Santa Lucian • Sept. 20161

SANTA LUCIAN Sept. 2016

Volume 53 No. 8T h e o f f i c i a l n e w s l e t te r o f th e Sa n ta L u c i a C h a p te r o f t h e S i e r r a C l u b ~ Sa n L u i s O b i s p o Co u n t y, C a l i f o r n i a

IIIII n s i d en s i d en s i d en s i d en s i d eIn Borneo 2

A Diablo intervention 3

7 ways you can help us 4

Oak protection proceeding 5

Classifieds 7

Outings 8

Please recycle

This newsletter printed on100% post-consumer recycled paper with soy-

based inks

Sant

a Lu

cian

Sant

a Lu

cia

Cha

pter

of t

he S

ierr

a C

lub

P. O

. Box

1575

5Sa

n Lu

is O

bisp

o, C

A 9

3406

NO

NPR

OFI

T O

RG.

U.S

. PO

STA

GE

PAID

PER

MIT

NO

. 84

SAN

LU

IS O

BIS

POC

A 9

3401

Santa LuciaChapter

That sheep may safely graze A local resident takes astroll down Peachy Canyon Road, clearly hoping we cankeep our rural areas rural.

Adelaida’sSignificantImpactSave Adelaida v. SLO County means hopefor rural residents seeking protectionfrom proliferating “event centers”

“You Guys Are In a ReallyUnique Position:

already started flowing. Theterminals are already inTacoma. Here, you can stopthis before it starts. And it’sa hell of a lot easier to stopit now than once it’s beenapproved.”

Rep. Capps: Please Say No to the TPP The Trans-Pacific Part-nership (TPP) — the con-troversial pact between theU.S. and 11 other PacificRim nations that couldcome before Congress thisyear — would be bad newsfor our air, water, climate,jobs, and communities. Here’s why:

New rights for fossil fuelcorporations to challengeclimate protections The TPP would under-mine efforts to address cli-mate disruption and keepfossil fuels in the ground byempowering multinationalfossil fuel firms to use theinvestor-state dispute settle-ment (ISDS) system tochallenge environmentalsafeguards in private tradetribunals. Corporate law-yers, not judges, make thedecisions in these tribunals,which are not accountableto any domestic legal sys-

tem. The TPP’s extraordinaryrights for multinationalcorporations virtually repli-cate those in past pacts thathave enabled corporationsto launch nearly 700 casesagainst more than 100 gov-ernments. These corpora-tions have challenged, forexample, a moratorium onfracking in Quebec, a courtorder to pay for oil pollu-tion in Ecuador, and restric-tions on a coal-fired powerplant in Germany. Trans-Canada is now asking anunaccountable ISDS tribu-nal to order the U.S. gov-ernment to pay $15 billionfor rejecting the KeystoneXL tar sands pipeline. The TPP would extendISDS rights to over 9,000additional firms operatingin the U.S. — roughly dou-bling the current number.This includes hundredsof fossil fuel firms, such as

the subsidiaries of BHPBilliton, one of the U.S.’slargest foreign investors infracking and offshore drill-ing.• The TPP would nearlydouble the number of multi-national fracking corpora-tions that could challengenew U.S. fracking restric-tions in unaccountableISDS tribunals.• The TPP would enable oiland gas corporations withnearly 1 million acres’worth of U.S. offshore drill-

ing leases to use this privatetribunal system to try toundermine new offshoredrilling restrictions.

Increased climate-disrupt-ing emissions Though trade can signifi-cantly increase climate-disrupting emissions, theTPP text fails to even men-tion the words “climatechange.” The omission isalarming, given that theTPP would increase emis-sions by:

• Offshoring U.S. Manufac-turing and IncreasingShipping: The TPP wouldshift U.S. manufacturing tocountries like Malaysia andVietnam, where productionis two to four times as car-bon-intensive as in the U.S.This also would increaseshipping-related emissions.• Escalating Tropical De-forestation: In TPP-mem-ber Malaysia, new oil palmplantations are the primarycause of tropical deforesta-tion. The TPP’s elimination

of tariffs, or import taxes, onpalm oil would encourageoil palm expansion andmore climate-disruptingdeforestation.

Encouraging fossil fuelexports and fracking Under the TPP, the U.S.Department of Energywould be required to auto-matically approve all ex-ports of liquefied natural gas(LNG) to all TPP countries

TPP continued on page 5

Our effort to protect therural, agricultural nature ofthe Adelaida area beganwhen the County approvedan Event Center on Vine-yard Drive involving theconstruction of three build-ings and a permit to host 25events of 200 people eachyear. The approval also in-cluded at least doublingwater usage to enable pro-cessing of trucked-in olivesand demolition of a charm-ing, old, red agriculturalbarn. We held neighborhoodmeetings. Initially, approxi-mately twenty-five people

attended. Everyone ex-pressed concern and lovefor that barn. But peoplealso spoke of larger con-cerns that this project andrelated projects were posingfor Adelaida’s rural commu-nity, including the traffic,the limited water supply,noise, trash, the destructionof wildlife, overburdeningof Cal Fire and drunk driv-ing. No one objected to thelocal wine industry. How-ever, everyone in atten-dance also noted there hadbeen a significant change inrecent years. The concernexpressed was that the lo-

cal, rural area wasin danger of evolv-ing from moderateuse to a level thatwould overwhelmthe old farm-to-market roads. TheAdelaida area wasbeing seen by someas a prime invest-ment opportunityfor major outsidecommercially-focused corpora-tions. Along withthat trajectory,local residents feltCounty plannershad ignored thearea’s agricultural way of

By Save Adelaida!

ADELAIDA continued on page 5

- Arlene Burns, Mayor of Mosier,Oregon. SLO, July 9, 2016.

In Oregon, the oil trains had

Mayor Burns came to SanLuis Obispo to tell us what it’slike when a train carryingcombustible crude oil derailsnext to your town and youhave to deal with the resultingfire and contamination of yourwater, as Mosier, Oregon, didin June. Did the SLO CountyPlanning Commission listen?Find out on Sept. 22 (page 4). PROTECTSLO.ORG“It’s not a matter of if, it’s a matter of when.” Mosier, Oregon, Mayor Arlene Burns laid it out in Mitchell

Park last July for all communities facing proposed crude oil train terminals.

Judge’s ruling, 1st page

2 Santa Lucian • Sept. 2016

The Executive Committee meetsthe second Monday of every monthat 5:30 p.m. The ConservationCommittee meets the secondFriday at 1p.m. at the chapter office,located at 974 Santa Rosa St., SanLuis Obispo. All members arewelcome to attend.

Denny Mynatt PRINT MEDIA COORDINATOR

Energy Task Force Karen MerriamIntergenerational Task Force

Water Subcommittee Keith Wimer

Committee ChairsPolitical David BouquinDevelopment openConservation Sue Harvey

Nuclear Power Task Force Rochelle Becker Linda Seeley Climate Change Task Force Heidi Harmon

Victoria Carranza

Printed by University Graphic Systems CalPoly, San Luis Obispo. Mailing servicescourtesy of Silver Streaks.

Office hours Monday-Friday,1 p.m. - 7 p.m., 974 Santa RosaStreet, San Luis Obispo

Coordinator Kim Ramos, Admin and Development kimlramos@yahoo.com

Santa Lucia ChapterP.O. Box 15755San Luis Obispo, CA 93406

CNRCC Delegates Lindi Doud, Patrick McGibney John BurdettWildlands Stewardship Campaign Holly SlettelandCalendar Sales Bonnie Walters 805-543-7051Outings Joe Morris

Webmaster Monica Tarzier

Trail Guide Gary Felsman

Chapter Director Andrew Christie

Santa Lucian

EDITOR

Greg McMillanLindi DoudLinda SeeleySandy SimonEDITORIAL COMMITTEE

The Santa Lucian is published 10 times ayear. Articles, environmental information andletters to the editor are welcome. Thedeadline for each issue is the 13th of theprior month.

send to:Editor, Santa Lucianc/o Santa Lucia Chapter, Sierra ClubP.O. Box 15755San Luis Obispo, CA 93406sierraclub8@gmail.com

Santa Lucia Chapter

2016 Executive CommitteeKaren Merriam (12/18) CHAIRLindi Doud (12/17) TREASURERSue Harvey (12/16) MEMBERCal French (12/16) MEMBERPatrick McGibney (12/17) MEMBER

Open COUNCIL OF CLUB LEADERS

Andrew Christie

In Deepest Borneo7-9 p.m., Wednesday, Sept. 21st

The Yosemite Conserva-tion Heritage Center(YCHC) is a National His-toric Landmark built by theSierra Club in 1903. It isthe first permanent VisitorCenter in Yosemite Valleyand home to the SierraClub’s oldest educationalprogram. Featuring rough-hewn granite masonry, asteep-pitched woodengabled roof, exposed ham-mer beams, and scissortrusses, the building lendsitself to lofty thoughts andinspiration. Many notable SierraClub pioneers have guidedthe program and cared forthe building including,Edward T. Parsons, AnselAdams, Joseph N. LeConte(“Little Joe”) and MarionRandall Parsons. Today,the Curator is highly re-garded John Muir historianand author, Bonnie J.Gisel, Ph.D. Since 2002, Bonnie hasdeveloped a world-classprogram that is enjoyed byover 15,000 visitors peryear.

