ML19305B725

Forwards Analysis of C Newhall Volcanological Review. Analysis Is Based on Several Erroneous Preconceptions. Assumes That Mount Natib Was Active Volcano During Holocene Era.Volcano Is Relatively Old & Deeply Weathered

ML19305B725
Person / Time
Site:	05000574
Issue date:	03/13/1980
From:	Hazak J EBASCO SERVICES, INC.
To:	James Shea NRC OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS (OIP)
Shared Package
ML19305B722	List: ML19305B725
References
NUDOCS 8003200143
Download: ML19305B725 (26)

Text

myg...mm~ .gn.+ mm -rc - - ~ - .e -

~

p

. *.%

• ps y. '--,~e 'y.h. u- j EB ASCO SERVICES INCORPORdTED h l'%.)N Two Worid ira::e Cemer. New York. KY.10048 i i

h Mr. James Shea, Director 9 9

D Office of International Programs g mm9 'g~hph %h j U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 b *{ b "

i d

f 2 ' I ubject:[ S PNPP Unit 1 - Volcanological Review by C. Newhall ]

@::.- h i

Dear I b 7. h p; W yQ':

Mr. -Shea: . - -

i

'X_ "

j Mr. Newhall is~ a lucid though specious writer who displays intimate

. acquaintance with much current thought in the field of volcanology. However, i without even claiming to have set foot on the Bataan Peninsula, Mr. Newhall, '

a student, alleges that there are serious scientific shortcomings in the volcanological studies for this plant. Ebasco categorically denics that  ;

allegation. Ebasco participants in the geological investigation leading to j

, the NPC-Ebasco deter =1 nations and positions on the siting of PKPP-1 inclCded f

41 scientists and engineers, 18 with Ph.D degrees, who jointly have over t

500 can years of post-acade=ic experience. This group spent some 70 can years of intensive effort of which 19 =an-years were on Bataan and in the Philippines. A li'st of Ebasco staff participants, consultants and members 3 of the Technical Review Board is enclosed as Table 1. In addition, '

throughout the course of the investigation, they were assisted by as many as six to eight Philippine counterpart staff scientists and engineers. N Consultants who reviewed work in the Philippines with Ebasco staff and other  ;

co,nsultants included Dr. Alex McBirney, Professor of Tolcanology at the University of Oregon and editor of the Journal of Volcanology and Grothermal Research, and Dr. Arturo Alcaraz, the pre-e=inent Philippine volcanologist and author of numerous publications on volcanism in the Philippines. The geological work of Ebasco and the Ebasco consultants have withstood rigorous peer review, most recently by expert consultants to the Philippine Puno Co==ission. Ebasco is confident that this work would withstand rigorous ,

scientific interchange with Mr. Newhall.

We believe that much of Mr. Newhall's criticism is founded on several =ajor -

errone'ous preconceived ideas. First and. foremost, he appears to assu=e -

that Mt. Natib has been active during the Holocene, like all of the vol-sanoes he has studied. Secondly, he assumes that the techniques and procedures applicable for the preparatica of a Ph.D thesis on Holocene .

veic'anoes are necessarily useful, valid and applicable to a siting and SAR study on a relatively old, deeply weathered volcano. Tnirdly, he has i serious isunderstandings of the capabilities of the dati,,ng techniques used in the study. Fourthly, he fails to adequately differentiate between the a=ount of infor=ation which can reasonably be obtained about volcanic  :

[

l E RPO 8003 200143

, . , . _ . -n..._. - .

. a- w. .

~. .o : . .

activity from the historical record and that which is available in the geologic record. Because these and other erreneous assusprions for= the  ;

int,ellectual underpinning for much of his review, cany of the conclusions . I which he reaches are simply not supportable.

Mr. Newhall contributes to tha misapprehension that the Philippine plant

~

~

site is uniquely or dangerously exposed to geological hazards. As can be .

seen on the attached Figure 1 and Table 2, a nu=ber of nuclear power

... plants .:4a the world are located closer to active volcances than is the

'~G[Philippineplant. Mtr Natib cannot be considered an active volcano by

'J,. g ..any ac,cepted definition;_in conventional geologic tercs, Mt. Natib is t-iextinct. "' c H < .

~-'

. .- t .

it' is particularly unfortunate that Mr. Newnall has seen fit to make the

~

i kinds. of criticisms which he has cade given the fact that he did not review a substantial portion of the documents available that relate to. volcanism. l As can be seen from the attached Table 2, over a' dozen documents and reports which describe volcanism, volcanic hazards, and the planned -

engineering and administrative response to them were not reviewed by ,

. Mr. Newhall. -

Fipally, Mr. Newhall urges the NRC to proceed to establish volcanological siting and design criteria. Our considered. opinion is that the International Atomic Energy Agency is the appropriate agency to lead any cove toward the establishment of such guidelines, as is indicated by the distribution of nuclear power plants.

Notwithstanding our consents above,16. Newhall has , produced a serious ))

review deserving of a serious scientific and technical response. That response is enclosed with this letter.  :

a Yours truly, u -

g

John T. Hazak Project }bnager .

NRT/PS/cq

Enclosure:

As above cc: file .

M l

. m -

.n ,

~..- .

