ML19260B276

Summary of ACRS Waste Mgt Subcommittee 790418-19 Meeting W/Doe,Bechtel,Rockwell & Bnwl in Richland,Wa Re Recent Developments in Vitrification & Solidification of High Level Wastes

ML19260B276
Person / Time
Issue date:	08/10/1979
From:	Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
To:	Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
References
ACRS-1633, NUDOCS 7912070510
Download: ML19260B276 (93)

Text

.7

[

a n

a

.a.

J (,t. ';

I.

a'

~

WORKING C0 Y MEETING DATE: APRIL 18-19, 1979 DATE ISSUED:

AUG 101979 MINUTES OF THE AC25 WASTE MANAGEMENT SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING

./f THUNDERBIRD HANFORD HOUSE RI1HLAND, WASHINGTON APRIL 18-19,1979 The ACRS Waste Management Subcomittee met in Richland, Washington to be briefed on:

1) recent developments in solidification eand vitrification of high level wastes;

2) Department of Energy studies of disposal of high level wastes #n both becded salt and non-salt media (basalt, granite, seabed);

3) recent changes in the NRC Waste Management Pmgram; and

4) State of New Mexico activities in connection with the proposed Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) site.

The notice of the meeting appeared in the Federal Register, Vol. 44, No. 58, Friday, March 23,1979.The proposed agenda for the meeting is attached (Attachment A). A copy of the tentative detailed schedule is included (Attachment B). A list of attendees is attached (Attachment C). Copies of presentation slides and supporting documents are included as noted below. No requests were received rrom m!mbers of the public to make written or oral statements and none were i.ade.

The meeting was called to order at 1 p.m.

Presecc were:

Dr. D. W. Moeller, Chairman, Waste Management Subcomittee Dr. S. Lawroski, i51b i6B Dr. J. C. Mark Mr. William M. Mathis Q C G ~ C ' ??

H 4i' t

,?

'3 Juj-OC1 7912076 f1

• e' 4

'. Mr. A. Grendon, Consultant Dr. R. F. Foster, Consultant Dr. F. L. Parker, Consultant Mr. H. M. Parker, Consultant Dr. D. A. Orth, Consultant Dr. M. J. Steindler, Consultant Mr. J. W. Healy, Consultant Dr. S. S. Philbrick, Consultant Mr. R. Muller, ACRS Staff, Designated Federal Employee NRC Waste Manacement Plan - John Martin, Director, NRC Division of Waste Management Mr. Martin introduced Mr. James C. Malaro, Dr. Michael Bell, and Larry White of his division.

Mr. Malaro discussed the NRC High Level Waste (HLW) program plan. His presentation is outlined in Slides 0-1 to 0-7 attached. The objectives of the NRC program are to:

(a) develop regulations for the geologic disposal of HLW (10 CFR 60), (b) prepare regulatory guidance, (c) develop assessment capability, (d, define internal review pmcedures, (e) conduct reviews, (f) develop an inspection program and (g) assess the DOE technical program.

The Waste Management Division will coordinate this effort but all of NRC will participate. Care will be taken not to unnecessarily foreclose any options. A Multi-Barrier approach will be used. Mathematical modelling will be used but not to the exclusion of other methods.

Dr. Mark commented that a mathematical model is only as good as the input data. Mr. Parker noted that one perfect barrier could obvia*e the need for other bariers. He felt it better that NRC should prescribe criteria for the overall barrier system rather than to say barriers must be multi-layered. Mr. Malaro pointed out that if one barrier unexpectedly breaks down it would be im-portant to have one or several more.

1515 169

. Dr. Foster observed that NRC would be working in a vacuum until EPA published its environmental criteria. Mr. Malaro stated in the absence of EPA release standards NRC would develop a set of interim standards.

NRC's technical support program is $8-10,000,000 per year.

(See Slide D-5).

The DOE program is approximately 1 billion dollars, one third of which is applied to spent fuel storage.

Mr. Malaro discussed the NRC schedule which called for a proposed procedural rule by late April or May 1979 (Final, January 1980) and a technical rule draft in May 1979 and a proposed technical rule by January 1980.

(Final about a year later).

Mr. Malaro explained that the licensing procedure would consist of a preapplication site review which would be an informal review. Then DOE would submit an application which would consist of an environmental report and a safety analysis report (SAR) similar to that in a reactor review.

There would be a formal review, a public hearing, and then issuance of a construction permit. The repository would then be constructed.

In situ tests would be performed, and the applicant would apply for an operating license. There would be a similar review at this stage. Then after 20-40 years of operation the NRC would decide if the depository could be closed and the waste left in irretrievable form.

Mr. Malaro called on Mr. Larry White, who explained that the environmental impact statement which addresses 1515 i7u

.. the criteria will appear in January 1980 concurrently with the proposed rule.

The Staff assumes that the ACRS would conduct independent reviews at each stage similar to the Comittee's reactor reviws.

Mr. Malaro stated that an R&D facility is not licensable by the NRC under present rules.

Re the shortage of qualified people, Mr. Malaro stated that the new Division status will permit hiring some additional help. Recruiting is on a nation-wide basis, consultants will also be used.

In response to Dr. Moeller's question re repository scenarios, Mr. Malaro called on Terry Donich,an NRC contractor from Lawrence Livermore Laboratory (LLL),who explained two modelling techniques applied at LLL and Sandia.

In response to Dr. Moeller's question, Nr. Donich stated that there were no ties between LLL and the work under J. Greenborg, at PNL.

He did not feel it a problem that different groups might develop different models that yielded different resultc as long as the results were not contradictory.

Models can be compared, data bases can be compared and reference sets developed.

Dr. Philbrick expressed dissatisfaction with the current lack of an acceptable limit for radionuclide migration through a repository.

\\ Sib ili

_3 Most of the developed models apply to geologic disposal and not seabed although some model features could be applied to seabed disposal.

Dr. Philbrick made the following points.

1.

In addition to the National Laboratories under DOE,the Bureau of Mines and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have capabilities to supply technical support.

2.

In order for NRC to judge whether or not DOE is developing all the needed information, basic specifications for a high level repository must be developed by NRC. He cited the following obvious criteria:

a) The waste should be out of the biosphere b) The repositcry should be in rock strong enough to support the openings necessary to create the needed rooms c) There should be no gmundwater d) The terrain should be seismically stable.

e) It should not be inadvertently encountered by future societies.

3.

Avoidance of natural resources is important only if the resources are valuable.

4.

Data on the effect of heat on geologic media is available in the l i te rature. All geologic media were formed in the nresence of intense heat.

5.

Maximum erosion in geologic periods is known in many areas.

1515 172

~~ Mr. Healy felt geological history was important, citing German data on constancy despite alternate periods of land and sea, earthquakes, melting glaciers, and boulder and gravel deposits.

Dr. Parker suggested that the surface storage option for as much as 100 years, should be kept open.

Dr. Steindler praised the goal of NRC influencing DOE's program but said it was not clear how this would be done'. He felt that the proposed State veto was not practical. Furthermore, it seemed impracticable to disclaim the use of probabilistic analysis. _ Also Dr. Steindler felt a reactor-based licensing program should not be used as a model for a repository.

Mr. Malaro explained that what was meant was that probabilistic analysis would not be used exclusively; it would leave NRC open to the same criticisms levelled against the Rasmussen report.

Dr. Moeller observed that some of the Subcommittee's criticisms had been made previously but he felt the Staff had made considerable progress since it last met with the Subcommittee.

1515 173

.. u MEETING WITH DOE AND ITS CONTRACTORS 1.

SEABED DISPOSAL - D. G. Boyer, DOC D. R. Anderson, Sandia Mr. Boyer explained that feasibility studies on seabed disposal would con-tinue until 1983, and, if feasible, engineering demonstrations would then be started (1983-1990). The third phase, an emplacement demonstration would follow (1990-1995). A secondary objective of the first phase is to develop the capability to look at other nations's work in this area.

Mr. Boyer's discussion is included in Attachment E.

The project has recently been moved from the Environmental part of DOE to the Office of Waste Manage-ment under Sheldon Meyers. There is an international working group on seabed technology which shares technology and coordinates the use of research vessels.

Mr. Boyer warned against overselling this technology until the environmental and technical feasibility has been demonstrated.

In response to Dr. Moeller's question Mr. Boyer stated that a seabed site would be outside the 200-mile limit from shore. The USSR has been kept informed through IAEA but has not directly participated.

While DOE would probably favor underground disposal, seabed does provide an alternative if no one wants the waste "in his backyard."

Dr. Foster observed that the seabed might more easily meet EPA dose limits and might provide a more homogenecas repository in deep sea sediments.

\\b\\s \\14

.. Mr. Boyer observed that two treaties already cover some aspects of seabed disposal, the one on the Law of the Sea, and the London ocean-dumping convention.

Mr. Perge stated that the EIS on seabed disposal was receivad from the printers that morning and would be distributed shortly.

Mr. Boyer in response to questions pointed out that the Marine Protection and Rollution Act gives EPA prime responsibility for issuing permits for ocean disposal. This program has been discussed with EPA. Lawyers differ on whether this disposal falls within the Acts' prohibitions.

Dr. Anderson pointed out that the U.K. and Japan will either pay someone to dispose of their waste on land or will cc v, ocean disposal.

Dr. Anderson's slides are included in \\ttachment F.

In response to Dr. Moeller's question, Dr. Anderson explained that a site search was being conducted on a national basis but other nations were being kept in formed.

70% of the program is contracted out to universities (Slide F-10).

The Study of radionuclide pathways 'and the research approach were explained with slides F-11 and F-12.

Dr. Anderson listed Site Selection Characteristics (Slide F-15) as:

1.

Geologic Stability (Faulting, Volcanism) 1C1r 9~

lJlJ l/3

.n,

-g-2.

Climatic Stability (Air, Water) 3.

Lack of Resources (Food, Minerals) 4.

Predictability (Vertical and Lateral Uniformity)

Dr. Anderson described the subacean crust of the Earth, indicating the more and less stable geological regions. He said that the certers of the circular ocean currents were the most stable areas climatically.

He showed a computer modelling chart (Attachment F-22) comparing sea surface temperatures 18000 years ago (during the last ice age) with those today.

In some stable areas there has been no change.

Dr. Anderson discussed areas where manganese nodules could be mined and areas where biological productivity is high (South of Hawaii) and where it is low.

He indicated that thermal energy noves in the oceans via conduction, not convection.

Laboratory tests and field tests are planned for verification of the high temperature high pressure heat transfer model. By the 1982-3 time period it is proposed to put down an In Situ Heat Transfer Experiment (ISHTE) platform using a plutonium heat source and a SNAP-21 power supply for el ectricity.

This will be placed in the mid-North Pacific.

A pmblem observed is that at high pressures (great ocean depths) temperatures continue to rise for a long period as energy is added.

In these conditions the hydrothermal chemistry of the sea water and the sediments changes 1515 176

-,. drastically. Large changes in pH result from magnesium complexing and preci-pitating the sulfur in water, generating hydr: gen ions. Canisters are seriously affected by this wide swing in pH.

Dr. Anderson mentioned a proposed canister 1 foot in diameter and 10-15 feet long to be emplaced 90 feet into sediments by some form of rocket assist.

It would have a conical nose cone and fins on the back. Some experimentation has beer, core by oil compac Deeper deposition would require drilling.

One other facet of the problem mentioned by Dr. Anderson was the expansion and resultant buoyancy of heated water deep in the ocean. He stated that at a 6 kilometer depth the pressure might attain 0.5 kilobar. There is little data on sediments at ambient conditions (0.5-2 C, and 0.5 kilobar).

At 5 kilometer depth, water cannot boil.

It forms 2 phases, salt rich and salt poor.

2.