“I envision community as aplace that embraces an idealof inclusiveness and bringsforth the best in us as humanbeings to preserve and con-serve natural resources, wil-derness, and all things wild.Here at YCHC, we share thatideal with visitors fromaround the world and allwalks of life.” Over 100 volunteers staffthe Lodge during the sum-mer season between May 1and September 30. TheseSierra Club members greetvisitors and introduce themto the Club’s vision of envi-ronmental stewardship.Elaine Gorman, MotherLode Chapter, is one suchvolunteer. “Seeing the aweand joy on visitors’ facesreminds me of the unique-ness Yosemite Valley, andthe Sierra Club’s activism toget the Valley added toYosemite National Park in1906.” A well-stocked library andchildren’s corner are bigattractions and all who entermarvel at the beautiful archi-tecture of the building. Well-

attended evening programsare presented Friday andSaturday evenings offeringa wide variety of topicsincluding natural history,literature, music and pho-tography. This year’s inter-active project, “Think Likea Tree” lets kids create anart project and take homeinformation about the lifecycle of trees and their im-portance to our ecosystem. In 2016, Sierra ClubBoard of Directors voted tostop funding this uniqueprogram. Please help usSave the Sierra Club Home

in Yosemite National Park!We need to raise $90,000by October 1, 2016 to fundoperations for 2017. The YCHC is where theSierra Club began its jour-ney to become the influen-tial environmental organiza-tion it is today. Now morethan ever, we must remem-ber our story. Please sup-port this effort to save theYCHC for the future. If youare not able to donate,please share our messagewith others to support theefforts of dedicated volun-teers.

Help Save the Sierra Club’sHome in Yosemite

Jere

my

Evan

s

Randy Knight, retired Cal Poly professor, regales uswith slides and memories of the first-ever Sierra Clubtrip to Borneo in 2011. With his wife and a dozenother adventurers, Randy rode, boated, and hiked pastjungle rivers and deep rainforests, seeing much wild-life on the ground and overhead. In addition, hisgroup connected with indigenous people resisting thewidespread encroachment of palm-oil plantations.Environmental news begins the meeting.

Note change in location, this meeting only: SLO Library Community Room, corner ofPalm and Osos Sts, SLO. Info: Joe Morris, 549-0355

Sierra Club General Meeting

dpj1942@earthlink.net

monica@tarzier.org

On August 08, GovernorBrown announced that hisadministration would notpursue legislation beforethe end of August to pushthrough a regional electric-ity market made up ofPacifiCorp (a large powercompany operating mostlyin the Interior West) andthe California IndependentSystem Operator (thequasi-public agency thatmanages the flow of elec-tricity through the wiresthat make up the grid inCalifornia). There are some benefitsto a regional market, in-cluding potentially moreefficient movement ofrenewable energy through-out the West. However, theproposed merger withPacifiCorp, which isthe largest coal-firedpower producer in theWest, raised some con-cerns about how to makesure the merger doesn’t

result in extending the life ofsome coal-fired plants andactually does result in morerenewables and reducedclimate pollution. Sierra Club was the first—and for a time, the only—environmental group raisingthese concerns last year.Over the last many months,others have raised similarconcerns. Fortunately, thegovernor has taken the con-cerns seriously, hence thedelay in legislation.

The additional time willallow the Club to partici-pate in stakeholder effortsto make sure legislationintroduced in January yieldsbenefits for the state and theenvironment. California Club staffersTravis Ritchie, BillCorcoran, Gloria Smith,Edward Moreno, MartaStoepker and Club staffoutside the state, as well asa small army of volunteers,helped make this decision

happen. Additionally, both theSenate Leadership and the Assem-bly Leadership helped make surethe public interest was protectedand that no bill could go forwardwithout certainty that it would notresult in backsliding on GHGs.All are due congratulations ontheir efforts. Now we move to the nextphase, which is to carefully,thoughtfully craft legislation thatachieves the benefits of regional-ization without creating newproblems.

by Kathryn Phillips, Direc-tor, Sierra Club California

Slow SpeedAhead onRegionalEnergy

To donate online:http://www.sierraclub.org/yosemite-heritage-center

To donate by checkPlease write “Restricted to LeConte Memorial Fund”and make payable to: The Sierra Club Foundation.Mail to:The Sierra Club Foundation2101 Webster St., Suite 1250Oakland, CA 94612

For more info contact: Michael Bryant atmichael.bryant@sierraclub.org(707) 579-1429.

Santa Lucian • Sept. 20163

Sierra Club85 Second St., 2nd FloorSan Francisco, CA 94105-3441

wwwwwwwwwwwwwww.sierraclub.org.sierraclub.org.sierraclub.org.sierraclub.org.sierraclub.org/////santa-luciasanta-luciasanta-luciasanta-luciasanta-lucia

Outings, events, and more!

search: “Santa Lucia” and become our friend!

Now onFacebook

Visit us onthe Web

2500

Change of Address? Mail changes to:

or e-mail:address.changes@sierraclub.org

How uncanny is the near-simultaneous timing ofyour retirement and theannouncement thatPG&E would not seek torelicense Diablo?

Well, as of this writing,the door is closing, but notclosed. And I don’t knowthat I would say I am “re-tired” from this issue. Un-like PG&E’s offer to itsworkers, there was no “re-tention bonus” or severancepackage! (LOL). While Iam no longer the full-timeoutreach coordinator for theAlliance, I will still makemyself available to “con-sult” on such matters asA4NR wishes to explore,including any media work,which had been my spe-cialty in the years beforecoming on board with thisissue. However, we had begunto see the writing on thewall or read the tea leavesfor the ultimate non-relicensing decision onDiablo for the last threeyears, and specifically overthe last year. We evenposted our “evidence” forall this in a footnoted pageof bullet points on our website. An op-ed we penned forthe SLO New Times in De-cember 2014 was eerilyprescient, I can now say inretrospect. It reviewed“PG&E’s consistently sty-mied attempt to relicenseDiablo Canyon for an addi-tional 20 years,” evolvingstate policies, delays by theutility, and abrupt plantshutdowns in Florida andWisconsin the year before,and concluded that this“should put the communityof San Luis Obispo on no-tice: License renewal ofDiablo Canyon—even con-tinued operation until theend of its current license—is not a foregone conclu-sion.” We wrote that con-cerned San Luis Obispanswould be wise to begin“holding workshops with

The Unlikely Activist From the moment of itsfounding in 2005, the Al-liance for Nuclear Respon-sibility has focused relent-lessly on a single issue inthe galaxy of concerns sur-rounding nuclear power:the economic case for shut-ting down California’s lastnuclear plants. For the last two years,David Weisman, the Al-liance’s Outreach Coordi-nator, had planned to stepdown from his 11-year stintwith the Alliance and return to civilian life at the end of June 2016. As fate would have it,his personal plans wound up coinciding with the Alliance’s receipt of an invitation to aseat at the table that same month to negotiate the decision not to seek relicensing of theplant. The deal was announced ten days prior to the date of David’s scheduled departure. Real life seldom provides that kind of serendipity, so we invited David to look back overthe last decade on a unique activist career. We sent him a few questions that eventuallyresulted in the following exchange.

planners and communitymembers.” Although some have ques-tioned whether A4NR usesa crystal ball for prognosti-cation, we had been follow-ing PG&E’s financial trailfor some time. From ourattorney, John Geesman (aformer bond trader), welearned to read the tran-scripts of the quarterly, SECmandated 10-Q investorconference calls. John no-ticed a pattern of statementsby PG&E’s CEO TonyEarley that seemed to fol-low those of SCE’s CEOTed Craver as he beganpreparing investors for thatcompany’s decision to shut-ter San Onofre in the wakeof their failed steam genera-tor replacement project. AsJohn once reminded me,“When bringing down ablimp, best to let the air outslowly.” By the end of2015, CEO Earley’s state-ments on Diablo’s re-licensed future were lessand less enthusiastic. Furthermore, we had beenusing the California Inde-pendent System Operator(CAISO) report from 2015that noted the continuedreliance on inflexiblebaseload power fromDiablo Canyon was an im-pediment to building a gridmore reliant on intermittentrenewable energy. Greaterflexibility was the goal, andDiablo was unable to rampup or down quickly tomatch the dispatch ofrenewables. As part of ourdiscovery in the CPUCproceedings, we saw re-dacted (and our attorneyssaw unredacted) copies ofPG&E’s internal reportswhich told them that load-following would not workat Diablo. Again, we sharedall the public informationwith elected officials fromSLO to Sacramento. The Joint Proposal tophase out Diablo by 2025must still be approved bythe CPUC before December2017. A lot can happen

between now and then andnumerous parties will file inthat case. That said, I don’tthink there is any wayPG&E can “walk back”their commitment to phaseout the plant. They havealready publicly linked it tomeeting the state’s ambi-tious renewable energygoals, and PG&E appearedalongside Jerry Brown atthe climate change talks inParis, making a very publicshowing of their intent. We knew that the StateLands Commission outfallpermit was going to be acrucial part of this, and thatdate was set for June 28.One way or another, thatdecision would be the laststraw on Diablo going for-ward and regardless of howit turned out, license re-newal did not look viable.So I felt safe estimating thatmost of our work would bedone by then, and I couldleave my position feelingwe’d accomplished a primegoal of our mission state-ment: prohibiting licenserenewal of aging nuclearplants on our fragile,seismically active coast.

