Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncilmember Boardman Recommendation - A Resolution Regardi Esparza, Patty From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Monday, November 05, 2012 3:43 PM To: agendaalerts@surfcity-hb.org Subject: FW: Item#23- Recommendation for Council to Draft a Resolution re: San Onofre nuclear plant safety From: Grace van Thillo [mailto:gracea@earthlink.net] Sent: Monday, November 05, 2012 3:11 PM To: Hansen, Don; ddwyer@surfcity-hb.org; cboardman@surfcity-hb.org; Bohr, Keith; jcardhio@surfcity-hb.org; mharper@surfcity-hb.org; jshaw@surfcity-hb.org Cc: Fikes, Cathy Subject: Item#23 - Recommendation for Council to Draft a Resolution re: San Onofre nuclear plant safety Item#23 - Recommendation for Council to Draft a Resolution re: San Onofre nuclear plant safety Honorable Mayor and Huntington Beach City Council KEY southland cities like the City of Huntington Beach are carrying out their mandate to protect the SAFETY of their residents and businesses; and I urge you to join them, and VOTE to send Letters of concern to all state/ federal entities involved with San Onofre nuclear safety issues. Your own photovoltaics on city buildings are already proving a safe alternative; and incentives from the state for large users to create their OWN "voltage support" with on-site generation, including rootftop solar, micro wind turbines and fuel cells, like Google, Wa1Mart, can all build energy efficiency and conservation; The California (ISO) is already preparing for Summer 2013 without San Onofre or Huntington Beach generation. Together with renewables, Edison can develop more innovative infrastructure upgrades for greater capacity and voltage support across the OC & the southland for peak demand. As we ratepayers SAVE money and CONSERVE, grid reliability can be boosted; and all this can help maintain a safer closed San Onofre nuclear plant while Edison deals with the defective Steam Generators & works to keep 1500 tons of spent fuel secure, as it sits next to I-5, the only N/S train service & Camp Pendleton Marine Corps families & training facilities. San Onofre nuclear has the worst record in the nation's nuclear history for critical steam generators and Edison still wants to restart Unit 2 without actually fixing it; so we MUST keep the plant shut down. Hopefully upcoming CPUC hearings can take place in the southland re: ratepayer refunds and a "reasonableness review" of Edison's handling of the defective Steam Generator Replacement 1 Project. Cities' concerned voices on behalf of their residents and businesses are ALL making a difference. I urge you to VOTE YES to send your letters of concerns. Thank you. Grace van Thillo, Concerned San Clemente and Southland resident hqp://www.energy.ca.gov/201 I publications/CEC-100-2011-001/CEC-100-2011-001-CMF.pdf http://www.environmentalleader.com/2011/11/02/walmart-coke-lead-as-firms-buy-over-250-fuel-cell-s, sty 2 CITY OF HUNTINGTONBEACH City Council interoffice Communication To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members From: Connie Boardman, City Council Member eb Date: October 31, 2012 Subject: CITY COUNCIL MEMBER ITEM FOR NOVEMBER 5, 2012, CITY COUNCIL MEETING—A RESOLUTION REGARDING TIME SAN ONOFRE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION STATEMENT OF ISSUE: As we are well aware, the San Onofre Nuclear Power Plant has been closed since January 31, 2012, because of unusual wear of tubes in a steam generator. A small amount of radiation did leak inside one of the buildings from one of the tubes associated with a steam generator. The city of Huntington Beach is within a 50-mile radius of the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station. A few months ago, residents of the city met with Council Members and also spoke during public comments to express their concerns regarding the operation of the nuclear power plant at San Onofre. The residents requested that the item be agenized for discussion and that the City Council consider drafting a resolution similar to the one attached from the city of Laguna Beach. RECOMMENDED ACTION: I recommend the City Council of Huntington Beach join other Orange County cities, such as Laguna Beach, Mission Viejo, San Clemente and Irvine, in expressing our concern over the failure of the new tubes at the plant by adopting a resolution similar to the attached resolution adopted by the city of Laguna Beach. CB-cf xc: Fred Wilson, City Manager Paul Emery, Deputy City Manager Bob Hall, Deputy City Manager Joan Flynn, City Clerk Jennifer McGrath, City Attorney /l�0 I�CIW v 1 n)!/i 77477)o-AJ w�-_s Give 70 I 1 2 RESOLUTION NO. 12.068 3 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF 4 THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH REGARDING THE SAN ONOFRE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION 5 6 WHEREAS Southern California Edison's(Edison) four replacement steam generators manufactured by Mitsubishi for the two nuclear reactors at their San Onofre site were shut down 7 after one tube failed and released radiation in January 2012, after less than two years of operation, 8 while the original equipment operated for 28 years; and 9 WHEREAS Edison informed the Nuclear Regulatory Commission(NRC)that the replacement steam generators would be"like for like" or"in kind,"that is, fabricated to the same 10 design specifications as the original San Onofre Combustion Engineering steam generators,but in 11 fact, have significant design changes from the original steam generators; and 12 WHEREAS the NRC has reported that design flaws have led to the malfunction of the new steam generators; and 13 WHEREAS the replacement steam generators in San Onofre Unit 2 and Unit 3 are identical 14 and are both showing excessive, early tube wear that the NRC confirms poses a serious safety 15 problem; and 16 WHEREAS there is no agreed, safe long-term solution to storing nuclear waste;and 17 WHEREAS the replacement steam generators were originally promised by Edison to save ratepayers money, since January 2012, due to the flawed re-design,the steam generators have failed 18 to generate electricity to the consumers. In addition, consumers are likely to be pressed to pay for 19 additional costs incurred by the shutdown and need to procure replacement power; and 20 WHEREAS an Order of Investigation(OII) by the California Public Utility Commission is needed to determine, in a transparent,public process, which parties are responsible for paying for 21 the costs associated with the faulty replacement generators, including the costs incurred during the shutdown(for example, replacement power, inspections, monitoring) and the cost of any repairs; 2 2 and 23 WHEREAS expenses for the San Onofre reactors could increase further with seismic 24 upgrades in the wake of advancing earthquake science, lessons learned from the nuclear disaster at Fukushima Daiichi, and seismic studies underway that California's nuclear power plant operators 25 have been mandated to undertake by the State of California;and 26 WHEREAS the State of California has further mandated that coastal power plants end 27 once-through cooling(OTC)technology due to the damaging impacts on sea life, and both San Onofre and Diablo Canyon nuclear power plants are currently undergoing feasibility studies for. 28 upgrades to their OTC systems, which would be extremely costly when implemented; and 1 1 WHEREAS it is therefore critical to create and implement strong contingency plans for 2 alternative power sources to San Onofre, especially those deriving from conservation, energy efficiency and renewable resources; and 3 WHEREAS the State of California has set aggressive goals for efficiency and renewable 4 electricity installation, but has struggled to meet its targets on time; 5 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,that San Onofre should not restart until and 6 unless Edison completes alicense amendment process with a public,transparent hearing to 7 determine the safety of the restart plan; and 8 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that the City of Laguna Beach urges the California Public Utilities Commission to proceed with its plan to expeditiously issue an OII regarding the financial 9 status and viability of San Onofre to protect the ratepayers; and 10 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that ratepayers should not be held responsible for errors which led to faulty replacement steam generators being installed, outage expenses, and the need for 11 repair expenses; and 12 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that additional incentives and programs are urgently 13 needed to support the rapid installation of new power generation,power savings, and grid stabilizing technologies; and 14 15 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that these new electricity solutions should prioritize efficiency and renewable energy resources whenever possible. 16 ADOPTED this 7th day of August 2012. 17 18 19 Jane Egly,Mayor 20 ATTEST: 21 22 Martha.Anderson, City Clerk 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 1 2 I,MARTHA ANDERSON, City Clerk of the City of Laguna Beach, certify that the 3 foregoing Resolution No.12.068 was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of said 4 City held on August 7,2012,by the following vote: 5 6 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Iseman,Pearson, Rollinger,Egly 7 NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None 8 ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Boyd 9 10 11 City Clerk, City of Laguna Beach, California 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 Esparza, Patty From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Monday, November 05, 2012 10:26 AM To: Boardman, Connie; Bohr, Keith; Carchio, Joe; Dwyer, Devin; Hansen, Don; Harper, Matthew; Shaw, Joe; Connie Boardman; Devin Dwyer; Joe Shaw; Keith Bohr; Matthew Harper Cc: Wilson, Fred; Emery, Paul; Hall, Bob; Flynn, Joan; Esparza, Patty; McGrath, Jennifer Subject: FW: Testimony for tonights meeting From: Robert Dettloff [mailto:rodettloff@socal.rr.com] Sent: Monday, November 05, 2012 10:03 AM To: Fikes, Cathy Subject: Testimony for tonights meeting Cathy; please distribute the following to members of the City Council and other appropriate City officials. Thanks! `1' Unfortunately, I will be setting up a polling place on Monday evening and will not be able to testify in person at the City Council meeting where Council Member Boardman has a resolution. I suggest that it is inappropriate to raise this issue at this time. A new City Council will be installed in a month and they should have the right to make this decision for the citizens of Huntington Beach, not a subset of outgoing City Council members. I know of no reason for a hasty submittal of a resolution to the regulatory agencies. I also suggest that this is not an appropriate position for the City Council to take with only one night of testimony for or against the resolution as written. As late as last Saturday, the agenda item on San Onofre, was not posted on the Cities web site. Therefore, I doubt that very many residents are aware of the proposed resolution and therefore will not be at the meeting to voice their opinion. I don't doubt that a faction of the environmental community, both within the City and outside the City, has been rallied to show up in force and try to overwhelm the Council into a position without the entire Huntington Beach citizens aware of the meeting and resolution in their name. The regulatory agencies are the ones who will make the final decision of required modifications and other operational and cost issues based on their findings. City resolutions are fine and appropriate to let the regulatory agencies know the position of the cities on the future of San Onofre. SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: Agenda Item No.