As a South County resident and business owner who is interested in public safety, our local economy, water resiliency, and state electrical power capacity, I recently visited Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP) for the first time.
I was impressed by their adherence to a culture of safety. My experience as a professional pilot has taught me that safety largely involves methodical compliance to a good process and training to have the capacity to respond to a variety of situations. From my first encounter with PG&E staff at the meeting location where we were given a safety briefing that included confirming who has and has not had CPR training, to compliance with the proper use of personal protective equipment, it is clear they are imbued with a safety-forward culture. The plant’s security protocols were visible and formidable, with escalating measures as we approached critical areas of plant operations. I was struck by such details as background checks a week prior to our tour date and guard towers with armed personnel tactically located to provide a clear line of sight to approaches to sensitive areas.
The facility itself is extensive, with its own fire department, control room simulator, environmental team, professional divers, a shooting range, and threat simulator utilized by both PG&E security personnel and our own SLO County Sheriff’s Office for training. I heard people on the shooting range both at the time of our entrance in the morning and again passing the facility in the afternoon when we departed the plant.
The facts related to Diablo Canyon’s energy production are well known, with the plant producing nearly 9 percent of the state’s total electrical supply and 17 percent of the state’s zero-carbon electricity. From a local public safety perspective, Diablo’s benefits to our county are both substantial and positive, with not only monetary contributions to our county emergency services but also training and supply of emergency equipment to our first responders. The training component includes first responders working with their partner agencies at the municipal, county, and state levels. This cross-agency training provides for a more integrated emergency disaster response. Both the training and equipment paid for and supplied by PG&E can be used for any emergency purpose in our county by an authorized agency.
From an economic perspective, the plant contributes a whopping $800 million to $1.1 billion to our county annually, depending on the study you reference. Employing approximately 1,300 people and more during an outage, we are lucky to have this economic driver here at a time when our state has experienced some high-profile departures of large businesses.
From a water security perspective, using the existing desalination plant at DCPP to better serve our community represents a unique opportunity, long-discussed but unrealized. Whatever the fate of Central Coast Blue or its progeny might be, this potential water supply could enhance the water portfolio that serves South San Luis Obispo County. Yes, there are hurdles. The existing planned closure of the plant in 2030 limits the extent of planning our county and municipalities could conduct with PG&E. And of course, there are engineering and infrastructure enhancements required to make this happen. However, the most important (and likely most expensive) piece of infrastructure is already in place: an operating desalination plant.
I commend the SLO County Board of Supervisors majority for recently voting yes on a resolution to support keeping DCPP operating for up to another 20 years. I urge the state Legislature and regulatory bodies to increase the operating timeline for DCPP from its current five-year licensure to up to 20 years, providing flexibility in its timeline of operation. I, for one, view Diablo Canyon Power Plant as a valued member of our community, providing clean energy to our state, enhancing our public safety, and as a potential future partner in bolstering our water resiliency. Δ
Adam Verdin writes from South San Luis Obispo County. Respond with an opinion piece of your own by emailing it to letters@newtimesslo.com.
This article appears in Education Today 2024.
Mr Verdin’s cheerleading propaganda for Diablo Canyon’s continued operation and model of safety is not supported by facts. On July 30 three prestigious and science based organizations protested the NRC’s Licensing Board decision to deny public hearings on documented and serious safety concerns at the plant.
San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace (SLOMFP), Friends of the Earth (FoE), and Environmental Working Group (EWG) yesterday appealed to the Commissioners of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to reverse a hearing board decision. The decision denies a public hearing on critical safety and environmental concerns related to the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant license renewal process.
The groups argue that Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s (PG&E) proposal to extend the plant’s operation by 20 years poses significant risks. On July 3, 2024, the Licensing Board rejected the admissibility of three key contentions, including unacceptable earthquake risks, the aging and vulnerability of Unit 1s pressure vessel to rupture, and Coastal Zone Management Act noncompliance. This decision leaves significant safety and environmental concerns unaddressed.
