ML12332A237
| ML12332A237 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 06/18/2012 |
| From: | NRC Region 4 |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NRC-1798 | |
| Download: ML12332A237 (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. Greg?
9 MR. WERNER: Well, the 50.59 process is the 10 regulation and by regulation, they were -- they were 11 allowed to do what they did. Now, to say that it wasn't 12 reviewed, portions were reviewed by the NRC. Actually, 13 there were two changes that did require License 14 Amendments that were reviewed by the NRC.
15 The NRC did do reviews of part of the design 16 before the change integers were installed were, as well 17 as the Augmented Inspection Team also looked at the 18 design.
19 As I said earlier, we are continuing our 20 review, and we did identify those two issues for -- I 21 mean the one issue, with the 50.59, associated with the 22 two changes to the code of record that was used, as 23 follow-up plans we have to look at.
24 FACILITATOR DANIELS: 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 6
MR. COLLINS: I'd like to add to that, to 1
that response to your question. It's an outstanding 2
question. It's one we have got ourselves. Because of 3
what was in the plant while the plant was operating, 4
we had to be absolutely clear, you know, what happened 5
here, and how did these steam generators get in the plant, 6
what were the NRC's review processes, what are our 7
regulations, to make sure that this went the way that 8
we wanted.
9 And we are still looking at that. We 10 haven't reached our final conclusion. But we had that 11 question, as well. And so we indicated in the 12 presentation -- and this is part of the augmented team 13 inspection procedure -- that we would look for these 14 conditions, look at ourselves, ask ourselves what else 15 do we need to do. And so that's a question we are trying 16 to answer, as well. I think your question is right on 17 the money.
18 With respect to the category 3 meetings, 19 I have got to tell you, we have been knocking our brains 20 out, you know, how to do these meetings as best we could.
21 And on this one, we really, we would have 22 preferred to have gone that route. We just didn't quite, 23 couldn't quite get to it with the information we wanted 24 to present to 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 7
But that is actually a question for our next 1
meetings or the series of meetings, which one of those 2
would be appropriate. And we want to have those meetings 3
so we can have a better, I think, exchange of information, 4
a better dialogue with you here in California. So, 5
thanks for raising that.
6 MR. STONE: Respectfully, we demand that 7
type of meeting.
8 MR. COLLINS: All right, thank you.
9 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Thank you, gentlemen.
10 I'm going to come to this lady over here. Excuse me.
11 Give us your name.
12 MS. BECKER: Rochelle Becker, Executive 13 Director of the Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility.
14 I have two questions, and I thought I saw Mr. Craver 15 here earlier. Is he here?
16 17 MR. CRAVER: Yes, I am.
18 MS. BECKER: Okay. Hello, Mr. Craver.
19 I have a question for you. Could you just stand up, 20 because I think the whole audience would like to hear 21 the answer.
22 My question is, is there a number, is there 23 an amount of money -- we know that there is no amount 24 of safety before you reopen -- but is there an 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 money before you reopen? How much money do you expect 1
your ratepayers to pay before this plant re-operates?
2 Is there a break-off point in which Edison decides this 3
is just too much?
4 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Coming right to you.
5 I'll get back to you.
6 MR. CRAVER: At this point all of our focus 7
has been on trying to understand the technical aspects 8
and what exactly is taking place here, what the mechanism 9
of wear is, what the causes of wear are and how we are 10 going to actually address those.
11 As we get through the final evaluation of 12 what the final fixes are, what those will look like, 13 are those the same fixes for the near term as they are 14 for the long term, then I think we will have a better 15 idea of what those cost components are.
16 But I think it is actually really important 17 for us not to get the financial piece into this at this 18 point, for us to just focus primarily on the safety issues 19 and primarily on what we are going to be able to do to 20 fix it.
21 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Thank you. Hang on, 22 folks. Hang on. We are going to try to keep the 23 questions oriented towards the steam tubes. Is this 24 a question on the 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 9
MS. BECKER: Okay. This is to the NRC.
1 We have just been told that you spent 1300 man-hours 2
or 1500 man-hours, or whatever, for this review.
3 However, you didn't spend this amount of time before 4
you approved it and the State of California invested 5
in these steam generators.
6 Is the federal government going to help in 7
any way with the ratepayer cost of this, or are we 8
supposed to pay for your mistakes, as well as Edison's 9
mistakes? Thank you.
10 (Applause) 11 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Okay.
12 MR. BLOUNT: The agency had -- and you are 13 asking for us -- how are we going to handle our regulatory 14 responsibilities. We have an obligation to review the 15 safety of these facilities and how they are operated.
16 We will do that as we are mandated to do.
17 When situations arise, that's why we have 18 reactive inspections, and so we address those as they 19 come up. I guess I'm not sure how I would address that 20 much beyond that. Please.
21 MR. COLLINS: Thanks, Rochelle. Good to 22 see you hear tonight. It's been a while. I think we 23 have already indicated we need to go back and look.
24 You know, wid we follow the -- did NRC follow 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 10 processes, which are implementing our regulations, and 1
was the right implementation of inspection programs that 2
were put in place to look at this very thing.
3 And our accountability, I think, goes to 4
the oversight committees we answer to in Congress 5
ultimately -- and we have some representatives here -
6 that hold us to that, to make sure we follow our 7
processes.
8 I mean, that's all I can do is follow my 9
process from the regional office. And we are doing our 10 best to make that happen. So, if we're not, we want 11 to be the first to fix it.
