ML20140E723
| ML20140E723 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/03/1985 |
| From: | Reiter L Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Stepp J ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20140B566 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-85-535 NUDOCS 8505020030 | |
| Download: ML20140E723 (4) | |
Text
- _ .
t p rer
[ o
- ,, UNITED STATES 8 n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g R WASHINGTON, D. C. 20556
/ APR 0 31985 Dr. J. Carl Stepp Electric Power Research Institute 3412 Hillview Avenue P. O. Box 10412 Palo Alto, CA 94303
Dear Carl:
In response to your March 18, 1985 request for corrments on your minutes of our February 27, 1985 meeting, I am enclosing an annotated version of your minutes which reflects my understanding of that meeting. I believe that the meeting was worthwhile and that subsequent meetings and the LLNL, EPRI and USGS studies will be very useful in he. ping the NRC make decisions in this highly complex area.
I recently participated in the first meeting of a National Academy of Science / National Research Council panel on Seismic Hazard Analysis. The panel Chairman indicated great interest in the LLNL and EPRI studies and I " volunteered" LLNL and EPRI sending copies of the results and comparative reports to the 15 panel members. The panel was also very interested in attending the proposed NRC sponsored, USGS coordinated, workshop / conference on Seismic Hazard Analysis which we are planning to hold in November 1985. If'there-is any problem with EPRI sending their May 1985 and subsequent reports, please let me know.
Sincerely, y =
Leon Reiter, Acting Chief Geosciences Branch, DE
Enclosure:
As stated cc: w/ enclosure D. Bernreuter, LLNL J. Savy, LLNL J. King, EPRI J. J. Taylor, EPRI W. Loewenstein, EPRI I. B. Wall, EPRI J. Knight R. Bosnak MY W '?Jr.
57 Smith, fff.f$ z)$1 R. A. Thomas 58 4#//
, . *2 s - ,
.t -
Minutes ausl Meeting with NRC/LLNL 4
February 27, 1985 Westin St. Francis San Francisco, CA The meeting was begun at 9:00 AM.
Present Leon Reiter (NRC) Carl Stepp (EPRI)
Jean Savy (LLNL) Jerry King (EPRI)
Donald Bernreuter (LLNL)
Purpose
'^ '
clac.wn To f- - ' '__ _..l ,-: '- _2 -
plans for comparative evalua-tions of the WLLNL and EPRI seismic hazard methodologies at nine test sites, f gg Sched ule w, e e.l. Ah .4 compardwe evaliaAbsur y Coo -Aiwa1,*e4 a__m : will be initiated with an*information exchange - on May 23, 1985. The following key milestones were established. %eeb) ,
h& .1.-
ek-3 otistun 'p' \aueA ad escsS e May 23, 1985 : a to cc::- -
h cechnical re-'3 Co*f *'*
cu* iv+sw of the WLIllL ar.d EPRI seismic hazard methodologies a.M --1..._ ._..
e c --
.ti--- . ' u .
e4 wi%1 cq.,,m 3 .t i q.i.t- t
- s g sitere' ullf reie,Y.resdJ
- .~~,ns xx.n -.+...-.--...-....e-. .
bidk. of e June 3, 1985 to Perform comparative evaluations.
September 3, 1985 4 4 u.v1.si=8 fD'fl e September 3-27, 1985 Prepare ch-ef-t comparative evaluation 4 reports.
~Sq^ '- ~ '%* 16 '"
'm h6+m3 -on comparative evaluations.
e L-Am@
^
- ~ . m . .a u t .s, . :3 vva.p m _ m --== ci. .. _.1-m.. .crv. ..
- =7
- tJoue bw, it2f' bes&%.om a+ sShes es peut o+ LLSU/96C cmkrO*CC N h 8 CCO **c f(4 2.aird It'e!
Y r ab 1- j General Structure i'1*y 4 of hw4esM=3 (1) EPRI presentation of methodology including proposed parametric analyses.
> > ; )
1
' @ u.NL presegh%m .4 Q b iM c,puw .f LLut d treet cenlh
& 9 3 sis +ed st+er (3) NEiVLLNL presentation of mathodelc';7 ii.cludies proposed parametric analyses.
@ 'O(scularon e+ addi4%.\ co>ipar.Mvc eve lw.Amr . .__
.(?' m-,' _ a _3 --.__ _. _
-- General Structure of Merkchc e -2 Se sermeeE]
(1) EPRI presentation of draft comparative evaluations.
