Overview of the History and Role of the Diablo Canyon Independent Safety Committee

The concept of an independent safety committee for Diablo Canyon Power Plant arose in context of the opposition by the California Public Utilities Commission's (CPUC) Division of Ratepayer Advocates (now known as the Office of Ratepayer Advocates) and the then California Attorney General (John Van de Kamp) to Pacific Gas &Electric's (PG&E) request for recovery from its ratepayers for the cost of building both Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant (DCPP) units.  Those parties argued that billions of dollars of these costs were unreasonable and to resolve the matter in June 1988 the parties entered into a Settlement Agreement with PG&E providing for "performance based pricing."   Opponents of the Settlement Agreement, such as The Utility Reform Network (TURN) argued that performance based pricing gave PG&E an incentive to maximize energy production and profits which could threaten plant safety.  The CPUC recognized the safety implications of the then established performance based pricing for power produced by DCPP in its approval of Decision 88.12.083 in December 1988 which established the Diablo Canyon Independent Safety Committee (DCISC) to monitor safety at the plant.

The Committee was formed in late 1989, began its review activities on January 1, 1990, and conducted its first site visit on April 20, 1990 and first public meeting in San Luis Obispo on May 22, 1990.  The Committee issued an interim report for the period January 1 - June 30, 1990 and has issued an annual report every year since then.  The 21st through the 30th Annual Reports are now available on our website at www.dcisc.org.  The 30th Annual Report was approved at the DCISC's public meeting on October 23, 2020.  These Annual Reports, together with the CPUC Decisions cited herein, serve as source documents for the Committee's formation, continuing role and activities.

The Settlement Agreement provided that:
"An Independent Safety Committee shall be established consisting of three members, one each appointed by the Governor of the State of California, the Attorney General and the Chairperson of the California Energy Commission ("CEC"), respectively, serving staggered three-year terms.  The Committee shall review Diablo Canyon operations for the purpose of assessing the safety of operations and suggesting any recommendations for safe operations.  Neither the Committee nor its members shall have any responsibility or authority for plant operations, and they shall have no authority to direct PG&E personnel. The Committee shall conform in all respects to applicable federal laws, regulations and Nuclear Regulatory Commission ("NRC") policies."

The agreement further provided that the DCISC shall have the right to receive certain operating reports and records of Diablo Canyon, and that the DCISC shall have the right to conduct an annual examination of the Diablo Canyon site and such other supplementary visits to the plant site as it may deem appropriate.  The DCISC is to prepare an annual report and such interim reports as may be appropriate, which shall include any recommendations of the Committee.

As required by the provisions of CPUC decisions and of Assembly Bill 1890 enacted by the California Legislature in 1996, which mandated electric utility rate restructuring and deregulation, PG&E filed an application which proposed a rate-making treatment for Diablo Canyon which would have priced the plant's output at market rates by the end of 2001. On May 21, 1997, the CPUC issued Decision 97-05-088 which, while making the Diablo Canyon settlement adopted in Decision 88-12-083 of no further force and effect, found that the DCISC remains a key element of monitoring the safe operation of Diablo Canyon and continued the DCISC. The Decision ordered that the DCISC remain in existence under the terms and conditions of the settlement agreement (Decision 88-12-083, Appendix C, Attachment A) until further order of the CPUC.

On May 27, 2004, the CPUC issued Decision 04-05-055, the Test Year 2003 General Rate Case, setting the PG&E's revenue requirements for its electric generation operations.  In Decision 04-05-055 the CPUC also: 1) adopted a Stipulation between the DCISC, PG&E, the Office of Ratepayer Advocates (formerly the "DRA"), The Utility Reform Network, the CEC and the San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace which provided for the DCISC's continued existence and funding through PG&E's cost-of-service rates, at the funding levels established by Decision 97-05-088 and based on the DCISC's funding for calendar year 1996 with a 1.5% annual escalation each year thereafter; 2) changed the nomination procedures for DCISC membership to eliminate from the process the participation of PG&E and the Dean of Engineering at the University of California at Berkeley; 3) modified somewhat the qualification requirements for DCISC membership; and 4) added a new requirement for public outreach in the local, San Luis Obispo area community to the DCISC's mandate.

