ML20151X306

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Us Fish & Wildlife Svc Rept Containing Comments & Recommendations on Radiological & non-radiological Effects of Proposed Reactor Facility for Info,In Ref to Application for CP & Facility License.W/O Encl
ML20151X306
Person / Time
Site: Diablo Canyon, 05000000
Issue date: 09/15/1967
From: Morris P
US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
To: Peterson R
PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO.
Shared Package
ML20151W779 List:
References
FOIA-88-156 NUDOCS 8808250314
Download: ML20151X306 (2)
v • d • e


Text

._- --. __ . . - . __ . .. . . . - - . - - _ _ . . . _ - _ .

e

/

SEP 15 1967 i

Docket leo. 50 27$

Pacific ens and Electric Centasy 245 Market Street San Francisee, California M1H Attentient Mr. Richard R. Petersen Senior Vice President &

General Counsel

Gentlement 4

This refers to your application for a construction permat and facility license whleh would authertse seestreeties and opera-tion of a nuclear power reacter at the Diable Caayos site located La saa 1,uis Obtape County, Califersia.

We are transmitting a sepy of the Smited States Fish and Wildlife Service Repert eestatalag samesets and recemosedettees se both radielegical and non-radielegical effects of the propeeed reactor fac111ty for your lafsensttea. Coptes ef this report ere stee betag sest te approprlate atate and local offlatale. The redto-logical safety aspects of this report will be seasidered la the analysis of the safety of the project by the reestatory staff i and by the Advisory Casesittee se Raester asf*0uards. Our see--

clustoms will be imeluded in the safety evalasties us will prepare for the public hearing skish will be held to consider the issuance l of a construction permit.

14e sall your atteettee to the receumneadatimes made by the Fish sed Wildlife Service. We note that your appliaattee reflects your

' general plans for esedmeting pre operstimaal and past eyerattoast radiological surveye. We aloe understand that you have already started to cowedieste this progree with appropriate state officials and representatives of the Fish and Wildlife Service.

i J

' \ ,

d 8808250314 000721 PDR FOIA MCMILL AGO-156 PDR

4 4

Pacific Gas and tiectric Co. -

2- CEP 151:47 The reports which you will submit en the p* u-eparational surveys will be evaluated by the Commission and by the Fish sad Wildlife Servies at the time we seasider your application for a previstenal operating licoese La this proceediat. The reports of surveys made af ter operattees have begun will be similarly reviewed.

As you kaee, the Cammissies has as jurisdiction with respeet to the amenediological matters referred to in the Servise's report.

Bowever, we wish to salt these estters to year attenties in order that yew may have the benefit of the Service's recomuneadations eencarsing potential nea-radfological of facts spes the enviroe-meat.

I sincerely yours, Of;9st si;ntd by F:tttA V.ans Peter A. Morris, Director Division of Reactor Licensias

Enclosure:

W. 8. Fish and wildlife Service Report dtd. 6/23/67 cc: Gene A. Blanc, Coordinator (4) ter. Lyle F. Carpenter, chairman San Leia Obispo Ceesty Board of Supervisers MI. M Distribution:

SAN Document Roo:n LA Document Room AEC Pub. Doc. Rm.

Formal Supplemental REG Reading DRL Reading RFB #2 Reading Origt RLTedesco R. S. Boyd S. Levine CO (2)

H. Steele J. F. Newell OGC SEE ATTACHED SHEETS FOR OTHER CONCURRENCES.

orrnt > ..DRL: RP.. j.DRL:RT....._ . . OGC . .. DRL* RT. . ..

.. DR -

sumur , RLTedesco/ 1. .JFNewell... .. .~. p . . .'.g . j'I D k

..SLevine. ..JtS B o .. EAMo it ..

can >

W rm A W *31. Gev.6 m 9 /. N. 9. . . . . . . . . .I 9 / . m./.ku... 9/ O. I N ......

y , a.un,,.

E/.. E I- -9 [I5N ,

9/ IE

, .g a ,c1 's. o aie s.*

r v NATHAN M. NEWMARK 1114 civil ENGtNEERING gyu m..

e CON # ULT 1NG ENGINEERING SE4 VICES .

