ML20214T788
| ML20214T788 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 05/27/1987 |
| From: | Grimsley D NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM) |
| To: | Hough P SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORP. (FORMERLY |
| References | |
| FOIA-86-371 NUDOCS 8706100420 | |
| Download: ML20214T788 (5) | |
Text
.
F0I A-86 -371 s..
s,,h o
[4 mm s. em jo RESPONSE TO FREEDEM Ch d "
I l "
C S
/
INFORMATION ACT (FOIA) REQUEST MAY 2 7 1937 g
, e e,s e occaae uvata+.%se.i l
(
asoutstan l
Ms. Patricia B. Hough 1
f PART 1 -RECORDS RELEAS(D OR NOT LOCATED ISee checaed bonest No egency r.co,d..#,ect to t,,e,ege.e ha,e been ima,ed No addatenal egency records subsect to the request have been located l
Agency recorde subsect to the request that are identsted e Appendia E
a,e si,oady a,a,iabie fa, puSe,nspect.n and copymg in ine NRC Puac Document Room, XX 1717 H $treet. N W, Washington. DC Agency records sub,ect to the request that a o identded in Appendia -
- are bemg made avadable for puMc anspetten and copying m the NRC Pubhc Document Room. t717 H Street N W Washington, DC, en a folder under this FOIA numbee and requester name The nonproprietary versen of the proposaftet that you agreed to accept m a telephone conversation with a member of my sta'f is now being made avesebte for pubhc inspection end coveng at the NRC Puhe Document Room.17t1 H Street. N W, Was ington, DC. m a folder under this FOiA number and requester name n
XX (nclosed to ardormaten on how you may obtain access to and the charges for copying records placed irt the NRC PuMc Document Room,1717 H $treet, N W., Washington, DC.
Agency records subsect to the request are enclosed Aey apphcable charge for copies of the records previded and pay' rent procedures are noted in the comments section.
Recorde subpert to the request have been referred to another Federal agencytest for review and direct response to you in vsew of NRC 0 response to thee request, no further action 4 beeng taken on appeal letter da'ed PART li A-INFORMAflON WITHHELD FROM PUSLIC DISCLOSURf yy Certain m'ormaton in the requested records e being withbeid from pubhc desclosure pursuant to the FOIA e.emptione described m and for the reasono stated in Part 11. ese-tone 9. C, and D Any released portene of the documents for vehich only part of the record e beeng wethheld are being made svadable for pubhc inspecten and copymg in the NRC Pubhc Document Room 17t7 H Street, N W, Washegton, DC, m e folder under the FotA number end requester name Co===e The NRC has searched existing files and cannot locate the records identified on the enclosed Appendix G.
We have been informed that the clerical staff spent 1.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> on search at $5.00 1
per hour and the professional staff spent I hour of search time at $12.00 per hour.
The charges for these searches are $19.50.
In our previous letter to you dated October 23, 1986, we informed you that there was a charge of $126.00 for professional search. The total charges are $145.50. You will be billed for this amount by our Division of Accounting and Finance.
i r
i
^
SW **
4Gf oe D'yttio8v Y_s Aa." natunOS__ _$ r. _,,,,,,o _
&b* ; '== f Ab% m 3%
y l
l 0706100420 U70D27 l'DH HII A 110001106-373 PDR l
tRC F0;M 464 ee n
+9 t>
gy., ' 198/
CEEDOM OF E: FORMATION ACT CESPONSE FOIA NUV8tRiss F0!A-86-371 oArt PAXT 118 -LP, LIC A' LE FOIA EXEMPTIONS F
Hstords subsect to the request that are described in the enclosed Appendices
_ are being withheld in their entirety or in part under FOIA E: err.ptions and for the reasons set forth below pursuant to 5 U S.C. 5521b> and to CFR 9 5tal of NRC Regulations.
- 1. The wthbe6d eformation e property classAed pursuant to Enecutive Order 12356 # EXEMPTION 11 2 The wthheld mformation eWates soiety to the eternal personnel rules and procedures of NRC itxtMPTION 2!