� �� It is acceptable, to me, to attach the other Cities resolution to the Huntington Beach resolution, but I firmly believe that the prestige of the City of Huntington Beach warrants its own firmly worded resolution and not appear as a"me to" city. I would like the City of Huntington Beach's resolution to be more of a stand alone and to, as a part of the resolution, ask the regulatory agencies to look at the latest technology in determining the safety requirements for the facility and imposing them, to ask the regulatory agencies to look at the latest methods of determining the reliability of the hardware and the design of the facility and imposing them, to ask the regulatory agencies to determine the latest technology in Quality Control/Assurance of the hardware,the design, the implementation of the design, and the operational aspects of the facility and imposing them. The Safety, Reliability, and the Quality Control/Assurance are the keys to a successful operation of the best technology that we have for pollution free atomic energy. The use of atomic energy to produce energy within the United States has had only one minor malfunction, as far as I know. When one takes into consideration the number of successful hours of operation of atomic energy plants within our border as well as the number of kilowatt hours produced, we have had a very safe and successful use of atomic energy. Can the regulatory agencies do more? Probably. Atomic energy use to create power has come a long way since 1945. The United Stated on land and on the sea in our nuclear submarines and aircraft carriers has advanced the technology safely beyond the conception in 1945. The rest of the world also produces safe atomic energy. There have been only two notable problems, Chernobyl which was a different design and rampant with numerous human errors, and the Japanese power station that was inundated by the Tsunami. With the understanding of the past system failure causes and the implementation of current Safety, Reliability, and Quality Control/Assurance technologies, San Onofre can be a safe neighbor creating the electrical energy needed to meet current and future demands. Robert 0 Dettloff, Professional Quality Engineer Esparza, Patty From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Monday, November 05, 2012 11:36 AM To: agendaalerts@surfcity-hb.org Subject: FW: Resolution about restart at SONGS Attachments: FAULTY TOWERS.doc From: Donald Mosier [mailto:donaldmosier44@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, November 02, 2012 2:56 PM To: Boardman, Connie; Shaw, Joe; Harper, Matthew; Dwyer, Devin; Hansen, Don; Bohr, Keith; Carchio, Joe; Fikes, Cathy Subject: Resolution about restart at SONGS Dear Fellow Councilmembers, Please join the City Council of Del Mar and 7 other coastal cities in opposing the restart of Unit 2 at San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station. I have attached an article I wrote for a local newspaper highlighting why I believe the restart is a bad experiment with a flawed design that is identical to the Unit 3 steam generator that failed. This is from the NRC inspectors report. Don Mosier Donald Mosier Councilmember City of Del Mar 858-784-9121 daytime 858-337-5905 evenings Please conserve paper and energy: do not print this email or attachments unless essential. SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: Agenda item No.__ 3 1 FAULTY TOWERS Don Mosier, Councilmember Southern California Edison (Edison) applied to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for permission to restart damaged Unit 2 of the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) on October 41h, 2012. Lee Haydu and I attended an NRC public meeting in Dana Point on October 9th,where I participated as a panelist and stated my opposition to the restart without a full, license amendment hearing with public participation and review by independent experts, many of whom are against the restart. My comments were in line with Del Mar City Council action taken on September 24th. Why am I so adamantly opposed to restarting Unit 2?The January leak was in the new Unit 3 steam generator, and there is no proposal to start that reactor. The proposal from Edison is to restart Unit 2 at 70% power in the hope that lower power will reduce the risk of another radiation leak. Here is what the NRC inspectors concluded in July: "Since generator physical dimensions and design are identical, the operational parameters are basically the same between the Unit 2 and 3 steam generators; therefore,the hydraulic forcing function that caused tube-to-tube wear and accelerated anti-vibration bar and tube support plate wear should also be same. The initial inspections of the Unit 2 steam generators did not indicate significant wear except at the retainer bars (different mechanism caused this wear). However, subsequent follow up inspections in Unit 