ML20137D598

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Requests Response to Listed Queries Re micro-earthquake Activity Near Plant Site
ML20137D598
Person / Time
Site: North Anna, 05000000
Issue date: 01/04/1978
From: Allen J
NORTH ANNA ENVIRONMENTAL COALITION
To: Reiter L
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20136A555 List: ... further results
References
FOIA-85-363 NUDOCS 8508220520
Download: ML20137D598 (2)


Text

F._

W m

c.!,]v69 Q?@-.W.. W

. f!. r~b M.h.[ W-.

\\

c..l.

~ "'....

January la, 1978 P.O. DOX 3951 Cl!ARLOTTESVILLE, VIICINIA 2290:

(80a)293-6039

?

Ftr. Iron llei t er, Seismologi'st (717 J533.-704 or Geosciences !! ranch Division o f Si te Sa fety anul 1:nvironmental Analysis U.S. Nuc l ea r itegis la t ory Commi ssi on

%ashington, D.

C.

20W3

Dear bir. Itei t e r:

The North Anna Environmental Coalition rec;pectfully requests that you answer the foilowing questions at your earlient convenience:

(Re lleiter Af fidavi t of July 13, 1977) 1.

% hat work isthe Geosciences liranch doing to determine why "there is more act ivity (micro-seismic) along the lake shores" at North Anna?

You write ttjat "there is no evidence that micro-2.

carthquakOf t AMurring elsewhere along Acuschel's lineament," and argue against its being seismically active.

Does not the cluster of 16 micro-earth-8 quakes strongly suggest that at the point where the lineament intersects the lake, it has been activated by the weight of the water?

3 Do you agree with seismologist Seth Coplan that fault lubrication and reactivation is not a function of fault age?

Given that, does not the

" historical" record of activity along Neuschel's lineament bi'come irrelevant in terms of assessing the current water-induced activity?

1 When you st ate that carthquake activity at North 1

Anna "is not a t a ll regionally anomalous," what in the source of your data for the comparison?

If " Jack of instrumentation" has deprived you of base-line figures, and micro-earthquake monitoring installations einenhore are rare, how did you ar-rive at a standard of what was " regionally anom-alous" or regionally normal?

5.

Where else in Virginia have you found comparable clusters of la6 micro-carthquakes?

6.

bhore in the seinmological li t e ra t u re a re there examples of 30-year seismic predictions succesn-fully made on the banis of 3 years of micro-seismic monitoring?

7

% hat is the upper limit registered by the network?

What was the date or daten of the two carthquaken in the cluster which regintes ed a magnittulo of greater than 27 Thank you for your professional assintance.

G500220520 850722 POR FOIA DELLOS-363 PDR June A Ilen President, NAF.C cc th p..lohn Slens Sen. Gary llart

[h? ORTH ANNq ENViRONMENML COALMO)

Janua ry la, 1978 P.O. BOX 3951 CilARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 229 Mr. lxon Heiter, Seismologist (71?J533-7694 or (80 e)293-60:

f Geosciences 11 ranch Division of Site Safety and Environmental Analysis U.S. Nuclear llegulatory Commission Washington, D. C.

20555

Dear Mr. Ileiter:

The North Anna Environmental Coalition respectfully requests that you answer the following questions at your earliest convenience:

i (He Reiter Af fidavit of July 13, 1977) 1.

What work is the Geosciences Branch doing to determine why "there is more activity (micro-seismic) along the lake shores" at North Anna?

l 2.

You write ttgat "there is no evidence that micro-carthquakO215"Neurring elsewhere along ficuschel's lineament," and argue against its being seismically active.

Does not the cluster.of 16 micro-earth-6 l

quakes strongly suggest that at the point whero the lineament intersects the lake, it has been activated by the weight of the water?

3 Do you agree with seismologist Seth Coplan that fault lubrication and reactivation is not a function of fault age? Given that, does not the L

l

" historical" record of activity along Neuschel's lineament become irrelevant in terms of assessing i

the current water-induced activity?

f 1

When you state that earthquake activity at North 1

l Anna "is not a t all regionally anomalous," what I

is the source of your data for the comparison?

l If " lack of instrumentation" has deprived you of I

base-line figures,and micro-earthquake monitoring j

installations elsewhere are rare, how did you ar-I rive at a standard of what was " regionally anom-I alous" or regionally normal?

5.

Where else in Virginia have you found comparable clusters of le6 micro-earthquakes?

6 Where in the seismological literature are there examples of 30-year seismic predictions success-fully made on the basis of 3 years of micro-seismic i

monitoring?

7 What is the upper limit registered by the network?

What was the date or dates of the two earthquakes in the cluster which registered a magnitude of greater than 2?

Thank you for your professional assistance.

incerely, i sne A llen
  • President, NAEC cc:

liep. John Moss Sen. Gary llart i