ML20235C852

Comments on USGS Discovery of Active Earthquake Fault within Excavation Proceeding at Proposed Power Reactor on Bodega Head.Concerns Re Util Intentions to Continue Excavation Noted

ML20235C852
Person / Time
Site:	05000000, Bodega Bay
Issue date:	10/08/1963
From:	Pesonen D NORTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION TO PRESERVE BODEGA
To:	Seaborg G US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
Shared Package
ML20234A767	List: IA-85-665, Discusses Seismic Design of Nuclear Power Plants,Including Const of Nuclear Plants in Seismically Active Zones ML20234A761 ML20234A769 ML20234A792 ML20234A798 ML20234A803 ML20234A812 ML20234A816 ML20234A827 ML20234A830 ML20234A838 ML20234A841 ML20234A844 ML20234A847 ML20234A851 ML20234A855 ML20234A858 ML20234A861 ML20234A864 ML20234A868 ML20234A871 ML20234A874 ML20234A893 ML20234A896 ML20234A900 ML20234A911 ML20234A922 ML20234A929 ML20234A932 ML20234A937 ML20234A944 ML20234A956 ML20234A965 ML20234A968 ML20234A976 ML20234A984 ML20234A993 ML20234A996 ML20234A999 ML20234B005 ML20234B008 ML20234B023 ML20234B032 ML20234B035 ML20234B040 ML20234B062 ML20234B066 ML20234B076 ML20234B084 ML20234B098 ... further results
References
FOIA-85-665 NUDOCS 8709250036
Download: ML20235C852 (3)

Text

--

(.

No!.nern. BAY AREA CMAjTjR]!

m e.-

To Preserve Bodega Head and HCairto

/

~

g 2820 Telegraph Ave.!'MPU.?fG M W

• sorkeley 4, Cotifornia arbor % 3 Aovisoas Anal Adon4 ooa a,...r October 8,1963 f[.

John Enunons co Dr. Glenn T. Seaborg hk"#.

Ha'*3d Ma*

• /h Washington 23, D.C.U.S. Atomic Energy Commis i Joel owirofsaa Chairman gf Ib %

w.tdon F. neotd s on 9

0CT1 Joes 8.dspath -

C P<onci. He<<;ns Dear Dr. Seaborgr 4 jgg,s g q

u D'9 ryfe:~r.f,,

C

.1" i. :

U.S. Geological Survey ofThe San Francisco press waliom Per.n moit, Jr.

n, 7

.sQ Thamos Paranson in the an activeas reported a discovar,j(.

Company's proposed powerexcavation proceding for th 3.9 x.aneih n.xioch e Pacific Gasearthquake fault with-E company 's y, g,;c a.ynw.

Vice President--Enginee ireply to this finding was distreactor Dod t. Pesonea intends to The excavations ng, announced that the cressing; C.C. Wa EncutM Sa<,.,tary to disregardcontinue the findings and implied ompany Of perhaps of the U.S. Geological Survthey intended that your letter to Mr. Carverof your office to this infor

\\

even more ey.

of the Department of the Intmati to the effect that PG&E's response determine the oted excavation would be deepened extent of faulting within th

erior, The e

, to from yourreason for our reactor site.

statement that concern is the ample, despite provisionsgoverning reactor site critt L

i eria have no meaning.of 10 CFR 100 facility should be locat dof 10 CFR 100.20(c)(1), that "

the surface location of For ex-e closer than one-fourth mile f PG&E has continued a known no active earthquakwhich is known to be less th active to excavate eartnquake fault,"rom the site on Bodega Head, an one-fourth mile from a k the San Andreas. e fault -oneof the Earth 's within the reactor site, it w Now that the U.S.G.S. has f

\\\\g, nown most active--

is closed and that the

1. ,2

'.f.

company must moveould appear that theound a fa N oChk@e dA affair g

George W. Housnerwo commend to your elsewhere.

. g %

.g 7 (h PG&E's

. rp the California Institutattention the judgem

$g'\\."JO of own expert, in his

),

~t project r.

(included in the Hazards Summary Analreport to the com e

C, AEC Docket 30-203):

e s

s "As re Q,/,_.p~-@g\\j ysis, Appendix faulting, gards gross ground movement prod I would say that if ther likelihood of

~

uced by this happening, be used."

e appeared even then the site should n t a small o.

_w., c.

q

u- ~

Purposes To w k for pres.rvor; or y

ecologicalIntegrity of the surroudon of the scenic and historic heodi onds of Sodego Soy and to insure th ing marine 870925 6 #

• * ' da Non pro $t Corswation environment.

e

-k EB e

e D ~ AEj/Seaborg/lO-8-63,.'