...- . p i

t An Analysis of Newhall Review of FNPP-1

{

Mr. Newhall has conducted an extensive and detailed review of a portion of the documents related to volcanology. A point by point discussion .

of his co=ments would be inappropriate at,this ti=e, and we have not -

atte=pted to do so. Comments on his most pertinent points follow.

J Need For Detailed Studies .'

A n h. d * ~~'. ~~

T

~ l Mr. Newhall's most fundamental criticism, and the one on which =any of.

,Jis arguments are based, is that our failure to =ap and study Mt. Natib -

in detail leaves many of our conclusions in doubt. Newhall reasons that g "with tha detailed geologic base one can then say exactly where, when J and what types of eruptions occurred; without the detailed geolo'gy one l can only discuss generalities of eruptive style, age ranges and =inir.:s -

recurrence frequencies for various eruptive phenomena". This is not true. 3 The record that one gets from detailed =apping of the volcano, even if , ,

we could get it, is highly unrepresentative. It has the same proble=s he" t cited in dealing with the use of radiometric dates. It tells you only

[

about that part of the record that is preserved and visible. i Mr. Newhall's experience has apparently been confined to historically 3 active volcanoes, except for studies in the San Francisco volcanic 3 field in Arizona, last active a few thousands of years ago. In contrast, f the bulk of the rocks on Mt. Natib is over half a'tillion years old. Vol- '

canic breccia of laharic origin is the do inant rock. type. Lava flows I are generally restricted to su==it areas and are of very limited extent. l Traceable ash layers are virtually absent in the volcanic pile. Tens 6 of meters of saprollte are developed over the entire cone, except on "

the young pyroclastic deposits on the east side. Due to the deep -

weathering and lush vegetation, exposures are limited to radial strea valleys and the steep interior walls of the caldera.

Although the pre' paration of volcanic hazard maps would have provided g valuable information to city or industrial planners, our attention was

, focused on hazards to a single nuclear power plant site at Napot Point. }

Our perspective was and is directed toward determining hazards to one ]

y site f ro= all possible volcanoes, not the description of hazards to all j possible sites from-one or more volcanoes. Under these circu= stances, '

a plan of action was developed to direct our resources to the attainment of our final goals. Far from acade=ic mapping exercises and develop =ent of hazard maps for Central Luzon, we were interested only in the evaluation of hazards from Bataan volcanoes to a nuclear power plant site on the west side of the peninsula. To achieve this end, the ,

following gcals were set:

7 m . _- - . __

, ,~

1. Delineate sa=pl'e and date the absolute youngest deposits on Mt.

Natib. An extensive program of SLAR i=agery, ther=al IR, and color aL photography acquisition and analysis was co=pleted to aid in 4

, the location of the youngest volcanic deposits.

These data, coupled -

with topographic and field information pointed i==ediately to the material on the eastern flank of the cone as the youngest on Mt.

Natib. Th'e . =inor strea= dissection, lack of thick saprolite and the unweathered appearance of the caterial =ake this deposit unique and distinct on Mt. Natib.

li 2. . Deter =ine the characteristic types, volumes and extent of volcanic jf'k,_" , deposits on the cones. -

', ~ Each of the different eruptive products that could be p'roduced by '

' f the volcanoes (ash fall, pyroclastic flow, lahar, lava flows)  ;

'present different potential hazards. -Therefore, one aim of the field program was determination of the relative volu=es of the eruptive products, their extent, distribution, and e= place =ent characteristics. The lava flows, for exa:p.e, are restricted to su==it areas, are typically thick but not areally extensive, and f

, are strongly topographically controlled. They are, therefore, not ;'

considered a potential hazard to the plant site.

. ' Analysis of each hazard provided siting criteria that aided-in the choice of the final site, and provided design guidelines for dealing with those hazards deemed " credible".

, 3. Collect and analyze a suite of sa=ples to pr' vide o geochronological, geochemical, and paleo=agnetic data for development of a geologic history and statistical analysis of eruptive probability.

There is a tremendous difference between the study of active volcanoes in populated areas and the study of a several =illion year old cone that has had no activity in historic time. Mr. Newhall suggests that with detailed =aps and sections we would bc able to resolve "short ter= variations in eruptive style (e. g. , over 10's , 100's or 1000's

, of years)"* (page 21). A resolution of 10 years..in 1 million is

, _0.00001. We know of no applicable method, stratigraphic or analytical, capable of this resolving power. .

Age of Youngest Materials on Mt. Natib Since one of the pri=ary goals of the field progra= was locating, =apping, sa pling and datingthe youngest deposits on Mt. Natib, a tre=endous a=ount of ef fcrt was expended in that direction.

Analysis of re=ote sensing data, tcpographic =aps , and field =appi. n g all

, suggested that the pyroclastic =aterial on the east side of Mt. Nat'ib is the youngest eruptive caterial. The lack of a saprolite layer, distinctive smooth surface, minical dissection by streams, and general unweathered , s J

a~  !

l

- _ . . .y

. . g . _- _ . . ,  !

appearance indicate'the youth of the deposit. The unit was =apped and' found to be composed of several distinct flows; the stratigraphically youngest flow was sampled for che=ical, paleomagnetic, and age-dating analysis. .

