ML20215M998
| ML20215M998 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | North Anna, Diablo Canyon, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 10/23/1986 |
| From: | Grimsley D NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM) |
| To: | Hough P SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORP. (FORMERLY |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20197J003 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-86-371 NUDOCS 8611040150 | |
| Download: ML20215M998 (7) | |
Text
.
- h A
[f'%q k
UNITED STATES 4
e
( _/;
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5
E WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 f
....+
OCT a a 1986 Ms. Patricia B. Hough Science Applications International Corporation 1710 Goodridge Drive Box 1303 IN RESPONSE REFER McLean, VA 22102 TO F01A-86-371
Dear Ms. Hough:
This is in partial response to your letter dated May 21, 1986, in which you requested, pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (F0IA), copies of specified documents (Part A) and chronologies with related documents (Part B) identified in the December 1, 1977, memorandum from Edson Case to Thomas McTiernan regarding the Diablo Canyon plant. This response addresses Part A of your request.
The records identified on the enclosed Appendix A and portions of the record identified on the enclosed Appendix B are being placed in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) Public Document Room (PDR), 1717 H Street, NW, Washington, DC 20555. You may obtain access to these records by requesting PDR folder F01A-86-371 under your name.
An individual's date of birth has been deleted from the record identified on Appendix B because disclosure of this information would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. The information is being withheld from public disclosure pursuant to Exemption (6) of the F0IA (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(6))
and 10 CFR 9.5(a)(6) of the Commission's regulations.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 9.9 of the NRC's regulations,'it has been determined that the information withheld is exempt from production or disclosure, and that its production or disclosure is contrary to the public interest. The persons responsible for this denial are the undersigned and Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
This denial may be appealed to the NRC's Executive Director for Operations within 30 days from the receipt of this letter.. As provided in 10 CFR 9.11, any such appeal must be in writing, addressed to the Executive Director for Operations, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, and should clearly state on the envelope and in the letter that it is an " Appeal from an Initial F0IA Decision."
Additional records subject to Part A of your request are identified on the enclosed Appendix C and are available in the PDR. They are filed in PDR folder F01A-76-411 under the name of Rushforth.
The records identified on the enclosed Appendix D have been referred to other agencies-for disclosure determination and direct response to you.
8611040150 861023
[ffJcH 71 PDR
9 o
Ms. Hough We have been informed by the staff that the letter dated March 3,1975, addressed to Shell Oil, cannot be located.
The professional staff has informed us that to date they spent 10.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> on search at $12.00 per hour. The charge for this search is $126.00. Upon completion of the request, we will inform ycu of the total charges.
The search for and review of additional records subject to your request has not yet been completed. We will notify you upon completion of search for and review of additional records.
Sincerely, u$ w hee Donnie H. Grimsley, Director Division of Rules and Records Office of Administration
Enclosures:
As stated i
I a
l r
Wi--
F01A-86-371 (FirstPartial)
APPENDIX A Records Being Placed in PDR 1.
04/06/67 Memo to The Files from K. Woodard Re: Meeting with PG&E to Discuss Seismicity of the Diablo Canyon Site (4 pages)
NOTE: This record addresses the 3/21/67 meeting 2.
03/30/67 Letter to Peter Morris from N. Newmark Re: Diablo Canyon (4 pages) 3.
04/28/67 Memo to Files from K. Woodard Re: Phone Call from PG&E Re:
Earthquake Design Spectrum (1 page) 4.
10/04/67 Memo to Harold Price from P. Morris Re: PG&E Diablo CanyonPlant(1page) 5.
01/16/68 Letter to Nathan Newmark from Roger Boyd Re: Safety Evaluation Re: Diablo Canyon (1 page) 6.
09/06/74 Letter to Edson Case from R. DeYoung Re: Status of the Geology and Seismology Portion of the Diablo Canyon Operating License Safety Review w/ enclosure Mtr. Sumary (7 pages) 7.
11/04/74 Note to Denton, Gamill, Stepp, Hoffman, Halman and Hawkins from D. Allison Re: Geology-Seismology Report for Diablo Canyon (1 page) 8.
01/30/75 Letter to R. DeYoung from Harold Denton Re: Supplement to SER for Geology, Seismology and Foundation Engineering w/ enclosure Supplement to Diablo SER (13 pages) 9.
