ML20215N019
| ML20215N019 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, Diablo Canyon |
| Issue date: | 10/04/1967 |
| From: | Morris P US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | Price H US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20197J003 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-86-371 NUDOCS 8611040179 | |
| Download: ML20215N019 (1) | |
Text
\\
T*
.Pn,ce_ -
w-
't p.p C,"" "C'" j..
h
~
C.$
+-
y UNITED STATES COVERNMENT j aMI'.
N Memorandum ud=.M p..
o To Harold L. Price DATE: October 4, l'967 Director of Regulation FROM :
P. A. Morris, Director i
Division of Reactor Licensing SUBJEcr:
PG&E DIABLO CANYON PLANT We identified the problem of adequate design with respect to earth-quakes for the PG&E Diablo Canyon plant at our first meeting with PG&E and Westinghouse in March of this year (application filed on January 18, 1967). We have had continuing discussions with the applicant and have requested in ' writing information regarding seismic design.
The most recent meeting, including our consultant Dr. William Hall, was held on October 3, to further discuss this problem, based on information received in writing in August and before.
Dr. Hall has reported that he and Dr. Newmark consider the written material unintelligible. Further, Dr. Hall reported that the results of yesterday's meeting were unsatisfactory.
An ACRS subcommittee meeting is being held today.
Dr. Okrent has previously announced that he believes this case is the one on which to really come to grips with the seismic design problem. Dave is NN the chairman of the ACRS subcommittee on seismic design and attended the Tokyo conference on this subject.
We believe, based on discussions with Westinghouse, that the core design is probably all right, but that the supports for the reactor vessel and other heavy equipment for this reactor and other Westing-house designs may present some problems. However, we do not have the documentation needed to complete our review of this matter. The l
applicant has agreed to provide the information we need.
We have taken the position-based on our consultant's advice--that adequate seismic design must be supported by the applicant in writing.
Since we are not able to take a final position on the adequacy of the seismic design, there is a possibility that the ACRS subcommittee will recommend no October full committee meeting. We already have strongly urged that Diablo be on the October agenda-especially since PG&E and Westinghouse have not yet responded adequately-in order to get strong ACRS support for our position.
10 9 861023 deC'd Wi.)Yp. Of rieg.
ir D& N bl 1
HOUCHSb-371 PDR
((Tna c
%th.
/
Buy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularl.y on the Payroll Savings Plan A=
E
-. f-i
,