ML13137A382

LTR-13-0424 - Multiple Citizens and Organizations E-mails (30) Decision by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board for the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) License Amendment

ML13137A382
Person / Time
Site:	San Onofre
Issue date:	05/16/2013
From:	Barilotti D, Barilotti G, Beauchamp C, Brown S, Carlton P, Cherwink R, Gooch L, Halevy L, Hennessy D, Holtzman F, Iwane C, Lee D, Leichtling D, Lynch L, Masters M, Moldow B, Moore H, Charles Murray, Papaila D, Sanfilippo V, Sirkin K, Danni Smith, Sorgen P, Jeffery Steward, Steward R, Gregory Stone, Vanthillo G, Watland G, Young N, Ziermann C Public Commenter, San Diego County Green Party
To:	Macfarlane A NRC/Chairman
Shared Package
Assigned to NRR	List: ML13137A382
References
LTR-13-0424
Download: ML13137A382 (31)

Text

Joosten. Sandy From: Hugh Moore [hmpeace@cox.net]

Sent: Thursday, May 16, 20131:43 PM To: CHAIRMAN Resource; CMRSVINICKI Resource; CMRAPOSTOLAKIS Resource; CMRMAGWOOD Resource; CMROSTENDORFF Resource

Subject:

Please support an aQjudicated public hearing about the San Onofre Nuclear Power Plant.

Dear Commissioners,

The decision by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is exactly what the people of california have been calling for these many months. We want to express our gratitude for this decision and at the same time let you know what we expect to happen as this process moves forward.

1. No reversal of this decision by the five NRC Commissioners which would be seen as a breach of your oath of office and your motto "protecting people and the environment"

2. For this adjudicated public hearing under oath to happen here in Southern california.

3. Clarity and transparency in this process.

Hoping to work through this process with the NRC for a safer future for all Californians, especially our children.

Sincerely, Hugh Moore Treasurer, Green Party of San Diego County

'GREEN 166 N 1st Street, Unit 4 EI Cajon, CA 92021-6906 H: 619 793 5397 hugh@sdgreenparty.org http://www.sdgreenparty.org/

1

Joosten, Sandy From: Kate Sirkin [katesirkin@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, May 16, 20139:04 AM To: CHAIRMAN Resource

Subject:

Nuclear Safety

Dear Commissioners,

Yesterday's decision by Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is exactly what the people of California have been calling for these many months. We want to express our gratitude for this decision, and at the same time, let you know what we expect to happen as this process moves forward.

1. No reversal of this decision by the five NRC Commissioners. That would be seen as a breach of your oath of office and your motto "protecting people and the environment"

2. For this adjudicated public hearing under oath to happen here in Southern California.

3. Clarity and transparency in this process.

Hoping to work through this process with the NRC for a safer future for all Californians, especially our children.

Sincerely, Kate Sirkin 1

Joosten. Sandy From: Soul Magic [soulmagicI2@gmail.com]

Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 5:02 PM To: CHAIRMAN Resource; CMRAPOSTOLAKIS Resource; CMRMAGWOOD Resource; CMROSTENDORFF Resource; CMRSVINICKf Resource Cc: bandrowskLmike@epa.gov; snyder.ed@epa.gov; rosenblum.shelly@epa.gov; Benney, Brian; Hipschman, Thomas; Lantz, Ryan; Andersen, James; Borchardt, Bill; Hall, Randy; ruscof@gao.gov; decair.sara@epa.gov

Subject:

San Onofre I ask that you require a thorough license amendment process with public meetings and hearings in Southern California on San Onofre safety issues as ruled by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board.

Susan Brown TO Chairman@,nrc.gov, CMRAPOSTOLAKIS@nrc.gov, CMRMAGWOOD@nrc.gov, CMROSTENDORFF@nrc.gov, CMRSVINICKI@nrc.gov CC bandrowski.mike@epa.gov, snyder.ed@epa.gov, rosenblum.shelly@,epa.gov, Brian.Benney@nrc.gov, Thomas.Hipschman@nrc.gov, Ryan.Lantz@NRC.gov, james.andersen@nrc.gov, BilLBorchardt@nrc.gov, randy.hall@nrc.gov, ruscof@gao.gov, decair.sara@epa.gov http://gov.ca.gov/m contact.php 1

j Joosten, Sandy From: Nancy Young [hopesnana2@gmail.com]

Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 4:43 PM To: CHAIRMAN Resource; CMRSVINICKI Resource; CMRAPOSTOLAKIS Resource; CMRMAGWOOD Resource; CMROSTENDORFF Resource

Subject:

Shut down San Onofre Nuclear Power Plant

Dear Commissioners,

Yesterday's decision by Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is exactly what the people ofCalif.ornia have been calling for these many months. We want to express our gratitude for this decision, and at the same time, let you know what we expect to happen as this process moves torward.