01/30/75 Letter to Angelo Giambusso from Philip Crone Re: Diablo Canyon w/ enclosures Amend. #25 and Certificate of Services (5pages)
- 10. 02/04/75 Memo to Olan Parr from Dennis Allison Re: Diablo Canyon Seismic Evaluation (1 page)
- 11. 03/31/75 Memo to William Gammill from Renner Hofmann Re: Telephone Associates (2 pages) glas Hamilton of Earth Science Conversation with Dou
- 12. 05/08/75 Memo to A. Giambusso from R. DeYoung Re: Status of the SER for Diablo Canyon, Units 1 and 2 w/ attachments Outstanding Issues and Concerns and Issues and Concerns (5 pages)
- 13. 04/16/76 Memo to Olan Parr from D. Allison Re: Diablo Canyon Proprietary Information (1 page)
- 14. 04/16/76 Memo to R. Heineman from Schweil, NRR Re: Meeting Between SEB Staff and N.M. Newmark Consulting Engineering Services Concerning Diablo Canyon (4 pages) NOTE: This record addresses the 4/12/76 meeting
4 Re: FOIA-86-371 (FirstPartial)
- 15. 04/21/76 Letter to Ted Beeston from J. Stepp Re: Status of Review (1page) i
- 16. 09/14/76 Memo from Allision, NRR Re: Summary of Meeting Held on August 27, 1976 to Discuss Seismic Design Reevaluation (5 pages) NOTE: This record addresses the 8/27/76 meeting 4
- 17. 07/30/76 Memo from Allison, NRR, Re: Sumary of ACRS Subcosmittee Meeting Concerning the Diablo Canyon Operating License Application (4 pages) NOTE: This record addresses the 6/25/76 meeting I
18, 12/13/76 Memo to J. Knight from 1. Sibweil Re: Review of Diablo CanyonReevaluation(1page) 19.
12/29/76. Memo to D. Allison from J. Stepp Re: Response to ACRS Consultants Recomendations Re: The Diablo Canyon Review (3pages)
- 20. 01/10/77 Memo to I. Sihweil from J. O'Brien Re: Review of " Analysis 3
of Some of the Major Parameters Influencing)the Response Spectra for the Diablo Canyon Site (3 pages
- 21. 01/26/77 Note to File from D. Allison Re: Jack Anderson Column Concerning Diablo Canyon (2 pages) 1
- 22. 02/14/77 Note to File from D. Allison Re:-Conversation with Congressional Staff (2 pages)
- 23. 02/18/77 Letter to John Moss from Lee Gossick Re: Commission's Safety Reviews w/ enclosures Ltr. to John Moss from Lee Gossick and
~
Info. Re: Safety Reviews (26 pages)
- 24. 02/28/77 Memo to E. Case from Ben Rusche Re: DiabloCanyon(3pages)
Earthquake Occurrence Probability Data (1 page) yon Site, Memo to C. Stepp from I. Sihweil Re: Diablo Can
- 25. 03/14/77 Diablo Canyon Site
~26.
03/24/77 Memo to I. Sihweil from J. Stepp)Re:
OccurrenceProbabilities(1page l
- 27. 03/24/77 Memo to D. Eisenhut from L. Shao Re: Diablo Canyon Status Report (2pages) i
- 28. 03/31/77 Letter to Udall from Gossick w/ attached list of questions and responses and 2/9/77 letter to Rowden, NRC from Udall (42 pages) l 29.
6/3/77 Letter to Moss from Gossick w/ enclosures (8 pages)
- 30. 5/25/66 ~ Memo from Newell to Files re: Meeting w/PG&E re: proposed nuclear power plant sites (3 pages) This record addresses the 5/23/66 meeting i
-n-n.----,_--c+--__
>e FOIA-86-371 (FirstPartial)
APPENDIX B Portion of Record Deleted Exemption 6 1.
04/22/76 Memo to Ben Rusche from R. Boyd Re: Dr. N. Newmark's Review of the Diablo Canyon Seismic Design w/ enclosure Evaluation Pages from transcript Biographical Data - Nathan Newmark (14pages) l e
l'
F01A/86-371 (FirstPartial)
APPENDIX C The records identified by the following dates in Part A of the request are maintained in PDR folder F0IA 76-411:
11/16/74 3/10/75 10/24/76 11/17/75 1/5/76 1/13/76 1/21/76 2/4/76 3/23/76 4/1/76 4/20/76 4/21/76 8/5/76 9/9/76 11/23/76 11/29/76 i
i f
1 i
-w
- - - - -. - - - ~ - - - -
-n
,,.-~,,w,-
-~-.,-+__.-,-v..,.--n_--.,-.,v_-~
e F01A/86-371 (First Partial)
-APPENDIX D The records identified by following dates in Part A of the request have been referred to other agencies for disclosure determinations:
6/12/70 Referred to Department of Copenerce 12/24/75 Referred to Department of Interior U.S.G.S.
1/12/76 Referred to Department of Interior U.S.G.S.
