• News Ticker alerts

A Nuclear Regulatory Commission report issued February 9 but receiving little public attention since calls to light five safety incidents at the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station during an inspection completed December 31, 2011.

Two of the violations were identified and reported by the plant’s operator, Southern California Edison, three more were self-revealing during inspections. None of the problems were considered significant with regard to overall plant safety, and were treated by the Commission as “non-cited violations.”

One of the “very low safety significance” violations concerned an incident last August where a diver was dismantling part of a steam generator on the plant’s Unit 3 reactor in highly radioactive water. Usually, the diver would have a personal radiation alarm as well as remote monitoring equipment to ensure exposure to radiation was limited to a preset maximum dosage.

On August 25, 2011, however, the remote monitoring device malfunctioned and the project supervisor chose to continue work, relying on mathematical calculations to determine the safe exposure time. The diver, however, ended up working in a different position than assumed in the calculations, resulting in exposure to 60.6% more radiation than planned. The worker’s personal alarm did sound, but due to the seal on his wetsuit it was inaudible.

Other violations noted did not appear to place the public or any employees of the plant at risk.

  • News Ticker alerts


Founder Feb. 27, 2012 @ 12:04 p.m.

The NRC gave the Nuclear Industry a "PASS" on the tube wear issue before on San Onofre and other reactors around the Country http://wp.­me/p21p6a-­77L

BUT NOW They are realizing that they have a much bigger problem than they first "imagined"­; metal erosion cannot be tolerated when the radioactiv­e leakage is not only high in temperatur­e but also high in amount of radiation!

Would you use a dangerous leaking pressure pot day after day, ... or would you be smart and replace it with something safer? + Why nuclear is on the way out: 1. Radiation is dangerous to man 2. Expensive to build compared to Competitive Power Sources. 3. Creates long lasting radioactiv­e waste 4. Risky because Nature can destroy any land based nuclear reactor, … Any place anytime 24/7/365! 5. No meaningful insurance for MAJOR radioactive damages to property or people!


Founder Feb. 27, 2012 @ 12:08 p.m.

Please search the Reader site for additional stories on San Onofre and the peaceful protest on 3/11/12...


Founder Feb. 27, 2012 @ 12:10 p.m.

More on this here: Latest Accident at San Onofre Nuclear Plant Worries Activists, Residents http://is.gd/QGfzxF


monaghan Feb. 27, 2012 @ 2:09 p.m.

Who's on first at San Onofre? It sounds scary up there.

People busy diving into radioactive pools rely on in situ math calculations to determine if they're safe? And warning technology can't possible work because a remote monitoring device sets off an alarm inside the diver's wetsuit that's unfortunately inaudible to the diver because the wetsuit is properly sealed?

Back to the drawing board or better yet, remember Fukushima and shut it down.


Founder Feb. 27, 2012 @ 2:46 p.m.

I agree with your comment 100%.

Remember San Diego is within San Onofre's No Go Zone should it suffer a meltdown like Fukushima and even if they had a partial meltdown the radiation fallout would make property values drop to almost zero!

Why take that RISK when we can get along just fine (we are doing it right now) without either of them since they have been "off line" for some time now!


Founder Feb. 27, 2012 @ 2:55 p.m.

Join the Women of Fukushima on 311 at San Onofre


Join us for a day of PEACEFUL PROTEST at San Onofre, the nuclear power plant with the worst safety record of all 104 reactors in America.


How Do We Still Have Power When San Onofre is not Operating (19 days and counting)?



Founder Feb. 27, 2012 @ 3:44 p.m.

From eneformable.com comments snip We are now are being ruled by those in Nuclear Denial*; instead of by Leaders that demand an end to the Trillion Dollar Eco-Disast­er RISK that Nuclear poses to mankind!

How would the UK pay for a Fukushima or Deal with a 50 mile NO GO ZONE ?

Remember Nature does not follow design basis calculations or even engineering RISK formulas…

The nuclear industry is fighting tooth and nail to maintain it’s market share; yet NOW Solar (of all flavors) is far less costly to construct, faster to construct and carries with it N☢ Nuclear radioactiv­e baggage that can kill a Countries economy and or those living nearby! Ask The Japanese!

*Nuclear Denial http://is.gd/XPjMd0

The illogical belief that Nature cannot destroy any land based nuclear reactor, any place anytime 24/7/365!


Sign in to comment

Get $5 off any Reader event

Sign up for our email list to get your promo code