ML20125D068
| ML20125D068 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | North Anna  |
| Issue date: | 11/02/1979 |
| From: | Gossick L NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Warner J SENATE |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20125D070 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8001130210 | |
| Download: ML20125D068 (2) | |
Text
i,
.-~~
Locat pol
&g*WV UNITED STATES f
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
g
'r E WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 G _
l CiW E7 2 $1; Docket Nos. 50-338/339 50-404/405 The Honorable ' John W. Warner United States Senate Washington, D. C.
20510
Dear Senator Warner:
I am pleased' to respond to your letter of September 27, 1979, to Mr. Carlton Kammerer, Director of our Office of Congressional Affairs.
Your letter attached correspondence from your constituent, Frank C. Branchini of Arlington, Virginia.
You further requested that we provide our findings and views regarding Mr. Branchini's concerns in duplicate, along with the enclosures to your letter.
In Mr. Branchini's letter he expresses concern regarding (1) the geologic fault at the North Anna site, (2) seismic design (earthquake resistance) of the North Anna facility, (3) service water pumphouse settlement, and (4) the affect of a serious accident on residents of Arlington, Virginia.
In the spring of 1973 a geologic fault was identified at the North Anna site which transects the excasation of all four reactor units at the site.
Extensive investigations and evaluations were perfonned by VEPC0 and reviewed by the staff and its adviser, the U. S. Geological Survey to assess the impact of the fault on the design of the plant. As a result of our review of these investigations, the staff concluded that the fault passing through the plant site was not capable as defined by Appendix A to the Commission's Regulations 10 CFR Part 100 and therefore, the site for the North Anna Power Station Units 1, 2, 3 and 4 was found to be acceptable in this regard.
In its Initial Decision regarding this matter the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board affirmed the staff's conclusions.
These conclusions were also upheld by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board and U. S. Court of Appeals.
In this regard, we have received no new evidence to warrant further investigation on the acceptability of the North Anna site.
With respect to the seismic design of the North Anna Power Station Units 1-~and 2, VEPC0 and the Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation utilized analytical procedures which were different than those procedures used on the other plants designed by Stone and Webster which were ordered to be shut down.
We have reviewed the seismic design of the North Anna Power Station, Units 1 and 2 and have concluded that the analysis procedures utilized in the seismic design meets our requirements and therefore the seismic design is acceptable.
90017275 soous 2/o 9
e
Senator Warner In a letter dated June 13,1978, VEPC0 requested a change to Technical Specification 3/4.7.12 " Settlement of Class I Structures." Specific ally, this change was related to the maximum allowable average service water pumphouse settlement.
In our safety evaluation dated January 9,1979, and supplemented by our testimony to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, dated April 27, 1979, we concluded that on the basis of our review of the infonnation presented by. VEPCO, the North Anna Power Station can continue to operate with a reasonable assurance of a supply of water from the service water pumphouse in the reservoir. Although we have made some changes in VEPCO's proposed values of allowable settlement, we agreed with VEPC0 that the existing Technical Specification value could be safely modified. Accordingly, in Amendment No.12 to Facility Operating License NPF-4 for the North Anna Power Station, Unit No.1 dated June 28, 1979, we modified the Technical Specifications to meet our requirements.
The matter of the service water pumphouse is being reviewed by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board.
A public hearing regarding this matter was initiated on June 18, 1979. The Appeal Board has not yet rendered its opinion regarding pumphouse settlement at the North Anna Power Station.
Wind direction in the event of a design basis accident is considered in the preparation of Emergency Plans for the North Anna facility. The Emergency Plans for the North Anna facility have been reviewed and approved by the NRC staff. As a result of the Three Mile Island accident we are reassessing emergency plans for all nuclear facilities and if any changes are required as a result of our reassessment, we will implement them in the North Anna facility Emergency Plan. Current consideration is to plan for emergency measures due to plume effects up to 10 miles. Since Mr. Branchini resides approximately 80 miles from the North Anna site, radioactive contamination as a result of a postulated design basis accident would be approximately equal to natural background radiation levels.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide this information in response to your request.
Sincerely, Originni sienerl by [L G. Srnith Lee V. Gossick Executive Director for Operations i
90017276
.e w?.
"~.:.:.
.&m
, CF s
Q Distribution Docket Files 50-338-50-339 50-404 50-405 NRC PDRs (4)
Local PDR NRR Rdg ORB 1 Rdg ED0 Rdg L. Gossick H. Denton E. Case H. Berkow D. Vassallo D. Muller D. Eisenhut B. Grimes l
W. Gammill i
A. Schwencer P. Kreutzer L. Engle J. Cook Attorney, OELD IAE (3)
M. Groff G. Ertter (E00-07474)
SECY 79-2707 (5)
OCA M. Jambor j
M. Stine j
J. Butts 90017277 i
-i t
f E
rs fb
__ HSE 14%
.NRR g
Op EGCase HRDenton f6
/74 10/r 'h.f g
10/ /79 10/ /79,f, 10/ /79
.....R : U..n..d..0. 0..h...
...P.......D.O..
0.Q...h. M....[....
..E..D..O.........
DO '
d,,,,,,
..D..I.).R........... '...
i
,.s 3
,s'%I[,,,,,,,,,,
LEng1 :jb ASc hwenj,e,p,,,,,,W P,,,b,,9 mm
,,1,,,,,,,, DG E,,,,,,,,h,u,t,,,,,, Jg,y. e.e.e.*.........,(J.G,0.g,p,j.c.k,,, 3
. 0.. /.. R. 7...........
10..d..f./.7 9............1. 0../.N.../.7. 9..........
.1. 0../...../.7. 9......
....../....9......... 10../...f..
/ 7. 9..........
//
10 uts *
,. _,,,,,.,,, p
- =
- ~ ~ '
~~.:-.._