You can follow this blog: on 
Emergency? San Onofre workers get more time to swing into action
December 3rd, 2008, 6:30 am · 7 Comments · posted by Teri Sforza, Register staff writer
Q. What do you get when you cross a nuclear plant emergency with a traffic jam?
A. An extra half-hour to get key employees’ keisters to the plant.
Last week, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission approved changes to San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station’s emergency plan, allowing “emergency response organization” (ERO) staffers up to 90 minutes to reach the plant in the event of a radiological crisis.
Before, they had only 60 minutes.
The folks who hate San Onofre will hate this as well. Southern California Edison, and the NRC, obviously believe it is perfectly safe.
San O’s operator - Southern California Edison - requested the extra 30 minutes last year, saying that “this proposed extension is necessary because an increase in traffic congestion in the surrounding area over the last 2 decades has extended the normal drive time of ERO staff,” says the NRC’s evaluation, dated Nov. 28. “This increased transit time has reduced the number of SCE personnel that are available to fill ERO duty positions.”
The revised “E-plan,” as the NRC calls it, ”will enable more of the typical onsite shift personnel to fill key ERO duty responder positions,” and “will increase the pool of personnel available to fill emergency response organization positions.”
Says the NRC: “The E-plan, as changed, will continue to provide reasonable assurance that adequate protective measures can and will be taken in the event of a radiological emergency.”
To read the NRC’s assessment, click here: san-onofre-nuclear-generating-station-units-12-and-3-proposed-changes-to-emergency-plan
More Watchdog:
- Human error at San Onofre nuclear plant
- Vote: Is nuclear power safe?
- On watch at the nuclear plant: Zzzzzzzzzzzzz
- What does it cost to throw a presidential election?
- Dana Point officials spent $4,800 to attend Pebble Beach “concours”
- AIG junket - the movie! Bailed-out execs luxuriate on tape
- AIG subsidiary parties in style in OC, two weeks after bailout
- Yet another AIG subsidiary parties hearty days after bailout
- High-flying AIG subsidiary gets to play with Uncle Sam’s dough, too
- Truth or dare? AIG ordered to bare all its secrets
- Should feds have let AIG go bankrupt?
- Bailed-out banks ordered to reveal executive compensation
- AIG suspends controversial executive payouts worth millions
- Invisible sponsor of OC wine event: AIG
- AIG calls off lobbyists, cancels events totalling $80 million
- AIG’s “outrageous expenditures” cause more trouble
- AIG’s St. Regis blowout bill: $443,344
- Saturday Night Live skewers AIG excesses
- Obama on AIG’s $400,000 party: ‘Fire the scoundrels!’
- Cartoon zinger lampoons AIG bailout
- Prez didn’t push for bailout so execs could get facials
December 3rd, 2008 at 10:58 am
What is the industry average response time plan?
December 3rd, 2008 at 11:35 am
i bet if they put in the toll road, they could fix that
December 3rd, 2008 at 11:37 am
Were all gonna FRY!!!!!
December 4th, 2008 at 10:58 am
FYI - out of the 32 licenced, operating nuclear plants in the US, SONGS 2&3 rate as the bottom two for safety in the industry!
December 4th, 2008 at 11:10 am
Ross, there are more than 100 operating nuclear plants in the US. What are you basing that comment on….?
December 5th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
Reason #653 to finish the 241 Toll Road.
December 10th, 2008 at 10:33 pm
Stop developing literally every inch of land left in Southern California and traffic problems won’t continue to get worse and you won’t have to worry about this.
Some think the purpose of the proposed toll road is to relieve traffic–it will make it worse and then this will really be of concern. Why, I’ll explain. TCA gets what is called an impact use fee of about $4,000.00 for every house built along their toll road. 16 miles of open land with nothing but a toll road. What do you think will happen? How many new homes do you think will fit along that 16 mile stretch of open space? And the only road they will have available is that toll road. Which would connect at the I5 in San Onofre.
What do you think that is going to do for the traffic problem in Rancho Santa Margarita inland, San Onofre or San Clemente? If you think traffic is bad now you haven’t seen anything yet. TCA does not care about your traffic concerns, they care about revenue. Tolls and impact use fees is how they make their money. And so far it is not working very well, if it was TCA would not be crying for a Federal bailout.
Now I’m not saying traffic is not a problem or that something should not be done about it. This proposed road has been mis-sold to the public as a false solution. Don’t let TCA fool you.
Think about it. Every freeway junction traffic backs up worse until you get past it. How is that going to fix a traffic problem in San Onofre? It won’t! In the near future SCE would need to extend that e-response time another hour or more instead!
This is reason #1000 to widen the I5 instead–no traffic slowing junction involved and it would not facilitate the construction of hundreds of thousands of more homes and drivers on the roads in that area!
The problem…the no compete clause prevents CalTrans from widening the I5 as long as TCA drags out their struggle to build what they want, where they want. This is the real cause of the traffic problem.
Read this: http://www.abolishtca.com