San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station
  • San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station
  • Image from WIkipedia/D Ramey Logan
  • Story alerts
  • Letter to Editor
  • Pin it

The California Coastal Commission meets tomorrow in Long Beach to consider a matter critical to North County San Diegans: will 3.6 million pounds of nuclear waste repose within 100 feet of the ocean and only inches over the water table at San Onofre, site of the nuclear facility that has been shuttered?

Ray Lutz of San Diego's Citizens Oversight says that at the rate shorelines are eroding, the waste could be well out in the ocean in 100 years. If the commission decides to permit Southern California Edison to go ahead with its storage plan, the decision will be appealed, says Lutz.

Local attorneys Mike Aguirre and Maria Severson will argue tomorrow that the commission cannot make a decision now because both the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) and Edison are under criminal investigation for their secret role, and possible perjury, that led to the utility commission's decision to foist $3.3 billion of decommissioning expenses on ratepayers instead of on shareholders.

The staff of the coastal commission has recommended approval of Edison's proposal. Two units at San Onofre were shut down in 2012, "and some 2668 fuel assemblies remain in wet storage pools in the Units 2 and 3 fuel handling buildings," says the staff report. "This fuel is highly radioactive and requires secure storage for thousands of years to prevent harm to humans and the environment."

Continues the report, "At present, there are no feasible off-site alternatives to the proposed project. No permanent fuel repository or other interim storage facility exists." The staff believes that Edison's proposal for storage "would be sufficient to assure stability and structural integrity against geologic hazards, including seismic ground shaking, slope failure, tsunamis and flooding, and coastal erosion, without requiring shoreline protection." The staff recommends that the Edison proposal be authorized for 20 years.

In response to that statement, Aguirre and Severson provided the commission with the final report on Japan's Fukushima nuclear plant disaster. In that case, official and cultural over-confidence was one of the reasons for the nation's lack of preparedness for the calamity.

Although other governmental bodies, such as the federal Energy Department and Nuclear Regulatory Commission, are involved in nuclear waste matters, Lutz thinks the coastal commission "is the only clear-cut way to stop this in its tracks."

Early this morning (October 5), Aguirre composed a letter to the Coastal Commission, noting that "Southern Calfornia Edison has a track record of dishonest dealings with federal and state regulatory agencies." Aguirre particularly wants details on $5 million that Edison proposes to give the coastal commission, allegedly for mitigation and monitoring purposes.

"[Edison] consciously chose not to develop a site to remove the waste during the last 30 years," says the letter.

Lutz says it would be possible to move the waste to a spot in the desert if train tracks could be reinforced and train cars remodeled to take the weight of the casks holding the waste.

  • Story alerts
  • Letter to Editor
  • Pin it

Comments

jnojr Oct. 5, 2015 @ 3:28 p.m.

Well, if there are "no feasible off-site alternatives to the proposed project. No permanent fuel repository or other interim storage facility exists." that's because of leftists and NIMBYs. The spent fuel exists. There's no way to go back in time an uninvent nuclear power. We need to get Yucca Mountain operational. And we need real research into alternative energy, including various nuclear technologies like pebble-bed reactors. Today, all we get is handouts to political favorites like Solyndra who take the money and run. The private sector can solve this problem, but not when it's taxed and regulated to far beyond death. Note that GOVERNMENT is an enormous part of the problems surrounding the demise of SONGS.

1

Don Bauder Oct. 5, 2015 @ 5:10 p.m.

jnojr: Of course. Given that the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), a government agency, was involved in getting Edison off the hook on San Onofre's failure, the government was involved. Crookedly involved. However, the equipment failure was purely a failure of the private sector-- equipment that was to last 40 years lasted one year.

The CPUC held secret meetings with Edison so that the costs could be shifted to ratepayers and not to shareholders. The CPUC and Edison together rigged the system so that the government-required report on what went wrong was never done. And on and on.

But keep in mind that Edison is in the private sector. So in its totality, the rape of the ratepayer was a joint action of the government, CPUC, and the private sector, Edison. To believe that the market system could have solved this problem is to believe in the tooth fairy. Best, Don Bauder

1

AlexClarke Oct. 6, 2015 @ 5:38 a.m.

What! There us no Tooth Fairy? No Don say it ain't so.

0

Don Bauder Oct. 6, 2015 @ 6:40 a.m.

AlexClarke: Don't take my word for it. Put your false teeth under your pillow at night and see if there isn't an envelope full of cash there in the morning. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Oct. 6, 2015 @ 8:25 p.m.

Murphyjunk: You mean bitcoins? See entry above. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Oct. 9, 2015 @ 7:09 a.m.

Murphyjunk: Now who's denigrating a sacred being, the tooth fairy? You are, not me. Best, Don Bauder

0

laplayaheritage Oct. 5, 2015 @ 4:07 p.m.

