|
|
Line 17: |
Line 17: |
|
| |
|
| =Text= | | =Text= |
| {{#Wiki_filter:Enclosure Regulatory Guide Periodic Review | | {{#Wiki_filter:Enclosure Regulatory Guide Periodic Review Regulatory Guide Number: 1.198 Title: Procedures and Criteria for Assessing Seismic Soil Liquefaction at Nuclear Power Plant Sites Office/Division/Branch: RES/DE/SGSEB Technical Lead: Thomas Weaver Recommended Staff Action: Reviewed with issues identified for future consideration |
| | | : 1. What are the known technical or regulatory issues with the current version of the RG? |
| Regulatory Guide Number: | | Since issuance of RG 1.198 in 2003 recent liquefaction research by Bray and Sancio (2006) and Boulanger and Idriss (2006) calls into question screening techniques for evaluating liquefaction potential of fine grained soils presented in the RGs Discussion Section. These techniques are: |
| 1.198 Title: Procedures and Criteria for Assessing Seismic Soil Liquefaction at Nuclear Power Plant Sites | | Cohesive soils with fines content greater than 30 percent and fines that either (i) are classified as clays based on the Unified Soil Classification (UCS) system or (ii) have a Plasticity Index (PI) greater than 30 percent should generally not be considered susceptible to liquefaction. |
| | | Other designations involving the C description, if the clay content is greater than 15 percent by weight and the liquid limit is greater than 35 percent and occurs at natural water contents lower than 90 percent can be considered nonliquefiable. |
| Office/Division/Branch: | | In addition, updated procedures for evaluating liquefaction potential have been proposed (Cetin et al. 2004, Moss et al. 2006, Boulanger and Idriss 2012). There are considerable differences in the newly proposed empirical methods, in part due to differing interpretations of the liquefaction case history database. The differences in interpretation need to be assessed. A National Research Council (NRC) study has been initiated to address the differences in the empirical models. This work needs to be completed prior to updating RG 1.198. |
| RES/DE/SGSEB Technical Lead: | | The first draft of the NRC report is scheduled for September 2014 with a final report September 2015. While waiting for the National Research Council to address the case history database, the information in the RG continues to be the most up to date guidance available with the exception of the two sentences from the Discussion Section mentioned above. |
| Thomas Weaver | |
| | |
| Recommended Staff Action: Reviewed with issues identified for future consideration | |
| : 1. What are the known technical or regulatory issues with the current version of the RG? Since issuance of RG 1.198 in 2003 recent liquefaction research by Bray and Sancio (2006) and Boulanger and Idriss (2006) calls into question screening techniques for evaluating liquefaction potential of fine grained soils presented in the RG's Discussion Section. These techniques are: | |
| | |
| "Cohesive soils with fines content greater than 30 percent and fines that either (i) are classified as clays based on the Unified Soil Classification (UCS) system or (ii) have a Plasticity Index (PI) greater than 30 percent should generally not be considered susceptible to liquefaction.
| |
| | |
| "Other designations involving the "C" description, if the clay content is greater than 15 percent by weight and the liquid limit is greater than 35 percent and occurs at natural water contents lower than 90 percent can be considered nonliquefiable."
| |
| In addition, updated procedures for evaluating liquefaction potential have been proposed (Cetin et al. 2004, Moss et al. 2006, Boulanger and Idriss 2012). There are considerable differences in the newly proposed empirical methods, in part due to differing interpretations of the liquefaction case history database. The differences in interpretation need to be assessed. A National Research Council (NRC) study has been initiated to address the differences in the empirical models. This work needs to be completed prior to updating RG 1.198. | |
| | |
| The first draft of the NRC report is scheduled for September 2014 with a final report September 2015. While waiting for the National Research Council to address the case history database, the information in the RG continues to be the most up to date guidance | |
| | |
| available with the exception of the two sentences from the Discussion Section mentioned above. | |
|
| |
|
| ==References:== | | ==References:== |
|
| |
|
| Bray, J. D. and Sancio, R. B. (2006) "Assessment of the liquefaction susceptibility of fine-grained soils," Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 132, No. 9, pp. 1165-1177. | | Bray, J. D. and Sancio, R. B. (2006) Assessment of the liquefaction susceptibility of fine-grained soils, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 132, No. 9, pp. 1165-1177. |
| Boulanger, R. W. and Idriss, I. M. (2006) "Liquefaction susceptibility criteria for silts and clays," Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenviromental Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 132 No. 11, pp. 1413-1426.
| |
|
| |
|
| | Boulanger, R. W. and Idriss, I. M. (2006) Liquefaction susceptibility criteria for silts and clays, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenviromental Engineering, ASCE, Vol. |
| | 132 No. 11, pp. 1413-1426. |
| Cetin, K. O., Seed, R. B., Der Kiureghian A., Tokimatsu K., Harder L. F., Kayen, R. E., | | Cetin, K. O., Seed, R. B., Der Kiureghian A., Tokimatsu K., Harder L. F., Kayen, R. E., |
| and Moss, R. E. S. (2004). "Standard penetration test-based probabilistis and deterministic assessment of seismic soil liquefaction," Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering ASCE, Vol. 130, No. 12, pp. 1314-1340. | | and Moss, R. E. S. (2004). Standard penetration test-based probabilistis and deterministic assessment of seismic soil liquefaction, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering ASCE, Vol. 130, No. 12, pp. 1314-1340. |
| Moss, R. E. S., Seed, R. B., Kayen, R. E., Stewart, J. P., Der Kiureghian A., and Cetin K. | | Moss, R. E. S., Seed, R. B., Kayen, R. E., Stewart, J. P., Der Kiureghian A., and Cetin K. |
| O. (2006). "CPT-based probabilistic and deterministic assessment of in situ seismic soil liquefaction potential," Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering ASCE, Vol. 132, No. 8, pp. 1032-1051. | | O. (2006). CPT-based probabilistic and deterministic assessment of in situ seismic soil liquefaction potential, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering ASCE, Vol. 132, No. 8, pp. 1032-1051. |
| | | Boulanger, R. W., and Idriss, I. M. (2012). Probabilistic standard penetration test-based liquefaction-triggering procedure, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering ASCE, Vol. 138, No. 10, pp. 1185-1195. |
| Boulanger, R. W., and Idriss, I. M. (2012). "Probabilistic standard penetration test-based liquefaction-triggering procedure," Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering ASCE, Vol. 138, No. 10, pp. 1185-1195. | | : 2. What is the impact on internal and external stakeholders of not updating the RG for the known issues, in terms of numbers of licensing and inspection activities? |
| : 2. What is the impact on internal and external stakeholders of not updating the RG for the known issues, in terms of numbers of licensing and inspection activities? | |
| | |
| There are no large power reactor license applications anticipated in the near future (next 3 to 5 years). Thus, there is no immediate need for revising the guide at this time to address their licensing. For small modular reactors one application is anticipated in the next two years. | | There are no large power reactor license applications anticipated in the near future (next 3 to 5 years). Thus, there is no immediate need for revising the guide at this time to address their licensing. For small modular reactors one application is anticipated in the next two years. |
| : 3. What is an estimate of the level of effort needed to address identified issues in terms of full-time equivalent (FTE) and contractor resources? | | : 3. What is an estimate of the level of effort needed to address identified issues in terms of full-time equivalent (FTE) and contractor resources? |
| | |
| Revision of the RG will take 0.5 FTE of NRC staff time to participate in National Research Council meetings, and to perform in-house research on application of risk based methods for liquefaction assessment. | | Revision of the RG will take 0.5 FTE of NRC staff time to participate in National Research Council meetings, and to perform in-house research on application of risk based methods for liquefaction assessment. |
| : 4. Based on the answers to the questions above, what is the recommended staff action for this guide (Reviewed with no issues identified, Reviewed with issues identified for future consideration, Revise, or Withdraw)? | | : 4. Based on the answers to the questions above, what is the recommended staff action for this guide (Reviewed with no issues identified, Reviewed with issues identified for future consideration, Revise, or Withdraw)? |
| Recommend action is to consider RG 1.198 reviewed with issues identified for future consideration, pending release of National Research Council final report in September 2015. 5. If a RG should be revised, provide a conceptual plan and timeframe to accomplish this. Not applicable. | | Recommend action is to consider RG 1.198 reviewed with issues identified for future consideration, pending release of National Research Council final report in September 2015. |