What was your first expo-sure, shall we say, tonuclear power — the mo-ment that led to the deci-sion to devote a chunk ofyour life to doing battlewith nuclear utilities?

I had never been “anti-nuclear” in my earlier life. Iactually was intrigued by itas a kid in the 1970s—Imade a diorama of a reactorin grade school and wasfascinated by the atomicpowered merchant ship NSSavannah. However, in thelate 1990s I produced anddirected a 28-part educa-tional series on environ-mental technology as a PBSdistance learning programand one episode was aboutnuclear waste. For thatepisode I traveled to YuccaMountain and Carlsbad,New Mexico, and, of

Some funny thingshappened on theway to closing thenuclear powerplant

ACTIVIST coninued on page 6

course, based in Los Ange-les, the closest place to film“spent fuel pools” wasDiablo Canyon. We actuallyfilmed there on May 8,1998. Post 9-11, that wouldbe quite impossible. Over-all, that documentary expe-rience opened my eyes, butthen it is hard to make afilm with your eyes shut. I moved to Morro Bay inthe spring of 2001 with aplan to mostly write poetryand paint (along with ongo-ing documentary videowork). I noticed that theNRC was holding a prelimi-nary meeting on the spentfuel installation at the VetsHall in San Luis Obispo(SLO), and I thought,“Well, I’ve directed a TVdocumentary on the subject,maybe it would be a goodchance to introduce mytalents to the community—or possibly meet women.”Clearly self-centered, noth-ing altruistic about that. And that’s sort of whathappened. While it didn’tlead to any video work, Idid meet women…and theyturned out to be the Moth-ers for Peace. The Mothersby then had decades of ac-tivism on this issue, and itwasn’t long before I at-tended their meetings andby the end of 2002, I wasalready appearing on localTV as a spokesperson forthe group.

What was the motivationfor the formation of theAlliance, as distinct fromother anti-nucleargroups?

Rochelle Becker was inthe Mothers for Peacewhen, after George W.Bush’s second election, shecame to the realization thatthe federal government wasgoing to be of no use inaddressing our concerns. Infact, the Bush agenda her-alded a “nuclear renais-sance.” Rochelle also realized thatattempting to get theNuclear Regulatory Com-mission to do its job was anexercise in futility. Ratherthan continue to bang herhead against that wall (she

already had migraines!), shehad the very bold idea totake the idea to the statelevel, and to use state juris-diction to achieve our goals.That’s when she foundedthe Alliance. Her experience as a solointervenor at the CaliforniaPublic Utilities Commission(CPUC) in Diablo’s earlierhistory bolstered her know-ledge of the state’s jurisdic-tion to determine the costand reliability of electricgeneration—and this wasbacked up by a very impor-tant Supreme Court decisionfrom 1983. While the fed-eral government and NRChad the final say overwhether anything involvingnuclear power was safe orunhealthy, the state had thesole right to determine if weneeded those megawatts andhow much we should payfor them. Rochelle had alsobeen president of the boardof TURN (The Utility Re-form Network), a leadingratepayer protec-tion organization.Thus she wasfamiliar with theCPUC as a venue.And that is whythe Alliance sub-sequently did notstress or empha-size radiologicalor health issueswith Diablo. If asafety issue wasgermane, it wascouched as “howmuch will it costratepayers tomake it safe?”rather than argu-ing whether thehealth or radia-tion standardswere themselvesadequate. Armed with thisrevised approach,the Alliance thenhad to announceitself to a newfield of players inSacramento likethe Energy Com-mission and thelegislature. It wasno longer a matterof waiting for theNRC to come toSLO once or

Their winning ways David Weisman, Rochelle Becker and Santa Lucia Sierra Club Chapter DirectorAndrew Christie with the Environmental Alliance Award the Sierra Club bestowed on Ms. Becker in 2007.

twice a year and “listen” tothe public’s concerns (buttake no action). We broughtthe issues to Sacramento—ultimately on a monthly oreven weekly basis—andthen carefully explainedhow and why these deci-sion makers were not ex-empted from questioningwhether Diablo was neededor too expensive. That was a long, slowprocess. Luckily we re-ceived an excellent andearly reception from thenAssemblyman SamBlakeslee, and also fromBay Area representativeslike Mark Leno and SantaBarbara’s Hannah-BethJackson. We had somenotable early failures be-cause we underestimatedthe difficulty in passinglegislation, but with thesuccess of Blakeslee’s AB1632 (which started theseismic testing) we wereable to build awareness.

Sierra Club Will SeekIntervenor Status inDiablo Canyon HearingsPlant closure deal needs work

The Sierra Club will seek permission fromthe Public Utilities Commission to intervenein the proceeding in which the PUC will de-cide whether to approve the proposal that willensure the Diablo Canyon Nuclear PowerPlant shuts down by 2025. In the Joint Proposal submitted to the PUCon August 11, PG&E proposes not to seekrelicensing of Diablo beyond the expirationof its current permits in 2024-25, replace aportion of the plant’s output with renewableenergy, and provide community benefits toSLO County. “This can and should be a robust model ofhow to replace a nuclear power plant withadditional renewable power and energy effi-ciency,” said Sierra Club senior attorney MattVespa. “The goal should be to ensure thatgreenhouse gas emissions do not increasewhen the plant shuts down as compared tocontinued operation. To that end, we wouldlike to see the proposal amended to require amore robust and timely renewable energy com-ponent.” We are also advocating for the conservationof all the coastal lands surrounding the plant,about 12,000 acres of pristine potentialparkland, including the Wild Cherry Canyonlands adjacent to Avila Beach that are currentlytargeted for development. “Sixteen years ago, the people of San LuisObispo County passed Measure A, the DreamInitiative, expressing their wish that the landsaround Diablo not be sold off and subdividedafter the plant closes,” said Karen Merriam,Chair of the Santa Lucia Chapter. “PG&E ex-pressed agreement with that goal at the time,but has recently become vague in their publicstatements on the subject. It would behoovethe PUC to get PG&E’s verbally expressedgood intentions in writing on behalf of thepeople of California.” Public hearings on the Joint Proposal areexpected to commence in October.

4 Santa Lucian • Sept. 2016

Bomb Trains Are Good For You

Phillips 66 attempts to shove the words they want intothe Planning Commission’s mouth

At the end of its May 16meeting on the proposedPhillips 66 oil train terminalin Nipomo, the CountyPlanning Commission di-rected planning staff to getmore information on theproject from Phillips anddraft tentative findings ofapproval and a “Statementof Overriding Consider-ations” for the commission-ers to consider at their Sep-tember 22 meeting. While the request fromthe commission was pecu-liar – one does not normallyrequest tentative conditionsof approval for a projectunless one has voted totentatively approve theproject, which the commis-sion did not do – the re-sponse from the oil com-pany raised the bar on“peculiar.” A Statement of OverridingConsiderations is the key toapproval of a problematicproject. Under state law, aproject that would imposesignificant, unavoidableenvironmental impacts –impacts that cannot be re-duced to a level of insignifi-cance no matter how many

mitigation measures aretacked onto the permit –cannot be approved withouta legal finding that theproject’s benefits outweighits impacts. On August 15, Phillips 66attorneys generously sentthe County their own State-ment of Overriding Consid-erations. It was ventrilo-quized, phrased as theofficial findings of the Plan-ning Commission, to facili-tate the ease with which itcan be dropped into theSept. 22 staff report. Unsurprisingly, the docu-ment consists of all thearguments Phillips has beenmaking on behalf of itsproject since hearings be-gan in February -- argu-ments it made against Plan-ning staff, the County’senvironmental consultant,and the Environmental Im-pact Report. Phillips hasnow declared itself the win-ner of those arguments overhealth and safety risks, off-site and on-site emissions,and sensitive habitat. Many of the proposed“overriding considerations”predictably focus on the

economic benefits of theSanta Maria Refinery andthe claim that the jobs andproperty tax revenues itprovides will be threatenedif the project is not ap-proved. Planning staff hasalready determined thatwould not be the case, andCommissioner Jim Irvingflatly refuted the “jobs”argument, with no dissentfrom his colleagues, at theMay 16 hearing (“This isnot about jobs. It’s aboutprofits.”) Also dangled is the allureof additional property taxrevenues for the Countyshould the oil terminal bebuilt. For the County toagree that this is an overrid-ing consideration wouldmean agreeing that themoney it would make over-rides the increase in cardio-pulmonary disease andasthma cases the projectwould bring, the risk of tar-sands oil befouled rivers,streams and coastline, andsome local community’sdowntown eventually guttedby fire with attendant lossof life. The document continues

