NUCLEAR PLANT DEAL MERITS SPECIAL SCRUTINY

California power grid officials issued the summer’s first Flex Alert on Wednesday, calling for voluntary electricity conservation from 4 p.m. to 9 p.m. as thermometers soared, partly fueled by climate change, and air conditioning and fans beckoned.

The alert called to mind the personally (and politically) uncomfortable situation in August 2020 when Californians experienced the first series of statewide rolling blackouts in nearly 20 years. No one wants a repeat of that in this or any summer. Not the everyday Californians who are sweating through above-average temperatures, and not Gov. Gavin Newsom, who, whether or not he’ll actually pursue a presidential campaign in 2024 or beyond, is clearly trying to boost his national profile this year.

As a result, Californians finds themselves facing a different but still significant sort of discomfort — because of a complex bid to simply keep the lights on. Newsom is proposing keeping the state’s last operational nuclear power plant — Diablo Canyon, along the San Luis Obispo County coast — running up to 10 years after its planned shutdown in 2025.

First he must persuade lawmakers to pass a new bill that would enable a number of statutory and regulatory changes by the Aug. 31 end of their legislative session. The plan — vaguely outlined in 11 pages of draft legislation — surfaced days ago, raising many questions, some of which will take time to answer. The first inklings of it emerged in late April when Newsom told the Los Angeles Times editorial board he was encouraged by the Biden administration’s offer of financial support to help the the Diablo Canyon plant’s two reactors stay open. The plant provided 6 percent of the state’s power last year. Keeping it as one of the largest single sources of clean, reliable energy in the U.S. makes sense.

But environmentalists — who are worried about everything from on-site seismic safety and potential radiation to the loss of nearby marine life and longterm waste storage issues — are angry that Newsom would hit pause on a closure that’s been scheduled since 2016. Government watchdogs are upset that all California Public Utilities Commission ratepayers — including San Diego Gas & Electric customers — would pay a portion of the costs to keep the plant open. Many people are upset the plan includes a potentially forgivable $1.4 billion loan for plant operator Pacific Gas & Electric — funded by taxpayers across the state. Then there all the questions from those — including lawmakers — who wonder why such a complex deal with so much uncertainty and so many moving parts needs to be rushed. Why wasn’t more detailed legislation dropped earlier?

Those concerns are all valid. So is the mounting concern that the largest state in the wealthiest nation on the planet — with the world’s fifth-largest economy — can’t guarantee it can keep the power on. Just this January, The San Diego Union-tribune published an interview with the CEO of the California Independent System Operator, which manages the flow of electricity for 80 percent of the state, under the headline, “Will the power stay on this summer? California’s grid boss thinks so. Here’s why.” “Thinks so” isn’t exactly reassuring.

Yes, it’s hard to ask lawmakers, who face a rushing deadline to assess the usual crush of late-session legislation, to consider something as complicated as this energy arrangement. Yet it’s also essential. With a menacing climate emergency evidenced by wildfires, drought and rising worries about water and energy reliability, Californians need reassurances their elected leaders won’t leave them high and dry.

Only rarely are lawmakers called into a special legislative session, but Newsom has that power. He should exert it now: If he believes this deal merits immediate and “extraordinary” consideration, he should ask lawmakers to stay into September — beyond the end of their standard legislative session for a special session called solely to tackle this issue. That would give lawmakers more time to study nuances and needs, and give Californians greater assurances that their lawmakers aren’t rushing into a bad decision, or worse, refusing to give the matter the attention it deserves. Newsom was right to call attention to this issue. He’d be right to call a special session to proceed with expediency and extra care.