ML20147C998
| ML20147C998 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vallecitos Nuclear Center, 07000754, Vallecitos |
| Issue date: | 10/24/1977 |
| From: | Case E Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20147C935 | List: |
| References | |
| ORD-771024, NUDOCS 7812190026 | |
| Download: ML20147C998 (13) | |
Text
-
4..
II:llTED STATES Or AMERICA
(). NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0:iHISS100 ,
In the Matter of *
) .
) .
GENERAL ELECTRIC' COMPANY ) ,
) Operating License No. TR-l' (Yallecitos !!uclear Center - )
General Electric Test )
Reactor) ) a ORDER TO Sil0tl CAUSE
~
I.
The General Electric Company (GE or licensee), Pleasanton, California, is the holder of Operating License No. TR-1, issued on [anuary 7,1959, which authorizes the operation of the General Electric Test Reactor (GETR), at GE's Yallecitos Nuclear Ccnter (VUC) located near Pleasanton, California. Renewal of Operating License llo. TR-1 has been applied for by GE and a notice of consideration of the application for renewal was published in the Federal Recis-
. on September 15,1977 (42 FR 46427). A hearing in this matter has been requested and an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board has been designated to ;
rule on petitions for leave to intervene.
11.
GElR is a 50 H'l thermal test reactor primarily used in the production '
of radioisotopes for medical diagnosis and therapy and for industrial purposes. Additionally, boiling water reactor fuel element development testing its conducted in t$is facility.
9 781219 Dos
~; ~ ~ , -
~; . . . . . - . - . - . . - . - . . -. ..
hk -
l 111. .
llEW INFORllAT100 ,,
in mid-July 1977, the llRC staff initiated a review of the geology'and-seismology of the Vallecitos site in connection withlthe application for license renewal of GETR. A brief review of the updated information provided in support of th,e application indicated that difficult scismologic and geologic questions existed at the site and that there was inrif ficient
- information concerning the scismic and geologic characteristics of the area at VilC. The !!RC staf f's concerns were discussed with the licensee in August 1977 and thc. llRC staff indicated that additional geological and seismological information would be required. At that time, the HRC staff learned of a recently completed U.S. Geological Survey investigation of the region which includes YNC. .
Subsequently, on August 22, 1977, the HRC staff received an advance copy of the USGS open-file report, Humber 77-609, which contained an interpretation of the geology of Livermore Valley, California. A new geologic map which accompanied this report indicated that the Verona fault, previously mapped approximately 1/2 mile north of GETR, came within about 200 feet of GETR.
To obtain more information regarding the nature of the Verona fault, a trench was dug by. the licensee and inspected the week of October 10, 1977.
Members of the NRC staff, gccompanied by a member of the USGS, inspected the F e
, -.. . - . - - - - - , . , , - + - - - . - . - - , , - - - + - w - ~r e- - . -
_3 I
.tronch on October 13,1977. Although direct evidence of faulting -
could not be observed at that time, the possibility of thrus,t faulting l could not be discounted. Accordingly, the 11RC staff requested that the trench be allowed to. dry out, that it be' deepened at one end, and that'the walls be cleaned up and thoroughly mapped to confirm that therc ,
i was' no evidence'of the existence of- the fault. This work, and completion of a second tr,ench, was carried out by the licensee. On:
. October 20, a representative of the licensee, in a telephone conver-
.sation with the llRC staff, reported that its geological consultants had identified evidence of faulting in both trenches. A staf f. geologist and seismologist and a representative of USGS visited the site'on October 22 to observe and evaluate the geologic characteristics in the trenches. Existence of the fault ans! evidence that it might-be " capable",
as that term is used in 10 CFR Part 100, were confirmed' during our October 22 investigation. The significance of this new information )
, is presented below.