I. No reversal of this decision by the tlve NRC Commissioners. That would be seen as a breach ofyour oath of office and your motto "protecting people and the environment"

2. For this adjudicated public hearing under oath to happen here in Southern California.

3. Clarity and transparency in this process.

Hoping to work through this process with the NRC for a safer future for all Californians, especially our children.

Nancy Young 827-0 Via Alhambra Laguna Woods, CA 92637 1

Joosten, Sandy I

From: Phoebe Anne Thomas Sorgen [phoebeso@earthlink.net]

Sent: Wednesday, May 15,20133:57 PM

Subject:

For Californians alive today & for future generations whose DNA would be adversely impacted by on-going nuclear folly Importance: High

Dear Commissioners,

Monday's decision by Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is precisely what the people of California have been calling for these many months. Thanks for this wise decision.

Moving forward, we urge:

1. No reversal of this decision by the five NRC Commissioners, which would be breach of your oath of office and your motto "protecting people and the environment"

2. For this adjudicated public hearing under oath to happen in Southern California.

3. Clarity and transparency (including videotaping and televising) in this process.

We are hoping to work through this process with the NRC for a safer future for all Californians alive today and for future generations whose DNA would be adversely impacted by on going nuclear folly.

Sincerely, Commissioner Phoebe Sorgen of the BFUU Social Justice Committee and Fukushima Response Bay Area 1

Joosten, Sandy From: Rob [r_cherwink@comcast.net]

Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 20137:53 PM To: CHAIRMAN Resource; CMRSVINICKI Resource; CMRAPOSTOLAKIS Resource; CMRMAGWOOD Resource; CIVIROSTENDORFF Resource

Subject:

ASL's San Onofre Rulin

Dear Commissioners,

Yesterday's decision by Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is exactly what the people of California have been calling for these many months. We want to express our gratitude for this decision, and at the same time, let you know what we expect to happen as this process moves forward.

1. No reversal of this decision by the five NRC Commissioners. That would be seen as a breach of your oath of office and your motto ((protecting people and the environment"

2. For this adjudicated public hearing under oath to happen here in Southern California.

3. Clarity and transparency in this process.

Hoping to work through this process with the NRC for a safer future for all Californians, especially our children.

Sincerely, Robert Cherwink Sonoma, CA 1

/

Joosten, Sandy From: Charles Michael Murray [charles@endangeredplanet.net]

Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 11 :57 AM To: CHAIRMAN Resource

Subject:

SAN ONFORE - Decommission Now.

Dear Commissioners,

Yesterday's decision by Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is exactly what the people of California have been calling for these many months. We want to express our gratitude for this decision, and at the same time, let you know what we expect to happen as this process moves forward.

1. No reversal ofthis decision by the five NRC Commissioners. That would be seen as a breach of your oath of office and your motto "protecting people and the environment"

2. For this adjudicated public hearing under oath to happen here in Southern California.

3. Clarity and transparency in this process.

Hoping to work through this process with the NRC for a safer future for all Californians, especially our children.

Sincerely, Charles Michael Murray CMM Studio

.design.internet.photography cmmstudio.com Endangered Planet "connecting the arts with the environment" EndangeredPlanet.net Laguna Beach CA 92651 949.306.9640 1

Joosten, Sandy From: Libbe HaLevy [breezersmom@gmail.com]

Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 12:30 PM To: CHAIRMAN Resource; CMRSVINICKI Resource; CMRAPOSTOLAKIS Resource; CMRMAGWOOD Resource; CMROSTENDORFF Resource

Subject:

Support the ASLB ruling on San Onofre

Dear Commissioners,

Yesterday's decision by Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is exactly what the people of California have been calling for these many months. We want to express our gratitude for this decision, and at the same time, let you know what we expect to happen as this process moves forward.