DISRUPTIVE PHENOMENA IN VARIOUS MEDIA, WASTE ISOLATION SAFETY ASSESSMENT PROGRA!1 (NISAP) - G. Benson, Battelle Northwest (PNL)

(ACRS Consultants H. M. Parker and R. F. Foster withdrew at this point because of prior association with PNL).

Mr. Benson reviewed the WISAP program with the aid of slides in Attachment G.

WISAP is under contract with the Office of Nuclear Waste Isolation (ONWI),

DO E.

There are 4 Tasks.

(1) Release scenario analysis, (2) waste form release rate analysis, (3) Release consequence analysis, and (4) So rption/

desorption analysis.

1515 177

... Task 1 involves principally geoscientists.

3 media ara being addressed -

bedded salt, salt domes, and basalts.

It is assumed a repository will not have a direct pathway to the biosphere.

Its site will have low hydraulic conductivity, low permeability, etc.

Things that create a pathway and things that can alter the hydrology will be identifiec.

In response to Dr. Philbrick's question,Mr. Benson stated that in a site -

specific sense (depending on site) nothing would lead him to believe that burial in geologic media is unfeasible. However, he was not yet prepared to assert that storage of HLW in Hanford basalt was safe. Mr. Max Criter, PNL, pointed out that WISAP was directed toward developing a generic methodology whereas P.ockwe:1 Hanford Operation (RHO) was assessing the adequacy of basalt in the Hanford area and therefore Dr. Philbrick's question should be addressed to RHO.

Dr. Phil brick withdrew his question.

Dr. Steindler asked if the scenarios developed were reviewed by an equally competent peer group.

Mr. Perge indicated that DOE had set up the Office of Nuclear Waste Isolation at Battelle Columbus, among other things, to serve that function. Also similar work was being done in Germany and else-where overseas and there was ;. d technical exchange between the various gro up s.

1515 178

.. Dr. Parker reminded Mr. Benson that the Subcommittee in the past, had come out strongly opposed to a generic approach since site factors were so important in determining the adequacy of a repository.

Mr. Benson agreed that no final solution could be reached without site-specific detail s.

3.

A_CID DIGESTION -

C. Allen, HEDL Combustible organic material is treated with hot sul furic acid at 2500C pro-ducing a carbonaceous tar material in sul furic acid.

If nitric acid is introduced the carbon is rapidly oxidized to carbon dicxide. The net product is a dry powdery residue.

Compared to incineration this process does not carry radioactivity into the offgas stream in tar, soot, or flyash. Thus treatment of the outstream is minimizad. Plutonium that may be in refractory form gets converted to non-re fractory.

This process was developed for certain defense wastes, but it is finding more general applicability. Volume reduction can exceed 60X.

Mr. Allen used the slidas in Attachment H to illustrate the system.

In response to Dr. Orth's question, Mr. Allen stated that the system could tolerate the inclusion of chlorinated plastics but,because of the glass lining,it cannot tolerate fluorinated plastics althc.Jgh occasional introduction in modest amounts has been tolerated.

1515 179

.. It won't digest teflons.

It has trouble with parafin hydrocarbon and carbon tetrachloride.

The dry residue consi.sts af sulfates, and inert materials used in plastics

'qd rubber as f'ller materials.

(silicates and aluminum compounds). The p

ess produces no secondary waste stream. The acid is recycled. The system is excellent for Pu recovery and therefore is of great interest to certain foreign countries.

In response to Dr. Lawroski's question, Mr. Allen reported that the system works on thorium. Mr. Allen said for the next 18 months the system should still be considered R&D.

Mr. Perge commented that the Germans were using a similar system, developed at HEDL, at Eurochemie. Current policy has reduced international exchange.

At 5:45 p.m. the meetins was adjourned until 8 a.m., April 19.

1.515 180

-w-The meeting was reconvened at 8 a.m., April 19th.

4.

BASALT WASTE I-SOLATION PROGRAM - R. Deju, RHO Mr. Deju used the slides in Attachment I to illustrate his presentation.

The purpose of the program is to assess the feasibility of building a repository in a non salt medium such as basalt.

The program involves 119 subcontractors with 25% of the budget at universities and 40%'at National Laboratories.

The area under study is the Columbia Plateau (Eastern Washington, Oregon, and Idaho) with approximately 100,000 cubic miles of basalt. The depth of the basalt in the Pasco Basin (Hanford Reservation) is 6-8 kilometers. The Near Surface Test Facility (NSTF) is designed to study the behavior of basalt under heat stresses and subject to the emplacement of spent fuel canisters.

The R&D phase, which will last several more years, will be followed by a construction phase if the project proves feasible. A low-level effort is being expended on preconceptual repo s to ry desi gn.

USGS is heavily involved in the geo-aspects of the program. Geophysical surveys have been conducted.

70 miles of seismic reflection work has been completed as well as numerous aeromagnetic and magnetotelluric tests, which have shown that with some difficulty, ther can be used for structural mapping of basalt at 3-4000 feet.

This permits subsurface study with a minimum number of drill holes.

Hydrology is also being investigated. The current years program is $5 million; including field data, laboratory work, and modelling.

Numerous holes have been drilled, the deepest to 10,600 feet.

By October the hydrologic report 1515 181

... will be issued for peer review.

Hydraulic conductivity of basalt is generally very low; the gradient is flat.

Engineered barriers are being studied, including over pack and the waste form itsel f.

Interaction of waste with barriers is being studied at PNL, LBL, and P2nn State University. The work incitides theoretical modeling as well as le bora';o.ry experiments.

In the NSTF in Gable Mountain, Mr. Deju explained that the extensometer rocm, where the instruments that will monitor the heaters will be located, will be 23 feet tall.

It will have no supports. The 3 tunnels range between 600 and 700 feet into the. mountain. The demonstration will involve placement, storage, and retrieval of something under 20 canisters of waste. Tunnel construction is 70% complete.

(Completion, Dec. ' 79).

Basic properties of basalt have been detennined from drill cores in this area and also from drill cores in other areas as supplied by the Army Corps of Engineers.

3 years of time-scaled heater tests looking at temperature, displacement and stress fields around the array will simulate 30 jcars of opration. Variations in thermal conductivity as a result of waste emplacement will be studied.

Sensitivity analyses will be performed to check the validity of computer mine models.

1515 182

... Decision analysis techniques will be used to screen sites. By the end of 79 it is hoped to identify the better areas within the Columbia Plateau.

Preliminary siting will be completed by the end of 19C1.

During the last 2 years the program has issued about 150 research papers. 400 persons attended the first annual meeting in Richland last November.

Dr. Moeller suggested that if NRC has not provided licensing criteria perhaps the program should provide the criteria it believes it can meet to NRC to see if they are acceptable. Mr. Deju pointed out that NAS/NRC Committee had issued a report on Geological Site Criteria that spells out the basic criteria. A report is being prepared on the program's conformance with those criteria and when complete Mr. Deju expected that DOE would submit it to the NRC.

In response to Dr. Phil bri'.k's question, Mr. Deju stat ad that in the Col unb';

Plateau the layers of basalt are structurally conformable but unequal in distribution. The preliminary studies of the waters show ages of 30,000 years in the Pasco basin.

In the unconfined aquifers the young waters are less than 500 years old. The older wa'ters are at greater depths.

The proposed repository depth would be below 2000 feet.

1515 183

.., Dr. Philbrick elicited the response from Mr. Deju that to date nothing that he knows would suggest that the study will prove basalt unfeasible.

He cited a Canadian mine bui.it in 1872, going to a depth of 7000 feet which is in similar basalt and is still dry.

In response to Mr. Parker, Mr. Deju explained that although the Columbia Mateau extended to Oregon and Idaho, the basalts were thickest in the Pasco Ba sin. The whole region was being studied and if the Hanford Reservation contained the selected site it would be for technical reasons and not because Oregon "did not want" waste In response to Dr. Mark, Mr. Deju stated that the area is low in seismic activity. The University of Washington has operated a microseismic network for some time and this will be expanded. There are no continuous faults within the Pasco Basin basalt. Recent project and USGS st" dies have moved the age of the sediments overlying the basalt from 1 million to 3.5 million years.

There is no evidence of deformation in the overlying sediments.

Dr. Steindler asked about extrapolation of NTSF data to deeper repositories.

Sr. Deju explained how it was proposed to do this with models.

The program now costs about $30 million/ year Regular meetings on it with NRC are scheduled by DOE.

Dr. Orth cited tritium tracer measurements of water migration in granite under SRL and wondered if the program involved similar studies. Mr. Deju stated 1515 184

.. that water was difficult to trace. Techniques for measuring pressures at depth, and permeabilities by electronic devices were greatly improved.

Dr. Foster pointed out that the one very deep hole ( 10,000 feet) was drilled by an oil company and wondered if future oil exploration was anticipated.

Mr. Deju stated that it was a dry hole, and because of the thickness of the basalts and the difficulty of drilling through them it was not likely that oil drilling would'ever be economical. Compared'to salt, drilling basalt may be a bit more expensive (not over 150")

but retrievability is easier in basalt according to Mr. Dej u.

5.

WASTE ISOLATION PILOT PLANT (WIPP) -

(Wendel Weart, Sandia Laboratories)

WIPP was intended for the disposal of defense TRU wastes both contact and remote-handled (200 mr/hr contact is the dividing line).

Mr. Weart used slides in Attachment J for his presentation.

WIPP is intended also as an underground laboratory, and it has been proposed as a demonstration repository for up to 1000 spent fuel elements.

All wastes will be retrievable, TRUs for 5-10 years, fuel elements for 20-25 years.

Optimistic scheduling calls for construction to start in 1981 and first wastes to be accepted in 1986.

DOE has decided WIPP should be licensed, however, Congress has placed certain restrictions on that.

\\3\\D

\\0

.. Spent fuel and HLW would be set at a depth of 2600 feet, TRU's at 2100 feet.

The site is 26 miles east of Carlsbad, N.M.

The salt removed will be retained for final backfilling upon decomissioning. The remainder will be put into existing brine lakes aiid salt tailings disposal areas.

Site selection criteria are:

a.

geology b.

seismology c.

tectonic stability d.

geochemical compatibility e.

economic and social compatibility In response to Dr. Philbrick's qu,estion, Mr. Weart explained that the solution front, attacking the Salado, is moving eastward at about 6-8 mfies per million-years horizontally and 300-500 feet vertically per million years. At the maximum rates the repository would not be breached for several millions of years.

There is good potential for natural gas in the area at depths of 10-15,000 feet.

Potential for oil (mostly from 4000 feet down) is very low.

It is expected that the gas can be extracted without jeopardizing the integrity of the site. Gas does not cause the subsidence problem that oil does. There is potash in the area but not in the immediate site area. Mining is permitted but not solution min in g.

In response to Dr. Lawroski's question, Mr. Weart stated that mechanical mining in the area does not involve significant quantities of water.

Calculations have been done assuming the waste is as soluble as salt, that show using ultraconservative assumptions, that TRU wastes would start showing up in 1515 186

... the Pecos River in about 35000 years.

(Water or unretarded isotopes would reach the Pecos in 1500-3000 years), but the annunts would be orders of magnitude below background.

One item of concern is possible gas generation, a#ter the repository is sealed, possibly causing hydrofracture.

Bacterial decomp'sition o f organics has the greatest potential for gas generation but early results indic te that the salt can withstand this gas pressure.

Sandia has co' firmed that brine migrates to the heat source.

Several engineering solutions to protecting the wastes during the high thermal period are being investigated. An experiment will be placed in a potash mine with characteristics similar to the WIPP site.

Sumps to collect the brine, and chemical binders to tie it up are being looked at.

These will be done underground at about 1100 feet.

In response to Mr. Healy's question, Mr. Weart explained that the Salado and Castile formations were deposited between 230,000,000 and 200,000,000 years ago.

They have been submerged below the seas at least 3 times.