3 The wthheid mformation is specifically esempted from pubhc disclosure by statute edicated itxtMPTION 3 Secten 141145 of the Atomic f reegy Act whech prohibits the disclosure of Restricted Data or Formercy Restricted Data I42 0 5 C 21612t66L Section 147 of the Atomic Energy Act whnh prohitats tee disclosure of Unclassefed Sa'eguards information 142 U $ C 216h 4 The wthMd mformation is a trade sacret or commercial or franciai informaten that is being ethheid for the reasonist edicated itxtMPTION di The mformaton e co'sedered to be confidential business fproprietaryl eformaten The mformation e sonsidered to be proprietary mformaten pursuant to 10 CFR 2 790idull The Wormaten was subestted and received m confidence from a fore.gn source pursuant to 10 CFR 2 790idM21 l The wthheid infermaten consists of interagency or etraegency records that are riot evadable through discovery during litigation Deciosure of credeosional 6nforfration would tend to mbibit the open and frar'st enchange of ideas essential to the delberative process Where records are wthheid in their enterety, the f acts are mentricably mtertened with the credecisenal anformaten There a so are no reasonably negregable factual portens because the release of the facts would permit an XX nderect equiry anto the predeosional procese of the egency #DEMPI ON bi 6 The wthheld m'ormation e esempied from pubhc disclosure because its disclosure would result in a clearfy unwarranted invasion of personal privacy itxtMPTION 61
- 7. The ethbed eformaten consists of investigatory records comoded for law enforcement purposes and a bemg etheeld for the reasonist mdecated, IDEMPTION 76 Desdoeure would interfere wth an enforcement proceedeg because et couid reveal the mope, detecten, and focus of enforcement a forts. and thus could r
pois,tny een taem to take atten to shield potential wrongdoing or a veistion of NRC requirements from mventigators itxtMPTION 7t An Disclosure would constitute an un*arvaated evasen of personal privacy itxtMPTION 7(CH The information consists of names of individuais and other eformaten the dtsclosure of which would reveal ideetities of confidentes sources itxtMPTION 71011 PART if C-DENYfNG OFFICIALS Pursuant to 10 Cpm 9 9 and or 915 of the U $ Nucieer Regulatory Commission regulatons. it has teen determeret that the eformation wethheld e esempt from production or dist.losu e r
and en t ets producten or disciosure e contrary to the pubs c interest The persons responsible for the denist are those officiais identAod below as denverig officiais and the Director.
e Division of Rules and Records. Ortwo of Admmestraten, for any den ais that may be appealed to the (secuteve Director for Operatene if ooi Of NyiNG Of f ectal fif LE Of 8tCE RECORDS OtNit0 APPELLAf t OFFICIAL Ueput~i Geiie7WCounseT su omar em James P. Murray for Hearings and Appendix F X
Enforcemen t.
PART tl D. APPE AL RIGHis The densat by each denying official identified in Part il C may be appasied to the Appellate Official kjentified in that section Any such appeal must be in writing and must be made within 10 days of feceipt of this response. Appeels must be addressed as appropriate to the Esecutive Director for Operations or to the Secretary of the Commission U S. Nuclear Hegulatory Cnmmission Washington DC 20%5, and should clearty state on the envelope and in the letter i
that it is an " Appeaf from en initial FOI A Decision niac tonM asa iPart s' U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
- *a.
FOlA HESPONSE CONTINUATION
l 1
0 Re: F0lA-86-371 l
APPENDIX E RECORDS ALREADY AVAILABLE IN THE POR r
NOTE: The documents listed in the Office of the Executive Legal
(
Director's (OELD) Chronology with the exception of one record are dlready &Voilable for inspection and Copying in the Commission'S Public Document Room in the OGC/0 ELD Formal Files microfiche under the following proceedings related to Diablo Canyon Unit 2 (Docket No.
50-323):
1.
Construction Permit, Unit 2 t
2.
SpecidlProceeding(NEPA[1])
3.
SpecialProceeding(NEPA[2])
4.
Operating License Proceeding i
i l
l l
i i
l l
l
I Re: F01A-86-371 APPENDIX F i
DENIED IN ENTIRETY - EXEMPTION 5 1.
Undated ELD Chronological Sunmary of Legal Documents Filed in the Diablo Canyon Construction Permit and Operating License Cases (15pages)
I I
I I
i i
I
i i
i I
Re: F01A-86-371 i
f i
APPENDIX G RECORDS WHICH CANNOT BE LOCATED DUE TO LACK OF PROPER IDENTIFICATION 1
j 1.
Office of Inspection and Enforcement Chronological list t
l 2.
March 25, 1977 record i
j 3.
April 7, 1977 record t
1 4
December 31, 1970 record which is listed in OELD's chronological 4
list as identified on Appendix F.
1 i
i
'l I
I 4
t i
I I,
l i
i i
i I
1 j
l i
i r
i r
1 l
i i
r l
+
I l
.e.
w sal 2 Scence Aplicates htomatmaICorporate May 21, 1986 pyq( q 0F N t
Am REQUEST Director. Office of Administration p ff y/
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Q
igy g
Subject:
Freedom of Information Act Request Gentlemen / Ladies:
Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (5 USC 552 et seq.)
and fiRC implementing regulation 10 CFR 9 Subpart A, we request that you furnish the documents identified in the attached F0IA request.
In accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 9.14, we are prepared to pay fees necessarily incurred in responding to this request.
If you should have any questions regarding this request, please contactmeat(703)827-4964.
Your prompt attention to this request will be greatly appreciated.
Very truly yours, SCIENCC APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION WS f
Patricia 3. Hough Attachment
-cq%*
n-Ill0 Goodr49e Drive, PO Dos 1301 McLean, Virgna 22102, (703) 8214300 ow sac ones nonsa sneen noem cMm. cosres saryn cer m owwr. wem La un ton Avon oen no ors,n ree m se om seene ra,e we nemmn ac e
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REQUEST A.
