NUREG-0797, Summary of Meeting on 890905 in Rockville,Md to Discuss Ground Motion Estimates for Criner Tectonic Structure of Southern Oklahoma Aulacongen in Wichita Tectonic Province, Per Section 2.5.2 of Fsar.Viewgraphs Encl

Summary of Meeting on 890905 in Rockville,Md to Discuss Ground Motion Estimates for Criner Tectonic Structure of Southern Oklahoma Aulacongen in Wichita Tectonic Province, Per Section 2.5.2 of Fsar.Viewgraphs Encl

ML20247E699
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	09/11/1989
From:	Joshua Wilson Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
RTR-NUREG-0797, RTR-NUREG-797 NUDOCS 8909150359
Download: ML20247E699 (28)

Text

. _ _ - _ - - _ _ _-. - - - - - - - - --

^ . p mog#o Ig UNITED STATES c !" p- NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

'5 rp WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 j# September 11, 1989

• • ..+

Docket Nos. 50-445 and 50-446 APPLICANT:- Texas Utilities Electric Company (TV Electric)

FACILITY: Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station (CPSES), Units 1 and 2

SUMMARY

OF MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 5, 1989 A meeting was held on September 5, 1989 in Rockville, Maryland to discuss ground motion estimates for the triner tectonic structure of the Southern Oklahoma Aulacogen in the Wichita Tectonic Province as it relates to the staff's review of Section 2.5.2 of the FSAR for Comanche Peak. A list of attendees is provided as Attachment 1. The slides used by TU Electric in their' presentation are provided as Attachment 2.

Recent NRC staff effort associated with the review of the operating license application for Comanche Peak has involved an extensive review of the staff's Safety Evaluation Report, as supplemented, since NUREG-0797 was originally issued in July 1981, to determine the extent to which the con-clusions in that report have been affected by design changes resulting from the Corrective Action Program, amendments to the Final Safety Analysis Report, and other events that have occurred over time.

Part of that effort has involved consideration of the effect of the results of seismic hazard studies on the seismic design basis for Comanche Peak. Detailed investigations of the Meers Fault by several organizations, including NRC research contractors, had demonstrated that it is a capable fault, as defined by the siting criteria in Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 100. Although there is no current seismicity associated with the Meers Fault paleoseismic evidence shows that there have been at least two large seismic events on the fault within the past 3000 years. Based on analysis of the paleoseismic data, estimates of the sizes of these prehistoric earthquakes are in the magnitude range from 6 3/4 to 7 1/2.

Recently, ongoing research studies by an NRC contractor have identified another fault that appears to be similar to the Meers Fault with respect to relatively young surface rupture, lack of seismicity, and being a member of the Wichita Frontal Fault System. The discovery of the Criner Fault now raises the possibility that at least two capable faults lie within this 700 kilometer-long fault system.

The Criner Fault lies near the southern boundary of the Southern Oklahoma Aulacogen and is about 200 kilometers north of Comanche Peak. This area is part of the Wichita Tectonic Province, as defined in Section 2.5.2.2.2 of the FSAR and in the Ouachita-Wichita belt of seismicity, as discussed in Section 2.5.2.3 of the staff's SER. In the SER, the largest regional historic earthquake, the 1882 maximum Modified Mercalli intensity VII Paris, Texas earthquake, was associated with the Ouachita-Wichita belt and assumed to occur at its nearest approach to the plant site: 65 miles or about 105 kilometers.

8909150359 890911 \

FDR ADOCK 05000445 *n y 0 A PDC 7

e .

f,;r - .

f,fe ' Summary of 9/5/89 Meeting Although this information is recent, the staff believes that it would'be.

~

prudent to assess the effects.of a capable Criner Fault on.the seismic design

. basis and seismic safety of Comanche Peak. Accordingly, the staff informed TU Electric of these findings and arranged a meeting to discuss the matter.

. Staff and contractors from TV Electric. visited the site of the Criner Fault in August 1989. Low-angle. lighting videotapes and photographic slides were-presented at the meeting to supplement discussions of the similarities and differences between Criner and Meers. Based on that information, TV Electric and its consultants have concluded that the Criner Fault is:not a ' capable fault.

Nevertheless, TU Electric also presented preliminary information concerning the relevant seismic ' forces and ground motions, attenuated.to the plant site, that

.would be produced by. the maximum earthquake from a Criner Fault. Based on that evaluation, TU Electric concluded that the Comanche. Peak seismic design basis  !

adequately envelopes the resulting seismic forces.

At the conclusion of the meeting, the staff stated that'it would request TV Electric to submit additional information on the docket to assure that an adequate basis exists-for the Comanche Peak seismic design.

k Jan/es H. Wilson, Assistant Director fbf Projects Comanche Peak Project Division Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosures:

1. ' List of Attendees 2'. TU Presentation Slides '

cc: See next page I

i

.a .,

...l l +

)

. .CC*

Jack R. Newman, Esq.

Mr. Robert F. Warnick Assistant Director Newman & Holtzinger f

-for Inspection Programs 1615 L Street, NW Comanche Peak Project Division Suite 1000.

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Connission Washington, D.C. 20036 q P. O. Box 1029 1 Granbury, Texas 76048 Chief. Texas Bureau of Radiation Control J I

Texas Department of Health Regional Administrator, Region IV 1100 West 49th Street, U. S. Nuclear' Regulatory Connission Austin, Texas 78756 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 Arlington, Texas 76011 Honorable George Crump County Judge '

Ms. Billie Pirner Garde, Esq. Glen Rose, Texas 76043 Garde Law Office Mr. William J. Cahill, Jr.

