Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Addison

(299 posts)
Thu May 23, 2013, 05:40 PM May 2013

San Onofre nuclear plant can restart before safety and criminal investigations are complete

The restart of the San Onofre nuclear plant could be authorized before the conclusion of investigations into the conduct of the plant operator, the chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission told a Senate committee on Thursday.

At a re-confirmation hearing in Washington, Allison Macfarlane said she expected her agency’s evaluation of a restart proposal to conclude at about the same time as an investigation into whether plant operator Southern California Edison provided accurate and complete information to federal nuclear safety regulators.

But if the investigation lasts longer, nuclear commission staff would consult with their agency’s Office of Investigations on any safety issues that may have emerged from the Edison probe. No specific time frames were discussed.

The technical staff “will follow their procedures and will talk to the office of Investigations staff and ask, ‘Are their any safety issues?’” Macfarlane said.

The comments were a response to Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), chairman of the environment and public works committee that provides oversight of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, who sought assurances that the investigations will be completed before any restart decision.

“Let’s just say if SoCal Edison wasn’t honest with what they said to the commission and you allowed them to restart -- let’s just say we have a problem,” Boxer said.

A separate investigation into allegations of possible willful wrongdoing by nuclear commission personnel is being conducted by the agency’s Office of the Inspector General.

The investigations are just one potential regulatory hurdle as Edison seeks permission to restart one of two reactors that have been sidelined since a radiation leak occurred on January 2012.

. . .

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2013/may/23/nuclear-restart-awaiting/

8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
San Onofre nuclear plant can restart before safety and criminal investigations are complete (Original Post) Addison May 2013 OP
Macfarlane's answer wss correct badtoworse May 2013 #1
Yeah, let's just let the liars who broke the law get back to work. Addison May 2013 #2
What lsws did they break? badtoworse May 2013 #3
Lying to the federal regulator - sorry, "allegedly" lying Addison May 2013 #4
Your example leaves an obvious safety question unanswered. badtoworse May 2013 #5
I guess we're arguing past each other. Addison May 2013 #6
The two can be very different badtoworse May 2013 #7
And I'll take erring on the side of caution Addison May 2013 #8
 

badtoworse

(5,957 posts)
1. Macfarlane's answer wss correct
Thu May 23, 2013, 05:52 PM
May 2013

Safety is the criterion on which a decision to restart should be based. If there are unresolved questions that could affect safety, the plant should not restart. If the unresolved questions don't affect safety, the plant should restart as soon as it's safe. San Onofre's power is needed.

Addison

(299 posts)
2. Yeah, let's just let the liars who broke the law get back to work.
Thu May 23, 2013, 06:16 PM
May 2013

I'm sure they can be trusted to keep things safe.

Addison

(299 posts)
4. Lying to the federal regulator - sorry, "allegedly" lying
Thu May 23, 2013, 06:31 PM
May 2013

"Allison Macfarlane said she expected her agency’s evaluation of a restart proposal to conclude at about the same time as an investigation into whether plant operator Southern California Edison provided accurate and complete information to federal nuclear safety regulators."

I don't know about you, but I'd be a little uncomfortable if the cops pulled someone over for a possible DUI and then let them drive home pending the lab tests. And a nuclear plant is a hell of a lot more dangerous than an automobile.

 

badtoworse

(5,957 posts)
5. Your example leaves an obvious safety question unanswered.
Thu May 23, 2013, 06:34 PM
May 2013

I said I would not restart under those circumstances.

Addison

(299 posts)
6. I guess we're arguing past each other.
Thu May 23, 2013, 06:44 PM
May 2013

Sen. Boxer gets it: you can't distinguish a criminal investigation from a safety investigation. If criminals and liars are running the place, that's a safety problem, regardless of whether the science has been proven to be safe. The plant should not restart until ALL investigations are complete and all issues rectified.

 

badtoworse

(5,957 posts)
7. The two can be very different
Fri May 24, 2013, 01:02 PM
May 2013

It;s entirely possible that the safety matters could be identified and corrected before a criminal investigation concludes. The people at the NRC aren't stupid and they know a lot more than Boxer does about nuclear safety and how to run a power plant. I'll take the NRC over Boxer anyday.

Addison

(299 posts)
8. And I'll take erring on the side of caution
Fri May 24, 2013, 01:57 PM
May 2013

over erring on the side of alleged criminals, any day. Especially when the stakes are so high.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»San Onofre nuclear plant ...