12 But also, we are going to take a look at 13 these processes and see if they need to be improved 14 because of what's going on here.
15 This is a very difficult, technical issue, 16 and to be quite honest with you, it has not been seen 17 before. That doesn't give anyone any comfort. But we 18 need to be smarter, up-front about these types of changes 19 in nuclear power plants. I'll acknowledge that.
20 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Thank you, Elmo.
21 This gentleman, you have a question. Can you stand up, 22 please.
23 MR. CUMMINGS: My name is Jim Cummings 24 (phonetic),
retired Southern California Edison 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 employee, Unit 1. I have a question in regards to why 1
the design was changed on the steam generators from the 2
initial construction to where we fabricated something 3
out of the -- maybe different from what the final 4
engineering report would have had you do. That seems 5
like there's been a major deviation right there as far 6
as the steam generator design.
7 MR. WERNER: Yes, I'll take that question.
8 Of course the steam generators were different than what 9
was originally put in because the original steam 10 generators had to be replaced. So they had issues with 11 the original generators across the industry, and from 12 a lessons learned standpoint, with the numerous changes 13 that have been incorporated in the new generators.
14 FACILITATOR DANIEL: We'll get to you.
15 Steam tube generators.
16 MR. HOLTZMAN: Staying on focus -- Joe 17 Holtzman, Mission Viejo -- my question is one question.
18 I would like to direct it to the NRC, Greg, perhaps 19 you can take it and maybe Mr. Dietrich could take it.
20 Was there a failure mode effect analysis 21 done on these designs before construction was started?
22 (Pause) 23 MR. HOLTZMAN: The silence is deafening.
24 MR. WARNICK: Like Greg said, as part of 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 the inspection process, we have a procedure that we 1
implement for replacement of steam generators. We 2
reviewed in part the 50.59s associated with the 3
replacement steam generators.
4 We did not review it to the level of detail 5
to determine if the failure mode analysis was done.
6 Beyond that, Edison, if they choose to reply, they can 7
shed some light on that.
8 MR. DIETRICH: Thank you. The steam 9
generators were replaced using an engineering design 10 change package which does look at potential modes of 11 failure of the steam generators and it looks for 12 understood or anticipated modes of failure.
13 Included in our technical specification 14 changes were two License Amendments to change the 15 plugging limits on the new steam generators compared 16 to the old steam generators, to move to a lower percentage 17 of through-wall wear to plug the steam generator tube.
18 So we did look at and analyze the potential 19 for wear affecting our steam generators. That was 20 documented in our engineering change package. A failure 21 modes and effects analysis is traditionally done in our 22 business associated with looking at a new occurring 23 problem.
24 So specifically to answer your 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 13 there was not an FMEA, a failure modes effect analysis 1
done per se. We are working through that as part of 2
our solution set and problem-solving situation.
3 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Thank you. I'll get 4
back to you. Okay?
5 PARTICIPANT: (Name inaudible). Why is it 6
that Mitsubishi is not present at this meeting and the 7
same for AREVA and Westinghouse?
8 MR. BLOUNT: In this particular case for 9
this meeting, this meeting, the Augmented Inspection 10 Team results, it was as the NRC providing our response 11 to the licensee on what we have found.
12 Mitsubishi, AREVA, others, are vendors to 13 that licensee. They are not the ones that we look to 14 for responsibility associated with that facility. So 15 if they were here, they would be here in an advisory 16 capacity to the licensee.
17 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Thank you, Tom.
18 Steam tubes.
19 MS. RUSCH: My name is Emily. I am a 20 concerned citizen and the director of the California 21 Public Interest Research Group, a statewide consumer 22 advocacy group, and like Rochelle, I am concerned first 23 and foremost about safety, but I am also concerned about 24 cost to ratepayers who are already paying for 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 14 generators that are now not operating.
1 And I'm wondering if Southern California 2
Edison can commit to not asking ratepayers to pay for 3
those steam generators again, should they need to be 4
replaced.
5 MR. COLLINS: I'll start. I appreciate 6
your question. We all know this is, on the face of it 7
a costly -- the plant has been shut down, not generating, 8
for a number of months.
9 Just from the NRC's perspective, we are 10 primarily interested in safety. And so I know I can't 11 put myself in your shoes as a California ratepayer, so 12 I really don't understand how you're feeling, but I would 13 ask you to look at us and say we are going to take a 14 look at safety first and see where it goes.
15 And now I'm going to see if you want to -- if 16 Pete might add to that answer for you, since they do 17 think about cost.
18 MR. DIETRICH: Yes, thank you. You know 19 tonight we came out to talk about specifically the 20 augmentation team results and to talk specifically about 21 what our learnings are up to this point.
22 I will share with you the concerns of our 23 stakeholders, the concerns of our customers are very 24 important to us and we are mindful of that as we go 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 forward.
1 All of our discussions regarding costs or 2
cost issues are ahead of us types of discussions. We 3
will have opportunities to continue to discuss that and 4
it will play out very openly in front of the California 5
Public Utility Commission.
6 So, we are committed to providing that 7
visibility to the situation going forward. But I think 8
tonight it's important to talk about the technical 9
situation and how we move forward over the next few 10 months. Thank you.
