ML13309B625

Shine Medical Technologies, Inc., Application for Construction Permit Response to Environmental Requests for Additional Information, Enclosure 2 Attachment 24 - Seismic Hazard Assesment Report (Janesville) Rev 4, Part 1 of 2

ML13309B625
Person / Time
Site:	SHINE Medical Technologies
Issue date:	08/03/2012
From:	Golder Associates, SHINE Medical Technologies
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML13303A887	List: ML13302C044 ML13309A984 ML13309A987 ML13309A988 ML13309A989 ML13309A990 ML13309A991 ML13309A992 ML13309A993 ML13309A994 ML13309A995 ML13309A996 ML13309B005 ML13309B006 ML13309B007 ML13309B008 ML13309B009 ML13309B010 ML13309B012 ML13309B013 ML13309B014 ML13309B016 ML13309B032 ML13309B033 ML13309B034 ML13309B035 ML13309B036 ML13309B037 ML13309B038 ML13309B039 ML13309B040 ML13309B041 ML13309B618 ML13309B619 ML13309B621 ML13309B622 ML13309B623 ML13309B624 ML13309B625 ML13309B626 ML13309B627 ML13309B628 ML13309B629 ML13309B630 ML13309B631 ML13309B632 ML13309B633 ML13309B634
References
113-81051, SMT-2013-034
Download: ML13309B625 (45)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:62 pages follow ENCLOSURE 2 ATTACHMENT 24

SHINE MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC. SHINE MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC. APPLICATION FOR CONSTRUCTION PERMIT RESPONSE TO ENVIRONMENTAL REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESMENT REPORT JANESVILLE, WISCONSIN REVISION 4, AUGUST 3, 2012

SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESMENT REPORT JANESVILLE, WISCONSIN

Submitted To: Dr. Gregory Piefer/CEO SHINE Medical Technologies 8123 Forsythia St., Suite 140 Middleton, WI 53562 Submitted By: Golder Associates Inc. 4438 Haines Road Duluth, MN 55811 USA Distribution: Katrina Pitas, SHINE Medical Technologies Golder Associates Inc. Project No. 113-81051 Report No. Golder Report 5, Rev 4, August 3, 2012

SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report 1Report#5Executive SummaryThis report provides a summary of a seismic hazard assessment (SHA) completed by Golder Associates Inc. (Golder) for the site of the proposed SHINE medical isotope production facility in Rock County, Wisconsin. The SHA results include a summary of the geologic and tectonic history of a region within approximately 124 miles (200 km) of the SHINE site, a review of regional geologic structures to evaluate whether they are "capable" faults, a review of the historical record of felt and instrumentally-recorded earthquakes, estimation of the maximum earthquake potential, and the seismic parameters recommended for application of the 2009 International Building Code (2009 IBC) and American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) 7-05 standard. The geologic history of the basement rocks and the development and growth of major tectonic structures indicate that the SHINE site is located in a region of relative tectonic stability. Several post-500 million year old geologic structures have been mapped near the site, including the Sandwich and Plum River fault zones, the La Salle anticlinorium, and the Wisconsin and Kankakee Arches. These geologic structures appear to have formed and been seismogenic under a tectonic regime different from the present-day. No seismogenic "capable" faults are recognized within the SHINE site-the closest known "capable" faults are part of the Wabash Valley liquefaction features located about 170 miles (274 km) south of the site, and the New Madrid seismic zone located about 400 miles (644 km) south of the site. Within 124 miles (200 km) of the SHINE site, available earthquake catalogs contain only 35 epicenters for small to moderate earthquakes up to expected moment magnitude (E[ M]) 5.15 that have occurred since 1804. Interpretation of readily-available felt intensity records indicates that only moderate earthquake shaking (i.e., Modified Mercalli Intensity scale V) has probably been felt at the site four times in approximately the last 200 years. Estimates of seismic hazard for the region from the U.S. Geological Survey 2008 national seismic hazard maps indicate that the SHINE site is located within one of the lowest earthquake hazard areas in the conterminous United States. For example, a peak ground acceleration (PGA) value of 0.19 g (a moderate to strong level of earthquake ground shaking) has a return period estimated at more than 19,900 years. We evaluated the 2,475- to 19,900-year return period deaggregations of the national seismic hazard model for the SHINE site. Based on this model, a magnitude 5.8 earthquake is an acceptable estimate of the maximum earthquake magnitude expected for the SHINE site. Seismic parameters required for application of the 2009 IBC-ASCE 7-05 seismic design procedures are shown in Table ES-1 below. 2SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report Report#5Table ES-1 2009 IBC-ASCE 7-05 Seismic Parameters for the SHINE SiteParameterValue S S 0.129 g S 1 0.050 g Site Class D S MS 0.206 g S M1 0.119 g F a 1.6 F v 2.4 T L12 seconds Notes: 1. Parameters based on SHINE site location of 42.624136°N, 89.024875°W. 2. Parameters include: short period spectral response acceleration (S S), 1-second spectral response acceleration (S 1), maximum considered earthquake spectral response for short period (S MS), maximum considered earthquake spectral response for 1-second period (S M1), site coefficient for short period (F a), site coefficient for 1-second pe-riod (F v) (IBC, 2009); long-period transition period (T L) (ASCE, 2005). 3. S Sand S 1are for Site Class B; S MS and S M1for Site Class D. Table of Contents List of Tables

List of Figures

5Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report 1.0) IntroductionSHINE Medical Technologies (SHINE) proposes to construct a manufacturing plant for production of Molybdenum-99 (99Mo) at a site located south of the community of Janesville in Rock County, Wisconsin (Figure 1.1-1). SHINE has contracted Golder Associates Inc. (Golder) toprovide a range of technical services in support of the environmental impact assessment, site application process for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC), and groundwater hydrology and geotechnical engineering analysis for engineering design. To date, Golder has completed a range of subsurface boreholes, soil testing, groundwater assessment, and geotechnical analyses at the SHINE site (Golder, 2012a; 2012b; 2012c). The geotechnical analyses are to support initial engineering design of manufacturing and related facilities proposedat the SHINE site. One important aspect of both the site safety analysis process and engineering design is the assessment of seismic hazard at the site. While Wisconsin is not generally regarded as an area of high historical earthquake activity and seismic hazard, it remains necessary for engineering design to quantify the level of earthquake hazard at the site. Principal outputs of this seismic hazard assessment (SHA) are as follows:

• A description of the geologic, tectonic and seismic history of the region surrounding the SHINE site;
• An evaluation of the location and activity of any "capable" faults that could affect the SHINE site; and
• Seismic parameters recommended for structural analysis and design of both building and non-building structures as outlined in the 2009 IBC-ASCE 7-05 procedures. 1.1) Work ScopeThe full extent of professional services and associated tasks SHINE contracted from Golder are set out in Golder's proposal to Shine Medical Technologies on October 6, 2011 (Golder proposal P113-81051). For the SHA, Golder has undertaken the following office-based tasks:
• Acquire and review regional and site geology within the region of the SHINE site, including regional stratigraphy, regional geologic history and structural development, and location and seismic potential of any significant basement structures as indicated by the analysis of geophysical data such as magnetic and gravity anomalies, deep seismic reflection interpretations, and borehole measurements.
• Search online databases of historical seismicity to develop a project-specific historical epicenter catalog within the region of the SHINE site, including records of felt earthquake intensity (isoseismal maps) for the major historical earthquakes.
• Review available geologic information to evaluate the potential for seismically "capable" faults within the region of the SHINE site.
• Evaluate the seismic hazard at the site by obtaining estimates of peak ground acceleration (PGA) and spectral accelerations (S a) from the 2008 U.S. Geological 6Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report Survey (USGS) national seismic hazard maps and associated ground motion estimation tools.
• Recommend seismic parameters for application of the 2009 IBC-ASCE 7-05 standard procedures.
• Evaluate the Maximum Earthquake Potential for the site by completing a deaggregation of the 2008 USGS seismic hazard model to evaluate source(s) of the seismic hazard at a range of return periods from 475 to 19,900 years.
• Prepare this report, including figures, maps, tables, and databases. The principal purpose of this report is to summarize existing geologic and seismic information for the Shine site and surrounding region. The information is provided to contribute descriptions of the site geologic and seismic characteristics for the environmental impact assessment of the project. The seismic information contained in this report also forms part of the engineering analyses for the SHINE site. This report is not the Safety Analysis Report (SAR) for the site characteristics, which is at present in preparation. Golder has, however, reviewed the guidelines of NUREG 1537 Parts 1 and 2, Section 2.5 for non-power reactors so that information provided in this SHA is, wherever practical, compatible with the NUREG 1537 guidelines. The preparation of this report was undertaken following the Golder Quality Assurance Program Description (QAPD) (Golder, 2012d). Golder's Geotechnical Engineering Report for Janesville, Wisconsin (Golder, 2012a) provides a description of the QAPD. 1.2) DefinitionsFor the purposes of this report we define the SHINE region as the area within a 124-mile (200 km) radius of the SHINE project site (SHINE site) near Janesville. For the assessment of the "capability" of the mapped faults, we use the definition of "capable" as set out in Appendix A of 10 CFR Part 100: a "capable" fault is a fault with at least one of the following: 1. Movement at or near the ground surface at least once within the past 35,000 years or movement of a recurring nature within the past 500,000 years. 2. Macro-seismicity instrumentally determined with records of sufficient precision to demonstrate a direct relationship with the fault. 3. A structural relationship to a capable fault according to characteristics above such that movement on one could be reasonably expected to be accompanied by movement on the other. The 10 CFR Part 100 definition of "capable" identifies faults that are considered capable of being the source of moderate to large earthquakes in the future. Evidence for the existence of capable faults is based on a geomorphic expression of surface fault rupture in surficial sediments that range in age from present day to 35,000 and/or 500,000 years old, instrumental evidence for the alignment of hypocenters that could indicate a subsurface fault; and in the case where these 7Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report types of evidence are lacking, a structural relationship with a known capable fault (i.e., a fault is parallel or offsets similarly aged rocks by the same amount as the capable fault). 1.3) LimitationsSeismic hazard assessment and geotechnical earthquake engineering are dynamic and fast- evolving fields of research and engineering practice. The standard of practice in this technical area will continue to develop. In keeping with the evolving standards, the seismic design parameters presented in this report should be reviewed and updated when new data and/or new practice standards become available.

8Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report 2.0) Geologic Setting of the SHINE SiteIn this section we summarize the regional geologic and tectonic setting of the SHINE site, and describe the site's earthquake-related hazards. The summary is based on a review of relevant, readily-available, peer-reviewed published reports and maps. We have not undertaken an exhaustive review of all information; additional information may be available in sources such as records and unpublished reports from federal and state agencies, and unpublished reports in theses, fieldtrip guides and conference papers. This summary includes a description of the following major geologic characteristics within about 124 miles (200 km) of the SHINE site:

• Regional physiography and geomorphology
• Tectonic provinces and structures within the basement rocks
• Bedrock geology including stratigraphy, lithology and structure
• Magnetic and gravity geophysical anomalies
• Surficial geology and glacial history Our analysis of these characteristics focuses on identifying the major geologic and geophysical structures in the region, and evaluating any evidence that these structures represent potential seismogenic sources for historical and future large earthquakes. The analysis is qualitative only.

