*Don't be confused when you sign this petition and it takes you to a donation page for iPetitions. We've donated to support them and encourage you to, if so inclined, but your signature has already been recorded without doing so. You can just close the window and you're done.

Thank you!

Edison (SCE) always contends that there is no need to answer the following questions about storing nuclear waste at San Onofre because the probability of having an accident is so low. With a track record of consistent failures, we find that conclusion to be totally unacceptable, (see latest failure here). The maker of the thin-walled, temporary nuclear waste canisters admits that they can crack and leak radiation, even if only from exposure to ocean moisture, if not from natural disasters, human error or terrorism.

We demand answers to these questions from trusted nuclear experts so we can plan accordingly. Edison has the advantage of telling us what we want to hear, without having to validate their overly optimistic conclusions.

By signing this petition, you are making a statement that will be delivered to the appropriate elected representatives, calling for an independent risk analysis study. We intend to establish our own panel of highly qualified experts who value safety over profit, the way we did in our shutdown efforts at San Onofre.

Without knowledge of the facts, we will continue on this path leading to the world's next nuclear disaster, instead of approaching these risks with realistic solutions. Thank you for standing with others who share these concerns.

QUESTIONS

When will the last canister, (each of which holds the equivalent of all the radiation released in the Chernobyl accident), be able to be transported to a safer location?

What options are available if radioactivity from fuel assemblies in pools or in dry cask storage begins to escape into the environment, due to any number of possibilities?

How far could a radiation event spread and what would be the impact on our health, personal property and local-national-global economies?

What kind of compensation for a nuclear accident would be available to a community that is the unwilling host for stranded nuclear waste that the Department of Energy (DOE) was supposed to begin removing in 1998?

If we could actually predict that a devastating earthquake was certain to take place three years from now, how would Edison begin to prepare for it today, knowing that the most recent seismology report from Scripps Institute anticipates an earthquake four times stronger than the plant was designed to withstand?