URBANN ILUNOIS 419o1 13 Septemtser 1967 Or. Peter A. M)rris. Ofrector Olvision of Reactor Licensing U. 5. At omic Ene rgy Comrniss ion Wa s F i n gt on . 0.C. 20545 Re: Draft Report on Diablo Canyon Site Nuclear Plant (Docket 50-275)

Dear Dr. Morris:

We are t ranstnitt lng herewith two copies of our revised draf t The revisions contained herein report on the above noted applicat ion.

were transmitted to tt'e DRL staf f by telephone yesterday.

Sincerely yours.

'.d* g .g) s V. J. Hall bj w Enclosure cc: N. M. Newmark

. 1 l A v

47487AOd

- , -S- n!- ,-9 j 3048

, i

.,7 NAYHAN M. NEWMARK 1114 CIVIL ENGINEERING BUILDING j

, cohouLTING ENGINEERING SERVICES URBANA. ILUNOIS 41801 i

i

. ORAFT

  • i REPORT TO AEC REGULATORY staff 4

ADEQUACY OF THE STRUCTURAL CRITERIA FOR

THE DIABLO CANYON SITE NUCLEAR PLANT l

Pacific Ges and Elect ric Company

~

(Occket 50-275) l l

1 i

i i by ,

9 t N. M. Newmark j l and [

4 W. J. Hall

)

7 Septenber ic67 l

o O

b e a a ., #

o17 v. --- jyfp

t a ADEQUACY Of THE STRUCTUPAL CRIT (RIA FOR l

' t THC 01/8L0 CANYON SITE NUCLEAP. PLANT [

1 f by i 3

!!. M. Nwwnark end t'. J. Hall i

INT R00' JCT 10N i t

This report concerns the adequacy of the containment st ructures and conponents, reactor piping and roector Internals for the Diablo Canyon Site Nuclear Plant. for which application for a const ruction permit and operating license has br:en made to the 't. S. Atomic Energy Cornission (Docket No. 50-275) by the Pacif ic Gas and Elect ric Compcny. The facility is to be located in San Luis Obispo County. Ca li f o rn i t. . 12 miles west southwest of the city of San 4

LLis Obispo, and adjacent to the Pacific Ocean and Oleblo Ccnyon Creek. The  ;

site is about 1C0 miles south of $an Francisco end 150 niles northwest of  ;

Les 'ngeles.

Specifically this report is concerned with the evaluetion of the dcsign criteria that determine the ability of the containment system. piping and rocctor Internels to withstand a design earthquale acting simultaneously with other applicchie loads for.-Ing the basis of the design. Tbc facility also is to be designed to withstand a naximum earthquake sinu!(ancausly with other applicable loads to the extent of insuring safe stutdown and containment. This re po rt is based on Informotlen and criteria set forth in the preliminary safety analysis report (PSAR) and supploncnts thereto as listed et the end of tPIs report. 'Je have participated in discussions with the ALC Regulatory Staff, ced the applicant and its consultants. In which nony of the design criteria w:re discussed in detall, i

i

t i

+

1 j DESCRIPTION Or _THE F?Cll_ITY j i

! TPc Olablo *cnyon N; clear f%nt is descrited In the PS3R cs e pressurlzed i 1

water reactor nuclear stcan supply system furnish.d by the Ucstingkous Elect ric f

,~

4 Cerporation and designed for on initial power output of 3250 M.it (1060 Mae net). l 4 '

1 T.-e reactor cooling systen conslSts of four closed reactor coolant loops [

]

connseted in parallel to tbc reattor vessel, ea" eravided with a reactor coolant i t punp cnd a stean generator. Tec reactor ver

'. t+v: an Insid; diameter -l j .

!' of at.out 14.5 ft.. a belght of 42.3 ft.. vi .: ,.

a design pressurc j d ,

0~ 245 ps t g, o des ign t enp rature of 6MF. _ nt# Of SA-722 prede P $

id allcy itect intcrnally clad ulth ty?o 3'4 austasit cinless steel.  ;

