ML19329E001
| ML19329E001 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 10/31/1967 |
| From: | Byerly P JOHN A. BLUME & ASSOCIATES, ENGINEERS, SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8004090541 | |
| Download: ML19329E001 (14) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ - _ - - - - - - - - - -
O 2
O 056 O
1 ooo 5.U 8o0
CONTENTS
'd APPENDIX 2 2A SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT (SMUD) METEOROLOGICAL INVESTIGATION AND SUPPLEMENT 2B SOUTHEAST AREA PLAN PRELIMINARY PROJECTIONS OF CALIFORNIA AREAS AND COUNTIES TO 1985 2C GEOLOGY AND SEISMOLOGY GEOPHYSICAL REPORT - RANCHO SECO POWER PLANT SITE ADDITIONAL SEISMIC EXPLORATION GEOLOGIC LOGS OF DRILL HOLES 2D REPORT TO THE SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT ON SEISMIC HAZARD AT THE CLAY SITE (RANCHO SECO SITE)
ADDENDUM TO THE REPORT ON SEISMIC HAZARD AT THE CLAY SITE i
REPORT ON SEISMIC HAZARD AT THE SIERRAN SITE 2E RANCHO SECO SOIL REPORT PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION (PSAR) REPORT OF LABORATORY. TESTING RANCHO GENERATING STATION, UNIT 1 SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT 2F METEOROLOGICAL STATION 2G STORAGE RESERVOIR CRITERIA 2H ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS 057 O
O.J Amendment-3 A2d r
g v,
e r--m
-+y--
er
-r-rty'-g--- - - +
p e
+y-
..... -~.. - -.. - -. -. _.
Submitted in connection with l
AEC site visit on April 9,1966.
- i. _.
Docket-50-312 f,k Amendment No. 1 l
February 2, 1968 i
i i
l i
t i
i Report on Seismic Hazard at
)
the Sierran Sites Area.
i By Perry Byerly.
l 1
((
I To the Lawrence Radiation Laboratory on March 3,19@s.
4 i.
O
+
- 4 058 t
S i
4 b
n n-r
.a,
.-.n,.
-.,n....
.,..,m_
_.,,.mn-,.---an
,_.-r_
-,n,.,,-e,.n.,,,,w,re,,,n-_
1
'l 1
Index l
1 In troduc ti on - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1 j
Table la Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale j
of 1931 2
l 5
Earthquake Hazard at Sierran Sites Area
-5 Earthquakes Reported Felt in the Area Table 2: Towns reporting earthquakes felt and n ot fel t - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6 8
Epicenters Located in the Area 9
Conclusions 1
Ra Grenc e s - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 10 s
l 4
9
.059 l,-
- - -...-..-..---.----.._..--.-,,_-,..--.-......-_,---.1
([ \\
's )
Report on Seinmic Hazcrd at the Sierran Sites Area by Perry Byerly Introduction This report follows one of November 9,1963, entitled
" Report on Seismic Ha ard at Camp Parks and Montezuma Sites".
z The " Introduction" in that report applies to this report and is repeated here.
In discussing earthquakes seismologists use two terms which
~
confuse non-ceismologists.
l ()
The older term is " intensity".
It describes the effect of an earthquake on man and his works and on soil and rock.
The modi-fled Mercalli Scale of Intensity is shown in Table 1.
Such effects depend on the reactions of people, on the nature (the soundness) of his structures, and the geological foundations, as well as on the distance from the source of the earthquake.
The intensity can be modified by man if he is willing to build soundly on ' uitable s
a geologic foundations. Piling when dsed on poorer geologic founda-tions has been found to have a very good effect.
The " magnitude" of an earthquake (usually referred to as the Richter magnitude, af ter its originator) is based on seismograms--
on the records written by seismographs.
Originally it was defined
"'\\-
as the logarithm (to the base ten) of the maximum amplitude (in i
~(d millimeters) on the seiscogram written by a Wood-Anderson seismograph
~
~
060
~c w
~.
?).
2.
(of standard type) at t. distance of 100 km. from the c3 ' enter.
By means cf a nemogre'.: Richter extended its use to Wood-Anderson soismograms recorded :.t other epicentr.3 d i r. :anc e r.
Although other ways of computing magnituder.eere later developed, the magnitudce as compu ted for thic report are obtained fro:a Richter's nomogra:a and Wood-Anderson seismograms.
In 1954 Gutenberg and Richter tried to get a relation between the magnitudo, M, of an earthquaxe and its intensity at the epicenter I.
They Cave M1+2/3I o
o There have been efforts to got a relationt. hip between acceleration, a, and intensi ty 1.
In 1956 Hershtercer came up with log a = 3/7 I - 9/10.
The above relationships involve gross approximations.
Table 1.
