RA-13-018, Response to NRC Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) Regarding the Seismic Aspects of Recommendation 2.1 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident - 1.5 Year Response for CEUS Site

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Response to NRC Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) Regarding the Seismic Aspects of Recommendation 2.1 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident - 1.5 Year Response for CEUS Site
ML13312A918
Person / Time
Site: Harris, Brunswick, Robinson  Duke energy icon.png
Issue date: 09/11/2013
From: Waldrep B
Duke Energy Carolinas
To:
Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
RA-13-018
Download: ML13312A918 (23)
v • d • e


Text

Benjamin C.Waldrep 526 South Church Street DUKE Charlotte,NC 28202 MailingAddress:

ENERGY, P.O. Box 1006- EC07H Charlotte,NC 28201-1006 Office: 704 382 8162 Fax: 704 382 6056 Benjamin.Waldreplduke.energy.com 10 CFR 50.54 (f)

Serial RA-13-018 September 11, 2013 ATTN: Document Control Desk U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 Duke Energy Progress, Inc., formerly known as Carolina Power & Light Company Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-325 and 50-324 Renewed License Nos. DPR-71 and DPR-62 Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 Docket No. 50-400 Renewed License No. NPF-63 H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit No. 2 Docket No. 50-261 Renewed License No. DPR-23

Subject:

Response to NRC Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) Regarding the Seismic Aspects of Recommendation 2.1 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident - 1.5 Year Response for CEUS Sites

References:

1. NRC Letter, Request for Information Pursuantto Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 50.54(f) Regarding Recommendations 2.1, 2.3, and 9.3, of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichiAccident, dated March 12, 2012, ADAMS Accession No. ML12053A340
2. EPRI Report 1025287, Seismic Evaluation Guidance, Screening, Prioritizationand Implementation Details (SPID) for the Resolution of Fukushima Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.1: Seismic, ADAMS Accession No. ML12333A170
3. NRC Letter, Endorsement of EPRI Final Draft Report 1025287, "SeismicEvaluation Guidance,"dated February 15, 2013, ADAMS Accession No. ML12319A074
4. NEI Letter, Proposed Path Forwardfor NTTF Recommendation 2.1: Seismic Reevaluations,dated April 9, 2013, ADAMS Accession No. ML13101A379

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Serial RA-13-018 Page 2

5. Duke Energy Letter, Response to NRC Request for Information Pursuantto 10 CFR 50.54(f) Regarding the Seismic Aspects of Recommendation 2.1 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichiAccident, dated April 26, 2013, ADAMS Accession No. ML13121A063
6. NRC Letter, EPRI FinalDraft Report X00XXXX, "SeismicEvaluation Guidance:

Augmented Approach for the Resolution of Near-Term Task Force Recommendation

2. 1: Seismic,"as an Acceptable Alternative to the March 12, 2012, Information Request for Seismic Reevaluations, dated May 7, 2013, ADAMS Accession No. ML13106A331
7. NRC Letter, Status of 60-DayResponse to Issuance of Seismic Evaluation Guidance Related to the Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.1, Seismic, dated August 2, 2013, ADAMS Accession No. ML13161A286 Ladies and Gentlemen:

On March 12, 2012, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued Reference I to all power reactor licensees and holders of construction permits in active or deferred status. Enclosure 1 of Reference 1 requested each addressee in the Central and Eastern United States (CEUS) to submit a written response consistent with the requested seismic hazard evaluation information (i.e., items 1 through 7) by September 12, 2013. Reference 2 provides industry guidance for responding to Reference 1. Section 4 of Reference 2 identifies the detailed information to be included in the seismic hazard evaluation submittals. On February 15, 2013, the NRC issued Reference 3, endorsing the industry guidance (i.e., Reference 2).

On April 9, 2013, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) submitted Reference 4 to the NRC, requesting NRC agreement to delay submittal of some of the CEUS seismic hazard evaluation information so that an update to the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) (i.e., 2004 and 2006) ground motion attenuation model could be completed and used to develop that information. NEI proposed that descriptions of subsurface materials and properties and base case velocity profiles (i.e., items 3a and 3b in Section 4 of Reference 2) be submitted to the NRC by September 12, 2013, with the remaining seismic hazard and screening information submitted to NRC by March 31, 2014.

In Reference 5, Duke Energy provided the 60-day response to the NRC, as required by Reference 1. The response informed the NRC that Duke Energy intended to follow the alternative approach and schedule set forth in Reference 4. In Reference 6 the NRC approved the schedule modification (i.e., Reference 4). Based on the NRC approval of Reference 4, the NRC issued a letter on August 2, 2013 (i.e., Reference 7) and acknowledged the Duke Energy response (i.e., Reference 5) was acceptable.

The enclosures to this letter contain the requested descriptions of subsurface materials and properties and base case velocity profiles for Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, and H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant. The geotechnical profile data included as Table 1 of each enclosure is from the plant design record. Table 2 is based on Table 1 for the reactor building control point. The profiles provided in Table 2 and Figure 1 of each enclosure represent a Mean Base Case (Profile 1), a Lower Bound (Profile 2), and an Upper Bound (Profile 3).

