Without Oversight for Spent Fuel

1
129
Share this:

Editor,

What we learned in Carlsbad on Sept. 26 at the first NRC meeting on decommissioning San Onofre is that the NRC is giving SCE two years to come up with a plan for decommissioning SONGS that doesn’t need NRC approval or anyone’s approval. We can ask questions. SCE has 60 years to complete the decommissioning process.

Meanwhile every day the dangerous spent fuel, 1,631 tons of it, rests without “defense-in-depth” protection that was demanded for the fuel within the reactor domes. The spent fuel cooling pools are not guaranteed in the same way against earthquake, tsunami, firestorm, electrical outage or terrorists.

SCE wants to lower safety standards by using a new dry cask system that crowds 32 fuel assemblies into the same space that currently holds 24.

It is time to call in the Camp Pendleton Marines and get SCE out of the decommissioning picture. They care only about profit, not the safety of 8.4 million people who would be displaced if any accident like Fukushima should compromise the spent fuel pools sitting there.

Write your California elected officials at the federal, state and city level. We can’t let this dangerous high burn fuel stay at SONGS for the next 20 years waiting to see if we will stay lucky.

At the NRC send a copy of your letter to: [email protected]  He is gathering comments on the public’s confidence about waste storage for a proposed rule.

Marni Magda, Laguna Beach

 

 

Share this:
Firebrand Media LLC wants comments that advance the discussion, and we need your help to accomplish this mission. Debate and disagreement are welcomed on our platforms but do it with respect. We won't censor comments we disagree with. Viewpoints from across the political spectrum are welcome here. While everyone is entitled to their opinion, our community is not obliged to host all comments shared on its website or social media pages, including:
  • Hate speech that is racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic slurs, or calls for violence against a particular type of person.
  • Obscenity and excessive cursing.
  • Libelous language, whether or not the writer knows what they're saying is false.
We require users to provide their true full name, including first and last names, as a condition for comments. We reserve the right to change this policy based on future developments.

Scroll down to comment on this post.

1 COMMENT

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here