ML16340A649

Responds to CA Legislature Re Deferral of Facility Ol.Plant Design Can Withstand Seismic Event

ML16340A649
Person / Time
Site:	Diablo Canyon
Issue date:	10/26/1979
From:	Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Bates T CALIFORNIA, STATE OF
Shared Package
ML16340A650	List: ML16340A649
References
NUDOCS 7911120359
Download: ML16340A649 (24)

Text

Distribution w/o Docket Files',

5

/32~~

NRC PDR Local PDR EDO Reading NRR Reading OCT 3 6

~gyp L!JR 1 File H.

R.

Denton E.

G.

Case The Ignorable Thomas H. Bates D.

B. Vassallo Asseiribly California Legislature Sacramento, Ca 1 ifornia

. 93814 B. Buckley E. Hylton Dear Ylr. Bates."

Attorney, ELD G. Ertter (05897)

Let me first express my regrets, for tl% <@Papain responding to your April 5, 1979 letter to the Chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Comission in which you urged the deferral of an operating license for the, Diablo Canyon Jluclear Po>>er Station until certain matters were 'resolved.

As you can imagine, a great many letters from the public have come into the Nuclear Regulatory Comoission in the months following the Three Nile Island accident, all,of which we are ans>>erii>g as fast as resources permit.

kfe endeavor to answer mail such. as yours on a high-p'riority basis; however, your letter was misdirected in our system.

r E.

Hughes B. Moore J. Yore, ASLB IE (3)

SECY Hail Facility (3) (79-0898)

H. =Shapar, In your letter, you and your fellow members of the Assembly California Legislature expressed concern over the accident at the Three Nile Island, Unit 2 Nuclear Po>>er Plant; the repudiation of the Rasmussen Report in regard to the probability of nuclear power, plant accidents; and the seismic hazards associated with the operation of the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Station.

Under the NRC rules of'ractice Chairman Hendrie and the members of.the Comnission may be called upon to review the 'orders and d'ecision of the Licensing Board and hence it would be inappropriate for him or other members of the Coomission to coment on the matters raised in your letter; therefore, your letter was referred 'to me for reply.

The NRC staff.is presently engaged in an extensive evaluation of the Three Nile Island accident.

Over the past several months following the Three Nile Island occident, the KRC staff has been conducting an intensive reviews of the design and operational aspects of nuclear power plants and the emergency procedures for coping with potential accidents.

The purpose of these efforts was to'dentify measures that should be taken in the short-term to reduce the likelihood of such accidents and to improve the emergency preparedness in responding to such'vents.

To carry out this review, efforts within NRR were established in four areas:

(a) licensee emergency preparedness, (b) operator licensing, (c) bulletins and orders followup (primarily in the areas of auxiliary feedwater systems reliability; loss of feedwater and small break loss-of-coolant accident analysis; emergency operating guidelines and procedures) and

( d) Short-Term Lessons Learned.

The results of these efforts are a set of requirements that the st'aff has recommended for impl'ementation.

On October 4, 1979 the Commission approved a Policy Statement on the Three Vile '~ ~+

.r,r6@c ors will 'be a

hy tl e-t~RC-St'aTV';- thorized by omic Safety nd Licensing xc'e'p't";At'e'i'N'6't'-6Yct5r-'

"El'"cdlmh'fM

'oards or i ssi

'ow'steel'f '-'-'

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~

~ PCS'l0 (9:l6) NRCBK 0240

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~

~ ~ I

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~

~

ts.c, oovamfsssmssr mss<Nrssso ommsccs sore - see -rem

0 S

x 1'1) l

e 0,

The Honorable Thomas H. Gates In your letter, you refer to the repudiation of the Rasmussen Report and state

,that this report was used to form the basis on which previous decisions vjere made for the nuclear industry.

While it fs correct that the abov'e cited report has certafp shortcomings, the independent study group, chaired by Professor Lewis, went on to state. that the Rasmussen Report provides, at this time the'most complete. single picture of accident probabilities associated with nuclear reactors.