Modified Mercalli Intenci ty Scale of 1931 (abridged)
I.
Not felt except by a very few under specially favorable circumst ance s.
(I Rossi-Forel scale).
II.
Felt only by a few persons at rest, ecpecially on upper floors of buildings.
Delicately cuspended objects may swing.
(I and II Rossi-Forel scale).
III.
Felt quite noticeably indoors, especially on upper floors of buildinic, but many people do not recognice it as an e arthqu ake.
Standint; motorcarr m ty rock a] 2chtly.
Vibra-tion like pancing of truck.
Im ra t i on c o ti:1 ate d.
(111 Ront:i-Forel ccale.)
3.
(/b IV.
During the day felt indoors by many, outdoors by few.
At night some awakened.
Dishes, windows, doors disturbed; walls make crerJung sound.
Sensation like hecvy truck striking building.
Standinc; motorcars rocked noticecbly.
(IV to V Rossi-Forel scale.)
V.
Felt by nearly everyone, many awakened.
Some dishes, windows, e tc., broken; a few inntences of cracked plaster; unstable objects overturned.
Disturbances of trees, poles, and other tall objects sometimes noticed.
Pendulum clocks may s top.
(V to VI Rossi-Forel scale.)
VI.
Felt by all, many friCnteried and run outdoors.
Some heavy furniture moved; a few instances of fallen plaster or damaced chimneys.
Damage slight.
(VI to VII Rossi-Forel scale.)
VII.
Everybody runs outdoors.
Damage negligible in buildings of good desicn and construction; slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures; considerable in poorly built or badly designed structures) some chimneys broken.
Noticed by persons driving motorcars.
(VIII Rossi-Forel sc ale. )
- %,/
VIII.
Damage slight in specially designed structures; considerable in ordinary' substantial buildings, with partial collapse; great in poorly built structures.
Panel walls thrown out of frame structures.
Fall of chimneys, factory stacks, columns, monuments, walls.
Heavy furniture overturned.
Sand and mud ejected in small amounts.
Chances in well water. Persons driving motorcars disturbed.
(VII]+ to IX Rossi-Forel scale.)
IX.
Damace considerable in specially designed structures; well-designed frame structures thrown out of plumb; great in substantial buildings, with partial collapse.
Buildings shifted off foundations.
Ground cracked conspicuously.
Underground pipes broken.
(IX+ Rossi-Forel scale.)
X.
Some well-built woodon structures destroyed; most mascr~y y
and frame structures destroyed with foundations; ground badly cracked.
Rails bent.
Landslides considerable from riverbanks and steep slopes.
Shifted sand and mud.
Water spisshed (slopped) over banks.
(X Rossi-Forel scale.)
ex XI.
Few, if any, (masonry) structures remain standing.
Bridges destroyed.
Broad fissures in ground. Underground piplines completely out of service.
Ecrth slumps and land slips in sof t ground.
Raila bent greatly.
y 062
4.
XII.
Damage total.
if avec ccen en cround curf aces.
Lince of si6 t and level dintorted.
Objec ts throun upuc.rd into air.
h
" Modified Mercalli Intencity Scale of 1931", by Harry O. Wood and Frank IJeumann, Eulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Vol.12, Iso. 4, December 1931.
We must note that the accelerations used by Eershberger were those determined from strong motion ceismographs.
They are not due tc static forces but to wave motion.
Before the U.S. Coact and Geodetic Survey began its program of measuring " strong motion" in earthquakes (about 1930) we thought that an acceleration of one tenth of gravity would wrcck cities.
It vac not so.
Although Long Beach was considerably damaged in 1933, the city was not vreckcd.
Accelerations there were 0 3 gravity accompany 2ng waves of periods 0.1 to 0 3 seconds which were repeated several times.
In studying the lists of earthquakes of the past we should remember a fundamental postulate of earth sciences "The future will be like the past."
We cust not be led to reading into such lists any long term laws of change in the seismic habit of a region.
063
5 Earth ur.d:e Hazard at Sierran Sitec Area t
I defino the Sierran Sites Area as that between latitudes 38 35' and 39 N. and between lon6 tudes 121 and 121 25' W.
i Earthquakes Reported Felt irl the 'Arca In the report on the Camp Parks and Montezuma Sites, I included only earthquakes reported for intensities greater than IV (windows and doors rattle, house creaks).
In the case of the Sierran Sites there are only three earthquakes in the record which had an intensity over IV (these were V); I have included all earthquakes reported felt.
k The following towns were selected for the study:
Town County Auburn
- Placer Sowman Clarksville El Dorado Folsom*
Sacramento Lincoln
- Placer Loomis*
Placer
~
Natoma*
Sacramento Newcastle
- Placer Penryn*
Placer Represa*
Sacramento Rocklin*
Placer Roceville*
Placer Sheridan*
Placer
O 6.
