ML19246B029

Responds to Re Earthquake Potential & Existence of Hosgri Fault.Cp Could Be Issued Based on Current Seismic Criteria.Some Parts of Plant Do Not Provide Degree of Safety Currently Required.Discusses Waste Disposal & Exposures

ML19246B029
Person / Time
Site:	Diablo Canyon
Issue date:	05/18/1979
From:	Boyd R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Greever R AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
References
7905L8, NUDOCS 7907100691
Download: ML19246B029 (6)

Text

[

4 g

-M.~ 2 WJai iL

,a r.

~

I_,

T

. @y

( o.

v 3

~

,s

,q,-

7 f.

6 c -y

.,~,)'

e s.

'W t sco 11 h [/ b h

[a

)hf5 Mr. Richard Greever e

6050 El Colegio Rd. #16C

]

b dfj

%]'Q1U E Isla Vista, California 93017 a

Dear Mr. Creever:

I an pleased to respond to your letter of arch 17, 1979 to the Chairman, Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Since it would not be appropriate under current Comission rules for the Chairman to coment on ycur concerns, your letter was referred to me for reply.

In your letter, you asked that in view of the earthquake potential of the area and the existence of the Hesgri fault, would a construction permit be issued for Diablo Canycn, Units 1 & 2 if cne were recuested at the present time.

Ycu also asked if the present structural design of the Diablo Canyon facil-

..ies satisfy current requirements for issuance of a construction permit.

Additionally, you raised concerns over (1) the arount of money already scent in the construction of the Diablo Canyon facility and what bearing this may have on the Comission's decision to issue an operating facility license; (2) inflation allowances for decomissioning costs; (3) waste storage, low level radiation effluents and transportation of spent fuel; and (4) safety related occurrences at nuclear pcwer plants.

In regard to the above cited concerns, I have identified each concern below and a corresponding response.

Concern:

Would the Pacific Gas and Electric Ccacany be issued a construction cermit for a site at Oiatlo Canycn if it were requested today, knowing about the earthcuake potential of the area and the presence of the Moscri Fault?

If so, would the original structural plans have been repeated or would updated plans be required?

e t"*

Response

A construction permit could be issued based on current 3Q

}Ob knowlecge of earthquakes noted in the application and acceptable structural designs that meet current seis-'ic criteria. As in the present plant design, tFe plant wculd be designed

u. withstand a magnitute 7.5 earthquake hypothe-sized to occur at the Hosgri Fault. As a principal geologic advisor for the Comission, the 'JSGS in 1975 suggested that a magnitude of 7.5 be assigned as a potential seist.ic value for the Hosgri Fault.

It is impcrtant to note that the 'JSGS did not say that the Mosgri Fault. wculd experience a 7.5M earthquake but from a conservative standpoint that magnitude could not be ruled out.

Cor:prehensive public hearings on this natter were held by the Atomic Scfety and Lice'ising Board over about a two-month neriod. Socc.e of this natien's and the world's

~c s >

.w m >

SAf t >

i

-y

,,. m m w

h....... _.,,.............,,,,.........

7 907100$7/

9 s

a ;.;. c r a e.

u

.. r.

i s.

.P r

a. z. e. r q T,

. y-p,.;a2 i.3 e. ;,... '. :.,

3.

3..

e

..e e..

u

....i

....v

.g s,..se

<r.....q.

-,. p c.., c. e.,. e.., S

.nL.< 3..r g q. k, c c...

a

.,,>-.:.. r. e p.

uss s.

i,.

. ms

,d

, r, C,,

• h. v.. o.

o x

o. r '. S..'.'S'.'... e ".".'.'.

.'$ CT. *. 3 V.".iu 't'.

2 y

..a

.C re r215 0r.3 bl e 2 5 5 e 5 5-e nt of t h e C 3;'3'O i lity Of the UC5gri

'n

.9 '. e r. '. O e 2.,/

• *~ 2 t,

'. b..o r.sa'.

r 2.,u 'i..

S.. ". E r '. " o. '6 s. S S,

'w'...'

.:.(. o. r '. t.

2

+

s o

o s

h35 50en desiC.ned to with$tind '.he C.re3ter Seis.~.iG event of r--

.9.'*

_ 'y '" r. h..

.%.. $,p. f.

r..** k.

• N

• 2 b

A **E

• R

s f O..*.* f.**O.

b. f v. *.. *.*.2 f

a,

. s w

[* p s>

.. t

-. m.

