Friday, October 19, 2012

10-18-12 SCE's RSG Testing Update + New NRC Blog Topic



The NRC has just posted this new topic on their blog site:
In Response to Your Letters: Proposed Restart of SONGS Unit 2

by Allison Macfarlane
NRC Chairman

You are encouraged to add your own comments, but be advised that moderation/posting is glacial!


====== 10/18/12 RESTART NEWS UPDATE =====

Information Concerning SCE's Ongoing RSG  Restart Testing At SanO:
I saw this info and I've had this email conversation with NRC Region IV about it:


(I saw this on Oct. 17, 2012 and sent it to the NRC)

Sir
I saw this posted on Twitter today and wanted to forward it to you, in the hope that it is not factual, because if it is, then the NRC has more problems at San Onofre than just damaged and leaking SG tubes...

This was posted on Facebook:
"ACTION ALERT! San Onofre Nuke Plant could Re-Start Within 10 Days!
From a whistle-blower at San Onofre nuclear plant in Southern California: "We are working on Unit 2, bringing it up from Mode 5 to 4 and are preparing to go from Mode 4 to 3 by the weekend of October 20th. Southern California Edison (SCE) brought in the auxiliary boiler (which runs off of oil), and assigned 12 hour shifts. SCE are making damn sure that no steam leaves the domes for fear the public will catch on. I can’t believe how audacious they are, but for all practical purposes, they are going to restart Unit 2—which still is highly radioactive—without the NRC thoroughly reviewing Edison’s application that was just submitted. Their motivation is to see if they fixed the new reactor head which leaked profusely the first time they tried it. They don’t want anything holding them back from actually restarting when they get the green light from the NRC. The NRC’s Confirmatory Action Letter allows them to take it up to Mode 3 because the reactor is not “critical”, (fission reaction is on hold). They are trying to beat the clock before time runs out on them and the CPUC (California Public Utility Commission) sticks Edison with the cost of the outage instead of the ratepayers.” -M


Question: Has the NRC approved this new TESTING, (as it was my understanding that there would be no restarting until the NRC decided it was safe to do so)?   You should be able to confirm the validity of the above with a simple phone call to the resident inspector at San Onofre...


Hopefully Mr. Elmo Collins will honor his quote, "We don't experiment with safety"...

I look forward to your timely response, as I want to give the NRC a chance to comment before publishing the above.

=====

I got this reply on Oct. 18, 2012:

Southern California Edison is permitted, by their license, and by the Confirmatory Action Letter issued March 27, 2012, to heat up and pressurize Unit 2 to normal operating pressure and temperature.  This heat up is being done using offsite electrical power.  This is NOT starting up the plant.  The safety concern with Unit 2 steam generators is the excessive vibration that occurs during high steam flow conditions in the steam generator, which may result in unexpected and rapid steam generator tube wear.  This cannot occur in the condition the plant is being taken to.  The steam generators will be hot, and pressurized, but there is no heat generation from the reactor, and the heat generation from the auxiliary boiler and reactor coolant (electric) pumps is very small and cannot produce enough energy to cause vibration in the steam generator tubes.  

The NRC has no concern with the structural integrity of the Unit 2 steam generator tubes today, in their current reactor shutdown condition.  The NRC is currently evaluating Southern California Edison’s proposal to restart the reactor.  This proposal states that Unit 2 can be operated, meaning it can start the reactor to produce the large amount of heat and steam flow for 70% of normal full power operation.  This amount of steam flow must be shown to not result in additional unexpected and excessive tube wear, or the NRC will not allow the reactor to be restarted. 

The reactor has not been, and will not be started up until NRC has granted permission.  The “testing” that is being referred to is normal testing that is allowed by the current license at San Onofre.  The “testing” that Mr. Collins was referring to is any test or experiment that is not currently an approved procedure and is outside the safety analysis as described in the facility Updated Final Safety Analysis Report.  As an example, the NRC would not allow the reactor to be restarted, producing the large amount of heat and steam flow, so that the licensee could monitor tube vibration to ‘see’ if excessive vibration is occurring – that would be a “test”.  The licensee must prove, with reasonable assurance, before starting the reactor, that excessive vibration will NOT occur.


Victor Dricks
Public Affairs Officer
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission / Region IV


=====

So I sent this reply yesterday:


Question 1 – Is the pressurized and hot reactor coolant (Any Amount) being circulated through SG 2E-089 under these test conditions?
Question 2 – Does the NRC postulate a MSLB outside containment under these test conditions?
Question 3 – If the answer to Question 1 and 2 is yes, does NRC postulate > 99.6 % steam voiding in the U-Tube Bundle?

 The public is going to ask ,"What is going on between Region IV and the NRC? People need the answers in a hurry.  Is the NRC more concerned about the Safety of The Public or letting Edison get away with whatever they want to do?  If NRC was strict from the very beginning with Edison, things would not have to come to this.  There is still time.  Here is a quote for your benefit, An anonymous participant in an Industry Conference was asking questions and persistently complaining about complex and unclear NRC regulations.  A NRC Branch Chief said, "Sir, to resolve any complex technical problem and understand unclear regulations, you have to, 'Read and reread in between the lines', use, 'Critical questioning and an investigative attitude' and 'Solid teamwork & alignment'."
=====

I'll update this post, if I get any additional replies
Best
CaptD






4 comments:

  1. Very Big News from San Clemente Green http://conta.cc/Qyx0KO

    Greetings!