As part of the attached memorandum dated December 1,1977, from E.G. Case to T.J. McTiernan, entitled, " Justice Request Regarding Diablo Canyon," a chronology of events and associated documents was prepared by NRC on Fault Assessments on Diablo Canyon Site (Docket Nos. 50-275 and 50-323).
Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, please provide noted copies of the documents associated with the following dates noted on that chron-ology:
(These documents are not available in the Public Document Room.)
5/23/66 4/1/76 3/21/67 4/12/76 3/30/67 4/16/76 4/28/67 4/20/76 10/4/67 4/21/76(2) 1/16/68 4/22/76 6/12/70 6/25/76 9/6/74 8/5/76 11/4/74 8/27/76 11/16/74 9/9/76 1/30/75 11/23/76 2/4/75 11/29/76 3/3/75 (letter to Shell Oil only) 12/13/76 3/10/75 12/29/76 3/31/75 1/10/77 5/8/75 1/26/77 10/24/75 2/14/77 11/17/75 2/18/77 12/24/75 2/28/77 1/5/76 3/14/77 1/12/76(USGS) 3/24/77 1/13/76 3/25/77 1/21/76 3/31/77 2/4/76 4/7/77 3/23/76 6/3/77 B.
The December 1, 1977, memorandum mentions certain chronologies that were being prepared by I&E and OELD.
Please provide copies of these chronolo-gies and all documents that are identified in these chronologies.
1 1
f b
~ g**
(,
_ l,,,,,2,,,.
(
t.
ff /
- 1
't WUCLE AM Cf CULATZY COMM11SION k
f
.3 era 1dlNC foN. D. c. 30666 gs....j
.t c.1 =
p; 14R.C.
C3RC WD W Y I9 % -1977 ND o u 2UM FOR: Thomas J. McTiernan, Director '
Office of Inspector and Auditor FROM:
Idson C. Case, Acting Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
JUSTICE MQJEST MCAADING DIARO CN#0N As you requested, enclosed is a chronology of events and the associated docu=ents from the NRA staff's review of the seismic concerns result-ing from faults in the vicinity of the Diablo Canyon site. Also enclosed is a chronology prepared by the Project Hanager which addresses the staff's overall review activities associated with the Diablo Canyon application.
The chronologies prepared by Int and CELD are being provided separately
(
by those offices as you suggested.
If further assistance or additional information is required, do not hes.itate to call.
\\
pg o-Idson C. Case, ting Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Enclosurd As stated e
g t
g.
' r* 'l,-
u 1
<(
e j
,A i
}qk &
e i
.,, o a
(
(
- w....
CHRONotMy 0F PRINCIPAL RVERTS t
~
fat!LT ASSIS$W RTS e
'DIABLO CAWON 37T5 "ftrNTTs 'I 'end 3) n e.it. aed.hronole,x and a.seciated do!
nis ars intended t.,re.
vide a sumary of the NRA staff's review of seismic senterns resulting from faults in the vicialty of the*Diable Canyon site. In preparing this thronology and selecting thebe Secuments to be provided, the followl,ng guidelines were Eseit All documents which addresh faultlag in the plant environs or the magnitude of the' earthguale that forms the basis for deriving an effective accelerstion for input into the process leading to seismic design analysis are included.
Documents which address the hcceptability of the various sosponents to meet'this selhais design are met included.
Correspondence 6f a routine administrative nature euch as forwarding of PSAR/75AA amenAmants to staff sensultants is not included.
en All P5AA/TSAA amendaent receipts are ladicated but these
'which addressed fault related information are salted evt.
Copies of each amen &sent do not exist at Central Files
- but are available 6n microfiche at the NRC Public Document Boos.
- I.xcerpts from the referenced' documents are provided la sene cases to indicate the state of review which existed at that time. The excerpt is not intended to be a sosplete summary of the material addressed in the documents.
Wealy reports prepared by'the staff en the status of the Disblo Canyon fault review are not listed in the thronelery but are included with the documents provided.
.s e
g-k,
- o
- g,
ao 1
- (.
CNe0NOLOGY OF PefNCIPAL fvtNTS
}AULTA55t35'9ENTS k!A9LO CANYON 5"W IUnits 1 and l !
i t
l Constru'etten Permit Review l
glay 23,~1966 AfC.DAL staff met to discuss
)
/
pacific 8es and Electric Company's preliminary plans for a nuclear 4
plant at several proposed loca-tiens. (May 25,1966 setting sunnary attached.)
j r
i I
'The major safety problem for either site would be assectated
~
with the earthquake potential and the possibility of faults l
pa'ssing through the site. In this respect the Diable Canyon l
site would appear to be more favorably situated since it is a
fa further rer.sved from the known active' earthquake faults in the i 6, resten."
