ML19250H018
| ML19250H018 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 05/14/1981 |
| From: | Dircks W NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19250H019 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-81-307, TASK-PINV, TASK-SE SECY-81-306, NUDOCS 8106100325 | |
| Download: ML19250H018 (13) | |
Text
,
W' RE G 4
May 14,1981 SECY-81-306 POLICY ISSUE a
(Notation Vote)
Y g"
T N
[~
C
.G;0 M L;;
Jc.s.'gdIge: Q
~
c" U...g For:
The Commissioners
- s.,. @ T o' N
From:
Executive Director for Operations
Subject:
Request for Proposal (RFP) No. RS-RES-81-173 Entitled, "Long Term Performance of Materials Used for High-Level Waste Packaging"
Purpose:
To request Commission approval to enter into a contract which exceeds $1,000,000.00 Discussion:
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is responsible for the granting of construction permits and operating licenses for geologic repositories for the disposal of high-level radioactive waste 3.
Granting of these permits and licenses is based on an NRC review of the application, Safety Analysis Report (SAR), prepared by the Department of Energy (DOE) who will be the licensee for such repositories.
In order to provide early guidance to the DOE, State and local Governments, and the interested public, the NRC is developing a regulation (10 CFR Part 60) governing the disposal of high-level radioactive wastes in geologic repositories. ~
Contacts:
K. Kim, RES 427-4564 S. Wollett, DC 427-4365 81061003E
. It is the applicant's (DOE) responsibility to provide the technical data base upon which compliance with the regula-tion can be demonstrated.
However, the NRC must provide guidance to the applicant concerning the technical data that may be essential for performing this evaluation. This guidance must be available in a timely relationship to the promulgation of the regulation.
A series of Regulatory Guides are necessary to delineate the acceptable methods for demon-strating compliance with the regulation.
Licensing review and regulation of the repository operation require a sufficient assessment capability which is independent of DOE to assure unbia sed licensing / regulatory decisions.
The ability to explain the technical basis for these decisions is important relative to making the NRC's licensing / regulatory process transparent to_
the public.
This effort proposes to develop a generic data base on long term performance characteristics of materials currently con-sidered in packaging of nuclear wastes to be used in:
(1) refinement and elucidation of the regulation, (2) establishing acceptance criteria for the demonstration of compliance with waste package performance criteria, and (3) identifying critical environmental and processing parameters that should be incorporated into quality control / assurance programs.
Attached hereto is the planned Statement of Work for the proposed RFP.
The Division of Contracts proposes to issue competitive RFP No. RS-RES-81-173 upon receiving Commission approval; and, upon completion of evaluation of proposals in accordance with NRC Manual Chapter 5101, and other applicable laws and regula-tions, to issue a contract for the performance
'f this project.
It is anticipated that the period of time required for comple-tion of the work in tnis project will be five years for an estimated total cost of $5,000,000.00.
The Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research certifies that funds to be obligated in FY 1981 for this project are currently available in Waste flanaaement Decision Unit.
4-e.
. The Source Evaluation Panel and the Contracting Officer will consider the question of Organizational Conflicts of Interest in accordance with NRC policy stated in T:tle 41, CFR 20-1.54 and will ensure that no organizational conflict of interest exists in the resulting contract award.
The Senior Contract Review Board (SCRB) has reviewed and approved this project.
If Comission approval is not granted for this requirement, the NRC's assessment on acceptability of proposed high-level waste packages per 10 CFR 60 would suffer from large uncer-tainties due to the limitation of existing data and methods for long term prediction of materials performance under repository condition.
Recommendation:
It is recommanded that the Commission provide approval to enter it.to 4 contract for performance of this effort.
It is requested that all information concerning this project be held confidential until after award in order to comply with various provisions of the Federal Procurement Regulations which are aimed at safeguarding the competitive process.
Reference:
None
)
Nd William'J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations
Attachment:
Statement of Work Commissioners' comments should be provided directly to the Office of the Secretary by c.o.b. Tuesday, June 2, 1981.