O' Of these towns, those whore n:ma are carked wi th an asterisk have sent in reports (fe2 t or not felt).
The reports fellow in Table 2.
Table 2.
1854, June 26, P1ncer County: two 156 t sh ockn.
h 1875, 1)ccember 23, Placer, t:evada and Yuba Countieu.
1885, Febraary 22, III at Newcastle, very slight.
1892, April 21, Newcas tie, sljcht.
1898, March 30, felt in Auburn (earthquake destructive at Mare Island).
1906, April 18, slicht shocks felt in Newcastle and Auburn; T
clocks stopped at Lincoln.
(The great San Francisco earthquake.)
1932, T;ocomber 20, IV at Roseville where hanging objects swunc, III at Auturn (A Nevada earthquake) 1933, June 25:
V at Lincoln where small objects moved.
V at Newcastle where vases and dishes were moved.
IV at Auburn where windows rattled and walls creaked.
IV at Roseville where windows rattled and henging objects r
swun6
)
1940, February 8:
IV at Sheridan where windows and dishes rattled and hanginc
)
~
objects swunc; few were wakened.
IV at Loonis where windows and dishes rattled; few were
7.
,~
wakened.
IV at Penryn; same effects as at Loomis.
IV at Rocklin where windows rattled and fremes creaked.
l.
1948, December 29:
V at Sheridan where many were awakened and a few were frightened.
~
IV at Roceville where windows rattled slightly.
1950, December 14, V at Sheridan, rattled dishes, shif ted sugar bowl.
1952, July 21, IV at Sheridan where windows rattled (the Tchachapi earthquake).
1954, July 6, IV at Auburn where house creaked (the first Fallon,
[
Nevada, shock).
1954, August 23, V at Roseville where all were awakened (the second Fallon shock).
IV 1954, December 16, at Roseville where windows and dishes rattled (the Fairview Peak, Dixie Valley, Nevada, abock).
1954, December 21, IV at Auburn vaere windows rattled (a Humboldt County shock).
C 1959, April 1, IV at Auburn where windows, doors and dishes, rattled,
.and house creaked (epicenter near Loyalten).
Reported not felt at Natoma, Penryn, Rocklin, and Roseville.
. The record extends through 1962.
Several people have) remarked to me that the city of Sacramento is frequently strongly affected by large Nevada earthquakes.
This 2
is quite true.
06-6 k_
8.
However the Sierran area under discussion is not so affected.
There are numerous reports in the record of strong shaking in Sacramento accompanied by "not felt" reports from our area.
If one examines the isoseismal caps of the U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey he will find shocks not listed in Table 2 above, in which our area is included in the felt zonee--but looking into the reports he finds that none of our towns reported them although towns more distant from the epicenter did.
Eoicenters Located g the Area.
Since 1941 the Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations of the University of California lists epicenters in northern California and Nevada with some detail.
)
A search of these Bulletins for 1941 through 1961 inclusive reveals only one in the selected area.
This occurred on March 19, 1943, and was located at 38?8 North,12171 West.
The magnitude of the shock was 3 9 However the location was rated "d" (out of a, b, c, d) or poor.
In my study of the Camp Parks and Montesuma sites I excluded such.
.p The only g'ood epicenter near the area, but not in it, occurred on October 15,196o, at 3911' North,1219' West (east of Marysville).
The rating of the epicenter was b (good).
The ma6nitude was 3 3 067
~
OD O
\\
9 I
r-O 1
Conclusions.
The earthquake hazard at the Sierran Sites Area appears
~
we miC t say four h
to be negligible.
As far as intensitiec go, and a half is the greatest to expect, and get from Hershberger 2
an acceleration of 10 cm/sec,
Judging from the last twenty years, there is no reason to suspect active faults in the area; i.e. epicenters.
This con-clusion regarding active faulting is borne out by the record of felt earthquakes.
(
l O
e W
T 068 Q
(
L
10 References.
For Intensitien.
Town 1cy, S. D. and Allen, Maxwell W., " Descriptive Catalog of Earthquakes of the Pacific Coast of the United States, 1769 to 1928"
/
" Abstracts of Earthquake Reports for the Pacific Coast and Western Mountain Region", a quarterly incued by the U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey.
" United States Earthquakes", an annual icsued by the U. S.
s.
Coast and Geodetic Survey.
Hershberger, John, "A Comparison of Earthquake Accelerations with Intennity Ratingo", Bull. Seismological Soc. America, Vol. 46, pp. 317-320,1956.
For Epicenters.
" Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations", iscued by the Univer-sity of California.
Tocher, Don, " Seismic History of the San Francicco Bay Recion",
California Division of Mines Special Report 57, 1959 069 e
.