The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, which operates within the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,¹ recently imposed the most severe penalties in its 13-year history on the Virginia Electric and Power Company (VEPCO), following its finding that VEPCO officials were responsible for a series of material false statements to the Commission. The false statements, 12 in all, were made between 1968 and 1973 at various stages in VEPCO's application for licenses to construct a four-unit complex of nuclear power reactors at North Anna, in rural Louisa County, Virginia. The penalties, $60,000 in fines and a three-part order requiring certain actions of VEPCO officials to prevent recurrences, are noteworthy for their magnitude compared to past penalties, and the novel forms of affirmative action imposed on VEPCO officials. Moreover, the findings imply a high standard of care in reporting of safety information by licensees and applicants for construction permits, which may have far-reaching effects on future reporting practices by private corporations and public utilities building nuclear power plants.

Allegations of false statements first came to light in August 1973, when a citizen group, the North Anna Environmental Coalition, based in Charlottesville, formally requested that VEPCO construction license proceedings be reopened to assess the safety impact of a geologic fault at the construction site. The Coalition charged that VEPCO officials had been apprised of the existence of a fault at the site as early as February 1970, but had failed to report it to the staff of the then-Atomic Energy Commission,² as required by Commission regulations. Subsequent investigations, conducted in 1973 by VEPCO, independent geologists, and government officials, confirmed the existence of a fault running directly through the excavations for all four reactors. In June 1974, however, the AEC announced a final decision that the fault is "not capable," or inactive, within the meaning of its rules and regulations, and therefore poses no threat to public health or safety.³ Construction at the site was allowed to continue.