ML15014A094
| ML15014A094 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 01/14/2015 |
| From: | Southern California Edison Co |
| To: | NRC/EDO |
| Cai J, OEDO, 415-5192 | |
| References | |
| Download: ML15014A094 (11) | |
Text
Survey: SONGS Communications Feedback Overall External Survey Results Count
Response
1 BizFed 1
CA Sm Bus Assn 1
CITY OF SAN CLEMENTE 1
California Energy Commission 1
California Public Utilities Commission 1
City of Laguna Hills 1
City of San Juan Capistrano 1
IBEW 1
Northstar Financial 1
Orange County Business Council 1
Orange County Environmental Health 1
Orange County Register (I've since left) 1 Residents Organized for a Safe Environment (ROSE) 1 San Clemente Green 1
San Clemente Watershed Task Force 1
San Diego COunty Office of Emergency Services Name of your organization (optional):
1
Type of organization you represent (check all that apply):
24%
44%
24%
8%
4%
4%
Individual/self Local or State government Non-profit organization Environmental group Trade group Other 0
100 25 50 75 The NRC held a number of public meetings during this period. Did you attend any of NRCs public meetings in person or remotely (via Webcast, Webinar, or teleconference)?(Note: full listing with meeting materials can be found here.)
Yes 84%
No 16%
2
Attended in person Attended remotely Responses 06/18/2012 San Juan Capistrano Community Center NRCs Augmented Inspection Team provided status of recent inspection 14 93.3%
1 6.7%
15 10/09/2012 The St. Regis Monarch Beach NRC discussed regulatory status of SONGS 16 94.1%
1 5.9%
17 11/30/2012 The Hills Hotel NRC discussed Southern California Edisons response to Confirmatory Action Letter 11 84.6%
2 15.4%
13 12/18/2012 NRC headquarters in Rockville, Maryland NRC discussed review of Southern California Edison's response to the NRC Confirmatory Action Letter 0
0.0%
4 100.0%
4 01/16/2013 NRC headquarters in Rockville, Maryland Petitioner requesting action against Southern California Edison addressed the NRC Petition Review Board 0
0.0%
2 100.0%
2 02/12/2013 Capo Beach Church NRC discussed regulatory status of SONGS 6
85.7%
1 14.3%
7 02/27/2013 NRC headquarters in Rockville, Maryland NRC discussed review of Southern California Edison's response to the NRCs Confirmatory Action Letter 0
0.0%
3 100.0%
3 04/03/2013 NRC headquarters in Rockville, Maryland NRC discussed Southern California Edison's plan to submit a license amendment request 0
0.0%
2 100.0%
2 If yes, please indicate which ones, to the best of your recollection:
Enough public meetings were held during the shutdown period.
Strongly disagree 9.5%
Somewhat disagree 9.5%
Neutral 4.8%
Somewhat agree 33.3%
Strongly agree 42.9%
3
Count
Response
1 All the meetings were swarmed by the anti nuclear industry denying honest public participation 1
There were adequate public hearings.
1 Early meetings were not facilitated well, and it appeared that the audience was in control of the meetings. This improved through later public meetings. Webcast and other remote options were very helpful and appreciated. Unfortunately, many of these meetings were too long ago to be able to provide much more specific feedback.
1 The St. Regis meeting - Needed a single identified NRC representative "chairperson" on the panel - even though not an official meeting - with a gavel to provide support to the PIO staffer who tried to facilitate and be respectful of all who wanted to make comments, but some of whom were rude and interrupted.
1 Favor was given to environmentalists, and there were times when I was fearly for my safety. Control of the meeting was not maintained and this lead me to decline attending future hearings. There was not balance sought in public comments, and yelling and threats were allowed to continue. It was, in short, very unprofessional and disheartening to see that our government agencies are not capable of providing a fair hearing to all sides of an issue.
1 NRC always listen well, but the question is do the understand the concerns. Then does the NRC take real action on the public's concerns to make real change for the nuke industry????
1 I had my Executive Director attend each of these meetings. I assume he will provide more detailed feedback.
1 The meeting was a circus. It was too crowded. The location was not easy to find. The NRC did not handle the meeting well and many speakers were cut off and could not make their points.
1 If I recall, the church venue had a lot of spillover into other rooms, though if I remember right they could see the proceedings on a monitor.
1 The facilitator had a difficult time maintaining the groups that occupied time, from the discussions of how the problem might be fixed, to protesting Nuclear Power as a concept! It was non-productive and distracting.
