A proposal to study Diablo Canyon's earthquake safety and the potential for converting the nuclear plant to natural gas has positioned Assemblyman Sam Blakeslee as an ambitious and somewhat contrarian freshman Republican.
SAN LUIS OBISPO, Calif. — A proposal to study Diablo Canyon's earthquake safety and the potential for converting the nuclear plant to natural gas has positioned Assemblyman Sam Blakeslee as an ambitious and somewhat contrarian freshman Republican.
Blakeslee will submit the bill next Tuesday. On Thursday, a key Democratic lawmaker seemed willing to consider it. Assemblyman Lloyd Levine, D-Van Nuys, heads the Utilities and Commerce Committee, which will be among the first to review the proposal.
Levine said he has not seen Blakeslee's bill, but it follows a trend in which the state is moving away from nuclear power and toward alternate forms of energy.
"I am not a big fan of nuclear power," Levine said. "I don't believe anyone is looking at nuclear as a viable option." Blakeslee surprised many in the community last week when he announced his idea for the Diablo studies.
Since then, the proposal has come under criticism from Diablo owner Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Republican state Sen. Abel Maldonado. And it has garnered praise -- and surprise -- from environmentalists.
"This is a perfect time for this study as it pertains to PG&E and the overall state energy plan," Blakeslee said. "Long-term energy issues are the hot topic because there is greater awareness of our economy's vulnerability to energy shortages." Levine said he would like to submit legislation that requires the state to get 20 percent of its power from renewable sources, such as solar, by 2010. Currently, 20 percent of the state's power comes from nuclear power produced by two plants.
Blakeslee's legislation only applies to Diablo Canyon and not to the state's other nuclear plant in San Onofre, in Southern California.
Political observers say it is unusual for a freshman assemblyman to propose such ambitious legislation. New legislators normally start off with more modest proposals, said Bruce Cain, a political scientist at UC Berkeley. "This certainly bucks the trend," he said.
However, term limits that restrict assemblymen to three two-year terms tend to make legislators more aggressive because they have limited time to get things done, Levine said.
"Mr. Blakeslee should be aggressive and move forward," Levine said. "I would never call him foolhardy for pursuing something like this." Blakeslee, a businessman and geophysicist, said the bill doesn't contradict his pro-business, conservative philosophies.
PG&E faces several major decisions at Diablo Canyon, he said, and it would be better for the utility if the studies he proposes are done soon.
The utility plans to spend more than $700 million of ratepayer money to replace the plant's steam generators and is deciding whether to apply to renew the plant's operating licenses, which expire in 2023 and 2025.
"There are business impacts of not moving ahead with this," Blakeslee said.
The bill would mandate state agencies such as the Energy Commission and the Public Utilities Commission to make Diablo Canyon studies a priority. The studies would focus on three issues:
--Independently assess earthquake studies done at the plant to see if new technology and lessons learned by recent local earthquakes can be used to better understand seismic risks to Diablo Canyon;
--Determine the feasibility of converting the plant to natural gas in the event PG&E has trouble with its license renewals; and
--Determine what incentives to PG&E might be needed to facilitate the conversion to natural gas.
"This analysis will be done eventually," Blakeslee said. "We want to do it early enough to create as many options (as possible) now before the community is in a crisis mode." Where utility stands PG&E is opposed to the idea of converting Diablo Canyon to natural gas. At a recent town hall hearing by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, PG&E executives said replacing Diablo Canyon's nuclear power with natural gas would be a bad idea because it would reduce the diversity of power sources for the state and increase air pollution.
Company executives also believe that the process of converting the plant would have licensing challenges of its own. PG&E has noted Duke Energy's problems in obtaining a license to revamp its Morro Bay plant, already powered by natural gas. In addition, PG&E has noted that converting Diablo does not solve the problem of where and how to store its radioactive waste, and it requires building a natural gas pipeline to the plant.
"We are not interested in repowering Diablo Canyon with natural gas," said David Oatley, the senior PG&E official at Diablo Canyon.
Pleasantly surprised Environmentalists said they were pleasantly surprised by Blakeslee's bill. They agree that now is the time to look at alternatives to nuclear power before PG&E moves ahead with the steam generator replacement project.
"There's a lot of political risk in this for this guy (Blakeslee)," said Carl Zichella, a legislative analyst for the Sierra Club in Sacramento. "I think he should be rewarded for putting his community before his political aspirations."
Blakeslee has taken on one of the state's most powerful political entities in PG&E, Zichella said. The utility is committed to keeping Diablo Canyon nuclear, in spite of the cost and problems associated with storage of its highly radioactive spent reactor fuel.
"If it weren't for the political clout of PG&E, this would be an easy conversation," he said.
To see more of The Tribune, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.sanluisobispo.com. (c) 2005, The Tribune, San Luis Obispo, Calif. Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News.
