LTR-13-0453 Glenn Pascall, Chair, San Onofre Task Force, Sierra Club, E-mail New Information on the San Onofre Nuclear Generating StationML13143A312 |
Person / Time |
---|
Site: |
San Onofre |
---|
Issue date: |
05/21/2013 |
---|
From: |
Pascall G Sierra Club - Angeles Chapter |
---|
To: |
Apostolakis G, Macfarlane A, Magwood W, Ostendorff W, Kristine Svinicki NRC/Chairman, NRC/OCM/GEA, NRC/OCM/KLS, NRC/OCM/WCO, NRC/OCM/WDM |
---|
References |
---|
LTR-13-0453 |
Download: ML13143A312 (3) |
|
|
---|
Category:E-Mail
MONTHYEARML22348A0322022-11-30030 November 2022 NRR E-mail Capture - Request to Resume Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation for Decommissioning of San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Units 2 and 3 ML22348A0532022-11-30030 November 2022 NRC to National Marine Fisheries Service (Nmfs), Request to Resume Endangered Species Act Consultation for Decommissioning of San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Units 2 and 3 ML22278A0182022-10-0404 October 2022 (SONGS) Unit 2 Reactor Head and Closure of Commitments Related to Peaceful Use of Foreign Technology- Acknowledge Receipt ML22265A2122022-09-22022 September 2022 Request for Additional Information for Exemption Request from 100m 72.106(B) Requirement, Docket Nos 50-206, 50-361, and 50-362 ML22119A2422022-04-29029 April 2022 Riv FOLLOW-UP Response: Question About April 11 San Onofre Event ML22034A9962022-02-0202 February 2022 S. Morris Response to C. Langley-Questions About Moving Snf at San Onfre ML21280A1022021-12-0606 December 2021 NRC to NMFS, Supplement to Request to Reinitiate Endangered Species Act Consultation for San Onofre Decommissioning ML21277A2342021-09-30030 September 2021 NMFS to NRC, Receipt of Request to Reinitiate Endangered Species Act Consultation for San Onofre Decommissioning ML21242A0602021-09-30030 September 2021 NRC to NMFS, Request to Initiate Consultation for SONGS Decommissioning ML21117A3492021-03-30030 March 2021 March 30, 2021, Email from Public Watchdogs on Providing New Information to Its October 13, 2020, 2.206 Petition ML21069A2482021-03-10010 March 2021 Umax, 07200054, 05000361, 05000362, FSAR Revision 4 for San Onofre ISFSI ML21068A2712021-03-0909 March 2021 Request for Additional Information Regarding Biological Opinion - SONGS- EPID L-2021-LLL-0006 ML20343A1292020-12-0808 December 2020 NRR E-mail Capture - Request for Additional Information ML20302A3252020-10-21021 October 2020 E-Mail: Acknowledgement of Receipt to the Petitioner Regarding SCE Use of Hi-Storm at SONGS ML20233A7342020-08-18018 August 2020 LTR-20-0313 David Victor, San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) Community Engagement Panel, Chair, Et Al., Letter Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Security at SONGS and Recent SONGS Community Engagement Panel Meeting on O ML20224A0172020-08-0707 August 2020 8-7-20 Corrected Hearing Time - Intervenor SCEs Acknowledgement of Oral Argument Notice (9th Cir.)(Case No. 20-70899) ML20224A0182020-08-0707 August 2020 8-7-20 Intervenor SCEs Acknowledgement of Oral Argument Notice (9th Cir.)(Case No. 20-70899) ML20204B0782020-07-22022 July 2020 Donna Gilmore Email Holtec Umax Materials (07200054, 05000361, 05000362) ML20198M4522020-07-15015 July 2020 Supplement to Public Watchdogs 2.206 Petition ML20163A3402020-05-0505 May 2020 Email Transmission - Peaceful Use Commitments State Dept for SONGS Rx Heads and Steam Generators ML20120A0282020-04-28028 April 2020 4-28-20 Notice of Addition of James Adler as Attorney for NRC (9th Cir.)