11 FACILITATOR DANIEL: I'm just going to move 12 over here. I'm coming, folks.
13 MR. COLLINS: I hope some of you have 14 questions. I've got a technical team sitting here in 15 the front row. They're just dying to answer your 16 questions.
17 MR. LUTZ: Okay, Okay. Ray Lutz with 18 Citizens Oversight. Now you mentioned that the 19 unexpected tube-to-tube wear was due to excessive steam 20 velocity. The question is -- and you said your 21 simulation simulated it to be three to four times higher 22 than the other simulation.
23 And my first question is, did you actually 24 measure the velocity of the steam to find out if either 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 of those simulations is any good? Did you measure the 1
velocity in the actual steam generator? Number 1.
2 And number 2, why is the steam at a higher 3
velocity? That is not the root cause. You need to jump 4
back and say why is it going faster? Is it because 5
Southern California Edison modified these steam 6
generators by adding 370 additional tubes and 7
subtracting the certain supports and so fourth? Is that 8
the reason?
9 Is it -- what is the reason? Because you 10 guys came in here saying you came to the cause of this 11 and you gave us no cause. This is not the cause.
12 So I want to know the answer. What is the 13 cause of the excessive steam velocity? If you tell me 14 it is because of something that happened somewhere else, 15 then you have to ask why did that happen?
16 And you're stopping just after one thing 17
-- oh, excessive tube-to-tube wear, that's why the leak 18 started. Why did that happen, excessive steam velocity, 19 why did that happen?
20 So, please go down that trail. And I want 21 to know, did you measure the steam velocity?
22 MR. WERNER: Actually, that question is 23 outstanding. We have to understand and SONGS owes us 24 that answer as far as what specifically in the design 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 change in the steam generator causing the higher than 1
expected velocity, and as they talked about steam void 2
fractions.
3 So they still owe us that. That's been 4
something that we've discussed since we have been on 5
site. I'm sorry. What was the other question?
6 Oh, they do not measure steam flows within 7
the steam generators. There is not that capability.
8 The modeling is done based upon experimental data, as 9
well as empirical data.
10 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Okay. Another 11 question about steam tubes. Yes, ma'am.
12 MS. STONE: Karen Stone from Laguna Hills.
13 I wanted to know just how much radiation was released 14 from 3 having its problem. You are saying it's minimal, 15 but how much was it? We need to know.
16 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Thank you, Karen.
17 MR. WARNICK: Thank you for the question.
18 As I told you before, I was on site. I responded to 19 the event. Full time, when I'm on the site, I wear a 20 radiation badge that measures my radiation. So I'm 21 monitored.
22 We independently verified and quantified 23 how much release there was. The amount was 5.2 E to 24 the minus 5 millirem.
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 Now, what that means, essentially is it was 1
more than 10,000 times below what you would receive from, 2
say, an x-ray of the arm or what each of us receives 3
daily from naturally occurring background radiation, 4
which is about one millirem. So, it was 10,000 times 5
below that amount.
6 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Okay. Thank you.
7 MR. WARNICK: Essentially, on my radiation 8
badge that I wear every day, that measures my radiation, 9
it was negligible. It wasn't picked up at all.
10 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Thank you. Okay.
11 Question to Gary Headrick.
12 MR. HEADRICK: My name is Gary Headrick, 13 representing San Clemente Green, about 1500 citizens.
14 And I'd like to share a more general observation that 15 will cover the steam generator issue indirectly. But 16 if you would please indulge me while I read.
17 This is an intervention. The people that 18 you are sworn to protect, the ones that you ultimately 19 serve, are speaking up in a strong and forceful way 20 because you are blindly following a path that has become 21 a habitual routine.
22 Unfortunately, it eventually will lead to 23 the destruction of everyone and everything for miles 24 around if allowed to continue indefinitely. We can't 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 simply let this situation continue any longer. We have 1
been extremely lucky so far.
2 The reckless behavior of Edison that has 3
been exhibiting over the years has got to stop. Edison's 4
insatiable appetite for gambling continues to escalate, 5
when losing, it is virtually impossible thanks to the 6
Price-Anderson
- Act, and winning is practically 7
guaranteed simply by staying in the game.
8 This situation would be an irresistible 9
temptation for even the most timid gambler. Having 10 never lost, the obsession becomes even stronger. Yet 11 the longer one goes on a winning streak, the more likely 12 it is that luck will run out.
13 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is 14 equally responsible for this situation reaching such 15 an intolerable condition. Your good intentions aiming 16 to make sure that the power we need is delivered in a 17 safe manner has an inherent conflict of interest that 18 can't be avoided.
19 You either have to put safety first or 20 follow your loyalty to the industry from which you came.
21 You have become the enabler in this relationship, a 22 codependent partner torn between what is best for those 23 you work closely with and the public at large.
24 It is with concern for the good of all that 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 we must step in as interveners, reminding you that you 1
must act responsibly and remember your original 2
obligations to the people and the environment.
3 FACILITATOR DANIEL: All right, Gary.
4 Hang on a second. Is this going to result in a question 5
about the steam tubes? Another minute.
6 MR. HEADRICK: It's for a lot of people.
7 The plain truth is that we don't need to gamble our 8
families and our possessions in order to get the power 9
we need for the comfortable lifestyles we are accustomed 10 to. The last four months have been living proof of that 11 fact.
12 The cost of continuing to support this aging 13 nuclear power plant is not necessary. All of the 14 consternation over evacuation routes and sheltering in 15 place to escape radiation has vanished with this recent 16 revelation.
17 The only responsible action to take is for 18 Edison to transition to truly sustainable and safe 19 alternatives before the competition gets too far ahead, 20 and for the NRC to recognize that it is time to retire 21 this old racehorse and deal with the extremely toxic 22 waste that has been piling up in the stall for more than 23 30 years now.
24 FACILITATOR DANIEL: All right, Gary. Okay.
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 Thank you. Thank you.
1 (Applause) 2 FACILITATOR DANIEL: We'll get back to you, 3
Gary. We'll get back to you.
4 MR. WERNER: Yes, I'd like to respond to 5
that. I think it's important to understand that at the 6
NRC safety is first. We do not have a schedule for 7
restart. No decision has been made.
8 And again, the units are not running because 9
currently it is not safe to restart, until they go ahead 10 and do actions to prevent tube degradation due to 11 vibration.
12 The NRC does not rely on luck, nor does the 13 nuclear industry. The steam generators of the reactor 14 itself, the design, actually incorporated looking at 15 a steam generator tube rupture. So that was part of 16 the design that the plant could respond to.
17 As Greg Warnick indicated earlier, they 18 have detection equipment that rapidly detects small 19 leaks. Operators are trained. They go to training, 20 extensive training. They are able to respond to the 21 leak, isolate it, minimizes the leak, as well as multiple 22
- 11:45:21 (inaudible) in place.
23 So again, the plant design, the training 24 and the construction of the plant are specifically 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 designed to combat accidents, including steam generator 1
tube rupture. So there is no luck involved with that.
2 MR. HEADRICK: Can I finish one paragraph?
3 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Gary, Gary, I'll tell 4
you what, as time permits, we will get back to you for 5
the last paragraph. Okay. We're not going to forget 6
you. Okay? I promise. We're going to get back to you.
7 Sir.
8 MR. WEISS: My name is Rick Weiss and I have 9
two questions I think are germane to this issue. They 10 concern the tubes. And I wanted to know a little bit 11 more about the details of the tubes. I understand that 12 they're three-quarter of an inch diameter. I want to 13 know what they are made of, how thick the walls are and 14 how they have been tested to withstand -- we have been 15 talking about vibrations -- how they have been tested 16 to withstand the earthquakes that we have around here.
17 That's a concern for me.
18 And the other question is, in the event that 19 they need to be replaced or something, what happens to 20 them? I mean, where did they go, what plans do you have 21 to dispose of them or store them. Or actually, what 22 are your plans to -- that was a good question about the 23 nuclear waste piling up, for the past 30 years it has 24 been piling up and we have been looking for solutions, 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 waiting for solutions. And are there any new solutions 1
that you have for that?
2 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Thank you, Rick.
3 MR. WERNER: I'm going to let Emmett answer 4
the question about the steam generator tubes, right there 5
in front. He's part of the Augmented Inspection Team, 6
30 plus years' experience looking at team generators.
7 Go ahead, Emmett.
8 MR. MURPHY: Okay, I believe one of the 9
questions was what are the tubes made of. They are made 10 out of INCONEL
- 690, a
thermally treated 11 nickel-chromium-iron alloy, very corrosion, stress 12 corrosion, crack resistant, compared to the INCONEL 600 13 tubing used in the original steam generators. I'm sure 14 I'm missing part of your question.
15 FACILITATOR DANIEL: The seismic -- the 16 seismic --
17 MR. MURPHY: The diameter -- the diameter 18 of these tubes is three-quarters inch.
The 19 thickness -- the wall thickness is 0.043 inches, 43 mils.
20 The steam generators were designed for seismic 21 conditions to stay within stress limits required by the 22 code, the ASME, or American Society of Mechanical 23 Engineering, section 3, code stress limits.
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 24 MR. MURPHY: The tubes? Each of the tubes 1
is welded at the tube ends to the tube sheet and in 2
addition, they are hydraulically expanded for the full 3
thickness of the tube sheet.
4 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Okay. Thank you.
5 MR. WARNICK: I can't answer how far apart 6
each tube is. Maybe you can get that information from 7
Emmett and we can add that additionally.
8 MR. MURPHY: The tube pitch is one-quarter 9
inch. In other words, the closest nominal dimension 10 between the tubes is 0.25 inches.
11 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Thanks, Emmett.
12 MR. WARNICK: Your second question is what 13 do they do with these steam generators when you replace 14 them. That was actually part of our inspection, when 15 they replaced the old steam generators with the new steam 16 generators.
17 The old steam generators are essentially 18 decontaminated best they can. The cleaned portion is 19 cut up and you know Edison, whatever they choose -- I 20 think they sold most of the metal that they had for scrap, 21 that was clean.
22 There is a portion that is radioactive on 23 the primary side in the tubes, and that's shipped to 24 low level waste facilities that are located throughout 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 country.
1 As far as the bigger waste question, as 2
you're probably aware, that's something that is being 3
debated in Congress now. There was a Blue Ribbon 4
Commission that gave a report recently and that's 5
something that's being determined at the energy policy 6
level.
7 MR. MURPHY: Just one brief -- a correction 8
to what I said -- that the minimum gap between the tubes 9
is one-quarter inch. The pitch is one inch, plus 10 diameter equals pitch.
11 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Thank you, Emmett.
12 (Off-mic question) 13 FACILITATOR DANIEL: That was answered by 14 Emmett. All right. Ma'am, do you have a question?
