Form NRC Form 671 NRC Form 671 NRC SONGS Survey

Feedback Form on

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Communications During the

San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station’s Extended Shutdown

Instructions

We invite you to complete this feedback form about interactions you had with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) during the extended shutdown at the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) that was caused by replacement steam generator tube degradation. This was during the time frame of January 2012 to June 2013. We are in the process of doing a review to see what lessons can be learned from our experiences during this time.

This form is voluntary. We will use the results to evaluate how well we communicated with you and other interested parties during this period, and what could be learned from the experience. Your answers will be confidential and will not be attributed to you or your organization individually.

It should take about 15 minutes to complete the form, and submissions are requested by [date]. You can complete the form online through this link: [Fill in online survey link], or you can complete the attached form and submit it to:

Mailing address: June Cai

Mail Stop T16 E15

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Washington, DC 20555

Email address: [email protected] (separate email address to be set up)

Fax number: 301-415-2162

If you want to submit your answers anonymously, please use the online link, or mail or fax a completed paper form. If you would like to be contacted by NRC staff to discuss any of your responses in detail or to provide additional insights, please indicate your interest and list your contact information on the last question. We will contact you to set up a time for discussion.

Public Protection Notification

The NRC may neither conduct nor sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. Burden is estimated to average 15 minutes per response. Please send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection for information, including suggestions for reducing the burden to:

Mailing address: Records and FOIA/Privacy Services Branch

Mail Stop T-5 F52

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Washington, DC 20555-0001

Email address: [email protected]

OMB Control Number: 3150-0217

Expiration: 01/31/2017

Feedback Form on

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Communications During the

San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Extended Shutdown

1. Type of organization you represent (check all that apply):

Individual/self
Local or State government
Private sector business
Non-profit organization
Environmental group
Trade group
Media organization
Other
Name of your organization (optional):

2. The NRC held a number of public meetings during this period¹. Did you attend any of NRC’s public meetings in person or remotely (via Webcast, Webinar, or teleconference)?

Yes / No

2a. If yes, please indicate which ones, to the best of your recollection:

Date	Location	Meeting Purpose	Attended in person	Attended remotely
06/18/2012	San Juan Capistrano Community Center	NRC’s Augmented Inspection Team provided status of recent inspection
10/09/2012	The St. Regis Monarch Beach	NRC discussed regulatory status of SONGS
11/30/2012	The Hills Hotel	NRC discussed Southern California Edison’s response to Confirmatory Action Letter
12/18/2012	NRC headquarters in Rockville, Maryland	NRC discussed review of Southern California Edison's response to the NRC Confirmatory Action Letter
01/16/2013	NRC headquarters in Rockville, Maryland	Petitioner requesting action against Southern California Edison addressed the NRC Petition Review Board
02/12/2013	Capo Beach Church	NRC discussed regulatory status of SONGS
02/27/2013	NRC headquarters in Rockville, Maryland	NRC discussed review of Southern California Edison's response to the NRC’s Confirmatory Action Letter
04/03/2013	NRC headquarters in Rockville, Maryland	NRC discussed Southern California Edison's plan to submit a license amendment request

2b. For the meetings you attended, to the best of your recollection, please provide feedback using the following scale (leave blank if you do not have any input):

1 2 3 4 5

Strongly disagree Somewhat disagree Neutral Somewhat agree Strongly agree

Question	06/18/12	10/09/12	11/30/12	12/18/12	01/16/13	02/12/13	02/27/13	04/03/13
The meeting location, starting time, and duration were reasonably convenient
The meeting facility was appropriate for the size of the meeting
The room set up supported the purpose of the meeting
The purpose/objectives of the meeting were made clear
The structure of the meeting (e.g., presentation format and flow) supported the meeting objectives
The presentations and explanations given by the NRC staff were understandable
The amount of time allotted for topics was appropriate
The meeting helped me to understand the topics discussed
Attendees were given sufficient opportunity to ask questions or express their views
Attendees were listened to and understood by NRC staff
The facilitator: maintained control and focus of the meeting was fair and balanced
Overall, the meeting achieved its stated purpose
Overall, I am satisfied with the NRC staff who participated in the meeting

