ML12221A373
| ML12221A373 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 06/18/2012 |
| From: | NRC/RGN-IV/DRP |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NRC-1798 | |
| Download: ML12221A373 (47) | |
Text
Official Transcript of Proceedings NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Title:
Augmented Inspection Team Exit Meeting with Southern California Edison Company DVD 2/4 Docket Number:
(n/a)
Location:
San Juan Capistrano, California Date:
Monday, June 18, 2012 Work Order No.:
NRC-1798 Pages 1-46 NEAL R. GROSS AND CO., INC.
Court Reporters and Transcribers 1323 Rhode Island Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 234-4433
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 1
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2
+ + + + +
3 AUGMENTED INSPECTION TEAM EXIT MEETING WITH SOUTHERN 4
CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY 5
+ + + + +
6 MONDAY 7
JUNE 18, 2012 8
+ + + + +
9 SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CALIFORNIA 10 DVD 2/4 11
+ + + + +
12 The meeting convened in the Community Hall 13 at the San Juan Capistrano Community Center at 25925 14 Camino Del Avion, San Juan Capistrano, California, at 15 6:00 p.m., Richard Daniel, presiding.
16 NRC STAFF PRESENT:
17 RICHARD DANIEL, Facilitator 18 THOMAS BLOUNT 19 ELMO COLLINS 20 GEORGE CRAVER 21 EMMETT MURPHY 22 JOHN REYNOSO 23 JOEL RIVERA-ORTIZ 24 GREGORY WARNICK 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 2
PRESENT: (CONTINUED) 1 GREGORY WERNER 2
3 ALSO PRESENT:
4 PETER DIETRICH, Southern California Edison Co.
5 DOUGLAS BAUDER, Southern California Edison Co.
6 THOMAS PALMISANO, Southern California Edison Co.
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 3
P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 1
(11:20 a.m.)
2 FACILITATOR DANIEL:
(Joins during 3
progress) ready for the question and comment period, 4
what you all have come for. For those of you that may 5
not have been here for the first two-thirds, my name 6
is Rick Daniel. I will be the facilitator here.
7 And this is the way we are going to try to 8
work this tonight, folks. The job, my job is to try 9
to provide -- be fair and balanced. I'm going to be 10 moving about. I am going to be approaching folks that 11 have questions.
12 If you have a question, you raise your hand.
13 I will come to you. Not yet. I will come to you.
14 If you can make your way to the aisle, you cane make 15 your comment, ask your question and the appropriate NRC 16 person will address you.
17 18 We have our first question. Just a minute. Folks, we 19 will limit questions and comments to two minutes. Okay.
20 I'll be right with you.
21 Keep in mind what I said earlier about our 22 focus. It's about the steam tubes on the steam 23 generators. I hope we can stick to that. If we can't, 24 I'll help refocus us. Keep in mind, you always have 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 4
the option of filling out the NRC form out there on the 1
table. Okay.
2 So we have our first question. Just a 3
minute. Thank you. Folks, we're going to limit the 4
questions and comments to two minutes, okay? I'll be 5
right with you. Go ahead.
6 Why don't you give us your name, if you like, 7
and go ahead.
8 MR. STONE: I'm Gene Stone from Residents 9
Organized for a Safe Environment. On April 6, I had 10 a personal meeting with Chairman Jaczko, as many of our 11 local coalition did, and he promised us, as much as he 12 could, that this meeting would be open for people to 13 speak because at the last April meeting in San Juan 14 Capistrano, the lights were turned off at 8:30 and we 15 had to leave.
16 Now I understand, and I agree, that the 17 steam generator issue is very important, and we should 18 talk about this issue, and I agree with that for that 19 tonight.
20 I would officially ask Elmo for the next 21 meeting to be a category 3 meeting so that we can actually 22 discuss everything that the public wants to discuss with 23 no limited time on that meeting.
24 (Applause) 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 5
MR. STONE: If Elmo can tell me how to do 1
that legally, publicly, or whatever it takes to get that 2
done with the NRC, I'll leave you my email.
3 So my question is how is it that 39 design 4
changes did not trigger a complete review by the NRC 5
and complete public hearings as is required by law?
6 Has the law been broken by either California Edison, 7
Mitsubishi or the NRC? Thank you.
8 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Thank you, Gene.
9 Greg?
10 MR. WERNER: Well, the 50.59 process is the 11 regulation and by regulation, they were -- they were 12 allowed to do what they did. Now, to say that it wasn't 13 reviewed, portions were reviewed by the NRC. Actually, 14 there were two changes that did require License 15 Amendments that were reviewed by the NRC.
16 The NRC did do reviews of part of the design 17 before the change integers were installed were, as well 18 as the Augmented Inspection Team also looked at the 19 design.
20 As I said earlier, we are continuing our 21 review, and we did identify those two issues for -- I 22 mean the one issue, with the 50.59, associated with the 23 two changes to the code of record that was used, as 24 follow-up plans we have to look at.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 6
FACILITATOR DANIELS: Elmo.
1 MR. COLLINS: I'd like to add to that, to 2
that response to your question. It's an outstanding 3
question. It's one we have got ourselves. Because of 4
what was in the plant while the plant was operating, 5
we had to be absolutely clear, you know, what happened 6
here, and how did these steam generators get in the 7
plant, what were the NRC's review processes, what are 8
our regulations, to make sure that this went the way 9
that we wanted.
10 And we are still looking at that. We 11 haven't reached our final conclusion. But we had that 12 question, as well. And so we indicated in the 13 presentation -- and this is part of the augmented team 14 inspection procedure -- that we would look for these 15 conditions, look at ourselves, ask ourselves what else 16 do we need to do. And so that's a question we are trying 17 to answer, as well. I think your question is right on 18 the money.
19 With respect to the category 3 meetings, 20 I have got to tell you, we have been knocking our brains 21 out, you know, how to do these meetings as best we could.
