IA-84-430, Further Response to FOIA Request for Documents Re Charleston Earthquake of 1886 & Seismic Design for Vogtle. Documents 1 & 2 Available in Pdr.Document 3 Encl

Further Response to FOIA Request for Documents Re Charleston Earthquake of 1886 & Seismic Design for Vogtle. Documents 1 & 2 Available in Pdr.Document 3 Encl

ML20133Q185
Person / Time
Site:	Vogtle
Issue date:	07/11/1985
From:	Felton J NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM)
To:	Bell N NUCLEAR INFORMATION & RESOURCE SERVICE
References
FOIA-84-430 NUDOCS 8508150051
Download: ML20133Q185 (2)

Text

. '+p % 'g, UNITED STATES PD(L/0/9 8'

~

c NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION h -

W ASHINGTON, D. C. 20555

...../

JUL 11985 Ms. Nina Bell Nuclear Information and Resource Service 1346 Connecticut Avenue, NW, 4th Floor IN RESPONSE REFER Washington, DC 20036 TO F01A-84-430

Dear Ms. Bell:

This is the final response to your letter dated May 23, 1984, in which you requested, pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (F0IA), six categories of documents regarding the Charleston earthquake of 1886 and seismic design for the Vogtle nuclear power plant.

Documents 1 and 2 of the enclosed appendix are already available in the NRC Public Document' Room (PDR). Document 3 is being placed in the PDR in folder F01A-84-430 under your name.

This completes NRC's action on your request.

Si erely 2

['-

. M. Felton, Director Division of Rules and Records Office of Administration

Enclosure:

As stated 8508150051 PDR FOIA 850711 BELL 84-430 pyg

Re: FOIA-84-430 APPENDIX

1. 11/19/82 Draft Commission paper, " Clarification of U. S. Geological Survey Position Related to Seismic Design Earthquakes in the Eastern Seaboard of the United States." (7 pages)

Accession No. 82121300064

2. 10/82 " Studies of Postulated Millett Fault," Vols. I and 2 (809 pages)

Accession No. 8210150373

3. 03/23/82 Memo to EDO from J. Ahearne; USGS Earthquake Analysis (1 page) w/ enclosure:

3/19/82 Memo to Chairman Palladino from W. J. Dircks; Summary of Meeting Held at USGS. (4 pages) s I

1 i

a 4

.t

o ucuq J -

[s ig g

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION N

WASHWGTON D.C.20555

.f '

E March 23, 1982

'+,, . . . . . /

CFFICE OF THE j

. COMMISSIONER l l

1 MEMORANDUM FOR: ExecutiveDirecforforOpeations /

FROM: .

John Ahearne '

SUBJEC. T : . USGS EARTHOUAK ANALYSES -

" '.' ? ^ ...

0

^ ': . .  ;~ ' .' '

• _ :. v Lzg R j ~-:..

,_ ,( . ,

On March 19, 1982 you reported on a recent meeting with -

the' USGS. In Secy-82-53 you had alerted us to some of the issues to be discussed. However, from your recent memorandum it i.s not clear 'to me what are the USGS's positions on the Charleston earthquake and on eastern earthcuakes in general.

Can you prepare a description for me?

cc: Chairman Palladino '

i Commissioner Gilinsky

• Commissioner Roberts OPE OGC

,S .D. M"-

t .

~

t .

i o

g .

K h , 19I Rec'd 0 f: .f.3 : . . , ,,,,,,4

( y$ 37fi4 5 Date . .

" Time . . . 2 o. . . . ...M 3

Ib 1 NUC AR REGULATOTFL@Jdak%L%'J WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 3 k. g .y f , .

March 19,1982 k*%.** 4 MEMORANDUMFbR: Chairman Palladino  !

FROM: William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations -

SUBJECT

SUMMARY

0 . F MEETING HEl.D AT USGS -

On March 1,1982, Harold Denton, Jim Knight and I met with Dallas Peck, .'