Field data suggest that the 69,000 ybp age for these materials is reason-

=able. The moderately consolidated nature of this deposit suggests that

^

it is older than the youngest deposits on Mt. Pinatubo, which are not  ;

consolidated and are less than 10,000 years old. Thick (up to 100 meters) 4 sedimentary piles derived from this pyroclastic debris has been =apped in

~

H "several areas. It is hard to imagine that deposition, erosion, a6d .

][re-deposition- could occur in significantly shorter periods than we have

~

}

.,. .suggested.

q 9

3:o deposits were fo'und that were younger than this material. The Napot i tuff; for exa=ple, was overlain by several tens of neters of saprolitic breccia units, and was therefore clearly much older than the eas.t side

~

materials. Paleomagnetic work on sa=ples from the Unit 1 excavation  ;

yielded ages on the order of 500,000 to 700,000 years for younger 1 horizontal channel filling sediments and pyroclastics. Paleomagnetic 4

, ages for the Napot tuff are 1.6 my 1 0.25 ny. ~

We do not share Newhall's opinion that C-14 is the method of choice for dat'16g volcanic samples less than 60,000 years old. At best, this is an outdated textbook 'tatement. s The choice of method depends on many factors mor.e i=portant than age. One always hopes to find high uranium zircons i for fission track ages, or high potassium rocks with a low atmospheric argon content. Newhall places a great e=phasis on C-14 dates, seemingly unaware of the limitations of the techniques in actual practice. He states that " charcoal and wood are not well preserved on volcanoes in tropical cli=ates," but appears to be unaware that even with a large i degree of apparent preservation, significant alteration of the integrity -

of the original C-14 activity commonly takes place by recent action of micro and macro organisms and groundwater. In point of fact, every potential sa=ple of organic matter in the young pyroclastic blanket was determined to be too altered or conta=inated to date with C-14. Samples from .the saprdlites which blanket the rest of Mt. Natib were all obviously too altered for C-14 techniques to be useful in the unlikely

, event that this highly weathered material is less than 60,000 years old.

In point of fact, there is no reason to suspect that this saprolite is as young as 60,000 years.

Newhall's criticism of our geochronological technicues is apparently due to his lack of understanding of K-Ar dating and those factors which control its limitation. He states that "the lower limit of this method under ideal circumstances is approximately 50,000 years; the lower limit selected by Ebasco for reliable K-Ar ages on Natib rocks is approximately 180,000 - 200,000 years....". This is a critical =isunderstanding; for a number of his other criticies in both the section on geochronology and on probability of eruptions appears to be based on his erroneous opinien that there was a big gap in the^ time range over which our dating methods were applicable.

• 3

-%.- . , - - - m .- - q

,' ,- .k 4

!I The lower limit "of R-Ar dating "under ideal circumstances" is not 50,00'O h years. (The La Scha=p volcanics at 20,000 years are well dated by K-Ar.)

~

T The lower limit is not set by the' age of a rock, but by the difference T in.the 40Ar/36Ar ratio between the sample and atmosphere "under ideal circumstances", or the relative volumes of the radiogenic and atmospheric T components and the ability of the techniques to measure 40A ;/36 Ar.

amount of 36 Ar measured for all samples greatly exceeded that of the gas The [

~

extraction and mass spectrometer line blank as well as any absorbed ,

36 Ar component on the sample. The greatest amount of 36Ar measured I therefore resided in the rock and represents either argon dissolved in @

, the silicate melt or incorporated atmosphere at the time of eruption. ir

{

. < _- ~.-g.7 _

~

. Had'he studied the data for other volcanoes, he would have seen that our

' lower' limits for K-Ar ages were not 180,000 - 200,000 years. The lower p limit.for K-Ar dating varies from one sample to the next, and was not

" selected by Ebasco", but perhaps by mother nature. On Mt. Natib, the p lower limit of the K-Ar method was exceeded only by the punice sa=ples, , if primarily due to the relatively large amounts of atmospheric gases in- 5 corporated by pumice eruptions. It was only af ter argon analyses 'c revealed this large ctuospheric co:ponent that we rescored to the more time censu=ing fission track method and the less well established U-Th -

[

methods. }$.

His' statement that no K-Ar ages less than 200,000 years are to be expected is incorrect for the reasons given above. The 200,000 yrs. maximum age

[

{-

reported for sample 476-3W (Pinatubo) can not be applied to any other i sample. The fact is that for sa:ples 975-9W and 376-lG (both Pinatubo), [

the atmospheric co=pon'ent was so overwhelming that its K-Ar age could be i:

anywhere from one year to ten million years. Nevertheless, Ebasco

~

[:

rec.ognizes and documents the necent activity of Pinat'ubo, using geo- N chronology and other information. .

h We do not feel that our statement in the PSAR about hot lahars is mis-  :

' leading. We do feel that Mr. Newhall's statement that an eruption must I have occurred at the tice that the boulder was reheated is cisleading, however, as it is true only if outgassing of the boulder was co=pleted.

We also feel rhat his criticises of our dates of sa:ples 376-1G and .

97529W from Mt. Pinatubo are unwarrented. In both ca'ses, the problem I

, with the dating technique was the large atoospheric argon co=ponent,

• Vithout which quite low upper limits could have been set on the a'ge of these samples.

