ML20003H377
| ML20003H377 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vallecitos File:GEH Hitachi icon.png |
| Issue date: | 05/01/1981 |
| From: | Devine J INTERIOR, DEPT. OF, GEOLOGICAL SURVEY |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20003H372 | List: |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-SC, NUDOCS 8105050678 | |
| Download: ML20003H377 (6) | |
Text
i 6
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0fVIISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
)
GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-70 1
(Show Cause)
(Vallecitos Nuclear Center -
General Electric Test Reactor,
)
Operating License No. TR-1)
)
NRC STAFF TESTIMONY OF JAMES F. DEVINE REGARDING SEISM 0 LOGY OF THE GETR SITE Q.1. Mr. Devine, please state your name and present occupation.
A.1. My name is James F. Devine. I am the Assistant Director of Engineering Geology for the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).
Q.2. Please summarize your educational background and relevant work experience.
A.2. I have a Bachelor of Science in Geology from West Virginia Uni-versity.
I have had additional university training in mechanical and earthquake engineering.
I have over 20 years experience as a geophysicist which includes extensive research on ground vibration and earthquakes, conver.tional blasting, missile launchings, and large scale underg-:,und nuclear blasts.
I have been an adviser to the Nuclear Regulatory Commis-sion (NRC) and its predecessor, the Atomic Energy Commission, for 13 years during which time I have reviewed the geology and seismology of over 100 proposed nuclear power plants. A copy of my professional qualifications is attached to this testimony.
3105050678
O o Q.3. Please describe the scope of your participation in the USGS review of the GETR site.
A.3. The extent of my participation in the review of the GETR information was limited to portions of the seismological aspects of the review and as the USGS coordinator for NRC activities which included all of the USGS review of this information. For the last year, I have pro-vided the Director's Office overview for this effort.
Q.4. Please summarize the role of the USGS with respect to the NRC for the review of the GETR site.
A.4. The USGS has served as an adviser of the geological and seismo-l logical aspects of the GETR site.
In fulfilling this function, the Survey has reviewed materials submitted by the licensee, comments by the inter-venors, the appropriate scientific literature, and information contained within the USGS. Some advice has been provided on the degree to which l
NRC's regulations have been acconnodated by the work of the licensee, but no site suitability judgments ha!e been offered by the furvey.
It is the function of the staff of the NRC to assimilate all the information including our advice into the process of site suitability determination. To do this, the NRC uses information, such as structural engineering and seismic design, not considered by the Survey in its review of the geology and seismology.
1 i
l Q.5. Please summarize the results of the USGS seismological review.
i A.S. A summary of our seismological review, including our conclusions, is contained in Appendix A to the Staff's Sep'. ember 27, 1979, SER and 1
t
.~
O o Appendix C to the Staff's May 23, 1980, SER.
In addition, we provided some of the input for, and agree with, the Staff's discussion of seismology set forth in section 3 of the September 27, 1979, SER.
Q.6.
Do you also agree with the Staff's conclusions regarding the maximum vibratory ground motion and acceleration peaks at the free-field surface for the GETR site as set forth in the Staff's May 23,1980, SER?
A.6.
Yes. Although the USGS did not prepare the seismology section of the Staff's SER for the GETR, we do support the following Staff seismology conclusions set forth in the referenced SER at pages 5 and 6 as being a reasonable description of the maximum ground motion and acceleration values which could be expected at the GETR site: Maximum vibratory ground motion at the GETR site would result from a magnitude 7 to 7.5 earthquake centered on the sector of the Calaveras fault nearest the site, with acceleration peaks at the free-field surface (i.e. without incorporating factors dependent on soil-strN ture interaction or behavior of the structure) which could be slightly in excess of 1 g.
The horizontal vibratory ground motion at the GETR site resutling from an earthquake of magnitude 6 to 6.5 centered on the Verona fault could contain acceleration peaks as high as 1 g, but the l
overall level and duration of shaking would be less than that expected from the Calaveras fault.
Q.7.
What is the basis for your conclusions stated above in A.67 l
l A.7.