Sd

,. C

...{

q.. - b. +. '. s v u. j-. 7 i

.. Ie J

b.3 y= a. "y E.pmm j8 3 L* e. e, q

• p, u. j s q * " r.., j t.

g..t.*,'.

e*

f. ' )- *

q. p. '. ' q*

2 A.)

5. s%... q 35 e..** 5 e

• * *

• 5 b

N **

?..' - O.

l' "o* e ( 2

'. 4 Q '..

is

?a.

.:.h '

e,Nm 'i e5 ". s : k 'i 0 s

sC I.. - +,, e.

e~e.c.s.

- i,,-. e

t. '. e S "w. r u.

v.

Cr.re. 2.s 'i sn. p e

2 p

s....

v w

2 o

..'.b.'y-..-...... -

-a

. iq. 3 6 ; 7

-.."r

...r..- -.2 e

y.-

v.,js.r, m.

, ', u p *., *

• j.

b. 4. ya g

p. f *. A. a.

d 2,- ei } 5. '3 I. q

• e. a.

e 3. S.. 2 5 d

1*.

',.m

• 2

• .s

.'. r]

y e p 3. " A. q. t.

g* p. M. E. #. E.(*..a. i. v^ r'. g.,, s.3..* g p 4. *s. [ f,3.4

• '.m.

p.3 * ^ (* j f E { 2 *..,. 5. g.**. G a. *5 i

F d

6 i

s C r ' '. d. r.' A.

' '.9 2

.'2

...... - 3' v' # ' . ' c--

' ' '. ". ' - ~ " '.

. %, r-4, 2 46

• I 26

e...

(..; y,- : a.

a. f c : f.:,

• j,

.t r e J q

.s pp6

'bs y

7. r..

• ,..2 u

i s

s of sa'aty cr0 viced are we d d ; rovi ce nC"eP e' e s s *.h e ra rf..

3, e -

e. - :. w 3 r c. '

• p. -,,1.4*wae %.,DCL V n.., d I '," /.... W )/

w.st by.

...L2&..

I,l h

3.Ot. :. C s '

,4 s

6

i.. $

• ..,.,. $ e s.

..'n

, s

aq g.,

e,..4-

-. p

.

-. 4... p,2 q~ ~...

. 3

.a s

s,.

.s

1. .* ; e. 6..r

l. '..,. g i e. 6 4

r.a. c l 3.a p ~

• e. *. ]. = ;, d ;

2 3.

m

' - i ~s. $ e q q#1

• s)

...: ~. '. z. r e '.v~

1.

a s,es.

...te.%

.S E z i=. *. q.

.s q.

- n

1. ^

J.

p q, e.~ s.

..%.r. L'.

)

v a

v.

. i o.,

...y.

. 2..

" % w; Ia a ~.-}3r

/s

'q pbg

. f ; e * '-= 'I ' p-

,J

2. ' * 'q 1 r* A q ; f. g

• j mi s-g

• 'p< g 3L vs

. 'a r

L

, ?. s. d..

,s d r, - 2 q..

6

-+

t.

4..

c..'., c, s d.

. b.. c....

2 p; p. p w ;..: - _, y '. a. e. g s

. i.

1. . ' e r.'m # ". e '. ". o ig

,aC.4

. r.

F I.

a. 6.3

21. e a. 5 4. /. A '. I*. c.r O,'.'A.r.2*-'.c 3

4 w

i c

.s. y. >. -.,'

a. I..*. * *. *3,

i**4m,

. p i-4 o g a r....32. d

• N e "... S.

2 d g a..... j-af *.hg d;#.A.*.f-gio e

o 2

1. .. n d.

b, o.

o. a. v. r. r,, s.

.. 2. m... i.1 2

c. '. w..

, e C.".. s.

.'"'i.

s M

w...

i s

..w ii I

-b' ya.;,*,

t

- I. ; e

• 5. e' n. t-o.

3. i s '.. - '. '. '. '.

r-2 j. * ', e a.. y,

...* q

• l.,if q p i. 3. e.2

.... 1. E c..

', 3

.a.,

,, q

• js s i.

s i

.[

'. a. r *..s. g,. 4 4 m,' e, q -.. -3 i

9

. b g u a r,. ; e. r 1

ad.

^

7 i

-sg(j}.. a.

b. ;. i p.

p e 3..

n; *.. M.

2 in my

.u.

3. m g i ;...di2 s.p..is-s. 'r. 2..

4

-4e

-. g

.W j. a.. q u...2.,,"j.

.3 2

, e. ; c,.. - i c..-. c, i..,. ;..a, -. 5.

s.

m.

t.~, r, C u;. n.

' r. 4, '. :. i v n 2 I,i...

^

., 3

... ~. -

v

........... e....

.... - a. 2 s.. c,,:,

q e 3

c r. p a. L-,. :.,.

...s,.

I-

c, d,..-

2

.. 'q,, 1.,3

.d s

s w

. b.; s.

.,J

( :. s. a. 4. L,

, p e.

-'2,

.s'.'..

...., d v.c n : T.a.. ~ q,...s.

p

..e s

ui w.

. i-r s...*..e a.

. -....,1..,

,e.$.,,...,..,

~

u.

-n'... -.3

,.. m 1-

.s

~

a

.s s

v.. 'i i. j, t ml.... o

.... a a... /. -*

s.

r

..ec-46

.2

..-.. W.3

.a,..

...u w n. e.,.,.,i I, :i 'C..-;30is.

., d.d o.

s a

3

,.On :ibr Mc

.i uc a.

.I e 3 J. s.

'i

.ig.

racendy hen :ss.ed in NEG-M Pevisicn 1 in :ece--ber 1973 i l s o. '. =. s 'i, r C ^. r - s e. e..

%... L.w>l

.'ie#'.2r'qv

'W.. C. w 'a 4 2 c

i v.

i mi w.iL s. q *. '. o u'

• d w. t.* h. n y.ud

• S.

.'.O.

2..

1. c* h. I. 3 '

3 J. ^s.

..!. *. i y e # e-e*

.e5 d

s

• I 3*

s

.o 6

u s w.

r.. r,3 3

=..y T C P the V ari CUS Cl i5 $ 25 of r'sc,i dir dC1. '.: 25 Ire

. 3r f_idril g

,. a. e.., n...

. s. *. 3 : vC6

=.

363 IM OmWR r@' rf %m W

7B o_ m.., h[) 6 n,

-. w.

CI J

M..

gijf'i,%

a r l' r

-% :{l..

.ij J u;.iJ.

?

m/ U u G

i f g.

\\s

~

d v

., 3 ~J u Lt UQy

' ~ '

=

1 Mr. Richard Creever Concern :

Storage of High Level Radioactive Waste.

Respenre: A principal source of high level radioactive waste is in spent fuel.

The Pacific Cas and Electric Company may elect to submit, in the future, a proposal to increase the storage capacity of the spent fuel storage pool.

Increased spent fuel storage capacity proposals have been previously revieved and approved fo. other licensed operating reactors The generic pruulens of interim spent fuel storace has been accressed in a craft " Generic Envi ro. rental Irract Statecent on handling & Storage of Spent LWh i.i," 10f.EC 0404 issued by the PIC staff in Farch 197E.

The staff fcurd that corcercial spent fuel generated through the year 20C0 can be accorrodated in a safe and environn.entally sound manner either by mcdificaticn

. of storage pcols_at the reactor sites or by provicing independent spent fuel storage facilities located on the site of a parent facility such as a nuclear pcwr station.

With regard to nuclear waste cisposal at of f-site repositeries, the Comission has been quite concerned with this natter. While the Depart: rent of Energy has primary responsibility for developing and constructing waste disposal facilities, the FC has the responsibility to license such facilities and to insure that nuclear waste stcrate and disposal will net endanger the health anc safety of the public.

The f;RC has been arkinr to develop a regulatory frar.emrk for the licensing of high.-level traste repositeries and has published for cocrent in the Federal Register proposed procedures for such licensing (42 FR 52d59, f,ovember 17, 1970).

The i;RC has established an cf#1ce with divisicnal status, tne Civision of >.aste Panagemert, wnicn ceals exclusively with nuclear waste issues.

In accition, the f.EC participated in the activities of the Interagency Eeview Crcup cn f;uclear '.aste Fanac.erent which was established by President Carter in ' arch cf 1978 and charged with develcping a governr..ent-wide stratyy for dealing with the waste management prcblen. The draf t rescrt of this group, incor-ocrating a broad rar.ge of inputs and views fror many scientific croups anc r c= Lers of the public, was issuec for puolic corrent in Cctober 107t.

It was issued in final forr, incorporating n any of the three tncusand concents received, in i' arch of 1979.

~

The repcrt is to be fcrwarded tc tbc President for further action.

It is expectec that the reccrrendations in this report will shape the future handling of the ruclear waste disposal part h

-p-ime roax ns (9 m acx no

• +=...a--'--naaam"""'"'"

Ob)

I

Mr. Richard Greever issue. These activities are indicative of the attention being given to the nuclear waste disposal problec at the NRC and at other government agencies.

Concern :

Low Level Radioactivity Effects.

Respcnse:

In the matter of low level radiation hazards, the Cormission has always subscribed to the principle that radiation exposure of the public should be kept as low as is' reascnably achievable. This principle has been a central one in the field of radiation protection f or :nany years.

Operating licenses of nuclear powr ulants include provisions to limit and centrol radicactive ef tltents frcm the plants.

Tne te.r:.. "as icw as is reasonably achievable" requires taking into account the state of technology, the econe-ics of improvements in relation to benefits to the public health anc safety, other societal and sociceconcnic consideraticos, and the relationship of these to the use of nuclear energy in the public interest.

The Cornission has adopted nwe" ;al guicelines for design objectives and limiting conditi;.1s for operation of ruclear power plants to meet the criterion of "as low as reasonably achievable" for radicactive material in effluents from nuclear pot.er pl ants.

Using these guidelines, the radiation resulting from radicactive release fron nuclear pcwer plants curing normal plant cperation is a small fraction of that received from natural backgrounc activity.

The !EC has expenced substantial effcrt in studying the potential health effects of low-level ractation en nmans.

Funcing has been allocated for research on the effects of specific radioactive isotopes and of epicciology studies, the analyses of current research in the fielc cf radiobiolcgy and epicemiology and the drawing up of preliminary plans to study the feasiDility of a large-scale epidemiology investigation cn Icu level radiaticn effects.

The t,RC staff is also participating with international agencies en the control of long-livec radionuclice er.issions fect the nuclear fuel cycle.

In resarc to Ciablo Canyon, environnental matters including low level radiation ef fluents from the Diablo Canyon t:uclear Power Plants were the sut;ect of prcceedings in a public hearing.

After extensive censiceratiens, the Atcmic Safety and Licensf rg seen om@ng4 evanau r >

.. n..[,.k....\\.

sars >

'~

mc mu m s.m.-m u

- - - ~

w.

-es

-IW' av Mr. Richard Greever 1 Board issued a Partial Initial Decision of June 12,1978 and concluoed that the effects of low level radiation from plant operation will be negligible and will result in no significant risk or increase of genetic defect incidence in the population of the San Luis Obispo area during the projected thirty years of operation.

Concern:

Transportation of Radioactive Waste Materials.

Response

Transportation of radioactive caterial is regulated at the Federal level outsice of the nuclear power plant license principally by the nuclear Fegulatory Comnission and the Cepartrent of Transportaticn.

In fiscal year 197S, there were 19 transportation events which licensees were required to repcrt to the Nuclear Regulatory Concission. None of the resulting expcsures exceeded 100 tilli-rems which corresponds to the average annual dose from background activity. Sixty-six other events were called to. the attention of NRC, however, they were not reportable events.

We are not aware of the average of one accident per day that you stated in ycur letter.

Concern:

Large tomber of Reported " Safety Related Occurrerces."

Respense:

We assume that the " Safety Related Occurrences" cited in ycur letter correspond to the reportable events that the licensees of operating nuclear facilities are required to submit to the fuclear Regul atory Cor, mission.

Stringent reporting requirenents are imposed on all licensees of operating nuclear facilities that recuire prompt notification of the Comnir.sion's staff of a cesign ceficiency or cegraded operation of plant compcnents.

These ancmalies are reviewed and where appropriete receive immediate attention to resolve these matters in an expeditio s manner.

A certain number of these reportable events may fall uncer the category of " abnormal occurrence."

An abncreal occurrence is defined as an unscheduled incident or event which the Conrissicn determines is significant from the stancpoint cf public health and safety.

As required by law, the fuclear I

- 6,3 s,<

3

.n.u w gyfWW A M C >

OATE >

.g.

4........................e.-.* e.ees.es.

~m,.,

...n s m e.,

a

[

Mr. Richard Creever Regulatory Comission reports to the Congres; each calendar quarter on any abnomal occurrence that may have taken place involving facilities or activities regulated by the HJclear Regulatory Comission.

In Fiscal Year 1978, a total of nine events were determined to be abnormal occurrences, anc four events reported by the Agreerent States met the criteria for abnormal occurrences.

F.atters related to the effects of the Diablo Canyon plant on public health and sifety have been reviewed by the Comission's staf f, its consultants and ths. Adviscry Comittee on Reactor Safeguards. The general public has been provided with the opportunity of participating in public hearings conducted by an Atomic Safety anc Licensing Ecard related to t,oth safety and environrental issues.

The most recent hearing, which extended over a period of about two ponths was concluded on February 15, 1979.

The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is in the process of preparing its decision regarcing the licensing.of Diablo Canyon based on the record of the bearing procee::i ngs.

I trust that the above information has been responsive to your concerns.

Sincerely, Original Signed 9Y Roger S. ecyy Roger S. Boyd, Di rector Civision of Project Panagecent Office of fucle Feac ce Regulaticn ib

^

3 63