GEOLOGICAL AllD SEISit0 LOGICAL SIGillFICAUCE The GETR site is located in the Livermore Valley. Geologically the site is within the Livermore Syncline and-is approximately 7500 feet from the nearest ' splay of the Calaveras fault. The site is
- -)
within the trace of the Verona fault as pastulated by the USGS (USGS l l . 1 Open-File Report flumber 77,689). The Las Positas fault, if projected n to the southwest, passes within about 10,000 feet of the sito. l l
l 1
1
, - q
- e 9
8
1 4-l l
, The Livermore Syncline, the Verona fault and the Las Positas .
fault must, on the basis of current information be considerdd to s be genetically related to movement on the Calaveras fault. The Calaveras fault is a major strand of the San Andreas fault system.
Movement on the San Andreas and associated faults is foccurring at about 6 cm per year.
The tectonic setting, of the site must be considered to be active.
.. The Calaveras fault is known to be moving in a right lateral strike slip direction which results in the rock raass west of the fault being moved northward relative to the rock mass on the east 3ide of the ,
f aul t. The rate of movement across this fault zone can be measured in millincters per year. The Verona fault trends approximately northwest-southeast and at an angle to the north west trending Calaveras fault.
The fault dips (apparently to the north) at a low angle. Itovement on the Verona fault is of a thrust nature with the northern block being relatively thrust over the block to the south. On the basis of current information, this fault must be considered to be genetically related to the Calaveras faul t. The genstic relationship of the Verona Fault to the known active Calaveras fault, the close proximity of the Yorona fault to the Calaveras fault, and the evidence revealed by the October 20-22 investigations, lead us to conclude that the Verona faul.t should be considered to be capably.
e k
- . , . . . . , ..,,_,_.-,_w,. -..4.s.,, .m.- -.-s.-.,c r _
[
Yibrat)ry ground motion at the site will likely be control, led by movement on either the Verona faul t, on the Calaveras faul t .or on both. Our assessment of the earthquake potential of the Calaveras fault, based on currently available data, leads us to c.onclude that the most severe earthquake associated with the fault would be in the magnitude range of 7 to 7.5.. An earthquake of lesser magnitude, perhaps 6 to 6.5, would he associated with the Verona fault.
Based on these considerations, either the Calaveras or tho' Verona fault would be capable of producing ground motions at the site with accelerations of sustained ,
duration in excess of .75g if the carthquake were to be centered along the sectors of the fault nearest the GETR site.
Of particular significance in this situation is the fact that an earthquake of this magnitude would be expected to produce offsets of the
' ground surface, or surface faul ting, of several feet. Given the close
, proximity of the Verona fault to the Calaveras fault, movement on the Yerona faul t simultaneous with movement on the Calaveras faul t would be expected to occur.
Based on the highly active nature of the Calaveras fault, the high ground accelerations and, more importantly, the vertical displacement or surface faulting now associated with the Verona f ault, which have not been considered previously, we have concluded. that a potentially hazardous condition may exist at YllC with respect to the continued operation of GETR for an extended period of time, in that this facility has not been designed to wi thstand those severe earthquake ef fects.
w :
l For these. reasons, operation of the facility should not be continued l for an extended period-until such new information is completely assessed. g Accordingly, in the absence of further infomation the staff co'ncludes that such facility operation be suspended until all relevant information has been i fully evaluated and unless resumption of operation is approved by the staff.
4 k
IV. I 1
GETR is primarily used in the production of radioisotopes for medical 1
diagnosis and therapy and for industrial purposes. We have given careful i
consideration to the potential adverse impact on the availability of radio-' l isotopes for the medical community which may result from bossation of . l
~
operation of GETR. Of particular concern is the availability of technitium .
99m for use in the diagnosis of pulmonary enbolisms. A critical situation would result if the material presently in process were not made available at the end of the present cycle on Thursday, October 27, 1977. Extended discussic!
1 with the URC's medical consultants and other representatives of the medical !
community indicate that immediate disruption of the supply of technetium 99m l would have a significant impact on the life saving uses of this material.
Indications are, however, that other supplier: inay be able to make up most of the deficit after the present batch is processed. Steps are being taken to- l arrange al ternate sources.of supply.
, a 1
l V.