In Section 2.2 Site Geology, the geologic setting, structural geology, and geologic history of the SHINE site with respect to the regional geologic and tectonic history are summarized in greater detail. 2.1) Regional GeologyThe rocks and geologic structures that comprise the regional geology of Wisconsin record several phases of continent building and deformation, sedimentary deposition, and glacial and post-glacial processes. These are described in further detail below. 2.1.1) Physiography and GeomorphologyWisconsin and the SHINE site are located within the Central Lowland Province of the Interior Plains Division of the United States (USGS, 2003)-one of many geomorphic, or physiographic regions of the United States as defined by terrain texture, rock type, and geologic structure and history. The regions represent a three-tiered classification of the United States by division, province, and section. Figure 2.1-1 shows the boundaries of the three physiographic sections of the Central Lowland Province that surround and include the SHINE site. The south-central portion of Wisconsin is located within the Till Plains-a region of predominantly Illinoian-age glacial deposits (formed 310,000 to 128,000 years ago). To the west is the Wisconsin Driftless section-a region of unglaciated terrain. To the east is the Eastern Lake section containing the most recent topography associated with glacial advance deposits surrounding present-day Lake Michigan. 9Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report The present-day physiography of the Central Lowland Province and the three sections described above has been influenced strongly by processes associated with Pleistocene (1.8 million years to 10,000 years ago) glacial erosion and deposition, and the subsequent post-glacial erosional and deposition as described by Fullerton et al. (2003) and Attig et al. (2011). Glacial processes in this part of Wisconsin were part of the widespread glaciations that affected the entire northern portion of the continent. Although the most recent episode of widespread glacial advance in Wisconsin (late Wisconsin Glaciation) occurred from approximately 31,000 years ago to about 11,000 years ago, and covered much of the state, the immediate area of the SHINE site was not covered by glacial ice during this episode. 2.1.2) Tectonic Provinces and Major StructuresThe tectonic provinces and structures surrounding the SHINE site preserve a record of major geologic events over about the last 2.6 billion years of geologic history. Figure 2.1-2 (left) is a generalized summary of the major older (Archean and Paleoproterozoic-2.6 to 1.6 billion years ago [Ga]) geologic provinces, structures and phases of major crustal deformation (orogens). Figure 2.1-2 (right) summarizes the same information but for the relatively younger Meso- to Neo-late Proterozoic time (1.6 to 0.542 Ga). In Wisconsin and the surrounding region, the geologic age of the tectonic provinces and structures generally decreases from north to south. These geologic provinces are inferred to represent several stages of continental expansion that occurred by processes of continental accretion and intrusions of igneous rock (e.g., granite); and continental rifting related to partial continental breakup. The tectonic chronological overview below is drawn from the studies of Charpentier (1987), Howell and van der Pluijm (1990), Sims and Carter (1996), Braschayko (2005), Sims et al. (2005), Schulz and Cannon (2007), Whitmeyer and Karlstrom (2007), Cannon et al. (2008), Garrity and Soller (2009), and Hammer et al. (2011). The Superior or Southern Province of the Canadian Shield in northern Wisconsin forms part of the Archean craton that preserves rocks ranging in age from approximately 2.6 to 2.75 Ga. In the northern Wisconsin and Lake Superior region, the Superior Province (Figure 2.1-2) consists of gneiss, amphibolites, granite, and metavolcanic rock types. The Penokean Orogen (Figure 2.1-2) in northern Wisconsin represents two phases of accretion to the southern margin of the Canadian Shield in this part of North America. Approximately 1.86- 1.84 Ga ago, the Pembrine-Wausau Terrane, a volcanic arc, accreted to the Canadian Shield along an east-northeast-trending suture zone. Then approximately 1.84-1.82 Ga, the Marshfield Terrane, composed of Archean crust, accreted to the Pembrine-Wausau Terrane. The processes of continental accretion continued as the Yavapai Province, included in the Central Plains Orogen (Figure 2.1-2) of southern Wisconsin, accreted to the Penokean Orogen terranes approximately 1.76-1.72 Ga. The Yavapai Province represents an assemblage of oceanic volcanic arc rocks as inferred by the abundance of rhyolite and granite rocks preserved within the Province. In southern Wisconsin, quartzite deposits with an approximate age of 1.7 Ga were deposited as the siliceous rhyolite and granite rocks were eroded and deposited in local sedimentary basins. Following the accretion of the Yavapai Province, the Mazatzal Province of southern Wisconsin and northern Illinois accreted to the Yavapai Province approximately 1.69-1.65 Ga. Accretion occurred along a northeast-striking (northwest vergent) suture zone (Figure 2.1-2). The Mazatzal Province rocks, included in the Central Plains Orogen, represent volcanic and related 10Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report sedimentary rocks that formed at the then-active continental margin. Intrusion of granite-rhyolite rocks into the Penokean Orogen terranes, and Yavapai and Mazatzal Provinces along the southern Wisconsin border region and in northern Wisconsin, occurred at approximately 1.48- 1.35 Ga. At approximately 1.1-1.2 Ga, a period of continental breakup resulted in the development of the Mid-Continent Rift (Figure 2.1-2). While the rifting ultimately failed to fully break up this part of North America, it left a major geologic and geophysical region known as the Mid-Continent Rift (MCR). The MCR can be traced north from Michigan up through Lake Superior, then southwest through northern Wisconsin and the Midwest of the United States (Figure 2.1-2). Rocks associated with the MCR include flood basalt, rhyolite, sandstone, and gabbroic assemblages. In addition, several northeast-striking normal faults developed in southern Wisconsin as part of intracontinental extension within the Marshfield Terrane, Yavapai and Mazatzal Provinces, 1.7 Ga quartzite deposits, and 1.48-1.35 Ga granite-rhyolite rocks. During the Paleozoic Era, the Michigan Basin formed and accumulated substantial thicknesses of Cambrian to Pennsylvanian sedimentary deposits (540 to 300 million years [Ma] ago) (Figure 2.1-3). The Michigan Basin is one of several basins in the Midwest that contain predominantly Paleozoic sedimentary rocks underlain by Precambrian basement rock units. Models for the formation of the Michigan Basin include post-rifting thermal subsidence, tectonic reactivation of pre-existing crustal structures, and regional subsidence influenced by the active Appalachian Orogeny farther east. Three major structures that controlled the western margin of the Michigan Basin are present in Wisconsin-the Wisconsin Dome in northern Wisconsin, the north-trending Wisconsin Arch in the southern portion of the state and trending into northern Illinois, and the northwest-trending Kankakee Arch in northern Illinois and Indiana. 2.1.3) Bedrock GeologyThe Proterozoic basement rocks beneath and surrounding the SHINE site are parts of the Marshfield, Penokean, Yavapai, Mazatzal Provinces/Terranes (Figure 2.1-2), as well as local quartzite and granite-rhyolite intrusive rocks that, in general, are overlain by Paleozoic marine sedimentary rocks. The following discussion of regional bedrock for the project region, including stratigraphy and lithology, is based on geological maps prepared by Mudrey et al. (1982) and Garrity and Soller (2009). Figure 2.1-4 shows the mapped bedrock geology of the project region. The oldest rocks in the project region occur in the north (Figure 2.1-4), consisting of isolated Early Proterozoic quartzite and felsic volcanic rocks, and the Middle Proterozoic Wolf River Batholith. The oldest Phanerozoic sedimentary rocks generally occur in the northwest, but are also locally present where younger bedrock units have been eroded away, or where the older bedrock has been locally uplifted along major faults. Cambrian sedimentary rocks composed of sandstone, dolomite, and shale represent the oldest Phanerozoic bedrock units. Flanking the eastern and southern margins of the Cambrian bedrock units are Ordovician shale, dolomite, and sandstone, with additional limestone and conglomerate units. The Ordovician units are in turn flanked to the south and east by Silurian dolomite. Along the southern portion of the project area, upper Devonian and Pennsylvanian limestone, sandstone and clay rocks have been mapped. Upper Devonian and lower Mississippian carbonate, sandstone and shale rocks are preserved along the eastern portion of the project area. 11Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report 2.1.4) Structural GeologyWe summarize the structural geology of the SHINE site region in terms of major faults and folds. The summary commences with structures mapped in Wisconsin and then continues clockwise through Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, and Minnesota (Figure 2.1-3). Additionally, we describe and discuss the development of regional structural basins and arches. Basement faults mapped in Rock County are discussed separately in Section 2.2.2. Faults are described in terms of "capable faults" per 10 CFR Part 100, Appendix A. Several faults have been mapped in the Wisconsin portion of the SHINE project region. In Waupaca County, an unnamed, east-northeast-striking, approximately 19-mile-long (31 km) normal fault (south side down) was interpreted by Sims et al. (1992) to mark the contact between early Proterozoic rhyolite and Waupaca granite of the 1.470 Ga Wolf River Batholith (Figure 2.1- 3). Mudrey et al. (1982) present an alternative interpretation that this fault offsets only Cambrian and Ordovician sedimentary units. Based on the similar length, strike, and mapped location of this fault with respect to faults discussed below, we conclude that this unnamed fault is not a "capable" fault. The Waukesha fault of southeastern Wisconsin is a northeast-striking normal fault (southeast side down) mapped to occur with Silurian and possibly Ordovician sedimentary rock units (Mudrey et al., 1982) (Figure 2.1-3). Fault length estimates range from 38.5 miles (62 km) to 133 miles (214 km), with multiple strands or splays possible (see Braschayko, 2005). Based on the interpretation of Exelon (2006a), there is no evidence that the Waukesha fault or associated minor faults have Pleistocene or post-Pleistocene displacement. We conclude, therefore, that these faults are not "capable" faults. The Madison fault is mapped as an east-striking, approximately 8-mile-long (13 km) fault by Mudrey et al. (1982) (Figure 2.1-3). From Exelon (2006a), two fault segments of the Madison fault are inferred: a northern segment with north side downthrown 40 to 75 feet (12.2 to 23 m), and a southern segment with south side downthrown 85 to 125 feet (26 to 38 m). Both fault segments lack evidence for Pleistocene or post-Pleistocene displacement. We conclude, therefore, that the Madison faults are not "capable" faults. Located in the southwestern corner of Wisconsin, plus adjacent portions of Iowa and Illinois, the Upper Mississippi Valley mining district contains folds with southeast-, east- and northeast-trending fold axes. These folds include the Mineral Point and Meekers Grove anticlines, and Galena syncline (Exelon, 2006a; 2006b) (Figure 2.1-3). The northeast-striking Mifflin fault is approximately 10 miles (16 km) long and is located on the northeast limb of the Mineral Point anticline (DPC, 2010). The Mifflin fault has at least 65 feet (20 m) of vertical separation (northeast side down) and about 1,000 feet (305 m) of strike-slip separation, with the most recent fault movement estimated to have occurred from 330 Ma to 240 Ma (DPC, 2010). The last movement on the Mineral Point and Meekers Grove anticlines is estimated by Exelon (2006a) as Late Paleozoic in age. We conclude, therefore, that the Mifflin fault, and Mineral Point and Meekers Grove anticlines are not "capable" faults. Major faults within the bedrock of Michigan have not been identified by Garrity and Soller (2009), or in northwestern Indiana by Nelson (1995). Thus, the potential for "capable" faults in these areas is not considered further. 12Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report In northeastern Illinois, a northwest-striking fault zone with Precambrian basement downthrown to the southwest 900 feet (274 m) has been mapped in the Chicago area by Exelon (2006a) and DPC (2010). The most recent fault offset may be pre-middle Ordovician in age. An additional interpretation by DPC (2010) suggests that the Precambrian basement is not offset and this fault may not be present. An additional 25 minor faults are identified in the subsurface of CookCounty. The location and existence of these faults is based on the interpretation of subsurface seismic data. The interpretations indicate up to 55 feet (17 m) of vertical displacement at faults dated as post-Silurian and pre-Pleistocene in age (DPC, 2010) (Figure 2.1-3). None of these faults have evidence of displacement of the present-day ground surface. We conclude, therefore, that the Chicago area and Cook County faults are not "capable" faults. The Sandwich fault zone in northern Illinois is a northwest-striking, approximately 85-mile-long (137 km), normal fault system with a generally down-to-the-northeast sense of vertical displacement, and up to approximately 330 feet (100 m) of vertical separation (Kolata et al., 2005; DPC, 2010) (Figure 2.1-3). There are also mapped anticlines with fold axes parallel to the fault system (Exelon, 2006b). The most recent movement is constrained to post-Silurian time and pre-Pleistocene (DPC, 2010), or post-Pennsylvanian and pre-Pleistocene (Exelon, 2006a). Based on felt intensities, the earthquakes of May 26, 1909 and January 2, 1912 may be related to the Sandwich fault zone within the Precambrian basement (Larson, 2002; Exelon, 2006a). However, the lack of surface rupture in the last 35,000 years, and lack of microearthquake activity associated with the fault suggests that the Sandwich fault is not a "capable" fault. The La Salle anticlinorium is a northwest-trending, series of folds in northern Illinois, and is located on the eastern flank of the Illinois Basin (DPC, 2010) (Figure 2.1-3). Faults may be present on the west flank of the anticlinorium and exhibit pre-Cretaceous movement (DPC, 2010). The major movement of the fold belt is post-Mississippian (Exelon, 2006a). Larson (2002) suggested that three historic earthquakes in 1881, 1972, and 1999 may have been generated on faults associated with the northwest-trending Peru monocline that is part of the La Salle anticlinorium. Larson suggests that these moderate earthquakes may indicate that some faults within this larger Paleozoic structure could be in the process of reactivation within the present-day stress field. The lack of surface rupture in the last 35,000 years, and lack of microearthquake activity associated with the faults related to folds suggests that the faults associated with the La Salle anticlinorium are not "capable" faults. In northern Illinois and eastern Iowa, the Plum River fault zone is an approximately 150-mile-long (241 km), east-northeast-striking fault and fold system (DPC, 2010; Witzke et al., 2010) (Figure 2.1-3). The faults have en-echelon segments with 100 to 400 feet (30 to 122 m) of vertical, down- to-the-north separation. Exelon (2006b) recognizes synclines and anticlines that are parallel to the fault system. The last movement on the fault zone is constrained between post-middle Silurian and pre-middle Illinoian (DPC, 2010). No evidence of Quaternary activity has been identified on the Plum River fault zone by Exelon (2006a). Based on the lack of confirmed Quaternary movements, we conclude that the faults associated with the Plum River fault zone are not "capable" faults. To the south of the Plum River fault zone, the Iowa City-Clinton fault zone follows a similar east- northeast strike to that of the Plum River fault zone (Witzke et al., 2010) (Figure 2.1-3). The Iowa City-Clinton fault zone has a south-side-down sense of vertical separation. The Iowa City-Clinton fault zone has not been mapped in Illinois (Kolata et al., 2005). There is no known evidence for displacement during the Quaternary Period along mapped traces of the Iowa City-Clinton fault 13Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report zone. Based on similar geometries and physiographic settings for both fault zones, we conclude that faults associated with the Iowa City-Clinton fault zone are not "capable" faults. Located in the southeast corner of Minnesota, several northwest-to northeast-striking faults up to approximately 9 miles (14 km) long offset Cambrian to Ordovician sedimentary units in the Yavapai Province (Jirsa et al., 2011) (Figure 2.1-3). DPC (2010) completed a study of facility site characteristics at a boiling water reactor south of Genoa, Wisconsin. They concluded that faults within a 200-mile (322 km) radius of the site are at least pre-Pleistocene in age and, therefore, are not "capable" faults. They note that the closest mapped fault to the Genoa project site "... of any size-" is the Mifflin fault. While the faults of Jirsa et al. (2011) are not specifically mentioned in DPC (2010), we conclude based on DPC (2010) that the faults in the southeast corner of Minnesota are not "capable" faults. The faults and folds described above have developed during the formation and development of a series of regional basins, arches and domes (Figure 2.1-3). The Michigan Basin contains Cambrian to Pennsylvanian sedimentary deposits (540 Ma to 300 Ma). The Illinois Basin is located to the southwest of the SHINE site. The last known major tectonic movements occurred in the Michigan Basin in the early to late Proterozoic (Exelon, 2006a). The Wisconsin Dome is located in the northern portion of Wisconsin, to the west of the Michigan Basin (Heyl et al., 1978). Separating the basins and domes are several structural arches. The Wisconsin Arch trends south from the Wisconsin Dome and had its last major tectonic movements in the early to late Paleozoic (Exelon, 2006a). The Kankakee Arch in northern Illinois forms the southwestern margin of the Michigan Basin (Howell and van der Pluijm, 1990), and had its last major tectonic movements in the Ordovician to Pennsylvanian (Exelon, 2006a). The Mississippi River Arch to the west of the Illinois Basin had its last major tectonic movements in the post-early Pennsylvanian (Exelon, 2006a). 