to flog the favorite notionput forward by the oilcompany’s lawyers in pub-lic hearings: that the projectwould result in improvedair quality – that is, betterair quality than exists now –because Phillips proposesto limit “the time of dayduring which crude oil trainunloading and switchingactivities may occur…toreduce emissions duringperiods of calm meteoro-logical conditions” (lendingan eerily literal quality tothe George Orwell quotereproduced below.) The County’s environ-mental consultant has dis-missed this scenario as in-feasible. One need onlycontemplate the likelihoodof refinery managers duti-fully throwing their sched-ule out the window, costingtheir company money, andrefusing to unload an oiltrain because it isn’t windyenough on any given day,and the likelihood that aCounty enforcer will hap-pen to be on site at the time

if they don’t. The document goes intoomission overdrive in at-tempting to claim that theproject conforms with theCounty’s General Plan, em-ploying the simple expedientof citing vague General Plangoals and objectives that itcan claim alignment with(“promote a strong and vi-able economy… retain andenhance a diverse econ-omy”) and not citing thespecific policies with whichthe project would be obvi-ously inconsistent (“Pre-serve open space, scenicnatural beauty and naturalresources…Protect agricul-tural land and resources…Preserve, protect and im-prove the air quality of thecounty… Energy, fossil fuel,and related facilities will besited, constructed, and oper-ated in a manner to protectthe public from potentialhazards and significant envi-ronmental impacts… Alldevelopment and land divi-sions within or adjacent toan Environmentally Sensi-

tive Habitat Area shall bedesigned and located in amanner which avoids anysignificant disruption ordegradation of habitat val-ues…” and so on.) As the Final Environmen-tal Impact Report notes atmultiple points in its Gen-eral Plan consistencyanalysis, “The proposedRail Spur Project has thepotential to result in oilspills and resultant firesthat could impact agricul-tural land/natural re-sources/scenic areas/ ter-restrial habitats/coastalstreams and riparian veg-etation along the mainlinerail routes.” Finally, the documentattempts the most glaringomission of all: simply notmentioning the status ofsome twenty acres of theproposed rail spur site asaforementioned Environ-mentally Sensitive HabitatArea (ESHA) and stating“There are no significant,unavoidable adverse envi-ronmental impacts from

project construction oroperations on the refin-ery site.” Throughout thehearings, the CoastalCommission has pointedout that Phillips’ finelylawyered arguments andtechnicalities attemptingto deny the physical real-ity of an Environmen-tally Sensitive HabitatArea does not makeESHA go away — nor isESHA portable, hencethe proposal in the sug-gested overriding consid-erations that Phillips will“compensate for the lossof habitat by creatingnew native habitat” is anon-starter. And so is industrialdevelopment in ESHA.

“SLO County should weigh benefits and risks of Phillips 66 rail spur,” by Matthew Hoy,The Tribune, Aug. 7, 2016.

Summary: Those opposedto the proposed oil trainterminal at the Phillips 66refinery are members of “anenvironmentalist cult” whodon’t understand that evenif the worst potential im-pacts of the project come topass, everything will beokay.

Upshot: The Phillips 66 oil train terminal project has been under public review for almost three years. Inthat time, the number of oil train derailments across North America increased, and public understanding ofthe risks and environmental hazards inherent in the rail transport of this project’s proposed cargo has im-proved over the course of two draft Environmental Impact Reports, a final document, and six exhaustivepublic hearings. Mr. Hoy’s arguments display no awareness that any of these things have happened – mak-ing it appear that he has not heard the testimony from the County’s health and air quality experts or read theenvironmental review or the protest letters from more than two dozen California cities, counties and schoolboards, or even the news stories in the local media reporting on them. Instead, he has formed a fixed idea inhis mind that reflects a determined need for a single opponent and a simplified world, no matter how muchobjective reality threatens to intrude -- a quality the author shares in common with young children.

Yes, hewrotethat. Itseemslike onlyseven

paragraphs ago that Mr. Hoywas scolding those whowould “casually dismiss”concerns about lost jobs be-cause they “aren’t concernedabout other people’s liveli-hoods” — the loss of humanlife excepted…along with thespike in asthma and cardio-pulmonary disease that theEnvironmental Impact Re-port determined the project’sirreversible impacts on ourair quality would bring.

Oil spills occur on a too regular basis. Butwe have also built a lot of technology andexpertise to clean up these messes whenthey happen. That’s why the Gulf Coast re-turned to being a tourist attraction just acouple of years after the Deepwater Horizonoil spill.

Mr. Hoyherelaunchesinto hismainthesis: thePhillips66 oil train terminal isopposed by naïve foolswho don’t understand thatwe are and shall foreverremain dependent on fossilfuels for our energy needsdespite our love for solarpanels and electric ve-hicles; also, “rising gasprices tend to hit thepoor...the hardest.” Thefirst argument is incorrect;the second is irrelevant:the oil that is proposed fortransport to the Nipomorefinery by rail is part ofan historic glut; a domes-tic oversupply of cheap oilthat Phillips is aimingprimarily at the overseasmarket, largely in the formof non-gasoline price-impacting petroleumproducts such as butaneand propane.

Taking Issue: Phillips 66 - What Me Worry?Problematic environmental coverage & commentary in our local media

Young childrenand environ-mentalistsshare a lot ofthe samequalities.

Concerns that failure to approve theplan may mean the loss of somejobs…are casually dismissed by acti-vists who aren’t concerned aboutother people’s livelihoods.

This con-cern isdismissedby thosewho aren’tconcernedabout oilindustry propaganda. This includes theSLO County Department of Planning andthe environmental consultants who pre-pared the Environmental Impact Report,which found that the denial of the projectwould not put refinery jobs at risk, Phillipsis likely to have ample access to numerouslocal sources of crude oil in the future, andits pursuit of Canadian tar sands oil is abusiness strategy to seek out “advantagedcrude” – the cheapest oil that can be soldfor the highest profit.

Even in a worst-case scenario, verylittle of what might happen – theloss of human life excepted – isirreversible.

“Dr. Samantha Joye, abiogeochemist at the Uni-versity of Georgia… esti-mated that 30 million gal-lons of oil from the BPspill remain in the Gulf –the equivalent of nearlythree Exxon Valdez spills –and that about half of thisamount has settled on the

ocean floor, where its ecological effects could be devastating…. ‘When people say,“Oh, the oil spill is over,” Joye told me, ‘they’re not realizing that the full impactsare on a very long time scale of decades or more.’”-- “Thirty Million Gallons Under the Sea,” Anthony Juhasz, Harpers, June 2015.

7 ways you can support yourlocal Sierra Club chapter

1. BECOME A SIERRA CLUB MEMBER or give a giftmembership.

2. DONATE TO OUR SUMMER MATCHINGFUNDRAISER until September 15th and your donationwill be matched dollar-for-dollar.

3. JOIN THE CAL FRENCH CIRCLE by making a sus-taining donation of $25 per month or more and join anetwork of well-connected environmental leaders fromour community. Members are eligible for benefits, includ-ing invitations to special receptions of visiting experts.

4. SUPPORT US WITH A NON-TAX-DEDUCTIBLEGIFT that supports all our work in San Luis ObispoCounty, including citizen-based advocacy and lobbying.

5. SUPPORT US WITH A TAX-DEDUCTIBLE GIFTto The Sierra Club Foundation earmarked for the localChapter’s conservation and outreach work.

6. PLAN YOUR GIVING by designating funds to sup-port the Chapter in a variety of ways, including bequestsand charitable gift annuities. Naming us as a beneficiaryin your will, living trust or other estate plans will providea significant, meaningful and enduring impact to yourSanta Lucia Chapter.

7. HAVE A BUSINESS? PLACE AN AD IN THE SANTALUCIAN and support local conservation work while rais-ing awareness of your business or event. The Santa Lu-cian reaches over 2,000 Sierra Club members and thepublic in San Luis Obispo County. For information aboutdisplay ads, including rates, contact sierraclub8@gmail.com. The next issue deadline is September 16.

Go to www.santalucia.sierraclub.org and click the“Donate” button. Thank you for your donation !

Next hearing:

SLO County PlanningCommission

9 a.m. Thursday, Sept. 22

County GovernmentCenter

1055 Monterey St., SLO

Santa Lucian • Sept. 20165

— including Japan, theworld’s largest LNG im-porter. This would facili-tate:

• Greater global dependenceon a fossil fuel that causessignificant climate pollu-tion;• More construction of fos-sil fuel infrastructure, whichwould lock in the produc-tion of fossil fuels; and• Increased fracking, lead-ing to greater air and waterpollution and increasedhealth risks.

Conservation threats, notprotectionsEnvironmental provisions,while broad, are generally

very shallow. In some re-spects, they take a step backfrom past trade deals. TheTPP even includes newthreats to animals and eco-systems.• Threats to EndangeredAnimals: Rather than ban-ning commercial whalingand shark finning — majorissues in TPP countries —the TPP would encourageincreased trade in shark finsby eliminating the tariffsthat major shark fin import-ers like Vietnam and Malay-sia impose on major export-ers like Mexico and Peru.The deal also would elimi-nate tariffs on certain el-ephant ivory, undercuttingefforts to ban all ivory tradeto protect endangeredelephants.• Multilateral Environmental

Agreements (MEAs) Roll-back: All U.S. free tradedeals since 2007 have re-quired trade partners to“adopt, maintain, andimplement” policies tofulfill their obligationsunder seven core MEAs.Yet the TPP only includesthis requirement for oneof the seven MEAs. Thisregression contradicts U.S.law for fast-trackedtrade deals and would al-low TPP countries to vio-late critical environmentalcommitments to boost tradeor investment.• Weak ConservationRules: While the TPP envi-ronment chapter mentionsvarious conservation is-sues, the deal mostly in-cludes weak obligations forcountries to address these

challenges. Rather thanprohibiting trade in illegallytaken timber and wildlife,the TPP only asks membercountries to “combat” suchtrade at their “discretion.”• A Failed EnforcementSystem: Even if the TPP’sconservation terms includedstronger obligations, thereis little evidence to suggestthat they would be en-forced. The U.S. has neveronce brought a case againstanother country for violat-ing environmental commit-ments in a trade deal, evenamid widely documentedviolations under trade dealswith the same enforcementmechanism as the TPP.

