Communications re: Diablo Canyon advocacy and Vendenberg Air Force Base

All: I thought you would be interested in this response from the U.S.
Navy's Steve Chung regarding CGNP's pro- Diablo Canyon advocacy to support
nearby Vandenberg Air Force Base's vital national security mission.
Additional information is available on request.

Gene Nelson, Ph.D.  San Luis Obispo, CA   (805) 363 - 4697 cell

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: RE: [Non-DoD Source] RE: Offshore Wind Proposal for VAFB
From:    "Gene A. Nelson, Ph.D." <government@cgnp.org>
Date:    Tue, August 20, 2019 7:15 am
To:      "Chung, Steve U CIV USN COMNAVREG SW SAN CA (USA)"
<steve.u.chung@navy.mil>
Cc:      "Gene Nelson, Ph.D." <government@cgnp.org>
         "CORTOPASSI, RONALD B GS-15 USAF AFSPC 30 SW/CD
(ronald.cortopassi@us.af.mil)" <ronald.cortopassi@us.af.mil>
         "SCHOBEL, WALTER R GS-13 USAF AFSPC 2 ROPS/DON
(walter.schobel@us.af.mil)" <walter.schobel@us.af.mil>
         "GARCIA, GABRIEL GS-14 USAF AFSPC 30 SW/SEL
(gabriel.garcia@us.af.mil)" <gabriel.garcia@us.af.mil>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Steve: Thank you for your email.  CGNP is still preparing its final
submission for the California State Lands Commission (CASLC.) You will be
copied on that message.

I'm a former Docent at the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum in
Washington, DC. I'm aware of Vandenberg Air Force Base's (VAFB's) long
history of supporting our nation's warfighters as I specialized in the
CORONA surveillance satellite system. The first CORONA launch in 1959 was
from VAFB, as were all of the remaining CORONA< GAMBIT< and HEXAGON
missions. The last of those film-return missions was launched in 1986.

The 30th Space Wing at VAFB continues to launch important surveillance
assets. In addition, an installation of the  Missile Defense Agency's
Ground-Based Midcourse Defense system is at VAFB. These assets merit
protection from any adversary's cruise missiles launched from the west of
VAFB. VAFB's defense requires unobstructed RADAR surveillance. Such
surveillance is incompatible with offshore wind generators. In my many
tours of VAFB, I have not observed any on-shore wind generators within the
base perimeter, nor nearby. Wind generators and RADAR installations are
incompatible. CGNP will be supplying updated information about this
incompatibility to the CASLC.

In the mean time, I thought you and your colleagues would be interested in
seeing CGNP's submission to the California State Water Resources Control
Board (SWRCB.)  This filing addresses the reliable provision of electric
power to VAFB from nearby Diablo Canyon Power Plant  (DCPP) in support the
base's vital national security missions. Since those missions run around
the clock, VAFB should be supplied from an "always on" power source,
namely DCPP into the foreseeable future. Neither intermittent wind nor
solar are dispatchable, so neither power generation means makes any
meaningful contribution to VAFB's energy supply resiliency. On the other
hand, DCPP operates independently of California's aging natural gas bulk
distribution and storage system. Instead, DCPP's energy source is located
within DCPP's twin reactor cores.  Brief refueling outages occur on a
staggered basis very 18-20 months. Thus, DCPP reliably produces power
without interruption for VAFB for many years at a time.

Sincerely, and V/R

Gene Nelson, Ph.D.  CGNP Legal Assistant
Californians for Green Nuclear Power, Inc. (CGNP)
1375 East Grand Ave Ste 103 #523
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420-2421
(805) 363 - 4697 cell
Government@CGNP.org email
http://CGNP.org  website