Representative Darrell Issa is Co-Sponsored the September 29, 2015 H.R. 3643 Interim Consolidated Storage Act at the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

"To amend the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 to authorize the Secretary of Energy to enter into contracts for the storage of certain high-level radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel, take title to certain high-level radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel, and make certain expenditures from the Nuclear Waste Fund."

http://riponadvance.com/stories/510640948-interim-consolidated-storage-act-will-address-nuclear-waste-concerns

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/3643/text

http://issa.house.gov/press-releases/2015/09/issa-sponsors-bill-to-create-interim-storage-site-for-nuclear-waste/

0

Don Bauder Oct. 5, 2015 @ 5:19 p.m.

laplayaheritage: The Yucca Mountain imbroglio is one for the books -- and one that isn't going away soon. Best, Don Bauder

0

Twister Oct. 5, 2015 @ 7:41 p.m.

Odd that anyone believes or ever believed that nuclear waste could be safely stored anywhere. Homo sap. is like any other mass murderer--after he gets rid of all the other species, he will turn the gun on himself.

Tw

0

Don Bauder Oct. 5, 2015 @ 9:12 p.m.

Twister: For decades, people have predicted mass nuclear destruction. It hasn't come. But it still could: nuclear proliferation is still a problem. Best, Don Bauder

1

Twister Oct. 6, 2015 @ 10:09 a.m.

I'm predicting mounting piles of nuclear waste amounting to a mountain that will slowly render more and more of the earth less and habitable until it's all gone.

Ye who would seek wisdom would do well to dwell in humor: A farmer who won the lottery was asked what he would do with all that money. "I reckon I'll jest keep farmin' 'till it's all gone!"

1

Don Bauder Oct. 6, 2015 @ 11:21 a.m.

Twister: That's the economic situation of independent farmers these days. They keep losing money but keep farming. But your comment reminds me of a joke.

Fella calls his wife: "I just won the lottery! Pack your bags!" Wife: "Oh goodie! Should I pack winter or summer clothes?" Fella: "It doesn't matter. I just want you out of the house." Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Oct. 6, 2015 @ 6:42 a.m.

John Boyersmith: I confess I don't get it. Best, Don Bauder

0

Twister Oct. 9, 2015 @ 4:55 p.m.

Apparently JB ain't with us anymore. Ain't it odd (or am I odd?) that folks who start something never finish it?

0

CaptD Oct. 6, 2015 @ 12:08 p.m.

Don — If I could have attended, here is what I would have said:

Please don’t allow SCE to store Nuclear Waste On-Site. If nothing else SCE needs to do a EIR Type Study (including public comments) to see if moving it as far as possible to the East of Hwy 5 (and the railroad tracks) is possible and if so, why has it not been do before now, since it would provide far better protection than storing it on the coastline…

1

Don Bauder Oct. 6, 2015 @ 3:21 p.m.

CaptD: How about moving it out in the desert? What's the chance of Edison doing an EIR when it refused to do an investigation of the San Onofre mishap -- something that was required by law? CPUC helped Edison dodge the law. It will again. Best, Don Bauder

1

Twister Oct. 9, 2015 @ 5:01 p.m.

Which desert? How about making bullets out of it and spraying them indiscriminately all over the Middle East? A way of committing slow and painful genocide? Nope--that's been done. To a limited degree--but just wait!

Das genie ist outen from ze bottle!

Oops! You said "in" the desert. You must have meant some kind of ghost train condemned to move around in the desert interminably--something like musical chairs or roulette?

Hmmmm . . .

0

Don Bauder Oct. 6, 2015 @ 4:43 p.m.

COMMISSION APPROVES EDISON PLAN. The Coastal Commission today (October 6) unanimously approved Southern California Edison's plan to have 3.6 million pounds of nuclear waste within 100 feet of the ocean at the shuttered San Onofre's North County location. Best, Don Bauder

0

LeeGrove Oct. 7, 2015 @ 4:56 a.m.

Don,

You should send the Accostem Commission a copy of this: https://youtu.be/HeVPMzJOFrQ We're fuc*ed.

0

Don Bauder Oct. 9, 2015 @ 7:12 a.m.

LeeGrove: Edison says the nuclear waste will be safe along the shoreline. But who believes anything Edison says? Best, Don Bauder

1

Don Bauder Oct. 9, 2015 @ 7:14 a.m.

Mike Murphy: Why don't you ask the Coastal Commission whose pockets they reside in? Best, Don Bauder

1

Don Bauder Oct. 9, 2015 @ 7:15 a.m.

Angela Lamar: Your suggestion of sending nuclear waste into space has been posed before. I can't remember when or by whom. Best, Don Bauder

0

Twister Oct. 9, 2015 @ 4:50 p.m.

I presume Lamar has done the numbers?

0

Don Bauder Oct. 9, 2015 @ 7:19 a.m.

CHILDREN LIVING NEAR FUKUSHIMA SAID TO HAVE HIGH RISK OF CANCER. The Associated Press is reporting that a new study indicates that children living near the Fukushima disaster "have been diagnosed with thyroid caner at a rate 20 to 50 times that of children elsewhere." The Japanese government questions the findings. Best, Don Bauder

1

Sign in to comment

Win a $25 Gift Card to
The Broken Yolk Cafe

Join our newsletter list

Each newsletter subscription means another chance to win!

Close