In:any event, the NRC has not used the Rasmussen Report as a basis for forming a decision to license a plant.

Nth respect to your concern regarding the adequacy of the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plants to withstand a seismic event at the Hosgri Fault, this matter has.

received extensive consideration.

The Hosgri Fault, which is located 3 1/2 miles from the Diablo plants, was discovered in 1971 and has been the sVbject of intensive investigation by the Pacific Gas 5" Electric Company, the U. S.

Geological Survey and the Nuclear Regulatory Corrmissfon.

As a principal geology advisor for the Comofssion, the USGS in 1975 suggested that a magnitude'f 7.5 be assigned as a potential seismic value for the Hosgri Fault, and the Corrmissioner adopted this value, Comprehensive public hearings of this matter were held by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board over about a two-month period.

These hearings were completed on February 15, 1979.

The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board issued a partial initial decision on September 27, 1979, which included a favorable finding on the seismic design adequacy of the Diablo Canyon plants.

A copy of thfs decision is enclosed for your information.

I trust that the above information is useful in assessing the concerns you rais'ed in your letter.

Sincerely, Priaina1 S:,"I~'-" bk H.

R.'Dantan'arold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosure:

Partial Initial Decision i

SEE PREVIOUS YELLOWS FOR CONCURRENCES*

RETYPED TO CORRECT ADDRESS e

OI I IOI2~

ggRNRMCW OATII~

L>IR 1*

EHy 1ton/red-

.Muak.lsz........

10/22/79 Ll(R 1$

~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

. P.Sto3.z...,........

p*

~ ~ ~ ~ 0JSHI 'i ~ ~ ~i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

o ~ ~ ~oSYaregaoi

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

10/23/79 10/5/79 in*

~ ~ ~ )

o EllPo o""",.""

~ ~ ~ IeLOavo3eSI

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

10/10/79 DPN>'

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

NR

..QYas,san.o........MO.

" 10/23/79 10(

0 iL~ ~ ~ ~

/79

~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

1CRh! NO (9.76) ÃRCM ONO 0 Ve4e OOVRRNMRNT IeRINTINO OleleICRI I~ 2 ~

244 2 ~ P

l gf

~

~

II

~Distributionw/o e os

'-"'Docket Fi 1 es 50-275/3 NRC PDR

, Local PDR EDO Reading NRR Reading L'lJR 1 File.

H.

R.

Denton

,. E.

G.

Case D.

B. Vassallo J. Stolz B. Buckley E. Hylton

Attorney, ELD G. Ertter (05897) f1. Groff E.

Hughes B. I'loore J.

Yore, ASLB IE (3)

SECY flail Facility (3)

(79-0898)

H. Shapar Hr. Thomas H. Bates flember of the Assembly Twelfth District State C pital Room 4171 Sacramen o, California 93814

Dear Chair an Bates:

Let me first press my regrets for the delay'in responding to your Apri.l 5, 1979 letter to the airman of the Nucl'ear Regulatory Commiss'ion in which you urgAed the deferral of operating'ic'ense for the Diablo Carlyon Nuclear Power Statiofl until certain matt s were resolved.

As you can. imagine, a

reat,many letters from the public ha've come into the Nuclear Regulatory Comm'ion in the months following the Three Mile Island accident, all of which w are answering as fast as resources permit.

Me endeavor to answer mai'l su as yours op a high-priority basis; however, your*

letter was misdirected in ou system.

I In your letter, you and your fe ow members of the Assembly California Legislature expressed concern over the accide t at the Three Nile Island, Unit 2 Nuclear Power Plant; the repudiation of th Rasmussen Report in regard to'the probability of nuclear power plant accidents; an the seismic hazards associated with the operation of the. Diablo Canyon Nuclear ower Station.

Under the NRC rules'of practice Chairman Hendrie and the membe of the Commission may be called-.upon to review the orders and decision of the L censing Board and hence.it would be inappropriate for him or other members o

the Commission to comment on the matters raised in your letter; therefore, you letter was referred to me for "

reply.

s The NRC staff is presently engaged in an extensive valuation of the Three Nile Island "accident.