22 And on this one, we really, we would have 23 preferred to have gone that route. We just didn't 24 quite, couldn't quite get to it with the information 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 7
we wanted to present to you.
1 But that is actually a question for our next 2
meetings or the series of meetings, which one of those 3
would be appropriate. And we want to have those 4
meetings so we can have a better, I think, exchange of 5
information, a better dialogue with you here in 6
California. So, thanks for raising that.
7 MR. STONE: Respectfully, we demand that 8
type of meeting.
9 MR. COLLINS: All right, thank you.
10 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Thank you, gentlemen.
11 I'm going to come to this lady over here. Excuse me.
12 Give us your name.
13 MS. BECKER: Rochelle Becker, Executive 14 Director of the Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility.
15 I have two questions, and I thought I saw Mr. Craver 16 here earlier. Is he here?
17 18 MR. CRAVER: Yes, I am.
19 MS. BECKER: Okay. Hello, Mr. Craver.
20 I have a question for you. Could you just stand up, 21 because I think the whole audience would like to hear 22 the answer.
23 My question is, is there a number, is there 24 an amount of money -- we know that there is no amount 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 8
of safety before you reopen -- but is there an amount 1
of money before you reopen? How much money do you expect 2
your ratepayers to pay before this plant re-operates?
3 Is there a break-off point in which Edison decides this 4
is just too much?
5 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Coming right to you.
6 I'll get back to you.
7 MR. CRAVER: At this point all of our focus 8
has been on trying to understand the technical aspects 9
and what exactly is taking place here, what the mechanism 10 of wear is, what the causes of wear are and how we are 11 going to actually address those.
12 As we get through the final evaluation of 13 what the final fixes are, what those will look like, 14 are those the same fixes for the near term as they are 15 for the long term, then I think we will have a better 16 idea of what those cost components are.
17 But I think it is actually really important 18 for us not to get the financial piece into this at this 19 point, for us to just focus primarily on the safety 20 issues and primarily on what we are going to be able 21 to do to fix it.
22 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Thank you. Hang on, 23 folks. Hang on. We are going to try to keep the 24 questions oriented towards the steam tubes. Is this 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 9
a question on the steam tubes?
1 MS. BECKER: Okay. This is to the NRC.
2 We have just been told that you spent 1300 man-hours 3
or 1500 man-hours, or whatever, for this review.
4 However, you didn't spend this amount of time before 5
you approved it and the State of California invested 6
in these steam generators.
7 Is the federal government going to help in 8
any way with the ratepayer cost of this, or are we 9
supposed to pay for your mistakes, as well as Edison's 10 mistakes? Thank you.
11 (Applause) 12 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Okay.
13 MR. BLOUNT: The agency had -- and you are 14 asking for us -- how are we going to handle our regulatory 15 responsibilities. We have an obligation to review the 16 safety of these facilities and how they are operated.
17 We will do that as we are mandated to do.
18 When situations arise, that's why we have 19 reactive inspections, and so we address those as they 20 come up. I guess I'm not sure how I would address that 21 much beyond that. Please.
22 MR. COLLINS: Thanks, Rochelle. Good to 23 see you hear tonight. It's been a while. I think we 24 have already indicated we need to go back and look.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 10 You know, wid we follow the -- did NRC follow our 1
processes, which are implementing our regulations, and 2
was the right implementation of inspection programs that 3
were put in place to look at this very thing.
4 And our accountability, I think, goes to 5
the oversight committees we answer to in Congress 6
ultimately -- and we have some representatives here -
7 that hold us to that, to make sure we follow our 8
processes.
9 I mean, that's all I can do is follow my 10 process from the regional office. And we are doing our 11 best to make that happen. So, if we're not, we want 12 to be the first to fix it.
13 But also, we are going to take a look at 14 these processes and see if they need to be improved 15 because of what's going on here.
16 This is a very difficult, technical issue, 17 and to be quite honest with you, it has not been seen 18 before. That doesn't give anyone any comfort. But we 19 need to be smarter, up-front about these types of changes 20 in nuclear power plants. I'll acknowledge that.
21 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Thank you, Elmo.
22 This gentleman, you have a question. Can you stand up, 23 please.
24 MR. CUMMINGS: My name is Jim Cummings 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 11 (phonetic),
retired Southern California Edison 1
employee, Unit 1. I have a question in regards to why 2
the design was changed on the steam generators from the 3
initial construction to where we fabricated something 4
out of the -- maybe different from what the final 5
engineering report would have had you do. That seems 6
like there's been a major deviation right there as far 7
as the steam generator design.
8 MR. WERNER: Yes, I'll take that question.
9 Of course the steam generators were different than what 10 was originally put in because the original steam 11 generators had to be replaced. So they had issues with 12 the original generators across the industry, and from 13 a lessons learned standpoint, with the numerous changes 14 that have been incorporated in the new generators.
15 FACILITATOR DANIEL: We'll get to you.
16 Steam tube generators.
17 MR. HOLTZMAN: Staying on focus -- Joe 18 Holtzman, Mission Viejo -- my question is one question.
19 I would like to direct it to the NRC, Greg, perhaps 20 you can take it and maybe Mr. Dietrich could take it.
21 Was there a failure mode effect analysis 22 done on these designs before construction was started?
23 (Pause) 24 MR. HOLTZMAN: The silence is deafening.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 12 MR. WARNICK: Like Greg said, as part of 1
the inspection process, we have a procedure that we 2
implement for replacement of steam generators. We 3
reviewed in part the 50.59s associated with the 4
replacement steam generators.
5 We did not review it to the level of detail 6
to determine if the failure mode analysis was done.
7 Beyond that, Edison, if they choose to reply, they can 8
shed some light on that.
9 MR. DIETRICH: Thank you. The steam 10 generators were replaced using an engineering design 11 change package which does look at potential modes of 12 failure of the steam generators and it looks for 13 understood or anticipated modes of failure.