Mr., Newhall'.s criticisms of our paleocagnetic dating techniques are  !

also based on a misunderstanding of the basic , concepts used in paleo- [

magnetis=.

(a) No use was made of the inclination of the the Sore =anent f magnetization for any dating purposes. The declination was  ;

used. [t (b) The declination of the Napot Pcint TRM direction has normal  !.

polarity and varies from 330 to 351 . inis var 1ation of 21 I f,

6

y.._ .

=.v._ ~ ., ,

j

)

is la'rge,' larger than that found in non-pyroclastic entities."

It has been assu=ed that this variation is due to rotation 4 of =agnetic vectors during cocpaction.

~

(c) The' study has shown a steady counterclockwise rotation of the ,

declination of the TRM direction with time for radiometrically dated'.sa=ples. This rotation is due to a tectonic rotation of {

Luzon. The declinations thus can be used for relative dating. ." 1 The mean declination for Napot cbincides with that for Mt.  ;

San Cristobal, dated at 1. 60 1 0. 32 cy . This radiometric age l and the magnetic polarity place the San Cristobal rocks in the 4

..XFJ!c . .liGilsa Normal Event of. the Matuyama Reversed Epoch. The f.E N .

" ~~

statistically high noise level (21 )0 i= plies that, the age of ,

, the' tuff could vary by as much as 0.6 cy. Probability analysis based on the assu=ption of rando= cocpaction however, reduces .

this range to 0.25 my. Thus the Napot Tuff 1. 1.60 1 0.25 my.

(

Thus no circular reasoning was involved. . e mean declination i of the Napot Tuff was directly compared with the declination <

of the TRM in radiometrically dated lavas. Since the tuff overlies pyroclastics, the latter are older and probably of  ;

, Early Matuyama age.

• d Newhall's su==ary points on this subject are seriously in error:

~

(a) There are reliable age dates for Napot Point. These agree with the detailed stratigraphic evidence that the Point is well over 1 million years old.

(b) The youngest. rocks on Mt. Natib have clear,1y been dated.

Sa=ples on the western flanks were dated by the methods best suited for them, the K-Ar and paleomagnetic methods.

(c) We do have reliable methods to date in the range 60,000 to 200,000 yrs. A nu=ber of samples reported in the PSAR are within this range. Based on the large volume of data now available on Mt. Natib, we can rest assured that there is no evidence of volcanic activity on Mt. Natib.in tens of thousands of years.

Probability of Eruption Newhall has. compiled data that purport to show that " serious" eruptions in the Philippines'and Indonesia over the last 160 s years have been =cre frequent than presented by Ebasco. He does not give the data on this, so it is impossible to co= pare the eruptions we have counted, but we are confident that the reason for the difference lies in the fact that he is. counting =uch s= aller eruptions and in many cases must be counting different phases of a series of events as different eruptions rather 2an a single one. Moreover, he has calculated his " volcanic explosi- ,

' O-D]

..~,

~._ , . . .--

7

?

vity index" in a way which includes. eruptions that would not have presented a serious hazard. We believe that this has happened because _

he probably takes the cumulative discharge for a prolonged period of activity and comes up ud ?.I' a large volume of ejecta and a high amount of total energy.

Forourpurposeshowevegg it makes a great deal of diff-crence whether an eruption releases 10 ergs in a single explosion or  ;

over a period of . months, just as it is very dif ferent if a meter of ash  ;

is laid down in the course of a day or over a period of months. Mr. '. j Newhall may have found information on eruptions that we missed, but we j

.----did not ov.erlook two-thirds of them!

3 Not withstanding this fact, Newhall's extrapolatons of eruption' rates

',do differ radically from ours.

The principal reason for the disc'repancy

~

is that the two calculated rates are for two different things. Newhall's ra'tes are for serious,' individual eruptions of active volcanoes, which =ay  ;

be. separated in time by years, months or even weeks. Such rates may be  ;

calculated from the historic record or from the geologic record of Holocene 1' activity. Data from Mt. Natib, however, spans over 2 million years.

Ebasco's calculations, as stated clearly ir. the PSAR, are for major eruptive events, perhaps lasting as much as hundreds or thousands of years .

. and consisting of one or more individual eruptions. The young pyroclasti':

blanket on the east side of Mt. Natib which is composed of several layers ,

of material separated by thin soil horizons represents one such event, and sever'al individual. eruptions. The statistical analysis, therefore, yields probabilities of major eruptive events, not probabilities of individual lava flows, tephra eruptions, or pyroclastic flows.

Mr. Newhall quotes Walker's (1974) calculation that only 2 percent of the worlds active volcanoes erupted less than once in,10,000 years. j Mr..Newhall suggests that Ebasco believes that Mt. Natib is one of the select few percent of the world's volcanoes with long repose periods. '

On the contrary, the data collected by Ebasco indicates that Mt. Natib is not an active volcano, and therefore, would not even be considered in Walker's calculation. According to Williams and McEirney (1979),

there are tens of thousands of volcanoes in the world, only'500 of which have erupted during historic time. Mt. Natib is one of the tens of thousands of inactive or extinct volcanic edifices. .To classify it as

" active" and therefore subject to statistical calculations based on

'd historic data from other volcanoes in a gross mis-application of , '

volcanologic co= mon sense". None of.the worlds " active" volcanoes are mantled with tens of meters of saprolite, or have mature, deeply dissected flanks with well developed radial drainages. The world's

" active" volcanoes have typically'had many eruptive events younger than 10,000_ years, while'Mt. Natib has had none. ,.