Over the past several months folio> ng the Three flile Island

accident, the NRC staff has been conducting an intensi review of the design and operational aspects of nuclear poser plants and the ergency procedures for coping with potential accidents.

The purpose of these fforts was to

'dentify measures that should be taf;en in the short-term to educe the, likelihood of such accidents and to improve the emergency preparedness in responding to s0ch events.

To carry out this review, effort;s within NRR were estaf. ishy6 in,four ':

areas:

(a) licensee emergency preparedness, (b) operator 1icensi?

~,(c) bulletins and orders fo)lowup (primarily in the areas of auxiliary feedwater stems reliability; loss of feedwater and small break loss-of-coolant accident analysis; emergency operating guidelines and procedures) and (d) Short-Term Lessons Learned.

The results of these efforts are a set of requirements that the staff has recommended for implementation.

II On OlrtrICrfg PQNNAII%sfra b

PATIIQ ctober 4, 197 r?d;-8?n+ "2-tors t~il,l,be he tiRC Staff, the Commissi

~1 de??t 0A'tcv3"0 uthor ized by except after n approved a

~ates-+but-??o too>ic Safety urther order Policy Statem 05'P "]1CeiNe8

~

and Licensing of the Commis

~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

nt on the jh 01 "ouGlea4 "p Boards or is ion itself,,

0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~

ee f'file q~o ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ orer ~

~ ~

0

~

~ 0

~ ~ ~ ~

~I~ ~ ~

XKC PAGE 518 (9.76) M1CM OX41?

0 Uoee OOVIIINIIONTPIIINTINO ONNICOI I 4S4 444 4 ~ 4

IF I~

IF

f1r. Thomas H. Bates 2

In your tter, you refer to the repudiation of the Rasmussen Report and state that this eport was used.to form the basis on which prev>'ous decisions were made for th nuclear industry.

While it is correct that the above cited report has c

tain shortcomings,, the independent study group, chaired by Professor Lewd, went on to state that the Rasmussen.

Report provides at this time the most c

piete single picture of accident probabilities associated with nuclear rea ors..

In any event, the NRC has not used the Rasmussen Report as a basis or forming a decision to license a plant.

I With respect to your oncern regarding the adequacy of the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plants to withst d a seismic event at the Hosgri Fault, this matter has received'xtensive cons> eration.

The Hosgri Fault, which is located 3 1/2 miles from the Diablo pla ts, was discovered in 1971 and has been the subject of intensive inve~tigation y the Pacific Gas 8 Electric Company. the U-S Geological Survey and the Nu lear Regulatory Corrnission.

As 'a principal geology advisor for the Co>mission, t USGS in 1975'suggested that a magnitude of 7.5 be assigned as a potential seis ic value for the Hosgri Fault, and the Commissioner a'dopted this value.

Comprehensiv public hearings of this matter were held by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Bo rd over about a two-month period.

Thes'e hearings were completed on February 15, 1979.

The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board issued a partial initial decisl n on September 27, 1979, which included I

"a favorable finding on the seismic des n adequacy of the Diablo Canyon plants.

A copy of this decision is enclosed for our information.

I I. trust that the above information is usefu in assessing the concerns you raised in your letter.

Sincerel

Enclosure:

Partial Initial Decision Harold R. Dento Director Office of Nuclea Reactor Regulation SEE PREVIOUS YELLOWS FOR CONCURRENCES*

y,rS

~fC e ~~I OFFICE~

DIIRN AWEW DATE~

LWR 1

'Eff"1'

""'Z" y'

~BBuc ey-

~ \\ ~ 4~< ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~

~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~

<R 1

~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~

~

ol

~

~ 0 ~ ~

~

~ ~ ~ \\ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

.....W~~iv...,...

LWR*

ELD*

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ot ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~

~ I

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Cuav nR

~..tO/5/79...........10/10/Z9.........

s allo....

~..10/KA/7.9....:.

,NRB

...HQenian.....

...10/..../7.9...