1. No reversal of this decision by the five NRC Commissioners. That would be seen as a breach of your oath of office and your motto "protecting people and the environment"

2. For this adjudicated public hearing under oath to happen here in Southern California.

3. Clarity and transparency in this process.

Hoping to work through this process with the NRC for a safer future for all Californians, especially our children.

Sincerely, Libbe HaLevy Producer/Host Nuclear Hotseat Podcast www.NuclearHotseat.comiblog 1

j Joosten, Sandy From: Diane Smith [celebratepaso@gmail.comj Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 20132:09 PM To: CHAIRMAN Resource

Subject:

Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Decision

Dear Commissioners,

Yesterday's decision by Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is exactly what the people of California have been calling for these many months. We want to express our gratitude for this decision, and at the same time, let you know what we expect to happen as this process moves forward.

1. No reversal of this decision by the five NRC Commissioners. That would be seen as a breach of your oath of office and your motto "protecting people and the environment"

2. For this adjudicated public hearing under oath to happen here in Southern California.

3. Clarity and transparency in this process.

Hoping to work through this process with the NRC for a safer future for all Californians, especially our children.

Sincerely, Diane Smith 402 Montebello Oaks Drive Paso Robles, CA 93446 1

Joosten, Sandy From: Joe Holtzman [joeholtzman@cox.net]

Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 20134:50 PM To: CHAIRMAN Resource

Subject:

San Onofre situation Chairman:

I live in Mission Viejo, California approximately 17 miles from Southern California Edison's defective nuclear plant. A catastrophic failure would undoubtably wipe out the value of my home, my single largest asset. Most likely casualty counts would be astronomical-- well beyond everyone's imagination. There are NO workable evacuation routs.

Yesterday's decision by Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is exactly what the people of Mission Viejo, California have been calling for these many months. 1/ we want to express our gratitude for this decision, and at the same time, let you know what we expect to happen as this process moves forward.

1. No reversal ofthis decision by the five NRC Commissioners. That would be seen as a breach of your oath of office and your motto "protecting people and the environment"

2. For this adjudicated public hearing under oath to happen here in Southern California.

3. Clarity and transparency in this process.

Southrn California Edison has a miserable record of non compliance, obviscation of facts, and data.

NRC audits validate this fact/statement.

I make my self available to the NRC to work through this process, and with the NRC for a safer future for all Californians, especially our children.

Regards, F. K. (Joe) Holtzman 21651 Balerma Mission Viejo, California 92692 1

Joosten, Sandy From: suwish [suwish37@yahoo.comj Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 20132:47 PM To: CHAIRMAN Resource; CMRSVINICKI Resource; CMRAPOSTOLAKIS Resource; CMRMAGWOOD Resource; CMROSTENDORFF Resource

Subject:

San Onofre

Dear Commissioners,

Yesterday's decision by Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is exactly what the people of California have been calling for these many months. We want to express our gratitude for this decision, and at the same time, let you know what we expect to happen as this process moves forward.

1. No reversal of this decision by the five NRC Commissioners. That would be seen as a breach of your oath of office and your motto "protecting people and the environment"

2. For this adjudicated public hearing under oath to happen here in Southern California.

3. Clarity and transparency in this process.

Hoping to work through this process with the NRC for a safer future for all Californians, especially our children.

Sincerely, Claudia Ziermann 1

Joosten, Sandy From: Valerie Sanfilippo [vsanfi@gmail.com]

Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 3: 13 PM To: CHAIRMAN Resource; CMRSVINICKI Resource; CMRAPOSTOLAKIS Resource; CMRMAGWOOD Resource; CMROSTENDORFF Resource

Subject:

Support Decision to Close San Onofre

Dear Commissioners,

Yesterday's decision by Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is exactly what the people of California have been calling for these many months.

We want to express our gratitude for this decision, and at the same time, let you know what we expect to happen as this process moves forward.

1. No reversal of this decision by the five NRC Commissioners. That would be seen as a breach of your oath of office and your motto "protecting people and the environment"

2. For this adjudicated public hearing under oath to happen here in Southern California.

3. Clarity and transparency in this process.

Hoping to work through this process with the NRC for a safer future for all Californians, especially our children.