2.1.5) Magnetic and Gravity Geophysical AnomaliesMaps and interpretations of geophysical magnetic and gravity anomalies have been used by others to summarize the geologic interpretations of geophysical anomalies for the project region. Much of the published literature focuses on areas in central and northern Wisconsin, such as the MCR, Penokean fold belt, and Wolf River Batholith (e.g., Klasner et al., 1985; Chandler, 1996). We reviewed five principal sources of magnetic anomaly data: the magnetic anomaly map of North America (NAMAG, 2002); subsequent interpretation of Precambrian basement by Sims et al. (2005); the Earth magnetic anomaly grid (Maus et al., 2009); the Wisconsin composite aeromagnetic map of Daniels and Snyder (2002); and a magnetic anomaly map of Illinois from Daniels et al. (2008). Figure 2.1-5 is the magnetic anomaly map from Maus et al. (2009) with interpretation of Precambrian basement structures from Sims et al. (2005). The magnetic anomalies have been interpreted by Sims et al. (2005) to illustrate the major tectonic features such as the MCR and major basement faults. Sims et al. (2005) also infer several northeast-striking ductile shear zones (faults in the mid to lower crust) and northwest-striking high-angle faults. They suggest that these basement structures are of late Paleoproterozoic-Mesoproterozoic age (1.76-1.70 Ga), and were the result of northwest-southeast shortening of the crust at that time. These shear zones probably bound the 1.76-1.65 Ga belt of rhyolite-quartz arenite to the north of the SHINE site. To the south of this belt of siliceous rocks, the Eastern granite-rhyolite province (1.5-1.4 Ga) is preserved and continues into Illinois. The SHINE site is located within the Eastern granite-14Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report rhyolite province. Figure 2.1-6 is a large-scale map of uninterpreted magnetic anomalies of Wisconsin and northern Illinois (Maus et al., 2009). We reviewed three principal sources of gravity anomaly data for the region: the Bouguer gravity anomaly map of the conterminous United States presented by Kucks (1999), the Bouguer gravity anomaly map of Wisconsin prepared by Daniels and Snyder (2002), and a Bouguer gravity anomaly map of Illinois (Daniels et al., 2008). Interpretation of the gravity maps suggests that the southern margin of the central Wisconsin gravity low is possibly the northeast-trending shear zone that marks the boundary between the rhyolite-quartz arenite belt and Eastern granite-rhyolite province. Figures 2.1-7 and 2.1-8 are uninterpreted Bouguer gravity anomaly maps on the regional scale, and display Wisconsin and northern Illinois, respectively. These maps show the MCR as a strong positive anomaly because it is a region of dense volcanic and igneous rocks surrounded by lower-density sedimentary rocks. The Wolf River Batholith is interpreted by Chandler (1996) to be the source of the large negative gravity anomaly in central Wisconsin. 2.1.6) Surficial Geology and Glacial HistoryThe surficial geology of the SHINE project region is controlled principally by processes associated with the advance and retreat of Pleistocene glaciers, and processes such as erosion and sedimentation that followed the retreat of glacial ice (post-glacial). Several major periods of Pleistocene ice advance are recognized in northern North America. These Pleistocene glaciations are known as the pre-Illinoian, Illinoian (also referred to as pre-Wisconsin), and Wisconsin (Roy et al. 2004) glaciations. Figure 2.1-9 is a map of the surficial geology of the SHINE project region as modified from Fullerton et al. (2003). Figure 2.1-10 indicates the estimated thickness of overburden and drift for Wisconsin and northern Illinois (Piskin and Bergstrom, 1975; WGNHS, 1983). The following summary is based on physiographic divisions from the USGS (2003), and summaries of the surficial geology and glacial history described by USDA SCS (1974), Fullerton et al. (2003), WGNHS (2004), Clayton and Attig (2007), and MLRA (2012). The oldest known landform in the project region is the unglaciated Wisconsin Driftless section of the Central Lowland Province. The Wisconsin Driftless section contains relatively rugged, fluvially-dissected topography with about 600 feet (180 m) of topographic relief. Based on its geomorphology and lack preserved glacial deposits, the Wisconsin Driftless section has not been glaciated. In Dane County, Wisconsin, the Driftless section comprises near-horizontal Paleozoic sedimentary rocks that are locally mantled by Pleistocene deposits of windblown (eolian) and hillslope sediments. Landforms composed of glacial deposits that formed during the Illinoian and Wisconsin Glaciations are present within the SHINE site region. During the Wisconsin Glaciations, the Laurentide Ice Sheet flowed south and comprised several ice lobes, including the Green Bay and Lake Michigan ice lobes that flowed over the SHINE site region. Glacial till was deposited from these ice lobes as basal and end moraines. Sand and gravel were transported from the edges of the glacial ice across to form extensive glacial outwash fan surfaces. Fine-grained sediments (silt and clay) were deposited within proglacial lakes near the ice margins and within the outwash plain. The maximum extent of the Wisconsin Glaciation ice occurred approximately 30,000 years ago. Ice was absent from the area of the state of Wisconsin by about 11,000 years ago (Attig et al., 2011). Alluvial and wind processes reworked the glacial deposits during the Holocene Epoch (last 10,000 years) during and following ice retreat. 15Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report With the retreat and almost complete melting of the Laurentide ice sheet, land surfaces of North America experienced a period of adjustment (known as glacial isostatic adjustment, or GIA) that continues to the present day. In GIA, slow movements occur in the highly viscous mantle, in response to the loading and unloading of the Earth's surface. In North America, GIA is still causing vertical movements of the land surface because of the removal of significant volumes of ice more than 10,000 years ago. Based on Global Positioning System (GPS) measurements, Sella et al. (2007) established a hinge line in the Great Lakes vicinity; north of the line, uplift from GIA is still occurring (e.g., 10 mm/yr of present day uplift at Hudson Bay, Canada), while south of the line subsidence of up to 2 mm/yr is ongoing. Based on the GIA model of Sella et al. (2007), Wisconsin has 0 to 2 mm/yr of ongoing subsidence. This subsidence is, however, regional in nature and not expected to result in any differential movements across the SHINE site. 2.1.7) ConclusionGolder's review of the regional geological stratigraphy, structure, and tectonics found no positive evidence that the region's major geologic structures have experienced any significant tectonic movements in Quaternary time (over the last 1.8 million years). Geologic and geophysical structures are preserved in the pre-Phanerozoic basement rocks and appear related to major episodes of continent accretion and breakup before about 500 million years ago. We identified several structures that appear to deform the Paleozoic rocks in the SHINE region: the Sandwich fault zone, the La Salle anticlinorium, several small and limited-length faults, and the regional Wisconsin and Kankakee Arches. The Wisconsin and Kankakee Arches are regional-scale, long wavelength tectonic features that appear related to crustal adjustment during and following the filling and development of the Michigan Basin more than 300 million years ago. The bedrock faults such as the Sandwich and Plum River fault zones appear to have generated vertical offset of the Paleozoic rocks, indicating that the fault movements post-date the filling of the Michigan Basin. We found no evidence, however, that either of these faults has propagated upward into the Late Wisconsin sediments and/or to the ground surface. The lack of surface traces for these faults suggests that there has been no significant displacement of the faults at the ground surface for perhaps 35,000 years. The pattern of historical seismicity of the region does not demonstrate a positive alignment of the few known epicenters that might indicate ongoing seismic activity and reactivation of these older structures by the present-day stress field. The epicenter of the E[ M] 5.15 earthquake in 1909 estimated by Bakun and Hopper (2004) is, however, close to the mapped trace of the Sandwich fault within the Paleozoic rocks of northern Illinois (Figure 3.1-1). It is not clear, however, whether the single, moderate-magnitude earthquake indicates reactivation of the Sandwich fault zone, or if it was generated by localized strain release on some other small-scale fault. Based on our review of and interpretation of available literature and data, including USNRC documents for other sites, we have not found any evidence for "capable" faults within approximately 124 miles (200 km) of the SHINE site. 16Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report 2.2) Site GeologyThis section is a summary the geologic setting, stratigraphy and structure within about a 6 mile (10 km) radius of the SHINE site. 2.2.1) Geologic History of SHINE SiteAs described in the previous Section 2.1 Regional Geology, the Precambrian basement rocks originated as geologic terranes were accreted to the North American continent prior to about 1.48-1.35 Ga. During the Paleozoic Era, the region lay within a large continental marine area where shallow deposits of marine sediments accumulated within the Michigan Basin. Development of the Wisconsin Arch resulted in the formation of long wavelength, open regional folds within the Cambrian through Ordovician sedimentary rocks. Based on the geologic maps by Mudrey et al. (1982) and Cannon et al. (1999), we infer that the bedrock beneath the SHINE site is Cambrian-age sandstone with some dolomite and shale (Figure 2.1-4). The sedimentary rocks of the Michigan Basin and Wisconsin Arch overlie Archean and Proterozoic volcanic and associated basement rocks that were intruded by a 1.48-1.35 Ga granite-rhyolite intrusive episode (Whitmeyer and Karlstrom 2007). These basement units are part of the Yavapai or Mazatzal Province/Terrane (Figure 2.1-2). The mapped bedrock geology in the vicinity of the project site is composed of the Ordovician Period Prairie du Chien Group (dolomite with some sandstone and shale), Ancell Group (sandstone with minor limestone, shale, and conglomerate), and Sinnippee Group (dolomite with some limestone and shale). From Mudrey et al. (1982), the Ordovician sedimentary rock sequence is approximately 200 feet (60 m) thick, and underlain by an estimated 1,000 feet (300 m) of Cambrian sedimentary rock, that in turn overlies the Precambrian basement rocks. The surficial geology of Rock County consists of the Wisconsin-age Jonestown moraine to the north. This moraine was formed at the margins of the Green Bay ice lobe. The remainder of the county contains Illinoian-age ground moraine deposits that in places were dissected by southward flowing Late Wisconsin outwash streams. The stream valleys now contain Late Wisconsin- and possibly Holocene-age glaciofluvial outwash deposits (Fullerton et al., 2003; RCGIS, 2012). The Green Bay ice lobe also produced paleo-lakes Yahara and Scuppernong with outflow that extended through the Rock River drainage basin (Clayton and Attig, 1997). Soil mapping at and surrounding the project site shows Warsaw and Lorenzo well-drained, loamy soils underlain by stratified sand and gravel at depths of approximately 10 to 40 inches (0.25 to 1 m) (USDA SCS, 1974; RCGIS, 2012). The sand and gravel units represent outwash plains and terrace deposits. Two estimates of depth to bedrock at the SHINE site are available: an estimate of 200-300 feet (60-90 m) from WGNHS (1983), and an estimate of 100 to 300 feet (30-90 m) from Mudrey et al. (1982). A third estimate is available from Winnebago County, Illinois at the Illinois-Wisconsin state border about 8.7 miles (14 km) south of the SHINE site. At this border, topographic contours to top of bedrock range from 500 feet to 700 feet (152 to 213 m) elevation in the Rock River Valley (McGarry, 2000). 17Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report Review of the borehole logs from the SHINE site (Golder, 2012a) indicates that the depth to bedrock at the site is more than 221 feet (67.4 m) below ground surface (bgs). Subsurface conditions include about 1 foot of topsoil and crop residue overlying a relatively clean, fine to coarse grained sand that extends to depths of 180 to 185 feet (54.9 to 56.4 m) bgs, followed by 10 to 18 feet (3.1 to 5.5 m) of sandy silt, and finally silty sand to 221 feet (67.4 m) bgs. The sediments underlying the site are predominantly sand derived from fluvial reworking of glacial outwash deposits. We interpret from the lack of weathering and near-surface sand density that the sediments are Late Wisconsin to Holocene in age. 2.2.2) Structural GeologyThe SHINE project site is located near the axis of the Wisconsin Arch (Charpentier, 1987) (Figure 2.1-3). Despite the presence of the arch, cross sections from Mudrey et al. (1982), suggest that Cambrian and Ordovician sedimentary rock units beneath the site probably have shallow to horizontal dips. These data indicate little or no net deformation beneath the site over about the last 500 million years. Two east-striking faults within Cambrian to Ordovician sedimentary bedrock are identified in Rock County by Mudrey et al. (1982). The Janesville fault (also named the Evansville fault) consists of an approximately 19-mile-long (31 km), east-striking fault with north side down (DPC, 2010) located approximately 6 miles (10 km) north of Janesville (Figure 2.1-3). This fault is identified as the predominant fault segment, with a second segment striking to the north (DPC, 2010). We assume that an estimated 70 feet (21.3 m) of displacement for the downthrown side (Exelon, 2006a) of the Janesville fault is associated with the primary east-striking fault segment. There is no evidence of Pleistocene or post-Pleistocene activity on the Janesville fault (Exelon, 2006a). We conclude that the Janesville fault is not a "capable" fault. An unnamed, approximately 1.6-mile-long, (2.6 km) east-trending fault in Rock County is located approximately 1.9 miles (3.1 km) north of Janesville (Mudrey et al., 1982) (Figure 2.1-4). We are unable to identify the type or amount of fault displacement from our review of the available literature. Based on this unnamed fault's similar orientation and location with respect to the Janesville fault, we conclude that this unnamed fault is also not a "capable" fault. 18Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report 3.0) Historical SeismicityThis section describes the history of recorded and felt earthquakes in southern Wisconsin- northern Illinois based on online earthquake catalogs and databases, and peer-reviewed publications on specific earthquake events. These data are taken at face value because we have not undertaken any additional earthquake-specific studies, interpretations or reconciliation of any location or magnitude conflicts and errors within and between earthquake catalogs. 3.1) Historic EarthquakesWe developed a project-specific catalog of historic earthquakes for the SHINE site by searching several earthquake databases and published references on the location and intensity of historic earthquakes. Earthquake records were gathered for a search area extending from 40.5° to 45° north latitude, and 86° to 92° west longitude, and then filtered to include only those records located within a 124-mile (200 km) radius of the SHINE site at 42.624136° north latitude, 89.024875° west longitude. The following earthquake databases and references were reviewed in the initial phase of catalog development:

• Worldwide ANSS (Advanced National Seismic System) Composite Catalog (ANSS, 2012): The catalog is created by merging the master earthquake catalogs from contributing ANSS institutions and then removing duplicate solutions for the same

event.* USGS/NEIC 1973 to Present Preliminary Determination of Epicenters Catalog (PDE) (USGS, 2012d): The catalog includes earthquakes located by the U.S. Geological Survey National Earthquake Information Center (NEIC).

• Significant U.S. Earthquakes (USHIS) 1568-1989 (USGS, 2012d): The catalog is from the NEIC based on Stover and Coffman (1993).
• Eastern, Central, and Mountain States of the United States, 1350-1986 (SRA) (USGS, 2012d): The catalog is from the NEIC based on Stover et al. (1984).
• National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research (NCEER) Group (NCEER, 2012): Catalog of central and eastern United States earthquakes from 1627 to 1985 (Armbruster and Seeber, 1992).
• U.S. Geological Survey reports on central United States earthquakes and earthquake information by state: Bakun and Hopper (2004), Dart and Volpi (2010), Stover and Coffman (1993), Wheeler (2003), Wheeler et al. (2003), USGS (2012f).
• Review of significant Canadian earthquakes from 1600-2006 (Lamontagne et al., 2008) and Natural Resources Canada earthquake information (NRC, 2012).
• Centennial Catalog (Engdahl and Villasenor, 2002): A global catalog of earthquakes from 1900 to 2008. Because of numerous inconsistencies within and between various databases and references (e.g., different epicenter locations for a given earthquake), we conducted a second phase of review on the Central Eastern United States earthquake catalog (CEUS-SSC, 2012). This 19Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report earthquake catalog was compiled as part of studies to develop a new characterization model for seismic sources in the Central and Eastern United States. The catalog contains records of earthquakes documented from 1568 to 2008. Earthquakes from various magnitude scales were recalculated to a uniform magnitude scale using moment magnitude (M). Based on the uncertainty of assessment, the recalculated magnitudes for historic earthquakes are termed expected moment magnitude (E[

M]) in the CEUS-SSC (2012) catalog. The primary benefits of using the CEUS-SSC (2012) catalog to develop the project-specific SHINE catalog include a) using a single earthquake database that has been compiled and reviewed under uniform procedures, and b) obtaining uniform earthquake magnitudes for the project-specific database

with E[M] values. Based on the CEUS-SSC (2012) catalog, we developed the following project-specific catalog containing 35 records of historic earthquakes with epicenters located within about 124 miles (200 km) of the SHINE site. This project-specific catalog is presented in Table 3.1-1, and includes earthquake magnitudes ranging from E[ M] 2.32 to 5.15. Four events are assigned depths of 5 or 10 km, with the remaining depths assigned a depth 0 km. We note that the October 22, 1909 and October 17, 1913 earthquake epicenters have the same latitude and longitude coordinates. 20Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report Table 3.1-1 Historic Earthquake Epicenters Located Within Approximately 124 Miles (200 km) of the SHINE SiteYear 1Month 1Day1,2Latitude (°N)1Longitude

(°W)1 Depth 1 (km)Expected MomentMagnitude (E[M])