Instead of subjecting theworld to yet another danger-ous trade deal, we need a

new model of trade thatprotects communities andthe environment.

On August 12, theWhite House alerted Con-gress that it will attempt toimplement the increasinglyunpopular TPP in the post-election lame duck session,despite opposition by envi-ronmental organizations,labor unions, the Demo-cratic nominee for Presi-dent, and millions of Ameri-cans. The day before, speakingat a rally in Michigan,Hillary Clinton said “I willstop any trade deal that killsjobs or holds down wages,including the Trans-PacificPartnership.” “Issued just a day afterthe Democratic Presidential

Per Public Citizen, theTrade Reform, Accountabil-ity, Development and Em-ployment (TRADE) Actoutlines a way forward to anew trade and globalizationagenda that could benefitmore Americans. It’s been around for years,under one name or another,most recently in the 2009-2010 Congressional ses-sion, where it was re-intro-duced by Rep. MikeMichaud with 106 cospon-sors, including nine com-mittee chairs and represen-tation from the entire rangeof Democratic caucuses andclasses. The fact that nearlyhalf of the House Demo-crats supported this legisla-tion from the start shouldhave sent a clear signal to

Try the TRADE Act, Mr. President“The answer isn’t to turn inward and embrace protectionism. We can’t just walk away from trade. In aglobal economy where our economies and supply chains are deeply integrated, it’s not even possible.”

- President Obama, Washington Post, Aug. 1, 2016

the Obama administrationthat only the strong, specifictrade reform agenda of theTRADE Act would gainsupport in Congress. The TRADE Act was sup-ported by a broad array oflabor, consumer, environ-mental, family farm andfaith groups, and required areview of existing tradepacts, including the NorthAmerican Free Trade Agree-ment (NAFTA), the WorldTrade Organization (WTO)and other major pacts, aswell as setting forth whatmust and must not be in-cluded in future trade pacts. It provides for the renego-tiation of existing tradeagreements and describesthe key elements of a newtrade negotiating and ap-

proval mechanism to re-place Fast Track that wouldenhance Congress’ role inthe formative aspects ofagreements and promotefuture deals that could en-joy broad support amongthe American public. The TRADE Act trans-lated into action the spe-cific commitments for tradereform made by manymembers of Congress overthe course of recent elec-tion cycles and by Presi-dent Obama during his2008 campaign. The bill’s provisions re-garding what must andmust not be in Americantrade agreements capturedthe reforms promised in the2008 Democratic platformand the campaign commit-

ments made by PresidentObama and the 71 Houseand Senate members electedin 2006 and 2008 who re-placed those who had votedfor NAFTA and the WorldTrade Organization (WTO).By moving Congress andthe public beyond the rut ofrepeated fights againstmore-of-the-same tradepacts, the TRADE Act canhelp avoid the divisivenessand political fallout thatsuch fights invariably bring. The premise of theTRADE Act was thatAmerica’s trade agendamust be brought into con-formity with America’sdomestic agenda of goodjobs, a clean environment,safe food, quality and af-fordable medicines, and

essential services. By re-moving provisions that limitimported food and productsafety and financial serviceregulation, provide foreigninvestors with rights to at-tack domestic environmen-tal and health laws, andincentivize the offshoring ofjobs to low-wage countries-- and adding effective la-bor, environmental, healthand safety standards to pro-vide the floor of decencynecessary to ensuring tradeagreements benefit morepeople -- the road map pro-vided by the TRADE Actwould lead to trade agree-ments that could enjoybroad public support. This legislation offeredthe White House a patharound an ocean of political

quicksand because it was aroad map for trade expan-sion that Democrats couldsupport, with fixes for thekey conflicts between thecurrent NAFTA/TPP-styletrade pacts and the Demo-cratic Party’s core agenda. The White House shouldhave considered taking thatpath in 2009. Since itdidn’t, it should introducethe TRADE Act in the nextCongressional session. What it should not do ispretend that the alternativeto the TPP and the corpo-rate “free trade” model isno trade at all.

nominee doubled down onher strong opposition to thereckless corporate tradedeal, and when the TPPclearly does not have thevotes to pass in Congress,this maneuver is all forshow,” said Ilana Solomon,director of the Sierra Club’sResponsible Trade Pro-gram. ”The TPP threatensour jobs, our communities,and our climate, and it mustbe stopped.” Ask Rep. Capps to addher voice to those of HillaryClinton and Nancy Pelosiopposing the Trans-PacificPartnership.

Rep. Lois CappsWashington, D.C.:Phone: (202) 225-3601Fax: (202) 225-5632

San Luis Obispo:Phone: (805) 546-8348Fax: (805) 546-8368

Cappscontinued from page 1

life. On top of that, the EventCenter would have been theprimary economic use ofthe property, but this com-mercial use would still beclaimed as qualifying asagriculture so as to receivea major tax break under theWilliamson Act. New Times picked up thestory of the Barn and ourgroup became known col-lectively as “Save Ade-laida!” Very quickly wegrew to nearly one hundredconcerned residents. The project initiallyasked for approval of 25events of 200 people each,enlargement of the tastingroom, demolition of theBarn, and construction of ametal and glass “barn-likestructure.” Additionally,county planners had minis-terially approved the oliveoil production facility to beconsidered a “winery,”even though they did notproduce wine or growgrapes. This enabled theapplicant to qualify foradditional County wineevents and privileges, in-cluding production of5,000 cases of wine and

waiver modifications ofdesign standards and set-backs. Over our objections, theproject was approved with-out modifications on Janu-ary 2, 2015. We filed anappeal, accompanied by themandatory $850 fee. It became readily appar-ent that there had beenfaulty notification of resi-dents. In fact, the next-doorneighbors to the project hadsomehow never been noti-fied. Due to the non-compliantnotification, the developer’sconsultant advised theCounty to properly notifyresidents and Planning toreschedule a hearing. At that time, we thoughtthe only thing necessarywas the correction of faultyinformation provided to theCounty. However, the sec-ond hearing seemed merelyperfunctory. It became clearthe presiding Hearing Of-ficer had been the sameperson who had overseenpart of the project’s plan-ning process. Nevertheless,the project was approvedwith five fewer events and arevised, earlier time fornoise abatement. We re-filed our appeal,this time joined by a second

appeal from the next-doorneighbors to the project,who were, again, nevernotified. We were also verytroubled by the County’sMitigated Negative Decla-ration; we found that therewere several areas of con-cern. The Mitigated Nega-tive Declaration had notmitigated or even fully ana-lyzed potential significantimpacts to traffic, fire con-cerns, noise, water use andwastewater generation. Fur-ther, the County had notaddressed the project’s po-tential significant cumula-tive impacts, the combinedresults of past, current andfuture activities. The Save Adelaida! grouprallied to speak in front ofthe Board of Supervisors.Many people took time offwork to voice their objec-tions to the project. Eachperson was allowed threeminutes to talk. Neverthe-less, we managed to presentsubstantial evidence of po-tential impacts, supportedby both citizen and experttestimony. Supervisor FrankMecham noted that this areahad reached a “tippingpoint.” Supervisor Arnoldsaid that she would not like

this next door to her. Butobjections to the projectwere overruled and theBoard of Supervisors againapproved the project, 5-0. On July 9, 2015, we fileda lawsuit alleging violationsof CEQA, the WilliamsonAct, and County land useregulations. On June 23,2016, Superior Court JudgeGinger Garrett ruled in favorof Save Adelaida! and saidthat indeed, an Environmen-tal Impact Report (EIR) wasrequired to consider water,noise, traffic, and the cumu-lative effects of this project. Meanwhile, San LuisObispo County Planningand Building continues toapprove new similar pro-jects with apparent disregardfor the concerns of residentsand neighbors. It is ourhope that the efforts in-volved in limiting this devel-opment will bring attentionto the concerns of localpeople and help preserve therural, agricultural nature ofAdelaida, as well as similarareas in the county andthroughout the state. It is very important thatconcerned citizens becomeactive and voice concernsbefore the next inappropri-ate development is ap-proved. Action is required!

