Tuesday, April 16, 2013

Fighting to Shut down San Onofre Gary & Lauri Headrick



Gary & Lauri Headrick, founders of SanClementeGreen.org tell why they are devoting their lives to seeing that the crippled San Onofre nuclear power plant is shutdown for good.


Monday, April 15, 2013

Serious Risks of San Onofre - Harvey Wasserman


Investigative Journalist Harvey Wasserman, long-time anti-nuclear activist, editor of http://www.nukefree.org/ lays out the risks of a San Onofre restart. Read his report on recent developments in San Onofre to the Public: DROP DEAD!  http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/04/13-4 

Decommission San Onofre 

Sunday, April 14, 2013

What Mass Evacuation Plan for San Onofre?


Emergency response professional Deanna Polk talks about the many holes in radiological emergency preparedness in the region surrounding the leaky San Onofre nuke, including lack of training and resources for first responders and the absence of a realistic mass evacuation plan.

Jen Tucker are you listening?

No Escape From San Onofre Meltdown.
No Escape From San Onofre Meltdown.

Saturday, April 13, 2013

Donna Gilmore Shutdown San Onofre


San Clemente resident Donna Gilmore, the founder of SanOnofreSafety.org talks about her own process of awakening to the risks posed by the nearby San Onofre nuclear reactors, and her discovery, confirmed by the Governor's Office that Gov. Brown has the authority to shut down California's San Onofre and Diablo Canyon nuclear reactors because they violate the 'once-through-cooling' prohibition under the State's Water Resources Control Board's rules.

San Clemente California ~ Fukushima USA
San Clemente California ~ Fukushima USA 

Friday, April 12, 2013

Kill San Onofre Before It Kills Us


S. David Freeman, legendary former Tennessee Valley Authority and the Sacramento Municipal Utility District administrator, who has shutdown many a nuke in his career - and is now working in his 85th year to help local residents and Friends of the Earth decommission San Onofre - explains why we have to 'kill nuclear power before it kills us.'

What part of Fukushima do you not understand?
What part of Fukushima do you not understand?
 

Corporate Terrorism



It is now clear that the NUCLEAR MAFIA and their cronies at the NRC, U.S. Gov’t and CA State Gov’t plan to perpetrate another act of nuclear terrorism upon the people of Southern California and the world. By allowing Southern California Edison to restart the damaged and defective reactor number two that has not even been repaired, to experimentally restart at 70% power sometime in June or July 2013.

I say terrorism because many people in California are afraid for the health of their children, their property values, and what would happen if a major nuclear accident happened at San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station? By definition terrorism is an act that its purpose is to create fear. Just thinking about the evacuation plan that every Californian knows would not work, and having to shelter in place during a nuclear meltdown at SONGS.  Then after the radiation damage to people's health has been done just like Chernobyl and Fukushima, the government will announce in a month or two (far too late) that in a 10, 20 or 30 mile radius will be an exclusion zone due to high radiation levels, and everyone has to leave their homes and possessions to go live in a refugee camp somewhere in Riverside County. The loss of billions in property values, infrastructure (schools, roads, beaches, farm land and food crops, local governments) personal disruptions and destruction of several millions lives, all put at risk in the name of profits for SCE. 

What will be the fate of Southern California if this act of Nuclear Terrorism by the NUCLEAR MAFIA is allowed this experimental restart at San Onofre Nuke plant?

Sent to me anonymously

Monday, April 8, 2013

Why fatigue damage will stop the NRC from allowing Unit 2 to restart






FATIGUE DAMAGE TO SONGS STEAM GENERATORS
J. Hopenfeld 

Provided to the “DAB Safety Team” as additional explanation of the fatigue damage to SONGS steam generators which was discussed in a report by the author and was submitted to the California Public Utility Commission on March 29, 2013

Note: Links to these documents are listed below 

SCE/MHI made a mistake in their stress analysis, which directly impacts the safety of restarting Unit 2.  When the error is corrected, the result clearly shows that Unit 2 has already used up its allowed fatigue life and is not fit for service any longer.  This means that if Unit 2 is restarted at any power level an abrupt pressure change such as inadvertent closing or opening of a valve or a steam line break could lead to a sudden tube ruptures.   The ASME code and NRC regulations do not permit safety components to operate when their fatigue life has been exhausted.

The source of MHI’s error resulted from how they calculated the increase in the local stress at geometrical discontinuities  (notches), which are formed when two metal surfaces come in contact during vibration.  Since the worn surfaces of the tubes inside the steam generators cannot be seen, MHI made two key assumptions, which are inconsistent with the observation that both the tube and the supporting bar are worn into each other.  First, MHI assumed that the ASME endurance limit could be applied directly to the notched tube surfaces.  Since it is commonly known that surface roughness significantly reduces fatigue life and since the ASME data is for smooth polished surfaces, this assumption would underestimate the amount of fatigue damage.  Second, when using the Peterson chart, MHI assumed unrealistically large fillet radius and consequently derived a low concentration stress factor.  Large radii would decrease the local stress and cause the tube to fail at a higher stress thereby increasing its fatigue life.  Only by using these two, arbitrary non-conservative, assumptions was MHI able to conclude that Unit 2 did not suffer any fatigue damage.

As depicted in the MHI drawings the support bar and the tube form a sharp discontinuity at the contacting surface, therefore the appropriate geometry for calculating the stress concentration is an abrupt geometry change (very small radii), not a large radius shoulder fillet that was assumed by MHI.  When a correction is made to account for the sharp notch, the corrected stress indicates  (see Figure 1 below) that the tubes have used up their fatigue life during the first cycle of operation.  Structures with sharp notches can fail catastrophically when subjected to high cycle vibrations.  (MHI redacted their assumption so the exact value of the radius they used is unknown.)

 The loss of fatigue life is a major defect in the tube material; NRC regulations 10CFR50, Appendix B, Criterion 16 specify that for a licensee to maintain his operating license, such non-conformance must be promptly identified and corrected.   The licensee must assure that “corrective action (is) taken to preclude repetition.  NRC’s General Design Criteria 4 and 10CFR50 Appendix A also specify that steam generator tubes must be able to “ accommodate the effects of loss of coolant accidents “ The fact that the NRC has not already raised these issues in any of their  “Requests for Additional Information, RAIs” indicates that the NRC would be ignoring its own regulations if it allows SCE to restart Unit 2.

 In Summary: The SCE request for approval to operate Unit 2 at 70 % power for 150 days provided no explanation for the selection of this inspection interval.  The absence of such explanation and the absence of an indication of the actions that would follow demonstrate the unreliability of SCE entire assessment of restarting Unit 2.  Edison did not specify pass/fail criteria for the tubes during the outage inspection.  Given the fact that fatigue damage does not lend itself to detection, SCE request is unacceptable and should be rejected.