INC PCS SlO (M6) KRCM 0240 0 Vade OOVERNlkdNT PRINTINO ONNICdl IOTO CO ~

14t

r I

~'

V 5

p l P

8 pl I/

l A

~ 'ie

~, A)

a v

',Distribution Docket Files (50-275/323)

NRC PDR

'B.

t1oore Local PDR J.

Yore, ASLB EDO Reading IE (3)

NRR Reading SECY t/ail Facility (3)

LMR 1 File (79-0898)

H.

R.

Denton H. Shapar E.

G.

Case ter. Thomas H. Hates D.

B. Vassallo Member of,the Assembly J. Stolz Twelfth Di'strict B. Buckley State Capit~al Room 4171 E. Hylton

'Sacramento, Cal ifornia 93814

Attorney, ELD G. Ertter (05897)

Dear Chairman B

es:

M. Groff E.

Hughes Let me first -expre s my regr'ets for the delay in responding to your April 5, 1979 letter to the Chain n of the Nuclear Regulatory Coranission in which you urged the deferral of an op rating. license for the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Station until certain matters u, re resolved.

r As you can-imagine, a gre many letters from the public haVe come into the

~ Nuc'lear Regulatory Comissi n in the months following the Three thile Island accident, all of which we ar ansHering as fast as resources permit.

/le endeavor to answer mail such a

yours on a high-priority basispahouever,,yItur letter, was misdirected in our s tern.

I In your letter, you and your fell r members of the Assembly Californ'ia Legis'lature expressed concern over the accident at the Three Mile Island, Unit 2 Nucleal'oser Plant; the repudiation of the asmussen Report in regard to the proba ility of nuclear powe'r plant accidents; and the seismic hazards associated with t e operation of the Diablo Canyon Nuclear ower Station.

Under the NRC rules

.f practice Chairman Hendrie and the.membe of the Coranission may be called upon to review the:orders and decision of the icensing Board and hence it would be inappropriate for him or other members f the Coomission to comment on the:,

matters raised in your letters.therefore, y

r letter was referred to me 'for reply.

E The RRC staff is presently engaged in an extensI e evaluation of the Three Nilh Island accident.

Over the past several months fo loving the Three Nile Isl'and accident, the NRC staff has been conducting an int sive revieu of the des, gn and operational aspects of nuclear poIIer plants and he emergency procedures for coping with potential accidents.

The purpose of ese efforts was to identify measures that should be taken in the short-te to reduce the likefihood of such accidents and to improve the emergency preparedr ss in responding to such events.

To carry out this review, efforts within NRR we establish'ed in fou'r areas:

(a) licensee emergency preparedness,

( b) operator icensing,.( c) bulletins and orders followup (primarily in the areas of auxiliary fe dwater systems reliability; loss of feedwater and small break loss-of-coola t accident 'analysis; emergency operating guidelines and procedures) and (d) Short-erm Lessons,,Learned.

The results of these efforts are a set of requirements that th staf'f has recommended for implementation.

s Un OlrgtlO'fg CIINNatsttK by OATC~

ctober 4, 197 nd- -Um4 tors,>cil 1, be he NRC Staff, the Commissi 34&At AsshiCh" uthorized by except after n approved a

~ates-that-no tomic $afefy urther order Policy Statem mr-1 icenses-and Licensinj of the Commis nt on ie Th er nuc1 av-p Boards, o iq ion itsel ee f1ile

+47t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

ued

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

8

~

~

~

~

~ ~

KMPCa& 510 (9.76) ~CM %49 Q V 4, OOSICIINDSCNT ~NINTINO OlvivICCI IDTD 444 144

J

~

~ I 1* (

~ ~

1 4

E

~ I E

~ *P F

~

1 jr WI I ~

F 4

4 F

E

/

I >

1 4

E

/

C>;

LL 1 I e<<4 LC

(>(L

(

/

4 If F

I I

C 4 ~ 4 ~ '

• I 1

L A

I 44 EV F

"w Fa

~

~

~

1 a

1

', 'Distribution

<<E

'Docket Files (50-275/323)

NRC PDR-Local PDR B.