| | | : 5. If a RG should be revised, provide a conceptual plan and timeframe to accomplish this. |
| NOTE: This review was conducted in September 2014 and reflects the staff's plans as of that date. These plans are tentative and subject to change.}} | | Not applicable. |
| | NOTE: This review was conducted in September 2014 and reflects the staffs plans as of that date. These plans are tentative and subject to change.}} |
|
---|
Category:Regulatory Analysis
MONTHYEARML22076A0022023-05-18018 May 2023 Regulatory Analysis for Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1404 (RG 1.253 Rev 0) ML21288A1122022-01-31031 January 2022 DG-1393, RG 1.248 Rev. 0 Regulatory Analysis ML21285A2692021-10-12012 October 2021 Rev 2 Courtesy Copy for ACRS Review ML21004A1682021-03-12012 March 2021 Regulatory Analysis DG-1357 ML20231A8912020-11-0606 November 2020 DG 1360 RG 1.205 Rev 2 Regulatory Analysis (RA) ML20231A8742020-11-0606 November 2020 DG 1359 RG 1.189 Rev 4 Regulatory Analysis (RA) ML20091L6962020-04-30030 April 2020 Public Comment Resolution Table DG-1353 for RG 1.233, Guidance for a Technology-Inclusive, Risk-Informed, and Performance-Based Methodology to Inform the Licensing Basis and Content of Applications for Licenses, Certifications, and Approval ML19206A4932020-02-0606 February 2020 DG-1287 RA from Gw (1) ML18337A2142019-04-30030 April 2019 Regulatory Analysis for Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1353 - Guidance to Inform Content of Non-LWR Applications ML17258A5802019-04-30030 April 2019 DG-1284 (Rg 1.199) - Regulatory Analysis ML16172A2392019-04-30030 April 2019 DG-1283 Reg Analysis ML18129A0852018-06-30030 June 2018 DG-1336 Regulatory Analysis ML16091A2712018-02-28028 February 2018 DG-1329 Regulatory Analysis ML17083A1332017-12-31031 December 2017 DG-1335 - Regulatory Analysis ML14041A3452014-09-22022 September 2014 Periodic Review of Rg 1.198 ML12237A1242014-03-21021 March 2014 Regulatory Analysis for DG-5038 Special Nuclear Material Doorway Monitors. ML13051A0352013-05-31031 May 2013 Regulatory Analysis for Rg 1 68, Revision 4 ML12219A4002013-04-24024 April 2013 Regulatory Analysis to Draft Regulatory Guide (DG)-1235), Qualification Tests for Safety-Related Actuators in Nuclear Power Plants (Proposed Revision 1 of Regulatory Guide 1.73, Dated January 1974) ML12298A0732012-11-28028 November 2012 Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1259 ML12160A0492012-09-17017 September 2012 Regulatory Analysis to Rg 1.68.3, Rev. 1 ML12160A1702012-09-0606 September 2012 Regulatory Analysis to Rg 1.68.1, Revision 2, Initial Test Program of Condensate and Feedwater Systems for Light-Water Reactors. ML1031207522012-08-0909 August 2012 Regulatory Analysis for DG-1208, Software Unit Testing for Digital Computer Software Used in Safety Systems of Nuclear Power Plants ML11273A0602012-06-30030 June 2012 Regulatory Analysis for Rg 1.140 Revision DG-1280 ML1135501992012-06-30030 June 2012 Regulatory Analysis for DG-1277, Initial Test Program of Emergency Core Cooling Systems for Boiling-Water Reactors ML1201700632012-02-29029 February 2012 Regulatory Analysis for Rg 1.106, Rev. 2 2023-05-18
[Table view]Some use of "" in your query was not closed by a matching "". Category:Regulatory Guidance
MONTHYEARML20182A1082020-06-30030 June 2020 Periodic Review of RG 5.29 - Special Nuclear Material Control and Accounting Systems for Nuclear Power Plants ML19126A3062019-05-0808 May 2019 Periodic Review ML18136A7612019-04-30030 April 2019 DG-1335 Public Comment Response ML19025A1732019-01-25025 January 2019 Periodic Review of Rg 1.105 ML19009A2662019-01-14014 January 2019 Periodic Review Rg 1.81 ML18353B0652018-12-20020 December 2018 Periodic Review Memo Rg 1.30 ML18353B0662018-12-20020 December 2018 Periodic Review of Rg 1.30 ML18354A8622018-12-20020 December 2018 Periodic Review Rg 1.89 ML18232A3962018-08-22022 August 2018 Periodic Review of NMSS Regulatory Guides ML18156A5452018-06-0707 June 2018 Results of Periodic Review of Regulatory Guide 8.28 ML18155A4942018-06-0505 June 2018 Periodic Review ML18155A4952018-06-0505 June 2018 Results of Periodic Review of Regulatory Guide (Rg) 1.61, Damping Values for Seismic Design of Nuclear Power Plants. ML18150A2332018-05-31031 May 2018 Periodic Review ML18142B2012018-05-23023 May 2018 Periodic Review of Rg 1.92, Revision 3, Combining Modal Responses and Spatial Components in Seismic Response Analysis ML18102B2352018-05-0101 May 2018 Memorandum - Generic Issue Management Control System Report for the First Half of Fiscal Year 2018 ML18067A7412018-03-0909 March 2018 Rg Memo for 1.109 and 1.112 Periodic Reviews ML14107A4102015-11-17017 November 2015 Public Comment Resolution Table October 2014 ML14056A0112015-03-0909 March 2015 Draft Regulatory Guide (DG)-1299, Regulatory Guidance on the Alternate Pressurized Thermal Shock Rule ML14041A3452014-09-22022 September 2014 Periodic Review of Rg 1.198 ML13109A4672013-06-18018 June 2013 Staff Responses to Public Comments on Rg 1.33 Rev 3 2020-06-30
