ML20126F523
| ML20126F523 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 12/18/1992 |
| From: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 9212300369 | |
| Download: ML20126F523 (145) | |
Text
NM4%%%%%%%WWn%%Wh%%%%%tt%',t;VA%%%%%Af,;yfffgggggggi
- AM5MlHAL TO:
Occutent Control Dest. 016 Phillips C
s 3
- DVANCED COPY TO:
The Public Occument ocem 3
/yd / /YA l
l ATE:
f PCM:
SECY Correspondence & Records Branen og 7
d Attacnea are cecies of a Conn 15sion meeting transcript and related meeting 3
occument( s).
They are being f:rvarded for entry on the Daily Accession List and g
3 placement in the Public Cocu:r.ent Room.
No other distribution is recuested or g
o reautrec.
O 3
eeting
Title:
/did/, h db E %
- 4 g )
/ht#wt.s.->o w
J u
f a
-a "eeting Cate:
/A //F/9 A Open [
Closed
/
C
,~
a Copies 3
Item Cescriptien**
Advanced DCS to POR Copy.
c i
i::
b h
)
c
- 1. TRANSCRIPT 1
1 f
V G
O ) / M ts-ench -)
d a
) t urna d % Q. / L ctL d t
/
/
l 2.
{lEA.
/> //f /9 A g
3 3-E m:$
.>I 4-c
- 6 y0s
- e B:
w
?
t
,e
, 4 U U L s1 3
c c
I i
4 t
h CSR Branch files the original transcript, with attacnments, withcut SECY
)((
wd
- POR is advanced one copy of each document, two of eacn SECY paper.
- i q
- 3cers.
9212300369 921218 J
PDR 10CFR AlW - J
\\
PT9.7 PDR MNM@NMMMMMI
I
\\
2 UNITED STATES OF AMERIC A-NUCLEAR REGULATORY'COMM 1.S SION
's
- k
- e..
1
(.
va N #..O.
' BRIEFING BY. DOE ON HLW PROGRAM 1-.
LOCiti0:1:
ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND i
- i h3I6' DECE.BER 18, 1992 t
,riC95:
- ' PAGES Lg l
- 1
).6_
1 L
'U.LR.GROSSANDCO.,.INC.
C *,
f REPORTER $ AMD TRANSCRIBERS 1323 uode Island Avenue, Northwest Washington, D.C.
20005 l.
(002) 234-4433 l-i i
l 1
k I
- m..
DISCLAIMER i
This is an unofficial transcript of a meeting of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission held on December 18, 1992 in the Commission's office at One White Flint North, Rockville, Maryland.
The meeting was open to public attendance and observation.
This transcript has not been reviewed, corrected or edited, and it may contain inaccuracies.
The transcript is intended solely for general informational purposes.
As provided by 10 CFR 9.103, it is not part of the formal or informal record of decision of tne matters discussed.
Expressions of opinion in this transcript do not necessarily reflect final determination or beliefs.
No pleading or other paper may be filed with a
the Commission in any proceeding as the result of, or addressed to, any statement or argument contained herein, except as the Commission may authorize.
NEAL R. GROSS court RIPoRTIR$ AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHoDE 15 LAND AVINUE, N.W.
WASHINGTON. D.C.
20005 (202) 232 4600 g (202) 234-4433
1-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2
. NUCLEAR REGULATORY _ COMMISSION 3
4 5
BRIEFING BY DOE ON HLW PROGRAM 6
7 PUBLIC MEETING q
8 9
Nuclear Regulatory Commission 10 One White Flint North 1
11 Rockville, Maryland' 12 i
13 Friday 14 December 18,-1992 15 16 The - Commission met in open session, pursuant. to 17 notice, at 10:00- a.m., the Honorable-IVAN SELIN, Chairman
'18 of the Commission, presiding-.
19 20 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:
a 21 IVAN SELIN, Chairman of the Commission j
22 KENNETH C.-ROGERS,' Member of the' Commission I
23 JAMES R. CURTISS,' Member of the Commission' j
24 FORREST J. REMICK, Member of.the Commission 25 E. GAIL de PLANQUE, Member of the Commission NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPOATERS AND TRANSCRIDERS.
- 1323 HHOOE lSLAND AVENUE, N W i
I (202; 234 4133 WASH;NOTON. D C. 20005 (202) 234 4433 -
2 1
STAFF AND PRESENTERS SEATED AT THE COMMISSION TABLET 2
SAMUEL J. CHILK, Secretary 3
MARTIN
- MALSCH, Deputy General Counsel for 4
Licensing Regulation 5
HUGO POMREHN, Undersecretary of Energy 6
JOHN BARTLETT, Director, Of fice of Civilian Rad 7
Waste Management, DOL 8
FRANK
- PETERS,
~ Deputy
- Director, Office of 9
Civilian Rad Waste Management, DOE 10 CARL
- GERTZ, Associate
- Director, Office of 11 Geological Disposal 12 ROY
- MILNER, Associate
- Director, Office of 13 Storage and Transportation 14 JOHN ROBERTS, Acting Associate Director, Of fice 15 of Systems and Compliance 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W (2 @ 2344433 WASHfNGTON, D C 20005
(?c2) 234 4433 4
3 1
P R O C E__.E D I N G S
-2 (10:10 a.m.)
1 3
CHAIRMAN SELIN:
Good morning, ladies and 4
gentlemen.
The Commission is meeting at this time to 5
receive a briefing by the Department of Energy on the 6
Civilian High Level Waste Program. Although this briefing 7
does meet our needs for periodic reporting, in fact, we 8
all know it's something rather special in two senses.
One 9
is at the time of change in Administration.,
it's 10 appropriate to do more of a sort of in retrospect than 11 just the transactions of the last six months, and the 12 second is consistent with the same approach, is Mr.
{
13 Bernero sent you a letter to which you've rc'sponded, Dr.
14 Bartlett, asking what amounts to a summarization of where 15 do we stand as opposed to what's been the progress on X, 16 Y or Z.
17 So, we are very pleased to have Dr. Hugo Pomrehn 18 and Dr. John Eartlett, the Director of DOE's Office of 19 Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, and several of a
20 their staff.
You folks have to work on your acronyms.
21 DR. BARTLETT:
That's part of the test.
22 CHAIRMAN SELIN: Part of the test. We were_last 23 briefed by Dr. Bartlett on this program 1 in late June of 24 this year, less than six months ago.
Even in that short 25 time, he has reported significant milestones, and we are NEAL R. GROSS COURT REFOHTEAS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHOOE tSLAND AVENUE. N W (202) 234 4433 WASHINGTON. O C 20006 (202) 2A4433
i 4
-(
1 told that DOE has been able to make significant progress 2
in actually characterizing the site, Lincluding the i
3 initiation of work to construct the underground 4
exploratory studies facility.
5 This is welcome news.
The Commission is very 6
interested in hearing a little more about the progress 7
that you've made, and equally interested, maybe even more 8
so, about the problems that are yet to be resolved, and 9
the overall prognosis for how the project is doing from l
10 your point of view, from the management point of view.
11 We would like you to go further than we've asked 12 you to do in the past, and give an assessment of the J
13 future of the program and the steps that will have to be i
14 made in order to continue, or even to accelerate progress 15 and, eventually, to exceed success in accomplishing the
~1 16 dual goals of monitored nuclear fuel storage facility and 17 a functioning geological repository, wherever it may end 18 up being located.
4 19 Would any of my fellow Commissioners care to-
-i 20 make any comments?
l 21 (No response.)
22 Dr. Pomrehn, welcome.
This is the first time-23 we've had you here.
We're pleased to see you.
24 DR. POMREHN:
Thank you.
It's been a few years 25 since I was here on behalf of Browns Ferry when that was NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCA18ERS 1323 RHODE ISt.AND AVENUE, N W (202) 2344433 WASHINGTON. O C 20005 (202) 234-4433 W
l 5
t-1 in trouble.
2 CHAIRMAN SELIN:
I guess you're not a complete 3
stranger to tough projects.
4 Would the DOE group care to begin?
5 DR. BARTLETT:
Thank'you,-Mr. Chairman.- We're 6
very pleased to be with you again, you and' the Commission, 7
and to have an opportunity to respond to the comments-8 you've just made about the future of the program, et' 9
cetera.
10 Let me-begin by briefly ; introducing my 11 collnagues at the table.. First,. on my extreme right, John 12
- Roberts, Acting Associate ~ Director' for Systems and d
13 Compliance.
On my extreme left, Ron Milner, who is 14 Director of Storage and Transportation; Carl-Gertz, 15 Associate Director for Geologic Disposal; and as you have 16 already noted, I'm very happyL to have with us' this 17 morning, Dr. Hugo'Pomrehn, Undersecretary of Energy.
18 I think, as you know, Dr. Pomrehn has the heavy i-l 19 responsibility, operational responsibil'ity, for all
'20 nuclear activities in the Department. And as we all know, 21 there have been many recent events that affect all of-l l
22 those things, and this program and'its interf aces with the 23 other activities and, of course, therefore, Dr. Pomrehn's 24 responsibilities.
25 And, so, what we would like to do-this morning.
NEAL R. GROSS COUni AEPORTERS AND TRANSCHIDERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W (2021 234 4433 WASHINGTON. D C 20005 (202) 2344433
6
)
. (
l as a basis for our discussions is provide, and you already.
2 have, my statement for the record, and to ask Dr. Pomrehn 3
to provide a statement of his perspectives with respect to 4
this program and other things.
So, if I-may, I'd like to 5
call on Hugo to pick up on that.
6 DR. POMREHN:
Thank you, John.
I know we've 7
come here to talk about the status of the Civilian 8
Radioactive Waste Management Program, but I'm particularly 9
pleased to be here because I think there's a couple of 10 other important involvements that draw from thio.
11 Chairman Selin, you've mentioned one of them, and that is a
12 the transition.
l 13 To emphasize the Department of Energy's 14 commitment of maintaining nuclear power as a viable option 15 for this nation, it really is a key part of our mission of 16 providing a stable economic energy supply for the country, 17 in an environmentally' acceptable way, and I.think this 18 project, this activity, is a key part of keeping nuclear 19 alive as an option for the United States.
20 And I want to review the progress with you of 21 this program.
In order for us to do our briefing to-the 22 transition team, not only in terms of the positive gains 23 that we have made in particularly the last year -- and 24 you're going to see some of that today -- but some of the 1
25 problem areas as we see them, and-we'll evidence some of NEAL R. GROSS CGJRT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBEHS 132? RHODE ISLAND AVENUE, N W.
(202} 234-4433 WASHINGTON. O C. 20005 (202) 2344433
l 7-(.
I those here today, too.
So, I think that's an important 2
part'of why I want to be involved in today's session.
3 I want to express my strong desire to improve 4
the timeliness and cost-effectiveness of the repository 5
site characterization and its associated licensing 6-process, to see if we can strive to achieve some paradigm 7
shifts in how we're going about this process,.and maybe 8
have some better assurances earlier than.the current 9
program allows.
So, we wanted to put together an activity 10 that may explore some of those licensing alternatives that 11 might be of interest to us.
12 And as I'm sure you're aware --
13 CHAIRMAN SELIN:- Somebody is going to follow up 14 in a little more detail on that?
15 DR. POMREHN:
Yes, we will.
i 16 CHAIRMAN SELIN: Because one of the things we're 17 concerned with is we have documents on one concept, and 18 there's a lot of-conversation about somewhat ' dif ferent 19 concepts but, you know, we need to know about them.
20 DR.- POMREHN:
We will.
And I'm sure you're 21 aware, Section 803 of the National Energy Policy Act of.-
22 this year requires an evaluation of the_ status, and the-23 requirements of the existing Nuclear Waste Program, which 24 is what we are basically characterizing here today, and.
(
'25 followed with a report to Congress on that matter.
This NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W (2C2) 2344433 WASHINGTON. 0.C 20005 (202) 2344 433
.~
l-8
(
1 has to happen.in one year from the enactment date, which 2
puts it in the fall time frame.
And I think we have to 3
work with you jointly to put that statement together, as i
4 well as with the EPA and others.
I think that's a very 5
important milepost out there in front of us that we need 6
to work together toward.
7
- And, finally, to enhance our pro-active and 8
focused interaction on. Yucca Repository and the Site 9
Characterization Program.
So, that's why I appreciated 10 the opportunity to come and talk to the Commission and be 11 part of this presentation today.
12 So, I'm going to briefly go through three
(
13 elements.
The first one is recent progress in our 14 program, and I'm going to give just a brief overview of 15 some of the software in that regard, and we have Carl 16 Gertz here today to talk through some of the physical 17 aspects of what's going on out at Las Vegas at the site, 18 as well as to characterize some of the near-term 19 milestones that are on our plate.
20 Second..y, I want to talk a little bit about Bob 21 Bernero's letter to us of the 18th of November, - - and -
22 characterize some of what that means to us and some of our 23 working relationships that will evolve out of that 24 statement from the Commission, and discuss a little bit
{
25 how we can enhance our relationships in the future,- our-NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRtBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W (202) 234-4433 W A$HINGTON. O C. 20005 (202) 234-4433
-._____________._.____m
b 9'
y-1 communications abilities.
2 First of'all, in terms of recent progress, we-3 all cheered yesterday when-we saw Carl's video of the 4
bulldozers moving dirt at the site, to get ready for the 5
Exploratory Studies Facility at the mountain.
And in 6
spite of moving dirt, I want to assure the Commission that 7
your concern about the adequacy of our design processes-8 including up'and through construction, are very soundly 9
based in quality ' assurance programs that I think have 10 significant rigor and integrity, and that was some of the 11 concerns that we had early in the program, and I'think 12 those have been basically resolved.
We also have' closed
(
13 all open issues associated with starting to move dirt at~-
14 the site.
15 We've initiated drilling and coring of the first 16 major unsaturated zone borehole.
I think that that 17 particular hole is near completion.
I think we're. at 1200 18 feet, going to about 1600 feet with that particular test.
19 And I've got to tell'you, seeing how they've managed ~that' 20 data, how they've managed those cores, and the ability now 21 to-have the scientists look at what's down there' via those.
22 cores, is going to be very substantial.
And it's high 23 quality integrity, and it will continue out through the 24 surface exploratory program out at the site.
f 25 We've developed the annotated outline, as I'm NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON O,C 20005 (202) 234 4433
l l
10 1
1 sure you're all aware, which is the framework for our 2
license application down the road.
We really do 3
appreciate the interaction and the comments that we've 4
gotten f rom the Commission on that document, and we expect 5
to submit revised drafts and have that be a living 6
document as we go down the road, as kind of a guidebook 7
and a status report of our investigations.
I think it's 8
a great way to communicate together with you all.
9 I think our interactions there have been sound 10 also.
I think we're going to have another draft of that 11 in about five or six months down the road, probably in the 12 late spring or summer.
13 14e've initiated a feasibility study on the use 14 of a multi-purpose canister for waste management.
This 15 study will be cotapleted shortly, and will provide guidance 16 and options regarding our future course of actions in this 17 regard, not just in the permanent repository program, but 18 in what takes place between now and then in terms of 19 interim storage and interim storage management.
20 I think this is a major problem, and we're 21 discussing with the transition team the possibilities 22 here.
Furthermore, we've had an interchange with the 23 Energy Committee via Bennett Johnston, and we put an 24 alternate option program in from of him just yesterday, as k
25 a matter of fact.
He has our statement which he NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W (202) 234 4433 WASHINGTON O C 20005 (202) 734 4 33
11 j
'1 requested, _
as
~to the status of that short-term 2
intermediate waste problem that we have in front:of us.
3 And I think it's a very pro-active statement that we've 4
given to Senator Johnston, and'we'll be discussing that 5
with you in great detail here in the near-term.
6 CHAIRMAN SELIN:
You might start with leaving a-7 copy of it behind when you leave.
~
8 DR. POMREHN:- We're going to make all-calls lto 9
the Senator's office.in the near-term, but it's certainly 10 available.
We'll go over it with you, I'm sure, in great 11 detail.
12 And I want to again say that Carl's going to be-l 13 spending a-few minutes, and with some videos,-' covering 14 some of the details of our_ progress at the Mountain. -
I 15 think it's very important that we see that first-hand, as 16 well as characterize near-term milestones'over the next 17' year or two,-that we expect-to meet.-
So,- he 'll come -' up_-
18 after I finish my brief introductory statement here.
19 In response to the November 18th letter from Bob 20 Bernero to John Bartlett, let me make a-few comments.
We 21 will, I think, answer that letter in detail, possibly more 22 so than the briefing materials that have been forwarded to 23 you already, in that regard.
I think it's worthwhile 24 capturing the sense of that letter in more rigor than i"
25 testimony that has been submitted does. And I think, more NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON. D C 20005 (202) 234-44'3
)
,z 12 t-1 importantly, that that response will create action 2
statements and organizational focuses that are going to be f
3 very important to the future of that program.
So, we 4
intend to answer that letter directly in detail, with our j
5 program elements that pertain to those various issues.
6 CHAIRMAN SELINt If I might just interrupt you, 7
Dr. Pomrehn, I think that's very important.
I feel 8
obligated to repeat a couple of things that have' been said I
9 in the past, just really for the record, on cooperation.
j i
10 The cooperation between the Department of Energy and the
)
11 NRC in this issue is comparable to that between the police 12 and the courts.
I mean, we must cooperate, but we also i
13 must be reminded of our separate responsibilities.
And 14 the annotated outline is a very important document there, 15 it's a way for the DOE and our staff to 7ooperate.
The 16 staff is trying to close these issues in the sense of 1
17 saying that their immediate concerns have been addressed 18 and you are making progress but, of course, nothing is 19 closed until it's all closed, and it's not closed until we
- i 20 have the application at the Commission level.
And 21 although I found a lot of reassuring and interesting 2.2 material in the testimony, Mr. Bernero's letter probably 23 should be read at two levels, one at the questions he 24 asks, but what he's really saying is, "Where do you guys k
25 stand, and how far do we still have to go",
and the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE, N W (2021 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D C 20005 (202) 234-4433 a
.~
. ~..
13 f
I answers didn't really have the. time to get into that.-
So,-
2 we're, I think, quite pleased to hear your intention-to go.
3 not just in more detail,-but really to sit.back'and say 4
this is a time of stock-taking not just from what have we 5
closed, but what.else is there to close, when will it 6
happen, and how is progress going on.
7 DR. POMRE!!N:
I think that's a great statement, 8
and I have-the same feeling.
I've read the letter several 9
times now, and I've found more than.just two levels, very - definitive 10 Chairman. Selin.
That's why I want a 11 statement of p:ogram fitting in with his concerns in the 12 letter -- not c oncerna in the letter, but his observations
-i 13 and thoughts in the letter.
14 Let me just go through a few of the points, 15 though, to highlight.
With r. gard to the need to conduct 16 a total systems performance l assessment, which will be an 17 ongoing process, nevertheless, we have completed the first.
18 performance assessment in July, with basically acceptable 19 results, and that's hard to define unless-you want to get.
20 into the details.
This was discussed with staff here at 21 a technical exchange this week, and we intend to conduct 22 this assessment periodically.
It's going to be kind of a 23 driver for the performance capability of that site, and 24 it's' ability to sustain the requirements for permanent
(
25 deposition of the waste.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND THANSCRIBERS 1323 RHOOE ISLAND AVENUE N W (202) 2344433 WASHINGTON O C 20005 (202) 234 4433 e
s-
14
. e need to understand the tectonic phenomenon.
(,
1 W
2 There is a - seismic action plan in place.
We need to
'3 understand that.
We need to draft that and put that in 4
your hands in a formal way, as well as we've initiated 5
activities to characterize the potential for volcanism at 6
the site which, if you look at the topography in the area,-
7 might alarm you.
So, we are studying hard that activity,-
8 and we'll be putting together a topical repcrt regarding 9
volcanism at the site.
I 10 We vill improve the technical integration of 11 this very, very complex program and the multiple elements 1
12 in the program.
The M&O contractor and we have crafted a I
13 number of task groups, multi-disciplined, looking cross-l 14 functionally rather than organizational 1y and l
15 scientifically, at some of these issues.
16
-Recently, we put.
together a
geophysical 17 integration group, for example, to combine some'of the 18 scientists into one problem-solving entity and, if:you 19 look across the organizational structure now, you'll find i
20 a lot of systems analysis type activities and integration:
l 21 type groups that oversee a number of sciences or a number 22 of disciplines that are going to be critical to our L
23 future.
And I think that's important to do.
If we get l-l-
.24 ourselves caught in organizational boxes like we do in our 1
25 organizational bureaucracy, it's going to be wrong.for NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ! GLAND AVENUE. NW (202) 234 4433 WASHINGTON, D C. 20005 (202) 234 4433 l-
-15.
p 1
this particular program.
So, we've taken those ideas and 2
those thoughts to heart, from you all, and I think you'll
~
3 see now,-in our program and development,.that a careful 4
integration of these-sciences are being put together.
5 The need to resolve open site characterization.
6 analysis concerns, I think, is another concern that we 7
have.
And we've established a specific Issues Resolution 8
Steering Group that will allow us to track very carefully 9
the programs that-are defined to solve those issues, or to 10 solve those
12 for that particular task, and we mean to have a very
{
13 rigorous tracking system for those kinds of concerns.
14 We've also discussed, I think, these issues with 15 your staff at a technical exchange November 20th, and we 16 will continue these er. changes on a regular' basis,. driven 17 by that agenda.
l 18 I think we need to foster better-relations and 19 better focus interaction with you
- all, and I
20 wholeheartedly agree with this commission's point of view.
l 21 I think it's of f to a reasonably good start but, in my old l
l 22 nuclear power days of dealing with the regulatory l
23 environment, I think it's got to be almost hand-in-glove l
l-24 for sure maintaining our specific protocols and
(
25 responsibilities that we have, but I think we can do a lot l
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W..
(202) 234 4433 WASHINGTON. O C. 20005 (202) 234 4433
16-f 1
better than we are currently doing.
2 The licensing support system comes back again.
3 We've studied that very hard, and I think you have in your 4
hands now some alternative approaches to that tracking 5
system that I think we both can use more ef fectively than 6
having separate systems for tracking our licensing 7
activities.
I think we need to marry that system right 8
away, so we don't get too much behind us before we can do 9
that, and we'll cover that in detail in the future.
10 CHAIRMAN SELIN:
Dr. Pomrehn, the background to 11 that was an impression that we had gotten that because 12 it's our responsibility to develop the LSS, that somehow, i
13 you know, we were going to be able to do this on our own 14 but, in fact, there are two points.
One is we can't 15 possibly do this without the very,- _very active 16 participation by DOE at just the degree of activity as 17 laid out in those options.
And the second is, without a 18
- database, there's no license application, that as a 19 practical matter that system has to be up and running on 20 a schedule concurrent.
So, whether the law calls for NRC 21 to do this with DOE's support, or vice versa, it 's - a 22 prerequisite to processing the prelicense and the license.
23 DR.
POMREHN:
Exactly.right, and that's our 24 intention, too, and I think we can do it cost-ef fectively, l
25 if you will, together, better than we can separately.
I NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE, N W.
.j (202) 234 4433 WASHINGTON. O C 20005 (202) 234 4433
-17 i
y 1
don't think.there's any debate.about that.
2 I think the process for developing t h e.. n e w -
3 Environmental Protection Agency standard is really'right, 4
and I'm really challenged by that.
I think --
5 CHAIRMAN SELIN:
Did you say it's " ripe" or 6
"right"?
7 DR. POMREHN:
-- right for problemsolving.
We' 8
support the development of a health-based standard by the 9
EPA, with input from the National Academy.
I think it can 10 really be a very important driver for this program, and I~
11 think the fact that it was mandated through Section 801 of 12 the legislation is very, very important to us, and we k
13 plant to enthusiastically participate in that activity.
14 We also agree that the schedule for developing.
15 the standard will not adversely affect the current 16 program, although it's not clear that the Academy-is going 17 to be able to do their analysis and studies in a timely 18 way to meet the law, but.I think there's going to have to 19 be some extenuating circumstances there. I think they are t.
20 talking about.a two-year period.
Even so, having the 21 budget thing taken care of for the Academy work to be 22 done, it can't be done, I don't think, in the time that's 3
23 called for in'the legislation.
24 A couple of words on our relationship with the
(
25 Commission.
I think this is of grt-mportance to the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE, N W (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON O C. 20005 (202) 234 4433 i
l-
18-(
1 success of.the-program and to me personally.:-
I really-2 think the programs I've been -involved in where that 3
relationship'has been positive and pro-active, has been 4
the successes in my experience, and I think we need to
~
5 maintain that kind of an approach here.
6 The coming year particularly presents some very 7
important challenges for us, and we expect, for example, 8
to expand our surf ace-based-testing activities, and Carl's 9
going to portray that with some rigor in a minute.
We've 10 initiated studies and excavation at the Exploratory-11 Studies Facility, and we've conducted advanced conceptual 12 designs of the repository and the waste package and the
-i 13 engineered barrier systems.
We need to communicate those 14 very thoroughly and our basis for that work with you all.
15 We will work closely with the staff to develop - the 16 licensing support system that we just talked about.
17 We are committed to a better, more effective 18 relationship with the Commission and staff, and'I think-19 this will be enhanced by timely resolution of theseL 20 issues, and I think that's why a formal answer, maybe at
~
~
21 two levels, to the Bob Bernero staf f statement, your staf f '
22 statement, to us is going to be critical.
23 In order to prove the effectiveness-in some of 24 these dealings, and recognizing our shortcomings in this 25 regard, I'm very happy that we've retained knowledgeable NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE, N W.
(202) 234 4433 WASHINGTON. DA 20005 (202) 234 4433 yw w
y y-*V v
19
(
1 licensing counsel on the project team now, and those folks 2
have a proven track record of dealing successfully in the 3
licensing environment, and I think it's going to spur this 4
on, I think, quite well.
I think you probably know who 5
that is.
I won't mention their names here, but I think 6
they've been of great help already.
And there's other 7
experts that have been brought in with track records in 8
this particular arena that I think are going to be helpful 9
to the program.
Those are recent changes just even since 10 I've been here as the Undersecretary.
11 Our current plan is to submit the first topical 12 report on regulatory issues, for your review next month, k
13 and a topical report on the volcanic hazards, which I 14 mentioned earlier, in June. We will also keep you updated 15 with our activities through periodic progress reports and 16 the annotated outline updates that we've also mentioned 17 earlier.
18 I'm just very encouraged as to what we've 19 accomplished this year.
I think I'm getting on the horse 20 at the right time, if you will, in terms of what's gone on 21 in the last six months to a year on this program, bringing 22 the M&O onboard, and getting him in the saddle, and 23 starting to rido down a very, I think, well organized 24 plan, and not that that plan might not iterate or change, k
25 but I think we're on-track, and I think you're going to NEAL R. GROSS COURT HEPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE N W (202) 234 4433 WASHINGTON D C 20005 (202) 234-4433 1
20-
-4 1
see, from some of Carl's ideas here in a minute, what that 2
means.
3 I think we have a common goal to manage the 4
nation's nuclear waste, and our commitment is to work-5 hand-in-hand and ensure a more successful, cost-ef fective 6
achievement of that goal.
7 Should I just go ahead and introduce Carl, or do 8
you have any questions or thoughts about this,'or we'll 9
come back after the presentation.
10 CHAIRMAN SELIN:
We'll come back later.
We 11 welcome your sentiments, and we'll come back to questions.
12 DR. POMREHN:
I think we should, yes.
- Carl, l
13 will you proceed?
14 MR. GERTZ:
Okay.
Thank you very much, Hugo.
15 Gentlemen, what I hope to do is talk a little bit about.-
16 the physical progress at Yucca Mountain, and summarize 17 work that we're doing in ESF, summarize the work we're 18 doing in surf ace-based testing, and provide a-short, five-19 minute video that captures maybe the year's activities for 20 you.
21 (Slide)
First of
- all, let's talk about 22 Exploratory Studies Facility. ' Work is underway at several 23 locations, including starting our preparation on 11/30/92.
24 That was a big day for us.
We had planned 11 months ago
'{
25 to start by the end of November, and we were able to make
' NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE, N W (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON. O C. 20005 (202) 234 4433
i 21 j
1 that.-
i 2
We are also drilling -- three drill rigs are in 3
operations one for engineering boreholes', one at UZ-16, 4
which is 1200 feet deep, another one for the near-surface-5 infiltration studies. We have 22 of those holes done. We 6
also have several soil pits and seismic act'ivities.
We 7
are -looking at trenches for return or refaulting.
8 Certainly, with the earthquake of June'29th, that became 9
a high priority for us.
10 COMMISSIONER REMICK:
Carl, you mentioned you 11 have the boreholes for the neutron experiments. -Have you 12 started to take data yet?
l 13 MR. GERTZ:
Oh, yes, we've started to take some 14 data and, in short, examine the core. We had an excellent 15 recovery, about 87 percent of the core has been recovered 16 in 20 of the holes that we've completed at this point in 17 time.
18 We also completed our design borehole for the 19 ramp design that you'll see shortly, the portal, and we've
-20 worked at Fran Ridge doing some blasting so we can fine-
~
21 tune our photogrammetric techniques as we go into the 22 mountain, and we've done, as Dr. Pomrehn pointed out, 23 extensive excavations in the volcanism area.
24 And I want to point out, not only is gathering h
25 data important, but is it the right data.
It's like NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND 'fRANSCRIDERS 1323 RHOOE ISLAND AVENUE, N W (202) 234 4433 WASHINGTON. O C 2000$
(202) 2344433
22 4
1 working hard is important, but you've got to be working 2
hard on the right things.
We think we've focused our 3
program in the' past year and in the next year -- and I'13 4
talk more about that -- on getting the right data to get 5
results and address some of the issues such as erosion, 6
such as tectonics, such as volcanism.
7 (Slide)
This-is just some pictures.
We have 8
them in the book for you, but that was our construction of 9
our drill pad for the north end of our ramp.
10 (Slide)
Drilling is going on, as I said, three 11 locations.
Right now, three dif ferent drill rigs working 12 on the mountain.
Fifteen pieces of major equipment, j
13 (Slide)
This happens to be one of our seismic-14 investigations right in Midway Valley, assuring that 15 there's -- to see if there's any-hidden faults, assuring 16 that where we're going to propose our ESF location and.
17 future repository location surf aces, should Yucca Mountain 18 be suitable, that we understand the seismic risks involved 19 in that area.
20 (Slide)
This highlight of our photogrammetric-21 activity where we've blasted some holes in Fran Ridge to 22 develop the techniques that we'll use in a couple of 23 months, as we go into Exile Hill with our drill and blast 24 activities.
k 25 (Slide)
Let's just talk a little bit about the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 HHODE ISLAND AVENUE, N W (202) 234 4433 WASHINGTON. O C 20005 (202) 234 4433
23 J_
.1 ESF.
We consider this a key aspect of our program.
It 2
enables testing in the underground laboratory at the 3
repository horizon, and also access to the Calico Hills 4
zeolitic formations which act as a principal barrier to 5
radionuclides.
Also, should Yucca Mountain be suitable, 6
it provides real-time data for potential repository _ design 7
and construction activities.
8 (Slide)
You see the ESF sketch up there. We're 9
primarily focused up at the north end right now.
.We're 10 going to be getting the portal done and then starting the
~
11 ramp, and our g a1 is to make the U-shaped loop coming 12 down the north ramp, across the repository horizon, and up
(
13 the south ramp.
I'll show you another schematic of that, 14 but that's our goal.
We have a time frame to do that, in 15 two and a half to three years from now.
That'five-mile 16 loop will provide access for the world scientists to'see 17 what the geologic formation looks like right ' at' the 18 repository level, and that's where we're accelerating our 19 activities.
20 (Slide)
The first part of that, though, is
~
21 building a pad and a portal, with the goal to be 200 feet 22 into that mountain right there,.in
'93.
That initial 23 excavation will be done by drill-and-blast techniques. It 24 will create a starter tunnel for our tunnel boring l
25 machine, but that work is underway clearing that pad. area l
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHOOE ISLAND AVENUE. N W (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON. O C 20005 (202) 234 4433 I
i 24
~
1 right-now, as we speak.
As I said, we have 15 pieces of l
2 major equipment.
3 CHAIRMAN SELIN:
Before you're done, you'll 4
sketch out for us, or somebody will sketch out for ~us, 5
your current ESF concepts, and where, if any, they dif fer
)
6 from what we've heard before?
7 MR. GERTZ:
Yes, we will.
8 (Slide) In plan view, as a civil engineer, I 9
feel I should show the plans, but work started in a i
10 topsoil preparation area, in road work there.
Work 11 started across the road in Midway Valley, on access road 12 to the pad, the pad being the light blue, and the
{
13 excavation then will go right into the mountain, on the 14 right-hand side of that particular -sketch.
There's a 15 blow-up in your handouts, too.
16 (Slide)
Let's talk about our current ESF 17 approach.
As I say, it is a ramp.
We've talked about the 18 ramps with your staf f.
This represents a cross-section of 19 the north ramp.
It's about 6,000 feet long.
Of course, 20 it will start up in Exile Hill, and that's where we intend 21 to excavate our first 200 feet. And I think your staf f is 22 well aware that over the last two years we changed from a 23 shaft concept to a ramp concept, and the only thing we're 24 doing now with the ramp concept is fine-tuning our
(
25 construction approach and construction operations NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHOOE ISLAND AVENUE. N W.
(202) 234 4433 WASHINGTON. O C 20005 (202) 234 4433
25 f
1 approach, and I'll talk to you about it but, essentially, 2
it starts down the ramp and, as we go down the ramp,_we 3
cross _several areas of geologic interest, including f aults-4 and different stratigraphic layers of the mountain.
This 5
will be approximately a 25-foot diameter ramp, allow lots 6
of opportunities for the geologists to get in and look at 7
what's going on in the mountain, and also we'll be 8
creating test alcoves to conduct specific. tests at areas 9
of interest along the journey below ground.
10 (Slide)
Here is a blow-up of the first part of 11 that, it's where we'd like to be in less than a year from 12 now.
We would like to have our launch chambers, starting i
13 tunnel, whatever you call it, excavated so that we will be 14 able to put a TBM, tunnel boring machine, in there, in 15 approximately one year from now.
I'll show you our 16 milestone schedule for that.
17 (Slide) Here's our schedule. The things in red 18 have been accomplished, some of the things in green have 19 been started.
First of all, we did start work on November 20 30th with, as I said, 15 pieces of major equipment.
We 21 did let out early this week a request for procurement for 22 a tunnel boring machine, where we went to industry to find 23 out what's available, what's the best machine at the best 24 price.
It's a 25-foot to 30-foot diameter spec that we're
(
25 out to look at now.
And in the green bars is our logical NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 HHOCE ISLAND AVENUE N W.
i202) 234 4433 WASH;NGTON. O C 20005 (202) 234-4433
26 1
progression of construction, where we build roads and 4
2 pads, start an initial tunnel, put some metal tunneling 3
cover to it, and then go 200 feet in the mountain, with 4
the bottom line being 200 feet or more into the mountain 5
at the end of the year, and then have a TBM on the way, we 6
hope.
This schedule shows it arriving on-aite in 7
November.
That's going to be dependent upon the 8
manufacturcr we
- choose, what's available, and any 9
negotiations we have on schedule.
10 COMMISSIONER REMICK:
Are there any U.S.
11 manufacturers of tunnel boring machines?
12 MR. GERTZ:
Yes, the U.S.
probably leads the i
13 world.
The Robbins Company is one of the world leaders, 14 out of Seattle, Washington.
There are others who use 15 various types of equipment.
And there are some-foreign 16 competition, too.
17 COMMISSIONER CURTISS: Carl, can you sustain the 18 schedule for at least FY'93 with your current funding 19 level?
20 MR. GERTZ:
This schedule you see for '93 is 21 based on our current funds in
'93, and all these 22 milestones that we are committed to be meeting in '93 with 23 current funds.
24 (Slide)
Just a brief Vu graphs of -- this was
(
25 our big day.
We had planned on it for a long time, and it NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE, N W 1202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON. D C 20005 (202) 234 4433
_. _ _. _ _ _... _ _ - -_ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _. ~
27 2
1 felt good as a project manager, to finally be moving dirt, 2
and moving what I think is in a very important location on 3
the mountain, trying to get underground to look at the 4
mountain.
5 (Slide)
It's hard to see, but this was a week 6
ago, a couple of days ago, progress where we were going to 7
go into the mountain straight below that white rock.
8 That's where the tunnel is going to go in, right about-in 9
tnere. We stripped the soil, lots of activities. going-on,.
10 and we certainly encourage-you to come again in four or 11 five months. Many of you have been out very recently, and -
1 12 we appreciate that.
k 13 CHAIRMAN SELIN:
I thought-- there would be a 14 picture of Commissioner Curtiss in this.
15 MR. GERTZ:
Sir, we will get uo that a little 16 later.
17 (Laughter.)
18 (Slide)
Let me talk about our milestones for 19 this year, following up on Commiss'ioner Curtiss' thoughts.
l 20 We are completing design of the rest of the ESF, or the 21 next phase, the ramp part.
We have completed design ~of 22 what you saw, the portal entry.
We did start ESF site i
L 23 prep.
We will be ordering our. machines.
We will be 1
24 continuing with that construction.
We will award a
l 5
25 subcontract for the underground construction also.
Not NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE N W (202) 234 443)
- WASHINGTON, D C. 20005
.(202) 2344433 l
l-J I
,-,6
28 1
only do we want the world's best machine, we'd like the 2
world's best construction subcontractor as part of our 3
team, and we hope to be doing that the first quarter of 4
next year, awarding that subcontract.
5 Bottom line on that one is like other objectives 6
we made, let's get into the mountain a couple of hundred 7
feet by the end of this fiscal year -- 61 meters la what 8
we have on this chart.
9 (Slide)
When you talk about our concept, I 10 think I'd like to dwell on this chart a little bit, Mr.
11 Chairman.
Although it's hard to see, you have it in your 12 book, but what this is is a plan view of the tunneling l
l 13 operation, and we hope to start with a TBM af ter the first 14 200 feet, at the bottom of that chart.
In early
'94, wo 15 want to start down at the bottom, start going into the 16 repository horizon, going across the repository, going in 17 effect south on the chart, and then coming back up the 18 south ramp, and that anticipates right now a two-year 19 operation.
20 Some of our current construction concept changes 21 is we may not stop that TBM to do some side drifting.- We-22 may just do the loop first.
We are certainly dialoging 23 within the project, with the TRB, with many other 24 consultants, what's the most effective way.
If we can
(
25 keep the TBM going and also do exploratory side NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS l
1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE, N W.
f 202) 2344433 WASHINGTON, D C 70005 (209 2344433
29
(
1 excavations to Ghost Dance Fault, Imbricate Fault, we'll 2
do that, too.
But right now, we think it may be most 3
important to complete that five-mile loop, and do it as 4
soon as possible.
There's two years on that schedule.
5 Maybe we can do it in less than that, depending on how 6
effective the TBH works.
We hope to work it around the-7 clock and, certainly, that's going to depend on '94.and 8
'95 emding for some of these activities.
9 But that's our concept.
That's a little bit of 10 change from what we had before. We had four TBMs going in-11 before, now we have one working the loop, potentially a 12 second one on the Calico Hills later on in this time
{
13 frame.
14 COMMISSIONER CURTISS:
Carl, let me ask you a 15 question.
As I understand at least the current plans, 16 your thinking is that you would drill-and-blast down to 17 about 200 feet into the mountain.
When I was at the site 18 earlier this week, there was some discussion about whether 19 that technique would be used to go beyond that distance 20 into the north ramp.
l l
21 Is the option of using the blasting technique 1
22 beyond 200 feet -- actually, two questions here -- one, 23 required because of the timing of the TBM or the hardness 24 of the rock; and, secondly, are there any implications 25 from the standpoint of the stability of tho formation if l
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRAPGCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE N W (202) 2344433 W ASHINGTON, D C 20005 (202) 234 4433
-..I:
30 1
you drill-and-blast versus using the TBM?
j i
2 MR. GERTZ:
We think that -- let me answer the 3
- first question. Whether we go more than 200 feet is going 4
to depend on a couple of things.
One, it is the hardness 5
of the rock.
What do we see after 200 feet? And, two, is 6
the availability of the TBM.
And should it be 7
advantageous for us to drill-and-blast without affecting 8
the ability of the mountain to isolate waste, without 9
affacting the scientific investigation and, while we're 10 waiting for a TBM, we may choose to go more than 200- feet, 11 but we will have to do that impact analysis to assure it 12 doesn't affect waste isolation or the scientific-testing.
i 13 We don't think it will because we are still-almost a mile 14 away from the repository horizon, even at 200. feet into 15 the mountain.
16 So, the other aspect is,-we understand through 17 our drill and core examination, there may'be a layer of 18 very hard rock, while though very thin, but very hard,- and 19,,
it may be wiser to drill-and-blast through that layer l
2'p before we start on the TBM.
21 COMMISSIONER CURTISS:.Okay. That's the kind of-22 issue, particularly if there 4 ~s an impact on the stability 23 of the formation that, as you get into - the Phase II 24-design, it's important to keep in close contact with~our f
25 staff.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS.
1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE N W.
(202) 2344433 WASHINGTON D C. 20005 (202) 234 4433
31 1
MR. GERTZ:
And we certainly hope to.
2 DR. POMREHil:
It can be a very robust strategy, 3
that you can just tell by his thinking that we've got some 4
optional ways to maintain that schedule, and this TBM 5
machine is going to be a tough procurement to do in a 6
timely way, as well as the get. logical aspects of what he 7
just talked about.
But I think our strategy is very 8
robust in terms of schedule in this regard.
9 COMMISSI0llER CURTISS:
Good.