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Serial RA-13-018 Page 3 This information is being provided for Catawba Nuclear Station, McGuire Nuclear Station, Oconee Nuclear Station, and Crystal River Unit 3 under separate cover letters. The information provided in the attachments to this letter is considered an interim product of seismic hazard development efforts being performed for the industry by EPRI. The complete and final seismic hazard reports for Duke Energy will be provided to the NRC in our seismic hazard submittals by March 31, 2014 in accordance with Reference 5.

This letter contains no new regulatory commitments.

If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact Jeff Thomas, Fukushima Response Support Manager, at (704) 382-3438.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on September 11, 2013.

Sincerely, BejnC. lrep Vice Preside tr Corporate Governance &

Operation Support

Enclosures:

Descriptions of Subsurface Materials and Properties and Base Case Velocity Profiles for Brunswick Steam Electric Plant (BSEP), Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Docket Nos. 50-325 and 50-324, Renewed License Nos. DPR-71 and DPR-62 Descriptions of Subsurface Materials and Properties and Base Case Velocity Profiles for Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant (SHNPP), Unit No. 1, Docket No. 50-400, Renewed License No. NPF-63 Descriptions of Subsurface Materials and Properties and Base Case Velocity Profiles for H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant (HBRSEP), Unit No. 2, Docket No. 50-261, Renewed License No. DPR-23

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Serial RA-13-018 Page 4 xc:

V. M. McCree, Region IIAdministrator U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Marquis One Tower 245 Peachtree Center Avenue NE, Suite 1200 Atlanta, GA 30303-1257 C. Gratton, NRR Project Manager (BSEP, Unit Nos. I and 2)

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 11555 Rockville Pike Mail Stop 8G9A Rockville, MD 20852-2738 A. Hon, NRR Project Manager (SHNPP, Unit 1)

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 11555 Rockville Pike Mail Stop 08G-9a Rockville, MD 20852-2738 S. P. Lingam, NRR Project Manager (HBRSEP, Unit No. 2)

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 11555 Rockville Pike Mail Stop 8 G9A Rockville, MD 20852-2738 M. P. Catts, Senior Resident Inspector Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 K. M. Ellis, Senior Resident Inspector H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit No. 2 J. D. Austin, Senior Resident Inspector Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1

ENCLOSURE I DESCRIPTIONS OF SUBSURFACE MATERIALS AND PROPERTIES AND BASE CASE VELOCITY PROFILES FOR BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT (BSEP), UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-325 AND 50-324 RENEWED LICENSE NOS. DPR-71 AND DPR-62 El-1

Serial RA-13-018 RESPONSE REGARDING THE SEISMIC ASPECTS OF RECOMMENDATION 2.1 BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT (BSEP)

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant Site Description The basic information used to create the site geologic profile at the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant is shown in Table 1. This profile was developed using information documented in Reference 1 of this enclosure. As indicated in Reference 1 of this enclosure, the safe shutdown earthquake (SSE) Control Point is at depth 47.83', Elevation -28.33', and the profile was modeled up to this elevation. For dynamic properties of soft rock layers, modulus and damping curves were represented with two models. The first model used rock curves taken from Reference 2 of this enclosure, the second model assumed linear behavior. These dynamic property models were weighted equally. For dynamic properties of fill, compacted sand, sand, and clay layers, modulus and damping curves were also represented with two models. The first model used soil curves taken from Reference 2 of this enclosure, the second model used soil curves taken from References 3 and 4 of this enclosure. These dynamic property models were weighted equally. To model the profile, rock modulus and damping curves from Reference 2 of this enclosure were paired with soil modulus and damping curves from Reference 2 of this enclosure and linear rock modulus and damping curves were paired with soil modulus and damping curves from References 3 and 4 of this enclosure.

The 3 base-case shear-wave velocity profiles used to model amplification at the site are shown in Figure 1. Profiles 1, 2, and 3 are weighted 0.4, 0.3, and 0.3, respectively. Thicknesses, depths, and shear-wave velocities (Vs) corresponding to each profile are shown in Table 2.

References

1. URS (2012). Site Geologic Conditions for Brunswick Nuclear Power Plant - Revision 2, Report dated 12/03/2012.
2. EPRI (1993). Guidelines for DeterminingDesign Basis Ground Motions, Elec. Power Res.

Inst., Palo Alto, CA, Rept. TR-102293, Vol. 1-5.

3. Silva, W.J., N. A. Abrahamson, G.R. Toro, and C. Costantino (1996). Description and Validation of the Stochastic Ground Motion Model, Rept. submitted to Brookhaven Nati.

Lab., Assoc. Universities Inc., Upton NY 11973, Contract No. 770573.

4. Walling, M.A., W.J., Silva and N.A. Abrahamson (2008). "Nonlinear Site Amplification Factors for Constraining the NGA Models," Earthquake Spectra, 24 (1) 243-255.

E1-2

Serial RA-13-018 RESPONSE REGARDING THE SEISMIC ASPECTS OF RECOMMENDATION 2.1 BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT (BSEP)

Table 1 Summary of Geotechnical Profile Data for Brunswick Steam Electric Plant Shear Elevation Soil/Rock Densit Wave Range (feet) Description y (pcf) Velocity (fps) 19.5*** Surface ---....