1 1
s l-l l
i
f
- g... _,i (a
,'m, mm.
t
,I C:UcLean REcutATany coumisslON M
k i
I erAssosecroev.o.c.sossa gw...../
c e s
L
. yf g
MTLC. MC @WY 19 % -1977
\\
D O CRANDUM FOR: Thomas J. NcTiernan, Director' Office of Inspector and Auditor FROM:
Edson C. Case, Acting Director Office of Nuclear Rasctor Regulation SUS /ECT:
JUSTICE MQUEST RIGARDING DIABLO CANYON
- As you requested, enclosed is a chronology of events and the associated docunents from the NRR staff's review of the selssic concerns result-ing from faults in the vicinity of the Diablo Canyon site. Also enclosed is a thronology prepared by the Project Manager which addresses the staff's overall review activities associated with the Diablo Canyon application.
The chronologies prepared by 18E and CELD are being provided separately (s
by those offices as you suggested.
If further assistance or additional information is required, do not hes.itate to call.
e-
{
On Edson C. Case, ting Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Enclosurd:
As stated 8*.
- fif
~
r...
d
(.b G W GO N h,g.
j e
,.4
,o
(
{
e i
j CHRONotDCY OF PRINCIPAL EVENTS t
FAULT ASSESS @frS
'DIABLO CAWON 8175 "fuNTTs 1 and 2) s The attached chronologt and associated documents are intended to pro-vide a summary of the NRR staff's review of seismic concerns resulting from faults in the vicinity of the* Diablo Canyon site. In preparing this chronology and selecting tho'e documents to be pwvided, the s
followi,ng guidelines were tised:
All documents which addresh faulting in the plant environs or the' magnitude of the'oarthquale that foms the basis for deriving an effective hccelention for input into the i
process leading to seismic design analysis are included.
Documents which address the 6cceptability of the various sosponents to meet *this seismic design are act included.
Correspon3ence 6f a routine administrative nature such as j
forwarding of PSAR/FSAR, amen 8ments to staff consultants is l
not included.
All PSAR/FSAR smendment receipts are indicated but those which addressed fault related infomation are called out.
I l
Copies of each amen &oent do not exist at Central Files
- but are available 6n altrofiche at the NRC Public Document Room; Excerpts from the referenced' documents are provided in some cases to indicate'the state of review which existed at that time. The excerpt is not intended to be a complete
~
shamary of the material addrested in the documents.
Weekly reports prepkred by'the staff en the status of the Diablo Canyon fault review are not listed in the chronology but are included with the documents provided.
h e
e
.--,---,,,-,-----w-._,.----,---~-,m
- ~ - -. - -
i
. s.
,(,.q C
C.
e 1
(.
CNRON0 LOGY OF PRINCIPAt TVENTS
')'AULTA$$ES$MENTS RfABLO CANYON SITE IUnits 1 and 2)
Constru'etion Permit Review 1
May 23,1966 AfC-DAL staff set to discuss
/
Pactfic Gas and tiectric Company's pre 11stnary plans for a nuclear plant at several proposed loca-tions.
(May 25,1966 seating summary attached.)
i
'The major safety problem for either site would be associated with the earthquake potential and the possibility of faults pa'ssing through the site. In this respect the Diablo Canyon site would~ appear to be more favorably situated since it is further removed from the known active earthquake faults in the h.
' region.'
September 26, 1966 Paciffe Sas and Electric Company 1etter describing trenching emple"-
ration at the site (attached).
f..*.
. September 30, 1966 '
Pacific Ses and Electric Company submits preliminary site report f*
and requests AIC-DRL review (attached).
"No lerne of active fault is known to exist within the site l
area. The site is forty or fifty miles west of the San Andreas Fault. The Nacimiento Fault is about twenty to thirty miles away, but it is not considered active. There are other mappable faults with a northwest-southeast trend at varying places in the Coast Ranges however, no major faults have been mapped near the Diablo Canyon site."
October 7.1966 AIC-DRL letter to Coast and geodetic
. Survey rsquesting seismological review sT site (attached).
- 9 e
e.
.... em
.....o me..
enee.
_e
....o mmune
(
z s.
y geolo instruseEtation and contrb,,turbineafssiles,teactor core and containment design and angineered safety features.
(May 18,1967 meeting summary attached.)
'The applicant was requested to present a plot of the plant g,
layout, locating the trenches and the known faults in relation i
to plant structures."
Aprf128,1987
- Memo sumarizing phone call free' PG4E concerning establishment of a e
new design spectra (ettached).,
my 5,1967 AEC-DRL 1etter requests additional information en site and structural 1
design (attached).
May 15,1957 AEC-DRL and ACR5 staff met to discuss sefsnic design af Diable Canyon reactor.