4 T. c rcoct or cetelnn.nt st ructurc w!-ich enclohs th< rccctor and e tcom 4 i

9 ii

-ene.rct;rs. consists of e stt el lined cencretc shel! in tr e form of c reinforce,d i

rincr t. v .rt *ct! ca;lind.r with a flat brse end hemisph.richt done. The J

4 cylindric. ) st ructarc of 1'o it. Inside dien.t er bas s idc 6.t!!s r!> lng 142 f t. l fr)m tri, linct at ttt %cf: te the spring; line of th; det. The cencrete s ide mils of the cylindar and the dere will b.: approx 1'+rt Cly 3 f t. 6 and 2 f t. 6 ,

j In. in cl icPness. resp.ct IW ly. Th; cont.rcte reinforcing stccl pattern is

^

d scridcd concepturi'iy in %pplora:nt 1 and consists of Ners oriented et 30 from I 2

t*e vertital in sucl a tr.cnne r that thc pottern dxs not requirc terralnation of [

f  !

a ny ba rs in t he do'-e , ves: diegonal bars are designed te carry t'oth the lateral )

t sh ar as well as vcrtical tensile forces. In additirah ttere is boop reinforcing l

i in the cylindricel pertion of the st ructurc. For re.dici sheer reinforci,ng the applicant proposes to use 0 system of vr.rticci wide f!cnge bc6ms spaced four f eet on cceters. Ti c t eens arc atter.hed by binge cornect ion to the base  !

51th at the lower end end orc t(rnin:ted etout 2f' f t. a% eve the top of the f I

' esc 5th. Tic 'functioe of t! c tcans is to provide resistance te tt e coments i I

'r l

r i
  • 3 cad si cars crected by the discontinuity at tle has. rnd t: orovide a gradual t .- rsit ion of locd ccrrying cicnents between the base cnd tt e cylinder vall.

T'ssv beams do not participetc in resisting cither uplif t due to pressure or 5Fcar cnd tens ton due to certhquale loading; these forces are to be resisted by the diagonal steel reinforcing just described. The concrete wall in this Tre inner zone, about 1 (t. thich, lower zone is divided into thrse zones.

censtst! of reinforced concretc and is thc element to which the liner is cttached. Tl e middlc zene contcins the verticcl stec) 1-beams whicF in turn a:t as supports (cr tl:e 16 in. thich reinforced concrete slab spanning ti-c space between the beams . The oute r zone cons is ts of about 14 in. of cencretc in which

t. e dicgonal and hoop r :niorcement er enSedded. Tr e three zones are provided

-ith bond-t reaking materici to insure ti-at tt elenents will act scperately.

T-c rcinforcing steel for the donc. cylindrical walls and base nat will be-ASTM A432 specificat ion. Ti e high st renctl. reinforcing conforming to th.

'432 reinforcing bars of sizo lc rger then *:o. 11 are to be spliced with Cadwald splices ex;cpt in cases where eccessibility makes welding mandatory.

The liner, as described in Supplement 2, will be a minimum of 3/8 in.

t'.ick f c r the dome and cylindrical ~ walls and 1/4 Ir.. thick for the base slab.

T,c enchor stubs are to be ! shcped end will be fusion weldei to the liner platc. ~ The studs will be spaced et 20 in on centers, and the design is made to preclude ma.ior af fects arising f rom buckling of the liner.

Personnel and equipment access b..tches arc provided for access to the containment vessel.

In addition there are othe r penet rations for piping and clact rical conduits.

The f acility includes a sea water intake structure located at sea level ct the base of the cliff with circulating water conduits and auxillcry salt water conduits leading up to the nuclear plant.

--' 'd M.

g_ --

Ti e inforcat ion on the geology at the site is described in the PSAR and thc s eve ral s upplement s.

The bedrock at the site arca is of tertiary age and conprises narine sbales, sandstone and fint-grained tu'faccous sediments, 11 oleng with a considerable variety of tuffs of submarine volcanic origin.

and are exposed in the seaward edge of the t~ese rocks are firm and compact, te rrace on which the plant is to be built, which ranges in elevation from 60 The bedrock te 100 f t . above sea level, and is approximately 1,000 f t , wide.

Tbc rejor is overlain by marine and non-marine deposits of Pleistocene age.

ccnponents of the power plant t re to be founded in bedrock in all cases.

is no evidence of any (cult of fs:ts TE c Site hos been well explored and the re TFc report by tbc consulting geologist on o' recent origin of s ignif icance.

t ' c p ro,i ect , Dr. Richerd H. Johns, prcsonted as App.tndix A of the third sapplcment. concludes that the possibility of f ault-induced pc rmanent ground useful life of the power plant d'spltcenent within the plant area during th4 is suf ficiently remote to be saf ely dis regarded.

