ML23067A252
| ML23067A252 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 03/06/2023 |
| From: | Castelveter D Office of Public Affairs |
| To: | Blanch P - No Known Affiliation |
| References | |
| Download: ML23067A252 (1) | |
Text
From: David Castelveter To: Paul Blanch
Subject:
From the Nuclear Regulatory Commission: Response to Your Inquiry Date: Monday, March 6, 2023 6:17:00 PM
Dear Mr. Blanch:
On behalf of Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff, I am following up with a response to your request that the Commission hold a public meeting to discuss concerns you have regarding the independent spent fuel storage installation at the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) and the NRCs efforts to update Management Directive (MD) 8.11 Review Process for 10 CFR 2.206 Petitions.
Because the agency has already thoroughly explained its position on the issues that you wish to discuss, there is no basis to hold such a meeting.
Over the last approximately three years, our records indicate that you have submitted multiple letters articulating your concerns with spent fuel storage at SONGS as well as various concerns regarding the NRCs 10 CFR 2.206 petition process. The NRC staff reviewed each of your concerns. As explained in the NRCs detailed responses, you have not provided sufficient factual basis for those concerns that would justify further NRC enforcement action related to SONGS. Additionally, we have communicated extensively with you about the 10 CFR 2.206 petition process and its purpose. The NRC has previously carefully considered and dispositioned the information you presented to the NRC regarding your 2.206 petitions, which included your opportunity to meet publicly with the PRB to explain the basis for your concerns and to ask questions about the 2.206 process, in accordance with the procedures in Management Directive 8.11.
In sum, the NRC has heard and considered your concerns regarding SONGS, fully consistent with the agencys processes. The NRC has likewise publicly explained its rationale for its continued updates to the 2.206 process. Absent new information, no further meeting with you on these issues is warranted. If you believe you have concerns regarding wrongdoing by specific NRC employees, I encourage you to report such concerns to the NRC's Office of the Inspector General.
Finally, while you are free to raise concerns about nuclear safety, consistent with the agencys responsibility to efficiently perform its work, you should not expect to receive an NRC response to any letter that fails to raise concerns or provide new information that the staff has not already considered and addressed. Thank you for your continued interest in our regulatory activities. I can assure you that our priority remains protection of public health and safety.
David A. Castelveter Director, Office of Public Affairs Nuclear Regulatory Commission