10 COMMISSIONER ROGERS: Is that machine unique, or 11 will it be similar to something else that they've already 12 built?
i 13 MR. GERTZ :
It's very similar to the 11 machines 14 that were used on the English Channel.
There are several 15 machines operating on the Chicago Tunnel
- Project, 16 stormwater project.
So, it's industry-existing, has to be 17 a little bit fine-tuned, including the cutters that I'll 18 talk about in a second, have to be designed specifically 19 for the rock types you're working in.
But that's our here's in words that 20 concept, is to get that U done and perhaps in
'96, 21 construction approach -- (Slide) 22 take the world's top scientist, the scientists from the 23 State of Nevada, and make that five-mile loop and walk and 24 see what's really down there.
Let people look at it and i
25 then maybe assess our progress at that time, and what the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPOHTERS AND TRANSORIDERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W (202! 234 4433 W ASHING?ON, D C 2000$
(202; 234 4433
I 32 1
next steps might be.
But we think it's an important 2
element of our program, to complete this loop.
3 (Slido)
And that's the kind of tunnel boring 4
machine that's out in the narket r3ght now.
The cutters 5
are being researched at Colorado School of Mines.
We're 6
trying to desic6 T' en* + ers that are specific for this is very hard, eight times 7
type of rock.
awa 21 2 r>
8 stronger than norme
..iarcto in some areas, so it's going 9
to be a challenge for the TnM to work through it, although 10 TBMs work like that in granite under Chicago right now.
11 (Slide)
In eddition, though, to f ocus in on the 12 ESF, we're trying to keep a balanced program, as I pointed l
13 out, by keeping three drill rigs running, doing trenching, 14 doing geophysical tests.
15 CHAIRMAN SELIN:
Just a second, before you get 16 of f the f acility, what is your thinking about a prototype 17 test facility at this point, or would you rather address 18 that at a different --
19 MR. GERTZ : Currently -- I'll address that right 20 now -- we do not have a prototype test facility in our 21 current plans. We think the accelerated access to the ESP 22 will allow us to conduct tests with sufficient time.
23 CllAIRMAN SELIN: Without considering a prototype 24 facility.
4 25 MR.
GERTZ:
Without considering it, that's NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENVE, N W.
(20B 234 4433 WASHINGTON. D C 20005 (202) 2344433
33 1
right.
However, we have it laid out, we know where we'd 2
like to put one.
It'n a combination of two things:
- One, 3
lack of funds, where do you want to put the funds we have 4
and, right now, we've chosen to put it on the ESF.
- And, 5
two, we think with accelerated ESF access, it may mitigate 6
the need for a prototype facility.
We were talking about 7
it in Busted Butte.
In a perfect world, if I had enough 8
funds, I'd probably build a prototype facility right now, 9
too, but I don't feel it's worth diverting funds for that 10 right now.
11 CHAIRMAN SELIN:
Thank you.
12 MR. GERTZ:
Sure.
(Slide)
We do have a multi-
}
13 faceted surface based program which includes drilling and 14 trenching -- as I pointed out, three drill rigs working.
15 We hope to complete our first deep hole with our UZ-16 rig 16 and move it on to UZ-14, then we want to investigate the 17 hydrologic head north of the site.
We have lots of 18 surf ace-based testing that needs to be done in addition to 19 the ESF.
So, we have a program laid out and milestones to 20 accomplish it this year.
21 (Slide)
This happens to be Commissioner de 22 Planque out at the site, looking over the drill rigs and 23 the different drill bits.
24 (Slide)
Here is a view o.f Midway Valley as it f
25 looked before we started backfilling those trenches to NEAL R. GROSS COUR1 REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W 6202) 234-4433 W ASHtNGTON D C 2as (202) 234-4433
.34 1
build the pad.
We're in a very aggressive posture of 2
digging trenches, mapping them, get the scientists to look 3
at them, then backfilling, and getting on with our next 4
operations.
5 (Slide)
I gave you the outline for our ESF.
6 llore is the outline for the surface-based program in 7
March.
We hope to complete UZ-16 to_1600-and-some feet.
8 We hope to complete our 24-hole in the shallow 9
infiltration studies of Dr.-Flint.
We then want to move 10 on to-two other things.
We hope to complete the six-11 boreholes, and the NRG stands for north ramp geologic 12 hole, and that will help us determine how much we're going i
13 to drill-and-blast as we understand the rock properties 14 along the conter line of the ramp.
SRG is the south ramp 15 geologic hole.
16 And we're going to.do a tracer test in the C-17_
well complex.
We have a complex of wells jest off the 18 edge.of Yucca Mountain where we're going to push some 19 tracers into it and try ' to determine travel times of 20 water, et cetera. And that's a big experiment for us this 21 year.
And we will, of course, continue to gather seismic 22 data, continue to gather geologic data, continue to gather 23 water, rainfall, water level tables, things like that.
24 (Slide)
In essence, in '93, we're focusing on
(
25 getting ready for ordering - the tunnel boring machine, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE IStAND AVENUE N W (202) 2344433 WASHINGTON, O C, 20005 (202) 234 4433
s 35
(
1 being into the mountain, running three drill rigs, doing 2
the correct environmental programs both in flora, fauna, 3
and archeological studies, keeping the public informed, 4
and trying to get results and answer questions, provide 5
you all with some topical reports where we can at least 6
reach interim resolutions of issues, and then move on to 7
something else.
8 Hight now, I'd like to show you a short,.five-9 minute video that captures some of the work, and I'll 10 narrate over it.
11 CI! AIRMAN SELIN:
This may be in here, I really 12 didn't have a chance to look through but, at somo point.,
i 13 we'd like engineering is more important than
~~
t l
14 regulation, but still at some point I'd like to see a 15 chart like this with open items being resolved, you know, 7
16 a
real project plan towards the resolution of-the 17 regulatory stuff.
Maybe you've got one' hidden away --
18 MR. UERTZ:
I have one, and I provided that, I-19 think, at the ACNW review a while ago, but we'll --
l 20 CilAIRMAN SELIN:
I mean, the nice thing.about.
21 this is it's-not just milestones, but everybody 22 understands sort of what you're trying to do, and there's 23 this 10 percent or 30 percent of the way,.and that's what 24 I'm missing on the regulatory side, you know, how close f.
25 are we to really breaking a logjam, or are we just sort of 1.
NEAL R; GROSS l
COURT REPORTE.R$ AND 1RANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W.
l
- Go?) 2344433 WASHINGTON,'O C 20005 (702) 2344433
_ ~ - - - - - _
36 1
nibbling at the edges of the regulatory issue.
2 HR.
GERTZ:
In some areas, we're close to 3
breaking some logjam, like on extreme erosion, like on 4
volcanism, and hopefully very Qortly on these seismic 5
design issues.
Other areas, we have lots of holes yet to 6
drill.
So, we will provide you some information like 7
that.
8 DR. BARTLETT Just to emphasize, Mr. Chairman, 9
the purpose of all this, of course, is to provide the data 10 as a basis :or issue resolution, and some of it, the 11 age rate data to-date, has been put together to begin the 12 for al process of submitting topical reports for issue l
13 discussion and resolution at this point. And this is what 14 Dr. Pcarehn mentioned earlier with respect to the erosion 15 and the like.
And we do have these plans for a strategic 16 approach to that, building f rom the acquisition of data as 17 we move ahead.
18 MR. GERTZ:
Just in summary, I happen to have 19 one in front of you, we did a tally a while ago, and we 20 think we have about 200 objections,
- comments, and 21 questions from you on the F s.
We believe, and I think 22 you concur with us, we closed about 60 of those, which 23 leaves 140 for us to be working on; 40 or so need site 24 data before they could be resolved; we think we've sent
(
25 you another 30 or so, but we have lots of other items to NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE, N W (202) 234-443)
WA5HINGTON, D C 20005 (202) 234-4433
37 1
work on, and we are developing specific action plans for 2
each of those items as to when we can present it to you 3
and attempt to try to close it.
And that happens to be 4
another chart on my project management list of charts. But 5
as I said, we're focusing today on some data, but it is 6
important that that data get results to answer questions.
7 CHAIRMAN SELIll:
I just want to make sure we 8
don't have a situation where we pay a salesman based on 9
how many calls he makes and he doesn't have time to write 10 up the order.
11 MR. GERTZ:
I think I tried to allude to that 12 carlier, it's not only important to work hard, but be l
13 working hard on the right things.
14 DR. POMREllN:
Sounds like the independent power 15 scenario.
16 (Laughter.)
17 MR. GERTZ:
Okay. With that, I'd like to run --
18 Cl! AIRMAN SELIN: That's not a nuclear issue, Dr.
19 Pomrehn.
20 MR. GERTZ:
With that, I'd like to run the 21 video.
I think they are ready for it.
22 (Whereupon, a videotape was shown.)
23 MR. GERTZ:
It's got some soft music, but I'll 24 narrate over it.
It does try to focus on our recent i
25 activities in '92, and we've updated even with the work NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCA BERS
]
1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE, N W l
(2* 2) 034 44D W ASHINGTON. D C 20005 (202) 234 4433 J
~
F 38 1
going on at ESF. This happens to be completion of a 1400-4 2
foot well that was required by the state for our water 3
permit.
This is JF-3.
It was completed earlier in the 4
- year, which now we're providing constant monitoring data. -
5 This was early in the year when we hauled our 6
big drill rig onto the site.
Wo had to train our crews 7
due to lack of permits in Arizona and Utah but,_once_on-8 site, this drill rig has been working very successfully 9
for us.
This is a top view of how we get the pipe.in 10 place.
No more chains, no more cables, we do.it with 11 robotics.
It seems to increase the morale of the workers.
12 because of the safety aspect of it, and it certainly helps
(
13 us in the efficient timeliness of changing pipe.
14 This is the shallow infiltration program, as:I l
15 said, where we completed originally 12, and now 9 or 16 approximately 10 today of the second set of holes.
We 17 certainly have a chain of custody that is very well 18 documented,'has withstood several audits.
We think wo 19 have a good process.
20 This happens to be some of the trenching work at 21 Trench -14 relative to the theory about the mineral 22 deposits, whether they're up-welling or not.
Certainly, 23 that's still on people's minds right now.
24 This - was o u r.
drill pad road. where we got
)
'('
25' information'for designing:the tunnel which will go right l
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBER $ l 1323 RHODE lSLAND AVENUE, N W l
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON. D C 20005 (202) 234 4433
39 1
below that drill pad. This is kind of a vista of the area 2
that we're working in, preparing for the pad to get into 3
the mountain.
And our seismic studies there, I think, 4
were fairly favorable.
We didn't find anything that we 5
think is a problem in seismic design, including this 1100-6 foot long trench that we had excavated across the area and 7
mapped and found it to be a f airly - stable area.
That 8
trench, by the way, withstood, just like it stands, the-9 earthquake in the area, without any sloughing or anything.
10 We are working on pavement studies at Busted 11 Butte, helping us to understand the geologic history of 12 the mountain,-
the relationship of the different I
13 stratigraphic layers.
This was some of our blasting 14 activity as we got ready to do the photogrammetric i
15 prototype studies.
Another vista of the mountain in-16 Solitario Canyon, and here we're emphasizing that it is 17 important to keep people informed about what we're doing.
18 We take several tours.
Once again, we're pleased to have 19 you
- out, Chairman, and the other members of-the 20 Commission. We keep the media informed, and we think it's 21 important to keep the public informed.
22 Before we do any drilling or blasting, though, 23 we have to have a comprehensive pre-activity survey both 4
24 from the environmental aspects of flora and fauna, but
(
25 also from archaeologic aspects.
Those studies are NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE N W-(202) 2344433 WA$HINGTON, D C 20005 (702) 2344433
-~,~
m.,
40 I
completed.
We carry ongoing water well monitoring 2
activities, and we continue to try to understand the 3
existing characteristics of the mountain so we can predict i
4 the future. That's why we're gathering the data. We also 5
had to deal with endangered species.
We have, I think, 6
over 90 of these desert tortoises now with radio 7
transmitters, so we can understand them.
8 I'll switch very briefly now to our ESF.
Wo 9
talked a little bit about the-concept of it.
There will 10 be a computer simulation of what the layout is.
We went 11 through that before, but it is a two-level excavation.
12 The upper level you see there is at-the repository rise, I
13 and the lower level is in the zoolitic layers of the 14 Calico 11111s.
The side drifts are to areas of interest.
15 Our tunnel will probably be a little rounder than this, 16 but this is one artiss simulation.
And keep in mind, 17 the only reason we're building the tunnels is to conduct 18 tests and create opportunities for the scientists to do 19 tests in alcoves like this.
20 We were pisased, of course, to get started with 21 this activity on the 30th.
As I pointed out, we have 15 22 pieces of major equipment working out there now, building 23 roads, scraping activities for the pads and, hopefully, 24 af ter the first of the year we will be ripping some of the
(
25 rock off the mountain, getting ready for our first slots.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W.
t?Oh 2344433 WASHINGTON. D C 20005 (20h 2344433
l 41 1
As both Hugo and John pointed out, it's a major point for 2
us to start getting underground, and we're pleased to be
{
3 underway with that activity.
(End of video.)
l 4
(Slide) A couple of closing Vu-graphs pointing l
5 out we think not only it's important to do work, but it's 6
important to keep the people in Nevada informed of the s.
7 work that we do.
As a result, we have an information 8
office.
We've had over 15,000 visitors to this office in 9
Las Vegas.
We continue to conduct tours of the mountain.
10 At update meetings, we had over 300 people attend our last 11 meeting in Las Vegas.
It's of our own volition.
It's not 12 required by any law.
We just do it every six months in
}
13 three locations to have an opportunity to interact with 14 the public.
This particular meeting with 300 people, 1 15 think the vast majority happened to be supportive of-the 16 study.
We had another meeting in Reno where the vast 17 majority were opposed to the study, of about 50 people.
18 (Slide)
In addition to.that,.we conduct tours 19
- and, since all of you were recently there, I
have 20 Commissioner Remick in this particular-picture, from the 21 top of the mountain.
22 (Slide)
And even last-week, we were timely and 23 you had asked about it, so you're right on.
We have 24 Commissioner Curtiss there looking out at the mountain.
l 25 (Slide)
You might' wonder what people ~ think NEAL R. GROSS
- COURT REPORTERS AND TuNSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE, N W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON. D C. 20005 (202) 2344433
~. _,
42 1
after they take the tour, and we do a survey when people 1
2 come to the mountain.
It's not a sampling of Nevada 3
population, but it does represent those people who have 4
toured the mountain.
Four thousand-or-so have toured-it.
5 Over 90 percent of the people who have toured the mountain 6
support DOE's continuing the studies at the mountain.
It 7
is self-selective.
They call up to ask for a tour, but. it 8
repr9sents what they think af ter they have taken the tour.
9 (Slide)
I think I'd like to conclude with the 10 statement that I've issued to my project staff, that we 11 are now starting to do some things on the mountain, and we 12 hope that " great things are done when men and mountains
{
13 meet", and that's a William Blake quotation from a while 14 ago, and we think we're on our way to doing some great 15 things.
16 With that, I'll gladly take any questions you 17 have, and I appreciate the opportunity'to update you on 18 what'c going on.
19 CHAIRMAN SELIN:
Commissioner Rogers?
20 COMMISSIONER ROGERS:
I don't have any on this.
21 CHAIRMAN SELIN - Commissioner Curtiss?
22 COMMISSIONER CURTISS:
No.
23 CHAIRMAN SELIN:
Commissioner Remick?
24 COMMISSIONER REMICK:
Is that the end of the
(
25 presentations from DOE?
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPQRTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE, N W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON. D C, 20005 (202) 234-4433
43 1
DR. BARTLETT Yes, sir.
2 COMMISSIONER ROGERS:
Well, I have some.
3 CHAIRMAN SELIN:
Well, we've got a lot of 4
questions, but, I mean, the assumption is we've read Dr.
5 Bartlett's statement, and then this is Mr.
Gertz' 6
presentation.
So, why don't we start over again.
7 Commissioner Rogers?
8 COMMISSIONER ROGERS:
Well, yeah, I was curious 9
as to what your budgetary restrictions are that were 10 placed on you when you didn't get the amount of money you 11 requested, but you asked for $40 million for the MRS and 12 only 16 million woro enacted.
And I was.just curious as I
13 to how you are accommodating to that' impact on the PRS 14 and, in fact, what your thoughts are with respect'to the 15 prospects of an acceptable site for an MRS.
16 I
have to tell you,-
I heard a-little 17 presentation some weeks ago, to Narouk, from one of David 18 Leroy's staf f, and he seemed to be rather optimistic about 19 the possibilities of an-acceptable candidate for an MRS 20 site in the next year or so, and I wondered what your 21 thoughts are on this, John.
22 DR. BARTLETT:
Yes.
The negotiator has been 23 working for a little over two years now, in his efforts to 24 establish a negotiated siting with a volunteer host, as
(
25 I'm sure you know.
NEAL R. GROSS -
COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENVE. N W (202; 234 4433 WASHINGTON. D C 20005 (202) 2344433
~.
i 44 i
Last May, the Secretary, in a letter to chief ~
2 Executive Officer
- Howard, of Northern States Power 3
Authority, indicated, first, his commitment to progress 4
and the ;
ation of an interim storage f acility beginning 5
in Janue.cy, 1998, and he also included in that letter a 6
series of milestones associated with our present plans for 7
achieving that goal. The initial milestone was one of the 8
need for the negotiator to present to the congress in June 9
of 1993, an agreement established wita the perspective 10 host for ratification.
11 Prior to that
- event, it would have been 12 necessary for the negotiatur to have established the
{
13 identity of a candidate host in October.
That has not 14 been completed cnd, as a result, we don't anticipate the' 15 under the present procedures involving the volunteer host 16 prospect, that we would be able to achieve the goal of 17 beginning spent fuel receipt in 1998.
18 As a result, the Secretary has taken action to 19 further the opportunities to achieve his goal -- and if I 20 can shift the ball to Dr. Pomrehn, he can tell you more 21 about the present strategy for that.
22 DR. POMREHN In terms of the interim storage 23 issue, we've been tasked by Bennett Johnston to look at 24 that problem of 1998 and what we do about it.
That letter f
25 of response to him is in the mail, and in his hands today NEAL R. GROSS ~
COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE,. N W (202) 2344 433 WASHINGTON. O C. 2000$
1202) 234 4433 y
w w
gr
-i7-q' d
y..-
eam
'4w-+y
.e--A.
F-
+4N'-#
'e
-+~me W
_.____m__
45 1
-- as matter of fact, it went out last night.
2 It's got several aspects.
One is basically 3
broadening the siting possibility to ine)ude some 4
government sites and other places where we might 5
distribute this material, rather than an MRS, all capital 6
letters, that's going to be the end-all for this problem.
7 We don't see that happening, and so we take --
8 CHAIRMAN SELIN:
You don't see a single MRS --
9 DR. POMREllN:
-- a single MRS happening on a l
10 volunteer basis.
We will continue to work with the 11 negotiator as we develop other. possibilities in this 12 regard.
I 13 COMMISSIONER CURTISS:
Just to clarify, at all,-
14 or in a fashion that would permit it to be operational by.
15 1998?
16 DR. BARTLETT The latter.
17 COMMISSIONER CURTISS:
Okay.
That's what I 18 thought.
19 DR.
BARTLETT:
The negotiator does,- as he-20 indicated in the meeting with
- Narouk, has under
~21 consideration several promising candidates, but the 22 process that is associated with the volunteer approach.
23 would not allow the Department to meet its goals for 24 beginning in January, 1998.
25 DR. POMREHN So, we basically have broadened NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTER $ AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W (202) 234 4433 WA$HINGTON. D.C 20005 (202) 234-4433
46 1
the siting aspects from just the negotiator being 2
involved, not that we haven't been supporting him from a 3
technical point of view, but we've had to open that work 4
possibility thinking somewhat, and the letter does that, 5
back to Bennett Johnston. You'll have that in your hands, 6
I'm sure, shortly.
if you don't 7
CHAIRMAN SELIN:
Before yn" 8
mind, Commissioner Rogers?
9 COMMISSIONER ROGERS:
Go ahead, sure.
10 CHAIRMAN SELIN Would you describe a little 11 more what you mean by using the federal lands as a 12 distributed MRS site?
I didn't really follow that.
i 13 DR. POMREHN:
I think some of those sites have 14 been characterized and have the capability to store 15 nuclear waste, high-level waste, and fuel materials.
For 16 example, Savannah River, Idaho, and some of these other 17 f acilities are already committed to that kind of a mission 18 for the military or the other part of what we do.
19 CHAIRMAN SELIN:
And the concept would be to 20 have some kind of an interim waste facility in which you 21 could take fuel from more than one commercial power plant 22 23 DR.-POMREHN:
As an interim storage location'--
24 right.
{
25 CHAIRMAN SELIN: -- and store that interim until NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBER $
1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE, N W.
(202) 234-4433 WA$HINGTON. O C. 20005 (202) 234-4433
47 f
1 there were s MRS available?
