ML20041E600
| ML20041E600 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 01/29/1982 |
| From: | Dellums R HOUSE OF REP. |
| To: | Palladino N NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20041E597 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8203110131 | |
| Download: ML20041E600 (3) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _
'N P;bNALD V. DELLUMS
,,,,,,,,,T,0,,,,,,,,
f arr.cc c.c:ncs,
, me r. cr. c.w e g
C ut ise-sv cr. swer ios v
.()
c w3. c.ure.
usi7 c w a*same.
o.s n$[oNcNum"stA
~
t C sm u,. o_.
,o4 m.v c, _....
(sts)1sbeits Anut:3 samvtets commiTTar c
C ses c n e w.r. som 217 w.'e evoa. O c. *csis Congte%% of tf)e 6m*teb &btated
= ~ ~ ~ - - - - -
e
~,.c - ~~
=
(4is) s44-7747
%ouse of Repttielitatibts
..... us.
m,-.u.
January 29, 1982 a o **",1 =-
Mr. Nunz'io Palladino Chairman, Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1717 H Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20555
Dear Mr. Chairman:
I request that the NRC 1) set aside the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation decision of November 16, 1981 denying the request for. revoking or suspending the operating license on San Onofre Unit 1; 2) review this decision in light of evidence presented at the Atomic, Safety and Licensing Board hearings on the seismic risk at San Onofre in the matter of licensing San Onofre Units II and III; and 3) that the low-power test license for San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) Unic II be delayed until, as' in the case of Diablo Canyon, an independent audit can review current seismic capabilities and overall clant construction.
The San Onofre Plant, less' studied than Diablo Canyon, poses an ev'en greater danger.
Approximately half the population of California (10-12 million) live within 100 miles of the plant.
According to a' Science Applications, Inc. study commissioned by the California Office of Emergency Services (OES) a worst case accident there could result in the relocation of 8 - 10 million people for a period of up to 10 years.
The study calculates that latent deaths due to radiation release can occur.up to 100 miles from the plant.
The earthquake hazard at San Onofre is more severe chan at Diablo Canyon.
ASLB hearings held in San Diego this summer, clearly established the following:
- 1) There exists a major fault located 4 miles from the plant known as the off-shore of deformation.
It is a single continuous throughgoing fault at least 240 kilometers long and could be 420 kilometers long.
2/1...To EDO to Prepare Response for Signature of Chairman and Com Review...Date due Com: Feb 12..Cpys to: Docket RF, OCA to Ack.. 82-73 8203110131 820225 PDR ADOCK 05000206
~
~
l
,s 2)
Depending on which method of determining the maximum earthquake is used, this fault is capable of generating an earthquake from 7.4 up to a magnitude of 8.1.
The plant.is designed for a magnitude of up to 6.5.
3)
The OZD is capable of generating horizonal ground accelera~ tion in excess of 1 G.
The plant is designed for only a
.67 peak horizonal ground acceleration.
- 4) A geologic feature known as the Christianitos Zone of Deformation splays from the OZD and is mapped to within 3 kilometers of the plant, and could continue on underneath the plant.
On November 6-9, 1981, 20 seismic events occured on or near the Christianitos Zone of Deformation. The applicant an.d NRC staff had been claiming that this fault was inactive and of no consequence.
These events prove otherwise - it is active.
The fact thac the SONG Unic II 420 ton reactor vessel was installed 180 degress backwards as well as the fact that it's support barrels are misorientated, raise doubts that it can withstand the.67G design standard.
This is not simply an image problem as at Diablo Canyon but potentially much more serious.
Conflicting and imcomplete documentation on Unit II's seismic design coupled with the lack of workable evacuation' plans raises credicable concerns.
l SONGS Unit I operated only 46 days in a recent 19 month period (April 1980 - October 1981). Rated by the NRC to be among the top
.8 reactors in the nation to be the most vulnerable to reactor vessel embrittlement, Unit I could experience an uncontrolled radiation release.due to this phenomenon.
In response to 1560 petition letters demanding the closure of Unit I (NRC Docket
- 50-206, 11/16/81), the NRC denied.the request but admitted that vital components are not built to withstand the.67G seismic l
standard.
The NRC response explains that an earthquake induced j
collapse of the North Turbihe Building Extension and the West l
Feedwater. Heater Platform could result !n " eliminating all i
methods for providing water" to the reactor core to avoid a meltdown.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) described the l
emergency response plans for local residents as " minimally adequate" and implementation of the plan as " inadequate" last May.
One December 3, 1981, the NRC made oublic a recent FEMA update recommending expansion of the evacuation zone to include the Cities of San Juan Capistrano and Dana Point (just outside the current 10 mile zone).
SONGS Unit I should not operate until seismic uograding and emergency preparedness olans are adequate for public health and safety.
l
~
i d ')
- 5 It is my hope that you will delay your decision on the low-power test license regarding SONGS Unit 11 and set aside the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation decision on November 16, 1981 and order an independent audit of SONGS Units I and 11 to insure the safety and well being of all Californians.
Thank you for your time and consideration of these most vital concerns.
I look forward to your response.
Sincerelv l
I p~
. j e
Rcnald V. Dellums j
Member.of Congress RVD/mae 9
C D
W e
E
\\
s e
a 9