Moore EDO Reading J.

Yore, ASLB NRR Reading IE (3)

LNR 1 File SECY Mail Facility (3)

H.

R.

Denton (79-0898)

E.

G.

Case '.

Shapar D.

B. Vassallo J. Stolz

'r.

Thorn g H. Bates B. Buckley

'iember of e Assembly E. Hylton Twelfth Dist 'ct

Attorney, ELD State Capital.

om 4171 G. Er'tter (05897)

,Sacramento, Cali iiia 93814 M

Groff E.,Hughes'

Dear Chairman Bates:

Let me first express my egrets-for the delay in responding to your April 5~1979 letter to the Chairman o

the. Nuclear Regulatory Cotmission in which you urged the deferral of an operati license for the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Station until certai n matters were r olved.

In your letter, you and your, fellow riiembers of the Assembly California Le 'slature expressed concern over the accident at the Three Mile Island,'Unit 2

N lear Power Plant; the repudiation of the.

Rasmussen Report in regard.to the robability.of nuclear power plant accidents,;

'nd the seismic hazards associated ith the operation of the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Station.

Under the NR rules of practice Chairman Hendrie and the members of the Commission may be, calle upon to.review the orders and decision of the 'Licensing Board and hence it would b inappropriate for him or other members of the Co>vis'sian to comment on the matte raised in.your letter~ therefore, your letter was referred to me for reply.

The NRC staff is presently engaged in an exte ive evaluation of the Three Mile Island accident.

This'evaluation will cover a aspects of the design and operations of that plant with the objective of i entifying improvements which should be applied to nuclear power plants which a e now under construction or operating.

On October 4, 1979 the Commission app ved a Policy Statement on the Three Mile Island, Unit 2 accident which 'stat s that no new licenses for nuclear power reactors will be authorized by Atom'afety an3 Licensing Boards or issued by the NRC Staff, except after furthe order'-of the Comoission itself.

In your letter, you refer to the repudiation of the Rasmuss Report and state that this report was,used to form the basis on which previou decisions i(ere made for the nuclear industry.

l!hile it is correct that the a

ve cited report has certain shortcomings, the independent study group, ch ired by Professor Lewis, went on to state that the Rasmussen Report providqs at this time the most ca~piete single picture of accident probabilities associated

. with nuclear reactors.

In any event, the NRC has not used the Rasmussen Report as a basis for forming a decision to licdnse a plant.

orricoW QQIIIIAICCW DATC~

~ NRC FORM 518 (9-76) NRCM 0240 4 II ~ OOVOIIIIMICIIVI'IIINTIIIOars ICO I I ~ ss so ~

10 ~

Ii J"

v vrrt v

rhv ~

V QI'r h

~

h(

r h

1 I.

/

v I

~'

a 1

v

/ II J

I d lrl. s"vhi tt

~ v V

J il A

v v, I

, ~

.f lf

~

I 5>>

'V'

~

I~

~

"I ~

4 C

v I

r r

~

~

0 v

~,vr v ~"r

~

~

v g

~

~

~

• d

>>1

~

~

'J ~ ~

~ ~

vvl r

I v

v I

4VV~

hr. Thomas H. Bates With r spect to your concern regarding the adequacy of the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power P

nts to withstand a seismic event at the flosgri Fault, thi's matter has received xtensive consideration.-

The Hosgr i.Fault, which is located g 1/2 miles from the Di'ablo plants, was discovered in 1971 and has been the subject of inteJ1siV investigation by the Pacific Gas JI Electric Company, the U. S..

Geological Su ey and the Nuclear Regulatory Corenission.

As a principal geology advisor for the ommission, the USGS in 1975.suggested that a magnitude-of 7.5 be assigned as a

otential'eismic value for the Hosgri Fault.

It is important to note that the U

S did not say that.the Hosgri would experience a 7.5fi earthquake but from conservative standpoint that magnitude could,not'e ruled oot.

Comprehensive p )llc hearings of this matter I<ere held by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board ove about a.two-month period.