(2) NRG/LLNL presentation of """ comparative evaluation report. f
( 3) usf.,5
=^ ='p' fcae Ma.w oi I"8 *l CVa 4gM
( -
~^
c_" _ ; ....- - - - - - . _____-.
fl g 5. i-c ber siser41wj is Yo M " **
An issue to be resolved prior to " r'g?.s--
i
? - '
_, - .y.- ._
th: ,r r : : : J . . .
f c -r-- :- ,
nrxi_._ ....___.. y~.. _ .-,'
m __ , _c ., -
E Ui Ed [U'Ri eUMr wolf lee'ce.cos,.cd ' ~.
.ss3lc g*oid. r e ed.
"^' ~ ~" 'm HitC Fouked (LSGS aMQ
- *?CCC caf f ._ _.+=a=2 _: ;;rtici,_ . ....-m..:. _. T
% - . . a c c- - __
==m - 7:
=r. ,,,mm g o-
, pr : '
t~ ~. m . m.4~.
e The USGS has done some parametric analyses based on alterna-tive tectonic models (perhaps other considerations (?)) . Leon
'"^ .:Im Reiter will dc___.-_c ,_ C m...
..w m w q , , ,, w m 4-,,,.
32 _ . - - __ , :_ _ ; i _. m m ,, i , ,m _
' k " * " ~ - f toLkA< ier o'( +Neer s1a cloes -/s J.LUL aa.JSAe(,
Preliminary Parametric Analysis Proposed by LLML
- 1. Test lower bound magnitude cut-off.
-- EPRI ground motion model will be used for this comparison.
- 2. Test impact of different earthquake catalogs used by EPRI and i LLNL.
-- Determine differences in catalogs.
-- Perform computations to test impact on final hazard estimates.
- 3. Perform independent calculations of seismicity model para-meters a and b using a statistical model to be developed by LLNL. Both EPRI catalog and LLNL catalog'will be used.
- 4. Use EPRI's seismicity parameter evaluation method to estimate a and b values for LLNL source zones,Ae4 assess ne. hiT cinews of N Pf agpre4 a seh we h ..,4 e3h.w d e
- 5. Perform sensitivity on site corrections.
G. 453e:3 yehuce, oS cufilevet (<:uels att ud I.] LLUL fene( incathers N t.**ef 7 l Ted stjnhca.iice of assupm win resged to Se cay ined4<7 zue.
- . .-h.
_3-plo A sses.s AWreue; beben A ePo CAscnN a L Af l LM- Cce*bu*ud 9ffreetkel b bedisj trucedoid7.
8 g. Perform sensitivity on source zone uncertainties.
N 77 Perform sensitivity on distance and magnitudeg parameters.
% 8- mm..m. t i . i ti cf th: him12 tion an.rcach ' _ il ; .:--e
_u m .,
th; ly ic w m. au uuuute irrni; fm. aggs;gstin, , surz: 20nc;-
$-, -k wuaw wuava .2w ww sv Lv Id C Z t i # # d- .
- 9. T;at o c. ;;i _ n i ty c.- 2ccuziny ns, partial, full- corrdlatic.. Lu tynn" '
2nd b paramotcrc Of thu a c l oi.u u . -i mcdcl.
Preliminary Parametric Analysis Proposed by EPRI
- 1. Comparisons to test essential' dif ferences between the leeree cdiscrett -
st.- ~ e approach (EPRI) and the c.m_. n---- 1 -- - : i ce=b uous approach (LLNL).
-- Specific isolation of sources.
-- Specific isolation of seismicity parameters.
- 2. Comparisons to test details of the methodologies.
-- Method for truncating upper bound magnitude.
-- Methods for determining seismicity parameters, a and b.
-- Methods for determining activity rates and establishing appropriate constraints.
-- Impact of site-specific versus general regional interpretations.
-- Upper bound magnitude.
-- Different seismicity models.
- 3. Specific evaluations to assess key elements of the EPRI methodology.
-- Scientific uncertainty matrix.
-- Data uncertainty matrix.
The final methodology should be site independent. The NRC feels that this should_ include interpretation of source zones,y The scope of comparative evaluations will be f--inalizcd at tne May 23 woricshop . olebe::(
The meeting was adjourned at 11:30 AM.
so as b aweil inconsistancies cd d$bt s,h. N@ :=dicaN 8 N anessi5 A.c e&i of aalb[ site-sgec&c 2.m h p EJoregiLl ea(b c4 Me 1 fed sski: