Simplified methods to estimate mean hazard due to updated ground motion model: Application to nuclear power plants in CEUS

Abstract

Two methods were developed to estimate updated mean seismic hazard for existing probabilistic seismic hazard analyses (PSHAs) due to a change in the ground motion model (GMM). Both methods were used to estimate updated hazard at nuclear power plant (NPP) sites in the Central and Eastern United States (CEUS) for a change from the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) 2013 GMM to the Next Generation Attenuation (NGA)-East GMM. These methods present efficient tools to inform decisions on whether to perform a full PSHA revision or other detailed evaluations, especially when a large number of sites must be analyzed. A Simplified Hazard (SiHaz) method was developed to estimate mean hazard explicitly using a reduced PSHA logic tree that incorporates the updated GMM and potential changes in the site response model. An alternative scaling method was independently developed to be applied directly to current CEUS NPP hazard. Both methods were validated using updated PSHA results at several sites. Estimates at 46 NPP sites using both methods showed good agreement for mean annual frequencies of exceedance between 1E-4 and 1E-5/yr.

Keywords

CEUS seismicity NGA-East nuclear power plants NTTF 2.1 PSHA SiHaz seismic hazard seismic hazard scaling simplified hazard site amplification

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) (2004) CEUS ground motion project final report. EPRI 1009684. Palo Alto, CA: EPRI.

Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) (2013a) EPRI (2004, 2006) ground-motion model (GMM) review project. EPRI 3002000717. Palo Alto, CA: EPRI.

Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) (2013b) Seismic evaluation guidance: Screening, prioritization and implementation details (SPID) for the resolution of Fukushima near-term task force recommendation 2.1: Seismic. EPRI 1025287. Palo Alto, CA: EPRI.

Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) (2020) Simplified method for estimating mean seismic hazard for an updated ground motion or site amplification model: Application to the Central and Eastern United States. EPRI 3002018216. Palo Alto, CA: EPRI.

Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), and U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC) (2012) Central and Eastern United States seismic source characterization for nuclear facilities. Technical report, EPRI 1021097 / DOE NE-0140 / NUREG-2115. Palo Alto, CA: EPRI.

Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER) (2018a) Central and Eastern North American ground-motion characterization: NGA-East final report. PEER report no. 2018/08. Berkeley, CA: PEER.

Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER) (2018b) Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis code verification. PEER report no. 2018/03. Berkeley, CA: PEER.

Talaat

Anup

Graf

Hardy

Richards

(in press) Seismic risk assessment for the CEUS nuclear power plant fleet based on the NGA-East ground motion model. Earthquake Spectra.

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) (2019) Unified hazard tool. Available at: https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/ (accessed June 2019).

10.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC) (1997) Recommendations for probabilistic seismic hazard analysis: Guidance on uncertainty and use of experts. Report, NUREG/CR-6372. Washington, DC: USNRC.

11.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC) (2001) Revision of regulatory guidance on design ground motions: Hazard- and risk-consistent ground motion spectra guidelines. NUREG/CR-6728. Washington, DC: USNRC.

12.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC) (2007) A Performance-Based Approach to Define the Site-Specific Earthquake Ground Motion, Regulatory Guide 1.208. Washington, DC: USNRC.

13.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC) (2012) Request for Information Pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 50.54(f) Regarding Recommendations 2.1, 2.3, and 9.3, of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Daiichi Accident. Washington, DC: USNRC.