Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: 74980693-f1d2-4f59-a418-b297e1cc6509
Document Type: srp
Title: SURFACE FAULTING
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0707/ML070730597.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 2
Section ID: 2.5.3
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
e applicant's analysis and assumptions, the reviewer should require the applicant to submit additional investigative results supporting the conclusions in question. 2. Geologic Evidence, or Absence of Evidence, for Surface Deformation. The reviewer evaluates geologic evidence, or the lack thereof, for surface deformation by first determining, through a literature search and comparison with the applicant's data, that all evidence of tectonic deformation (e.g., fault offset) identified in the literature has been considered by the applicant. The reviewer analyzes results of the applicant's site investigations and compares them to results derived from the literature search to determine if there is evidence for existing or possible faulting. If evidence of faulting is found, additional field investigations (e.g., geologic mapping, surface and borehole geophysical investigations, borings, or trenching) must be carried out to completely define fault characteristics. The distinction should be made between tectonically- induced surface or near-surface deformation and deformation resulting from non-tectonic phenomena (e.g., growth faulting or collapse due to dissolution in karst terrane). 3. Correlation of Earthquakes with Capable Tectonic Sources. The reviewer assesses correlation of earthquakes with capable tectonic sources in conjunction with consideration of SRP Section 2.5.2. Historical earthquake data derived from review of SRP Section 2.5.2 are compared with known local tectonic features and a determination is made regarding whether any earthquakes can reasonably be associated with local tectonic structures. This determination includes an evaluation of the hypocentral error estimates of the earthquakes. When available, earthquake source mechanisms should be evaluated with respect to fault geometry. Applicants and licensees are encouraged to evaluate the relationship of fault parameters to earthquake magnitude. These parameters should include fault geometry (including