E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Mark Ralston / AFP - Getty Images
A view of the San Onofre Nuclear Power Plant in north San Diego County is seen in this March 2011 file photo.
The operator of California's troubled San Onofre nuclear power plant proposed Thursday to restart one of the plant's shuttered reactors, despite an outcry from activists who say doing so could be catastrophic.
Southern California Edison filed the proposal with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission after concluding a reactor could be operated safely despite damage to scores of its tubes that carry radioactive water.
A plan to return even one reactor to service is a milestone for Southern California Edison, which has spent months unraveling what caused excessive tube vibration and friction inside the plant's nearly new steam generators, then determining how it might be fixed.
But the plant is far from returning to robust operation.
Edison must wait for approval from U.S. nuclear regulators before restarting the unit. Nuclear regulators say there's no timetable to restart the plant, and review of the application could take months. "The agency will not permit a restart unless and until we can conclude the reactor can be operated safely," NRC Chairman Allison Macfarlane told Reuters. "Our inspections and review will be painstaking, thorough and will not be rushed."
Watch the most-viewed videos on NBCNews.com
The proposal was immediately denounced by environmentalists and anti-nuclear activists who have argued for months that restarting the plant between San Diego and Los Angeles would set the stage for a catastrophe. About 7.4 million Californians live within 50 miles of San Onofre, which can power 1.4 million homes.
"Both these reactors are alike, and neither is safe to operate," said S. David Freeman, a former head of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power who advises Friends of the Earth. "While Edison may be under financial pressure to get one up and running, operating this badly damaged reactor at reduced power without fixing or replacing these leaky generators is like driving a car with worn-out brakes."
Edison wants to operate Unit 2 at 70 percent power, which company officials predicted would prevent vibration that has caused excessive wear to tubing. Company officials expressed confidence in the proposal, which followed more than 170,000 tube inspections over more than eight months.
Stay informed with the latest headlines; sign up for our newsletter
In January, the Unit 3 reactor was shut down as a precaution after a tube leak. Unit 2 was taken offline earlier that month. Neither unit has been operational since. The plant's Unit 1 was shut down permanently in 1992.
Federal regulators examined the plant to determine what happened to Unit 3 and how it could have been prevented. While the Nuclear Regulatory Commission commended the staff for their handling of the leak, they expressed concern over the design flaw that caused it.
Southern California Edison also pointed to the high costs of running the plant as a reason for downsizing its staff. Compared to similar plants, the staffing and costs are much higher. The company will also reduce costs by “improving plant processes while fully maintaining all safety commitments,” they stated in August.
This article includes reporting by NBCLosAngeles.com's Lauren Steussy and Reuters.
More content from NBCNews.com:
- Almost-Eagle Scout denied award because he is gay
- Somalis 'should leave culture at door' remark by Maine mayor stirs outrage
- 'Business as usual:' Congress asks VA to explain chronic late payments to student vets
- 7 bears killed in Montana after becoming dependant on humans for food
- Philadelphia student wearing Romney shirt told to 'get out of the class'
Leave a Comment:
Great, more nuclear waste. Where you gonna dump it? Earthquake zone is not where we would operate.
Sure start it back up. When the core melts down it should clear about 250,000 from the area permanently out of the area and pick up business for doctors hospitals,morticians and cemetery realtors. Meanwhile Japan, Germany and several other countries are closing their nuclear power plants is favor of wind and hydro power
The re-start and continued operation of SONGS is the dream of every oncolgi$t in southern California.
Somewhere in the middle is a compromise that doesn't pollute as bad and provides the needed electrical generation required to run our society, I don't believe it lies solely in Renewables as they are at the mercy of nature (wind, sun, water all take a break and are not available 24/7/365). It's a nice thought but the reality is, it is not attainable with current technology at a reasonable price. Nuclear should be in the mix, Gas-Fired should be in the Mix and Clean Coal should be in the mix, until we start thinking about the available resources and utilizing all of them, we will be faced with the current condition of marginally available resources to provide the desired societal norms on which we depend. Electricity is no longer considered a luxury but is a necessity for the status quo, to do otherwise is to head to candles and kerosene lamps.
San Onofre is under a microscope this instant, greater minds than those responding to this article are looking at the problem and have done the engineering to bring the unit back at a reduced load in a way that eliminates or minimizes the vibration that were/are causing the problem. They are requesting to do this under the scrutiny of the NRC in a Post-Fukushima Operating Environment, I would hope we learned from the disaster. I would think we can trust that the entities operating SONGS (San Ofonfre Generating Station) that they will only do so if there is no risk involved and will shutdown at the slightest indication of a problem.
California may need to re-think it's anti-fossil fueled generation restrictions as they are painting themselves into a corner that leads to candles, kerosene and horse drawn buggies.