Mr. Healy pointed out that very little could be learned in the 5 year period of retrievability planned for TRUs.

Mr. Weart described one scenario in which,100 years after deposition a curious geologist would drill through a spent fuel canister and spend one hour looking at a 3 foot section of fuel at a distance of 1 meter. He would get 90 rem.

After 200 years he would get 8 rem.

It was pointed out that this would not involve a large population.

151 lnl b

o

.., A draft EIS has just been relaased on WIPP.

Mr. Weart indicated that his project had very little interchange with NRC except for the DOE /NRC meetings mentioned by Mr. Deju.

Dr. Steindler asked what plans were made to exchange information with NRC. Mr. Weart reminded Dr. Steindler of the prohibition against spending any funds for licensing which was written into the current appropriatidn for WIPP. The current budget is about $16,000,000.

In discussing the effect of subsidence in a mined regiog Mr. Weart stated that with subsidence on the order of 4 feet there was no fracturing of the sal t.

The economics of ootash mining is discussed in the EIS.

Mr. Weart apologized for Mr. Schueler's absence but explained that he was attending a press briefing on the EIS.

6.

STATE OF NEW MEXICO ACTIVITIES - Robert Neill, New Mexico State Environ-mental Evaluation Group The WIPP budget for FY '80 is $55 million - 5% of the waste management total.

The purpose of the Environmental Evaluation Group is to conduct an independent 1515 180M

.., evaluation of the WIPP. The State budget under DOE contract is $350,000/yr for 6 years. The Group will provide reports to DOE, the Secretary of Health and Envimment Department, the legislature, the governor and the public.

At present, in addition to Mr. Neill (formerly with the Bureau of Radiological Health, USPHS) the Group consists of an environmental engineer and a hydrologi st and makes liberal use of consultants in such areas as health physics. The Group will assess risks ascribed to WIPP and compare them with other risks.

Eight members of the New Mexico legislature have been assigned the job of defining concurrence as permitted the State by DOE. A three man task force of State executives (Secretary of Healtn and Environment Department, Secretary of Energy & Minerals Department, and the Highway Administrator) will coordinate State activities relative to the prop sed action.

New Mexico has passed a transporation act which insures uniformity of regulations throughout the State.

Mr. Neill pointed out that New flexico had not banned the repository; 22 other states, however, bave done so without jiving it a fair and thorough review.

One pmblem the State has is that EPA and NRC standards are not yet available.

Whereas Mr. Deju stated that RHO was using criteria proposed by the National Academy of Sciences, Sandia used criteria which they had established as well as some recommendations from an ORNL group. New Mexico has asked DOE to have some group such as ACRS or NAS examine these standards and either concur in 1515 i89

... their use or recommend changes. Mr. Neill recognized that it WIPP is not licensed and the NRC Staff prepares no Safety Evaluation Reports the ACRS task of reviewing it would be difficult. The State is contemplating asking for at least equivalent review.

If the waste management R&D budget is $1 billion there must be many things not well enough known to rush ahead with the project. As more money is spent on WIPP will it become impossible to abandon even if not feasible?

Mr. Neill's group is looking at the benefits vs risks associated with radiation exposures due to WIPP.

Perceived as benefits of the WIPP facility are such things as jobs created,

added tax revenues, etc.

Detriments are loss of potentially minable potash, lost tax revenues, loss of jobs when the facility is shut down. Mr. Neill requested the Committee's help assessing the pros and cons. A problem he cited is that health effects, dollars, and the ability to maintain a stmng military posture come in different units.

Mr. Neill said he felt it important that his group not be pro or anti WIPP during the evaluation.

In response to Dr. Mark, Mr. Neill indicated that he had not yet seen the Sandia EIS on WIPP which was just being released.

Mr. Grendon pointed out that though the benefits of WIPP would be national t le risks would be principally local.

Mr. Neill implied that perhaps there could 1515 190

... be compensation if the risks are not unreasonable.

Dr. Steindler questioned the desirability of the risk / benefit approach.

He noted that,in addition to technical data,the problem must take in societal and political data. Further he felt that if each state were to be compensated for risks it took for the nation at large, for ex:::; pie, to Michigan for exporting iron, to Pennsylvania for taking the risk of manufacturing steel, soon there would be 50 countries instead of 50' states. He felt that care should be taken not to go down an irreversible path in this direction.

In response to Dr. Orth's question, Mr. Neill indicated that information is exchanged with other states through the National Conference of State Radiation Control Program Directors.

7.

FIELD TESTS IN GRANITIE-ROCK AT NTS - L.D. Ramspott (Lawrence Livermore Laboratory (LLL))

Mr. Ramspott used the slides in Attachment K with his presentation. He explained that the Nevada tests were generic for granite at any site; as well as being site specific to evaluate the major tarmations at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) regarding their suitability for a repository. Thermal properties and permeabilities were measured during 1978. A test of storage of spent fuel assemblies is scheduled to start in the Spring of 1980. A rock mechanics test facility has been proposed to complement measurements from the spent fuel test.

1515 191

... Mr. Ramspott cited these practical considerations which influenced test design (Slide K-6):

a.

Keep :osts low b.

Safe Operation c.

P'dlic Accessibility d.

Ec.H iest Feasible Schedule The program involves 11 canisters of spent fuel, 6 electrically-heated simulated canisters, and 20 auxiliary electric heaters to simulate the early history of a repository. The Climax Granite site is 1400 feet below the surface.

It is 50 miles nceth of the Southwest corner of NTS where the fuel will be received. Mining has been completed. The fuel will provide the effect of heat and radiation, the heaters will provide the effect of heat alone on the granite.. About 2 kilowatts will be dissipated over a length of 15 feet. An experiment in England at 18 kw resulted in decrepitation of the rock.

Mr. Ramspott showed that the peak temperature was much lower for older fuel than for younger. For fuel as old as ten years, it never gets very high.

The project is trying to use 2-1/2 year old fuel which is about as early as it can be dry shipped, but the actual age will depend a little on the test schedule. Ventilation is expected to remove a significant fraction of the heat. The assembly will be put into a canister surrounded by an air gap, a steel liner, an air gap and rock:

Dr. Moeller asked what the capacity of the site would be. Mr. Ramspott explained that these 'er generic tests, but because of the nature of the NTS a

it would not make a permanent repository.

In response to Mr. Healy's question, Mr. Ramspott explained that depth vs. surface temperatures would be compared.

1515 192

... Spacing of canisters is not critical. Most of the heat in a given hole comes from the element in that hole.

Asked by Dr. Steindler if NRC has looked at the experimental design, Mr.

Ramspott replied that this was the first formal presentation to any group.

In response to Dr. Orth's question, Mr. Ramspott explained that decrepi-tation of the rock can possibly cause thermal runaway by greatly lowering the thermal conductivity of the rock surroundin,g the bore hole.

In response to Dr. Philbrick's questioning, Mr. Ramspott explained that at the time of insertion the surface dose rate is 65,000 r/hr. The canisters are ten feet center to center. Sometine toward the end of the first year the heat from adjoining canisters will affect eacn canister. Radiation effect is not anticipated.

8.

SWEDISH-AMERICAN COOPERATIVE PROJECT AT STRIPA; P. A. Witherspoon, LBL Earth Sciences Div.

Dr. Witherspoon described the 2-year old program with the aid of slides in Attachment L.

The program objectives are:

1.

Establish design parameters for repositories in granite.

2.

Develop new instruments and techniques.

3.

Collect data for predictive models.

4.

Promote international exchange.

The site is an iron mine that has been in shallow operation for 400 years.

The LBL program consists of heater experiments and fracture hydrology assessment. The underground rooms are at the 330 meter level. The tunnels 1515 193

... are 5 meters in diameter and have a total length of 100 meters.

Two canisters are emplaced 22 m apart so that over the two years there would be no interaction. The two. canisters, 12 inches in diameter and 10 ft. long have respectivel'y 5 kilowatts and 3.6 kilowatts.

Granite has the advantage of being very tough, thus requiring no support.

Its main disadvantage is decrepitation which occurs at temperatures around 300 to 320 degrets centigrade.

In addition, heat transfer in fractured granite may be predicted but such prediction requires accurate fracture mapping of the granite.

Waste storage in granite has aroused much interest in Europe and members

~ ' - - -

of the European Common Market are considering contributing funds to the Stripa project even though Sweden is not a member. The U.S. has so far contributed, through 00E, $10 million while Sweden has spent 56 million.

Among additional work areas are fracture hydrology, design of systems to prevs't decrepitation, and prediction of thermally induced rock movements.

I f

1515 194

... 10.

Mr. J. Carr - Battelle, Office of Nuclear Waste Isolations (attachment M)

Mr. Carr discussed the dry surface storage (of spent fuel) project at the Nevada Test Site. -Two modes of storage are being tested: sealed storage cask arrangement (abo.? ground) and drywell storage arrangement (in ground).

The primary purpose of this project is te study the effects on spent fuel when it is placed in a repository.

11.

Mr. M. Kehnemuyi - Battelle Columbus (attachment N)

Mr. Kehnemuyi summarized the DOE sponsored activities at Battelle Columbus.

The goal of these activities is to identify a suitable geologic site for terminal waste disposal. The most promising geologic structure seems to be salt domes, of which eight are being studied.

It is expected that by 1981, a site will be identified, and a decision may be made to proceed with a depository. Then it would take about nine years to license, construct and test the site.

If 00 and NRC maintain infomation exchange prior to DOE's formal application, less time may be required to license a facility.

Of the nine years, about five years would be used to develop the shaft in the salt.

12. Mr. John Mendel

- Battelle Northwest (attachment 0)

~

Mr. Mendel talked about tests done to investigate the behavior of waste-containing glass. At elevated temperatures (due to decay heat), a glass would devitrificate. Also, high tempe ature promotes leaching of wastes 0

from the glass. However, even at 900 C, and using deionized water, the increase in leach rate is no more than 10 times that at 25 C.

As the ion concentration of the water increases, the leach rate decreases to a stable rate.

Furthermore, one can avoid high leach rates by designing to 1515 195-

.. avoid high tegeratures.

Battelle has spiked glass with curium 244 to accele~ rate alpha irradiation of the glass to the equivalent of half a million years of alpha dose.

The only physical change observed was just a 1". change in densitv.

Mr.

Mendel concluded that glass is a very radiction-stable and thermally stable material, and should be a satisfactory waste form.

13.

Dr. John Rusin, - Batte11e Northwest Dr. Rusin stated that the study of alternate waste foms is to provide a backup or "second generation" process. Supercalcine is one of these alter-nates.

The "multibarrier" concept is applied to supercalcines. These barriers are applied to the surface of the solidified waste, and are coatings of metal, carbon or other substances. Barriers would help to reduce leaching by water.

Supercalcine ceramics were subjected to 200 years' worth of alpha exposure and were found to maintain the.ir physical integrity. Present effort is directed to develop new waste forms and compare the advantages and disadvan-tages of each of the present known ones.

14. r;. Jerry Landon, - DOE Mr. Landca introduced three speakers who talked about decommissioning and decontamination (D&D): (attachment P)

Mr. R. Wahlen discussed the DOE-sponsored Site Cleanup Program at Hanford.

The purpose of this program is to eliminate nu: lear facilities no longer 1515 196

... in use. Most of the 51 buildings in the area are not contaminated ar:d have been removed. Removal of contaminated buildings will commenca at the start of FY'82, and be completed at the end of FY'84. The estimated cost to clean up a produccion reactor anta is about $25 million, assuming the current radiation exposure limits are applicable. (Higher cost if limits are lowered). A total of about 80 people will be needed to do the work. Of particular interest is the pronosed disposal of the contaminated graphite - it will be boxed and buried in an old railroad car. Members of the Subcommittee felt that this was inadequate. Depending on the C-14 content in the graphite, some of it may be put into interim waste storage and then into a long-term repository.