Director, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and memb.ers of his staff. I' requested this meeting in a letter of December 14, 1981 to Dr. Peck for the purpose of discussing the continuing need for review assistance from the USGS and to assure continued coordination of review schedules

~

necessary to meet plant licensing requirements. A list of attendees is attached.

The interaction between'NRC and USGS continues to be effective.-

Con-duct of a comprehensive safety review requires input from USGS~

research in both specific site and regional matters as wel.1 as topical . .

issues such as earthquake hazard estimation. Close coordination between -

. the USGS and NRC staffs assure that pertinent information flowi.ng from -

USGS research programs is brought into NRC safety evaluations in a timely fashion. The particularly rapid development of inf'ormation in the area of strong ground motion that has occurred in the past few years has ma.de '

this coordination all the more necessary.

Better understanding of the geologic basis for certain eastern seismic events such as the New Madrid and Charleston earthquake has been gained -

through USGS research. The geological process occurring in the New Madrid region is now considered to be well understood. We spent considerable tim'e on the Charleston issue. The geologic features related to the Charleston, So'uth' Carolina event under current hypoth-esis may not be unique to the Charleston area. The cumulative displace-

~

ments over geologic time are small on these features. In light of todaf's-

! knowledge, it may not be appropriate to fix a single location for the

' Charleston event but to express the probability, albeit low of such an earthquake occurring anywhere in a large region. Probabilistic' charac-terizations may also- be more appropriate for some western sites of complex geology such as the Hanford, Washington ' area. The USGS and NRC staffs will work' closely on these developments to assure effective communication.

j h& .

bh  %

i. .

--~-.a....~.._.............. . ... f _.,. a .. m .. _ _

. .,. .. ~

+

Cha.irman Pall'adino March 19,1982 -

Other parts of interest resulting from the meeting included:

- A briefing on the proposed. safety. goals for nuclear power plants would be useful as one means of assisting communication between the USGS and NRC staffs with r,egard to the evaluation and use of probabilistic methods in seismic hazard and safety evaluation.

This briefing will be arranged at the earliest opportunity. -

- Probabilistic characterization of seismic activity may appear The to conflict with the approach of Appendix- A to 10 CFR 100.

need for revision of Appendix A is well recognized and is planned USGS assistance

~~

'" to st&it when NRC staff resources are available.

in this effort will help assure the application of best available technology. ,

' - The use of peak "g" values is inappropriate-for setting design seismic input because there is little, if any, correlation to damage. Cooperative efforts between USGS, NRC and the National .

Science Foundation in the field of engineering seismol.ogy.are

- desirable and could lead. to the development of appropriate -

conservative yet rational design input param'eters. .

- Continued NRC support for the state geologic agencies is desirable.

.- particularly in light of reductions in the USGS bddge.t for funding Seismic networks in the region of i . seismic instrument networks.

several operating plants have provided .the information necessary ,

- for. timely and accurate interpretation o~f actual ground motion

'by both the NRC staff and the state agencies during recent small earthquakes. ,

Finally, Dr. Peck and Jim Devine stressed a point that they wished us' to bring to the ASLB Panel's attention. The duration and scope of the NRC hearing process often makes USGS planning for NRC assistance difficult.

In some cases, the Hearing Bo.ards have been issuing subpoenas directly to individual USGS staff. members. These individuals, many times, have been '

j pursuing research that is on the fringes of generally accepted geologic

.or sei.smic science and do not represent USGS position. Dr.. Peck emphasized i

2 that'the Boards should attempt to use proper channels and procedures when seeking USGS views. He recognizes and respects the right of intervenors

' to seek out and subpoena USGS individuals to support.a particular position i .' -

6 l .

.l

Chairman Palladino , ,

-3. , ,

March 19,1982 staked out in a case bt he felt that if the Boards wanted official ~

USGS positions, they should use' acc'epted chabnels that exist through:

the Director's office. I have discussed this' with Tony Cotter and

~

l ' provided him with the contact point at USGS.-

! . ppsWilliam1914

.' - William 5. Dircks Executive Director

- - for Operations Enclosure ' '

List of attendees .