2 DR. POMREHN:
There's two other elements.
- One, 3
the engineering aspects of the container, multi-purpose -
4 container system, and we've studied that already, and 5
you've been part of that study,-and some of the utilities 6
have been very pro-active in this regard.
7 Now, the integrated system really -is just a 8
concept, but I think we've got to go forward with that in 9
a rigorous way and, in fact, a budget adjustment letter-10 has been submitted to the Bureau, and we think we can get.
11 some additional funding to carry that program in an 12 accelerated way, forward.
i 13 The third --
14 COMMISSIONER CURTISS:
Could I just ask on this-15 point, before we get off-the theme, just--to clarify it, 16 and the letter itself may clarify some of the details, 'but 17 I'm interested in knowing, the concept that you have for 18 this f acility, whatever its acronym might be, whether it's-19 a MRS or an AFR or what have you, but the concept of 2
20 distributed storage of the commercial spent nuclear-fuel 21 at federal-sites, I assume that those would be licensed-22 storage sites on_the federal sites?.
23 DR. POMREHN:
I think we have to study that, but 24 I think the answer-is yes.
{
25 COMMISSIONER CURTISS:
Okay.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON. O C. 20005
-(202) 234 4433-vt 11 p-gg 9
m
,y-w 5-t-ma
A 48 1
DR. pOMREHN: It adds a little bit of complexity 2
if it's already a committed site, to take and handle that 3
kind-of material.
And I'm not precluding, in fact, some 4
utility already licensed sites, to enhance their capacity 5
in this regard.
6 For example, we had a team go visit Surrey just 7
Monday morning, to see what's going on down there.
8 Virginia Power is very pro-active in this regard.
9 COMMISSIONER CURTISS:
Okay.
10 DR. POMREHN: In f act, we'll probably be putting 11 together a Memorandum of Understanding with them, to go 12 forward in an accelerated way.
l 13 COMMISSIONER ROGERS: Now, on your multi-purpose 14 cask, are you going to say anymore about that, or --
15 DR. POMREHN:
I hadn't planned on it.
I think 16 we've had some recent studies and discussions in detail, 17 on that concept.
18 COMMISSIONER ROGERS:
Well, now, the purposes 19 are on-site storage as well as transportation, is that --
20 DR.
POMREHN:
- Receipt, storage on-site, 21 transportation, and final' disposal at the repository, the 22 whole integrated system.
Now,- what packages you need, 23 what enhancements you need, what supplemental frameworks
-24 you need, is going to be part of that system.
There's a
(
25 tremendous amount of dif ferent kinds of fuel that we need NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBliRS 1323 RHOOE ISLAND AVENUE, N W.
(202) 234 4433 WASHINGTON. O C 20005 (202) 2344433 s.
49 j
1 to capture here, and it goes beyond the commercial feel in 2
the sense of the overall DOE.
3 I've got naval reactors highly' enriched 4
materials, I've got off-site fuels ' coming back from 5
research reactors around the country, and I've ' got a 6
number of other types of fuel that we want to be able to 7
accommodate here, focusing, of course, on the 75 percent 8
of the problem of commercial fuel in terms of volume and 9
scope.
10 So, we're going to accelerate that. program, I 11 think, to have that license design in hand, and be able to 12 proceed, and then serve up to the sites, multiple sites, i
13 we think, in different parts of the country, this material 14 for the interim holding pens, if you will, or holding 15 points.
And I
think they've got to be licensed 16 facilities.
17 COMMISSIONER ROGERS:
Okay.
18 DR. POMREHN:
We know how to do that, though.
I.
19 mean, it's not as if that's breaking new ground.
So, the 20 other element here,-I think, is the budget element.
What 21 happens in the utility CEO's mind who says, as of 1998, 22 early in the year, we own that stuff ---that is, the 23 Department.
We're wrestling hard-with that.
I think we 24 own the responsibility to help with the solution to their
(
25 problem.
Some-of the utilities have been very pro-active NEAL R. GROSS
)
COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1
1323 PHODE ISLAND AVENUE, N W.
(202) 2344433 WASH!NGTON, D C 20005 (202) 2344433 l
. - l
=.
50 1
in managing their spent fuel on their own sites.
Some of 2
them have very significant difficulties.
Some of them 3
have very significant difficulties with the regulators and 4
the rate regulators.
5 So, we're understanding of that problem, and I 1
6 think what we intend to do with Bennett is to study 7
necessary legislation changes, to make sure everyone is 8
aware exactly what's going to happen in January of 1998, i
9 and I
think it's going to take some legislative 10 adjustments to make sure that's clear to everyone.
11 We don't read the tea leaves that we are legally 12 liable to take waste. We do feel a responsibility and the 13 commitment to help manage the system that's going to 14 accommodate that waste in 1998, and we've accelerated the 15 pace of solution to this problem greatly, as you'll see in 16 Bennett Johnston's letter that we just crafted.
It's 17 near-term stuff, too.
It's things that we're going to be 18 doing, in fact, this month, in laying out some guidelines 19 for the transition team, should maybe we not be here to 20 kick this thing along the road, so that they know exactly 21 what has to be done.
And I think Bennett Johnston has 22 picked-this ball up and run with it terrifically.
I'm 23 really happy with this program statement that we just made 24 to him.
(
25 COMMISSIONER CURTISS: Could I follow up on that NEAL R. GROSS CoVRT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE, N W_
(202) 2344433 WASHlHGTON, D C 20006 (202) 2344433 L*
Js~
51 1
point, Ken, if you don't mind, while we're on the topic.
2 COMMISSIONER ROGERS:
Sure.
3 COMMISSIONER CURTISS: This is one of the issues 4
that came up at the last briefing that we had and, in 5
po ',1cular, on what the Department's position was on the 6
1998 question.
You have clarified that matter in your 7
letter of October to me and, f or my purposes, I think 8
that's a useful clarification.
I'm not interested in 9
discussing whether the position is consistent or 10 inconsistent with what was previously said by previous 11 Administrations, the important thing in my mind is to know 12 what the current Administration's position is on the 1998
{
13 issue, and I think that letter makes it clear.
14 It is clear that you intend to accept: this 15 material when you have a facility in which to put it, 16 whether it's an MRS, an AFR, a repository, or some 17 alternative that you may be considering.today and, for our 18 purposes, I think that's a useful clarification.
l 19 I raised the issue then because, as we have seen i
20 here in the past_ year or two, the issue has started to-21 come into sharper focus for the NRC in a manner where I 22 think our interaction on the question, our knowing what i
23 you intend, you knowing what our situation is, will be 24 especially important.
f 25 With the plants that have shut down prematurely l-NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHOOE ISLAND AVENUE, N W.
(202) 234 4433 WASHINGTON, O C 2000$
(202) 234 4433
-.-, ~.
l.
52 t
1 and with the information that we are beginning to glean 2
from their estimates as to what's required to decommission 3
a facility and manage the plant in a post-shutdown 4
situation, it's become evident from the three or four that 5
have come in with refined estimates, that the major 6
contribution to the cost of decommissioning which, in 7
turn, is based upon some minimum values that we have 8
established in our decommissioning
- rule, the major 9
addition to that cost is the cost of spent fuel storage 10 management, and there are policy questions attendant to 11 that
- fact, including the question of whether some 12 adjustment ought to be made on our part, to more I
13 accurately capture what the cost will be of the post-14 shutdown period for plants that shut down, given the 15 position that the Department has now taken on the 1998 16 question.
17 My own personal view here -- and I will speak 18 personally -- is that while the option of modifying the 19 decommissioning rule that we have on the books, to add to 20 the decommissioning estimates the cost of spent fuel 21 storage on-site, would be a legal, and I think in.some 22 respects a defensible, approach to take.
I am concerned 23 that that approach would essentially, if it led to 24 utilities having to_ set aside funds in trust funds for k
25 that
- expense, would lead to a situation where the NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBER $
1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE N W (20?) 234 4433 WASHINGTON, D C 20005 (202) 234 4433
. - =..
I 53 1
utilities were essentially double-billed.
And for that 2
reason, that option is not one that I pre *.or although, in 3
my judgment, it's an issue that we.need, as a - federal 4
government, to-come to grips with.
5 You've clearly had extensive discussions, a
6 manifestation of which may be set forth'in the options 7
that you've addressed in the letter that you've sent to 8
Senator Johnston, and it will be, I think, instructive to 9
take a look at what you have proposed but, in my view, the 10 sooner we can move forward with a clarification of what 11 the funding regime for spent fuel sto e management will 12 be, whether a plant is shut down prematurely or what have
{
13 you, in a case where spent fuel storage will have to be l
14 managed by the utility, which is one of the options that i
15 you've laid out here with the all-purpose casks, _ the 1
16 better off we'll be in terms of having the certainty that
~
17 those funds will be forthcoming.
18-I personally believe that perhaps the most-19 reasonable option that has the greatest advantage at this 20 point, is to explore, to the extent that utilities will be 21 called upon to manage that fuel at'their site as opposed 22 to the federal government taking title to it in some 23 fashion that-may be a distributed federal arrangement, 24 that. it makes sense to take a good,. hard look. at--
25 recompensing 1the utilities for that storage-cost ~out of NEAL R. GROSS
. COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCHtBERS 1323 AHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W.
(202) D44433 WASHINGTON, O C. 20005 (202) 234-4433 I
~.,
54 1
the Nuclear Waste Fund, and that in turn, in my judgment, 2
would provide a more stable f ramework.i n terms of how 3
those expenses which are now accruing, will be managed, 4
and I'm sure that's an option that you're considering.
If 5
you have thoughts on it, as to where you are, I'd 6
appreciate it.
h 7
DR. POMREHN:
I think it's a little even more 8
than an option, that's'a goal of the program.
We haven't 9
got all the economics of that put together yet, and there 10 are some uncertainties out there in terms of these sites, 11 but our goal is to live within that Waste Fund capability 12 right now, and not add a premium to it, and certainly not j
13 double-charge the utilities for their own storage costs, 14 and then this program on top of it.
So, we are right on-15 track with what you said, and scurrying forward towards 16 that end.
17 CHAIRMAN SELIN:
That's very interesting.
I 18 need to ask you a. scheduling question before we go back --
19 is there any chance you'd be able to stay until about-20 12:00 o' clock?
21 DR. POMREHN:
I have no --
22 CHAIRMAN SELIN:
-- because it's how I allocate i
23 the time.
24 DR. POMREHN:
Sure.
f l
25 CHAIRMAN SELIN: That would be very gracious, if NEAL R. GROSS l
COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE, N W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON. O C. 20005 (202) 234-4433
i
=55 1
you would be able to do that.
2 DR. POMREHN:
Sure.
3 CHAIRMAN SELIN:
Commissioner Rogers?
4 COMMISSIONER ROGERS:
When do you think that 5
you'll be able to prodm.:e a definite. timetable for 6
settling those issues?
7 DR. POMREHN:
A year?
8 DR. BARTLETT: A year'from now because of the --
9 COMMISSIONER ROGERS:
A year from now.
10 DR. FOMREHN:
With the engineering problems and 11 the siting investigations going on:in parallel with that, 12 but the basic plan for that, we're probably-a. year away I
13 from being definitive on th ase milestones.- In f act, we'll 1
14 be studying right now the funding aspects ar any waste 15 legislation, Waste Act legislation, that has to be 16 adjusted. We tried to do that in this particular '92 Act, 17 Energy Act, and-it was unsuccessful.
So, those crafting 18 of those words and those kinds of commitments have been-4 19 attempted, and I think we-have to do that again.
And 20 Bennett Johr. ton's, I think, supportive of that approach, 21 an.c that's what we're going to be getting into in the next 22 month or two.
23 DR. BARTLETT:
The thing we expect to have accomplished about a year from now is a further detailed 24 I
f 25 definition of the concept of uses, but in the original NEAL R GROSS CGURT REPORTER \\ND TRANSCRIBERS-1323 RHOOE ISLAND AVENUE. N W-(202) 234 4433 WASH!NGTON O C 20005 (202) 2344433 w-
---wt p-
-.un,
..a----
e-
56 1
Nuclear Waste Policy Act, it's called " federal interim 2
storage", which is the concept for the alternsrive sites, 3
or alternative approaches, and the deta' y of the 4
concept of the multi-purpose canister as a basis for 5
operation.
6 We have done a generic study of that concept, 7
that has been completed, and we met just yesterday with 8
your
- staff, on some of the potential issues on 9
certification of the concept.
So, during the coming year, 10 we'll be developing the details for both of those aspects, 11 and that's what we expect to be completed.
12 DR.
POMREHN:
Commissioner Rogers, could I 13 broaden your question relative to budget and funding for 14 the mountain itself?
15 COMMISSIONER ROGERS:
Yes.
I just wanted to, 16 before we leave the multi-cask, how much of a complication 17 to the question of cask design and the schedule, is being 18 introduced because you are considering the use of these 19 casks for the defense fuel as well as the civilian fuel?
20 DR. BARTLETT:
I don't think we'd let that 21 interfere with the commercial program at all.
In 22 parallel, we do have an effort underway to provide current 23 technology casks so that they can be used, if appropriate 24 and necessary, for the initial receipt of spent fuel from 25 the reactors.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE, N W (2021 234 4433 WASHINGTON. O C 20005 (20h 234 4433
.-5 7 1
COMMISSIONER ROGERS:
Please go ahead.
2 DR. POMREHN The broader question of the Waste 3
Fund itself and its management, and our budgeting cycle 4
and its management, have got to come toget.her, and we'll 5
be addressing that specifically in response to Bennett 6
Johnston's inquiry also, because we want to put ourselves 7
in a position of dealing with the Waste. Fund so the 8
utilities, in fact, see the value-to that fund.and what 9
it's accomplishing in terms of the mountain, and we need 10 a consistent resource availability for the conduct.of the 11 program that you see today.
12 I think we survived '93, and we'll survive. ' 94, 13 but if we get ir a position where we want to accelerate 14 some work, I think we've got to have the reserve resource
~
15 availability to go do those things.
And in particular, 16 that chart that Carl showed, with the horseshoe and the 17 dates on - those mileposts, of :- getting that -- main boring 18 machine through the mountain and back out the south-end, 19 my feeling is that if_ we could accommodate a license s
20 submittal when I exit at the' south end, having done my 21 research and my studies en route, which would probably
- 22 take additional resources than we currently have, we could-23 be in a position to submit some sort of a license request 24 at that point in time, for. partial use or for some 25 additional testing or for some other things, and that's NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPOR'fERS AND TRANSCRiOERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W.
(2024 234 4433 WASHINGTON D C 20006 (202) 234 4 33 4
.,n.
58 1
why I want -to get a _ task group to look at those 2
possibilities, and I want to do that in the near-term.-
3 That date out there of '96, and what it means in 4
terms of access and safety. and my ability to_ get' 5
scientists in there to do studies and further characterize 6
the mountain, it's very intriguing.
But we need a 7
consistent, steady stream of resources from the Waste Fund 8
that is very visible to Congress, and very visible to our 9
customer, the utility in this regard, and I think he's 10 committed to do something with the legislation to help 11 that get off the balance sheet, if you will, or off the 12 budget cycle some way.
Not to give up control of it, or 13 give up management of it, but give us a fairly long-range 14 view, more than the budget cycle review, of what the hell 15 the resources are going _ to be -- what the heck the 16 resources-are going to be.
17 So, we're working on that - issue,
- too, and 18 there'll be another letter crated in the broader sen'se of 19 thic budget issue, with regard to the commercial waste 20 program shortly.
That letter will-be shortly.
21 COMMISSIONER ROGERS:
Just let me turn to one 22 other issue, and then I'll give over to my fe'l' low 23 Commissioners.
I'd like to hear your thoughts -- we 24 haven't heard the words today -- on issue closure.
It's 25 been a matter that we've discussed back and forth.
We've NEAL R. GROSS g
COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSC41bCRS 1323 AHODE 6SLAND AVENUE. N W 6202) 234 4433 WASHINGTON, O C 2000$
(202) 2344433
1 59 1
made the commission level position. very clear on what 2
closure is.
It isn't closed until it's closed here but, 3
nevertheless, there are considerations of coming to some 4
kind of an understanding that enough immediate attention 5
has been directed to a particular issue, to move on to 6
other issues.
7 How do you see that, that process of closure 8
taking place? What issues do you see having this kind of l
9 tentative closure, if you want, being addressed in the 10 near future, and at what level would you expect some 11 concurrence on an issue to take place at NRC?
12 DR. BARTLETT:
We really have two issues, and i
13 this was very clearly articulated by your staff and 14 yourselves previously, and that is, from our point of 15
- view, first of
- all, closures with respect to a
16 determination of site suitability, and then, secondly, 17 closure of issues with respect to licensing of a facility 18 if the site of it proves suitable.
19 And, again, as you've made very clear, there 20 will be no closure from the NRC's point of
- view, 21 essentially, until we get into the formal licensing 22 proceedings, and that's well understood.
23 The issue that that raises then is the 24 relationship between sufficiency of information to close i
25 for suitability versus sufficiency of information for NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTER $ AND TRANSCRIBER $
1323 RHOOE ISLAND AVENUE. N W j
(202; 2344 433 WA$HINGTON. O C 20005 (2023 2344433 l
60 1
closure with respect to licensing.
I think fundamentally 2
they have to be very close to each other.
3 And, so, as we go through the proceedings using 4
the annotated outline of the structure and the topical 5
reports as the immediate device on determination of 6
positions and requirements for information for closure, 7
that I can see the potential that this will evolve 8
effectively as the instrument of progress for our 9
purposes, so that at any point in time we come to a mutual 10 understanding of the sufficiency of data for purposes, I 11 think that process can work effectively.
12 COMMISSIONER ROGERS:
Are you saying that the 1
13 topical reports themselves are really key pieces?
14 DR. BARTLETT:
They will be the instruments of 15 communication f or closure.
And as Dr. Pomrehn mentioned, 16 in the relatively near future, we will submit the first of 17 these for consideration by the staff on extreme erosion, 18 and we hope not too long thereaf ter to be addressing some 19 of the other issues, too.
20 They serve two purposes, from my point of view.
21 One is to start the process, so we learn from it and 22 obviously to accomplish the results that are sought from 23 the process,
- too, because this affects then how we 24 allocate and expend our resources in the future.
If we t'
25 can get sufficiency of closure, then this perhaps enables NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE N W (2C2) 234 4433 WASHINGTON D.C 2000s (202) 23 t4433
61-to not do some things that might have been necessary 1
us 2
otherwise, et cetera.
3 COMMISSIONER ROGERS:
Have you generated a list 4
of the topical reports that you expect to generate?
Has 5
that list been defined totally?
6 LR.
BARTLETT It's based on the site 7
suitability criteria and the study plans.
I think Carl 8
may be able to --
9 MR. GERTZ:
Yes. We have ten areas in the near-10 term issue closure, and another 20 after that issue 11 resolution / closure.
So, we have a list.
We've discussed 12 some of those with your staf f.
We're starting to focus on 13 some of them.
14 I'd just like to add one other thing, what are 15 we expecting f rom you and your staf f.
I think af ter we go 16 through a topical and we say we think we have enough data 17 such as for extreme erosion and, therefore, we propose not 18 doing the tests that we've laid out in the study plan, 19 we'd expect comments from you on that that would say, 20
" Yeah, we agree with you, and now you have enough data, 21 you don' t need those tests", or something.
So, that's the 22 area I look.
Thrt's how I see it coming together.
23 COMMISSIONER ROGERS:
- Well, what I
was 24 interested in also was how this list of topical reports, 25 which are presumably the issues, are related to your NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 DHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W GG212 h 4431 WASHINGTON D C 20005 (202) 234-4413
62 1-schedule for tests on the site.
I mean, is there a clear 2
connection?
Can you look at.the set of topical reports 3
and look at your test schedule and say these are the 4
elements which will feed into that topical report and' 5
close out your contributions to that report?
6 MR. GERTZ:
Yes, yes, there is.
7 DR. BARTLETT:
And we have been evolving this 8
recently in our efforts to converge and focus the efforts 9
of the Yucca Mountain site on producing exactly these 10 results.
And we now have exactly that kind of a program 11 plan, relationship of topical reports to really three 12 major thrusts of ef fort: site suitability evaluation, the 13 EIS process, and the licensing process.
And, so, we now 14 have an integrated plan of how the information production 15 and use in the topicals will feed into those three 16 mainstreams of products from the effort.
17 MR. GERTZ:
I think I need to point out just one 18 more time that while it's important to drill holes and' 19 build tunnels, that's not our goal, to set world tunneling 20 records or to drill holes.
We want to answer issues, and 21-answer questions, and get results.
22 DR. BARTLETT:
As efficiently as possible.
23 MR. GERTZ:
So, that's our goal, is to gather 24 data, and that's why we've laid out these issue resolution
('
25 schedules, and we'll provide that to you in the near NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCAIBEHS 1323 RHODE ISt.AND AVENUE. N W.
(202) 234 4433 WASHINGTON. O C. 20005 (202) 2344433 r
63 1
p 1
future.