Adelaidacontinued from page 1

TAKE ACTION

On August 16, the Board of Supervisors voted to extendthe Native Woodlands and Agricultural pond urgencyordinances necessitated by the June clear-cut of some8,000 oak trees on the property of Justin Vineyardsafter Justin was purchased by Beverly Hillsbillionaires Stuart and Lynda Resnick. Hearteningly, the debate on the Board was not overif, but how long. They settled on nine months, puttingplanners under the gun to come back with permanentordinances in less than a year, but not so much as thesix-month duration proposed by Supervisors Arnold andCompton before they agreed to a compromise. It is now crucial that planners and supervisors getinput from other than just members of the Ag communitybetween now and next spring when permanent ordinanceswill be drafted. They need to hear that our woodlandsare part of the commons, not just the personal propertyof people who own the land, and must be protected assuch, There are dozens of ordinances the County can use asa model, but few counties have taken a woodland approachas opposed to protecting individual trees. Our countycould become a model for others.

Oaks Win One

What we need Holly Sletteland, speaking for the Sierra Club atthe June 21 board meeting where the urgency ordinances werefirst put in place, said the permanent Native Woodlands Ordinancemust have penalties severe enough to deter violations and requireadequate replacement planting and monitoring “that will sustain thewoodlands we have left and recover some of what we have lost.”

County stays on track for permanent oakwoodlands protection

In a letter to the Supervisors, Janet Cobb of theCalifornia Oaks Coalition pointed out relevant Countypolicy:

“We understand that you are balancing the goals set forthin the Conservation and Open Space Element of the county’sGeneral Plan with those set forth in the Agricultural Ele-ment.... We suggest that the Conservation and Open SpaceElement’s Biological Resources Policy 3.3: Oak Woodlands Preservation – ‘Maintain and improve oak woodlandhabitat to provide for slope stabilization, soil protection,species diversity, and wildlife habitat’ — serves to protect thevital ecosystem services that oak woodlands contribute to theagricultural landscape. These ecosystem services extend be-yond property lines, and, when degraded have impacts be-yond property lines.” We concur.

Download the TPP activist toolkit:sierraclub.org/trade/activist-toolkit

6 Santa Lucian • Sept. 2016

Activistcontinued from page 3

Living through the legisla-tive process turned out to beway more intense than whatI remembered from those“how a bill becomes a law”lectures from high schoolsocial studies. In the end, the Alliance’ssuppositions were correct:It was economics thatdoomed Diablo Canyon—dollars, not disaster,brought an end to the facil-ity. I had said for years that“it won’t be Geiger countersbut bean counters that willshut Diablo,” and thisseems to be the case.

PG&E has never waveredin its position that “theplant is safe.” Are youconvinced yet?

paycheck from PG&E todefend their seismic theoryand at the same time evalu-ate it fairly in light of con-tradictory evidence? PG&E’s solution wassimple: They invested indozens of colored hard-hats; red, white and blue,each designating the “role”the wearer was playing. Bychanging their hat from a“proponent” to a “referee,”some magical force wasunleashed that changedyears of internal program-ming, yielding impartialresults. We sat throughdays of this process, thoughwithin the first hour wewere aware that this was atravesty of science. As afilmmaker, I knew there was

needed. Therefore theywere 99.7% available,which merits a “green”rating. Clearly the NRC

think he made a nobleattempt to understand the“stakeholders” point ofview, and did so despiteoften receiving chilly re-sponses from his superiorsat the agency. He was arare bird in that otherwisestodgy bureaucratic envi-ronment, and we subse-quently had many produc-tive conversations over theyears.

What’s your fondestmemory as a CPUC in-tervenor?

Involvement with theCPUC is about asbyzantine a labyrinth as Ihave ever negotiated. Inresponse to PG&E’s No-vember 2009 announce-ment that they would seekrelicensing from the NRC,Rochelle decided thatA4NR would oppose themwhen they went to seekratepayer funding to payfor the relicensing process.This follows A4NR’s strat-egy of seeking a state re-course, rather than chal-lenging the federal NRC.In January 2010 PG&E didseek (through the CPUC)$85 million for therelicensing process. Thatseemed like a lot of moneyto push some papers acrossa desk and then get themunder the NRC’s ever-ready rubber stamp ofapproval. I would say the mostwhimsical moment in oneof these cases came duringcross-examination of autility witness by RochelleBecker. I had written outquestions to be asked, indetail, with follow up ques-tions based on either a“no” or a “yes” from thewitness. I also includedparenthetical notes, muchlike a composer adding“allegro con brio” to thesheet music. In her zeal,she read all of it, some-thing like, “Well then, ifyou are unable to meet thedeadlines, how do youexpect to get the permit,emphasis added?” Atwhich point I whispered inher ear, “Um, Rochelle,those are the stage direc-tions….” I looked up at thebench and quickly added,“Your honor, can thosewords be stricken please,she was reading the stagedirections.” There was abit of good-natured chuck-ling from the other lawyersand the judge, himself aDiablo veteran from the1980s. A lot of our earlywork at the CPUC wasbased more on zeal andrighteous indignation thanon established legal prac-tice! There was an instancewhen Rochelle went into alengthy preamble whenquestioning an Edisonwitness. Finally theutility’s frustrated lawyerstood up and said, “Objec-tion, your honor, she’s notasking a question, she’smaking a speech!” Towhich that same judgereplied, “Overruled! I’veheard many a professionalattorney do far worse. Youmay proceed, Ms. Becker.” We actually prevailed inthose cases, in spite of ournon-professional legalskills. Still, it was a greatrelief when John Geesman,a superior attorney of de-served renown, agreed torepresent A4NR. But he

later admitted that itwas our diligence anddetermination inthose early cases thatimpressed himenough to wish tosupport our efforts.We, of course, weremost grateful. But Iam very glad to havegone through thatminiature version oflaw school. The chal-lenges helped megrow, and the disci-pline it required hashopefully refined my

advocate,” and while theweekly papers quicklyadopted that nomenclature,it was slow in coming to theTribune. Perhaps with theclosing of Diablo now adefinitive event, things willchange. It goes without saying thatthe Santa Lucian has beengenerous in its coverage ofthis issue, given that theChapter itself is a productof the great Diablo debatethat fractured the Club inthe 1960s. Of particularnote, the “Taking Issue”feature of the Santa Lucianhas provided a meta-cri-tique of the local mediathrough its “he said—shesaid” counterpoint and fact-checking. From our formation in2005 up through about2011, A4NR was invitedonto KCBX by host GuyRathbun about every four tosix months to do an updateon our perspectives for hisprogram “Issues and Ideas.”After 2011, KCBX under-went a major managementand programming change.Guy—who had covered theDiablo conflict from itsearliest days—left the sta-tion. In the years since,A4NR’s voice has beenheard only once on KCBX,for thirty seconds in 2015. Up through 2015, A4NRwas a more frequent visitorto the Dave Congalton radioprogram on KVEC. Thosewere lively, hour-longbroadcasts with a wide (butvery predictable) array ofcallers and concerns. Davewas a fair host, and I be-lieve he respected that whenpresenting our argument Ialways supplied actual

Back in the day Mark Skinner, Paula Daillak, Rochelle Becker andDavid Weisman of the Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility with exhib-its they entered into evidence at a June 20, 2006, PG&E ratepayercase in San Francisco. Sierra Club and the Alliance were co-interve-nors in the case, filing to oppose PG&E’s request for $19 million inratepayer funds for an in-house study of the potential renewal ofDiablo’s operating permit. A court ruling earlier that month, in whichthe judge agreed with Mothers for Peace, Sierra Club and formerSupervisor Peg Pinard that the utility could not ignore the possibilityof a terrorist attack on Diablo’s planned dry cask storage facility forspent fuel rods, played a role at the PUC.

To be ambushed like thatat a meeting was nowreferred to as beingDiablo’d. Hooray, we’dbecome a verb!potential, but just howmuch didn’t become clearuntil I reviewed the hours ofvideotape from the event. Ihad the idea to edit togetherall the switching of thehats—some less gracefulthan others—to the tune ofThe Mexican Hat Dance. Itwas a long process to de-liver the 90 seconds of mil-linery chicanery, but I thinkthe point was made. Thevideo is on Youtube at:https://youtu.be/CGUP3CljzfM

Describe your contribu-tions to the archives of theNRC and their staff train-ing program.