Commission Staff Office comments, if any, should be submitted to the Commissioners NLT May 26, 1981, with an information copy to the Office of the Secretary.
If the paper is of such a nature that it requires additional time for analytical review and coment, the Commissioners and the Secretarict should be apprised of when comments may be expected.
DISTRIBUTION Commissioners Commission Staff Offices Exec Dir for Operations ACRS ASLBP Secretariat
PART III SCOPE OF WORK, 7ERMS AND CONDITIONS ARTICLE I - STATEMENT OF WORK A.
BACKGROUND The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is responsible for the granting of construction permits and operating licenses for geologic repositories for the disposal of high level radicactive wastes.
Granting of these permits and licenses is based on an NRC review of the application, a Safety Analysis Report (SAR), prepared by the Department of Energy (DOE) which will be the licensee for such repositories.
In order to provide early guidance to the DOE, State and local Governments, and the interested public, the NRC is developing a regulation (10 CFR Part 60) governing the disposal of high level radioactive wastes in geologic repositories.
The technical requirements in the Draft Part 60 are based on a " multi-barrier" concept of ;ne repository design.
The components of a multi-barrier system are waste package *, backfill, repository structure, and geologic site.
The design of the waste packages and the underground repository str"-tures and the selection of geologic sites should be such that each satisfies the specific technical requirements for each respective barrier.
The performance criteria for the waste packages are determined independently, that is, without consideration of the projected isolation
_. capabilities offered by the other barriers. This approach is considered to be an appropriately conservative application of the " multi-barrier" concept.
Based on the requirements for protecting public health and consideration of state-of-the-art technology, the following performance criteria associated with the waste package are under consideration:
'" Waste Package" means the physical waste form, its container and any ancillary enclosure, including its shielding, packing, and overpack.
2-The waste package shall be designed to:
(a) provide for safe handling, emplacement and retrieval (if necessary) of the waste for a period of 50 years after termination of waste emplacement operation; (b) assure radionuclide containment by the package for minimum of 1000 years after repository decommissioning; and (c) control radionuclide release rate such that the total release from the repository facility will be a small fraction (such as 10-5/yr) of the contained inventory following tne 1000 years containment period.
Although the numerical values are tentative at present, and specific technical definitions associated with the above criteria are noi. yet established, changes in the values are not likely to have an impact on the qualitative character of the design or analysis. That is, the waste package should be designed such that the containment of radioactive materials can be reasonably assured during the period required for the hazard and heat associated with the major fission products to subside.
Furthermore, the design of the waste package-should provide a release rate a_s low as reasonably achievable (ALARA), even after 1000 years.
DOE is responsible for developing, designing, manufacturing, and testing waste packages, including r.ecessary research, and for developing the information needed to demonstrate that the packages will meet NRC performance requirements.
The NRC is responsible for prcviding DOE with guidance concerning the types of waste package perfccmance verifications required, to properly assess the progress of the DOE program, and eventually to assess proposed waste packages against NRC performanca requirements.
These responsibilities require that NRC clearly understand why and how proposed tests and models can be relied
. upon tc predict actual package performance.
The NRC therefore, must carry op.t research necessary to develop:
1.
an understanding of the processes which can lead to failure or waste package containment and which affect the rate of degradation of the package and the rate of radionuclide release from the package and its immediate environs once the waste package containment has been breached.
2.
an understanding of the reliabil1ty, reproducibility, uncertainty limits, analytic sensitivity and limitation of methods which may be used by DOE for testing the performance of proposed waste packages and package components to:
a.
compare and s, elect among alternative waste packages; b.
demonstrate with reasonable assurance that proposed waste packages will meet NRC performance requirements; c.
assure that the performance of all waste packages produced will meet or exceed the f+rformance of the tested prototype (s) (quality assuranc2 (Q/A),and process verification); and d.
determine whether the performance of emplaced waste packages should be monitored and if so the type of monitoring needed.
B.
OBJECTIVES The basic objective of this pcject is to develop a validated method for predicting the long i.erm (~1000 years) behavior of waste packages emplaced in different geologic media that DOE is considering.
