ML20128L694

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Summary of ACRS Subcommittees on Extreme External Phenomena & Diablo Canyon Units 1 & 2 840524 Meeting in Los Angeles,Ca Re Chairman Palladino 840413 Request for Comments on Technical Paper Which Recharacterizes Hosgri Fault
ML20128L694
Person / Time
Site: Diablo Canyon  Pacific Gas & Electric icon.png
Issue date: 05/24/1985
From:
Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
To:
Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
References
ACRS-2212, NUDOCS 8507110419
Download: ML20128L694 (50)
v • d • e


Text

\

r NCRS - D O I L PROPOSED MINUTES OF THE gj M' J COMBINED ACRS SUBCOMMITTEES MEETING g,l7 h(. h; EXTREME EXTERNAL PHENOMENA AhD DIABLO CAtYON MA.Y 24, 1984 M 66 & M LOS AIiGELES, CALIFORNIA The ACRS Subcommittees on Extreme External Phenomena and Diablo Canyon Units 1

& 2 met on May 24, 1984 in Los Angeles, CA at the Airport Holiday Inn. The purpose of this meeting was to review matters relateo to Chaiman Palladino's April 13, 1984 request for coments on Diablo Canyon. Chairman Palladino's April 13, 1984 letter requested that the ACRS comment on: (1) a proposed license condition which would require PG&E to develop and implement the state-of-the-art program to evaluate the seismic design basis for Diablo Canyon, (2) the technical paper by J. Crouch, et al, which recharacterizes the Hosgri fault, (3) the appropriateness of PG&E taking the lead in the management of the proposed seismic reevaluation. The ACRS Subcommittees heard presenta-tions from representatives of hRR, PG&E, and Dr. J. Crouch.

A copy of the notice of the meeting is included as Attachment A; the list of attendees is incluoed as Attachment B; the schedule of this meeting is included as Attachment C; and the handouts from this meeting are included in the ACRS files. The meeting began at 6:30 A.M. on May 24, 1984 with a short executive session in which Dr. Okrent, the Subcommittee Chairman, summarized the objec-tives of the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 6:00 P.M. and conoucted in open session. Dr. R. Savio and Mr. J. McKinley were the Designat-ed Federal Officials for this meeting.

DISCUSSION OF ThE DIABLO CANich SEISMIC LICENSE CONDITION (J. Knight, S.

brocoum, S. Israel, D. hcMullen, R. Ruthman, and R. Jackson, NRC Staff)

Messrs. Knight, Brocoum, Israel, McMullen, Rothman, and Jackson discussed the hkC Staff's position on the proposed seismic license conaition for Diablo Canyon. The Commission has voted in favor of requiring that PG&E develop and l

implement a state-of-the-art program to reevaluate the seismic design basis

/ used for Diablo Canyon. The intent of requiring this seismic reevaluation is Y that the inf ormation which has been oeveloped since the last ASLB hearing in

? 8507110419 850524 1

,'h PDR ACRS .

' 2212 PDR j

'. l

)

May 24, 1984

- EEP/Diablo Canyon Minutes 1979 be reevaluated in a systematic' fashion. A program plan and implementation schedule is to be developed by PG&E by January 30, 1985 and the evaluation program is to be completed 'in a final report submitted to the NRC by July 1 1988. The hRC Staff has developed a general plan for this reevaluation program The (see Attachment D May 7,1984 letter from R. Jackson to R. Vollmer).

They are:

plan which the NRC Staff has developed has three basic elements.

(1) that PG&E review all relevant geologic ano seismic information that has become available since the 1979 ASLB hearing and evaluate the impact of this information on the design basis ground motion; (2) that PG&E perform a seismic PRA to determine which structures, systems, or comp'onents are important in preventing core melt; ano (3) that PG&E, as necessary, determine the seismic mdrgins which are associated with these critical structures, systems, and components. The NRC Statt has proposeo that PG&E take the lead in. managing

- this seismic reevaluation and that the NRC Staff perform a independent, but more limited, assessment which would be geared toward the review of the PG&E work. . The Nhc effort would involve assistance from the the USGS, selected national laboratories, and Dr. Slemons. It is proposed that the ACRS be The NRC Staff involved in the review of both the PG&E and NRC Staff efforts.

proceeoed to outlinec the fundamental elements of their proposed PG&E and NRC Staff evaluation plans. These are summarized on pages 1-7 of Attachment D.

There was some discussion of the nature of the PRA to be Representatives of performed in conjunction with this seismic reevaluation.

PGhE indicated that it was P6&E's intention to perform a " full scope" PRA (as opposed to a simple seismic PRA) and to use contractors to perform a It was noted that, to the extent practical, as state-of-the-art evaluation.

built, rather than generic, Diablo Canyon fragilities would be used in this evaluation.

hhl WORKING GROUP ON DESIGN MAR 61NS COMMENTS (R. Jackson)

Mr. Jackson noted that an internal NRC horking Group had been set up to guide The Working the NRC in the establishment of a seismic design margins program.

Group is chaired by Messrs. Jackson and Richardson and includes representativ

May 24, 1984 ,

EEP/Diablo Canyon Minutes l l

from the probabilistic risk assessment, licensing, and research areas within the NRC. .A panel of experts has been assembled to aid in the formulation of an NRC program.

PGLE PRESENTATIONS (J. Hoch, H. A. Cornell, R. Kennedy, and D. Brand)

Mr. Hoch,Dr. Kennedy, Dr. Cornell, and Mr. Brand discussed PG&E position on the PG&E agrees with this plan and proposed NRC plan for a seismic reevaluation.

will formulate a detailed plan for implenienting the NRC Staff's proposal by January 30, 1965. PG&E will augment this work by performing a full PRA rather than a seismic PkA and expects to work closely with the NRC Staff in this program.

SUh!GkY OF THE CRubCh PAPER (J. Crouch, NEXTON, Inc.)

Dr. Crouch sur,anarized a recent paper by J. Crouch, S. Bachman, and J. Shay entitled, " Post-Miocene Compressional Tectonics Along the Central California Margin." This paper presents a interpretation of a number of high resolution seismic reflection profiles which were obtaineo offshore in the Santa Maria Basin, northern Santa barbara Channel, and Point Conception areas. These seismic reflection profiles reveel major post-Miocene thrust faulting in the offshore central California region. These thrusts can be recognized on lines both normal ano parallel to the regional structural grain. On lines normal to the grain, they commonly imbricate and curve asymptotically downwara to a basal sole thrust fault. On lines parallel to the grain, they appear as a band of nearly horizontal reflectors that truncate tightly folded strata above the thrust fault.

P6&E PRESEhTATI0h (D. Hamilton anc S. Smith) bessrs. Hamilton and Smith presented the PG&E coninents on the paper by Crouch, bachman, and Shay. PGLE indicated that they believe that the interpretation presented in this paper by Crouch, et al, was generally consistent with the cata and interpretations that were submitted and reviewed previously in connection with licensing studies for biablo Canyon. They noted that this gives further evidence of the unlikelihood of a large earthquake being

' May 24, 1984 EEP/Diablo Canyon Minutes generated on the Hosgri fault. They aooitionally noted that they believe that the fault dips under and passes. below the plant site at distances greater than 6 kilometers.

hRC STAFF PRESENTATION (R. Jackson, R. Rothman, and S. Brocoum)

Messrs. Jackson, kothman, and Brocoum summarized the Staff's interpretation of the paper by Crouch, et al. 1 hey noted that they have completed a preliminary review of the paper and have concluded that the work cescribed therein is of high quality and bears serious consideration within the Diablo Canyon seismic evaluation. They believe that the paper should be reviewed within the context The Staff of other information which has become available over the past years.

noteo that the distance to which the fault approaches the plant foundation and the differences in the nature between the near-source motion generated by strike slip and thrust fault should be considered. It was noted that if the Hosgri is indeed a thrust fault, the observed lack of sea floor offset would inoicate a longer recurrence interval for a major earthquake than if the Hosgri were a strike-slip fault. It was also noted that if the Hosgri was a thrust fault it woulo raise the possibility that small faults observeo near the plant site would be splays of the Hosgri.

The NRC Staff discussed these estimates as to what difference in ground i

motion might be expected between stride siip and thrust faults. They noted that mechanisms for ground motion were not well guantified and were still the subject of some speculation. The NRC used techniques and data published by R. Campbell (1983) to obtain the following estimates for ground motion.

EEP/Diablo Canyon Minutes May 24,1984 4 .- ,.

= * -

3 E- %3 -

i 35 "-

Mi i E! #2 T .:^ ~

o

u. < m x

Strike Slip 0.42 0.61 7.5 5.8 Thrust 0.59 0.86 7.5 5.8 Thrust 0.74 1.08 7.5 2.5 Thrust 0.52 0.75 7.0 5.8 Thrust 0.69 1.02 7.0 2.5 l Thrust 0.44 0.65 6.5 5.8 Thrust 0.64 0.93 6.5 2.5 The comparisons of vertical and horizontal ground acceleration were also made. These estimates were also taken from work by Campbell and the results appeared to be dominated by data taken on soil sites.

4 %3 ~.

B 8 "

E  % $E E<

Et #2 &&

? # 54 a < ma a s z .g Strike Slip 0.51 0.77 1.21 7.5 -

5.8 t

0.73 1.09 1.23

' 7.5 5.8 Thrust 1.1 1.6 1.5 2.5 Thrust

1 EEP/Diablo Canyon Minutes May 24, 1984 The NRC Staff stated that they were cur;ently negotiating a contract with.the USGS for a continuation of Dr. Campbell's work.

PRESENTATION BY hEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC Mr. B. Campbell, Ms. S. Silver, hs. A. Rich, Ms. J. Evered, and Mr. S. Mendes spoke as members of the public. All of these persons opposed the operation of The adequacy of the seismic design, the the Diablo Canyon huclear Power Plant.

adequacy of the quality control used in the construction of the plant, and the integrity of the review process were the principal issues that were raised.

haterial was provideci by the speakers and is included as Attachment F.

GENERAL DISCUSSION The Staff's proposal for a seismic reevaluation and the paper by Crouch, It was generally concluded that Bochman, Shay were discussed at some . length.

the paper by Crouch, et al, was high quality work and represented a significant A

advaice in the interpretation earthquake mechanisms in central California.

number of proposals were made for specific elements that should be included in the seismic reevaluation. These were: (1) a state-of-the-art inelastic analysis of the as-built structues at Diablo Canyon; (2) a thorough review of proprietary oil-well drilling data; (3) the use of free-field and in-plant seismograph data that has been obtained at Diablo Canyon during recent earthquakes; (4) reconsider-ation of the nature of the on-shore faults in light of the possibility of the existence of an underlying thrust fault; (5) reexamination of the postulated connection of the Hosgri fault with the San Gregorio and San Simeon faults.

I I

o i

KTAGl MENT A

Fed-ral Registir / Vul.19. No. 86 / Wed,esday, May 2.1984 / N;tices - ""~~~ T8799 Ap ::cy C/co .: n U.% e.: liern.an G. September 28.1483 (48 FR 44291). oral or located at the licensee's site in Appling Th rr..ng. (202! 3Y-9421 written s!atements may be presented by County. Georgia.The licenses are OAfB Ofhce. , Carlos Tel ez. [202) 395- rnembers of the public, recordings will subject to all rules and regulations of the 7340 be pe mitted only during those portions Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Title Sune3 of Utilization of of the meetmg when a transcript is being Commission).

Umvers.g-Industry Conperative kept. and questions may be ask ed only gy Research Centers: A Psactice Manual by members of the Subcommittee. its A'/ccted rublic: Indi viduals. Stste or consultants: and Staff. Persons desiring On November 19.1980. the local gnvernments, business, nonprofit to make oral statements should notify Commission published a revised 10 CFR institutions. and small businesses or the Cognizant Federal Employee as far 50.48 and a new Appendix R to 10 CFR orFanizations in advance as practicable so that 50 regarding fire protection features of Nurnber of Responses 1.500 responses; a'ppropriate arrangements can be made nuclear power plants (45 FR 76602).The total rumber of burm n hours-375 to allow the necessary time during the revised i 50.48 and Appendix R became i Abstmct. NSF prepare: and meeting for such statements. effective on February 17.1981. Section distributed in 1982 a manual providing The entire meeting will be open to 111 of Appendix R contains fifteen prartical guidance on planning. pubhc attendance. subsections. lettered a through O. each organizing and implementing university. The aFenda for subject meeting shall of which specifies requirements for a industry cooperatne research centers be as follows: particular aspect of the fire protectiori User feedbad is needed from the Thursdav. May 24.19fA--4.30 a.m. Until features at a nuclear power plant. One mancars indn idual recipients in f these fifteen subsection. Ill G.,is the the Conc'lusior": of Business industry and academia on how well the subject of this Exemption.Specifically.

manual'has served their needs. and During the initial porton of the subsection !!!.G.2 requires that one train what might be done to improse it and meetmg. the Subcom nittee, along with of cables and equipment necessary to NSF s continuing role in fostering better any ofits consultants who may be achiese and maintain safe shutdown be university.industrs rese rch present, may exchange prehmmary maintained free of fire damage by one of co!Liboration.

V2'*s reFardmg matters to be the following means:

c nsidered dunng the balonce of the a Separation of cables and equipment liennan G. riming

  1. ~'" UnF ut.*B Ch cw O'i . and associated non-safety circu!'s of Tha Sub;cmminee w:ll than hear redundant trains by a fire barrier harmg 5 ,' , ' l . , , , . s m ,, , pimmat.cns b a s r.ud h .,Wons a 3-hour ratire Structural steel formmg w iq. n pro- nm ,the Gas e.v ; - og ,m.c ..., Lectnr Cer.; an.. NP.far .rg' their a part of or se; parting such fire barr.ers e- S:o:.. shall be protected to prov:de fire r : r n': arts. s.n;: otwr mteres.ed resistance eq#velen' to that regi.:rud d twC;Lt.r:reGA C ORY I ' 7 " ".' ' O F "$"*"- the barrh r.

COWIS90N

  • P """ " 'W
  • E'6 b. Separation of cables and eumr. nt N; .m u sed. whetner tne n.wt ng and associated non-safety c:r-w -

Acviso , Cearmmee c,n F; acto rg ' . r c;nahea or reschedded the redundant trains bv a he w:ti gg,g,srds U'"m.sni rdu:c on reqJeSS fur the distante of more tl$an 20 fee *

  • rr c;; u:.ait) tu present oral statements uno the tir.e m.otted trierefor can be inter eninF combustibics cr f.re Cemtdoed Sabcommittee on D.:bo hazards. In add: tion. fire deter. r> nd Canyon Nacrear Power P; ant Units 1 (pa:r.t d L 3a prepaid it.cphene call t an automatic fire suppression $3 ste n and 2 and Extreer.e Externai tre rc:n.zan: Des.gnated F ederal shall be installed in the fire e ea: or Phr,omena: Meeting Emp:3) "t D: R. chm Sovw (:tle;. hone c. Enclosure of cable and eppnient and and associated non-safety circuits of T. - CP.F. % .~ e .. o:. D .

F" "'* one redundant train in a f;a t.a ner C. . N .. t.. . T.c Lre .

a n" c . M L : . . O. . :, ! h . .r Dated Ar.. ' w+4 having a 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> ratm; In ad:: tion. fire w d: '4 :i-

  • W . ; r y o . M r. Johr c. ib>le detectors and an automatic fire 24 w . . - !i L. ,1~- Airpon M. E ' O C' r ~ '* M . . 0% c. suppression system shall be ins *ahd in S 1- C I:h  ! ~ Ar ph. Cp l'+ ' o *-m * - " . de fire aret Tt r E c: . , v. " . . s v w .: e ri es u-scor.t w .u U re ' d t. D: . 6.