    I have some interesting facts for you about what is going on today regarding San Onofre nuclear reactors.

    1) Starting today, Unit 2 will be run at full capacity with highly radioactive water flowing through the damaged tubes in the steam generators for the next 5 days! This dangerous experiment is allowed by the NRC because the reactors are not actually being activated. Instead, they will use huge heat generating pumps to simulate running the system at 100%. Without repairing the problem, Edison is experimenting with a defective nuclear reactor just to see what happens. This fact was first brought to our attention by someone who is working on unit 2 presently and found this risk to be unacceptable. It is a little known fact that we had serious problems with the new reactor head because of the more prominent issues with the defective steam generators, (see specifics on the message from the whistleblower below). It has since been confirmed by Greg Warnick (greg.warnick@nrc.gov), NRC's Chief Inspector on site. On Friday, he told me that this information was accurate. Unit 2 had several leaks in the new reactor head which was installed during the scheduled shutdown prior to the leak in Unit 3. He said that this is the only way for Edison to know if they have fixed the leaks in the many connections and fittings associated with the reactor head. He did not have the same level of concern about the defective steam tubes bursting as did our friend who is working on this project right now. Should we be concerned? I'm not sure, but I do think the public has a right to be informed about things like this in advance, and not covertly by someone afraid of losing his job.

    Here is what he told me over the phone...

    "Things are pretty bad here at the plant; Edison just hired a "union busting hot shot lawyer" and everyone is too afraid of losing their jobs to talk about anything that could make the company look worse, especially right now. I'm afraid of losing my job too, but my family and I also live ten miles away and I care more about them than anything else. We are working on Unit 2, bringing it up from Mode 5 to 4 and we are preparing to go from Mode 4 to 3 by the weekend of the 20th. They brought in the Aux. boiler, assigned 12 hour shifts, and they are making damn sure that no steam leaves the domes for fear the public will catch on. I can't believe how audacious they are, but for all practical purposes, they are going to restart Unit 2-which still is highly radioactive-without the NRC thoroughly reviewing Edison's application that was just submitted. Their motivation is to see if they fixed the new reactor head which leaked profusely the first time they tried it. They don't want anything holding them back from actually restarting when they get the green light from the NRC. The NRC's Confirmatory Action Letter allows them to take it up to Mode 3 because the reactor is not "critical", (fission reaction is on hold). They are trying to beat the clock before time runs out on them and the CPUC (California Public Utility Commission) sticks Edison with the cost of the outage instead of the ratepayers."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Con't:


      2) Coincidentally, while this is going on, an emergency preparedness meeting is taking place today in San Clemente. All the experts will converge to discuss disaster preparedness. I am going there to talk about Unit 2 "restarting" today and to see that they don't merely gloss over the topic of sheltering in place. If there is a radioactive plume coming our way we need to be able to get by on our own for weeks, not days. Will they discuss how to decontaminate yourself and prevent ingestion of radioactive particle that will remain in your body the rest of your life? Will they discuss the need for enough plastic and duct tape to seal your home after an earthquake shatters all the windows? We have other important questions we hope to get discussed in this forum. I hope you can join us for what will hopefully be an informative and perhaps even a lifesaving event.


      Thousands of letters have been sent to our elected officials, but more are still needed to make sure they hear us loud and clear.

      We are simply requesting that they support our reasonable expectation that the decision regarding the fate of the nuclear reactors at San Onofre should be done in a court-like setting. We can't allow the NRC to make this decision alone because they are the ones who have failed us in the past.

      The Great California ShakeOut reminds us once again that our government agencies prefer to ignore the possibility of a radioactive disaster. This is a critical point in time where we need to be heard loud and clear. Tell our Public Servants that we want our safety to come first. An adjudicated license amendment hearing is the best way to make sure of that.

      Please send a letter to 88 civic leaders
      INSTANTLY and get others to do so as well.

      GO TO

      thegreatfallout.org
      Be sure to use the social media links that we provide there too!

      Delete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. CITIZENS' OVERSIGHT SUBMITS PETITION TO INTERVENE AND REQUESTS HEARING INTO SAN ONOFRE LICENSE AMENDMENT REQUEST
    http://eastcountymagazine.org/node/11457
    snip:
    Changes remove inspection specifications from license, reducing public and NRC review and clouding operator requirements, watchdog group says

    October 20, 2012 (Washington D.C.) -- Citizens' Oversight, an El Cajon-based citizens watchdog group, submitted a formal request[1] to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regarding a license amendment request[2] by Southern California Edison (SCE) for the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (San Onofre).Raymond Lutz, Electrical Engineer and Founder of Citizens Oversight, prepared the petition to intervene based on a review of the proposed changes to the operating license of San Onofre. These changes to the license do not directly reflect on the recent emergency shutdown on January 31, 2012, and furthermore, is not in response to the proposal by SCE to operate San Onofre Unit 2 at a lower power level despite massive and severe damage to the steam generator tubes due to excessive vibration.

    Instead, the proposed license amendment makes a large number of changes throughout the technical specifications of the operating license. Most of these changes are quite similar in nature: they remove explicit requirements for inspections from the operating license and move these to a separate document which is no longer under the control of the NRC, but is under the control of the licensee.

    ReplyDelete

Thank you for your comment!