ML16342C703
| ML16342C703 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 10/21/1994 |
| From: | Russell W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Martin E, Martin G AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| Shared Package | |
| ML16342C704 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9410270226 | |
| Download: ML16342C703 (12) | |
Text
'K 0>R 0KQy (4
~o b
0O I
+**++
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 October 21, 1994 Hr. Edward T. Martin Hs.
Genevieve A. Martin 587 Erhart Road Arroyo Grande, California 93420
Dear Hr. Hartin and Hs. Martin:
I am responding to your letter of August 3, 1994, to President Clinton concerning Pacific Gas and Electric Company's (PG&E's) July 9,
- 1992, application to recapture the period spent constructing the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant so as to allow for 40 years of operation, as permitted by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC's) regulations in Section 50.51 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR 50.51).
Your letter was written in opposition to "extending Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant's license an additional 15 years."
The extension you refer to concerns PG&E's proposed amendment to recapture the construction period into the operating licenses for Diablo Canyon, Units 1 and 2.
The proposed amendment is a matter currently pending before an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) that was convened to hear issues regarding this proposed amendment.
The amendment request was noticed in the Federal
- Register, and the San Luis Obisbo Mothers for Peace (SLOHP) requested a
hea'ring on the matter.
The formal hearing was held in San Luis Obispo from August 17-25,
- 1993, and all filings were completed in Dece'mber 1993.
Based on statements associated with the auxiliary salt water system documented in an NRC inspection report issued in January
- 1994, SLOHP filed a motion to reopen the hearing record.
All filings on the motion to reopen were completed in August 1994.
A decision has not been reached by the ASLB.
Your letter also states that Diablo Canyon was inadvertently built astride the Hosgri earthquake fault.
The Hosgri Fault is a short distance offshore.
In 1973, PG&E applied to the NRC for operating licenses for Diablo Canyon, Units 1
and 2.
During the licensing process, the NRC's Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) reviewed the seismic and nonseismic aspects of the plant.
- ACRS, an independent advisory committee established by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, reports to the Commission, advises it, and is entirely separate from the NRC staff.
On July 14,
- 1978, the ACRS issued a letter report to the Commission stating that it had completed its review and that there was reasonable assurance that Units 1
and 2 could be operated at full power without undue risk to the health and safety of the public.
With regard to seismic issues, the ACRS noted that the theory and analyses of earthquake and seismic wave generation, transmission and attenuation were in a state of active development and gPI; FIZ I;H@HI CQPV 94i0270226 94102i PDR ADOCK 05000275 P
,'DR
R
)
Nr. and Hs. Hartin recommended that the seismic design of Diablo Canyon be reevaluated within ten years to take into account applicable new information.
It was this recommendation that eventually led to issuance of the conditions on Unit 1's operating license requiring a reevalua'tion of the seismic design basis of the plant.
The license condition required a
reevaluation of all aspects of the seismic design of the plant, including
'geology, seismology, engineering, and probabilistic risk studies.
PG&E completed the reevaluation (Long Term Seismic Program
[LTSP]) in July 1988.
NRC staff reviewed independent studies by NRC staff consultants, including
, the U.S. Geological
- Survey, and reviewed the LTSP, concluding that PGLE met the license condition and that the Diablo Canyon seismic design continued to be acceptable.
On June 6,
1991, the NRC staff documented its review of the LTSP in Supplemental Safety Evaluation Report 34 (SSER 34).
The ACRS concurred in the conclusion that the license condition had been met.
The ACRS further concluded that the seismic margins for the plant are adequate and quite similar to those for other plants in the United States, that the probabilistic risk assessment showed no significant vulnerabilities, and that Diablo Canyon can be operated without undue risk to the health and safety of the public.
You also expressed concern about the storage of high-level nuclear waste.
Current plans for management of high level waste (HLW) call for the development of alternatives to a monitored retrieval storage facility by
- 1998, and a permanent HLW repository deep beneath the surface of the earth by the year 2010.
The U.S. Department of Energy has the responsibility for disposing of HLW.
The U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency is responsible for developing appropriate environmental standards for HLW.
The NRC has the licensing authority for the disposal and long-term storage of HLW.
Currently, the repository program is focused on prelicensing site characterization activities.
This is a complex problem and we agree that there is a considerable amount of uncertainty involved in establishing a
final HLW repository.
However, the Commission has made a generic determination that, iF necessary, spent fuel gener ated in any reactor can be stored safely and without significant environmental impacts at its spent fuel storage basin or at either onsite or offsite independent spent fuel storage installations.
As previously stated, the seismic margins for Diablo Canyon, including the onsite spent fuel storage, were determined to be adequate.
The NRC's actions regarding the Diablo Canyon units have been consistent with statutes applicable to this agency, that is the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, and the Commission's regulations implementing these statutes.
These statutes and the NRC's actions are intended to protect the public health and safety.
If the NRC could not make such a finding, Diablo Canyon would not be allowed to operate.
7 h
~
~
C Mr. and Ms. Martin I trust this information addresses your concerns.
If you have further questions about this matter, please contact me.
Sincerely, Docket Nos.
50-275 and 50-323 ORIGINAL SIGNED BY FRANK 3.
MIRAGLIA FOR:
William T. Russell, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation bcc:
Sue J.
Smith Director, Office of Agency Liaison Room 6, OEOB The White House Washington, DC 20500 DISTRIBUTION:
See attached list 1
Document Name:
DC010515.GRN
- See revious concurrence OFC LA:DRPW PM:PD4-D:PD4-2 TECH ED NAME DATE DFoster-Curseen (C/ )'7/94 (0/<
94 Lc/ -l 94 SPeterson:
k Tguay JMain*
10/ll 94 OFC NAME DATE OGC AHod don*
10 12/94 D:DRPW JR 0/
4 94 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
/
/94
0 l
y) Pt tl
}
President Bill Clinton 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. N.N.
washington D.C.
20500 Dear President Clinton~
587 Erhart Road Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 August 3, 1994 This is a request for any assistance you can give in preventing the Nuclear Regu3.atory Commission from extending Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant's license an additional 15 years.
The NRC is presently considering this extention request from Pacific Gas 5 Electric Company.
Many thousands of people who live here on the central coast of California will be placed in considerable danger if the license is extended.
Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power. Plant was inadvertanly built astride the Hosgri earthquake fault. All parties agree it would not have been built if there was prior knowledge of the fault. Since the plant was near completion when the faul't was discovered the license was granted.
Pacific Gas 8c r.lectric claims the Hosgri is not capable of the 7.5 quake the plant was upgraded to withstand. Predicting
- strength, type and effects of earthquakes is hardly an exact sciences And now an additional danger is present - spent fuel.
No storage of high level nuclear waste was anticipated.
Limited, temporary pools have been constructed at Diablo.
A search for high level nuclear waste storage has been going on for 50 years with no end in sight'-
The reality is that PG~:" will have to store all waste at the plant site. This
~~
presents a risk that the citizens of San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties should not be exposed to. An accident or earth-quake could certainly cause release of dangerous radiation from such pools of spent fuel.
Ae appreciate any attention you can give to this local matter considering the vast scope and import of your position.
Sincerely, C'I <. z<<.~ ~'.,~'~A,~~
Edward T. 14artin
~
~
~
/eA
/J)
Ge evieve A. Martin J
k
~
,e
Hr. and Hs. Hartin I trust this,information addresses your concerns.
If you have further questions about this matter, please contact me.
Sincerely, Docket Nos.
50-275 and 50-323 ORIGINAL SIGNED BY FRANK 3. HIBAGLIA FOB:
William T. Russell, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation bcc:
Sue J.
Smith Director, Office of Agency Liaison Room 6, OEOB The White House I
Washington, DC 20500 DISTRIBUTION:
See attached list Document Name:
DC010515.GRN
- See revious concurrence OFC LA:DRPW l
NAME DFoster-Curseen PH:PD4-D:PD4-2
SPetersbn:
k Tguay TECH ED JHain*
DATE lO n 94
'LO/<~94 1 94 10/ll/94 OFC OGC NAME AHod don*
DATE 10 12 94 D:DRPW JR 94 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY WR
/
94
A 4
DISTRIBUTION:
Letter to E.
and G. Martin iDocket File, (50-275 and 50-323)
(w/incoming)
Public (w/incoming)
EDO¹ 0010515 J. Taylor J. Milhoan H. Thompson J.
Blaha R. Bernero J. Callan A. Thadani D. Crutchfield K. Bohrer W. Russell/F.
Miraglia R. Zimmerman PD4-2 Reading (w/incoming)
J.
Roe T.
Quay OGC OPA OCA NRR Mail Room (EDO¹ 0010515 w/incoming) (012/G/18)
C.
Hawes T. Gibbons S.
Peterson (w/incoming)
D. Foster-Curseen A. B. Beach, RIV K. Perkins, RIV/WCFO Dated:
October 21, 1 994
~
~
A P