14 Included in our technical specification 15 changes were two License Amendments to change the 16 plugging limits on the new steam generators compared 17 to the old steam generators, to move to a lower 18 percentage of through-wall wear to plug the steam 19 generator tube.
20 So we did look at and analyze the potential 21 for wear affecting our steam generators. That was 22 documented in our engineering change package. A 23 failure modes and effects analysis is traditionally done 24 in our business associated with looking at a new 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 13 occurring problem.
1 So specifically to answer your question, 2
there was not an FMEA, a failure modes effect analysis 3
done per se. We are working through that as part of 4
our solution set and problem-solving situation.
5 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Thank you. I'll get 6
back to you. Okay?
7 PARTICIPANT: (Name inaudible). Why is it 8
that Mitsubishi is not present at this meeting and the 9
same for AREVA and Westinghouse?
10 MR. BLOUNT: In this particular case for 11 this meeting, this meeting, the Augmented Inspection 12 Team results, it was as the NRC providing our response 13 to the licensee on what we have found.
14 Mitsubishi, AREVA, others, are vendors to 15 that licensee. They are not the ones that we look to 16 for responsibility associated with that facility. So 17 if they were here, they would be here in an advisory 18 capacity to the licensee.
19 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Thank you, Tom.
20 Steam tubes.
21 MS. RUSCH: My name is Emily. I am a 22 concerned citizen and the director of the California 23 Public Interest Research Group, a statewide consumer 24 advocacy group, and like Rochelle, I am concerned first 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 14 and foremost about safety, but I am also concerned about 1
cost to ratepayers who are already paying for the steam 2
generators that are now not operating.
3 And I'm wondering if Southern California 4
Edison can commit to not asking ratepayers to pay for 5
those steam generators again, should they need to be 6
replaced.
7 MR. COLLINS: I'll start. I appreciate 8
your question. We all know this is, on the face of it 9
a costly -- the plant has been shut down, not generating, 10 for a number of months.
11 Just from the NRC's perspective, we are 12 primarily interested in safety. And so I know I can't 13 put myself in your shoes as a California ratepayer, so 14 I really don't understand how you're feeling, but I would 15 ask you to look at us and say we are going to take a 16 look at safety first and see where it goes.
17 And now I'm going to see if you want to -- if 18 Pete might add to that answer for you, since they do 19 think about cost.
20 MR. DIETRICH: Yes, thank you. You know 21 tonight we came out to talk about specifically the 22 augmentation team results and to talk specifically about 23 what our learnings are up to this point.
24 I will share with you the concerns of our 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 15 stakeholders, the concerns of our customers are very 1
important to us and we are mindful of that as we go 2
forward.
3 All of our discussions regarding costs or 4
cost issues are ahead of us types of discussions. We 5
will have opportunities to continue to discuss that and 6
it will play out very openly in front of the California 7
Public Utility Commission.
8 So, we are committed to providing that 9
visibility to the situation going forward. But I think 10 tonight it's important to talk about the technical 11 situation and how we move forward over the next few 12 months. Thank you.
13 FACILITATOR DANIEL: I'm just going to move 14 over here. I'm coming, folks.
15 MR. COLLINS: I hope some of you have 16 questions. I've got a technical team sitting here in 17 the front row. They're just dying to answer your 18 questions.
19 MR. LUTZ: Okay, Okay. Ray Lutz with 20 Citizens Oversight. Now you mentioned that the 21 unexpected tube-to-tube wear was due to excessive steam 22 velocity. The question is -- and you said your 23 simulation simulated it to be three to four times higher 24 than the other simulation.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 16 And my first question is, did you actually 1
measure the velocity of the steam to find out if either 2
of those simulations is any good? Did you measure the 3
velocity in the actual steam generator? Number 1.
4 And number 2, why is the steam at a higher 5
velocity? That is not the root cause. You need to jump 6
back and say why is it going faster? Is it because 7
Southern California Edison modified these steam 8
generators by adding 370 additional tubes and 9
subtracting the certain supports and so fourth? Is that 10 the reason?
11 Is it -- what is the reason? Because you 12 guys came in here saying you came to the cause of this 13 and you gave us no cause. This is not the cause.
14 So I want to know the answer. What is the 15 cause of the excessive steam velocity? If you tell me 16 it is because of something that happened somewhere else, 17 then you have to ask why did that happen?
18 And you're stopping just after one thing 19
-- oh, excessive tube-to-tube wear, that's why the leak 20 started. Why did that happen, excessive steam 21 velocity, why did that happen?
22 So, please go down that trail. And I want 23 to know, did you measure the steam velocity?
24 MR. WERNER: Actually, that question is 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 17 outstanding. We have to understand and SONGS owes us 1
that answer as far as what specifically in the design 2
change in the steam generator causing the higher than 3
expected velocity, and as they talked about steam void 4
fractions.
5 So they still owe us that. That's been 6
something that we've discussed since we have been on 7
site. I'm sorry. What was the other question?
8 Oh, they do not measure steam flows within 9
the steam generators. There is not that capability.
10 The modeling is done based upon experimental data, as 11 well as empirical data.
12 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Okay. Another 13 question about steam tubes. Yes, ma'am.
14 MS. STONE: Karen Stone from Laguna Hills.
15 I wanted to know just how much radiation was released 16 from 3 having its problem. You are saying it's minimal, 17 but how much was it? We need to know.
18 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Thank you, Karen.
19 MR. WARNICK: Thank you for the question.
20 As I told you before, I was on site. I responded to 21 the event. Full time, when I'm on the site, I wear a 22 radiation badge that measures my radiation. So I'm 23 monitored.
24 We independently verified and quantified 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 18 how much release there was. The amount was 5.2 E to 1
the minus 5 millirem.
2 Now, what that means, essentially is it was 3
more than 10,000 times below what you would receive from, 4
say, an x-ray of the arm or what each of us receives 5
daily from naturally occurring background radiation, 6
which is about one millirem. So, it was 10,000 times 7
below that amount.