[Table view]Some use of "" in your query was not closed by a matching "". Category:Regulatory Guide
MONTHYEARML23248A3432023-08-31031 August 2023 Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1404, Rev. 1, Guidance for a Technology-Inclusive Content-Of-Application Methodology to Inform the Licensing Basis and Content of Applications for Licenses, Certifications, ML23102A0322023-05-17017 May 2023 Rev 2 Periodic Review ML22195A2822023-01-31031 January 2023 DG 1405 - Design, Fabrication, and Materials Code Case Acceptability, ASME Section III (RG 1.84 Rev 40) ML22195A2842023-01-31031 January 2023 Draft Regulatory Guide DG 1406, Inservice Inspection Code Case Acceptability, ASME Section XI, Division 1 (RG 1.147 Rev 21) ML22196A0632023-01-31031 January 2023 Draft Regulatory Guide DG 1407, Operation and Maintenance Code Case Acceptability, ASME OM Code (RG 1.192 Rev 5) ML22196A0652023-01-31031 January 2023 DG 1408 ASME Code Cases Not Approved for Use (RG 1.193 Rev 8) ML22101A2632023-01-30030 January 2023 Rev 2 Acceptability of ASME Code Section III Division 5 High Temperature Reactors ML22221A2202022-10-0505 October 2022 Rev 0, Guide for Assessing, Monitoring, and Mitigating Aging Effects on Electrical Equipment Used in Production and Utilization Facilities ML22223A1592022-08-12012 August 2022 Draft Regulatory Guide 1.250, Rev. 0, Dedication of Commercial-Grade Digital Instrumentation & Control Item for Use in Nuclear Power Plants (for ACRS on 9-7-22) ML22066B2752022-05-31031 May 2022 Spent Fuel Heat Generation in an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation ML21288A1152022-01-31031 January 2022 Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1393, RG 1.248 Rev. 0, Guide for Assessing, Monitoring, and Mitigating Aging Effects on Electrical Equipment Used in Nuclear Power Generating Stations Regulatory Guide 1.1922021-12-31031 December 2021 Operation and Maintenance Code Case Acceptability, ASME OM Code Regulatory Guide 1.1472021-12-17017 December 2021 0, Inservice Inspection Code Case Acceptability, ASME Section XI, Division 1 Regulatory Guide 1.842021-12-17017 December 2021 9, Design, Fabrication, and Materials Code Case Acceptability, ASME Section III Regulatory Guide 1.1932021-12-17017 December 2021 ASME Code Cases Not Approved for Use ML21288A5652021-11-0909 November 2021 ACRS Version DG-1393 (RG 1.248 Rev. 0) (Advance Copy for ACRS Use) ML20356A1272021-03-31031 March 2021 Regulatory Guide RG 1.240, Fresh and Spent Fuel Pool Criticality Analyses ML21068A4042021-03-12012 March 2021 RG 1.102. Transmittal Memo Periodic Review 2021 ML20301A1702021-02-17017 February 2021 Transmittal Memo to OCA for Revision 4 of RG 1.136, Design Limits, Loading Combinations, Materials, Construction and Testing of Concrete Containments ML20339A5582021-02-0303 February 2021 DG-1304 for Rev 0 of RG 1.243, Safety-Related Steel Structures and Steel-Plate Composite (Sc) Walls for Other than Reactor Vessels and Containments ML20339A5592021-02-0303 February 2021 Regulatory Analysis for DG-1304 for Rev 0 of RG 1.243, Safety-Related Steel Structures and Steel-Plate Composite (Sc) Walls for Other than Reactor Vessels and Containments ML21033B0912021-02-0202 February 2021 Draft for ACRS Meeting 3-3-21: Regulatory Guide - RG 1.240 Rev.0 for Fresh and Spent Fuel Pool Criticality Analyses ML20301A1672021-02-0101 February 2021 Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.136, Rev 4, Design Limits, Loading Combinations, Materials, Construction and Testing of Concrete Containments Regulatory Guide 1.1772021-01-0404 January 2021 (DG-1287) an Approach for Plant-Specific, Risk Informed Decisionmaking: Technical Specifications ML21033B0832020-10-23023 October 2020 Draft for ACRS Meeting 3-3-21: Public Comment Resolution Table for