ML13144A031
| ML13144A031 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 05/16/2013 |
| From: | Christwitz W - No Known Affiliation |
| To: | Rules, Announcements, and Directives Branch |
| References | |
| 78FR22576 00283, NRC-2013-0070 | |
| Download: ML13144A031 (2) | |
Text
Page 1 of 2 As of: May 17, 2013 Received: May 16, 2013 PUBLIC SUBMISSION Status: Pending Yost PUBLC S
BMISIONTracking No. ljx-85ct-phqb Comments Due: May 16, 2013 Submission Type: Web Docket: NRC-2013-0070 Application and Amendment to Facility Operating License Involving Proposed No 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-2013-0070-DRAFT-0 189 Comment on FR Doc # 2013-08888 3
Name: Wiliam Christwitz Submitter Information
--2 3
Address:
3568 Vista Street Clearlake, CA, 95422-8204 Organization: CHI General Comment
Dear Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
The comments included below are regarding Docket ID NRC20130070.
Both San Onofre reactors are severely damaged. Restarting Unit 2 experimentally, when the root cause of the problems hasn't been found, Edison's own experts disagree on even the secondary cause of the issues, and disagree on the length of time left before another accident could occur -- which could be somewhere in the range of a few months to a little over a year -- puts the public at unnecessary and unacceptable risk.
I ask that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission deny Edison's narrow license amendment and request for a no significant hazard determination, both of which fail to address the significance of the problems at San Onofre and could lead to a restart of the San Onofre nuclear reactor Unit 2.
Additionally, Senator Boxer has asked the NRC to complete a comprehensive investigation and provide full opportunity for public participation and independent expert testimony. I agree. The investigation may reveal critical information that would provide important insights into the safety of the restart proposal. To pave the way for restart without having all relevant information in hand would be both premature and irresponsible.The narrow license amendment request and request for a no significant hazard determination consideration amount SUNSI Review Complete Template = ADM - 013 E-RIDS= ADM-03 https://www.fd.
Add= B. Benney (bjb) mtstreamer?objectld=09000064812e7115&for...
05/17/2013
Page 2 of 2 to an end run by Southern California Edison to rush restart of their damaged reactors, rather than ensuring safety. As the regulatory body charged with ensuring safety, you must reject these requests and hold Edison accountable to a thorough vetting of all the safety issues raised by their restart plan and the numerous areas where the restart scheme does not comply with the terms of their license.
I was deeply disturbed when on April 10 the NRC staff ignored the requests of Senator Boxer -- and the public -
- and instead announced a "preliminary finding" that a San Onofre restart posed no significant safety. Thanks for listening. WC https://www.fdms.gov/fdms-web-agency/component/contentstreamer?objectld=09000064812e7115&for...
05/17/2013