Last login: Wednesday, June 20, 2012
It's always a "small amount of radiation" that "poses no threat". Do you really think they are going to admit "Ya, an incredible amount of radiation was released because we are incompetent. Get ready for some cancer!" Please. They just FINALLY told us the "amount" of radiation released at the meeting- because people were asking OVER AND OVER. 5.2 Milirems- although they have shown clearly that they are not to be trusted, so why should we believe that number? Why was it such a problem to tell us the number in the first place if it was no big deal? Why does it take a year for radiation readings from their monitors to be posted to the NRC website? Any one with a geiger counter can get the readings instantly. Some other facts released at the meeting: In Unit 3, 9% of the tubes showed wear of 10% or more. In Unit 2, 12% of the tubes showed wear of 10% or more. These tubes were supposed to last for 40 years. NRC also said that "damage during shipping" could have accounted for the difference in wear between Unit 2 and Unit 3. Don't they inspect these things before they install them? This is NOT a test site, we ARE people with families who live here! I bet no one in the NRC lives in the "50 Mile Zone" around San Onofre. Maybe if they did, they would have regulated a little more.
June 20, 2012 at 11:25 p.m.
( permalink | suggest removal )