15 PARTICIPANT: Specifically what are the low 16 level -- where is the low level waste being -- places 17 around the country?
18 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Well, you know, that's 19 outside the scope of this meeting. That's something 20 for another meeting. But you can put it on the feedback 21 form and submit it and somebody will try to answer it 22 for you. We are going to focus on the steam generators 23 and the tubes, have questions about the tubes. Utah.
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 PARTICIPANT: Yes. I know that the nuclear 1
regulatory agency has a lot of channel at its disposal.
2 I assume also that there is independence. I would like 3
to know, as there is among really trained professionals, 4
if there is a minority report.
5 I know that that's considered to be a little 6
difficult. The NRC has been under criticism because 7
of the fact that there has been dissent and it's led 8
to people saying well, you're not playing the game right.
9 And we've had a recent hearing before Congress about 10 all of this.
11 We want independent professional opinion, 12 if there is a majority view and if there is a minority 13 view, about the safety of this, because safety is 14 supposedly your number 1 concern and for that safety, 15 you are responsible to us.
16 FACILITATOR DANIEL: All right. Thank 17 you. Your question is, is there a minority report 18 related to the steam tubes?
19 PARTICIPANT: Other than just the line that 20 has been given to us here, as universal opinions.
21 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Okay. Do you 22 understand that question?
23 MR. COLLINS: Yes. First of all, I want 24 to say I couldn't agree with you more in your comment 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 and even to put a finer point on that, when you do have 1
opposing views or differing views, that drives us to 2
even a better conclusion when they're considered 3
evaluated, understood.
4 My definition of objectivity is I
5 understand the opposing view. I might not agree with 6
it, but I need to understand it when I make a decision.
7 That's when I can look at myself and say I'm close to 8
making an objective decision.
9 I've been watching this team work for a 10 number of months now, and I mean, if there is a minority 11 report or non-concurrence, it will be documented in 12 writing and it will available in publicly.
13 But I have got to tell you right now, I am 14 not hearing any. So far the team is fairly well 15 consistent and it converged on what you've heard here 16 tonight. So I think what -- this is really a team view.
17 So --
18 MR. BLOUNT: If I can just add to that 19 discussion slightly. One of the things that we were 20 concerned with is that we would develop a mindset that 21 said we're headed down this path and that was the answer 22 and we'd put blinders on to this particular issue.
23 So we took the opportunity to bring two 24 separate individuals that are outside the agency as 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 experts to look at what it was that it was that this 1
team was putting together, and we handled them as 2
separate and distinct, much like a challenge board, to 3
look at what the team did and what their findings were 4
and how they went about doing their business to make 5
sure that we got the best insight that we could.
6 With that, then, we were -- we did make the 7
determination that the team did do the inspection that 8
we expected of them and we did reach the appropriate 9
identification of issues.
10 FACILITATOR DANIEL: So in answer to this 11 gentleman's question, Tom?
12 MR. BLOUNT: At the end of the day, we will, 13 once the report is crafted, once we have finalized the 14 report, it will be a publicly available document and 15 it will be available on the NRC website.
16 MR. COLLINS: Just to be clear. That's two 17 reports. There's this team's report and then there's 18 this report that was prepared by the other engineers 19 that we brought in to challenge us on our conclusions.
20 So --
21 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Okay. Steam tubes.
22 Steam tubes.
23 MS. STEMKE: My name is Janesa Stemke and 24 I live in Riverside. The last I heard before tonight 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 about the radiation leaks, I heard, "We don't have 1
statistics on that. We need time. We want to take 2
accurate measurements and these things take time."
3 That was the last I heard and that was back 4
in February or something. We need timely and accurate 5
radiation reports, released and made available to the 6
public immediately. And if that cannot be provided, 7
then you did not have the right to operate a nuclear 8
power plant in this vicinity or any vicinity because 9
the public needs to know this information.
10 And is there a radiation monitoring system 11 made available to the public for this purpose and if 12 not, it makes me wonder if the Nuclear Regulatory 13 Commission is actually paid on commission to keep nuclear 14 power plants operating. Thank you.
15 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Thank you.
16 MR. WERNER: Actually, the NRC does get 17 information, an annual effluent report is published.
18 But it is important to note that the utility did measure 19 the amount of radiation, as Greg Warnick said. They 20 have detectors on the secondary side, the steam side, 21 so they picked up the amount of radioactivity and they 22 analyzed that and came up with the release phase. A 23 couple of weeks after we actually had a radiation 24 detection team from the Region 4 office out here. 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 actually looked at it and looked at the values and 1
confirmed the numbers.
2 MR. COLLINS: Yes, this is Elmo. I'd like 3
to add to that response. Actually I really appreciate 4
the question. Actually, I heard three questions in 5
there.
6 One was what about the specific event on 7
January 31st. I think we've talked about. There are 8
actual measurements and a computation was made.
9 Then I heard about the NRC's annual report 10 that by regulation Edison has to publish. The question 11 with that is that doesn't seem very timely. What good 12 is that? Every year, how is that being done?
13 I do think we're in the process of taking 14 a look at that to see as an agency if there is anything 15 we can do to speed that up. I don't want to speak and 16 say more than I know. But I believe we haven't had that 17 question before, and I appreciate it.