May 25, 1967 meeting summary a(ttached.)
e i
IC'
/uly10,1967 Pacific Cas and Electric Company submits Amendment No. I responding to questions in DRL's May 5,1962 lettar.
~
July 19,1957 ACR$ subcomittee visit of proposed i
site.
July 24,1967 Pacf fic Ces and Electric Company submits Amendment No. 2 responding to questions in DAL's May 5,1967 e-letter.
July 31, 1967 Pacific Ces and Electric Company submits Amendment No. 3 responding s-to DRL's May 5,19671etter and provides supplemental information en afte geo1egy.
- August 15,'1967 AEC-DRL staff met to review seismic design Bases.
August 17, 1967 meetngsummary(attached.)
=
<--,r,m e-w--
--n p y w w,
- gme y.,
o mvm mm e,-w--,-_
(
g oo
=
s.,
~
October 5.1967
'ACR5 Comittee met to dfscuss technical aspects of proposed summary %pcated.) (No meeting reactor a.nd site.
s October 18, 1967 Paciffe tas aid Tiectric Company submits Amendment No. 5 supplying i
su)plemental.information en setsste design.
November 6.1967 Pacific Sas and Electric Company submits Amendment No. 8.
November 9.1967 Pacific Cas and Electric Compay
.submtts Amendment No. 7.
November 29, 1967 Pacific 8as and Electric Compay submits Amendment No. S.
. December 1.1967 ACR$ Subcommittee met to discuss summary located.) (No setting proposed reactor.
i
!('
' December 5,1967 Paciffe Sas and Electric Company t
submits Amendment No. 9.
{
Secember 7.1967 ACR5 Co r.fttee met to discuss proposed reactor. (Nomeeting sumary located.)
" December 20, 1967 ACR$ Report issued (attached).
January 16, 1988 Atc.DRL 1etter to N. Newmark Fegarding h{s input to the staff'S SER (attached).
January 22. 1968 Letter from N. Newmark forwarding modifications to his SER input
)
(attached).
i January 23, 1968 Atc.DRL staff issues safety Evalva-1 j
tfon for Unit 1 (attached).
e 3
l(
1 1
Ll
*-*VCw*f
--paTwN_
T
---7 e s w we-ewomew w'w e--e-'w--e-yamm'-eeur w -ww MWD w N*
N
e-
. y.
- o.
(
t s
e
(.
- October 16,1959 Acts Report issueE for Unit 2 (attached).
Alovember 18. 1969 AEC-DRL staff issues Safety Evalv-atton of proposed Unit 2 et Diablo Canyon site (attached).
January 13-14. 1970 An Atoett Safety and Licensing -
Board conducts a public hearfog in Son Luis Obispo. Californfa.
June 15. %970 Letter from Coast nd 8eodetic **
' ' jurvey to AEC re'gu, atory staff providing evaluation of certata salsalc 1ssues *(attached).
t
/ *It is the conclusion of the Coast and teodetic Su'vey that the offshore earthquake activity and Edna Fault Zone do not have a.
r significant bearing on the earthquake potential for this sita because they present a hazard such less than than already con-sidered in the evaluation of the site."
e July 15.1970 Atomic Safety and Lftensing Board reopenfng ef bearfag.
August 7.1970 Nearfag reconvenes in San Luis Obispo. Callfornia.
e-petember 8,1970 Initial Decision of ASLS erders fasvance of a construction permit.
Decision discusses considerations ef. geology and sefsmology, intervenors' tontentions andrationale for accept-fag proposed design basis (attached).
~
December 9,1970 Notice of Issuance of Provisional -
Construetion Persft.
Becember 9,1970 provisional Construction Permit flo. CPPR.691ssued.
. June 1.1973 Issued Final Invironmental state-ment for Units 1 and 2.(attached).
- e f
e e
,.,.,. T
~. ~
-t------------
1.. -;
C
(
e
(.
t October 25, 1973 Site visit and meeting related to geology and sofssology.
(October 31, 1973 seating summary attached.)
a
- The staff has requested additional information en offshore t
faults. PG&E fndicated that this subject is discussed to some
. extent in a report by Noskins and Griffith, Reference 17, 4
i page 2.5-83 of the FSAR, but that more recent information is expected from the USGS wrk befng funded by the AEC. The results' of this wrk should be avaflable about the afddle of November i
1973.*
November 19, 1973 -
Subelttal of Amendment No.1 i
l.
- consisting of afscellaneous revised and additlonal pages of the FSAR.
November 19,1973 Staff nottffed by USGS of the l
. discovery of possible offshore
[>
faults in the vicinity of Ofablo Carpen.
