ML12132A426

G20120260/LTR-12-0163/EDATS: SECY-2012-0191 - Response to Email Sylvia Watson Re Perry Nuclear Power Plant - Safety Concerns

ML12132A426
Person / Time
Site:	Perry
Issue date:	05/11/2012
From:	Michael Case Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research
To:	Kline J - No Known Affiliation
Case M
Shared Package
ML12132A409	List: ML12132A426
References
EDATS: SECY-2012-0191, G20120260, LTR-12-0163, SECY-2012-0191
Download: ML12132A426 (2)

Text

file:///Cl/

...ments%20and%20Settings/srw1/Desktop/Perry%20Ohio%20Nuclear%20Plant%20Safety%20and%20Hydrolic%20Fracturing.htm

[5/11/2012 4:15:21 PM]

From:

Case, Michael Sent:

Friday, May 11, 2012 8:48 AM To:

jkline@ulmer.com Cc:

Richards, Stuart; Hogan, Rosemary; West, Stephanie

Subject:

Perry Ohio Nuclear Plant Safety and Hydrolic Fracturing

Dear Sir or Madam,

I am responding to an email you sent to our colleagues in the Department of Energy regarding hydraulic fracturing, earthquakes, and nuclear plant safety.

Thank you for your interest.

I hope the following questions and answersprepared by our technical experts at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) will inform you as to our views on this important topic.

(1) What is being done to assess the effects of drilling and hydraulic fracturing on the safety of theplant? All currently operating nuclear power reactors are designed to withstand the effects of natural phenomena suchas earthquakes.

The NRC requires that safety-significant structures, systems, and components be designed totake into account:The most severe natural phenomena (earthquakes) historically reported for the site and surrounding area.

The NRC's regulations require additional design margin be added to account for the limited historical data

accuracy;Appropriate combinations of the effects of normal and accident conditions with the effects of the naturalphenomena; andThe importance of the safety functions to be performed.Drilling and hydraulic fracturing (or hydro-fracking) have not been directly shown to be the cause of significant earthquakes.

Rather, it is the disposal of the by-product wastewater of the process that has been implicated in thetriggering of local earthquakes.

Open literature sources report that there does appear to be a causal link betweenthe deep-well injection of wastewater from gas fracking operations and earthquakes at some locations, but not all.

Recent, moderate magnitude earthquakes have been associated with deep fluid injection in Arkansas, southernColorado, Texas, Oklahoma and Ohio.

Based on observations to date, the magnitudes of the earthquakes associated with these injection processes inthe United States have been less than about magnitude 5.6.

Earthquakes of this magnitude have historically hadlittle effect on well-engineered structures such as nuclear power plants.

However, this is an active area of researchat the DOE, US Geological Survey (USGS) and various universities.

The NRC is aware of this issue and is stayingabreast of this research.

Since the earthquakes associated with the injection process occur within a few kilometersof the injection wells, the region potentially impacted will be confined to the immediate vicinity of the injection

activities.

(2) Is there any effort to monitor the seismic activity in the area?

Monitoring of earthquake activity in the United States is conducted by the USGS through the Advanced National Seismic System and, in some areas, by other local entities such as universities.

The website http://earthquake.usgs.gov/ contains additional information on earthquake monitoring in the U.S. and an updatedlisting of recent earthquakes located by the USGS.

(3) What is being done to measure the impact of any activity on the plant?

All currently operating nuclear power reactors have some type of seismic instrumentation.

These types ofinstruments are activated (or "triggered") by moderate or strong ground shaking.

Low-amplitudes of ground file:///Cl/

...ments%20and%20Settings/srw1/Desktop/Perry%20Ohio%20Nuclear%20Plant%20Safety%20and%20Hydrolic%20Fracturing.htm

[5/11/2012 4:15:21 PM]shaking, such as that associated with smaller magnitude earthquakes, would not be detected by this type of instrumentation.

These low-amplitude ground shaking levels are not of concern to modern well-engineered facilitiessuch as nuclear power plants.

(4) What safeguards are being put in place to protect the safety and integrity of the plant and whatrestrictions are being put on the drillers?

The NRC is continuing to monitor the safety of all currently operating nuclear power reactors.

This effortincludes a request for reactor licensees to re-evaluate the seismic hazards as part of the NRC required actions following the March 2011 Fukushima, Japan accident. Details on this request can be found on the NRC Automated Document Access Management System (or ADAMS) using the following accession numbers: ML12056A046 /

ML12053A340.

Any significant earthquakes, either natural or triggered, will be considered during this reevaluation.

The activities associated with drilling and hydraulic fracturing are not regulated by the NRC.

The disposal of thewastewater produced as a by-product of the hydro-fracking process is regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency via Underground Injection Control (UIC) regulations.

These regulations are generallyadministered by the states.

Additional information on earthquakes and nuclear power plants can be found at:

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/fs-seismic-issues.html

If you have any additional questions regarding this matter, please contact Jon Ake of my staff or me. He may be reached at jon.ake@nrc.gov

.

Best Regards,

Michael Case

Director, Division of Engineering Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research