18 The last point is on maybe some radiation 19 detectors off-site. I tell you one of the -- and I have 20 been with the NRC almost 25 years -- one of the hardest 21 things we have to do is -- one of the hardest things 22 I have to do was stand in front of you and tell you that 23 there is little to no radiation being released from San 24 Onofre, because how are you going to believe me? 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 31 can't feel it. You can't taste it. You can't touch 1
it. Right? There is no way you can intuitively tell 2
whether or not you can believe what I'm saying. I 3
understand that.
4 And so one answer to that might be -- and 5
I don't know how we would get there -- but to have 6
detectors off-site so that they can be available for 7
you.
8 (Applause) 9 MR. COLLINS: I understand why you want 10 that. The regulations don't require it, but there may 11 be something, you know, a solution there.
12 FACILITATOR DANIEL: All right. Thank 13 you, Elmo.
14 MR. MARLOWE: Rick Marlowe (phonetic), out 15 of Ramona, California. A couple of things. Realtime 16 reporting over the internet, the emissions would be 17 greatly appreciated by, I'm sure, by most of the people 18 in this room.
19 My concerns about the tubes are Mitsubishi 20 has been making these stem generators for quite a long 21 time. They have been putting all kinds of plants across 22 the United States and there may be some design changes, 23 but the basic geometry and flow in and flow out are 24 probably pretty consistent amongst all these generators.
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 I can't imagine that their simulations are 1
three to four times off, and if so, how can that be?
2 And if they are that far off, how come we haven't had 3
these problems in other places and why is it showing 4
up now?
5 FACILITATOR DANIEL: All right. Thank 6
you, Rick. Greg?
7 MR. WERNER: Yes. And actually, Mitsubishi 8
has only had two generators that are currently designed 9
and operating in the United States. One is -- well, 10 both the units that are at SONGS and at Fort Calhoun 11 located outside Omaha, Nebraska.
12 Those steam generators are similar 13 designed, but they are much, much smaller. And actually 14 we had the same concern with the wider thermal hydraulic 15 model, underpredicted the flows. And again, that's 16 another area that we were asking what caused -- what 17 was it in their model that caused those thermal hydraulic 18 conditions to be underpredicted.
19 So we have already asked for that also.
20 FACILITATOR DANIEL: No. I told you, we'll 21 try to get back to you. No. No. We will try to get 22 back to you Gary. Just a minute.
23 PARTICIPANT: So you guys want timely 24 information. Go to the internet. We have our own 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 sources. If you would like them, you can come and see 1
me later.
2 Show of hands, how many people here are here 3
because they do not want any nuclear power?
4 We're here on a post mortem. So why are 5
these things not reviewed upon delivery? I was 6
listening to the earlier part of it and there were 7
accelerometers that had been put off and showed that 8
there could be damage to these things.
9 Now, if I was a clerk at Ralph's and I 10 accepted a shipment like that, I would -- it would come 11 out of my paycheck. So why is it not going to come out 12 of your paycheck?
13 How many of these -- oh, you actually 14 answered this question. The models were off by three 15 to four times. The confidence interval there is 16 straight off the normal curve.
17 So, here is one about how long has an 18 investigation of this sort had to have -- how many -- how 19 long has it taken for an investigation of this sort to 20 have come to a conclusion in the past?
21 FACILITATOR DANIEL: All right, Zeke.
22 Thank you. Greg?
23 MR. WERNER: Well, to answer the question 24 about accelerometers, they were actually evaluated by 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 SONGS. We just had a concern as we looked at them to 1
make sure they were properly evaluated.
2 So, they just weren't blown off. They were 3
actually reviewed. We wanted to make sure that we 4
understood, to make sure they were actually evaluated 5
in accordance with their procedures.
6 So, the other thing, again, about the model, 7
again, we feel the same way as far as being 8
underpredicted. I mean, we don't understand it and 9
that's the kind of situation we're in right now.
10 FACILITATOR DANIEL: All right. Who had 11 some question about steam tubes. Stand up please and 12 come on out here.
13 MR. HARRIS: Harris, (phonetic) building 14 contractor, North San Diego County. I have got a 15 question for Greg. These steam tubes, did I hear you 16 right? Because the statistic were flying so fast. 128 17 tubes were tested, pressure tested?
18 MR. WERNER: 129.
19 MR. HARRIS: 129. Eight of them failed?
20 MR. WERNER: Yes.
21 MR. HARRIS: Were they randomly tested 22 throughout the entire amount of tubes?
23 MR. WERNER: No. Actually, if you go back, 24 all approximately 40,000 tubes had inspections completed 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 on them, and then numerous tubes were reinspected beyond 1
what was required.
2 The tubes that were selected for in situ 3
pressure testing were actually based upon the ones that 4
had the extensive tube wear.
5 MR. HARRIS: So there was no random test 6
of the entire 19,450 tubes in Unit 3?
7 MR. WERNER: That is correct, as far as the 8
in situ pressure testing.
9 MR. HARRIS: With a failure rate of 0.06 10 percent, you might have 1,167 bad tubes.
11 MR. WERNER: I'll let Emmett help me out 12 on this also. But the way the tubes are selected, again, 13 we're looking once the 80 current testings have 14 identified those tubes that would be susceptible to 15 failure, they go in and test them, because they don't 16 have information to analytically say they're okay.
17 So the idea is to go in and physically test 18 them to make sure they will or will not hold. And of 19 course, those eight tubes did not hold, and we suspected 20 that a number of tubes would fail. That was not beyond 21 what we did not expect to happen.