As indicated in the USGS letter of September 5, 1979, from Henry W. Coulter to Mr. Harold R. Denton of NRC, we have noted that the M 6.6 San l
Fernando earthquake of 1971 which occurred on a fault structure that is l
l
. v similar in many ways to the Verona-Las Positas system, produced ground motion in excess of I g acceleration very near the fa' sit break. Also, USGS studies by Page et al, (1979)I, Boore, et al (1978)2, and Joyner, et al (1981)3, support the judgment that the accelerations set forth by the f1RC staff are reasonable and conservative.
l l
1 Page, R.
A., D. M. Boore, W. B. Joyner and.H. W. Coulter (1972).
l Ground motion values for use in the seismic design of the trans-Alaska pipeline system, U.S. Geol. Surv., Circular 672, 23 pp.
Boore, D. M., W. B. Joyner, A. A. Oliver III, and R. A. Page (1978).
I Estimation of ground motion parameters, U.S. Geol. Surv., Circular 795, I
43 pp.
3 Joyner, W. B., D. M. Boore and R. L. Porcella (1981). Peak hori-l zontal acceleration and velocity from strong-motion records including records from the 1979 Imperial Valley, California, earthquake, U.S. Geol.
Surv. Oyen-File-Report 81-365, 46 pp.
E. ?~ '
-5,. cm Q
CIPUTY FO?. ENnIi:EEP.it 'i
\\
CFFICE OF EARTH /JA;-:E STUZ:._
U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY o
't i
Present Assigrcent:
In addition to serving as Oc:. y for Engineering, Office of Earthquake Studies, fir. Devine is also f e U.S. Caological l
Survey Cecrdinator for the f uclear Regulatory Cc 'ssion's i;uclear P:,utr l
Plant Siting Activities. In this ' role, he is res::nsible for supervising the preparation of all G.S. reviews of nuclear pc-ar plant applicaticas, perfon.ts ti.e policy review of each report, and supervises all G.S.' parti-cipation in.N.R.C. hearings.
l I i:
Prior to assuaing the supervisory and policy reviae role,Jir. Devine was i
the principal ravict:er of the seismology portion cf over 100 nuclear l !'
power plant applications over a 10 year period.
j ji Ctr.ar experience of Mt. Cavine's include 3 years :" seismic instrumenta-tion resacrch and operation; 5 years blasting seis ology research and l
5 years assorted seismic eng'ncering research prc.'s:ts such as rocket l
launches at Cape Kennedy, underground nuclear dat: ations in ::evada and
!?ississippi, rocket ex;1csiens a': Ed.-:ards Air Fcres Ease; structure
'l studies such as Libby Da=, l'ontana, Great Stone Fa:e, New Ha:pshire, I i l ;
a.:d the !!ashington f*o3unent, Washington, D.C.
Th's extensive geoph" sic:1 ex;erience was cbtained while exploysd oy the fcl*.:eing govern:.ent ager.cies U.S. Coast & Geodetic Survey l
U.S. Sureau of !!ines
!!ational Oceanic and Atnospheric Administrat :-
U.S. Geological Survey u
In addition to the 100+ administrative reports on r.: clear power plan:
ao:lications, tir. Devine has published over 20 rariarch papers on seismic l
and seist: alogical engineering subjects.
I Education:
f 1*9 8.S. Geology - Vest Virginia University Advanced courses:
Explosives Use - Bureau of 14fncs Earthquake Engineering - f4.I.T.
l Earthquake Engineering - UCLA l.
Earthquake Engineering - U.C. Berkley 9
3
~
\\.
s I ',
1.
i 9
9 Professional Organi:s tice.s and Cc-if ttecs:
1.
!! ember Seismological Society of !.:crica 2.
Ficmber All E - Society of flining Enginccrs 3.
lismber I:a.t York Academy of 5cience 4
itamber Eastern Section - Sci:ralcgical Society of America i
5.
I cnber Earthquake Engineering Resea: ch Ir.stitute 6.
l' amber Marican ::cclear Scciety 2.1 Comittae i :
7.
Liaisen l'a:ber I;aticnal ::esearch Council ?anil on~ Earthduake Problems Related to Siting of Critical Facilities 8.
Chaire.an - Task Group A-2 Seismology - Design Earthquake, l
Interagency Cemittee on Carn Safety (ICODS) 9.
Registersd Professional Geologist - State of Idaho n g. Ilo 203 i
e
- 10. 1.isted A.22rican Itan of Science i;-
!,i f
1 -
l l
l.
I i
1 l
l l
1 l
[
t t
i Is t
l l
n---
,m