What Is Cost of Safety at San Onofre?

* We simply won't accept the B+ rating on the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station ("NRC Gives San Onofre an A-/B+ Rating," Aug 9). We want an immediate investigation to determine how Southern California Edison can bring its plant up to an A rating.

We can't remedy fires and earthquakes, but surely we can take action on this potential threat to our safety.


Laguna Beach

* Re: "Early San Onofre Closure Endorsed," (July 8): Laguna Beach, on a 3-2 vote by the council, has endorsed the early closure of the San Onofre nuclear plant. It happens to have been a wise decision from various standpoints, not the least of which has been an inadequate evacuation plan should there be a critical event at the plant.

We citizens of San Clemente are well aware of the defective evacuation plan since we live "next door" to the plant. We were deprived of the second leg of the evacuation route because of a landslide that closed a portion of Pacific Coast Highway/El Camino Real. Also, the plan has changed without public input--namely that we remain at home if an event occurs.

Regarding the economics of maintaining Units 2 and 3, it is unlikely that the units will pay for themselves in the near future. According to the Southern California Edison representative, the units continue to be debt financed and the initial construction of the units remains in debt. It is cheaper to borrow funds than to live within the budget.

The basic argument to the Public Utilities Commission by Southern California Edison will be to continue operations until 2013 by presenting a solid three-year budget. Little known is that Southern California Edison will be prepared to relicense the units past 2013.


San Clemente

Karoline Koester is a former member of the San Clemente City Council.

Copyright © 2019, Los Angeles Times
EDITION: California | U.S. & World