8 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Okay. Thank you.
9 MR. WARNICK: Essentially, on my radiation 10 badge that I wear every day, that measures my radiation, 11 it was negligible. It wasn't picked up at all.
12 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Thank you. Okay.
13 Question to Gary Headrick.
14 MR. HEADRICK: My name is Gary Headrick, 15 representing San Clemente Green, about 1500 citizens.
16 And I'd like to share a more general observation that 17 will cover the steam generator issue indirectly. But 18 if you would please indulge me while I read.
19 This is an intervention. The people that 20 you are sworn to protect, the ones that you ultimately 21 serve, are speaking up in a strong and forceful way 22 because you are blindly following a path that has become 23 a habitual routine.
24 Unfortunately, it eventually will lead to 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 19 the destruction of everyone and everything for miles 1
around if allowed to continue indefinitely. We can't 2
simply let this situation continue any longer. We have 3
been extremely lucky so far.
4 The reckless behavior of Edison that has 5
been exhibiting over the years has got to stop.
6 Edison's insatiable appetite for gambling continues to 7
escalate, when losing, it is virtually impossible thanks 8
to the Price-Anderson Act, and winning is practically 9
guaranteed simply by staying in the game.
10 This situation would be an irresistible 11 temptation for even the most timid gambler. Having 12 never lost, the obsession becomes even stronger. Yet 13 the longer one goes on a winning streak, the more likely 14 it is that luck will run out.
15 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is 16 equally responsible for this situation reaching such 17 an intolerable condition. Your good intentions aiming 18 to make sure that the power we need is delivered in a 19 safe manner has an inherent conflict of interest that 20 can't be avoided.
21 You either have to put safety first or 22 follow your loyalty to the industry from which you came.
23 You have become the enabler in this relationship, a 24 codependent partner torn between what is best for those 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 20 you work closely with and the public at large.
1 It is with concern for the good of all that 2
we must step in as interveners, reminding you that you 3
must act responsibly and remember your original 4
obligations to the people and the environment.
5 FACILITATOR DANIEL: All right, Gary.
6 Hang on a second. Is this going to result in a question 7
about the steam tubes? Another minute.
8 MR. HEADRICK: It's for a lot of people.
9 The plain truth is that we don't need to gamble our 10 families and our possessions in order to get the power 11 we need for the comfortable lifestyles we are accustomed 12 to. The last four months have been living proof of that 13 fact.
14 The cost of continuing to support this aging 15 nuclear power plant is not necessary. All of the 16 consternation over evacuation routes and sheltering in 17 place to escape radiation has vanished with this recent 18 revelation.
19 The only responsible action to take is for 20 Edison to transition to truly sustainable and safe 21 alternatives before the competition gets too far ahead, 22 and for the NRC to recognize that it is time to retire 23 this old racehorse and deal with the extremely toxic 24 waste that has been piling up in the stall for more than 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 21 30 years now.
1 FACILITATOR DANIEL: All right, Gary.
2 Okay. Thank you. Thank you.
3 (Applause) 4 FACILITATOR DANIEL: We'll get back to you, 5
Gary. We'll get back to you.
6 MR. WERNER: Yes, I'd like to respond to 7
that. I think it's important to understand that at the 8
NRC safety is first. We do not have a schedule for 9
restart. No decision has been made.
10 And again, the units are not running because 11 currently it is not safe to restart, until they go ahead 12 and do actions to prevent tube degradation due to 13 vibration.
14 The NRC does not rely on luck, nor does the 15 nuclear industry. The steam generators of the reactor 16 itself, the design, actually incorporated looking at 17 a steam generator tube rupture. So that was part of 18 the design that the plant could respond to.
19 As Greg Warnick indicated earlier, they 20 have detection equipment that rapidly detects small 21 leaks. Operators are trained. They go to training, 22 extensive training. They are able to respond to the 23 leak, isolate it, minimizes the leak, as well as multiple 24
- 11:45:21 (inaudible) in place.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 22 So again, the plant design, the training 1
and the construction of the plant are specifically 2
designed to combat accidents, including steam generator 3
tube rupture. So there is no luck involved with that.
4 MR. HEADRICK: Can I finish one paragraph?
5 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Gary, Gary, I'll tell 6
you what, as time permits, we will get back to you for 7
the last paragraph. Okay. We're not going to forget 8
you. Okay? I promise. We're going to get back to you.
9 Sir.
10 MR. WEISS: My name is Rick Weiss and I have 11 two questions I think are germane to this issue. They 12 concern the tubes. And I wanted to know a little bit 13 more about the details of the tubes. I understand that 14 they're three-quarter of an inch diameter. I want to 15 know what they are made of, how thick the walls are and 16 how they have been tested to withstand -- we have been 17 talking about vibrations -- how they have been tested 18 to withstand the earthquakes that we have around here.
19 That's a concern for me.
20 And the other question is, in the event that 21 they need to be replaced or something, what happens to 22 them? I mean, where did they go, what plans do you have 23 to dispose of them or store them. Or actually, what 24 are your plans to -- that was a good question about the 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 23 nuclear waste piling up, for the past 30 years it has 1
been piling up and we have been looking for solutions, 2
waiting for solutions. And are there any new solutions 3
that you have for that?
4 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Thank you, Rick.
5 MR. WERNER: I'm going to let Emmett answer 6
the question about the steam generator tubes, right 7
there in front. He's part of the Augmented Inspection 8
Team, 30 plus years' experience looking at team 9
generators. Go ahead, Emmett.
10 MR. MURPHY: Okay, I believe one of the 11 questions was what are the tubes made of. They are made 12 out of INCONEL
- 690, a
thermally treated 13 nickel-chromium-iron alloy, very corrosion, stress 14 corrosion, crack resistant, compared to the INCONEL 600 15 tubing used in the original steam generators. I'm sure 16 I'm missing part of your question.