The predictions ere
. needed to assure that t:1 p%: ages meet the performece requirements of the proposed NRC tecnnical rule for high level waste disposal in geologic media, 10 CFR Part 6').
Pradiction of waste package behavier will require the develop-ment of methods for predicting the long term behavior of the waste pachge materials that will be used for containing the wa:,tes.
Important technical areas include corrosion, leaching, solubility, oxidation / reduction, gas generation, mechanical stresses, chemical stability, radiation, and heat effects.
C.
EXPECTED END PRODUCTS (be expected end products of the project responsive te the objectives described in.ier. tion B are (1) physical / chemical principles cf material degradation /
failure, and theoretical models chat can ce used to assess and predict
- h.e longevity (~1000 years) of waste packaga mater "als under c epository conditions and l2) quantification of separate, effects of each Lttribute such as temperature and radiation on waste packace material dcgradation.
Unr.ertainty boundaries and cor.fidence levels associated with meast data reduction and raodelling should be identified for each of the above end products.
It is emphasized that the predictive models should be based on sound physical and chemical principles which are based to the__ extent reasonable on existing reliable information and on experimental data that will be developed by the contractor.
The contractor should consider and use existing applicable methods; data, and scenarios wherever practicable.
D.
STATEMENT OF WORK Task I:
Develop Work Plan For Lono Tern Predictive Methodolog The contractor shall, based upon a review and evaluation of available pertinent information:
(a)
Provide a work plan for developing methodology of predicting lonc-term
. performance of waste packages.
As a minimum this plan shall:
1) identify any inadequacies, uncertaintiec, and lack of existing information; 2) identify areas in which further development of data is required; 3) assumptions; 4) identification of existing predictive methods; and 5) schedule thru completion of the contract.
Tha work plan shall be submitted to the NRC Project Officer within three (3) months from the effective date of the contract Within two weeks of receipt of the contractor's work plan the NRC shall provide written approval or recommendations for changes.
(b) The methodology shall be based on:
1) mechanisms and processes of packaging material degradation in genera'.;
2) currently used predictive methods and uncertainies and confidence levels of methods; 3) identification of the upper bounds of the combined environmental conditions for which the method can simulate scenarios.
~
(c) The methodology shcil reflect the following objectives:
1)
The length of time after repository closure over which the waste package can totally contain the radionuclides; 2)
The rate at which radionuclides will be released from the waste package after the period of total containment; and
. 3)
Retrieval of intact waste packages from the repository for the first fifty years after termination of waste emplacement.
For each objective, the contractor's research shall address processes which can affect the ability of the package to meet these objectives, and.nethods by which the package could be shown to comply with the performance objectives of proposed 10 CFR Part 60 per'aining the objectives.
(d) The approach (Task 1) and specific experiments (Task 2) will be modified as new data and new insights are developed.
Task II:
Dsvelop Mett9dology for Predicting Long Term Performance oi Waste Package The contractor shall develop a methodology for predicting long term perform-ance of waste package under three different repository environmental conditions.
(Salt, basalt, and one to be specified by the NRC).
The methodology shall be in accordance with the approved work plan in Task I.
The contractor shall perform laboratory experiments required to quantify the separate effects.
Environmental and process parameters pertinent to the waste form and package durability shall be identified and quantitative relationships between these parameters and waste package material durability shall be established.
As a minimum the following parameters shall be addressed:
Environmental - a.
pressure b.
Temperature c.
Radiation d.
Solution chemistry (for example pH, Eh, flow rate)
- e.
Cycling and rate effects Processing
- a.
Thermal Nistory (heat treatment) b.
Waste package material compositon and structure c.
Waste loading d.
Effect of fabrication (for example welding, machining)
The following processes should be considered to the extent that they are pertinent :o the durability of u terials:
a.
Selective leaching by ground water b.
Dissolution of matrix by ground water c.
General ' bulk) corrosion d.
Pitting and crevice corrosion f.
Geochemical interactions and diffusion 9
Mechanical failure h.
Embrittlanent i.