There ard a number of other facilities at the VNC site. These 1
include the 11TR, a 100 kwt light water cooled and moderated graphite (
F e
crr a w
refl,ccted reseach reactor which p,rovides neutrons for. cxperime. ital.
studies',- for neutron radiography, and for the. production of microfilter membranes. Operation is authorized by License-No. R-33. l .
While HTR, like GETR, has not been ovaluated taking into consi-deration design bases appropriate for the above scismological condi ^1ns, ;
i preliminary assessments suggest that failure.of HTR structurcs and its related safety systems would not result in consequences lin excess However, the staff of . guidelines set forth .in Commission regulations. i is considering in greater detail the need for further action, if any, with respect to .HTR. ,
Also located at the VNC site are the Vallecitos Boiling Water Reactor (VBWR) a deactivated (in 1963) facility from which all fuel has been removed, and the ESADA-Vallecitos Experimental Superheat Reactor (EVESR), a deactivated (in 1967) reactor from which all' fuel
- has al so been . removed.
Neither of those facilitics can be operated i
. without prior URC approval.
' There are also several buildings in which material subject to .
Special Nuclear Material and Byproduct Material licenses are stored and used. The need for action, if any, on these licenses, .is also l under consideration by tl,10 NRC staff. Certain of these. activities l
are governed by -licenses issued by' the State of California, and we )
are in consultation with California concerning this matter.
GE has a6rced that by Friday,' October 28, 1977, it will provide to the NRC staff an assessment of all NRC-licensed activitics at the I
VUC site.
. n l l
- Y "e"- w --. .,,, ,.,,_,..,. _._
l l
1 V ,
l For the reasons set forth in Section !!! above, and giving due consideration to the factors in Section IV above, the staf f has concluded that public health, safety and interest requires that the facility be placed in a cold shutdown condition upon completion of the present cycle on October 27, 1977, pending further Order of the Commission.
In view of the foregoing and pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of
~
1954, as amended, and the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR Parts 2 and 50, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED TilAT:
- 1. Pending further order by the Director, Of fice of !!uclear Reactor .
Regulation, the GETR shall, upon completion of the present cycle on Thursday, Oc tober 27,-1977, be placed and maintained safely t
in a cold shutdown condition.
- 2. GE show cause, in the manner hereinaf ter provided, why the
, suspension of activities under Operating License llo. TR-1 should not be continued.
The licensee may, within twenty days of the date of this order, 1
file a written answer to this order under oath or affirmation. Wi thin l 1
the same time, the licensee or any interested person may request a hearing. I I
Upon failure of the licensee to file an answer within the time specified, I the Director, Of fice of fluclear Reactor Regulation will, wi thout further l l
notice, 'ssue an order suspending any further activities under Operat.ing ]
License ,a. TR*.1 pending conclusion of the proceeding before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board in connection with renewal of this license.
l
\ l
\. .,
I l
~ " ,
i i
9
- In the event that a hearing is requested, the issues to be consider'ed at such a hearing shall be: .
What the proper seismic and geologic design bases for i (1) 1 the GETR facility should be; i (2) Whether the design of GETR structures, systems and components important to safety can be modified 'so as to remain functional
. .cons idering the s'eismic design bases determined in issue
- (l)above; j
(3) Whether activities under Operating License No...TR-1 should be !
' i suspended pending evaluation of the foregoing. 4 j
i lk
{
b]E'%
- wlL: - ..
' Edson G. Case, Acting Director
( Of fice of fluclear Reactor Regulation
. Dated this 24th day of l October 1977 s
I e
6 4
0
- e 1
c . .
t-
. ~ . . . .,_.. - . -
' i COMMENTS FOR GETR MEETING 12/2/77
Purpose:
Evaluate Potential for Surface faulting at the GETR site Peas coocerns on to GE
- Express Problems
- Express Investigations needed to aid in resolving problem Prob 1. ems A. As, expressed in show cause order
- 1. Mapped location of the Verona fault
- 2. Thrust offset observed in trenches
- 3. Structural relationship of the Verona to the Calaveras fault
- 4. Regional tectonic setting Entire response to show cause order in surf ace faulting area is based on the premise that the Verona fault as postulated does not exist.