D'ovember II.1973 Staff memorandes discussing the
(
- (
newly reported fault (attached).
i
'On November 19, 1973 I ws informed by Dr. E. N. Saltz, Jr.,
W5GS Wagne,r of their Menlo Park office concerning a fault which
. =
- 4
- recently been discovered about two alles offshore of Diable 1
Ca n,, yon. Mr. Wagner reported that an offset was noted en the l
ecean floor en three crossings and, although the records have not yet been analyzed, he feels that there is little doubt that the offset is,a fault scary."
, December 13, 1974 Subetttal of pre 1(afnary geological information related to slope stability (cover letter attached).
December 21,'1973 Letter to app 1(cant confirstng the safety revfew sche.dule for Ofable Cartyon (attached).
- Presently, there are several fsportant itees en which we requfre significant additional information, e.g., possible effects of newly discovered geologic fa'ults, effects of tsunants caused by potential nearshore generators, and slope stablitty field work and analysts. Your failure to provide the required information e
g
- 2. >.:." ;, -
c c
~
S
(
n.s March 28,1974 U.S. Geological Survey letter forwardfag the results of their FeVIew ef the FSAR (attached).
- 0ns feature, howeverg for trhich adequale4nformation is not t.
provided is an offshore fault er structuralhne which has been recognfred since presentation and review of the Preltsinary Safety Analysis Report (PSAR)."
'Secause of the apparent 1ennth and proxfatty of the offshore.
- sone to the site, consideratoon of the zone as another possible source of a maxfaus earthquake in addition to the four proposed by the appilcant say be necessary.
Until deffattive information is presented to demonstrate otherwise, prudence requires that 4
the sone be considered capable."
krch 39,1974 Subalital of Asentee't No. $
n consisting of afscellaneous revised and addittenal pages of the FSAR.-
April 15,1974 Subatttal of Amendment No. 7 '
g consisting of afscellaneous revised C. 's and additional pages of the FSAR.
Aprf) 28,1974 Meeting with applicant to disevss offahera geology and seIsoology, (May15,1974 seating sunrsary e
attached.)
"The staff asked PG&E and their consultants to swearize how they plan to respond to our concerns regarding offshore faulta.
Doug Hamilton. indicated that they will utilfte all existing,
offshore data, including the work of Hoskins-Griffith in the preparation of their report.
some addittenal 'effshore survey trork in ar PG&E is con,templa In addition
.t eas fairly close to the plant sita."
April 30-May 1.1974 Conclusion of the first Operating Licensing Prehearing Conference.
m y 2, 1974 Staff Gemorandum identifying outstanding items in the Ofable Canyon safety rovfew (attached).
m y 13, 1974 Submittal of Amendment No. 8 consisting of partial response to the staff a roguests for addittenal informatfen.
4 O
e
....b':*l,..
(
(
33 -
i
'g surveys requested by the staff (cover letter attached).
August 2,1974 Subatital of Amend 4ent No.14.
Augus't' 5,1974 Subalttal of Amendment No.15.
l August 16, 1974 Subatital of Amendment No.16.
september 3,1974 Submittal of Amenhent No.'17.
I Sept' ember 5,1974 Staff memorandum roviding's l
. status of the geogogy and safsmology.
portion of Ofablo Canyon review j
(attached).
1
'With regard to evaluation of the stesafe potential of the l
offshore faults in the vicinit USG5 will peed to review PG&t'y of Diablo Canyon, the staff and s report before a final deterufna-
. tion can be made. The staff did conclude after the July 5,1974 seating that PG&E had undertaken a very comprehensive offshore i
field program. However, the feeling stf11 prevaf1s that it will be extremely difficult to establish the capability of these
,, 8 faults using conventional datint methods."
)
September 12,1974 ACR$ Subcosofttee meeting emphasfa-i ing Geology and safsmology and ICCS-Appendix K evaluations.
(September 27,1974 meeting sumnary i
~
i attached.)
'The mejority of the remaining portten of the meeting was devoted to a detafled and sofsmology, presentation by PG&t's consultants'en the geology i
of the central Calf fornfa coastal regfon. includtag both enshore and offshore areas.
The presentation was handled chiefly by,0. N. Hanf1 ten of Earth 5ctances Associates.*
i October 16,1974 Safety Evaluation Report issued l
(attached).
i l
October 22, 1974 Submf ttal of Amendment No.18.
November 1,1974 Letter to applicant informing his of changes in the safety rev"ew l
schedula (ettached).
l
\\
1
.;. " l l-(
~ 15 -
January 16, 1975 Submittal of Amendment No. 24.