1Appro ximateDistancefrom Epicenter toSHINE Site (km) 31804 8 20 42.0 87.804.18122 1804 8 24 42 8904.1269 1861 12 23 42.09 87.9802.98105 1869 8 17 41.56 90.6002.32176 1876 5 22 41.29 89.5103.31154 1881 5 27 41.3 89.104.44147 1892 8 4 42.68 88.2802.7961 1895 10 7 41.1 89.003.31169 1897 12 3 43.1 89.803.9283 1897 12 3 42.4 90.403.31116 1907 11 28 42.3 89.802.7773 1909 5 26 41.6 88.105.15137 1909 10 22 41.8 89.702.98107 1911 7 29 41.8 87.602.98149 1912 1 2 42.3 89.004.3836 1912 9 25 42.3 89.102.3237 1913 10 17 41.8 89.703.38107 1914 10 7 43.1 89.402.6561 1922 7 7 43.8 88.504.1137 1928 1 23 42 9003106 1933 12 7 42.9 89.203.0334 1934 11 12 41.5 90.503.73175 1942 3 1 41.2 89.703.48168 1944 3 16 42.0 88.302.6192 1947 3 16 42.1 88.302.6583 1947 5 6 43.0 87.903.53101 1948 1 15 43.1 89.702.6576 1956 7 18 43.6 87.702.65153 1956 10 13 42.9 87.902.6597 1957 1 8 43.5 88.802.3299 1972 9 15 41.64 89.37104.08113 1981 6 12 43.9 89.902.65159 1985 9 9 41.848 88.01452.91120 1999 9 2 41.72 89.4353.41106 2004 6 28 41.44 88.9454.13132 Notes: 1 Data from CEUS-SSC (2012) source file: CEUS_EQ_Catalog_R0.shp 2 Day is based on time with respect to Coordinated Universal Time (UTC), not local time. 3 Distance (ellipsoidal) estimated based on SHINE site location at 42.624136° N, 89.024875° W. 21Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report In the project-specific catalog, the largest earthquake is the May 26, 1909 E[ M] 5.15 event located approximately 85 miles (137 km) southeast of the SHINE site. The largest earthquake since the 1970s is the June 28, 2004 E[ M] 4.13 event located approximately 82 miles (132 km) south of the SHINE site. The closest earthquake epicenter to the SHINE site is the December 7, 1933 E[M] 3.03 event located approximately 21 miles (34 km) to the northwest. The project-specific catalog indicates that in general, the region surrounding the SHINE site has an historic record of relatively infrequent, small to moderate earthquakes that is typical of much of the central and eastern United States. 3.2) Felt IntensitiesIn addition to recorded earthquake epicenters, information is also available on how earthquake shaking has been experienced by people located in Janesville and other communities near the SHINE site. The experience of earthquake shaking by people and a qualitative assessment of damage is measured on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale (MMI). Table 3.2-1 provides a description of MMI levels of intensity from USGS (2000). While the quality of the measurements is highly variable depending on the skills of the observer and the quality of local engineered and non-engineered structures, the MMI scale nevertheless provides a reasonable estimate of the occurrence of moderate and large earthquakes before the development of a network of recording instruments. 22Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report Table 3.2-1 Modified Mercalli IntensityLevelAbbreviated Description I Not felt except by a veryfewunde respecially favorableconditions. IIFelt only by a few personsat rest,especiallyonuppe rfloorso fbuildings. Delicatelysuspended objects may swing. IIIFelt quite noticeably by personsindoors,especiallyonuppe r floo r s o f buildings.Many people do not recognize it as an earthquake. Standing motor cars may rock slightly. Vibration similar to the passing of a truck. Duration estimated. IVFelt indoors by many, outdoorsbyfewduringtheday. Atnight, some awakened.Dishes, windows, doors disturbed; walls make cracking sound. Sensation like heavy truck striking building. Standing motor cars rocked noticeably. VFelt by nearly everyone;manyawakened.Somedishes,windows broken. Unstableobjects overturned. Pendulum clocks may stop. VIFelt by all, many frightened.Someheavy f u rnituremoved;a few instances o f f allenplaster. Damage slight. VIIDamage negligible in buildingso fgooddesignandconstruction; slight to moderatein well-built ordinary structures; considerable damage in poorly built or badly designed structures; some chimneys broken. VIIIDamage slight in speciallydesignedstructures;considerabledamage in o rdinarysubstantial buildings with partial collapse. Damage great in poorly built structures. Fall of chimneys, factory stacks, columns, monuments, walls. Heavy furniture overturned. IXDamage considerable inspeciallydesignedstructu res;well-designed framestructures thrown out of plumb. Damage great in substantial buildings, with partial collapse. Buildings shifted off foundations. XSome well-built woodenst ructuresdestroyed;mostmasonryand frame structuresdestroyed with foundations. Rail bent. XI Few, i f any(masonry) structu resremainstanding.Bridgesdestroyed. Rails bent greatly. XII Damage total. Lines o f sightandlevelaredistorted.Objectsthrown into theair.Notes:

Reference:

USGS (2000). The National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC) of the National Oceanic and Atmosphere Administration (NOAA) developed the National Earthquake Intensity Database (NEID), which is a collection of records of damage and felt reports from more than 23,000 U.S. earthquakes (NEID, 2012). The database contains information regarding earthquake epicentral coordinates, estimated magnitudes, and focal depths, names and coordinates of reporting cities (or localities), reported intensities, and the distance from a city (or locality) to the epicenter. Earthquakes listed in the NGDC database date from 1638 to 1985. From 1985 onward, the reports of earthquake shaking are maintained by the U.S. Geological Survey. Earthquake shaking intensity records within approximately 124 miles (200 km) of the SHINE site from NEID (2012) contain reports from eight earthquakes that occurred from 1928 to 1985. We developed the composite dataset listed in Table 3.2-2, consisting of the earthquake location and expected moment magnitude from the CEUS-SSC (2012) database, plus the event MMI values 23Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report Year Month 1 DayEarthquakeApproximate Distance from

Epicenter to

SHINE Site (km)MMI at SHINE Site (Reported or Estimated)LatLongMMI 3 Expected MomentMagnitude (E[M])1804 8 24 42 89 VI 4.12 69 - 1909 5 26 41.6 88.1 VII 5.15 137 1912 1242.3 89 III 4.38 36 Felt In Madisonand Milwaukee1928 1 23 42 90 IV 3.00 106 - 1942 3 1 41.2 89.7 IV 3.48 168 - 1972 9 15 41.64 89.37 VI 4.08 113 1985 9 9 41.848 88.014 V 2.91 120 - 1985 11 12 41.85 88.01 III - 120 - from the NEID (2012) database and other sources cited in the table. The eight earthquakes listed in Table 3.2-2 are shown in Figure 3.1-1. An estimated MMI value of V at the SHINE site accompanied the 1909 E[ M] 5.15 earthquake located approximately 85 miles (137 km) to the southeast, and accompanied the 1972 E[ M] 4.08 earthquake located approximately 70 miles (113 km) to south-southwest (Table 3.2-2). Table 3.2-2 Recorded Earthquake Intensities (Modified Mercalli Intensity - MMI) forEarthquakes Within Approximately 124 Miles (200 km) of the SHINE Site (° N)(°W)

Notes: 1. Data from CEUS-SSC (2012) source file: CEUS_EQ_Catalog_R0.shp; except 11/12/1985 data from NEID (2012). 2. Day is based on time with respect to Coordinated Universal Time (UTC), not local time. 3. Maximum MMI for earthquake from NEID (2012) data. 4. Distance (ellipsoidal) estimated based on SHINE site location at 42.624136° N, 89.024875° W. 5. From Bakun and Hopper (2004). 6. From (USGS, 2012f), Wisconsin Earthquake History. 7. From NEID (2012) data for Janesville, Wisconsin (42.68° N, 89.02° W). We also reviewed historic earthquake reports and isoseismal maps for the central United States from 1568 to 1989 (Stover and Coffman 1993), 1827 to 1952 (Bakun and Hopper, 2004), and United States earthquake information by state and territory (USGS, 2012f). In addition, we reviewed a summary of significant Canadian earthquakes from 1600 to 2006 (Lamontagne et al., 2008; NRC, 2012). Table 3.2-3 lists historic earthquakes with epicenters greater than 124 miles (200 km) from the SHINE site where earthquake shaking was reported as felt or inferred to have been felt in the SHINE site area. Similar to Table 3.2-2, we developed the composite dataset listed in Table 3.2-3 with event location and estimated moment magnitude from the CEUS-SSC (2012) database, earthquake MMI values from Stover and Coffman (1993), and estimated MMI values at the SHINE site from sources cited in the table. Depending on the level of detail in historical earthquake descriptions, we were able to estimate the MMI value at the SHINE site for some earthquakes, but only able to extract general felt intensity information for other earthquakes (e.g., "Felt in Wisconsin"). Isoseismal maps from Stover and Coffman (1993) and Bakun and Hopper (2004) representing some of the earthquakes listed in Table 3.2-3 are reproduced in Figures 3.2-1 through 3.2-6. 24Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report YearMonth 1DayEarthquake A ppro ximateDistance from Epicenter to SHINE Site (km)MMI at SHINELocationLat (° N)Long

(°W)1 MMI 3 (E[M])1811 12 16 Arkansas 36 90 X 7.17 740 1877 11 15 Nebraska 41 97 VII 5.50 686 Felt in Wisconsin1886 91 South Carolina 33.0 80.2 X6.90 1319 II-III to IV 3;1891 927 Illinois 38.3 88.5 VII5.52 482 I-III 5 (site is may be outside this isoseismal) 1895 10 31 Missouri 37.82 89.32 VIII 6.00 534 IV 31917 4 9 Illinois 37 90 VII 4.86 630 Felt in Wisconsin1925 31Quebec 47.8 69.8 -6.18 1611 III in Mil waukeeand LaCrosse1935 11 1 Quebec 46.78 79.07 - 6.06 913 1937 3 2 Ohio 40.488 84.273 VII 0M462 Felt in Milwaukee1937 39Ohio 40.4 84.2 VIII 5.11 472 Felt in Milwaukeeand Madison1939 11 23 Illinois 38.18 90.14 V 4.75 502 1944 9 5 New York 45.0 74.7 VIII 5.71 1181 Felt in Wisconsin1968 11 9 Illinois 37.91 88.37 VII 5.32 526 I-III 3; IV 61974 43Illinois 38.549 88.072 VI4.29 460 I-III in southernWisconsin1987 6 10 Illinois 38.713 87.954 VI 4.95 444 Felt in WisconsinTable 3.2-3 Recorded Earthquake Intensities (Modified Mercalli Intensity - MMI) forEarthquakes with Epicenters farther than 124 Miles (200 km) of the SHINE SiteSite (Estimated)