Mr. Graves (Attachment 0) said that the objective of D&D is to reduce or eliminate the requirement for radiological controls on facilities that are no longer needed. To achieve this, facilities cculd be de-contaminated to remove radioactivity, contaminated components could be removed, and wastes could be consolidated to reduce surveillance re-quirements. A vacuum furnace and an arc saw have been developed to melt and cut components, respectively, to proper shapes and sizes for handling.

Fir. R. Kane (Attachment R) dio a run-down of the ceneric R&D projec.s that are being done by Battelle Northwest. The techniques and equipment may be used to D&D any appropriate facility. These include: a device sbich mechanically spalls concrete, electro-polishing, rapid field survey instrument, dry ice blasting of metal components and fixatives to fix sources of radioactivity onto concrete.

1515 197

.. 15. Mr. C. W. Manry_ - Rockwell Hanford Operation Mr. Manry described operations to remove low-level waste from dumping sites at Hanf::rd.. " Low-level waste" as defined by Mr. Manry is soil onto which Pu-containing Liquid was dumped, and thus contains fission products and transuranics (estimated 691 kg of Pu at these sites).

In the fifties, it was considered acceptable practice to dump radioactive liquids into " cribs" in the ground where the contaminants were exoected to disperse and be absorbed by soils in the crib. Tanking of liquid waste was not considered. Thus Hanford produced 392 dumping sites.

Mr.

Manry described operations to remove the top 30 cm of soil, the most contaminated, at some of these sites,and packaging the soil in 55-gallon drums to be stored in TRU storage areas.

In terms of the long half-life of Pu, the removal of contaminated soil from these sites is a preferred operation to long-term surveillance of these sites.

Executive Session During this session, members of the Subcommittee made a number of comments about the NRC Waste Management program. These are summarized as follows:

The NRC should not lose sight of the overall objective, namely, to place high level wastes in a solid, continuous, impervious medium that is essentially dry, rigid, and not readily accessible to man. This is the basic goal.

The NRC might consider developing its criteria initially on an interim basis and then confirming them as the design and construction of early facilities progress. This approach will facilitate the input of newer data as they are developed.

I5 E l90

... A generic approach to the licensing of high level wastes is not warranted at the present time, since only a few facilities will be established over the next decade and each can (and should) be handled on a case-by-case basis.

The NRC should direct primary attention to the establishment of overall criteria for a facility; specification of the need for, cr number of required, multi-barriers should not be part cf NRC's criteria.

Undue empha:is should not be placed on mathematical models; engineering judgment is still a useful tool to assess the acceptability of various waste disposal methods, i

The NRC Staff must incraase its efforts to keep abreast of what DOE, the NAS, the NCRP, and other groups are doing.

The NRC st.ld bear in mind the need to keep the public informed of its decision making processes.

(Whereupon, at 6:10 P. M., the meeting was adjourned.)

NOTE: A complete transcript of the meeting is on file at the NRC Public Document Room at 1717 H St., N.W., Washington, D. C.

or can be obtained from ACE Federal Reporters, Inc., 415 Second Street, N.E., Washington, D. C. (202-547-6222).

l 1515 199

Attachments:

Proposed agenda (FRN, Fri. 3-23-79, Vol.f44 No. 58, p. 17837) (Also F A.

Vol. 44 No. /,CE /4 qgs B.

Tentative Detailed S.chedule C.

List of Attendees D.

Presentation Slides used by James C. Malaro, Chief, High Level Waste Licensing Branch E.

Status Report on the U.S. Program to Assess the Isolation of High Level Radio-active Waste in Deep Ocean Sediments: D. G. Boyer, DOE F.

The Sub-Seabed High Level Waste Disposal Assessment Program; D. R. Anderson, Sandia Laboratories.

G.

Waste Isolation Safety Assessment Program (WISAP) Slides used by Gary Benson, PNL H.

Acid Digestion of Combustible Radioactive Waste, C. Allen, HEDL, W I.

Basalt Waste Isolation Program; Raul Deju, Rockwell Hanford Operations (RHO)

J.

"What is the WIPP", Wendel Weart, Sandia Laboratories.

K.

Nevada Nuclear Waste Storage Investigations; Field Tests in Granitic Rock at NTS; L. B. Ramspott, Lawrence Livennore Laboratory (LLL).

L.

Swedish American Cooperative Project at STRIPA; P. A. Witherspoon, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (LBL)

M.

Slides used by J. Carr, Battelle Columbus N.

Slides used by M. Kehnemeyer, Battelle Columbus 0.

Handout by J. Mendel of Battelle Northwest P.

Slides used by R. Wohlen of United Nuclear Corporation Q.

Slides used by A. Graves of Rockwell-Hanford R.

Slides used by R. Kane of PNL S.

Slides used by C. W. Manry of Rockwell International 1515 200

MEETING 0F THE WASTE MANAGEMENT SUBCOMMITTEE April 18-19,1979, Richland, Washincton LIST OF ATTENDEES:

Dr. Dade W. Moeller, Chairman Dr. S. Lawroski, ACRS Member Dr. J. C. Mark, ACRS Member Mr. W. M. Mathis, ACRS Member Mr. Herbert M. Parker, Consultant Dr. Martin J. Steindler, Consultant Dr. Frank L. Parker, Consultant Mr. John W. Healy, Consultant Dr. Richard F. Foster, Consultante Dr. Donald A. Orth, Consultant Mr. Alexander Grendon, Consultant Dr. Shailer S. Philbrick, Consultant Mr. Ragnwald liuller, Staff, DFE AFFILIATI0M Alex F. Perge D'OE/ETW, Washington Peter B. Myers NAS/CRWM-Washington Kenneth 0. Flaig Chem-Nuclear Systems D. L. Martin Rockwell Donald E. Wood Rockwell-Hanford R. L. Koontz Rockwell-Hanford Robert Shropshire Rockwell-Hanford Richard R. Eggleston Rockwell-Hanford Lawrence A. Whi te NRC/ Waste Mgm't.

John B. Martin NRC/ Waste !!gm't.

Stan Wilkerson KXLY-TV-Spokane Madge Watson Richland resident Robert H. Neill New Mexico Health /Env. Dept.

Randall M. Dodd KXLU-TV News Christine G. Harwell PNL Bill Stromdahl LBL Richard Holland N.M. Health /Env. Dept.

William A. Burns D. of Energy,Richland Oper. Office Jonn P. Corley Batelle Northwest R. C. Lawrence Battelle Northwest C. Chapman Citizen John J. Schrezber DCE Joseph K. Soldat BNW Jean Orth F. R. Standerfer DOE L. J. Adams DOE-RL P. E. LaMont DOE-RL

0. J. Elcont DOE-RL M. Kehnemouyi Battelle-ONWI M. R. Kreiter Battelle-Northwest Carl M. Unruh Battelle-Northwest C. A. Mendel Housewife John Mendel Battelle-Northwest Jeff Senezstaeh WNOU Bill Cartmel KUEW Kent Harman Battelle Northwest 0F Hill Battelle-Northwest Emmett Moore Battelle 15l5 2i]!

Revision 1 April 2,1979 TENTATIVE DETAILED SCHEDULE ACRS SUBCOMMITTEE t'IETIIG ON WASTE MANAGEME!IT COLUMBIA ROOM, HANFORD HOUSE (RICHIAND, WASHIBGTON)

April 18, 19, 1979 April 18 Times are Approximate 1:00 P.M.

Openirg Statement - Dr. Dade W. Moeller, Chairman 1:05 - 2:35 NRC Waste Management Program Update -

James C. Malaro, (NRC Staff) 2:45 - 2:45 BREAK 2:45 - 4:45 Seabed Disposal - R. Anderson (Sandia) 4:45 - 5:15 Acid Digestion - C. Allen (RHO) 5:15 - 5:45 P.M.

Disruptive Phenomena in Various Media -

G. Benson (WISAP) 5:45 - 6:00 P.M.

Air Cleaning Filters - Lewis Muhlestein April 19 8:00 - 8:30 A.M.

State Activities re WIPP - R. H. Neill, New Mexico Environmental Evaluation Group 8:30 - 9:30 WIPP Projact Status - D. Schueler (ALO)

W Weart (Sandia) 9:30 - 10:30 Nevada Test Site Climax Stock Granite -

L. RF nott (Sandia) 10:30 - 10:45 BREAK 10:45 - 11:15 Stripa Program (Swedish Granite) -

P. Witherspoon (LBL) 11:15 - 11:45 Ebel Element Surface Tests - J. Carr (OtMI) 11:45 - 12:15 P.M.

NWrS Current State Activities - M. Kehnemuyi (OtMI) 12:15 - 1:15 WNCH 1:15 - 2:15 Basalt (BWIP) - R. Deju (RHO) 2:15 - 3:15 Vitrification, Solidification, etc. - A. Platt, et al (PNL) 3:15 - 3:30 BREAK 3:30 - 4:15 Decontamination & Dectramissioning - J. Nemic (UNI) 4:15 - 5:15 LLW Clean-up at Hanford - D. Wodrich (RHO)-

5:15 - 6:00 Executive Session - (Open) Discussion with consultants re recommendations 6:00 P.M.

AIMOURN 1515 202

/

[,

UNITED STATES

[ i, c'(

i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 ' :"(

j ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS s 'y WASHINGTON. D. C. 20555 March 28, 1979 SITE VISIT SCHEDULE FOR ACRS WASTE MANAGEMENT SUBCOMMITTEE - APRIL 18, AND APRIL 20, 1979 - RICHLAND, WASHINGTON April 18,1979 9:30 a.m.

Bus Departs Federal Building Tour of 324 Bullding - Hot Cells, G1 ass Solidification Process.

N 11:30 a.m.

Return to Federal Building (ACRS Subcommittee will meet in the Columbia Room, Hanford House, at 1:00 p.m.)

(NOTE: The Richland Section Health Physics Society, will meet the evening of April 19, 1979. Speaker:

Dr. Dade W. Moeller)

April 20,1979 8:30 a.m.

Meet at Science Center (adjoining Federal Building) for showing of videotape of Basalt Mine 9:00 a.m.

Bus Departs Federal Building for:

9:30-10:15 a.m.

NEC0, commercial LLW burial ground, and 10:30-11:00 a.m. Gable Mountain Basalt Mine, NSTF, (near Surface Test Facility) 12:00 N00N Return to Richland - with intermediate stops at airport (s) g as desired.

1515 203

n i

NOUCES 17837 p59Wy}

• Power and electrical Systems,

-Emergency Core Cooling Systems.

NUCLEAL REGULATORY March 30.1979. Phoenix, AZ. The May 4,1979. Ios Angeles Calif. The COMMIS$10N Subcommittee will review the poten-Subcommittee will meet with repre.

tial advene interactions through the sentatives of the NRC Research Office ADv110tf COMMITT!! ON REACTOR interconnection of protection and to discuss the program for assessing SMEGUARDS safety systems with reactor control and verifying ECCS/LOCA related systems for the Westinghouse computer codes.

j pr.p...d me.Hage RESAR-414 design. Notice of this

• Reactor Fuel May 8.1979. Wash.

M in order to provide advance informa-meeting was published in the FEDERAL

-o tion regarding proposed meetings of Rratsm on March 20,1979.

ington. D.C. The Subcommittee will discuss various items concerning NRC the ACRS Subcommittees and Work.

Combination of Dynamic Loads.

ing Groups, and of the full Commit. April 3.1979. Washington, D.C. The actions on fuel-related issues.

N tee, the following preliminary sched-Subcommittee will review the techn!.