January 28. 1975 5.5. Geological Survey' letter forwarding theft report of geolo and sefsmologic data (attachad).gic
'However, in conclusfon, we believe that with the Ifsit of the of the test Soundary fault to the Santa Lucia B earthquake similar to the November 4 1927 event but occurring along the East Soundary Zone er the bnta Lucia Bank fault zo represents the maxfaum earthquake that is likely to occur sear to the site.
considered fa the constructfon permit evaluati hearin valid.gs 'and reviews. As long as this interpretation remains 1t is our opfafon that the design value of 0.5 sere period acceleration in the development of the appropriate 3 veed as a eesponse spectra is inadequate.'
January 30, 1975 Staff memorandum forwarding proposed geology and seismology section for
,.1 5tR supplement (attached).
January 30. 1975 Sutriittal of Amendment No. 25.
January 31. 1975 Sup lement No. I to the sefety,
Evapuntion Report issued (attac region and its relationship to earthquake occ t
~.
altered by the subsequent de, tailed offshore investigations (tscussedpreyfously.
of the Hosgri fault zone is continutngs we will provide ou conclusions en this matter in a future supplement to the SCR.*
I January 31.19f5 Staff set with USGS to dfscuss Diablo Canyon geology and setssel-egy. (February 24 sumary attached.) 1975 setting February 4. 1975 Staff menorandum regarding USG5 seismic evaluation (attached)..
'The USGs letter af January.28 higher accelerations are approp.1975 4ep1tes that significantly riate. On Ja
, set with the USGS to discuss thetr concerns,nuary al.1975 we some of which were s
O
___m i.mm__.m._.2-
.-__._-.__a.-
a t
e.
(
(
o o
i e
- st -
l mrch 3D,1975 staff memorand Canyon and other safsmic issue (attached).
. k...rch 25,1975 Submittal of Amendment No. 2
(
March 31,1975 of Diable Canyon review i
April 4,1975 meting with arplicant to discuss items relative to the so g
desten of Diablo Canyon.fsmic (May8 1975 setting svanary attached.),
of the Diablo Canyon sefsafe design.'The s i
l mation and seat with individuals l
aspects.'
3 i
April 10,1975 Second Oper Conference.ating License Prahaaring
{
,f 8
April 28.May 2.1975
.\\
i g
desfen at PG4E offices in Sa I
i Francisco.
susary of h(May 19,1975 staff tshlights attsched4 i 'At the closing of the audit meeting. NRC avitt st l that based upon the above described results design controls implemented for the p I
I j
I i se,tisfactory and acceptable."
{
vnd April 30,1975 m y 8. 1975 Submittal of Amendment No. 27.
Staff memorandas of SER (attached)providing status m y 9,1975 Supplement No. I to the Safety May 15, 1975 tvaluation Report issued (attached).
May 23. 1975 Submittal of Amendment No. 28.
\\
ACA5 Subcomnittee meetin
'7 in Los Angeles 1975 meeting. Calf fornfa.g(June 1 t
sunnary attached).
I 8
2
(
~
r
)
o g
19 g
=
- to the staff's request for addi-Sfonal inforsiation on geology and
'sefsmology dated February 12, 1975.
September 18, 1975 Supplemerft gp. 3 to the Safety Evaluation gQ,fssued(attached).
September 26,1975 Letter to app 1(cant regardfag j
outstanding issues and requesting schedule for submittin information (attached)g additional October 8,1975 Subalttal of Ae'endment No. 35 includine partfal response to i
49estfons dated February 12,1975.
- Sctober 21,1975 Substttal of Amendment No. 35.
October 24, 1975 Staff senorande regarding safsafe stabillty of cut slope (attached).
October 30, 1975 Submittal of Asenenent'No. 37 facorporating c88pletion of responses to request for informa-(. I,,
i sfon dated February 12, 1975.
t November 11,1975 Letter free applicant subeltting
- Peporta entitled "Talesefsate Location of the 1927 Lompoc Earth-l quake" and 'Aftershocks of the 1927 Leopoc farthquake" (cover i
e 1etter attached).
\\
j November 12, 1975 Letter free applicant submitting toport entitled ' Western Geo-physical Cocpany and Shell 011 Company Proprietary 5efsafe Reflec-ifon Data from the Offshore Region i
between point Estere and Point j
Arguello: Basic Data, Interpre -
l ifve Data and Discussion,' and toquesting that the report be
=
withheld from public disclosure as proprfetary data (cover letter attached).
i i
g i
e e
e
l
.3.
C C
(
21 December 24,1975 Staff memorandue regarding USGs t
report (attached).
- The draft USGi report is due to es today. Prelfstnary indica-
"tfons are that the USGS will. ence again recomend re the proposed design basis earthquake for,this plant.*,lecting l
1 December 24,1975 f,etter from USGS to NRC staff goviding draft report on Diable von (attached).
\\
- For reasons stated in subsequent parts of this review, how.
ever, the magni.tude of the design basis earthquake for the Diable Canyon nuclear reactor site should be in the range of 7.0 to 7.5 and located on the Hosgrf fault zone. This is based principally i
en the fact that the Npvember 4. Ig27 earthquake had a magnitude of 7 3 and that the best estimates of its location indicata that it could have occurred on,the Nosgri fault."