Sincerely, Regards, Val Sanfilippo, San Diego, CA Service Employees, Sierra Club 1

Joosten, Sandy From: Laurie Gooch [Iauriegooch@hotmail,com]

Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 3: 12 PM To: CHAIRMAN Resource

Subject:

San Onofre

Dear Chairman,

Yesterday's decision by Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is exactly what the people of California have been calling for these many months. We want to express our gratitude for this decision, and at the same time, let you know what we expect to happen as this process moves forward.

1. No reversal of this decision by the five NRC Commissioners. That would be seen as a breach of your oath of office and your motto "protecting people and the environment"

2. For this adjudicated public hearing under oath to happen here in Southern california.

3. Clarity and transparency in this process.

Hoping to work through this process with the NRC for a safer future for all Californians, especially our children.

Sincerely, Laurie Gooch 1

J Joosten, Sandy From: Dawn E Papaila [dawn.papaila@gmail.com]

Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 3:10 PM To: CHAIRMAN Resource

Subject:

Yesterday's Decision by Atomic Safety and Licensing Board

Dear Chairman,

Yesterday's decision by Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is exactly what the people of california have been calling for these many months. I want to express my gratitude for this deCision, and at the same time, let you know what I expect to happen as this process moves forward:

1. No reversal of this decision by the five NRC Commissioners. That would be seen as a breach of your oath of office and your motto "protecting people and the environment"

2. The adjudicated public hearing under oath will be located here in Southern California.

3. Clarity and transparency in this process.

Hoping to work through this process with the NRC for a safer future for all californians.

Sincerely, Dawn Papaila, CPT 858-414-5566 (mobile) 1

I Joosten, Sandy From: cathy iwane [cathyiwane@yahoo.com]

Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 3:01 PM To: CHAIRMAN Resource; CMRSVINICKI Resource; CMRAPOSTOLAKIS Resource; CMRMAGWOOD Resource; CMROSTENDORFF Resource

Subject:

No to restart without a public, adjudicatory hearing!!!!!!!

Dear Commissioners,

Yesterday's decision by Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is exactly what the people of California have been calling for these many months. We want to express our gratitude for this dedsion, and at the same time, let you know what we expect to happen as this process moves forward. ! write you because after evacuating Japan, I now live 35 miles downwind of SONGS. You are endowed with the responsibility of protecting the people and yet you side with the nuclear industry time and time again!

1. No reversal of this decision by the five NRC Commissioners. That would be seen as a breach of your oath of offICe and your motto "protecting people and the environment" 2, For this adjudicated public hearing under oath to happen here in Southern California.

3. Clarity and transparency in this process.

Hoping to work through this process with the NRC for a safer future for all Californians, especially our children.

Sincerely, Cathy Iwane (US citizen and evacuee with my 2 daughters from Japan in April, 2012 after working and living there for 25 years.)

1

/

Joosten, Sandy From: Diane Hennessy [diane@cslcv.org]

Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 12:28 PM To: CHAIRMAN Resource; CMRSVINICKI Resource; CMRAPOSTOLAKIS Resource; CMRMAGWOOD Resource; CMROSTENDORFF Resource

Subject:

San Onofre

Dear Commissioners,

Yesterday's decision by Atomic Safety and Ucensing Board is exactly what the people of California have been calling for these many months. We want to express our gratitude for this decision, and at the same time, let you know what we expect to happen as this process moves forward:

1. No reversal of this decision by the five NRC Commissioners. That would be seen as a breach of your oath of office and your motto "protecting people and the environment"

2. For this adjudicated publiC hearing under oath to happen here in Southern California.

3. Clarity and transparency in this process.

Hoping to work through this process with the NRC for a safer future for all Californians, especially our children.

Sincerely, Diane Hennessy San Clemente, CA 1

j Joosten, Sandy From: Gene Stone [egstone700@gmail.com]

Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 11 :37 AM To: CHAIRMAN Resource

Subject:

San Onofre

Dear Chairman,

yesterday's decision by Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is exactly what the people of California have been calling for these many months. We want to express our gratitude for this dedsion, and at the same time, let you know what we expect to happen as this process moves forward.

1. No reversal of this decision by the five NRC Commissioners. That would be seen as a breach of your oath of office and your motto "protecting people and the environment"

2. For this adjudicated publiC hearing under oath to happen here in Southern California.

3. Clarity and transparency in this process.

Hoping to work through this process with the NRC for a safer future for all Californians, especially our children.