Enough public meetings were held during the shutdown period

1 2 3 4 5

Strongly disagree Somewhat disagree Neutral Somewhat agree Strongly agree

Please elaborate on any of your answers above, especially where you answered “1” or “2,” and/or provide any additional feedback on the public meetings NRC held:

3. NRC staff set up a dedicated webpage during the extended shutdown to provide background information, links to documents, meeting records, and general updates². Did you look at the SONGS website during the extended shutdown?

Yes / No

If yes, please provide feedback, to the best of your recollection, using the following scale:

1 2 3 4 5

Strongly disagree Somewhat disagree Neutral Somewhat agree Strongly agree

Website location was easy to find	1 2 3 4 5
Website content was informative	1 2 3 4 5
Website content was easy to understand	1 2 3 4 5
Website content was comprehensive	1 2 3 4 5
Website contained up-to-date information	1 2 3 4 5

Please elaborate on any of your answers above, especially where you answered “1” or “2,” and/or provide any additional feedback on the website:

4. The NRC Blog featured several posts on SONGS during the extended shutdown³. Did you read any of the SONGS related Blog posts during this period?

Yes / No

If yes, please provide your feedback, to the best of your recollection, using the following scale:

1 2 3 4 5

Strongly disagree Somewhat disagree Neutral Somewhat agree Strongly agree

The Blog posts were informative	1 2 3 4 5
The Blog posts were easy to understand	1 2 3 4 5
The Blog served as a useful tool for getting updates	1 2 3 4 5
The Blog provided a useful avenue for conducting dialogue	1 2 3 4 5

Please elaborate on any of your answers above, especially where you answered “1” or “2,” and/or provide any additional feedback on the Blog:

5. Did you engage in any other interactions with NRC staff or have experience with any other communication products during this period (e.g., had individual discussions with NRC staff, read NRC press releases, etc.)? If so, please describe the activity or product:

Did you find this activity or product to be useful? Please explain why or why not.

6. Focusing only on the interactions and communications you experienced during the shutdown period (i.e., independent of any views related to nuclear power or SONGS you may have), please rate using the following scale:

1 2 3 4 5

Very poor Poor Acceptable Good Excellent

Overall quality of NRC’s interactions and communications	1 2 3 4 5
Overall quantity of NRC’s interactions and communications	1 2 3 4 5

Please elaborate on any of your answers above, especially where you answered “1” or “2,” and/or provide any addition feedback on this topic:

7. Please provide any specific suggestions or recommendations on how NRC could improve in communicating with interested people for similar situations in the future.

8. Do you have any recommendations of good practices used by other agencies or organizations in communicating with interested people for similar situations that NRC should consider? If so, please provide details.

9. Would you like to be contacted to discuss any of your responses in more detail or to provide additional insights on how well NRC communicated with you and other interested people/organizations during SONGS’ extended shutdown? If so, please provide your contact information, and NRC staff will contact you soon to set up a discussion time.

Name:

Title:

Organization:

Phone Number:

Email:

Thank you for taking the time to complete this feedback form.

We sincerely appreciate your input.

Please submit completed form by [date]:

Mailing address: June Cai

Mail Stop T16 E15

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Washington, DC 20555

Email address: [email protected] (will set up separate email account)

Fax number: 301-415-2162

If you prefer to provide an anonymous submission, please use mail or fax.

1 Full listing with meeting materials can be found at: http://www.nrc.gov/info-finder/reactor/songs/songs2/public-meetings.html.

2 This website has since been updated to include information on decommissioning status. The current SONGS website can be found at: http://www.nrc.gov/info-finder/reactor/songs/decommissioning-plans.html.

3 To locate posts, visit http://public-blog.nrc-gateway.gov/, and perform a search using the term “San Onofre.” Look for posts from the period of January 2012 to June 2013.