Some of this nation's and the world's leading'uth rities,ho were subject to cross-examination, testified-at these hearings regardi the seismic design 'adequacy of the Diablo Canyon plants.

These hearings we completed on February 15, 1979.

The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board issued a

artial initial decision ori September 27, 1979, which included a favorable fi ding on the seismic design adequacy of the Diablo Canyon plants.

A copy of this ecision is enclosed for your information.

I I trust that the above informatio is useful in assessing the concerns you raised in your letter.

Sincerely,

Enclosure:

Partial Initial Decision Har IdR. Denton, Director Offi e of Nuclear Reactor-Regulation RETYPED PER OELD SEE PREVIOUS YELLOW FOR CONCURRENCES*

ommlcls~

ISVIINAMK~

L'HR 1

~.KJJyl.ton/red BBuckle 10/ti /79

~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ \\ ~ilb ~ ~ ~

~

~

LMR 1

JStolz 10/

/79 L'LJR*

~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ I

~

SVarga 10/5/79 ELD*=

~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ I LDDavi,s 10/10/79 DPH DVassallo 10/

/79 JJRR HDenton 10/

/79

,, -NRC 1IORbt 518 (9-76) NRCM 0240 Q U e oovollNMONT elllNolNO OmmlcoI I ~ s ~

see se ~

1

'f H

(h

ture of acci ant., @he" f'NG deci si on to 1 i nt pr obabi1 i

>as-not-used" ense a L1lant le mos comp ucIear...roact t as a basis ies asso iat he"Basmus en e essng cps rs,...In-any-o or for1I1inq a hg orr~~j Redo OUIIIIAI44~

/

DATC~

ggLC PORN 318 (9-76) NRCM026ttaea 44VCtitlMCIIl'AINDIN4CrrICDI I ~t ~

S ~ ~

te ~

~P i3+%2$

OeefI gPC~J 9t<'O~,

-'-'ocket Files (50-275/323)

NRC PDR 5X Local PDR EDO Reading '.

Moore NRR Reading J.

Yore, ASLB 0

LMR 1 File IE (3)

R.

H. Denton SECY Mail Facility (3)

E.

G.

Case (79-0898) 4 D.

B., Vassallo H. Shapar Mr e Thomas H. Bates J. Stolz Member of the Assembly B. Buckley

~

Twelfth District E. Hylton State Capital Room 4171

Attorney, ELD Sacramento, California 93814 G: Ertter (05897)

. N. Groff

Dear Chairman Bates:

E.

Hughes 5

CP I

Let me first express my regrets for the delay in responding o your April 5, 1979 1etter o the Chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Com1ission in which you urged the defer 1 of an operating license for the Diablo Canyon Nuclear'Power Station-until certa matter s were r'esolved.

In your letter, yo and your.fellow members of the Assemb California Legtsiature expressed cancer over the accident at the Three Nile land, Unit 2 Nuclear Power Plant; th repudiation of the Rasmussen Report regard to the probability of nuc ear power plant accidents; and the seismic haz ds associated with the operati n of the Diab'lo Canyon Nuclear Pomr Station.

Under the NRC rules of pry tice Chairman Hendrie and the members of the Co11missi may be called upon to review the orders and decision of the Licensing Board and h

ce it would be inap opriate for him or other members of the Coranission to commen on the matters r ised in your letter, therefore, your ~

letter was referred to me fo r'eply.

aces

~ es The NRC staff is presently engag in a extensive evaluation of the Three Nile Island accident.

This evaluation il cover all aspects of the design and operations of that plant with the o 'ective of identifying improvementq which should be applied to nuclear power 1 nts which are now under construction or operating.

Until Chat evaluatiop is c 1pleted or until otherwise directed by the Corm1ission, the staff does riot inten to issue any new licenses for nuclear power reactors even if author'zed by a Li nsing Board such as that presiding a

over the Diablo Canyon proc eding.

If, as a result oi'he aluation, it is deters ned that changes in the design of the Diablo Canyon gant are required and thos changes warrant a reopening of the record, the N C staff will take the initiat e to do so.