17 FACILITATOR DANIEL: The seismic -- the 18 seismic --
19 MR. MURPHY: The diameter -- the diameter 20 of these tubes is three-quarters inch.
The 21 thickness -- the wall thickness is 0.043 inches, 43 mils.
22 The steam generators were designed for seismic 23 conditions to stay within stress limits required by the 24 code, the ASME, or American Society of Mechanical 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 24 Engineering, section 3, code stress limits.
1 (Off-mic question) 2 MR. MURPHY: The tubes? Each of the tubes 3
is welded at the tube ends to the tube sheet and in 4
addition, they are hydraulically expanded for the full 5
thickness of the tube sheet.
6 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Okay. Thank you.
7 MR. WARNICK: I can't answer how far apart 8
each tube is. Maybe you can get that information from 9
Emmett and we can add that additionally.
10 MR. MURPHY: The tube pitch is one-quarter 11 inch. In other words, the closest nominal dimension 12 between the tubes is 0.25 inches.
13 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Thanks, Emmett.
14 MR. WARNICK: Your second question is what 15 do they do with these steam generators when you replace 16 them. That was actually part of our inspection, when 17 they replaced the old steam generators with the new steam 18 generators.
19 The old steam generators are essentially 20 decontaminated best they can. The cleaned portion is 21 cut up and you know Edison, whatever they choose -- I 22 think they sold most of the metal that they had for scrap, 23 that was clean.
24 There is a portion that is radioactive on 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 25 the primary side in the tubes, and that's shipped to 1
low level waste facilities that are located throughout 2
the country.
3 As far as the bigger waste question, as 4
you're probably aware, that's something that is being 5
debated in Congress now. There was a Blue Ribbon 6
Commission that gave a report recently and that's 7
something that's being determined at the energy policy 8
level.
9 MR. MURPHY: Just one brief -- a correction 10 to what I said -- that the minimum gap between the tubes 11 is one-quarter inch. The pitch is one inch, plus 12 diameter equals pitch.
13 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Thank you, Emmett.
14 (Off-mic question) 15 FACILITATOR DANIEL: That was answered by 16 Emmett. All right. Ma'am, do you have a question?
17 PARTICIPANT: Specifically what are the 18 low level -- where is the low level waste being -- places 19 around the country?
20 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Well, you know, 21 that's outside the scope of this meeting. That's 22 something for another meeting. But you can put it on 23 the feedback form and submit it and somebody will try 24 to answer it for you. We are going to focus on the steam 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 26 generators and the tubes, have questions about the 1
tubes. Utah.
3 PARTICIPANT: Yes. I know that the 4
nuclear regulatory agency has a lot of channel at its 5
disposal. I assume also that there is independence.
6 I would like to know, as there is among really trained 7
professionals, if there is a minority report.
8 I know that that's considered to be a little 9
difficult. The NRC has been under criticism because 10 of the fact that there has been dissent and it's led 11 to people saying well, you're not playing the game right.
12 And we've had a recent hearing before Congress about 13 all of this.
14 We want independent professional opinion, 15 if there is a majority view and if there is a minority 16 view, about the safety of this, because safety is 17 supposedly your number 1 concern and for that safety, 18 you are responsible to us.
19 FACILITATOR DANIEL: All right. Thank 20 you. Your question is, is there a minority report 21 related to the steam tubes?
22 PARTICIPANT: Other than just the line that 23 has been given to us here, as universal opinions.
24 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Okay. Do you 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 27 understand that question?
1 MR. COLLINS: Yes. First of all, I want 2
to say I couldn't agree with you more in your comment 3
and even to put a finer point on that, when you do have 4
opposing views or differing views, that drives us to 5
even a better conclusion when they're considered 6
evaluated, understood.
7 My definition of objectivity is I
8 understand the opposing view. I might not agree with 9
it, but I need to understand it when I make a decision.
10 That's when I can look at myself and say I'm close to 11 making an objective decision.
12 I've been watching this team work for a 13 number of months now, and I mean, if there is a minority 14 report or non-concurrence, it will be documented in 15 writing and it will available in publicly.
16 But I have got to tell you right now, I am 17 not hearing any. So far the team is fairly well 18 consistent and it converged on what you've heard here 19 tonight. So I think what -- this is really a team view.
20 So --
21 MR. BLOUNT: If I can just add to that 22 discussion slightly. One of the things that we were 23 concerned with is that we would develop a mindset that 24 said we're headed down this path and that was the answer 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 28 and we'd put blinders on to this particular issue.
1 So we took the opportunity to bring two 2
separate individuals that are outside the agency as 3
experts to look at what it was that it was that this 4
team was putting together, and we handled them as 5
separate and distinct, much like a challenge board, to 6
look at what the team did and what their findings were 7
and how they went about doing their business to make 8
sure that we got the best insight that we could.
9 With that, then, we were -- we did make the 10 determination that the team did do the inspection that 11 we expected of them and we did reach the appropriate 12 identification of issues.
13 FACILITATOR DANIEL: So in answer to this 14 gentleman's question, Tom?
15 MR. BLOUNT: At the end of the day, we will, 16 once the report is crafted, once we have finalized the 17 report, it will be a publicly available document and 18 it will be available on the NRC website.
19 MR. COLLINS: Just to be clear. That's two 20 reports. There's this team's report and then there's 21 this report that was prepared by the other engineers 22 that we brought in to challenge us on our conclusions.
23 So --
24 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Okay. Steam tubes.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 29 Steam tubes.
1 MS. STEMKE: My name is Janesa Stemke and 2
I live in Riverside. The last I heard before tonight 3
about the radiation leaks, I heard, "We don't have 4
statistics on that. We need time. We want to take 5
accurate measurements and these things take time."
6 That was the last I heard and that was back 7
in February or something. We need timely and accurate 8
radiation reports, released and made available to the 9
public immediately. And if that cannot be provided, 10 then you did not have the right to operate a nuclear 11 power plant in this vicinity or any vicinity because 12 the public needs to know this information.