6 to > 100 blows per

+19.5--7 Fill - Confined Compacted Sand 115 750 foot Upper Yorktown - Unconfined Weight of Hammer to

- 25 Compacted 115 750 4 blows per foot Sand 23 > 100 blows per per

-25 50 SSE control point - Lower -1400 23 >

Yorktown - Natural Dense Sand 130 900-1400 foot 20 >100 blows per

- 93 Oligocene Sediments - Stiff Clay 145 5500 foot

- 220 Castle Hayne - Limestone 138 4500 Cretaceous: Peedee Limestone

-220--Il -151 -well consolidated shell 130 3000 limestone that contains amounts of clay varying

-1510* Crystalline basemat 165 10000*

Estimated values

    • Information sourced from Dynamic Soil Properties Calc by AMEC E&I Inc. Table 1 - Soil Profile. January, 19, 2012.

Information sourced from the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report Page. 3-35.

E1-3

Serial RA-13-018 Enclosure I RESPONSE REGARDING THE SEISMIC ASPECTS OF RECOMMENDATION 2.1 BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT (BSEP)

Vs profiles for Brunswick Site Vs (ft/sec) 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 -~

100 200 i

Il_ II 1 1 300 400 50o 600 -Profile 1 9 700 -Ii -__ -~__

-Profile 2 800 IIProfile 3

~ -t -

'V.

900 1000 ___ I - ___

-I 1100 1200 V

1300 1400 I LI>K 1500 _____ ___

1600 11711 ifi Figure 1. Vs profiles for Brunswick Steam Electric Plant site E1-4

Serial RA-13-018 RESPONSE REGARDING THE SEISMIC ASPECTS OF RECOMMENDATION 2.1 BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT (BSEP)

Table 2 Layer thicknesses, depths, and Vs for 3 profiles, Brunswick site Profile 1 Profile 2 Profile 3 depth depth depth thickness(ft) (ft) Vs(ft/s) thickness(ft) (ft Vs(ft/s) thickness(ft) (ft) Vs(ft/s) 0 1122 0 898 0 1403 5.0 5.0 1122 5.0 5.0 898 5.0 5.0 1403 5.0 10.0 1122 5.0 10.0 898 5.0 10.0 1403 5.0 15.0 1122 5.0 15.0 898 5.0 15.0 1403 5.0 20.0 1122 5.0 20.0 898 5.0 20.0 1403 1.7 21.7 1122 1.7 21.7 898 1.7 21.7 1403 4.0 25.7 5500 4.0 25.7 4400 4.0 25.7 6875 5.0 30.7 5500 5.0 30.7 4400 5.0 30.7 6875 5.0 35.7 5500 5.0 35.7 4400 5.0 35.7 6875 5.0 40.7 5500 5.0 40.7 4400 5.0 40.7 6875 5.0 45.7 5500 5.0 45.7 4400 5.0 45.7 6875 5.0 50.7 5500 5.0 50.7 4400 5.0 50.7 6875 4.0 54.7 5500 4.0 54.7 4400 4.0 54.7 6875 5.0 59.7 5500 5.0 59.7 4400 5.0 59.7 6875 5.0 64.7 5500 5.0 64.7 4400 5.0 64.7 6875 27.7 92.3 4500 27.7 92.3 2866 27.7 92.3 7065 27.7 120.0 4500 27.7 120.0 2866 27.7 120.0 7065 35.8 155.8 4500 35.8 155.8 2866 35.8 155.8 7065 35.8 191.7 4500 35.8 191.7 2866 35.8 191.7 7065 19.4 211.1 3000 19.4 211.1 1911 19.4 211.1 4710 19.4 230.5 3000 19.4 230.5 1911 19.4 230.5 4710 19.4 250.0 3000 19.4 250.0 1911 19.4 250.0 4710 25.0 275.0 3000 25.0 275.0 1911 25.0 275.0 4710 25.0 300.0 3000 25.0 300.0 1911 25.0 300.0 4710 25.0 325.0 3000 25.0 325.0 1911 25.0 325.0 4710 25.0 350.0 3000 25.0 350.0 1911 25.0 350.0 4710 25.0 375.0 3000 25.0 375.0 1911 25.0 375.0 4710 25.0 400.0 3000 25.0 400.0 1911 25.0 400.0 4710 25.0 425.0 3000 25.0 425.0 1911 25.0 425.0 4710 25.0 450.0 3000 25.0 450.0 1911 25.0 450.0 4710 25.0 475.0 3000 25.0 475.0 1911 25.0 475.0 4710 25.0 500.0 3000 25.0 500.0 1911 25.0 500.0 4710 E1-5

Serial RA-13-018 RESPONSE REGARDING THE SEISMIC ASPECTS OF RECOMMENDATION 2.1 BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT (BSEP)