Sincerely, Gene Stone Residents Organized For a Safe Environment (ROSE) 949-233-7724, On twitter @gene_stone http://residentsorganizedforasafeenvironment.wordpress.coml www.sanonofre.com "The earth and myself are of one mind. It ,..chief Seattle, Nez Perce "It does not require many words to speak the truth." Sitting Bull 1

j Joosten, Sandy From: Capt.D [captddd@gmail.com]

Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 3:38 PM To: CHAIRMAN Resource; CMRSVINICKI Resource; CMRAPOSTOLAKIS Resource; CMRMAGWOOD Resource; CMROSTENDORFF Resource

Subject:

NO Restarts at San Onofre before Open Hearings (in CA.) about their flawed RSG Dear Commissioners.

Yesterday's decision by Atomic Safcty and Licensing Board is exactly whatthc people of California have been calling for over a year. We support this decision, and at the same time, urge you to fasttrack this proccss.

PLEASE:

I. No reversal of this decision by the five NRC Commissioners. That would be seen as a breach of your oath of office and your motto "protecting people and the environment" .

2. Conduct this adjudicated public hearing under oath, here in Southern Califomia.

3. Insure clarity and transparency in this process along with webcasting.

I'm sure you will agree, thc USA cannot afford a Trillion Dollar Eco-Disaster like Fukushima!

Sincerely, Don Leichtling

- The DAB Safety Team 1

J Joosten, Sandy From: Jennifer Steward [heartorg@cox.net]

Sent: Wednesday. May 15.20135:51 PM To: CHAIRMAN Resource

Subject:

San Onofre Nuclear Power Plant

Dear Commissioners,

Yesterday's decision by Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is exactly what the people of California have been calling for these many months. We want to express our gratitude for this decision, and at the same time, let you know what we expect to happen as this process moves forward.

1. No reversal of this decision by the five NRC Commissioners. That would be seen as a breach of your oath of office and your motto "protecting people and the environment"

2. For this adjudicated public hearing under oath to happen here in Southern California.

3. Clarity and transparency in this process.

Hoping to work through this process with the NRC for a safer future for all Californians, especially our children.

Sincerely, Jennifer Steward 1

Joosten, Sandy I

From: Ron Steward [resteward@cox.net]

Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 6: 11 PM To: CHAIRMAN Resource

Subject:

San Onofre Nuclear Power Plant

Dear Commissioners,

Yesterday's decision by Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is exactly what the people of California have been calling for these many months. We want to express our gratitude for this decision, and at the same time, let you know what we expect to happen as this process moves forward.

1. No reversal of this decision by the five NRC Commissioners. That would be seen as a breach of your oath of office and your motto "protecting people and the environment"

2. For this adjudicated public hearing under oath to happen here in Southern California.

3. Clarity and transparency in this process.

Hoping to work through this process with the NRC for a safer future for all Californians, especially our children.

Sincerely, Ron Steward 1

j Joosten, Sandy From: Gene & Dee Barilotti [barilotti@cox.net]

Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 6:27 PM To: William Ostendorff; CMRMAGWOOD Resource; CMRSVINICKI Resource; CMRAPOSTOLAKIS Resource; CHAIRMAN Resource Cc: Cammie Ingram; Bob Hamilton; Craig Barilotti; David Barilotti; Dee Barilotti; Dianne Barilotti; Emilia Williamson; Jessica Elwise; Jim Foster; Rick Barilotti; Tiffini Scurry; Tyler Hamilton; Vicki Hamiltton; Wendy Randal; wjfosterj; Gene Barilotti

Subject:

San Onofre Immediate Action Alert

Dear Commissioners,

yesterday's decision by Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is exactly what the people of California have been calling for these many months. We want to express our gratitude for this decision, and at the same time, let you know what we expect to happen as this process moves forward.

1. No reversal of this decision by the five NRC Commissioners. That would be seen as a breach of your oath of office and your motto "protecting people and the environment"

2. For this adjudicated public hearing under oath to happen here in Southern California.

3. Clarity and transparency in this process.

Hoping to work through this process with the NRC for a safer future for all Californians, especially our children.