1 I don't believe in holding government meetings in a church. The venue was small compaired to the others.
Please elaborate on any of your answers above on the NRC's public meetings, especially where you answered somewhat disagree or strongly disagree, and/or provide any additional feedback:
4
Strongly disagree Somewhat disagree Neutral Somewhat agree Strongly agree Responses Website location was easy to find 2
15.4%
0 0.0%
1 7.7%
6 46.2%
4 30.8%
13 Website content was informative 1
7.7%
0 0.0%
0 0.0%
6 46.2%
6 46.2%
13 Website content was easy to understand 1
7.7%
1 7.7%
0 0.0%
7 53.8%
4 30.8%
13 Website content was comprehensive 1
7.7%
0 0.0%
2 15.4%
5 38.5%
5 38.5%
13 Website contained up-to-date information 1
7.7%
0 0.0%
2 15.4%
5 38.5%
5 38.5%
13 NRC staff set up a dedicated webpage during the extended shutdown to provide background information, links to documents, meeting records, and general updates. Did you look at the SONGS website during the extended shutdown?(Note: This website has since been updated to include information on decommissioning status.
The current SONGS website can be found here.)
Yes 56%
No 44%
If yes, please provide feedback, to the best of your recollection:
5
Count
Response
1 Finding documents or correspondence between the NRC and SCE is difficult.
1 It was a iseful tool 1
NRC website is very large and difficult to navigate to find exactly what you may be looking for.
1 The website adequately informed the public of the ongoing process.
1 WHEN YOU PUT DATES ON THE WEBSITE, BE SURE AND INCLUDE THE YEAR.
1 Overall, the NRC website is relatively easy to use and easy to search and find information, especially considering the volumes of information. MUCH more user friendly and transparent than the California CPUC's obfuscated website (and its corollary activity regarding SONGS).
Strongly disagree Somewhat disagree Neutral Somewhat agree Strongly agree Responses The Blog posts were informative 0
0.0%
0 0.0%
2 33.3%
4 66.7%
0 0.0%
6 The Blog posts were easy to understand 0
0.0%
1 16.7%
0 0.0%
5 83.3%
0 0.0%
6 The Blog served as a useful tool for getting updates 0
0.0%
0 0.0%
2 33.3%
3 50.0%
1 16.7%
6 The Blog provided a useful avenue for conducting dialogue 0
0.0%
1 16.7%
3 50.0%
2 33.3%
0 0.0%
6 Please elaborate on any of your answers above, especially where you answered somewhat disagree or strongly disagree, and/or provide any additional feedback on the website:
The NRC Blog featured several posts on SONGS during the extended shutdown. Did you read any of the SONGS related Blog posts during this period?(Note: to locate posts, visit the NRC Blog, and perform a search using the term San Onofre. Look for posts from the period of January 2012 to June 2013.)
Yes 28%
No 72%
If yes, please provide your feedback, to the best of your recollection:
6
Count
Response
1 Acronyms are always difficult when you don't use them everyday.
Count
Response
1 I've had a few communications with the Region IV director.
1 Meeting in Oceanside with the shutdown team.
1 Meeting with NRC staff.
1 NRC meeting with the affected Labor groups 1
Requested from chairman information on high burn up fuels 1
phone call 1
NRC staff met with the members of the Interjurisdictional Planning Committee to discuss the the shut down process and to let us know what we could expect.
1 I met with the Chairs and had monthly calls with NRC technical staff. All of these discussions were very frank and very useful.
1 Telephone discussions with staff regarding the deferred maintenance and general poor condition of the SONGs condensate demineralizers.
1 Press releases, signed up to receive documents through your automated system - which worked very well, was easy to understand, and easy to search. Again, actually useful compared with the legalize and acronyms in CPUC document titles.
1 As a reporter for the Register, I spoke frequently with media affairs personnel and, at some meetings, NRC staff members.
1 I have personal relationship with members of NRC staff and spoke with them informally about this issue.
Please elaborate on any of your answers above, especially where you answered somewhat disagree or strongly disagree, and/or provide any additional feedback on the Blog:
Did you engage in any other interactions with NRC staff or have experience with any other communication products during this period (e.g., had individual discussions with NRC staff, read NRC press releases, etc.)?
Yes 54.2%
No 45.8%
If so, please describe the activity or product:
7
Count
Response
1 Both the NRC and the CPUC will be reviewing the decommissioning plan for SONGS.
1 It helped me understand the technical aspects of the problem better 1
NRC staff were upfront and candid about the process and the uncertainties we could expect.
1 indicated they understood small business was an important sector in process 1
It is important for both NRC staff and the public to develop relationships with NRC staff to develop trust and better understanding of all the critical issues.
1 The material concerning defective steam generators at SONGS was highly technical, with plenty of opportunity to get things wrong. Victor Dricks and other staff helped me to check accuracy of my reporting and descriptions unfailingly, despite a heavy burden of many press people seeking interviews.
1 Demonstrated the depth of knowledge being brought to bear on this shutdown. The experience of the team is encouraging.
1 I needed a good understanding of the nature of the problem, potential solutions and the likely timing of the resolution so we could plan the power situation in California.
Count
Response
1 No reply 1
Staff was not interested in the condition of the demineralizers because it's considered non-safety related. The problem is that the demineralizers are important to the water quality in the steam generators. The NRC should not wait for the water quality to get so bad that the steam generator is contaminated or the the plant trips, unnecessarily challenging safety systems.