Investigations to date have shed new light on our understanding of the site geology - but present evidence is not conclusive.
At this point in our review we are not in a position to support con-clusion that denies the existence of a Verona fault. Sufficient investigations have not been accomplished to date to show that such a fault does not exist.
LANDSLIDES
- 1. Evidence for the existence of large, old landslides includes:
- a. photointerpretation of landforms
- b. shear planes and low angle thrust features observed in trenches and borings near base (toe?) of proposed slide
- c. jumbled nature of subsurface materials and shears observed in trench 2.
- - - , + + ,,,.+ r. r ,, e -
- I i 1
l
- 2. Evidence for landsliding is not conclusive because:
- a. headscarp boundaries have not been supported by trenching ,
- b. lateral shear zones have not been observed in trenches to l define the limits of the slide J
- c. the primary slip surface has not been sufficiently located
- d. units of stable bedrock have not been shown to be discontinuous )
across slide boundaries 1
- e. units (beds) of stable bedrock have not been correlated with units in slide mass - sequences would be the same
- f. rotation of beds has not been demonstrated )
a
- g. the mechanism for mass movement has not been conclusively establi,shed, i.e. stream erosion of toe, more humid paleo-climate, breached resistant cap exposing materials susceptible to sliding
- h. observed shear zones have not been correlated with primary and secondary slide masses
- 1. the age of soils offset in trench one has not been established,
, nor has the age of the landslide.
3 other geomorphic explanations of arcuate escarpments have not been addressed or evaluated, i.e. stream meanders, terraces, f aulting w/ secondary sliding, etc. i l
VERONA FAULT
- 1. Evidence for the existence of the Verona Fault includes
- ]
1
- a. prominent south-facing scarp l l
- b. generally linear, sharp break in topography i
l c. unexplained linear features in site area i
! d. seeps and ponds along linear feature
)
l I
l l
- e. thrust of fset along shear planes exposed in trenches
- f. dif f erence in elevation @-'450') between Livermore gravels on either side of sharp break in topography
- g. active local and regional tectonic setting and possible association of linears with Calaveras, Williams and/or Las Posit as Faults
- h. existing geologic maps and texts of Vickerey, Hall, Herd, Cal. Dept Water Resources, GETR i
- 1. stratigraphic relationships on either side of proposed fault (Texas Company's Foley No. 1 well)
- 2. At the present. time we cannot conclude that the Verona fault as postulated does not exist because: ,
- a. thrust of fsets observed in trenches may or may not be due to landsliding. Trenches have not been dug along the proposed f ault trace in areas where landsliding definitely does not exist (i.e. to the northwest under Qt alluvium)
- b. local geology has not been mapped in detail
- c. subsurface geology is complex and poorly. understood at present
- d. structural and stratigraphic relationships of geologic units are poorly understood in site area
- e. geomorphology of area is poorly understood - origin of anomalous landforms have not been evaluated
- f. photo-linears have not been trenched or explained
- g. origin of seeps and ponds have not been explained
- h. soils offset in trench 1 have not been dated
- 1. thrust offset has not been dated J. resistant gravel unit east of the site has not been dated or stratigraphically related to the Livermore gravels 1
. I 4 . -
.l Summary -i In our view. at the stage of our rev'iew, the situation is one of con- /
flicting hypotheses. - One hypothesis proposes f aulting as the primarv ,
genetic cause of the features observed in the site area. .This hypothesis -!
has been forwarded by a number of geologists who have ' worked in .the site region and the NRC staff. ' Alternate hypotheses have been of fered which, in essence, ascribe to erosion and mass wasting as the primary genetic cause of the. features observed in the site area.- This hypo-
~
thesis is supported by data acquiredand evaluations made by General Electric Company consultants during the past two months.
At the-present time we do not feel that sufficient data has been pro-. !
vided which will' allow us to conclude that the latter hypothesis is i valid.
i I
l v- , v ,,-w -
--,,-- r- , -,r -
, ,-e --e v.~---,w, nw----.e- ,,. ,, .- -wn,-- ~- > -