22 So, we expected a number of tubes.
23 Actually, I was surprised more didn't fail.
24 PARTICIPANT: But they only tested 148?
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 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Hang on.
1 MR. COLLINS: We need some explanation here.
2 There is a misunderstanding of what we know about the 3
tubes. So, Emmett.
4 MR. MURPHY: Okay. Every time a plant 5
conducts a steam generator inspection, one of the 6
purposes is such to find tubes that are -- that are 7
damaged beyond accepted limits and those tubes are 8
removed from service.
9 The second question a steam generator 10 inspection is intended to address, is whether or not 11 the plant or the utility was successful in maintaining 12 adequate safety margins in all of the tubes during the 13 last cycle of operation since the last inspection.
14 Normally, that assessment is performed 15 through analysis of the inspection or any current test 16 data of each of the tubes. They measure the depth and 17 length of the cracks.
18 They take into account measurement error.
19 They utilize standard equations for predicting girth 20 strength of the tubing as a function of the length and 21 depth of the flaw.
22 And then
- they, based on all that 23 information, they determine whether or not they have 24 maintained factors of safety against failure consistent 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 with the requirement.
1 These analyses tend to be very conservative 2
because a lot of the input parameters have a lot of 3
uncertainty, and so sometimes you predict through these 4
analyses that tubes don't have sufficient strength.
5 But it is a very conservative analysis.
6 So, in situ pressure tests, then, are a way 7
to then more realistically establish the amount of safety 8
margin or confirm that you have the appropriate safety 9
margin.
10 So based on your earlier analyses done by 11 Southern California, the eddy current inspection data, 12 they identified a significant number of tubes where their 13 analyses indicated they didn't have the appropriate 14 margin.
15 But these were conservative analyses.
16 That's why we did the pressure tests to determine for 17 sure whether or not they had the appropriate margins.
18 The rest of the tubes that were not tested, it was very 19 clear, upon the eddy current inspection data, that they 20 had the appropriate safety margins.
21 So, it's just the ones -- they just test 22 the ones where there was some question as to whether 23 or not they had appropriate the safety margin. Thank 24 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 38 MR. WERNER: I'd like to add to that also, 1
even before the steam generators were brought here to 2
site, that each steam generator, at least one time, if 3
not multiple times, was pressurized, the entire steam 4
generator, to 125 percent of design pressure.
5 So every steam generator tube was 6
pressurized to 125 percent of design pressure.
7 (Off-mic question) 8 MR. WERNER: No, the -- again, you go in 9
from the primary side, so we'll go approximately 2000 10 pounds, so add another, you know, 2500 pounds, and add 11 another 500 pounds. So they're all pressurized to 2500 12 pounds, the entire steam generators. It just wasn't 13 the tubes. It was entire structure.
14 MR. COLLINS: I want to make sure we -- this 15 is a very important point that's made by the gentleman, 16 understand, what's been done at the steam generators 17 and what the condition of the tubes are today. I need 18 the team to tell me. I wasn't on the team, so I could 19 have a misunderstanding.
20 One hundred percent of the tubes, almost 21 20,000 of them, had the tube thickness measured, I think, 22 for the full length, right? So we know the thickness 23 and have data on every tube, almost 20,000 on the steam 24 generator, and it was only those that I think Emmett, 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 as Emmett described, that had the most wear that received 1
the in situ pressure testing. So, we know what's out 2
there with these tubes.
3 MR. WERNER: It's also important to 4
understand that the tubes will wear during the normal 5
operation. So, as part of the inspection program, they 6
go and look at them to make sure even if they don't have 7
a leak, they inspect so many tubes as required by tech 8
specs. Again, the first outage they inspect 100 percent 9
of all the tubes.
10 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Okay. Steam tubes.
11 MR. TEASLEY: Hi, I'm Russ Teasley, local 12 resident, with the Earth/Ocean Society. My question 13 is did the NRC or any of the investigators involved do 14 specific analysis of the presence or absence of the stay 15 cylinder, the primary stabilization element of the steam 16 generator?
17 MR. WERNER: I'm going to let Joel answer 18 that question. Joel Rivera-Ortiz was on the team. He 19 actually looked at the design changes associated with 20 the --
21 MR. RIVERA: This is Joe Rivera, NRC, 22 Region 2. As part of the AIT, we looked at many of the 23 design changes that were made from the regional to the 24 new steam generators, and we looked at how the stay 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 cylinder was changed from the regional to the new steam 1
generator.
2 We reviewed the design basis of the steam 3
generators and how the regional steam generators rely 4
on the stay cylinder to perform their function, which 5
formed the basis for operating licensing, operating 6
license of the facility.
7 And we determined that the final safety 8
analysis report of the facility did not rely specifically 9
on the stay cylinder for the safety functions of the 10 steam generator.
11 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Thank you, Joel. All 12 right. I've got to go to this lady in the green shirt 13 before her arm falls off. You had a question about steam 14 tubes? Right? Okay.
15 PARTICIPANT: Thank you so much. This 16 event that happened on January 31st, correct? Okay.
17 What would the tubes' strength be on January 30th if 18 we had had a serious seismic challenge to that plant?
19 What would it take?
20 They certainly were damaged the day before, 21 but they only broke on the 31st. Now maybe they were 22 damaged on the 20th or the 21st. What do we know about 23 how strong these were prior to? Aren't we just gambling 24 here? Aren't we just taking our chances? We are not 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 a test facility here, a nuclear test facility. We are 1
families. We are a community. And we deserve better.