CC: Co::nissioner Gilinsky ' ' ~

Commissioner Ahearne ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '

Commissioner Roberts '

-SECY ' ~

OGC ..

~

• OPE '

HRDenton/NRR '

. BPCotter/ASLBP RBMinogue/RES .. .-.

.. Di'stribution WJDircks/EDO -

EKCornell/ DEDO .

TARehm/A0 00 .

EDO R/F ,

o 5

i 1

}.

i e mcc v ......QEQQ.......... .......-............... ...................... ......................

W sumwt) ....... J.Di rcks/.. ms..................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . .

........................ ....................... ................s em> ..... 31.. ' S.1.8 2 . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .........:.............. ........................ ........................ .................

^

-i  : ,.,. *r ATTENDEES NRC/USGS MEETING - MARCH 1,1982 ,

.c .

. ngc .- , .

. .~

, ~ ~'

W. Dircks, Executive Director for Operations -

H. Denton, Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

- J. Knight, Assistant Director for components & Structures Engineering .

USGS ', . -

.s D.

D. Peck, Frederick,tAssociateDirect'or, USGS ~ Dir'ector, USGS . .

• ' - - - - - - ~

). Devine, Assistant Director 'for Engineering Geology .

R.' Hamilton, Chief

• Geologist .

6 C

. , ,

• 1 .

. e

.y e

I g

e.-

g .

s -

g .

u

. .=:.- .

a l

Q [0 b yi;um

{

\uc ear In"ormation anc Resource Servir ;

f 1345 Connect ct,t Avenue hn 4th Ficor. Wash 1ngton. D C 20036 (202) 296 7552 May 23, 1984 i

James M. Felton, Director i Division of Rules and Records FREEDOM OF INFORMATK)N Office of Adminstration ACT REQUEST U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

, g ,

i FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REQUEST A h *

Dear Mr. Felton:

Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 522, as  ;

amended, the Nuclear Information and Resource Service re- i quests the following documents regarding the Charleston Earthquake of 1886 and seismic design for the Vogtle nuclear power plant. Please consider " documents" to include reports, studies, test results, correspondence, memoranda, meeting notes, meeting minutes, working papers, graphs, charts, diagrams, notes and summaries of conversations and interviews, computer records, and any other forms of written communication, including internal NRC Staff memoranda. The i documents are specifically requested from, but not limited to, the Office of the Executive Legal Director (OELD);

Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (Research); Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR); Generic Issues Branch of the Division of Safety Technology, NRR; and the Operating '

Reactors Branches of the Division of Licensing. In your response, please identify which documents correspond to f j

which requests below. I Pursuant to this request, please provide all documents pre- l pared or utilized by, in the possession of, or routed ,

through the NRC related to: 'l I

1. The Millett earthquake fault postulated to exist 7 miles from the Vogtle reactor site (USGS Open File Report No. ,

t 82-156);

2. The implications for the siting and seismic design of the Vogtle nuclear plant of the 1886 Charleston earthquake; 1

3. The development (and any subsequent reanalysis) of a Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) and an Operating Basis Earthquake (OBE) for the Vogtle nuclear plant; 4 Contract No. RS-RES-84-128 " Charleston Earthquake 1 11- '

. .  ?*

r 2 1,.

Research Program";

5. All correspondence between USGS and the NRC regarding the Charleston earthquake, the Millett fault or the Vogtle nuclear plant; and

6. All NRC Staff memoranda or correspondence related to the seismic design and/or siting of the Vogtle nuclear plant.

In our opinion, it is appropriate in this case for you to waive copying and search charges, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.

552(a)(4)(A) "because furnishing the information can be considered as primarily benefiting the general public." The ,

Nuclear Information and Resource Service is a non-profit organization serving local organizations concerned about nuclear power and providing information to the general public.

Sincerely, D

Nina Bell Nuclear Safety Analyst cc: File i

l l

l