ML13155A164

Comment (450) of Bill Hawkins Opposing Restart of San Onofre Unit 2 Until NRC Completes Comprehensive Investigation

ML13155A164
Person / Time
Site:	San Onofre
Issue date:	05/10/2013
From:	Hawkins B - No Known Affiliation
To:	Rules, Announcements, and Directives Branch
References
NRC-2013-0070, 78FR22576 00450
Download: ML13155A164 (3)

Text

ýý (ý (aq UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001-rn.5-76-~78 F-0 rCP SUNSI Review Complete Template = ADM -013 E-RIDS= ADM-03 Add= B. Benney (bjb)

Wright, Darlene From: Bill Hawkins [billleel23456@gmaiL.com]

Sent: Friday, May 10, 2013 12:50 AM

Subject:

San Onofre Sad Saga Continued

-NRC/SCE/MHI/Independent Experts and Public Awareness Series Summary: United States President and Congress's Directive to NRC is to ensure reactor and public safety and not keeping Edison in Business.

SCE is just issuing and repeating empty threats to NRC and Public. Even, if San Onofre closes for a few years, Edison is still in control because Edison owns the $32 Billion Grid, has Monopoly Franchise Electrical Power Supply Agreements with Cities, can purchase bulk and surplus power from Independent Producers, Arizona Power, PG&E and charge the customers cost plus generous profits, because it controls the California Public Utilities Commission.

Therefore, Neither Edison, Nor San Onofre are going anywhere.

Instead of wasting time, money and fighting with MHI and NRC, Money-Sick and Panicky SCE needs series of injections of Political, Financial, Community Responsibility, Public Safety and Nuclear Operation/Design Wisdom. Ted Craver needs to contract San Onofre Replacement Steam Generators Repairs/Replacement to Westinghouse, fire the discriminatory/retaliating and inefficient San Onofre Senior Leadership Team, Return the money owed to rate payers and learn to live like a Gentleman and not behave like Lawless Mafia or Hooligans through its PR Machine, Political/Money Clout, Lobbyists and its team of Endless and Shark Attorneys.

Reference:

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. 50-361; NRC-2013-00701, Application and Amendment to Facility Operating License Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination; San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 2]Credit is acknowledged to Forbes Magazine for some portion of this article A proposal to restart San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station at partial power is approaching an array of regulatory hurdles in the coming weeks. Plant operator Southern California Edison has warned that time to restart is running out as repair and replacement power costs mount.CEO Ted Craver said a decision could be made by year's end to permanently shut down the plant in northern San Diego County, which would be costly and mean less energy for the region's power grid.The comments have refocused attention on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission as it conducts a technical review of Edison's plan to restart one of two reactors at 70 percent power for a short period."There are many potential decision scenarios involving Unit 2 and Unit 3. They all have different implications for grid reliability, customer costs, attainment of greenhouse gas and air quality objectives." Other than permanently shutting down the units, SoCalEd could choose to work with the MHI that installed the steam generators to fix the problem. That would take five years, meaning that costs would continue to add up while the facility would not be bringing in any revenues.

All this has created a mess between SoCalEd and Mitsubishi Corp., which installed the steam generators that have defective parts. The vendor says that its liabilities are limited to $139 million, which is considerably less than the overall maintenance costs, not to mention to the loss of business.

It also says that it had informed the utility in 2009 of the malfunctions, which led to the radiation leaks in 2012. Mitsubishi maintains that a strategic business decision was made in 2009 to fix the problem, as opposed to re-install different parts. SoCalEd, however, denies that supposition, adding that it had no knowledge of the issue until January 2012. That's when the tubes began leaking.Now both companies are being accused by citizen groups and policymakers of improprieties and caring more about profits than they do safety. Specifically, Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass. wants the U.S.1 "Securities and Exchange to probe into whether investors were intentionally misled. "Investors presumably would want to know whether a company is choosing not to implement additional safety protocols because such actions might require a nuclear reactor to go through a more strenuous licensing process," says Rep. Markey, who is top Democrat on the House Natural Resources Committee. "Such choices could be evidence of poor management or even possible civil liability." SoCalEd has said that safety has always been its top priority and that it is convinced it can successfully address the vibrations causing the erosion of the tubes. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission may eventually agree with that evaluation, although it will not do so by summer. The question then becomes how long can SoCalEd afford to let this huge nuclear plant sit idle."Speaking as a former regulator, it's certainly part of the industry playbook to say, 'If we don't get our way, something you're not going to like will follow,'" said Peter Bradford, a former member of the nuclear commission who teaches at the Vermont Law School. "I can't tell you if that's what Edison is doing in this case." It is clear that SCE wants to restart a degraded reactor, so they can rip off the customers, stay in business and get away with all the past and future Billions of Dollars mistakes.

First Edison said, customers need San Onofre for the Peak Summer Months and as a Grid Voltage Stabilizer.

Now, they say that time to restart is running out as repair and replacement power costs mount. Southern Californians need safe, reliable and economical electricity and not radiation deaths, cancers and Fukushima.

Edison is in trouble because of its negligence, carelessness and greed. SCE reverse engineered and wrote defective specifications and back fitted a defective and misleading 50.59 to get around NRC 50.90 License Amendment Process and Public Hearings.

SCE picked an unqualified, cheap, inexperienced and bragging manufacturer, which did not have the tools, technology, knowledgeable personnel and skills to build such complex and large generators tailored around the expanded 11 %increased heat transfer area demanded by SCE defective specifications and 50.59 instructions (SCE to MHI, "Do Not tell the NRC, if anything is wrong. NRC is our friend, we will tell them if something is wrong. It was MHI's duty to tell, if they found something wrong. Both SCE/MHI violated the law and NRC Police was sleeping at the wheel in a stalled car, which was out of gas, with no ammunition and no radio communications.

2