SOURCES OF _ STRESSES _I_N _CONTATHMEffT STRUCTURE A The containrent st ructure is to le designcd for the following locdings:

decd locd of the st ructures; live locds (including c,nstruction loads and equipment loadsi; Internal pressure due to a loss-of-coolant accident of about

'7 psig; test pressure of 54 psig; negative internal pressure of 3.5 psig; stresses crising f rom thermal expansion; wind loading corresponding to the Uniform 2ullding Code - 106% cdit ion and corres. c onding to 87 to 100 mph winds; and carthquake loading as described nex, The earth sake lording will be based on two earthquakes, which for .

the design aarthquake condition correspond to maximum horizontal ground The containment design also will be reviewed accel .rct ions of 0.20g and 0.159 .

9 4

mm -

.- 5 f or no loss of funct ion usina response spect ra corresponuing to earthquakes of twice the maximum accelerat ion noted above, namely 0.409 and 0.309 ,

but with the latter earthquake having a maximum ground velocity The corresponding roughly to a value of 0.409 ground acceleration.

U. S. Coast and Geodet ic Survey report (Ref. 3) concurs in 0.209 and

0. 40 9 values of maximum ground accelerat ion for design and maximum cond i t ions .

Class ! piping and equipment, as discussed in answer to Quest lon

!!.G of Supplerent 2 will be des igned to the usa S. I.831.1 Code for p.ressure pip *ng which includes consideration of internal pressure, dead load, and other appropriate loads such as thermal expansion. It does not contain Powever, the applicant indicates provision for earthquake loading.

that they will combine earthquake loadings with the loadings just noted and further elaboration on this point is g' in Appendix A of Supplement 1.

The reactor internals are to be designed for combined earthquake, blow down loadings and other applicable loadings.

C0KMENTS ON 90EQUACY OF OESIGN Seismic Design For this f acility the containment design is to be made for two eartnquaket e,orresponding to maximum horizontal ground accelerat ions For the maximum of 0.209 (Earthqu'ake 0) and 0.159 (Earthquake 8) .

earthquake loading the two earthquakes are characterized by horlzontal c i t ed, namely 0.409 and ground accelerat icns of twlce the values just 0.309. Spectra corresponding to these earthquakes are presented as Figs. 2-11 through 2-14 of the PSAR and again in Supplement No. 3 beginning on page 22, along with an envelope of the spectra for the no-loss-of funct ion condit ion (F ig. Ill . A.12-5, Supplenent 3). We concur with the respon,se spect ra for the earthquakes when they are used in t he f ollowing manne r.

Since the response spect rum values for Earthquake 0 give values control that cont rol for high f requencies, and for Earthquake B, values that for Intermediate and low f requencies, both earthquakes must be uf ed and the maximum response in either must be considered to apply to the design This is permissible or saf e shut-down of single degree of f reedom elements.

in view of the fact that Earthquake B gives response values for low and Intermediate frequencies that lie above the response spect rum values f rom Hence this TID 7024 when normallred to an accelerat ion of 0.409 .

earthquake may be cons idered to correspond to a 0.409 earthquake for low and intermediate frequencies.

However, for saf e shut-down of mult i-degree-of-f reedom systems, we take the position that the combined.or envelope spectrum for the two earthquakes must be used in order to aveld a possible deficiency in the provis ion for saf e shut-down. This envelope 5 pect rum is consistent with an El Ce,nt ro type response spect rum for a maximum gro9nd accelerat ,lon of 0.409 Vertical acceleration values in all cases will be taken as two-thirds the corresponding maximum horizontal ground acceleration, and the ef fects of

~

borizontal cnd vert ical earthquche loadings will be corbined, and cons idered to cc: simaltaneously. In addit ion in the cicstic analysis, the usual f ract ional increase in s t ress for si. ort term loading will not be us d. We concur in these criteria.