. C.. , e n #.. a e rr ,r A - r. ,. liy letters da'ed July 1. W/; i.

P.".-d:b.tri]F..s. . ; .9T

."e D ' " " ' " "' N C sepplemented by letters dets.1 te-

. ' ;mT .m. .% .-

Wy N. N vember % anc Ya a ~

. 6 *

  • t. i t '.' f."I "- : c v w w M ) e Georg:a Po* cr Cc npar.y. et a'. (Edwirt r p *d ha nse c c.rdiv.r. w hich w ould December 20.1983. the hcensee I. htch N .clea Plant. Ur.'ts Nos.1 and rque<ted an exemptron fror. ti .

";. Pe df :. G t i T.. - to L O 6 2;; Exe nption re gaircments of subse .tior 12 G ; -

'Nd) t- .t e ".e D.,hh i Appendix R is 26 areer of tr+ }mi L ,

c'e te- L 2 r i.i 'i. dear Plant. Units 1 and 2. Tne r;;a pyten-sv if tus sitd3 w e J.v.e. The Georg.a Power Corpa ra tGPC or c'i, < ne Go and niectric t d.nz the ecceptability of the enerr.ptier recuert t! c laenseel end thret che c.hwners I# each of then 26 artas is addressed 3- , < r this praicct. en! lv neers are the ho'ders of Tacih". Op n.!.ng

r. - : c tu t! e I as : fe .'t .,s dxussed Lir (:m s Nes Dpg s er.d Noi ; i b h k. w. M re detai!s are con'amed in tr+

i:. < ; ; ; rntt!cd "1. s .'.' .rr' e:.t Commssion's related Safe y Eva!ustwr.

. ec:r.c za cm a a r cf tu Edw r 1.

Comp en:o w! Teron;cs A% the ILic F Nu:lu.: Tknt Un. s 1 and 2 IV Ccr *..' Calif arr.i. M.qn" 13 j i: (ll,:th or the f#htr>s; e's: cad. ca e 4 ' "#

C*om h. et al. n ,, 7 w,7 .t u is net m e.a r ss o!

ID H .~ . orc' n ";r e V ' - ' t. t *.ru, _ns 24 M r - . w 6th he: - n\ [0 path . , t

< 6*C l ' L c- . I, . -g.3q.,., *

, g ,,, _ , , , ,

. c ;-
  • e Fr4 of P, per or Tri (, 'q: ,,9 .
wg., , gg g gyg. c,,, ,

+ wy. < - w.r - - . . .-, . w .--. crf, 7 ,.,w.g v. ,q _ _ . . . , , , , , . m_,, , , , , , , , , , , . , . .

O 1

ATTACIAMENT B i

l

$U5LIMittitt Nttimu. _ COMBINED EXTREME EXTERNAL PHENOMENA & DIABLO CANYON H Way Inn, Los Angeles, CA May 24,1984 LOCATION: .

NDANCE LIST

ASE TRI N T I 6i F il I si lO.'J . f I'*'I r Cemna EEP Sueconn,rre, J)c g 3-
1. Q OrrENr
r. C.R Siess C w a m w D asio Omo ' Sue <0~~rree #C#s AcRS Menper 1 . W R"q n r L M C Maou sg

/*

5. d [Ef95cLE (znuiran
s. y rurrinnw
7. B. Pne .

. Acts Coasurrer

~

l

s G. / 40nio.1ou "

l a el Mnxweit it

't

10. M. TR/FUM C.

,11. E loco A&RS Sta f f DFE 1p. Ji' Snio

/*

13.d W / A' W L E P 14 C. A I nc s i -

CAc. t.1c. y m&d 4 oc-E sc RR Frav l P6sndE .

1s. len h. Noci hdl- /dia)- Af//

we

~

li7. DAhr, Rn c%e hek-veic jtw v.nas uu , s Lao 3 : "

-%kTsl

\w He:ns %inND i

10.

G a s 4 /A wali i &h4 da {&lrie C -

\m. 1% ' ~ c . Essel-Wa.d 6 d_

4 -t, Q 4 e m

n. edi-we'n &i,1 I .

~ h i d f., b n p b }e [ f _ b k f

23. bk hd i b4 ll '

h  %

,p. V M. \ day _

e---,-----,,- mw,.._..- ,. ,, , ,,. - ,_

J. C. NCKINLEY

~

03f illitt. httimu. _ COMBINED EXTREME EXTERNAL PHENOMENA & DIABLO CANYON May 24,1984 Holiday Inn, Los Angeles, CA .

T _

^ ATTENDANCE LIST -

?L' EASE TRI t!T:i i m uomoa ~~

7 ? G ep@ E.

2 \/ i$e rnivcw2 D.M Mam i A/o ri E. s A E to . San o y PG6 P 6,E 1 l

_ J nk % vt %A. Pecaret _, .

M . J . A two2-W e'rwG Hoas E

. E . rs . Baras (Al&ST/N4 HoLISE .

i. XSc/JPGLLAro .

r v r n 3 as,o o, /~ew w

-r .,4., =n erc<.- l

(-

l Pm tric Gn 2 Encre c Co -

HAMM Q. S iMW pa c , c,< c,az a t k m ,; ca.

, . Au1nes F Lecxc On iL 9 news L4

-yo se p), Oswahve PKl'Rc. GAS & EL M Lc O s

0lfo Ste, n ha relf*

.5'huc/uu//>1ec4ania Axoc.

s. Robn// Kennec/v '

t & ,.m f En aA -_ Neck.n % c.

's. 6 =/2Atn G2A 7_/E8 ScaecQ & b'b tv. O sr.o e rt PG$$ '

n. R ?. bvm .

9GsE '

tr. []ll4A$u W.M l' C . P A. S.

n. % .oi n 4' Me vi e r w6 su s .

}L L/ FE C - 5,L :D

14. G AS YS/36MJS
d. @. (3$M337 ~

COMBINED EXTREME EXTERNAL PHENOMENA & DIABLO CANYON U5r % Itt.t.Pittlano; May 24,1984

.MI00 _ Holiday Inn, Los Angeles, CA .

g NDANCE LIST LEASE TRI f!Tla E I AF F IL Isil0:1

) !( 'YAJ.f1MJ2nhetaVfi &faf46) \

A$tfb/ b 4WNh ^

Amun:, u/i~;u Liw&L ll ft%.ut, %wlev -

. %J t ewJ l (d /vdCL612 DcMhMin 4e f>K tt'lC a.x/ critt72Ck 80 ut e~ (A(~f NFL(

e I.

j G'.

s -

l e

)._

1.

?.

1.

"L -

6.

>l 7. ~3 -

i 'S .

, ^, . N -

?O. .

?1. .

i??.._

! ??.

74.

O l

s.

4 AT ACMMENT C

]

i I

]

l

, 5/10/84 PROPOSED AGENDA FOR THE DIABLDCANYONANDEXTREMEEXTERNALPHENOMENA SUBCOMMITTEE MEETINGS ON THURSDAY, MAY 24, 1984

1. Executive Session C. Siess 15 Min. 8:30 - 8:45 am D. Okrent
2. Status of licensing activities NRC Staff 15 Min. 8:45 - 9:00 am on Diablo Canyon
3. Discussion of issues raised in April 13, 1984 Letter from N. Palladino to J. Ebersole a) Discussion of proposed siesmic reevaluation
1) Discussion of NRC Staff 1 Hr & 9:00 - 10:30 am proposal for a seismic 30 Min.

reevaluation

          • BREAK ***** 15 Min. 10:30 - 10:45 am
2) Comments from NRC Working 30 Min. 10:45 - 11:15 am Group on Seismic Design Margins
3) PG&E Comments 30 Min. 11:15 - 11:45 am
4) General discussion and 60 Min. 11:45 - 12:45 pm ACRS Consultant's comments
          • LUNCH ***** 1 Hour 12:45 - 1:45 pm b) Discussion of technical paper by J. Crouch, et al
1) Presentation by J. Crouch 30 Min. 1:45 - 2:15 pm

Diablo Canyon & EEP Agenda ,

5/10/84

2) Discussion of NRC Staff 60 Min. 2:15 - 3:15 pm position as to"the impact on the design basis ground motion
          • BREAK ***** 15 Min. 3:15 - 3:30 pm
3) USGS coments 30 Min. 3:30 - 4:00 pm
4) PG&E coments 60 Min. 4:00 - 5:00 pm
5) General discussion and 60 Min. 5:00 - 6:00 pm coments by the ACRS Consultants and J. Crouch
4. Sumary, conclusior.s and future C. Siess 30 Min. 6:00 - 6:30 pm actions D. Okrent
        • Adjournrrent **** 6:30 pm d

u4a_ a _- - a .- - - - - - -, - - - --- --

, e l

i  :

l ATTAEl4 MENT V

.. ..r- . ..