i Septes.ber 26,1946 Pacific Sat and Electric Ceepany 1
1etter describing trenching emplet ration at the site (attached).
i
,5eptember 30,1966
- Paciffe 8as and Electric Company I
.. /
- subelts preliefnary site report J
tnd requests AIC.DRL review (attached).
i l
1 Me lorse et active fault is known ta entst within the site I
area. The site is forty or fifty alles west of the San Andreas i
Fault. The Nectetente Fault is about twenty to thirty miles
}
sway. but it is met considered active. There are other asppable faulis with a porthwest. southeast trend et varying places in the l
t Coast Ranges however, no major faults have been aspped meer the
)
Diable Canyon site.'
l October 7,1988 Atc.tRL 1etter to Coast and Geodetic
. Survey riquesting seismological a
review of site (attached).
j 1
- (.
I l
r 1
e e
.-...-,-.m.-.-.-
_.., ~ _.~_..,_ -
--_m,..._..,.
y
(
z
- *..g oo
,3,
- y geology, instrumentation and sentrol, turbine missiles, reactor core and containment desfon and engineered safety features.
(May 18,1967 meetfag summary sttached.)
'The applicant was requested to present a plot of the plant s*
layout, locating the trenches and the known faulta in relation to plant structures."
Aprf128,1987
- Memo susmarizing phone call fros' PGAE concerning establishment of a new design spectrum (ettached).,
8 May 5, 1967 AEC-DRL 1etter requests additional inforsation en site and structural desfgn(attached).
May 15, 1967 AEC DRL and ACR5 staff met to discuss setsste design af Diable Canyon reacter. (May 25, 1957 e
meeting sunnary attached.)
duly 10,1967 Pac {ffe Cas and Electric Company submits Arendment No. I responding ta queatiens in DRL's May 5, 1953 letter.
July 19,1957 ACR$ Subconsistee visit of proposed
.sita.
July 24,1957 Faciffe cas and Electric Company submits Arendment No. I responding te questions in ORL's May 5,1957 s.
- jegger, July 31,1957 Facific Ces and Electric Company subsfts Amendment No. 3 responding s.
to DRL's May 5,1967 letter and provides supplemental information on afte seelegy.
August 15,'1967 AEC DRL staff met to rovfew sef ssf c desinn Bases.
(August 17,1957 meet'ng senary attached.)
(.
O h
(
(
.5 -
=
ACR5 Comittee met N dfscuss October 5.1967 technical aspects of proposed sumary tocated.) (No meeting reactor s.nd site.
j s
October 18, 1967 Pacific ses ald Tlectric Company submits Amendment No. 5 supplying 4
su'pplemental.information en setsste design.
l*.
November 6.1967 Pacific tas and Electric Company submits Amendment No. 4.
4 l
November 9.1967 Pacific Cas and Electric Company
. submits Amendment No. 7.
i November 29. 1967 Paciffc Sas and Electric Company submits Amendment No. S.
. December 1.1967 ACR$ Subcomittee met to discuss i
proposed reactor. (Nomeeting sumary located.)
- December 5.1967 Pacific ses and Electric Company submits Asendment No. 9.
ACR5 Comittee met to discuss I
December 7,1967 proposed reactor. (Nomeeting j
sumary located.)
i J
i
" December 20, 1967 ACR5 Report issued (attached).
l January 16, 1968 Atc.DRL letter to N. Newmark regarding his input to the staff's SER(attached).
i j
January 22, 1968 Letter from M. Newmark forwarding 1
modifications to his SER fnput (attached).
j January 23, 1968 Atc.DRL staff issues Safety Evalva-I 1
i tion for Unit 1 (attached),
i j
l
\\
l(
l
. ~......
(
(
7
(
October 16. 1959 ACRS Report issued for Unit 2 (attached).
.~,
November 18, 1969 AEC-DRL staff issues safety Evalv.
ation of proposed Unit 2 at Diablo Canyon site attached).
January 13-14. 1970 An Atomfc Safety and Licensing -
Board conducts a public hearing in San Luis Obispo. Calf fornfa.
, 5_urvey to AIC re_g and_Ss'ode June 12,1970 Letter from Coast u
ulatory staff providfag evaluation of certain setsalc issues '(attached).
i
/ 'It is the conclusion of the Coast and Geodetic Su'rvey that the offshore earthquake activity and Edna Fault Zone do not have a significant bearing on the earthquake potential for this site because they present a hazard much less than than already con-sidered in the evaluation of the site."
t July 15,1970 Atomic safety and Licensing Board reopening of bearing.
August 7,1970 Nearing reconvenes in San Luis Dbi.spo. California.
December 8,1970 Initial Decision of ASLR orders
~
issuance of a construction permit.
Decision discusses considerations of, geology and sefsmology, intervenors' contentions andrationale for accept-Ing proposed design basis (attached).
December 9,1970 Notice of Issuance of Provisional -
Construction Fernft.
December 9,1570 Ph visional Construction Permit he. C, PPA,69 issued.
. June 1.1973 Issued Final Environmental state-sent for Units 1 and 2 (attached).
(
\\
e 8
e g
...v
! ;,.t...
(
(
.(.
t October 25, 1973 Site visit and meeting related to geology and seismology.
i (October 31, 1973 seating simmary attached.)
- The staff has requested additional information on offshore faults.
PG&E indicated that this sub, ject is discussed to some
. extent in a report by Moskins and Griffith, Reference 17, page 2.5-83 of the FSAR, but that more recent information is expected from the USGS work being funded by the AEC. The results' of this work should be available about the middle of November I
1973."
~
November 19, 1973 -
Submittal of Amendment No.1 consisting of afscellaneous revised and additional pages of.the FSAR.
November 19, 1973 Staff notified by USGS of the
. discovery of possible offshore
(
faults in the vicinity of Ofablo Canyon.
- e*
Novecher 21,1973 Staff memorandum discussing the
(
! 1 newly reported fault (attached).
"On November 19, 1973 I was informed by Dr. E. N. Baltz, Jr.,
j USGS, that he had,fust recafved a telephone call from Mr. Holly' i
Wagner of their Menlo Park office concerning a fault which has
- recently been discovered about two alles offshore of Diablo Canyon, Mr. Wagner reported that an offset was noted on the ocean floor en three crossings and, although the records have 1
not yet been analyzed, he feels that there is If ttle doubt that i
the offset is a fault scarp."
, December 13,197}
Subaittal of preliminary geological information related to slope stability (cover letter attached).
i i
December 21,'1973 Letter to applicant confirstng the 1
j safety review schedule for Diablo Cartyon (attached).
1
" Presently, there are several faportant itees en which we require significant additional information, e.g., possible effects of newly discovered geologic fa'ults, effects of tsunants caused by l
potential nearshore generators, and slope stability field work and analysts. Your failure to provide the required information i,
j 4
l g
n
~.
, b.. ' t,
(
-(
1
[
?,
31 s
March 28,1974 U.S. Geological Survey 1etter forwarding the results of thefr reviewof.theFSAR(attached).
.s
" *0ne feature, however; for which adequate 4aformation is not provided is an offshore fault or structuralbne which has been 4 recognized since presentation and review of the Preliminary Safety Analysis Report (PSAR)."
"Because of the apparent length and proxistty of the offshore.
- 3one to the site, contfderation of the zone as another possible source of a maximum earthquake in addition to the four proposed by the applicant may be necessary. Until definitive information is presented to demonstrate otherwise, prudence requires that the sone be considered capab1e.*
March 39,1974 Submittal of Amendme't No. 5 n
consisting of afscellaneous revised and additional pages of the FSAR.-
April 15,1974 Submittal of Amendment No. 7 g
consistin of afscellaneous revised C,,>
and addit onal pages of the FSAR.
April 26,1974 Meeting with applicant to discuss offshore geology and sefssology, (May 15, 1974 seating sumary attached.)
'The staff asked p0&E and their consultants to summarize how
~
they plan to respond to our concerns regarding offshore faults.
Doug Hamilton. indicated that they will utilize all existing,
offshore data, including the work nf Hoskins-Griffith, in the preparation of their report'.
In addition, PG&E is contemplating some additional offshore survey work in areas fairly close to the plant sita."
April 30-May 1,1974 Conclusion of the first Operating Licensing Prehearing Conference.
May 2, 1974 Staff memorandas identifying outstanding items in the Diable Canyon safety review (attached).
May 13,1974 Submittal o'f Amendment No. S consisting of partial response to the staff a requests for additional information.
e e
~
T
'e e
(
(
13 -
(s surveys requested by the staff (cover letter attached).
August 2,1974 submittal of Amendment No.14.
Augls't' 5,1974 subatttal of Amendment No.15.
August 16, 1974 Submittal of Amendment No.16.
September 3,1974 submittal of Amenhent No.'17.
Sept' ember 5,1974 Staff memorandum providing a
. status of the geolog/ and seismology.
p(attached).ortion of Diablo Canyon rev
~
- With regard to evaluation of the stesnic potential of the offshore faults in the vicinit USGS will need to review PG&E'y of Diablo Canyon, the staff and s report before a final determina-tion can be made. The staff did conclude after the July 5,1974 meeting that pCLE had undertaken a very comprehensive ofishore field program. However, the feeling still prevails that it will be extremely difficult to establish the capability of these (8
faults using conventional dating methods."
September 12, 1974 ACRS Subcommittee meeting emphasiz-ing geology and seismology and ECCS-Appendix K evaluations.
(September 27,1974 seating sumary attached.)
~.
"The majority of the remaining portion of the seating was devoted to a detailed presentation by PG&E's consultants *on the geology
- and seismology of the central California coastal region, including both onshore and offshore areas. The presentation was handled chiefly by,0. H. Hamilton of Earth Sciences Associates.*
October 16,1974 safety Evaluation Report issued-(attached).