Other pertinent processes The package material which will be consider in this contract are as follows:
As host matrix:
(a) Boro-silicate glass with various additives (b) High-silica glass (c) Titanium based synthetic mineral (synroc)
As canister /overpack:
(a) Fe alloy (stainless steel)
(b) Ni alloy (super Alloy)
(c) Ti alloy
. It is expected that some experiments will involve the contractor preparing experimental samples containing radionuclides and making measurements under radiatior. environments.
It is expected that these experiments will be per-formed in a hot cell because the level of radiation is expected to simulate that of high level radioactive waste.
The materials that may be used ';r packing, absorbent / adsorbent, or bact-filling r*e not included in this e' fort.
However, the potential impacts due to the interaction between these materials and the waste container shall be considered.
Task III: Validation of tiethodology and Test Procedures A testing procedure (s) shall be established to validate the methods developed under Task 11.
Successful application of accelerated tests of materials under controlled environmental conditions and comparison with nee rally aged or arcaaeological objects could be useful for the validation of the model.
Validation of the model and test procedures will include sensitivity analyses and modifications that would simplify the model or test procedures without significantly increasing uncerf:ainties in the predictions.
Benchmark problems involving use of at least three (3) different materials (combinations of waste form and container) and at least three (3) different repositories environments shall be established and solved by the methods developed in Task II.
E.
REPORTS, DOCUMENTATION, AND OTHER DELIVERABLE END ITEMS To assure that formal NRC contractor documents will carry the registered NRC designation "NbREG" as the prime icentification, the final technical report listed below is to be docur.ented, produced, and disseminated in accordance with NRC Manual Chapter 3202 which is part of this contract.
-g-1.
Monthly Letter Progress Report, in 10 copies to the Project Officer and I copy to the Contracting Officer, shall be due by the 15th day of each raanth and shall include as a minimum:
a.
A technical report of progress describing findings to cate, problems incurred and solutions proposed, and plans for the ensuing month.
b.
A report of costs incurred to date as follows:
Direct Labor Costs Travel Expenses Overhead Additional Costs Forecasts for Contract Contpletion 2.
Plan of Work / Methodology (Letter Report) Task 1 Within three (3) months after the effective date of the contract, a plan of work end methodology in letter report format shall be submitted in three copies to the Project Officer (P0) and one copy to the Contracting Officer (CO).
3.
Annual Report An annual report summarizing each year's activities, results and findings shall be submitted to the Project Officer (P0) within 30 days of the end of each contri.ct year.
The annual report, as ; minimu:.., shall ir.clude:
Definition of experimental methods, nilestones and major accomplishments Organization and manpower utilization Report of costs
. Ncte:
The annual report will eliminate the need for a monthly progress report in the last month of each year.
4.
Topical Reports At the completion of each project, task or subtask, the contractor shall furnish one (1) camera-ready and six copies of a topical report to the Project Officer and shall include as a minimum:
A techneial report of progress describing findings to date, problems encountered and solutior. proposed, and plans for ensuing tasks.
5.
Draft Final Report Sixty (60) calendar days prior to the expiration of this contract, the contractor shall furnish 15 copies of a draft of the final report to the *4RC Project Officer for review.
The NRC Project Officer will review this " draft" for completeness and consistency with the contract objective and will provide comments to the contractor within two (2) weeks of the date of receipt by the HRC Project Officer.
The final report shall contain as a minimum:
a.
A comprehensive recapitulation of the entire contract effort; b.
a description of the predictive methods recommended c.
the rationale ano assumptions used in Leveloping and recommending the methods d.
the applic'ltion of the methods to benchmark problems a summary of two to three pages fully substantiateo by the body of the Final Report.
. The format of the Final Report shall De in a clear and concise style and shall permit users (NRC Staff, licensees and cognizant scientists) to obtain useful guidance from it.
6.
Final Report Upon approval of the draft final report, the contractor shall submit one camera-ready copy of a final report to the NRC Project Officer.
The Final Report shall eliminate the need for a Annual Progress Report in the last year of the contract.
,