ML15197A372

San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace'S Motion to Correct False Inference Raised by a Misleading Statement of Material Fact by Pacific Gas & Electric Co

ML15197A372
Person / Time
Site:	Diablo Canyon
Issue date:	07/16/2015
From:	Curran D Harmon, Curran, Harmon, Curran, Spielberg & Eisenberg, LLP, San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace (SLOMFP)
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
SECY RAS
References
50-275-LR, 50-323-LR, ASLBP 10-900-01-LR-BD01, RAS 28069
Download: ML15197A372 (15)

Text

July 16, 2015 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the matter of Pacific Gas and Electric Company Docket Nos. 50-275-LR Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant 50-323-LR Units 1 and 2 SAN LUIS OBISPO MOTHERS FOR PEACES MOTION TO CORRECT FALSE INFERENCE RAISED BY A MISLEADING STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACT BY PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO.

I. INTRODUCTION Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. §§ 2.323, San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace (SLOMFP) seeks leave to correct a false inference raised by a material and misleading statement of fact by Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E) regarding SLOMFPs Contention C (Inadequate Consideration of Seismic Risk in SAMA Analysis). The statement was made during oral argument before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) on July 9, 2015. By claiming to have installed earthquake monitoring equipment west of the Shoreline Fault several years ago, without also acknowledging that the monitoring equipment did not function, PG&E has raised a false inference that PG&E collected and considered earthquake data from west of the Shoreline Fault. This false inference should be corrected because it undermines a material statement of fact in SLOMFPs Contention C, and because it improperly impugns the competence and professionalism of SLOMFPs expert, Dr. David D. Jackson.

II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND The gravamen of SLOMFPs Contention C is that PG&Es Severe Accident Mitigation (SAMA) Analysis is inadequate to satisfy the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) because PG&Es evaluation of potential mitigation measures is not based on a sufficiently

rigorous or up-to-date analysis of seismic risks. San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peaces Motion to File New Contentions Regarding Adequacy of Severe Accident Mitigation Alternatives Analysis for Diablo Canyon License Renewal Application at 6 (Apr. 15, 2015) (SLOMFP Motion). In the statement of basis for Contention C, SLOMFP asserts, inter alia, that the seismic stations used to locate earthquakes on the Shoreline Fault are all onshore, east of the fault, so that the faults east-west location is highly uncertain. Id. SLOMFP based this assertion on the expert opinion of Dr. David D. Jackson, who reviewed PG&Es report of its Seismic Source Characterization 1 and other documents prepared by PG&E to evaluate the earthquake risk for the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant. Declaration of Dr. David D. Jackson in Support of San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peaces Motion to File New Contention, Etc. (Apr. 15, 2015), attached to SLOMFP Motion. Because PG&E promised to update its 2010 SAMA Analysis with the results of the SSC, the lack of adequate data in the SSC Report affects the reasonableness and reliability of the SAMA Analysis. SLOMFP Motion at 2-3. SLOMFP contends that PG&E should account for the lack of adequate data regarding the location of the Shoreline Fault, either by collecting data from the west side of the fault or by considering both nearer and farther locations of the Shoreline fault with realistic weights that reflect the fault location uncertainty.

Id. at 6.

During the July 9, 2015 oral argument before the ASLB, undersigned counsel for SLOMFP repeated Contention Cs assertion that:

PG&E has put seismic monitoring stations only on the east side, or at least the report only represents results from locating earthquakes on the east side of the fault, and not on the west side. Apparently, PG&E plans to install additional monitors, but that should have been done. That is not enough data to locate the fault.

1 Seismic Source Characterization for the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, San Luis Obispo County, California; report on the results of a SSHAC level 3 study (Rev. A, March 2015) (SSC Report).

2

Oral argument transcript (tr.) at 813 (Curran). Counsel for PG&E responded that PG&E had indeed installed earthquake monitors west of the Shoreline Fault and that they have been there for several years. Tr. at 889 (Repka).2 While Mr. Repka appears to be correct that offshore earthquake monitors were installed and have been there for several years, he failed to add the critical information that the monitors did not work and therefore had to be replaced with temporary monitors in late 2014:

The OBS [ocean bottom seismometer] system, soon after deployment in late 2013, stopped functioning due to underwater cable damage. To mitigate this problem, four temporary OBS units were deployed on November 4, 2014.

Request for Major Project Contingency Release (2014) (emphasis added) (Attachment 1).3 See also SSC Report at 7-12 (referring to recordings from ocean bottom seismometers recently 2

The full text of the relevant colloquy is as follows:

MR. REPKA: I feel duty-bound to point out, I think there has been -- representations were made that there is no monitoring west of the site. And as part of the Central Coastal Seismic Imaging Project, PG&E does have monitors, ocean bottom seismometers west of the site, so just to make sure the record is very clear on that.