104 East Wisconsin Avenue Executive Vice President, Nuclear Appleton, Wisconsin 54911 Texas Utilities Electric Company 400 H. Olive Street, L. B. 81 Mrs. Juanita Ellis, President Dallas, Texas 75201 Citizens Association for Sound Energy 1426 South Polk Dallas, Texas 75224 Mr. E. F. Ottney P. 0. Box 1777 Glen Rose, Texas 76043 Mr. Roger D. Walker Manager, Nuclear Licensing Texas Utilities Electric Company 400 North Olive Street, L. B. 81 Dallas, Texas 75201 Texas Utilities Electric Company c/o Bethesda Licensing 3 Metro Center, Suite 610 Bethesda, Maryland 20814 William A. Burchette, Esq.

Counsel for Tex-La Electric Cooperative of Texas Heron, Burchette, Ruckert & Rothwell 1025 Thomas Jefferson Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20007 GDS ASSOCIATES, INC.

Suite 720 1850 Parkway Place <

Marietta, Georgia 30067-8237

c;;t.;- n .

ef 39: $ ; <

' ; ec. :;. / ' m. Attachment I--

- . .; i 1 3c.:-, -

l /

1 lI List of: Attendees at meeting held on,

September 5,'1989 in R.ckville, o MD.

to discuss ground motion estimates for Criner Fault

]

. NRC' C I. Grimes J...E. Lyons-~

i, - J. H.' Wilson-M.' Fields G. Bagchi L.!Reiter:

R. McMullen-R. Rothman D. Guzy:.

A. J. Murphy.-

l

'TU Elect'ric-R..D. Walker

-0. Lowe.

., < J. S.'. Marshall L C. T.LHooten R. M. Kissinger.

'B.!F1anigan J. C. Stepp-

- H. R. Acharya -

- N. R. Tilford M.'Axelrad T. Hicks N. Donovan CASE Doyle 1

i 4

E T

I S S I

S S E A S B P N C G E I S

C E Y N D T

I I

S C C

I E

N I

M M O S E I E

S S D S

I E O H S P CD E S R REZ S U AI S P ER P

C E SE S ET TD P . RC Al l C EA HA ZR TV N A MS I

G C H RN I I

O FA CS NM EA OE RW CR i

l 1 ll l j

1 N _

G I

S E E SV D TI T L A S

E AD UV S TR S E R Y P I

HO E N T

C C LF R 0NS VA F

5OO I

WT I I C O NN 2

5CN I

S -

RGO M A T C

OA CND S D E N M /I I

E N PN O O R GS EU L E

E SO I

L S AR T A N R SIV S G DU M UE E E A EH RM E NSP N D C -

T c O T S CM F S N S P E LC NY AET N C E R I

I W L S

I RAI O S E PUT W- EA I

ELP AM VT ES I I RN Y L V E U VS EO P S EA VR POS RB OF ATA

' . , 1 il

,L

. . j

. \

l

'gt.. M s

N~.. >

l L

m n,Yi::*. .:. ... i.. -

s,,

. r-e: . .. ..

...~ :.' U. .;- m.,

, ::.. ' ,..  : io

'A . - rn, ~

f af\

1. E.:'.

, . . . i.. l.:.

. 1 1...M i

N .

m

- .. e. -.:..:.:. o-

. .:::.:.. w

-::..:.:: N ..

.:- ~

M

... o n

. .... . . m

.,e * ~

\  :.:..:.i:.::....:,

... :.. m,,, . . . . ...

. m

~

. . ... ..:.. ::. . . ... . . .: . :::.~.,

,c

..  :.6..

.:... . ; ...?.. . . . ::?.l.::!!.!:i}i:le.:::::.::

.. .. . .: :. ...:.c.::l.i:::i: * $a

.. 2. .: .....

. :. :. *i.. : :.. . a.

. :.~. :. ..v:::.5::.  ::.: : .:. . . . . . .. r.: :

..:i.::.i.-}.i.}:.<. ./ .:. .::fi.:.. . i.::l:: .... r.:: /.:.'

.a

.... c no

'b. ! .. .' .

o m

i. ::::: ... ..::::. .:::.  :.::. i . .  : .: ...:. . .: . . i'

..:< w

.::. .:.v. . .: ::. . . ... ..:.t.

...v  ::  :. . . -

. . ...... a

%.. ....:.... i ,:i. yi::: i lv.. .  :::.::: ,o'

. .. . : : . ....:..  : .:.:  : Y. . .:%. : :: . .. . .i .

.. ::. . ...  : r.-t.;.. ...:.::::: .:: ... *:i. ':.:. "-t :,. :.....:: .F. - w 4

.....,:.v... ....

c w w w

.:v..... :.:.: .::.:.:: .. ..:: ... . . . . : :.:. .- . . ... .:. . .

• w e c o u

. .. ::::.ii.::::::e,. : e w a o f- O a

.. sn e a M oowo Z O *~)

N o zgg o

N 8 8 9 I

. . . .. oaNM

)

. .,j

• j w W t,aJ LaJ

,/ ZZZZ

/ ' ,

OOOO p ' / > - / i NNNN

'.d...*

H~ ,,,ppf" 1

COMANCHE PEAK S.E.S.

FNAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT

- UNITS 1 and 2 SEISMIC RISK MAP ALGERMISSEN AND PERKINS FKiURE 2.5.2-1

~)

l. .. .

- \

.. OMLA.

fN%R * .

I Texas -

" OKLAHOMA l ARKANSAS

\. . ARKOMA ANDARKO BASIN f W2 Y/d BASIN *

]

O uC ALESTER amatwon.eu Omt sett Jf

. ~~

1 (k /

gg4 ~~^

}

MA f

- /, g,.

< wT

"*'in HARDEMAN

• y BASIN N RDuo ~~~~

=5 #%

i o W y' _ . .