January 5,1978 Staff semorandum recomending i
upper management meetings en j
Stablo Cavon review (at4ched). *
' Clearly we can benefit from further discussions with USGS at e lower level before they send their formal recomendation. Now-i ever, in 11ght of the serious nature of the decision we must j
make, the unknown quality of the USGS recomendation and the l
. extra difficulty involved in reversing a USGS opinion after it.
is published, we recomend contracting top management at the Department of Interior and expressing our need for an feediate occelerated reevaluation of tse geologic situation, including:
- 1. The indep'endent opfatons of several top USGS geologists not heretofore directly involved in the Diablo Canyon j
- review, 1
- 2. A clear expression of the technical reasoning which can be discussed meaningfully with the staff.
\\
In addition we should (mediately retain additional top geologists directly as, consultants and initiate further independent review on our own. Depending on how sickly we take action. the results may er mag not be completed in (tira to support the schedule for Ifeen.
i sing.
i l
1 h
a
. nn r
2,r.
.=
z-g-
g\\
- response to a retvest for informa tion dated November 14 1976 and requestfag that the rep, ort be
.~
i withheld from public disclosure as
... ~.
attached).y data (cover letter proprfetar f
January 21, 1976 Staff memorandus regarding speeming seating with pG4E en USGS geologie review (attached).
i-January 29, 1976 Staff asso'anda summarfzfag r
meeting with Newmark Hall and USC5 (attached, plus, February 2 i
1976 supp1 ament).
I
'It was seating. generally agreed that frogress had been made'at the i
The staff s engineerin concerns, while more fully expressed, trera not apparently a leviated to any of nf ficant degree.
They now constitute the major barrier to t sely and favorable resolution of the satter February 2,1976 Subetttal of Amendment No. 39.
February 4, 1976 Neeting with Newmark and Nall ta
~
l diseuss 9eology and seismology.,,
(February 17,1976 aceting summary attached.)
4 "We agreed to inform the applicant of the essential points of
{
of a parallel pr,to indicate the perf t of his independent pursuit eur program and ogram since we would not expect to make a conclu-i sfon on the issues involved untti he has provided his analysis i
and conclusions.
The applicant should be able to complete his l
work before.we complete ours."
l February 5,1976 Meeting wtth applicant and USC5 to efscuss geology and safssology.
(March 4, 1976 seating summary attached.)
"The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the differences of epf alon which had arisen regarding geology and seismology at this site, to hear pC&E's v"evs regarding such differences and is give pG&E eur views and those of the U545.*
March 2, 1976 Letter from app 1(cant sube'f tting~ a report entitled "A Ofscussfei ef the A.M 11cstfer.,of the Hf;- ti *.
Prccest, to hencern Geophysical e
p
a
(
(
35 -
,h
- pG&E representatives stated thc', although they did not egree that the earthquake magnitude should be 7.5 with the analysis as quickly as possible.', they would proceed e
i April 30,,1976 Staff memorandum regarding Sernreuter's progress (attached).
April 21,1976 Staff senorandum summarizing conversation with San Luis Obis g
)
newspaper reportar (attached). po l
i Aprf121.1976 Staff letter forwarding USGS toports to California Energy l
CanalssIon (attached).
Aprf) 22, 1976 Statf memorandum regarding cont 11ct 3
of interest question associated withNewmark(attached)..
Aprf) 29.1975 Letter fres USGS to NRC staff reviding report en Diable Cagon attached)
"For reaso'ns stated in subsequent parts of this review, howe the magnf tede of the design basis earthquake for the Diable is Canyon nuclear reacter site should be about 7.5 and located on the Nosgrf fault zone.
This is based prir.cfpally en the fact that the November 4,1927 earthquake.had a magnitude of 7.3 and
==
that the best estfastes of its location indicate that it could
~
{
have occurred on the Hosgrl fault.
]
Furthermore, the range in magnitude is compatible with the largest recorded er estlastad sagnitudes of earthquakes that have occurred on substdf ary faulta in the San Andreas systaa."
May 11, 1975 supplement No. 4 to the safety Evaluatten Report issued (attached).
. 'The U.S. Geological Survey concluded that a magnitude 7.5 earthquake could occur en the Hongri fault As stated in Appen-dix C to this supplement, the survey's repo.
rt is intended ta into.the process leading to safssic design analysis the Ofable Cayon Nuclear power Statten)." -this case wi1 e
e
.,--n_
o L'
. ty.