Notes: 1. Data from CEUS-SSC (2012) source file: CEUS_EQ_Catalog_R0.shp; except 3/2/1937 data from Stover and Coff- man (1993), M fa(body-wave magnitude calculated from earthquake felt area). 2. Day is based on time with respect to Coordinated Universal Time (UTC), not local time.3. From Stover and Coffman (1993). 4. Distance (ellipsoidal) estimated based on SHINE site location at 42.624136° N, 89.024875° W. 5. From Bakun and Hopper (2004). 6. From NEID (2012) for Janesville, Wisconsin (42.68° N, 89.02° W). 7. From (USGS, 2012f), Wisconsin Earthquake History, New York Earthquake History. The MMI values for historic earthquakes within an approximate 124-mile (200 km) radius of the SHINE site range from MMI III to MMI VII (Table 3.2-2). The largest MMI value (VII) recorded in the region was during the May 26, 1909 E[ M] 5.15 earthquake. Figure 3.2-5 shows the isoseismal map from a detailed study of the 1909 earthquake by Bakun and Hopper (2004). The location of the estimated earthquake epicenter depends on the reference. For example, the 1909 event is located approximately 85 miles (137 km) southeast of the project site in CEUS-SSC (2012) and Stover and Coffman (1993); and 68 miles (109 km) south of the SHINE site according to the study of Bakun and Hopper (2004), and as depicted on Figure 3.2-5. For this report, we 25Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report use the CEUS-SSC (2012) dataset as the primary dataset for epicenter locations for reasons discussed in Section 3.1. Thus, Figure 3.1-1 displays the felt intensity epicenter of the May 26, 1909 earthquake based on the location provided in CEUS-SSC (2012) and Stover and Coffman (1993). Based on our review of felt intensity records for historic earthquakes (up to 1985), regional earthquakes have developed MMI values ranging from III to VII within approximately 124 miles (200 km) of the SHINE site. Greater than 124 miles (200 km) from the site, felt intensities of historic earthquakes (up to 1989) developed MMI values estimated from I to V at the SHINE site. We estimate that the maximum felt intensity experienced at the SHINE site in historical times is only moderate shaking (MMI V). MMI V intensity may have occurred at the SHINE site four times in approximately the last 200 years during earthquakes that occurred in 1811, 1886, 1909 and 1972. 3.3) FaultsWe reviewed the U.S. Geological Survey Quaternary Fault and Fold Database of the United States, including the 2010 update (USGS, 2012c). This database contains no Quaternary faults or folds within an approximate 124-miles (200 km) radius of the SHINE site. Review of site aerial photographs and Google EarthŽ images found no evidence for geomorphic features that indicate a Quaternary age fault within the SHINE site. Based on our review of USNRC projects in the project region, we conclude that no "capable" faults are present in Rock County, Wisconsin. Two zones of "capable" faults are located hundreds of miles to the south of the SHINE site, the New Madrid seismic zone and the Wabash Valley region. The northern boundary of the New Madrid seismic zone is located about 400 miles (644 km) south of the SHINE Janesville site (Figure 2.1-7). The 1811-1812 earthquakes resulted in MMI V felt intensities (Figure 3.2-1). Recurrence intervals of paleoseismic events may be on the order of 400 to 1,100 years (Crone and Schweig, 1994) The northern boundary of the Wabash Valley region is located approximately 170 miles (274 km) south of the SHINE Janesville site (Figure 2.1-7). Liquefaction studies indicate that at least seven Holocene earthquakes and one late Pleistocene earthquake may have generated on the order of moment magnitude 7.5 earthquakes (Obermeier and Crone, 1994). 3.4) Present-Day Stress FieldThe World Stress Map database of Heidbach et al. (2008) contains data and interpretations for the orientation of maximum horizontal compressive stress (S H) worldwide. For the Wisconsin- northern Illinois area, S Hhas a generally northeast trend based on five measurements from five hydraulic fracture measurements and from available earthquake focal mechanism solutions. The earthquake focal mechanisms suggest that movements along reverse and strike-slip faults within the basement rocks are the source of the few historic earthquakes. There is no evidence that any of these faults have ruptured to the ground surface during the historic earthquakes. 26Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report 4.0) Seismic Hazard EvaluationProbabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) is commonly used to estimate expected levels of earthquake ground shaking for regions and for sites (e.g., McGuire, 2004). The PSHA method provides a probabilistic estimate (annual frequency of exceedance) for the specified levels of earthquake ground motion. The earthquake ground motions can be reported as peak horizontal ground acceleration (PGA) estimates, as often required for foundation or slope stability analyses, or spectral accelerations (S a= accelerations at a specified frequency), as commonly used in most modern building codes and structural standards. The USGS developed national probabilistic seismic hazard models in 1996, 2002 and 2008 (with minor updates in 2010) which all include Wisconsin (e.g., Petersen et al., 2008). Each update of the national probabilistic model and associated hazard maps has incorporated the latest information on fault locations and fault characteristics; historical earthquake locations, magnitudes and effects; and a range of ground motion prediction equations developed from earthquake records from the United States and around the world. The seismic hazard models can be used to estimate probabilistic PGA and S afor any site in the conterminous United States (USGS, 2012e). 4.1) Seismic Hazard EstimatesWe obtained probabilistic PGA estimates for the SHINE site based on the USGS 2008 national hazard model (USGS, 2012a) (Figures 4.1-1 through 4.1-5). For the SHINE site, the USGS 2008 model is limited to the estimation of hazard for outcropping, weak rock and hard rock sites with average shear-wave velocity profiles in the upper 100 feet (30 m) of 760 meters per second (m/s) (soft rock) or 2,000 m/s (hard rock), respectively. We used the 760 m/s value and obtained PGA estimates for five return periods from 475 years to 19,900 years as listed in Table 4.1-1 below. Table 4.1-1 Probabilistic Estimates of PGA for Selected Return Periods at the SHINE Site for Vs30 (760 m/s) Site Class BCReturn Period (years)PGA (g)475 0.017 2,475 0.050 4,975 0.079 9,950 0.124 19,900 0.194 Notes: 1. m/s = meters per second 2. Parameters based on SHINE Janesville project location of 42.624°N, 89.025°W. 27Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report The PGA values listed in Table 4.1-1 indicate a low to very low earthquake shaking hazard level at the SHINE site. 4.2) Maximum Earthquake PotentialThe review of historical earthquake records indicates that the maximum earthquake that has occurred during the last 200 years within 124 miles (200 km) of the site is an E[ M] 5.15 event. Well studied historic earthquakes suggest that the strongest shaking experienced at the SHINE site is MMI V, with a maximum in the region of MMI VII. These values are typical for geologically stable, continental interior regions such as the central United States where infrequent, moderate-magnitude earthquakes occur without a clear association with known geologic structures. A 200-year record is generally considered too short a time period to estimate the longer term earthquake potential, particularly in regions where the larger earthquakes occur infrequently. To estimate the longer term earthquake potential, we reviewed the results of the deaggregation of the 2008 USGS seismic hazard for return periods of 4,975 to 19,900 years. Figures 4.1-3 through 4.1-5 show deaggregation results for 4,975, 9,950, and 19,900 years, respectively. The deaggregation plots for the longer return periods all indicate that the major contributor to seismic hazard are earthquakes with magnitudes between about M5 and 6. The PGA values for the longer return periods increase because the source earthquake has a higher probability of being close to the site. To assess a reasonable maximum magnitude for the SHINE site and surrounding region, we reviewed the mean earthquake magnitude estimate for return periods of 4,975, 9,950 and 19,900 years. The mean earthquake magnitude for the longer return period deaggregations lies in a narrow range of about M5.7 to 5.8. This magnitude is higher than the E[ M] 5.15 maximum that is estimated to have occurred in the last 200 years within about 124 miles (200 km) of the SHINE site. We conclude, therefore, that a moment magnitude 5.8 earthquake can reasonably be regarded as the maximum earthquake magnitude to occur within the region. We note, however, that this estimate is largely qualitative because it is based only on deaggregation of the consensus 2008 national earthquake hazard model, and our review of historical earthquake magnitudes and felt intensities. 4.3) 2009 International Building Code Seismic Design ParametersInterim Staff Guidance Augmenting NUREG 1537 Part 2 Article 6B.3 requires that the criticality accident alarm system (CAAS) be "designed to remain operational during credible events, such as a seismic shock equivalent to the site-specific, design-basis earthquake or the equivalent value specified by the Uniform Building Code." In Wisconsin, the Uniform Building Code (UBC) has been superseded by the 2009 International Building Code (IBC, 2009). Thus, seismic design parameters for the proposed SHINE project are discussed in terms of the 2009 IBC and associated standards rather than in terms of the UBC. Seismic provisions within the 2009 IBC Chapter 16 (IBC, 2009) and ASCE 7-05 Chapter 11 (ASCE, 2005) are based on spectral accelerations for a maximum considered earthquake (MConE) with a return period of 2,475 years (2% probability of exceedance in 50 years). Spectral acceleration values for MConE are for soil Site Class B (weak rock) soil conditions (V s 30 = 760 m/sec). For most sites, the short- (S s) and long- (S

1) period spectral accelerations for weak rock sites (V s30 = 760 m/sec) can be read from maps included with the code, or they can be 28Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report calculated from the online USGS Ground Motion Parameter Calculator and U.S. Seismic "Design Maps" web application (USGS, 2012b). These weak rock site values are for 2009 IBC Site Class B sites, and they are modified by the application of site coefficients F aand F vfor other site classes (Site Class A, C, D, E and F) where SMS = S S x F aand S M1= S 1 x F v(IBC, 2009). The USGS Ground Motion Parameter Calculator (USGS, 2012b) indicates S S and S 1values of 0.129 gand 0.050 g, respectively (F aand F v= 1) for the MConE. These values are slightly different than those obtained from the USGS 2008 national hazard maps because the 2009 IBC-ASCE 7- 05 MConE values are based on the earlier 2002 USGS national hazard maps. When modified for a Site Class D site, we obtain S MS and S M1values of 0.206 g and 0.119 g, respectively (F a= 1.6 and F v= 2.4). These spectral acceleration values are suitable as a basis for design of site structures to meet the seismic design requirements of the 2009 IBC and ASCE 7-05 standard. Key parameters for the 2009 IBC-ASCE 7-05 procedures are listed in Table 4.3-1 below. Table 4.3-1 2009 IBC-ASCE 7-05 Seismic Parameters for the SHINE SiteParameterValue S S 0.129 g S 1 0.050 g Site Class D S MS 0.206 g S M1 0.119 g F a 1.6 F v 2.4 T L12 seconds Notes: 1. Parameters based on SHINE Janesville project location of 42.624136°N, 89.024875°W. 2. Parameters include: short period spectral response acceleration (S S), 1-second spectral response acceleration (S 1), maximum considered earthquake spectral response for short period (S MS), maximum considered earthquake spectral response for 1-second period (S M1), site coefficient for short period (F a), site coefficient for 1-second pe-riod (F v) (IBC, 2009); long-period transition period (T L) (ASCE, 2005). 3. S Sand S 1are for Site Class B; S MS and S M1are for Site Class D.

29Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report 5.0) Summary and ConclusionsGolder's analysis indicates that the SHINE site is located in a region of relative tectonic stability and historic seismic inactivity. This conclusion is based on the long-term geologic history of the emplacement and metamorphism of regional basement rocks; stratigraphy and structure of the local sedimentary bedrock; analysis of the surficial geology and geomorphology; and the historic record of regional earthquake locations, magnitudes and felt intensities. Geologic structures mapped near the site such as the Sandwich and Plum River fault zones, the La Salle anticlinorium, and the Wisconsin and Kankakee Arches appear to have formed under a tectonic regime different from the present day. No "capable" faults are recognized within the SHINE site-the closest known "capable" faults are part of the Wabash Valley liquefaction features located about 170 miles (274 km) south of the site, and the New Madrid seismic zone located about 400 miles (644 km) south of the site. While small to moderate earthquakes up to expected moment magnitude 5.15 have occurred within the region of the SHINE site, they have been infrequent and developed only a moderate level of shaking at the site four times in the last approximately 200 years. Estimates of seismic hazard for the region by the USGS in 2010 indicate that the site is located within one of the lowest seismic hazard regions in the conterminous United States. The low hazard estimate is illustrated by PGA values of 0.19 g (a strong level of earthquake ground shaking) having a return period of more than 19,900 years. The low hazard is also reflected in the seismic parameters required for application of the 2009 IBC-ASCE 7-05 seismic design procedures as listed in Table 4.3-1 above. Evaluation of 2,475-year to 19,900-year return period deaggregations of the 2008 USGS seismic hazard model indicates that a magnitude 5.8 earthquake is an acceptable estimate of the maximum earthquake magnitude to occur within the region of the SHINE site. 30Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report 6.0) ClosingWe trust that this report meets your requirements. If you have questions or require additional information, please contact one of the undersigned at (714) 508-4400. GOLDER ASSOCIATES INC.Eric C. Cannon Alan Hull, Ph.D., C.E.G. Senior Project Geologist Principal, Seismic Hazard Practice Leader 31Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report 7.0) References1.ANSS, 2012. Advanced National Seismic System ANSS Catalog Search, Northern California Earthquake Data Center, Website: http://quake.geo.berkeley.edu/cnss/catalog- search.html, Date accessed: January 9, 2012. 2.Armbruster, J. and Seeber, L., 1992. NCEER-91 Earthquake Catalog for the United States, National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, SUNY Buffalo, Website: http://folkworm.ceri.memphis.edu/catalogs/html/cat_nceer.html, Date accessed: January 27, 2012. 3.ASCE, 2005. Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures (7-05). American Society of Civil Engineers. 4.Attig, J.W., Bricknell, M., Carson, E.C., Clayton, L., Johnson, M.D., Mickelson, D.M., and Syverson, K.M., 2011. Glaciation of Wisconsin, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey, Educational Series 36 [fourth edition], 4 p. 5.Braschayko, S.M., 2005. The Waukesha Fault and Its Relationship to the Michigan Basin: A Literature Compilation, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey, Open-File Report 2005-05, 60 p. 6.Bakun, W.H. and Hopper, M.G., 2004. Catalog of Significant Historical Earthquakes in the Central United States, United States Geological Survey, Open-File Report 2004- 1086, 142 p. 7.Cannon, W.F., LaBerge, G.L., Klasner, J.S., and Schulz, K.J., 2008. The Gogebic Iron Range - A Sample of the Northern Margin of the Penokean Fold and Thrust Belt, United States Geological Survey, Professional Paper 1730, 44 p., 1 sheet. 8.Cannon, W.F., Kress, T.H., and Sutphin, D.M., 1999. Digital Geologic Map and Mineral Deposits of the Lake Superior Region, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, United States Geological Survey Open File Report 97-455 (Version 3, November 1999), Website: http:/ /pubs.usgs.gov/of/1997/of97-455/index.html, Date accessed: December 18, 2011. 9.CEUS SSC, 2012. Central Eastern United States - Seismic Source Characterization for Nuclear Facilities, United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, United States Department of Energy, Electric Power Research Institute, Website: http://www.ceus-ssc.com/index.htm, Date accessed: March 27, 2012. 10.Chandler, V.W., 1996. Gravity and Magnetic Studies Conducted Recently, in: Sims, P.K., and Carter, L.M.H, (eds.), Archean and Proterozoic Geology of the Lake Superior Region, U.S.A., 1993, United States Geological Survey, Professional Paper 1556, pp. 76-86. 11.Charpentier, R.R., 1987. A summary of petroleum plays and characteristics of the Michigan basin, United States Geological Survey, Open File Report 87-450R, 33 p. 12.CGIAR-CSI, 2012. STRM 90 m Digital Elevation Database V4.1, Consortium for Spatial Information, Website: http://www.cgiar-csi.org/data/elevation/item/45-srtm-90m-digital-elevation-database-v41, Date accessed: April 27, 2012. 32Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report 13.Clayton, L., and Attig, J.W., 1997. Pleistocene Geology of Dane County, Wisconsin, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey, Bulletin 95, 64 p., 2 sheets. 14.Crone, A.J., and Schweig, E.S., compilers, 1994. Fault number 1023, Reelfoot scarp and New Madrid seismic zone, United States Geological Survey Quaternary fault and fold database of the United States, Website: http://earthquakes.usgs.gov/regional/qfaults, Date accessed: April 23, 2012. 15.Daniels, D.L., and Snyder, S.L., 2002. Wisconsin Aeromagnetic and Gravity Maps and Data: A Web Site for Distribution of Data, United States Geological Survey Open-File Report 02-493, Website: http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2002/of02-493/index.htm, Date accessed: January 4, 2012. 16.Daniels, D.L., Kucks, R.P., and Hill, P.L., 2008. Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio Magnetic and Gravity Maps and Data: A Website for Distribution of Data, United States Geological Survey, March 2008, Version 1.0, Website: http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/321, Date accessed: April 25, 2012. 17.Dart, R.L., and Volpi, C.M., 2010. Earthquakes in the Central United States, 1699-2010, United States Geological Survey, General Information Product 115, 1 sheet, scale 1:250,000. 18.DPC, 2010. La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor - Decommissioning Plan Revision, November 2010, Document Date 12/28/2010, Dairyland Power Cooperative, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Accession Number ML110190592, Website: http:// adams.nrc.gov/wba, Date accessed: April 24, 2012. 19.Engdahl, E.R., and Villasenor, A., 2002. Global Seismicity: 1900-1999, in: Lee, W.H.K., Kanamori, H., Jennings, P.C., Kisslinger, C., (eds.), International Handbook of Earthquake and Engineering Seismology, Part A, Chapter 41, pp. 665-690, Academic Press. 20.Exelon, 2004. Braidwood and Byron, Units 1 & 2 - Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR), Page Index through Braidwood Table 2.5-53, Document Date 12/16/2004, Exelon Generation Co, LLC, Exelon Nuclear, United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Accession Number ML051660169, Website: http://adams.nrc.gov/wba, Dateaccessed: April 24, 2012. 21.Exelon, 2006a. Rev. 4 to Site Safety Analysis Report for Exelon Generation Company, LLC Clinton Early Site Permit, Appendix B - Seismic Hazards Report, Cover to Chapter 2, Document Date 04/14/2006, Exelon Generation Co, LLC, United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Accession Number ML061100308, Website: http:// adams.nrc.gov/wba, Date accessed: April 24, 2012. 22.Exelon, 2006b. Rev. 4 to Site Safety Analysis Report for Exelon Generation Company, LLC Clinton Early Site Permit, Appendix B - Seismic Hazards Report. Chapter 4 Figure 4.2-1 to Chapter 6, Document Date 04/16/2006, Exelon Generation Co, LLC, United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Accession Number ML061100310, Website: http://adams.nrc.gov/wba, Date accessed: April 24, 2012. 33Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report 23.Fullerton, D.S., Bush, C.A., and Pennell, J.N., 2003. Map of surficial deposits and materials in the eastern and central United States (east of 102 degrees West longitude), United States Geological Survey Geologic Investigation Series I-2789, Version 1.0, Website: http://pubs.usgs.gov/imap/i-2789, Date accessed: January 17, 2012. 24.Garrity, C.P., and Soller, D.R., 2009. Database of Geologic Mapof North America - adapted from the map by J.C. Reed, Jr. and others 2005, United States Geological Survey Data Series 424, Website: http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/424, Date accessed: December 16, 2011. 25.Golder, 2012a. Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report, Janesville, Wisconsin, Golder Report 6, Project No. 113-81051, Rev 3, Golder Associates Inc., August 3, 2012. 26.Golder, 2012b. Preliminary Hydrological Analyses, Janesville, Wisconsin, Golder Report 7, Project No. 113-81051, Rev 3, Golder Associates Inc., August 3, 2012. 27.Golder, 2012c. Site Soil Classification For Seismic Design, Golder Report 1, Project No. 113-81051, Revision 5, Golder Associates Inc., August 3, 2012. 28.Golder, 2012d. Quality Assurance Program Description (QAPD), GAI DUL D02 01/2012 RL1, Project No. 113-81051, Golder Associates Inc., January 12, 2012. 29.Hammer, P.T.C., Clowes, R.M., Cook, F.A., Vasudevan, K., and van der Velden, A.J.,2011. The big picture: A lithospheric cross-section of the North American continent, GSA Today, vol. 21, no. 6, doi: 10.1130/GSATG95A.1. 30.Heidbach, O., Tingay, M., Barth, A., Reinecker, J., Kurfe, D., and Müller, B., 2008.The World Stress Map database release 2008, doi:10.1594/GFZ.WSM.Rel2008, Website: http://dc-app3-14.gfz-potsdam.de/pub/introduction/introduction_frame.html, Date accessed: December 1, 2011. 31.Heyl, A.V., Broughton, W.A., and West, W.S., 1978. Geology of the Upper Mississippi Valley Base-Metal District, University of Wisconsin-Extension Geological and Natural History Survey, Information Circular Number 16, 1970, (Revised 1978), 45 p. 32.Howell, P.D., and van der Pluijm, B., 1990. Early history of the Michigan basin: Subsidence and Appalachian tectonics, Geology, vol. 18, pp. 1195-1198. 33.IBC, 2009. International Building Code. International Code Council, Inc., February 2009. 34.Jirsa, M.A., Boerboom, T.J., Chandler, V.W., Mossler, J.H., Runkel, A.C., Setterholm, D.R., 2011. Geologic Map of Minnesota-Bedrock Geology, Minnesota Geological Survey, State Map Series S-21, scale 1:500,000. 35.Klasner, J.S., King, E.R., and Jones, W.J., 1985. Chapter 21, Geologic Interpretation of Gravity and Magnetic Data for Northern Michigan and Wisconsin, in: Hinze, W.J., (ed.), The Utility of Regional Gravity and Magnetic Anomaly Maps, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 267-286, doi: 10.1190/1.0931830346.ch21. 34Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report 36.Kolata, D.R., Denny, F.B., Devera, J.A., Hansel, A.K., Jacobson, R.J., Lasemi, Z., McGarry, C.S., Nelson, W.J., Norby, R.D., Treworgy, C.G., and Weibel, C.P., 2005. Bedrock Geology of Illinois, Illinois State Geological Survey, Illinois Map 14, scale 1:500,000. 37.Kucks, R.P. 1999. Isostatic gravity anomaly grid for the conterminous US, United States Geological Survey Mineral Resource On-Line Spatial Data, Digital Data Series DDS-9, Website: http://tin.er.usgs.gov/gravity/isostatic, Date accessed: December 18, 2011. 38.Lamontagne, M., Halchuk, S., Cassidy, J.F., and Rogers, G.C., 2008. SignificantCanadian Earthquakes of the Period 1600-2006, Seismological Research Letters, vol. 79, no. 2, pp. 211-223, doi:10.1785/gssrl.79.2.211. 39.Larson, T.H., 2002. The Earthquake of 2 September 1999 in Northern Illinois: Intensities and Possible Neotectonism, Seismological Research Letters, vol. 73, no. 5, pp. 732-738. 40.Maus, S., Barckhausen, U., et al., 2009. EMAG2: Earth Magnetic Anomaly Grid (2-arc- minute resolution), Website: http://geomag.org/models/emag2.html, Date accessed: April 23, 2012. 41.McGarry, C.S., 2000. Bedrock Geology of Boone and Winnebago Counties, Illinois, Illinois State Geological Survey, Open File Series 2000-3, scale 1:100,000. 42.McGuire, 2004. Seismic Hazard and Risk Analysis, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, MNO-10. 43.MLRA, 2012. Land Resource Regions and Major Land Resource Areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin, MLRA Explorer Custom Report K -Northern Lake State Forest and Forage Region, 95B - Southern Wisconsin and Northern Illinois Drift Plain, United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service, Website: www.cei.psu.edu/mlra, Date accessed: January 16, 2012. 44.Mudrey, Jr., M.G., Brown, B.A., and Greenberg, J.K., 1982. Bedrock Geologic Map of Wisconsin, University of Wisconsin-Extension Geological and Natural History Survey, scale 1:1,000,000. 45.NAMAG, 2002. North American Magnetic Anomaly Group, Bankey, V., Cuevas, A., Daniels, D., Finn, C.A., Hernandez, I., Hill, P., Kucks, R., Warner Miles, W., Pilkington, M., Roberts, C., Roest, W., Rystrom, V., Shearer, S., Snyder, S., Sweeney, R., and Velez, J., Magnetic Anomaly Map of North America, United States Geological Survey Special Map, Version 1.0, Website: http://pubs.usgs.gov/sm/mag_map, Date accessed: December 18, 2011. 46.NCEER, 2012. NCEER Catalog Search, National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, Center for Earthquake Research and Information, University of Memphis, Website: http://folkworm.ceri.memphis.edu/catalogs/html/cat_nceer.html, Date accessed: April 5, 2012. 35Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report 47.NEID, 2012. Earthquake Intensity Database Search 1638-1985, National Geophysical Data Center, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Website: http:// www.ngdc.noaa.gov/hazard/int_srch.shtml#eqcoord, Date accessed: January 10, 2012. 48.Nelson, W.J., 1995. Structural Features in Illinois, Department of Natural Resources, Illinois State Geological Survey, Bulletin 100, 144 p. 49.NRC, 2012. Important Canadian Earthquakes, Natural Resources Canada, Website: http://earthquakescanada.nrcan.gc.ca/historic-historique/map-carte-eng.php, Dateaccessed: January 16, 2012. 50.Obermeier, S.F., and Crone, A.J., compilers, 1994. Fault number 1024, Wabash Valley liquefaction features, United States Geological Survey Quaternary fault and fold database of the United States, Website: http://earthquakes.usgs.gov/regional/qfaults, Date accessed: April 23, 2012. 51.Petersen, M., Frankel, A., Harmsen, S., Mueller, C., Haller, K., Wheeler, R., Wesson, R., Zeng, Y., Boyd, O., Perkins, D., Luco, N., Field, E., Wills, C., and Rukstales, K.,2008. Documentation for the 2008 Update of the United States National Seismic Hazard Maps, United States Geological Survey, Open-File Report 2008-1128, 61 p. 52.Piskin, K., and Bergstrom, R.E., 1975. Glacial Drift in Illinois: Thickness and Character, Illinois State Geological Survey, Circular 490, 35 p. 53.RCGIS, 2012. Rock County Geographic Information System, Rock County, State of Wisconsin, Website: http://68.249.68.135/Rock/ viewer.htm?Title=Rock%20County%20GIS%20Map%20Viewer, Date accessed: January 16, 2012. 54.Roy, M., Clark, P.U., Barendregt, R.W., Glassman, J.R., and Enkin, R.J., 2004. Glacialstratigraphy and paleomagnetism of late Cenozoic deposits of the north-central United States, Geological Society of America Bulletin, vol. 116, no. 1/2, pp. 30-41, doi:10.1130/ B25325.1 55.Schulz, K.J., and Cannon, W.F., 2007. The Penokean orogeny in the Lake Superior region, Precambrian Research, vol. 157, pp. 4-25, doi:10.1016/j.precamres.2007.02.022. 56.Sella, G.F., Stein, S., Dixon, T.H., Craymer, M., James, T.S., Mazzotti, S., and Dokka, R.K., 2007. Observation of glacial isostatic adjustment in stable North America with GPS, Geophysical Research Letters, vol. 34, L02306, 6 p., doi:10.1029/2006GL027081. 57.Sims, P.K., 1992. Geologic map of Precambrian rocks, southern Lake Superior region, Wisconsin and northern Michigan. United States Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Investigation Series Map I-2185, scale 1:500,000. 58.Sims, P.K., and Carter, L.M.H, 1996. Archean and Proterozoic Geology of the LakeSuperior Region, U.S.A., 1993, United States Geological Survey, Professional Paper 1556, 115 p., 2 sheets. 36Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report 59.Sims, P.K., Saltus, R.W., and Anderson, E.D., 2005. Preliminary Precambrian basement structure map of the continental United States - an interpretation of geologic and aeromagnetic data, United States Geological Survey Open-File Report 2005-1029, Version 1.0, 31 p., 1 plate, Website: http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1029, Date accessed: January 4, 2012. 60.Stover, C.W. and Coffman, J.L., 1993. Seismicity of the United States, 1568-1989 (Revised), United States Geological Survey, Professional Paper 1527, 418 p. 61.Stover, C.W., Reagor, B.G., and Algermissen, S.T., 1984. United States Earthquake Data File, United States Geological Survey, Open-File Report 84-225, 123 p. 62.USDA SCS, 1974. Soil Survey of Rock County, Wisconsin, United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service, in cooperation with University of Wisconsin Department of Soil Science, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey, and the Wisconsin Agricultural Experiment Station, July 1974, 160 p., Website: http:// soils.usda.gov/survey/printed_surveys/state.asp?state=Wisconsin&abbr=WI, Dateaccessed: January 16, 2012. 63.USGS, 2000. The Severity of an Earthquake, United States Geological Survey Unnumbered Series, General Interest Publication, Website: http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/ earthq4/severitygip.html, Date accessed: April 4, 2012. 64.USGS, 2003. A Tapestry of Time and Terrain: The Union of Two Maps - Geology and Topography, United States Geological Survey, Website: http://nationalatlas.gov/tapestry/ physiogr/physio.html, Date accessed: December 14, 2011. 65.USGS, 2010. Physiographic divisions of the conterminous U.S., United States Geological Survey, Website: http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/metadata/usgswrd/XML/physio.xml, Date accessed: April 25, 2012. 66.USGS, 2012a. 2008 Interactive Deaggregations (Beta), United States Geological Survey, Website: https://geohazards.usgs.gov/deaggint/2008, Data accessed: April 5, 2012. 67.USGS, 2012b. Java Ground Motion Parameter Calculator, United States Geological Survey, Website: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/javacalc.php, Date accessed: April 5, 2012. 68.USGS, 2012c. Quaternary Fault and Fold Database of the United States, 3 November2010 update, United States Geological Survey, Website: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/ hazards/qfaults, Date accessed: April 5, 2012. 69.USGS, 2012d. Rectangular Area Earthquake Search for United States Geological Survey/National Earthquake Information Center (Preliminary Determination of Epicenters (PDE) since 1973), Significant United States Earthquakes (1568 - 1989), and Eastern, Central and Mountain States of United States (1350 - 1986) catalogs, United States Geological Survey, Website: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eqarchives/epic/ epic_rect.php, Data accessed: January 9, 2012. 37Report#5SHINE Medical Technologies Seismic Hazard Report 70.USGS, 2012e. Seismic Design Maps and Tools for Engineers, United States Geological Survey, Website: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps, Date accessed: April