WICHITA FALLS p

p..g*

//

.r *

,,.- 1

,,a v **** '

O Ap 1

, 97 479

),;y o

j g

%9 oaps g* \ }/ SABINE w b

o ronfwon EAST $

b 3 l [ f N o ) ,/

/ b

• * , TEXAS UPLIFT f

• h M.vge \.,

b \ SITE E W 3:' EMBAYMEN 5 i Qy osoccHcs

[

2 [ y Co

\ M ,' i

= l 4 LLANO v

/ ,~ .

w .] g f '

} [ >g,, oft ?'"' .-- " .

. c /

UPLtFT ,

Y g

• e f $ *Ssim

,5,*/

l fo D,

8 ERR BASIN g 5 go #//% $f / s'

/ fhy'#/ /A::s ' s

1. o so no eo

• • • ""*""""""'"# COMANCHE PEAK S.E.S.

a. u., .: v..... FNAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT seua cts: t- c..i.....i wi r.., u.,

.. I

• UNITS 1 and 2 I'c. .'i.,i.'.'u.',".ll"u'*!.Un'*$3/.',IR i m#.., .

o a.,i ,A.A.P.c.,i,u...e a *. u 4 c u.

REGIONAL TECTONIC STRUCTURE FIGURE 2.5.l-3

n. _ _ _ _ . . - ___m. _..____m_m_ _ _ ___ __ _ . - - _ . _ _ ___ __m_ _-

'- - ; y- -. _

,- 7

,)

I 3: I( - - ~k- .g {; '.{- .% $.

vi

p. ,

W D yay

., .,. }- s-

h. .. ,;

r < v f

.g agw tEuy~

v.

l ~

r vs a.'"t e =

s~ s; ..

M 3 )e.

~: )

-g

$ <- ug

+.

I-8 \

3

b. ll

• f*

. ,/ ,

I-C _

p  ; .

E.

i et:

!s *-

" IE I l1 tr

.Io o  : ?I Et

- 1: ji 8 .

> . I;r  : ,,'a

l j*lp  !} 1-I: -l

g. o

I f-i' I s:

li or., b of. y  !!

~3 g ig g.f p-El,s y; t-

-: of. f oof ge je ,>-

-- - &,-. . o ye . . I

.o. p. . ;

- ja di i - I.o Ife

'*[f' ..- . p

. , g, y;I -

3. -

L o -

g coi! - _ ----

3. . g d'

M h y . o L 8"SI- ' 3 i

. f.

t' Fo y. j- i f,r a,  ; f

.f o Bf .l

~

' l

.p h t, 4 'e ii.

d as , ,I" *-

Jsf s > > . ,;*  : . , s i,, , ,a ,m ,,, s '

' ,, ,,,' ' a rb , P~1l'

a i

y *s }*

.p'

. $n k;"ll

. s.

,% .::'" ';,(,', ',' ' -

'r

'* , t .  ::

• ta I t- y q

!! ,y.

8 -

I-

s. .

s I

I d, I ~ "

$ - I! -

• ~

N i og :.

g, _

! 't

io-

,v , .-

e .

9 5

/

'~

. E f ola i j j

. ' " is  : , 1 (! $ ?

• ! \ [s**

Yo e j

a* -

3 fa j

" : )-

~

Q l8

)

'o

• s, o

i:o 3

II

}j n

=c a la II j

E le Joe

• e p- I- 4 ,

i i ' - i s . .- . . - . .... .,w...,..,..--r.. >

__.__1 q ___O_= - -

n .~

i .. .

. og __ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _

. . f ,

t_. - _ . _ . ._ A

.- ,= ~

.m _,_ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -

. ,.m - o. =., s o 1r M a *.

/ l

. . - t.,

m s u omse 5 e

.i, = en,

'['a 8X anasaaco sassa Y

• To oy ..

-= a% t og* y a f 4" - -

n-m o .0..' = -

vo o,,p.e,.s -7,.

'e m,m ,1.P,. .,

Y e o t ... - o"#

^ 04 "ht OI guTCHITA

. ., . er.rr i

PR0Y!hC WICHITA * ,f5k'd PR0VINCI .

- ,,,, .. ap -

O N O j- j "f'

Page E ags" de,g, v.4 y E , -

E i

• "** / sASIs ~'N ###t 85"***'"-- ,,x Ensin / _

/$

. </ an, nma a,,,;p ' o"E:: ;. %~~ *' 4. u,osa @

,,,g anos

,,g, . . .-i. r cuacmita y

... 333 .

On>+-~ suernovince j'.,.,,,,,

j *<,, f . -

a u r

+

.o s -

7 .

stataaL f(AA5 SNELF 8 a,

n / 1Asist IE ** 8 8 "

/ tAst T WEST CENTRAL [ SITE */ Q ts As- .s, vi.,.

- .O x' tastingarl '

a* n '

TEIA$ P R 0 Y l'N C E * . ins

c. j m.4r-r i

= - ,

, , -= ,,m v- In-r.. .. . o .

a.1 -

/

y-x ,

[a,,',5,t* l l \ -t' -- b..

j

!~g hm, , , , '

I

,'/,

g ..

. ,e 1 <

. -1

1. g j/ / ['y vtsi susrnovinct ,,..

\

I g jo *** 2 \

8 s Ji ,e 1

>  : g s.,~ -

a ,,.-

~<

\ ~ }

%, # rig <

stu ..

WPLIFT ,, ,

A-

• m i .l g es*5 . O v .,

-V

- +

. . a me ,,,.

\ 1 mi i

"6',

u 1

- n u a,,,, g.. **'

• s/ I.

c s /

\ _.

""l

_.- / .

g s

4 l l.

.-# //'g . \ -

o ..