. . _. . - w. a u l'

B. CONDITION 1 - UPDATE GE0 LOGY & SEISMOLOGY .

1. REQUIREMENTS A. EVALUATE POST-1979 ASLB HEARING INFORMATION B. REEVALUATE SELECTED PRE-1979 DATA THAT MAY BE NEEDED TO FILL IN GAPS IN THE NEW DATA, USING NEW REPROCESSING TECHNIQUES jf
2. PURPOSES A. CONFIRM CHARACTER OF HOSGRI AT DEPTH -
8. CONFIRM OVERALL LENGTH OF HOSGRI IN LIGHT OF THRUSTING HYPOTHESIS
c. CONFIRM RECENCY OF LAST MOVEMENT & DETERMINE RECURRENCE D. CONFIRM THAT THERE ARE NO SIGNIFICANT THRUST '

SPLAYS CLOSER TO SITE o

S

.me e

il.

C. CONDITION 2 - REEVALUATE THE SSE  :

1. REQUIREMENTS - MAGNIT'UDE OF SSE -

A. FAULT LENGTH' B. RUPTURE LENGTH

c. SLIP RATE
o. MAXIMUM DISPLACEMENT FROM SINGLE EVENT E. HISTORICAL SEISMICITY F. OTHERAPPROACHESSUCHASAREA0FFA9LTPLANET'O ESTIMATE MAGNITUDE .
2. REASONS A. NEW DATA ON GE0 LOGY AtlD TECTONICS OF C0ASTAL CALIFORNIA THAT MUST BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT B. NEW TECHNIQUES FOR ES11 MATING MAGNITUDE FROM '

GEOLOGICAL RECORD (1) LENGTH OF FAULT (2) LENGTH OF RUPTURE DURING SINGLE EARTHQUAKE (3) SLIP RATE -

(4) MAXIMUM DISPLACEMENT FROM SINGLE EARTHOUAKE (5) AREA 0F RUPTURE SURFACE DURING EARTHQUAKE

,4

'. .' - ] ha & '

y

~

D. CONDITION 3 - REVAllDATE GROUND MOTION AT THE SITE  :

1. REQUIREMENTS ,

A. REGRESSION ANALYSIS - HORIZ & VERT. SPECTRAL VALUES FOR SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS lE ~

B. SITE SPECIFIC SPECTRA (VERT. & HORIZ.)

c. EARTHOUAKE NUMERICAL MODELLING STUDY USING MODERN TECHNIQUES 1[

D. S0ll-STRUCTURE INTERACTION EFFECTS *

2. REASONS .

A. MORE RECENT NEAR-FIELD RECORDINGS THAT SHOULD BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT B. MODELLING STUDY ALLOWS FOR SENSITIVITY STUDY ,

C. S0ll-STRUCTURE INTERACTION ANALYSIS TO EVALUATE THE EFFECT OF STRUCTURES ON THE GROUND MOTION eau.

~

i e .

E. CONDITION 4 ASSESS THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RESULTS OF - -

CONDITIONS 1, 2 & 3 WITH RESPECT TO DESIGN &

CONSTRUCTION s s

1. REQUIREMENTS A. SEISMIC PRA f
s. IF NECESSARY - DETERMINISTIC ESTIMATES OF SEISMIC CAPABILITY OF SELECTED STRUCTURES SYSTEMS, OR COMPONENTS ,
2. REASONS .

~

A. ASSESS SIGNIFICANCE OF ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN EXISTING SEISM. DESIGN BASIS AND THAT .

RESULTING FROM PREVIOUS 3 CONDITIONS

s. LIMITED DETERMINISTIC ANALYSIS CAN BE USED TO ~

BETTER DEFINE SPECIFIC SEISMIC MARGINS e* F L

e' i

.m.4

~

4.: ,a c e me m.

. ~= . * * * . . .-.... . ..

l. .

III. PARALLEL STAFF EFFORTS '

'A . CONDITION 1 '

1. REVIEW DATA PROVIDED BY PGsE
2. SOME ANALYSIS OF INDEPENDENTLY ACQUIRED DATA l

- 3. USGS AND DR. SLEMMONS, ADVISORS g B. CONDITION 2 ~

1. REVIEW 0F PGsE ANALYSES
2. INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT OF SSE MAGN.
3. ADVISORS - USGS & DR. SLEMMONS C. CONDITION 3 .
1. REVIEW PGSE ANALYSIS
2. ADVISORS - NATIONAL LAB's a USGS .

D. CONDITION 4

1. REVIEW PG8E'S PRA
2. ADVISORS - NAT'l LABS & USGS ,

E. Sell 10R ADVISORY REVIEW PANEL, OR PANELS, TO REVIEW .

RESULTS s

O i

9 l

.4

/

[

--_ .__. 3 E

c. . .

d IV. PROGRESSREPORTINGANdSCHEDULING A. PROGRESS REPORTS '

1. QUARTERLY PROGRESS REPORTS .

- 2. SEMI-ANNUALMEETINGSINBETHESDAg B. SCHEDULE .

30, 1985

~

1.PG8ESUBMITPROPOSEDPROGRAM-dfN

2. PROGRAM COMPLETED AND FINAL REPORT SUBMITTED ,

3 YEARS AFTER APPROVAL BY THE NRC STAFF .

e

.4

n.:

7 III. PARALLEL STAFF EFFORTS. * -

'A. CONDITION 1

1. REVIEW DATA PROVIDED BY PGaE
2. SOME ANALYSIS OF INDEPENDENTLY ACQUIRED DATA

- 3. USGS AND DR. SLEMMONS, ADVISORS g

~

B. CONDITION 2 *

1. REVIEW 0F PG&E ANALYSES
2. INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT OF SSE MAGN.
3. ADVISORS - USGS & DR. SLEMMONS . .

C. CONDITION 3

1. REVIEW PG&E ANALYSIS
2. ADVISORS - NATIONAL LAB's a USGS .

D. CONDITION 4

1. REVIEW PG8E'S PRA
2. ADVISORS - NAT'l LABS & USGS ,

E. SEilIOR ADVISORY REVIEW PANEL, OR PANELS, TO REVIEW .

RESULTS

~

. ._ m

,n., _. a.a - r -.---.- . - .- --- ---.-.m +d.e.. A ._ . a __ .u.

b O

O d

1 i

i l

l A TAELNENT E i

l I

l l i

4 l

1 l j

i l

I l

1 i

1 I l t- _

I UNITED STATES 9[+mte:yo

, 'o,,

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 4., ,$ ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS yQ,gg *h ,

WASHINGTON, D C. 20555 May 31, 1984 MEMORANDUM FOR: A,CRS M rs FROM: t jSavio, nior Staff Engineer

SUBJECT:

PRESENTATIONS BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AT THE MAY 24, 1984 JOINT MEETING ON EXTREME EXTERNAL PHENOMENA AND DIABLO CANYON Mrs. B. Campbell, Ms. S. Silver, Ms. A. Rich, Ms. Evered, and Mr. S. Mendes made presentations as members of the public at the May 24, 1984 meeting of the joint subcommittees on Extreme External Phenomena and Diablo Canyon. All of these speakers opposed the operation of the Diablo Canyon Plant. The written material which was provided by these persons is attached to this letter.