Tectonic Model ,

Mr. Newhall's criticisms of the tectonic model have little to do with the issues of site safety, since, contrary to his apparent belief, Ebasco has at no time used the tectonic-model as a predictive tool of ,

DW  ? 0 m

h al h)f'[h ~

7._ ,

-safety-related factors. Therefore, opinions as to the validity of the model have little 1 pact on our basic conclusions. The model presented was used to explain the anomalous features of the central Eataan are seghent with respect to the seg=ents to the north and south. These ,

features are: the lack of seis=1 city below 100 km, the lack of shoshonitic volcanism, the presence offshore of the West Luzon Trough, 9 and the significant che=ical changes through time and' space within the .

. 3 Mt. Natib volcano from tholeiitic in the western vents to clac-alkaline ]

in the eastern vent. The model presented accounts for these anomalies.

_Other models could also be for=ulated; and for that reason, the assess- l uent of volcanic risk to the Napot Point site considered all three vents J; 4t the ~ summit ,of Mt. Natib to be equal with respect to eruptive proba- l bility. This is.. clearly a conservative approach, and is co=pletely ihdependent of the model. -

v i

A few co==ents are in order about Newhall's discussions of relationships i between subduction and the structure and eruptive activity of the over- '

L lying volcanoes. Some of the assertions he cakes are hypotheses that '

are popular at Dartmouth but are not generally accepted elsewhere. The [

ideas about the relationships between the spacing and activity of .  !

volcanoes and the segmentation of the subducted plate have been presented r several times in print and at meetings and have been received with  !

considerable scepticism. Th'e state =ent that there is a correlation between rates of subduction and volcanism is simply absurd. All one has  !

to do is look at a few exa=ples, such as the Andes and Tonga-Kermadec, where subduction rates are high and volcanism is trivial or regions like f the 6ntilles or Indonesia, where the rate of subduction is low and there are many historic eruptions of great magnitude, to see that this is nonsense.

Eruption from the West Flank s

Mr. Newhall makes a case that an eruption on the west flank of Mt. Natib h is possible. 'We believe that the best evidence on this topic is the "

geologic record. Although a member of vents and parasitic cones have formed in Sataan during the last 5 million years, no evidence of any ven Vest of the su--it of the major volcanoes has been found. All of the youngest rocks on Bataan originated either at the suc=it of the cones or on the east side of the peninsula. No faults or other features # have been found which would provide a conduit for magmas originating under the east side of the peninsula to erupt on the west side. Finally, all tectonic models suggested for the region agreed that volcanism will migr' ate away from the trench (to the east on Eataan). We believe that these factors strongly sugge.st that an eruption'on the west side of Bataan is not credible, in the sense that the likelihood qf such an eruptien is s=all enough to warrant that it need not be taken into' account in design of the plant.

It should be stressed that the fact that there are no known vents on the west side =eans that an eruption there would entail opening cf a new I conduit. This is very different fro = an eruption fro: an established O

L

]

0[ dkb i

~

vent, because it requires a cajor change in the structural and ther=al regi=e of the volcano and cannot occur without conspicuous premonitory pheno =ena that would be detectable long before an outbreak. Newhall ,

does not allow for this difference in any of his discussions, and it  ;

clea'rly has a fundamental bearing on whether or not the postulated events

~

can be anticipated and guarded against. [

The process of opening a new vent requires a major change in the stress ".

. regime and inevitably leads to large numbers of seis=ic chocks, changes in the grourdwater circulation, tilting, and in variour physical and chemical features of the volcano, such as gravitational field. Tliese could not pass undetected. In 'those cases in which new vents have been

. : opened in an area that has not been the scene of previous activity, as

'for exa=ple in'the Paricutin vent that opened in 1943, frequent tremors were felt over a period of years, and a thermal anomaly and depression f of. the. ground were detected at least five years before the outbreak. We f know of no exception to this rule. I

?

Volcanic Hazards and Montoring Mr. Newhall =akes a number of points on volcanic hazards, the monitoring

• of. volcanic eruptions, and the administrative and engineering questions on t;hese topics. We believe that it is far core appropriate to focus on th'e practical question of anticipating events and taking precautionary measures than to discuss hypothetical events. The possibility that an (

i eruption on the west flank, a major pyroclastic flow, collapse of the i caldera, or landsliding on a large scale could occur without detectable .

precursory phenomina can be ruled out quite confidently. ~

Newhall states that surveillance could detect premonitory activity at Mt. Natib and in doing so, he essentially concedes everything. All the '

'other arguments are reduced to purely academic proportions. He raised a number of questions about how this surveillance will be carried out, -

and what administrative procedures will be followed. Although they were apparently not reviewed by Mt. Newhall, plans have been prepared detail- ,

ing the specific engineering and administrative activities which will be required to ensure plant safety if any signs of eruptive activity are j

detected. These plans call for collection of several years of baseline infcrmation from the volcanic monitoring program. Anomalous data.will

mmedistely i be brought to the attention of an internationally known group of experts who will recoc: mend appropriate actions. Finally, engineering .

features are being designed into the plant to protect it fres relevant -

-volcanic hazards. The procedures and plans developed to date have been 4 reviewed and approv'ed by the Philippine Ato:ic , Energy Co= mission. As core specific plans and procedures are developed, they too will be submitted to regulatery bodies, as appropriate. ..