The damping values to be used in the design are giv n on page 2-29 (revised 7-31-67) of the PSAR and w concur with the values given therein,

'!ith regard to the method of analysis of the con' ainment st ructure, it is noted on page 2-29 of the FSAR that all modes havir g r period greater t han 0.03 secs . will be included in the analysis and tF.t in addition for components or st ructures having multiple degrecs of f cedon, all significant modes, and in no case less than 3 modes, will be cor sidered. It is furthcr stated thct for single degree of f rccdon systems, the fundamental node of vibration will be used in the analysis. Our interpretation of th:se statenents is tlat, for a single degree of f reedom system, no ca t t c r wl c t Rhc period, whether it is abcvc or below 0.08 secs, the appropriate period and spect ral accelerat ion will be employed in the des ign, and f urther the, for nultiple degree of f reedom syst .rs all ' des will be considered. On the bas is of this Interpretat ion, as Interpreted in the second paragraph of this section, we concur with the approach.

The nctbod of dynamic analysis is described in Sections 2 and S of the PSAR and again in answer to Quest ion III. A lS of Supplement 1. It is noted that the dyncmic analys is to be followed for the Class I components and st ructures is the nodal part icipat ion f actor method. It is cur understanding "urther that the nodal analysis may be carried out citl'er through the use directly of the smoothed spectra, or employing a time history of ground notion,

mploying earthquake rccords with emplitude vclues scaled which, lead to essentially the same snaothed spect re. Discussion of this point is presented c - _ - - ,%. .. ,. - - .,r - _

-S-We concur' b, ' t h e applicant in t,nsu'a r to quest ion I I I . A.13 in '.spp h nent 3.

ir the us; of th. .codcl pc rt icipat ion ms thod in the enalys is and des ign, as vsll cs the use of citt er th srootbed spect ra or the t ime histesry input nctFnd provided that the t ime history input yields the sene response spect ra as givcn in th. report without any ma,1cr deviat ions belcw thosc scoothed

r. spens. spect rum values presented in the PSAR.

As a f urther point on tic dynamic .nalysis, it is our understanding trat for the saf e si utdoun ccr.di t isns pa rt icularly, fcr '.1::s I components a-d s t r 'ctur s . the design will

  • ncdc f o r 11~ 'nvelopc c' th ccedincd 5 'ct re of th two ca rt houM.c5 for th. cppropric tc d. rping Icvel . On the beinn foli:ved v.c concur in the design es 5 unit ion ti.ct this ap rctch is the ont
?rocch cd>pted.

Oc 1eral D: s iqn "revis im s e N vc revi.wcd tbs d 11gn st ress criteria pr.s:nted on eace 3

lord 'actnr exp ress ions to be employed in the des ign and c' the CS?A crd the r urther, we note on page 5-12 of the PS/.R that no steel f ind these reasonahic.

at the reinforecm?nt will experience average st ress .beyond tne yield point the liner will be designed

'actored lood, and a statement on page 5-13 that cxceed ihe yield point at the f actored loads.

to assure that stresses will not

0. rtSc r amplif icat ion on these points is given in answer to Tucst ion III. ' 5 of lupplecent 2. We interpret these statements to mean thet th0 average st ress in the reinforcement and liners will not exceed yield and that. the deforcetions l ding will ' ee limited to that of general yielding under the maximum earthquake . oa conditions. On the assumption that this interpretation is correct we concur in the approach.

I The detail for carrying tne radial shear, namely through the use of I

a vertical I-bcan, as descrlicd in the PSAR and in more particular l

t

.eginning on page 30 of Supplement 1 is novel cnd app.ars acceptable to us.

V.- recorrend that careful attention be given to the detall at the base of the I 5:ction where It is keyed into the foundation, to insure thet no dist ress can cccur in either the liner or the diagonal reinforcing bars through any rotation that might occur at this point under carthquake loadings or other types of accident loadings.

It Is noted in answer t'o Quest ion III. A.9 of Supplement I that the diagonal reinforcing will be carried over the top of the cylindrical shell and form a more or less completely tied unit t h rou gh t he conta inment st ructure with tic-down into and through the foundation as described in answer to

-.vestion 111. /, .10. It is f urther noted that the splices for the ASTM A-432 bars, wmich comprise the diagonal reinforcing in the side walls and carry the lateral shears and vertical loadings in the containment structure, will be spliced by the Cadweld process and that less than 1 percent of them will be welded by virtue of inaccessibility for Cadweld splice units. The proposed approach appears acceptable to us.

The design of the intake st ructore located at sea level is described in detail in the PSAR and the various supplements. This will be designed as a Class I structure, with due regard for expected tsunami water helghts.