" g '

i s -

Mf -

/,. \....

e _[. -

~, ., t.e .t te. it.te, . ...s -

J.S.&eelegtsal Servey.lMS. -

if taelf coast Region. U.S.A.. '

- wit Casst assectatten Sf .. I'~ -

~

titles esed the Amertcea

' htroleum Eselegtsts.1972.

j . , ,

af the Unit,e. States. I*

serves9488*

v.s. seate 6 cal '

.an Assectf ttee of 7 ontsts. sur. j O ress pey3,.

flawn .f 47, te (J.,.$. 19,618 Walthall r in 4 seii e, -

/' IUI'8 "2s OtIneh an. Estat.1972; e

unu

.eedbury g1 *al., 4973; asoses - PtrDC*

,1973.;.isoraJ ene batains. ..

PRI90*

... m.im. .

. . O arran:

u ..

a.

o m.

s e. .

. m : m , , u,.ur , a ctw.

ye :p. y f 'i'

. >p. ,r.

, sy- *l* *l*

a 'yg -

' p- */

s 1-ga ga g

N vi '5 4 * -

l[ < 2ga: u i

)

h{ j

4. -

5-ggy sgd  ;

< ~4,1 ago ggi  !

4 . m nao aw j I

4,g, , - .. t f,[*.". .. . . W r L ~~; k g,

g

\

v .@' i \. ~> Is 4

g /. j " w .

4

/,r g.' p'N , .

,. , g,h. - ,:.

pil 5

g ti t

d, {

i s t[ -

u 5- g , ..

8 .. p. c

-~.

- y i ch, i.

i-i ios im'. i M

. l. - EE E

. -l 4' ] 4.l0d**-S;'

i a '\~ w ' # h- "

', 5 !i [ f iF

.t. _r. u  : 1;je i  %; t- . '

4 'eg I" *1'

h 35 ) .\

g

' E li )

___d* :1 ' ' g((lj!)

y l9 #I j 4 :ni,,, i Li. to -d.I' 4i  !.' jr,p.b Ayi'-Q' j jj jj,TM' a,,_,. i pi4i/(jj1i.l D GC 4

4 a u, :4_ _,;

r '.oa p1_u- <

MJ i j

..c.s_b

e. ..

• . _. _ . . . . . .*v. -.

'v,-

Nfi.r) h f'

, .- l <- .

-44: a I

a y$

p

. h, l

' kf--

y 4'sw . 47_. p, ; w... A-Q x

"~ .g:.?h

.. 4.ri..

h? f-su.b.-\qq\ g -

m

'$ w,- *

• y n *.,dg,.h eMiA4 t.

mW-C - p' 4 '

r .M .[zs. n..,~7,,,[$f,3k;."

, , , , u< 4 , , , !"

, p

, hh -~ e , M,\\ .c 4.m. .

-p

,\ 2 I g

t

' n : ,, 5y, )..[,"yIPN v

.?

h5j ,. %%N E >>

'Q .

f ,g.q I

-~~~>y 1

%]

4 -

3 ; l

j ,p .s  ; % _ ~. , % ,nq . ,.

k,'su::4;% n:.

,(i-i- gg .-w " , y$, , \ , 's s {

ss o

n  ;/.vi, r  :: -s s x. 4

'+w

• s 4

a.

i r. u ;

I

==

gn4. s. 4, 4 j .. . _ _ {g 55 i g j  ::=

l

-i "

A f. s.-

. , /

+

.nf

~

,' n; = y .

SM _f i= ,

e/j [

y 3er -

,d , t  ;

• v  :

l l 2,21_. 5 l g\ *

" 5.' -

h !! l v

\

$h2lh p ! ' :.n g.

.

9 i ,- .

8" d lji 4 . n t os: 2,, no..

e I i3 1 pl 3

- 1 ja o E '}

4  %

k ] =i . . . fri.. w. w i

% A_'-m .. f._..t f . a k---a  :..c; c-f h En3 R

O D .

> + 1 sw sw w w w w >

~ xe a, . . ~ .= (  ;

~

.ov.a d =ce ,

e, / d9 ,,

wu

• • 7" l D- 4 A W

( 42*

.n g.._w.yu-]..q

~

Tel .,.

.n. . 4 .~ .u. <.

.-n 9 _._...

.~.  :

- -v m a qi, C i i ,i. .,

Apr.l 9,1952 d .2 i

m- 1111 .n 1 j

.iw > o.r "

W .nl NEB. 2=n1 W

.n ~ . . .Q

~ un. .

l .-., ..-- >(- - ~ m

/

/ *v 6 .

Taina. *= . ' L .w.*.

'"'s

• • • • • A c

.s f ms.< ,

f .*-7k & .

K .,, A h Q w .x w

~.

, , sv / 0

-m- .:.a.

i

/-su.

.-~ g$ .

=-

n xAN. ,3 .

y% we

!c . < =

ONLA 4 .r m%  !  ! i ****

.. D._ .,, /, p *b ' * , ahalen E *'* D M.Q ..

TF.X. . w. , .- ARK. .s" ,

w

"'~(' .

.. / kf %* \g\1 ~a .: '""*

• w  ?

/j .d .l+ i N f

.cs <

y1 1111 .c" * ' -

/ d.m

.l . -

1 0/ L .34 0  : M

. . _ - 3. ..\ i .%_ f w ; m, .. _ m

.v . .. - =*

\~ e~.n.- j l

~

84em. \1 i y .r u..a n

._, d  ! ,,,,, - --

h-L ' % n -- '

w -f e w . . . .

• • ! .e._-'M w

% sq r fe .uh s.y L. 7 .c a. .

cm . s **'s nx.

v . r ..,.. . .

e.m

.w.m ,_fu llll v-.

( w ~

. NT '

v... Statute Mues

" ^

• o so 200 v

+ j

..- , . }

.a ~ .

g./.u.

3.,.,---

y y._. y- _

-- y a ,a w sw w n w w i

i COMANCHE PEAK S.E.S.

FNAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT UNITS 1 and 2 1952 EL RENO, OKLAHOMA ,

SOURCE: Murphy L.M. and Cloud,W.K. (27) EARTHQUAKE INTENSITY MAP  !

FIGURE 2.5.2-8 1

r -.L s __-__ _> < a ~-

• l

p, v u.

e-e.

to-

.i 7 , ip u

., g, 113 u g.r igg, i ,,

4

},

,3 0 y;

3 y

sm tv ,,

3

%y h -c ,

3 /j,i i " '

p

>f'

. /t l . .- h .

L y .: /^ I- (* o

,6 f LV vA '

k,. n.$ 1'. ) (S'J ,1 t

l, I- .

l' Pi lW ll =

, M (ti r s

.I

% ip l s

2 r

t-  ! ...1 pd J

t u)rTri .

lt .

i r....g -

i

. 9 900 stafvtg me.as 1 'j j b 1

k f~ _% wg

• El 5

7 .3 , y P N .

gI [;g g g' e q l Ig gs -

3 ,

3 ~% ,

ll '

/- !&% h

.n

• f9 ----

--- */&^ l_ N\ \ .

l=

) \ M h 4\ \

~

_ c/ .i r X%M '

Nowi)) 1 1.

r 1 N NS%m/ .; --

I=

N '%g ~

e sg,[.

1

~  %..

l' Eh litter il li:

i j i f

i 4

i i 4 <

i

. . . . , , - t

/ r.

t -l[ i [ . II l-  : / e- . I r -

riu e -mm

.i 1 i t_ P ii i% TEM 8 8 1 i , .

fr' x'1 ,1 "- ,'/*eent) iA )L 1 i

~

J.I l ~I f. X L WMV FN', rs  !

jl3 l 8

d i Q-i%F 1%.<~( ~

)=] )fr i

ge ,, t D

< 3 M i il,b- i~i j a  :

i --__

l Tl* li9.e ,

ei 1 [.

i, i

I l

.' 1

-*: 0 g. : s . . . . .. .

's s

~

\- -

g .

"q 3 MOWELL AND SCHULTZ (1975) s 1

"N,

\

N\ -

g/ ~

CORNELL AND

\

N g WER2 (1974) -

g g t -

g -

. g j - \. N [THISSTUDT k

N s-SUPTA AND -

N fp g _ NUTTLt (ISTS) \. ,N _

3; . . \

i* .

-g .

1 E3 *

\

c.

9k g _

[ -

k. \ -

, y s, \ .

s g

s.\

SAFE SMUTDOWN \

4 - EARTHQUAKE g .-

EVALU ATION

\ )

g 7 . . . . . . . .. .t 10 20 30 SO SO 800 800 300 400 000 1000 2000 R - KILOWETERS

? '?  ? Y Y 'F *?' *?'4??' F n- miut.

EPICENTER DISTANCE 1

l NOTES: BASIS FOR INTENSITY DATA j INTENSITY Vill - VALENTINE, TEXAS, 1931 INTENSITY Vil -

BONHAM, TEXAS, 1882 EL RENO, OKLAHOMA,1952 9 ASIS FOR COMPARISON (121,122.123) 10 - EPICENTER INTENSITY ]

I(R) - INTENSITY AT DISTANCE R COMANCHE PEAK S.E.S. I FNAL SAFETYANALYSIS REPORT UNITS 1 and 2 j EARTHQUAKE ATTENUATION FIGURE 2.5.2-14

- _ - - . - - . . - - - - . _ . _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ = _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ . _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ -

g1' ..

, j

.. ...g

.4 CP5E5#54R TAstt 2.5,2 3 EARTMOUAKE ATTENUATION Maximan Distance of Ofstance Eartheuake Closest Point Maniam Used for hautsam

' Intensity le Of Subprovince - Earthquake Attenuation intensity Ground Subprovince To site Fron Site Of Eartheuake Used For Intensity ' Acceleration.

Tectonte subocovince And Oste (Miles) (Miles) (ntles) Attenuation . At site - at Site i

Wichita Provtace Anadarta Basta V!! 1952 163 213 163 VII IV * <0.05 Amar111e Up11f t Wichita Mtns.

Arbuckle Upttft VI 1968 91 141 fl VI <VI 0.06 Palo Duro Basin.

Hardeman Basin el 1951 153 373 153 VI <VI 0.06 Matador Arch.

Red River Uplift Meunstar Arch IV 1950 70 91 70 IV <!V <0.05 Seetnote-hemaha' Uo1tft Provtace VII 1952 172 213 172 VII !Y * <0.05 Ouachita Province Esposed Duachtta VI 1969 162 34! 162 VI <VI <0.06 -

Wichita-Duachita VII 1882 se 155 70 VII VI

• 0.10 5 table Ouachita 0 40 tiest Centest Temas Provtace Basin Subpi1 mince IV 1965 187 24 187 ^ IV <!V <0.05 Llano Upttft - 0 82 Central femas Shelf 0 0 latcones mesta.Talco IV 1970 50 104 50 IV <!v <0.05 Province V.VI 1932 50 90 50 VI <VI 0.06 mesorote 5helf Province East loans tabayment 0 106 Mt. Enterprise VII 1891 120 160 128 VII V+ 0.06 West Subprovince V 1914 Os 190 SS V <V <0.05 Sabine Upttft V 1957 168 106 168 V <Y <0.05 l

l l

E f Coast Province VI 1930 183 438 183 VI <VI 0.06 l

l

\.

e i

i n n r

e o e C n e i

g d

^ y n l E C-w dr a a L

w d

o o

W i

l a

e c r i o s y

o h M p

& o e

s G e

m n a t o

D s

/

e V

i l t e u t

h o

c d e n B o R

f'

Et--

________..________7_

s -:s -;_,

t..

l . 7-

• ~ ,

- e

., I Dames & Moore .