I think the incident youreference here came in June2004, near the end of mytenure with the Mothers forPeace, and before A4NRwas formed. It certainlyreinforces A4NR’s decisionto move away from theNRC as a venue for ad-dressing our concerns. Itprobably remains my mostvisible endeavor in the fieldof “agitprop” activity. In December 2003, a 6.5quake erupted on a previ-ously unknown thrust faulteast of Paso Robles, knownas the San Simeon quake(but not on the San Simeonfault—yeah, I know, it’sconfusing!). Long storyshort, the NRC got aroundto holding their public in-quiry on this event in June2004. Before that meetingthey issued their annualreport on Diablo, whichuses a color coded gradingsystem to judge safety:Green is good, yellowmeans caution and red isbad. I noticed that in thecategory of “emergencyalert and notification”Diablo got a “green” for“good.” But in another partof the report, I also saw forthe first time that at themoment of the quake,nearly half the emergencysirens in our county lostpower, because they wereconnected to the same gridas the plant and the commu-nity. I’d always assumed(incorrectly) that the sirensmust have had some formof backup power for emer-gencies such as earth-quakes. It turns out theNRC does not requirebackup power for sirens. Ifthe earthquake had causedenough damage to merit anevacuation, how wouldmany of us have known?With this knowledge, howcould the “emergency re-sponse” get a green rating,since backups had yet to beadded to the siren system,nor did they say the sirenswere repaired? The NRC’s answer wassimplicity itself: The reportlooks at each quarter of theyear. There are 2,190 hoursin each quarter. The sirenswere only inoperative for afew hours during that quar-ter — the hours when theywould have actually been

in SLO that night, I stoppedat Smart & Final and pur-chased 100 sets of red, yel-low and green paper plates,and brought them into themeeting. Then, during pub-lic comment I offered theforegoing observations,reiterating how nonsensicalthe NRC’s approach was.Removing the plates frommy bag, I announced thatwe’d pass out the coloredplates to any who wantedthem, and that for the rest ofthe evening we would besubjecting the NRC to ourcolor-coded judgment. Ifwe felt they were telling thetruth, we’d show green; ifwe felt they were prevari-cating, we’d show yellow,and if we felt lied to, we’dshow red. There was minor pande-monium in the audience.Many plates were passedaround. By the time thenext presenter from theNRC spoke he prefaced hisstatement with, “Well,you’d might as well getyour red plates ready, be-cause you’re not going tolike what I’m going to say.”Plus, the community accesstelevision videotape of themeeting clearly showed thesea of red plates. TheNRC’s credibility for thenight was ruined. During a break that fol-lowed the brouhaha, I wasoccupying a stall in thehotel restroom when I hearda couple of the NRC staffpeople enter. “They told me this wasgoing to be an easy meetingand the scenery was beauti-ful,” said the first. His colleague replied,“Yeah, and I was at themeeting outside Chicagolast week, and the wholeaudience was in favor ofnuclear power…thesepeople are hostile!” The postscript to the storyis that many of the NRCemployees that night facedsevere scrutiny upon theirreturn to the office for hav-ing let the meeting get “outof control.” I am told by aformer NRC employee thatthe videotape from theevening was later shown tostaff in a lecture entitled“Don’t let this happen toyour meeting.” The sameformer employee told methat a new word entered theNRC lexicon. To be am-bushed like that at a meet-ing was now referred to asbeing Diablo’d. Hooray,we’d become a verb! Finally, I was told thatsome of the confiscatedpaper plates made their wayback to NRC headquarters,where they were displayedas a warning to others. Chip Cameron, who wasthe NRC facilitator thatnight, impressed me bysincerely reaching out to meafter the fact and wanting toengage in a dialog in orderto understand how and why

neededsome helpwith their“color co-ordination.” On theway to themeeting atthe EmbassySuites Hotel

Come to order Rochelle Becker and David Weisman, right, convened thefirst meetings of the Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility in January 2005 atthe old Marsh Street offices of ECOSLO and the Sierra Club in SLO.

What we’d say is there areconflicting analyses of theseismic footing and designresilience of the structures.Then we’d get the statelegislature to ask the ques-tion for us. As Dr. Blakesleedid with AB 1632, the con-cern is phrased in the bill asthe need to:

…determine the potentialvulnerability, to a majordisruption due to aging ora major seismic event, oflarge baseload generationfacilities of 1,700 mega-watts or greater, includ-ing a specified analysisof the impact of a majordisruption on systemreliability, public safety,and the economy.

the agency was failing tocommunicate in a meaning-ful way with the public. I

ACTIVIST cont. on page 8

The “reliability” and“economy” part of thatspeak to our direct con-cerns. The “public safety”would ask, “how much willit cost if anything happensthat could impact publicsafety” but does not delveinto any prohibitions orprescriptions for orderingchanges at Diablo Can-yon—only the NRC can dothat. What we have seen so far,

which of course, to us,raised the issue of cognitivebias. How could they take a

the cost of those retrofits isnot warranted and refuse togrant ratepayer money toPG&E to do the work.Without ratepayer money,there is very little thatPG&E will do. They are inbusiness. Taking ratepayermoney is what they do.

What’s your opinion ofthe fashion choices of theaverage SSHAC partici-pant, specifically theirtaste in head gear?

Ah yes, the hats. TheSSHAC process involvedbringing seismic scientistsinto a workshop where,theoretically, all points ofview would be heard. How-ever, it turns out that someperspectives were margina-lized. The problem wasPG&E’s own admission thatthe field of seismic scien-tists surrounding structureslike nuclear plants is sosmall and incestuous—theirword—that finding enoughscientists to serve as wit-nesses for the differenttheories and as “impartial”arbiters of the results wasimpossible. So some par-ticipants served both roles,

dent had an especially astuteear for the politics surround-ing Diablo. Smaller paperslike the Times Press Re-corder (South County) andthe Bay News (Tolosa Press)have run stories that, whileinfrequent, were accurateand relatively thorough. As for the paper of record,the SLO Tribune, the resultsare mixed. The editorialdepartment has done an ex-cellent job of coveringDiablo issues over the pastdecade, and A4NR has hadmany of our op-eds placed intheir “Viewpoint” column.The news department has notbeen as open to A4NR’sperspective. When breakingDiablo news does occur,their reporter has seldomcontacted A4NR for com-ment, and although we havesubmitted press releases onthese occasions, their contentseldom made it into the Tri-bune. In addition, the Tri-bune took the longest tocatch on that A4NR wasdifferent from the Mothersfor Peace, often lumping allopposition to Diablo as “theanti-nuclear activists.” Weworked very hard to makesure that our self-identifiedrole was that of “ratepayer

documents, transcripts andother original sources ofinformation rather thansecond-hand accounts andhearsay. I recall one in-stance when an irate callerwas adamantly denying thatthe NRC could have possi-bly done what we claimed itdid, to which Dave re-sponded, “Sir, I am readingthe actual NRC documentright on their own letter-head” before cutting him offthe air. Although perhaps notconsidered “local media,”there is one organizationthat I believe has providedthe most important in com-munication and outreach onDiablo issues since my ar-rival in SLO: AGP Video,the providers of local com-munity access program-ming. AGP provides livestreaming and archives ofcounty government as wellas NRC meetings, seismicworkshops and the DiabloCanyon Independent SafetyCommittee. There is noth-ing as powerful as usingsomeone’s own words asevidence—and we’re nottalking here about inadvert-

research and analyti-cal skills.

What’s your take onthe local media’scoverage of Diabloissues?

I have on my shelf about atwo-foot wide collection ofthree-ring binders with pho-tocopies of all the news sto-ries featuring or relevant toA4NR from its inception inJanuary 2005. So, if sizematters, I would say we’vebeen afforded ample presscoverage. That alone doesnot tell the entire story. Ibelieve the most in-depthlocal analysis has been doneby the weeklies—the NewTimes of SLO and the Inde-pendent of Santa Barbara.Perhaps because they don’thave to cover daily breakingnews stories, they can devotemore column inches to thesecomplex issues. Reporterslike Colin Rigley and MattFountain at the New Timesdid some remarkable digginginto the records and wroteexcellent pieces covering theseismic issues. Likewise,Nick Welsh of the Indepen-

in response to AB 1632 andlater studies, is that PG&E’sscientific methods in assert-ing their certainty of seis-mic safety were subject tovoluminous critique by thegeophysical community, asanyone knows who saw thelively workshops of thepost-Fukushima seismic re-evaluation by the SeniorSeismic Analysis Commit-tee, known by the acronymSSHAC. We still don’tknow how much seismicretrofits to Diablo will cost,because the NRC has notyet tendered their finalevaluation of the SSHACreport. But again, it’s thoseanticipated costs over whichthe state has control. TheNRC may say in theirevaluation that the plant issafe with only some minorretrofits. The CPUC, on theother hand, may decide that

How could they take a paycheckfrom PG&E to defend their seismictheory and at the same time evalu-ate it fairly in light of contradictoryevidence?

Santa Lucian • Sept. 20167

ClassifiedsNext issue deadline is September 16. To get a rate sheet or submit your ad and payment,contact: Sierra Club, P.O. Box 15755, San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 orsierraclub8@gmail.com

CYNTHIA HAWLEYATTORNEY

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONLAND USE

CIVIL LITIGATION

P.O. Box 29 Cambria California 93428Phone 805-927-5102 Fax 805-927-5220

Following an August9 panel presentation onthe Chumash HeritageNational Marine Sanc-tuary at the SLO Uni-tarian Universalist Fel-lowship, Carol Georgi,a volunteer with the SanLuis Obispo Chapter ofthe Surfrider Foundation,received the Bill Denneen Environmental Award. The award recognizes individuals who have made significant environmental contribu-tions on California’s Central Coast. In 2009, Carol founded the alliance that eventuallydrafted the proposal for the nomination of the Sanctuary, including Surfrider, Sierra Club,the Northern Chumash Tribal Council and local coastal advocates. “Receiving the award fills me with gratitude for working with so many dedicated volun-teers toward achieving a new national marine sanctuary for the generations to come,” shesaid. “We need to believe the CHNMS will become a reality.” For more information on the Sanctuary campaign, go to chumashsanctuary.com. Add your name to the petition at tinyurl.com/CHNMSpetition.

