ensure no further harm comes from it.

Return ALL LAND TO CALIFORNIA INDIANS. All land in California stolen from CA Indians and needs to be returned.

As a PG&E customer for the past 50 years I, along with millions of other Californians, paid for the lands upon with the Diablo Canyon power plant is located. Now that PG&E is closing the plant, it is only fair that, to the maximum extent allowed by California law, security concerns and the NRC, those lands be returned to the people of California who paid for them with provisions for permanent public access and use. This is particularly important for the undeveloped lasts closest to the ocean. PG&E should not be allowed to sell them for residential development or other commercial development. The most appropriate use for these lands is as parks and open space preserves with hiking, biking and horseback riding trails. The existing access road from Port San Luis and the existing ranch roads provide the initial infrastructure for such public use. Do not allow this unique opportunity to be squandered.

Due to the timing of the CPUC Tribal Lands Transfer Policy adoption in December before the Diablo Canyon Decommissioning Engagement Panel was even aware of the policy, I strongly encourage that the Panel takes a step back and look towards an inclusive outreach to the local communities and indigenous tribes who were left out of this process. This policy has a direct bearing on the panel’s mission to recommend future use of the land. This is an opportunity to preserve one of the last undeveloped coastal lands with a long history of the first protectors of the land and sea, the Chumash people. The land should be protected and not to be turned into expensive homes for the few.

The CPUC should hold a workshop in San Luis Obispo (since we are directly impacted) before new policy guidelines are adopted; and

Any land transfers occurring under the Tribal Land Transfer Policy must be accompanied by a conservation easement, to ensure the conservation of the land’s resources and protection of sustainable public access.

I add my voice to the Northern Chumash Tribal Council in support of:

1. Commitment to Native American tribal government self-determination acknowledging Native American tribes with equal standing under the law with inclusion rather than exclusion.

2. Commitment to open space and public access to Pecho Coast lands around Diablo Canyon.

3. Protection of tribal resources, sacred sites and culturally sensitive grounds through deed restrictions and preservation.

4. Collaboration with the communities to create a dynamic multi-use sustainable seashore that includes Indigenous peoples, the proposed Chumash Heritage National Marine Sanctuary, the fishing industry, renewable energies, tourism, agriculture.

I fully support the Panel's recommendation regarding the Tribal Land's Policy and believe the regulations should provide for the conservation of these lands in perpetuity.

We as Californians are making a galactic mistake in shutting this plant down. I am more interested in a discussion of how to keep Diablo running than I am in shutting it down.

Dear DCDECP Panel Members-
First of all- thank you to each and every one of you Panel members who have put in such time, study, and effort to accomplish the many things you have done in such a short time period. The Strategic Vision Report that you have assembled is a very significant capture of our Community's collective intelligence as to how we best see the Decommissioning process unfold and evolve. That Strategic Vision Report alone- is a practical, accurate, and intelligent resource to be used and referenced in all future planning and discussion of the shutdown of Diablo and the transition into life after the Power Plant is closed.

I wanted to write a brief note to the Panel to address some of the many things I heard and saw on the most recent meeting that was televised on Wednesday March 11th. Thank you for televising the meeting in it's entirety and including and allowing the public to participate and comments via computer. For some reason, my original comments did not get registered.

My thoughts and observations and input - specifically are aimed at echoing the two presentations that I saw made by Kara Woodruff about Land Transfer and Use-and Linda Seeley, who made a great summary of the Dry Cask Storage Process.

I thought what Kara presented was a great perspective that reflected the respect and inclusion of Native American's opportunity to be much more included in the process. The accelerated and incomplete Native American Transfer process being formulated by the CPUC is a logical and honorable intent to work with the Native American Tribes who were directly impacted to their Ancestral lands. The fact that the CPUC did little or no outreach to the tribes and the other dedicated groups and agencies that have been deeply involved with Diablo Canyon specifically seems like a tragic oversight, and the fact that they held no local meetings to gather input or discuss the protocol or process seems glaringly wrong- and I was glad to hear the the DCDEP, and PGE were both writing letters requesting that the CPUC does indeed hold a local meeting, and include the goals, objectives, and observations of the Strategic Vision Document - which reflects our communities strong preference to conserve and preserve the open space and land in perpetuity.
Thank you for being proactive.
The historical and cultural perspectives of why the native american's should be given first right of refusal makes sense- and seems appropriate- and I was glad to hear that the letters from the Native American community seemed to support and endorse conservation easements and the overall objective of Conservation of natural lands, cultural and archealogical sites, and the flora, fauna, and habitats that are threatened by both the proximity to the power plant and the stored spent fuel.
I also greatly appreciated the presentation by Linda Seeley on the Dry Cask Storage and spent fuel hazards that will need to rise in value and assesment- as the constant and huge risk of just one of the 80-90 casks stored- can immediately ruin and disasterize our entire coast, all it's prized habitat and value, and make that land completely ruined and changed forever. Through Ms. Seeley' s presentation, I was glad to hear and see that the demands for the most safe, the best possible materials and technologies, the need for constant 24/7 monitoring and the ability to access, repair, remove, transport, and limit exposure to any radioactive dangers. We need to be mindful that when historic and tragic nuclear accidents have happened, it was that- an accident- nobody intended it to happen- but what kind of a response, how rapidly and thoroughly, and effectively the safety responders can contain and reduce and remove the threat will deterimine the extent of the damage. To be clear- there should be greatly increased safety planning, training, funding, and facility development to handle this continual threat. In my opinion, PGE or whomever is the plant operator need to hold the appropriate funding for such dry cask storage in an escrow account- so the general public will know that a mere bankruptcy declaration does not remove them from the responsibility to handle the nuclear waste they produced. Additionally, they, and other Nuclear waste producers should be responsible for continued research and analysis of longer term storage solutions and reception sites that could consolidate and process the nuclear waste and ongoing threat of long term storage. I imagine this will be a part of the discussion on some of your upcoming meeting topics.