2 with a more sensitive probe confirmed the existence of minor tube-to-tube wear in two neighboring tubes but in one of the steam generators. The tube-to-tube wear that was found in Unit 2 was in a similar location as that found in both of the Unit 3 steam generators." (page 58, SAN ONOFRE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION - NRC AUGMENTED INSPECTION TEAM REPORT 05000, 361/2012007 and 05000362/2012007; July 18, 2012) So Edison is willing to experiment that the identical design to a failed unit will perform better, and that no further radiation leaks will occur. This experiment ignores the root cause of the problem, which clearly is faulty design and fabrication of the new steam generators, which is described in euphemistic terms as "flowering" (see illustration). This experiment will put 8.4 million southern California residents at risk, and the proposed benefit is generation of 700 megawatts of electricity that makes a small and unneeded contribution to our regional energy needs. It is this poor risk:benefit ratio that may have prompted both the LA Times and the Union-Tribune to reach rare agreement that SONGS should not be restarted. And the risk is increased by the close proximity to active earthquake faults. Tube Bundle Shape at Cold Condition Elastic Deformation ("Flowering" Effect) -09 `Tube Support' Plate No.7 Tubesheet In-Plane Deformation Out-of-Plane Deformation Description of"Flowering" Effect (Conceptual Drawing— For Illustration Purposes Only) Mitsubishi Heavy Industries,who constructed the steam generators for Edison, has proposed that tube-to-tube wear in the U-bend sections at the top of the generators is due to "flowering" at the high temperature, high pressure operating environment. (source: same NRC report of July 18, 2012 cited above). Lugar, Robin From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Monday, November 05, 2012 12:33 PM To: agendaalerts@surfcity-hb.org Subject: FK SONGS From: Marilyn Wigglesworth [mailto:tjandmw@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2012 6:05 PM To: Fikes, Cathy Subject: SONGS Dear City Council Member, Thank you for putting the critical issue of SONGS on your agenda. We need local community leaders to stand up for the safety of their citizens. Your voice is critical to ensure that the NRC is held accountable for ensuring public safety. Please join other cities in Orange County and San Diego County by supporting the following: © Urge the Nuclear Regulator Commission to not allow restart of San Onofre until and unless Southern California Edison completes a license amendment process with a public, transparent hearing to determine the safety of the restart plan. ® Urge the California Public Utilities Commission to: o Expedite the OII [Order of Investigation] regarding the financial status and viability of San Onofre to protect the ratepayers; and o Not hold ratepayers responsible for errors which led to faulty replacement steam generators being installed, outage expenses, and the need for repair expenses; and o Provide additional incentives and programs to support the rapid installation of new power generation, power savings, and grid stabilizing technologies; and o Prioritize efficiency and renewable energy resources whenever possible. Thank you, Marilyn Wigglesworth San Clemente Green SUPPLEMENTAL COMIMUNICATION. Meeting Date: 0�� Agenda Item No. i `s r� k n r � C 5y k � f 5 2 l E '� __" � aa�d ,ATM �'3H� � r - �•• F r r x s # 3EZ ir. Ist 'P 0 u sl r V r }ry November 5, 2012 To: Huntington Beach City Council Members From: Donna Gilmore SanOnofreSafety.org Subject: San Onofre Nuclear Power Plant Concerns The attached documentation,based on government and scientific data, substantiates why Southern California Edison should not be allowed to restart San Onofre's severely defective nuclear reactors. Included in the attachments: • SAFETY ALLEGATIONS: Nuclear Regulatory Commission(NRC) data was used to produce these four safety allegation(complaint) charts. These charts compare San Onofre to all the other U.S. nuclear power plants. There are 54 nuclear power plants and 104 nuclear reactors in the nation. San Onofre has the worst record of all of them: • Most complaints from on-site employees and contractors for over 5 years. • Worst record of harassment and retaliation against employees reporting safety problems for over 5 years. • Extremely high record of complaints compared to the average of all other U.S. nuclear power plants. • Continues to have the highest number of complaints compared to all other U.S. nuclear power plants. • STEAM GENERATOR TUBES PLUGGED: Nuclear Regulatory Commission data was used produce the plugged tubes chart. Fairewinds Associates (independent nuclear experts) and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission provided the data for the summary of problems • San Onofre replacement steam generators have the worst record in U.S. history • Edison's redesign of the steam generators caused the premature tube wear and radiation leak. Now they want to restart reactor Unit 2 without repairing it first. • STEAM GENERATOR LETTER FROM UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS: Independent nuclear expert, David Lochbaum, provided a report to the NRC as to why Edison has not proved their case for restarting Unit 2. This reinforces the need for a license amendment and evidentiary hearing. • EXCESS POWER IN CALIFORNIA: California has a 40% surplus of power without California's two nuclear power plants • NO BLACKOUTS NEXT YEAR: California's electric grid operator has plans to avoid blackouts next year. 2.3