ML16343A267
| ML16343A267 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 11/23/1994 |
| From: | Russell W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Evered J AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| Shared Package | |
| ML16342C757 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9412010221 | |
| Download: ML16343A267 (6) | |
Text
gyes REGS+
~o Cy n
0
~O
~**++
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 2055~001 November 23, 1994 Ms. Judith B. Evered P.O.
Box 20241 Santa Barbara, CA 93120-0241
Dear Ms. Evered:
I am responding to your letter of September 29, 1994, to Vice President Gore concerning Pacific Gas and Electric Company's (PGKE'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.
You expressed opposition to "extending the operation of the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant for an additional 15 years" and requested that certain individuals be contacted to research the situation.
You referred to a
proposed amendment that was brought before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB).
The amendment request was noticed in the Federal Register on July 22, 1992.
This notice provided the public the opportunity to express their views regarding the amendment request to the NRC either through comments on the Staff's proposed no significant hazards finding, or by requesting a
hearing before the ASLB.
As you are aware through your limited appearance in and attendance at the hearing, the San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace (SLOMP) responded to this Federal Register Notice and requested a hearing on the matter.
On August 17-24, 1993, the ASLB held a formal hearing, and all filings were completed in December.
On February 25,
- 1994, SLOMP filed a motion to reopen the hearing record based on statements about the auxiliary salt water system documented in an NRC inspection report issued in January 1994.
On Harch 23, 1994, the ASLB denied that motion.
This denial was without prejudice to a later motion to reopen based on any of the unresolved items demonstrated to be significant and to possess substantive implications for implementation of the maintenance and surveillance program.
On August 8, 1994, the SLOHP filed such a motion.
On November 4, 1994, the ASLB issued an initial decision in which it concluded that PGItE satisfactorily justified the license extensions and should be granted those extensions, subject to certain conditions.
The satisfactory completion of these conditions, which are considered post-hearing
- matters, has been delegated to the NRC staff by the Board.
The Board also denied SLOMP's August 8,
- 1994, Renewed Motion to Reopen the Record.
The Board's initial decision shall become effective and constitute the final action of the Commission 40 days after the date of its
- issuance, subject to any review pursuant to the Commission's regulations.
The situation has been thoroughly adjudicated through the hearing which provided opportunity for individuals to express their concerns.
You also stated that Diablo Canyon was inadvertently built next to a major earthquake fault and experienced more than 10 years of serious errors in its design and construction.
The Hosgri Fault is a short distance offshore.
In 30Q.l~w nnn q~p>~%~ F'IIIV 9412010221 941123 PDR ADOCK 05000275 'i H
II
Hs. Judith B. Evered
- 1973, PGLE 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 entirel separate from the NRC staff.
On July 14, 1978, the ACRS issued the Commission a letter report in which it found reasonable assurance that Units 1 and 2
could be operated at full power without undue risk to the health and safety of the public.
ACRS stated that the theory and analyses of earthquake and seismic wave generation, transmission, and attenuation were in a state of active development and recommended that the seismic design of Diablo Canyon be reevaluated within 10 years to consider new information.
NRC addressed the recommendations by issuing conditions on the operating license for Unit 1.
The license conditions required a reevaluation of all aspects of the seismic design of the plant, including geology, seismology, engineering, and probabilistic risk studies.
PG8E 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, reviewed the
- LTSP, and concluded that PGINE 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.
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.
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has the responsibility for disposing of high-level waste (HLW).
DOE plans include the development of monitored retrieval storage installation by 1998, and a permanent geologic HLW repository deep beneath the surface of the earth by the year 2010.
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-tenn storage of HLW.
Currently, those within the DOE repository program are determining the suitability of the Yucca Mountain Site for development of a repository before the licensing process begins.
The disposal of HLW is a complex problem, and we agree that establishing a final HLW repository involves uncertainty.
However, the Commission made a generic determination that, if necessary, spent fuel generated in any reactor can be stored safely and without significant environmental effects at the reactor facility's-spent fuel storage pool or at either onsite or offsite independent spent fuel storage installations.
NRC also found the seismic margins for the Diablo Canyon facility adequate for the storage of spent fuel at the site.
f
Hs. Judith B. Evered The NRC's actions regarding the Diablo Canyon units have been consistent with
'he 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.
I trust this information addresses your concerns.
If you have further questions about this matter, please let me know.
Sincerely, Docket Nos.
50-275 and 50-323 Ori8ina1 sigae'ct 5p";
"""-"-'l-J. A/iragli@
William T. Russell, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation DISTRIBUTION:
See attached list Document Name:
lEVERED
- See Previous Concurrence OFC LA:DRPW PM:PD4-2 D:PD4-2 TECH ED NAME DFoster-Curseen*
SPeterson:
k TQuay*
JMain*
DATE OFC 11 18 94 OGC<<'
MIse D:DRPW-11,18 94 ADP:NRR 'D:
RR 11/16 94 NAME DATE CMarco*
ll/18/94 JRoe*
ll 21 94 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY RZimmerman*
ll ll 21 94 zs ~94
~
4t, k
'"l.
'I I J
I f
k' i
l
-'4 l J