I COMANCHE PEAK S.E.S.

l.

FNAL SAFETY ANALYSIS HEPORT

l. >.

' UNITS 1 and 2 TECTONIC PROVINCES AND EARTHOUAKE EPICENTER MAP 1 FOURE ' 2.5,2-2 l

\;

g  % I I'* ' q ,\~ll

-~

wl '

~,

~

~ , ., s

~

,. 10 -

'/ "*

sk

== 6.

,;ll; =# ,o F

h**

.Nt;ap"<

, - i,~

ens esses ensees x

59AbN { U,,,,5,N .

m  %- , g =3 e

i e

W 4

• ~ "

' 4

. .c -. -.

w l1: C-..

COMPARISON MEERS AND CRINER FAULTS N. R. TILFORD TEXAS A&M SIMILARITIES MEERS CRINER VERTICAL VERTICAL STRAIGHT STRAIGHT INVOLVES LIMESTONES INVOLVES LIMESTONE PALEOZOIC TRANSFORM MOVEMENT PALEOZOIC TRANSFORM MOVEMENT DOWN TO NORTH DOWN To NORTH?

POST PALEOZOIC MOVEMENT INFERRED POST PALEOZOIC 1 MOVEMENT DOMINANTLY VERTICAL DOMINANTLY VERTICAL j MAINLY REVERSE REVERSE TYPE UP TO NORTH UP TO NORTH

. 1 FITS PRESENT STRESS PATTERN FITS PRESENT STRESS PATTERN )

PRESENT CONDITIONS PRESENT CONDITIONS LACKS EARTHQUAKES OF ANY SIZE LACKS EARTHQUAKES?

LIMESTONE ON NORTH, LIMESTONE ON NORTH SANDSTONE AND SMALE TO SOUTH SANDSTONE AND SHALE TO SOUTH

..w.

A ._.__d.__.________E_._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . ._m___

I:: _ . , _ o < . .- _ - _

9,, ,

DIFFERENCES

[ CRINER g ,

MEERS

'27-37 KM LONG - 12 KM LONG YOUNG TERRACE dFFSET - YOUNG TERRACE NOT OFFSET MULTIPLE QUATERNARY ALLUVIAL - ABSENCE OF MULTIPLE TERRACES SUGGEST EPISODIC QUATERNARY ALLUVIAL TERRACES QUATERNARY ACTIVITY 3UGGEST LACK OF EPISODIC QUATERNARY ACTIVITY l

I L -

1000' TOPOGRAPHIC RELIEF - LESS THAN 100' RELIEF l- -

CONTINUOUS SCARP < - DISCONTINUOUS SCARP

- COLLUVIUM STRANDED-UP BLOCK - NO SOIL-COLLUVIUM ON UP BLOCK

- LACK OF RECEMENTATION-TENSION - LIMESTONE BREAKS HEALED?

l GASHES AND RAMPS YOUNG FANS-DOWN BLOCK - NO YOUNG ALLUVIAL FANS ON I DOWN BLOCK SEEN NEW DRAINAGE - NO NEW DRAINAGE SEEN

- ELOCKS OF TOPSOIL TO DOWN SIDE - NO TOPSOIL FRAGMENTS TO DOWN BLOCK 7

- NO COMPETING EXPOSURE, I.E. - BEDDING PLANE SCARPS SAME BEDDING PLANES HEIGHT AND ASPECT AS FAULT SCARP FOLDING AT SURFACE REDIRECTS - NO SURFACE FOLDING? )

STREAMS SOFT AND HARD ROCKS RETAIN - ONLY HARD ROCKS REMAIN HIGH SCARP

$ MALL SCARPS ON SCARP - NO SMALL SCARPS 3 WEATHERING PATINA NOT SET - WEATHERING PATINA UNEVENLY )

DEVELOPED-RECENT EROSION?

i n n r

e o e C n e i

g d y

n l E C-

~ w dr

~

a a L w d

o o

W l

a e c r i o s y

o h M p

& o e

s G e

m n a t o

D s e

W l t e u t

h o c d e n B o R

=.

i -

. 1 August 29,1989 COMANCHE PEAK Summary of Combined Probability Studies (200 kms) 1 Second Period Response many . ... . . . . . . . ~ . ..

jn.E dreenf !Ysil@ll e  ;., , , g .... ..... ,

Bechtel WP ~ c.,,.c, .. ;  !.!s. .s. .@. . . . . '

~ . - - .. ............ --

er Dames & Moore  :

igg!!

1

.. sm ...............

Law Engineering ;3iW -  ;) y fjj ijig%iji

...s Nd$sw$

nxue a .:

Rondout k?~. yng

@W - g -

!:993::

Weston Geophysical 5%PM , if  !!!$@!i:

!... 5 Woodward Clyde ifhj$ f ggf  !!!s;s#2!!:

s l

l 1

I u_._ _..__.u... .__.

...,r_..... ~ ,

[ .x.

o

a. . . . . ...., . . . . . . . . .

i nY  !

Q

~

~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

TYeighted EPRI TYeighted LLNL s .

A .

o.

me : h' ,s%%  :

m -

%s .

y . .

g . .

N - .

O

g. . .

O 4g N9  :

k.g  :

M  :  :

e . .

g . .

O . . . . ..... . . . . . . . .

10.0 100. 1000.

Distance in Kilometers Comparison of LLNL and EPRI attenuation relationships for the peak acceleration of a magnitude 7 event. All weighting of 11 LLNL equations and 3 EPRI equations was done arithmetically.

.~

3 ., :>. -

3. -

'5, Spectral comparison of Comanche Peak 5% damped spectrum with LLNL cnd,EPRI spectra for a' magnitude 7 event at.200 kilometers. All veip'-ting of 11 LLNL and 3 EPRI equations was done arithmetically.