Table 2 Layer thicknesses, depths, and Vs for 3 profiles, Brunswick site Profile 1 Profile 2 Profile 3 depth depth depth thickness(ft) (ft) Vs(ft/s) thickness(ft) (ft) Vs(ft/s) thickness(ft) (ft) Vs(ft/s) 32.7 532.7 3000 32.7 532.7 1911 32.7 532.7 4710 32.7 565.4 3000 32.7 565.4 1911 32.7 565.4 4710 32.7 598.1 3000 32.7 598.1 1911 32.7 598.1 4710 32.7 630.9 3000 32.7 630.9 1911 32.7 630.9 4710 32.7 663.6 3000 32.7 663.6 1911 32.7 663.6 4710 32.7 696.3 3000 32.7 696.3 1911 32.7 696.3 4710 32.7 729.0 3000 32.7 729.0 1911 32.7 729.0 4710 32.7 761.7 3000 32.7 761.7 1911 32.7 761.7 4710 32.7 794.5 3000 32.7 794.5 1911 32.7 794.5 4710 32.7 827.2 3000 32.7 827.2 1911 32.7 827.2 4710 32.7 859.9 3000 32.7 859.9 1911 32.7 859.9 4710 32.7 892.6 3000 32.7 892.6 1911 32.7 892.6 4710 32.7 925.3 3000 32.7 925.3 1911 32.7 925.3 4710 32.7 958.1 3000 32.7 958.1 1911 32.7 958.1 4710 32.7 990.8 3000 32.7 990.8 1911 32.7 990.8 4710 32.7 1023.5 3000 32.7 1023.5 1911 32.7 1023.5 4710 32.7 1056.2 3000 32.7 1056.2 1911 32.7 1056.2 4710 32.7 1088.9 3000 32.7 1088.9 1911 32.7 1088.9 4710 32.7 1121.7 3000 32.7 1121.7 1911 32.7 1121.7 4710 32.7 1154.4 3000 32.7 1154.4 1911 32.7 1154.4 4710 32.7 1187.1 3000 32.7 1187.1 1911 32.7 1187.1 4710 32.7 1219.8 3000 32.7 1219.8 1911 32.7 1219.8 4710 32.7 1252.5 3000 32.7 1252.5 1911 32.7 1252.5 4710 32.7 1285.3 3000 32.7 1285.3 1911 32.7 1285.3 4710 32.7 1318.0 3000 32.7 1318.0 1911 32.7 1318.0 4710 32.7 1350.7 3000 32.7 1350.7 1911 32.7 1350.7 4710 32.7 1383.4 3000 32.7 1383.4 1911 32.7 1383.4 4710 32.7 1416.1 3000 32.7 1416.1 1911 32.7 1416.1 4710 32.7 1448.9 3000 32.7 1448.9 1911 32.7 1448.9 4710 32.7 1481.6 3000 32.7 1481.6 1911 32.7 1481.6 4710 3280.8 4762.4 9285 3280.8 4762.4 9285 3280.8 4762.4 9285 E1-6

ENCLOSURE 2 DESCRIPTIONS OF SUBSURFACE MATERIALS AND PROPERTIES AND BASE CASE VELOCITY PROFILES FOR SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT (SHNPP), UNIT 1 DOCKET NOS. 50-400 RENEWED LICENSE NO. NPF-63 E2-1

Serial RA-13-018 RESPONSE REGARDING THE SEISMIC ASPECTS OF RECOMMENDATION 2.1 SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT (SHNPP)

Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant Site Description The basic information used to create the site geologic profile at the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant is shown in Table 1. This profile was developed using information documented in Reference 1 of this enclosure. As indicated in Table 1, the safe shutdown earthquake (SSE)

Control Point is defined at the top of "sound bedrock," and site amplifications correspond to that location. For dynamic properties, modulus and damping curves for rock layers were represented with two models. The first model used rock curves taken from Reference 2 of this enclosure, the second model assumed linear behavior. These dynamic property models were weighted equally.

The 3 base-case shear-wave velocity profiles used to model amplification at the site are shown in Figure 1. Profiles 1, 2, and 3 are weighted 0.4, 0.3, and 0.3, respectively. Thicknesses, depths, and shear-wave velocities (Vs) corresponding to each profile are shown in Table 2.

References

1. URS (2012). Site Geologic Conditions for Shearon HarrisNuclear GeneratingStation-Revision 1, Letter Report PE-HNP-A07-12267 dated September 21, 2012, transmitted by letter from B. Alumbaugh to C. Albers dated September 25, 2012.
2. EPRI (1993). Guidelines for DeterminingDesign Basis Ground Motions, Elec. Power Res.

Inst., Palo Alto, CA, Rept. TR-102293, Vol. 1-5.

E2-2

Serial RA-13-018 RESPONSE REGARDING THE SEISMIC ASPECTS OF RECOMMENDATION 2.1 SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT (SHNPP)

Table 1 Summary of Geotechnical Profile Data for Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant (1)

Shear Depth Wave Compressional Range Density Velocity Wave Velocity Poisson's (feet) Soil/Rock Description (pcf) (2j (fps) (fps) ratio 0-8 Residual Soil 130 50V" 1500 0.44 Weathered and Fractured 8-16 Rock 160 2500 5500 0.37 Sound Bedrock Below 16 (SSE Control Point) 160 5600 12000 0.35 Note: Estimated depth to crystalline basement rocks at the site is approximately 5000 ft Note: On Page 2.5-189 of the Shearon Harris Advanced Reactor Units 2 and 3 Combined Construction and Operating License Application, it is assumed that the crystalline basement is the point at which the generic Central and Eastern United States hard rock conditions are encountered and a shear wave velocity of 7600 fps is estimated.