' Regulatory Activities. May 9.1979, cal basis of the NRC Staff Order to Washington, D.C. The Subcommittee ule reflects the current situation.

taking into account additional meet

• shut down five nuclear plants due to win review proposed regulatory guides g

ings which have been scheduled and salpy.related piping systems being in and revisions to existing regulatory meetings which have been postponed nonconformance with NRC require-guides; also. It will disucuss pertinent or cancelled since the last list of pro

• ments for withstanding earthquakes. activities which affect the current li-posed meetings published February 28 Notice of this meeting wa.s published censing process and/or reactor oper-1979 (44 FR 11279). Those meetings in the FEDERA1. Rzctsm on March 19".s *ti.

shich are definitely scheduled have 1979 amie Load Combtnations. May had. or wt!! have, an individual notice pjant Arrangements. April 4.1979 9.1979 at 1:00 p.m., Washington, D.C.

i published in the FEDERAr. Rectsm ap-Washingtm. D.C. POSTPONED IN-he Subcommittee d review with proximately 15 days (or more) prior to DEFINITELY. Notice of this meeting representatives of the NRC Staff the the meeting. Those Subcommittee and was published in the FEDERAI. Escism methodology for combining dynamic Working Group meetings for which it on February 28,1979.

loads.

is anticipated that there will be a por-

• Regulatory Activities, April 4.1979

' Reactor Operations. May 9,1979, Lion or all of the meeting open to the Washington, D.C. The Subcommittee Washington, D.C. The Subcommittee pub!!c are indicated by an asterisk (').

will review proposed regulatory guides will consider the request of the Notth.

It ts expected that the sessions of the and revisions to existing regulatory east Nuclear Energy Company full Committee meeting designated by guides; also. it will discuss pertinent (NNECO) for an amendment to the an asterisk (*) will be open in whole or activities which affect the current 11 operating license for the Millstone Nu-in part to the public. ACRS full Com-censing process and/or reactor oper. clear Power Station. Unit No. 2 to au-mittee meetings begin at 8:30 a.m. and ations. Notice of this meeting was pub-thorize operation at the stretch power lished in the FxtraA1. RIX:IsTER on rating of 2700 MWt.

Subcommittee and Working Group 5". arch 20,1979.

meetings usually begins at 8:30 a.m.

'ITuid Dynamics. May 17-18. 1979 The exact time when items listed on

'Consideratton of Class-9 Accidents. Washington D.C. The Subcommittee the agenda will be discussed during April 4.1979 at 2:00 p.m Washington, full Committee meetings and when D.C. The Subcommittee will discuss a will review the Mark I containment Subcommittee and Working Groups plan of action for arriving at a recom-and the NRC Staff position on the meetings will start will be published mendation to the full Committee on load definitions. Other items related approximately 15 days prior to each the role Class-9 Accidents should have to the Mark I program may also be discussed.

meeting. Information as to whether & in the licensing process. Notlee of this meeting was pubIlshed in the FtorRar.

• Evaluation of Licensee Event Re-meeting has been firtnly scheduled. Rrcism on March 20.1979.

ports. May 24-25. 1979 Washington, cancelled, or rescheduled, or whether changes have been made in the agenda

' Procedures. April 4.1979 at $:30 D.C. The Subcommittee will continue for the April 1979 ACRS full Committ-p.m Washington D.C. The Subcrm-its study of L!censee Event Reports.

tee meeting can be obtained by a pre-mittee will discuss the role and respon-Safeguards and Security. late May, paid telephor.e call to the Office of sibility of the ACRS in the regulatory 1979. Washington, D.C. The Subcom-the Executive Director of the Commit-process. The proposal that the ACRS mittee will discuss recent safeguards tee (telephone 202/634-3267. ATIN: discontinue the practice of referencing events, advice from its consultants, Mary E.Vanderhotti between 8:15 a.m.

unresolved ACRS generic items in its and the 1979 Review and Evaluation and 5.00 p in EST.

project reports will also be discussed. of.the NRC Safety Research Program.

Notice of this meeting was published Eraluation of Licenser Event Re-StaconrTrEE AND WoRENG GaoUF n

Ar.

sm on March 20 ports June 28-29 and July 19. 1979 Mrr m cs Washington, D.C. The Subcommittee aste Jfanage -

f.

April 18-19'

'Eralvarion of Licensee Erent Re-1979. Hanford, e Subcommit-E nt Re ports. March 23-24.1979 Washington, tee will be brie e on: 1) recent devel-D.C. The Subcommittee will continue opments in solidification and vitrtfica-ACRS Futi Conrrrzz MErmas its study of Licensee Event Reports. tion of high level wastes. 2) Depart.

April M,1979.

Notice of this meeting as published in ment of Energy studjes of disposal of A. 'Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units 1 the FEDERAL Ptcrsm on March 8 and high level wastes in both bedd:.d salt and 2-Operating License Review.

March 15,1979.

and non-salt media (basalt, granite.

B. 'Palo Verde Nuclear Generating

'Palo Ferde Nuc! car Generating Sta-seabed). 3) recent changes in the NRC Station. Units.1. 2. and 3-Construc-tion. Unus 4 and 5. March 29,1979 Waste Management Program, and 4) tion Permit Review.

Phoenix Artz. The Subcommittee will State of New Mexico activities in con-C.

• Anticipated Transients Without review the application of the Arizona nection with the proposed Waste Iso. Scram-Review Proposed Alternative Public Service Company for a permit lation Pilot Plant tWIPP) site.

Plant Modifications.

to contruct Units 4 and 5 of this sta-

• Eraluation of Licensee Irenf Re-May 10-12.1979-Agenda to be an-tion. Notice of this meeting was pub-ports. Apft! 26-27. 1979 Washington, Dounced.

lished in the Frutnas. EsonsTtn on D.C. 2"M* Subcommittee actil continue June 14-16,1979-Agenda to be an.

March 14,1979, its study of Licensee Event ReportJ.

nounced.

FEDERAL RIGISTER. VOL. 44, NO. SS-FRIDAY, MARCH 22. 1979 f

IJlJ 4-U 4

SWEDISH-AMERICAN COOPERATIVE PROJECT AT STRIPA LBL Earth Sciences Division P.

A.

Witherspoon Swedish-American Cooperative Project at Stripa - Program Cbjectives 1.

2.

Location of Stripa Mine 3.

LBL Program of Investigations at Stripa Location of Experimental dooms in Granite Rock Mass at Stripa 4.

5.

Cutaway Drawing of Full-Scale Heater Experiment Photograph of Full-Scale Heater Prior to Installation 6.

7.

Isometric View of Time- --led Heater Experi ent 8.

Photograph of Time-Scaled Heater Room 190 Full-Scale Heater Results - Predicted vs Measured Temperatures, 9.

Days After Heating F ' Started Full-Scale Heater Results - Predicted vs Measured Temperatures at 10.

Radius of 0.5 m from 5 kw Heater 190 Time-Scaled Heater Results - Predicted vs Measured Temperatures, 11.

Days After Heating Had Started Full-Scale Heater Results - Predicted vs Measured Displacements Between 12.

Anchor Points 3 m above and 3 m Below Hester Midplane of 5 kw Heater Recults of Fracture Mapping in Time-Scaled Heater Rocm - Plan View 13.

Results of Fracture Mapping in Time-Scaled Heater Roc = - Vertical 14.

Section Results of H-10 Heater Wall Decrepitation at Stripa 15.

Results of Temperature Measurements in Heater Hole in Granite at 16.

Cornwall, England 17.

Photograph of Testing Equipment for Ultra-Large Cores Hydraulic Conductivity Measurements vs Normal Stress from Different 18.

Size Cores 19.

Photograph of 1-meter Core from Stripa Granite Fracture Hydrology Program of Investigation at Stripa 20.

Plan View of Stripa Projec't Showing Location of Boreholes 21.

Plot of Oxygen 18 vs Chloride Concentration for Strica Waters 22.

Screholes Plan Layout of Ventilation Room Showing Locations of 76 mai 23.

1515 205

Isometric View of Bentilation Room Showing Ductwork and Instrument 24.

Panels htat Have We Learned From Stripa Project?

25.

9 O

f I

4 1

~i}

I IJ LJO

1 SWEDISH-AMERICA?l COOPERATIVE PROJECT AT STRIPA PROGRAM OBJECTIVES" ESTABLISH DESIGri PARAMETERS FOa 'dASTE REPOSITORIES FR O

LARGE-SCALE FIELD EXPERIMENTS IN GRANITE O

DEVELOP IIEW INSTR'jME!!TS AND IECHillCUES FOR EARGE-SCALE FIELD IESTS COLLECT DATA FOR DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF PREDICT 0

MODELS PROMOTE INTERNATIONAL EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION AND IDE 0

1515 207

2 k-Q FOR$ MARK 8

STRfPA O

STOCKHOLM O i

i l

n.

SIMPEVARP RINGH A LS oo BARSE85CK 'o O

s Reactor in operation Reactor under construction 0

50 100 km Nuclear power plant SCALE LOCATION OF STRIPA IllNE 1515 208

3 LBL PROGRAM

.e.s Fracture Hydrology Full scale Time-Scaled Assessment Hester Experiments Hester Experiment l

Support Activities e

Geophysical Measurements Laboratory Material Properties e

e

/n Situ Stress Measurements e

Ventilation Mass Transfer Measurements The LBL program of investigations at Stripa.

1515 209

4 U. S. Ventilation Experiment n

U.S. Time-scaled Beator Experiments

,_ ~ Computer Room (U.S.)

ifs.?

E

+.?

e ;

. ~. * * '

Swedich

, fe;,

Beater Experiment U.S. Full-Scale 2..'.I,ihM*;[.,j_"f Heater Experiment j

'.'c*..,.,

,i V.f m'

~

J@y" f";f

. 5* g

.....;...;?:. :P - ; l: 5'.;#

,d.; N_.;. W ;fl.yfif' cg.

_ v;.

T Swedish Permeability Experiment

.~

.(.

Swedish Injection Experiment Location of experimental rocxns in granite r3ck mass ut Stripa.

I'C I3 210 r

5 JJ o

,r p' O.S.f6-scale l s.

,'m>~

hea+,r experimea

's-

..-3.-

f F

I ull scale heater drift t;

t

.r~~<~

-y]

y

,/' f.Il' _Q s

~

g

/ ~-

,j

+'

t nr 0 hl,,wl,pr,

. 'q! !ml! j_

i, n

di

. y vc.

ij ilh

!i!! !l i i;

!! f

., s d

i l?i

,o

^

W

, :m,.:

.m.,

l.i

,l sici! ;-

'i o"yc

!;,,.

:f. Cull scale w.

.m.

jj'

..l'i'-

i

'p,ns

~

r F.

s

-'9? f

-,er Drawing of Full-Scale Heater Experiment Cutawa'/

w 1515 211

g r*-

1515 21<,

PHOTOGRAPH OF FULL-SCALE HEATER EXPERIMENT

7 QDf.o @

dh o

'/h'

~

b*

i

.s l '.,1 l

I-l,,

I

t... l I

' V, 8

'3 J~

s;'

s '. -

y i :.,.,

N,..

I ;,..,

g

\\

9*,.*

s t.

~

-. 6.Os Cf.

W 5

W

\\

W D,

.J l,*,.

<u W

l 1 L

r:..

z t..-

l'c I

o i

.)

f' a

-y a

I

~

-r I

ln u

/"

l I.

Q f.

5 J.

.)

e

\\n

\\.,

\\'

\\S\\S 2\\5

3

~_

r C

O e

CC W

W<

E_

aW J<

U Co IW=

/

/

LL c

\\

/

c:

O C-e c

1515 214

=*

M

g

~

4.0

istix,

'ss,'s s

-,,'s s

27

\\

• s o

s s

~ -'s*

38 \\

\\-

C e8 o

s

\\

sN

\\

N s

j

/

61

's 1

Y O

73 s

\\

,f

,o N

g j

,j%_I

'\\,

j I

\\ 'O

\\ >7 2

I

"?