MS. CURRAN: Could I ask a question about that?

JUDGE ARNOLD: Go ahead.

MS. CURRAN: Because it's my understanding that that monitoring has -- is something more recent than what is reported in the seismic characterization report.

MR. REPKA: I don't want to get into that further. I just want to point out that certainly as a going forward basis, that that is the case.

MS. CURRAN: Right. It's my understanding, too, that starting now or soon in the future, PG&E are to install monitoring devices on the west side of the fault, but that didn't get done for this report that was submitted.

MR. REPKA: Mr. Strickland points out to me that the monitors in fact have been there for several years.

Tr. at 889-90 (emphasis added).

3 The Request for Major Project Contingency Release is an internal PG&E document, released by PG&E during discovery in California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) proceeding No.

A.15-02-023.

3

installed by PG&E as [p]ossible future data) (Attachment 2). Mr. Repka did not assert, nor is there any evidence in the record, that the SSC Report includes even the limited amount of OBS earthquake monitoring data collected after November 4, 2014.

III. ARGUMENT SLOMFP respectfully submits that PG&Es misleading representation during the oral argument raises the false inference that PG&E collected data from offshore OBS monitoring stations west of the Shoreline Fault for several years and that this data was considered in the SSC Report. The ASLB should order the correction of the record for two reasons.

First, correction of the record is necessary because the lack of earthquake monitoring data from the west side of the Shoreline Fault is material to Contention C. As a result of PG&Es failure to collect earthquake monitoring data west of the Shoreline Fault, PG&Es assertions regarding the location of the fault are not reasonable or reliable. In fact, the fault could be closer to the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant than assumed by PG&E. SLOMFP Motion at 6.

Second, correction of the record is necessary to ensure that Dr. Jackson is given due credit for his high level of expertise and his thoroughness in reviewing PG&Es SSC Report and related documents. Dr. Jackson has extensive experience in the fields of geophysics and seismology, including forty-six years as a professor at the University of California and longstanding membership in many high-level professional organizations and scientific panels.

His considerable expertise and professionalism are reflected in Contention C. The record should be corrected to remove the false inference raised by PG&E that Dr. Jackson lacked the competence or care to correctly identify or interpret key data in PG&Es seismic documents.

PG&E has provided no basis to discredit or even question Dr. Jacksons expertise or his correct observation that no OBS data is relied on in the SSC Report to locate the Shoreline Fault.

4

IV. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, the ASLB should grant SLOMFPs motion and order the correction of the false inference, raised by PG&Es unqualified statement regarding the existence of offshore earthquake monitoring devices, that the SSC Report considers earthquake monitoring data from the west side of the Shoreline Fault.

V. CERTIFICATION REGARDING CONSULTATION Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. § 2.323(b) undersigned counsel for SLOMFP certifies that on July 16, 2015, she contacted counsel for PG&E and the NRC Staff to seek their consent to the filing of this motion. Counsel for PG&E stated that PG&E does not take a position on the merits of SLOMFPs motion at this time, and may respond in due course. Counsel for the NRC Staff stated that the Staff has no objection to the filing of the motion.

Respectfully submitted,

[Electronically signed by]

Diane Curran Harmon, Curran, Spielberg & Eisenberg, L.L.P.

1726 M Street N.W. Suite 600 Washington, D.C. 20036 202-328-3500 Fax: 202-328-6918 E-mail: dcurran@harmoncurran.com Counsel to SLOMFP July 16, 2015 5







ATTACHMENT1





 







ATTACHMENT2



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the matter of Pacific Gas and Electric Company Docket Nos. 50-275-LR Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant 50-323-LR Units 1 and 2 SAN LUIS OBISPO MOTHERS FOR PEACE CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on July 16, 2015, I posted on the NRCs Electronic Information Exchange SAN LUIS OBISPO MOTHERS FOR PEACES MOTION TO CORRECT FALSE INFERENCE RAISED BY A MISLEADING STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACT BY PACIFIC GAS &

ELECTRIC CO. It is my understanding that as a result, the NRC Commissioners, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, and parties to this proceeding were served.

Respectfully submitted, Electronically signed by Diane Curran Harmon, Curran, Spielberg & Eisenberg, L.L.P.

1726 M Street N.W. Suite 600 Washington, D.C. 20036 202-328-3500 Fax: 202-328-6918 E-mail: dcurran@harmoncurran.com 1