ML020570130

Requests Information Re NRC Proceeding for SONGS

ML020570130
Person / Time
Site:	Diablo Canyon, San Onofre
Issue date:	02/13/2002
From:	Becker R San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace
To:	Borschman P, Henderson B - No Known Affiliation, NRC/FSME
References
+sispmjr200505, -RFPFR
Download: ML020570130 (4)

Text

f"T"imo6thy "Kobetz - [Fwd: Fwd: NRC proceedings for SONGS] _____Page 1

• 2-f~+I7-6 From: <beckers @thegrid.net>

To: Breck Henderson <BWH@nrc.gov>, Patricia Borcshman <Pdbsongsl @cs.com>

Date: 2/13/02 7:11PM

Subject:

[Fwd: Fwd: NRC proceedings for SONGS]

What is going on? Who is in charge? No required hearings, is this a new strategy by the NRC to railroad the public who must live by these high level radioactive waste sites? Will this be a precedent for Diablo Canyon?

Please answer as soon as possible, something appears very wrong.

Rochelle Becker San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace 0 rnsso IPLb h'(.

T!imothy Kobetz - Questions _____ _____ Page 1 From: <beckers @thegrid.net>

To: Tim Kobetz <tjkl @nrc.gov>

Date: 2/19/02 12:38PM

Subject:

Questions

Dear Mr. Kobetz,

I understand you would rather do this by phone, but the fact we have not been able to connect should be a signal to you that this is not realistic. If the questions that I submit below should require follow up, I will follow up.

Questions:

-What is the SPECIFIC difference between the lack of public proceedings and intervention not allowed at SONGS and the procedure that will be followed for Diablo Canyon?

-Does this lack of public proceedings in San Clemente and possibility for intervention pertain to Unit 2&3 HLRW as well?

-While both plants are in seismic areas and both sit on coastal bluffs, why are different casks being proposed at SONGS than proposed for Diablo?

-Is the licensing of the cask itself reason to make HLRW sites at each nuclear plant in the US generic?

I know the industry and the NRC prefer to call this storage ISFSI, however, when there is no where to send it and no specific date by which this HLRW will leave it must fit the criteria of HLRW in our state.

Sincerely, Rochelle Becker San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace

Timothy Kobetz - Re: Questions ___Page 1 From: Timothy Kobetz To: beckers@thegrid.net Date: 2/19/02 1:53PM

Subject:

Re: Questions Mrs. Becker, The difference between the NRC's licensing process for the SONGS independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) and the Diablo Canyon ISFSI is that SONGS has elected to store the spent fuel using a general license. A general license allows utilities with an reactor operating license to store fuel in a cask design that has previously been reviewed and approved by the NRC. The cask that is ultimately chosen by the utility must be designed to withstand all environmental conditions for that site including earthquakes.

Diablo Canyon elected to request a site specific license.

In December 1996, NRC published the "Information Handbook on Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations," which fully describes both the general licensing and the site specific licensing processes and the history of why NRC developed both processes as Congress required in the "Nuclear Waste Policy Act." If you provide me an address I would be glad to send you a copy. I think you will find the publication very informative and responds to your questions in much greater detail that I can in an e-mail.

If, after you have reviewed the handbook, you still have questions please contact me or the NRC Office of Public Affairs at OPA@ NRC.qov.

Thank you for your interest, Tim

>>> <beckers@thegrid.net> 02/19/02 12:38PM >>>

Dear Mr. Kobetz,

I understand you would rather do this by phone, but the fact we have not been able to connect should be a signal to you that this is not realistic. If the questions that I submit below should require follow up, I will follow up.

Questions:

-What is the SPECIFIC difference between the lack of public proceedings and intervention not allowed at SONGS and the procedure that will be followed for Diablo Canyon?

-Does this lack of public proceedings in San Clemente and possibility for intervention pertain to Unit 2&3 HLRW as well?

-While both plants are in seismic areas and both sit on coastal bluffs, why are different casks being proposed at SONGS than proposed for Diablo?

-Is the licensing of the cask itself reason to make HLRW sites at each nuclear plant in the US generic?

I know the industry and the NRC prefer to call this storage ISFSI, however, when there is no where to send it and no specific date by which this HLRW will leave it must fit the criteria of HLRW in our state.

Timothy Kobetz - Re: Questions Page 2:

Sincerely, Rochelle Becker San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace CC: Breck Henderson; Sue Gagner