Note: The base case profile used in "Seismic Hazard Results Using the USGS 2008 Seismic Source Model: Brunswick, Crystal River, Harris, and Robinson Nuclear Sites" estimates a shear wave velocity of 9200 fps at a depth of 7000 ft.

(1) Reference Table 2.5.2-3 SHNPP Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR)

(2) Reference Table 3.7.1-2 SHNPP FSAR (3) This value was assumed on the basis of previous experience under similar conditions.

E2-3

Serial RA-13-018 RESPONSE REGARDING THE SEISMIC ASPECTS OF RECOMMENDATION 2.1 SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT (SHNPP)

Vs profiles for Shearon Harris Site Vs (ft/sec) 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 500 1000 1500 ..... . .......................... _ -

2000 ---- - Profile 1 2500 -------- . . -. - Profile 2 3 0 .............Profile 3 5000 ---

F500 1..Vs.profi.es.for....aron.Harris.Nuclear.Power.Plant.

-si Figure 1. Vs profiles for Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant site E2-4

Serial RA-13-018 RESPONSE REGARDING THE SEISMIC ASPECTS OF RECOMMENDATION 2.1 SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT (SHNPP)

Table 2 Layer thicknesses, depths, and Vs for 3 profiles, Shearon Harris site Profile 1 Profile 2 Profile 3 depth depth depth thickness(ft) (ft) Vs(ft/s) thickness(ft) (ft) Vs(ft/s) thickness(ft) (ft) Vs(ft/s) 0 5600 0 3567 0 8792 5.0 5.0 5600 5.0 5.0 3567 5.0 5.0 8792 5.0 10.0 5601 5.0 10.0 3568 5.0 10.0 8794 5.0 15.0 5603 5.0 15.0 3569 5.0 15.0 8797 5.0 20.0 5606 5.0 20.0 3571 5.0 20.0 8801 5.0 25.0 5608 5.0 25.0 3573 5.0 25.0 8805 5.0 30.0 5611 5.0 30.0 3574 5.0 30.0 8809 5.0 35.0 5613 5.0 35.0 3576 5.0 35.0 8813 5.0 40.0 5616 5.0 40.0 3577 5.0 40.0 8817 5.0 45.0 5618 5.0 45.0 3579 5.0 45.0 8821 5.0 50.0 5621 5.0 50.0 3581 5.0 50.0 8825 5.0 55.0 5623 5.0 55.0 3582 5.0 55.0 8829 5.0 60.0 5626 5.0 60.0 3584 5.0 60.0 8833 5.0 65.0 5628 5.0 65.0 3585 5.0 65.0 8837 3.0 68.0 5630 3.0 68.0 3586 3.0 68.0 8839 6.0 74.0 5631 6.0 74.0 3587 6.0 74.0 8841 6.0 80.0 5632 6.0 80.0 3588 6.0 80.0 8843 6.0 86.0 5634 6.0 86.0 3589 6.0 86.0 8845 6.0 92.0 5635 6.0 92.0 3589 6.0 92.0 8847 7.0 99.0 5639 7.0 99.0 3592 7.0 99.0 8852 7.0 106.0 5642 7.0 106.0 3594 7.0 106.0 8858 7.0 113.0 5645 7.0 113.0 3596 7.0 113.0 8863 7.0 120.0 5649 7.0 120.0 3598 7.0 120.0 8869 6.0 126.0 5652 6.0 126.0 3600 6.0 126.0 8874 4.0 130.0 5654 4.0 130.0 3602 4.0 130.0 8877 5.0 135.0 5657 5.0 135.0 3603 5.0 135.0 8881 5.0 140.0 5659 5.0 140.0 3605 5.0 140.0 8885 5.0 145.0 5662 5.0 145.0 3606 5.0 145.0 8889 5.0 150.0 5664 5.0 150.0 3608 5.0 150.0 8892 5.0 155.0 5667 5.0 155.0 3610 5.0 155.0 8896 5.0 160.0 5669 5.0 160.0 3611 5.0 160.0 8900 4.0 164.0 5671 4.0 164.0 3612 4.0 164.0 8903 E2-5

Serial RA-13-018 RESPONSE REGARDING THE SEISMIC ASPECTS OF RECOMMENDATION 2.1 SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT (SHNPP)