DG-1373 ML20142A4892020-08-31031 August 2020 DG-1351 Rev 1 - Licensee Actions to Address Nonconservative Technical Specifications_FY20 ML20078K9202020-08-31031 August 2020 DG-1370 Proposed Revision 1 of Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.191, Fire Protection Program for Nuclear Power Plants During Decommissioning ML20164A2142020-08-0404 August 2020 FRN for Regulatory Guide 3.15, Rev 2, Standard Format and Content of License Applications for Receipt and Storage of Unirradiated Power Reactor Fuel and Associated Radioactive Material at a Nuclear Power Plant ML20125A7322020-07-0101 July 2020 FRN for RG 1.187-Rev 2 - Guidance for Implementation of 10 CFR 50.59, Changes, Tests and Experiments ML20055F4902020-06-30030 June 2020 Reg Guide 1.236 - Pressurized-Water Reactor Control Rod Ejection and Boiling-Water Reactor Control Rod Drop Accidents Regulatory Guide 1.1872020-06-30030 June 2020 Rev. 2, Guidance for Implementation of 10 CFR 50.59, Changes, Tests and Experiments ML20055F4892020-06-10010 June 2020 Pressurized-Water Reactor Control Rod Ejection and Boiling-Water Reactor Control Rod. Response to Public Comments - 2nd Comment Period ML20141L6132020-05-31031 May 2020 Reg Guide 1.142 Rev 3 - Safety Related Structures for Nuclear Power Plants (Other than Reactor Vessels and Containments) ML19156A1292020-02-29029 February 2020 Regulatory Guide (Rg) 1.151, Revision 2 Instrument Sensing Lines ML19266A6192020-02-21021 February 2020 Response to Public Comments on DG-1337 ML14161A6212020-02-12012 February 2020 DG-3036 Standard Format and Content of License Applications for Storage Only of Unirradiated Power Reactor Fuel and Associated Radioactive Material ML20022A2142020-01-22022 January 2020 Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1364, Volcanic Hazards. Draft for ACRS Public Meeting 1-22-20 ML19175A0442019-12-19019 December 2019 Regulatory Guide (Rg) 1.180, Guidelines for Evaluating Electromagnetic and Radio-Frequency Interference in Safety-Related Instrumentation and Control Systems ML19213A3452019-09-30030 September 2019 Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1341, Standard Format and Content for Applications to Renew Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses ML19141A2142019-08-16016 August 2019 Regulatory Guide Periodic Review ML18312A2422019-04-30030 April 2019 Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1353, Guidance for a Technology-Inclusive, Risk-Informed, and Performance-Based Methodology to Inform the Licensing Basis and Content of Applications for Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Non-Light-Water ML18114A2262018-08-31031 August 2018 Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1343, (Rg 1.192 Rev 3), Operation and Maintenance Code Case Acceptability, ASME OM Code ML16315A1302018-06-30030 June 2018 Rev. 1, Guidelines for Evaluating the Effects of Light-Water Reactor Water Environments in Fatigue Analyses of Metal Components. ML17083A1332017-12-31031 December 2017 DG-1335 - Regulatory Analysis ML17083A1342017-12-31031 December 2017 Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1335,(Revision 5 to Reg Guide 1.97), Criteria for Accident Monitoring Instrumentation for Nuclear Power Plants ML16182A3212016-10-28028 October 2016 Draft Regulatory Guide (DG)-1337, Restart of a Nuclear Power Plant Shut Down by a Seismic Event ML16104A2202016-09-30030 September 2016 Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1332 (Proposed Revision 3 of Regulatory Guide 1.12), Nuclear Power Plant Instrumentation for Earthquakes ML15313A4252016-06-30030 June 2016 DG-1292, Dedication of Commercial-Grade Items for Use in Nuclear Power Plants ML15203B4102015-12-18018 December 2015 Draft Regulatory Guide DG-8033, Operating Philosophy for Maintaining Occupational Radiation Exposure as Low as Is Reasonably Achievable ML14107A4102015-11-17017 November 2015 Public Comment Resolution Table October 2014 2023-08-31
[Table view]Some use of "" in your query was not closed by a matching "". |
Text
Enclosure Regulatory Guide Periodic Review Regulatory Guide Number: 1.198 Title: Procedures and Criteria for Assessing Seismic Soil Liquefaction at Nuclear Power Plant Sites Office/Division/Branch: RES/DE/SGSEB Technical Lead: Thomas Weaver Recommended Staff Action: Reviewed with issues identified for future consideration
- 1. What are the known technical or regulatory issues with the current version of the RG?