Did you find this activity or product to be useful?
Yes 83.3%
No 16.7%
Please explain why it was useful.
Please explain why it was not useful.
8
Very poor Poor Neutral Good Excellent Responses Overall quality of NRCs interactions and communications 1
4.0%
1 4.0%
3 12.0%
13 52.0%
7 28.0%
25 Overall quantity of NRCs interactions and communications 1
4.2%
0 0.0%
5 20.8%
11 45.8%
7 29.2%
24 Count
Response
1 I received no updates not info about other open meetings.
1 NRC reps have always conducted themselves with a high degree of professionalism.
1 What ever happened to the concept of "defense in depth"? It seems that the NRC now waits for an indicator to get into an unacceptable range before acting instead of looking for the precursors to those excursions. Look at INPO audits to see how the NRC needs to change.
1 I thought NRC staff did reasonably well to explain the situation and their role. Perhaps one weakness was that some members of staff didn't seem to relate well to the public. To many people, it seemed like NRC sat on information before releasing it to the public. I understand that NRC has to get approvals before releasing information but maybe they can speed up this internal process so that people feel like they are getting information in a more timely manner.
1 Again my discussions were very useful. I had to triangulate on my conversations with SCE and the public.
1 Staff members like Victor are experts in their own right. I could not have reported these stories correctly without them.
1 Communication seemed to drop off after Edison actually announced it was shutting down SONGS. Perhaps I am not signed up to correct notifications.
1 I am saying neutral here neutral here because I feel NRC needs to have more "real dialogue" with the public. Not just a presentation and question and answer period. To me,a real dialogue is more of a two conversation. The NRC come much closer to this in the small private meeting I have attended.
Focusing only on the interactions and communications you experienced during the shutdown period (i.e.,
independent of any views related to nuclear power or SONGS you may have), please rate:
Please elaborate on any of your answers above, especially where you answered "poor" or "very poor,"
and/or provide any additional feedback on this topic.
9
Count
Response
1 Address our issues with RASCAL.
1 Hold meetings in appropriate locations (i.e. publicly accessible.
1 Keep it up.
1 See responses in 15.
1 more emphasis on small business as sector 1
I also attended the meeting held at SONGS for local elected officials (on behalf of elected officials). This was an excellent meeting. I would strongly encourage the continued use of such "internal" meetings to share detailed information with elected officials/staff, in addition to press releases and public meetings. It dispelled rumors, misunderstandings and added clarity.
Press releases and public meetings are also important, but cannot convey the details and allow the Q & A directly with the SONGS and NRC leaders/engineers/experts. This may have been a SONGS called meeting, but I would encourage NRC to require such from other reactor operators when significant issues arise.
1 No suggestions. Given the extreme pressure during this period, NRC communications was top notch, and they also could be reached after hours if needed.
1 Inform the public and not allow meetings to be swarmed by the anti nuclear industry both inside and outside the government 1
Limiting the redundant, off-topic comments of some of the professional anti-nuclear power advocates would speed the meetings up.
1
- 1. Use of a podium 2. More meetings like Oct 9, 2013. Giving stakeholders a seat at the table, without the the pro nuclear people who made some pretty dumb statements. 3. Without the pro nuke people we would have had a deeper roundtable discussion, in my opinion.
1 I am the Safety Liason for the state of California. Bill Maier was a very good liason for the NRC. He was a very point of contact into the NRC.
1 It was clear to me that a conclusion was already arrived at during the meeting I attended, so I did not engage in any further investigation or reading of communications from the NRC.
1 I believe the NRC did a good job through this process. It is a shame that the outcome couldn't have been different.
1 Your staff wasn't interested in listening to suggestions. In fact they didn't seem to be listening to us at all. They seemed to think it was none of our business.
Please provide any specific suggestions or recommendations on how NRC could improve in communicating with interested people for similar situations in the future.
10
Count
Response
1 The result was a foregone conclusion. Other options were not seriously considered for SONGS.
1 READ INPO AUDITS! Auditing to best practices and maintenance standards will flag problems long before auditing to regulatory compliance.
1 The NRC's website for the decommissioning of SONGS could be more user friendly. Documents and correspondence should be included by subject matter, without having to know the NRC inspection report number or NRC filing code.
1 Give each side a fair hearing. Do not come with preconceived ideas or priorities, and make sure your public comment participants feel safe. Shut down yelling, profanity, threats and extreme behavior. It shuts down an honest dialogue.
1 It is difficult to do in a "crowd" mentality but unsubstantiated fabricated "facts" need to be refuted before they spread through these meetings. Anecdotal stories serve no purpose other than to inflame the crowds!!
1 EPA has several public involvement processes that provide additional opportunities for the public to become meaningfully engaged with site-specific issues. They might be a good model for NRC to adapt.
Do you have any recommendations of good practices used by other agencies or organizations in communicating with interested people for similar situations that NRC should consider?
Yes 25%
No 75%
If so, please provide details.
11