ML15237A313

Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility Letter Regarding Nuclear Regulatory Commission Plan for the Audit of Pacific Gas and Electric Companys Seismic Hazard and Screening Report Submittal Related to the NTTF Recommendation 2.1 - Seismic for Di

ML15237A313
Person / Time
Site:	Diablo Canyon
Issue date:	08/24/2015
From:	Becker R Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility
To:	Nicholas Difrancesco Japan Lessons-Learned Division
DiFrancesco N, NRR/JLD, 415-1115
Shared Package
ML15237A311	List: ML15237A313 ML15237A323 ML15237A334 ML15237A335
References
Download: ML15237A313 (2)

Text

August 24, 2015

Nicholas DiFrancesco

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

transmitted via email

njd2@nrc.gov

Re:

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION PLAN FOR THE AUDIT OF PACIFIC

GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY'S SEISMIC HAZARD AND SCREENING

REPORT SUBMITTAL RELATED TO THE NEAR-TERM TASK FORCE

RECOMMENDATION 2.1 - SEISMIC FOR: DIABLO CANYON POWER PLANT,

UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 (TAC NOS. MF5275 AND MF5276)

Dear Mr. DiFrancesco:

I write to supplement my letter to you of May 12, 2015 regarding the Category 1 meeting NRC

staff held with PG&E seismic personnel on April 28, 2015. I am attaching the Direct Testimony

that the Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility submitted to the California Public Utilities

Commission on July 14, 2015 and the Supplemental Testimony it submitted on August 21, 2015.

I specifically call your attention to PG&Es deterministic analyses of joint ruptures on the

following linked faults: (1) Hosgri linked to faults up to Mendocino Triple Junction; (2) Los Osos

linked to Hosgri; (3) San Luis Bay linked to Hosgri; and (4) Shoreline linked to Hosgri, which is

described on pages 42 - 44 of the July 14 testimony of John Geesman. The shortcomings of

PG&Es analytical approach - especially the degree to which magnitude saturation in peak

ground acceleration encourages PG&E to limit its concerns to earthquakes of M6.5 or below - is

discussed at pages 2 - 6 of the August 21 testimony, with particular emphasis on concerns Dr.

Thomas Heaton of CalTech has expressed about long-period ground motions.

The NRC staffs recent reaffirmation that the Diablo Canyon relicensing environmental

assessment will not consider seismic issues (Fed environmental review of Diablo Canyon wont

PO Box 1328 San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 (858) 337-2703 (805) 704-1810

study earthquakes, San Francisco Chronicle, August 15, 2015) magnifies the significance of

your review. Thoroughness requires your careful assessment of the concerns raised by the

materials I have attached.

Sincerely,

/s/ Rochelle Becker

Executive Director

NOTE: due to the potential limitations on attachment size acceptance by NRC email inboxes,

this letter is being sent in three parts, with one attachment on each part, all under the same

subject line, NRC plan for audit of PG&E seismic hazard and screening report. Should these

attachments be rejected by the NRC mailboxes, you may download them from this web page:

http://a4nr.org/?p=3476

cc:

Michael.Markley@nrc.gov; Richard.Plasse@nrc.gov; Michael.Wentzel@nrc.gov;

Wayne.Walker@nrc.gov; Ryan.Alexander@nrc.gov; Thomas.Hipschman@nrc.gov;

Bill.Maier@nrc.gov; Jon.Ake@nrc.gov; Yong.Li@nrc.gov; Nilesh.Chokshi@nrc.gov;

Jim.Xu@nrc.gov; Kamal.Manoly@nrc.gov; P.Y.Chen@nrc.gov; John.Burke@nrc.gov;

Clifford.Munson@nrc.gov; Gerry.Stirewalt@nrc.gov;

Timothy.Lupold@nrc.gov; jstamatakos@swri.org

Attachments:

1)

A.15-02-023 Prepared Testimony of John Geesman

2)

A.15-02-023 Prepared Testimony of Sam Blakeslee

3)

A.15-02-023 Supplemental Testimony of John Geesman,