As a native plant ecologist, I want to speak up for the many plants, animals, and habitats that rely on Diablo Lands to be left in tact and have minimal disturbance and human interference. I am in agreement with conservation easements and controlled public access- but reluctant to build an extensive network of trails, camping, and other potentially invasive and unintended human interference with the natural habitat. Given the current perspectives of State Parks within our region, I would be reluctant to look at annexing the land to the State Parks. I do like the idea of a long term Conservation and Land Management agreement with Land trusts or Conservancy groups- who can both effectively manage the natural treasures of the land, and provide research, recreation, and appreciatoion for the habitat values and cultural values of the precious land.

In closing- please continue to do the great and important work you are performing. The DCDEP is accomplishing significant goals and objectives as a representative of a broad cross section of the public that will be affected by this transition. Thank you to PGE and Tom Jones- for continuing to be at the table, and participating and supporting the Panel in setting and determining practical solutions to a Post Power Plant future, and being responsible and willing to mitigate and minimize the risks associated with a Nuclear Power plant and all its inherent dangers and pollutants.
Conservation and Mitigation is still the will of the people, and reflected quite clearly in the Strategic Vision Document you all created. The latest move by the CPUC to use the Native American Land Trust act is a seemingly reasonable and honorable act- but they need to be much more inclusive and include a local meeting here in SLO County to include all viable stakeholders in the process.

I look forward to participating in future workshops and meetings and again am grateful to each of you for your heroic efforts and input on our behalf.

Respectfully yours-
Bruce Berlin
Arroyo Grande

I would like to see your group ensure that all the Northern Chumash tribal groups are represented in decision-making about how the land and water are protected and used. Returning these areas to indigenous control is the most just and equitable approach. I look forward to the Northern Chumash management and the cultural and economic opportunities they would create.

See attachment

While conservation of the Diablo Canyon lands has been repeatedly affirmed by San Luis Obispo residents, I am concerned about the disposition of the land's ownership in the face of the current bankruptcy proceedings and looming court deadline for a proposed resolution. It is all well and good to propose any number of conservation & ownership options for public and/or tribal benefit, but realistically, does this present exercise have legal standing under the current legal cloud hanging over PG&E?

It's imperative land transfers from PG&E include conservation easements. County residents have been fighting for this for years. Additionally, the decomissioning project must include protection of and access to Diablo Lands. Thank you.

I have been actively advocating for creation of a "Pecho Coast National Seashore" (or National Park) since I first published an article recommending this strategy in December, 2016. See the attached file. I'm still recommending that the Panel consider this option seriously for the following reasons:

1. As a unit of the National Park system, Federal funds would be available for access improvements, recreational facilities including trails and campsites, and potentially for re-purposing many of the buildings that are currently under the control of PG&E but which will no longer be needed for power generation.

2. The National Park system as a whole, and this unit in particular, is founded on a premise of broad public engagement and participation by local entities - including Native Americans.

3. As a National Park (or Seashore), these lands would continue to serve as intact ecological units and funds would be available for fisheries restoration, archaeological and historical investigations, and research into the impacts of climate change on this rare coastal shelf.

4. Finally, a National Park would attract visitors from throughout the entire world. It would not be out of bounds to suggest that the economic impact of the National Park services ALONE could offset up to 1/3 of the loss in local economic activity that will result when the power plant closes.

Thank you for considering my views.

I am submitting comments to the newly adopted Tribal Land Transfer Policy. First, there was not sufficient public input process on this policy. San Luis Obispo citizens have been very involved in the Decomissioning process for Diablo Canyon. No one was aware this policy was being considered, not even people on the Decommissioning Panel. The Policy should be rescinded and, if it is still desired, a full public involvement process followed that engages all the communities potentially impacted, especially San Luis Obispo County since we are in the Decomissioning process and this policy greatly affects us. We should also be involved in any rule making for a policy that affects the dispersement of any Public Utility lands.

Secondly, the in the Decomissioning Panel hearings, public has given overwhelming support for the lands to be purchased for conservation and recreation hiking, biking and horseback riding on a coastal and inland trail system that will link Montana de Oro State Park to Avila/Irish Hills. The lands and coastline are outstandingly pristine and should remain that way, not developed. This is the largest contiguous undeveloped coastal lands in Southern California. It is unique and can never be replaced. Even the military bases are riddled with roads, target ranges, launch sites, etc. Public support for conservation and recreation is documented in the Decommissioning Panels Strategic Plan and in the SLO County 2000 Dream Initiative.

Third, I think this policy is inappropriate. Public Utility investments have been funded by all the public and all the public should benefit from an dispersement of public utility lands. The Public Utility did not steal these lands from Native Americans; they bought them and presumably anyone else could have bought the lands when they were for sale. Nor did the Americans steal the land. The Spaniards conquered the native population in the south part of California and made Land Grants to private individuals, Mexico won California from Spain, then the United States won the lands from Mexico, but honored the Spanish Land Grants. If there are local people who have Native American ancestry who want land, they could go and buy a piece of land like any other person.

Lastly, if the lands are transferred to tribes or any other entity, a conservation easement should be attached and recorded to any land prior to any transfer away from PG&E (or its subsidiaries) such that regardless of who owns the land (tribal or otherwise), the conservation values are protected and sustainable public access is assured -- in perpetuity. Santa Ynez went through a recent struggle with the Chumash Tribe where the tribe acquired a piece of private land, had it converted to tribal land, and then the County had very little control over development on the land. If the tribe is serious about wanting to conserve the land, they should support a conservation easement to prevent development and to ensure public recreation access on established trails.

I am very concerned to learn of the new CPUC Tribal Land Transfer Policy and the potential impacts that this policy could have to WildCherry Canyon, other Diablo lands and Avila Beach. During the meeting I was happy to hear that conservation easements could be attached prior to any transfer away from PG&E (or its subsidiaries) such that regardless of who owns the land (tribal or otherwise), the conservation values are protected and sustainable public access is assured -- in perpetuity. I strongly recommend that this occur. The CPUC needs to have a meeting for Avila citizens to hear our concerns.

Why would this not also go to LOCAC since the lands back up to and affect the Los Osos community?

This is Chuck Anders, Panel Facilitator. We are having technical difficulties transmitting the meeting. We are working on the problem and will resume the meeting when resolved. Please stay with us. Thank you.

You have had several meetings regarding economic impact... A lot of polite talk... Have there been any conclusions ?.... hourglass... Please comment

Please ask the rep from San Luis Obispo County Planning comment regarding cpuc tribal lands policy... Sovereign Nation status, Chumash Casino Santa Ynez etc

Because of the power plant, the 12,000 acres of land remain some of the most pristine lands in California. These lands should be kept as open space, with multi-use trails (coastal, inland and a few in-between trails). Integrating the lands into the existing Montana de Oro State Park, or creating a new National Seashore (similar to Pt Reyes National Seashore) would make the most sense. Incorporating Wild Cherry Canyon into the park, or to be sold to the Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo, would be the icing on the cake. Protection of sensitive cultural, flora and fauna must also happen. The Chumash would be good stewards, but I have concerns about their potential ability to develop projects, such as a casino, with minimum public input.

Can a conservation easement be attached and recorded to any PG&E land prior to any transfer away from PG&E?

Dear esteemed and hard-working Panel,

Being in attendance for a recent presentation at a Mothers for Peace meeting, reading the current local Sierra Club newsletter, as well as reading today's editorial in the Tribune, one would wonder at the furious attempt to gain support to upend the new Land Policy decision of the CPUC. Instead of recognizing the progressive decision made with this ruling, efforts are being directed to once again put limitations, in perpetuity, on possible land acquisition by the local Native American Tribe. There seems to be a basic underlying fear or mistrust directing all these efforts.

I wonder where this fear comes from- certainly our families have proven themselves capable of being good stewards of the land, as we all should know the history of this area and our role as being successful caretakers of this land for thousands of years.

The fear of development? Our inherent responsibility to this land is preservation and conservation. Our history of working with the Land Conservancy of SLO has succeeded in providing managed public access to the Pismo Preserve- and yet, efforts have already been needed to thwart folks from “loving a place to death.”

Even so, what we have stated from the beginning of this journey in presenting to the Engagement Panel is to include managed public access in our plans. We honor the incredible beauty and gift of these lands, and want others to honor them as well.

So where does this fear come from? Just as our DNA holds the life blood and spirit of those who came before us, so also does the DNA of all who are on this panel. Just as we are willing to fight for the return of our homelands, so also is there seemingly some sort of historical replication in some for seeking control over our behavior and actions.

I would ask the panel to support the CPUC tribal lands policy as written, as it aligns beautifully with the vision document of this decommissioning engagement panel. Thank you all for you continuing work. It has and continues to make a difference.

Sincerely,

Wendy Lucas
yak titʸu titʸu yak tiłhini
Northern Chumash Tribe of SLO County and Region
Board Vice President, yttyt Kinship Preservation