Enclosure:

As stated cc w/o encl: M. Libarkin G. Quittschreiber 0

e

,m.. -- . . . . - - ,_ ._. . --

Adi 5 - D a I L PROPOSED MINUTES OF THE U W -

. J COMBINED ACR$ SUBCOMMITTEES MEETING EXTREME EATERNAL FhEh0MENA AhD DIABLO CAhY0h hh tj 4 f MAY 24, 1984 LOS Ah6ELES, CALIFORNIA The ACRS Subcomittees on Extreme External Phenomena and Diablo Canyon Units 1 j l

& 2 met on May 24, 1984 in Los Angeles, CA at the Airport Holiday Inn. The purpose of this meeting was to review matters relateo to Chairman Palladino's l

April 13, 1984 request for comments on Diablo Canyon. Chairman Palladino's April 13, 1964 letter requested that the ACRS comment on: (1) a proposed license condition which would require PG&E to develop and implement the state-of-the-art program to evaluate the seismic design basis for Diablo Canyon, (2) the technical paper by J. Crouch, et al, which recharacterizes the Hosgri fault, (3) the appropriateness of PG&E taking the lead in the management of the proposed seismic reevaluation. The ACRS Subcommittees heard presenta-tions from representatives of hRR, PG&E, and Dr. J. Crouch.

A copy of the notice of the meeting is included as Attachment A; the list of attendees is incluced as Attachmet,t B; the schedule of this meeting is included as Attachment C; and the hancouts from this meeting are included in the ACRS files. The meeting began at 6:30 A.M. on May 24, 1964 with a short executive session in which Dr. Okrent, the Subcommittee Chairman, summarized the objec-tives of the rieeting. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 6:00 P.M. and cor.cacted in open session. Dr. R. Savio and Mr. J. McKinley were the Designat-ed Federal Officials for this meeting.

DISCUS 510h 0F THE DIABLO CAinch SEISMIC LICENSE CONDITION (J. Knight, S.

brocoum, S. Israel, D. bcMullen, R. Ruthman, and R. Jackson, hRC Staff)

Bessrs. Knight, Brocoum, Israel, McMullen, Rothman, and Jackson discussed the hhC Staf f's position on the proposed seismic license conoition for Diablo Canyon. The Commission has voted in favor of requiring that PG&E develop and implement a state-of-the-art program to reevaluate the seismic design basis used for Diablo Canyon. The intent of requiring this seismic reevaluation is that the inf ormation which has been oeveloped since the last ASLB hearing in

[

May 24, 1984 EEP/Diablo Canyon Minutes

~

1979 be reevaluated in a systematic fashion. A program plan and implementation schedule is to be developed by PG&E by January 3D,1985 and the evaluation program is to be completed in a final report submitted to the NRC by July 1 1988.

The hRC Staff has developec a general plan for this reevaluation program The (see Attachment D. May 7,1984 letter from R. Jackson to R. Vollmer). They are:

plan which the NRC Staff has developed has three basic elements.

(1) that PG&E review all relevant geologic ano seismic information that has become available since the 1979 ASLB hearing and evaluate the impact of this information on the design basis ground motion; (2) that P6&E perform a seismic l

PRA to determine which structures, systems, or components are important in 1

preventing core melt; ano (3) that PG&E, as necessary, determine the seismic mdrgins Which are associateo with these critical structures, systems, and The NRC Staf t has proposeo that PG&E take the lead in. managing components.

this seismic reevaluation and that the NRC Staff perform a independent, but

[

more limited, assessment which would be geared toward the review of the PG&E work. . The hkt effort would involve assistance from the the USGS, selected It is proposed that the ACRS be national laboraturies, and Dr. Slemons.

The NRC Staff involved in the review of both the PG&E and NRC Staff efforts.

proceeced to outlinec the fundamental elements of their proposed PG&E and N These are summarizeo on pages 1-7 of Attachment D.

Staff evaluation plans.

There was some discussion of the nature of the PRA to be Representatives of performed in conjunction with this seismic reevaluation.

PGhE indicated that it was P6&E's intention to perform a " full scope" PRA (as opposeo to a simple seismic PRA) and to use contractors to perform a It was noted that, to the extent practical, as state-of-the-art evaluation.

built, rather than generic, Diablo Canyon fragilities would be used in this evaluation.

Nhl WORAING GROUP DN DESI6h kM u kS COMMENTS (R. Jackson)

Mr. Jackson noted that an internal NRC horking Group had been set up to guide The Working the NRC in the establishment of a seismic design margins program.

Group is chaired by Messrs. Jackson and Richardson and includes representat

May 24, 1984

- EEP/Diablo Canyon Minutes from the probabilistic risk assessment, licensing, and research areas within the NRC. .A panel of experts has been assembled to aid in the formulation of an NkC program.

PGLE PRESENTAT10h5 (J. Hoch, H. A. Cornell, R. Kennedy, and D. Brand)

Mr. Hoch,Dr. Kennedy, Dr. Cornell, and Mr. Brand discussed PG8E position on the P6&E agrees with this plan and proposed NRC plan for a seisniic reevaluation.

will formulate a detailed plan for implementing the NRC Staff's proposal by January 30, 1985. PG&E will augment this work by performing a full PRA rather thhn a seismic PkA and expects to work closely with the NRC Staff in this program.

SUNGkY OF THE CRubCh PAPER (J. Crouch, NEXTON, Inc.)

Dr. Crouch sunraarized a recent paper by J. Crouch, S. Bachman, and J. Shay entitled, " Post-Miocene Compressional Tectonics Along the Central California Margin." This paper presents a interpretation of a number of high resolution seismic reflection profiles which were obtainea offshore in the Santa Maria Basin, These seismic northern Santa barbara Channel, and Point Conception areas.

reflection profiles reveel major post-Miocene thrust faulting in the offshore central Califurnia region. These thrusts can be recognized on lines both normal ano parallel to the regional structural grain. On lines normal to the grain, they commonly imbricate and curve asymptotically downwara to a b sole thrust fault. On lines parallel to the grain, they appear as a band of 1

truncate tightly folded strata above the nearly hurizontal reflectors that thrust fault.

P6&E PRESEhTATION (D. Hamilton and S. Smith) bessrs. Hamiltun and Smith presented the PG&E concents on tha ;;.per by Crouch bachman, and Shay. PGhl indicated that they believe that the interpretation presented in this paper by Crouch, et al, was generally consistent with the cata and interpretations that were submitted and reviewed previously in They noted that this connection with licensing studies for biablo Canyon.

gives further evidence of the unlikelihood of a large earthquake being l

l

May 24, 1984 EEP/Diablo Canyon Minutes generated on-the Hosgri fault.

They adoitionally noted that they believe that the fault dips under and passes. below the plant site at distances greater than 6 kilometers.

hRC STAFF PRESENTATION (R. Jackson, R. Rothman, and S. Brocoum)

Messrs. Jackson, kothn.an, and Brocoum suninarized the Staff's interpretation of the paper by Crouch, et al. lhey noted that they have completed a preliminary review of the paper and have concluded that the work cescribed therein is of high quality anc bears serious consideration within the Diablo Canyon seismic evaluatior.. They believe that the paper should be reviewed within theThe context Staff of other information which has become available over the past years.

noteo that the distance to which the fault approaches the plant foundation and the nature between the near-source motion generated by the differences in '

strike slip and thrust fault should be considered. It was noted that if the Hosgri is indeed a thrust fault, the observedforlack of sea floor a major earthquake offset would inoicate a longer recurrence interval than if the Hosgri were a strike-slip fault. It was also noted that if the Hosgri was a thrust fault it woulo raise the possibility that small faults observeo near the plant site would be splays of the Hosgri.