But that's our goal, is to answer' questions..Isi 2
it' safe,-or-is it'not safe, that'a'the idea.
3
-COMMISSIONER ROGERS:
Well, yeah, but that's 4
done in a nitty-gritty detailed way,! step by step.
_5 MR. GERTZ:
Of course, it is, and you have-to-
'6 gather the information to do - it, and we're proud. to
-e 7
- portray to.you that we're starting to -gather that 8
information.
And it was many-years before we could even 9
make those kind of steps.
Now, we need to-get the dNta-10 into results, so we can reach resolution and move on'to 11 the next areas.
12 CHAIRMAN SELIN:
Commissioner Curtiss.
13 COMMISSIONER CURTISS:
I just have a couple of 14 minutes here, first, and I have some comments just to 15 share with'you -- no questions ---but the announcement 16 that you've made here on -- the observation that you've 17 made on your approach to spent fuel atorage, I guess, 18 unless I'm missing something, I
interpret. as major 19 developments in this regard.
We're now seeing' :some
(-
t l
20 significant progress moving forward,Lif I understand what L
l 21 you're saying, and subject-to just seeing the details,.
22 which will be important, your focus during this period _of 23 time, before you are preparing to have a repository open, 24 will be on trying to minimize the. extent to which
(-
25 utilities have to store material on-site -- spent fuel --
NEAL R; GROSS COURT HEPORTERS AND1 AANSCAlBERS 1323 AHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W.
(202) 234 4433 WASHINGTON. D C 20006 (202) 234 4433-
,,y-l _
~
r v
w-
)
I 1
b 64 4
I, by providing, for example, distributed storage at federal 2
sites, and to the extent that they do have to store 3
material on-ai e through dry casks, or what have you, 4I really, two points here:
one, we're trying to come up 5'
with a multi-purpose cask that will serve more than one 6
function and, two, you are proposing, as I understand it, t
7i that that expense should be recompensed out of the Waste 83 Fund, or at least considering that as your principal 1
9 objective here, as I think you put it, and that point, in t
10 '
my view, is the most significant thing in this area that 11 we've heard for sometime.
12 Just a couple of quick observations on the 13 visit.
I was impressed, and I would be remiss if I didn't 14, say so, I was impressed with the extent of your technical 15 interaction with the technical people within the state.
16 That process for working closely with the technical folks 17 when I was at the site, impressed me, and I encourage you 18 to keep that work up.
There appears to be a good deal of 19 good interaction.
20 Second, there are a couple of points that have 21 already been made here about the importance of integrating 22 the studies as they come in.
We call it " iterative 23 performance assessment".
I know you are working in that 24 regard.
And that's a focus that will need to be expanded I
25 as you get into the actual conduct of the tests, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPOATERS AND TRANSCRIBERS f
023 AHODE ISLAND AVENUE, N W q
G02) 234 443')
WASHINGTON O C 20005 (202) 234-4433
(
ll 65 1
The three major technical issues that I saw out j_
2 there, as I looked at the site, and I think our staff 3
probably concurs in this, your silicate veins in Trench 4
14, I know you are taking a look at that, and as you get 5
down in depth, we'll have more information to determine 6
whether those are coming from the top or the bottom.
They 7
hydrologic shelf to the north of the site is, I think, an 8
important yet unexplored issue and, of course, the age of 9
the center cones and the related volcanism question we've 10 been concerned about for
- sometime, as you look at 11 addressing those issues.
12 But, in conclusion, I'm pleased with what I've i
13 heard here today, particularly on the question of storage 14 of the material either at the utility site or in some 15 f ashion at a federal site, and I look forward to continued 16 progress, hopefully legislative response, in a positive 17 way, if that's required, and encourage you in that regard 18 to, as the details of that get fleshed out, to work 19 closely with our legal and technical staff on the 20 implications of those options.
So, thank you.
21 CHAIRMAN SELIN:
Commissioner Remick.
22 COMMISSIONER REMICK:
Just a couple of items.
23 John Roberts, at the last meeting, you indicated that 24 there was consideration being given to using annotated i
25 outlines in other
- areas, like perhaps environmental NEAL R. GROSS COUAT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 AHOCE ISLAND AVENUE N W (202i 234-4433 WASHINGTON. O C 20005 (202) 234-4433
~.
66-1 impact.
Have you given further thought to that?
4 2
MR. ROBERTS: Yes. As was mentioned recently on 3
converging our efforts on site recommendation report.and 4
the EIS, those are going forward, plans are being made.
5 The implementation will be with Carl's people, my office 6
will assist and have regulatory compliance and review 7
oversight, and those_ things are underway, as.Dr. Bartlett 8
has said.
9 MR. GERTZ:
Let me just expand.
While the 10 annotated outline for the license application is.quite 11 voluminous, we expect to use chat process for the EIS and 12 site recommendation site suitability, not' quite as
{
13 voluminous though, but it's a-standard way to-approach 14 something, I think,.because it's in the outline and a few 15 other places.
16 COMMISSIONER REMICK:
Yes, I think a very good:-
17 approach, yes.
18 Dr. Pomrehn, you indicated that I think it 19 was you, or maybe it was John -- indicated that the NASA 20 study -- NAS study--- excuse me -- would take two years.
21 Is that a DOE impression, or-is that a position that'NAS-22 has responded to?-
23 DR. POMREHN:
I have to say, we haven't had 24 direct dialogue in that area yet, that's mainly an EPA-
[
25 and, I guess, Congress staff interaction, but they said NEAL R. GROSS-COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCR$(RS 1323 RHOOE ISLAND AVENUE. N W (202) 234 4433 WASH NOTON, D C. 20005 (200 2344433
~,
67 1
they couldn't meet the. one-year type of statement that is 2
- in the -legislation and, in fact, they are dealing with 3
some heavy technical issues that would be a surprise if 4
- they said they could do that.
So, it's by second-hand.-
5 We haven't been in direct _ dialogue with them, tried to 6
challenge what -- can we have intermediate statements or 7
milestones or analysis completed in that time frame.
8 COMMISSIONER REMICK:
I see.
So, it was an NAS 9
response apparently.
10 DR. POMREHN It was an NAS response,_a strong 7
11 response.
12 COMMISSIONER REMICK:
Okay.
I was not aware of k
13 the fact that you had a contractor to help you in the 14 licensing area, but I just want to say I-think that in 15 extremely important.
An observation I made becoming a 16 Commissioner was how soon that vendors forget, in the-17 reactor area, about that process.
I have made a couple of 18
_ statements that I thought -a couple of years ' ago, the 19 vendors kind of thought you sent in an-application and a 20 couple of months later something came back stamped 21
" approved", and I thought frou a regulatory standpoint, 22 the view was, when we receive an application, we will-23
- begin to _ review it.
And I know that. that's not the 24 situation here. There's a lot of interaction, but it does i
25 take some knowledge of how to approach a licensing NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTEHS AND TRANSCRIBEAS 1323 AHODE ISLAND AVENUE N W (202) 734 4433 WASHINGTON. O C 70005 (702) 234 4433 I:9 en 4
.m-e~m w
r-+
w e-p a,
y 9
68 1
process, and particularly when it comes to the hearing 2
process, the importance of having competent witnesses, and 3
good data, and good testimony, and so forth.
4 DR. POMREHN:. Exactly.
5 COMMISSIONER REMICK:
So, I'm pleased to_ hear o
6 that, and hope that they will be useful to;you.
7 DR. POMREHN And I scoured the whole Department 8
of Energy, by the way, to find some pearl that might_be 9
lying there, that have also done this, and have-legal 10 credentials in addition, and there are -- I found ; r.wo.
11 However, they always seem to find themselves in a very 12 vital role in whatever arena they land in, and.so while 13 I'm struggling hard to maybe bring them into -this 14 particular project and staff, I've been unsuccessful in 15 that so far.
And I'm sure if we can talk privately, some-16 of those names might ring a bell with you all.
I think 17 it's a vital breakthrough also, not quite as-dramatic-as 18 I think what we've achieved on-the interim storage, but we 19 absolutely need.that_ viewpoint on this project team, and-
'20 we have it now.
21 COMMISSIONER REMICK:. I agree. Carl, going back 22 to the neutron experiments for' infiltration studies, the-23 last time we met about six months ago, I guess, _there was 24 some conjecture that perhaps the mountain was drying out.
I 25 Has that been resolved?
NEAL R. GROSS COURT R5 PORTERS AND TRANSCRIBEFt$
1323 RHODE ISLANO AVONUE N W (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON. D C 2000$
(202) 2M433
69 1
MR. GERTZ:
I think Dr. Flint's research and 2
study of the results is coming to that kind of a model, at 3
least for the last 3-to-5,000 years.
In your backup, 4
there's some observations by Dr.
Flint on what he's 5
learned from the 22 holes or so that he's completed, not 6
only the fact that we've completed, but he's taken data, 7
and how this is helping him develop a model.
He believes 8
these 24 holes will be sufficient to develop a model, and 9
whether it represents drying out or small amounts of 10 infiltration has yet to be determined, but that model will 11 be able to sustain peer review and vill be will be 12 validated and verified.
i 13 COMMISSIONER REMICK: Good. One last point, I'm 14 very pleased to hear that you are considering alternatives 15 to the spent fuel problem.
I must admit, in the past, 16 I've wondered why alternatives weren't being considered, 17 but I assume that was related to the fact that until the 18 window of opportunity for a volunteer site for an MRS was 19 closed, that it probably did not make much sense to pursue 20 it, but I assume behind the scenes you were doing some 21 thinking about this.
22 DR. BARTLETT: For the last couple of years, the 23 Secretary has been pursuing a policy of technical support 24 to the volunteer process through a negotiator.
25 COMMISSIONER REMICK:
Yes.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRtDERS 1323 HHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W 12021 234 4433 WASHINGTON, O C 20005 (202) 234 44?1
70.
1 DR. BARTLETT:
And as you say, now.that the 2
window of opportunity-for timely success under.present 3
- plans, therefore, since that window is closed,- it's 4
timely, and that's what's been timely.
5 COMMISSIONER REMICK:
I'm pleased that'you'are 6
moving ahead with considering those. Thank you very much.
7 CHAIRMAN SELIN:
Commissioner.de Plangue.
)
I 8
COMMISSIONER de PLANQUE:
.Yes.
First of.all, 9
Carl, I wanted to thank you for all the support.'during my 2
10 visit.
I found it very interesting.
.I'm very impressed i
i 11 with the activities going on at the site, and I also was 1
l 12 impressed with the Visitor's Center.
I think that's an l
13 excellent project.
14 One small technical detail, when I was-looking l
15 at some of the work being done on the cores, as best as I 16 could tell, the cores that were being ' done for the i
17 research didn't have any portion of those cores archived.
18 I'm not sure I got the proper understanding of that, but 19 it's something I'd like to explore a little more.
I.found
,- ; j i
20 that a_little curious.
But thank'you very much for all 21 your help with the site visit.
22 MR. GERTZ:
We'll take that as an action to~get j
i 23 back with you.
We at one time had hoped to archive with 24 the smaller cores.
We'd made a management and scientific
[
25 decision that the videotapes and the other things would NEAL R.- GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS M23 RHOCE ISLAND AVENUE, N W.
J202) 2344433 WASHINGTON. O C. 20005 (202) 2344433
= 71 1
serve-that purpose,-but we'.11 get with you and; provide-2 action items on that.
3 COMMISSIONER de PLANQUE:
- Yes, I-was just-
~
4 concerned about-the basis for-that decision,.if later on 5
-a question would come up, you could ever go back and do 6
anything on a portion of that core.
7 I'm very interested al'so in hearing about the 8
possible alternative - of interim storage on : government-9 sites.
I just came back from Savannah River, looking at' 10 what they are doing there in their storing - the 11 noncommercial waste.
12 Did I understand.you properly, Hugo, that you 1
13 would expect that we would have to license such a site?
14 DR. POMREHN:
I think -- that 's open, Gail.
I --
15 can't quite answer at this time, I. don't think.
It may 16 depend on which site it 'is, and what reservation it is.
17 There's a lot of_ military basis that.are green sites from 18 the standpoint of handling radioactive materials,_ and we 19 might, in that case, take on an NRC licensing role as 20 opposed to a savannah River, or an Idaho, where we've got' 21 rules of the road that are pretty well prescribed.
So, I 22 guess I just can't quite answer yes, that's the basis for 23 our proceeding.
24 CHAIRMAN SELIN: Well, licensing tends to depend
{
25 more on what goes in rather than where it is.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCR!BERS 1323 HHOOE ISLAND AVENUE, N W (202) 2 % 4433 WASHINOTON O C 20005 (202) 234-4433 J
72 1
DR. POMREHN:
That's right.
2 COMMISSIONER de PLANQUE:
I guess the one 3
question that comes to mind, having just come from 4
Savannah River, is the implications of licensing a site 5
for commercial purposes, and leaving open the question, 6
- well, what about the site that's already there for 7
noncommercial.
It's just an interesting problem to keep 8
in mind.
9 DR. POMREHN:
Complexity.
10 COMMISSIONER de PLANQUE:
Yes.
11 DR. BARTLETT:
We've recognized that, and this 12 is one of the duties for our legal folk, too.
13 COMMISSIONER de PLANQUE:
Yes.
Okay.
This is 14 a very interesting alternative now.
15 DR. POMREHN: The idea.of it being interim gives 16 us some flexibility there, too, that.it's a stopover point 17 en route to permanent disposal is a very important-factor 18 here, I think, too.
19 COMMISSIONER de PLANQUE:
Okay.
That's all I 20 have.
21 CHAIRMAN SELIN:
.I have a lot of questions, but 22 I'm going'to speak with Mr. Bernero, let him just send-23 them to you, because they are much less important than 24 some of the things you've said today.
(
25 Certainly speaking for myself, and I think you NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCR!8ERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE, N W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D C 20005
- 002) 2M-4433
+
1 73 1
see some of these echoes, we found this a most encouraging 2
briefing.
I mean, Carl makes progress, we expect him to 3
make progress, but some of the ideas that you put forth, 4
Dr. Pomrehn, really were quite novel, and I might even
~
5 say, overdue, but it's very good to get the feeling that 6
the iceberg is starting to break up a little bit, although 7
there may be some sharp points on the pieces that come out 8
of it.
9 Without in any way undercutting the very 10 positive impression I have, I'd just like to make three 11 points.
The first is te people who haven't been in it 12
- and, antil a few months ago, I hadn't been in it, i
13 licensing is much more complicated than you think.
So, 14 start of f assuming you have to license everything and make 15 sure you know what you're getting into, and work back.
16 Don't, you know, come up, well, it's only five years, we 17 don't need a license, or it's only a uranium enrichment 18 plant or, you know -- it's a big deal.
19 The second, much more importantly than that 20 point, if I had to quibble, I would only quibble with your 21 very opening remark.
I believe that we are faced here 22 with one of the most important environmental questions 23 f acing the United States, and the solutions you're talking 24 about are terribly important, whether you're pro-nuclear i
25 power, anti-nuclear power, or couldn't care, this is a NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPOATERS AND TRANSCRIBEAS 1323 AHODE ISLAND AVENUE N W (202) 23+4433 WASHINGTON. O C 20005 (202) 2344433
74 1
major; environmental issue which has, of course, great 2
implications for the nuclear: industry, but even if there 3
weren't a nuclear industry, you've got 35-to 40,000 tons 4
of highly toxic and highly radioactive materials that have 5
to be dealt with and, to me, that's the primary motivation 6
of what's going on, and we should always bear that in a
7 mind.
I don't mean to lecture on that, but I just think 8
that's a critical point in the approach.
9 And the third thing is, I would like to be'a-10 little more precise in what I said before, we are charged both with providing we, at NRC, are charged 11 12 technical advice and avoiding sandbag, so that the federal I-13 government doesn't waste money. and, at the same time, 14 retaining the detachment not to be so co-opted in these 15 approaches that we can't then deal with them on an arm's 16 length basis. That's not a problem once we finally worked 17 out the procedures.
Just make sure all meetings are 18 gazetted, that all interested. parties, and there are many, 19 have an opportunity to attend, and that goes beyond the 20 straight ESF questions, or even the < quality. assurance 21 questions, as you get into some of 'these other issues..As 22 long as we follow the same rul'es, we, the staff, and, if 23 appropriate, the Commission, would be quite pleased to
~
24 continue these discussions because, in our area, I can't
[
25 think of anything more important than finding a set of NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE, N W (202) 2344433 WASHINGTON. D.C 20005 (202) 234 4433
75 1
time solutions of appropriate duration, to these issues.
2 Thank you very, very much for coming out.
to-3 say it's a
breath of fresh
- air, I
- think, is 'an 4
understatement to.
some of the poi.nts, both the 5
generalities at the beginning and the more specific thing's 6
that you are looking' forward to working on at the end.
o 7
So, thank you very much.
8 DR. POMREHN:
Thank-you very much.
9 CHAIRMAN SELIN:
Merry Christmas.
10 (Whereupon, at 11:45 a.m.,
the meeting _ was 11 adjourned.)
12 k
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
{
25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 132'J RHODE ISLAND AVENUE. N W (202) 234 4413 WASHINGTON. O C 20005 (202) 234-4433
~_ _ _
CERTIFICATE OF TRANSCRIBER This isi o certify that the~ attached ~ events of a meeting
-i t
.'of'the United States. Nuclear Regulatory Commission entitled:
w TITLE OF MEETING:
BRIEFING BY DOE ON HLW I xOGRAM.
PLACE OF MEETING:~ ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND DATE OF MEETING:
DECEMBER'18, 1992' were transcribed by me. I further certify that;said transcription is accurate and complete, to the best 'of my ability, and'that the transcript is'a true and accurate record of the foregoing events.
N
)
H&110"
/
(I J(/i I.
b=
Reporter's name:
PHYLLIS YOUNG-I l
HEAL R. GROSS CoutT R$90RTERS AMO TRANSCRitet$
1323 RMOOG ISLAND AVENUt, N.W.
(202) 234 6 WASM0MGTON, D.C. ^20005 (202) 232 4600-
y a'
(,
'g
[
i U S DEPARIMENT OF ENERGY j
G
_ YUCCA MOUNTAIN C
SITE CHARACTERIZATION p
PROJECT w
rg,,
M UPDATE ON MAJOR FIELD ACTIVITIES i
ATYUCCAMOUNTAIN I
F PRESENTED TO NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i
.t PRESENTED BY
/*
CARL GERTZ.
'e PROJECT MANAGER e
- ?
r
- b
~
y*m'p DECEMBER 18,1992 j
4 t
~
1
~
AGENDA Summary of Work Underway
- - Exploratory Studies Facility (ESF) c
. Accomplishments Future plans.
Surface Bas ~ed Testing
- Accomplishments-Future: Plans 1
[
Field!WorkVideo.
I M.Ef Y UCPG1218T i
~
I WORK UNDERWAY L
AT SEVERAL LOCATIONS i
L Summary ESF site preparation / construction began on 11/30/92 Drilling at North Ramp Geologic Hole (NRG-6) approximately 80 feet l
Drilling at borehole UZ-16 approximately.1200 feet 22 neutron access boieholes completed for natural infiltration studies. An additional 2 boreholes are planned (70 ft.- 270 ft) 28 soil test pits and 4 trenches were excavated in Midway i
Valley study area 33 test pits (Phase 1) excavated as part of. Soil and. Rock
~
-Properties investigations related to north area surface and subsurface access facilities.- An additional 39. test pits (Phase II) excavated as part of design data for accessiroads and other surface' facilities :
mmummum.
a
WORK UNDERWAY (CONTINUED) u Sumraary (conunoem 6 trenches excavated and 4 pavements cleared for Quaternary fault studies NRG-1 (north ramp geologic hole) access road and pad completed; drilling completed (150 ft)
Drilling of JF-3 environmental monitoring well (1,300 ft) completed and monitoring equipment installed; fulfills commitment to National Park Service Fran Ridge photogrammetric studies began Volcanism studies - 45 excavations completed mmm-um-t 5
- ' ~ -
I ESF MISSION IS TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO GEOLOGIC HORIZONS TO EVALUATE SUITABILITY OF GEOLOGIC BARRIERS TO ISOLATE WASTE 1
I Enable testing in " underground laboratory" Determine the suitability / unsuitability of Yucca Mountain as a potential repository site Provide access to the potential repository horizon (Topopah Spring) for inspection and testing Provide access to the Calico Hills level for testing and inspection
- Primary barrier for radionuclide transport
. Develop data for potential repository design and construction ALYM Pt9CJG10T,T
A
]
i (f
j(
j-
[
a
?*
-(,
}
gs j 1
l i
]
fp E
k
[
o Q
~
1 g
6 l'-
LL.
l u) 1 } i 3:
h.
LLI ig a
I g 71
!is 4
l
~
e i
4
}
g
/
/
j_ _
g 4
y l$ k g,, lj :'
Y
, j h Ik
s
.i'l; t
s.
[
- .il j t
[
r m
x $
'/ -
N e
. ~
A 3
A s
N 1
-'S
}
N F [
n,. s
_x E
/
~
G 9
~
t' A
K~ n
~ hv" w_ %l.
K 4
C g/.
?
~
- /
A
< p*w,~
A_ {,,,m a n/
^
P N
G
. W(m
,, /
I
~
S
=
_ y,%
._ x?. m.
2_ __ 7..
E
?.
D
/.^~A.
L A
2 m9.%
N-N T
y R
~
p7__'v:v-
=
O A_/gf_
- Q,
~
/
P H
T i,D. Qg\\.
J IIll R
n"-
t p
g g
l l
O i
3
.N s
N f
h
~
W_
- l
>,.f-r F
S
~
.},
N
~
E ps s'
~
'~
--g e
i j:
l 1
y-
.e
~
. s.
u :w-q- ~,..;:: m nf w. ? - -
-r 7xf n
v
.c
~-
3, m.
w-N. 3, ~
s s,,/.
- W ;-
t-o, m,_
~
.~
~
v%
p/ :~uao si
~
s.,
. &,s,,s 4
er
-oz.
a...-
,.2 n
w i
-56E s. M :.M. N. N.
.e
[
q : M,p+.,:. e w @ &. c-J, G
L s
. uru e sJ v e>
y v
.c
~
x--
n.
nam.
~ww m -41 io..' s.., - s c:q.. - ! l
,3 l
- -x,a.
-oo a=r..
o i
. m.p".'*
. mee m
s c
l
' 'i f
- -2 n sa w
.. z
~%.W * *. 4 c. J..
w Z e pt 3
4 g
- 1c
&g -
j ),.;'\\,.,e % g lu' w N J
L.
v.
J.', [ g
. i
-,.., ; 4 u.,
u 7.
y
(., s. ; d.
.,,c:.3,;;z$. ~l w'7
' g.
-t.'
- 4. ' p l.
-. ; %..%..=s.., #-.( ' ' y %,. W..'As R @.s.
. c. d' -
(,
z
~
N. '.
3 s
o
'x. T'N,.kk,
-s
=
s
,;>,E,,:,';;.N ' 4.'
f'
\\ 9-G \\ h '
- N '1 ' %..
.j
.. b v:~
e
>.s s
,' \\a. a.. y[; u.. L s
. O' T M.. E h..?
- - '[N r%e,
'M'
-('.%.;-%~N.a.,,.
1 z
- y x., ;. d. s _ p. x.'!
5 v 1.u y
s t,,.,
o r
m.a, w.,.
gss-s.,.-
e.p,. e
,A s
wx
%a
- y.. A.
c s.
g<
,3
,~
v u.k..
u. s s
w.
m.;. : w m u ---
ri. o s.
s.
.r ix g em, E j
.+ :s. % p.., < 7 w a,$,4 a.t.v o - g,,
,.'ce.s ~~ p., s.e
~. w e i
, :s.
e
.Ae.
a w
..r A l
~
..c g a
- p. z
\\
n,y
.,..- ~.
.m
. u. i :r w.
q-;4. o w
- s. s ;
m w-r.
- m
'"U -"*
.. ~~.
/
i \\..* ",b
.9a, - {. :==.w/,,h/. e.M12.,p j,
- a. a.
i
, ~...
- s. 8 x
-x',
a,,.
.N 3., t.&, g(-.,.
A
- s
- 4...% 1
( g
' ll- %;%,
N a;.7",m f W).qq.-gg 3 W :.
m o4 s
., y N. 3....Q.,m.h, g~ t,2,c; M 4 i ~.j%;,j,.!!y a
?'~
&u
%.%,\\C.y.. N x,
,g yoW
^y e p.
m e f.g:,4) @=.a-M'p.. -
% g r
v y %.
of
- q
-.y w,
%. 9.
w
.. -.s.. a -s.
c ' ..
- s. -
m
, e gb. y
. J4TQ.gs,.,."lkN. '.- tih - g i :, p,i:
s
-~ - s G
- *>~~
- - g",,I w u.
4/
' w' g.*c..4,y.,g.:% g.
--5 4,
+
r yp?M,; --.
e/* :s e
+y n. " ---
-1
.,,. 9,
a
~, b..,
y
",~'.r.-
% :G,Mg\\..%[.:.,:
$,y, y m.y' 's-gs,,p %,
~
-~.3 g a
g G.s ?
's.;1
.p{h.[.,r C ' M,--. L b
. \\,;
4 i
{My, g ;
u
../.ye,.w
- w x.J.
3..
g.w. 4 v
- f r..
.s, ;.. +-.-
7 S,
g. g-~'*--a~'
s,.'
x--
p w
4, 'l#8f,,,,,,,,j y
n f
s
<4.."::p.
M.g g
.v
- s....-.' e,m :<-,e *g mgi s-f f fl'.
.?
~ Y,
- Q'.~.. %- ..,. O.R 4.*l-.'
S * *-
+
J
,;q \\s.,,,,;%O:p
. -..s s *,,,.q
- c&y _
N \\. ~;..; A" i e'..-
' /.
- =,
- \\.
r":nm
,._/
2;e a.,,. m e.~
- u,..;-n
- w
.s.Q.
~ 7: '.:
. y-,
.-,s-~~n,'-*'<
. _ :, s Q.,f (.'
- - ~~%:,,%. g% '"' r%.
c
- w..L,
h;,,,.
- .Y.:g A'.
. si \\;, -
.:9 e%.,
w k.',
l.
%g r:
7;;^ Q J . '
s.
,,_ s.!
'- Q: \\ Q g.,'"] 4 A I i;f *
%,.,h,~..;d.
- h. c.r.. A,: k... Rise RI.;M'NN,. s.j s
wu
.N g
<vN
)x
-.,, - u- -
..i k g s
f. ' I ~~~ ./ g,..",:, 5: \\g\\)Q..
'(,.
.r - Qq G'-~ ~*%,{.
' N 'N \\ssc f, '"~a N
e' '
f.,.
- b.. r N pN - s
\\ ' 'S.,Y ~'p" j;
Q..
' ' %4 c
,w 4
y
- b sd,.]- >
5:4:4:~%.,.
k., b h 3,ahW;'M* ', ~,/ :.. d.s,.,,q
>.t^-
.1 J
.- p. ~ <
- 4.,,.
a. ~ -s..
-y..
3
. y:.:,w.,.:..,
- ~
-.... g,:-
/,}
2 7.,.
s
,i,s
- w a
s..
s
~ ; %..a.
% 4..
,';;C.fa.. ; 7. ~. m' O LL - ::e
- ?,~.
....s.~. /.9 'sd. ~~~5' ~.s. %s,;;.h s,.r
.i 3 / L,;;,py -
o
.n.,p4.-r m.
\\.
e, f.1i:
";t
..n./
y
. i sM {.l'?ydi
.h. '
~
N r
,f
- s
.y :
.t s
AMOO
~'. y o :r.,.. \\* g..
i e
M l
. . j,,p i
I",y.,,,. 4 g'.
.A F
.cr,+-. O A g 4.s.,a w e wo c
s g::
< j /,f s -
4 c.
r js.
a..,,, ;.,3.,
een,;
%. q L ;.. S Q-
[
i oc
.g t
^p
?D 4 h.-..
21 '.
- )'.
-h,
.0 4 *- 70...
- wn rf :.
7' I
,, ?, 'f f -
. / + r.s
\\.>,
- 0. z osee n:..
. u so..
w~
l
- 2 O se e
- g..
.osg s o.b pC.:
- s. ;.
y y Q_
war.
~s..v.-y i
1.
D
.... i : %
a
,,,,.,'y $,;,, s - j. +%e,.;
)
.g gg u-
- o. w s C
-' #- v
.W c@
-u
~
- srt, v
//
e
.~ '.s : 6 %..,,
l
,J:l! b p.,.Wh.d 4
- s f"' :,.5.
.. o.* Q~'
, e
~
+
ae f.
MVZW ?,p
,.gg
- $ m&:..t..
, i.
.L:
..'".,7.3. :0. 'ji ; t,
':/
L.A
.-...g.'
c
~y@:
g U0 7& ;,
b
- f,,,"*~?'n'~#
U- [t>;
~ ~ '' ; y". '. p." -lc A.
~~
~
%, g~'"-=~,n,7.:s.
- J
),['
t
.m x "
~.
- ng
-. :.~::.
- o. ;.
-i.
0,b:%;*.
g, f A.~
y3 O 3. 4 g,<
Yy r
,j.
.. s,,..... ' hn, u q.s d'. w 3 ::' -
)
y...
" p:
- .g, s,
.. n.f. ?,..
c,. a n. ~*
a,
- ; M.,
=
. s...r%.
a...
. x :.
.w,.
M./,.,, >
4.,.
v.
.s.. ~.a3's.; :h. X 2;.:<"::
- s.e.% =...
- .:j
- n.,..
N', cw=... ;:.1 M $
.?
w
~
.1.-
.%.- - W ";;-;.:d ;s i
- z..
9
. ~,
g h
s L
NORTH RAMP DESIGN WILL INCLUDE AREAS OF GEOLOGIC INTEREST TO BE STUDIED o
NW SE
,,si.rt Emile H418
=!
i
- = e=
g
\\
\\:..
T
~ t I
/
~
'i i
Topopoh Levet nemp Tsus g-g i: f
- d :! 0 i f l.gl :-
lf l
}4 l
's.2 ca=== t-I a==9 i
t ThermallMechanical Units 4
j Tcw Tiva Canyon Member
- Yucca Mountain Member PTn Pah Canyon Member j-TSw1 Topopah Spring Member TSw2 Topopah Spring Member TSw3 Tuffaceous Beds of Calico Hills CHn
. Conceptual Illustration Not To Scale TZZ - -
Zeolite-Vitric Contact in Calico Hills (TZZ)
(Not Present on This Selection)
PARAAM't3W NSECT/7 to 92
L i
l l
i CROSS SECTION OF EXILE HILL SHOWING TBM LAUNCH i
CHAMBER, NRG-1 AND FUTURE NORTH PORTAL PAD i
Exile Hill W
(peak elevation 3.8s4 ft)
J Alluvium &
i Colluvium Borehole Trench 14 Alluvium &
l NRG-1 Future North Colluvium t
Portal Pad l
3te}un.y.?p:
En 1,.
a
- f..
en 4,e,
. _ Mt NIN i n ;:n..,
.i.
h
[ '
m$NNG%s 1 q nwn; a
Ol M %,r:., p::..
- i. - _
34
% a $ i{ y ;, /ll: a asn i
Not to nie Note:
drill pad to be removed prior to excavation of launch chamber.
i
=
=
F
i PRELIMINARY ESF CONSTRUCTION
SUMMARY
SCHEDULE 1992 1993 l
Tasks Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec lasue TBM RFP J Award TBM contract Delivery of TBM b->b bHb b
b Milestones Receive TBM Proposals l
Prepare topsoil pad, road &
l I
l drainage Construct north portal pad & slot
~
Construct rock storage pad Construct first 50 ft of starter tunnel Construct
' cut & cover' tunnel entry Extend starter tunnel to 200 ft.
ESFCHr1 GERRt10 23 92 i
1
+
RAMP / DRIFT SCHEMATIC WITH ESF CONSTRUCTION MILESTONES l
l t
Construct Complete TSL i
I South Ramp Main Drift Mid 1995 i
Breakout f
f South Ramp l
Early 1996 l
Construct l
TSL Cross Drifts l
199510 1996 i
l Start ThermalTesting Mid 1996 i
f Construct Main Test Area 1994 to 1996 b 4
I To Imbricate Fault name mens numa I
Complete North Ramp Start TSL Main Drif t I
Begin TBM Mid 1994
~
Operations at North Ramp I
l Early 1994 ESFCON3125 NWIRU\\12 47 92 f
i
i PRELIMINARY ESF CONSTRUCTION
SUMMARY
SCHEDULE i
1992 1993 Tasks Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Issue TBM RFP 3 Award TBM corAract Delivery of TBM
~
b- >b bHb b
b Milestones Receive TBM h
proposals i
Prepare topsoll pad, road &
1 l-drainage Construct north portal pad & slot 4
~~
Construct
^
rock storage pad t
i Construct first 50 ft of starter tunnet
' cut & cover' tunnel entry l
Construct Extend starter tunnel to 200 ft.
-l ESFCHT t GERTZtto 23 92
=
r l
FY93 PLANNED ACTIVITIES FOR i
1.2.6. EXPLORATORY STUDIES FACILITY
)
($49.0M)
Oct 92 Continue ESF Title li Design, including Packages 18 and 2 1
Nov 92 Start ESF site preparation Dec 92 Issue TBM RFP t
Jan 93-Receive proposals, and award contract for j
[
Apr 93 first large TBM and support equipment l
(
l l
Jan 93 Start temporary power supply upgrade procurement I
j for ESF i
Mar 93 Award subcontract for underground construction l
Sept 93 Complete design of-north ramp and selected north l
access surface facilities
[
Sept 93
. Construct first 61 meters of north portal and ramp L
i et=cwasio cmu iz 92 j
I I
L E
.-----,-----,-,-,g i
RAMP / DRIFT SCHEMATIC WITH ESF CONSTRUCTION MILESTONES i
l Construct Complete TSL l
l i
South Ramp Main Dritt l
Mid 1995 l
Breakout i
South Ramp i
Early 199g Construct I
TSL Cross Drifts
[995 to 1996 l
l s
1 l
Start ThermalTesting Mid 1996 t
i Construct Main Test Area 1994 to 1996 \\
d To Imbricate Faul 3
j t
Complete North Ramp StartTSL Main Drift l
Begin TBM Mid 1994 l
Operations at North Ramp l
Early 1994 ESFCON3125 NWTRB1217 92 i
.I REVISED CONSTRUCTION APPROACH l
Procurement for one large diameter TBM to begin mid-December 92 Procurement results (new or used machine) will determine TBM startup date L
l TBM receipt could occur as eady as Nov 93 TBM operation could begin as early as Feb 94 One large diameter TBM (25 - 30 feet /7.6-9.1 meters) will start at the north portal, excavate the north ramp to the TSL, the TSL main drift, and the south ramp from the TSL to the surface (Approximately 26,000 feet /7925 meters)
A second, smaller, TBM (18 feet /5.8 meters) will be used initially to drive tho TSL cross drifts; then used to drive: the north CH ramp to the CH level; the.CH main drift (from north to south); and the south CH ramp from the CH to connection with the south TSL ramp BCCSEPSP25125 NWIFiB1145 92
- ~ ~ "
E.
l
~
~
e
%, e e*
\\
% g,,*'
%E
'\\J k
d
\\
s
.11
l e
I
[
FY93 PLANNED ACTIVITIES FOR i
l 1.2.3 SITE INVESTIGATIONS ($50.0M) v#
Mar 93 Complete UZ-16 borehole, install instrumentation and begin testing Apr 93 Complete drilling / continue data collection to support study of j
shallow Unsaturated Zone (UZ) infiltration (neutron boreholes) l Apr 93 Start UZ-14 borehole drilling' i
Sept 93 Complete boreholes NRG-2 through NRG-6 and SRG-5; provide i
ESF ramp design data l
Sept 93 Complete / revise prerequisite study plans and job packages for ESF tests in starter tunnel l
Sept 93 Complete trenching program in Midway Valley; complete most of trenching program for quaternary faults in the site area Sept 93 Carry out C-well pump test l
Continue collection of data (hydrologic, meteorological, l
geochemical, seismic) that would otherwise be lost l
l l
l nocwasi cmi, im L
l
~
j
i YUCCA MOUNTAIN PROJ ECT SU RFACE B ASED TESTING l
l 1991 1992 1993 1994 l
Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct Jan Midway Valley l
Trench MWV-T7 y
i Trench Mapping M _j Quaternary Faulting - Region Prerequisites Trench Excavation l
UZ-Infiltration Phasei M
Phase llA
]
l Phase llB I
I UZ-Percolation UZ-16 Drilling E
~
l T531 A
i Soll& Rock Properties Test Pits-Phase i E
~
(
i Pavement at NRG-1 NRG-2 thru -6 i
NRG-1 Geophysics g
i
- Geophysics Prerequisites M~_
i i
Collect Data i
j Volcanistn
~
l i
Issue Resolution Report M
l A
NRCTE l
l Test Pits Fran Ridge Pit Mapping M ]
i SBIS1HDP1 GERTZ11214 92 i
I 1
. ~.. - - - - -
. - ~ - - -. ~. - -
n 1
5 7
\\
l
- b i
y l
'e 4
~
.~
\\
3s) e
- ^
.l g
l0 g
- g%
4'4 & d i
.f,
..-------....n.
f!L f
>!til
!!!t!,
! ;L s
l!!Iit
- !iit!!*
e7 k2 a8 l
1 B
N 7
E m5 H".
a7 i 1 T
l WE W
l i
E E
N M OS DN I
S O G M N
H D I
T NA T
AN EE RGM
~
, *:i t
i.
+!:
!2 i!
!>!1l;i!
l t
ilei!
- iii!*
I3i
THE YUCCA MOUNTAIN SITE CHARACTERIZATION PROJECT HAS A BALANCED SITE CHARACTERIZAT PROGRAM TO MEET REQUIREMENTS Published Site Characterization Plan in acco with requirements of the NWPA and NRC Reviewed by public, external and oversight groups; comments received and responses generated NRC, EPA, USGS found the site characterization program to be adequate Detailed study plans prepared and. reviewed by NRC Controls in place to revise characterization plans as needed om m
.i, i?I L
'r i
t!
j!i:
I>II
)r$
i li, b
i e
+
4 e7
-e k2 a8 e
l 1
B n
N 7
a e
m L
E m5 H".
a7 i 1 T
l WE W
l i
E EN M OS DN I
S O
G M
F N
IH D T N t'
A T
AN EE RM G
y y
y c
r G
1 1i i;;,'
, lit.
!it
i i
I I
J L.
s y
D MO4 CEI 6
l I
I i
b a.
O i
L THE YUCCA MOUNTAIN SITE l
CHARACTERIZATION PROJECT HAS A BALANCED SITE CHARACTERIZATION PROGRAM TO MEET REQUIREMENTS i
Published Site Characterization Plan in accordance
.with requirements of the NWPA and NRC i
l Reviewed by public, external and oversight groups; i
comments received and responses generated NRC, EPA, USGS found the site characterization l
l program to be adequate t
i Detailed study plans prepared and. reviewed by NRC l
1
- l l
j Controls in place to revise characterization plans L
as needed j
- - mmm
~
SURFACE BASED TESTING RECENT ACCOMPLISHMENTS Drilling Drillhole Status Depth UZ-16 Drilling ongoing (TD:1663')
1200 ft Neutron boreholes Phase I complete (12 holes) 50 - 270 ft Phase ll ongoing (9 of 12 complete) 50 - 300 ft Ramp boreholes NRG-1 complete 150 ft NRG-6 ongoing (TD:1100')
80 ft 1140 ft JF-3 Complete SPC261 CPG 1218 92 w
e
L 7
r 1
L SURFACE BASED TESTING o
l RECENT ACCOMPLISHMENTS i
(CONTINUED)
Trenching a
j-
-Test Pits / Trenches Status Length-
-(
l j;
Midway Valley 28 test pits completed l-Trench MWV-T5 Complete.
1100ft Trench MWV-T6 Complete 20 ft i
Trench MWV-T7 Complete 300 ft l
Trench 14D-Complete
~200 ft l
Trench MWV-T4 (old 17)
. Complete 100 ft l
Soil & Rock Test Pits Phase 1 33 Complete Soil & Rock Test Pits j
j-Phase ll-39 Complete j
j Volcanism Trenches 2 Complete 500 ft l
{
Volcanism Test Pits 42 Complete (Lattwop Wells & Cima Volcanic fields) j i
i Crater Flat 3 trenches complete
~100 ft l
Stagecoach Road Fault
.3 trenches complete
~100 ft l
Fran_ Ridge Test Pits Complete i
SPC262 CPGr1218 92
[
j
SURFACE BASED TESTING RECENT ACCOMPLISHMENTS (CONTINUED)
Other 4
l Pavements Status Busted Butte Complete L
Fran Ridge Mapping in progress North Portal Access
, Complete Seismic Studies Status 55 station seismic network Transition from USGS to UNR complete Little Skull Mountain Portable instruments deployed and Earthquake (6/92) still collecting aftershock data Borehole Security 30 boreholes secured as of October 19,1992 NRG-1, RF-9,-10,-11 plugged and abandoned 11/25/92 prior to ESF construction SPC263 CPG 12-t8 92 l
~
^
li FY92-FY93 SHALLOW NEUTRON HOLE L
DRILLING PROGRAM l
i To provide access to a variety of hydrologically active L
topographic settings (i.e., washes, hill slopes, ridgetops) to evaluate the most dynamic part of Yucca Mountain, the near surface
{
Profiles of saturations and physical properties measured on core samples.have provided understanding about j
i shallow infiltration. processes:
- The top.of the nonwelded base of the Tiva Canyon flow unit is l
nearly saturated, which supports the expectation, from the j
conceptual model, of-capillary barrie'rs l
l
- This nearly saturated zone is likely a zone where fracture flow terminates, below which matrix flow dominates. (This zone is l
l also a likely barrier to gas flow between the Tiva Canyon and Topopah Spring units) i mmmm-L i
FY92-FY93 SHALLOW NEUTRON HOLE DRILLING PROGRAM (CONTINUED)
The new boreholes have provided a dataset for INTRAVAL o
j (an international model validation program) which will be used to develop flow transport models
- Preliminary modeling by the USGS Indicates that the system has been in a long term drying trend (>1000 years). In order to produce current saturation profiles seen in the deeper neutron holes there is a net water loss from Yucca Mountain under the current arid conditions. The system is not steady state Future information will help in many ways to characterize o
Yucca Mountain:
- Data from geochemical analysis will help to identify fast pathways which may be criticalin determining the suitability of Yucca Mountain
- Continued neutron moisture meter logging will help characterize changes in water content over the variety of topographic settings thought to be hydrologically active unu n w nun =
n s
I
WORK UNDERWAY l
Neutron Access Boreholes - Phase i Borehole
- Depth, Diameter, Percent Core Date identified Feet Inches Recovered Completed 1.
USW UZ N-55 255.3 6
96.1 13 NOV 91 2.
USW UZ N-54 244.7 6
89.3 11 DEC 91 3.
USW UZ N-37 270.4 6
74.6 31 JAN 92 4.
USW UZ N-11 84.4 6
98.5 25 FEB 92 5.
USW UZ N-36 59.8 6
98.2 4 MAR 92 6.
USW UZ N-17 59.8 6
97.5 19 MAR 92 7.
USW UZ N-15 59.8 6
92.1 25 MAR 92 8.
USW UZ N-16 60.0 6
78.5 30 MAR 92 9.
USW UZ N-38 89.6 6
99.2 13 APR 92 ME DTOtlRP3 GERTZ/1218 92
4 WORK UNDERWAY 4
f l
Neutron Access Boreholes - Phase I (conunoed)
Borehole
- Depth, Diameter, Percent Core Date identified Feet-Inchas Recovered Completed j
i
.10. -USW UZ N-64 60.0 6
84.7 17 APR 92 11.
USW UZ N-27 202.4 6-83.7-29 APR 92 12.
USW UZ N-53 234.5 6
86.0 12 JUN 92 s
f i.
1 j
i 1
t i.
unummuzuem l
f a
=
WORK UNDERWAY Neutron Access Boreholes - Phase II (12 holes?
l Borehole
- Depth, Diameter, Percent Core Date Identified Feet Inches Recovered Completed 1.
UE25 UZN-63 60.0 6
84.0 11 Aug 92 2.
USW UZN-33 75.0 6
99.0 18 Aug 92 3.
USW UZN-34 84.1 6
87.0 24 Aug 92 4.
USW UZN-31 192.6 6
95.0 22 Sep 92 5.
USW UZN-32 207.4 6
93.0 9 Oct 92 6.
USW UZN-35 175.8 6
64.0 26 Oct 92 7.
USW UZN-57 118.9 6
96.0 4 Nov 92 8.
USW UZN-58 118.9 6
94.0 18 Nov 92 9.
USW UZN-59 118.8 6
93.0 8 Dec 92 AfDU fW Uittt2 UT
~-
i
WORK UNDERWAY i
j Borehole UZ-16 i
Planned Depth - 1663 feet or approximately 40 feet below 1
i:
the water table t
Planned diameter l
L inch surface casing presently set at 52 feet 12-3/8':' borehole will be drilled to Total Depth (TD)
Start date - drilling / coring init!ated May. 27th Present. depth ~1200 ft l
Estimated completion.date l
Drilling / coring: 5/13/93 (to include borehole geophysics)
Borehole testing: 11/5/93 (to include air permeability tests) i
- Vertical Seismic Profiling (VSP) testing: 2/7/94 (assumes 12/3/93 start)-
Drill Flig LM-300 l
-.mmm.
WORK UNDERWAY A
Borehole UZ-16_ (conune Use of data:
~
l The structural, stratigraphic, hydrologic, mechanical and -
geochemical information obtained from the cores will benefit many studies to help understand if the natural barriers at: Yucca Mountain can isolate nuclear waste j
Information on rate of infiltration of surface waters at depth-In-situ tests of the bulk rock mass f
Borehole-to-borehole correlation data Provides a means fot' lmproved understanding of subsurface structural features and stratigraphic correlation
. MEDIOURP21 GERTZ/12'l8 92 ;
m
WORK UNDERWAY AT YUCCA MOUNTAIN 1
North Ramp Geologic Borehole Program (NRG-1?
Purpose:
To collect data for Exploratory Studies Facility design
==
Description:==
l NRG-1 Geotechnical borehole completely cored to total depth of 150 feet (targeted below tunnel invert)
Hole diameter 5.5" - core 2.5" nominal Drilling method - dry air circulation w/ tracer Drill Rig - CME 850 Use of Data Design of portal high wall excavation and support
. Design of tunnel launch chamber for Tunnel Boring Machine mmomm-
t I-L WORK UNDERWAY AT YUCCA MOUNTAIN L
l North Ramp Geoloaic Borehole Proa_ ram (NRG-65 l
Purpose:
To cohect data for Exploratory Studies Facility design
==
Description:==
NRG-6 Geotechnical borehole to be cored to total depth of 1100 feet Coring presently.at 80 feet.
Hole diameter 6"- core 2.5" nominal i
Drilling method - dry air circulation w/ tracer.
Drill Rig ~ Joy-Use of Data e
Location TSW1 -TSW2 contact new north end of proposed repository Design data forTBM & tunnel support m m m m m m.
- v 5-
' e -
=
a
MAJOR NEW WORK AT YUCCA MOUNTAIN Soil and Rock Property investigations i
Phase 1: test pits consisted of 33 excavations at Exile Hill Phase ll: test pits consisted of 39 excavations along roads and other facilities of the ESF l-Size:-
3 ft wide by 20 ft long by 15 ft deep with selected 10 x 10 enlargement for testing j
i
Purpose:
Examine bedrock and in-situ soil conditions
]
Determine' soil gradation characteristics Test in-place soil density Use of: Data:
j Design of ESF Surface Facility pad excavation,, engineered fill requkements, building foundations, roads, and soil / rock storage areas Design of portal high wall excavation and support requirements mmmmu
[
I a
Major New Work at Yucca Mountain l
Midway Valley Investigations
Purpose:
To prepare a detailed geologic map of Midway Valley and to evaluate the potential for faulting (earthquake activity) at the prospective surface j
facilities
. Progress to Date April 1991.
Preliminary geologic map completed July 1991-i
. 350-ft.-long,8-ft.-deep trench was excavated and mapped No' evidence of faulting'was found in the trench
' March 1992
- 18. soil test pits were exowated in Midway Valley Descriptions of the soils will provide information on the ages of <
the geologic l deposits in the. mapped area r
a s
WORK UNDERWAY H
MidwayVallevInvestiaations
Purpose:
To prepare a detailed geologic map of Midway Valley and
- j to evaluate the potential for faulting (earthquake activity) 1 at the prospective surface facilities 1
June 1992-1 1100 ft long,10 ft deep trench MWV-T5 was excavated in the area of the prospective surface facilities to determine if faults are present Final map of trench is complete a
~ 400 ft portion ~of trench will be back filled prior to November 30,1992 -
start ESFconstruction December 1992 10 additional soil pits excavated for a total of 28 in Midway Valley i
Soil information collected from soil & rock pits excavated at Exile Hill Trenches MWV-T4, -T6, and -T7 excavated 1
Trenches MWV-T5,-T6, and -T7 mapped and backfilled to make way for ESFconstruction i
Three trenches completed in Crater Flat and three trenches completed
]
on the Stagecoach Road Fault-Mapping and data compilation in progress l
n-
L WORK UNDERWAY 1
Groundwater Monitoring Well JF-3
Purpose:
L Well.JF-3 has been developed by DOE as an early warning l
monitoring well to protect against potential impacts of water I-withdrawals from wells J-12 and J-13 on water rights,. sensitive I
wildlife habitats and other beneficial uses of groundwater in l
. Amargosa Valley, Ash Meadows and Death Valley
[
Well JF-3,is part of the well and spring groundwater monitoring-l program accepted by the National Park Service and the Nevada l
State Engineer i
.i Well data; r
o i
I Depth of hole 1298 feet i
Date started November 26,1991
[
Date completed April 20,'1992 q
i
-- Diameter of hole (cased):
8-5/8 inches
,em m an
.e a
m m
.a' M
d
=r-
'*1 umd*
-,--F bdw 5+
VmwL s-V m
j 7
l y
l WORK: UNDERWAY p
I; Volcanism Investigations
)
L Purpose l
Test alternative models of the eruptive history of the volcano Examine soil development to test chronology results i
F
- LCollect samples for petrology.
e
[
Progress to Date:-
L NRC video conference held in August 1992 on issue Resolution / Study Plans
]
l Since JulyL1991:
[
35 excavations (test pits and trenches) completed at the Lathrop Wells
--i Volcanic Center-9 excavations completed in the Cima Volcanic Field.-
I
.Estim. ate 10 more trenches to: complete Lathrop Wells studies j
Starting other; Quaternary centers-Increasing' level of effort in effects of volcanism - NWTRB recommendation-
[
[
Conclusions to Date:
g Lathrop; Wells
~
y
[
- - JAge of lavas bracketed between 65,000 and-130,000 years 1
[
Age' of. cone 25,000 -;45,000 years l-unn - mea.x i
x q
p y
g
?
g' g
g-
)
g-F 2%".
N
'e 6+m i
m -m b
L WORK UNDERWAY-Volcanism Investigations 1conunuem Planned Trenching - FY93 Finish at Lathrop Wells Begin at the Sleeping Butte centers and the 1Ma centers in Crater Flat
=
~
waauvownmaew
VOLCANISM STUDIES GEOCHRONOLOGY INVESTIGATORS J
l
-u U-Th Disequilibrium:
Dr. Mike Murrell, Los Alamos National Laboratory Cosmogenic 3He:
Dr. Jane Poths, Los Alamos National Laboratory.
Thermoluminescence:
Dr. Steve Forman, Ohio State University K-Ar and "ArP8Ar:
Dr. Peter Zeitler, Lehigh University Geomorphic Studies:
Dr. Stephen Wells, U. C. Riverside Soils Studies:
Dr. Leslie McFadden, University of New Mexico Paleomagnetism:
Dr John Geissman, University of New Mexico Field Studies:
Dr. Bruce Crowe, Los Alamos National Laboratory Geochronology Advisor:
Dr.-Donald DePaolo, U.C. Berkeley m m,. m nunam,
.s p
.2 a
s.
4 i
N 0
s
/
og o j
s
~
f_
E
=
a v
.9 g.
l J
b 6
e g
c_
i 3
/
==
ESpLAVOW
. - : w.... :.. :t
-ego-jv--*
/ *%.
% :/f=. -
x h
/
-},;= M w,--- s
- _ n, s:q.a...a a
W
' /W F.,.. aT,.,
f R
.a
" ~
l
-f 3
p 1
- s. -
l j
x
/
-s q
1 s ~.
_f j
y 4 1
.y,
- J< 4101 r'
,,, u w.
- q, t,,c:tss,
f,Q/
y'P.-
y, '
A 1,csaq
,u,, u a
- t.myfy,,,,n /
53,, cuss *2
,,f y'!;ctss**
j
,1,osnen
,f9,4 l
- g. ja w'"*",
/
N
{}
,,,e :r.
y s
,,/ \\q
,\\\\
"[/ ?
~
-*=#*
t
/*/
//
\\
f s
ll/ /
x
... g. c, m. mf /*:'
pa%*
h
//
t
,9 f>
\\
7ff
/
eg riuk
. - - ~
s I
\\
._,- /
?
\\
( s, i
s
///,,,
/
g* g "
satt
~
' y7 ,u,_/,/
'4o l.
.--,-f~~_'--.~#.-
,,,,... e>~c6
-/
\\
,,g.,,,S.,.,s,**=' ';
curant 7, Y
=6 t
, ",.ne g ""_*"
~
I,e$tsS'82,,a u *- -<
'\\\\,,::ts% l' s
y
+
?
l s ',
a
\\ e'f j
f
~
['-
/
s
. " Wg j
e
?Joggfaud r
- # s I
%j [
/
W
/
"~,
g,/,
r
~
- gg utWs
~
~. _ _ __ -
g,g g>10AT
/
~
- S\\f15 j
,/,
- ,<c
,2,
s s
s M
- y..,,.. :
-s s
.- * = 1$ 1 '..- n;k..g ANO
%C*L
. g 5;ON, w*35*RL,,,',
%, As-87 m
g anA* * " }g
$.~ Abk.
,35t$ Sr'O#g
PLANNED ESF DESIGN / CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES FY 1992 & 1993 l
{
Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct 1 Jan Apr Jul Oct i
i 1
i f
f f
I I
I l
l l
l l
l l l
l l
Title.11 Design * - N.' Access Roads, l
92
- Pads G Portali p Nov l Mobilization & Job Package Preparation i
I Const.- N. Access Roads, Pads & Portal Selection Process-No.of TBMs i
Release Receive on site i
BM RFP
_L Identify 1st Title 11 Design-N. Access Surf. Fac. & Ramp Ramp I
i Solf & RockTest Pits I
Condtruction North Access Facilities' i
I Siiallow Ddit Hole
- Comflete Ramp Sizing Study i
I Conc. Design --
I l
. Incrudes f
. First Access Area On-Site Elec.
I Title i Design-I Design Sufficient Upgrades 1
On-Site l
for Blasting and Site l Elec. Upgrades Revise & Accept Title i l
Grading i
~
. Soils Storage Design On-Site Elec.
. Waste Water Disposal l
. Water Distribution l
l
~
u ce ac t es Footprints status as of: 12-4-92 l
=
trustocn> me si w
. Launching Chamber
i I
.l.
'I
..,/...........................Y.
9 4
f.
w 4
/ 1.
E i
C
- w:
I
[
W g:
g.
=
. 8:
i t:
t 2
.(.
gi
- 3:
e f
....W6.........
":E:
m
.N
.w Q:
g.
w
...! g.' :b.
hW w
4
>l
- w M
. y T44 J
4 d4
'g.:,
8 v
- ww
- 1 l...w.......!.4................. c C
.,i f..,
ld.
lw:
+.:
l W::
lw*
as
.p.
lc.
g
.g.
g
!,Wd i _u j g. L.d..p...j g f. 4.....j..d..{,...,...,...
? *$ !*! !
i8i j
!Z
- 1. m. ',
.O
.c 5
- 1:
- eg:if:i a
W: s C!
some O
- 4W :
l 6>',w:
N um.
. v==,<u.
..,...>...:.4 g.g4...t....,.........
O.
>Z4. '
n
.s ewl.
.b dj mo"!
g:
wes:
- k:
W !
b@w :
i g
Om
- e 2
..s g
4
.,..3..
...,.... y...$
. s....
..4.....
ZW
,,.....y.
- Z:
O j j
.w.
{g,s
!, g su ld:
=
b
.a w
l Z..l i
l o
14 C
.,~n 3.
g
.......q....
..q.
g
..q.
.,.. y. 9.. q... +.....
> +
EW i
~
- WEM
.>-t._-
/
. gas
!**E i
- 8 W l
l
- , ; *+ 0.a'
!'i l
. f.
. s 8
i
/.
s :
, /...
a.
./ :
g-g.
g.. s....
....8,.,.....................
C 9,~
w.
g' b
o.
o i.88888888888888888888888.t' C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C 8Ce e.
e.
e.s C. 7 s - e e w m ee e C e e
- e w m
@ w g is @ g 4 g g @ c c p
a=
- = a
- a.. m.
ei m *=
ru m m m e e m m m e e art m mm m e m m m m m m i
9,
$, 4 e
- r, Q
S, e,
O e
p
\\\\^
O
'\\
c w\\'
w o
1
- r 0\\
w zy
-l w
e z
d b
- r f fh g
8 W
\\-
M w 0 1Q Ja8
~
u 5
a o
E "f5 "di E
f
- c U
Id 3 US
[-
_. _ t
\\-
Ir r\\,- N -,
l' gm x
w a~
g,
\\
rp... _.. _. _. &.. _.
T
\\.
- 1. V 3dO75 7.2-Fz F
m 4
_ u _ o _ 2 _1 p
0 s
zJ g
- a. ogx
< _ l~}
E
\\
CL 25
.se.
\\
m o$!
~2SEs 5.
{ ggw d.
<.n
-m g
EE
$$5
\\]
g Es us;
\\h es r_ =
L EW3
\\"8W N
i ys
\\
s g
1560000ft 136400 aft
-1$64000f t Cl* Cl19 gUI!! Visit i
Otl* C 1 i-Gilw E l E
ii b:$
.I'$..')'
/
-i.
slI /
/ ts CIs4 Cl Il us7A tl i/
-/
n.ts wret i
e
,,/
,/ ' U125 VZet 3
1
,.4n.u4ft
- g n.
/
E
?!g.g$I8 cs e -nse es
- MAlN, est u s fibi,
n 25. er All,A i.
e
- H 15 a tC,l '
ti na e.
E125 tiel 44
+
ff
'Uit C.4 0
'"8 'I Cl15 Ife!
)
n.asi ei.
/
+
9194 6fj6 x
4
}
- 9
=
l
!/%
k/
l
/f CH DICI510N DATI !!96 STAti IHIIMAL IIST 4!96 g
g l
csw n.7 nw cz.a :-
Ei nw wt.:
E 9
E nw n4 7m jl ea n u.i
?? E
.av
/
2,3
'1 :
,/
, ' = -
/
Ts $007R 0t07 "l-U "* '8 5.
/
et asc e%
f
/
.I enw s.:
3.
m f
g i
/
/**
l
?
4 t.*.*./
l t
5 0
.5 5
WIL15
.5 K110MIIII5 A asses ne.n.=s i
1 M:4PMY.]ssis SEITIMOLII
-5 SELIM -
5,.
5' 0
5 1
k
/>...
i
.. ^,
r B
l
./
/
3
/-
'/
/
?
~
i 5
ms
/
e
- .cas st tp
/
a cas uig 7 yap HTI!03 ST
/
/
)'cis wsp
/
/
L 4.cas es-f
./
j!!-
s cti wsp f,/
- ! j hs wst arc wsc,
3 isi zxi tsv siit\\
1' s i-E is
}
'3 siir N7,,g
=
g l.u.os wsc 9
ol. ras rn st.iv-----*
i l A "'83 'U a,swn a,m.zc sr-
/'
it 4D8 '8C 1 g N o
691( TSIT LAMtiBT TRATS
.os,,,
69l2 ITAD N0!!lCED HC
.iw wn l
,s/!,g O
.og wn p#
.awsg
~
E 4.os wsc g
- "8 6 116 4 919 D' 3 33,n i
l
...,,,m
//
acir g
11sRf 52 :)
7//l 1 AllA sleBFsIII 4GtX 511g g78 ff 4GtX vl.
4CH U 7
/
9 431 wtc
~~*
3
,.co
.. ~,
/P) iii ws<
/
g
/
4
/
p&
/)q / 3:i
,.1v wn.
it N
.k i
e 31.fv vs'.'
41zU wI l
i i
i i
tf0005651 tf000465E tf0000651
f Little Skull Mountain Earthquake Time of occurrence:
3:14 a.m. (PDT) on June 29,1992 36.718 N latitude,116.289 W longitude Location:
Depth:
9 km(5-1/2 miles)
Magnitude:-
5.6 (body-wave magnitude) (National Earthquake Information Center)
Distance from proposed repository:
Approximately 20 km (12-1/2 miles) y
, )
7
~
~,.
')
l 1
E
?.
1 Bee,
t Acom eocasen e,.
\\
s
- JCCA L@* Skud MM Eanhousse 62S92 '
\\
Q
- Mourta.no e 9
D' M
'*g ercury :
t k
t
+
Pantump-l
'W V0933
'g" h
O Genom Fault I
g Bef3 TOW l:
I-
.k i
5
%s4 s* Wcca vasey x
%Eaefciu** 62&S2
\\
g\\..
s San Bernao.no.
- va,.,.
Mnto Mtn. Fault l.
Pasm Sonngs I
r
'N
,i
~
L
-.m e.
T-7 C-E E
O,,:g 32 t
.. g L
g.
NmO s]
=-
>sik Q e$nd R&
a 8
o e O*2 A
1 Og
- y Q..,
A2 A
@E 48
- c. m 4
4 4
m5 4
y e
tr e A
.R
[M4 [4 g g &,
.c.c
- & y,y 15 8m l$l
l c
.y a
h %p 9 y ] gl W l l 4 *.
=y$glwliW""
- p g,
$?
g e4+ kvkA? -
e.,
5
@W%a
.e y
~
av i
2 m' .h m _y;;9;"'h 4*C m o.
s
.5 m cv,
h a7:69y E
i n
~
%s 8
Oo
=
Em O.
