San Onofre decommissioning fund $300 million short -- utility seeks to further gouge ratepayers over shortfall

Image by J. DeStefano, 2012

As reported by Bloomberg in a June 7 article entitled "Edison Faces Regulatory Battle Over San Onofre Shutdown Cost," regarding decommissioning costs:

'...The cost to customers may not be settled until late next year, Edison said. The company has already asked for a $16 million a year increase to cover the cost of decommissioning the reactors, Scilacci said on today’s call. The decommissioning fund is about $300 million short of what’s needed, he said.

Both reactors at the San Onofre plant, about 45 miles (72 kilometers) southeast of Long Beach, were shut in January 2012 after a radioactive leak and the discovery of unusual wear on tubes that transfer reactor heat to power-generating turbines.

Edison may recover some investment costs from Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd. (7011), maker of the failed plumbing, and from its nuclear insurer, Craver told reporters. The company has asked Mitsubishi for $139 million and $234 million from the insurer, according to a filing...'

San Onofre nuclear plant enters its decommissioning phase, which will take multiple decades and cost billions

Image by J. DeStefano, 2012As reported by the Capistrano Dispatch:

'...Victor Dricks, spokesman for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region IV, which regulates SONGS, said the NRC will continue its oversight of the plant but determination of the impact the announcement will have on existing investigations and licensing actions will have to wait until Edison submits its decommissioning plan.

“The NRC is aware of Southern California Edison’s plans, but the agency is awaiting formal notification of the utility’s actions,” Dricks said. “Once Southern California Edison formally notifies the NRC that it has permanently removed all fuel from the San Onofre reactor cores, the NRC will use its existing processes to move San Onofre to the agency’s decommissioning oversight structure.”

In a conference call with reporters early Friday, Craver said the plant’s closure would be a “multi-decades long process,” cost billions, result in the layoff of hundreds and leave spent nuclear fuel in dry-storage at the plant’s existing sight for years to come.

According to Craver, the company has a $2.7 billion decommissioning fund, after taxes, to handle costs associated with the closure. The fund, he said, should cover 90 percent of expected expenses...'

Swan SONGS as Southern CA Edison throws in the towel at San Onofre 2 & 3!

Image by J. DeStefano, 2012Southern California Edison has decided to permanently shutter its Units 2 and 3 San Onofre Nuclear Generating Stations (SONGS) reactors in Southern Cal! Congratulations to all who fought so hard for this great victory! Read the Edison press release.

"This is very good news for the people of Southern California," said [a] statement from Friends of the Earth (FOE) president Erich Pica. "We have long said that these reactors are too dangerous to operate and now Edison has agreed. The people of California now have the opportunity to move away from the failed promise of dirty and dangerous nuclear power and replace it with the safe and clean energy provided by the sun and wind." 

As pointed out by FOE's Damon Moglen on a press conference call, the lack of reliability, as well as the exorbitant costs (into the hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars) of needed repairs, at San Onofre 2 & 3 is what accounts for the economic uncertainty that led SCE to permanently shutdown the two reactors.

SCE claims that it has over two billion dollars in its decommissioning fund, about 90% of what is needed to do the job. However, as was demonstrated at the Big Rock Point, MI decommissioning, NRC regulations allow for significant radioactive contamination to remain in soil, groundwater, surface water sediments, flora and fauna, even as NRC allows the sites to be released for "un-restricted re-use." Thus, actually "cleaning up" a site would cost a lot more than is currently being spent (or saved up for). In addition, Big Rock Point's $366 million decommissioning bill was for a relatively tiny 70 Megawatt-electric (MW-e) nuclear power plant. San Onofre Units 1 (449 MW-e), 2 (1,146 MW-e), and 3 (1,146 MW-e) amount to a total 3,741 MW-e. How many billions of dollars it would cost to comprehensively clean up that much radioactive contamination, and radioactive waste in terms of the site's extensive facilities, is certainly more than a couple billion dollars. Hence, NRC will allow SCE to undertake but a token, shallow clean up of the site.

Beyond Nuclear has compiled comprehensive media coverage on, and other reactions to, the San Onofre 2 & 3 closures at its Nuclear Retreat page.