ML19249E494
| ML19249E494 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Grand Gulf  |
| Issue date: | 06/19/1978 |
| From: | Stepp J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Stolz J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7910010594 | |
| Download: ML19249E494 (4) | |
Text
D I:,
IBUTItN:
I fi tf Dr KET FII.E (50-416/417) t,aa noc El I 9 W3 j
1 DSE EDG
,1 CB RDG
?!E"0P.A'!DCf TOR:
J. Stolz, Light h'ater Peactors trauch ::o.1. DP:t FR0't:
J. Carl Stepp, Chief, Cooacicacea " ranch, DSB SUaJECT:
ACCEL'TA';CF. pJ'. VIE'd - GEOLOGi'/SCISMOLOGY TE';T ?UlfC: Grand Calf 1 fr 2 LICE'iCI?;G CTAGE:" Acceptance l'evf cw of FSAR DOCKET "r?t"PR:s 50-416/417
!!ILESTO'?R NIIli:R : 61)
PESPO.;SIELE ?,I'At;C!I:
Lk'bl, C. Thona9, LT 1 FEQUESTED CC:!PT,ETI0'I DATE:
5/28/78 DESCRII'TIO ! OF PISPO'.;SE: ficquast for Additicaal Inforration RLVIE*,1 STATUS: !.ualting Peopoases frc:a Applicant Un hvio ravicued tha sections in the FSAR portrfning to r,colog/
r.nd ccier ology provided by the Itisaianippi Pouer. nd T.f ht Cor'pany L
fu support of its applicatica to opecate linits 1 nad 2 of the Cecnd Gulf !!ccicar Station. Tased upon the revicu perforced by P. Sobel and A. T. Cardone, we reco= cod that the FSAR be accepted for
. ~.. --
..a
. t -',.:t Nr
~ 'i t in:ml Turor- ' t !cn cc-mins c,
'.alepel brinr, cur eccepter.cc revicv.
'"he rearouaca to these questfoas are required for our review and should be included In the decheted FSAR.
3, C. stcyOriginal Signcy y/
J. Carl Stepp, C'iicf Ceosciences Branch Division of Site Safety and Environc. ental Analysis rnelosure:
6U As stated cc: u/o enclosure R. p 3yd 7733P0238 R. DeYoung cc: v/encicaura D. Ya3callo
- 11. Denton U. Mvln9 C. Th raa F. MiraglIa A. CarJena R. Dalice J. Stepp J. Dennett J. Knight L. lin it u n O. Thenpaon DSE:ST:GBp
R. I!ofnann L, q.tller PSchel br'
..-.S_E : S.T..:G.
.. D_S..E..: ST.:. G P[
,, n 1 Mca61M,T:GB
._ adLidunnl J.csb
. DSE:S D.
cr,;s>
7
.23b.
6/8/78
_,6//2/78
_6ff 'f /78 or,>
hPC EORM 313 p.76) hi:CS: 0240 D ur s. a cyra w r%T PMNTIN3 CF FIC U l&79 - f 9.e 2 4 1oojo N
(
1032 1:.
79
~
Pa @ g y,y ne<pmnt for Addit innal luf ormat ton Grand Gulf 16 21:uclear St at ion Duclar t 1;unber 50-416/417 361.1 Page 2.5-22, line 26, states " South of Memphin f rom t he Missi ssippi-Tennet.see border t o the hurled Duachit a Tectonic belt, the t op of Precachrlan consi;ts of a relatively aoot h, un i f ornly n it ir.wzet-dipping surf ace which is unbroken by rajor fault ing (Figure 2.5-3)."
Recent lufornat ion developed by t he 7ti: ;im;ippi Ceological Survey indicates faulting along t he Mim Is 4.ippi htver in Tunica County, Mim;is ;!ppi and probable additional f aulting t o the cae of Tunica County.
a) Provide copies of the cross-nect ion nunber 2 f rom Tiqhot.iingo County to Tunica County, Minsinnippi by Alvin R.
Richer.ir.,
1974.
b) Discuss the significance of the recent informtion de eloped by the Iliasissippi Geological Survey to t he Grand Cul f s i t eo.
361.2 Discuss in detail the paper present ed at the 3rd Internat ionni Conference on Basement Tectonict entitled " Geological Age and Significance of bineaant and Aeromagnetic Patterns in the t!issinsippi F,nbayment by Dennis U. O' Leary and Thomas G.11ildenbrar.d, both with the 11 S.
Geological Survey, Denver Federal Center, Denver, Colorado.
a) What are the impilcations of this paper to the southern boundary of the 1:ew !!adrid Seismic Zone as prea-ntly defined, and b) What ;ignificance does the information proseated in the paper have to t he seismic design of t.he Grand Gulf ':uclear Plant?
I l
1032 a
4 361.3 In Figures 2.5.-4 and 2.5-53 clearly show the boundaries of the C"If Coast Unsin and IIIssi: ;ippi Enbayner.t tectonic provinces and the New Madrid Fault Zone.
361.4 Explain the relationships of the October 22, 1882, Paris, Texas; January 9, 1891, Rusk, Texas; and Decenber 17, 1931, Northern 11isni: sippi earthquakes to tectonic provinces or geologic structures.
361.5 In the FSAR the New Madrid Fault Zone continues sout hwestward f
to ne:ir ifemph is, Tennennee, and a "ow Madrid earthquake of Intensity XI-XIII (MM) is post ulated t o occur 220 miles north of the site (2.5.2.4).
The staff position in previous licensing actions has been that we do not accept the acceleration levels predicted by I!uttli (1973) from Hew Madrid earthquakes to scale Regulatory Guide 1.60 ;pectra at large distances as used in the FSAR.
Instead, determine the ef fect of the New Madrid events at the site by scaling appropriate accelerograns of long duration for sinilar large earthquakes.
To determine if the new Madrid event is the controlling event at the site, conpute response npectra for theme accelero;;c:ms and co pare them to the Regulatory Guide 1.60 spectrum scaled to 0.15.
3 For examples of this approach r:ee the PSAR for Clinton (Docket No.
50-461/462), Marble Hil' icke "o. 50-545/547), and Callaway (Docket No. 50-43_i A
je79
,-L
-3 i
361.6 Nnpare the conservatism in the design ;pectra for the SSE l
f Regulatory lJigure 3.7-1) and the OBE (Figure 3.7-2) to that o factors in these response Culde 1.60 by comparing the mnplification spectra with both the inean and incan-plusane-standard--deviation of 1.60.
the a:aplification factors used in developing Regulatory Culde Pl]& duran!Mn DPR dt B
1032 JJ