[CEUS-earthquake-hazards] Question-

[Wang, Zhenming]

Dear Laurence,

There are many seismic standards, particularly recommended or adopted by the federal agencies such as FEMA and NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission), that are available for consideration for this blood center. Somebody may provide you those standards.

Here is my suggested procedure for determining the design ground motion for the blood center from a seismologist point of view. Actual procedure should be more complicated because other factors must also be considered. This procedure may not conform to any established standard, but make more sense and transparent in decision making.

First, you need to determine the performance goal or the level of acceptable risk to the structure, for example no damage (0 %), some minor damage (cracks), no member failure, or no collapse during the life (45 years). In this case you may choose no damage (0%) or some (for example 10% chance) minor damage during its life.

Second, all man-made and natural hazards at the site should be evaluated to determine the controlling hazard(s). In this case the seismic hazard is the ground motion at 60 km from a M7.7 earthquake (500 years recurrence interval) in the New Madrid seismic zone (assuming a median PGA and standard deviation [in log] of 0.3g and 0.7).

Third, if earthquake is determined to be one controlling hazard. A 0.6g PGA (median +one standard deviation or 84% confidence level) or 1.2g PGA (median +two standard deviations, or 98% confidence level) can be considered for design.

Thanks.

Zhenming
___________________________________
Zhenming Wang, PhD, PE
Head, Geologic Hazards Section
Kentucky Geological Survey
228 Mining and Mineral Resources Building
University of Kentucky
Lexington, Kentucky 40506
Phone:(859)257-5500x142
Email: zmwang at uky.edu
Website: www.uky.edu/KGS/geologichazards
____________________________________