The NRC Staff discussed these estimates as to what difference in ground l

I They motion might be expected between stride slip and th' rust faults.

l noted that mechanisms for ground motion were not well guantified and The NRC used techniques and were still the subject of some speculation.

data published by R. Campbell (1983) to obtain the following estimates for ground motion.

l

EEP/Diablo Canyon Minutes May 24,.1984 n n 4* e **

m 3 E-i* 33 '

32 Eg *g

" m 24 in

< Ew

- E o Strike Slip 0.42 0.61 7.5 5.8 Thrust 0.59 0.86 7.5 5.8 Thrust 0.74 1.08 7.5 2.5 7.0 5.8 Thrust 0.52 0.75 f Thrust 0.69 1.02 i 7.0 2.5 0.65 5.8 Thrust 0.44 6.5 Thrust 0.64 0.93 6.5 2.5 The comparisons of vertical and horizontal ground acceleration were also made.

These estimates were also taken from work by Campbell and the

(

f

~

results appeared to be dominated by data taken on soil sites.

4 **

~ S; 3 8 24 E* a #E E

" ab w

  • E,

< g5m E

2 g 0.51 0.77 1.21 7.5 -

5.8 Strike Slip 0.73 1.09 1.23 7.5 5.8 Thrust 1.1 1.6 1.5 2.5 Thrust

EEP/Diablo Canyon Minutes May 24, 1984 The NRC Staff stated that they were currently negotiating a contract with the USGS for a continuation of Dr. Campbell's work.

PRESENTATI0li bY hEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC br. B. Campbell, Ms. S. Silver, Ms. A. Rich, Ms. J. Evered, and Mr. S. Mendes All of these persons opposed the operation of spoke us members of the public.

The adequacy of the seismic design, the the Diablo Canyon huclear Power Plant.

adequacy of the quality control used in the construction of the plant, and t integrity of the review process were the principal issues that were raised.

haterial was prc,videci by the speakers and is included as Attachment F.

bENERAL DISCUSSION The Staff's proposal for a seismic reevaluation and the paper by Crouch, It was generally concluded that Bechman, Shay were discussed at some . length.

i i ificant the paper by Crouch, et al, was high quality work and represented a sA gn advan'ce in the interpretation earthquake mechanisms in central California.

number of proposals were made for specific elements that should be included in the seismic reevaluation. These were: (1) a state-of-the-art inelastic analysis of the as-built structues at Diablo Canyon; (2) a thorough review of proprietary oil-well drilling data; (3) the use of free-field and in-plant seismograph data that has been obtained at Diablo Canyon during recent earthquakes; (4) reconsider-ation of the nature of the on-shore faults in light of the possibility of the existence of an underlying thrust fault; (5) reexamination of the postulated connection of the Hosgri fault with the San Gregorio and San Simeon faults.

h e

I e

KTAGIMENT A

Ted7:el Regkt:r / Wl 49. No. 86 / Wedned . M:y 2.19M / K; tic ~s - ~~~~~~T8799 Ap: c.t Cko .:nu U",r er. Ihrmen G Septe r.ber 28.1%3 (48 FR 44291) oral cr loc;t;d ct the licensee's site in Appling Fh r .rc (202l 35'-9421 written statements may be presented by County. Georgia.The licenses are OMB O'ficer Ca:los Tel:ez. !202] 395- members of the public. recordings will subject to all rules and regulations of the 7340 be pe mitted only during thost portions Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Title Sunc> of Utihzation of of the meetmg where a transcript is being Commission).

Umvers.'3. Industry Cc,,peratne kept. and quesSons may be est ed only Research Centers: A Practice Manual by members of the Subcommittee.its II A.8/ccted rubhe:Indi.iduals State or consultants: end Staff. Persons desinna On November 19.1980. the .

local gns ernments. business. nonprofit to make oral statements should notify Commission published a revised 10 CFR institutions. and small businesses or the Cognizant Federal Employee as far 50 48 and a new Appendix R tolo CFR orFanizations in advan:.e as practicable so that 50 regarding fire protection features of Number of Responses 1.5n0 responses, appropnate arrangements can be made nuclear power plants (45 FR 76602). The total n amber of burden hours-375 to allow the necessary tirne during the revised i 50.48 and Appendix R became Abstract NSF prepared and meeting for such statements. effective on February 17.1981. Section distributed in 1982 a manual providing The entire treeting will be open to III of Appendix R contains fifteen prertical s.ndante on planning. public ettendance. subsections. lettered a through O. each craanizing and implementing unis ersity. The agenda for subject meeting shall of which specifies requirements for a industry cooperatae research centers be as follows: particular aspect of the fire protectiori Uscr feedback is needed from the Thursda3. May 24.1984-8.30 a.rn. Untij features at a nuclear power plant.One manual s indmdual recip;ents in the Conclusion of Basiness of these fifteen subsection. Ill G.. is the industn and academia on how well the subject of this Exemption. Specifically.

manuaihas sened their needs. and During the initial porton of the .

subsection lil.C.2 requires that one train what might be dor.e to improse it and meetmg. the Subcommi' tee, a!ong with of cables and equipment necessary to NSF s contincing role in focering better any ofits consultants who may be achiese and maintain safe shutdown be unn ersiteindustn rese.rch p" sent. may exchange prehminar) maintained free of fire damage by one of co!Nbora' tion. Vie"S.reFardmg matters to be the following means:

He-man C mming consioered dennF the ba!.nce of the a. Separation of cables and equipment

'* F and associated non-safets circu!'s of O'S , ,

CA 7~ O", - Tb S'ub:cmminee wil,! th-n hear redundent trains by a fire barrier having

.),..sm,, ple5'.rtat.nns by and t. ,id d.s: sWons a 3. hour retire S:ructural steel forming d), .

  • eq .. w..

a; E.eerit:r ;e Cemp Nm ' an.. tq aNF.f_ .ri S:. , .

Gas a part of or se;partmg such fire bi.n.ers twar shall be pro ected to provide fire r : r .: arts. cr.: otne interes*ed resistance ega:velen' to that ret; tar %! n'

""I'"'

Nt'C.I.t.c r 5 GS tJ OF.Y I ' ~ ' ' " " ". E E the bartit .

C Gi. Mis s ton * #i* 2 * d '#' '

t i; u ta sed; w hether the n."get.ng

' *M* b. Sepa ation of cables and eu.mr. .nt and associated non safety c:r c -

Acvisory Ce r.matee en Racto :ae : r ondec r reschedcad the redundant trains by a henw::i gg ,g,3rds U" naris ru:n:c on regaests fur the distance of more than 20 fee w* rr.

c; ; u:;n:t> t.,pesent oral statt'nents

, intenening combustibles er f.re Cen thes Shcornmittee on D.:t,io ar.d the tir.e oaotted tnejeto' can be hazards. In addition. fire dete:., s and C:.nyon Nacitar Pov.er P; ant Units 1 (r'artd b) e p:cpaid te.rphcne cal! t an automatic fire suppression sys'e n and 2 and Estreer.e External t e rc:n.:nn Drsgnated Fedeal shall be installed in the fire area" or Pne,omena: Me eting r.".P:: Pt D: R.O.r c, Sav s Delephone c. Enclosure of cable and e';uipraent

"' " 'd and associated non-safety cir:ti's of T. - A CI'.. . 4 .-- .

  • e: . D .

[ .J ' '" ne redundant tram in a firc ba ner C. . N i. .

1. n " .; . 4 F. : . . D . . : , ., ' 1 :

I. l'-^.

.rc r,.'ne c : M having a 1.bour ratmg In ad::uer.. fire w i!. *

. i -
. m: ..- ::,. on Mo . f r.hr C 16 31 detectors and an automatic fire 1-- Aepor 9:.11 M'O C' r m - A:;  : e 0% er. suppression system shall be instalied in N. . H i .

the fire arec.

S 1..: C 11. 1 ~ A t 6 !.. C/. I '+ " mM - ". .

