A major release of radioactive waste at the San Onofre nuclear plant could cost the Southern California economy more than $13 trillion over future decades, according to a study released Tuesday by a nonprofit foundation.

The study was immediately rejected as meaningless by the shuttered plant’s owners, who said such a release is no longer possible.

The number in the study contemplates the worst-case long-term damage to property and job centers within 50 miles of the plant, which closed in 2012 and is now in the process of being decommissioned.

“In the 50-mile impact scenario, about $13.4 trillion in gross regional product could be at risk over a 50-year time horizon,” the Samuel Lawrence Foundation study said. “These potential catastrophic losses are at least ten-fold larger than present levels of insurance against these types of events.”


A separate report also released Tuesday by the same group urged regulators to stop the waste-transfer process at San Onofre overseen by majority plant owner Southern California Edison until a more thorough analysis can be completed.

Edison officials, who already halted the transfer of millions of pounds of spent nuclear fuel in August after a near-miss accident, rejected the reports as contrary to Nuclear Regulatory Commission findings and peer-reviewed research on the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, which was also known as SONGS.

“The whole basis for the economic report is simply fearmongering at its worst,” said John Dobken, a spokesman for Edison. “The NRC has affirmed that with the nuclear reactors at San Onofre permanently defueled and SONGS used fuel having decayed for seven years, there are no credible accident scenarios that would produce an offsite radiological release.”

In a news release last month, the utility said the transfer of spent nuclear fuel from pools to so-called dry storage has been on hold since August.


“Transfers will resume only after SCE is satisfied that our team has successfully demonstrated fuel transfer can proceed utilizing the new procedures, training and technology, and the NRC has an opportunity to inspect practice runs and has reviewed re-start plans,” the company said.

The twin studies were released weeks after federal regulators issued a notice of violation against Edison for the August incident that temporarily left one of the huge canisters improperly wedged against the lining of a storage cavity, 18 feet above where it should have been placed.

Edison was cited not only for a performance error but also for a lack of training, lax oversight and failing to immediately report the accident to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Late last year, the utility said it hoped to proceed with the fuel transfer as soon as this month but federal regulators have not yet allowed the fuel transfer to restart.


According to the economic-impact study, a major release of the spent fuel could do decades-long damage to the Southern California population as well as its many industries and property values.

The analysis includes the potential closure of Interstate 5 and ports in Los Angeles, Long Beach and San Diego. It also cited potential job losses of 4.5 million -- more than 20 percent of the people currently employed in California.

“The net present value loss of $13.4 trillion over 50 years is equivalent to 70 percent of U.S. GDP (gross domestic product) in 2017,” the report said.

The second study said Edison’s plan to transfer 3.6 million pounds of spent fuel from cooling pools into steel-lined canisters planted along the beach is “fatally flawed” due to its location, technology and management.


“Operators have no visibility of the canister during downloading and precise adjustments to canister orientation cannot be made,” the report said. “These gouges remain undetected and unrepaired due to the lack of thorough inspection and monitoring.”

The San Onofre nuclear plant closed seven years ago this month after excessive wear in newly installed replacement steam generators caused a small radiation leak. Edison decided to close the plant for good in June 2013.

The utility says its process for storing the fuel is safe. The company says on its community website for the decommissioning: “San Onofre, like nuclear power plants throughout the United States, has a process for safely managing and storing used nuclear fuel and protecting workers, the public and the environment. San Onofre safely stores used nuclear fuel on site using a combination of technologies: enclosed, steel-lined pools (spent fuel pools) and sealed stainless steel canisters that are housed in reinforced concrete structures (dry cask storage).”

The Samuel Lawrence Foundation is a Del Mar-based nonprofit organization that works to promote broader access to science, medicine, arts and education.


jeff.mcdonald@sduniontribune.com (619) 293-1708 @sdutMcDonald

UPDATES:

6:45 p.m. This story was updated with a response from Southern California Edison.