Table 2 Layer thicknesses, depths, and Vs for 3 profiles, Shearon Harris site Profile 1 Profile 2 Profile 3 depth depth depth thickness(ft) (ft) Vs(ft/s) thickness(ft) ft Vs(ft/s) thickness(ft) (ft) Vs(ft/s) 5.0 169.0 5672 5.0 169.0 3613 5.0 169.0 8905 5.0 174.0 5675 5.0 174.0 3615 5.0 174.0 8909 5.0 179.0 5677 5.0 179.0 3616 5.0 179.0 8913 5.0 184.0 5680 5.0 184.0 3618 5.0 184.0 8917 5.0 189.0 5682 5.0 189.0 3620 5.0 189.0 8921 5.0 194.0 5685 5.0 194.0 3621 5.0 194.0 8925 5.0 199.0 5687 5.0 199.0 3623 5.0 199.0 8929 5.0 204.0 5690 5.0 204.0 3624 5.0 204.0 8933 5.0 209.0 5692 5.0 209.0 3626 5.0 209.0 8937 5.0 214.0 5695 5.0 214.0 3628 5.0 214.0 8941 5.0 219.0 5697 5.0 219.0 3629 5.0 219.0 8945 5.0 224.0 5700 5.0 224.0 3631 5.0 224.0 8949 5.0 229.0 5702 5.0 229.0 3632 5.0 229.0 8953 5.0 234.0 5705 5.0 234.0 3634 5.0 234.0 8956 5.0 239.0 5707 5.0 239.0 3636 5.0 239.0 8960 5.0 244.0 5710 5.0 244.0 3637 5.0 244.0 8964 6.0 250.0 5713 6.0 250.0 3639 6.0 250.0 8969 6.3 256.3 5716 6.3 256.3 3641 6.3 256.3 8974 6.3 262.7 5719 6.3 262.7 3643 6.3 262.7 8979 6.3 269.0 5722 6.3 269.0 3645 6.3 269.0 8984 10.0 279.0 5727 10.0 279.0 3648 10.0 279.0 8992 10.0 289.0 5732 10.0 289.0 3651 10.0 289.0 9000 10.0 299.0 5737 10.0 299.0 3655 10.0 299.0 9007 10.0 309.0 5742 10.0 309.0 3658 10.0 309.0 9015 10.0 319.0 5747 10.0 319.0 3661 10.0 319.0 9023 12.0 331.0 5753 12.0 331.0 3665 12.0 331.0 9033 10.0 341.0 5758 10.0 341.0 3668 10.0 341.0 9040 10.0 351.0 5763 10.0 351.0 3671 10.0 351.0 9048 10.0 361.0 5768 10.0 361.0 3674 10.0 361.0 9056 10.0 371.0 5773 10.0 371.0 3678 10.0 371.0 9064 10.0 381.0 5778 10.0 381.0 3681 10.0 381.0 9072 12.0 393.0 5784 12.0 393.0 3685 12.0 393.0 9081 7.0 400.0 5788 7.0 400.0 3687 7.0 400.0 9087 E2-6

Serial RA-13-018 RESPONSE REGARDING THE SEISMIC ASPECTS OF RECOMMENDATION 2.1 SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT (SHNPP)

Table 2 Layer thicknesses, depths, and Vs for 3 profiles, Shearon Harris site Profile 1 Profile 2 Profile 3 depth depth depth thickness(ft) (ft) Vs(ft/s) thickness(ft) (ft) Vs(ft/s) thickness(ft) (if) Vs(ft/s) 10.0 410.0 5790 10.0 410.0 3688 10.0 410.0 9091 10.0 420.0 5795 10.0 420.0 3692 10.0 420.0 9099 10.0 430.0 5800 10.0 430.0 3695 10.0 430.0 9106 10.0 440.0 5805 10.0 440.0 3698 10.0 440.0 9114 10.0 450.0 5810 10.0 450.0 3701 10.0 450.0 9122 10.0 460.0 5815 10.0 460.0 3704 10.0 460.0 9130 10.0 470.0 5820 10.0 470.0 3707 10.0 470.0 9138 10.0 480.0 5825 10.0 480.0 3711 10.0 480.0 9146 10.0 490.0 5830 10.0 490.0 3714 10.0 490.0 9153 10.0 500.0 5837 10.0 500.0 3718 10.0 500.0 9164 104.7 604.7 5863 104.7 604.7 3735 104.7 604.7 9205 104.7 709.5 5916 104.7 709.5 3768 104.7 709.5 9285 104.7 814.2 5968 104.7 814.2 3802 104.7 814.2 9285 104.7 919.0 6020 104.7 919.0 3835 104.7 919.0 9285 104.7 1023.7 6073 104.7 1023.7 3868 104.7 1023.7 9285 104.7 1128.4 6125 104.7 1128.4 3902 104.7 1128.4 9285 104.7 1233.2 6177 104.7 1233.2 3935 104.7 1233.2 9285 104.7 1337.9 6230 104.7 1337.9 3968 104.7 1337.9 9285 104.7 1442.7 6282 104.7 1442.7 4002 104.7 1442.7 9285 104.7 1547.4 6335 104.7 1547.4 4035 104.7 1547.4 9285 104.7 1652.2 6387 104.7 1652.2 4068 104.7 1652.2 9285 104.7 1756.9 6439 104.7 1756.9 4102 104.7 1756.9 9285 104.7 1861.7 6492 104.7 1861.7 4135 104.7 1861.7 9285 104.7 1966.4 6544 104.7 1966.4 4169 104.7 1966.4 9285 104.7 2071.1 6596 104.7 2071.1 4202 104.7 2071.1 9285 104.7 2175.9 6649 104.7 2175.9 4235 104.7 2175.9 9285 104.7 2280.6 6701 104.7 2280.6 4269 104.7 2280.6 9285 104.7 2385.4 6754 104.7 2385.4 4302 104.7 2385.4 9285 104.7 2490.1 6806 104.7 2490.1 4335 104.7 2490.1 9285 104.7 2594.9 6858 104.7 2594.9 4369 104.7 2594.9 9285 135.2 2730.1 6918 135.2 2730.1 4407 135.2 2730.1 9285 135.2 2865.3 6986 135.2 2865.3 4450 135.2 2865.3 9285 135.2 3000.6 7054 135.2 3000.6 4493 135.2 3000.6 9285 E2-7