( '

4 And further:

'd...It is quite impossible to design a power plant to survive without damage the large permanent ground surface displacement L

'that might occur if the earthquaka f ault slippage occurred at the site."

Under what specific conditions would the AEC deny a construction permit for a nuclear reactor because of earthquake hazards?

It is misleading to suggest that the purpose of the present ex-cavation at Bodega Head is to assess the extent of faulting.

Tne cospany is obviously constructing a reactor and is looking at the nature of the bedrock to the same extent that a hignway department would inspect a bed of fossils in the path of higaway construction.

The company has poured concrete, reinf orced with steel, in a ring that is clearly designed to provide for laying up the frame of the vapor pressure suppression system--a permanent partoof the reactor complex.

This is construction, not geological exploration, and would appear to violate the provision of 10 CFR 50.l(b) which -states:

"No person shall begin the construction of a production or utilization facility on a site on which the facility is to be operated until a conutruetion permit has been issued.

Au used in thic paragraph, the term ' construction' shall be deemed to include pouring the foundation for, or the installation of, any portion of tae permanent facility on the site:..."

\\

The present activity is clearly a violation of this provision.

j Since your agency appears to find thac tae-licensing and regulation 1

of reactors is exclusively reserved to the federal' government, are you prepared to enforce tne provisions of tais regulation, promulgated by your agency?

It is becoming abundantly clear that this. project has accumulated more momentum than a responsible utility management should nave allowed.

According to testimony by the company in a recent lawsuit in Sonoma County, "After February 9, 1960, the company incurred engineering, material, construction and miscellaneous expenses in the amount of 51,386,648, all of which have been directly related to the proposed construction of the said facility, " in adcition to a contract of approximately 3500,000 on the present hole.

All of this has prs-coded even the scheduling of learings by your agency on the safety of tne installation.

This suggests,that the project has gotten quite out of nand and taat perhaps the utility management no longer exercises adequate con-trol over it.

The purpose of this l etter is to sug;est that the pre-rogatives of your agency be expanded to rescue the company from what has beqome an increasingly embarrassing mistake.

- /

Sincerely,

/

A ~ c->scG l< _ /

0 fsavi.d $f'Pesonen DAVID E. PE30 DEN Executive Secretary

- )

f

't j

__________m____________M

Nk

n. 5I rS. Y j[g. fe 3lh eg <y s 5 M

N

= aa : 2 l ?rg, e

aEe I{ t' at[

m Qeo3n s5 4u 41I*

<ge

• 5

a 0

8; "ry=

a

• e 32df, >

o345,

e E<yl.

<E 0

8i5-o

• c M@O~

e$;

8g a

gm OaJ $a

[**4 rD e

3 jg5i ii5 gE-

"talE $.

E d -t;;5f 8 =.

~

h*"e d[

.n v T4

.J a

.EQ f

o:.'gtSC a

s

".4. j' Hdda F"

uh m3n f N 3-Cv 9ef,.,

Hml

$a

• • Lt u.A

> Jgg

• 4d 3

E%I tt

.]

a s.

j355 g

j k 4 So

~

gg% g*$ryy4 gIi3

.el*

i rdE a

{

i d5h. k 4d 8

. d E,.

m., d oo l

)a jA, $ j%e N

p-> E,f,

'Wi o a1 tli ['

.jis E(<:ysMa l

$8- $w2::Ua.

- Se) 3n

'a u S

"]

s

{ *,_

d5oH O> Og ig xk o0:2temoa a 1

e i

e.i*.

E=I! = s! sIe, b,

e r

WF 3

o R

(

EM A

MF sF K

^

o e o io F

F R

S t

r er g r o

o t

n r

r y

d i d ap i

ni t r a

I s

g s ue p

n t

c rp p

f a

r u

ea r

o i

s r

o r

b s

( a p

m u

i Rt r

a t

o ei i

t i

n fo a

i en t

o on a

r e

n t

o t f h

to C

o a

o r

n o

m Me d

t m

ap l

h i

nl i

e s

uy n

r s

a g

i l f 2,

C o

o o

n Cr m

e h

w(I' r

r o

m r

aC i

s p h s

t a ei s

F H i

I rr oo o

n m

rw n

f 0a a

e o

2n t r 4

s m

0 s' hd e

t a

)

C h.

t C.

i h

o aB n

ir ro mw a,n n

(

J D*

r.

)

6 8

C

,!l

'