ML20137D621
Text
NdRTH ANNA ENVlRONMENTTL COAUTNN P.O. BOX 3951 Mr. Edson G. Case, Acting Director CilARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22903 Nuclear Reactor Hegulation (717]S33-7694 or, (804)293-6039 U. S. Nuclear Hegulatory Commission January 7, 1978
" N Y'lunIs'I b Washington, D. C.
20555 nriarcrest cardens flershey, PA 170M
Dear Mr. Case:
Thank you for your letter of December 27, 1977 Since it arrived in Charlottesville on December 30, I was not able to thank you in person on December 29 At another time, I hope to have an opportunity to dis-cuss its content with you.
For today, let me ask you just one additional clarifying question:
upon what date did your office or the AEC receive the Dames & Moore Foundation Con-.
ditions Heport of ) fay 8, 1969?
The purpose of today's letter in to call your attention to VEPCO's REGIONAL EPICENTER MAP--Period: Janua ry 21, 19716 through Au:cust 1, 1977.
The map would appear to provide undeniable evidence of o
the on-going seismic influence of lake Anna -- most particu-larly at the point where the lake is intersected by Neuschel's or the Spotsylvania Lineament, a point marked by a cluster of 16 micro-earthquakes.
1 Does your position agree with that of VEPCO -- that the I
cause of the cluster " remains obscure"?
If so, what is the logical step that translates obscurity into safety?
Should it not be the NHC position that such an anomaloun 16 micro-earthquakes should be studied in relation cluster of 1
to regional structures -- particularly the 38th parallel frac-ture zone and the Stafford and Neuschel'n (Spo tsylvania)
Faults >-- before monitoring is discontinued and approval given?
IIan the NHC Division of Site Safety looked into the Na-tional Science Foundation 1977 studies of the Neuschel struc-ture -- studies that move toward its confirmation as a regional fault? You may recall that Dr. Donald Wise, Piedmont geologist from the University of Massachusetts, expressed reservations about defending the North Anna site if the Neuschel's Lineament were actually a fault.
f IftheNHChas'notlookedintothesemattersthoroug[hly, are its licensing actions nn act of faith rather than o proof?
o A second purpose of today's letter la to ask the status of u)
(D the SEISMIC HE-EVALUATION OF NORTil ANNA requested on April 22, y g 1977 by NHC 's J. P. Kn i gh t, Assistant Director for Engineering, g g Did the NRC Staf f ever apprise the Atomic Safety and Li-DSS.
o,y censing floard of the existance of this re-evaluation called "a major milestone in the completion of the licensing action"?
-s ki Given (tn licenn tnic significance _, how can you recommend licensing
%j of North Anna before its completion?
'ihank you again.
Sincerely, j
j
. ine Allen (Hrs. P. M.)
cc:
Sen. Gary Hart President, NAEC Rep. John !!oss
-