4 O

o a_ . .

m -

o  :

M.  :

.q) .

cn - ~ ~ ~ ~

EPRI -

N -

1wt B

o-rsa vo ~

N N

..*e

g ss. , .

s .

• M N ,N o

s o -

.sg.

q s .

b)- -

s\ N M

N  :

C  : g\  :

6 .

o N .

O q -

NQi,',s 4 to sQ,

- . . . . ...., . . . . ...., . . .....s

'.1 1. 10. 100.

Frequency (Hertz) \

o 4 c - ..

]

1.- ..- .

}

3l-L

- CONCLUSION:

l YOU HAVE HAD AN UPDATE ON THE WICHITA PROVINCE, SPECIFICALLY )

l l

l NO EARTHQUAKE ACTIVITY ON THE MEERS OR l

CRINER FAULTS IN THE HISTORICAL RECORD i

l AMPLE EVIDENCE OF MOVEMENT ON THE MEERS

-l FAULT SUBSTANTIAL TOPOGRAPHICAL EVIDENCE THAT THE I i

CRINER HAS NOT MOVED IN THE RECENT GEOLOGIC

{

PAST. j l

NOTWITHSTANDING THE ABOVE, WE HAVE POSTULATED A j MAGNITUDE SEVEN EVENT ON THE CRINER AND DEMONSTRATED THAT THIS EVENT COULD BE ACCOMMODATED AT CPSES.

THE CRINER FAULT (IF CAPABLE) WOULD BE A MINOR CONTRIBUTOR TO THE SEISMIC HAZARD AT CPSES.

i COMANCHE PEAK SEISMIC DESIGN SPECTRA IS VERY CONSERVATIVE AND REVISION IS NOT APPROPRIATE.

)

4 a ,

• __ .._____________________?_.'_CIl

. . e- , ,

m REFERENCES j

Atwood, W.W., 1940, The Physioarachic Proviness of North Ameriq_q: Ginn and Company, Boston MA, 536 p.

Bain, H.F.,~ 1900 Geology of the Wichita Mountains: Geolooical Society of America Bulletin, Vol.11, pp.127-144.

Brewer, J. A. , Good, R. , Oliver, J.E. , Brown, L.D., Kaufman, S. ,1983, C0 CORP profiling' across the southern Oklahoma Aulocogen: 1 Overthrusting of the Wichita Mountains and compression within the {

Anadarko Basin: Geolocy, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 109-114. l Buckman, R.C. and Anderson, R.E., 1979.-Estimation of fault-scarp ages .l from a scarp-height-slope ingle relationship: Geoloov, Vol . 7. ,

No. 1, pp. 11-14. l Census 1980, The World Almanac and Book of Facts: Newspaper Enterprise Associates. Inc., New York, NY, 608 p.

. i Chase, G.W., 1954, Permain Conglomerate around Wichita Mountains, Oklahoma: American Association of Petroleum Geolocists Bulletin, Vol . 38, No. 9, pp. 2028-2035.

Compton, R.R., 1962,, Manual of Field Geoloov: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., {

New York, NY, 378 p.  !

Donovan, R.N., Gilbert H.C., Luza, K.V., Marchini, D., Sanderson, D.,

1983 Possible Quaternary Movement on the Meers fault, southwestern Oklahoma: Oklahoma Geoloov Notes, Vol. 43, pp. 124-133.

I Evans, R., 1980, Mechanics of Water Erosion and their Spatial and Termporal ,

Controls: An Empirical Viewpoint, In Kirkby, M.J. and R.P. Morgan l (editors), Soil Erosion: John Wiley and Sons Ltd., New York, NY, pp. 109-128.

Gilbert, H.C. ,1983a, The Heers Fault: Unusual Aspects and Possible Tectonic Consequences: Geolooical Society of America Abstracts with I

Prcorems, 1983 South-Central Section Meeting, College Station TX, Vol. 15, No. 1, p. 1.

l-Gilbert, M.C.,1983b, The Heers Fault of southwestern Oklahoma: evidence for possible strong Quaternary seismicity in the midcontinent:

American Geophysical Union Transactions, EOS, Vol . 64, No.18, p. 313.

Gilbert, M.C., 1983c, Timing and chemistry of igneous events associated ,

with the southern Oklahoma Aulacogen: Tectonophysics, Vol. 94, 1 No. 1-4, pp. 439-455.

Gilbert, H.C., 1984 Comments on Structure within the Igneous Core, Wichita Mountains Crustal Block, In Technical Proceedings of the 1981 Amercian Association of Petroleum Geolocists Mid-Continent Recional Meetino: Oklahoma City Geological Society, Norman, OK, pp. 177-190.

I i

• .. o - , ' '

W _ __________-____ - - _ A

g , . D#ti

. , p. .

s* -

Gilbert. M.C. and Donovan, R.N.. 1982 Geoloov of the Eastern Wichita Mountains of Southwestern Oklahoma, Oklahoma Geological Survey Guidebook 21: University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK,160 p.

Hall, S.A., 1982, Late Holocene paleoecology of.the southern plains:

p Quaternary Research, Vol. 17, No. 3, pp. 391-407.

Ham, W.E., Denison, R.E., Merritt, C., 1964 Basement rocks and structural evolution of southern Oklahoma: Oklahoma Geolocical

' Survey Bulletin 95, 302 p.

, Harlton, B.H., 1951, Faults.in sedimentary part of Wichita Mountains of Oklahoma: American Association of Petroleum Geoloaists Bulletin. .

Vol. 35, No. 5, pp. 988-999.

L Harlton,'B.H., 163. Frontal Wichita Fault System of southwestern Oklahoma:

American Association of Petroluem Geolocists Bulletin, Vol. 47.