October 22, 1974 submittal of Amendment No.18.
November 1.1974 Letter to applicant informing him of changes in the safety review schedule (attached).
1 a.
e o
l
. ' +. ", '
(
(
e
(:;
15 E-
~
January 16, 1975 Subnittal of Amendment No. 24.
January 28, 1975 U.S. Geological Survey'1etter forwarding their report of geologic and seismologic data (attached).
"However, in conclusion, we believe that with the Ifnit of the of the East Boundary fault to the Santa Lucia Ban earthquake similar to the November 4,1927 event but occu,rrin an along the East Soundary Zone or the Santa Lucia Bank fault zon 1
to the site. represents the maximum earthquake that is likely to occur nea considered fa the construction permit evaluati hearin valid,gs'and reviews. As long as this interpretation remains it is our opinion that the design value of 0.5p used as a zero period acceleration in the development of the appropriate
~
sesponse spectra is inadequate."
January 30, 1975 Staff memorandum forwarding proposed geology and seismology section for (J
SER supplement (attached).
January 30, 1975 Submittal of Amendment No. 25.
January 31, 1975 Supplement No. I to the Safety.,
Evaluation Report issued (attached).
- The earlier conclusions regarding the geologic structure of the altered by the subsequent de. tailed offshore in
(
piscussed previously.
of the Hosgri fault zone is continuing; we will provide ou conclusions on this matter in a future supplement to the SER.*
}
i January 31,19f5 j
Staff met with USGS to discuss Diablo Canyon geology and seismol-ogy. (February 24
{
sumary attached.),1975 setting j
February 4,1975 Staff memorandum re seismic evaluation (garding USGS attached)..
'The USGS letter of January 25 higher accelerations are approp,riate.1975 4mp11es that significantly On Ja
, met with the USGS to discuss their concerns,nuary 31,1975 we some of which wer.e 1
I e
...-w.
(
c mrch 20,1975 5taff memorandue regardini Diablo Canyon and other seismic fssues (attached).
, March 26,1975
~
Submittal of Amendment No. 26 March 31,1975 Staff memorandum regarding prog April 4,1975 of Diablo Canyon review (attached Meettag with applicant to discuss ftems relative to the se design of Diablo Canyon.ismic j
(May8 1975 meeting sumary attached.).
of the Diablo Canyon seismic design.4he sta i
mation and meet with individuals re ispects.'
April 10,1975 Second Oper Conference.ating License Prehearing 8
f j
April 28-May 2.1975 Review of the Diablo Canyon safsmic design at PGAE offices in San Francisco.
(May 19.1975 staff sumary of highlights attached.4 l that based upon the above described I
, design audit, the seismic design methodology. proced
' design controls feptemented for the plant were in ge f
i sa,tisfactory and acceptable."
April 30.1975 Submittal of Amendment No. 27.
~
May 8,1975
.~
Staff memorandum of SER (attached)providtag status May 9,1975 Supplement No. 2 to the safety t
Evaluation Report issued (attached). '
May 16. 1975 Submittal of Amendment No. 28.
May 23,1975 Los Angeles California.ACR$
in 1975 meeting sumary attached).
(
\\
g
-6
- 19 g
' to the staff's request for addi-
~
~
(
.,tional information on geology and seismology dated February 12 1975.
September 18,1975 Supplemerft g. 3 to the Safety Ev luation p Q issued (attached).
September 26, 1975 Letter to applicant regarding
~
outstanding issues and requesting schedule for submitting additional
~
information (attached).
e
~2:tober5,1975 Subatttal of Mendment No. 35 C
including partial response to queations dated February 12,1975.
- Cetober 21, 1975 Subalttal of Amendment No. 38.
October 24, 1975 Staff memorandum regarding seismic stability of cut alope (attached).
October 30, 1975 Submittal of Amendment No. 37 facorporating completion of responses to request for informa-((. 8.,
tion dated February 12,1975.
November 11,1975 Letter from applicant submitting
- toports entitled "Talesefssic Location of the 1927 Loupoc farth-quake" and "Aftershocks of the 1927 Lompoc Earthquake" (cover
~
1etter attached).
November 12, 1975 Letter from applicant submitting teport entitled, " Western Geo-
'~
physfeel Coepany and Shell 011 Company Proprietary seisafe Reflec-tion Data from the Offshore Region between Point Estero and Point Arguello: Basic Data, Interpre--
tive Data and Discussion," and requesting that the report be
=
withheld from public disclosure as proprietary data (cover letter attached).
e y
l
,,-- - - _ _. ~. -
t,'..'
(
(
~
21 December 24,1975 Staff memorandum regarding 0$g5 e
report (attached).
