Southern California Edison (SCE) today made public a white paper, supported by key documents, demonstrating that “for over 16 months, Mitsubishi failed to offer any viable, implementable and licensable plan that would safely and reliably restore the replacement steam generators to 100-percent power for their promised 40-year operational life” at the San Onofre nuclear plant.
SCE’s publication of these materials follows the Sept. 20 findings of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that Mitsubishi’s replacement steam generators at the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station failed, in part, due to a flaw in Mitsubishi’s proprietary computer code used to design and manufacture them.
The steam generator white paper and timeline made public today by SCE can be found at www.SONGScommunity.com/library. According to SCE, once the Mitsubishi-designed and -manufactured replacement steam generators failed, “SCE spent hundreds of millions of dollars to investigate, repair and keep San Onofre in a state of readiness for potential restart.”
Despite Mitsubishi’s contractual obligations, Mitsubishi failed to provide SCE with complete documentation regarding the replacement steam generators failures and potential repairs, “repeatedly delayed in providing a final repair recommendation and failed to substantiate that the repair proposal and the replacement proposal eventually offered would resolve the underlying problems with Mitsubishi’s design.”The SCE materials also detail SCE’s repeated attempts to gain access to important documents in Mitsubishi's possession. Nonetheless, according to the SCE white paper, “Mitsubishi still refuses to allow SCE access to its documents.” The SCE documents released today also illustrate how Mitsubishi failed “to fulfill its contractual obligation to ‘repair or replace (as appropriate) any defective part’ of the replacement steam generators ‘at its sole expense with due diligence and dispatch.’” On the contrary, “despite these constant meetings and other communications, Mitsubishi failed to offer a repair plan that (1) solved the cause of the replacement steam generator failures, (2) was feasible and implementable, (3) was validated and (4) was licensable.”