ML20126G845

FOIA Request for Documents Re 1982 Order Requiring 0.67g Seismic Design Std & 1984 Order Allowing Restart,Including Applications for Amends to Const Permit,Ol,Psar & FSAR & Facility Seismic Design Deficiency Repts

ML20126G845
Person / Time
Site:	San Onofre
Issue date:	02/21/1985
From:	Zaelke D Sierra Club
To:	Briggs W NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC)
References
FOIA-85-126 NUDOCS 8506180164
Download: ML20126G845 (3)

Text

. . . . . . c. . .m . ..-

. . . . .. ._._9_

a :s . .,

EV-

.sW%.

4

\ -

SIERRA CLUB LEGAL DEFENSE FUND,INC.

a =* , m. w =io Am=1 Ad== 1424 K Street. NW Suite 6oo Wulungton, D.C. zooo5 (2c2) 547-877o se mmence omcs FnMc P. Sudaded February 21, 1985 2=*'= D*"a' Lamas H. Sum I NbY J supen c. v.aer Mr. William II. Brisgs FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REQUEST SW da"=F Office of General Counsel vmm Puka I"v"* Ch United States Nuclear Regulatory Commisaion fC[Q -$$ - /h r=t hnw ofce=at Wgshington, D.C. 20555 b 'd 2-28-93 Ddarah s. R=a= Dost Mr. Briggs:

Eqal Antnsent 2a44 FJlnwe it C

As discussed during our Conference Call yesterday with the Ninth Circuit (Susan Johnson), we are submitting the

$3Noo ^ " following Freedom of Information Act Request as part of our effort to determine which documents we believe should k@c",# ,, be included in the supplement to the administrative Kzm P. Shelden reCoed.

1An PWDi

• 1. d"""" As the supplement is due 14 days from Monday, g p' February 25 (or March 11), it is important that our FOIA 3 t. 3 4 request be complied within the normal 10 day period the omm. co sozo2 statute allows (or March 4). We hope this will not 053)89241 present a problem. We note that most of the documents wa>e<mn.. o.c. emc= were requested November 28, 1984 by the Nuclear rna.nti s. uac.un, m Information and Resource Service (Exhibit A), and Ham ard !. Foz December 13, 1984 as part of our discovery request in the 7d2"* k administrative proceeding (Exhibit B).

responded to the November 28, 1984 FoIA request on NRC partially 3414 K $t.. N W sm= 6ao February 14, 1985 by providing documents from their Whwan. o.c. soool regional office. What remains are the documents from the

(***) l47'877* Washington, D.C. headquarters.

umoma Lati adm The general category of documents requested relate

• d d"'"'O directly to the issues in this case:

4,9 6th St.

%8Q, o whether the 1982 order requiring the .67 g seismic design standard was an amendment (or some (907) f8 6173:

,,,, m am other type of action).

M,IIo ,,,, o whether the 1984 order relaxing the .67 g seismic

,,, g, m design standard and allowing restart was an sww6eo amendment (or some other type of action).

Newiek. N.Y. sooss

(*1a)389 46,6 0506100164 050221 PDR FOIA PDR ZAELKE050126 L_ ZG TD 'ON AS H ) *l-1 'N TO:90 & 9240 )

,/.

Mr. William H. Briggs February 21, 1985 j Page Two

! o whether the 1984 order presents an unreviewed .

safety question.

o whether the plant is safe to operate at below the

.67 g seismic design standard.

o whether NEPA has been complied with.

More specifically, we request the following documents:

1. All amendments to application for construction permit and/or license for SONGS I.

2. All amendments to the construction permit and/or license for SONGS I.

3. All amendments to application for operating license for SONGS I.

4. All amendments to operating license for SONGS I.

5. To the extent not included in Nos. 1-4 above, all changes, amendments, supplements and updates to the Preliminary and Final Safety Analysis Reports for SONGS I.

6 All documents relating to the generic issue of determining when a license amendment is required.

7. All documents relating to license amendr.ents involving seismic issues for any plant under NRC jurisdiction.

8. All documents relied on in determining that the August 11, 1982 NRC order requiring seismic upgrading of SONGS I was not an amendment to the operating or construction license and/or did not require Scuthern California Edison (*SCE') to apply for such an amendment.

9. All documents relating to amendments to operating and construction licensea for SONGS II and III and any t other nuclear plant 8CE operates.

l, O M M FdQIS% PRdiN?/fdC

. . . _~ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _

~

. 4'., ,-

-l- .

Mr. William E. Briggs February 21, 1985 Page Three l 10. All communication between SCB, the licensee, and .

the NRC staff and Commissioners prior to the Commission meeting on November 21, 1984 that concern restart of t const r- tion prior to completion of seismic upgrade to

.47 g.

11. All documents constituting or referring to a review pursuant to NEPA of:

l a) the potential environmental effects of the 1 decision to allow restart of SONGS I in 1984, 1 and/or,

)

b) whether an environmental analysis of the restart decision should be prepared.

12. All documents referring to an investigation into circumstances surrounding the licensee's notification of the NRC of seismic design deficiencies in SONGS I. (This investigation was requested in a memorandum from Harold Denton, Director, office of Nuclear Regulatiens, to James A. Fitzgerald, Acting Director, Office of Investigations, dated May 13, 1982, to which the NRC is referred to assist in responding to this request). The scope of this request includes all documents pertaining in any way to such investigation, including, but not limited to, the initiation, decision not to initiate, conduct, '

suspension reinitiation, termination or pending nature of l such investigation.

Thank you for your attention to this request.

Best regards, h)

Durwood 3 el e cc: Mr. James N. Felton l

f, l

- - _ - _ >