Serial RA-13-018 RESPONSE REGARDING THE SEISMIC ASPECTS OF RECOMMENDATION 2.1 SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT (SHNPP)

Table 2 Layer thicknesses, depths, and Vs for 3 profiles, Shearon Harris site Profile 1 Profile 2 Profile 3 depth depth depth thickness(ft) (f) Vs(ft/s) thickness(ft) ft Vs(ft/s) thickness(ft) _ f) Vs(ft/s) 135.2 3135.8 7121 135.2 3135.8 4536 135.2 3135.8 9285 135.2 3271.1 7189 135.2 3271.1 4579 135.2 3271.1 9285 135.2 3406.3 7256 135.2 3406.3 4622 135.2 3406.3 9285 135.2 3541.6 7324 135.2 3541.6 4665 135.2 3541.6 9285 135.2 3676.8 7392 135.2 3676.8 4708 135.2 3676.8 9285 135.2 3812.0 7459 135.2 3812.0 4752 135.2 3812.0 9285 135.2 3947.3 7527 135.2 3947.3 4795 135.2 3947.3 9285 135.2 4082.5 7594 135.2 4082.5 4838 135.2 4082.5 9285 135.2 4217.8 7662 135.2 4217.8 4881 135.2 4217.8 9285 135.2 4353.0 7730 135.2 4353.0 4924 135.2 4353.0 9285 135.2 4488.3 7797 135.2 4488.3 4967 135.2 4488.3 9285 135.2 4623.5 7865 135.2 4623.5 5010 135.2 4623.5 9285 135.2 4758.7 7933 135.2 4758.7 5053 135.2 4758.7 9285 135.2 4894.0 8000 135.2 4894.0 5096 135.2 4894.0 9285 105.8 4999.7 8053 105.8 4999.7 5130 105.8 4999.7 9285 3280.8 8280.6 9285 3280.8 8280.6 9285 3280.8 8280.6 9285 E2-8

ENCLOSURE 3 DESCRIPTIONS OF SUBSURFACE MATERIALS AND PROPERTIES AND BASE CASE VELOCITY PROFILES FOR H. B. ROBINSON STEAM ELECTIC PLANT (HBRSEP), UNIT NO. 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-261 RENEWED LICENSE NO. DPR-23 E3-1

Serial RA-13-018 RESPONSE REGARDING THE SEISMIC ASPECTS OF RECOMMENDATION 2.1 H. B. ROBINSON STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT (HBRSEP)

H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant Site Description The basic information used to create the site geologic profile at the H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant is shown in Table 1. This profile was developed using information documented in Reference 1 of this enclosure. As indicated in Reference 1 of this enclosure, the safe shutdown earthquake (SSE) is defined at the ground surface elevation, so the profile up to the ground surface has been modeled for site amplification. For dynamic properties of sand, gravel, clay, sandstone, and mudstone layers, modulus and damping curves were represented with two models. The first model used soil curves taken from Reference 2 of this enclosure, the second model used soil curves taken from Reference 3 of this enclosure and Reference 4 of this enclosure. These dynamic property models were weighted equally.

The 3 base-case shear-wave velocity profiles used to model amplification at the site are shown in Figure 1. Profiles 1, 2, and 3 are weighted 0.4, 0.3, and 0.3, respectively. Thicknesses, depths, and shear-wave velocities (Vs) corresponding to each profile are shown in Table 2.

References

1. URS (2012). Site Geologic Conditions for H.B Robinson Steam Electric Plant,Unit 2, Letter Report PE-RNP-A07-12128 dated July 9, 2012, transmitted by letter from B. Alumbaugh to C. Albers dated July 9, 2012.
2. EPRI (1993). Guidelinesfor Determining Design Basis Ground Motions, Elec. Power Res.

Inst., Palo Alto, CA, Rept. TR-102293, Vol. 1-5.

3. Silva, W.J., N. A. Abrahamson, G.R. Toro, and C. Costantino (1996). Descriptionand Validation of the Stochastic Ground Motion Model, Rept. submitted to Brookhaven NatI.

Lab., Assoc. Universities Inc., Upton NY 11973, Contract No. 770573.

4. Walling, M.A., W.J., Silva and N.A. Abrahamson (2008). "Nonlinear Site Amplification Factors for Constraining the NGA Models," EarthquakeSpectra, 24 (1) 243-255.

