The Nuclear Regulatory Commission today released a document that opponents of the troubled San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station say proves Southern California Edison knowingly installed faulty steam generators without regard to the safety risks.
Why? Environmental groups and some lawmakers allege it was to avoid a costly and lengthy bureaucratic process the NRC would have required if they had fixed the problem. The controversy has prompted city officials from Los Angeles to San Diego to call for additional oversight of the plant because of the safety impact on millions of people. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Ca) and Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass ) lead the charge release the documents today.
“These reports raise serious concerns about whether Southern California Edison and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries rejected safety modifications to avoid triggering the more rigorous license amendment and safety review process," Boxer stated in a joint press release with Markey.
"That is why it is essential that the NRC complete its expansive investigation into whether Southern California Edison fully complied with its legal obligations at the San Onofre nuclear facility," she said.
Regulators and Edison officials have said in the past that they complied with all regulations when installing the faulty $670 million in steam generators -- one of which sprang a radioactive leak last year.
"[Steam generator manufacturer Mitsubishi Heavy Industries] repeatedly reassured SCE of the efficacy of the design," Edison officials said in a statement Friday. They continued, saying Mitsubishi, "did not require additional design changes or measures, and that the replacement steam generators would perform as warranted."
But a coalition of local and national environmental groups is crying foul. The national group Friends of the Earth has lodged a legal complaint demanding that the NRC force Edison face a judge before a decision on whether to restart the plant can be made.
They argue that Edison made significant design changes that should have triggered a formal license amendment process before they installed the new generators, which use radioactive steam to boil fresh water through dense bundles of closed tubes. The process would have provided the additional scrutiny and oversight of the project.
Friends of the Earth point to a passage in the newly-released documents they say shows Edison knew the new design could cause intense vibration, but prevented engineers at Mitsubishi Heavy Industries from doing anything about it to avoid triggering the formal review process.
“Early in the project, [Southern California Edison] and [Mitsubishi Heavy Industries] formed an [anti-vibration bar] Design Team with the goal of minimizing U-bend tube vibration and wear..."
One of the causes of the leak -- which revealed damage to more than 1,300 tubes throughout the plant's four generators -- was caused by the vibration of the tubes at the point where they bend around in a "U" shape. The tubes rubbed up against the stabilizers called "anti-vibration bars," causing the tube walls to grow thinner.
The anti-vibration bar team "had considered making changes" to reduce the vibration but decided against them, according to the document.
"Each of the considered changes had unacceptable consequences and the AVB Design Team agreed not to implement them," the document states. "Among the difficulties associated with the potential changes was the possibility that making them could impede the ability to justify the [replacement steam generator] design under the provisions of the 10 C.F.R. §50.59 [NRC licensing rules].”
That section refers to the section of NRC code that requires a formal license amendment for significant design changes.
Chief Nuclear Officer Pete Dietrich said in Edison's statement that it is wrong to think the company would knowingly install unsafe equipment.
“SCE’s own oversight of MHI’s design review complied with industry standards and best practices,” Dietrich said. “SCE would never, and did not, install steam generators that it believed would impact public safety or impair reliability.”
See the redacted report as released by the NRC in the PDF attached to this article.
I think I might know why! hah! ;^)
The idea that they can even think that it can be back in operation is as insane as a junkie thinking that they can have their drug sometimes & it will be in control. Same thing here , SoCal Edison is just crazy to put us in such danger when there are other ways to get electricity, such as Solar! Plus the nuclear waste, there is no logic in that!
France gets the majority of it's energy needs meet by nuclear power. There's never been an accident there that I know of. I say let's do what France does. Heck, nuclear energy is renewable PLUS you don't have to assault Mother Nature in the process! The libs should love that!
Anytime radiation leaks into the atmosphere or ocean, or if you want to call it Mother Nature, then I would think that may be considered an assult. Exactly how much power generated by SONGS do you think is distributed to let's just say Oceanside, Vista, Escondido, San Diego, San Clemente, Dana Point, Capo Beach, Santa Ana, Huntington Beach etc.? Talk to the Germans about Solar Power or better yet, get your Visa together and head for France because this NUKE is getting shut down!
You see, increasing nuclear power useage for energy in America could cut down greatly on our dependence of fossil fuels that could possibly result in nuclear war when those resources start to deplete and nation's start to worry about their dwindling energy reserves and economies as rising energy costs and subsequent reductions start to erode GDP. The Middle East is already a hot bed politically and militarly for us. Do you want that to escalate into a full-blown war, possibly nuclear in nature? Do you? Again, what do you plan to replace the lost energy with if San Onofre is shut down? Wind turbines on the San Clemente coast?? heh. Good luck with that, Sir. We need to consider the consequences shutting down San Onofre. Are you comfortable with a $450/mo home electric bill and much higher prices for goods and services since businesses plagued with higher energy costs will be forced to pass their cost along to consumers. Have you thought about any of this, San Juan? Just curious?
Of course I'm not happy about a $400.00 a month electric bill, and I'm really not happy about paying $4.50 for a gallon of gas, but we're still shipping it (oil) over here from Saudi and we're still shiping American Jobs to China and Heco in Mexico. The cost of energy consumption is gonna rise no matter what we do, I don't care if it's fossil fuel or bio mass boilers (Delano), refuse burning boilers (Terminal Island), Poop Burners (Bandini in Carson), Co Gens (Anaheim, Otay Mesa, Cornado, Cambell Industrial lPark on Oahu, Geo Thermal (Heber), Pulp Mill Refuse (Eureka) . Whats wrong with wind turbins on the coast? Mirrors in the desert? Plungers in the ocean? What's wrong with getting the heck out of the Middle East? Nah, I haven't given it any thought. (+;
So the natural evolutionary tendency is to use more and more energy per person. And to go the other way is not natural and is to go against nature.