On Tue, August 20, 2019 1:28 am, Chung, Steve U CIV USN COMNAVREG SW SAN
CA (USA) wrote:
> Good Evening Mr. Nelson,
>
>
> Thank you for your note.  The military greatly appreciates your
> thoughtful consideration to protect DoD's readiness capabilities.  Our
> military personnel have, and will continue to give critical review of any
> project proposals to ensure mission compatibility.  As you may already be
> aware, the proposed pilot offshore wind project resides in CA State
> waters, and as such, the permitting authority for the proposal resides
> with the CA State Lands Commission.
>
> Again, thank you for your insightful note.
>
>
> All the Best and V/R,
>
>
> Steve Chung
> NRSW Regional CPLO - Encroachment Program Director
> 937 N Harbor Dr, San Diego, CA 92132
> Office: 619-532-4268 / Cell 619-723-5936
> steve.u.chung@navy.mil (NIPR) steve.u.chung@navy.smil.mil (SIPR)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gene A. Nelson, Ph.D. <government@cgnp.org>
> Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2019 7:08 AM
> To: Chung, Steve U CIV USN COMNAVREG SW SAN CA (USA)
> <steve.u.chung@navy.mil>
> Subject: [Non-DoD Source] RE: Offshore Wind Proposal for VAFB
> Importance: High
>
>
> Steve Chung
> NRSW Regional CPLO - Encroachment Program Director
> 1220 Pacific Highway
> San Diego, CA 92132-5190
> 619-532-4268  Voice
> 619-532-2518  FAX
> steve.u.chung@navy.mil
>
> August 18, 2019
>
>
> Dear Steve:  I have grave concerns regarding the wind energy proposal >
for Vandenberg AFB (VAFB) described in the following article.  I
>summarize those concerns with one word: "INCOMING!"
>
> (I'm sending this pure-text file first in the event that your email
> system blocks files with attachments. In the event that your email system
> blocks emails with attachments, you will not receive CGNP's subsequent
> email.)
>
> Unfortunately, I have a schedule conflict for Friday, August 23. I have
> added the relevant agenda item to the California State Lands Commission
> (CASLC) meeting to the first newspaper article.  I will be attending a
> meeting of the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) in
> Sacramento to advocate for the continued safe operation of Diablo Canyon
> Power Plant (DCPP.) Perhaps other members of our independent nonprofit
> will attend the CASLC meeting.
>
> I was driving through VAFB via Highway 1 yesterday. I noticed the
> numerous radomes (RADAR domes) dotting the hillsides.  I'm confident many
> of those radar systems are dedicated to national security purposes to
> protect an important strategic asset, namely VAFB.
>
> Even the small "research scale" wind turbines suggested for the offshore
> oil platform will serve to "blind" radars aimed in the general direction
> of the wind turbines.  RADARs may be programmed to ignore the random
> reflections associated with the operation of a wind turbine. However,
> that means turning off surveillance to that section of the sky.  As an
> example, please see the November 12, 2013 Ottawa Citizen article which
> follows this message.
>
> Please also recall the story of the sinking of the HMS Sheffield by
> Argentina's Air Force during the Falklands War using an Exocet missile on
> May 4, 1982. With VAFB's RADARs blinded, such sea-skimming missiles would
> not be seen by the defenders of VAFB, perhaps until the very last second.
>  Then it would be too late, just as it was for the HMS Sheffield.
>
>
> Additional references regarding this national security topic are found
> here:  http://wiseenergy.org/Energy/NC/RadarReports.pdf  A copy of this
> page follows the Ottawa Citizen article. ___________
>
>
> It seems that interests opposed to U.S. military readiness advocate for
> inherently-intermittent power sources to be used by military bases such
> as VAFB.  CPUC intervenor Californians for Green Nuclear Power, Inc.
> (CGNP) established in written testimony before the California Public
> Utilities Commission (CPUC) and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
> (FERC) using official records from the California Independent System
> Operator
> (CAISO) that the capacity factor (percentage ON time) for both solar and
> wind for the half year ending on January 31, 2017 for all of California's
> wind and solar was a paltry 20%. Summary performance data is presented
> here:  "NECG Commentary - Diablo Canyon Retirement" by Gene Nelson, Ph.D.
>  January 11, 2018
> https://nuclear-economics.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/2018-01-11-DCPP-1
> .pdf
> or    https://tinyurl.com/Wind-And-Solar-Scam.  For the approximately 80%
> of the time remaining, California solar and California wind require
> natural gas-fired backup - and California's natural gas-fired generation
> is woefully dependent on an aging (mostly 50-to 60-year old - and
> vulnerable) natural gas pipeline and storage system. An illustration of
> such vulnerabilities was the September 9, 2010 San Bruno Pipeline
> explosion, which killed 8. Another example was the Aliso Canyon Storage
> Field blowout during the fall and winter of 2015-2016.
>
>
> CGNP desires for both public safety and national security in their
> advocacy for the continued safe operation of PG&E's DCPP beyond 2025. In
> contrast to wind and solar, DCPP runs 24/7 Sun or no Sun, wind or no
> wind, drought or flood. Since DCPP has two reactors, the interval between
> the plant being off-line is measured in years. Each of DCPP's reactors
> has a capacity factor in excess of 91%. Its energy source is the U-235 in
> each reactor core. This energy is available independent of California's
> aging natural gas pipeline and storage system. DCPP supplies its reliable
> power to VAFB to support its important national security mission.
>
> __________
>
>
> Furthermore, offshore wind turbines would destroy the last section of the
> Pacific Ocean that is currently a "pristine environment" for military
> R&D, an important contributor to California's economy. The offshore wind
> turbines would blind radars and their substantial infrasonic emissions
> would cripple SONAR for many miles around any offshore wind turbine
> installation.
>
> CGNP has a core technical team comprised of four Ph.D.s whose fields are
> related to nuclear power production. Our legal team is headed by former
> four-term California Assemblyman Mike Gatto. We stand ready to assist you
> in your mission to prevent encroachment of this pristine offshore
> environment by selfish commercial interests that have hired
> smooth-talking lobbyists.  We would also be pleased to meet with you or
> your designee to discuss how DCPP support the national security mission
> of California's 39 military bases - and to discuss the future prospects
> for even more reliable power for these military bases from Small Modular
> Reactors
> (SMRs.)
>
>
> Please confirm receipt of this message - and our subsequent email.
> Thanks!
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
> Gene Nelson, Ph.D.  CGNP Legal Assistant Californians for Green Nuclear
> Power, Inc. (CGNP)
> 1375 East Grand Ave Ste 103 #523
> Arroyo Grande, CA 93420-2421
> (805) 363 - 4697 cell
> Government@CGNP.org email       http://CGNP.org  website

Attachments area