In this regard, you may be interes d to know that intervening parti in the Diablo Canyon proceeding have r quested the Commission to stay the p ceeding pending the outcome of ti1e 'estigation of the Three Nile Island ac dent.

These requests have not yet b en acted upon by the Comission,et t'e Lice ing goareIt Aae qledetaaJ 3ea ~ Jg ge9 g ga3 PC.+P lQ 9'VFChgbt'g I Sy 0 <airi Cuir in PI9L+ tb ~~

0 Dg QL%, CSgf LCfegt 09 +1+

En your let'r, pou refer to the repudTation of the Rasmussen eport and state that this eport was used to form the basis on which previous'isions were made for he nuclear industry.

awhile it is correct that the abo e cited report as certain shortcomings, -the independent study group, cha ed by Profer or Lewis, went on to state that the Rasmussen Re ort rovid t

lrit ',&'g 4 (P o

~0

~

'i I

S

.is h~

'4 44

~

I I

ir I

N ~

I l

r r

n

/

/

I ll J

iA IP J'

/

'I

$0 ~

'pl I

'I I

'I

.~

'I ll 1

rl Qk iQ

~ ~ P'W't%X'>>

I

~

<<5 I

I

<r,tVI"

(-'4 as+~g~ >'t Pg w rcCg,py~g l

'I I

I I

I i

i I

. ~

Nr. Thomas H. Bates I With respect to your concern regarding the adequacy of the Diablo ny, n Nuclear Power Pl'ants to withstand a seismic event at the Mosgri Fault,

>s matter has received extensi e consideration.

The Hosgri Fault, which i ocated 3 1/2 miles from the D a lo plants, was discovered in 1971 and h

been the subject of intensive invest> ation by the Pacific Gas 8 Electri ompany, the U. S.

Geological Survey and the Yuclear Regulatory Commissi As a principal geology advisor for the Co@vis ion, the USGS in 1975 sugges d that a magnitude of 7.5 be assigned as a potent'al seismic value for the osgri Fault. lt is important to note that the'USGS di not say that the Hos i would experience a 7.5N earthquake but from a con rvative standpoi that magnitude could not be ruled out.

Comprehensive public arings of th matter were held by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board over about two-no period.

Some of thi's nation.'s and the>>orld' leading authorities, o

re subject to cr oss-examination, testified at these hearings regarding the se'c design adequacy of the Diablo Canyon plants.

These hearings>>ere corn ete on February 15, 1979.

The Licensing Board issued

a. partial initial decis' on Se ember 28, 1979, which included a favorable

'inding on the seismic desig adequacy o

he Diablo Canyon plants.

I trust that the above i ormation is useful 'ssessing the concerns you raised in your letter.

Sincerely, Harold R. Denton, i rector Office of Nuclear R actor Regulatiori'rrtcII9 OUIINAIIK~

DATC~

LWR 1

EHyltorr--- '-

.BBuckl.egA 10/

/79 LWR 1

~

~ ~ ~

~

~ oJStg o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e ~ ~ ~

10/Q/79 vg

/

/79 DP.fi-"..."-.s"ri DVassallo 10/

/79 P

I

~

~

HDenton 10/ I>/79 10/

/79

'NRC PORN 518 (9.76) NRCM 4244 Q U,~, OOVONNeIONT ~NINTINO9NNICCI I ~ 1 ~

eee Te ~

I ~

IA

'll I'

4 I

I I

~

~

4 Nr. Thomas H. Bates w 2 w

With respect to your concern regarding the adequacy of the Diablo yoh Nuclear Power Plants to withstand a seismic event at the Hosgri Faul iis atter has received extensive consid ation.

The Hosgri Fault, whi s loca/

d 9" 1/2 t

,.miles from the'iablo plant was discovered in 1971 has been the subject of intensive investigation b

the Pacific Gas 5 El ric Company, the U. S.

Ceological Survey and the Yucl ar Regulatory C

iission.

