ML20153C388: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot insert)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 20: Line 20:
=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:,
{{#Wiki_filter:,
I i     ?       . . . . . .            _ --      . _ _ . . .            .        . . . . _ _ . .        . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .._
i
                                                .]                                         A                                                         l
?
[p nee         c                ./             UNITED STAvtS                 9                                                     ;
.]
y                    g              NUCLEAR REGULATORY CvictSS10N                                                                     j l
A
            $                    3                          WASHINGTON, DJ* 20666
[p nee
                                                                                                                                                    \
./
            \.....]
UNITED STAvtS 9
OPPICE OF THE October 29, 1981 COMMISSIONER l
c NUCLEAR REGULATORY CvictSS10N j
    .              Dr. J. Carson Mark i               Chairman                                                                             '
y g
                  - Advisory Comittee on Reactor Safeguards Washington, D.C.
l 3
WASHINGTON, DJ* 20666
\\
\\.....]
October 29, 1981 OPPICE OF THE COMMISSIONER Dr. J. Carson Mark i
Chairman
- Advisory Comittee on Reactor Safeguards Washington, D.C.


==Dear Dr. Mark:==
==Dear Dr. Mark:==
 
The ACRS' {{letter dated|date=July 14, 1978|text=July 14, 1978 letter}} regarding Diablo Canyon lists several "offsetting factors that lead to acceptance of these bases.and criteria" used in the seismic reevaluation of the Diablo Canyon Station, j
    -                      The ACRS' {{letter dated|date=July 14, 1978|text=July 14, 1978 letter}} regarding Diablo Canyon lists several "offsetting factors that lead to acceptance of these bases .and criteria" used in the seismic reevaluation of the Diablo Canyon Station, j .
One of the three factors is that "because of the extent and depth of the j
One of the three factors is that "because of the extent and depth of the j               staff's review of the . applicant's seismic reevaluation, the likelihood                                                         ;
staff's review of the. applicant's seismic reevaluation, the likelihood of an undetected error in the seismic analysis or design is greatly i
of an undetected error in the seismic analysis or design is greatly                                                             ;
reduced."
i                reduced."
I realize that it is premature to ask the Comittee to reevaluate its letter until a clearer picture of the extent and consequences of the errors at Diablo Canyon are available. However, I think that it will be necessary for you to do so at that time.
    !                        I realize that it is premature to ask the Comittee to reevaluate its letter until a clearer picture of the extent and consequences of the errors at Diablo Canyon are available. However, I think that it will be necessary for you to do so at that time.                                                                                         l I
Sincerely, Peter A. Bradford Comissioner i
Sincerely,                                                                   I
cc: Chairman Palladino Comissioner Gi.linsky Comissioner Ahearne Comissioner Roberts S. Chilk, SECY 8805060220 G80410 PDR FOIA HAMLINB7-444 PDR
        .                                                            Peter A. Bradford Comissioner i
_..}}
cc: Chairman Palladino Comissioner Gi.linsky Comissioner Ahearne Comissioner Roberts S. Chilk, SECY 1
l 8805060220 G80410 FOIA PDR                        PDR                                                                                        '
HAMLINB7-444                                                                                                               ,
                                                                                                    . _.      .--            .        -        _. .}}

Latest revision as of 03:08, 11 December 2024

Requests That ACRS Reevaluate Until Clear Picture of Extent of & Consequences of Errors at Plant Available
ML20153C388
Person / Time
Site: Diablo Canyon  Pacific Gas & Electric icon.png
Issue date: 10/29/1981
From: Bradford P
NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To: Mark J
Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
Shared Package
ML20151Y970 List: ... further results
References
FOIA-87-444 NUDOCS 8805060220
Download: ML20153C388 (1)
v • d • e


Text

,

i

?

.]

A

[p nee

./

UNITED STAvtS 9

c NUCLEAR REGULATORY CvictSS10N j

y g

l 3

WASHINGTON, DJ* 20666

\\

\\.....]

October 29, 1981 OPPICE OF THE COMMISSIONER Dr. J. Carson Mark i

Chairman

- Advisory Comittee on Reactor Safeguards Washington, D.C.

Dear Dr. Mark:

The ACRS' July 14, 1978 letter regarding Diablo Canyon lists several "offsetting factors that lead to acceptance of these bases.and criteria" used in the seismic reevaluation of the Diablo Canyon Station, j

One of the three factors is that "because of the extent and depth of the j

staff's review of the. applicant's seismic reevaluation, the likelihood of an undetected error in the seismic analysis or design is greatly i

reduced."

I realize that it is premature to ask the Comittee to reevaluate its letter until a clearer picture of the extent and consequences of the errors at Diablo Canyon are available. However, I think that it will be necessary for you to do so at that time.

Sincerely, Peter A. Bradford Comissioner i

cc: Chairman Palladino Comissioner Gi.linsky Comissioner Ahearne Comissioner Roberts S. Chilk, SECY 8805060220 G80410 PDR FOIA HAMLINB7-444 PDR

_..

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20153C388&oldid=4147110"