\\
July S.1976 ACR5 Full Comefttee meeting in Washfasten meeting sum. D.C.. (July 30,1376 mary attached),
g, July 29.1976 "52ty 29,1976 Schmittal of Amendment No. 44.
. Submittal of Amendment No. 45 Including information concerning reevaluation of seisoft design sapabilities.
l August 5.1976
. Staff memorandus regarding com*.
August 11,1g74
- parisons of design spectra (attached) heting with app 1tcant concerning '
toevalustfon of seismic design capahtlities metting summa. (August 25. 1976 ry attached.)
August 27, 1976 1
Meeting with applicant concerning reevaluation of seismic desi aseting sunna. (September 14.gn capabilities 1
1376
(~,,.~~
ry attached).
i t,
August 27. 1976 Staff samorandus discussing sse of i
proper design response spectra (attached).
Sep*tember 7.1976 w
heting with app 1fcant concerning reevaluation of setsste design capabillties (attached).
September 9.1976 Staff senorandum regarding compar-ison of desfgn spectra (attached).
September 10. 1976 Supplement No. 5 to safety Evalua; tion Report issued (attach.ed).
s'upplement, discusses,the effective hori tion (0.753) and presents the rationale that it is based upo As stated fn supplement No. 4 to the Safety Evaluation we have accepted Dr. Newaark's recommendation."
U l
I 1
\\
e en mse
.... m ee
. -emmuun
.e.
e-en --
-eummune een en me. eum
= es
,-,m-~+---,,---,,,-e
,,,,an_.
e -
+--------------~~v
---,w
,r "
~
(*
(-
. t'9 - %
January 5.1977
- Neettng with spp11 cant to disevss
~
~
sefsnic desfgn reevaluation.
(January 2.1977 seating summary attached
""" *pG8E fndicated its intentfon to respond all of the concerns raised in the coments.
11y as possible to developed spectfic information concerning the nature of itsPG8E responses or the schedule for providing them. p0&E fndicated
'that this spectfic information would be available fa the near future.'
January 7.1977
~
Submittal of Amendment No. 46.
January 10.1~977."
Staff samorandum svanarfafag review of Serareuter and Wight report on parameters influencing response spectra (attached).
January 25.1977 Staff senorandus sumarizing g.
conversation with San Luis Obispo reporter (attached).
(,*
F,ebruary 4.1977
- mating with applicant to disevss sefsafe design reevaluation. CMay 18 1977 seating senary (attachedk "pG&E presented a specification that described the eethods and criteria proposed for use in reevaluating the major structures.
These proposals were discussed and varfous changes were made to the s'pecification during the meeting. At the conclusion of the asettal we indicated to pG&E that the proposed methods and.
criters as changed during the meeting, would be acceptable to the NRC staff.*
P.
February 14,1977 Staff memorandum sumarfrfn h
sonversation with Congressifnal 1
e staff (attached).
i February 18. 1977 Staff letter to House Subcomittee en Oversight and Investigations' pro-vfding sumartes of reviews conducted by and for the Comission regarding i
the Diable Caen site (attached).
i k
i 1
Q
)
as s
t,,
- 31 e fisy 3. 1977 Meeting w(ith applicant on sefsafs deslan.
June 29,1977 setting surcary attached.)
'In a letter dated March 13. 1977 afa Energy Resources Conservation and Developm the KRC staff had outifned the material that t would allow plaat operation while the sa ed being completed."
'The purpose of the meetin concerning this material."g was to discuss further details -
1 Ane 2.1977 fleeting w(ith applicant en satsafe desfgn.
June 29. 1977 setting sumary attached.)
'In order to justify a full ters e >erating Ifcense. PG8E wod1d I
need to complete the sefsafe reeva untion at 0.75 i
PGLE that in performing this reevaluation they should co 3
We informed
- p...
'the calculated loads resulting from a postulated loss earthquake at 0.75.* accident with the calculated loads r
}
3 4
' June 3.1977 Staff letter to Hou'se Subcomittee en Oversight and Investigations pr j
vfding additional information con o-terning Diablo Canyon review (attached i
~
i
&ne 21-t3,1977 ACR$ Subcomittee seating.
(Jul 1977 meeting sumary attached.) y 15
&ne 30,1977 Staff testifies before Subcomittee en Energy and the Enyfronment of the Ibuse Interfor and Insular Affairs Comittee (transcript attached
- July 14,1977 Supplement No. S to the safety Evalv-stfon Report issued (attached).
July 18, 1977 Staff memorandum regarding release of faternal documents requested by Repre-sentatf~ve Udall (ettsched).
July 28. 1977 Staff annorandum facluding ACR5 con-sultant coments (attached).
I e
--