E3-2

Serial RA-13-018 RESPONSE REGARDING THE SEISMIC ASPECTS OF RECOMMENDATION 2.1 H. B. ROBINSON STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT (HBRSEP)

Table 1 Summary of Geotechnical Profile Data for H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant Shear Depth* Wave Compressional Assumed Range Density Velocity Wave Velocity Poisson's (feet) Soil/Rock Description (pcf) (fps) (fps) ratio 0 to 56 Recent Alluvium (Sand and Gravel) 125 1000** 1500 0.33 Cretaceous Middendorf 56 to 460 (Sands, Silty and Sandy Clay, Sandstone and Mudstone) 130 3600 7200 0.33 Pre-Cambrian Crystalline

> 460 (Granite, Gneiss, Phyllite Schist) 170 11200 17500 0.15

  • Measured from EL. 226 ft.
    • The original soil profile data obtained from Figure 2.5.1-2 of the HBRSEP Unit 2 Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) has been adjusted based on recommendations of MACTEC in EC54720-ZOO Attachment A. Figure 2.5.1-2 had a shear wave velocity of 750 fps for the first 30ft of soil (measured from EL. 226 ft); whereas, MACTEC suggested an adjusted value of 1000 fps for the first 70ft of soil (measured from EL. 240 ft). All other soil profile data in Table 2 remains the same as given in Figure 2.5.1-2 of the UFSAR.

E3-3

Serial RA-13-018 RESPONSE REGARDING THE SEISMIC ASPECTS OF RECOMMENDATION 2.1 H. B. ROBINSON STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT (HBRSEP)

Vs profiles for Robinson Si te Vs (ft/sec) 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 80100 9000 10000

I 100

-Profile 1 200 --

-Profile 2 f250 -

Profile 3 300 350 400 -- -- ÷ 450 -L_

500 __...

Figure 1. Vs profiles for H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant site E3-4

Serial RA-13-018 RESPONSE REGARDING THE SEISMIC ASPECTS OF RECOMMENDATION 2.1 H. B. ROBINSON STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT (HBRSEP)

Table 2 Layer thicknesses, depths, and Vs for 3 profiles, Robinson site Profile 1 Profile 2 Profile 3 depth depth depth thickness(ft) (ft) Vs(ft/s) thickness(ft) (ft) Vs(ft/s) thickness(ft) (ft) Vs(ft/s) 0 1000 0 640 0 1570 5.6 5.6 1000 5.6 5.6 640 5.6 5.6 1570 5.6 11.2 1000 5.6 11.2 640 5.6 11.2 1570 5.6 16.8 1000 5.6 16.8 640 5.6 16.8 1570 5.6 22.4 1000 5.6 22.4 640 5.6 22.4 1570 5.6 28.1 1000 5.6 28.1 640 5.6 28.1 1570 5.6 33.7 1000 5.6 33.7 640 5.6 33.7 1570 5.6 39.3 1000 5.6 39.3 640 5.6 39.3 1570 5.6 44.9 1000 5.6 44.9 640 5.6 44.9 1570 5.6 50.5 1000 5.6 50.5 640 5.6 50.5 1570 5.6 56.1 1000 5.6 56.1 640 5.6 56.1 1570 5.0 61.1 1566 5.0 61.1 1002 5.0 61.1 2458 4.0 65.1 1706 4.0 65.1 1092 4.0 65.1 2679 7.4 72.5 1914 7.4 72.5 1225 7.4 72.5 3005 7.5 80.1 2110 7.5 80.1 1350 7.5 80.1 3312 11.0 91.0 2312 11.0 91.0 1480 11.0 91.0 3630 15.0 106.0 2531 15.0 106.0 1620 15.0 106.0 3974 18.0 124.0 2815 18.0 124.0 1802 18.0 124.0 4420 22,0 146.1 3100 22.0 146.1 1984 22.0 146.1 4867 25.0 171.1 3380 25.0 171.1 2163 25.0 171.1 5306 33.0 204.1 3720 33.0 204.1 2381 33.0 204.1 5840 42.0 246.1 4150 42.0 246.1 2656 42.0 246.1 6515 35.0 281.1 4520 35.0 281.1 2893 35.0 281.1 7096 35.0 316.1 4520 35.0 316.1 2893 35.0 316.1 7096 33.3 349.4 4780 33.3 349.4 3059 33.3 349.4 7504 33.3 382.7 4780 33.3 382.7 3059 33.3 382.7 7504 33.3 416.1 4780 33.3 416.1 3059 33.3 416.1 7504 44.0 460.1 4780 44.0 460.1 3059 44.0 460.1 7504 3280.8 3740.9 9285 3280.8 3740.9 9285 3280.8 3740.9 9285 E3-5

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=RA-13-018,_Response_to_NRC_Request_for_Information_Pursuant_to_10_CFR_50.54(f)_Regarding_the_Seismic_Aspects_of_Recommendation_2.1_of_the_Near-Term_Task_Force_Review_of_Insights_from_the_Fukushima_Dai-ichi_Accident_-_1.5_Year_Response_for_CEUS_Site&oldid=2454776"