2 (Applause) 3 MR. WERNER: Thank you. I'd like to answer 4
that question. Of course, the steam generators, the 5
design, take into consideration the seismic. As part 6
of the in situ pressure testing, again, they selected 7
those 129 tubes, as Emmett described.
8
- Now, all those tubes were 9
pressurized -- attempted to pressurize up to 5200 psi, 10 which is, again, essentially almost three times higher 11 than normal pressure.
12 So three of the tubes failed around what 13 we call the main steam line pressure, which was -- I 14 think the test was 3300 psi. And those are the tubes 15 that we were concerned with from a safety standpoint, 16 because they failed at the lower pressure and then the 17 other tubes failed almost at or near the 5200 psi. The 18 rest of the tubes maintained the pressure and they had 19 full strength and showed the integrity that they needed.
20 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Okay. Go ahead, Elmo.
21 MR. COLLINS: Let me re-ask that question.
22 Do we think the tube degradation, the as-found 23 conditions of the tubes, had a significant impact on 24 the ability of the steam generators to withstand 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 42 seismic event? That might have been one of the questions 1
I heard there.
2 FACILITATOR DANIEL: That's right.
3 MR. COLLINS: What -- and did we look at 4
that? Do we have an assessment? And do we think seismic 5
qualification was significantly impacted? hate to put 6
my team on the spot, but that was the question we got, 7
I think.
8 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Go ahead, Emmett.
9 MR. MURPHY: Well --
10 MR. COLLINS: Okay, we had the team leader.
11 Now we need the expert to speak, so --
12 MR. MURPHY: The pressure tests -- the test 13 procedure calls for considering not only the 14 differential pressures that are at work during normal 15 operation and during the accident conditions, the safety 16 margin, but for the section that you're testing, section 17 of the tube that you're testing, you must adjust the 18 test pressure to the extent that loading from a seismic 19 event or a local rarefaction wave or some other 20 hypothetical event, if that could affect the pressure 21 capability of the tube, that should be reflected in the 22 test pressure that the in situ pressure test was 23 conducted.
24 It was my understanding during discussions 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 that I had with personnel during the time that the tests 1
were done that at the sections that they were testing 2
that no -- that the loading conditions for size 3
differential pressure did not impact the failure 4
pressures.
5 MR. WERNER: Thank you, Emmett. That's 6
why I have people like him on the team. A lot smarter 7
than I am.
8 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Well, what does that 9
mean? Okay. Clarification.
10 MR. COLLINS: Let me restate it. Emmett, 11 you check me to make sure that I say this in plain language 12 accurately.
13 (Off-mic question) 14 MR. COLLINS: It would be the ground 15 acceleration for the design basis earthquake at San 16 Onofre, point 6 gs. But I think I heard Emmett say -- I'm 17 looking at him carefully -- is that based on those 18 stresses alone, the tubes would have retained their 19 structure. Is that what you said? No? Emmett is going 20 to clarify.
21 MR. COLLINS: The test pressure, test 22 pressures at which the in situ test was conducted should 23 reflect any seismic that is occurring.
24 I think maybe the point of confusion was, 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 you know, is how much does seismic affect the failure 1
pressure for the conditions that we had at San Onofre.
2 It affected it -- it affected it in a negligible manner.
3 In other words, it was differential pressure that 4
controlled the structural margins for this situation.
5 (Off-mic question) 6 MR. MURPHY: Whatever magnitude they were 7
required to consider. I don't know that -- that's 8
not -- I don't know the answer to your question.
9 FACILITATOR DANIEL: All right. Thank 10 you, Emmett.
11 MR. COLLINS: I think we all understand 12 that it's not the magnitude. It's the magnitude and 13 how close it is to the plant. So, what the plant has 14 to be built to is what is the maximum ground acceleration 15 at the site, and then it's doubled.
16 Then that acceleration is doubled. And for 17 San Onofre that's 0.67 gs that constitutes the design.
18 That's the ground acceleration at the site that the 19 plant has to withstand.
20 (Off-mic question) 21 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Is that horizontal and 22 vertical?
23 MR. WARNICK: There are components, 24 horizontal and vertical. I don't know the numbers of 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 exactly the horizontal and vertical, but yes that is 1
considered.
2 FACILITATOR DANIEL: Okay. We have a 3
gentleman here who has a question about steam generators.
4 MR. STEINMETZ: Thank you. My name is Jeff 5
Steinmetz. I've got concerns concerning some of the 6
changes regarding the generators and steam tubes.
7 Previously, you stated that you did not -- that you only 8
considered two changes to be under the 50.90 rule.
9 This I'm confused by because it's my 10 understanding that you guys removed the stay cylinder.
11 This should have fallen under the 50.90 rule. The 12 changed tube sheet, the thickness of the -- excuse 13 me -- the change tube sheet was changed. This should 14 have fallen under the 50.90 rule. The tube alloy change.
15 This was the only, as I understand it, thing that was 16 clear to the NRC that was changed that SCE notified 17 you guys of.
18 The additional tubes, 370 tubes per 19 generator, this should have fallen under the 50.59 rule.
20 The changed tube supports should have fallen --
21 (Whereupon, at 12:18 p.m., DVD 2 ended) 22 23