Sincerely, Dee and Gene Barilotti Oceanside, Ca 92057 1-760-967-2157 1

Joosten, Sandy From: Dhanaleen Lee [dhanaleen@yahoo.com]

Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 20136:33 PM To: CHAIRMAN Resource

Subject:

Public hearing Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Dear Commissioners~

Yesterday's decision by Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is exactly what the people of California have been calling for these many months. We want to express our gratitude for this decision~ and at the same time, let you know what we expect to happen as this process moves forward.

1. No reversal of this decision by the five NRC Commissioners. That would be seen as a breach of your oath of office and your motto "protecting people and the environment"

2. For this adjudicated public hearing under oath to happen here in Southern California.

3. Clarity and transparency in this process.

Hoping to work through *this process with the NRC for a safer future for all Californians, especially our children.

Sincerely, Sent from my iPad 1

Joosten, Sandy From: Paul Carlton [pfcsage@cox.net]

Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 7:48 PM To: CHAIRMAN Resource; CMRSVICKI@NRC.gov; CMRMAGWOOD Resource; CMROSTENDORFF Resource

Subject:

SONGS Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged

Dear Commissioners,

Yesterday's decision by the ASLB is what I and most citizens in San Clemente wanted. I want to express my gratitude for this decision and here is what I expect you to do as the process moves forward: No reversal on this decision by you Commissioners as I want you to protect we citizens of San Clemente and the surrounding areas. I want an adjudicated public hearing to happen in San Clemente or nearby. And please be clear and open to the public and the media as you go forward in this process. Let us not have another Fukishima herel Paul Carlton San Clemente 1

Joosten, Sandy From: Maureen Masters [momasters@cox.net]

Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 10:52 PM To: CHAIRMAN Resource Cc: CMRAPOSTOLAKIS Resource; CIVIRSVINICKI Resource; CMRMAGWOOD Resource; CMROSTENDORFF Resource

Subject:

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board's decision is right on!

Dear Commissioners,

Yesterday's decision by Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is exactly what the people of california have been calling for these many months. We want to express our gratitude for this decision, and at the same timet let you know what we expect to happen as this process moves forward.

1. No reversal of this decision by the five NRC Commissioners. That would be seen as a breach of your oath of office and your motto "protecting people and the environment"

2. For this adjudicated public hearing under oath to happen here in Southern California.

3. Clarity and transparency in this process.

Hoping to work through this process with the NRC for a safer future for all Californians, especially our children.

Sincerely, Maureen Masters Ron Plomell 1

Joosten Sandy J From: Craig J Beauchamp [Iegallycraig@gmail.com]

Sent: Wednesday. May 15. 2013 10:54 PM To: CHAIRMAN Resource; CMRSVINICKI Resource; CMRMAGWOOD Resource; CMROSTENDORFF Resource; CMRAPOSTOLALlS@nrc.gov

Subject:

Don't Restart San Onofre without full licensing heaings Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged

Dear Mr. Chairman and NRC Commissioners:

I live about 35 miles from San Onofre but have many friends who live within the 12 mile zone of danger.

These generators were flawed and defective as evidenced by the extreme wear and small radiation leak occurring so soon after installation. Running the generators at even 70% capacity as a test run puts the lives of 7.8 million people at risk. Are you really willing to take that risk?

The defective generator tubing design even run at reduced capacity is outside of the original licensing agreement parameters. I believe there should have been licensing hearings before the new replacement generators were ever designed, built and installed, because obviously they were substantially different enough to have failed in less than a year after installation. The tubing design was different.

In addition to the risk, there is a cost factor to consider for the ratepayer. I understand that this whole fiasco has already cost over $550M over and above the original $680M to design, build and install these generators.

Good heavens, man, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize there is a problem that needs more than a 5 month test run to see if it "might work". Not good enough when you are dealing with potential radiation leaks, no matter how small. Zero tolerance should be the standard from the NRC.

Therefore, I call upon you as Chairman and the other members of the NRC to uphold the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board panel's decision and maintain the shut down until SCE and SDGE have gone through the entire licensing process on San Onofre before any decision can be made to restart the generators.

Most respectfully, Craig J. Beauchamp, Esq.*

Attorney at Law PO Box 25857 Santa Ana, CA 92799 (949) 689-9709 (949) 269-6421 fax Legallycraig@gmaiLcom

• Licensed in CA and lL, 1

Joosten, Sandy From: Berton Moldow [bmoldow@gmail.com1 Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 20136:55 PM To: CHAIRMAN Resource; CMRSVINICKI Resource; CMRAPOSTOLAKIS Resource; CMRMAGWOOD Resource; CMROSTENDORFF Resource

Subject:

Atomic Safety and licensing Board ruling on SeE proposal.

Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged I commend your decision to have the technical experts on the Atomic Safety Board determine if Southern California Edison be allowed to proceed with a dangerous experiment that could impact the lives of 7-1/2 million residents of Southern California.

Allowing a badly damaged plant to operate, even at 70% without knowing the true extent of the damage or the true cause of the origins of the failures experienced would have gone against your mission to assure the safety of the people of Southern California.

As Chernobyl, Fukushima and Three Mile Island have shown, nuclear power is not to be trifled with and the consequences of a failure could be disastrous when it comes to SONGS.

Prudence demanded that an open Judiciary hearing be held to fully ascertain the true cause of the Steam Generator failures and determine the safety of operation of this facility as it now exists.

I request that serious consideration be given to holding the hearings at a location which will make it possible for

, the largest number of people, who have a vested interest in the outcome, to be in attendance.

Sincerely Berton Moldow 3503A Bahia Blanca W Laguna Woods, CA 92637 949-587-9776 1

Joosten, Sandy

/

From: Beverly Findlay-Kaneko [blfkaneko@yahoo.com]

Sent: Wednesday, May 15,20135:12 PM To: CHAIRMAN Resource; CMRSVINICKI Resource; CMRAPOSTOLAKIS Resource; CMRMAGWOOD Resource; CMROSTENDORFF Resource

Subject:

Docket ID NRC20130070

Dear Nudear Regulatory Commission,

The comments included below are regarding Docket ID NRC20130070.

I urge the NRC to reject Edison's unacceptable license amendment and no significant hazard consideration requests. The NRC must ensure that Edison undergoes the appropriate thorough license amendment process for the multiple areas of noncompliance with their operating license, that aU relevant investigations are completed, and that public hearings on these requests are held before any decision on a licenses amendment or restart proposal is made.

I applaud the ASLB ruling that a fun, transparent adjudicated hearing is necessary, and that restarting reactor #2 at 70% power is tantamount to an experiment. I strongly urge you to respect that ruling and fulfill your duties as representatives of the public, and ensure that the process is transparent and accessible to the people it is supposed to protect, and not beholden to SCE's bottom line. A ruling from the ASLB--a judicial panel--should be taken very seriously for the legal ramifications possible if a forced and hasty decision to restart the broken reactor were to cause further damage to our environment and economy in Southern California.

In addition, please make arrangements for the hearings to be held in Southern California, so that concerned citizens can attend. Also, strive for the highest level of transparency in the process. The credibility of the NRC as an institution that is supposed to "protect people and the environment" depends on just and transparent proceedings.

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 partidpation 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 to an end run by Southern Califomia 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.

We were 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 at 70 percent power posed no significant safety risk.

The safety of Southern Califomia cannot be reduced to merely wordsmithing and removing Edison's requests from the context in which they are requested -- which is to restart a severely damaged reactor.

Sincerely, Beverly Findlay-Kaneko Huntington Beach 1

/

Joosten, Sandy From: Grace van Thillo [gracea@earthlink.net]

Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 11 :23 AM To: CHAIRMAN Resource; CMRSVINICKI Resource; CMRAPOSTOLAKIS Resource; CMRMAGWOOD Resource; CMROSTENDORFF Resource Cc: Hall, Randy; Paige, Jason

Subject:

ASLB Order for San Onofre May 15,2013 Honorable Nuclear Regulatory Chairperson and Commissioners, For the SAFETY of 8.4 + million southern Californians and the California ECONOMY, we are grateful for the ASLB's determination for a public hearing re: San Onofre nuclear plant's known replacement steam generator DESIGN FLAWS and FABRICATION CHANGES before any restart consideration.

Mitsubishi (MHI) disclosures about the defective RSGs that Congressional, GAO and state entities are scrutinizing; plus, the global nuclear industry's admission during your NRC meetings of San Onofre RSG's unprecedented, never-before-seen tube wear and integrity issues, ALL reveal the sane and safe course which the Nuclear Regulatory Commission MUST TAKE. This becomes evermore apparent as SCE testimony before the CPUC yesterday revealed more questions re: the licensee's "integrity testing"!

http://www.californiaadmin.comlcpuc.shtml Please, follow the ASLB' s determination. NRC MUST REJECT Edison's EXPERIMENTAL restart plans of the defective San Onofre Unit 2 nuclear reactor.