O l

)

}"

n s

~

~

\\

s l

I y

\\ 14 7rL /50,/

i i

s

/ 71 J

s l

S

~

... x6 o

/

/

f

's

)

\\

' 37

/

f SO' D

/

i l

l-

~

' [

'N 38

/

f g3 yy s

i i

s,%s F

/

~ ~,.

,s

/

25 l9 /

,s a/

I I

/

I 8 4.0

-2.0 0

2.0 4.0

--+-x FULL-SCALE HEATER RESULTS - PREDICTED VS ElEASURED TEMPERATURES,.h0DAYSAFTERHEATINGHADSTARTED 1515 215

10

?OO n

V._______.-----------

+-

P p

2 LOC

/.i 2

s E

t E.

E I

O0 10 0 200 Time (days)

FULL-3CALE HEATER RESULTS - PREDICTED VS MEASURED TEMPERATURES AT RADIUS OF 0.5 M FROM 5 Kw HEATER 1515 216 4

D "D 'Tlh' m or dne 6 Xbh

_N C

j C

'r

• l lcp a ~N :l'. ', ',

'?

1 r

=

l

. e t

',. g g;....,'

o

?

.wm...

I s

j i

C a

s u

3 sv i

=

2.:

\\

l X

C.:

i l

o.=

i t

c-o e

c s

s-s

c. c u y

c s

n ss u m-

~

e.J G @

f

~

. gz -.-

=w-l

-~~.,=

O

~,,.

f.

m l

' s,, '

• e u2,

~ ~' '..

,C[ m -

'1 o -

~

.s a

=

5r,,i

~s ssi s

t m.

,r, C.S' '3

's

's i 1

,/

.=

r s

c-u c

C C; maiC C D

it

-ee im,y=,

,3cr e ru.,

.. o.< 1) c

.n q,,' o-.

• y un e m i,

w w.=

.>C

' d ', #

n 6 c :

%~~~~..,_

5 =

_'--C ',_,C

\\

m cC7 bO U N

O r=

g~,

N c,i N

=-+-

C-

• s%

C

,/

E ec

's c

e

.e L E g

N

.a o C-Q t

m t

Qs

'C C ""

/

O C @

y N

g; g

's 3

0 L

/

aO C C s'

's oc - C =

p' m

n O

O C

,,-v,-~._-.,

sv s s w

____s-e

e. U g

T r

j g-

-- s s

= v0-s

/

's

//

C.

~

f s

.5

%s 1

g e

s s a.-.

K

\\

ea C

I

.?

C Cy.

C' D

Q Dai w

/

E C >

egg l%$

..W L c-Q

,f

,g' s

p' m %,

>\\

f C.: % O A

s\\ P e

s

%=.".*

/I

. =. - ":

N_"--

Sr.s /

g lC

_=

s e.

w k,

'CC-i

~

^=

j

,_, ~~~..-

('

L a e "O

C C C

.. $Z g *. -

s O-C K

.5 @

l l

.e

(*

,e y

g

.- g 6 h T

U m

y D LT

's, 1

L4.x I

L -

~4 s

C

.6 1

\\

8 4

i ew s

f

,2b._

a g

,s ag-.

(

y 7%

F f

i I

\\

\\

,e*

m ' s\\

i g

y!sL e

• "-*m l

I

%e I

l o t,=,s $..f.\\

t t

I ga g., a g

t t gs 6NI f i,

f o.

o C

e A

T m

1515 217

1.0 0.5 i

i O

E E

\\

\\

~

E

,g 0.5

\\

o E -0.5 -\\

j E

o N

\\

~a

.2

\\

Q -1.0

\\

's 0

s%-, ~~

~~~~_

-l.5 I

I I

I I

I I

O 40 80 12 0 160 0

40 80 12 0 160 Time (dOys)

Time (days)

FutL-SCALE !! EATER RESULTS - PREDICTED VS IlEASURED DISPLACEMENTS BETWEEN

~

u, ANCHOR POINTS 3 M ABOVE AND 3 M DELOW llEATER IIIDPLANE OF 5 KW llEATER n

N i

,)

3

- )(f

'a 0 '%* 0 0

.,d

. v m

6J

.E.. _6 4

I m.

t h{i' i11iQ 1

t Ao l

Filin et i

<", kj f

• • U j'M N

s!!!i!!s f.

• k

?*~l,

~

g_ s-[;W,p.}

f i

\\

t

's f

\\

I fl

+mm. wet' t; e t,;; {

.e y/s 3

f i

.%f,s. A;.D W4' fm. - r,1 n h, 1

/

\\$elili!

i

, aji i

is s

,w.

+

1 3 jjjn; -

" M i.?; j ?.lz u u y (V

6y

\\

; r-( uiii

'^

J:

l

.LM b y.

4' i

. 5; : O R y y] Q, %..,

g v

\\.

/

. s.

l

,in '..s. W., w#, _,Ms,

,1

/yy,,s,l i

w,

,,...,. q g.

s

s,

,., p..

t

,MSy.,Q,4.fs'.,

e V'.:

I '.

, 't i,

.,.a a;

v -; n s-I

,w "2-ml~~.~.:n, J. {w =~#y._1, Q.

f

2. p+ =

1. 4_:.

n, m

2 q

a I

c.

2. -m'q_.

i,

=. <

z.

i

..s

.W^* ' w.p, w,,,sc_ n.,

a, n

I

. m,m_x o,f.-

.v...- ( c..

s-> a A.

cr

,,)

w W

. s... ?,,,. k?;

L.,p,S..A x

2

,s.f, y,,,

~

j w /.

"i

~

\\:

x-

.} ;-

.,-.w.

a

'i!.y.l %

~',- -

t'

+<

m~

t D,.' %~w ~./.?Q*/

' f./

p.

% r.

r,,

g,,l

,\\

./

4 y

t u

k'* /4 s.

\\

\\

co M 'A*Q.w'. h,,n'c '{7, -k

[

h g

.c i

f e

j 6y x\\a VF '

i s'

~

w,T 1

. u_. hg~'h; 256'"A

,s, i

• ~

• J

=

W v

~

A i

s'

~ _:.

.csn

. wf. %g m, Al:

~

E ic m v iv l;=.,

=

w-.

.. s t-t id;.MWe5

, =

l N

w e : -A i

-\\v i\\

3

N 3.u&'s., zsuRv w

v l

l b

- \\

i g, W:s

/4.ml=b W, <

\\\\.*,,

W e4.i a

Y.-

u t

u.

I

'l' o

. n.- w~~

j I

. :Qh

?;

5 p:=W]isg,,

3,- ri,e>:,- %,

y i

3 W.l\\

I Y:;v sm J

n Mm

, 7,m[, 5., c,+

=

E

,t

/

. ; i,? 9..,.

/

I

\\.

s

~ ~-----...:! M.2..

1515 219 jk

• g,

14 QO O D'3" D

2.'j

.ow

~

I i!

I f

I i

I i

I I

1 I

'l \\ f ff)

'.l.

s' ' / -

j j

er d

I" a

g B

m f

eXI 1 I

/

/#

\\

\\

I O.2 i

w_

1

.s N

c J<

• o u

M

}j ~I i

=

p we x

x i m.

e c_..

..x

_s u

s Lp w

g,n#

e.,

e ie

, z e/

v iv

/N.

pjg,;

a" N-

~~~

hu s._

gIei s

~~s-e z

o tzz /

~

c.

W c

e

/

W

2~

./

I '

w l

\\ \\_

~

3'-

y TGw

_A x

1 0

O u

O a="#

j

,* a N_

i a i

1 A

e.

M x s

--_t

...-.i1..x s y

wg b

g

=

m, 7

m_.

x.

u _, - ~..

,.. o,_.

u O

=. p-...e.r m. q

.g u,

r

/

_J

=

y)

W Cf.

. --m + aa. w.

n.., x,: r, a

Y=

/

AN A

i %'i4.I t'M.'. :

~,

s e

s i

u v

s 1515 220

D*D

1. ' D

' T Tf l 'dJ)_tt/, -

15 oo Da y 'T 2)a.7 77

01..= / 4 g M F,.

t

,r y

E

' % = U S tA Pa

~'

5 2

~

ll, NJf$

%,se 17 C*L.

s t

T *.:

. l

% e,q g ~w '.-

' ^ '

ain a.t-c.s n r aij.,s

,,y c: q,,a:.,,

c..

&y x

+

r i

JN s

b pN c <M

(

,.-;-r-i N

f~

t~

s s

4 w

e c

a

}

l 180h

(

1. ) SNt v

i 2

Vieiv3. #'

h der i

i v

2 h.1e w.it A%k 3,mw

)

l; y

e 3

s b.ve.c. p.

4 0-,,->s L

a 6 %.* 4 v.A v

e.

4 x

o.3 a o.4 = ?e rc p.

I he,l.v.

1 v, e.t

.s

,a D.y 4.o 4.r d e.y '2,/ /

Te a ps.v Wes.,)

FA<

3.L'y 1N h

.F.>..

i. ee s in alves i s khis a b.a v s.

p c. d ts e.g.

Q 4100 MPs PCdod

(, Q=174MP Q - a.n nP.

f

..; t

% e:: s oo MP.

y

. l

,1 ;

• .m.

g-x s

.,. 1-l',a

.;., ~.

7 L h'.r.e,::.. i e s y

'r li-l' t.'

'mij i?.y r

, -]

li i 7

m 5

f

+ c h~

a

• A

}

,Nh

$$[h$

-M M

4sst '

i 1

S E S'(

Y y

{-

x v.

L y

l

,\\

N p,*

(

n ',

s.., b>

.,,,w,,,,,

1515 221 r

RESULTS OF H-10 HEATER WALL DECREPITATION AT STRIP

Time (Days) 10 10 1

10 100

-2

-1 600 Ed e of Heater Hole 0

500 Ox u

o t

400 x

E X

I o

.9 tr ee g

e -300 s

x2x 2ft g

t; x*

t 8

x

.9 g

200 x

c.

x o

t-x 5f t x

75ft 100 10 f t xX x

x x

04 r#E 8

A 2

3 10' 0

'n

-1 1

10 10 10 10 Time (l'ours) w N

G Harwell results of temperaturo rise vs. time from N

surface heater tests in Cornwall, England.

N

.. 3...

1

(

17

., l s.-

fy ei.' s.s. s.

\\,

(

r

,i

\\

~.

=

k

_1 f

h l

1

.T-I

l..-

lT' I

I-PHOTOGRAPH OF TESTING EQUIPMENT FOR ULTRA-LARGE CORE r

~

4

~

~

r 5

3 f

..; s 1515'223 t

\\

f s',

4>

N# $

13 0.1 l

10 40

'~

E 10-2

=

N go-7 E G

s.,

X L

A E

E

.\\

?

\\

in-situ specimen lg-e,

g g

dO-3

\\

(Pratt et al.,1977)

M

\\

\\

N.%.

s 3

0.15 m specimen o

iO-S 2 o

5~

( twol,1976) c b

o nd run I at run 4

o 0.95 m specime s

g04

( Wit hers poon et al.1977)'

]

o O

%.=.

g

• O

[O ' @

H y

N.

i

\\g cg N

o-"

V-g4 O.1 1

10 40 Total Normal Stross, cr, MPa 1515 224

19 r m --

e d

t 1

~**

/\\

r G

.- 7 -<~[ L,...

l l~c h

• W.';,. ~,m,-,u.,,, ss* '

..%g...

q,y-

., r..

.y f m$ -

.l I

.. ty

, a,,t..,,,,M:p * \\ r

,,,3.,. ;.

.1

~

3

'.,/

t t.

_A '

l

. e y ',

,Y f

s,,

s

_J (F

A,6; s

u

,.....,(.

s~ *)

• s.