"The draft USGS report is due to us today. Preltsinary indica-
,'tions are that the USGS will, once again, recomend re the proposed design basis earthquake for this plant." jecting December 24,1975 Letter from USGS to NRG staff oviding draft report on Diabio nyon(attached).
i
- For reasons stated in subsequent parts of this review, how.
ever, the mgni.tude of the design basis earthquake for the Diablo i
Canyon nuclear reactor site should be in the range of 7.0 to 7.5 and located on the Hosgri fault zone. This is based prinetpally on the fact that the Npvember 4,1927 earthquake had a segnitude k
of 7 3 and that the best estimates of its location indicate that it could have occurred on.the Hosgri fault."
January 5,1978 Staff everandum recommending nepper management meetings on Diablo Cartyon review (atsached). *.
' Clearly we can benefit from further discussions with USGS at a lower level before they send their formal recomendation. How-l ever,.in light of the serious nature of the decision we must make, the unknown quality of the USGS recomendation and the
. extra difficulty involved in reversing a USGS opinion after it is published, we recemend contracting top management at the Department of Interior and expressing our need for an imediate accelerated reevaluation of tae geologic situation, including:
3.
The indep'endent opinions of several top USGS geologists not heretofore directly involved in the Diablo Canyon review.
2.
A clear expression of the technical reasoning which can be discussed meaningfully with the staff.
In addition, we should inr.ediateiy retain additional top geologists directly as consultants and initiate further independent review on our own. Depending on how quickly we take action, the results may or may not be completed in time to support the schedule for lican-sing.*
~
1 O
m.-. _.. -, _
m._,
_,. :;o. _
=__-
z
(-
s 33 l
1 response to a req' vest for informa-l tion dated November 14,1975 and requestin that the report be withheld roa public disclosure as proprietary data (cover letter attached).
January 21, 1976 Staff memorandue regarding upcoming meeting with PG&E en USGS geologic review (attached).
January 28, 1976 Staff memo'randus sumarizing meeting with Newmark, Hall and USGS (attached, plus February 2 1976 supplement).
"It was seating. generally agreed that progress had been made'at the The staff s engineerin concerns, while more fully expressed, were not apparently a leviated to any significant degree. They now constitute the major barrier to timely and favorable resolution of the matter February 2, 1976 Submittal of Amendment No. 39.
(k-February 4, 1976 Meeting with Newmark and Hall to discuss geology and sefssology. "ry (February 17, 1976 aceting summa attached.)
d
~,.*
"We agreed to inform the app 1feant of the essential points of aur program and,to indicate the perf t of his independent pursuit af a parallel program since we would not expect to make a conclu-t sfon on the issues involved until he has provided his analysis and conclusions. The applicant should be able to complete his work before.we complete ours."
t February:5,1976 Meeting with applicant and USGS to discuss teology and seismology.
(March 4,1976 seating sursary attached.)
"The purpose of the seeting was to discuss the differences of i
opinion which had arisen regarding geology and seismology at this site, to hear PG&E's views regard.ing such differences and to give PG&E our views and those of the USGS."
March 2,1976 Ntter from applicant subattting' a
(
g report entitled, "A Discussie, ef the 4-11catien of the Mi;--.i.
Precest. to 'mes ern Geophysical
~
l p
1
..,m.
(
(.
~,
- PG&E representatives stated that, although they did not agree that the earthquake magnitude should be 7.5 with the analysts as quickly as possible.', they would proceed
. April 20,,1975 Staff memorandum regarding Sernreuter's progress (attached).
April 21,1975 Staff sesorandum summarizing t
conversation with San Luis Obis g
ervspaper reportar (attached). po l April 21,1975
{
Staff letter forwarding D$G5
~
reports to California Inergy 8
Commission (attached).
April 22,1975 Staff memorandum regarding conf 1fet of interest question associated with Newmark (attached)..
April 29,1975 Letter from USGS to NRC staff providing) report on Diablo Cavon (attached
- For reasins stated in subsequent parts of this review, however, C
the segnitude of the design basis earthquake for the Diablo Canyon nuclear reactor site should be about 7.5 and located on the Hosgri fault zone.
This is based principally on the fact that the November 4,1927 earthquake.had a magnitude of 7.5 and a-
~
that the best estfastes of its location indicate that it could have occurred on the Hosgrt fault.
Furthermore, the range in
{
angnitude is compatible with the largest recorded or estimated j
I
~~
magnitudes of earthquakes that have occurred on subsidiary faults in the San Andreas systas."
.May 11, 1975 Supplement No. 4 to the Safety Evaluation Report issued (attached).
'The U.S. Geological Survey concluded that a magnitude 7.5 earthquake could occur en the Hosgri fault.
dix C to this supplement, the Survey's report is intended toAs stated in Ap form a basis for deriving an effective acceleration for input into.the process leading to seismic design analysis (which in this case will be a reevaluation of the safsmic capabilities of the Diablo Cayon Nuclear power Station)."
(
m
. - _. =. _.
u.
W
,o
(. ".
J.......
27 -
July 8,1975 ACR$ Full Committee meeting in Washington setting sus B.C.
(July 30,1975 t
1 snary attached).
g, July 29.1975 Submittal of Amendment No. 44.