The decision to deny a hearing on these vital safety issues is not only disappointing but dangerous, said Diane Curran, legal counsel for the petitioners. Insulating PG&Es unsafe operation of Diablo Canyon from public scrutiny to determine whether the plant can operate safely puts millions of people in California at risk if a meltdown should occur.
Earthquake risk at Diablo Canyon has been a serious concern since the reactors were built in the 1970s. Expert testimony on seismic risks, presented to the NRCs Licensing Board by Peter Bird, Professor Emeritus of Earth, Planetary, and Space Sciences at the University of California, Los Angeles, illustrated that the risk of an earthquakecaused core damage accident is approximately one in a thousand per yearso severe that the plant meets NRCs criteria for immediate shutdown. See Dr. Birds explanation of the risks here.
Adding to the multi-dimensional disappointment of the Licensing Boards refusal to hear public testimony, is the NRCs Chairman Christopher T. Hanson reneging on a promise he made on April 19, 2023 to California Sen. Padilla. The chairman promised Padilla that the NRC would re-evaluate the seismic risk at Diablo Canyon during the license renewal process. The Licensing Board, however, ruled that this commitment has no legal effect, leaving PG&E’s license renewal application unchallenged despite significant seismic concerns.
In a letter to Sen. Padilla, the environmental groups now urge the Senator to hold Chairman Hansen to his promise. They write: Only by virtue of Chairman Hansons commitment would the NRC evaluate the significance of the new information or provide a public hearing.
The appeal also highlights PG&Es neglect in conducting comprehensive testing and inspection of the Unit 1 reactor vessel, which has shown signs of embrittlement since 2003. Dr. Digby Macdonald, Professor Emeritus at the University of California, testified that the risk of embrittlement of this critical componentwhich holds the highly radioactive core of the reactor and the water that cools itcould lead to catastrophic failure in a coolant loss accident due to PG&E’s failure to monitor the vessel.
Additionally, the groups raised concerns about PG&Es failure to comply with the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA). Correctly, the California Coastal Commission (CCC) has withheld approval due to identified deficiencies. PG&E argues that compliance is not needed now, but the petitioners assert that NRC regulations require raising contentions as early as possible, making PG&Es lack of state approval both timely and admissible.
It is a slap in the face to the California Coastal Commission for PG&E to sweep its regulations under the rug by delaying compliance, said Caroline Leary, Chief Operating Officer & General Counsel for EWG. PG&Es culture of disregarding compliance should not be tolerated, especially for operating an old and dangerous nuclear plant like Diablo Canyon.
Charles Varni
Downwind in Oceano
Charles, I think differing views on important issues is a good thing. Indeed, we can all learn from each other. However, I do find it interesting that you refer to my op-ed as propaganda when it appears all you did was cut and pasted the July 30th press release from the groups you noted. Their press release is below.
PRESS RELEASE
San Luis Obispo, CA July 30 San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace (SLOMFP), Friends of the Earth (FoE), and Environmental Working Group (EWG) yesterday appealed to the Commissioners of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to reverse a hearing board decision. The decision denies a public hearing on critical safety and environmental concerns related to the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant license renewal process.
The groups argue that Pacific Gas and Electric Companys (PG&E) proposal to extend the plants operation by 20 years poses significant risks. On July 3, 2024, the Licensing Board rejected the admissibility of three key contentions, including unacceptable earthquake risks, the aging and vulnerability of Unit 1s pressure vessel to rupture, and Coastal Zone Management Act noncompliance. This decision leaves significant safety and environmental concerns unaddressed.
The decision to deny a hearing on these vital safety issues is not only disappointing but dangerous, said Diane Curran, legal counsel for the petitioners. Insulating PG&Es unsafe operation of Diablo Canyon from public scrutiny to determine whether the plant can operate safely puts millions of people in California at risk if a meltdown should occur.
Earthquake risk at Diablo Canyon has been a serious concern since the reactors were built in the 1970s. Expert testimony on seismic risks, presented to the NRCs Licensing Board by Peter Bird, Professor Emeritus of Earth, Planetary, and Space Sciences at the University of California, Los Angeles, illustrated that the risk of an earthquakecaused core damage accident is approximately one in a thousand per yearso severe that the plant meets NRCs criteria for immediate shutdown. See Dr. Birds explanation of the risks here.