,t..,, * '., -

,/,,

s

=

~

n

• 1. • ,d.

-. *[

(

gr=%g

'a.[.-

~. *.. - s "* #*

seY w

e,h

,c' n..,

r.,

.. my /

p'Q~'..:.

x f ;

,+

'~\\,,,,,..S'~%__//

ir...:

.-z) ww* ' C. */ -

t..

u

't N'

-. N,

\\

Q, '

,g,g e

N"...**.

a..

" * =

g-s ee

[

\\,.'

s

/

c..

,(

/y.

m.

/

- s.

, g-I s

~

]

I

• i,,

/

/

/

y.*

~

a.k

, _ h_ gh 6

..gs

.._o_

PHOTOGRAPH OF 1-METER CORE FROM $TRIPA GRANITE 5l) d u.,,

,,0 FRACTURE HYOROLOGY STUDIES AT STRIPA SURFACE OUTCROPS EICAVATIONS ORIERTED BOREHOLE BOREHOLE liiJECTION R

I" "!"!",

TESTS A.

.E q

i

,r FRACTURE CE0METN y:

FRACTURE APERTURE

< r

~

PERNEABILITT TERSCR NATHENATICAL koviL l

~-

GE00:lElllCAL T RACER VEilTILATION PUNP CATA TESTS EXPERl!!ENT TE5TS ir 7

VQ Y

Q TS V

J y

NATHENATICAL N00EL FRACTURE HYDROLOGY PROGRAM.OF. INVESTIGATIONS,AT STRIPA,

1515 226

.a.

i 50'? V

[gj' Granite outcrop

~$

. t

,%n

--l o

r//s t.iptite outcrop

j W

/

3gx e

g 1

W sa s@^ g J.P Pb d

Q 450X SBH-3 h

J

/

i 350X

(

/ 3lo"

= "cf C '33'"

y shaft,$,5 ^4 I Shaft p 3)! '

250X p 4,.

9 9

p

/

NNo en I

i l~ a i

's G

650Y 750Y 850Y 950Y 1050Y

. Il50Y N

Z PLAtt VIEW OF STRIPA PROJECT S 10WIf1G LOCAT10tl 0F RORE110LES

o.

A 8 OL SMOW 3

SURFACE YtATER g

I 1 PRrvATE wtLLS s

'O m

\\.

O 04Og

-Il -JO f

O O

,~

'h

\\

/

4 tom HOLE

~

~ ~ ~

' '/

/

e 12

• o *e * * *

'l s

• ee i

g

~~

s

/t se e CD'.

/% _,/

\\

~

s 'N 330m LEVEL N

~__~~+_

e g

-i3 -

'-w____','

20 40 60 80 100 12 0 14 0 16 0 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 Cl ppm N

N A plot of 6180 versus chloride c.oncentration for waters of the Stripa area.

Sample of shallow (private wells), intermediate (330-m-level) and deeper en (410-m-level) groundwaters are outlined.

u, N

N CO G

g o

1

\\'

/

s

~

/

s e

5 m

i E

g m

B s

i i

a k

e 8

/

Bi r

8 e

i

[

h 5

0 N

23 a

e m

d Y

5 E

ij s5 bh 5

0

)

/

0 g

O g

0 0

3 0

O 3

O gb 2

0 0

1515 22]

Ococa

24 po e 3 m 3 3 y g r_mom eMl llL e

7_

a t;

.5

.t my

.s

, m\\

52,*

.._.)r * \\

e s

B is e

ER

\\o 7,

RM 3

\\

\\

V E

a T.

Q 5

Q C

\\., #,.' \\

e

=

)

e s

s

/

g

/

3 x

s a

2N l

/

)

\\

Nl\\

'>. /

[/..'

3 d

'g

., i n2A;'

\\R/

J f3 t

A=e f

j p

. M'

/

/

5

.s

\\

,A

/\\

-N.

~4 -

\\

t E

\\s;

/

\\

/

o

_e

\\

A a

TA' I

i b' W n.?~b b

N

~

+V) x I. _,

.o

\\

y

N,_ %, t < Q

\\

's, 1515 230

i WilAT llAVE WE LEARilED FROM STRIPA PROJECT?

PREDICTABLE IIEAT IRANSFER IN FRACTURED ROCKS -- BY CONDUCT 10fl 1.

NOT YET PREDICTABLE TilERMALLY INDUCED ROCK MOVEMENTS -- Il0N-LINEAR 2.

FURTHER DEVELOPMEllT OF INSTRUMENTATION NEEDED FOR STRE 3.

DECREPITAT10tl 0F GRANITE IN llEATER ll0LES WilEN STRE 4.

<(APPROXIMATELY 3000 C AT STRIPA)

LABORATORY MEASUREMENT FRACTURE PERMEABILITY MAY DEP 5.

ACCURATE FRACTURE MAPPillG IIEEDED TO UNDERSTAND:

6.

A.

THERMAL-MECHA'llCAL ROCK RESPONSE GROUNDWATER ll0VEMENT OVER TOTAL FL0w SYSTEM B.

GEOCHEMISTRY AtID ISOTOPE IlYDROLOGY RESULTS 7.

VERY OLD - OVER 25,000 YEARS METHOD NEEDED TO CONVERT MICR0 MEASUREMENT OF FR 8.

VALUE FOR IOTAL FLOW SYSTEM (VENTILATI,N EXPERIMENT -- FIRST ST m

]

e f 1,- ?~', gM, uJe y!

Cr4 A

, u $ "4 & k>

tc., ) s ; y g..-)

t.-

,1 w

\\'

i NEVADA NUCLEAR WASTE STORAGE INVESTIGATIONS:

FIELD TESTS IN GRANITIC ROCK AT NTS L. D. RAMSPOTT LAWRENCE LIVERMORE LABORATORY m

APRit 19, 1979 m

k1 E

THE NEVADA TEST SITE IS LOCATED IN SOUTHERN NEVADA, ABOUT 120 KM NORTHWEST OF LAS VEGAS

@j I

t e

Salt Lake City Reno o

Denver e

. San Franc,isco gg

(

\\Las a

-Q l

5 eLos Angeles Albuquerque

/

Phoenix g

Nogales f El Paso Ln N

L.- J as

i NEVADA NUCLEAR WASTE STORAGE INVESTIGATIONS OBJECTIVES 9 EVALUATE THE MAJOR GEOLOGIC FORM'ATIONS ON THE NTS TO DETERMINE IF THEY ARE SUITABLE FOR LOCATING A REPOSITORY FOR PERMANENT ISOLATION OF HIGH-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE..

O PROVIDE RESEARCH AND DEVEL6PMENT SUPPORT TO THE N ATIONAL WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM IN THE FORM OF TESTS AND TEST FACILITIESWHICH MAY BE UNIO.UELY IMPLEMENTED AT THE NTS.

G G

N m

e'

FIELD TESTS IN GRANITIC ROCK AT NTS

}l EATER IEST //1 THERMAL AND PERMEABILITY MEASUREMENTS DURING FY 1978 SPENT FUEL IEST TEST STORAGE OF SPENT FUEL ASSEMBLIES TO START IN SPRING OF 1980 ROCK MECHANICS IEST FACILITY PROPOSED PROJECT TO COMPLEMENT MEASUREMENTS FROM SPENT fuel IEST mM LTI LTI N

04 LJ1

i THE SPENT FUEL TEST IN THE CLIMAX GRANITE IS A GENE IN WHICH SPENT FUEL ASSEMBLIES FROM AN OPERATING COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR REACTOR ARE EMPLACED AND RETRI E

AT A PLAUSIBLE REPOSITORY DEPTH IN A TYPICAL GRANITE e The early time, close-in thermal history of a repository is simulated with 11 canisters of spent fuel,6 electrically heated simulator canisters, and 20 auxi!!ary electrical heaters

• The effects on granite (and possibly backfill) of heat alone (electrical simulators) may be compared with the effects of heat plus radiation (spent fuel) e A combination of laboratory tests, computer simulation, and field tests with electrical heaters could lead to similar information, but without

.two benefits from the spent fuel test

- insurance against unexpected synergistic effects being revealed only by a final vault test

- An experience base in packaging, handling, transport, and storage of spent fuel m

N U

CN

i PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS AS WELL AS PURELY TECHNICAL OBJECTIVES INFLUENCED THE TEST DESIGN M

Keep Costs Low e Minimize capital investment for this experimental facility (no hot cell near the storage. site) e Use existing spent fuel program canister design Safe Operation e Design the test to keep radiation levels low e Design the test to keep fuel cladding temperatures below the allowable maximum Public Access.ibility e Design the test to operate in a manner facilitating 1nspection of the hardware and observation of activities by authorized governmental, scientific, and public interest groups Earliest Feasible Schedule e Use off-the-shelf technology G

e in the above, no attempt was made to design a prototype of a full scale repository tn N

U N

i

~.

SEQUEMCE OF OPERATIONS, SPENT FUEL TEST, CLIMAX GRANITE, NTS g e Acquire fuel assemblies e Ship fuel to NTS e Encapsulate fuelin canisters at E-MAD e Transport to Climax Granite site e Lower to 1400 ft level e Transfer via railcar to storage hole e Emplace in storage hole which is steel-lined e Energize auxilliary heaters for repository simulation 9 Monitor thermal history of fuel and rock e Monitor radiation and rock mechanics measurements

• Store for up to tive years S

e Retrieve and return to E-MAD u,

e Report results periodically y

u C3

e NEVADA NUCLEAR WASTE STORAGE INVESTIGATIONS CLIMAX STOCK _

l rTuHNEL a

i o

i, it

/

,o I

$MniklE FIO6E 2

4 s

n h

1

~

30 li' VUCCA M

\\ A ll 7

CALICO 6

11 HILLS r 16 D

EMAP W

g i

\\

o

\\

\\ )

dua.

.a MTbj cn 6

Ln N

7 23 m

NO

~.

CLIMAX GRANITE PROGRAM CANISTER HANDLING gj 2

1 Loading cask in E-MAD Hot Bay Lowering canister in shaft

- Area 15, NTS m

g

[

N

\\

ON M

000=

e=

4WY WHs7H

'y EV/tr/47/47//W//*Y/MU

- W//MHMS ( UUUUUM/WUHHHHW//U//M492 h

3

~4 Inserting canister into granite Canister entering rail cask

- 1400 ft below 5

t M ilnessWIF il W C x

,f.r O

$'tdiIr,i qsg4temiwe=eiweiweige Q

ave;rswapreg W

9'7 a y e

3 l16 m

v e

a 15 E Ili 7 i L if dr

=nh y

%8

%F w

N Aw CD

E5 SPENT FUEL TEST LAYOUT IN CLIMAX GRANITE, NTS

---

Existing workings Car;.tc-New construction

/

access hole f

(

=

s,o r

,1 J,l

!!________it.___________________]

• ,y,1

,/,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

L_____________________,,

/g.

, Rp 7

. +o.,,,. +,,.

.,, /.

/l/

s <:

,A./

24" X 20' storage holes

/

+,'-

l?

,,/

o

~,

i

I

+o.

,8 l

(

a' l

NX X 20' heater holes Y

's**?' /

I.

Shatt O

Ig(

,/

i t 1, e

j Instrumentation alcove- -

,_____],__

f g.._____.,,,,,'

__e 12' X 12' Tab drift

~~'---- '-~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~~~~~

e.

N

.:==

s e

e THERE ARE TWO MAIN EXPERIMENTS IN THE SPENT FUEL g

TEST IN THE CLIMAX GRANITE

. Radiation Effects Experiment

- The effects on granite of heat alone (electrical simulators) are compared with the combined effects of heat and radiation (spent fuel)

. Repository Simulation Experiment

- The response of a granite repository to waste is investi0ated in a repository simulation module using a small number of spent fuel elements and electrical heaters Repository Canister storage drift simulation module North heater drift-(15 m X 15 m)

./.

.\\

car Access hole l

pe e. e...

..... ;e e e. e.

Y

!_._ _ _ _ j j

South heater drift e Electrical simulators Radiation Effects Experiment e Spent fuel

• Heaters tu 4

fM

i THE EARLY TIME THERMAL HISTORY OF A TYPICAL REPOSITORY ELEMENT IS SIMULATED WITH 11 CANISTERS OF SPENT FUEL, 6 ELECTRICALLY-HEATE] SIMULATOR CANISTERS, AND 20 AUXILLIARY ELECTRICAL HEATERS E

e The hypothetical repository is a large array of parallel drifts spaced on 15 m centers, with canisters 3 m apart

• The spent fuel test simulation is a 15 m X 15 m module of that repository array

• The design parameter is the temperature history of the rock wall adjacent to the center canisters of both the repository and the

, test array e Thermal parameters from the in-situ heater test completed in FY 1978 are used in the calculations u,

u, N

LN

i THE TEMPERATURE - TIME CURVES FOR THE REPOSITORY CALCULATION AND THE SPENT FUEL TEST CALCULATION AGREE WITHIN 1% FOR THE FIRST 7% YEARS g

Spent Fuel Assembly Power 2 kW at 2.6 Years 100

~

90,-

~

80 -

~

70 -

y 60 -

i k 50 F

3 j 40 m

30 20 10 g e t i 1 t i i I t I I

I I

2 3

4 5

6 7

3 9 10 0

Time out of reactor, years LJ1 fx) 42.

r HEAT FROM AUXILLIARY HEATERS IN AN ADJACENT DRIFT WILL SUPPLEMENT THAT FROM THE CANISTER ARRAY TO GIVE A TOTAL THERMAL HISTORY WHICH SIMULATES A LARGE REPOSITORY g

Spent Fuel Assembly Power 2 kW at 2.5 Years 100 90 -

~

80 -

Total 70 g

60 j

Canister stray e 50 K

E 40 S note canister E 30 20 Auxilliary heaters 1

2 3

4 5

6 7 8 9 10 0

Time out of reactor, years Spent fuel test centerhole rock temperature history.17 canisters emplaced on 3 m spacing at 2.5 years out of reactor. Two rows of 10 auxilliary heaters on 6 m spacing spaced 10 m on each side of canister row. Auxilliary heater power constant at 1730 W each, lleaters turned on at 2.8 years.

N A

L.J1

i THE ROCK NEXT TO THE CENTER CANISTER IN A LARGE REPOSITORY WILL UNDERGO A TEMPERATURE -TIME HISTORY WHICH VARIES WITH THE AGE OF THE EMPLACED WASTE

[y]

Spent Fuel Assemble Power 2 kW at 2.5 Years 100 90 -

~

80 -

] 60 N

E 50 E

8 40 t

3d 20 10

' >>ii i

e i i

• i iii 0:

1 2

5 10 20 50 100 Time out of reactor, years Storage hole rock temperature history for a repository with fuel assemblies on a 3 m X 15 m spacing. Fuel u

stored at 2.5,5 or 10 years out of reactor core.

m N

CN

i DEPENDING ON THE FINAL TEST SCHEDULE, THE SPENT FUEL TO BE EMPLACED IN THE CLIMAX GRANITE WILL BE 2% TO 3 YEARS OUT OF THE REACTOR CORE g

100 I

90 -

7 00

,~

,s g

70 j60

<1 f50 g

c E

Maximum granite AT 40 for 500 m X 500 m arra9 E

i 45 m /can 2

30 20 10

[

I i i i iie i i. e i i ie ii i

e i i

i i tn i

10 100 Years out of core, b

N

TilERE ARE IMPORTANT SECONDARY TECilNICAL MEASUREMENT PROGR SPENT FUEL TEST - CLIMAX GRANITE OuANTITATIVE STUDY OF EFFECTS OF VENTILATION ON HEAT e

DISTRIBUTION DURING TEST DURATION 8

DEFINITION OF SITE GEOLOGY, INCLUDING IN-SITU STATE-OF-STRESS e

ROCK MECHANICS MINE-BY EXPERIMENT e

MEASUREMENT-OF TEST CHIPS IN ROCK ENVIRONMENT, AND IN HIGH RADIATION ENVIRONMENT ON/0R IN CANISTER QUALITATIVE EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTS OF STORAGE ON THE SPENT e

FUEL ASSEMBLIES AND CANISTERS POSSIBLE BACKFILL STUDIES (NOT CURRENTLY SCOPED OR FUNDED) e 2/ 79 C

N J>

CD

I E

SPENT FUEL TEST LAYOUT IN CLIMAX GRANITE, NTS

- ------- Existing workings Canister access hole New construction

/

- Hoi,i.

N l

r-f10l&8-10 ll p

HBil7 Y

'< /

HDif1-3 6

9 6,,

6 9

4

'0

• 4 3 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ i'!. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ i t _ _ _ __ _ _ u _ _.. _

..]

b%E')

f

. Q*q

"'+, r

'-----------------,7-G D

i,

.p P

,+

d

' h?e)

". o.

e 4

o','

t

/ ;

Hall))-

o*

's,

/'

,r,, '

+,

l ('

/,

24** X 20'storago holos f

~<

m l

HBl14 6 4,.,',,,' h

NX X 20' hea or hole Y

t f,

g,,,,

,'? */

.l g(

.)

q1 Instrumentation alcove /j i

__,,4........,,,,,

____.]..

__e

~$ il dr'ih

~ ~ ~'--- - '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~

~

12' X 12' 9

W.>

%C)

e SCHEMATIC OF SPENT FUEL TEST SHOWING RELATIVE

_ ((]

LOCATIONS OF MINE-BY INSTRUMENTS o

g Key.

gg A Extensometer head O

O Extensometer anchor O

g

' O Convergence head O Vibrating wire stress meter

- @59 EE gg

~~

, f

.-- 20'6

O O

o, _ _ _ __ o

==

C 0

\\

/

20'

i

15' 20'

= j = 1 1 '-

Stress-relief 66'

=

=

overcore holes en l

~_

H10'H

~

LD CD

s DISPLACEMENT AFTER COMPLETE EXCAVATION OF IUNNEL

)

I l j j i

I WA5TE 150LAllikIfif Pt i t) HELgtyc 'vit OH. Ja

/ttT 08 u at LH T N"

Ol5Pt.AC D ML Pi A N g.

s

.s Vee)

I h_h_f f f

,Q&GQtIt M

Y e

I t

m D

GRID SCALE-f-e s

l l ( (; fi l

w s_ -

l. n.

M

~

(1 METER)

I i

1 t

l gh

(

pf P

i i

Ji i

i i' i i i DISPLACEMENT SCALE I

(1 MILLIMETER)

. m I

NL-I i

i

=

l I = = =

• en-e>

e w

-muum. - m w e oise. s.r.. s j [w_. y!

N w _ __. _

9 6

e

A DISPLACEMENT FROM THERMAL LOAD AFTER 364 DAYS

.l wsr/ iso J tour n'ea si tss 2kw ore v

.o i it t /s S

DisPLAC D W.PE A i fut 64 0

- Et

,//

/

/l

~

~

x

- '-' ~

/

~

- N

... _. / j '

M

~~f ~

~

Il ' ll ',

g

/

-Q

...l. t- '

gD

.-j

.f']m D}',,._

Q 5

. ; _],

LQ

.~

.\\ 4.. d j.

M

~

~

~

a --

-Il.iT.J

~

-!--l

.% Q

<.-i GRID SCALE i

~

1

~

~

- g g

(1 METER) wg j

.r r

i

~1 _.i~j'j(

-- l

1.--

... J b

--4 n

]

~1

-}

-g

_ y '--

DISPLACEMENT SCALE

~ q y a l

1 i

I I

I J I

i (2 MILLIMETERS)

- L l

. l l

' { '"

~..

m i l !

l

.l w

i

--~~

y ^ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\\\ \\ t-s

- _l.-

N LT1

~

I~~

e

i 10 o

.,s-9o-

-e 8.5 L '. J s s'

F1 an Qaj l

75 c5 u

m,o

?

s5 we) e a

o c

m y

an l

l

?

ss m _,

N I

so

>- gia w

9 n.

45 j-m t/ /

4o

/

3.5-i 1

i s o-3-D CALCULATION W/

VENTILATION 2 5-

,2

, 3~~

.4

,5 e

<n a

e e

e, e,

e.

e.

2 *e e,

.. s s

o

<n e

o m

TIME OUT OF CORE (YEARS) lX ~i N.,:'

=

.C D

m w..

.-.--e e

PilYSICAL OCEAN 0GRAPillC MODELING SURFACE

. SURFACE

(

8 LAYER REGIONAL SURFACE CIRCULATION MODEL e

X f

~

o" o

>2ss LAYERED REGIONAL LAYERED MID-WATER OCEANIC' M

HID-WATER CIRCU W 10N MODEL CIRCULATION

[a J REGION MODEL

,W a

1 PD,

9 REGIONAL BOTTOM BOUNDARY LAYER a BENTHIC

(

N DISPERSION MODEL

\\

t SOURCE MODEL h

]

SEDIFiENT-WATER C

s INTERFACE rv y

Ln b

PilYSICAL OCEAN 0GMPilIC MODELING SURFACE

\\

/

SURFACE

(

LAYER REGIONAL SURFACE CIRCULATION MODEL I

l F

[

. /

~

1 N

LAYERED REGIONAL LAYERED I

MID-WATER HID-WATER 4

OCEANIC" CIRCULATION liODEL CIRCULATION REGION MODEL V

REGIONAL BOTTOM BOUNDARY LAYER a y

DENTHIC 4

Y DISPERSION MODEL

\\

I SOURCE MODEL b

YR

[n SEDIMENT-WATER C

~

INTERFACE u,

L N

U7 LJ1

PilYSICAL OCEAN 0GRAPilIC MODELING

+

d SURFACE F

M SURFACE LAYER REGIONAL SURFACE g

CIRCULATION MODEL

/

t X

f N

LAYERED REGIONAL LAYERED '

I MID-WATER

~

i OCEANIC HID-WATER A

REGION CIRCULATION H0'JEL CIRCULATION MODEL t

I a

/

J n'

DENTHIC 4

\\

REGIONAL DOTTOM DOUNDARY LAYER a s

DISPERSION MODEL

\\

L I

SOURCE MODEL N

]

SEDIMENT-WATER C

w INTERFACE un G

N U1 CN

PilYSICAL OCEtJ10GRAPilIC MODELING 4

SURFACE F

'A SURFACE 4

LAYER REGIONAL SURFACE CIRCULATION MODEL j/

e X

f N

LAYERED REGIONAL LAYERED

~

t MID-WATER OCEANIC MID-WATER CIRCUuTION MODEL CIRCULATION REGION MODEL f

n' BENTHIC

(

N REGIONAL BOTTAM BOUNDARY LAYER b DISPERSION MODEL BOUNDARY

^

/

]

LAYER i

SOURCE MODEL 6

4

-/-

]

SEDIMENT-t!ATER C

w INTERFACE N

y

' 11 N

P!!YSICAL OCEAN 0GRAPflIC MODELING SURFACE v

r N

~

SURFACE f

i LAYER REGIONAL SURFACE CIRCULATION MODEL i

f l

i i

LAYERED REGIONAL LAYERED s

MID-WATER HID-WATER

(

OCEANIC CIRCU W ION H0 DEL CIRCULATION REGION MODEL I

e J

REGIONAL BOTTOM BOUNDARY LAYER a s

BENTHIC

(

V DISPEhdI0tt MODEL

)

i SOURCE MODEL b

SEDIMENT-WATER s

tn C

INTERFACE en v

N LD C 'a

.