N1y 29,1975 Submittal of Amendment No. 45 Including information concerning reevaluation of seismic design sapabilities.
August 5, 1975
, Staff memorands regarding con-parisons of design spectra (ettached)
August 11. 1975
- Meeting with applicant concerning
- reevaluation of sefsmic design capabilf tfes.
setting sumary(attached.)
August 25. 1975 August 27, 1975 Meeting with applicant concerning reevaluation of seisafe design capabilities. (September 14
( *., ""
meeting surinary attached).
1975 2,
~
August 27. 1978 Staff memorandus discussing use of proper design response spectra (a ttached).
e-5ep.tember 7,1975 heting with applicant concerning reevaluation of sefsmic design capabilities (attached).
September 9.1975 Staff samorandue regarding compar-ison of design spectra (attached).
~
September 10. 1975 Supplement No. 5 to safety Evalua-tion Report issued (attach.ed).
'Dr. Newmark's report s'upplement, discusses,the effective horizontal grou tion (0.75 ) and presents the rationale that it is based upon.
3 As stated in Supplement No. 4 to the Safety Evaluation Rep we have accepted Dr. Necark's recomendation."
(
o
.f
[
.r
{.
(
. :. - ~;
. t's. m January 5.1977
- Meeting with applicant to discuss l
~l seismic design reevaluation.
t (January 2.1977 setting summary attached
- pG8E fndicated its intention to respond 11y as possible to all of the concerns raised in the coments. PG&E had not yet i
t developed specific information concerning the nature of its responses or the schedule for providing them. PG&E fadicated
'that this specific information would be available in the near future."
January 7.1977 subalttal of Amendment No. '46.
January 10,1~977. " '
5taff memorandum svamarizing revfew of Bernreuter and Wight report en parameters influencing response spectra (attached).
January 25,1977 Staff sencrandum sumarizing conversation with San Luis Obispo y,
reporter (attached).
~
(.,*
F,ebru'ary 4.1977 -
Meeting with applicant to discuss sefsafe design reevaluation. Cttay 18 1977 setting sumary (attachadh
- pG&E presented a spectfication that described the methods and criteria proposed for use in reevaluating the major structures.
These proposals were discussed and various changes were made to
- the s'pecification during the meeting. At the conclusion of the
~ *.
setting we indicated to pG&E that the proposed methods and.
~
criter a, as changed during the seating, would be acceptable to the NRC staff."
9 Staff mercrandum sumarizing k
February 14, 1977 conversation with Congressional e
Staff (attached).
February 18,1977 Staff letter to House Subcomf ttee en Oversight and Investigations pro-f' vfding sumaries of reviews conducted by and for the Comission regarding the Diablo Carpn site (attached).
.q l
mv.
-o e
g-l
- 31 e May 3.1977 Meeting w(ith applicant on sefsnic*!
~
desfgn.
June 29,1977 sumary attached.)
seetfag
'In a letter dated March 13. 1977 to the Chatruan of the Calff the KRC staff had outlined the material tha would be necessary to justify an interim operating license that would allow plant operation while the sefsnic reevaluation was j
being completed."
'The purpose of the seatin concerning this material."g was to discuss further detaffs -
June 2.1977 fleeting with app 1feant on seismic design. (June 29 summary attached.),1977 seating
'In order to justify a full ters o trating 1feense. PG8E wod1d need to complete the seismic reeva vation at 0.75g.
PG&E that in performing this reevaluation they should combineN l
3..
"the calev1sted loads resulting from a postulated loss.cf-coo
)
accident with the calculated loads resulting from the postulated
~
aarthquake at 0.75.*
3
' June 3.1977
~
Staff letter to Hou'se Subcomittee -
en Oversight and Investigations pr
~
vfding additional information con o-carning Diablo Canyon review (attached June 2123,1977 ACR5 Subcomittee meeting. (Jul 1977 setting summary attached.) y 15, 3
i June 30,1977 staff testifies before subcomittee en Energy and the Enyfronment of the House Interfor and Insular Affairs Comittee (transcript attached.
~
July 14,1977 Supplacent No. E to the safety Evalu-1 stfon Report issued (attached).
July 18,1977 Staff memorandum regarding release of 1nterna1 documents requested by Repre-SantatGe Udall (attached).
1 July 28.1977 Staff menorandum including ACRS con-sultant coments (attached).
e.
--w
t
~~
MDEX.
CODE Carmolo g - M64-IO7 MRC P6d E CoREE5b@cwe/MR:Gr3
'y'ELLoV/
F o s d A - k c v.:, e _
l ORAmE Av4 ade_ fr.
P D R.
re dth raan.-
4 i
D 6 )is~
Priv\\elys doco,ueds -ys. ~F A ? oR.
1
%g-
% wr;k, ekcmeuk Vea-1 Re9.L % ksatz. k&w a
NI b
8
(
= Ro"ga) - suke aun & M "V
c. n.sg a &
.