DO NOT approve a REDUCTION in safety standards!! Your very investigations are continuing to uncover on-going plant issues, added to Unit 3's continued shut-down mode that all heighten stress to Edison International's management and SCE plant operations. All of this in tum further compromises San Onofre nuclear plant's SAFETY.

All of southern California - we residents, business, the environment; and the United States Marine Corps Camp Pendleton Base Marines, their families and personnel CAN NOT be experimented with.

Thank you and more concerned than ever!

Grace van Thillo San Clemente Resident 1

J Joosten, Sandy From: Laura Lynch [artistlauralynch@yahoo.com]

Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 20134:29 PM To: CHAIRMAN Resource

Subject:

Adjudicated Public Hearing on San Onofre Restart May 15, 2013 The Honorable Allison Macfarlane, Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.

Dear Chairman Macfarlane:

I am writing to you today to express my deep concern and hope that the NRC Commissioners will follow in step with The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board's decision made on Monday calling for detailed public hearings on Southern California Edison's restart proposal of San Onofre.

Senator Boxer has also advised that the ASLB's decision established "a legal framework for a full public hearing before any final decision on the restart of the San Onofre nuclear power plant is made."

The public and Southern California residents deserve nothing less. I have family and friends who live within 50 miles of San Onofre, and it is with great concern that we request you act in accordance by honoring your oath of "protecting people and the environment" and proceed with an adjudicated public hearing under oath to happen here in Southern California.

Thank you for your immediate attention to this crucial matter before us.

Sincerely, Laura Lynch artistlauralynch@yahoo.com 908 W. Islay Santa Barbara, California 93101 1

Joosten, Sandy From: George Watland [george.watland@sierraclub.org]

Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 8:14 PM To: Bladey, Cindy Cc: CHAIRMAN Resource; CMRAPOSTOLAKIS Resource; CMRSVINICKI Resource; CMROSTENDORFF Resource; CMRMAGWOOD Resource; US Senator Barbara Boxer; Glenn Pascali

Subject:

Docket 10 NRC20130070, Comments to the NRC: Do Not Restart San Onofre Unit 2 May 15,2013 Cindy Bladey, Chief Rules, Announcements and Directives Branch U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 Re: Docket ID NRC20130070

Dear Ms. Bladey:

Through its San Onofre Task Force, the Sierra Club is on record in extensive communications to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission urging that any restart ofthe plant should require a license amendment process before a judge, including public hearings, sworn testimony from expert witnesses, and rules of evidence. Some 3,500 citizens in the San Onofre region have written their own letters to the Commission on this point as a result of the Sierra Club's position on the issue.

We have been concerned about the degree of risk at a plant that has had a disturbing record of operational safety violations and unprecedented technology failures. We have also been concerned that fast-track approval of restart would imperil if not undermine the stated intent of Chair Lisa Macfarlane and other NRC officers to assure the public a high and consistent level of transparency in decision-making.

Both these concerns have been significantly increased as a result of a decision this Monday, May 13, by the U.S. Atomic Safety Licensing Board granting a petition by Friends of the Earth and ruling that the plant cannot restart operations before the NRC holds a formal license amendment proceeding with full public participation. While the NRC has legal authority to spurn an ASLB ruling, the consequences of doing so in this case would be devastating both to public concerns regarding safety and to the NRC's process credibility.

1

The Sierra Club, through its San Onofre Task Force, wishes to associate itself with, and to express full support and agreement with, the submission by Friends of the Earth of its petition opposing both Southern California Edison's request for restart without a public hearing process and the initial determination by NRC staff of no significant hazard in restart.

The granting of this petition by the ASLB adds enormously to its weight and we urge you to respond with due consideration in order to forestall the potential for highly negative environmental and public policy consequences.

Thank you for consideration of our views.

Glenn Pascall Chair, San Onofre Task Force Sierra Club Angeles Chapter 3435 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 660 Los Angeles, CA 90010 Cc: NRC Commissioners u.s. Senator Barbara Boxer u.S. Representative Ed Markey 2