13 And is there a radiation monitoring system 14 made available to the public for this purpose and if 15 not, it makes me wonder if the Nuclear Regulatory 16 Commission is actually paid on commission to keep 17 nuclear power plants operating. Thank you.
18 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Thank you.
19 MR. WERNER: Actually, the NRC does get 20 information, an annual effluent report is published.
21 But it is important to note that the utility did measure 22 the amount of radiation, as Greg Warnick said. They 23 have detectors on the secondary side, the steam side, 24 so they picked up the amount of radioactivity and they 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 30 analyzed that and came up with the release phase. A 1
couple of weeks after we actually had a radiation 2
detection team from the Region 4 office out here. They 3
actually looked at it and looked at the values and 4
confirmed the numbers.
5 MR. COLLINS: Yes, this is Elmo. I'd like 6
to add to that response. Actually I really appreciate 7
the question. Actually, I heard three questions in 8
there.
9 One was what about the specific event on 10 January 31st. I think we've talked about. There are 11 actual measurements and a computation was made.
12 Then I heard about the NRC's annual report 13 that by regulation Edison has to publish. The question 14 with that is that doesn't seem very timely. What good 15 is that? Every year, how is that being done?
16 I do think we're in the process of taking 17 a look at that to see as an agency if there is anything 18 we can do to speed that up. I don't want to speak and 19 say more than I know. But I believe we haven't had that 20 question before, and I appreciate it.
21 The last point is on maybe some radiation 22 detectors off-site. I tell you one of the -- and I have 23 been with the NRC almost 25 years -- one of the hardest 24 things we have to do is -- one of the hardest things 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 31 I have to do was stand in front of you and tell you that 1
there is little to no radiation being released from San 2
Onofre, because how are you going to believe me? You 3
can't feel it. You can't taste it. You can't touch 4
it. Right? There is no way you can intuitively tell 5
whether or not you can believe what I'm saying. I 6
understand that.
7 And so one answer to that might be -- and 8
I don't know how we would get there -- but to have 9
detectors off-site so that they can be available for 10 you.
11 (Applause) 12 MR. COLLINS: I understand why you want 13 that. The regulations don't require it, but there may 14 be something, you know, a solution there.
15 FACILITATOR DANIEL: All right. Thank 16 you, Elmo.
17 MR. MARLOWE: Rick Marlowe (phonetic), out 18 of Ramona, California. A couple of things. Realtime 19 reporting over the internet, the emissions would be 20 greatly appreciated by, I'm sure, by most of the people 21 in this room.
22 My concerns about the tubes are Mitsubishi 23 has been making these stem generators for quite a long 24 time. They have been putting all kinds of plants across 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 32 the United States and there may be some design changes, 1
but the basic geometry and flow in and flow out are 2
probably pretty consistent amongst all these 3
generators.
4 I can't imagine that their simulations are 5
three to four times off, and if so, how can that be?
6 And if they are that far off, how come we haven't had 7
these problems in other places and why is it showing 8
up now?
9 FACILITATOR DANIEL: All right. Thank 10 you, Rick. Greg?
11 MR. WERNER: Yes. And actually, Mitsubishi 12 has only had two generators that are currently designed 13 and operating in the United States. One is -- well, 14 both the units that are at SONGS and at Fort Calhoun 15 located outside Omaha, Nebraska.
16 Those steam generators are similar 17 designed, but they are much, much smaller. And actually 18 we had the same concern with the wider thermal hydraulic 19 model, underpredicted the flows. And again, that's 20 another area that we were asking what caused -- what 21 was it in their model that caused those thermal hydraulic 22 conditions to be underpredicted.
23 So we have already asked for that also.
24 FACILITATOR DANIEL: No. I told you, we'll 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 33 try to get back to you. No. No. We will try to get 1
back to you Gary. Just a minute.
2 PARTICIPANT: So you guys want timely 3
information. Go to the internet. We have our own 4
sources. If you would like them, you can come and see 5
me later.
6 Show of hands, how many people here are here 7
because they do not want any nuclear power?
8 We're here on a post mortem. So why are 9
these things not reviewed upon delivery? I was 10 listening to the earlier part of it and there were 11 accelerometers that had been put off and showed that 12 there could be damage to these things.
13 Now, if I was a clerk at Ralph's and I 14 accepted a shipment like that, I would -- it would come 15 out of my paycheck. So why is it not going to come out 16 of your paycheck?
17 How many of these -- oh, you actually 18 answered this question. The models were off by three 19 to four times. The confidence interval there is 20 straight off the normal curve.
21 So, here is one about how long has an 22 investigation of this sort had to have -- how many -- how 23 long has it taken for an investigation of this sort to 24 have come to a conclusion in the past?
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 34 FACILITATOR DANIEL: All right, Zeke.
1 Thank you. Greg?
2 MR. WERNER: Well, to answer the question 3
about accelerometers, they were actually evaluated by 4
SONGS. We just had a concern as we looked at them to 5
make sure they were properly evaluated.
6 So, they just weren't blown off. They were 7
actually reviewed. We wanted to make sure that we 8
understood, to make sure they were actually evaluated 9
in accordance with their procedures.
10 So, the other thing, again, about the model, 11 again, we feel the same way as far as being 12 underpredicted. I mean, we don't understand it and 13 that's the kind of situation we're in right now.
14 FACILITATOR DANIEL: All right. Who had 15 some question about steam tubes. Stand up please and 16 come on out here.
17 MR. HARRIS: Harris, (phonetic) building 18 contractor, North San Diego County. I have got a 19 question for Greg. These steam tubes, did I hear you 20 right? Because the statistic were flying so fast. 128 21 tubes were tested, pressure tested?
22 MR. WERNER: 129.
23 MR. HARRIS: 129. Eight of them failed?
24 MR. WERNER: Yes.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 35 MR. HARRIS: Were they randomly tested 1
throughout the entire amount of tubes?