N m
O in g
OU
~ ~ -
. e
~
LOS ANGELES TIMES SUNDAY, JULY 26,1992 3
l All Shook Up eue. le.i, l.wl e. is
.w, ed he e e..n u, a e a Safety: A 5.6carthquake
-.,,,.,,, o,. i.<n
. a u.
u.
I near a EropOSed RUClear Waste
'"""""""I'""""k"d'"""",M7' " '.
R fgg_ODgfggg#8*Fent-
- i., s. -. t,... -
c cage of on Ne-s a.L. 'l ess Nb in l' facility in Nevada has
...a o.., v..
u.
o.ou.-
reinind8 gg gg #,S convinta - nyinanne l'"' ""C""'
project triongs someplace else.
Quake'c0gggpy,.
nut the rederal government I
o earth.
., o,...-,"_""o4 contends that the risk is low.
Egag ga gyp
-u,, n, u-,-.,
en thePOss.ta.
Dard
" ";.'=="i:
r,um" ',"
.^""w sea.ssnse
" " " " ' ' ' " ' " ^
On tha t c."........... >"
'.....c.-
. ghlnE J0g (shakIn# is Solge*
u ooc ac
..a>
n u....~..
Ia,n.. n.s
....n.
.... a... <.e...
"a-
... sk y,.cragw S to sog.i e. sw. la air d
a..- i.
[Or>.
guc.t e h.:o t b. 4?ta.u,*
vnnnble. swi.Luus so r.u L in I,n s
.......,..,,,,v....,+.,~..
Clarence A na.. egygineer
..a...e.
a..
4..-
,....,....a ur,... n. s, c r., n,e r
~
....a ~,,u..
In ${g intepps.
sald "o -
~un c u.~u ". ~~
Saal. when.: ! G teinblo, s i,si
- qJJ
..,...ni.g,on
.n.
th.....n s.,
....s n.,c.........
.s.,o...o..
coOldgrg,th_O
,,fp we ~u.". "..".,",,"'
."..,"_""n --
ey.
n...a n
..a s n, i.oaa o, m.. c<o m.u
~id-(0abangOn Cahfe D e'd y3 Ve a,.",u-acauu-u
.a,...,,... a., roa o c..
"n dd d-
,....,,.a.......,..
v.r.;
.u.
ornua*ou
",...... +...
4a
.u-
,,,....o,,,..
i i..,..,
.,...,,,.t x
.x j
........ ~..
x..
..,, ~.
......, n.. i a, a....... -
.n u e,c..l.t.
.e.u..
..e
- s. 15
.L.
1
~.
~
Summary The earthquake and its aftershocks will provide valuable l
information on earthquake characteristics, relation of earthquakes to mapped Quaternary faults, ground motion in the vicinity of Yucca Mountain for seismic hazard assessment and design l
Facilities and equipment at the Yucca Mountcin site are being studied to determine what actions might be necessary to l
ensure worker safety Earthquakes of this.. magnitude areLinfrequent, but not unexpected in the vicinity of Yucca Mountain Ground accelerations produced at Yucca' Mountain from this l
earthquake were likely about 0.1g This value is 'significantly a
below accelerations ' currently being considered.for
~
prehmmary design EuyMP 125 tMr11076 92.l1
- 4 4
g 0,.
t e=,
t STATEMENT FOR THE RECORD PRESENTATION TO THE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION STATUS OF ThE CIVILIAN RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM BY JOHN W. BARTLE'I"T, DIRECTOR OFFICE OF CIVILIAN RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY DECENBER.18, 1992 INTRODJCTION I greatly appreciate this opportunity once again to discuss with the Commission the status of the Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Program.
I regard our meetings as an essential part of the productive interactions we have on activities and issues of mutual interest in order to move the Program forward.
Today, I will bring you up to date on the progress we've made since our meeting in June.
The issues Robert Bernero of your Staff identified in his letter of November 18, 1992, are important and I will address them specifically.
I will briefly review the Department's response to Commissioner-Curtiss' question concerning whether we have a legal obligation to accept spent nuclear fuel in 1998 even if an MRS or a repository were-not available to receive it at that time.
Finally, I will comment on the quality of our interactions with your Staff and the ACNW, indicate what we hope to get from them in the future, and advise you of our plans for interacting with the Commission in 1993.
RECENT PROGRESS i
In the last six months, we've made a great deal of progress in all aspects of our Program.
We continued our efforts to characterize the Yucca Mountain site.
Probably the most significant accomplishment occurred on l
November 30, 1992, when we started site preparation for the ESF.
l The Staff's lifting of Objection 1 in its Site Characterization l
Analysis (SCA) of the Site Characterization Plan (SCP) in November was key to our beginning excavation for underground testing, an essential part of our efforts to characterize the I
l 6
site.
This objection was concerned with the adequacy of our design control process and the adequacy of the design of the Exploratory Studies Facility (ESF).
We assessed the readiness of our participants to commence construction of the ESF under the OCRWM Quality Assurance Program, and concluded that they are ready, subject to the closing of identified open items.
We have closed those items relevant to site preparation activities and started to construct the roads and pads required for the North Ramp Portal.
That we are now underway is a major accomplishment.
We also began the drilling and coring of the first deep unsaturated zone borehole, UZ-16, an activity that is nearing completion.
In the process, we are continuously evaluating the conceptual models of the hydrology of the unsaturated zone at Yucca Mountain.
Following the June 29, 1992, earthquake, we developed a Seismic Action Plan concerned with the assessment of the seismic hazard at Yucca Mountain.
We will implement this plan as an expedited, integral part of our program.
Efforts to establish testing priorities in our Integrated Test Evaluation Task have progressed to the point where we will be using task results in making FY93 and outyear test planning decisions.
The focus of these tests will be on the investigation of site characteristics that are of priority importance to determination of whether or not the Yucca Mountain site is suitable and in developing scientific confidence in such a determination.
We have completed the first iteration of our Total System Performance Assessment, the results of which were generally within the release limits of 40 CFR Part 191.
We discussed the results of that effort with your Staff and the ACNW within the last few days.
We also informed your Staff that the second iteration, focused on parameter sensitivity, uncertainty analysis, and the comparison of simplified and more complex flow models, is underway.
In connection with our overall responsibilities, we have interacted with the Staff on many occasions over the past six months.
At these meetings, we discussed subjects such as MRS Design, the functional analysis of 10 CFR Part 60 performed for the NRC Staff by the Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory Analysis, the Total System Performance Assessment work I referred to above, and established a schedule for our meetings in the coming year.
We also briefed the Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste on subjects such as the June earthquake near Yucca Mountain, the revised NRC Staff position on fault avoidance, the impact of long-term climate change, and the use of the collective dose concept in repository licensing.
We continued the Annotated Outline Initiative efforts I discussed with you last June.
These efforts are concerned with developing and fleshing out annotated outlines (AOs) of license applications for a potential repository and a potential Monitored Retrievable Storage Facility (MRS).
He received th Staff's 2
L M
comments on Revision 0 of the AOs for the MRS and MGDS, addressed some of them in Revision 1 of these documents which we provided to the Staff for guidance and comment in September, and are now developing Revision 2 of these documents.
We expect to forward Revision 2 to the Staff in mid-1993.
Comments by the Staff will continue to be addressed in future iterations of these AOs, as appropriate.
The work we have initiated on the Advanced Conceptual Design of the repository, waste package, and engineered barrier system will contribute to future revisions of the MGDS AO and the progress of our program.
In October 1992, we initiated a study to evaluate the feasibility of using multi-purpose canisters (MPC) in the waste management system.
We expect to complete this study this month; early indications are that the use of MPCs could provide significant benefits to the system.
These are by no means our only accomplishments, but they are those that are particularly relevant to our discussions.
STAFF ISSUES IDENTIFIED IN NRC LETTER DATED NOVEMBER 18.1992 The issues identified in Mr. Bernero's letter of November 18, 1992, included four previously highlighted in NRC's letter of July 1989 transmitting the SCA as being of particular importance to site characterization.
They also included six additional and somewhat interrelated issues.
It is appropriate that I inform you of what we have been doing to address them.
The issues identified in the Staff's July 1989 letcer include:
e Need to Conduct Total System Performance Assessment The Department agrees that such assessments should be performed to provide early and ongoing evaluation of the adequacy of the site-related data being obtained and the ability of the site to meet the performance objectives of 10 CFR Part 60.
As I indicated previously, we completed the first iteration of our Total System Performance Assessment in July and discussed the results of that effort with the Staff at a technical exchange earlier this week.
Our second iteration is underway and is focused on parameter sensitivity, uncertainty analysis, and 'he comparison of simplified and complex flow models.
_ntend to perform such assessments periodically, consist.42 with the availability of the information required to make them meaningful.
Feed to Understand Tectonic Phenomena The Department agrees that there is a need to understand 3
b; tectonic phenomena and to consider.a. full range of appropriate tectonic models.
It is for this reason that we have developed and are carrying out a Seismic Action Plan' within the framework of our overall efforts to characterize and determine the suitability of -the Yucca Mountain site.
We will report and discuss the results-we obtain with the Staff as they become~available.
We have also. conducted 4
signficant new activities to characterize the potential for volcanism at the site area, and are developing a topical report on this issue.
o Need to Improve Technical Intecration of the Procram &
to Systematically Intecrate Studies Over the last two years, the Department has_ established, through the Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Project Office, Hydrology and Geochemistry groups to better integrate the site characterization program.
We have also recently formed a Geophysical Integration Group, which we discussed with_the ACNW in October, 1992.
In addition, the Department has charged the Civilian Radioactive Waste Management -System Management & Operating Contractor -(M&O) with responsibility to implement integration of-the overall site characterization program technically and to systematically integrate all-studies.
The ongoing effort is comprehensive.
It includes the following:
System Planning Group efforts to ensure the horizontal integration across the-project of the activities.of all project participants from. technical, cost, and schedule standpoints; Site Characterization Office efforts.to integrate all surface based testing-activities and coordinate and integrate those tests with the subsurface tests that are to be carried out;
- System Integration Group efforts to integrate design, construction, and site characterization activities :tcr ensure that they-do not compromise waste isolation or lead to test-to-test or construction-to-test-interference;
- Requirements Group efforts to integrate the development of project-level requirements documents, ensure their internal consistency, and ensure their consistency with program-level documents being developed by others; and
- Systems Analysis Group efforts to integrate the work of the many project participants and organizations within the M&O involved in carrying out the Repository Thernal Loading, Emplacement Mode, and Waste Package-Lifetime Performance Allocation studies.
I believe the M&O has made significant progress and I am 4
C pleased with their progress and with what they have accomplished to date.
The additional issues identified in the Staff's November 1992 letter are the following:
o Feed to Resolve Onen SCA Concerns DOE agrees with the Staff and the ACNW that resolving open SCA concerns is important and worthy of serious attention.
We are now actively involved in giving such resolution the serious attention that is required.
For each open concern, we're identifying the relevant work that has been done to date, the work required to resolve the concern, and the individual who should oe responsible for resolving the concern.
We believe that additional design, analysis, or testing will probably be required to provide the basis for resolving most of the concerns.
The resolution of other concerns may require the development of new study plans or can be based on existing information.
All of the concerns, however, are " issues" consistent with the definition we discussed with the Staff at our technical exchange on the Issue Resolution Initiative on November 20, ]991, and with you last June.
We have therefore assigned the responsibility for coordinating the resolution of these concerns to our Issues Resolution Steering Group and look forward to significant progress, consistent with the availability of resources, in FY 1993.
We hope to be able to address some of the Staff's concerns as they may relate to the topical reports that are currently under development.
Need to Better Focus DOE /NRC Interactions The thrust of this issue is on the need for more effective communications and more effective interactions designed to afford the NRC Staff the opportunity to provide more timely and meaningful guidance.
We share the Staff's concern and have been working to improve our efforts in this regard.
Our recent regularly scheduled meeting with the Staff to plan our interactions over the next six months, interactions which provide an opportunity for participation by representatives of the State of Nevadn and affected units of local government, is an example of our continuing efforts to work with the Staff in the process for planning forthcoming programmatic and technical interactions.
Although I agree that we must continue to work to improve communications and the quality of our interactions, I feel it appropriate to observe that they have, in fact, become more focused and more productive.
The DOE /NRC technical exchanges on tectonics and volcanism are cases in point.
We also communicate and interact with the ACNW frequently.
5
These interactions are important and have been effective.
I believe, however, that we need to find a better way, perhaps a mechanism comparable to our interaction planning meetings with the Staff, to plan and facilitate more effective interactions with the ACNW.
Such interactions could enhance the ACNW's ability to advise the Commission and provide guidance to the Staff.
An integral part of the overall communication process is the information we provide at meetings such as this on the matters we plan to bring to the Comnission's attention and on which we would like the Commission's guidance.
The Content and Timelv Availability of Site Characterization Procress Reoorts This issue has been a matter of concern for some time and I have directed that action be taken to resolve it to meet the needs of the Commission, the State, and other interested and affected parties.
The action includes standardizing the format, adding a " forecasting" section in which we will provide information on things to come, and adding an
" epilogue" at the end of the report that will include information on key events and decisions.that occurred subsequent to the close of the report period.
This-
" epilogue" should resolve one aspect of the timeliness issue.
We are also working to resolve the delay that has occurred in the publication of the report, by exploring ways and means of expediting release.
Progress Report No. 6 was issued on December 9, 1992.
It is printed on recycled paper and is just one example of our commitment to an environmentally sound program.
Progress Report No.
7, the first.of our reports to include the " epilogue," is undergoing internal review and we will do everything we can to expedite its availability.
I want also to reiterate 1the Department's-view, expressed in John Roberts' letter of July 20, 1992, to Joseph Holonich of your Staff, that the Semiannual Progress Report and the-MGDS Annotated Outline serve very different purposes.
The Semiannual Progress Report is a compilation of activities, accomplishments, and changes that together describe the status'of site characterization.
The MGDS Annotated Outline, on the-other hand, is focused on the parallel presentation of site characterization information and the integration of this information into a potential license application based, in part, on NRC guidance.
The Annotated Outline is used to develop the license application and, in addition, is a mechanism that facilitates DOE's evaluation-of the extent to which information'obtained satisfies the need for the information required to characterize the site in order to satisfy NRC requirements.
This is a function 6
4 the Semiannual Progress Report does not perform and was never intended to perform.
7te distinctions are important and must be maintained.
e Idantification of the Need for NRC Guidance The Staff is correct in noting that the iterative developmnnt of the AO provides an important mechanism for the Staf f to provide to DOE guidance on the interpretatic a and implementation of NRC regulations.
We are pleased that you have encouraged us to Adentify rpecific areas where se believe NRC should provide guidance or modify existing regulations.
We fully intend to do so and, in fact, we have begun this effort.
In 1990, we petitioned the Commission to amend 10 CFR 60 to include an accident dose guideline and to revise the definition of 'important to safety."
In May 1992, the Staff briefed the ACNW on its proposed 10 CFR Part 60 rulemaking which would, in part, address the substance of our petition and provide guidance for implementation.
We look forward to the completion of this rulemaking and will consider the submittal of other petitions to amend Commission rules, as appropriate.
Our technical exchange with the Staff on June 3, 1992, and the iterative AO process itself provides the basis for improvements in the quality of the AO and changes in NRC's draft Format and Content Regulatory Guide (FCRG) (DG-3003) for preparing a license application for a repository.
The Staff's comments have focused our attention on the information we need to provide to satisfy the intent of the FCRG and we are following its guidance.
Our experience in developing the AO is leading us to the conclusion that we should suggest changes that would improve the FCRG, consistent with the original intent of the Staff in suggesting development of an AO.
If we are convinced that this is appropriate, we will submit those suggestions to you for your consideration in FY 1993.
In conrection with the guidance it is providing on the MRS AO, the Staff provided to us a working draft of a NUREG being developed for " Interim Licensing Criteria for the Evaluation of Physical Protection Plans for Certain Spent Fut.."
We are using this document as the basis for 9
preparing the MRS Physical Protection Plan (Volume 4 of the O
MRS AO) and look forward to our interactions with the Staff as it reviews this plan.
We have, together, set in motion, a very effective process for identifying needs, providing guidance, and working together.
I am encouraged by it.
7
I e
Need to Ensure the Timelv Development of the LSS DOE agrees with the Staff that we need to work together to ensure the timely development of the LSS and we are continuing to do so.
In October 1992, we met to examine the feasibility of revising the cost estimates for the LSS using DOE's InfoSTREAMS as the basis for the system.
We committed to providing the estinates for the three options requested, each involving the use of InfoSTREAMS in progressively greater amountc.
We provided the estimates tc the LSS Administrator on December 11, 1992, and look forward to participating with the Staff in the evaluation of their implications.
e The Process for Develonino the New EPA Standard DOE fully agrees with the Staff that the schedule for developing the new EPA standard mandated in the Energy Policy Act of 1992 will not adversely affect our near-term site characterization efforts.
Section 801 of this Act provides for the development of a solid scientific basis for a health-based standard and NRC's implementing regulations.
We believe such basis is essential, support its development, and will participate in this effort to the fullest extent appropriate.
DOE's LEGAL OBLICATIONS UNDER THE NUCLEAR WASTE POLICY ACT During our meeting with the Commission on June 24, 1992, Commissioner Curtiss asked whether the Department would be legally obligated either under the Act or under the Standard Contract to accept spent nuclear fuel in 1998 even if a Monitored Retrievable Storage Facility were not ready to receive it at that time and directed my attention to a letter of February 7,
- 1984, on this subject by former Secretary Hodel.
His inquiry was promptad by questions raised by the Minnesota Department of Public Service in the matter of the Northern States Power Company.
I responded in general, advised that I would do so more fully at a later date, and did so in my letter of October 6, 1992.
Given the importance of the question and the fact that the Department has received similar inquiries, it is appropriate that I briefly summarize the Department's views.
In my formal reply, I referred Commissioner Curtiss to n letter from the Department's General Counsel to the General Accouncing Office which stated that "the Department's obligation to begin accepting spent nuclear fuel in 1998 arises 'followitg commencement of facility operations.'"
That letter also stated that "[nleither the statute as a whole nor the Standard Contract purports to obligate the Department to begin accepting upent nuclear fuel in the absence of an operating facility at which the spent fuel can be either stored or disposed of in the fashion 8
l' contemplated by the Act."
I noted further that all of the Department's recent correspondence is entirely consistent on this point and that there is nothing inconsistent with the Department's descriptions of its legal obligations to accept spent feel and the points made by former Secretary Hodel in his letter.
As I indicated in my letter, I trust that this information will be helpful to the Commission.
CONCLUSION: FUTURE DOE /NRC INTERACTIONS 1993 is going to be a very busy year for OCRWM.
We will expand our surface-based testing activities at Yucca Mountain.
We will place special emphasis on init1* ting the excavation for the access ramp to the Exploratory Studies Facility.
This will include excavation of a 200-foot long launch chamber for the large-diameter tunnel boring machine, that will be procurso in the coming year.
We will continue our work on the Advanced Conceptual Design of the repository, waste package, and engineered barrier system.
We will continus our efforts to deploy InfoSTREAMS and work with the Staf? on the development.of the LSS.
He will continue to support the Nuclear Waste Negotiator, to ensure the availability of transportation casks, and to complete follow-on conceptual design activities for the MRS.
We will carry out all of this work aggress _ <ely and with great care.
We will, of course, continue to interact extensively with t
the Staff and P.he ACNW.
These interactions in the past year have L
become more focased and more. productive, and ve are going to try to make them even more effective for ourselvel and the Commission.
As part of these interactions in 1992, we plan to work with the Staff to resolve open SCA concerns, Jn January, in connection with our Issue Resolution Initiative activities, we will submit to the Staff the first of our topical reports on regulatory issues.
We will request formal reviews and l
development by the staff of Safety Evaluation Reports 'SERs) on l
these documents.
These SERs should provide documentation for-agreements reached of Erosion and on the Origin of the Calcite-l Silica Deposits.
In June, we will submit.for review a copical l
report on Volcanic Hazards.
In addition, in midyear.1993, we plan to submit to the Staff Revision 2 of the MGDS and MRS Annotated Outlines.
We intend to update the MRS'AO annually, but will continue to revise the MGDS semiannually.
We look forward to receiving the Staff's response to these submittals.
It has been constructive thus far and we have every reason to believe it will continue to be so.
Finally, we look forward to interacting with the Staff in 1993 on a number of important matters it is pursuing that are.
most relevant to the progress of the Civilian Radioactive Waste 9
y
-w+
Management Program.
These include the proposed 10 CFR Part 60 rulemaking, the License Application Review Plan (LARP), the Topical Report Review Plan, and the Staff's plans for using regulatory analysis.
I vn encouraged by what we have accomplished during the past year, nad I am optimistic about our ability to complete the task that is before us.
I appreciate these opportunities to meet with you and believe they contribute to the progress we have made.
10 l
m___