On January 25, 2007, the CPUC issued Decision 07-01-028. The CPUC had previously adopted new practices and expectations for the DCISC without concurrently restating the Committee's charter to reflect those changes.  In its Decision, the CPUC granted the DCISC application for authority to restate its charter including the incorporation into the Restated Charter of several terms, conditions, changes, and clarifications necessitated by, and previously authorized by, the CPUC which govern the composition, responsibilities and operations of the Committee. In its Decision, the CPUC found the Restated Charter to be in the public's interest as it reflects the latest authority and obligations of the DCISC. The Committee's application was unopposed.

On June 21, 2016, PG&E announced a Joint Proposal with Friends of the Earth, the Natural Resources Defense Council, Environment California, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Works Local 1245, Coalition of California Utility Employees and the Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility to retire Diablo Canyon at the expiration of the current operating licenses from the NRC and to abandon license renewal activities for both units. Unit 1 having commenced commercial operation on May 7, 1985, with a license to operate until November 2, 2024, and Unit 2 having commenced commercial operation on March 3, 1986, with a license to operate until  August 26, 2025.

On August 11, 2016, PG&E filed Application 16-08-006 ("Application") with the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) for approval of the retirement of Diablo Canyon, implementation of the Joint Proposal.

On January 11, 2018, the CPUC voted unanimously to adopt Decision D. 18-01-022 approving PG&E's Application to retire Diablo Canyon by 2025.

On December 13, 2018, PG&E filed with the CPUC Application A-18-12-008 in the 2018 Nuclear Decommissioning Cost Triennial Proceeding (2018 NDCTP).

On January 10, 2020, a Joint Motion was filed with the CPUC in the 2018 NDCTP for Adoption of a Settlement Agreement between PG&E, The Utility Reform Network, the CPUC Public Advocates Office, the Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility, the County of San Luis Obispo, the yak tityu tityu yak tilhini Northern Chumash Cultural Preservation Kinship, and Women's Energy Matters for approval of the Settlement Agreement which, if approved, would provide for the Committee's Charter to be amended to extend the Committee's oversight role on nuclear safety matters until all spent nuclear fuel has been transferred from the spent fuel pools to the Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI).

At the DCISC public meeting on February 12, 2020, the Members of the DCISC reviewed a Second Restatement of the DCISC's Charter to provide for a continued role following Diablo Canyon's cessation of electricity generating operations for the DCISC to review nuclear fuel-related issues and to terminate that review upon completion of the safe transfer of all nuclear fuel to the ISFSI.  The Members approved the proposed Second Restatement presented at that meeting as the DCISC's proposal for a Second Restated Charter for the Committee and directed the Committee's Legal Counsel to provide the proposed Second Restatement to the CPUC Energy Division staff with a recommendation to pursue the most expeditious avenue to bring the proposed Second Restatement to the attention of the Administrative Law Judge in the 2018 NDCTP for a procedure to be found for consideration of its approval by the CPUC.

On September 9, 2021 the CPUC approved Decision 21-09-003 approving the adopting the Settlement Agreement proposed in the 2018 NDCTP to provide for a post-shutdown role for the DCISC. The Decision states "If the Settlement Agreement is approved [by the CPUC's adoption of the Proposed Decision], the DCISC charter would be revised to allow it to continue in its safety oversight role until all the DCPP spent nuclear fuel has been moved from wet storage to dry storage . . ."  Decision Finding of Fact 66 provides "Based on the Settlement Agreement, the Settling Parties agree to amend the Charter of the DCISC to extend its oversight role on nuclear safety matters until all spent fuel has been transferred from the spent fuel pools to the ISFSI."  Decision Ordering Paragraph  3 states "Pacific Gas and Electric Company shall submit any Advice Letters(s) within 30 days of the effective date of this decision to implement the specific terms of the Settlement Agreement approved in this decision".

On October 11, 2021, PG&E submitted Advice Letter 6361-E which was made effective on November 10, 2021, by direction issued on December 9, 2021, by the California Public Utilities Commission, Energy Division, Director of Cost, Rates and Planning.

The DCISC recognizes its commitment now and in the future under its Second Restated Charter  to continue to monitor and report on safety of operations at Diablo Canyon, including reviewing any effect of decommissioning-related activities on those operations while the plant continues to generate electricity and after cessation of generation operations until all spent fuel has been transferred from the spent fuel pols to the ISFS at the plant site. The DCISC will continue to provide information to the public and to the Governor, the California Energy Commission, the California Attorney General and to the CPUC on developments which may have an impact on safety of operations at Diablo Canyon.