All posts tagged: San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station

Mar 27 – Fukushima Online Book Club Discussion

Please join the authors of our new book, Fukushima: The Story of a Nuclear Disaster, in an online “book club” discussion on March 27. Praised as a “gripping, suspenseful page-turner,” the book is a definitive, scientific retelling of what happened at Fukushima three years ago—and an urgent reminder that U.S. nuclear power isn’t as safe as it could and should be. Fukushima Online Book Club Date: Thursday, March 27 Time: 11:00-12:15 p.m. PST RSVP for the Online Discussion Today About the Speakers: Dave Lochbaum and Edwin Lyman are two of the nation’s top nuclear power experts, having testified in front of Congress multiple times, including on Fukushima. Susan Q. Stranahan is an award-winning journalist who has written on energy and the environment for more than 30 years. She was part of the team that won the Pulitzer Prize for their coverage of the Three Mile Island accident. Visit our website to learn more about the book. If you have any questions about the book club or if you’d like to submit questions for the authors in advance, please email nuclearsafety@ucsusa.org.

Ratepayers – Penalized Again?

SDG&E is proposing that ratepayers pay for the mistakes made at San Onofre. Rate payers were not responsible for the failures at San Onofre.  There are provisions for handling such liability issues in the commercial code that involve the circle of liability of those responsible for the failure. I am not personally familiar with the detailed technical issues and all of the parties involved in the failures that have resulted in the projected financial costs.  However, it would appear that under standard commercial liability provisions the financial responsibilities would be assigned proportionately to the manufacturer, the design agent, the consultants involved in quality assurance along with other enterprises involved in the series of processes that ultimately led to these failures.  Any remaining financial liability that cannot be absorbed by the responsible commercial parties would accrue to the shareholders – not the ratepayers. This is the time for our local officials to take the initiative to assign costs to the responsible parties. Such an initiative would enjoy a groundswell of support from our citizens and ratepayers.  …

SDG&E Plans to Levy Additional Charges to Your Utility Bills

Here’s a letter that was sent to Todd Gloria after a meeting at the Uptown Democratic Club on June 25, 2013 Todd: Thank you for speaking at, and taking questions at the Uptown Democratic Club last night. …and thank you for listening to my question about SDG&E and SCE passing the cost of their $4,000,000,000.00 mistakes on to the ratepayers instead of the shareholders as you would expect a corporation with a major loss to have to do. I was perplexed about why I was the only one in the room that got the SDG&E “love letter” (attached) telling me about the pending San Onofre (SONGS) rate increase. A little research this morning revealed that it only went out to ratepayers who typically use more than 500 Kilowatt hours of electricity per month. I live inland from most of the people in the room and my typical monthly usage is 700-750 Kilowatt hours per month. For lower usage ratepayers the SONGS increase will be about $120 per year. SDG&E already has the highest rates in …

Update from Martha Sullivan on San Onofre (Feb 14)

The following, written February 14, 2013, has been reposted with Martha’s permission: A week ago, our Coalition to Decommission San Onofre (a formal Party in the CA PUC’s Investigation into the San Onofre outage), along with 2 other parties (Ruth Henricks represented by Mike Aguirre, and Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility) protested informal filings at the CPUC by Edison and SDG&E having to do with capital projects being undertaken at San Onofre exceeding $10 million. Our Coalition, joined by Ms. Henricks, particularly objected to Edison & SDG&E spending money to “get Unit 2 ready to restart” in advance of requisite government approvals (specifically, the NRC) — a reason given in these advice letters for some of these capital expenditures.   You can read our full Protest here (PDF). Wednesday afternoon, I received notice from the CPUC that these filings by Edison and SDG&E have been “suspended for a period of up to 120 days beginning February 14, 2013 to allow Energy Division to review” them. This is rather significant, given that Edison argued forcefully that these …

Chairman Boxer and Rep. Markey Call on NRC to Investigate New Safety Concerns at Southern California Nuclear Plant

Washington, DC – Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Chairman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works (EPW), and Representative Ed Markey (D-MA), Ranking Member of the House Natural Resources Committee, sent a letter today to Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Chairman, Dr. Allison M. Macfarlane, urging the NRC to immediately investigate new information that indicates Southern California Edison (SCE) and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI) were aware of problems with the design of the San Onofre nuclear power plant’s replacement steam generators before they were installed. The new information also raises concerns that SCE and MHI rejected enhanced safety modifications and avoided triggering a more rigorous license amendment and safety review process. The full text of the letter is below: