ML20118D305
Text
_ _.
_ - ~ _ _ _ _ _. _ _
c...
..,,,...,a w.r.o.
y tJNITED ST ATEh GOVLxNMENT
!/SC/110TGHdum 10 Files dan: March 27, 1964 (THRU)
R. H. Brya C ef, Research and Power Reacth af ety Branch, DIAR ruoM F. N. Watson, Reseatch and Power Reactor Safety ~b f
Branch, Division of Licensing and Regulation s t'Ig EcT: PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY - BODEGA BAY PLANT CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION f " - R :f On March 18, 1964, a meeting concerning the above mentioned subject was held in Room 107 of the Bethesda Office. Those in attendance included:
PACIFIC GAS 6 ELECTRIC CO.
U.S.A.E.C.
C. C. Whelchel C. K. Beck F. F. Mautz M. M. Mann D. V. Kelly L. Kornblitji P. A. Crane G. F. Hadiock R. H. Bryan i-GENERAL ELECTRIC J. F. Newell?
F. N. Watson.
R. B. Lemon M. K. Woodard D. McDaniel B. K. Grimes H. R. Denton In this meeting, representatives of the Pacific Cas and E1cetric Csmpany expressed their intention to submit a new amendment to their application for construction permit for a nuclear power plant at Bodega Bay, California. This amendment would state the Company's intention to surround the reactor-building, both on the sides and beneath the foundation, with a compressible or crushable material so that two inches of diff erential motion along the " Shaft Fault" could be absorbed with virtually no
-movement or other deleterious effect on the reaccor building.
They also expressed a belief that it could be shown that such a design would accomodate differential motion in the-bedrock of as much as one foot without destroying the integrity of the reactor's ultimate containment system.
As a second itep; PG&E representatives handed out copies of Amendment No./T to their cpplication. An important item of this (Continued:
)
l 9220120090 920520 PDR DRO NHCHIST PDR
. _ ~..
l 2-
~
4 l
amendment is a revised plot of earthquake induced accelerations as functions of period for various damping f actors.
Since this I
amendment had not been fortnally submitted, copies which i
had been handed out were collected and returned to Mr. Crane 1
who expressed an intention to make a formal submittal inrnedsately.
l The PG&E representatives asked for coments from EC representatives j
on both of these items. On both items AEC representatives i
stated that no innediate evalt.ation could be made but on the other hand no itunediate objection to the design plan or the i
amendment was raised.
PG6E representatives stated they would submit the amendment 3
i describing p1sns for absorbing dif ferential motion along the l
fault by early April.
They further expressed a desire to present their case to the ACRS at the earliest possible date.
ces E. G. Case J. F. Newell 1
i j
t l
l
+--,
,m--
y-
,.-,,-e,
--a w
y-r-v-
,-- +
e - -, - -
,m---,