Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant: The WikiBook/orphaned pages/Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility

From Wikibooks, open books for an open world
Jump to navigation Jump to search

PO 1328 San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 www.a4nr.org
Letter of the Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility

Since 2005, this Commission has acted responsibly to ensure that the state’s continued reliance on aging nuclear reactors on the state’s seismically active and eroding coast and with an increasing footprint of high-level radioactive waste stored onsite is based on factual information. Yet when PG&E ignored all CEC and legislative recommendations and directions it implied that California’s democratic process was irrelevant. As the state’s primary energy policy and planning agency, the public relies on the CEC to provide oversight and guidance and where necessary enforcement of its Integrated Energy Policy Report. The Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility asks that this agency fully participate in PG&E’s upcoming General Rate Case to guarantee that the state’s energy policy is adhered to and the state’s future generation needs are based on fact, nor coercion. PG&E's "Pre-Thanksgiving license renewal application surprise" was a disservice to the local community and to the state. The CEC--who are charged with planning our future energy sources, and the CPUC -- who are charged with just and reasonable rates for generation, can no longer rely on PG&E's implied commitment to comply with IEPR, legislative or CPUC direction. In fact, when the Alliance raised the probability (now a reality) that PG&E’s would use ratepayer funding for a license renewal study to unilaterally seek license renewal the CPUC responded: “We have already addressed this concern by requiring PG&E to submit the study to the Commission as part of an application in 2011 on whether to proceed with license renewal. If PG&E fails to do so, we agree with PG&E's observation that the Commission "has ample means to deal with PG&E's failure to comply with the Commission's order to file an application, if that should ever come to pass.1 " PG&E appears to imply that the state should have no voice, yet that is only true if the CEC and the CPUC allow it. Those who live within the "fallout zone" of Diablo Canyon, and ratepayers who are charged with funding the continued operation of aging reactors, and taxpayers whose funding is diverted to supporting the operation of agin g reactors on California's earthquake active and eroding coastal zones deserve to know that our homes businesses and generation supplies will be reliable and affordable. Without the completion and review of CEC recommended, and legislatively-approved, seismic and other 1632 studies the public and the state and future reliable generation are placed at risk. This commission need only look at the impacts of the 2007 earthquake in Japan to understand that ignoring seismic issues can be costly and can result in reliance on polluting technologies and spot market prices. The Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility asks that the CEC make it clear to PG&E that its license renewal filing with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is in defiance of CEC, CPUC and legislative actions and that the application should be place on hold until the state has decided that funding this application is in California’s best interest. Rochelle Becker, Executive Director Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility rochelle@a4nr.org (858) 337 270 1 CPUC Decision footnote 99 PG&E opening

comments on the Alternate Proposed Decision, p. 23.