Tr < $ c er .r . s < w : .< ' < r

  • c' "* 3 co 't ?c '-'t m

r'

  • i t-D; . ' <. .' . C.. . dA rt 4, n't "

Bv letters dated Ja!y 1.1E e

[,_I.5 f. ,, j f \ ,N', .N, ., . tht. has. 50 >n enc 5 -E 3epplemented b3 l etters don d e .-

"~

Mav 27. Nos emtser 16 anc n er.c

.c. . "l . ! - ; .-::'.. w..)e

.. Georg:a Por cr Cc npar.r. et at. (Edwin December 20.1983. the 1:censee

- p ud lia,.nse t crduc. w hir*. w onl , 1. Mtch Nsclea P4 ant. UrJts Nos.1 and .

e: . . !. d. . G- t r r., -

2;; t me :ption requested an exemptror, i fr,1: + -

n:. o do.i- r q.:ircments of suasect:.or ..., G

,, , , , ~ . , . . "g*"

t, ,h$.t , ' { 3 A;pendix R is 26 areer of tr:e hd:

'; t. ear Plant. Units 1 and 2. The

, ;-: ;r.$ tebii :s sn.'d> w e e'.v.t . The Georg.a Power Cor;.n> IGPC or ecceptability of the exernptien recuert c'i e f c Gas and T.iect:f r t d;ne the t' c !.t enseel and three t.the o..cwners ,

are the ho'ders of Taci!e. Dr.i:1. t.n; fu each of these 26 arcas is madressed i . ' r r this ;roicci. end F mone s

r. r c to th e Hos : fr 't ,.: r*xu-wd Ixt:m s Nes DPT-5 er d NOT ; At h 0 " '. . ' ' .deta!!s are contained in tra Ct.mm:ssion s re!ated Safe y Eva'uatwn i:. < : , r ene t:ed "1. s .. . rm :.e.

. . . tr := cpr ra :cn c,. u th.. - 1 -

Cover :ma! Tec'on;cs Ah Fr li tch Nu:h a T;ent Un.ts 1 and 2 IV Cr: r.J Ca!% r.i. M.c; n". b3 l i: {}h:tb o- the fehtes' e's:%d. swe A ' "'*

C o u h. e al. re. c 7 we . Ws n ? m r.srei,s of Ir. <' ? . u*d a r r e e '

  • t he , o + :  !*4 N i't * - V.'a t's be:-"' <il for eB C h Pn.1 4 0."T 7tJ.~. #J
  • W [lO *'-U* ' I
4 s  ;*
  • Ted "et Ye; -tPr or Trt l, - 3e. hr ' ; w a v~ r* \t'e! ? 600Y E.i ?W ECC -Crl:

" ' " ' ~

g y. ... 3 g,,, , ,- . --w-,=*--- celuw j. 7, ; - N ?"JW""*Z'RCsf T*f"

  • N ""
  • N'

i .

o ATTA04 MENT B

d. L. PIL Al r.L t. t LU$4tilitt rac.r.s anu. _ COMBINED EXTREME EXTERNAL PHENOMENA & DI ABLO CANYO May 24,1984 Holiday Inn, Los Angeles, CA

( g ~

ATTENDANCE LIST

? LEASE -

Tu nr I' d I AlFiLI6 104 .

Canna EEP Sueconn,rr,, &cp3

. O O K4'E N r C N #io m s M' [)is s j o Gyvsa 'Sugeonnryrre 0Cff

, C. E' 3/ESS Act?S Menper

. W ree p-

_M CARB0W

/g

/*

ERFPSME

^

(Emeniru.c )

. & Erstrwsrow AC.f's Coasutrsxr 1 8. Pse .
9, 6. [soMI"JO W_ "

~

l o_ tl Maxweit ,,

b. M. Difuget ..

l1. E loco S8a 1f DFE

_06RS

7. Ji' Serio

3.cl W5s'lEP C. A . ( r c o , i __

CAc , lac. f,1 c m)6d k PG E V RR Fn1v PSsndE .

is$ * / ~ lSlE

6. e e m . hoe MI, k $tmT) 17.

FAQ 6 ( /u g S Lv v0

1 blu O<h.'(w hfd-DN pg,
19. N^34eb ErthND fabbt bas f$dhic S
0. hs;?ve k //flitsaki l m.d, Lad _
v. 7Ain c. Euel -

4 -t,Q 4o w *

n. c4, Je., z. , ',,

dA h41 G4 ll ~D ? df C n en D e2Y ~

i Edf

23. '

h ^

24 v .n . d.\e .

J. C. F.CXINLEY

~

COMBINED EXTREME EXTERNAL PHENOMENA & DIABLO CANYON

'gg,w1H i e r.r. neu mu. _

May 24,1984 Holiday Inn, Los Angeles, CA gg .

~

ATTENDANCE LIST ASE

'RI NT

' kt V iL IG io:t .

~ ~

    • " ~ l E Tri tytO E 2 l > G pk [

f.' Y D. M //an, } /-lo r7 E. .s . A .

F. LU . &Lo o y PG$  ;

~

P 6,G 1 J n6 FL, vt e A.

P u r c e _,_ _

_f> . J . 4 % 2- W E'TwG HoaS E E . yt . Ba.r x.s (USST/AI4 HOUSE X.SeAPE L L-.4Tv '

l t 'F n 3aa'uo lo s At ek

-r .,6 ;, .,

Hacw

=1erce

c. siine . l puinc enasuuc. o

( _pa c , c,e c,ac a t pan,; co.

.k ,1. o n F. i.e e u _

L 4. (> nile, news

-To se p h t %.a h ve.

$if,nbard.h" PkCWLc. gas & ELMLc o DNo _ Shuc/uu/Mecta,ia A.r.<or.

. R06er+ K Kennec/v '

Nancn s c.

&n K L. A -

4 =nen D2A 7 /ER G S cQ & hc N ,

.b.h L,A hwmbut P.c. '

4 ibu e k%h ve~s et v a r /edy rtsv

i. v, u .

.. smen,.c '

t bl D. SmHk .

~ 7 ELawma Live ~m ms, We.sc.o. Lob.

KsSV-TV, SAnrA A h m/ B M sT - .

PG /> e.'

0. On9)b tv.Cs.oe>J '

9 c, a E

i. 9. P. h w _

C . C . A f?, S.

2. [))l4A $u V M vra su s .

t  %. a , ,- /' &.aer I c t / s c - 5 , L - c3 as. CEkh .57E~ 6CvA' > S' - __ _ _ _-

l)5t1% st.t. nr.c.i mu. _ COMBINED EXTREME May EXTERNAL 24,1984 PHENOMENA & DI ABLO Holiday Inn, Los Angeles, CA g .

~

E NDANCE LIST

4. LEASE 7RI f!T!.r E E AlFitIsi10:4 .

A d c f/:/ k <WR / ^ )$'Y%! fMhn VkiY '

dm u <. : : d i~; u Liw&&

N21.effp,/ [t$.RL b VLIeVi (dIvdCWneDcHB'Mide fMiFTC wrloMd%3 82 uc t~ (Al 1NH( i

^

.p.-_

A I

1

, NW 9

4 8 I. -~

au k a

9. s .

l 0.

1. .

'?. .

l .

l !3.

?4.

