ML13141A141

Comment (177) Paul Staples Opposing the Application and Amendment to Facility Operating License Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination; San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 2

ML13141A141
Person / Time
Site:	San Onofre
Issue date:	05/13/2013
From:	Staples P - No Known Affiliation
To:	Rules, Announcements, and Directives Branch
References
78FR22576 00177, NRC-201-0070
Download: ML13141A141 (1)

Text

Page 1 of 1

RULES AND DIRECTIVES BRANCH USNRC As of: May 14, 2013 Received: May 13, 2013 I CSIN 03 HY 14 P 4 0 Status: PendingPost PI US,AY 114 P 14o02 . Tracking No. ljx-85b7-uwe0 Comments Due: May 16, 2013 Submission Type: Web Docket: NRC-201 -0070 Application and Amendment to Facility Operating Licenfelhv lihg UoLeNo Significant Hazards Consideration Determination Comment On: NRC-2013-0070-0001 Application and Amendment to Facility Operating License Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination; San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 2 Document: NRC-20 13-0070-DRAFT-0092 Comment on FR Doc # 2013-08888 Submitter Information Name: Paul Staples Address:

P.O. Box 6911 Eureka, CA, 95502 177 General Comment I write to ask that the NRC reject Southern California Edison's narrow license amendment request and no significant hazard consideration. These requests from Edison would pave the way to restart before a full adjudicated license amendment hearing with testimony from independent experts was held. This license amendment seeks to remove the critical licensing issues from the context in which it is requested - to pave the way for restarting a severely damaged reactor without understanding the cause and without fixing the problems. It further fails to address significant safety and licensing issues, such as impacts on vital safety systems. Given the extensive damage at both reactors and tremendous public concern, Southern California Edison should not be attempting fast-track a restart decision. The health and safety of Southern Californians must come first.

Both reactors have been shut down since January 2012 when a radioactive leak led to discovery of extensive damage.

Though Edison has tried to minimize the damage of Unit 2, a September report revealed that its damage is nearly as bad as Unit 3 and more than 400 times what is normal for new steam generators in the entire country. Even Edison's own consultants have stated that if Unit 2 is restarted, another leak could be expected within months.

No significant hazard? According to a 1982 NRC study, a meltdown at one of San Onofre reactors could cause 130,000 prompt fatalities; 300,000 latent cancers, and 600,000 cases of genetic defects within 35 miles of the site. Since then, the population in the area has increased substantially with over 8 million people living within 50 miles of the reactors.

San Onofre must not be allowed to restart, and must have a public adjudicated license amendment hearing with testimony from independent experts before any decision is made.

SUNSI Review Complete Template = ADM - 013 E-RIDS= ADM-03 Add= B. Benney (bjb) https://www.fdms.gov/fdms-web-agency/component/contentstreamer?objectld=09000064812e223a&for... 05/14/2013