This is America. I guess anyone can claim almost anything, right? Has anyone proven a connection between a death or illness and working at San Onofre? Any monetary awards handed out? If not, your claims are purely speculative. "Of course I'm not happy about a $400.00 a month electric bill, and I'm really not happy about paying $4.50 for a gallon of gas, but we're still shipping it (oil) over here from Saudi and we're still shiping American Jobs to China and Heco in Mexico." Solutions? You are good at talking about problems. Solutions? Which energy source do you propose that we replace nuclear power and oil with? Wind turbines? "The cost of energy consumption is gonna rise no matter what we do...." I disagree. Nuclear power is by far the cheapest, most efficient and the cleanest. Plus, nuclear generated power does not cause wars or political turmoil or deaths of young soldiers in the prime of their lives. "Whats wrong with wind turbins on the coast? Mirrors in the desert? Plungers in the ocean?" Oh stop it, San Juan. Those wouldn't produce enough energy to run 10% of the manufacturing plants and industrial transportation in America, let alone for the remaining 90% or individual consumption needs. We need to think realistically here.
Tiny, GDP must increase proportionally to population increase, otherwise standard of life goes down. It takes lots of energy to drive an economy. That is why dependence on mid-east oil is so dangerous. Look how we are occupying nations over there to protect our sources of oil. Very dangerous, especially as fossil fuels decrease in volume and emerging nations require more energy to fuel their economies. Very, very dangerous when so many nations have nuclear weapons. That is why we need MORE nuclear generated power. Not less.
Yeah, your right we can claim just about anything here in the United States. However, tell that to the families who have lost loved ones to "alleged exposure" to radiation. The same issue came up with Asbestos, "nah it won't hurt you, prove to us that it's doing something to your health". How much asbestos do you see being used these day's? As I'm dying with Asbestosis and Industrial Bronchitis. Germany is producing Green power that dwarfs Nuclear production here in the U.S. I'm giving you soulutions, are you reading this with your eyes closed. Bio Mass, Trash, Co Gens, Poop Burners, solar, wind, ocean, get it this time? Anyway, we're beating a dead horse here. We have our differences in knowledge and beliefs and expierence in the power industry so we'll just have to "just get along" with those differences. But I do have a Nuclear Light Bulb here if you ever want to borrow it! Thinkin real here amigo! (+;
Modify the airline "hub & spoke" system by replacing the spokes with a network of high-speed rail. Gonna need lots of electrical power for it. Also gonna need to rebuild our high tech industrial capabilities. Lots of good jobs and and back to who we were. But two generations of heavy re-education following the 60s coup is a roadblock.
France uses much more nuclear energy proportionally than we do in the USA. Based on your theory, France should have a much larger incidence of radiation exposure disease than we do, per capita. But based on what I've read, the French don't. This seems to detract from your theory. "However, tell that to the families who have lost loved ones to "alleged exposure" to radiation." Again, speculative. Unless you can show me evidence of a clear connection between their illness and the radiation from SanOnofre, I cannot accept your theory. "Germany is producing Green power that dwarfs Nuclear production here in the U.S." Germany's economy is much smaller than the US economy. Our GDP would drop into negatives by 10 percentage points if we tried to fuel our economy with Germany's 'green power'. And that's even if Ben Bernanke kept printing his $85B per month in fiat currency to keep the economy afloat like he's doing today. The energy output per production unit simply does not generate the same outcome. Sorry. "Anyway, we're beating a dead horse here." Yes, I am stating facts and you seem to be stuck in theory and speculation mode. Be kind to horses! :^)
Any idea of what it would cost to build a high-speed train like that? By the end of the day about $150B. Wouldn't it be better to build better urban transportation systems so our citizens wouldn't be stuck on the freeway wasting gas from 4pm to 7pm on an average weekday? Have you ever been to a european city and experienced the efficiency and effectiveness of their public transportation system? In many cities one doesn't even need to own a car. Yes, they are THAT good. We spent the equivalent of TRILLIONS in today's currency to finance the Marshall Plan to reconstruct other nations while today ours is rotting in decay and obsolescence. Bridges are literally collapsing. heh. Go figure. heh. ;^)
Speculation, giddy up cowboy your avoiding historical facts that come from people who have died that speculated that their condition was a result of Acute and Chronic exposure to radiation at San Onofre (those facts come from O.C. Register, The L.A. Times and our beloved Sun Post) and that's just whats available to the public.. Maybe France manages their Nuclear Program differently than SONGS, kind of like what this article is about..."they knew of the design flaws and put them in anyway", now my horseback riding partner their aint no theory or speculation going on when it comes to that statement now is there? YeeHaw goin surfn amigo! .
Many people probably hesitate to think about a public rail system within cities because there are so many poor and want to be seperate from them. Kind of like the people feeling aristocratic living on the coast. Many don't care about development because they think it would mean more housing developments and crowded conditions for them - more freeways and cars and housing tracts, etc. But this is all the development we've had for the last 50 years. It's development of creativity and going to a higher economic platform that is good development, as opposed to the development that flows from individual greed that people to see and are confused about.
Everyone need to know what could happen here juse like Japan. 1. Fall out maps, after Fukushima for Japan & USA, after Chernobyl in Europe Atmospheric dispersion of radionuclides from the Fukushima-Daichii nuclear power plant. http://cerea.enpc.fr/en/fukushima.html 2. Radiation (only cesium) fall out map in Japan http://gunma.zamurai.jp/pub/2013/0121A.pdf