As a principal geology advisor for the Cormission, the USGS in 197 uggested that a magnitude of 7.5 be-.assigned as a potential seism 'c value r the Hosgri Fault. -It is important to note that the USGS did not say tha he Hosgri >;ould experience a 7.5N earthquake but from a conservative andpoint that magnitude could not be ruled out.

Comprehensive, public hear' f this matter were held by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board over abo a two-onth period.

Some of this nation' and the >>orld'.s leading autho

ies, v>ho w e subject to cross-examination, testified at these hearings rega ng the seismic esigri adequacy of the Diablo Canyon plants.

These hear+ s>>ere completed on ebruary 15, 1979.

The Licensing Board issued a partial 4'ftial decision on Sept I er 28, 1979, which included a favorable finding on the eismic design adequacy of th Diablo Canyon plants.

I trust t'ai t the above information is useful i assessing the concerns you raised 1n yo~ur Tetter.

Sincerely, Harold R. Denton, Director

- Office of tiuclear Reactor Regulation Ol'I'ICE~

CURNAIIC~

DATII~

LWR 1

'HHy'l'ton

~BBucklev/red 10/

/79 LWR 1

~ QQ QQ 1 $

0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

10/

/79 LWR SYarga" 10/

/79 DPI';tag' p DVassallo 10/

/79 ELD NRR HDenton 10/

/79 HRC PORN 518 (976) NRCM 0240

)elf v e oovoNNMCNT ~RINTINo oNNIOCI I ~ 1 ~ + ee ~

Te ~

s II 1

b 1!'

.,e e

V gP I"

E A

~

~ 'v

~

P I

ACTION CONTROL, COMPL DEADLINE ACKNOWLEDGMENT INTERIM REPLY DATES CONTROL NO.

DATE OF DOCUMENT'i TO:

C5e) [=et~ RedII'$e FINALREPLY 0/

FILE LOCATION

/'-/,./,

PREPARE FOR SIGNATURE OF:

Q CHAIRMAN Q EXECUTIVEDIRECTOR DESCRIPTION Q LETTER Q MEMO Q REPORT Q OTHER SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKS 4'+"

~ lC'QQMQC Cf $$8@8f C8 0'g C~f*ki'f@*

'1)Cen~a far Qlebie Ci"~Z $ @ V$C~ ef 'PIE DOCUMENT/COPY No, NUMBER OF PAGES POSTAL REGISTRY NO.

CLASSIFIED DATA CLASSIFICATION CATEGORY Q

NSI QRD Q FRD 5KC7 PM~a"449%

ASS IG NEO TO:

DATE INFORMATIONROUTING LEGAI. REVIEW Q

FINAL Q

COPY ASSIGNED To:

DATE NO LEGALOBJECTIONS NOTIFY:

Q EDO ADMINS CORRES 8R EXT.

COMMENTS, NOTIFY:

EXT.

JCAE NOTIFICATIONRECOMMENDED:

Q YES Q No NRCFORlvf 232 I11 75I EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS

DO NOl REAIOI/F THIS COPY PRINCIPAL CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL

H

1r

~

W4 79-08SB Loggngoats~4

.NRC SECRETARIAT Il TO:

Q Commis'sionerate XKHCNc. Dir./Oper.

0 Gen. Counsel 0

~ Cong. Liaison 0 Solicitor O Public Affairs O Secretary CI Incoming:

ThO From:

hi K

i

,~l579 sb;I:

Ur es ost onement of 1V ensin of i

T Nile Island XIQXPrepare reply.forsignature of:

0 Chairman 0 Commissioner.

XCB(EDO, Gc, CL, SOL, PA, SECY 0

Signature block omitted "Q. Return original of incoming with response 0

Fordirectreply.

.Q.For appropriate action 0

For information 0 "For recommendation Suspense:

April 25 "t$

~QC

~1 ~ e>>

s Remarks; C

S to:

Lo e

OGC, x

arte C

Ori inal to Docket nnc62 For the Commission:

mbS

'Send three (3) copies of reply to Secy Mail Facility ACTION SLIP.

fl,gb*~ - ~

~C' Vj ~

0 h

C'(

i

'