2 MR. WERNER: No. Actually, if you go back, 3
all approximately 40,000 tubes had inspections 4
completed on them, and then numerous tubes were 5
reinspected beyond what was required.
6 The tubes that were selected for in situ 7
pressure testing were actually based upon the ones that 8
had the extensive tube wear.
9 MR. HARRIS: So there was no random test 10 of the entire 19,450 tubes in Unit 3?
11 MR. WERNER: That is correct, as far as the 12 in situ pressure testing.
13 MR. HARRIS: With a failure rate of 0.06 14 percent, you might have 1,167 bad tubes.
15 MR. WERNER: I'll let Emmett help me out 16 on this also. But the way the tubes are selected, again, 17 we're looking once the 80 current testings have 18 identified those tubes that would be susceptible to 19 failure, they go in and test them, because they don't 20 have information to analytically say they're okay.
21 So the idea is to go in and physically test 22 them to make sure they will or will not hold. And of 23 course, those eight tubes did not hold, and we suspected 24 that a number of tubes would fail. That was not beyond 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 36 what we did not expect to happen.
1 So, we expected a number of tubes.
2 Actually, I was surprised more didn't fail.
3 PARTICIPANT: But they only tested 148?
4 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Hang on.
5 MR. COLLINS: We need some explanation here.
6 There is a misunderstanding of what we know about the 7
tubes. So, Emmett.
8 MR. MURPHY: Okay. Every time a plant 9
conducts a steam generator inspection, one of the 10 purposes is such to find tubes that are -- that are 11 damaged beyond accepted limits and those tubes are 12 removed from service.
13 The second question a steam generator 14 inspection is intended to address, is whether or not 15 the plant or the utility was successful in maintaining 16 adequate safety margins in all of the tubes during the 17 last cycle of operation since the last inspection.
18 Normally, that assessment is performed 19 through analysis of the inspection or any current test 20 data of each of the tubes. They measure the depth and 21 length of the cracks.
22 They take into account measurement error.
23 They utilize standard equations for predicting girth 24 strength of the tubing as a function of the length and 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 37 depth of the flaw.
1 And then
- they, based on all that 2
information, they determine whether or not they have 3
maintained factors of safety against failure consistent 4
with the requirement.
5 These analyses tend to be very conservative 6
because a lot of the input parameters have a lot of 7
uncertainty, and so sometimes you predict through these 8
analyses that tubes don't have sufficient strength.
9 But it is a very conservative analysis.
10 So, in situ pressure tests, then, are a way 11 to then more realistically establish the amount of 12 safety margin or confirm that you have the appropriate 13 safety margin.
14 So based on your earlier analyses done by 15 Southern California, the eddy current inspection data, 16 they identified a significant number of tubes where 17 their analyses indicated they didn't have the 18 appropriate margin.
19 But these were conservative analyses.
20 That's why we did the pressure tests to determine for 21 sure whether or not they had the appropriate margins.
22 The rest of the tubes that were not tested, it was very 23 clear, upon the eddy current inspection data, that they 24 had the appropriate safety margins.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 38 So, it's just the ones -- they just test 1
the ones where there was some question as to whether 2
or not they had appropriate the safety margin. Thank 3
you.
4 MR. WERNER: I'd like to add to that also, 5
even before the steam generators were brought here to 6
site, that each steam generator, at least one time, if 7
not multiple times, was pressurized, the entire steam 8
generator, to 125 percent of design pressure.
9 So every steam generator tube was 10 pressurized to 125 percent of design pressure.
11 (Off-mic question) 12 MR. WERNER: No, the -- again, you go in 13 from the primary side, so we'll go approximately 2000 14 pounds, so add another, you know, 2500 pounds, and add 15 another 500 pounds. So they're all pressurized to 2500 16 pounds, the entire steam generators. It just wasn't 17 the tubes. It was entire structure.
18 MR. COLLINS: I want to make sure we -- this 19 is a very important point that's made by the gentleman, 20 understand, what's been done at the steam generators 21 and what the condition of the tubes are today. I need 22 the team to tell me. I wasn't on the team, so I could 23 have a misunderstanding.
24 One hundred percent of the tubes, almost 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 39 20,000 of them, had the tube thickness measured, I think, 1
for the full length, right? So we know the thickness 2
and have data on every tube, almost 20,000 on the steam 3
generator, and it was only those that I think Emmett, 4
as Emmett described, that had the most wear that received 5
the in situ pressure testing. So, we know what's out 6
there with these tubes.
7 MR. WERNER: It's also important to 8
understand that the tubes will wear during the normal 9
operation. So, as part of the inspection program, they 10 go and look at them to make sure even if they don't have 11 a leak, they inspect so many tubes as required by tech 12 specs. Again, the first outage they inspect 100 percent 13 of all the tubes.
14 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Okay. Steam tubes.
15 MR. TEASLEY: Hi, I'm Russ Teasley, local 16 resident, with the Earth/Ocean Society. My question 17 is did the NRC or any of the investigators involved do 18 specific analysis of the presence or absence of the stay 19 cylinder, the primary stabilization element of the steam 20 generator?
21 MR. WERNER: I'm going to let Joel answer 22 that question. Joel Rivera-Ortiz was on the team. He 23 actually looked at the design changes associated with 24 the --
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 40 MR. RIVERA: This is Joe Rivera, NRC, 1
Region 2. As part of the AIT, we looked at many of the 2
design changes that were made from the regional to the 3
new steam generators, and we looked at how the stay 4
cylinder was changed from the regional to the new steam 5
generator.
6 We reviewed the design basis of the steam 7
generators and how the regional steam generators rely 8
on the stay cylinder to perform their function, which 9
formed the basis for operating licensing, operating 10 license of the facility.
11 And we determined that the final safety 12 analysis report of the facility did not rely 13 specifically on the stay cylinder for the safety 14 functions of the steam generator.