  • !though it appears that some protection has been provided agaInst the possibility of rock masses f rom the clif f falling onto, or into, the pump house, we recorrend that careful attent ion be given to any impossible Impairment of the controls or the pumping system through any possible rock falls or slides.

C ranes l

l The containment crane is listed on page 2-27 (revised 7-31-67) of the PSAR as a Class I structure. We wish to call attention to the design of the i

I l

l l

i

l crines to insure that these crancs cannot be displaced f rom the rails during f rom the des ign or noximum earthquake, or othe rwise to have damage result tre movement of items supported by them which could cause impalrnent of the containment or the ability for safe shutdown, i r e net rat Ions A discussion of the design of the penetrations is given in answer te question III . A.2 of Supplement 1. It is noted there that for the la rge penet rations the diagonal rebars will be welded direct ly to a heavy This approach appears st ructural steel ring through use of Cadweld sleeves.

sat isf actory to us.

The applicant further notes in ti c same section that the stress concent ratien in the vicinity of the opening will be considered in the analys is, the penetration although this approach may well be satisf actory, we believe that dcsign should take account of any secondary ef f ects arising f rom local bending,

. t he rrol ef f ects , and so on, to insure that the penet rat ion-door detail behaves satisf actorily, and secondly that there 15 no dist ress ir the containcent.

s t ructure in the t rans It len zone f rom the penet rat ion into the remainder Partial proof of the Integrity of the penet ration of the shell structure.

will be provided by the measurement program to be made concurrently with the Ve recomrend that penet rat ion def ormat ion proof testing of the containment vessel .

calculations be made prior to the proof testing to provide demonstrated evidence t hat the design does indeed meet the criterla set forth for both the large and small penetrat ions .

Mn3 Valves, and Peactor Internals _

The design of the piping is described in Section 2 of the PSAR, and in f urther detall in Supplements I and 2. On page 1-22 of the PS/R a statement

is made that cll piping will be designed to withstand any seismic disturbance predictaole for the site. On page 2-30 of the PSAR lt is indicatcd that there are regions of local bending where the st resses will be equivalent to 120 percent of the yield stress based on elastic analysis for

, Further elaboration on the piping design is the no-loss -of f unct ion crite r la.

I and again given in answer to Qucstion II.F and Appendix A of Supplement The discussion presented in in answe r to C.ucs t ion II.G of Supplement 2.

loadings will be combined Supplerents 1 and 2 Indicates that the earthquake the design directly with the other applicable leadings for the piping and that limits will be established in terre of code allowable st resses, which in cases can be as large as 1.2 to 1.8 times the code allowable st resses.

is t at of the possible impairment of the The rett r of concern to us serviceability of the piping throuch rupture or buckling if excessive deformations occur. As the result of discussions with the applicant we believe that for the specif ic materials used, and under the conditions cited, the deformations However, we urge that this generally will be limited to acceptable values.

during the design process.

matter receive further consideration by the applicant The isolation valve design is discussed in several places but

1. The approach out line part icularly in answer to Quest ion II. .14 of Supplement there appears acceptable to us.

The design of the reactor internals has been reviewed in some detail with the applicant. The internals are to be designed to withstand the combined maximum earthquake spectrum concurrent with blow down in such a manner that It is our moderate yiciding would not impair the capability of safe shutdown.

' understanding that this retter 15 under detailed study and further documentation and review of the design criteria for the Internals is required.

i

+ .-.

CONCLUSTONS In line with the design goal of providing serviceable st ructures and components with a rese ve In st rength and ductility, and on the basis of the information presented, we believe the design criteria outlined for the p r i ne ry e.on t a i nnent , secondary containnent and T pe I piping can provide an adequate margin of safety for seismic res istance. Still remaining for review is a detalled evaluation of ti e criteria to be employed in the design of the reactor internals.

REFERENCES

1. "Prel iminary Safety Analys is Report, Volumes 1 and 2," fluclear. Plant, Diaolo Canyon Cite, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, 1967.
2. "Preliminary Safety Analysis Report. Supplements 1, 2 and 2," Nuclear Plant, Diablo Canyon Site, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, 1967.
3. "Report on the Seismicity of the Diablo Cenyon Site," U. S. Coast and Geodet ic Survey, Rockville, Maryland, .

~.

6 e-  % - -

r r y

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20151X306&oldid=3355196"