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

4 e

s AT ACMNENT C

5/10/84 PROPOSED AGENDA FOR THE DIABL6CANYONANDEXTREMEEXTERNALPHENOMENA SUBCOMMITTEE MEETINGS ON THURSDAY, MAY 24, 1984

1. Executive Session C. Siess 15 Min. 8:30 - 8:45 am D. Okrent
2. Status of licensing activities NRC Staff 15 Min. 8:45 - 9:00 am on Diablo Canyon
3. Discussion of issues raised in April 13, 1984 Letter from N. Palladino to J. Ebersole a) Discussion of proposed siesmic reevaluation
1) Discussion of NRC Staff 1 Hr & 9:00 - 10:30 am 30 Min, proposal for a seismic reevaluation
          • BREAK ***** 15 Min. 10:30 - 10:45 am
2) Comments from NRC Working 30 Min. 10:45 - 11:15 am Group on Seismic Design Margins 30 Min. 11:15 - 11:45 am
3) PG&E Comments 60 Min. 11:45 - 12:45 pm
4) General discussion and ACRS Consultant's comments 1 Hour 12:45 - 1:45 pm
          • LUNCH *****

b) Discussion of technical paper by J. Crouch, et al

1) Presentation by J. Crouch 30 Min. 1:45 - 2:15 pm

Diablo Canyon & EEP Agenda 5/10/84 60 Min. 2:15 - 3:15 pm

2) Discussion of NRC Staff pe:'ition as to'the impact on the: design basis ground motion
          • BREAK ***** 15 Min. 3:15 - 3:30 pm 30 Min. 3:30 - 4:00 pm
3) USGS comments 60 Min. 4:00 - 5:00 pm
4) PG&E comments 60 Min. 5:00 - 6:00 pm
5) General discussion and comments by the ACRS Consultants and J. Crouch Summary, conclusions and future C. Siess 30 Min. 6:00 - 6:30 pm 4.

actions D. Okrent

        • Adjournment **** 6:30 pm 4

o

O l

ATTAEl4 MENT V I

l l

l 1 -- - . - -_ - - - - - - - - -

l

v - --

.=. = .- m

,. /'

B. _ CONDITION 1 - UPDATE GE0 LOGY a SEISMOLOGY

1. REQUIREMENTS A. EVALUATE POST-1979 ASLB HEARING INFORMATION
s. REEVALUATE SELECTED PRE-1979 DATA THAT MAY B NEEDED TO FILL IN GAPS IN THE NEW DATA, USING NEW REPROCESSING TECHNIQUES 1E
2. PURPOSES A. CONFIRM CHARACTER OF HOSGRI AT DEPTH -

B. CONFIRM OVERALL LENGTH OF HOSGRI IN LIGHT OF THRUSTING HYPOTHESIS

c. CONFIRM RECENCY OF LAST MOVEMENT & DETERMIN RECURRENCE D. CONFIRM THAT THERE ARE NO SIGNIFICANT THRUST ,

SPLAYS CLOSER TO SITE i

.4 e

e

f....

  • il-C. CONDITION 2 - REEVALUATE THE SSE  :
1. REQUIREMENTS - MAGNIT'UDE OF SSE A. FAULT LENGTH B. RUPTURE LENGTH
c. SLIP RATE D. MAXIMUM DISPLACEMENT FROM SINGLE EVENT E. HISTORICAL SEISMICITY F. OTHERAPPROACHESSUCHASAREA0FFA9LTPLANET'O ESTIMATE MAGNITUDE .
2. REASONS A. NEW DATA ON GEOLOGY AND TECTONICS OF C0ASTAL CALIFORNIA THAT MUST BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT .

B. NEW TECHNIQUES FOR ES11 MATING MAGNITUDE FROM ~

GEOLOGICAL RECORD (1) LENGTH OF FAULT (2) LENGTH OF RUPTURE DURING SINGLE EARTHQUAKE (3) SLIP RATE -

(4) MAXIMUM DISPLACEMENT FROM SINGLE EARTHOUAKE

, (5) AREA 0F RUPTURE SURFACE DURING EARTHQUAKE

.M

} hoO ~.

j D. CONDITION 3 - REVALIDATE GROUND MOTION AT THE SITE -

1. REQUIREMENTS ..

SPECTRAL A. VALUES REGRESSION ANALYSIS - HORIZ. & VERT. I FOR SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS '

B. SITE SPECIFIC SPECTRA (VERT & HORIZ.)

c. EARTHQUAKE NUMERICAL MODELLING STUDY.USING MODERN TECHNIQUES $

D. S0IL-STRUCTURE INTERACTION EFFECTS "

2. REASONS .

A. MORE RECENT NEAR-FIELD RECORDINGS THAT SHOULD BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT B. MODELLING STUDY ALLOWS FOR SENSITIVITY STUDY  : ,

C. S0ll-STRUCTURE INTERACTION ANALYSIS TO EVALUATE THE EFFECT OF STRUCTURES ON THE GROUND MOTION d

E

__. m

~

~

E. CONDITION 4 ASSESS THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RESULTS OF .

CONDITIONS 1, 2 & 3 WITH RESPECT TO DESIGN &

CONSTRUCTION .

s

1. REQUIREMENTS A. SEISMIC PRA f B. IF NECESSARY - DETERMINISTIC ESTIMATES OF SEISMIC CAPABILITY OF SELECTED STRUCTURES SYSTEMS, OR COMPONENTS .
2. REASONS A. ASSESS SIGNIFICANCE OF ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN EXISTING SEISM, DESIGN BASIS AND THAT RESULTING FROM PREVIOUS 3 CONDITIONS B. LIMITED DETERMINISTIC ANALYSIS CAN BE USED TO BETTER DEFINE SPECIFIC SEISMIC MARGINS l

. ..,,,.4

= - - -

III. PARALLEL STAFF EFFORTS '

%. CONDITION 1

1. REVIEW DATA PROVIDED BY PG&E
2. SOME ANALYSIS OF INDEPENDENTLY ACQUIRED DATA

- 3. USGS AND DR. SLEMMONS, ADVISORS jgj B. CONDITION 2 ~

1. REVIEW OF PG&E ANALYSES
2. INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT OF SSE MAGN.
3. ADVISORS - USGS & DR. SLEMMONS C. CONDITION 3
1. REVIEW PG&E ANALYSIS
2. ADVISORS - NATIONAL LAB's a USGS '

D. CONDITION 4

1. REVIEW PG&E'S PRA
2. ADVISORS - NAT'l LABS & USGS E. SEllIOR ADVISORY REVIEW PANEL, OR PANELS, TO REVIEW .

RESULTS W

6 6O

/

~. -

e. ,' '. . - -

' b Iv; PROGRESS REPORTING AND SCHEDULING A. PROGRESS REPORTS -

1. QUARTERLY PROGRESS REPORTS
2. SEMI-ANNUALMEETINGSINBETHESDA.)

- B. SCHEDULE .

30, 1985 1.PGaESUBMITPROPOSEDPROGRAM-dfN

2. PROGRAM COMPLETED AND FINAL REPORT SUBMITT .

3 YEARS AFTER APPROVAL BY THE NRC STAFF l

t .

t

r  :. 7

~

III. PARALLEL STAFF EFFORTS- -

[

'A. -CONDITION 1 . '

1. REVIEW DATA PROVIDED BY PG&E
2. SOME ANALYSIS OF INDEPENDENTLY ACQUIRED DATA

- 3. USGS AND DR. SLEMMONS, ADVISORS g .

B. CONDITION 2 ~

1. REVIEW 0F PG8E ANALYSES
2. INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT OF SSE MAGN.
3. ADVISORS - USGS & DR. SLEMMONS C. CONDITION 3
1. REVIEW PG8E ANALYSIS
2. ADVISORS - NATIONAL LAB's & USGS D. CONDITION 4
1. REVIEW PGaE'S PRA
2. ADVISORS - NAT'L LABS a USGS ,

E. SENIOR ADVISORY REVIEW PANEL, OR PANELS, TO REVIEW RESULTS O

4 9

._. a we agen

.s, +=

l l

ATTAELMENT E I

( sue I UNITED STATES ,

i

,-E 4'n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION U .. I

, ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS wAsmNGTON, D. C. 20555 o....

May 31, 1984 MEMORANDUM FOR: A,CRSM rs FROM: g$avjp, nior Staff Engineer

SUBJECT:

PRESENTATIONS BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AT THE MAY 24, 1984 JOINT MEETING ON EXTREME EXTERNAL PHENOMENA AND DIABLO CANYON Mrs. B. Campbell, Ms. S. Silver, Ms. A. Rich, Ms. Evered, and Mr. S. Mendes made presentations as members of the public at the May 24, 1984 meeting of the joint subcomittees on Extreme External Phenomena and Diablo Canyon. All of these speakers opposed the operation of the Diablo Canyon Plant. The written material which was provided by these persons is attached to this letter.

Enclosure:

As stated cc w/o encl: M. Libarkin G. Quittschreiber I

l .

O s

\

l l

l

_ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ . _ .

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20128L694&oldid=3462955"