15 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Thank you, Joel. All 16 right. I've got to go to this lady in the green shirt 17 before her arm falls off. You had a question about steam 18 tubes? Right? Okay.
19 PARTICIPANT: Thank you so much. This 20 event that happened on January 31st, correct? Okay.
21 What would the tubes' strength be on January 30th if 22 we had had a serious seismic challenge to that plant?
23 What would it take?
24 They certainly were damaged the day before, 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 41 but they only broke on the 31st. Now maybe they were 1
damaged on the 20th or the 21st. What do we know about 2
how strong these were prior to? Aren't we just gambling 3
here? Aren't we just taking our chances? We are not 4
a test facility here, a nuclear test facility. We are 5
families. We are a community. And we deserve better.
6 (Applause) 7 MR. WERNER: Thank you. I'd like to answer 8
that question. Of course, the steam generators, the 9
design, take into consideration the seismic. As part 10 of the in situ pressure testing, again, they selected 11 those 129 tubes, as Emmett described.
12
- Now, all those tubes were 13 pressurized -- attempted to pressurize up to 5200 psi, 14 which is, again, essentially almost three times higher 15 than normal pressure.
16 So three of the tubes failed around what 17 we call the main steam line pressure, which was -- I 18 think the test was 3300 psi. And those are the tubes 19 that we were concerned with from a safety standpoint, 20 because they failed at the lower pressure and then the 21 other tubes failed almost at or near the 5200 psi. The 22 rest of the tubes maintained the pressure and they had 23 full strength and showed the integrity that they needed.
24 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Okay. Go ahead, Elmo.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 42 MR. COLLINS: Let me re-ask that question.
1 Do we think the tube degradation, the as-found 2
conditions of the tubes, had a significant impact on 3
the ability of the steam generators to withstand the 4
seismic event? That might have been one of the 5
questions I heard there.
6 FACILITATOR DANIEL: That's right.
7 MR. COLLINS: What -- and did we look at 8
that? Do we have an assessment? And do we think seismic 9
qualification was significantly impacted? hate to put 10 my team on the spot, but that was the question we got, 11 I think.
12 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Go ahead, Emmett.
13 MR. MURPHY: Well --
14 MR. COLLINS: Okay, we had the team leader.
15 Now we need the expert to speak, so --
16 MR. MURPHY: The pressure tests -- the test 17 procedure calls for considering not only the 18 differential pressures that are at work during normal 19 operation and during the accident conditions, the safety 20 margin, but for the section that you're testing, section 21 of the tube that you're testing, you must adjust the 22 test pressure to the extent that loading from a seismic 23 event or a local rarefaction wave or some other 24 hypothetical event, if that could affect the pressure 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 43 capability of the tube, that should be reflected in the 1
test pressure that the in situ pressure test was 2
conducted.
3 It was my understanding during discussions 4
that I had with personnel during the time that the tests 5
were done that at the sections that they were testing 6
that no -- that the loading conditions for size 7
differential pressure did not impact the failure 8
pressures.
9 MR. WERNER: Thank you, Emmett. That's 10 why I have people like him on the team. A lot smarter 11 than I am.
12 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Well, what does that 13 mean? Okay. Clarification.
14 MR. COLLINS: Let me restate it. Emmett, 15 you check me to make sure that I say this in plain 16 language accurately.
17 (Off-mic question) 18 MR. COLLINS: It would be the ground 19 acceleration for the design basis earthquake at San 20 Onofre, point 6 gs. But I think I heard Emmett say -- I'm 21 looking at him carefully -- is that based on those 22 stresses alone, the tubes would have retained their 23 structure. Is that what you said? No? Emmett is going 24 to clarify.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 44 MR. COLLINS: The test pressure, test 1
pressures at which the in situ test was conducted should 2
reflect any seismic that is occurring.
3 I think maybe the point of confusion was, 4
you know, is how much does seismic affect the failure 5
pressure for the conditions that we had at San Onofre.
6 It affected it -- it affected it in a negligible manner.
7 In other words, it was differential pressure that 8
controlled the structural margins for this situation.
9 (Off-mic question) 10 MR. MURPHY: Whatever magnitude they were 11 required to consider. I don't know that -- that's 12 not -- I don't know the answer to your question.
13 FACILITATOR DANIEL: All right. Thank 14 you, Emmett.
15 MR. COLLINS: I think we all understand 16 that it's not the magnitude. It's the magnitude and 17 how close it is to the plant. So, what the plant has 18 to be built to is what is the maximum ground acceleration 19 at the site, and then it's doubled.
20 Then that acceleration is doubled. And for 21 San Onofre that's 0.67 gs that constitutes the design.
22 That's the ground acceleration at the site that the 23 plant has to withstand.
24 (Off-mic question) 25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 45 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Is that horizontal 1
and vertical?
2 MR. WARNICK: There are components, 3
horizontal and vertical. I don't know the numbers of 4
exactly the horizontal and vertical, but yes that is 5
considered.
6 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Okay. We have a 7
gentleman here who has a question about steam 8
generators.
9 MR. STEINMETZ: Thank you. My name is Jeff 10 Steinmetz. I've got concerns concerning some of the 11 changes regarding the generators and steam tubes.
12 Previously, you stated that you did not -- that you only 13 considered two changes to be under the 50.90 rule.
14 This I'm confused by because it's my 15 understanding that you guys removed the stay cylinder.
16 This should have fallen under the 50.90 rule. The 17 changed tube sheet, the thickness of the -- excuse 18 me -- the change tube sheet was changed. This should 19 have fallen under the 50.90 rule. The tube alloy 20 change. This was the only, as I understand it, thing 21 that was clear to the NRC that was changed that SCE 22 notified you guys of.
23 The additional tubes, 370 tubes per 24 generator, this should have fallen under the 50.59 rule.
25
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 46 The changed tube supports should have fallen --
1 (Whereupon, at 12:18 p.m., DVD 2 ended) 2 3