Since issuance of RG 1.198 in 2003 recent liquefaction research by Bray and Sancio (2006) and Boulanger and Idriss (2006) calls into question screening techniques for evaluating liquefaction potential of fine grained soils presented in the RGs Discussion Section. These techniques are:
Cohesive soils with fines content greater than 30 percent and fines that either (i) are classified as clays based on the Unified Soil Classification (UCS) system or (ii) have a Plasticity Index (PI) greater than 30 percent should generally not be considered susceptible to liquefaction.
Other designations involving the C description, if the clay content is greater than 15 percent by weight and the liquid limit is greater than 35 percent and occurs at natural water contents lower than 90 percent can be considered nonliquefiable.
In addition, updated procedures for evaluating liquefaction potential have been proposed (Cetin et al. 2004, Moss et al. 2006, Boulanger and Idriss 2012). There are considerable differences in the newly proposed empirical methods, in part due to differing interpretations of the liquefaction case history database. The differences in interpretation need to be assessed. A National Research Council (NRC) study has been initiated to address the differences in the empirical models. This work needs to be completed prior to updating RG 1.198.
The first draft of the NRC report is scheduled for September 2014 with a final report September 2015. While waiting for the National Research Council to address the case history database, the information in the RG continues to be the most up to date guidance available with the exception of the two sentences from the Discussion Section mentioned above.
References:
Bray, J. D. and Sancio, R. B. (2006) Assessment of the liquefaction susceptibility of fine-grained soils, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 132, No. 9, pp. 1165-1177.
Boulanger, R. W. and Idriss, I. M. (2006) Liquefaction susceptibility criteria for silts and clays, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenviromental Engineering, ASCE, Vol.
132 No. 11, pp. 1413-1426.
Cetin, K. O., Seed, R. B., Der Kiureghian A., Tokimatsu K., Harder L. F., Kayen, R. E.,
and Moss, R. E. S. (2004). Standard penetration test-based probabilistis and deterministic assessment of seismic soil liquefaction, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering ASCE, Vol. 130, No. 12, pp. 1314-1340.
Moss, R. E. S., Seed, R. B., Kayen, R. E., Stewart, J. P., Der Kiureghian A., and Cetin K.
O. (2006). CPT-based probabilistic and deterministic assessment of in situ seismic soil liquefaction potential, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering ASCE, Vol. 132, No. 8, pp. 1032-1051.
Boulanger, R. W., and Idriss, I. M. (2012). Probabilistic standard penetration test-based liquefaction-triggering procedure, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering ASCE, Vol. 138, No. 10, pp. 1185-1195.
- 2. What is the impact on internal and external stakeholders of not updating the RG for the known issues, in terms of numbers of licensing and inspection activities?
There are no large power reactor license applications anticipated in the near future (next 3 to 5 years). Thus, there is no immediate need for revising the guide at this time to address their licensing. For small modular reactors one application is anticipated in the next two years.
- 3. What is an estimate of the level of effort needed to address identified issues in terms of full-time equivalent (FTE) and contractor resources?
Revision of the RG will take 0.5 FTE of NRC staff time to participate in National Research Council meetings, and to perform in-house research on application of risk based methods for liquefaction assessment.
- 4. Based on the answers to the questions above, what is the recommended staff action for this guide (Reviewed with no issues identified, Reviewed with issues identified for future consideration, Revise, or Withdraw)?
Recommend action is to consider RG 1.198 reviewed with issues identified for future consideration, pending release of National Research Council final report in September 2015.
- 5. If a RG should be revised, provide a conceptual plan and timeframe to accomplish this.
Not applicable.
NOTE: This review was conducted in September 2014 and reflects the staffs plans as of that date. These plans are tentative and subject to change.