Adding to the multi-dimensional disappointment of the Licensing Boards refusal to hear public testimony, is the NRCs Chairman Christopher T. Hanson reneging on a promise he made on April 19, 2023 to California Sen. Padilla. The chairman promised Padilla that the NRC would re-evaluate the seismic risk at Diablo Canyon during the license renewal process. The Licensing Board, however, ruled that this commitment has no legal effect, leaving PG&Es license renewal application unchallenged despite significant seismic concerns.
In a letter to Sen. Padilla, the environmental groups now urge the Senator to hold Chairman Hansen to his promise. They write: Only by virtue of Chairman Hansons commitment would the NRC evaluate the significance of the new information or provide a public hearing.
The appeal also highlights PG&Es neglect in conducting comprehensive testing and inspection of the Unit 1 reactor vessel, which has shown signs of embrittlement since 2003. Dr. Digby Macdonald, Professor Emeritus at the University of California, testified that the risk of embrittlement of this critical componentwhich holds the highly radioactive core of the reactor and the water that cools itcould lead to catastrophic failure in a coolant loss accident due to PG&Es failure to monitor the vessel.
Additionally, the groups raised concerns about PG&Es failure to comply with the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA). Correctly, the California Coastal Commission (CCC) has withheld approval due to identified deficiencies. PG&E argues that compliance is not needed now, but the petitioners assert that NRC regulations require raising contentions as early as possible, making PG&Es lack of state approval both timely and admissible.
It is a slap in the face to the California Coastal Commission for PG&E to sweep its regulations under the rug by delaying compliance, said Caroline Leary, Chief Operating Officer & General Counsel for EWG. PG&Es culture of disregarding compliance should not be tolerated, especially for operating an old and dangerous nuclear plant like Diablo Canyon.
U gotta be kidding me!! plagiarism is no bueno. no bueno at all…. mr varni i strongly urge you to check this out if you wanna avoid this happening again!!!!! https://honor.virginia.edu/understanding-f…. also this one https://www.grammarly.com/plagiarism-check…
Yes, I cut and pasted the release which is obviously clear in the response.
What is also clear is that you ignore the validity of the critical facts presented in the press release.
Mr college professor got caught copying someone else’s work and he doubles down! Hootah!!! I respect it brotha, if paulding wasnt going to endorse you before he sure will now. Just like when u were against off roading and then went and crushed the damn clams urself. I sorta love having our very own trump right here in Oceano! #ClaudineGay
Charles,
No where in your original response to Mr. Verdin’s commentary did you state or suggest to the readers that the information when you shared was copy and pasted was from a different source. So, to any person reading your response without have seeing the press release that you took from, would have just assumed that you had written it. That is in itself plagiarism. I would suggest that next time you take the time to add in before the cut and pasting that you are taking the information from another source.
Mr Varni driving in the mean high tide line and disturbing the sensitive returning Pismo clams is very serious.
Mr. Varni’s apparent quest for political influence appears plagued by convenient double standards evidenced through his actions. His conflicting positions and disregard for the environment are concerning.
“Rules for thee but not for me.”
It has been reported that Mr. Varni has a long standing record of attacking members of the local community with demeaning, disparaging and slanderous comments. Yet, he seems to demonstrate little, or no regard, for environmental protections through his own actions.
Shortly after guidelines were established by the Coastal Commission for no vehicle use below the mean high tide line, witnesses photographed Mr. Varni in clear violation, driving his vehicle and parked BELOW THE MEAN HIGH TIDE LINE. He has called for restrictions and enforcements on families at Oceano Dunes, only to spend his own time in blatant violation of those guidelines and knowingly disrupting the sensitive Pismo clams with his vehicle.
Mr Varni has pushed for a vehicle-free beach. During a rally to reopen Oceano Dunes from closure, Mr. Varni parked his vehicle on the beach, again in the tide line, with a large sign reading “Vehicle Free Beach-Dunes.” Let’s sum that up…Mr. Varni drove his car onto the beach, to protest for a vehicle-free beach!
The community deserves better.