ML20126J092
| ML20126J092 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 06/11/1985 |
| From: | Reiter L Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Knighton G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML16341A686 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8506180522 | |
| Download: ML20126J092 (3) | |
Text
p CEsp
/
jo,,
UNITED STATES h g4 e fg g y I
NUCLEAR PEGULATORY COMMISSION o
g
- E WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
\\..../
JUN 1 1 1985 MEMORANDUM FOR:
George Knighton, Chief Licensing Branch No. 3, DL FROM:
Leon Reiter, Acting Chief Geosciences Branch, DE
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF THE MAY 22, 1985 MEETING WITH PG&E CONCERNING NRC C0fiMENTS ON THE SEISMIC REEVALUATION PROGRAM PLAN Attached is a sunnary of the meeting held on May 22, among PG&E and its
'cbnsultants and tfie NRC and its advisors. The purpose of the meeting was to allow PG&E the opportunity to respond to NRC comments on PG&E's Seismic Reevaluation Program. A list of attendees 1,s.,also attached.
Leon Reiter, Acti g Chief Geosciences Branch Division of Engineering
Attachment:
As stated cc: w/ attachment i
J. Knight R. Bosnak S. Brocoum G. Lear P. T. Kuo L. Heller L. Reiter l
H. Schierling R. Rothman R. McMullen D. Slemmons R. Brown, USGS l
/
l 85ggysad%A
May 22, 1985 MEETING REGARDING THE DIABLO CANYON SEISMIC REEVALUATION PROGRAM A meeting was held on May 22, 1985 among PG&E, its consultants and NRC and its advisors to discuss the NRC's comments on PG&E's Long Term Seismic Program. A list of attendees is attached.
Most of this meeting was involved with PG&E and its consultants orally addressing each NRC comment.
PG&E agreed with all of the general comments and will factor them into the Program Plan. Most of the specific comments required clarifications or more detailed elaborations, which the licensee presented orally. These presentations will be documented formally.
The NRC and its advisors caucussed at the end of the meeting and presented the following comments:
1.
The schedule for the near future includes the following milestones:
(1) June 10, 1985 - PG&E fornal response to NRC comments on the Program Plan; (2) June 24 and 25 - Diablo Canyon site field trip and geological reconnaissance; (3) June 28, 1985 - NRC's final report on the Program Plan; (4) July 10, 1985, 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. - ACRS Subcommittee meeting; (5) July 11, 1985 - ACRS meeting; and (6) November,1985 - Quarterly meeting among PG&E and NRC to discuss PG&E's program scoping analysis.
2.
PG&E should provide a written response to NRC's comments on the program plan for NRC and the ACRS. This formal response should include a summary of their presentations made at this meeting including viewgraphs with an explanation as to hcw this information supplements the program plan.
3.
The program plan should continue to be kept flexible.
4.
The ultimate goal of the seismic reevaluation program, to determine what the results mean to the seismic safety of the plant, should always be kept in mind. This was the intent of the seismic licensing condition.
5.
We request that PG&E summarize all of the major issues as it sees them, in the formal submission. The NRC and its advisors had difficulty.in providing constructive comments because the issues were not clearly stated in the Program Plan and PG&E did not present significantly new information at the meeting.
6.
Clarification is needed as to who will replace TERA and Stewart Smith in performing the seismology and ground motion functions.
7.
PG&E should also provide a response to ACRS comments on the Level 2 PRA in its formal response to NRC comments.
8.
PG&E's formal documentation should be submitted to the staff by June 10, 1985. The staff will review these materials and submit its conclusions regarding the Program Plan to the ACRS by June 28.
l l
I 1
l
-