G. Discussion

In our review of the proposed changes to the Safety Committee charter we are first concerned with whether the changes are, in fact, reflecting changes or clarifications made by the Commission in other proceedings. This assures us that the changes are legitimate reflections of the Safety Committee's authority and obligations. The second concern is that the changes do not intentionally or unintentionally expand or constrict the operations of the Safety Committee beyond its defined role and authority.

PG&E indicated that: "... [given] the Commission's statements affirming its belief that there is a continued need for the [Safety Committee] and PG&E's desire for clear and efficient operation of the [Safety Committee], PG&E does not oppose the Application." (Response, p. 2.) PG&E further correctly footnoted that "... pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission [NRC] has sole jurisdiction over public health and safety issues arising as a result of the operation of a commercial nuclear power plant." This decision in no way intends to change the relationships between the Safety Committee on the one hand and PG&E, the NRC or this Commission on the other: its sole function is to correctly conform the Safety Committee charter with our prior decisions.

The first decision, D.88-12-083, which authorized the Safety Committee, required the members of the Committee to be "persons with knowledge, background, and experience in the field of nuclear power facilities" as quoted in D.90-04-008, where the Commission denied petitions of the San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace and Rochelle Becker. At that time the Commission found the Safety Committee was operational and had competent members. The proposed changes in this application reflect the statements of then-president G. Mitchell Wilk, when nominating the first members, whereby the Commission emphasized the need for objective and independent committee members. It is reasonable that this be reflected in a statement on Conflicts of Interest, as proposed in the new section I.C.(3) of the charter, therefore, these revisions should be adopted.

In D.91-10-020, the Commission denied another petition of the San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace, Life on Planet Earth, and Rochelle Becker, in which the petitioners requested suspension of performance-based pricing for Diablo Canyon power and disbandment of the Independent Safety Committee, asserting that the Safety Committee was ineffective. This decision emphasized the Commission's conclusion that the Safety Committee was beneficial and affirmed its continued authorization of the Safety Committee. The application does not otherwise cite to this decision to support specific revisions proposed in this proceeding.

In D.97-05-088, the Commission supplanted the 1988 Diablo Canyon ratemaking settlement (D.88-12-083) with a new ratemaking mechanism. Relevant to the Safety Committee, the Commission ordered that it would continue in existence:

The entire Diablo Canyon settlement adopted in D.88-12-083 and modified by D.95-05-043 is of no force and effect as of the date this decision becomes final. However, the Diablo Canyon Independent Safety Committee shall remain in effect under the terms and conditions of Appendix C, Attachment A to the Diablo Canyon settlement decision D.88-12-083, until further order of the Commission. Funding for the Committee shall be established at its current level under the terms of Appendix C for 1996 at $673,077 and adjusted upward at 1.5% annually until further order of the Commission. (Ordering Paragraph 10.)

The proposed revisions derived from this decision include provisions for conflicts (Section I. C.(2).) and fees and expenses (Section II. E.(2).). After reviewing these proposed revisions, we find them to be consistent with our intent and the authority granted to the Safety Committee, and therefore, these revisions should be adopted.

We have reviewed the proposed changes to Paragraph II-D and agree with the Safety Committee that the revised language provides greater clarity on protecting confidential information, therefore these revisions should be adopted.

In D.04-05-055, with an extensive discussion (over 20 pages), the Commission considered and adopted significant new guidance and conditions for the Safety Committee. PG&E's application originally included a proposal to eliminate the Safety Committee. This decision instead adopted a ratemaking settlement; a major provision of the settlement was its Appendix C: Stipulation Agreement Among Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Luis Obispo Mothers For Peace, Diablo Canyon Safety Committee, Office of Ratepayer Advocates, Energy Commission, and The Utility Reform Network (Stipulation). The parties proposed this stipulation as a part of the overall settlement of the application. As a result of the adoption of the settlement and the Stipulation, several new terms and conditions were made applicable to the Safety Committee. These are now reflected in the proposed revisions to the charter which include an appointment process for committee members (Section I.B.), terms of appointment (Section I.D.), and a new function whereby the Safety Committee undertakes public outreach (Section I.F.). After reviewing these proposed revisions, we find them to be consistent with our intent and the authority granted to the Safety Committee, and therefore, these revisions should be adopted.