(Case No. 20-70899) ML20076A5742020-03-11011 March 2020 Response to A.Mcnally San Onofre Canisters (LTR-20-0003) ML20062F5762020-02-28028 February 2020 Public Watchdogs 10 CFR 2.206 Petition - NRC E-mail to Petitioner Regarding Petition Screening Results February 28, 2020 ML20063M3092020-02-28028 February 2020 Public Watchdogs 10 CFR 2.206 Petition - Response from Petitioner to NRC E-mail Regarding Petition Screening Results, February 28, 2020 ML20059M2292020-02-25025 February 2020 OEDO-20-00053 2.206 Petition - Flooding Likely to Create Radioactive Geysers at SONGS ML20049A0802020-02-14014 February 2020 Public Watchdogs 10 CFR 2.206 Petition - E-mail to Petitioner on Immediate Actions Request Determination February 14, 2020 ML20007E5342020-01-0606 January 2020 Oceansiders Initial Assessment & Public Meeting Response E-Mail ML20006D7012019-12-23023 December 2019 Public Watchdogs 10 CFR 2.206 Petition SONGS - Petitioner Request for Public Meeting and NRC Response - December 23, 2019 ML19354B6762019-12-20020 December 2019 2.206 Petition Initial Assessment Notification E-Mail ML19325C5902019-11-20020 November 2019 2.206 Petition Status Notification Email ML19326B2392019-11-18018 November 2019 Public Watchdogs 10 CFR 2.206 Petition SONGS - Screened-in and PRB November 18, 2019 ML19319B6262019-11-0808 November 2019 Oceansiders 2.206 Petition Immediate Action Response E-Mail ML19326A7122019-10-30030 October 2019 Public Watchdogs 10 CFR 2.206 Petition - SONGS Receipt of Exhibits October 30, 2019 ML19326A9692019-10-25025 October 2019 Public Watchdogs 10 CFR 2.206 Petition - SONGS Immediate Action Determination October 25, 2019 ML19326A3602019-10-23023 October 2019 Public Watchdogs 10 CFR 2.206 Petition - SONGS First E-mail to Petitioner October 23, 2019 ML19284B3232019-10-0808 October 2019 Response LTR-19-0351 Kalene Walker, E-mail Concerns About Critical Safety Problems with Holtec Nuclear Waste Storage System at San Onofre ML19344C7842019-09-0303 September 2019 Response from NEIMA Local Community Advisory Board Questionnaire 09-03-2019 RSCS ML19344C7212019-08-30030 August 2019 Response from NEIMA Local Community Advisory Board Questionnaire 08-30-2019 J Steinmetz ML19217A1862019-08-0202 August 2019 E-Mail from M. Layton/Nrc to K. Walker/Public San Onofre - SONGS Special Inspection - Damaged Canisters ML19214A1362019-08-0202 August 2019 Riv Pao Response to Mr. Langley Response to Inquiry ML19221B4122019-07-30030 July 2019 Southern California Edison Company, Southern California Nuclear Generating Station, E-mail from Charles Langley to Scott Morris, NRC, Redundant Drop Protection Features at SONGS ML19213A1072019-07-29029 July 2019 Reply to Mr. Langley Re. Redundant Drop Protection Feature at SONGS ML19210D4292019-07-29029 July 2019 E-Mail from M. Layton/Nrc to D. Gilmore/Public Reply to E-Mail Questions ML19210D4342019-07-11011 July 2019 Curtiss-Wright SAS - 10 CFR Part 21 Reporting of Defects for Introl Positioner 890265-010 ML19190A0432019-06-28028 June 2019 Discusses Proprietary Information for Curtiss-Wright SAS - 10 CFR Part 21 Reporting of Defects for Introl Positioner 890265-010 - Cw SAS Initial Report No. 10CFR21-48 ML19165A1102019-06-11011 June 2019 SONGS Webinar (6-3-2019) Message - Sarah Akerson ML19190A0442019-06-0707 June 2019 10 CFR Part 21 Reporting of Defects for Introl Positioner 890265-010 - Cw SAS Initial Report No. 10CFR21-48 ML19158A4432019-06-0404 June 2019 Southern California Edison Company; Scratches on Nuclear Storage Canisters at San Onofre Pose No Problems, NRC Says After Its Own Analysis - Orange County Register ML19156A1422019-06-0404 June 2019 LTR-19-0218 Donna Gilmore, Sanonofresafety.Org, E-mail Scratches on Nuclear Storage Canisters at San Onofre ML19158A1312019-05-31031 May 2019 Paragon Energy Systems LLC -10 CFR Part 21 Report of Defect GS2 Terry Turbine Introl Positioners 2022-09-22
[Table view] |
Text
Wright, Darlene From: Glenn Pascali [gpascall@att.net]
Sent: Tuesday, May 21,2013 q:18 PM To: CHAIRMAN Resource; CMRSVINICKI Resource; CMRAPOSTOLAKIS Resource; CMRMAGWOOD Resource; CMROSTENDORFF Resource
Subject:
Important new information on the San Onofre nuclear power plant
Dear NRC Commissioners:
Below is the text of a news story that appeared in the Los Angeles Times on Monday, May 20. It provides insight into previously unknown factors affecting the seriousness of technology failures as well as the cost, duration and difficulty of making repairs at San Onofre.