Surfrider’sCarol GeorgiReceives BillDenneenAward

In gratitude CHNMS panelists P.J. Webb, Andrew Christie and Fred Collinslook on as Carol Georgi accepts the Bill Denneen award.

8 Santa Lucian • Sept. 2016Outings and Activities CalendarSeller of travel registration information: CST 2087766-40. Registration as a seller of travel does not constitute approval by the State of California.

All our hikes and activities are open to all Club members and the general public. Please bring drinking water to all outings andoptionally a lunch. Sturdy footwear is recommended. All phone numbers listed are within area code 805 unless otherwisenoted. Pets are generally not allowed. A parent or responsible adult must accompany children under the age of 18. If you haveany suggestions for hikes or outdoor activities, questions about the Chapter’s outing policies, or would like to be an outingsleader, call Outings Chair Joe Morris, 549-0355. For information on a specific outing, please call the listed outing leader.

This is a partial listing of Outingsoffered by our chapter.

Please check the web pagewww.santalucia.sierraclub.org for

the most up-to-date listing ofactivities.

Activities sponsored by otherorganizations

(805) 549-0355

ent “bloopers” or care-lessly offhand Twittercomments—these are le-gitimate, “on the record”events. A4NR has madeextensive use in transcrib-ing or transmitting perti-nent statements and videosto relevant state and fed-eral agencies—and otheradvocates. AGP’s videosprovide an invaluablearchive of the Diablo his-tory as it unfolded in realtime. Having studied tele-vision at New York Uni-versity under professorGeorge Stoney, who iscredited as the father ofcommunity access televi-sion, I can say that AGP’swork truly fulfills hisdemocratic vision of whatcommunity televisioncould be used for when theconcept emerged in thelate 1960s. Most of A4NR’s videoappearances have beenplaced on our Youtubechannel, A4NR.https://www.youtube.com/user/A4NR

What’s your favoritepiece of legislationbacked by the Alliance?

There are now prettyclose to a half-dozen billssponsored or backed byA4NR that made it part wayor all the way through thelegislative process—an-other byzantine experience.I would say that AB 1632(Blakeslee), which startedthe seismic studies rollingback in 2006, was perhapsthe most important. Dr.Blakeslee deserves creditfor expressing his concernswell before Fukushima.Again, his motivations wereeconomic. Before Fuku-shima there was theKariwa-Kashiwazaki inci-dent. The world’s largestreactor complex, it wasdamaged by a severe earth-quake in 2007. While itdidn’t trigger a nuclear di-saster, it crippled a largesource of generation andwould have required bil-lions to repair. It was thesepotential economic conse-quences and losses thatmade AB 1632 even morerelevant to California. On a personal level, thebill that took the most timeand energy from me was SB418 (Jackson). That bill wasprescient then (2013) in theway Senator Monning’scurrent SB 968 is now: Itasked for full economicanalysis of all the costs that

license renewal would en-tail, over the entire 20-yearextended life of the plant.What additional compo-nents would need replac-ing? What would the costbe if the NRC changedregulations? I worked—literally day and night—with Hannah-BethJackson’s staff person torespond to every inquiry,providing detailed foot-noted answers to everycharge and claim madeagainst the legislation, andthen distilled those answersdown to “bullet points” asthe committee chairs re-quested. In the end, it wasfor naught. In spite of thesupport we thought we’dgarnered, the IBEW lobby-ist came into the hearingand declared that the billwasn’t about economicanalysis but was just an-other way to put his clientsout of work and shut theplant down. He banged hisfist on the table a few times,excoriated the committee,and the bill died. Of course, we now know“the numbers” SB 418 re-quested would not havepenciled out—three yearslater, PG&E has come to itsown conclusion and de-cided to halt license re-newal. But our state and

those PG&E workers wouldhave had a head start on theprocess if the legislationhad passed. In 2015, AB 361 (Achad-jian), which kept the SLOOffice of Emergency ser-vices funded through theend of Diablo’s currentlicense, was quite a rollercoaster ride. It ended upbeing given a final (andunanimous) vote from thefull legislature on the nightof the last day of the ses-sion. Since we had beentold it would pass early inthe week, we came to Sac-ramento prepared for oneday. We ended up (and I’mnot proud of this) wearingthe same clothes for theremainder of the week. Atone point, I borrowed anecktie from the desk man-ager at the Holiday Inn so Icould break up the mo-notony of my wardrobe. When the bill finallypassed at 10 p.m. on Fridaynight, Rochelle and I wereso exhausted, slumped on abench in the Capitol hall-way, that we found it impos-sible to manage anythingbut a forced and unenthusi-astic “high five.” Wetrudged back to the HolidayInn without even stoppingfor a celebratory drink. Which brings me to two

Activistcontinued from page 6

Sat., Sept. 24, 12-2:30 p.m. SWAPAnnual Celebration. The Small Wil-derness Area Preservation board ofdirectors is excited to have DanielBohlman, Conservation Director ofThe Land Conservancy of San LuisObispo, as Annual Celebrationspeaker. He will talk about and showphotos of the Land Conservancy’srecent acquisition, the beautiful PismoPreserve, and the Eagle Ranch 3,255acre easement donation in Atascadero.Come for an informative and enjoy-able presentation, good food, and achance to chat with fellow lovers ofthe Elfin Forest. Free. Morro ShoresMobile Home Park Community Room,633 Ramona Ave., Los Osos.

Sun., Sept. 18th, 2-3:30p.m. Historic Walk ofOld-Town Cambria.Guided stroll pastVictorian houses, 1880sstorefronts, saloons, cem-etery, and Chinese templein Cambria’s East Villageto learn stories of earlypioneers. Meet in front ofOlallieberry Inn, 2476Main St.. Leader: JoeMorris, 549-0355

Fri-Sun, Sept. 23rd-25th.National Public LandsDay in Black RockDesert. Join us in thisbeautiful, remote desertarea about 100 miles northof Reno for a work projectone day and play another.For further information,call David Book, 775-843-6443. Great Basin Group/CNRCC Desert Commit-tee.

Sat. Sept. 24th, 8:30 a.m.East Cuesta Ridge/LopezCanyon Trail. Walk Mt.Lowe Rd. (E. CuestaRidge) 4.6 miles from gatenear highway on trailwhere all morros can beespied on a clear day, fur-ther if group desires, thenback. Prepare for an all-day hike or you have op-tion of turning back earlyon an out-and-back trail.Bring water, lunch, andsturdy hiking shoes. Meetat Santa Rosa Park tocarpool to top of grade, orthose from north countycan meet us there at 8:45a.m. If hot weather ex-pected, hike will be post-poned to another date.Leader: Carlos Diaz-Saavedra, 546-0317.

Sept. 25-27, Oct. 23-25. Join us for a 3-day, 3-island, live-aboard cruise to the ChannelIslands. Hike windswept trails bordered with blazing wildflowers. Kayak rugged coast-lines. Snorkel in pristine waters teeming with colorful fish. Swim with frolicking sealsand sea lions. Look for unusual sea and land birds. Watch for the endangered island fox.Or just relax at sea! All cruises depart from Santa Barbara. $650 cost includes an assigned bunk, all meals,

snacks and beverages plus the services of anaturalist-docent assigned by the nationalpark to help lead hikes, point out items ofinterest and give evening program. Formore information, contact leader: JoanJones Holtz; 626-443-0706;jholtzhln@aol.com. To hold a reservation, mail a $100 checkto Sierra Club, and send to Joan JonesHoltz, 11826 The Wye St., El Monte, CA91732.

Island Hopping in Channel Islands National Park

conclusions: one personal,one political. Politically, we had great—nearly unanimous—suc-cess with Republican spon-sored legislation in a Demo-cratic majority state,proving as we had hopedthat nuclear policy could bea bipartisan issue. Much ofthat credit goes to our elec-ted officials, and some of itmay go to A4NR’s strategyof distilling the issue downto its core (what does thiscost us?) and leaving anyother baggage attached tothe subject of nuclear powerout of sight. We did notdiscuss the broader issuesof nuclear power and cli-mate change, or what wasbeing done in Europe orelsewhere, or the potentialfor advanced thorium reac-tors, but kept focused on thefate of two aging facilitieson our seismically activecoast. All politics really islocal. My personal note reflectsonly my experience andmay not be translatable toanyone else engaged in thistype of work. I rememberthe day Rochelle and I

learned (via email) that wehad prevailed in our firstCPUC case to stop relicens-ing funding. We had or-dered the lunch special atthe Chili’s in ArroyoGrande. She got the emailjust about the time theyserved us. We read it, there was aweird silence followed by“OK, wow, I guess we didit?” And then we went backto our enchiladas. No jump-ing up and down, wild em-brace, joyous exclamation.Ultimately, I noted that formyself our subsequent vic-tories (including the closingof San Onofre) seemedalmost anticlimactic; mat-ter-of-fact, even bittersweet. The defeats, on the otherhand, continued to stinglong after the battle wasover. Perhaps it’s my ownskin that’s too thin withregard to the losses. I canaccept that. But I was sur-prised that winning did notdeliver the exuberant joltI’d expected. Well, I guess I have sometime to ponder that now.One of these days, I mighteven have that drink.

In Memoriam

Our thanks to Howard and ElizabethSteinberg for their generous donationin memory of Harry Woolpert.