No. 8, pp. 1552-1580.

Harlton, B.H., 1972. Faulted fold belts of southern Anadarko Basin adjacent to frontal Wichitas: American Association of Petroleum Geoloaists Bulletin, Vol. 56, No. 8 pp. 1544-1551.

Kissam, P. ,1978, Surveyina Practice: McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, NY, 502 p.

Lambe, T.W., 1951, Soil Testina for Enaineers: John Wiley and Sons, New Y9ork, NY 165 p.

Luza, K.V. and Lawson, J.E., Jr., 1983, Seismicity and tectonic relationships of the Nemaha Volift in Oklahoma. Part V, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission NUREG/CR-3109: Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 115 p.

McConnell, D. A.,1983. -The macoina and interpretation of the structure of the northern Slick Hills. southwest Oklahoma: Unpublished Masters Thesis Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK,131 p.

i Miser, H.D.,1954. Geoloaic Map of Oklahoma: U.S. Geological' Survey and Oklahoma Geological Survey, Oklahoma Geological Survey, Norman, OK, scale 1:500,000.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1977, Climate of Oklahoma, Climatography of the United States No. 60: Environmental Data Service National Climate Center, Ashville, NC, 12 p.

I Odom, R.,1984, personal communication, Associate Professor, Department of j Geology, Florida State University Tallahasse, FL, 32306. 1 i

Powell, B.N., Gilbert, M.C., Fisher, J.F.,1980 Lithostratigraphic classification of basement rocks of the Wichita Province Oklahoma:

Geolooical Society of America Bulletin, P6rt I, Vol. 91, No. 9, pp. 509-514 Part II. Vol. 91, No. 9, pp. 1875-1994, i

a,_-_ r . _ _ . . - - - - - - - ~-

, .= e'  !

4' af% *

1. ' j W.C. Brown Company Publishers, Ritter, D.F., 1978 Process Geomoroholoov: q Dubuque. Iowa, 603 p.

J Sieh, K.E. and Jahns, R.H.,1984 Holocene Activity of the San Andreas l j

fault at Wallace Creek, California: Geolooical Society of America Bulletin, Vol. 95, No. 8, pp. 883-896.

Slemmons, D.B. and Chung. D.H.,1982 Maximum credible' earthquake j magnitudes for the Calveras and Hayward Fault Zones California, "

In California Division of Mines and Geolooy, Special Publication 62,-pp. 115-124. ,

Strahler, A.N.,1964, Quantitative Geomorphology of Drainage Basins and Channel Networks: In Chow, V.T. (editor), Handbook of ADolied .;

Hydroloay, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, pp. 4-76.

Thornbury, W.,1964, Principles of Geomoroholoov: ~ John Wiley and Sons, _

Inc., New York, NY, 618 p. l Thornbury, W.D. ,1965, Reaional Geomorphology of the United States:

John Wiley and Sons. Inc., New York, NY, 609 p.

Tilford, N.R. and Westen, D.P.,1984, Morphological evidence for yotng multiple surface ruptures along the Heers fault in southwestern Oklahoma: Association of Encineerino Geolocists Abstracts with Proarams, 27th Annual Meeting, Boston, MA, Vol. 27, p. 79.

United States Department of Agriculture,1967, Soil Survey of Comanche Lausiv. Oklahoma: Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with 1 Oklahoma Agricultural Experiment Station, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 38 p.

United States Nuclear Regulatory commission,1975, Seismic and Geoloaic Sitina Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants. Title 10, CFR 100 Appendix A: Government Printing Office Washington, D.C., p. 547.

Wallace, R.E., 1977, Profiles and ages of young fault scarps, north-central Nevada: Geolooical Society of America Bulletin, Vol. 88, No. 9, pp. 1267-1281. ,

Wischmeier, W.H. and Mannering, J.V., 1969, Relation of soil properties to its erodibility: Proceedings of Soil Science Society of America, Vol. 33, pp. 131-137.

' ._.__.__.b_____.__._ ___ _______.____--

September 11, 1989' Summary of 9/5/89 Meeting. Although this information is'recent, the staff believes that it would be prudent to assess the effects of a capable Criner Fault on the seismic design basis and seismic safety of Comanche Peak. Accordingly, the staff informed TU Electric of these findings and arranged a meeting to discuss the matter.

Staff and. contractors from TU Electric visited the site of the Criner Fault in August 1989. Low-angle lighting videotapes and photographic slides were presented at the meeting to supplement discussions of the similarities and differences between Criner and Meers. Based on that information, TU Electric and its consultants have concluded that the Criner Fault is not a capable fault.

Nevertheless, TV Electric also presented preliminary information concerning the relevant seismic forces and ground motions, attenuated. to the plant site, that would. be produced by the maximum earthquake from a Criner Fault. Based on that evaluation, TU Electric concluded that the Comanche Peak seismic design basis adequately envelopes the resulting seismic forces.

At the conclusion of the meeting, the staff stated that it would request

~

TV Electric to submit additional information on the docket to assure that an adequate basis exists for the Comanche Peak seismic design.

(original signed by)

James H. Wilson, Assistant Director for Projects Comanche Peak Project. Division Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosures:

1. List of Attendees

2. TV Presentation Slides cc: See next page DISTRIBUTION

Docket File, CVandenburgh 1

NRC PDR" OGC Local PDR' JPartlow CPPD Reading EJordan ADSP Reading BGrimes DCrutchfield JRichardson TQuay GBagchi CGrimes LReiter JHWilson RMcMullen JLyons AMurphy yo; RWarnick ACRS(10) t MMalloy , g MFields ESGB: NRR AD:CPPD:N D:CPPD:NRP -

JHWils .' h CIGrimes p 89 09/$/89', 09/y/89 heh c/

- _ - _ _