.l I

i

'< ^>

D 0 3 b TABLE 1 g e ML 3 .m LIST OF EXPERTS CONTRIBUTING TO STUDIES E3ASCO GEOLOGY / CIVIL ENGINEERING STAFF

~

i J. J. Gilmore, Civil Engineering )

N. R. Tilford, Consulting Geology i Dr. G. L. Stirewalt, Field Geology / Structural Geology . ,

Dr. I. N. Gupta, Seismology Dr. H. U.Acharya, Seismology '

Dr. U. Chandra,-Seismology

" .:. ~ fe - . F. G. Snider, Field Geology

']~-

. ^'R. Cannon, Field Geology / Geochemistry

. G. D. Qohnson, Engineering Geology 1 Dr. 3. S. Siegal, Remote Sensing l

. H. W. Maxwell, Engineering Geology Dr. Walter E. Newco=b, Field Geology P. G. Scheible, Coordination & Quality Assurance J. G. Sullivan, Research Dr. R. H. Hans=an, Research J. E. Palmer, Ground Water  :- J G. L. Bain, Ground Water

~

Dr. Z. A. Saleen, Ground Water D. F. Unites, Ground Water I. Cilogl',u Engineering Geology A. L. Williams, Engineering Geology }

M. Hayes, Engineering . Geology D. G. Welsch, Engineering Geology J. G. Cusack, Engineering

. Dr. J. J. Healey, Earthquake Engineering W. E. Cleva, Document Control / Quality Assurance J. F. Ferguson, Geophysics J. L. Ehas , Soil Mechanics & Earthquake Engineering i K. S. Liu, Soil Mechanics i Dr. S. G. Khoury, Quality Assurance A. R. Brown, Quality Assurance Dr. J. J. Shah, Soil Fhchanics Dr. F. F.-Yeh, Hydrology EBASCO ST'AFF CONSULTANTS Dr. P. C. Ragland, Geochemistry; Floriaa State University Dr. A. L. Odor, Geochronology; Florida State University Dr. J. deBoer, Paleomagnetis=/ Tectonics; Wesleyan University Dr. C.'W. Welby, Remote Sensing; NorEh Carolina State University TECHNICAL EEVIEW COMMITTEE Dr. A. Alcarc:, Volcanism (Pounder & Por=er Chairman-Philippine '

Cc =ission of Volcanology)

Dr. A. R. Mc31rney, Volcanism; University cf Oregen '

E. Oslick, Chief Licensing Engineer (Ebasce)

. E. P. O' Donnell, Chief Licensing Engineer (Ebasco)

D ]h0 h 0 \ e TABLE 2 s

, , NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SITES within 150-Kilometers of Active Volcanoes:

United States Japan Taiwan Italy Mexico i

Republic of the Philippines 4

O

k 4

S

Undead States (See Figure 2 for location of Plants and Active Volcanoes)'-

5 App rcxi=at e Plant Site _

Active Volcanoes Distance to Site Last Eruction .

2 Skagit, Washington- Mt. Baker 45 1870  ;

e WNP3,5 (Satsop) . Mt. Rainier 125 1882 .  !

Washington Mt. St. Helens , 125 1854 Trojan, Orego'n

~

Mt. St. Relens 50 -

1854 M.t. Ho.od 115 c.1801 ta_ v. -

2-4  ; +. Mt. Rainier 125 1882

...=. - 2 .

Pebble Springs . Mt. Hood 125 c.1801 Oregon-D**0 TYO~

een D

.A llki. ,

l l

(

(

e , s 4

.g #

e.

k 6 a O

e

y l

DT D @ 9 '?Wi Q" i asp J hkiks Jaoan (See Figure 3 'for location of Plant Sites and Volcanoes)

Active Volcanoes Approximate Last Plant Site (Map Code) Within 150 km (map code) Distance to Site Eruption km l

Sendai (A) Sakura-jima (2) 35 1979 i Kirishima (3) 60 1978 .  ;

Kaimon-Dake (1) ' 70 882 (?) i Unzen (4) 120 1792 Aso (5) 150 1979

^ Genkai (B) Unzen (4) 80 1792 Aso (5) 135 1979 Ikata-(C) Aso (5) 145 1979 j Takahaca (E) Haku-san (8) 130 1579 Oh1 (F) Haku-san (8) 115 1579 Miha=a (G) liaku-san (8) 90 1579

'On-take (7) 135 1979 Tsuruga (H) Haku-san (8) 70 1579 On-take (7) 125 1979 i Yake-dake (9) 145 1963 C Hamaoka (I) Fiji (6) 90 1707 -

Niigata (J) Niisata-yake-yama (12) 95 1974 Nikko-shirane (14) 105 1889 Kusatsu-shirane (11) 110 1939 Agaki (13) 125 1251 Nasu (15) 125 1963 Sandai (16) 125 1954 Asama (10) 135 1973 Adatara (17) 140 1900 Azuma (18) 140 s

1950 Tokai #1 (K) Nasu (15) 90 1963 Nikko-shirane (14) 110 1889 Agaki (13) 130 1251 Bandai (16) '

130 1954 Adatara (17) 130 1900 A uma (18) ,

140 1950 Tokai #2 (L) Nasu (15) 80 1963 Adatara (17) 110 1900 Nikke-shirane (14) 120 1589 Eandai (16) 120 1954' Azuma (18) 120 1950 Agaki (13) 140 1251

1

["

D 16wP D

• ]D o m Tl

11. .