This is not "public comment" but rather an exchange of letters between the utility operating San Onofre and the designer of the faulty steam generator design. The content is a highly significant exchange of conflicting views and appears relevant to the decision before you regarding a San Onofre restart.
Thank you for considering this new input in your review.
Sincerely, Glenn Pascall, Chair, San Onofre Task Force Sierra Club - Angeles Chapter, Los Angeles, California Rift over San Onofre repair by Abby Sewell, Los Angeles Times May 19,20133:30 p.m.
In a flurry of letters late last year, Southern California Edison and the manufacturer that designed the steam generators at the now-dark San Onofre nuclear power plant appeared to be at odds over a long-term plan to repair the troubled facility.
In the exchange, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries proposed a repair plan that it said could have the plant back online at full power in about a year and also suggested a far more aggressive and expensive repair job that would take more than five years to complete.
1
By the end of 2012, however, the companies were unable to come to an agreement on a long-range plan. .
At the same time, Edison warned Mitsubishi that the ongoing problems at the nuclear plant had "seriously harmed" the utility and its stakeholders and that it expected the manufacturer to "accept full responsibility" for the problem.
The plant had been offline at that point for nearly a year because of unusual wear on tubes that carry radioactive water in the plant's newly replaced steam generators, which were designed and manufactured by Mitsubishi. The problem came to light in January 2012 after a small amount of radioactive steam leaked from one of the tubes.
Edison asked the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in October for permission to restart one of the plant's two units and run it at 70% power for a few months to see whether the reduced power would alleviate the conditions that led to the wear.
But the company was pushing Mitsubishi to develop a plan that would allow both units at the plant to return to service at full power for the 40-year intended life span of the steam generators.
The letters between the companies were recently released as part of an examination by the California Public Utilities Commission of the costs of the plant's outage.
Edison Vice President Pete Dietrich told Mitsubishi in a Nov. 28 letter, after several months of discussions, that the lack of a long-term repair plan 10 months into the plant's outage "is not and should not be acceptable to either of our companies."
Mitsubishi responded that the type of tube wear seen at San Onofre had never been seen before in an operating steam generator, making the analysis time-consuming.
The company said it had done mock-up tests of repairs to the support structures and concluded that adding thicker support bars to prevent the tubes from vibrating would be a "practical and viable" option and would take about a year to accomplish.
Other options Mitsubishi presented included redesigning and replacing the entire bundles of more than 9,000 tubes in each of the plant's steam generators and replacing the steam generators completely. Either action, Mitsubishi said, would take more than five years.
The documents did not give cost estimates, but replacing the steam generators the last time cost $768.5 million. The steam generators were installed in 2010 and 2011.
"I am disappointed that it appears that MHI does not have a repair plan despite the passage of many months," Dietrich responded in a Dec. 19 letter.
2
Mitsubishi.s warranty on the steam generators is capped at $138 million, but Edison contends that the cap should not apply to this case.
In a Dec. 20 letter, Mitsubishi noted that Edison had rejected the proposal to install thicker anti-vibration bars. Tom Palmisano, Edison's vice president of engineering, said during a hearing Wednesday that the company had questioned whether the plan would be effective.
Edison and Mitsubishi officials said discussions continue, but the companies still have not agreed on a long-term plan.
"All options are still on the table, and we're developing details for all of them," said Frank Gillespie, a senior vice president at Mitsubishi.
In the meantime, Edison officials have signaled that they may decide by the end of the year to retire the plant permanently if they don't get the go-ahead to restart at partial power.
abby.sewell@lanmes.com 3