5, 2012. 71.USGS, 2012f. United States Earthquake Information by State/Territory, New York Earthquake History, Wisconsin Earthquake History, United States Geological Survey, Website: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/states, Date accessed: January 26, 2012. 72.WGNHS, 1983. Thickness of Unconsolidated Material in Wisconsin, University of Wisconsin-Extension Geological and Natural History Survey, Website: http:// wisconsingeologicalsurvey.org/pdfs/pgszpdf/thickness_unconsolidated.pdf, Date accessed: December 16, 2011. 73.WGNHS, 2004. Landscapes of Wisconsin, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey, 2 p., Website: http://wisconsingeologicalsurvey.org/pdfs/pgszpdf/ landscapes_of_wisconsin.pdf, Date accessed: January 24, 2012. 74.Wheeler, R.L., 2003. Earthquakes of the Central United States, 1795-2002 - Construction of the earthquake catalog for an outreach map, United States Geological Survey, Open-File Report 03-232, 14 p. 75.Wheeler, R.L., Omdahl, E.M., Dart, R.L., Wilkerson, G.D., and Bradford, R.H., 2003.Earthquakes in the Central United States -1699-2002, United States Geological Survey Geologic Investigations Series I-2812, Version 1.0, 1 sheet, scale 1:250,000, Website: http://pubs.usgs.gov/imap/i-2812, Date accessed: January 13, 2012. 76.Whitmeyer, S.J., and Karlstrom, K.E., 2007. Tectonic model for the Proterozoic growth of North America, Geosphere, vol. 3, pp. 220- 259, doi: 10.1130/GES00055.1. 77.Wisconsin DNR, 2012. Wisconsin DNRWebView, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website: http://dnrmaps.wi.gov/imf/imf.jsp?site=webview.drgdownload, Dateaccessed: April 13, 2012. 78.Witzke, B.J., Anderson, R.R., and Pope, J.P., 2010. Bedrock Geologic map of Iowa, Iowa Geological and Water Survey, Open File Map 2010-01, scale 1:500,000. FIGURES LEGENDLEGENDREFERENCE1.) 1:24,000 SCALE TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS PRODUCED BY USGSAND DISTRIBUTED BY WISCONSIN DNR (2012).QUADRANGLES SHOWN INCLUDE JANESVILLE WEST (1997),JANESVILLE EAST (1997), BELOIT (1997), SHOPIERE (1997).SHINESITESHINESITESCALE 0 11MILESROCK RIVERSHINE SITEFigure1.1-1 WESTERN LAKEWISCONSINDRIFTLESSDISSECTEDTILL PLAINSTILL PLAINSEASTERN LAKE K L ak e M i c h i g a nLake Superior LakeHuron L a k e E r i e Columbus Toledo Indianapolis Chicago Springfield Detroit Lansing Milwaukee Madison St. Paul Minneapolis Des Moines Omaha LincolnREFERENCE1.) PHYSIOGRAPIC DIVISIONS IN CONTERMINOUS USAPROVIDED BY USGS (2010).2.) SHADED RELIEF OF SRTM 3 ARC SEC ELEVATION DATAPROVIDED BY CGIAR CONSORTIUM FOR SPATIALINFORMATION (CGIAR-CSI, 2012).SCALE 0 KM 200 200LEGENDLEGENDSHINE SITE124 MILE (200 KM) RADIUSBOUNDARY OF PHYSIOGRAPHIC SECTIONSTATE BOUNDARYSCALE 0MILES 124 12495° 0' 0" W90° 0' 0" W85° 0' 0" W95° 0' 0" W90° 0' 0" W85° 0' 0" W80° 0' 0" W40° 0' 0" N45° 0' 0" N40° 0' 0" N45° 0' 0" NFigure2.1-1 CPO M C R M C R L a k e S u p e r i o r LakeMichigan LakeHuron L a k e S u p e r i o r LakeHuron RQEGR 0APPROXIMATE SCALE KM 300 300LEGENDLEGENDCENTRAL PLAINS OROGEN (INCLUDESYAVAPAI AND MAZATZAL PROVINCES)MINNESOTA RIVER PROVINCEPENOKEAN OROGEN (INCLUDESPEMBRINE-WAUSAU AND MARSHFIELD TERRANES)SUPERIOR PROVINCESTRATIGRAPHIC CONTACT (DASHED WHERE APPROXIMATED)HIGH-ANGLE FAULTSTRIKE-SLIP FAULTPREDOMINANT RELATIVE DISPLACEMENTTHRUST FAULTSHINE SITE 0APPROXIMATE SCALE KM 300 300MIDCONTINENT RIFTARCHEAN AND PALEOPROTEROZOIC GEOLOGIC PROVINCESLATE PROTEROZOIC AND MESOPROTEROZOIC GEOLOGIC PROVINCESSOUTHERN GRANITE RHYOLITEPROVINCEEASTERN GRANITE RHYOLITE PROVINCERHYOLITE-QUARTZ ARENITE BELTREFERENCE1.) SIMS ET AL. (2005). 0APPROXIMATE SCALEMILES 186 186 0APPROXIMATE SCALEMILES 186 186Figure2.1-2 K A N K A K E E A R C H S A N D W I C H F A U L T Z O N E L A S A L L E A N T I C L I N O R I U M P L U M RI V E R F A U L T Z ON E W I S C O N S I N A R C HWISCONSIN DOME M I C H I G A N B A S I NILLINOISBASINMEEKERS GROVEANTICLINEMADISONFAULTJANESVILLEFAULTMINERAL POINTANTICLINEZONE OFCOOK COUNT YFAULTSGALENA SYNCLINEWAUKESHAFAULTUNNAMED FAULTIN ROCK COUNTYUNNAMED FAULT IN WAUPACACOUNTY M I S S I S S I P P I R I VE R A R C HZONE OF UNNAMEDFAULTS IN SOUTHEAST MINNESOTA I O W A C ITY-C L I N T O N F A U LT Z O N EREFERENCE1.) STRUCTURAL GEOLOGY GENERALIZED FROMEXELON (2006a,b), HEYL ET AL. (1978), BRASCH AYKO(2005), AND NELSON (1995).SCALE 0MILES 43 43LEGENDLEGENDSHINE SITE124 MILE (200 KM) RADIUSSCALE 0 KM 70 70ANTICLINESYNCLINE124 MILE (200 KM) RADIUSFAULT (HATCHURES ON DOWNTHROW SIDE)92° 0' 0" W90° 0' 0" W88° 0' 0" W92° 0' 0" W90° 0' 0" W88° 0' 0" W42° 0' 0" N44° 0' 0" N42° 0' 0" N44° 0' 0" NGENERALIZED DOME AND BASINFigure2.1-3 [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[((((((((((((((((((((((%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%(((((((((((((((%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%******************************************************[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((****************************************************************************************!)Madison87° W87° W88° W 88° W89° W89° W90° W90° W91° W91° W44° N44° N43° N43° N42° N42° N41° N41° N³LEGEND! )SHINE SITE124 Mile (200 KM) RadiusState BoundaryPennsylvanianMississippianDevonianSilurianOrdovicianCambrian (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((Early Proterozoic

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Early Proterozoic

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%Early and MiddleProterozoic [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[Late ArcheanFault and Fold Trend Geologic Time Generalized Geologic UnitsCoal, limestone, sandstone, shale or clay shaleLimestone, shale or clay shaleCarbonate, sandstoneDolomite, silty limestoneConglomerate, dolomite, limestone, sandstone, shaleDolomite, sandstone, shaleREFERENCEBedrock geology map from Garrity and Soller (2009). Geologicunits generalized from references cited in report.60060 30 KMSCALE30030 15MILESSCALE S and w ic h Fau l t Zo n eQuartziteFelsic Rocks Granitic RocksOrthogneissLake MichiganWolf River BatholithOpen Water L a Sa l l e An t ic li n o r iu m P l u m R i v e r F au l t Z on e Iow a C i t y-C l i n to n F a u l t Z o ne M e e ke r s G r o ve A n t i c l in eMineral Point AnticlineMadison FaultUnamed Faultin Waupaca CountyJanesvilleFault W a u kesh a F a ul t Zo n e o f C o o k C o u n t y F a u l t s G a l e n a S y n c l i n eZone of Unamed Faults in SoutheastMinnesotaUnamed Fault in Rock CountyFigure2.1-4}}