,j a

Active Volcanoes Approximate ~ Last [

Plant Site (map code) Within 150 kg Distance to Site Eruption j - (r.ap code) km i .

Fukushima #2 (M) 'Adatara (17) 65 1900  ;

Azuma (18) .

75 1950 -

Bandai (16) 85 1954 .- ;

1 Zao (19) '

95 1939 Nasu (15) 100 1963 Fukushid #1 (N) Adatara (17) 60 1900 i .b' . -rf%

. Azuma (18) 65 1950 1 . Zao (19) 70 1939

's ~

Bandai (16) 80 1954

. Nasu (15) 110 1963 i j Kurikoma (20) 145 1950  ;

?

Onagawa (0) Kuriko=a (20) 90 1950 I

, Zao (19) 95 ~

1939 l Azuma (18) 125 1950 ,

j Adatara (17) 135 1900 '

'. Bandai (16) 150 1954 Tyokai (21) 150 1974 <

=

l I

i 1

9

• e 1

'l a .

I I

~

l l

r

.. ~

g* D D' I a w .I\ .tO.b. m Taiwan (See Figdre C for location of Plant Sites and Active Volcanoes) " '

Approf.ima:e- *ast Plant Site Active volcanoes Distance from Site E=ption, (km)

~

First Nuclear Northern tip Volcano 80 1867 ,

Proj ect ,

Second Nuclear Northern tip Volcano 75 1867 Proj ect East Coast Volcano 145' 1854 i

Third Nuclear Southern tip Volcano -45 1854 .

Proj ect I Tourth Nuclear Northern tip Volcano 65 1867 ,

Project East Coast Volcano '15 1854 O

e O

9 g OO O

a 6*

7 .

D**D *]D'9'V*~ -

00D o M.1.k a .

+

Italv .

Approximate Last Plant Site Active Volcano Distance to Si e{km)Eruptien t .

Garigliano Monte-Nuovo 45 1538 E

, l

?

- h

.. g

'Enxico. . .

'Last Approxi= ate P1'nt-Site:

~

a Active Volcano Distance to Site (km) Eruption  :

Laguna Verde Orizaba 120 1687 }

i:

h P

?

_s j

I a 5

9 d

. 9 e .

• m

%g e

e h

1 e

Dmm

. e . -

.D gl D 9 ,Rf' bb ] i d< a 4

-J1 m

i Philippines (3ee Figuge 5 for location of Plant Site and Active Volcano)',

App c:<ir. ate _

Last Plant Site Active Volcano Distance to Site Eruption Dr.)

PNPP #1 Taal-100 1978 s

s I

m . +. .-

n y 4

j s

e a 6%

h e

e

~-

. . , . . - = -

~ _ _

7, .

- z .. . .

t i,

t-D"D "D'$ yA  !

Bibliography for Table 2 ec .o .,

n a i'

s

1. , Geological Survey of Japan, 1968, Volcanoes of Japan ,

2. Kuno, H., 1962; Catalogue of Active Volcanoes of the World  ;

3. MacDonald, G.'A., 1972, volcanoes, New Jersey, Pre'ntice Hall' .

s  :.

4. Taiwan Power Company, 1978; 15th Annual Electric Power Survey ,

f

... . 5. 'Wyle Laboratories; 1978, World Atlas -of Seismic Zones and Nu'elear Power Plants 4 r 9;; -.,. ,. ..-

6.,

....., 1978;. Main "ransmission System and Power Stations 'of Japan i

s.

E j

• 9 4

. .. ,  ?

. I' 1

. 5 ss F _

.i i "<

i e

k 1 . l l

l

-. _ - ~ _ . - _ , .-_

.. . . i

%Il N(jljf! [6

~

Am 0 A]gk -

TABLE 3 b

ITEMS NOT REVIEEED BY NEWiiALL

1. Site Confirmation Report, Data Appendices I and II (Jan. 1976)

2. Preliminary ' Site Investigation Report (August, l'976) .

3. Geologic Razards to PNPP Unit 1 (July 1977) ,

j

4. PNPP Nnit 1 Volcanic Seismic Surveillance Program (August, 1977)

• S. .. Responses to PAEC Questions of 21 July,1977 (undated) y

6. N Report on the' Action Taken Regarding uhe PAEC/IAEA Site Safety

, Recommendations. ,

7. PAEC Status Report on Resolution of IAEA Mission Report Concerns (March 19, 1979)

8. Status Su==ary Report on the Resolution of Issues Raised by the 1978.

IAEA Safety Mission to the Philippines by Charles A. Willis 1

9. -

Additional Studies Requested by NPC in Connection with LWA No. 5 (April 12,1979) '

110. Additional PAEC Regulatory Staff Questions on Site Safety Issues-PNPP 1 ,

(August 28, 1979) 1

~

11. Ebasco Input to Final Position Meco for Presidential Co= mission 12.' ' Report of the Consultants to the Puno Com=ission (October, 1979)

13. Puno Commission Final Report (Nove=b er 15, 1979)

O 4 b +

s l

l

y

- y w o

- t O c -) <

vi

. w u) Z FW p L:.

-O cn -

z _z

$ 311 S 3 0 U 3 8 W h1 N -

C< 3 i in w n n c

g Wo gg g oo -

C- >

UW 5

L o,

• J& W 0 >

. e 0<

a e

~

- . . r.

~

-. . -- O O

%n LD U

, 3e Z oO O2 W Z l EE

z

< H F- C-U y) - C-a d ~5 O J s - .- 80 =

., g WQ f MEU REMIO '

ca um N:  :

o O SE E ..

E EE o

n To N, kN j s ,

2: SNh44 /

s =

.R ST*Eu EEb.is M

$ CL 2C h-E E_- .

o kkb c..k.

o C in v n n - t, S31tS d O H 3 8 W O N 8

~ _ . . . - -

. o, .. _

~ a -

l l Q

' 4 E~ .

@ Mt. Baker f SKAGIT, -

". _ ,go 5  ! .

Z j {

N 'T O N I lG

) w A S H

~

m WNP 3,5 SATSOP. Mt. Ranier WN P 1,2, 4  %

o -

$ Mt.St. Helens HANFORD l\

TROJAN

/*j -

PEBBLE j SPRINGS

^

j Mt. Hood l / -45 '

./

r O i  !

% O R E G O N i l

i 1

T

% l

' \

-40 0.. 50 100 150 200 ?co SCALE Its KILOM ET ERS EXPL A N A TION .

k Nuclearpowerplantsites LOC.ATION OF ACTIVE VOLCANOES AND ,

NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS IN THE U. S.

Q Active volcanoes .

l PHILIPPINE NUCLEAR ^ POWER PLANT UNIT NO.1 /

, .; g NPC FIGURE 2

) i

~,_- .. ._. _

EXPL A NA TIO N

• Active volcanoes u& a

• Nuclear powerplant sites r%

Note: Numbers andletters adjacent to symbols correspon'd .

~

to volcanoes andplant sites listed in Tables 1 & 2.

. ~~. <004

~ .

- ij i

-l 3eoz.

" ii

/ i ao c

m ,-

4 A

SEA  ;

9 D

3 ago .

N B  ! 'N N

E *. --g* H ,

T G 7,

' F Na.asaki O ,

4 / .

2 *c ,

SHIKOK .

ar c,,. K YUSH U

/ i

~

' I

(

, l s

,,c

]

e~

,. , , i t

I

~

/ .

+ y

• 2,8 Q H O. K K A I D e' .

~

' 25 9

% / e2s

~ 24 s  ;

y

/

/ 22e U

e23 .

O G

9, D

f 0 *21 , ,

20 *

/ di gata / 19 1,8 $

0 p

.o11 14 p 3 1;/e5 K*

3 g\,

o so 1cc g6 iso 2cc .250 ,

-/

• T CALE s ts O P/, E T E F. S

. Tokyo /

6 o / -

f LOCATION OF ACTIVE VOLCANOES AND

% / '

'I NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS IN JAPAN c[ PHILIPPINE NUCLE AR POWER PLANT UNIT NO.1

,' NPC FIGURE 3

• '

• W W

.w

r. . .

- -

• FIRST -

NUCLEAR PRdJECT NORTHERN TIP

. U J

(' \*w e y- . ,

4 b 4 9 - .,5- .SECOND l

\ NUCLE AR PROJECT 1 25*N Y !

• l FOURTH N NUCLEAR PROJECT

• 4 ,

4 5 .

- E AST COAST v0LCANO

'9 'd g

24*N T

, hR .

Y x EXP L A N A TIO N-e.

% y h Nuclearpov.erplant sites U

t o A pproximate position of i Q submarine vo! canoes s

T 23*N A

0

. Q .

0 .

THIRD . T NUCLEAR PROJECT

. 22 N- y

- . O so too h

SOUTHE RN TIP SCALE IN KILOMET ERS VOLCANO LOCATION OF ACTIVE VOLCANOES AND -

NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS IN TAlWAN I

PHILIPPINE NUCLE AR POWE R PLANT UNIT NO.1 NPC FIGURE 4 J

e ,

16 N F  !

v, N t-

• e

-=.

l a.

= ,

i.  :

1 ,

L U' Z O N k is*N r i I O . k

] = 5 2 -

PNPP UNIT 1 k gg ,

Bay j fs  :

Y

!1 3

Taat -

14 N Volcano -

7 e

~

EXPL A NA TIO N f Nuclearpowerplantsite c

, h Active volcrno ,

o 50 im Wm - -

S C A L E I N K ! L O t.* E T E R S LOCATION OF ACTIVE ' OLCANOES AND NUCLEAR POWER PLANT' IN THE PHILIPPINES PHillPPINE NUCLEAR PdWER PLANT UNIT NC.1 NPC FIGJRE 5